Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1160 Burlingame Avenue - Resolution; � RESOLUTIOV �TO. i RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL PERtdITS � I � RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of , Burlingame that; , i i WHEREAS, application has been made for a special permit � � fo= a take-out food ser�rice � ' I �� at 1160 Burlinqame Avenue ��., 029-153-120 ��I �� � � and I i WHEREAS, this Commission held a public hearing on said � i ' application on January 27 ,19II 6 � idOW THEREFOR�, it is hereby RESOLVED and DETERMINED by ; this Planning Commission that said special permit 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 P4ateo. R. M. Garcia Chairman I, ROBERT J. LEAHY, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a reqular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the lOtil day of Februar�! ,198 6 , by the following vote: AYES: CO.•1MISSIONERS: NOES: C0:IMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COi•IINISSIONERS: Robert J. Leairy 11/2/84 Secretary � i CITY OF BURLIiVGAME PLA��INING CONi��IISSION FEBRUARY 10, 1986 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlinqame was called to order by Chairman Garcia on Monday, February 10, 1986 at 7:31 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Staff Present: Commissioners Garcia, Giomi, Graham, Jacobs, Leahy, Schwalm, Taylor None City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Attorney Jerome F. Coleman; City Engineer Frank C. r.rbacher MINUTES - The minutes of the January 27, 1986 meeting were unanimously approved with the following corrections: Item #1, page 2, first paragraph, second line - insert after the findings C. Leahy's motion for approval with the two conditions listed in the staff report; page 11, insert "Items for Study" prior to Item #8. AGENDA - Order of the agenda approved. ITEi�IS FOR ACTION 1. CONTINUED ACTION ON SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A TAKE-OUT FOOD SERVICE AT 1160_BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED C-1, SUB-AREA A Reference staff report, 2/10/86, with attachments. C. Taylor stated he would abstain due to conflict of interest. C. Giomi who had been absent at the January 27, 1986 meeting at which time the public hearing was held stated she had read the minutes and listened to the tapes of this item. CA advised she could act on the item this evening. CP Monroe briefly reviewed the request and noted two letters in support and two in opposition received after the public hearing was closed. Chm. Garcia acknowledged Councilman Lembi in the audience. Commission comments/concerns: overlapping of vehicle trips during lunch hour peak, applicant's figures of 16 spaces required or 32 trip ends did not address overlapping, a business cannot survive without available parking; regarding applicant handling the problem of double parking, this is the authority of the Police Department; number of employees at the existing restaurant compared to the much larger number projected for this business; similar applications have been rejected because of oarking impacts on the city's congested downtown areas, applicants should be made aware of the city's concern, applicants presented data which indicated fast food restaurants impact an area more than any other use, this is a good business in the wrong place. Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 10, 1985 Further comment: applicant projects 750 customers per day goinq up to about 1,000 in five years, impact would increase in future years; do not-._feel the applicant's one day traffic survey has validity, other retail businesses in the area rely on parking for their customers, if this application is allowed the city will be doing a disservice to the other retail outlets on the Avenue. C. Graham moved to deny this special permit. His statements: parking is not available in the ara_a between 11:00 A.M,' and 1:00 P.M.; using applicant's figures of 32 vehicle trips pen c�iur during this period, thes` veHicles would be traveling around the block three times to find space (96 trips); garbage pickup is not ava�ilable in the building, garbage would be put on the street at nignt and that area not cleaned up until 10:30 the next morning when the,"restaurant opens; this is essentially a change in use from a din�} �r hour peak (existing) to lunch hour peak (proposed). Second C. Schw�lm; motion approved on a 5-0-1 roll call vote,��,C. Taylor abstaining�� Appeal procedures were advised. 2. VARIANCE 'I'O �A�,LOW A 705 5F ADll,�TION AT THE REAR OF THE HOL'�E AT 1804 LOYOLA DR�VE vVHICH WILL EXTEND 7'-0" IiVTO THE REQUIRED REAR YARD AREA,�',,ZONED R-1 Reference staff report� 2/10/ fi, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request,tiapplxcant's letter, letters of consent submitted by the applica�t,!`staff review, Planning staff comment. Three conditions were sugc�sted for consideration at the public hearing. ,� `�, Commission discussion: �6hen d� the original nonconformity occur; stability of underlyin� fill at the back of the lot; plans submitted show only two bedroom�; detail o�. letters of consent submitted by the applicant and discus�ed in paragra�h four of the staff re�ort. James Barientos, a �licant, was `', �P prese�t. He advised there were changes in the floor plan�of the plans submitt�l. He intends to add a third bedroom, the exi�fting dining room on the`plans will become the third bedroom, the ex�'sting family room will become the dining room and the new construction will be a family room; the`�house now has 2-1/2 baths; there will be a fireplace and portable bar iri�.the new addition; there is an existing two car garaqe and he can comfor.tably park four cars in the circular, driveway; a closet will be include8,in the proposed new bedroom (shbwn on the present plans as a dining rbom). It was determined,%Commission could act this evening addin� a condition to cover the�'changes in the submitted plans. Chm. G�,.fcia opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and tkie hearing was closed. C. Graham found this nonconformity would fill the void between the existing nonconformity at the rear of the house and the rest qf the house, that the variance was necessary for the applicant's enjoyment of the home, that it would not adversely affect the zoning plan of the Page 2 Burlingame Planning Commission ��Iinutes February 10, 1985 Further comment: applicant projects 750 customers per day going up to about 1,000 in five years, impact would increase in future years; do not feel the applicant's one day traffic survey has validity, other retail businesses in the area rely on parking for their customers, if this application is allowed the city will be doing a disservice to the other retail outlets on the Avenue. C. Graham moved to deny this special permit. His statements: parking is not available in the area between 11:00 A.M, and 1:00 P.M.; using applicant's figures of 32 vehicle trips per hour during this period, these vehicles would be traveling around the block three times to find space (96 trips); garbage pickup is not available in the building, garbage would be put on the street at niqht and that area not cleaned up until 10:30 the next morning when the restaurant opens; this is essentially a change in use from a dinner hour peak (existinq) to lunch hour peak (proposed). Second C. Schwalm; motion approved on a 5-0-1 roll call vote, C. Taylor abstaining. ApDeal procedures were advised. 2 VARIANCE TO ALLOW �1804 LOYOLA DRIVE �AR YARD AREA, Z A 705 SF ADDIrrI�N AT THE REAR OF 'I'HE HOME AT GVHICH WILL EXTEND 7'-0" INTO THE REQUIRED NED R-1 Referenc�.staff report, 2/10/86, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details o�`•,the request, applicant's letter, letters of consent submitted by the applicant, staff review, Planning staff comment. Three conditio�s were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Commission discussion; when did the original nonconformity occur; stability of underlying',fill at the back of the lot; plans submitted show only two bedrooms; detail on letters of consent submitted by the applicant and discussed in paragraph four of the staff re�ort. James Barientos, applicant, was p`r�sent. He advised there were changes in the floor plan of the plans submi�ted. He intends to add a third bedroom, the existing dining room on ��ie plans will become the third bedroom, the existing f.amily room will b'ecome the dining room and the new construction will be a family room; ttie.house now has 2-1/2 baths; there will be a fir�place and portable bar iri�..the new addition; there is an existing two car garaqe and he can comfor�bly park four cars in the circular driveway; a closet will be included � the proposed new bedroom (shown on the present plans as a dining rooiit`l,. It was determined Commission could act this evening adding a��c,ondition to cover the changes in the submitted plans. Chm. Garcia opened the public hearing. There were no audieri�e comments and the hearing was closed. �� C. Graham found this nonconformity would fill the void between the existing nonconformity at the rear of the house and the rest of the house, that the variance was necessary for the applicant's enjoyment of the home, that it would not adversely affect the zoning plan of the CITY OF BURLINGAME PLA,.�INING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 10, 1986 CALL TO ORDER A regular called to 7: 31 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlinqame was order by Chairman Garcia on Monday, February 10, 1986 at Staff Present: Commissioners Garcia, Giomi,:'Graham, Jacobs, Leahy, Schwa�m, Taylor None �' City Planner Margare.t Monroe; City Attorney Jerome F. Coleman; City �ngi�eer Frank C. r.rbacher MINUTES - The minutes of the Janu�ry 27, 1986 meeting were unanimously approved with the fol],owing corrections: Item #1, page 2, first paragraph, seco�nd line - insert after the findings C. Leahy's mot'�on for approval with the two conditions listed in the staff re�ort;;.�age 11, insert "Items for Study" prior to Item #8. AGENDA - Order of the ��ida approved . ITEi'�S FOR ACTION �' 1. � �, 1@ CONTINUED ACTION��,ON SPECIAL'�PERMIT FOR A TAKE-OUT FOOD SERVICE AT 1160 BURLINGAiKE'4AVE[�UE, ZONE�� C-1, SUB-AREA A _ Reference staff report, 2/10/86, 'th attachments. C. Taylor stated he woul3 abstain �e to conflict of in erest. C. Giomi who had been absent at the January 27, 1986 meeti at which time the public hearing was held stated she had read the minu s and listened to the tapes of this item. .CA advised she could act on the item this evening. CP Monroe bri.�fly reviewed the request and i%pted two letters in support and two in opposition received after the pbtblic hearing was closed. Chm. Garcia acknowledged Councilman Lembi i�the audience. . Commis�s�ion comments/concerns: overlapping of v��icle trips during lunch hour peak, applicant's figures of 16 spaces requ�red or 32 trip ends did not address overlapping, a business cannot su�.,vive without available parking; regarding applicant handling th� problem of double parking, this is the authority of the Police Departm�nt; number of �mployees at the existing restaurant compared to the much larger number projected for this business; similar applications have`�•:been rejected because of oarking impacts on the city's congested downtown areas, applicants should be made aware of the city's concern, applicants presented data which indicated fast food restaurants impact an area more than any other use, this is a good business in the wrong place.