HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1997.06.23CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
June 23, 7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman
Key on June 23, 1997 at 7:03 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Coffey, Deal, Ellis, Galligan, Mink: and Key
Absent: Commissioner Wellford
Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; City Attorney, Larry Anderson; City Engineer,
Frank Erbacher; Fire Marshal, Keith Marshall
MINUTES - The minutes of the June 9, 1997, Planning Commission meeting were approved
as mailed.
AGENDA - Item #11, 1802 Magnolia and Item #13, 16 Kenmar Way were withdrawn from
the agenda. The order of the agenda was then approved.
FROM THE FLOOR
OC There were no public comments.
ITEMS FOR STUDY
APPLICATION FOR A PARKING VARIANCE FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION AND SPECIAL
PERMITS FOR AN EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT 808 MORRELL AVENUE,
ZONED R-1. (ANDY SHABAZIAN, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER
Requests: explain if the interior wall on the left side can be modified/relocated in order to provide
20'x- 20' interior dimension for parking, can the closet be removed to expand the parking area; was
the second unit a part of the original construction, is there plumbing inside the unit; is it used as a
second dwelling unit now; why is a special permit required if it is an existing non -conforming
structure; there is an old- gas heater in the unit next to the garage, is there a gas line to the structure,
if so will it be retained. Item was set for public hearing on July 14, 1997.
se
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes lone 23, 1997
APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND PARKING, SIDE
SETBACK AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE VARIANCES AT 2205 RAY DRIVE, ZONED
R-1, (JAMES McFALL, APPLICANT AND JIM AND LORETTA STEPHENSON, PROPERTY
OWNERS).
Requests: difficulty finding exceptional circumstances based on the property (land), applicant talks
about a number of things in his response but does not address the land itself, please elaborate; can the
interior of the garage be enlarged to meet code requirements for parking, explain; what would be the
hardship on the project if the declining height envelope variance were not granted, could the building
be expanded some place else, etc. Item was set for public hearing on July 14, 1997.
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMITS FOR AN ACCESSORY STF.UCTURE, WITH A BATH
AND TOILET, WHICH WILL BE USED FOR RECREATION PURPOSES AND FOR WINDOWS
AND A SKYLIGHT WHICH WILL BE WITHIN 10'-0" OF A PROPERTY LINE AT 219
BLOOMFIELD ROAD, ZONED R-1, (LENORE MONTGOMERY, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY
OWNER
Requests: Is the fiberglass covering to be removed, the one that extends between the accessory
structure and the rear of the house; there are a number of antennas on the property which do not
appear as if they are being used, does the applicant intend to remove them or will they be used in the
future; house next door on the left is identical to this house without the extension (garage) on the rear;
why does the applicant want to retain the exiting windows within 10' of property line and add the
skylight within 10' of property line; why is a bath needed in the structure at the rear of the property;
is the fiberglass patio cover going to be removed. Item was set for public hearing on July 14, 1997.
APPLICATION FOR PARKING VARIANCES AT 920 CHULA VISTA AVENUE, ZONED R-3,
A (RICHARD AND MAUREEN HARBER, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS).
Requests: elaborate exceptional circumstances, they should apply to the property; in 1954 the parking
requirement was one space per unit, staff should explain change and why new requirements applied
here; what does the old accessors report show was originally on this site; ask applicant to provide
copies of the multiple listing at the time of purchase, 1995, and a copy of the contract of purchase;
also a copy of both the seller's and agent's disclosure documents. Item was set for public hearing on
July 14, 1997, providing that the documents requested have been made available.
APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDED RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR A 4-UNIT
CONDOMINIUM AT 1408 EL CA11fIINO REAL, ZONED R-3, (RON GROVE, APPLICANT AND
PROPERTY OWNER.)
Requests: concerned about the overall height of the structure given the interior height of the garage
shown at 7.5', will there be room for pipes etc. between ceiling and floor; add dimensions to show
overall height of structure and elevations at top of curb; the site plan is incomplete, add all required
dimensions; the parcel map shows the 4 unit townhouses encroaching into the easement, explain; why
is the applicant making the proposed changes from the previous approval; are there any other shared
-2-
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes June 23, 1997
9
access driveways in the city, what has been the experience both legally and operationally; the house
next door has sold, was it bought by the same property owners as this project, if common ownership
could lots be merged and development handled differently. Item was set for public hearing on July
14, 1997.
APPLICATION FOR A TENTATIVE MAP FOR A 4-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1408 EL
CAMINO REAL, ZONED R-3, (RON GROVE, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER.)
Requests: CE noted that a CalTrans permit would be required for this development. Item was set for
public hearing on July 14,1997.
APPLICATION FOR A RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, FRONT SETBACK, BACK-UP
AISLE AND PARKING MANEUVER VARIANCES FOR A 4-UNIT' CONDOMINIUM AT 38
LORTON AVENUE, ZONED R-4, (DALE MEYER ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND RICHARD
BALUSHIAN, PROPERTY OWNERZ
Requests: What is the hardship on this property which is 50'x 150', 30' longer than many lots on El
Camino developed within all code requirements, to justify the variances requested; each variance
should be addressed specifically as it relates to hardships on this property; the location of the support
posts should be clarified on the site plan. Item was set for public hearing on July 14,1997.
APPLICATION FOR A TENTATIVE MAP FOR A 4-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 38 LORTON
AVENUE, ZONED R-4, (DALE MEYER ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND RICHARD
BALUSHIAN, PROPERTY OWNER).
Requests: No additional comments were made. The item was set for public hearing with the project
on July 14, 1997.
APPLICATION FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND PARKING
VARIANCE FOR AN AUTO PARTS DISTRIBUTION FACILITY AND CAR SALES LOT AT 100
CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED, C-2, SUBAREA D, (PUTNAM BUICK-PONTIAC-GMC TRUCK,
APPLICANT AND J. P. PROPERTY, L.L.C., PROPERTY OWNER).
Requests: clarify why asking for a 41 space parking variance and not providing parking in parking
garage on -site; city has allowed off -site parking for another site in the parldng garage, now a building
on -site cannot put its required parking in the structure, why; provide information on schedule of
vehicles delivering parts, frequency and hours; does not seem that this car sales and parts business will
survive on 11 customers a day with a maximum of ten people on the site at a time for both activities,
would the applicant clarify; provide the actual number of parking spaces within the parking structure
and a table showing how_ they are presently used; where will cars for the used car lot be loaded and
unloaded, this has been a problem in the public right of way in the past, has it been solved with this
project; do not understand the parking variance request employees will park in the structure, how will
the rest of the structure be used; how will the five parking spaces in front of the new building be used;
explain what was meant by "if accept more than 5..."; how will the used car lot be operated; where
will the customers for this lot park; where will the parts delivery trucks be parked over night; will the
-3-
Burlingame Planning Conunissim Mimes June 23, 1997
parts facility serve only Putnam dealerships or will it be open to the pubic; will parts be delivered to
dealerships or will people from dealerships come to pick up parts; provide a history of the parking
garage and variances applied for to support other uses; what is the height of the parking garage; what
will happen at the Anita/Peninsula facility when the parts operation moves out, how will the space be
used. Item was set for public hearing on July 23, 1997, providing all the information requested has
been submitted in time.
APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A MONTESSORI
PRE-SCHOOL AND KINDERGARTEN AT 525 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUBAREA
B. (LYNETTE & PAUL MUHIC. APPLICANT AND GERALD E. FREY, PROPERTY OWNER)
Requests: this is a busy corner close to Oak Grove, ask city traffic engineer to give his comments on
the impact of this proposed use; parking on California is some times used by auto repair uses nearby,
will this be a problem for employees, where will they park; will the garage space in the building be
used for parking in the future; how will drop-off and pick-up of children be done safely, how will the
children be handled. Item was set for public hearing on July 14, 1997.
ITEMS FOR ACTION
APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION AT 1802
MAGNOLIA AVENUE, ZONED C-1, (MIKE YOUNESSIAN, APPLICANT AND DAVID R & C
M PEDERSON. TRS., PROPERTY OWNERS). WITHDRAWN
This item was withdrawn from the agenda.
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMITS FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO REPLACE
A GARAGE AT 834 WALNUT AVENUE, ZONED R-1, (SCOTT WITH, APPLICANT AND
.PROPERTY OWNER).
Reference staff report, 6.23.97, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed
criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Four conditions were
suggested for consideration.
Chairman Key opened the public hearing. The applicant was not present. Commission discussed the
need for additional conditions regarding the fill, grading, drainage and the eaves to be at the discretion
of the City Engineer and in accordance with the Building Code as amended by the City of Burlingame.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commission asked how the 18" of fill will affect the drainage of the overall property. Code requires
that drainage from all structures be carried to the street. Plan check approval was discussed and the
right and rear eaves will have to be eliminated. The building may not look as it does in this plan if
these eaves need to be changed. The conditions should be modified to include; approval of these plans
consistent with the Building Department's requirement on the eaves and in accordance with the
California Building and Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame:. It was also noted that the
City Engineer should review the grading and drainage plans before the building permit is issued.
-4-
Burlingame Plan g Cmunisslon Min ues June 23, 1997
C. Galligan moved approval of this application for special permits for an accessory structure to replace
an existing garage noting the need for additional conditions; first, regarding CE review of grading and
drainage and second, regarding modification of the eaves to building department requirements. The
approval of this motion is subject to the information in the staff report, with plans as required to be
modified by the Engineering and Building Departments with consideration to the retaining wall,
grading and drainage in the rear. Also, with respect to the placement of the eaves. This use will not
be detrimental or injurious to the neighborhood and is located in accordance with the General Plan.
This motion is by resolution, subject to conditions in the staff report as follows: 1) that the project
shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped May 27,
1997, Sheets 1 and 2, Site Plan, Floor Plan and Building Elevations, and Sheet 3, date stamped June
13, 1997, Retaining Wall Plans; 2) that the plate line of the accessory structure shall be not more than
8'-6" above grade, as measured from adjacent new grade; and that the eave overhang at the side and
rear property lines shall be redesigned if necessary to comply with the requirements of the California
Building and Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame; 3) that the accessory structure shall
be used as a garage, with 144 SF of storage in the open rafter attic area, and any change in use of the
structure shall require an amendment to this special permit; 4) that the; grading and retaining wall
proposed shall be reviewed for proper compliance with drainage requirements by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of the grading and building permits; and 5) that the accessory structure shall meet
all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995 Edition, as amended by the City
of Burlingame.
The motion was seconded by C. Deal and passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Weilford absent) voice vote. Appeal
procedures were noted.
APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT, FRONT SETBACK AND
PARKING VARIANCES AT 16 KENMAR WAY, ZONED R-1, (BAEK YOUNG AHN,
g APPLICANT AND JUNG HO LEE, PROPERTY OWNER).
This item was withdrawn by the applicant.
DETERMINATION AND RECOMMENDATION ON CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL
PLAN OF THE BURLINGAME SCHOOL DISTRICT USE AS AN OFFICE AT 1825
TROUSDALE, ZONED C-3, (BURLINGAME SCHOOL DISTRICT, APPLICANTS, AND IRWIN
J. AND MARION B. GIBBS. PROPERTY OWNERS).
Reference staff report, 6.23.97, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the determination request,
reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. All property owners
within 300 feet of the site were noticed.
Chairman Key opened the public hearing. Bob Peterson, Business Mwmager, Burlingame School
District, 2303 Trousdale Drive, was present to answer any questions. There were none, and there
were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed.
-5-
Burlingame Plmu ing Commission Minutes June 24. 1997
C. Ellis noted he looked at this site and this office use is consistent with the General Plan and zoning
implementing the general plan as long as its only use is to support offices for the District, he so moved
recommendation to City Council.
The motion was seconded by C. Galligan and was passed on a voice vote 6-0-1.
Commission commented that the Commission has been asked in this case to make a determination of
consistency with the general plan and current zoning; this is a recommendation on the use of the
building as proposed for office use by the school district, as presented; is a reasonable use and it will
be appropriate, is not obnoxious or detrimental to the welfare of the community, This requirement
exists in State Law to insure that the actions of public and quasi -public agencies are insured local
review before the individual agency takes action. It is intended to provide an opportunity for public
and local input and review before the agency takes irrevocable action.
PLANNERS REPORTS
- The CA informed the commissioners that he has recently completed a memo on the requirements
of Proposition 208. Commissioners asked that the memo be sent to them.
- The CP reviewed the July 7, 1997, City Council meeting with the commissioners.
The Commissioners discussed the revised draft of the Planning; Commission's "Rules of
Procedure". The Commissioners discussed selection of a chair in the; absence of the officers and
decided to let the remaining members should choose the chair at the meeting; noted some revisions
in wording and numbering for clarification; noted it was important for those speaking to the
commission to identify them selves and their address; and discussed how much disclosure should
be required before the public hearing. The commission concurred on the suggested changes,
directed staff to revised the draft and resubmit it with a resolution for adoption at the second
meeting in July.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
104MM6.23
W
Respectfully submitted,
Jerry Deal, Secretary