Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1995.11.13MINUTES CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION November 13, 1995 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Jacobs on Tuesday, November 13, 1995 at 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Deal, Ellis, Galligan, Mink, Wellford and Jacobs Absent: Commissioner Key Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; City Engineer, Frank Erbacher; City Attorney, Jerry Coleman and Fire Marshal, Keith Marshall MINUTES - The minutes of the October 23, 1995 Planning Commission meeting were approved as mailed. AGENDA - It was noted that study item #1 at 328 Chapin Lane is a request for two special permits "and a side setback variance". The order of the agenda was then approved. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. ITEMS FOR STUDY 1. TWO SPECIAL PERMITS AND A SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A TOILET IN A NEW SINGLE CAR GARAGE AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GARAGE TO BE LOCATED NOT IN THE REQUIRED REAR 30% OF THE LOT AT 328 CHAPIN LANE, ZONED R-1, (GEORGE F. II AND DEBORAH H. MONTGOMERY, PROPERTY OWNERS AND APPLICANT). Requests: give clearer description of reason for including photographs; clarify what effect would be to meet codes; what is the relationship of the garage to development or the property next door, are windows affected; can eaves be placed within 1' of property line; If all information is complete, item set for November 27, 1995. 2. TAKE-OUT PERMIT FOR A RESTAURANT AT 234 PRIMROSE ROAD, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA A, (FRANCIS J. & O. M. DUFFIELD, PROPERTY OWNERS AND CLIFF AND SUSAN WOODS, 1600 BEACH STREET, #302, SAN FRANCISCO. APPLICANT). Requests: will they have home delivery, like a pizza shop; If all information is complete, item set for November 27, 1995. -1- CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA November 13, 1995 3. PARKING VARIANCE FOR 18 SPACES FOR A TENANT IMPROVEMENT AT 1375 BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA A. (EDWARD W, BECK, PROPERTY OWNER AND ENRIQUE FAINCHTEIN. APPLICANT). Requests: what was the configuration at the time the building was used by the Levy Brothers Department store, was there any office; what would the parking requirement have been; give more specific reasons related to the property to make findings on the variance application for items A and B; clarify how much of what was useable space was put into open atrium area; Item set for November 27, 1995. 4. TAKE-OUT PERMIT FOR GOURMET FOOD AND CATERING AT 1420 BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA A, (BOARDWALK PROPERTIES, PROPERTY OWNERS AND BILLY HARRIS, APPLICANT). Requests: shows 3 tables, how many chairs; would like letter from building owner stating the parking behind the building is, in fact, available for customers and delivery vehicles to this use; if there will be deliveries from the site, how many vehicles will need on-site parking; what accommodations are provided on-site for delivery vehicles; since the variance approval allowed a larger restaurant (2,500 SF) how will the leftover area be used; what will the result be on the parking; if all information is complete, item set for November 27, 1995. ACTION ITEMS 5. REAR SETBACK VARIANCE FOR PROPOSED POOL TO ALLOW 2'-6" WHERE 4'-0" IS REQUIRED AT 1152 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1, (JAMES AND SHAREEN BARRY, PROPERTY OWNERS AND APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 11.13.95, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments. Commissioners asked about the minimum setbacks for pools and noted the 10' easement along the rear property line. Two conditions were suggested for consideration. Chin. Jacobs opened the public hearing. James Barry was present to answer questions. He noted that he had made the addition to the house. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Galligan noted the structures as outlined on the property. The request is reasonable as presented because of the confluence of the placement of the existing structures on the lot, the fact it is a corner lot, it is bad to put a pool in the front setback and the easement at the rear property line reduces the impact on the adjacent apartment development; there will be no public safety hazard. He then moved to approve this request for a rear setback variance with the following conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped September 27, 1995 Sheet 1, Site Plan; and 2) that the pool and the pool equipment enclosure shall meet all Uniform Building and Uniform fire code requirements as amended by the City of Burlingame. Motion was seconded by C. Ellis and approved on a 6-0-1 (C. Key absent) voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. -2- CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA November 13, 1995 6. SIGN EXCEPTIONS FOR NUMBER, SQUARE FOOTAGE, OVERALL HEIGHT AND SECONDARY FRONTAGE DETERMINATION AT 777 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, ZONED C-4 (RED ROOF INN, PROPERTY OWNER AND MARK E. ALBERTSON, APPLICANT) Reference staff report, 11.13.95, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the staff report describing the request, review criteria, and staff comments. Five conditions were suggested for consideration. Commissioners inquired if any other signs had exception for lagoon frontage, CP noted few other properties had lagoon frontage; how were the signs lit. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. Mark E. Albertson, representing Red Roof Inn presented his project to the Commission. He noted that the hood was a part of the national identification of the hotel chain along with the red roof. All signs proposed would be internally lit. The corporation makes two sizes of logo signs those with 33" lower case letters and those with 48" lower case letters; the larger letters read better from a distance. He noted that they are not asking for a height variance, and many of the other hotels in the area have height variances for their signs. Those hotels have an advantage because they get to be seen farther. Those hotels also have a much larger amount of signage than they are asking for. The red roofing they will add looks much like the blue roofing now on the Hyatt Hotel. Is the red roof a part of the corporate image, therefore a sign? CA noted that he did not believe so, but could add to the conditions that the red roof was not considered a part of the signage. Staff noted that the applicant would have to address the UBC light and air requirements for the rooms affected by the placement of the structural hoods along the balconies. Commission asked about the proposed double faced pole signs on the Anza Blvd. frontage. They noted that west bound traffic could not enter the hotel from there without making an illegal maneuver; a single faced sign for east bound traffic was sufficient and safer. It was noted that the two signs (monument and wall) on the Airport Blvd. frontage duplicated the message; the applicant noted that from some locations the trees blocked the view of the higher sign and only the monument could be seen under the canopy. The size of the monument sign was discussed; applicant noted that he did not believe that the Days Inn sign was installed as indicated on their sign permit. He would agree to make the Red Roof Inn monument the same size as the Days Inn ground sign. The amount of signage on the primary frontage was discussed and the need for 4' letters; the applicant indicated that 33" letters could be used for the wall sign. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Galligan noted that basically this is a reasonable request except that the double faced sign on the Anza frontage should be made single face to discourage illegal traffic maneuvers; this also reduces the number of signs; the size of the lower case letters on the primary frontage should be reduced to 33" because of the other signage on the frontage, however the 4' letters on the other wall signs are in keeping with what is needed for visibility from the freeway; the monument sign should be replaced at the same size it is now. He then moved to approve the application with the conditions amended to include the requirements cited and noting that given the other signage in the area using the Sanchez Lagoon side as a frontage was not a grant of special privilege and with the changes suggested the signage program met the criteria established in the code. The motion was seconded by C. Deal and failed on a 3-3-1 (Cms. Ellis, Wellford and Jacobs dissenting and C. Key absent) roll call vote. -3- CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA November 13, 1995 Commissioners discussed the sign program noting that the 4' tall letters did not have as much impact because they were stacked and interwoven; that the 33" letters would work on the front but because of their arrangement they would be hard to read at a distance; 3' letters were visible on Days Inn, why not for Red Roof; want 4' just because it is their standard; the font makes a difference in the impact of the size of the letter, in this case 4' is not too much because the end of each letter comes to a point; the problem with the sign facing the lagoon is that the 4' letters stacked are almost 14' tall, two such large signs side by side looks like a lot of signage on the corner facing the freeway, no problem with same recognition with 33" letters; eliminate the sign fronting the lagoon and keep the 4' letters on the remaining sign; Doubletree sign letters are bigger, 4' and 5% each site should stand on its own, other building is bigger can support larger amount of signage; size of letters is not as pertinent as size of sign, wall sign will be 13'9" tall by 10' wide. C. Mink then moved approval of this application with the following amendments to the proposed program: a base letter size of 33" for all wall signs, a single faced pole sign facing Anza Blvd., and a monument sign on the primary frontage which is the same size as the present ground sign with the following conditions: 1) that the signs shall be installed at the locations on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped September 26, 1995 and amended by the 8'/2" X 11" site plan indicating the correct location of the proposed pole sign, dated November 2, 1995, except that the pole sign on the secondary frontage facing Anza Blvd. shall be single faced; 2) that once the name of the restaurant has been decided, the restaurant sign shall be installed with the same font and letter size as shown on the elevation drawing dated November 2, 1995, not to exceed 41 SF; 3) that the smallest letter in the sign (such as the 'r' in Red Roof Inn) shall be 33" tall and the tallest letter in the sign (such as the 'f' in Red Roof Inn) shall be proportional and that the new monument sign on the primary frontage shall be the same size (77 SF per face) as the existing Days Inn ground sign; 4) that the "hood" structure to be added for the signage shall meet all of the light and ventilation requirements as set forth by the Uniform Building code and as administered by the Chief building Official; and 5) that the project shall meet all Uniform building and Uniform Fire Code requirements as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Ellis and passed on a 5-1-1 roll call vote (C. Galligan dissenting and C. Key absent). Appeal procedures were advised. 7. FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR A FOUR (4) UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM AT 1273 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED R-3, (JOHN SULLIVAN, PROPERTY OWNER AND ERNEST RENNER, RCE, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 11.13.95, with attachments. CE Erbacher discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Public Works Department comments. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Ellis then moved to recommend approval of the final map to City Council. In CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA November 13, 1995 Motion was seconded by C. Galligan. The motion was approved on a 6-0-1 (C. Key absent) voice vote. PLANNER REPORTS - CP reviewed City Council regular meetings of October 16, 1995. - CP reviewed a follow-up discussion on FAR calculations for basement areas. - CP and Commission discussed and reviewed the Draft M-1 District Regulations; Scope and Purpose Statement and Permitted Uses sections. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. MINUTES 11.13 WN Respectfully submitted, Mike Ellis, Secretary