Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1994.01.24CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 24, 1994 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Deal on Monday, January 24, 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; Jerry Coleman, City Attorney; Frank Erbacher, City Engineer; Keith Marshall, Deputy Fire Marshal MINUTES - The minutes of the January 10, 1994 meeting were approved with the following correction; Keith Marshall, Fire Marshal, was present (replacing Bill Reilly), and the minutes of December 13, 1993 were revised to correct the vote count on Item #7 page 5, paragraph 3 to read; "on a 4-1-2 voice vote." AGENDA - The order of the agenda was approved. CP Monroe noted that Item #3 at 845 Cowan Road, had been withdrawn and Item 12 at 700 Airport Boulevard, was continued to February 14, 1994. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. ITEMS FOR STUDY 1. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION AND PARKING VARIANCE AT 1024 OAK GROVE AVENUE, ZONED C-1 (GLORIA CONTI, PROPERTY OWNER AND WESTATES FINANCIAL CORP., APPLICANT). Requests: that tenant/employee/customer parking use behind building needs clarification and a variance application should be required. Check to see if any previous traffic studies were requested for site. The City Engineer noted that the curb cut needs to be closed. Item set for Public Hearing February 14, 1994, provided all requested information is received. 4 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 2. TWO SPECIAL PERMITS FOR A LIMOUSINE SERVICE AND ROOF ANTENNA AT 1380 MARSTEN ROAD, ZONED M -1 (PHILIP H. WONG, PROPERTY OWNER AND DON MAHNKE, APPLICANT). Requests: Include any prior traffic studies if available. Where will the antenna be placed on the building. Plot plan needs to be clearer regarding the building and the intended use of the 12 parking spaces (employees or 22/24 limousines to be stored). Item set for Public Hearing February 14, 1994. 3. TWO SPECIAL PERMITS AND TWO PARKING VARIANCES FOR A COURIER SERVICE AT 845 COWAN ROAD, ZONED M-1 (LANDO/SOBEL, PROPERTY OWNERS AND ROBERT B. GORDON, APPLICANT). Item #3 is withdrawn at the request of the applicant. VII. ACTION ITEMS 4. SIGN EXCEPTION FOR SIGN AREA AT 2828 TROUSDALE DRIVE, ZONED R-1 (BURLINGAME CALIFORNIA CONGREGATION OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES, PROPERTY OWNER AND UNITED SIGNS, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 1/24/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. If recommended to Council for approval,. action should include findings made for the sign exception, 3 conditions were suggested. Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Laura Bernstein, United Signs, proposed the removal of the previous sign and a realignment and replacement with the addition of spanish text in an effort to create easier identification of the building. Robert W. Trares, 2841 Trousdale Avenue, neighbor immediately across the street discussed his apprehension about the proposal because of the illumination of the current monument sign and the hours that it is lit. Does not seem to comply with the current approval, wants to see current enforced in connection with the time span and amount of illumination. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. There was discussion about the previously approved sign and the change in its size which had occurred over the years, C. Graham then moved to deny the directory portion of the application. Motion was seconded by C. Jacobs and approved on a 7-0 voice vote. -2- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 C. Graham then moved to approve the wall sign portion of the application with the following conditions: 1) that the new wall sign shall be indirectly lit and built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 27, 1993 Sheet one - Sign Elevations, Sheet Two - Site Plans; the directory sign shall be returned to its original dimension 2.5' X 3' and low level internal illumination, approved in 1977; and 2) that all signs may be. illuminated until 9:00 P.M. and no later than 10:30 P.M. when there are evening meetings; 3) that the project shall meet all Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Code requirements as amended by the City. The motion was seconded by C. Mink and approved on a 6-1 voice vote (C. Jacobs dissenting). Appeal procedures were advised. 5. AVERAGE FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE AT 1480 B OAK GROVE AVENUE, ZONED R-2 (ANGELO TAVERNA, PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 1/24/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. If recommended to Council for approval, 4 conditions were suggested. Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Angelo Taverna, 1480 B Oak Grove Avenue, answered questions from the Commission. Questions regarding the dimension between the garage doors and the size of garage doors were left unanswered. There was discussion on the method of calculation for the average front setback and the exclusion of the corner house's side setback in the computation. Jim Chiapelone, 1474 Oak Grove Avenue, questioned the method of calculation for the average front setback, and noted that the measurement of his home. was to the front stairs and not the covered portion of the porch, which increased his setback from the 15'-6" noted to 181. He mentioned the anticipated view of a two story blank wall, increasing the shade and decreasing the light in his home and the concerns of security because the view from the street to his house would be blocked from that side. The plans for the new construction do not fit in with adjacent homes. The charm and individual characteristics of the homes in the neighborhood are the opposite of this large, bulky addition which he felt would be a detriment to the property values in the neighborhood. Betsy Valdes, 1490 Oak Grove Avenue reiterated the review given by Mr. Chiapelone. The feasibility of the driveway with such a severe right turn angle into the second stall was. questioned. Cheryl Chiapelone, 1474 Oak Grove Avenue asked the Commission to consider the inadequacy of the answers given to the required questions showing why the project would not be detrimental to the community. -3- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs then moved to deny the application noting that to qualify for a variance one must show that there are no other alternatives on the site. There are other alternatives to provide parking at the rear of the lot and to make the second story addition over more of the existing structure. Motion was seconded by C. Mink and approved on a 5-2 roll call vote (Cms. Galligan and Kelly dissenting). Appeal procedures were advised. 6. SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE AT. 113 CHANNING ROAD, ZONED R-1 (REID F. & KIM M. GOTTHARDT, PROPERTY OWNERS AND APPLICANTS). Reference staff report, 1/24/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. If recommended to Council for approval, 5 conditions were suggested. Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Louis Liberty, 433 Airport Boulevard, Suite 421, Attorney for the applicant stated that this project is not detrimental to the neighborhood and there are no complaints. Further, to install a garage door would be an unreasonable hardship on the applicant since there is no driveway paving to the door. Reid Gotthardt, 113 Channing Road, the applicant, addressed the Commission. Residential disclosure was not in effect in 1986 when the property was purchased. An effort was made to locate Mr. Higgins, the previous owner, and it is known that he is somewhere in Calavaras County, however no address is available. Ken Nocentini, 300 Bayswater Avenue, was the subcontractor, hired by Mr. Higgins, to pump the foundation for the house and garage. There is a footing and a stemwall all the way across where the garage door should be, that would mean it is a 2' X 2' SF pad with steel rebar and would be extremely difficult to remove to install a garage door. Comment was made about an illegal duplex next door, parking for the illegal duplex causes problems and that neighbor's complaints triggered this application. He felt this to be unfair. Lois Blair Howard, 121 Channing Road spoke in favor of the residents at 113 Channing Road and requested that the variance and special permit be granted. She noted the entire family, children included, take very good care of their property. Stan Rosen, 118 Stanley Road spoke in favor of the parking variance for the Gotthardts. Mr. George Wong, 109 Channing Road spoke in opposition to the variance. Photographs were shown of a large truck, often parked at 113 Channing. Mrs. Fong, his landlady, had observed the Gotthardts making an illegal remodel after they bought the house and it is not -4- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 fair to say they bought the house "as it is". Parking is a problem Mr. Gotthardt told him not to park on the street next to his house therefore there must be a parking problem. He submitted a paper with names in opposition to the request. Children play in the street because they cannot play in the driveway. Mr. Gotthardt noted that the large truck is his employers and since he is a delivery man he stopped at home on rare occasions; his stays were always brief. The issue of corrective work was also discussed in light of the fact the house was purchased "as it was", commissioners noted that the conditions might include a requirement to provide a garage if the footprint or envelope of the house was ever expanded because of the added increment of impact on parking. It was suggested that the conditions be amended. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. There were questions regarding the tree on the property, it is not large enough to be a protected tree. In the event of an improvement on the property and the eventual removal of the tree it could be replaced in another location. C. Graham noted the long time period (back to 1985) as a consideration in this request, this property has an unusual configuration since it has a long driveway for off street parking which is unusual. No change is proposed which is not already there so will not affect the neighbors. If this were a proposal to expand the house without parking there would be a different set of circumstances, she then moved to approve the application with amended conditions; 1) that, within 30 days of City action on this application, the property owners apply to the Building Department for a retroactive building permit for the accessory structure as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped December 9, 1993; 2) that an inspection of the accessory structure be called for within 30 days of issuance of the building permit and any necessary corrections be completed and inspected within 60 days of the issuance of the permit; 3) that the accessory structure shall never be converted into an accessory living unit and that a separate special permit shall be applied for if the structure will be used for anything other than storage or if the structure is expanded in any way from the existing 13' X 20' (260 SF) dimensions; 4) that when this property is sold, or the footprint or envelope of the house enlarged, the structure shall be converted back to a garage by the issuance of a building permit for installation of a garage door, removal of landscaping and brickwork and installation of a driveway, before the close of escrow or final inspection of any improvements, and that the City shall be notified of the sale of the property and the completion of the corrective work; 5) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the -5- I Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 i Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame. It was requested that consideration be given to continuing non- conforming use that has not generated any problem to the neighborhood. When complaints are brought to the attention of the Commission there should be careful consideration with regard to the overall benefit to the City. Motion was seconded by C. Galligan and approved on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. The commission adjourned for a 10 minute break at 9:17 P.M. and reconvened at 9:27 P.M. 7. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION AT 330 PRIMROSE ROAD #408, ZONED C-1 SUBAREA A (EDWARD A. KEITH, PROPERTY OWNER AND ROBERT J. LOVEJOY, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 1/24/94, 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. The relocation within the building triggered a code enforcement issue because of the new space occupied and the increase in floor area requiring a use permit. Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. There were no comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs then moved to approve the application with amended conditions as follows because the small number of people working in this business would have no greater parking impact than a regular office use; 1) that the financial planning business(es) shall be limited to a 1400 SF area in Suite 408 within the building and shall have a maximum number of four (4) employees; and 2) 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. Graham and approved on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 8. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR SATELLITE DISH ANTENNA AT 1200 HOWARD AVENUE, SUITE 105, ZONED C-1 SUBAREA B (KING P. YEE, PROPERTY OWNER AND SCOTT W. BRENNAN, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 1/24/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. If recommended to Council for approval, 7 conditions were suggested. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Scott Brennan, 1200 Howard Avenue, submitted an additional drawing of the satellite dish showing a 3' diameter dish with a non -penetrating mount which could be placed anywhere on the roof with ballast to hold it in place. The Commissioners discussed with him the preferred location for the antenna on the roof noting it was of less concern since its overall 3' height was lower than the 42" parapet wall; therefore it would not be visible. Amendments to staff suggested conditions were discussed clarifying that the maximum size of the dish would be 3', that it would be mounted on the roof with a non -penetrating mount, and that its placement be at a least visible location. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Ellis moved to approve the application, noting that with the non -penetrating roof mount the 3' antenna would not be visible from the street, with amended conditions as follows; 1) that the antenna shall be installed on a non -penetrating mount in a least visible location on the roof; 2) that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspectors' January 10, 1994 memo shall be met; 3) that the dish antenna installed shall have a diameter of three (3) feet and shall not rise more than four (4) feet above the surface of the roof and shall be painted smoky gray with a non -reflective paint to match the roof; 4) that the applicant or property owner shall be responsible for an amendment to this use permit if future construction on any adjacent property requires relocation of the dish antenna, removal and reinstallation costs shall also be borne by the applicant and/or property owner; 5) that the applicant shall permanently maintain the nonreflective surface of the dish and its support structure, or remove all the equipment and support structure; 6) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame; and 7) that any modification to the antenna or its location shall require an amendment to this use permit. Motion was seconded by C. Kelly and approved on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 9. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR CLASSROOM USE AT 1245 HOWARD AVENUE, ZONED C-1 SUBAREA B (PHILLIP H. SHAMLIAN, PROPERTY OWNER AND JUDITH M. PISANO, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 1/24/94, 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. A 9:15 a.m. parking count averaged 142 available spaces and at 6:45 p.m indicated an average 151 spaces were available. -7- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 a Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Judith Pisano, 1325 Howard Avenue, clarified that the classes would be Monday - Saturday and the retail sales Tuesday - Saturday and asked that the conditions be amended to reflect these changes. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs noted that these classes will not have an adverse impact since students are leaving at the beginning of the peak daytime parking demand and parking is not a problem in the area in the evening. She then moved to approve the application with amended conditions as follows; 1) that the 750 SF of the second floor used for retail and associated classes shall be as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 21, 1993; 2) that there shall be a maximum of 22 students and 2 instructors on site at the time and classes shall be offered twice a day at 9:30 a.m. to noon and 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, retail sales will occur 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Tuesday through Saturday; 3) that any change to the size of the tenant space, number of students or hours of class offerings shall require an amendment to this use permit; 4) that, even if the use or intensity of the use does not change, if any tenant improvements are made in the future they shall be reviewed by the Building Department and all access requirements for the disabled required by state law shall be provided; and 5) that before occupancy all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire codes as amended by the City of Burlingame shall be met. The disabled access requirements in the Uniform Building Code were briefly discussed. The effect of remodeling on these access requirements was noted. The applicant intends to use the space as it is. Motion was seconded by C. Mink and approved on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 10. TAKE-OUT PERMIT FOR COFFEE SHOP AT 1158 CAPUCHINO AVENUE, ZONED C-1 (DAVID HINCKLE, PROPERTY OWNER AND GIULIANO POLLANO, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 1/24/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. If recommended to Council for approval, 6 conditions were suggested. Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Avenue, answered questions from the gate securing the parking was used. cm David Hinckle, 1616 Sanchez Commission regarding when the Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 Commissioners noted that the street this business was located on is one way and has residential uses on it which might be affected by very early morning traffic. Some commissioners noted that people use the side streets now to avoid congestion on Broadway and they did not think this would make that condition any worse in this area. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs noted that the hours of this business generally precede the.peak period in the area therefore it would have little adverse effect and the conditions which address no cooking regulate the size and type of business to keep it compatible and 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, December 9, 1993, General Floor Plan; 2) that at no time in the future shall any chairs or tables be placed inside the tenant space for customer use without a use permit and designation as an eating establishment; 3) that the sale of food and beverages shall be limited to coffee, refrigerated drinks and cold food and a full kitchen shall not be installed; 4) that the coffee shop will be open 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Sunday with a maximum of 2 employees at any one time; 5) that this business shall provide and maintain trash receptacles outside the door at a location approved by the City Engineer and Fire Department; and 6) 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. Graham and approved on a 6-1 voice vote, C. Galligan dissenting. Appeal procedures were advised. 11. SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE TO EXPAND FOOD ESTABLISHMENT AT 1219 BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED C-1 SUBAREA A (PAUL A. OHM, PROPERTY OWNER AND ISMAIL UNLU, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 1/24/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. If recommended to Council for approval, 9 conditions were suggested. The applicant is in the process of getting an agreement from the adjacent property owners for an easement allowing use for fire access. A sketch, presented in addition to the staff report, showed the removal of the storage shed to be replaced with a 10' X 10' structure with one hour walls which would be an extension of the building to replace the wooden storage shed. The proposed parking layout and the feasibility of replacing the 3 non- conforming angled spaces with one parallel space to code dimensions. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Ismail Unlu, owner of La Scala Restaurant, 1219 Burlingame Avenue assured the Commission there would be no additional food service in the new bar area just drinks and appetizers, the additional space request is only for a waiting area. David Gaig, 108 Myrtle, #4, recommended approval and noted the need for more waiting area for the convenience of the customers. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Mink then moved to approve the application for a parking variance for the storage mezzanine and special permit to expand the eating establishment with the addition of a 10' X 10' permanent storage area attached to the building at the rear with amended and added conditions to assure the new use would simply better serve the current customer volume as follows: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 21, 1993 Sheet A.0, Sheet A.1, Sheet A.2, Sheet A.3 and A.4; 2) that the conditions of the City Engineers' January 3, 1994 memo and the Fire Marshals' January 3 and 18, 1994 memos shall be met; 3) that this use permit shall not become effective, nor a building permit issued, until the property owner has obtained written agreement(s) for access easement from the adjacent property owner(s) and approval from the Fire Department concerning the access easement requirements for the rear exit through the alley; 4) that the restaurant shall be open Monday through Saturday 11:00 A.M. to 2:30 P.M. and 5:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. and, Sunday 1:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. with a maximum of 16 employees at any one time; 5) that no seating shall be located on the mezzanine and no activities other than storage shall ever take place on the mezzanine; 6) that if any activities other than storage do occur on the mezzanine the stairway shall be required to be removed within 30 days; 7) that the existing wooden storage shed (9'-6" X 121) located in the parking area at the rear of the structure shall be removed and replaced with a 10' X 10' fire rated structure on a foundation attached to the rear of the building, this new structure shall not obstruct required exiting and shall receive a building permit; 8) that the eating establishment shall provide and maintain trash receptacles at the door, or at locations approved by the City Engineer and Fire Department; 9) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame; and 10). that the property owner shall stripe and retain three (3) diagonal parking spaces at the rear of the building for use of the tenants. Motion was seconded by C. Galligan and approved on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. -10- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 12. SIGN EXCEPTION AT 700 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, ZONED C-4 (CALIFORNIA FEDERAL BANK, PROPERTY OWNER AND ARROW SIGN COMPANY, APPLICANT). This item was continued to the February 14, 1994 meeting. 13. TWO SPECIAL PERMITS FOR COURIER SERVICE AND OFFICE EXPANSION AT 1625-1633 ADRIAN ROAD, ZONED M-1 (FOLKE AND GUDRUM OHLSSON, PROPERTY OWNERS AND BILL ROGERS, APPLICANT) . Reference staff report, 1/24/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. If recommended to Council for approval, 6 conditions were suggested. It is noted, for the record, that the portion of the mezzanine to be used by DHL is not to be accessible; the other tenant will continue to use the portion of mezzanine within his tenant space, there will be no removal of the mezzanine area in the DHL tenant space and the mezzanine space is not included in the accessible area portion of the project calculations. A variance request for the antenna is forthcoming. Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Bill Rogers, representing DHL Airways, 809 Winchester Drive, in responding to questions noted that 15 - 30 people a day would drop off letters, boxes or documents to the site for delivery. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs then moved to approve the application by Resolution noting that there was adequate parking on site for increased office and 3% was a minimal increase in office. Her action included the following conditions; 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped, Floor Plan, December 28, 1993 and the amended Site Plan, January 12, 1994; 2) that the conditions of the City Engineers' December 13, 1993 memo shall be met; 3) that all the conditions of the Chief Building Officials' and Fire Marshals' December 13, 1993 memos shall be met; 4) that if the number of employees (20 full time, 41 part time) or number of fleet vehicles (23) grows beyond the amounts set forth in this application an amendment to this use permit will be required; 5) that if the access to the storage mezzanine is re -opened or more office area is added an amendment to this use permit and a parking variance will be required; and 6) 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. Graham and approved on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. -11- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 14. MASTER SIGN PROGRAM AND SIGN EXCEPTIONS AT 819-849 MITTEN ROAD AND 863 MITTEN ROAD/866 MALCOLM ROAD, ZONED M-1 (PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT, PROPERTY OWNER AND LISA GEIGER, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 1/24/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. If recommended to Council for approval, 2 conditions were suggested. Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Lisa Geiger, Sign Classics, Inc., contracted by E.S. Merriman & sons, property manager responded to questions regarding the location of the pair of monument signs. She noted the proposed master signage program was a part of the recent renovation of the entire office complex. She also noted that the project had evolved and the request was for signs with the sizes as stated in the table rather than as shown on the plans. The change in size was to give the property manager some flexibility to address various unknown tenant's need. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. A commissioner noted that because the street was narrow this much signage may not be necessary. Another commissioner noted that a master signage program such as this one was a good solution to a big identification problem is a complex like this using large street addresses and clear tenant identification. C. Mink then moved to approve the application because this has a good solution to the tenant identification problem for this large complex, with an amended condition as follows; 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the two, Master Sign Program Tables size for 819 to 849 Mitten Road and 863 Mitten Road to 866 Malcolm Road; and the plans relative location submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 9, 1993, Sheet 3 Existing One Sided Directory Sign, Sheet 4 Proposed Two Sided Directory Sign, Sheet 5 Existing and Proposed Wall Signs, Sheet 6, Proposed Wall and Monument Signs, Sheet 7, Proposed Wall and Monuments Signs, Sheet 8, Existing Address Signs, and Sheet 9, Proposed Monument Sign; and date stamped December 20, 1993 Sheet 10 Existing Deli Walls Signs, and Sheet 11, Existing Two Sided Deli Flag Signs; and December 29, 1993, Sheet 1, 819 - 849 Mitten Road Site Plan, and Sheet 2, 863 Mitten Road - 866 Malcolm Road Site Plan; and 2) that the project shall meet all Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Code requirements as amended by the City. Motion was seconded by C. Kelly and approved on a 6-1 voice vote, C. Jacobs dissenting. Appeal procedures were advised. -12- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 1994 PLANNER'S REPORTS - Review of City Council regular meeting of January 19, 1994. - Discussion of O -M District Regulations was put off to a shorter agenda. - Copies of the draft Housing Element were distributed to all Commissioners. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 P.M. MIN1.24 -13- Respectfully submitted, Ruth E. Jacobs, Secretary