HomeMy WebLinkAbout1080 Carolan Avenue - Plans. �
MEMO TO: PLANNING COMP�ISSION
FROM: CITY PLANNER
P.C. 8/13/84
Item # 4
SUBJECT: PARKING VARIANCE FOR 6 SPACES TO ALLOW RELOCATION OF
A MAINTENANCE STORAGE AREA AT 1080 CAROLAN AVENUE
Richard Coxall representing CNR Associates Inc. is requesting a six
space parking variance in order to relocate an enclosed maintenance/
storage area into the underground parking area of Building B at the
Northpark Apartments at 1080 Carolan Avenue (Code Section 25.07.030).
The apartment complex was built with 772 onsite parking spaces (City
required 510 for units and 262 for guests). Under current code the
complex would be required to provide 845 onsite parking spaces. The
proposed addition a.omplies with all other zoning requirements.
City Staff have reviewed this proposal. The Fire DZarshal (June 24,
1984 memo) notes he has no comments so long as the maintenance shop
is of one hour construction and is completely protected by an auto-
matic sprinkler system. The Chief Building Inspector (June 25, 1984
memo) agrees with the Fire Marshal on one hour construction. The
City Engineer (July 2, 1984 memo) notes that it is his understanding
that this area onsite and on-street has an impacted parking situation.
He recommends denial because of the parking situation.
With his application Mr. Coxall submitted a letter (June 13, 1984)
addressing his request. He notes that the current maintenance facil-
ity is located in an area which has been leased for the past 10 years.
The building is now being sold and is in escrow so Northpark has been
notified that they need to relocate their facility. The maintenance
building is an absolute necessity to the operation of the Northpark
complex. If it is located at grade it will detract from the existing
landscaping and surface parking. If located in the basement it will
affect parking but not landscaping. It is essential that the facility
be located on the Northpark site because of the size of the complex;
and the owner has the right to locate it where he wishes. Since park-
ing is adequate onsite the loss of six spaces is not a particular pro-
blem. Locating the facility in the basement parking area presents no
hazard to residents and does not detract visually from the complex.
The granting of this variance would have no affect on the City's zoning.
At Study the Commissioners had a number of questions regarding this
project.
•Amount of parking leased from Northpark.
Research on the property indicates that there are two outstanding
leases for parking signed by Northpark: one to Mike harvey Oldsmobile
for 15 spaces and one to the Chandler property (parcel now being sold)
for 10 spaces (Coxall letter August l, 1984). Both of these leases
are for daytime use of portions of the guest parking area at the rear
of the site near the Velvet Turtle. Random site inspections show this.
area to be relatively under use for parking during the weekdays. How-
ever, a complaint received by the Planning Department f�om a tenant
indicates that these areas are heavily used after 7:00 PP� in the even-
ing.
-a-
The Staff inemo of August l, 1984 indicates that the parking structure
for the Velvet Turtle is on property owned by the restaurant, although
Northpark residents have exclusive use of the tennis courts atop the
structure. Also Mike Harvey noted he had a lease agreement for a
total of 30 spaces in the Northpark guest parking area at a public
hearing on an amendment to the use permit for 1007-1025 Carolan. How-
ever we could find no documentation of the agreement for the additional
15 spaces in our files or from �orthpark management.
•Items to be stored in maintenance facility/shed.
An inventory of the existing maintenance facility showed the following
items to be stored there (Coxall letter August l, 1984): appliance
parts, light bulbs, paper towels, window screens, lumber, cleaning
supplies, tools, carpet cleaning machines, paint, paint thinner, ace-
tone, alcohol (small quantity) and 20 to 30 spray cans. The area as
used for storage and not actual maintenance work therefore no welding
or work with naked flame is done within the structure.
To grant a variance the Planning Commission must make the following
findings which relate to the property (Code Section 25.54.020):
a. that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
applicable to the property or class of uses in the dis-
trict, so that a denial of the application would result
in undue property loss;
b. that such variance would be necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a property right of the owner of the
property involved;
c. that the granting of such variance would not be materially
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or
injurious to the property or improvements of other property
owners, or the quiet enjoyment of such property or improve-
ments; and
d. that the granting of such variance will not adversely affect
the comprehensive zoning plan of the city.
Planning Staff would note that in the past several months the City
Council has been considering the problem of onstreet parking abuse in
the Toyon/Azalea/Linden/Rollins Road/Carolan area. After creating a
citizens committee, the Council agreed to the recommendation that the
parking be allowed on the westside of Carolan extending to the vicinity
of the Northpark frontage. However the on-street parking would be
limited to prohibit overnight use. Thus available parking in the
critical after 7 PP� period has not been increased in this area. Coun-
cil also expressed real concern about increased jay-walking across
Carolan as a result of parking on the westside. Therefore between the
time limit and jay-walking concern it does not appear that it was Coun-
cils intention to provide additional parking on Carolan for residents
in the area. In addition Staff might ask if 6 parking spaces to City
-3-
Code standards could be provided elsewhere on the site. The applicant
would still need a variance but at least the onsite parking situation
would remain the same.
The Planning Commission should hold a Public Hearing. At the hearing
the following conditions shoul� be considered:
l. that the conditions of the Fire Marshal's memo of June
24, 1984 and the Chief Building Inspector's memo of
June 24, 1984 be met;
2. that the storage area be built in the location and to
the size shown on the plans submitted and date stamped
June 15, 1984.
��� ��'��`�I �n cuQ.
Marg�ret Monroe
City Planner
PROJECT APPLICATION ��d"TM °� 1080 CAROLAN AVENUE
£t CEQA ASSESSMENT BURLINGAME project address
�; NORTHPARK APARTMENTS
�.��'����,�� project name - if any
Application received ( 6/15/84 )
Staff review/acceptance ( )
1. APPLICANT CNR Associates, Inc. 345-2101
name telephone no.
2040 Pioneer Court. #2, San Mateo, CA 94403
applicant s address: street, city, zip code
Richard Coxall 345-2101
contact person, if different telephone no.
� N
� � a�
N U U
U OT•r rCS
����
Q•r 3 N
N Y
i "6 M
o as a��
� � Q +�
•r Lf� Q N
v= Q •r
N � 'Q
N '� N t� �
U N N C
rCf � � � •�-
❑.•r � L .Y
N � 3 �
rn a� � �
� � t6 N
•r C b �
�G N O � C
� (� •r ((f •r
r�S 3 +� � +�
� •� � cn
-I-� "� rtS • r
(V•r�� X
� c r� <n w
��
N +�
t L t0 �
+� N N N +�
•r p.. fn U
3 � � �
��L��
"C 'U Z7 Q O
N rt3 •r S.
+� Q > S- Q
U v1 O �
� L O � N
� rnn E a
-I-� � M rt5 i
N •r � 1� fn •r
c�c-arn �
o z.. a� .-+ a� a-
v � +� � a�
C]. U C +� �
N � h-�
3 �� o�
o cn • 4- O
a--� c � c.�
U N O tn N
N E U � Q1 +�
•r7 •r U U �
O +� N r6 rLS �
L ro fl.. n. �
n. +� v� cn s.
r� �
V� L+� N Ln U
•r }� U I� �
.� N I� � �
I— i-� •n�--� r0
Q O � �
S.. N L -I--�
C'3 Q N •r
Z N U � V1
� 1� N Rf � cn
Y Ol .� Q N 41
d'�I— N ir-
¢
o..
2. TYPE OF APPLICATION
Special Perr�it () Variance* (X ) Condominium Permit () Oth�r
*Attach letter which addresses each of the 4 findings required by Code Chapter 25.54.
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PARKING VARIANCE to allow the relocation of existing maintenance
f�cilities from a arivately owned building on an adiacent lot
(originally part of the Northpark property) to an area beneath
one nf the apartment buildings resulting in the loss of six
r�uired ap rkin� s�aces -- 772 spaces now are provided, 766 would
remain. Today's parking standards would require 845 spaces for
th; � 51 n �,n; t hii i 1 d i ng . The �j ompl i es wi th other zoni ng
(attach letter of explanation if additional space is needed) requirements.
Ref. code section(s): ( 25.70.030 ) (
4. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION ptn.Parcel 1, Parcel Map Vol. 13�18
( 026-231-280 ) ( ) ( ) ( )
APN lot no. block no. subdivision name
( R-4 ) ( 489,309 )
z nin distric land area, s uare feet
I�ort�hpark �ro erties et a�
c/1a Frie��-�P�ker dtsnciatP� 300 Grand Avenue
land owner's name address
Oakland, CA 94610
Reouired Date received city zip code
(�) (no) ( - ) Proof of ownership
(yes) (��) ( ) Owner's consent to application
5. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
Existing 510 unit apartment complex with on-site parking
for 772 cars.
Required Date received
(yes) (rr� ( 6/15/84 ) Site plan showing: property lines; public sidewall:s and
curbs; all str�ctures and improvements;
paved on-site parking; landscaping.
(yes) (r� ( " ) Floor plans of all buildings showing: gross floor area
by type of usc�`on each floor lan.
(yes) (r� ( " ) Building elevations, cross sections (if relevant�.
(3Aas) (no) ( - ) Site cross section(s) (if releyant}.
(other) ( 6/15/84 � lattar p#' axnlanatinn; nTng �naGP
and apartment unit surve_v
*Land use classifications are: residential (show # dwelling units); office use; retail
sales; restaurant/cafe; manufacturing/repair shop; warehousing; other (to be described).
6. PROJECT PR�POSAL
Proposed construction, Below grade ( SF) Second floor ( SF)
gross floor area First floor ( SF) Third floor ( Sf)
Project Code Project Code
Pr000sal Requirement Proposal Requirement
Front setback Lot coverage
Side setback 110 C{1d P>uildinp height n
Side yard Landscaped area
Rear yard On-site pkg.space� 766 %�2*
� � � ' 6. PROJECT PROPOSAL (continued)
Full time employees on site
Part tir�e emoloyees on site
Visitors/customers (weekday)
Visitors/customers (Sat.Sun.)
Residents on property
Tri� ends to/from site*
Peak hour trip ends*
Trucks/service vehicles
EXISTING
after
8-5 5 PM
IPl 2 YEARS IN 5 YEARS
� after after
8-5 5 PM 8-5 5 PM
*Show calculations on reverse side or attach senarate sheet.
7. ADJACENT BUSINESSES/LAfJD USES
Auto-related uses to the east and west; Bayshore FreewaY and
restaurant to the north; S.P.R.R: tracks to the south.
Required Date received
(s'�) (no) ( — )
(.�) (no) ( - )
Location plan of adjacent properties.
Other tenants/firms on property:
no. firms ( ) no. employees ( )
floor area occupied ( SF office space)
( SF other)
no. employee vehicles regularly on site ( )
no. comnany vehicles at this location ( )
8. FEES Special Permit, all districts $100 () Other application type, fee $ ()
Variance/R-i,R-2 districts $ 40 () Project Assessment $ 25 )
Variance/other districts $ 75 (X ) Neoative Declaration $ 25 �( )
Condominium Permit $ 50 () EIR/City & consultant fees $ ()
TOTAL FEES $ 125 . �� RECEI PT N0. 5092 Recei ved by H. TowbPr
I hereby certify under oena
true and correct to t-h =�
��-� ��
Signature /"� `s% ��
perjury that the information given herein is
Jcnowledge and belief. �
i �' U ti>
Date ��_.-c %� � J`,
�
STAFF USE ONLY
NE ECLARATION 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 ,
Categorically exempt• Reference
Existinq Facilities, Code Sec. 15301.
i •
Sig ature of P cessing Official Title Dai:e Sign d
Unless appealed within 10 days hereof the date posted, the deternination shall be final.
DECLARATION OF POSTIMG Dai;e Posted:
I declare under penalty of per.jury that I ar� City Clerk of the City of Burlingame and that
I oosted a true copy of the above Neoati��e Declaration at the City Hall of said City near
the doors to th�a Council Chambers.
Executed at Qurlingame, California on
Apoealed: ( )Yes ( )P!o
19
JUD TH A. MALFATTI, CITY CLERK, CITY �F SURLINGAP4E
STAFF REVI EW
1. CIRCULATION OF APPLICATION
Project proposal/plans have been circulated for review hy:
date circulated reply received
City Engineer ( 6/20/84 ) (yes) (no)
Building Inspector ( �� ) (yes) (no)
Fire Marshal ( " ) (yes) (no)
Park Department ( — ) (yes) (no)
City Attorney ( — ) (yes) (no)
memo attached
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
2. SUMMARY OF STAFf CONCERNS/POSSIBLE MITIGATIOP! MEASURES
Concerns Mitigation Measures
Do the plans comply with all Request comments from the
Fire and Building Gode Fire Marsha1 and Chief Building
requirements? Inspector..
Will adequate parking area Request a parkin� survey;
be provided after the review site and future possible
addition? leasing of parking spaces to
adjacent office bui1ding.
Does the applicant satisfy the Review applicant's 6/13/84
four legal requirements of letter; make findings.,
Code Sec. 25.54.020 for the
granting of a variance?
3. CEQA REQUIREMEPlTS
If a Negative Declaration has not been posted for this oroject:
Is the project subject to CEQA review? N0. Categorically exempt.
IF AN EIR IS REQUIRED:
Initial Study comoleted
Decision to prepare EIR
Notices of preparation mailed
RFP to consultants
Contract awarded
Admin. draft EIR received
Draft EIR accepted by staff
Circulation to other agencies
�
�
�
c
�
�
�
i
)
)
)
�
)
)
)
)
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
�
�
�
i
�
�
�
4. APPLICATION STATUS Date first received ((/15/84 )
Accepted as complete: no( )�etter to anplicant advising info. required (�' Z�-•� )
Yes( X) date� g• �•�� _ P.C. study (]� 2 3�$ 4 )
Is application ready for a�ublic hearing? (yes) (wa� Recommended date ( g��3'�-)
Date staff report mailed to applicant ( )��t,e Jo�rren��s`�on hearing (a� 13'8� )
Application approved ( ) Denied (;�w� rf'c� r Appeal to Council (yes) (no)
Date Council hearing ( ) Aoolication aporoved ( ) Denied ( )
V 1/i�%/�i��' C�- �� 22
—�� signed date
TO : Helen Towber, Planner � � � � � � � �
F�: Malcolm Towns, Fire Marshal ,�UN 2 5]98�
SUBJECT: 1080 Carolan (Parking Variance) c,�„����
e�r�
DATE: June 24, 1984
This department has no objections to this request for a parking variance.
The proposed maintenance shop must meet building requirements (one hour
construction) and be completely protected by an automatic sprinkler
system.
Malco]m Towns
DATE: �/Z�^/��
MEMO T0: CITY ENGINEER
�=CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR �� .� .����Pc�.�E'�t- iti�x-�,E,� )
FIRE MARSHAL
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: �I�-i�tL Ec 7D ��yJ f�x�t�����h �/' lc- m, �zt��.
l���l�f�,
s�����.� �� /v
:c.lL.r�E'�C�
/GL'�[ �_ J% V� CV/ K L�'
An application has been received for the above project for review by the
Planning Commission. The application will be scheduled for Si�rU�
at their %- "L3 •-�� meeting. We would appreciate having
your comments by 7- � ��
G � a� ��
Thank you. , , �/
T'a. �/NM i�f De'pr.��iwe«/
/
Helen Towber
Planner
/`�J?oti+ •� �u ���N` ,Qiv /�'�%�✓
�� . � /O �'D � .�. �., �v �
/l�a ��a.�► d w s 7`� 6� ��'o� st l��� �.:, u.� .
� ���Co� c�!'Rc�t/�o.. /� /�E ��/� 6'r r1��c �r�Gr /a ,��
��
� � .
a t t . �'�, u �� /�`� /� �c�. � �., �c /9riv/�/" v. r�.� %�� Bk.�i�..l
� � �'P /• I �� N �G yCC / �C � �q �
D/ ✓ /dlO.,, !�/ 4u ��/CC !A �rL�e. C�� % /
6� �d�l� a �,��� � � .���.��a/
DATE : �o�Z�"��i
MEMO T0: ��TTY ENGINEER
CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR C�-� �->.e- tiy� l'u-�E't.z- iti�x-�,E=,� )
FIRE MARSHAL
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: ���-iiti Fc. 7� ��� l�r�i.atiG���.�. �c-t" lc. m,�r��
�il-L.'�G�l�
G �f�
�[wz� G�G'�9��Lt.L
An application has been received for the above project for review by the
i�
��������
JUL 2 - 1984
. ����
�.- �����,� 0,�� � Z ��
.� l
%�i=�.� ��-f�'/19l�!"/f�� _
�/
5;
�
Planning Commission. The application will be scheduled for 52<U�
at their T- 'L3 •-�� meeting. We would appreciate having
your comments by 7- 9��
Thank you.
Helen Towber
Planner
S/
att.
. / /
,��/�,/EG� Wll�I�Gl� �1.1�' v�'�/t��s
�.
/r! �/.t' ct/�?' .�C�Z�l..!'� o� //�'l
�qiyt�L� � .1'/�14�1�s� o� 5�72�� Gt/��?�✓'
. �% ����.rr�i� T������
�.� ,ri�e �f'� - i� �h�.r
��� ��1� Q,p,d��c �io"�✓ � a���
�e
G^
Iht � V i� 1 �il' �c ��1►
C N R Associates , I nc.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONSULTING
2040 Ploneer Ct., San Mateo, CA 94403
�Tune 13, 1984
City of Burlingame
Planning Department
City Hall
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: P.elocation of Maintenance Facilities at the
North Park Apartments, Carolan Avenue,
�urlingame, CA
�entlemen:
�.! U;V 1. �i ��$�
CI P�NINta DEPfME
(415) 345•2101
We hereby apply for a variance to the existing parking
area at the above property to accommodate a relocated
maintenance facility.
The existing maintenance facility has been located in
the Chandler Insurance Building which stands on property
leased from the Northpark apartment complex for the past
10+ years.
The above building has now been sold, and the lease
terminated on the maintenance shop area, necessitating a
relocation of the facility.
Tr�e hereby made application for this variance based,
on conditions A,B,C &'� of Sec. 25.54.020 of the City of
Burlingame building code with the f�llowing comments.
Sec. A
The present maintenance facility is an absolute
necessity to adequately provide service to the 510 apartments
at the complex.
Examination of the enclosed site plan will show that to
locate a new structure for the maintenance shop on the
property will detract and deduct from the existing land-
�caping and surface parking no matter where located.
For this reason, it is felt that by locating
the basement par]{ing area the aesthetic value of
mature landscaping will not be lost.
the shop in
existing
General Contractor's Llcense #438470
-2-
Sec. B
In a complex of this size it is essential that the
maintenance facility be located on the property, and we
believe it is the right of the owner to locate his facility
as he thinks best to provide the most efficient service to
his tenants.
Sec. C
Location of the facility in the basement parking area
provides no hazards to residents, and does not detract
visually from the complex.
Since parking is adequate at the site, the loss of the
six stalls presents no practical problem.
Sec. D
After examination of the City Comprehensive Zoning Plan,
we cannot find any areas where the granting of this variance
will have an adverse effect.
Should you require any further details or information,
�lease contact the undersigned.
Yours sincere ,
�
R. . all
Enc.
���;�r���
�! U �! 15 1;��a
CITY OF BURLINGAME
��l�NINu DEPT.
NORTH PARK APARTMENTS
Existing Parking Summary
Covered spaces 510
Exterior spaces 262
Total: 772
Apartment Units
2 bedroom units 120
1 bedroom units 240
studios 150
� • Page 8
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 1984
ITEMS FOR STUDY
7. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 2303 TROUSDALE DRIVE
Set for hearing August 13, 1984.
8. PARKING VARIANCE - 1080 CAROLAN AVENUE
Requests: information on the amount of parking leased from Northpark
by the Velvet Turtle and Mike Harvey Oldsmobile; clarification on use
of the shed, materials stored there, etc. Item set for hearing
August 13, 1984.
9. RENEWAL OF USE PERMIT - STAR EXCAVATION - 1645 ROLLINS ROAD
Requests: what are the applicant's plans to alleviate the problem
of dirt and mud on the site and on the street this winter;
information on the original permit request. Set for hearing August
13, 1984.
10. SPECIAL PERMIT - ACCUPRESSURE MASSAGE SERVICE -
1290 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY
Requests: other business2s located in this office building. Set for
hearing August 13, 1984.
PLANNER REPORT
CP Monroe reviewed Council actions at its July 16, 1984 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Nannette M. Giomi
Secretary
.Page 7
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 1984
received June 13, 1984; staff review: City Engineer (June 18, 1984),
Chief Building Inspector (June 18, 1984), Fire Marshal (June 18,
1984); sign drawing date stamped June 13, 1984; letter from the
property owner, Hillsboro Properties (June 11, 1984); letter from the
applicant (July 13, 1984); study meeting minutes (July 9, 1984);
Council appeal hearing minutes and staff report, office building
signage, 1979; and notice of hearing mailed June 13, 1984. CP
discussed details of the request, code requirements, staff review,
Planning staff comment, applicant's justification, letter from the
property owner, history of signage for office buildings in the Anza
Area.
Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. John W. Olsen, applicant
stated this is GTE Sprint's national headquarters and he felt it would
be to Burlingame's advantage to have the building identified; it will
help people find the building which has been upgraded; GTE Sprint is
adding much to the city and feel they are deserving of this signage.
Skip Green, Hillsboro Properties spoke in favor: we are one of the
owners of the 800 Airport Boulevard building and proud to have Sprint
locate there; other tenants of the building have no concern with this
signage nor do the property owners. There were no comments in
opposition and the public hearing was closed.
Commission discussion: employees/visitors generally arrive by taxi
from the airport, top management is picked up in corporate cars;
responding to a question about the need to illuminate the signs,
applicant stated people arriving from the East Coast often arrive
late, in winter it gets dark early, Sprint also has double shifts;
there ar� not a lot of signage alternatives for this site and do not
believe it would be a grant of special privilege to allow this sign
for a national headquarters; agree they need a sign but would prefer
no illumination; with the sophistication of the present development in
that area feel it is time for the city to implement a directional
signage program which would enhance the area and satisfy the
businesses located there; there is an identification need and not much
alternative for placement of the signs, certainly this signaqe is
smaller than the previous La Baie signs, they will have people coming
to the site equal to a restaurant or hotel.
C. Schwalm found there were special circumstances applicable to this
property in the need for identification of this business due to the
great number of outside people who will be coming here; that the
building only lends itself to signing at the proposed location; that
it is a smaller sign than previously on the site with more class.
C. Schwalm moved for approval of this sign exception application with
the condition that the sign be unlighted. Second C. Taylor.
Following discussion on the motion C. Garcia moved to amend the motion
to allow only the sign on the Airport Boulevard frontage, moving this
sign to the center of the building. Second C. Schwalm; motion
amendment failed on a 3-4 roll call vote, Cers Jacobs, Leahy, Taylor
and Graham dissenting. C. Schwalm's motion for approval failed on a
3-4 roll call vote, Cers Garcia, Giomi, Leahy and Graham dissenting.
There being no other motion the application was denied. Appeal
procedures were advised.
T0: CITY PLANNER
FROM: PLANNER
SUBJECT: NORTHPARK PARKING AGREEMENTS
I went through the Northpark Apartment files and also discussed the site with
Richard Coxall of CNR Associates and discovered the following information with
regard to the Northpark parking facilities:
1. Mike Harvey Oldsmobile negotiated a leas��in August, 1983 for use of 15
parking stalls adjacent to his car facilities at 1025 Rollins Road. These
stalls are used from 7 AM to 6 PM, Monday through Saturday. He indicated
in public hearing that he had arranged to lease 15 more. Staff has no
documentation of this additional lease agreement.
2. The status of the required parking for the office building adjacent to the
service station on the corner of Rollins and Cadillac Way is unclear at this
time. In 1972, the Council approved this building for use as an apartment
management office and storage building. 18 parking spaces were required
and the 8/7/72 minutes state that "18 of the 255 guest parking spaces will
provide required parking for the office building from 8 AM to 5 PM, during
the work week. The spaces will be released evenings and on weekends to
guest parking."
Since that time, Northpark has created a separate parcel containing the
office building (APM 026-231-270) for which no parcel map has been recorded
with the City. The City's files contain no information regarding this
arrangement between Northpark and the owners of the "Chandler" building.
Now that the building is for sale, the status of those required parking
spaces is not clear. Mr. Coxall indicated that the present agreement
didn't seem to discuss the parking at all.
3. According to the original resolution (Res. 29-71) authorizing agreement
between Burlingame Shore Land Company and the City for construction of the
Northpark facilities, the tennis court site (a separate parcel) remained in
Northpark's ownership but the adjacent restaurant had exclusive rights to
the parking under the courts.
Presently, however, the County Assessor shows the tennis court site under
the same ownership as the restaurant so there has been a change of owner-
ship. Mr. Coxall said that Northpark has some kind of 'air rights' lease
for use of the tennis courts.
H. Towber
8/1/84
T0: CITY PLANNER
FROM: PLANNER
SUBJECT: PARKING SPACE LEASES FOR THE NORTHPARK APARTMENT COMPLEX
I contacted Eric Raff with Friedkin-Becker Associates who handles
the Northpark property for the owners and asked about all leases
for use of Northpark parking spaces. He said that the Velvet Turtle
did not lease any parking spaces and that the only lease outstanding
was for 15 spaces for use by Mike Harvey Oldsmobile.
H.Towber
7/27/84
���i�1��G�
CNR Associates, Inc.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONSULTING
2040 Ploneer Ct., San Mateo, CA 94403
August 1, 1984
City of Burlingame Planning Commission
501 Primose Road
Burlingame, Ca
A U G � 198�
CI � �vNING DEPTME
(415) 345-2101
Attention: Ms Helen Towber
Re: Variance application for Northpark Apts, 1006 Carolan Ave.
Dear Ms Towber,
As per your request, we are pleased to enclose a copy of the
sales listing �or the Chandler Insurance building plus a state-
ment of the materials presently stored in the existing mairitain-
ence shop.
As can be seen on the sales information, the Chanr�.ler building
stands on leased land and the Northpark group has to be moved
out by the close of escrow.
We understand that there are 10 parking spaces on the Chandler
leased property with an additional 10 spaces being made avail-
able by Northpark.
If we can be of any further assistance please contact the under-
signed.
Sincerely You�.,rs�
i
Richar W. Coxall
Pnclosures
1 cc Friedkin Becker
General Contractor's License #438470
Statement of Materials
stored at the Northpark Maintainence shop
We examined the contents of the above maintainence shop and
are pleased to report as follows.
The bulk of the contents comprises of benches and storage shel-
ves used to stock spar� part� and supplies for regular main-
tainence of the 510 apartments on the complex.
Typical of these items are:
appliance parts
light bulbs
paper towels
window screens
lumber
cleaning supplies
tools
carpet cleaners and shampoo
The only hazardous materials noted were paint and miscellaneous
chemicals as follows:
Paint 30 gals ±
10 gals thinner
3 gals. acetone
1 gal, alcohol
20-30 spray cans
No work involving welding or naked flame is carried out in the
maintainence shop and the area is mainly used for storage rather
�han a workshop.