Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1990.08.13CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 13, 1990 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Vice Chairman Kelly on Monday, August 13, 1990 at 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Deal, Ellis, Galligan, Jacobs, Kelly, Mink Absent: Commissioner Graham Staff Present: Margaret Monroe, City Planner; Jerry Coleman, City Attorney; Keith Marshall, Fire Marshal MINUTES - The minutes of the July 23, 1990 meeting were unanimously approved. A ENDA - Order of the agenda approved. ITEMS FOR STUDY_ 1. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE LIMITATION ON THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ALLOWED, AT 890 COWAN ROAD, UNIT J, ZONED M-1 Requests: code parking requirements by uses for this unit, 1,862 SF office and 2,489 SF warehouse; fire code occupancy requirements for Unit J; number of employees in other businesses on the site, parking requirement for each business; is it applicants intention to add employees now or in the future, number of additional employees; in applicants July 12, 1990 letter what is meant by . . technical breach of the lease agreement". Item set for public hearing August 27, 1990. 2. PUBLIC HEARING ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, DEIR-68P, FOR A HOTEL DEVELOPMENT AT 460-480 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, ZONED C-4 Reference staff °report, 8/13/90, with attachments and Bayview Hotel Complex Environmental Impact Report (Draft), July 1990. CP Monroe reviewed traffic allocation granted for a hotel project on the 8.8 acre site at 460-480 Airport Boulevard, staff determination that an environmental impact report was required, Bay Conservation and Development Commission - Design Review Board processing, preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) by Environmental Science Associates, Inc., project description, changes to tht project during preparation of the DEIR, issues of the Draft EIR, scheduling of the environmental review process and review and action on the project. r. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 August 13, 1990 Chm. Kelly opened the public hearing. Phyllis A. Potter, Senior Associate, Environmental Science Associates, Inc., summarized the findings of the EIR. She noted this is a focused document, the Summary of Impacts table identifies impacts under major subject areas, their significance, mitigations and level of significance after mitigation. Ms. Potter discussed this table briefly including land use and planning, transportation and circulation, geology and seismicity, hydrology and water quality, vegetation and wildlife. Alternatives to this proposal were evaluated with a comparison table on pages 128-137. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission comment: why the reference to leasing some of the project's parking spaces (page 54); page 19 refers to Airport Boulevard as a four lane roadway, page 37 refers to Airport Boulevard as a two way roadway varying in width from two and four lanes, please explain; proposal is for two large hotels with only breakfast service, what might be the impact if there were full restaurant service in one or both hotels, if not full service what would impact be;.EIR mentions in several places that one of the goals of the project is to comply with the intent of BCDC and city guidelines with regard to public access, in the last paragraph, page 54, include increased public access parking as another alternative for the excess parking provided by the project; share concern about restaurants, up to two restaurants are mentioned as a possible alternative; how much meeting room space will there be, this would have separate impact on traffic and parking. Page 43, Planned Roadway Improvements, can these improvements be counted on; clarify parking with regard to the Pattaya Princess restaurant, impact of bank improvements on parking; page S-1, fourth paragraph under Planning, can understand impact and mitigation but do not understand level of significance after mitigation, asking for a special permit does not bring project into compliance, it just makes it legal, suggest change of wording; page 43, reference to Level of Service E at Broadway, has LOS E occurred anywhere else; what is city doing with regard to traffic improvements for Coyote Point. This is a phased project and the undeveloped lot for Phase II will have an environmental impact, address some basic time frame for full development of the site or at least a target date; regarding landscaping, how will this site not look like a parking lot, are there plans to berm it, address the view issue, what will the public see, why is landscaping being done in this way; it appears there are four ways to get to the project site, to help evaluate traffic impacts include proposed improvements and changes to roadways and what city is proposing with regard to Peninsula Avenue. Page 36, second paragraph, refers to link to San Francisco International Airport via Airport Boulevard and Route 101, document Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 August 13, 1990 also refers to shuttle to the airport, shuttle buses will probably use the frontage road and never get on Route 101; page 74, first paragraph under Seismicity, line 3 should read: ". . . 17 miles we4st of the Hayward fault." Page 128, under Alternatives, Alternative B includes FAR and lot coverage figures, Alternative C does not, this information should be added or all alternatives made to be uniform in their presentation. Page 39, Figure 9, average weekday traffic on 101 should read 216,000; regarding Broadway and Peninsula improvements, Caltrans is working with the County Traffic Authority to develop some planning schemes for these two interchanges. Comment: think document has handled environmental cumulative impacts well, expect applicant will receive comments on cumulative impacts on Route 101 from other agencies. Consultant will prepare responses to all comments received this evening as a part of the Final Environmental Impact Report document. ITEMS FOR ACTION 3. VARIANCES TO REAR YARD SETBACK AND LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION AT 1515 RAY DRIVE, ZONED R-1 Reference staff report, 8/13/90, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, applicant's letter. Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Chm. Kelly opened the public hearing. Aldo Pollastrini, 1600 Ray Drive, applicant and property owner, was present. He commented the garage is now on property line, they would like to move the garage forward so they can have a play yard at the rear for the children, property next door only has a 6' setback, new garage will have 51, it is only 21 now; his son and family live in this house, they cannot afford to buy a three bedroom home in this area. Responding to a question as to what is exceptional about the property to support the variance request, applicant said according to code the front of this lot is on Albemarle whereas the front of the house faces Ray Drive, thus there is a rear yard problem and there is no way to get 15' clearance on that side. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner comment: it is obvious there is no way to reduce lot coverage to 40% and still have two parking spaces; if garage is left as existing it is up against the neighbor's back yard; this proposal will increase existing lot coverage by a small percentage, it is an ingenious attempt to solve a number of problems, will pull garage away from the next door neighbor, pull it toward the street and enlarge the back yard area as opposed to having a large area of cement open to the street. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 August 13, 1990 C. Galligan found there were exceptional circumstandes in that the property is a corner lot, the house was built facing the side as opposed to facing the 50' frontage, the proposal will have positive benefits noted previously, it is not practical to go to a second story to solve the lot coverage problem since the house already exceeds lot coverage, it is compatible in design with the one story houses on the same side of the street on Albemarle; the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the property rights of the owner, it will not be injurious to the neighbors and will be compatible with the aesthetics of the area. C. Galligan moved for approval of the variances with the following conditions: (1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped July 10, 1990; (2) that the curb cut shall be relocated to match the new driveway; and (3) that the project as built shall meet all Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements as amended by the City of Burlingame. Motion was secoftded by C. Ellis. Comment on the motion: have a problem with finding exceptional circumstances based on convenience, it would be nice to have the garage moved away from the property line but applicant could add a second floor with a staircase, all corner lots have problems; cannot find exceptional circumstances because the side yard is at the front of the .house, the city has quite a few of these lots, the lot looks full now, think there could be a good project here without a variance. Commissioner comments in favor: the city has granted several variances for this type of project, it is a difficult situation when therear yard is in effect the side yard; from a site inspection the existing lot coverage does not look like 42%k there is a 7'-6" setback behind the sidewalk on Ray Drive (side setback) and a front setback to code requirements on Albemarle which give the property an appearance of openness, do not have a problem with the rear yard setback or with increasing lot coverage from 42.9% to 45.3%; prior to site inspection was concerned about the lot coverage variance, generally there is a solution, after site inspection found the neighbor has a room over the garage which looks like an afterthought and is not in character with the neighborhood, if a room could be incorporated over the middle of the house there would be a different visual impact, all houses on the west side of Albemarle are one story, on the east side they are all duplexes, if Commission insists upon the addition being placed over the garage lot coverage will still be over 40% and could impact the neighbors more. The actual impervious surfaces will be reduced by this plan, by moving the garage a significant amount of driveway will be removed, can find exceptional circumstances in the siting of the house on the lot, there is a 9' side yard setback which as far as the house is Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 August 13, 1990 concerned is the rear yard, the entire siting is exceptional, this proposal although numerically increasing lot coverage will reduce it aesthetically and open it up. Maker of the motion accepted these findings. Comment: there is nothing that dictates applicant has to add a room over the garage, there are some bad examples in the neighborhood but a good addition could be designed. Motion was approved on a 4-2 roll call vote, Cers Deal and Jacobs voting no, C. Graham absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 4. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A CAR RENTAL AUTO STORAGE LOT AND A VARIANCE FOR LANDSCAPING AT 1755 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY, ZONED M-1 Reference staff report, 8/13/90, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant's letter, study meeting questions. Ten conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing as well as a revised Condition #4 of the March 6, 1990 use permit amendment granted this applicant for the property at 1470 Bayshore Highway. Staff noted letter of August 7, 1990 from Joseph D. Geller, one of the property owners of 1799 Bayshore, listing concerns about the subject property. During discussion staff advised the portion of landscaping in the Bayshore Highway right-of-way which applicant proposes to landscape and maintain needs an encroachment permit but is acceptable to the Public Works Department, normally the property owner maintains landscaping in this area, code requires that 10% of the site be landscaped,_ applicant is asking that landscaping in the right-of-way be included in lieu of part of their required 10%. Commissioner comment: think it is important that this landscaping be in the front for a better looking bayshore. Chm. Kelly opened the public hearing. Lester Meu, architect representing Alamo Rent-A-Car, applicant was present. His comments: staff had indicated there would be an average of 60 one way employee trips on and off the site daily, in actuality there will be 1/4 to 1/3 that, employees generally carpool; the Cowan Road site was dropped because half the site was unimproved, the cost to improve it was too high; they do not intend to change what was approved for Anywhere America, will do everything they can to screen the cars, there is some perimeter landscaping on the sides, some facing 1799 Bayshore which they will retain, there is a continuous chain link fence along all property lines, Alamo will secure the property and repair fences where necessary, they plan to irrigate and replace landscaping as necessary. Addressing the suggested conditions, Mr. Meu said they do not want employees to park on this parcel, they will be brought to the site, Alamo did not believe the 15 spaces for employees was necessary. Regarding condition #8, they intend to secure the property and repair the fences; regarding Mr. Geller's letter, they do not intend to take out any landscaping, will upgrade Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 August 13, 1990 the existing, will not cut down the nine year old hedge on the property but will prune it to reduce the sign problem for the 1799 Bayshore site; Alamo's preference is not to have full time lighting, lighting the lot 24 hours a day may be necessary but they would prefer not to start out that way, at 1799 there is no site lighting, that area is relatively dark, full time lighting on Alamo's site could be a nuisance to others in the area. Responding to Commission questions, Mr. Meu said Alamo thought multiple rigs could all get on the site, painting the truck lanes was not objectionable to them, turning radius is sufficient, tire damage spikes will remain to keep trucks from going out the wrong entrance or backing onto Bayshore Highway. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. With the statement this project will be providing landscaping in the front which will improve the appearance of Bayshore Highway, with the conditions to regulate between this off-site car rental storage lot and the car rental agency itself at 1470 Bayshore Highway this proposal will not be detrimental to the area, C. Jacobs moved for approval of the special permit for a car rental storage lot and variance for landscaping at 1755 Bayshore Highway by resolution with the 10 conditions in the staff report. Motion was seconded by C. Mink. In comment on the motion Commission and staff discussed the need for 15 easily accessible parking spaces for employees, there was consensus to reduce this number to eight easily accessible, identified spaces for employees since many of the employees carpool. Regarding exceptional circumstances for the landscape variance, Commissioners found putting the majority of landscaping in the front is important on this particular site, landscaping in the right-of-way will improve the street, this is not a corner lot and borders M-1 property, the landscaping will be a benefit to the public; interior landscaping is meant for public use, in this case no public will come onto the site. Conditions of approval follow: (1) that the site shall be developed and planned as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped June 22, 1990 except that the entire area used for the parking shall be paved, the car carrier circulation aisle and loading and unloading area shall be clearly marked (striped) on the pavement and kept clear of parked stored vehicles at all times, and eight (8) easily accessible parking spaces shall be set aside and designated for employees to use to park their vehicles; (2) that no Alamo airport shuttle buses shall be parked on this site; (3) that the 1.19 acre site shall be properly graded and drained to meet the requirements of the City Engineer and no auto maintenance, repair or washing shall occur on this site; ( 4 ) that the site shall only be used for off-site auto storage by Alamo Rent-A-Car to be used Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 August 13, 1990 in conjunction with their facility at 1470 Bayshore Highway and no part of the site shall be sublet to another business for any use; (5) that no cars shall be rented or customers dropped off or picked up for car rentals from this site; (6) that the storage area shall operate between 6:00 A.M. and 10:00 P.M. daily except that no cars shall be transferred to or from the storage area and the rental facility at 1470 Bayshore Highway between A.M. peak (7:00 A.M. to 9:00 A.M.) and P.M. peak (4:30 P.M. to 5:30 P.M.) traffic hours; (7) that five percent (5%) of the site shall be landscaped and that the applicant shall landscape and maintain 2,291 SF in the Bayshore Highway right-of-way, all landscaping shall be irrigated with an automatic sprinkler system and shall be maintained by the tenant, all landscaping, irrigation systems and plant material shall be approved by the Director of Parks for compliance with water conservation regulations and these conditions before installation and inspected upon completion of installation; (8) that the site shall be fenced with a fence not to exceed eight feet (81) from adjacent grade; (9) that "right turn only" signs shall be posted at the access driveways and no left turns into or from this site shall be allowed; and (10 ) that this use shall be reviewed for compliance with the conditions in six months time (January, 1991) and every two years thereafter or upon complaint. Motion was approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Graham absent. C. Ellis moved for approval of a revision to Condition #4 of the March 6, 1990 amendment to the use permit for 1470 Bayshore Highway as follows: (4) that the loss of the use of the site at 1755 Bayshore Highway shall cause the use permit for Alamo Rent-A-Car at 1470 Bayshore Highway/778 Burlway Road to be reviewed by the Planning Commission because of the increased number of monthly rentals which the additional storage makes possible from the 1470 Bayshore Highway/778 Burlway Road site. Motion was seconded by C. Mink and approved unanimously on voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. Recess 9:10 P.M.; reconvene 9:18 P.M. 5. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A TRUCKING OPERATION ASSOCIATED WITH A WAREHOUSE USE AT 1873 ROLLINS ROAD, ZONED M-1 Reference staff report, 8/13/90, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, applicantfs letter, study meeting questions. Five conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Staff discussed how trucks get on and off the site and advised there are a large number of trucking and air courier businesses in this area. Chm. Kelly opened the public hearing. Gary Wolfe, AMS Relocation, Inc., applicant, was present. His comments: they are a moving and Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 August 13, 1990 storage company, trucks do not go in and out every day, a few days none move, three of the designated fleet are out a week at a time, sometimes longer, it is a 40 year old company. Regarding concern about backing up of the trucks, there are approximately 20 spaces for parking trucks along the side of the building where the spur track is located, they will only use seven, the drivers are professionally tested truck drivers, two trucks will back up a distance of 100 feet, the rest a very short distance, they have about three times the space they need. There are 15 to 20 part time employees who are the movers, they are day workers and will need parking spaces; the application requested only 35 parking spaces since they thought that would be ample, property owner has no problem diving them 44 spaces. Responding to Commission questions, Mr. Wolfe clarified the truck parking plan; there are two sets of tracks, one set on this site which will be left available for use, the area is 24, wide, there is another set of tracks not on this property; the trucks are 96 inches (or 81) wide. Hours of operation, 7:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M., are their present office hours, they are open to the public between 7:00 and 4:00, movers come back when a job is completed. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Staff advised there are dimension standards for required parking for commercial uses, these trucks are not in required parking, this will be a separate storage area, staff would leave the layout of the area up to the applicant; if trucks can't work in the area they cannot be kept on this site. Based on testimony this evening, C. Mink moved for approval of the special permit by resolution with the following conditions: (1) that the trucking operation shall have a maximum of five bobtail trucks 18, to 24, and _five tractor trailer trucks 28, to 40, and the office shall operate between the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. Monday through Friday with 10 full time and a maximum of 15 part time employees; ( 2 ) that the spur track area at the side of the building shall be paved and striped for parking of seven trucks and three trucks shall be parked on site in the loading dock area, no trucks shall be parked at any time in the required parking anywhere on the site or on the public right-of-way; (3) that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's June 29, 1990 memo and City Engineer's July 2, 1990 memo shall be met; (4) that this business based on the leased area shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped July 10, 1990 shall be assigned 44 of the 85 required on-site parking spaces and these spaces shall not be used to intensify any other use or change the use within any other structure on the site; and (5) that this use permit shall be reviewed for compliance with these conditions in six months (February, 1991) and every two years thereafter or upon complaint. Motion was seconded by C. Galligan and approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Graham absent. Appeal procedures were advised. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 August 13, 1990 6. SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONDUCT CLASSES AT 1240 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY, ZONED C-4 Applicant did not respond to Commission's request for information and the item has been dropped. 7. FINAL CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR THREE UNITS - LOT 9, BLOCK 91 MAP NO. 2 OF BURLINGAME LAND COMPANY - 1443 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE Reference City Engineer's agenda memo, 8/13/90. CP Monroe reviewed; one condition was suggested if recommended to Council for approval. C. Jacobs moved to recommend this final condominium map to City Council for approval with the following condition: (1) Unit B yard area shall be increased to include all the area of that unit (46 -t -SF ) clear of walkway. Motion was seconded by C. Galligan and approved on a 5-0-1 roll call vote, C. Deal abstaining, C. Graham absent. FROM THE FLOOR There were no comments from the floor. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Review - Hillside Area Construction Permit/Minor Modification - 2935 Trousdale Drive; no comment. CITY PLANNER REPORT CP Monroe reviewed City Council actions at its August 6, 1990 regular meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Charles W. Mink Secretary