HomeMy WebLinkAbout1011 Cadillac Way - Staff Report_ � ,
P.C. 8/11/86
Item #5
(� �,��.
MEMO TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY PLANNER
VARIANCE TO ON-SITE
SEPARATE PARCEL FOR
WAY, ZONED R-4
PARRING REQUIREMENTS TO CREATE A
AN OFFICE BUILDING AT 1011 CADILLAC
Mike Chandler is requesting an eight space parking variance (18 spaces
required) for an existing nonconforming office building in an R-4 zone
in order to convert the site from a leasehold to fee simple ownership
(Code Sec. 25.70.030). This existing office building originally served
as the construction office, then leasing office for Northpark
Apartments. When it was no longer needed for that purpose Mike
Chandler bought the structure to use as an insurance office. Northpark
retained a long term lease on the land. The designated leasehold site
was big enough for the office building and ten parking spaces. Over
the years Mr. Chandler owned the building Northpark arranged for Mr.
Chandler to lease 10 additional spaces during the day from their
required residential parking. Northpark is willing to continue this
lease agreement to the new owner, but a variance is needed because with
the separation of the leasehold under the office building from the rest
of Northpark's holdings, these leased spaces become off-premise
parking. The code does not allow on-site parking requirements to be
met on a separate site without a variance since these spaces are not
under the control of the property owner. Moreover, this arrangement
was unique since it represented a shared use of required parking, the
office use during the day (8:00 A.M, to 5:00 P.M.) and the residence at
night. However, since the areas used were all in the same ownership,
they technically met requirements of the city code for required
parking.
Staff Review
City staff have reviewed the request. The Fire Prevention Officer
(July 8, 1986 memo) and the Chief Building Inspector (July 9, 1986
memo) had no comments. The Director of Public Works (July 21, 1986
memo) noted that he had no objection if the spaces could be leased for
a long term from Northpark. Planning staff would note that even if the
long term spaces are available this office site would need a parking
variance because leased spaces are not in the same property ownership.
The variance would go with the land. The office use is nonconforming
in the R-4 zone. The building has been continually used for office so
the nonconformity is not an issue. Even with the parking variance the
use would continue to be nonconforming and, if the office use were
discontinued for six consecutive months or the structure destroyed over
50�, the office use could not be reinstituted.
Applicant's Letter
Mike Chandler wrote a letter describing his request and the reasons for
it. He notes the building is about 5,000 SF and requires under current
parking requirements 18 spaces. There are 10 parking spaces on site.
-2-
He would like Commission to consider the 10 spaces leased from
Northpark as offsetting the eight spaces he is short on site. He feels
that the shared (day/night) use of the space is complementary and
should not be subtracted from Northpark's parking. He states he
understands that the concept of shared parking has been used elsewhere
in Burlingame. In addition he notes that this shared use has been
employed since he owned and occupied the building, the variance won't
affect anyone's safety, welfare and public health, and that the
Northpark Apartment owners agree to the sale and lease and the
variance won't affect the zoning in the city. This action is merely
being taken to formalize and legalize an arrangement which has existed
for at least the past 15 years.
A letter from Mr.
indicating that he
of the variance.
Study Questions
Thomas Newman (July 17, 1986) is also attached
represents the potential purchaser who is in favor
The Planning Commission had two questions at study (Planning Commission
Minutes, July 28, 1986>. The lease agreement negotiated between
Northpark and the buyer is for shared use of the 10 parking stalls for
20 years. The term of the lease is five years with three subsequent
five year extensions (total 20 years). The contractor, Joe Harvey, was
contacted regarding alternative parking arrangements. He is trying to
contact the property owners involved.
Planninq Commission Action
The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative
action should be taken by resolution. The reasons for any action
should be clearly stated. At the public hearing the following
conditions should be considered:
l. that the parcel map as filed and recorded conform to the map
submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped June 30,
1986;
2. that the 10 parking spaces on site be clearly marked and designated
for the use of the office building's occupants and that the
property owner shall be responsible for maintaining markings and
enforcing use;
3. that the property owner secure and maintain for at least 20 years a
lease to use 10 parking spaces on the adjacent Northpark apartment
site for use from 8:00 A.M, to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and
that these parking spaces be clearly marked/posted for the office
use during these times, the posting to be installed and maintained
by the owner of the office building with the consent of the
Northpark Apartment management;
4. that the striping of the parking spaces leased from Northpark
Apartments be maintained by the owner of the office building; and
-3-
5. that if Northpark should ever convert to condominium use during the
20 year term of the lease that they would make arrangements to
provide eight permanent parking spaces for the office or make
arrangements to allow weekday, daytime use to continue.
�/�/]�/j� � "`�C1 ��
�.vl
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
cc: Mike Chandler
Eric Rath, Northpark Properties, et al
David T. 0'Neal, Jr., c/o Thomas W. Newman
Joe Harvey
Eric Rath (465-7500)
Northpark Prop. et al
CC d�SO t0:
PROJECT APPLICATION ���"�" °� 1011 CADILLAC WAY
�r CEQA ASSESSMENT BURLINGAME project address-
�b,�p'���;'� project name - if any
Application received � 3/3/86
Staff review/acceptance ( 7/9/$( j 5�/�
1. APPLICANT Michael Chandler 692-�
name telephone no.
1733 California Drive, Burlingame, CA 94010
applicant's address: street, city, zip code �/
Michael Chandler 692-9��
contact person, if different telephone no.
2. TYPE OF APPLICATION
Speci�?1 Per�it () Variance* (X ) Ccnc�omini�m Perr•.it () Other
*Attach letter which addresses each of the 4 findings required by Code Chapter 25.54.
s. PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARKING VARIANCE to allow 10 on-site parking spaces
for this existing office building (18 required). The building and
10 spaces are located on a leased parcel. Now the land owner
proposes to subdivide the property at the lease line and create
two separate parcels. The office buildinq would therefore be left
with 10 on-site parking spaces althou h the land owner proposes
to lease the remaininq required parkinq spaces from the apartment
for daytime (office hours) use.
a
c/o
(attach letter of explanation if additional space is needed)
Ref. code section(s): ( 25.70.030 ) (
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
�AP 026-231-270 �
( R-4 )
zoning district
Friedkin-Becker
land owner's name
Reauired
�yes) (no)
(yes ) �
Nly Ptn of Parcel
( ) ( )
lot no. block no.
( .30 Ac MOL. )
land area, square feet
1, Parcel Map Vol. 13/18
(subdivision name
300 Grand Avenue
�ark�and, CA 94610
Date received city zip code
( - ) Proof of ownershio
(MISSING ) Owner's consent to application
David T. 0'Neal, Jr.
c/o Thomas W. Newman 5
First San Francisco Corp.
989 E.Hillsdale Blvd.#200
Foster City, CA 94404
Joe Harvey (Nicolaides)
EXISTIPIG SITE CONDITIONS
Existing ±5,300 SF building on a±13,000 SF parcel with on-site
parking for 10 cars.
Reo,ui red
�YeS ) %$)
(3�e�s) (no)
(�Fs) (no)
(�c�) (no)
(other)
Date received
( 6/30/86>
( 2/28/86j
Site plan showing: property lines; public sidewall;s and
curbs; all str�!ctures and improvements;
paved on-site parkino; landscaping.
Floor plans of all buildings showing: gross floor area
by type of us�`on each floor plan.
Building elevations, cross sections (if relevant).
Site cross section s) (if relevant).
letter of exp anation
*Land use classifications are: residential (show # dwelling units); office use; retail
sales; restaurant/cafe; manufacturing/repair shop; warehousing; other (to be described).
5. PROJECT PRnp�SAL NO NEW CONSTRUCTION IS PROPOSED
Proposed censi:ruction, �elow qrade ( - SF) Second floor ( - SF)
gross floor area First floor ( - SF) Third floor ( - S�)
COde
EX1 Stl nc� RPqui rem�nt
Front setback � 15'
Side setback - n�d
Side yard Q�1$' S'
Rear yard 44' 15'
EX1St1C1 Code
g Requirement
Lot coveraae 41 . 4% 50% max .
Ruildin� height 35' SP over 5'
Lar.dscaoed area - -
on site �k�.space�- ],O 1 8
6. PROJECT PROPOSAL (continued)
Full tir�e em�loyees on site
Part time emnloyees on site
Visitors/customers (weekday)
Visitors/customers (Sat.Sun.)
Residents on property
Trin ends to/from site*
Peak hour trip ends*
Trucks/service vehicles
7.
EXISTING
after
8-5 5 PM
IPl 2 YEARS
� after
8-5 5 PM
*Show calculations on reverse side or attach senarate sheet.
ADJACENT BUSINESSES/LAfJD USES
Restaurant and service station to the north;
IP! 5 YEARS
after
8-5 5 PM
Northpark apartments
�o the east and south; auto sales to the west; this building is an
existing, nonconforming use at this location and should be allowed
Required Date received 0 COn 111U� e.
Fyes) (no) ( ' ) Location plan of adjacent properties.
(3�es) (no) ( - ) Other tenants/firms on property:
no. firr�s ( ) no. employees ( )
floor area occupied ( SF office space)
( SF other)
no. employee vehicles regularly on site ( )
no. comoany vehicles at this location ( )
8. FEES Special Permit, all districts $100 () Other application type, fee 3 ()
Variance/R-1,R-2 districts $ 40 () Project Assessment $ 25 (X )
Variance/other districts $ 75 ( X) Negative Declaration $ 25 (X )
Condominium Permit $ 50 () EIR/City & consultant fees $ ()
TOTAL FEES $125 . �� RECEI PT NO 131 OH Recei ved by B• wh i ttemore
I hereby cer ify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is
true.and co ect to the best of knowledge and belief.
' 3/3/86
Signature � �+'• � c � t�` f � �t L�� t�� �_ - Date
pp icant
STAFF USE ODlLY
NEGATIVE DECLARATION File No.
The City of Burlingame by on
completed a review of the proposed project and determined that:
( ) It will not have a significant effect on the environment.
( ) No Environmental Impact Report is required.
Reasons for a Conclusion:
19_,
Categoricall.v exempt: Reference Code
Sec. 15301, Existing Facilities.
r��' 2Q�- 6U..�Y1(� `� � 3► 9�
gnature of Processino fficial T tle ^ Dai; Signed
Unless appealed within 10 days hereof the date posted, the deternination shall be final.
DECLARATIO'V OF POSTI^JG Dai;e Posted:
I declare under penalty of perjury that I ar� City Clerk of the City of Burlingame and that
I posted a true copy of the above Ne�ati��e Declaration at the City Hall of said City near
the doors to th� Council Chambers.
Executed at 6urlingame> California on
Apoealed: ( )Yes ( )P;o
19
JUDIfHT.- M�LFATT�-CITY CLERK, CITY ('r= oURLINGAh1E
STAFF REVI EW
1. CIRCULATION OF APPLICATIOPd
Project proposal/plans have been circulated for review by:
Ci ty Engi neer
Building Inspector
Fire Marshal
Park Department
City Attorney
date ci rcul ated
( 7/2/86 )
� �� )
� " )
� — )
� — )
reply received
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
2. SUMMARY OF STAFF CONCERNS/POSSIBLE MITIGATIOPJ MEASURES
memo attached
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
Concerns Mitigation Measures
Does the applicant satisfy the Review applicant's letter;
four legal requirements for a make findings.
Variance?
Will the proposal comply with Request comments from the
all Fire and Building Code Fire Marshal and Chief Bldg.
requirements? Inspector.
3. CEQA REQUIREP�EPlTS
If a Negative Declaration has not been posted for this oroject:
Is the project subject to CEQA review? No - categoricallv exempt.
IF AN EIR IS REQUIRED:
Initial Study comoleted
Decision to prepare EIR
Notices of preparation mailed
2FP to consultants
Contract awarded
Admin. draft EIR received
Draft EIR accepted by staff
Circulation to other agencies
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Study by P.C.
Review period ends
Public hearing by P.C.
Final EIR received by P.C.
Certification by Council
Decision on project
Notice of Determination
4. APPLICATIOP� STATUS Date first received (3/3/86 )
Accepted as complete: no( X) letter to applicant advising info. required (3/ 1 0/ 8 6 )
Yes( ) date P.C. study (��28�g6 )
Is application ready for a public hearing? (yes) �(no) Recommended date ( Q//i ��)
Date staff report mail�ed� doplicant (�d v G) Date Commission hearing (4' f;/ !;'�)
Application approved (J ) Denied ( ) ' Appeal to Council (yes) no)
Date Council hearing ( ) Apnlication aporoved ( ) Denie
Il�"1(�►I��p� •/ .�' �
� signed date
cxaNni.Ex
INSURANCI�:
MANAGEMENT
S F R V I C F S
1 � C I) K P O R A 7' F, t)
February 26, 1986
Ms. Helen Williams
c/o Planning Department
Burlingame City Hall
Burlingame, CA 94010
K1�,�,C� � ��
� � � � � �9$6
CI� NNI� pEp ME
Dear Ms. Williams:
I would like to request your consideration of a variance for the parking
requirements for the building located at 1011 Cadillac Way, Burlingame,
California.
It is my understanding that Burlingame code requires one parking space for every
300 square feet of commercial office space or 18 spaces for the Cadillac Way
building of approximately 5,300 square feet.
The building currently has 10 spaces on site. The variance requested would
count 10 spaces leased from Northpark Apartments (copy of lease attached) for
the purpose of fulfilling the balance of the code requirement.
I would like to further request that since the parking spaces leased are for
daytime parking only (office hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday) the parking spaces being leased be counted in fulfilling the parking
requirements for 1011 Cadillac Way and the Northpark Apartments and,
specifically, that the leased spaces not be deducted from the current spaces
counted for Northpark parking requirements.
It is my understanding that a similar variance was granted in Burlingame whereby
parking spaces were used by one business for daytime business use and another
for nighttime and weekends.
1733 California Drive, Burlingame, California )4010. (800) 242-6353 in California, (800) 831-1388 outside California
Ms. Helen Williams
February 26, 1986
Page 2
I further request that you consider the following:
A. That there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances involved and
that a denial of variance will result in substantial and undue property
value loss.
B. The variance requested is necessary to preserve and enjoy property rights
which has been used and exercised by the current owner during the entire
period of his ownership.
C. The granting of the variance will have no impact whatsoever on the property
rights, safety, welfare, public health or enjoyment of property rights of
others and is in full concurrence and agreement with the owners of
Northpark Apartments.
D. The variance requested would have no adverse effect on the zoning of the
city.
The building located at 1011 Cadillac Way has been used as office space for
approximately 15 years, 8 under current ownership. An additional 10 parking
spaces have been made available by the current and past owners of the Northpark
Apartments for daytime business hours use. This request is made to formalize
and legalize that use under current Burlingame City Code requirements.
Thank you for your consideration.
�
,,
� A �
; ���..�.._�
Owner
First San Francisco Corporation
INVESTMENT BANKERS
Thomas W. Newman
July 17, 1986
Ms. Margaret Monroe
City Planner
City of Burlingame
San Mateo County
City Hall - 501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
h I�, �v �: U ��.. J�V
•.�
CI P��MNING DEP7ME
989 East Hillsdale Boulevard • Suite 200
Foster City, California 94404 •(415) 349-5050
TWN-86-133
SUBJECT: Change of Ownership - 1011 Cadillac Way, Burlingame, CA
Dear Ms. Monroe:
Please be advised that Mr. David T. 0'Neal, Jr, is purchasing the property
located at 1011 Cadillac Way through Escrow No. O1-901145-KC at Chicago
Title in Burlingame.
It is anticipated that this escrow will close on Tuesday, July 22 after
which time Mr. 0'Neal will be the sole owner. Mr. 0'Neal has authorized me
as attorney in fact to represent him in negotiating the contracts for
rehabilitation and the applications with respect to the variance and the
subdivision already in process with the City.
Please be further advised that we will be using Joe Harvey and Nicolaides
Builders as the general contractor in performing the rehabilitation work to
be done.
Should you have any auestions, pleas� call me at 349-5050. Thank you for
your attention to this matter.
Si �rely, �
�� �
\ 'i
� �/�
�'��h� s . �ewman�.�--
Attorney in Fact for David T. 0'Neal, Jr.
/vh
cc: Mr. Joe Harvey
Nicolaides & Son, Inc.
DATE : ��.?%�G
MEMO T0: CISY ENGINEER
,�•�IEF BUILDING INSPECTOR
FIRE MARSHAL
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: /°�ii�ir � ��iY�
%�� tA1�/ i/ i.-� o 0��� CC Q. f ID �� ` GtGi%/ /! � v
;�/l'{:!.✓ (�� / lGj Gf�1 i�ll � .
: �L� �•�w
S� sC , ��� t ,�,
An application has been received for the above project for review by the
Planning Commission. The application will be scheduled for �T�� y
at tl�eir �Z��d'/� meeting. We would appreciate having
your comments by %�/�'���
,%l � �/ �, 9-%��
Thank you . � a ,� ,�" /�► r, � ,.,`• ,�� /� -
� �
Helen Williams
Planner
S�
dtt.
�G� C_ d .�r� �� � .
� A
� �
� �
` \ � /1�iL�'-'� Cn'l.
�aTE: %/�j��
MEMO T0: CITY ENGINEER
CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR
vf�IRE MARSHAL
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: %�'f �'n-� ��"r�kH c_�
/(/CC.GI Lt'LG' ! C./ k' 6i.; ' "�:
%`r� c°4/iI`i:�_st 0,;�,1C �jf /0/i �Gc. �1/!� c�
/i- /
� � i(`' �'i r Yi;, .� - ,✓��l-c't:.: � (�� / l j !. r�i.�<l > _
An application has been received for the above project for review by the
Planning Commission. The application will be scheduled for �TG�� y
at tf�eir 7����'/v meeting. We would appreciate having
—��—,,
your comments by % /�' �'�
Thank you.
Helen Williams
Planner
5� �-�-�8�
att.
�V lt=l,t� � 01-� Si�,� ,
�
►-� cA� �1 �,�r�
DATE : ,��/��
MEMO T0: �TY ENGINEER
CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR
FIRE MARSHAL
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: /�'��i�r! ��'��2y�c�� �,�
r
�/�tt,ct ���: !L� ��� ?'t� ,q�
%lc2 �x/:%J�i��-� ���,C.G Q.f /D/� ���%1�1� �
S/ s�
r �j� � -%.1�rcC.� ( �� �-«'I Gr.i'�-�) ,
An application has been received for the above project for review by the
Planning Commission. The application will be scheduled for �T�-� y
at tl�eir 7���d'/v meeting. We would �ppreciate having
»
yo ur c ommen ts by 7�/�'��'�
�T
Thank you.
Helen Williams
Planner
S�
dtt.
%� - L�4 n.� � i n.�' Ci
�/� � r''� , �E� n � 1 �� 1��2,<<s
/ / � ' /
/ V .L7 � ' �) ] �' t/r t"' "9 i � ,3 �Ot�. G-C J" C f-�/i �fJ�
V
/�s.s �.� �� ��.- s �-..,.- ,
�, �-�--��
Page 8
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 1986
the E�►bassy Suites Hotel, it will combine several parcels of land,
subdivided lands and State lands; it indicates some easements which
will be abandoned, public access easements and utility easements to be
accepted and other easements as needed. The map is ready for City
Council approval. CP noted for the record this map will not become
final and effective until it is signed by the State of California.
Howard Hickey, civil engineer, was present. Chm. Schwalm opened the
public hearing. There were no audience comments and the public hearing
was closed.
C. Jacobs moved to recommend this tentative and final parcel map to
City Council for approval, all parties including the State of
California are required to sign the map. Second C. Graham; motion
approved on a 5-0 roll call vote, C. Giomi absent. Staff will forward
to Council.
Recess 9:32 P.M.; reconvene 9:40 P.M.
ITEMS FOR STUDY
10. VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN EXISTING HOME TO BE REMODELED TO FOUR
APARTMENTS - 315 EL CAMINO REAL
Requests: length of the substandard driveway; include correspondence
with adjacent property owner in action packet. Item set for hearing
August 11, 1986.
11. VARIANCE TO CREATE A SEPARATE PARCEL FOR AN EXISTING OFFICE
BUILDING AT 1011 CADILLAC WAY
Requests: clarify length of lease for the 10 parking spaces; are there
other parking alternatives. Item set for hearing August 11, 1986.
12. TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP - 1011 CADILLAC WAY
Item set for hearing August 11, 1986.
13. SIGN EXCEPTIONS - 101 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
Requests: does this site have a master sign permit; was Sign C
previously approved or is it a new sign. Item set for hearing August
11, 1986.
14. SPECIAL PERMIT TO EXTEND OPERATING HOURS - WALGREEN DRUG -
1420 HOWARD AVENUE
Requests: will liquor department also be open for the hours requested;
how were original hours established. Item set for hearing August 11,
1986.
Page 7
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 1986
control of expansion and more intensive use of land; in this case he is
using space which is already there; other merchants have not objected;
believe there has been adequate justification for a finding of
hardship. Motion approved on a 5-0 roll call vote, C. Giomi absent.
Appeal procedures were advised.
8. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW AN ART STUDIO AND SCHOOL AT
1530 GILBRETH ROAD, ZONED M-1
Reference staff report, 7/28/86, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed
details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment,
applicant's letter, property owner's letter, study meeting questions.
Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the public
hearing.
Discussion: this use would more properly belong in the C-2 district;
the zoning code requires a use permit for classes in any district; area
proposed for this use would require one parking space for warehouse
use, four parking spaces for office use.
Geri Kelly, applicant, was present. She expressed some concern about
the CE's requirement that no classes by held between 4:00 an3 6:00
P.M.; this condition could be modified to read "no classes shall begin
or end between 4:00 and 6:00 P.M." All classes will be taught by the
applicant herself, not 12 hours a day every day, schedule presented is
an overall schedule.
Chm. Schwalm opened the public hearing. There were no audience
comments and the public hearing was closed.
With the statement this use would have less impact than an office use
and that there are racquetball clubs in the M-1 district already, C.
Jacobs moved for approval of the special permit and for adoption of
Commission Resolution Approving Special Permits with the following
conditions: (1) that the art studio/class use be limited to the hours
of 9:30 A.M. to 8:00 P.M, and 9:00 A.M, to 2:30 P.M,, Monday through
Saturday, except that no classes shall begin or end between the hours
of 4:00 P.M. and 6:00 P.M. daily. Classes shall be limited to a
maximum of eight students and one instructor and have a maximum
duration of three hours; (2) that this use shall be operated in
conformance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code and
Uniform Fire Code; and (3) that this use permit shall be reviewed in
one year's time (July, 1987). Second C. Graham; motion approved on a
5-0 roll call vote, C. Giomi absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
9. TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 2 AND 3,
BLOCK 6, ANZA AIRPORT PARK NO. 6 AND A PORTION OF THE LANDS OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, PROPERTY OCCUPIED BY THE EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL,
150 ANZA BOULEVARD
Reference agenda memo from the DPW, July 22, 1986. CE Erbacher
reviewed the item; this map is one of the conditions of approval for
C I T Y 0 F B U R L I N G A M E
MEMO T0: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM; PLANNER
SUBJECT: 1011 CADILLAC WAY, STUDY QUESTIONS
At the July 28 study meetinq the following information was requested:
l. Duration of the parking lease agreement: the lease is for a five
year term with three options to extend the lease an additional five
years for a total of 20 years (Exhibit A, pp. 1 and 3).
2. Parking alternatives was discussed with Joe Harvey. He will be in
contact with the new property owner and alternatives will be
discussed at the public hearing.
/��- �-P.��►�
Helen Williams
Planner
HW/s
/ / � f � p ��',T ' L� .,,s ?'�4r� ' \ �.. ,/ . .
' � l� . f r
� } � 4 / 4 �.
� r � ' �' � i � : � . ��` � ... w' /��'c . .
� F, l�� � . i�' ♦ �. ��,�f� � ,- . ir`�', � � �,�c, v� . `' � n�; �.ol 4}';.�1 � \� ��, J;. � / '
__� � �f '{ �`� .r .��i � .<;' . , . k� ".. . � `Xj( l�ir�' { � z L . � .
� ; ��. ��% �� .�o � � � y i.�/�s.y S'.,.p{`Y �
. , , ' ��� �7 � / . ��M .!'�;� • li��'$:a� ��'. �s �� 4 ��' ti*. ��. y+ ' , r
.� � � '� ' � � t ��` �
; A � ' / .. \ M �l.
,F i�� �+7 � � /1�'� � .tY � � ' . ���`t+�i'4� � . y� �� �� ' /
� ; ,,�%� '� �,��,' . . �'� ' , 4g� � ,�.. �•. . �
� ��� � a .,� . . ' <% . � ;,� z -��'�a t ' ' ct � e� / .
R �1 1jj�} � / � � . �. "'� x1� q��� �s�,: s� ,
�,'� �f � . � " � 'E 1 , �:>' ; . �� t � 1r ' 1 � . .. _ "� "'wx _'=v.'Y,y. . �` .�+,� j
j /� J � �. { r r�� �/ � k �, � .,�� �.� ��
, \1 � " � • ' a _� '�t"' �� 1� '
� yr � ,
,� '�r ,�` � ,� ,.,. .' ;�'' �'� ��,,,�
, � .
� � � �'
� �:
�^�>`�� , p �. � / � � � �� `�� � �'���"�I� t �4 a
��.'��/ '' ' �f��� � � � •' �i ��' >�4�� ��* ` �� "",�� � :.
`�� ��' R ,
� �' a ` '`' ' `� A .'� '��� Nnt���� :
tf � � �� .;^ 1 �o � �?� . � , � �'�''}� � �' �►
i' w � ,� ��.�iy'4 � a
r
,t! � �' ,*: � 'Y� ,"� � �'!,)� � a �
�� � .+a'- '' ac t�' � �,'° .�. ,� �;_: �
. � � "' .��` �� ;��
�� ,;� �� �f;r � �,5 �`.� � � �� , , �
� �,I��`�,'; f �t� } ?J•" � � l �h� ��►� � '� � ��
� yY � : � ��.
A j �` �'�"�= ' n��!� _ ����, ; a � ', �t:
�� � � �` � �� � . y ,. � �> � � �.� �� }; ' �
��� � / r�� � � � �.
� F •,�� , ,; � y
� �
� k � �> ' ���:'�/'� �,t.;.. y�" ,�.
� . . '..., �y � �!y�` � �� \ _ f k � � '�... "
'�' � •, ' � • . ��� �� � �� r� i, � � t .
�.sj�/�'/j/ r C �� `itiT � ` � "�' '` r'� • � �� s
fd;*.[/� � � � I � -n4 . , v , �y1 l' � O �
u � ."��t � n11 � , •� � � �� ��,� `:�. �� s", � � '�
� � , n',v .. . .. �� / +�..-. � F
V
� ` � r' . . ; �v " .�' � � ! ,'�'� +�
'�: � �� ' . � �
` . ' 1 ,
_. . ` .
6� � ._ -,, '� cn
� .��/�. ��t `j i .a .
'� . �j� '_. .. .
�' � , , _ , s�"' � � �� 't 7 � � 4`�;" , ,� `�'
_ '� '� " , '�1 � t'� ,��
� . . ., .. � .+ .'"�', ,�i!,. i � L, ; . . �� i / � ' .. ♦ .\�i. ir���'� ��.;
' . . J S . � ' • �.\ ., ' � Y�
ti , .�weyw� 4..
'� � �1
i , .�,. �'` �/ � . � .1 . � �"1MS'. .. ,���'
� , „ � . . , , �j. , :; " �� '°"asaL ,s.
x �, s_ "� " �
i • � - . � c. • �
. � � > - . +{ . j '" . .
- �t � . � } �� � � � �� .
,� .• �. �:� �� ��
�.
- ��� . �'� .� - . � � � � . --; . � . � �
� � � � �. , � ��
�� ��, � ,� , � � - ' �, � � % � �
� ,
�. � � , �.'.'Y -�► � � �'�`
r1 . . -� � � � ,�
� � - � . � �.� �
�� ; ��� � � :. , zr_�;, ��
�
�� �� � ���
. . : �► ; �+c$ . �� � f � - . �} N
� . .. � �� i O � ..' ,%•x• ` �� � • �R�
� ' , - ���' ' .q-� , ' �` ��`.• ,,�'' �
7 � " �l �.�` ,
�, ` ` =�` r �.
� � >` � � � � � ` `'�' �� �,.
,�� �* f � � '/�ya��..��f� � �
� ' ti . : .. '�. �.��"� ��v rt* }J
. > ^ i � ' . ` � ' � # J'i'{
.... � � � . ! . ., � 4A � , �� �. F �.
. . � � , � � ' � rnV'Y . . .
�? . . .. ' ' � I , , ry � y` f
� I 1�' ' .1 t� �! � ' �:. � , ,
. I
Please return to:
Planning Dept.
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
I hereby certify this to be a
full, true and correct copy of
the document it purports to be,
the original of which is on
file in my office.
Date. � � ����
�
V --- �
Margaret M nroe, City Planner
11/2/84
Rr
���
��;;-
AF `
h'�
8610380`�
L��UilUk�! Al f1kUUk51 U;
`�"�- ���i/�n.C�
� � �
�u� cl � 3p rM °�p
''^:,,F,1''i�t � �+I,'r,,ri.F'tCi1rG�R
st:�r r�a���� c����r;tY
��F F�i.r,i,a� �r r:o►�os
RESOLUTIO:� �o. 23-86
RESOLUTION APPROVING Variance
�
RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Burlingame that; ,
I WHEREAS, application has been made for a Variance i
�! to on-site parkinq requirements to create a separate
! parcel for an office bui1dinq j
I at 1011 Cddi 11 aC Wdy (p,pp� 026-231-270 �, �
' and - i
i I
i taHEREAs, this Commission held a Public hearing on said
' application on AUgUSt 11 ,lgp6 � ;
:70W THEREFORE, it is hereby RESOLVED and DETERPIINED by
this Planning Commission that said Variance is approved,
subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto.
It is further directed that a certified copy of this
I resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of
i
San 29ateo.
f�
_ � / .� ,
^
�_, _.; /,,� i
, %;/ ,� � „� .,�, / �
"Jarnette M. Giom,; �
Chairman
Charles F. Schwalm, Vice Chairman
I, X���Xv�.X���� �CXJ�3CdC�C}X of the Planning
Comr,iission 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 Zlth day of
August ,1986 , by the following vote:
AYES:
NOP•.S :
ABSENT:
corir�zssioN�,Rs: GARCIA,GIOMI,JACOBS,SCHWALM �
COMMISSIONERS: NONE ,
cocKr�rsszorrERs: GRAHAM/LEAHY . � �
� 1
�.�Zjc� t E- -�
i �
- �iH%i°tr z10 -l�fdhlr �
- 6 GC1'Q{`flSt7 - - -
Charles F. Schwalm, Vice Chairman
��tP C�t��? II� �1t��t2�T��tYTtF
SAN MATEO COUNTY
CITY HALL- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010 TEL:(415) 342-8931
NOTICE OF HEARING
.�
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Monday, the llth day of Auqust, 1986 , at
the hour of 7:30 P.M., in the City Hall Council Chambers , 501 Primrose Road,
Burlingame, California the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame will conduct -
a public hearing on the application to allow 10 on-site parking spaces (18 spaces
required) for an existing office building at 1011 Gadillac Way, zoned R-4, a�_ ar
of a subdivision proposal to create two separate parcels
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 PLANNER
August 1, 1986
u
� RESOLUTION VO.
�
RESOLUTION APPROVING Variance
; RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Burlingame that;
i
i, WHEREAS, application has been made for a UdY'1d11C2
�, to on-site parking requirements to create a separate I
I� '
;i parcel for an office bui1dinq ,,
�` at 1011 CddilldC Wdy (ppN 026-231-270 �,'
I,
� and .
�� WHEREAS, this Commission held a Public hearing on said �
�
application on August 11 19II6 i
,
CIOW THEREFORE, it is hereby RESOLVED and DETERMINED by I
this Planning Commission that said Variance is approved, I
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 i
I i
San i4ateo. �
�
� (
; Nannette M. Giomi I
Chairman �
I
� �
I, ROBERT J. LEAHY, Secretary of the Planning
� Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that I
the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular
� meeting of the Planning Commission held on the Zlth day of
August ,1986 , by the following vote:
AYES: CObiMISSIONERS:
I NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
- �
-• ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
� Robert . Lea y �
11/2/84 Secretary �
"EXHIBIT A"
Conditions of approval, parking
variance, 1011 Cadillac Way
(effective August 19, 1986)
Property owner:
David T. 0'Neal, Jr.
c/o Thomas W. Newman
First San Francisco Corp.
989 East Hillsdale Blvd. - #200
Foster City, CA 94404
l. that the parcel map as filed and recorded conform to the map
submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped June 30,
1986;
2. that the 10 parking spaces on site be clearly marked and designated
for the use of the office building's occupants and that the
property owner shall be responsible for maintaining markings and
enforcing use; aj
0�
3. that the property owner secure and maintain a lease to use 10 ~
O
parking spaces on the adjacent Northpark Apartments site for use �
from 8:00 A.M, to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and that these
parking spaces be clearly marked/posted for the office use during ,p
these times, the posting to be installed and maintained by the
owner of the office building with the consent of the Northpark
Apartments management;
4. that the striping of the parking spaces leased from Northpark
Apartments be maintained by the owner of the office building;
5. that if Northpark should ever convert to condominium use they would
make arrangements to provide eight permanent parking spaces for the
office or make arrangements to allow weekday, daytime use to
continue; and
6. that the variance will become null and void should access to eight
additional parking spaces no longer be available, loss of the
variance would affect the amount of office use on site.
Page 4
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986
proposed with staff conditions as listed in staff report, eliminating
the monument sign (Sign A) and adding a 4' x 11'-10" double faced sign
(about 95 SF) to the pole sign approved in the ori.ginal sign exception,
raising the top of the pole sign to 24' fro ade. The motion
included approval of the two signs on awning as shown in the
amendment to the sign excep,�ion an pproval of the location of the 24'
pole sign as shown on the sign�' it approved for the Embassy Suites
hotel. Second C. Schwalm. otion app� d on a 4-0 roll call vote,
Cers Graham and Leahy a ent. Appeal proc�e�d'i��were advised.
CP requested thr copies of the proposal approved this"'evening be
delivered to e Planning Department on Tuesday, August 12, 1986.
5. VARIANCE TO ON-SITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS TO CREATE A SEPARATE
PARCEL FOR AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING AT 1011 CADILLAC WAY
Reference staff report, 8/11/86, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed
details of the request, staff review, Planning staff comment,
applicant's letter, study meeting questions. Five conditions were
suggested for consideration at the public hearing.
Discussion: variance, if approved, will run with the land, i.e., the
office parcel; reference to property owner in condition #2 is the owner
of 1011 Cadillac Way (a new owner who will own the building and the
land under the building); office building on this site is a
nonconforming use on R-4 zoned property, tnis has been a long term
nonconforming situation; if office building became a conforming use it
would still be nonconforming in parking, it would need 18 parking
spaces and there are only 10 spaces on site.
Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Joe Harvey, 2205 Adeline Drive,
was present representing the previous owner of the building and present
owner of the building and land both of whom were out of town. His
comments: he has been involved in the overall planning of the project
through his contracting business, Nicolaides & Son; lease on the 10
required additional spaces has been executed and approved by Northpark
and the new purchaser, it does allow for use of the spaces for 20
years; the lease definitely sets forth guidelines which will guarantee
the spaces as required; there will be no expansion of the footprint of
the building, no change in the exterior other than repainting; use of
the property will continue as it has been used in the past, there will
be no intensification of use; title of the building has transferred,
item #7 of tonight's agenda addresses transfer of the land; lease for
the parking spaces is a formal agreement, with specifics, and all
conditions in the staff report can be met; the previous understanding
for the spaces at Northpark was informal, it was not an issue with the
city at the time since the land under the office building was still
owned by Northpark and it wasn't considered off-premise parking.
For tne record Mr. Harvey stated he became involved in this application
some time ago prior to his appointment as City Treasurer and he was not
speaking this evening in any capacity other than as a general
contractor.
Page 3
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986
4. SIGN EXCEPTION TO ADD THREE SIGNS AT 150 ANZA BOULEVARD WHICH
EXCEED NUMBER AND AMOUNT OF SIGNS ALLOWED BY THE CODE
Refer�nce staff report, 8/11/86, with attachments. PLR.Williams
revie�ed details of the request, code requirements, st�ff review,
applic�nt's comments. One condition was suggested for' consideration at
the pu�lic hearing.
'�
Commission/staff discussion: could the proposed mo�iument sign be added
to the existing pole sign; applicant had wanted ,�`eparate identification
for the hotel and the restaurant at separate lor�ations; visibility of
signage from Anza Boulevard.
Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Paul Salisbury, representing
United Suites Development Co. and Bobby M ee's (the restaurant)
addressed Commission: restaurant became lessee of the hotel following
approval of th� previous signage packag ; since the amendment to the
sign permit was submitted it has occur ed to the hotel and restaurant
owners that it mi�ght be advantageous o combine the proposed monument
sign with the Embassy Suites pole s' n, placing the 4' x 11'-10"
restaurant sign under the Embassy ites sign, raising the approved
pole sign and top of�;, Embassy Suit sign to a height of 24' and
retaining the propos�� awning si�ns; hotel has given its approval of
this change. '� ��"
CP noted the diagram pre ente�d by the applicant this evening had no
dimensions and she would r�,�er to continue the item to give staff and
Commission time to review °is revised proposal. CE�s only concern was
that intersection requirem� s for visibility be adhered to. Planning
staff further advised this w ld not be an amendment to a master sign
program, there was no master 'gn program previously approved, just a
sign program.
There were no audien�e comments a d the public hearing was closed.
Further Commission/staff discussion°� think this is a good compromise,
would support approval this evening; �staff pointed out if the proposed
combination sign comes in at 24' the aV`�plicant will need another sign
exception for height; Commission's usua�time for review of a sign
exception is two weeks, would action thi evening be giving the
proposal due consideration; proposal will�give the restaurant signage
better exposure. Applicant advised hotel �lans to open the first week
of September and would like to have signageti�up prior to that time.
Y
C. Jacobs moved to continue the item to the me�ting of August 25,
1986r'�Motion died for lack of a second. Siz�,A=height and total square
footage of the combined pole sign was discussed as well as color of the
awning signs.
C. Jacobs found there were exceptional circumstances applicable to this
property in its location which is difficult to see from the street, the
proposal will consolidate two signs, it will not be detrimental to
adjacent properties. C. Jacobs moved to amend the sign exception as
Page 5
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986
There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed.
C. Jacobs found there were exceptional circumstances in that the office
building was located in the R-4 (residential) zone, in the combination
of building and land, and in the 20 year lease for parking spaces; it
is a property right of the owner to use his buildingand it will not be
detrimental to the area, there is a definite need for more parking in
the city. C. Jacobs moved for approval of the variance application and
for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving Variance with the
conditions in the staff report. Second C. Garcia.
Following discussion on the motion C. Jacobs amended her motion to
eliminate reference to 20 years in conditions #3 and #5 and to include
condition #6; amended motion accepted by C. Garcia. Revised conditions
of approval follow: (1) that the parcel map as filed and recorded
conform to the map submitted to the Planning Department and date
stamped June 30, 198b; (2) that the 10 parking spaces on site be
clearly marked and designated for the use of the office building's
occupants and that the property owner shall be responsible for
maintaining markings and enforcing use; (3) that the property owner
secure and maintain a lease to use 10 parking spaces on the adjacent
Northpark Apartments site for use from 8:00 A.M, to 5:00 P.M,, Monday
through Friday, and that these parking spaces be clearly marked/posted
for the office use during these times, the posting to be installed and
maintained by the owner of the office building with the consent of the
Northpark Apartments management; (4) that the striping of the parking
spaces leased from Northpark Apartments be maintained by the owner of
the office building; (5) that if Northpark should ever convert to
condominium use they would make arrangements to provide eight permanent
parking spaces for the office or make arrangements to allow weekday,
daytime use to continue; and (6) that the variance will become null and
void should access to eight additional parking spaces no longer be
available, loss of the variance would affect the amount of office use
on site.
Comment on the motion: am comfortable with this action, it has been a
long term on-going use with a unique history, do not believe it will
set a precedent for off-premise parking in the city, Commission has
been hesitant to grant off-premise parking; the day might come when
this site would be more valuable for R-4 (residential) use; shared use
of parking makes sense and is reasonable as long as uses continue as
they are.
Motion approved on a 4-0 roll call vote, Cers Graham and Leahy absent.
Appeal procedures were advised.
6. TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP TO CREATE A SEPARATE PARCEL FOR THE
BUILDING AT 1011 CADILLAC WAY (NLY PORTION OF PARCEL 1, PARCEL MAP
VOL. 13/18)
CE Erbacher recommended changes to the conditions in Engineering's memo
of July 21, 1986 so it would reflect Planning Commission action on the
variance and that the map be forwarded to Council for approval with
these revised conditions. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. There
were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed.
Page 6
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986
C. Schwalm moved to recommend this tentative and final oarcel map to
City Council for approval with the following conditions: (1) a sanitary
sewer easement be provided to Parcel A for sewer line to existing
building; (2) ingress and egress easement to Parcel B be granted
through the driveway area of Parcel A as approved by the City Engineer;
and (3) a sanitary sewer and storm drain easement be dedi gated to city
by owner for. approximately 7' x 94' adjacent to 20' stornf sewer
easement at �ollins Road adjacent to sewer pump statio��. Second C.
Jacobs; moti�n approved on a 4-0 roll call vote. ��
7. SPECIAL P�2MIT TO EXTEND THE OPERATING HOURS 0,� THE WALGREEN
DRUG STORE?�AT 1420 HOWARD AVENUE ,<
Reference staff�report, 8/11/86, with attachme�ts. CP Monroe reviewed
details of the r quest, staff review, applic �t's letter, study meeting
questions. Two nditions were suggested f consideration at the
public hearing, oning code regulation re uiring a special permit for
hours of operation outside of 7:00 A.M, t,,�' 11:00 P.M, for grocery, drug
and department stor s was noted. This r�quest is to extend the
operating hours to �dnight seven days�_� week.
P
Chm. Giomi opened the�public hearingr David Devencenzi, store manager,
stated their main conc rn is to kee `the pharmacy open until midnight
seven days a week. Wal reen's has;�een experimenting with 24 hour
stores, the Millbrae st e is ope�'24 hours. Walgreen's/Burlinqame
plan to put in a mini-gr ery and`"other items which people might need
late at night; grocery it s wo !ld include ice cream, dairy products,
frozen foods, non-alcoholi be,�erages, canned goods; no microwave items
and no food cooked on the p ecTr'ises for immediate consumption would be
sold from the site. They feq� this will provide better service to the
commun i ty .
�
There were no audience com�4ients nd the public hearing was closed.
C. Jacobs found this wouA�d be a b efit to the community, it would not
be detrimental; the 24 �iour store i Millbrae appears to be a success.
C. Jacobs moved for approval of the pecial permit and for adoption of
Commission Resolution;�Approving Speci 1 Permits with the following
conditions: (1) that,�the hours of oper tion shall be limited to 8:00
A.M, to 12:00 midnig`ht seven days a wee • and (2) that this use permit
shall be reviewed �'or compliance in one ar (August, 1987).
In comment on the"�motion it was noted that� ould take-out food service
develop on this site a special permit would required, staff will be
reviewing for compliance with the conditions o, approval in one year's
time.
Motion approved on a 4-0 roll call vote, Cers Grah�m and Leahy absent.
Appeal p�ocedures were advised. ��
8. SPECIAL PERMIT TO OPERATE R GROCERY STORE 24 HOURS A DAY,
SAFEWAY STORES, INC., 1450 HOWARD AVENUE
Continued to August 25, 1986.
Page 6
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1986
C. Schwalm moved to recommend this tentative and final parcel map to
City Council for approval with the following conditions: (1) a sanitary
sewer easement be provided to Parcel A for sewer line to existing
building; (2) ingress and egress easement to Parcel B be granted
through the driveway area of Parcel A as approved by the City Engineer;
and (3) a sanitary sewer and storm drain easement be dedicated to city
by owner for approximately 7' x 94' adjacent to 20' storm sewer
easement at Rollins Road adjacent to sewer pump station. Second C.
Jacobs; motion approved on a 4-0 roll call vote.
SPECIAL PERMIT TO EXTEND THE OPERATING HOURS OF THE WALGREEN
DRUG STORE AT 1420 HOWARD AVENUE
Re rence staff report, 8/11/86, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed
deta'ls of the request, staff review, applicant's letter, study meeting
quest'ons. Two conditions were suggested for consideration at the
public earing. Zoning code regulation requiring a special permit for
hours o�operation outside of 7:00 A.M, to 11:00 P.M, for grocery, drug
and depar£�ent stores was noted. This request is to exten� the
operating h�urs to midnight seven days a week. ,,,�`
Chm. Giomi ope d the public hearing. David Devence i, store manager,
stated their mai concern is to keep the pharmacy en until midnight
seven days a week. Walgreen's has been experime ing with 24 hour
stores, the Millbra� store is open 24 hours. lgreen's/Burlingame
plan to put in a mini�;rocery and other item which people might need
late at night; grocery��tems would include ce cream, dairy products,
frozen foods, non-alcoho 'c beverages, c ned goods; no microwave items
and no food cooked on the remises for mmediate consumption would be
sold from the site. They f 1 this "11 provide better service to the
community .
There were no audience comment�nd the public hearing was closed.
C. Jacobs found this would e a ben fit to the community, it would not
be detrimental; the 24 ho store in illbrae appears to be a success.
C. Jacobs moved for app val of the sp ial permit and for adoption of
Commission Resolution proving Special rmits with the following
conditions: (1) that he hours of operatio .shall be limited to 8:00
A.M, to 12:00 midni t seven days a week; an (2) that this use permit
shall be reviewed or compliance in one year ( gust, 1987).
In comment
develop on
reviewing f
time
on�e motion it was noted that should 't�ke-out food
th's site a special permit would be requi"�,�d, staff
o� compliance with the conditions of aoprova,l in one
Motion a,�proved on
Appeal,procedures
8. $PECIAL PERMIT
�'SAFEWAY STORES
` 'v,.
service
will be
year's
a 4-0 roll call vote, Cers Graham and Leahy absent.
were advised.
TO OPERATE A GROCERY STORE 24 HOURS A DAY,
INC., 1450 HOWARD AVENUE
Continued to August 25, 1986.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 5
August 11, 1986
There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed.
C. Jacobs found there were exceptional circumstances in that the office
building was located in the R-4 (residential) zone, in the combination
of building and land, and in the 20 year lease for parking spaces; it
is � property right of the owner to use his buildingand it will not be
det�;imental to the area, there is a definite need for more parking in
the �ity. C. Jacobs moved for approval of the variance application and
for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving Variance,�ith the
condi�ions in the staff report. Second C. Garcia.
�
Following discussion on the motion C. Jacobs amende her motion to
eliminate reference to 20 years in conditions #3 a #5 and to include
condition #6; amended motion accepted by C. Garc' . Revised conditions
of approv�l follow: (1) that the parcel map as led and recorded
conform td the map submitted to the Planning D partment and date
stamped Jui�,e 30, 1986; (2) that the 10 parki g spaces on site be
clearly marl�ed and designated for the use the office building's
occupants an�that the property owner sha be responsible for
maintaining m�rkings and enforcing use; 3) that the property owner
secure and mai ain a lease to use 10 �arking spaces on the adjacent
Northpark Apart nts site for use fr 8:00 A.M, to 5:00 P.M., Monday
through Friday, a d that these park'ng spaces be clearly marked/posted
for the office use during these t' es, the posting to be installed and
maintained by the o ner of the o ice building with the consent of the
Northpark Apartments anagemen ,(4) that the striping of the parking
spaces leased from No hpark artments be maintained by the owner of
the office building; ( tha if Northpark should ever convert to
condominium use they wou d ake arrangements to provide eight permanent
parking spaces for the of ce or make arrangements to allow week3ay,
daytime use to continue;,a (6) that the variance will become null and
void should access to e�''�ght dditional parking spaces no longer be
available, loss of the,dvarian e would affect the amount of office use
on site. /
Comment on the mot' n: am comfort le with this action, it has been a
long term on-goin use with a uniq history, do not believe it will
set a precedent or off-premise park' g in the city, Commission has
been hesitant t grant off-premise pa ing; the day might come when
this site woul be more valuable for R�`4 (residential) use; shared use
of parking ma es sense and is reasonable���;as long as uses continue as
they are.
Motion app�oved on a 4-0 roll call
Appeal prglcedures were advised.
��
vote, Cer`s�,Graham and Leahy absent.
�,
6. TEN TIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP TO CREATE A SEPARATE PARCEL FOR THE
BU LDING AT 1011 CADILLAC WAY (NLY PORTION OF PARCEL l, PARCEL MAP
V . 13/18)
CE bacher recommended changes to the conditions in Engineering's memo
of uly 21, 1986 so it would reflect Planning Commission action on the
va iance and that the map be forwarded to Council for approval with
these revised conditions. Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. There
were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed.