Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1010 Cadillac Way - Staff Report,� )� ��. P.C. 10/24/88 Item # 7 MEMO TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNER SUBJECT: SIGN EXCEPTION AMENDMENT TO RELOCATE SIGNAGE ON THE BROADWAY FRONTAGE AT 1010 CADILLAC WAY, ZONED M-1 Dan Secrest, representing Rector Cadillac, is requesting to amend the previously granted sign exceptions for 1010 Cadillac Way, zoned M-1. The proposal involves removing 2 signs totalling 90 SF of sign area on the Broadway frontage and replacing them with 2 signs totalling 144 SF. The code allows a maximum of 2 signs totalling 75 SF of sign area for this secodary frontage (Code Section 22.22.030). Staff Review City staff have reviewed this proposal. The Chief Building Inspector (September 21, 1988 memo), the Fire Marshal (September 20, 1988 memo) and the City Engineer (September 19, 1988 memo) had no comments. Planning staff would note that in July, 1986 a sign exception was approved for this site. This exception included approval of 4 signs, totalling 234 SF of sign area for the Broadway frontage. The site at that time encompassed both the existing property and the adjoining property to the south, currently being used for the Mike Harvey Oldsmobile dealership (1100 Carolan Avenue). Two of the approved signs, totalling 144 SF, were located on what is now the 1100 Carolan Avenue property and two of the signs, totalling 90 SF, were on the 1010 Cadillac site. when Rector Motor Car Company ceased using the 1100 Carolan Avenue property, the two signs on that property totalling 144 SF of sign area were removed. The applicant is now proposing to remove the two existing signs (90 SF) on the Broadway frontage and replace them with the two signs which were removed (but previously approved under the sign exception), totaling 144 SF. No other changes are being proposed to the signage on this site. This would result in a net reduction of signage on the Rector site of 90 SF on the Broadway frontage. In addition, 51 SF of Rector signage on the Carolan frontage have been removed. Applicant�s Letter In his Sign Exception request the applicant notes that without the requested signage, Porche and Audi will not renew their franchise with this operation. Study Questions The Planning Commission reviewed this application at study on October 11, 1988 (Planning Commission minutes October 11, 1988). -2- The proposed signage is oriented primarily toward the Broadway frontage and not the freeway. Two signs totalling 51 SF were approved under the 1986 sign exception for the Carolan Avenue frontage of this site. Rector Motor Company is no longer using the property fronting on Carolan Avenue, therefore all the signs on this frontage have been removed. A review of other approved wall signs for auto dealerships in the immediate area indicates that the range in height of other wall signs in the area is between 9'and 31' (table included in packet outlining wall sign heights). The proposed sign would have a total height of 25'. Findinas for a Sian Exception To grant a sign exception the Planning Commission must find that the following circumstances exist on the property (Code Section 22.06.110): a. any exception granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is situate; and b. because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, street frontage, location or surrounding land use; the size or height of the building on which the sign is to be located; the classification of the street or highway on which the sign is located or designed primarily to be viewed from, the strict application of zoning regulations is found to deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. Plannina Commission Action The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing and take action. Affirmative action should include findings; the reasons for any action should be clearly stated. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: 1. that the two signs totalling 144 SF shall be installed as shown on the plans submitted to the Planing Department and date stamped September 14, 1988, which shall include the removal of the two signs totalling 90 SF; and 2. that the applicant shall apply for a sign exception for any additional signs to be put on this site or any changes in copy on these signs prior to installation of the sign or change in copy. �d�C��°�Gt o�l-��-. Adriana Garefalos Planner cc: Dan Secrest E. James Hannay � _ SIGN PERMIT Date filed �--/�-�$ p Application to the City Planner Received by �j Sif ,]_ =� �l form S-2 Rev. 4/1/77 �.�-,. .. _. 1. PERSON/�OaP�AN�e O�eLS�ING THIS APPLICATION 415-348-011 � Name Telephone Firm Rector Motor Car Company Firm's Address 1010 Cad i 1 1 ac Way Bu r 1 i ngame , Ca 1 i orn i a , 1 2. r�,+�- .� o � 6- �`� �-���3 I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature Date BURLINGAME BUSINESS/ORGANIZATION REQUESTING NEW SIGNAGE Name of business establishment/organization RectoT MOtor Car COmpany Nature of business Dealership Name of business owner • James Hannay Telephone 415-348-0111 Address1010 Cadillac ay ur ingame, �oning district -Z OWNER OF BUILDING, STRUCTURE OR LAND Name E, James Hannay Address 1010 Cadillac Way Burlingame, California 94Q10 I know about th�oposed sign, o,r� signs, and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this ap c3�ion. / Signature F� �y�L� . �"~r ���' Date /�--�/ �/ �^--� : � � ( J V 4. PROPERTY I Lot width� Lot depth� Building width Building depth Building height Setback 5. SI6NAGE INFORMATION Number of existing signs on property Number of existing signs to remain Attach photo(s) Number of proposed new signs Sign construction details (SEE PAGE 2; please complete all parts) 6. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION X Site plan showing size of property and location of all signs. X Elevations drawn to scale of not less than 1/2" = 1'-0" for all signs. X Show sign positions on building elevations if relevant. �- Color rendering or perspective of all signs. 7. TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY PLANNER �/G/T/" ��'G�/�J'%O2� Maximum si na, e g q permitted by Title 22: Primary frontage Secondary —�m��d �'�T Total signage proposed by this application: Primary frontage Secondary �E�'EQU//c�L� IC� �F�'l1JY�_ This application is consistent with all Title 22 re irementsr, and a Building Permit T 7 �'/GJli'S �Oj/�LL/�ff� may be issued. (yes) �(no) �Q v/`' �/c c���i'.� A7��C � Signed LZ�/-� A�-��'�--= �/l` Z/`�� �ei���idLl�/} �"� Date ! — ��' �, -��PD�'� fG-�' �iyo ��LD� �T..� - SIG�� PERMIT FEE to be collected by Building Department: 3 — �2 �S�G/L�S roT�v.���.ry'G �yy s�= SIG�/S ��g �_ p�o� �.t� �z7 8� 'R��.oc�r� D 1�� S}= TOt�L SRo+qD�RY ��o�vr�j� � •SIGN A: q- ()Existing, no change Q()Existing, new copy ()New sign Sign type: ground sign wall sign X pole sign other (please specify): �Sp�o�ecting sign Overal l hei ght �(Y�'' ' Width of si gn face � 2• �� Neight of si gn face 6. 0 � Area of sign %2SQ• FT. Background color�''�h I te - Copy color Red/Ye o�T w Copy PORSCHE Type of illumination OresCen Hours to be illuminated Sign material : letters a5t i c body or sign surface � ast i c Method of support 4 l/2"thorouqhbolsGfsgle/double faced Sinqle Permit to: erect � alter $ paint move SIGN B: ()Existing, no change (� Existing, new copy (;New sign Sign type: ground sign wall sign X pole sign other (please specify): �5 if orojecting sign Overall height �� Width of sign face 12.0 � Height of sign face 6.0' Area of sign %2SQ. FT. Background colorWh i te Copy color Wh i te/Brown Copy - Aud i Type of illumination oreSCent Hours to be illurr�inated Sign materia}: letters P�astic body or siqn surface p�aSti,- P4ethod of support 4 1/2 thorouqh bol�s�gle/double faced_ S i ngle Permit to: erect alter X paint move SIGN C: ()Existing, no change ()Existing, new copy ()New sign Sign type: ground sign wall sign pole sign other (please specify): projecting sign Overall height Width of sign face Height of sign face Area of sign Background color Copy color Copy Type of illumination Sign material: letters Method of support Permit to: erect Hours to be illuminated body or sign surface single/double faced alter paint move SIGN D: ()Existing, no change ()Existing, new copy ()New sign Sign type: ground sign wall sign pole sign other (please specify): projecting sign Overall height Width of sign face Height of sign face Area of sign Copy Type of illumination Sign material: letters Method of support Permit to: erect Background color Copy color liours to be illuminated body or sign surface single/double faced alter paint move -2- S�r�NS ���, P�oP��=a r� 8� �E1.o� t�T� I� t�� J� �c�r� L S�.a+�D��Y ��o�r�� � •SIGN A: ()Existing, no change Q()Existing, new copy ()New sign Sign type: ground sign wall sign X pole sign other (please specify): �� p�o�ecting sign Overall hei9ht ,(K�` � Width of sign face12•�� Hei9ht of sign face 6.0' Area of sign 72SQ•FT. Background colorWh� te - Copy color Red/Ye o� w Copy PORSCHE Type of illumination orescen Hours to be illuminated Sign material : letters ast i c body or sign surface � ast i c Method of support 4 1/2"thorouqhbols$f5gle/double faced S i nq le Permit to: erect � alter $ paint move ` SIGN B: ()Existing, no change (� Existing, new copy (;New sign Sign type: ground sign wall sign X pole sign other (please specify): �J i� orojecting sign Overall height .rr. v Width of sign face 12, 0' Height of sign face 6. 0' Area of sign 72SQ. FT. Background colorWh i te Copy color Wh i te/Brown Copy . Aud i Type of illumination oreSCent Hours to be illuminated Sign material : letters P�ast i c body or siqn surface p � ast � r P4ethod of support 4 1/2 thorouqh bol�.is�gle/double faced Single Permit to: erect alter X paint move SIGN C: ()Existing, no change ()Existing, new copy ()New sign Sign type: ground sign wall sign pole sign other (please specify): projecting sign Overall height Width of sign face Height of sign face Area of sign Background color Copy color Copy Type of illumination Sign material: letters Method of support Permit to: erect SIGN D: ( )Existing, no change Sign type: ground sign pole siqn projecting sign Overall height Area of sign Copy Type of illumination Sign material: letters Method of support Permit to: erect Hours to be illuminated body or sign surface single/double faced alter paint ( )Existing, new copy wall sign other (please sF�ecify): move )New sign Width of sign face Height of sign face Background color Copy color Hours to be illuminated body or sign surface sinqle/double faced alter paint move -2- S�IGN EXCEPT ION Application to the Planning Commission �y� Da ' 1 ed Q-- �— r ��'�$75 Fe received by � �r�` Recei pt No. , - ",� r Public hearing scheduled 1. PERSON/COMPANY COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION Name Dan secrest Telephone 415-348-0111 Firm Rector Motor Car Company Firm's Address 1010 Cadillac Way Burlingame, California 9A010 ATTACH DENIED SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION 2. Has applicant read Section 22.06.110 of the City Ordinance Code? Yes No X 3. Describe the exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to your property which do not generally apply to other properties in your area, and the extent to which you may deserve special consideration to which your neighbors are not entitled. None 4. Describe why the exception is necessary now to preserve the continued use and enjoyment of the property. 5. What hardships would result if your request were denied? Currently Porsche and Audi will not renew our franchise if we do not display their franchise signs. This would result in serious hardship. 6. EVALUATION BY CITY PLANNER Code section(s) relevant to this application An exception has been requested because ... ��C'.�2"✓�i T�C'/ li�; � .,r ,,s ;�l � ,��1'C 6= ��%�C� ,I ' �" /" , r 1� �r �,' . ` �.- l �✓. i�� - LS 7'7c->�-' J` .D�r�,o _��1/� �"/ /9�� ..�1�'�r�=S, �� �i��T Tif,�_ �',�,�'�� .� �S'ff.�LL :�J���� }� ` �O�r-� � c.S/�.2� � Xc �,>�Trc?2° � � • � � �9�>� CiY.rpry��S ISI/ C'U,� 7-' O�L' Th��S�� c� �G�Y ; ���1'✓c' � D Tiy'sT./��.�/�T�0�7i G�% 7"Jf� �% v 2� O� �'if�.rYG.�` 1✓Y' �'O�Y, �� 0 � Y' r x �� r s � �-1�} T � �� %�E � �►�--� � -- - .— �� . _. ; � S� C��1 f� � Si6� �rCl��� �'�� � —1$ � $ �P SfC--�3 �i�s'►'f (i K.� � � ,:f �.�—...��-____- � --r-T-�---� . S ( G� �� G� t� � � a� � ��� ��r� � S�: s� 6� pE.r�� ��' �L��' � C~ jy�� � � � ����� ��'��'� '� ,. / r � x � � �, . ' i ; � �� . � � 1010 CADILLAC WAY - APPROVED & PROPOSED SIGNAGE ROLLINS ROAD FRONTAGE (Primary Frontage) Pole Sign (306 SF per face) Window Sign Window Signs NO 1 1 2 4 2 � 612 SF 48 SF (est) 8 SF (est) 668 SF 200 SF TOTAL ALLOWED BY CODE CADILLAC WAY FRONTAGE (Secondary Frontage) Projecting Signs (14 SF each) 2 28 SF Awning Sign 1 36 SF TOTAL 3 64 SF ALLOWED BY CODE 2 75 SF BROADWAY FRONTAGE (Secondary Frontage) Wall Signs (plexi-glass) (72 SF each) -Signs To Be Relocated- Painted Wall Signs (70 SF + 20 5F) -Signs To Be Removed - �roadway Frontaae: TOTAL SIGNAGE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED: TOTAL SIGNAGE PROPOSED: TOTAL SIGNAGE ALLOWED BY CODE: 2 144 SF 2 90 SF 4 2 2 234 SF 144 SF 75 SF CAROLAN AVENUE FRONTAGE (used to be secondary frontage, this is no longer a frontage for this business.) Wall Signs (18 SF and 33 SF) 2 51 SF -Both of these signs have been removed- . - ---- BURLINGAME �,�� -�- - t.Y.�.Q V�X�� Q�� ���.L�LA b.���.e SAN MATEO COUNTY CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURI.INGAME� GALIFORNIA 94010 TEL:(4�6) 342-6fl31 July 9, 1986 Mr. E. James Hannay Rector Motor Car Co. 1010 Cadillac Way Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Mr. Hannay: At their meeting of July 7, 1986 the City Council held an appeal hearing on your application for a Sign Exception Amendment for signage at 1010 Cadillac V1ay. Following a public hearing Council reverse3 the Planning Commission's denial and approved your application with the following conditions: 1. that the conditions of the City Engineer's May 13, 1986 memo shall be met; 2. that the signs shall be instal.led and maintained as described in the sign permit application submitted to the Planning Department and dated April 18, 1986; 3. that the applicant shall apply for a sign exception for any additional signs to be put on this site or any changes in copy on these signs prior to installation of the sign or change in copy; and 4. that all the signage on the support pole shall be removed. All signage for which no building permit has been issued will require separate application to the Building Department. Sincerely yours, iv l��G�� r `�', � Margaret Monroe City Planner MM/s att. cc: City Clerk Chief Building Inspector (w/att.) ,� y� ��� .,✓ DATE : /r�.���� � �% ���-� MEMO T0: vC'fTY ENGINEER CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR FIRE MARSHAL DIRECTOR OF PARKS FROM: PLANNING DEPAR7MENT SU6,]ECT: o C��,�/% r % �����,�o ��,r'�iQ . An application has been received for the above project for review by the Planning Commission. 7he application will be scheduled for J 7�T/C��/ at their ��� j Z meetin We would a �— 9• ppreciate having our corr�nents b -' y .v �f%�f��/ �D, /9� Thank you. , Helen Towber � Planner � ' ` �. 5 � �l�L•�� ��7�'�'�Q�� �� dtt. � �� 3 v�'� /�-D L�a'�-�r,'t�``��`�c �y"J � � � � '` � ^ � � v � �+ �- G3y'�r— T1c--��.s�1 „Z��/L"' � ^ . � cJ�--.-Q �-�i��`�- , - ����� �/�� � �� � r � � `�� � � .�2.�,.-�-�- �- �-'�� , G� �C, -G� � DATE : • 6 � Q � MEMO T0: CITY EN�INEER CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR FIRE MARSHAL DIkECTOR OF PARKS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: _ �_� �Q ��C(,C� ��4� _— Hrno,ua ��:� e�f� An application has been received for the above project for review by the Planning Commission. 7he application will be scheduled for � at their O('_�, �� [ q g� meeting. We would appreciate having your comments by_S�'rQ'�• 2�j �)��g y'_�� ��" ; � _ � Thank you. TG' � / � c� i� � � ,. � ,lJe" % � � o /`'/ /��.'��" � .�/� � -- � � _�� � DATE: ���' �� � I��4 MEMO T0: CI7Y ENGINEER CHIEF BUILDI�NG I ECTOR FIRE MARSHAL DI�tECTOR OF PARKS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: �� �Q � ��ly� _ S1 a� � kc� fi' 0 An applica�tion has been received for the above project for review by the Planning Commission. The application will be scheduled for �U at their ��_� , �� ��g� meeting. We would appreciate having ; your comnents by Se�• 2�j , jQ�'Q , Thank you. � �- 2� . �� � I o ' G4 N��lti� � r� � �i� %�j,4rz�,� � �n C�,�jM,�.✓T'i �� . DATE : • � I � �S MEMO T0: CITY ENGINEER CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR FIRE MARSHAL DI(2ECTOR OF PARKS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: �� 0 � � An application has been received for the above p roject for review by the Planning Commission. The application will be scheduled for � at their Q('�, �� � q g� meeting. We would appreciate having your comnents by_S�'�Q'�• 2�j � �Qg� Thank you. • � r' �1��.�1�y / � /�� � �/�"'' PE�^��j _�. � / �i / J G� ht ht��^ - � i� �� L�-C�'��'� � - � �,2i�T, �� �.!'' , ,/ CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 11, 1988 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Jacobs on Tuesday, October 11, 1988 at 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Staff Present: Commissioners Ellis, Garcia, Giomi, H. Graham, S. Graham, Harrison, Jacobs None Margaret Monroe, City Planner; Jerome Coleman, City Attorney; Frank Erbacher, City Engineer; Bill Reilly, Fire Marshal MINUTES - The minutes of the September 26, 1988 meeting were unanimously approved with the following correction: Item #9, page 3, last paragraph, fourth line, change "they were" to read "he was". AGENDA - Order of the agenda approved. ITEMS FOR STUDY 1. SPECIAL PERMIT - INSTALLATION OF A SATELLITE DISH - 3 CALIFORNIA DRIVE Requests: why the proposed location on the building which is closest to a San Mateo residential area; what will be transmitted, who will be using it, how many people and how many at one time, will it be limited to this dealership or open to other Mazda dealerships; letter from applicant as to why it is necessary; information on installation, placement of base of antenna and how base attached; what is the purpose, training or entertainment; if it is for entertainment why not cable TV. Item set for public hearing October 24, 1988. 2. SIGN EXCEPTION AMENDMENT - 1010 CADILLAC WAY Requests: is this signage oriented toward the freeway; have Rector signs facing Carolan been removed; how high are other wall signs in the immediate area. Item set for public hearing October 24, 1988. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 October '_:, 1988 3. SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT, TWO VARIANCES AND A FENCE EXCEPTION - 1730 ROLLINS ROAD Requests: letter addressing the need for a fence exception and findings for the variances; verify parking dimensions along the side of the building; diagram of railroad right-of-way for future parking; did applicant purchase this S.P. right-of-way; explanation of the need for_ an encroachment permit; does the shed with deck need building permit. Item to be set for public hearing by staff when corrected plans and all requested information have been received. ITEMS FOR ACTION 4. TWO VARIANCES AND A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION AT 777 WILLBOROUGH ROAD, ZONED R-1 Reference staff report, 10/11/88, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant�s letter, study meeting questions. One condition was suggested for consideration at the public hearing. CP advised a variance is not needed for the width of the driveway, that is an existing condition. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. Michael Nilmeyer, architect, referred to his letter discussing this 40' wide lot which does not offer much leeway for additions to an existing residence; the living room has a vaulted ceiling, cannot build over that area easily; building code requirement for width of stairways leaves very little room to obtain two good sized bedrooms upstairs; if the second floor were set in it would result in a substandard sized bedroom, 9' in width; to mitigate the smaller side setback they have set the plate line at 6'-6", approximately 18" less than normal; they wish to keep the addition to the rear portion of the house and not disrupt the front roof line and appearance of the house from the street. Mr. Nilmeyer presented four letters in support from neighbors. The Chair nnted the need for findings to support the variance request, why is it necessary to have four bedrooms. Applicant and Commission discussed distance of the second story addition from existing homes and windows in the addition. Peter Vogel, property owner, told Commission he is a free-lance photographer operating out of his home, this is a small two bedroom house and he uses one of the exist;ing bedrooms for an office, he has lived there since July, 1988. Architect explained how they could decrease the second floor plate line. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission comment: have no problem with the variance for parking but do have a problem with the variance to side yard setback, the WAI,L SIGNS IN THE VICINITY OF 1010 CADILLAC WAY: Heiaht of Wall Sicrns * 1100 Carolan Avenue Mike Harvey Oldsmobile 9'-20' 1025 Rollins Road Miller Chevrolet 17�-31' 1028 Carolan Avenue Sports & Imports 18' 1008 Carolan Avenue/ 1007 Rollins Road Mike Harvey Toyota 12�-16' *Height is measured from top of curb to the top of the sign. i� �� � . � � \, / y .� f � J t > y `� y► / �J,�� ' / ` `^� \ . y' � � `. � ' ��.• �.. ' l '. �� � � �� � ` ` ` 1�,�l� � � . � � { • � , � �l. � _ , . \ ; � yi � '• ? - � � '� 4 \� ` ` , - .� a � - � e � �'�, ' ' ' � ! • � ,,o, , s } ..�� % � �� . . - , ..� „ . - , � ,1 �r � �� .r. . -�� / , '� ` + � �J � , �. � � .. �� � � ,� + - �, '� � 1 �" , �'`` � , �• � � � . � i� � ��� . ,� �, � ` � ,�,�, � ~ � ;�js ,� � :' � � " . t' '' Oq , � ' �� � � �. -. a ���' � � -o �, � > � � y� . ��� �, . ,. � o'� � � �"� ,Z � �� �.. � � � : . � � � . � . •. . . e,. � p�'! `\�s � • •.� . . �"�. � � � ��• � �� �' � ' - �' ' . ' ••. . •. \ _ . ; � ; _ •. • � � a ,. •� , � � ; � •. � � ' `�' '�" � • * ; • \ `- : ! !/y$ , � � � : �'� i i � � � %t + \ • �..,� ' i 1 - � j• + �� .� � ^ • /- - • • � `i ~ ` _� �• � . • - . � � • r � � � �i ` • �< ti.� + ), � • /� '• 7t i � j • �`- •• ' • ��• � C � • . . •. . , ''• ' � � � � �► �. ••. ,'� : � �-�j � �; , � -� •.. � : o (� � �` �' � `� � ,��, _ ., . �. �� •. : � --•. �, , o•� . � � � � � �. • . f �` '� � • •• : �'•••• ' U� �' ; s • .� �� F A � 0 � ♦ � r' � i� � � � �, � '' A' : � .' f rj' i, `�� `` �' � � �� � � � .� , � : t � � � � �� � 0 � �. � „� ,�`� � . }-� ��' ,' � � �� . Lhr �`itu uf ��ui Iiit��rrir- SAN MATEO COUNTY CITY HALL- 501 PRIMROSE ROAO BURLINGAME. CALIFORNIA g4p10 NOTICE OF HEARING MASTER SIGN AMENDMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thdt Monday, the 24th of October, 1988 the hour of 7:30 P,M., in the City Hall council Chambers TEU'415i 342-8931 at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame will conduct d publiC hearing on the dppliCation for a Si�n Exception Amendment to relocate two signs on rhP Brncic.�a�� frnntaQe at 1010 Cadillac Wa , ZONED M-1 At the time of the hearing all persons interested will be heard. For further particulars reference is made to the Planning Department. MARGARET MONROE CITY PLAN�JER OCTOBER 14, 1988 RESOLUTION NO RESOLUTION APPROVING SIGN EXCEPTION � RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, application has been made for a sign exception for the relocation of signage on the Broadway frontage at 1U10 Cadillac way ,( APN 026-233-080 and �' WHEREAS, this Commission held a public hearing on said application on_ october 24 , 1 88, at wh.ich time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that said sign exception is approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. It is further directed. that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. RUTH E. JACOBS CHAIRMAN I, MIKE ELLIS, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the_ 24th day of October 1988 by the following vote: � AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MIKE ELLIS SECRETARY Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 October 24, 1988 the negative effect of this antenna, it is very large and will be obtrusive. Motior�. raas seconded by C. S.Graham who-,,,ra ` nted 95� use of this cj.��sh for entertainment is creat' �n attractive nuisance, peaple shopping for cars might sta onger angt'negati �y impact th�-`"neighborhood . / ,-�� � ��,�,.,..- , Mot' n to deny was a�pro+ve,�i...-�e�rt'"�a 5-1 roll call vot�, . H.Graham ting no, C. Garcia �nt. Appeal procedures were dvised. 7. SIGN EXCEPTION AMENDMENT TO RELOCATE SIGNAGE ON THE BROADWAY FRONTAGE AT__1010 CADILLAC WAY, ZONED M-1 Reference staff report, 10/24/88, with attachments. PLR Garefalos reviewed details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment, applicant�s sign exception request, study meeting questions. Two conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. Mark Lamazi, representing Rector Cadillac, was present. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission/staff discussion noted this proposal would result in a reduction of signage on the Rector site on the Broadway frontage. C. S.Graham moved for approval of the sign exception amendment and for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving Sign Exception with the following conditions: (1) that the two signs totaling 144 SF shall be installed as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped September 14, 1988, which shall include the removal of the two signs totaling 90 SF; and (2) that the applicant shall apply for a sign exception for any additional signs to be put on this site or any changes in copy on these signs prior to installation of the sign or change in copy. Motion was seconded by C. H.Graham and approved on a 6-0 roll call vote, C. Garcia absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 8. SPE AL PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR AN ATHLETIC CLUB WHICH REQUIRES TW VARIANCES AND A FENCE EXCEPTION AT 1730 ROLLINS ROAD, � rFn wr_ i , Refere,�'►ce staff report, 10/24/88,� with attachments. CP Monroe revie�6ed details of the application, previous request in June which was ,denied without prejudice, �taff review, applicant�s letters, study meeting questions. Seven conditions were �s�u�gested for consideration at the public hearing. Staff advised no letter had been received from the applicant addressing the necessary findings for�approval of the variances. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page October 24, 1988 Chm. Jacobs opened the public hearing. Arthur Michael, appl�cant, was present. He discussed: parking (when he bought the property compact parking was 48$, it has been that way ever since except to add 14 spaces at the rear); fence (his insurance company has requ�red the fence, they have asked for an 8' fence because there is a 2'-3' bank at the rear which would make a 6� fence only 4�); retaining wall at the rear ( it is 12 � away from the building, PUE is 10' away; main retaining wall is not in the PUE, turnaround area is still 11� wide, it meets building code. requirements for turnaround),; the storage shed will meet �all building code requirements. ]Regarding backup of the parking area, he put in a 24� backup when the last permit was granted but left the landscaping, li� will remove the landscaping or move the fence forward to give'� 24� backup. The new parking space will be 8'-7" x 17� with defici�nt backup (22� rather than 24'), this space does intrude into backu,p or turnaround �rea; he would like to have lighting around the'tennis courts, this detail will be included on the working drawings.�`,, Commission/applicant disc�ssion: land applicant owns at the rear is marshy, he has purchased`'��roperty north of the pump station and hopes to use this area for a�ld,�tional parking; parking is a problem in the Rollins Road area, Caai�nission would like to see additional parking provided before any;�f�.3�zther special permit amendments are approved for this site, tu�`naroiind spaces are narrow, difficult to maneuver and not very sa��; appli�ant stated they have left a 10' wide area for access to ,�uture par`}r,ing, he would prefer to put it on the north side of th� pump stati� rather than the south side. CE commented it has be�en close to a y'�ear since he has seen plans, the area could be used for parking except when flooded. CP stated the turnaround/backu�5 area is 11� wide,`��:it could be used if one were careful; in o�der for parking on t'Y�e drainage area to be considered for thi�"s increase in floor are�-�it must be on site, without title torthe SP right-of-way applica t cannot merge the parcels, and he ,�annot put parking there at t�is time because he has no access .,°'Applicant advised he owns all tH� property in the rear with the?exception of the railroad track,'�,,they are still negotiating on,'this; he has added parking as required by the city, parking on th� drainage area would be additional parking. Responding t�o a question, staff said that at this point`Commission could not g"rant a variance to parking requirement with a'"�ondition it be off site since the city has received no plans for art access easement. Discussion continued: when applicant took over� this business the city approved the spaces which were there, this�,does not mean the city will continue accepting applicant�s parking plans when he comes in for expansion; any new area added to the site must meet parking requirements, issue this evening is a single parking space, applicant is adding compact, not a standard stall, percentages in the staff report show the impact.