HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1994.08.0841(kl�
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called
to order by Chairman Galligan on Monday, August 8, 19,94 at 7:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Deal, Ellis, Galligan, Jacobs, Key and Mink
Absent: Commissioner Kelly
Staff Present: Margaret Monroe, City Planner; Frank Erbacher, City
Engineer; Keith Marshall, Fire Marshal
MINUTES - The minutes of the July 25, 1994 meeting were approved as
mailed.
Chairman Galligan informed all applicants for action :items that the rules
of procedure for the commission require a minimum of 4 affirmative votes to
pass a motion, there are only 6 members seated tonight,. If a vote ties the
motion does not pass. If an applicant would prefer to be heard by a full
commission, they may request a continuance. There were no such requests.
AGENDA - Item Number 12, 34 Anita Road was continued to the August
22, 1994 meeting. The order of the agenda was then
approved.
FROM THE FLOOR
There were no public comments.
ITEMS FOR STUDY
1. SPECIAL PERMITS FOR OVERSIZED DETACHED GARAGE AT 21 PARK ROAD, ZONED
R-3 (JOSE ABURTO, PROPERTY OWNER AND STANLEY E. YORKE. APPLICANT).
Requests: What is use of small unit; are there plans for a second driveway
on E1 Camino; is a use permit or home occupation permit required and what
are the stipulations regarding occupational vehicles; describe size of
vehicle; are the requirements for a detached garage the same in R-3 as in
R-1; could future owner use garage for residential. Item set for public
hearing August 22, 1994.
2. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR MARTIAL ARTS CLASSES AT 1247 BROADWAY, ZONED C-1
(WALTER RENNER, PROPERTY OWNER AND SCOTT WOODS. APPLICANT).
Requests: Parking study for Saturdays; what age groups attend the Saturday
classes; what are the parking requirements of this use vs a retail use;
duration of typical class; will there be tournaments or exhibitions at this
site; if so, when; Item set for public hearing August 22, 1994 pending
completion of the parking study.
-1-
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
August 8, 1994
3. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR REAL ESTATE USE ON THE FIRST FLOOR AT 1440 CHAPIN
AVENUE, ZONED C-1 SUBAREA B1 (CORTINA INVESTMENTS LTD, PROPERTY OWNER
AND CAROL RODONI OF CORNISH AND CAREY, APPLICANT).
Requests: Clarify size of area leased on second floor; is the Monday
morning meeting 35 or 80 people; address potential methods to alleviate
parking problem; include copy of Planning Commission minutes for previous
application; what has changed since last application; why no parking
variance required; need new parking study, including lunch hour monday
morning and peak parking demand times. Item set for public hearing August
22, 1994 if all necessary information is received.
4. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO COMBINE LOTS AND A VARIANCE TO STREET FRONTAGE
AT 025-169-160 & 170 AND 025-168-130, ZONED M-1 (ARTHUR MICHAEL AND
JOHN T. MICHAEL - R.W.R. PROPERTIES, PROPERTY OWNERS AND ARTHUR
MICHAEL, APPLICANT).
Requests: Estimate of the number of spaces now provided to Prime Time in
supplemental lot; What does the applicant plan to do with parcels; Item
set for public hearing August 22, 1994.
ACTION ITEMS
5. VARIANCES TO REAR SETBACK AND FLOOR AREA RATIO AT 2022 RAY DRIVE,
ZONED R-1 (JERRY AND EILEEN CEGLIA, PROPERTY OWNERS AND TAMARA HARMON,
APPLICANT).
Reference staff report, 8/8/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the
request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting
questions. Four conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. Tamara Harmon, T. H. Designs,
representing the applicant, addressed the commission and explained the
changes to the project and the obstacles, within the structure, created by
its original design, difficult to overcome. She stressed the fact that the
excess floor area ratio consists mainly of air space in the stair well that
could never become floor space. The garage side elevation is also reduced
in mass and bulk by the addition of the bay window sections. The previous
application asked for four variances; they are now with redesign requesting
two. A diagram of floor area removed by redesign on the second floor was
submitted to the commission to be a part of the record. C. Jacobs
commended the designer for the spirit in which the redesign was handled, to
address and reduce the Floor Area Ratio. There were no further comments
and the public hearing was closed.
The commission discussed the bay window and whether it could be allowed to
go to the floor without having to renotice and appear before the
commission. Since, if on a foundation it would encroach into the front
setback, another variance would be necessary.
C.Jacobs noted the exceptional lot shape which is not at all typical but is
odd and different. As designed this addition to the house will be an asset
to the neighborhood, she then moved approval of this application, by
resolution, 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 8, 1994 Sheets A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5 with a maximum FAR of
.553 or 3,093 SF; 2) that the front setback on the second floor shall be a
-2-
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 1994
t minimum of 20'-0" from the front property line; 3) that no portion of the
garage shall be converted into storage area or living area which decreases
the interior clear dimension of 20'-0" X 20'-011; and 4) that the project
shall meet all Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Code requirements as
amended by the City.
Motion was seconded by C. Ellis and passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Kelly absent)
voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
6. HEIGHT AND PARKING VARIANCES TO RENOVATE THE FIRST STORY AND BUILD A
SECOND STORY ADDITION AT 1617 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 (FRANK
SKOGLUND, PROPERTY OWNER AND CHU DESIGN & ENGINEERING, APPLICANT).
Reference staff report, 8/8/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the
request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting
questions. Three conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. James Chu, of James Chu Design
clarified the lot size as 6000 SF. The property owner objected to the use
of a flat roof and felt it would not be compatible with the neighborhood.
Dick Inokuchi, the neighbor directly to the rear, at IL616 Coronado, spoke
in opposition to the project, expressed his feelings that this would
restrict light, air and view to his property and presented the commission
with the signatures of neighbors opposed. Don Cory, 833 Alpine expressed
his concern with tall structures cutting off light for the houses across
the street. The property owner readdressed the commission to clarify that
the view obstruction is only about 5' over the 30' maximum and would have
little impact. There were no further comments and the public hearing was
closed.
Commissioners questioned the height of the current building which has a
raised roof and the method of determining height, which is from top of curb
at front property line. There was also discussion of the utility line
within the public right-of-way in the 5.5' area between the sidewalk and
front property line. setback area. Further discussion disclosed that this
project in fact will almost be a rebuild and under those circumstances it
would be possible to make the garage 3 or 4 feet wider which would then
provide the 2 parking spaces required; the floor could then also be lowered
keeping within the 30' height limit and still retaining the 9' ceiling on
the first floor.
C. Jacobs stated that this application, as presented, is not in keeping
with the bulk and character of existing uses of properties in the general
vicinity and could find no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to this property that do not generally apply to all
property in the neighborhood. The height is more of a problem than the
parking. She then moved to deny this application without prejudice.
Motion was seconded by C. Mink and passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Kelly absent)
voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
-3-
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 1994
7. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR SIZE AND REAR SETBACK VARIANCE FOR GARAGE AT 833
ALPINE ROAD, ZONED R-1 (DONALD CORY, PROPERTY OWNER AND DAVE HOWELL,
APPLICANT).
Reference staff report, 8/8/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the
request, reviewed criteria, and Planning Department comments. Four
conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. Donald Cory, 833 Alpine answered
questions. There were no further comments and the public hearing was
closed.
C. Deal stated that the rear setback is dictated by the fact that garage is
outside the rear 30% of the lot and the proportion of the garage relates
well to the house. This garage is an intelligent use of the property, will
fit nicely with the character of the existing neighborhood. He moved
approval of this application, by resolution, 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 14, 1994 Sheet 1, Existing Floor
Plan and Site Plan, and Sheet 2, Garage Elevations and Plans; 2) that no
portion of the garage shall be used as a living area or converted into a
living area at any later date; 3) that there shall be no encroachment of
any structures, equipment, or appliances into the 10' X 20' required
vehicle parking area; 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. Key and passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Kelly absent) voice
vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
The Commission adjourned for a break at 9:05 P.M. and reconvened at 9:15
P.M.
8. VARIANCE FOR REQUIRED AVERAGE FRONT SETBACK AT 950 PALOMA AVENUE,
ZONED R-1 (STEVE PETERSON, PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT).
Reference staff report, 8/8/94, with attachments. CP:Monroe discussed the
request, reviewed criteria, and Planning Department comments. Four
conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. Tom Hamacher, the architect, and
Steve Peterson, property owner were present to answer any questions. Mr.
Hamacher explained the porch accomplishes a buffering effect and creates a
flowing sight line down the block. There were no further comments and the
public hearing was closed.
Commissioners stated that this elongated and narrow lot requires a greater
setback in order to have a 24' turnaround space in the rear. This
solution, pulling their house forward, blends the setback with that of the
garage on the corner house eliminating a tunnel effect to the streetscape.
Reference to these reasons combined with the facts in the staff report, C.
Deal then moved to approve this variance application, by resolution, 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 19,
1994, Sheet A-1 and Front Setback Survey; 2) that the front setback to the
front porch shall not be less that 18'-6" and that the front setback to the
-4-
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 1994
main house shall not be less than 26'-011; 3) that the proposed fence
elevation (Sheet A-1) shall not be approved with this application and shall
be redesigned to conform to code prior to the issuance of a Building
permit; and 4) that the project shall meet all Uniform Building and Uniform
Fire Code requirements as amended by the City.
Motion was seconded by C. Jacobs and passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Kelly absent)
voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
9. PARKING VARIANCE FOR OFFICE USE ON THE SECOND FLOOR AT 311-315
PRIMROSE ROAD, ZONED C-1 SUBAREA A (RONNIE GOLDFIELD, PROPERTY OWNER
AND APPLICANT).
Reference staff report, 8/8/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the
request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting
questions. Four conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. Steve Kohn, Bruin Realty, 347
Primrose Road, was present on behalf of the property owner and elaborated
that findings should show it is physically impossible to provide the
required parking on site. Originally the second floor use was as two
apartments requiring only 1 parking space for each unit. Commissioners
noted they could not determine how the various areas on the second floor
were to be used or there size and asked the applicant to provide adequate
plans drawn to scale. Ronnie Goldfield, property owner, offered to answer
any questions. There were no further comments and the public hearing was
closed.
C. Jacobs made a motion to continue this application until the applicant is
able to submit a more complete set of plans in compliance with the Planning
Department's plan preparation checklist. It was noted. for the record that
this application should be renoticed at the time it is brought back to the
commission.
Motion was seconded by C. Ellis and passed on a 6-0--1 (C. Kelly absent)
voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
10. PARKING VARIANCE FOR SIX STALLS TO ALLOW SECOND FLOOR RETAIL USE AT
851 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-R (PAUL C. LEE, PROPERTY OWNER AND
APPLICANT).
Reference staff report, 8/8/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the
request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting
questions. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. A letter
objecting to the application, from the owner of 857-8151 California Drive,
was read into the record.
Commissioner asked clarification of the use permit in the event another
business were to occupy this site.
Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. Peter Lee, owner of Future Sound
and Ed Chamberlain, Manager of Future Sound were present to answer
questions. It was conceded the work had been undertaken and completed
without benefit of permits. Commissioners asked the applicant to determine
what are the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that are there now
and were not there and outlined in the planner's letter when the building
was purchased and prior to the construction. The applicant explained the
-5-
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 1994
zoning regulations changed after the property was purchased. The interior
work to the second floor was done so the business could survive. The
zoning restrictions changed in 1991. The applicant acknowledged they made
a mistake and are trying to remedy that error.
Larry Lyon, 1901 Garden Drive and Frank Hunt, 1134 Eastmoor Road, spoke in
support of the applicant. The business is an upscale, destination
distributor. They have been in Burlingame a long time.
The applicant answered the commissioners questions regarding the length of
time the applicant has done business in Burlingame. They have been in
Burlingame over seven years, on Burlingame Avenue and at this site.
Details of the second floor showroom use were furnished, there are no sales
transactions on the second floor. Commissioners commented about the
employee parking problems. There were no further comments and the public
hearing was closed.
Commission stated the applicant caused their own hardship and it is a
unique problem created by rezoning. C. Jacobs then moved approval of this
application, by resolution, with the following amended and added
conditions: 1) that the uses within the building shall conform to those
shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped June
23, 1994, and shall have 2484 SF of retail sales and :storage on the first
floor and 2160 SF of showroom only and 324 SF of storage associated with
the retail sales on the second floor; 2) that application shall be made to
the Building Department for a retroactive building permit(s) for all work
not previously approved by the Building Department and for any required or
proposed corrective work, and that prior to the issuance of any building
permit(s) for this work the property owner shall pay penalty fees equalling
ten times the building permit fee; 3) that only one business, and that
business shall be a retail business, shall operate from this site and that
the business shall operate within the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Monday through Saturday and 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Sundays, with a maximum
of four employees on site at any one time; 4) that all sales contracts
shall be written on the first floor; 5) that the conditions of the Fire
Marshal's memo dated June 27, 1994 shall be met; 6) that the project shall
meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as
amended by the City of Burlingame; 7) that all employees shall be required
to park on the east side of California Drive, so that the adjacent
residential area shall not be impacted; 8) that the applicant will comply
with requirements of the Uniform Building Code, obtain all required permits
and complete work within sixty (60) days; 9) that -this variance shall
expire in three (3) years and if the applicant wishes to continue the
showroom use on the second floor he shall reapply for a parking variance
prior to the expiration of this of this variance; and 10) that the
conditions of this variance shall be reviewed for compliance in six months
(January, 1995) and every year thereafter or upon complaint.
Motion was seconded by C. Key and passed on a 5-1-1 (C. Mink dissenting and
C. Kelly absent) voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
August 8, 1994
11. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR SATELLITE DISH ANTENNA AT 1100 TROUSDALE DRIVE,
ZONED C-1 (RUSSELLO & ROSENBERG ET AL, PROPERTY OWNER AND SHAWN
CHAPEL, APPLICANT).
Reference staff report, 8/8/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the
request, reviewed criteria, and Planning Department comments. Five
conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. Shawn Chapel, 1100 Trousdale
Avenue, clarified the operation of the satellite dish.. It receives only
educational material related to long term care networking, not
entertainment. There were no further comments and the public hearing was
closed.
C. Ellis stated that this antenna and its proposed use, at this location,
is suitable and compatible with the character of the existing neighborhood
and moved approval of this application, by resolution, with the following
conditions: 1) that the location of the antenna shall. be consistent with
the location shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date
stamped July 6, 1994; 2) that the top of the dish antenna shall not be
higher than 10'-6" above the grade adjacent to the sidewalk; 3) that the
antenna surface shall be non -reflective, painted to match the building and
the non -reflective quality shall be maintained by the property owner; 4)
that any change in the location, surface or size of this antenna or the
addition of other antennas at this site shall require an amendment to this
iermit; and 5) that the project shall meet all requirements of the Uniform
Building and Fire Codes as amended by the City.
Motion was seconded by C. Ellis and passed on a 4-2-1 (C. Deal and Mink
dissenting and C. Kelly absent) roll call vote. Appeal procedures were
advised.
Commission commented on the placement of this satellite dish and its
visibility to traffic on California Drive. Anything on the roof would be
visible to the residences up the hill.
12. VARIANCES TO RETAIN AN ILLEGALLY CONVERTED GARAGE AS A LIVING UNIT AT
34 ANITA ROAD, ZONED R-3 (ROSA AND YVETTE MEDINA, PROPERTY OWNERS AND
YVETTE MEDINA, APPLICANT). (ITEM CONTINUED TO AUGUST 22, 1994).
ITEM CONTINUED TO AUGUST 22, 1994.
13. TENTATIVE AND FINAL CONDOMINIUM MAP AT 1445 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED R-3
(DR. MOHSEN NAJAFI, PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT).
Reference staff report, 8/8/94, with attachments. CE Erbacher discussed
the request, reviewed criteria, Public Works and Planning Department
comments. There were no conditions were suggested for consideration.
There was confirmation that occupancy would not be allowed until the
landscaping is complete.
:hm. Galligan opened the public hearing. Mohsen Najafi, 754 Sir Francis
Drake Boulevard, San Raphael, was present to answer any questions and
assured the commission the landscape would be complete. There were no
further comments and the public hearing was closed.
-7-
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
August 8, 1994
C. Jacobs moved that this application for a tentative and final condominium
nap be recommended to City Council.
Motion was seconded by C. Ellis and passed on a 6-0--1 (C. Kelly absent)
voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised.
VIII. PLANNER REPORTS
There were no reports.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Mike Ellis, Secretary
MINUTES8.8