HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1992.09.14CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 14, 1992
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was
called to order by Chairman Mink on Monday, September 14, 1992 at 7:30
P.M.
Present: Commissioners Deal, Ellis, Galligan, Graham, Kelly, Mink
Absent: Commissioner Jacobs
Staff Present: Margaret Monroe, City Planner; Jerry Coleman, City
Attorney; Frank Erbacher, City Engineer; Bill Reilly,
Fire Marshal
MINUTES - The minutes of the August 24, 1992 meeting were
unanimously approved.
GA ENDA - CP noted two changes to the agenda: Item 14, 3121 Rivera
Drive, project has been modified to eliminate the need
for two variances, a hillside area construction permit
is required; Item 17, special permit at 1408 Chapin
Avenue, an error was made in noticing of this item,
applicant and property owner are aware it will be
continued to the meeting of September 29, 1992. Order
of the agenda was then approved.
FROM THE FLOOR
There were no comments from the floor.
ITEMS FOR STUDY
1. SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES, NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONDOMINIUM
PERMIT FOR A TWO STORY 11 UNIT TOWNHOUSE PROJECT AT 1209-1211
BAYSWATER AVENUE, ZONED R-4
Requests: basement parking area appears to have dead end at the rear,
will it affect parking, request comment from applicant; is there a
better location for trash containers; water heaters are open to the
bathrooms, this is not allowed, how will applicant correct; advise
applicant regarding exceptional circumstances that because it is
difficult to design does not make it exceptional. Item set for public
hearing September 29, 1992.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 2
September 14, 1992
2. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP AND TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR
LOT COMBINATION, LOTS 11 AND 12 AND PORTION OF LOTS 15 AND 16,
BLOCK 8. POLO FIELD SUBDIVISION. 1209-1211 BAYSWATER AVENUE
Item set for public hearing September 29, 1992.
3. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A SATELLITE ANTENNA AT 260 EL CAMINO REAL,
ZONED C-1. BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA. SUB AREA A
Requests: has applicant researched any alternative locations for the
antenna. Item set for public hearing September 29, 1992.
K*VNy •: h� •�
4. HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A PATIO COVER OVER A
PROPOSED EXERCISE POOL AT 3121 RIVERA DRIVE, ZONED R-1 (CONTINUED
FROM AUGUST 24, 1992)
Reference staff report, 8-24-92/9-14-92, with attachments. CP Monroe
reviewed details of the request, staff comments, study meeting
questions, review criteria for a hillside area construction permit.
Using the overhead projector she discussed applicant's modification of
the plans subsequent to the study meeting which eliminated the need for
lot coverage and side setback variances. Two conditions were suggested
for consideration at the public hearing.
,Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. Applicants were present. There
were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed.
C. Deal found this project would not block existing distant views from
nearby properties, applicant has worked with staff to eliminate any
problems, and moved for approval of the hillside area construction
permit by resolution with the following conditions: (1) that the
covered patio shall be built in conformance with the plans submitted to
the Planning Department date stamped July 8, 1992 and August 13, 1992
except that plans submitted to the Building Department for this project
shall show that the interior demising wall shall be screen only, and
except that the enclosed area shall be a maximum of 201.51 SF, 15.78'
x 12.771, enclosing the pool only, and the end of the structure shall
stop before the sliding glass door on the family room; and (2) that
this project shall meet all Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as
amended by the City of Burlingame.
Motion was seconded by C. Graham and approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C.
Jacobs absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 3
September 14, 1992
5. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR A FOUR STORY 38
UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM AT 530 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED R-3
6. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP, PARCEL 2 PARCEL MAP VOL. 31/15, 530 EL
CAMINO REAL
Reference staff reports, 9/14/92, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed
details of the request, previous proposal for this site which was
denied without prejudice, staff review, study meeting questions,
letters received from neighbors, required findings. Using the overhead
projector she illustrated the acacia trees to be removed and those to
be retained. Thirteen conditions were suggested for consideration at
the public hearing.
Staff explained ordinance requirements for protected trees; a
Commissioner requested Condition 11 be amended to include notes as
shown on the July 8, 1992 plans.
Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. Alex Mort:azavi of Habitat,
architect, was present. He stated they had tried to respond to all
concerns brought out at the time of the'previous application; a major
difficulty was relocation of the ramp and saving the trees which they
were able to do, only three trees will be removed, one (the 15" tree)
is severely damaging a fence and the neighbor has asked that it be
removed; they will retain the oak tree at the corner; there is a lot of
open space and landscaping, more than is required; they have responded
to Commission's concerns about exiting onto El Camino, all cars will
now exit onto Almer Road; they have also addressed storage area
questions raised by a Commissioner.
Commission/applicant/staff discussion: plans will be changed to correct
driveway apron; they will address arborist's concerns about the
eucalyptus trees along the south side; it appears a guest would have to
back out onto E1 Camino if no one were home, intercom system is in the
driveway; party wall and floor assembly rating was discussed, applicant
said these details would be on the final plans submitted for building
permit and will be above the minimum. Commissioners questioned width
and type of floor joists, noise reduction, wished to be sure there
would be 9' separation from floor to floor, how can a luxury unit be
sold without 8' ceilings; concern about sinking the structure,
applicant advised grade at exterior will be above sill plate, wood will
not contact dirt. A Commissioner asked if all traffic enters from E1
Camino Real and exits onto Almer Road why an intercom on the Almer
side; CE advised entrance from Almer would not be excluded and
suggested Almer would be used as a two way driveway, a condition might
be added to clarify entry/exit.
The following members of the audience spoke. Bob Harris, 525 Almer
Road: he asked if there had been a traffic study of the impact on Almer
of the 12' driveway; CE said it meets city standards for a driveway,
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes :Page 4
,September 14, 1992
the only ingress will be from E1 Camino, all exiting and some entrance
from Almer. John Bauer, 525 Almer Road: he said that at 525 Almer they
have 9' ceilings with 1' between floors, hopefully this condominium
will have a roof level about the same, he asked that staff ensure
applicant maintains the height limit. There were no further audience
comments and the public hearing was closed.
C. Kelly found that on the basis of the initial study, statements in
the staff report and comments received the project will not have a
negative effect on the environment. He moved for approval of Negative
Declaration ND -453P Amended, seconded by C. Galligan and approved 5-1
on roll call vote, C. Graham dissenting, C. Jacobs absent.
During subsequent discussion CA advised findings with reference to a
conditional use permit are not required for a condominium permit; there
was a concern expressed about a 12' driveway for a 38 unit development,
will this be dangerous with cars using it for entering and exiting;
staff suggested a condition could be added requiring a signaling
device.
C. Galligan found this project has addressed Commission concerns with
the previous project, traffic exiting to Almer, it makes sense to take
as much traffic off E1 Camino Real as possible, this may not be ideal
but it will work for this property; he had an objection to squeezing a
four story structure into a 35' height limit, it requires too much fine
tuning of the design, this is a luxury complex , 9' ceilings should be
part of that design. C. Galligan moved for denial of the condominium
permit, seconded by C. Graham.
Comment on the motion: architect has done a good job but would be more
comfortable knowing the exact height of the ceilings, the construction
used between floors and how the 35' height limit would be met; a
project of this size in this location is not good for the city,. there
are too many units in too small a space at the wrong time, the city
does not need more vacant condominium units; this is a large building
for this site, a huge piece of property built to the maximum.
Motion to deny the condominium permit passed on a 61-0 roll call vote,
C. Jacobs absent.
C. Graham moved to recommend to City Council denial of the tentative
condominium map, seconded by C. Galligan and approved 6-0 on roll call
vote, C. Jacobs absent. Staff will forward to Council.
Chm. Mink advised appeal procedures for the condominium permit.
7. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR TAKEOUT SERVICES AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR THREE
SPACES TO ALLOW A FOOD ESTABLISHMENT AT 1408 CHAPIN AVENUE, SUITE
1. ZONED C-1 BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA. SUB AREA B-1
This item was continued to the meeting of September 29, 1992.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 5
September 14, 1992
8. PARKING VARIANCE FOR FIVE PARKING STALLS AT 1313-1321 NORTH
CAROLAN AVENUE, ZONED M-1
Reference staff report, 9/14/92, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed
details of the request, staff comments, study meeting questions,
required findings. She noted that subsequent to the study meeting
applicant has revised office area to -keep it within 20% and therefore
a special permit is not required. Four conditions were suggested for
consideration at the,public hearing. Responding to a question, staff
advised the parking spaces at the side of the building are not counted,
that area is intended for fire access and required exiting.
Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. Applicant was present. There
were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commission discussion/ comment: happy to see a business expand but do
have a concern about an increase of five cars in an area where parking
is a problem now; not sure that by increasing the office space there
will be more cars parked out there or that the number of people in this
building will increase, do not have a problem with a five car parking
variance, what they are doing is reasonable; agree, actually there may
not be five more cars especially with a business like this; have a
problem making findings for exceptional circumstances, what is
different about this property.
C. Galligan found there were more people using this space in the past
and somehow they all were able to park, at the rear of the building
somebody has used the S.P. right-of-way, unusual circumstances could be
that there may not be legal spaces but the site is able to support the
parking need; parking can be provided if not to code. C. Galligan
moved for approval of the parking variance by resolution with the
following conditions: (1) that the addition as built shall conform to
the plans submitted to the Planning Department and (late stamped August
17, 1992 Sheets Al, A3; and plans date stamped August 17, 1992 Sheet
A2; and revised plans date stamped August 26, 1992 Sheets A4 and A5;
(2) that the conditions of the City Engineer's July 27, 1992 memo shall
be met; (3) that the smaller loft (approximately 426 SF) on the second
floor shall be used only for storage and never improved or converted to
office use; and (4) that the project shall meet all the requirements of
the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of
Burlingame.
Motion was seconded by C. Ellis. Comment on the motion: this area grew
through the years, it was built under a set of codes that no longer
exist, now someone is meeting all today's rules but. there is no place
to put more parking, do not think in the beginning there were any
parking requirements out there. Motion was approved 6-0 on roll call
vote, C. Jacobs absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
September 14, 1992
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
- Hillside Area Construction Permit - 2021 Devereux Drive
PLANNER REPORT
CP Monroe reviewed City Council actions at its September 9, 1992
regular meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:02 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael F. Galligan
Secretary