Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout824 Edgehill Drive - Staff Report� P.C. 6/24/85 Item #11 MEMO T0: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: REQI'7EST FOR ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF 'I'HE JULY 3, 1984 VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A PIANO CLASSROOM/STUDIO AT 824 EDGEHILL DRIVE On June 25, 1984 the Planning Commission approved the above permits for this 945 SF piano studio with four conditions: 1. that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's memo of May 11, 1984, the City Engineer's memo of May 18, 1984 and the Fire Marshal's memo of May 9, 1984 be met; 2. that the piano studio be operated as described in Sharon Cheek's letters of April 23, 1984 and May 9, 1984; 3. that the new construction be separated from the existing residential structure and new carport on the lot by at least four feet; and 4. that no student parking be allowed on Edgehill Drive. The permit became final on July 3, 1984. Since a Building Permit has not yet been obtained, the applicant is requesting to be granted a one year extension of these permits. Staff has no objection to this proposal. ���-- � �-- Helen Towber Planner HT/s cc: Sharon Cheek Sharon Cheek 824 Edgehill Drive, Burlingame, Ca.,94�10 June 17, 1985 Burlingame Planning Department C ity Hall Burlingame, Ca. I am request:xng a one=year extension of parking variance granted July 3, 1984 for our property located at 824 �dgehill Drive. rrhe plans for the proposed project will be read.y for submittal within two weeks, but due to an approximate three-weeks backlog of draw- ing submitted to the Building Department, it is doubtful that a building permit would be issued by July 3, 1985. For this reason, I am requesting the one-year extension. Sincerely, ���i�'v�o'ri �� � Sharon Cheek :��'c -> - � r , `.3. ��•-- ��as�� r -3- SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW A CREDIT UNION BRANCH OFFICE IN AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING IN THE M-1 DISTRICT AT 840 HINCKL ROAD, BY AMFAC MAINLAND FEDERAL CREDIT UNION ,,,�' CP Mbnroe reviewed this request to allow a credit union .�� an existing offic� building in the M-1 zone. Reference staff repq,r�, 6/25/84; Projec �Application & CEQA Assessment received 5/8/${�4"'; letter from Donna Bos`�er, Amfac Credit Union, April 10, 1984;,,��ite drawing received MatX 8, 1984; staff review: Chief Build'�g Inspector (6/1/84), Fire Marshal�(5/15/84) and City Engineer (5/1�,$�%84); City Attorney's April 6, 1984� tter to California Credit U�on League; City Attorney's lette of April 16, 1984 to Dorama Bosser, President, Amfac Mainland FCU; June 11, 1984 study meetir� minut�s; Bosser letter to Towber received May , 1984; aerial p O'�tograph; Notice of Hearing mailed June 15, 1984�osser letter�, �•� Towber, June 18, 1984. CP discussed details of the� request,,,�taff review, applicant's letter, study meeting questions. ��wo co�t`d`�itions were suggested for consideration at the public �e���ing. Chm. Graham opened the publ,a�"c h��ring. Donna Bosser, applicant, addressed Commission: est�'mated ntx�nber of Amfac employees in the M-1 District area is 276, a�•proximately�;100 of these employees are members of the credit union; r�dst members do �ot come to the 840 Hinckley office, business is ��ansacted by payro�l deduction or automatic deposit; Amfac run�courier.service betwe�n the different locations; most business is }�i mail or phone; have no impacted traffic or parking in the �:iea. There were no audienc comments and the �ublic hearing was cl�sed. Commission d'"iscussion: applicant uses leased are within the existing building; n-site parking appears to meet code; co e requires a special ermit for this use in the „I-1 district; do� not appear to be a busin�,ess that would impact the area. � C. J�cobs moved for approval of this special permit with he following co $itions: (1) that the Amfac Credit Union shall operate s outlined i Donna Bosser's letter of April 10, 1984; and (2) that thi use ermit be reviewed for compliance with the operation as outli d in Ms. Bosser's letter in 18 months time (December, 1985>. Secon C. Garcia; motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. �4 . 5. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW CLASSES AT 824 EDGEHILL DRIVE IN THE C-2 DISTRICT, BY DAVID AND SHARON CHEEK PARKING VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A PIANO CLASSROOM/STUDIO AT 824 EDGEHILL DRIVE WHICH PROVIDES NO OFF-STREET PARKING CP Monroe reviewed this request to hold classes in the C-2 zone and to allow a four space parking variance to build a new commercial structure for use as a piano studio. Reference staff report, 6/25/84; study meeting minutes, June 11, 1984; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 4/23/84; applicant's letter, April 23, 1984; r. �, r � ' -4- additional information on use/traffic received May 9, 1984; trip ends to/from site date stamped March 14, 1984; May 28, 1984 letter from Olga Chambers, landlord, 859 California Drive; staff review: Chief Building Inspector (5/29/84 and 5/11/84), City Engineer (5/18/84), Fire Marshal (S/9/84); aerial photograph; letters from the applicant received June 18, 1984; petition in support received June 15, 1984; letter in support from William R. Ward, Director of Music, United Methodist Church dated June 16, 1984; and plans date stamped May 24, 1984. CP discussed details of the request, code requirements, staff review, applicant's description of the business and justification for the variance, study meeting questions, staff comment. Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Letters in support were noted as follows: Fred Wm. Heron, principal, McKinley School (June 18, 1984); Priscilla Storms, teacher, Burlingame School District (June 21, 1984); Philip F. Acker, Acker & Son, owner of properties at 820 Edgehill Drive and 821 California Drive (June 22, 1984); Mary Harrell, resident at 839 Edgehill Drive (rec�ived June 25, 1984). Discussion: entire block between Edgehill and C.alifornia Drive is zoned C-2 commercial, there is a commercial use immediately adjacent with a driveway off Edgehill, auto repair would be allowed in this area, there is no space on site for cars to turn around, possibility of constructing the studio attached to the house, required covered parking will be provided on site for the residential structure. Sharon Cheek, applicant, discussed her proposal: has no desire to change the residential character of Edgehill; most of the students are dropped off and picked up; has been renting space and teaching piano in this same block for eight years; her studio provides many of the services which have been cut back in the schools; students perform in the schools and provide musicians for several churches; if this building were an office structure it would require less parking than the four spac� requirement for classes as determined by staff; she teaches during the school year with some private summer lessons; hours are 3:00 PM to 8:30 PM, at the end of the business day. Speaking to the variance request, Mrs. Cheek stated the rental of the studio she now uses is high, it would be a loss of income if she were unable to build on this property which was purchased in 1983; she would like to raise a family and locating the studio on the same site as her home would be ideal; regarding public safety, she teaches private lessons an3 general classes which include many of the same students, so times are staggered, there are.50-100 parking spaces across the street and two crosswalks within 100 feet of the site; doubt there would be a parking problem as a very small oortion of the students drive themselves; businesses in the block have not complained nor have tenants in the building wher� she presently teaches; therz are not many locations in the city where she can teach and many of those are not financially feasible. Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. Those speaking in favor: Priscilla Storms, 1232 Floribunda Avenue: this is an opportunity for the community, a young contributing citizen who will enrich the city; �. A ' v -5- Catherine Depew, 1427 Paloma Avenue: have been a piano student since five years of age, parents drop me off and pick me up, do not need parking space; Judy Michaelian: have been driving my sons to lessons for 2/3 years, once a year might park and go inside, applicant is outstanding member of the community and outstanding teacher; Judith Kell, 1257 Cabrillo Avenue: son is a student, drop him off and pick him up, seldom �ark and wait. Th�re were no further audience comments in favor. In opposition, Lorine Gandolfi, 825 Edgehill Drive expressed concern about parking on Edgehill; have no objection to parking on California Drive but because of apartment buildings there are parking problems presently on Edgehill. Applicant comment: would not want my students to park on Edgehill either. There were no fu.rth�r audience comments an3 the public hearing was clo.sed. Commission discussion: this is a good land use, a cultural addition to the city; parking is an important aspect but don't believe this use will have an adverse impact; variance goes with the land, if this structure were converted to another permitted use the variance would go with it; possibility,ladvisability of a condition prohibiting parking on Edgehill; feel this is a compatible use for the area and represents an opportunity for the community. C. Taylor moved that the application for a special permit for classes in the C-2 district be approved with the following conditions: (1) that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's memo of May 11, 1984, the City Engineer's memo of May 18, 1984 and the Fire Marshal's memo of May 9, 1984 be met; (2) that the piano studio be operated as described in Sharon Cheek's letters of April 23, 1984 and May 9, 1984; (3) that the new construction be separated from the existing residential structure and new carport on the lot by at least four feet; and (4) that no student parking be allowed on Edgehill Drive. Second C. Jacobs. Responding to Commission guestion about viability of the business applicant advised her net profit would be about the same the first few years if this proposed studio is approved. Motion approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Giomi absent. C. Taylor incorporated into the record the comments of Mrs. Storms and the applicant's April 23, 1984 letter to support findings that there arz exceptional circumstances, that the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a property right of the owner, that it would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to the neighbors and that it would not adversely affect the comprehensive zoning plan of the city. C. Taylor moved tor approval ��� of the variance request;.second C. Jacobs. C. Schwalm co:nmented that � loss of income and raising a family are not acceptable reasons for granting a variance; he found exceptional circumstanc�s in the way the property is laid out, this is an unusual lot, and the proposed business is a small oDeration which would not adversely affect the neighborhood. Motion approved 5-1 on roll call vote, C. Graham dissenting, C. Giomi absent. Appeal procedures were advised. Recess 8:50 P.M.; reconvene 9:02 P.M.