The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMin - PC - 1994.02.28CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION February 28, 1994 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Deal on Monday, February 28, 1994 at 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Deal, Ellis, Galligan, Graham, Jacobs, Kelly, Mink Absent: None Staff Present: Margaret Monroe, City Planner; Leah Dreger, Zoning Technician; Jerry Coleman, City Attorney; Frank Erbacher, City Engineer; MINUTES - The minutes of the February 14, 1994 meeting were unanimously approved. AGENDA - The order of the agenda was approved. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. ITEMS FOR STUDY 1. SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR SINGING CLASSES 1229 BURLINGAME AVENUE, SUITE 15, ZONED C-1 SUBAREA A, BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA (BRUCE KIRKBRIDE, PXQPERTY.OWNER AND MARIE B. COCHRAN, APPLICANT). -� Requests: Clarification whether the classes are 2 or 3 days a week, what was prior use; is this use more or less intense than the previous use which was exempt from the parking requirements; any complaints from other businesses; ask applicant to provide information on sound attenuation in and through walls, size of area leased (SF)? Item set for Public Hearing March 14, 1994. Commission suggested staff prepare for future use, a report enumerating the parking variances in the Burlingame Avenue area after the completion of the Donnelly Avenue Garage, to assist in keeping track of the potential cumulative impact of minor parking variances granted over time. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1994 2. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR OFFICES OVER 20% AND PARKING VARIANCES AT 1606 ROLLINS ROAD ZONED M-1 (JOSEPH DIMAIO, PROPERTY OWNER AND BAYSTAR MEDICAL SERVICES, APPLICANT). Requests: ask to expand on the need for a variance for 4 more spaces, what has changed that prompts the necessity for more office space; if the 1606/1610/1616 were considered in combination rather than as separate lots how could the parking requirements for all the sites be met; what is the traffic service level at Broadway and do traffic counts indicate an overburdened intersection? Item set for Public Hearing March 14, 1994 ITEMS FOR ACTION 3. PARKING VARIANCE AT 1319 BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED C-1, BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA, SUBAREA A (TRUST FUNDS INCORPORATED, PROPERTY OWNER AND STAN CLARK, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 2/28/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. If recommended to Council for approval, 3 conditions were suggested. CE Erbacher asked that the condition discussed in the City Engineer's memo asking for participation in a parking district be disregarded. Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Stan Clark, the applicant, 1319 Burlingame Avenue addressed concerns and answered the Commission's questions. The proposed changes will provide a midblock access through the store to Burlingame Avenue from the parking lot behind, deliveries will also be shifted to the rear rather than from Burlingame Avenue as is now the case. It was clarified that State Board of Pharmacy prohibits the public in the pharmacy area. The passage to the upstairs area is also through the pharmacy and will not be accessible to the public. Tom Foy, 2775 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto spoke in support of the tenant's request, he is the property manager, representing the owners of 1319 Burlingame Avenue. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Galligan explained that it is very clear this use will not significantly increase from the previous location and clarified via the CA that the move is only a substitution of space relocating the existing first floor office to the mezzanine storage area in order to create an access hallway on the first floor and asked that a condition be added stating "the office will only be used by the first floor tenant". There was further clarification that this is a unique -2- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1994 situation because the State Board of Pharmacy limits the use of and access to available space. C. Galligan then moved to approve the application with the following conditions; 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped January 17, 1994; 2) that application be made to the Building Department for the proposed improvements and that the requirements of the Chief Building Inspector's memo dated 2/7/94 shall be met;. 3 ) that the office wi 11 be used only by the first floor tenant; 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 approved on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. STUDY ITEMS (CONTINUED 4. HOUSING ELEMENT CP Monroe discussed the 1990-1995 City of Burlingame Housing Element. The Housing Element is intended to establish the city's policy and work program implementing that policy in the timeframe of 1990-1995 extended by the legislature to 1997. The major difference between the proposed Housing Element and that adopted in 1978 is the change in the State requirements that place an emphasis on quantifying need and matching the quantified needs by income level within the work program, and noting who is responsible for what. This, effectively lays out the work program that the Planning Commission would be following between now and 1997. There are deadlines within that work program. We are now in the adoption process for the Housing Element. The Planning Commission Public Hearing on the element is set for March 14. There was clarification about the certification process. Robert Ironside, Ironside and Associates, 508 St. Thomas Lane, Foster City summarized the key points of the Housing Element and explained that the city has an obligation to respond to the comments made by HCD on the draft Housing Element submitted. There is no obligation to continuously respond. There is enough contained in this Housing Element, if the City gets to the point of self certification, to make reasonable findings. The review at the state level looks at the whole menu and does everything the law might allow to make housing more affordable. Sometimes they do not seem to realize that it is not politically possible to do it all. In the element the case is made that this community is not exclusive, in the sense of Hillsborough, and points out that Burlingame has the highest number of apartments with a high degree of affordability, this is one of the things that would be put in the findings. The Housing Element discusses the community and takes into account the composition of the existing housing need and examines how it can be satisfied. The current zoning and general plan land use discussions would allow the housing needs to be met. A further -3- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1994 step, that this Housing Element takes, is what can be done as a community to be more assertive in making sure economic nature does not just take its course and that the community becomes an advocate for attempting to reduce housing prices to an affordable cost. Looking at the goals, policy and action is really where the City of Burlingame makes a statement as to what its commitment will be and what will be done to build lower cost housing. These are more than just words, the staff will be revising codes and taking active steps to seek out developers that would attempt to develop low cost housing rather than waiting passively. Ironside reviewed in detail each of the policies for implementing action programs. Several were discussed to clarify what the city's responsibility would be. The Planning Commission Public Hearing is set for March 14, 1994. PLANNER'S REPORTS - CP reviewed City Council actions/discussion at its February 23, 1994 regular meeting. ru3110161:i►l5" The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 P.M. MIN2.28 -4- Respectfully submitted, Ruth E. Jacobs, Secretary