HomeMy WebLinkAbout150 Anza Boulevard - Approval Letter.-�r �J
� �' �� '
��� CITY ��
BURLINGAME
:�,�� ,��
,�c ':�::: ` - . fIr ooJ
o Q' �� g /
�RqTED JUNE6
C��� � Lz�� .a.� �axx�Zz�.���rr.e
SAN MATEO COUNTY
CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME� GAI.IFORNIA 94010
March 10, 1983 '
Robert Blunk, A.I.A.
Blunk Associates
433 Airport Boulevard
Burlingame, CA. 94010
Dear Mr. Blunk:
At their meeting of March 7, 1983 the City Council reviewed the Planning
Commission's actions on the Granada Royale Hometel project located at
150 Anza Boulevard. The Council's action included granting a special permit
for design guidelines and a parking variance for 430 spaces as well as a
special permit for a maximum height on the main hotel structure not to
exceed 97'. Each of the Council's actions included the conditions listed
in Exhibit I attached. Any site improvements or construction work will
require separate application to the Building Department.
Sincerely yours,
��c� � �.
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
attachment
cc: Linda Pirola, BCDC (with att.)
Paul Salisbury, A.I.A, Blunk Associates )
Granada Royale Hometels, Newport Beach, CA. )- with att.
State Lands Commission )
0
TEL�(4151 342-893�
`F
l.
Burl i ngame Ci ty C1 erk / Chief Building Inspector
Assessor's Office, Redwood City (Lots 11, 12 and 13, Anza A?rpor� Park
Unit #6; APN 026-342-220/230!2�0)
«.�3...�rti.-.:^w+•.,_,,,�,.. A,.... _.'w.a-: r+b-.'+M1,rt�.i...-. .,r.......,-.. �.�-.
f' � ' ' =::�..� ;"-;�- -:- .:<'•�� �- cr�•. .t. , �=�a..._ '�` _ t, -•�---� r�>�^---„_.-._�.,�
�. '���.i�.+_ a , �. j_y'�`3:.i. ��s_v`.�.,_:,,�}-�r� _�•-rv'1.�-.. _ Ai% '�-:. vy3.s'r.'tr� ..� _ �,1•.
-s��,.�v" :i.`�; 1-..� l_ -"`-� ,Y��-v-_!�::,i"4a>,: >r-� -•.,��. t_3'� ..4�.�.�
�
0
EXHIQIT I
1.
recommended conditions as amended by the Planning Commission, February 14, 1983)
that the final plans and construction of the project be consistent with
the plans date star�ped January 14, 1983 and amended for screening of the
loading dock on February 4, 1983, and that no occupied area of any structure
be bel oYr el evati'on 9' ;
2. that the requirer�ents of the Chief Buildir�g Inspector's memo of January 3,
1983, the Fire Piarshal's memo of January 5, 1983 and the City Engineer's
memo of January 5, 1933 be met;
� 3. that the applicant abide by a 30 months construction schedule to begin
with BCDC approval; benchmark dates running consecutively from the date
of BCDC approval would be as follows: six months to submit final plans,
five months to pick up final plans and purchase building permit, two months
to start foundation, four monihs to foundation inspection, six months to
framing inspection and seven months to occupancy permit;
4. that a private security patrol be provided to regularly patrol the park
area, public access area and buildings; �
5. that a study be prepared to determine fire flow capacity of water main(s)
and identify necessary improvements, make improvements including insta7lation
of fire hydrants and provide adequate emergency access built to the Fire
Department's standards; �
6. that the secondary sewer treatment facility improvements are completed
before this project is conriected and that this project contribute its
proportional share of the one time cost to make the required sewer ��'acility
improvements;
7. that se�rage pretreatment facilities for all areas where food is prepared
are provided on site and facilities should meet the standards of the
San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board;
8. that the developer would develop a seismic ground response spectra and
incorporate its conclusions into the final design, surcharge fill areas
to be used for parking and roadways to reduce settlement, aiid stabilize
expansive ar2as under roadways and parking;
9. provide a storm water collection and pumping system to serve the project
including oil separating traps at all drains and driveways and in parking
areas and at collection points before drainage pumps; provide regular �
maintenance of all grease traps on a predetermined schedule established
by the city; "
10. that during construction mea.sures will be followed to ��•�tect adjacent.
bodies of water from siltation; landscaped areas�will be designed to
prevent runofF water frorr entering the Anza Lagoon; hardy plants will be
used �vhich requ�r2 a mini�un of fertiiization and pest and weed control;
EXHIBIT I °
(page 2)
11. develop final landscape plans ���hich meet BCDC and the State Lands
Corsnission's requiremen t for public access including public access
walk►�rays, a public fishing pier built on cement piles and a±4 acre
park, final plans of all facilities to be approved by the Burlingame
Park Departrent and built, improved and maintained by the developer.
12. that the project include lo�r flow water fixtures, drought resistant
plants in landscaping; .
13. that the project contribute its share to one time costs for expanding
water mains;
14. that pile drivers be provided with noise shields and pile driving be
limited to 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., Monday through Friday and 9:00 A.M.
to 4:00 P.Pi. on Saturdays; surround construction site with a fence which
would attenuate ground level noise by 5 dBA, and select building materials
�rhich would reduce interior noise levels io 45 dBA;
15. receipt of all permits from all necessary regulatory agencies including
BCDC, FAA, San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board, U. S. Army
Corps of Engirieers; �
16. that no ro�m in the hotel shall be leased to a single person for more
than 29 days and the rooms and buildings shall not be used for permanent
residential purposes; .
17. that Anza Boulevard be improved to standards established by the City
Engineer including concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk, a bus pull-off
area and drive�ay and intersection improvements as suggested by the
TJfU•i letter of January 10, 1983; and
18. that one-half the Bayfront Development fee be paid at the time of final
plan submittal with the other half paid at the time of final framing
inspection.
�
� � t
• ,
��.G ��.1�4� �.L �A�l-��L� I���Aa �.G
v�
SAN MATEO COUNTY
CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME� CALIFORNIA 94010
November 7, 1984
Paul Salisbury, AIA
Blunk Associates, Inc.
433 Airport Boulevard
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Mr. Salisbury:
�' � �
TEL:(415) 342-8931
At their meeting on November 5, 1984 the City Council reviewed the site plan
modification for the Granada Royale Hometel project and accepted the redesign
of the hotel to 344 rooms and dropping the 10,000 SF restaurant, parking
structure and arcade. They acknowledged the project change as well as your
revised construction schedule:
Begin foundation
Final foundation
Final framing
Final inspection/occupancy
November 5, 1984
January 4, 1985
September 13, 1985
May 15, 1986
Please call me if you have any questions regarding the traffic allocation or
the Council's action.
Sincerely yours,
� '��
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
..
� , . . .
,. ,
Ms. Margaret Monroe
Page Two
October 29, 1984
The freestanding restaurant has been eliminated since a large dining
room and lounge are provided in the hotel, in addition to the free
breakfast facility and cocktail bar for guests. The public restrooms
are provided in a free-standing structure adjacent to the park and pier,
and the fishing pier has been moved in closer proximity to the park.
Because of the changes, the construction schedule will be delayed. The
anticipated schedule is as follows:
Begin Foundations (Piles)
. Final Foundations
Final Framing
Final Inspection/Occupancy
Nov. 5, 1984
Jan. 4, 1985
Sept. 13, 1985
May 15, 1986
If I can provide any further clarification or information, please let
me know.
Very truly yours,
Pau1 G. Salisbury AIA
Asso iate
PGS/adf
Enclosure
cc: Hometels Development Corp.
Williams & Burrows
TO:
QATE:
� � -�' : 0 `� r'M
- , /�, _ �-s �% �_ ... � :,.,4 q,,.-`t f : + < ..
�, ciTr --- `
�a O� � AGENDA � , �
BURI.INGAME
��� �� ���� STAFF REPORT MTGM#
` 11/5/84
�� DATE
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED �/IC�I�i� 1" li��
BY
OCTOBER 29, 1984
FROM: CITY PLANNER eAYPROVED
SUBJECTt TRAFFIC ALLOCATION FOR NOVEMBER 1984
RECOMMENDATION:
Council should review the requests for schedule extension, project modification,
and take appropriate action.
There are two requests before the Council for November 1984 traffic allocation. Both
are for extensions to time schedules. The Burlingame Group project request would
extend the time schedule by one year and three months. Staff review suggests if an
extension is appropriate Council might want to consider a shorter time, 11 months, or
even delay granting the extension until the February 1985 allocation when more is
known about the proposed project design changes.
The second request is from Granada Royale Hometel which is asking for a four month
extension on occupancy because of a redesign of the project. The redesign reduces
the rooms in the hotel from 360 to 344 and eliminates the 10,000 SF restaurant over
the bait shop. The revision increases landscaping while reducing lot coverage and
improving compliance with the Design Guideline criteria. Council should review the
redesign as well as the schedule change; the action should acknowledge both.
BACKGROUND:
Four times a year the City Council reviews applications and requests for extensions
for traffic allocations for projects in the area east of 101. This November there
are two actions: the developers of the Burlingame Group project at 450 Airport
Boulevard are requesting an extension of the traffic allocation to their site; and
the developers of the Granada Royale Hometel site are requesting a site plan
modification and subsequent adjustment to construction schedule. In addition,
Ramada Inns has notified the city that they do not intend to build a 114 room
addition to their project and are giving up their traffic allocation.
- Burlingame Group
The Burlingame Group site and project (450 Airport Boulevard) has recently sold. The
new developer, Burlingame Joint Venture I, is requesting a revision to the traffic
allocation project schedule. On October 17, 1983 the City Council approved a 12,000 SF
restaurant, 7,000 SF restaurant and a 300 room, 45' hotel on the ±8 acre Burlingame
Group site. On December 15, 1983 BCDC approved Permit 18-83 for this project. Since
BCDC action the applicant has been trying to find a developer or series of developers
for this site. In May, 1984 the Council granted the previous owner a four month
extension to the traffic allocation construction schedule.
The current request deals with all structures in a single time frame and would extend
the date of occupancy from June, 1986 (the hotel) to September, 1987. The letter does
not mention whether the developer has operators for the hotel and two restaurants.
�
-2-
It should be noted that the BCDC permit shall become null and void if work authorized
on the permit is not commenced prior to January 1, 1985. The permit also states
that once begun the work must be diligently pursued and completed by January 1, 1987.
City approvals are valid for one year from the date of action except where BCDC
permits are required. When a BCDC permit is required the city's one year dates
from the date the BCDC permit is issued. Based on this, city approval for the
Burlingame Group project lapses January 15, 1985 unless the applicant requests and
receives an extension from the Planning Commission. Only one such extension can be
granted and the maximum time is one year (January 15, 1986). In order for a city
approval to remain valid, a building permit must be issued before the expiration
date of the planning approval.
Based on the applicant's time frame shown below, assuming the Planning Commission
grants a full year extension not to mention BCDC extension, they will not have
received a building permit prior to January, 1986 (schedule shows September, 1986).
In addition, since the traffic allocation request is for the same improvements
(7,000 SF restaurant, 12,000 SF restaurant, 300 room hotel) as already approved,
there is a real question as to why such a long time frame is necessary. It seems
unlikely that a redesign on basically the same format, even with full repeat review
from Planning Commission and City Council, could take a full year, unless there is
some dramatic change in the structures not explained.
Given these concerns staff would suggest one of the two following alternatives:
1. Request an application for extension to the project approval including
changes to design before December 1, 1984 and continue the traffic allocation
decision until February, 1985; or
2. Adopt a revised traffic allocation schedule. Staff would suggest the one below.
Burlingame Group Hotel/Restaurant Traffic Allocation:
Current, Extension, Staff Revision
BCDC approval
Submit final plans
Pick up building permit
Final foundation
Final framing
Occupancy
Current (Hotel)
January '84
March '85
April '85
October '85
February '86
June '86
Extension Request
January '84
March '86
April '86
September '86
December '86
September '87
Staff Revision*
January '84
August '85**
November '85
April '86
July '86
February '87
**Assumes P.C. extension of project approval and BCDC permit extension.
*Assumes that project design is similar to what has been approved by
city and BCDC.
- Granada Royale Hometel Modification and Construction Schedule Adjustment
As a result of review by contractors, BCDC and State Lands Commission, the proposed
project for the Granada Royale Hometel site has undergone revision. The revised
project deletes 16 rooms and the 10,000 SF restaurant elevated over a snack bar and
bait shop. A new restaurant is integrated into the hotel facility in the atrium.
The free-standing restaurant area was connected to the hotel by an open arcade,
which was also deleted. In his letter of October 29, 1984 Paul Salisbury,
-3-
the project architect, points out that by narrowing and shortening the hotel
structure and eliminating the restaurant and arcade all of the approved standards
of the Design Guidelines are exceeded. The only real change is in the parking
requirement. The required parking on site drops from 430 with the restaurant
to 344 (one per room) with the new design. In the new design all parking will
be provided at grade so the landscaped area increases by 3q, but not as much as
it might if some other parking were to be placed in the structure.
As a part of the revision, the restaurant will be moved inside the hotel to
supplement the breakfast facility and cocktail bar which were previously included
to serve guests. The hotel structure will be 7' narrower and 87' shorter in the
new design (see comparative site plan date stamped 10/30/84).
Because of the changes in design the construction schedule will be delayed. However,
the applicant intends to begin driving piles for the revised foundation before
November 6, 1984. With this in mind they intend to pursue the following schedule:
New
Begin foundation
Final foundations
Final framing
Final inspection/occupancy
The proposed revisions i
Commission. Proceeding
area and the public acce
the revised schedule wil
project reduced from 360
- Ramada Expansion Withdrawal
November 5, 1984
January 4, 1985
September 13, 1985
May 15, 1986
roject have been reviewed
e revised plans will meet
not been changed with the
include acknowledgment and
rooms with the restaurant
Previous Schedule
August 21, 1984
December 21, 1984
June 21, 1985
January 21, 1986
by BCDC and the State Lands
their criteria. The park
revision. Acceptance of
acceptance of the revised
and arcade eliminated.
William Birdsall, vice president of the real estate department for Ramada Inns, sent
a letter (September 25, 1984) telling the city that the corporation has decided not
to proceed with the 114 room expansion to the Burlingame Ramada Inn. He notes that
we may wish to make other use of the traffic allocation. The traffic allocation
table for November, 1984 shows the Ramada expansion allocation of 1.5 at Broadway
reentered into the total.
EXHIBITS:
- Available P.M. Peak Hour Capacity PJovember 1984
- Leonard H. McVicar, Pacific Urban Design, Ltd.,
with construction schedule attachment
- Paul G. Salisbury, Blunk Associates Architects,
with attachment of comparative plans
letter October 15, 1984
letter October 29, 1984
- William M. Birdsall, Vice President, Ramada Inns, Inc., letter September 25, 1984
MM/s
cc: City Clerk
City Attorney
Leonard H. McVicar
Paul G. Salisbury
William M. Birdsall
n the p
with th
ss have
1 also
to 344
AVAILABLE P.M. PEAK HOUR CAPACITY NOVEMBER 1984
Available Capacity
Allocated Projects
Anza/Owen Office Phase I
Phase II
Granada Royale Hometel & Park
Ibis Hotel (Four Seas)
Marriott - Phase I
CIF
Hyatt (497 new rooms & 303 existing)
Four Seas/La Baie Conversion
Legaspi Plaza Hotel (559 rooms less
existing use)
Available for Allocation November 1984*
Request Extension: Burlingame Group
Remaining
INTERSECTIONS
Ai'rport Broadway Peninsula
36.6 23.8 48.3
3.9
0
3.4
2.7
5.7
.1
1.9
- .8
1.Q
3.4
0
2.2
1.7
5.9
.5
5.8
- .4
1.3
5.1
0
1.5
1.2
- .4
2.4
17.8
3.5
14.3
10/25/84
*Returned (shown in Available Allocation November 1984)
Ramada _
Granada Royale Hometel Restaurant .9
3.4
2.2
1.2
1.5
.5
38.5
4.2
34.3
.4
;
i
" 1 �
I
BLUNK ASSOCIATES, INC.
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING . INTERIOR DESIGN
October 29, 1984
Ms. Margaret Monroe
City Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Ms. Monroe:
R�C�tIVEi�
0 C T 3 0 1984
C�7v oF BURUNc,�ME
PMNNIN(i DEPT.
Since the Granada Royale Hometel was submitted for plan-check in the
spring of this year, the project has gone through the kind of evolution
that bidding and plan review can often cause. Though the nature and
character of the Hometel has not changed, the various modifications are
such that we felt the Burlingame City Council and Planning Commission
should be brought up-to-date on the overall status of the Hometel. The
revised site plan and structure have been reviewed by BCDC and the
State Lands Commission.
In addition to the table below, which compares the critical code require-
ments for the project, T am enclosing a sheet which graphically compares
the present site plan with that which received the Special Permit in
March, 1983.
COMPARISON
Lot Coverage
Landscaped Area
Set Backs:
Required: 30 ft.
1/2 AW
Closest
Maximum
View Corridors
Total Building
Street Length = 547 ft.
Site Length = 1643 ft.
FAR
Rear Yard
Side Yard
Number of Rooms
Parking Spaces
In Structure
Original
17.3%
49.0%
42 ft.
133.5 ft.
191.0 ft.
502.75 ft.
91.96%
30.60%
1.0
50 ft.
160± ft.
360
448
221
Revised
10.2%
52.0%
42 ft.
58.0 ft.
176.0 ft.
388.00 ft.
70.93°�
23.61%
0.7513
65 ft.
220 ft.
344
345
0
433 AIRPORT BLVD. • BURLINGAME • CALIFORNIA 94010 . (415) 342-5224
San Frencisco Bay
_ �
�.—s��. ea,oa..y •
�
.�. eu��Opo j.J ��'^ RA AN DA `, �6�
� , ROYALE ���,
'� l\ HOMETEL �
� �----99� ��
rou� �\ %
��� — I,/
\ ENT[. '�� • '�I
/
►V11D�
�uuo�o
���I
fJ
U
r
E AMEE2
�
�U101pO
.1MTf11TlIl�NOM•' -- - - •
_ _ _ ,;so�
Anza Lefloon
�-`\ / - - \� �
� /v
% ' �A
� �I
�� %
AIRPOqT BOULEVARO
�� ��
,i
Se�chez C�sek Laqoon
0
MOLIO�Y IN
146'
r
,�
❑
LEOA•
TOWEN6 eO
48'
�a�
AMZA I
C011�01111
oFc�CFe
;
I
OW BAY PLAZA �e'I
�
--��
0
n
❑
`_ — — - ----- - - --
_ _ _� _�
-----____________________________BAYSMORE FREEWAY U.S. 101
ANZA AREA AEVELOPMENT
HEIC3HT OF COMPLETED � APPROVED PROJECTS
`', � ,
,,
,
� - - --- -- _-- - - — - - i
'I ��C�Or1M 6T11TION I
31
,�
�
- - - �-:
/ ---�'-_ -- -
�