HomeMy WebLinkAbout100 California Drive - Staff Report.�
City of Burlingame
Negative Declaration, Special Permits and Variance
for a new Wholesale Auto Parts Distribution Building and Car Sales Lot
Address: 100 California Drive
ITEM #1�
Meeting Date: 7/ 14/97
Request: Negative Declaration, Special Permits to allow a wholesale auto parts distribution use, and
for a building which exceeds the height limit (42'-0" tall, where 35'-0" is the maximum height), and
a Parking Variance for 13 on-site parldng spaces where 46 spaces aze required, at 100 California Drive,
zoned C-2, Subarea D(C.S. 25.38.030 (4), 25.36.030 (10), and 25.70.030 (I)).
Applicant: Putnam Buick Pontiac GMC Truck
Property Owner: 7.P. Property L.L.C.
Lot Area: 2.18 Acres (95,040 SF)
General Plan: Special Sales and Service Commercial
Adjacent Development: Automobile Sales and Service
CEQA Status: Refer to attached Negative Declaration No. ND 487P.
Previous Use: Car Dealership and Service
APN: 029-233-080
Zoning: C-2, Subarea D
Proposed Use: New 4-story, 41,472 SF automobile parts distribution facility and car sales lot
Allowable Use: Auto-related uses, uses deemed similar to permitted uses by special permit.
Summary: The applicant, Putnam Buick, Pontiac and GMC Truck, is requesting special permits to
allow a wholesale auto parts distribution use, and for a building which exceeds the height limit (42'-0"
building height where 35'-0" is the maximum allowed). The applicant is also requesting a parking
variance for 13 on-site parking spaces where 46 parking spaces are required. The proposal is to
construct a four-story, 41,472 SF automobile parts distribution facility and operate a car sales lot at 100
California Drive, zoned C-2, Subarea D. The ofiices for the car sales lot will be located in the new
building.
The site is now developed with a car dealership building, a used car sales and auto detailing building, a
service building, and a four-story parking garage which is used to store inventory from the dealerships and
to provide employee and customer parking. The 12,550 SF used car sales and service building on the
corner of California Drive and Bayswater Avenue is to be demolished as a part of this project. The auto
dealership and service buildings on the corner of California Drive and Howard Avenue and the parking
structure in the center of the lot will remain. The parking garage contains the required parking spaces for
the existing new and used car dealerships, the service building, a parts storage area in the garage and for
an auto dealership located at 3 California Drive. The required parking for these uses (85 spaces) is located
on the fourth floor of the parking garage. The applicant is providing five parking spaces for the new
building. The required parking for the building is 46 spaces (39,705 SF of waxehouse at 1 space per 1000
SF = 40 spaces; 1767 SF of caz sales of�ice at 1 space per 300 SF = 6 spaces). The applicant is requesting
a parking variance for 13 spaces where 46 spaces is the minimum required. Five spaces are shown in front
of the new building and 8 spaces will be designated for employee parking in the adjacent parking garage.
The wholesale parts distribution facility will operate Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a. m. to 5:00
p.m. The car sales lot will operate Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., and on
weekends from 9:00 a. m. to 6:00 p. m. Currently, there are 2 full-time employees for the existing
wholesale parts distribution facility at 925 Bayswater at Anita Road, and these two employees would
\
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCE I00 California Drive
staff the new auto parts distribution facility. The existing Putnam Buick's Used Car Department, which
is to be relocated to this site, is staffed by five salespeople, plus a manager. Initially, the new facility
will have 6 full-time employees during the day on weekdays, and 3 full-time employees after 5:00 p. m.
on weekdays. On weekends, there will be 6 full-time employees during the day, and 6 full-time
employees after 5:00 p.m. It is projected that the number of employees will increase in 5 years to 7
full-time employees during the day on weekdays, and 3 full-time employees after 5:00 p.m. on
weekdays. On weekends, the number of employees is expected to increase to 7 full-time employees
during the day, and 7 full-time employees after 5:00 p. m. Currently, 5 customers come to the site
during the day on weekdays, and 2 customers come to the site after 5:00 p. m. On weekends, 9
customers visit the site during the day, and 2 customers visit after 5:00 p. m. This is expected to increase
in five years to 9 customers during the day and 2 customers after 5:00 p. m. on weekdays, and to 13
customers during the day on weekends, and 3 customers visiting after 5:00 p. m. The maximum number
of people expected at the site at any one time is 10. The applicant will provide loading spaces for trucks
inside the building, off of Bayswater Avenue. No trucks will be parked on-site continuously throughout
the day.
Property Development Standards: The attached table shows the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance
as they relate to this project. In summary, the project requires the following special permits:
1. to allow a wholesale automobile parts distribution facility (determination that this use is similaz
in character to other uses permitted in the C-2, Subarea D zoning district);
2. to exceed the design review height limitations of the C-2 zoning district (42'-0" in height, where
35'-0" is the maximum allowed).
A Parking Variance is required for number of parking spaces (13 on-site parking spaces where 46 spaces
are the minimum required). The project meets all other zoning requirements.
Negative Declaration: The initial study prepared for this project identified potential impacts in the
areas of noise, aesthetics, and transportation and circulation. However, based upon the mitigation
measures identified in the initial study, it has been determined that the proposed project can be covered
by a negative declaration since the initial study did not identify any adverse impacts which could not be
reduced to acceptable levels by mitigation. The mitigation measures in the initial study are incorporated
into the recommended conditions of approval, and they are shown in italics.
The applicant has submitted a letter dated June 27, 1997, addressing two conditions listed in the
Negative Declaration and included in the proposed conditions of approval. The items discussed are
listed as Nos. 7 and 11 in the Negative Declaration, and are listed as Nos. 9 and 13 in this staff report.
Tfie first item of concern is the condition which originally stated that "there shall be no on-street loading
or unloading of trucks delivering or picking up parts or merchandise by customers or employees of the
various Putnam dealerships". The new facility has 3 overhead doors fronting on Bayswater so that
delivery trucks can load and unload inside the building. However, one of the GMC delivery trucks is
too large to be unloaded in these delivery bays. The applicant would like a loading zone designated on
Bayswater to accommodate the one delivery per day from GMC between 6:00 a. m. and 10:00 a. m.
2
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIAIVCE 100 California Drive
Designation of a loading zone would require approval of the City's Traffic, Safety and Parking
Commission. Staff has determined that the following condition will adequately mitigate the impact of
the loading and unloading of trucks on area traffic, and has amended the mitigation measure in the
Negative Declaration as follows:
There shall be no on-street loading or unloading of trucks delivering or picking up parts or
merchandise by customers or employees of the various Putnam dealerships, or the applicant shall
obtain approval from the Tra,,��c, Safety and Parking Commission for an on-street loading zone
on Bayswater Avenue. If approved, the applicant's use of this area for deliveries to the parts
warehouse shall be limited to the hours of 6.•00 a. m. to 10: 00 a. m. , and the loading zone shall
be marked with a 30�-minute time limit for loading and unloading; no car carriers shall use the
loading zone or shall load or unload in any public street.
The applicant has also addressed the condition which states "there shall be no outdoor public address or
amplification system used on this site for any purpose". The applicant states that it is common within
the automobile sales industry to use public address systems since the sales area is outside. Staff would
note that many complaints have been received from nearby residents regarding the public address
systems in the auto row area. The noise from a public address system would carry to nearby residential
areas because there is nothing to block the noise down California Drive or Bayswater Avenue.
Therefore, this mitigation measure has been included in the recommended conditions of approval.
StafF Comments: The City Engineer (June 2, 1997 memo) states that: 1) a property survey will be
required with all property corners set in the field; 2) parking back-up area shall be shown on plans; 3)
repair all damage� sidewallc, driveway, curb and gutters. The Fire Marshal (June 2 and 7une 16, 1997
memos) states that: 1) building must be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system throughout;
2) the building must have a complete fire alarm system; 3) items 1 and 2 shall be monitored by an
approved central station; 4) rack storage may require additional fire sprinkler coverage; 5) a 20' access
way must be provided from Bayswater to California Drive, and this area needs to be identiiied and
marked "No Parking - Fire Lane"; 6) the access aisle needs to include a radius for turn movements, no
right angle corners. The Chief Building Inspector (7une 2, 1997 memo) states that: 1) two (minimum)
stairvvays required from the fourth floor; 2) Handicap parking space does not need to be signed; 3) gas
meter must be relocated onto Putnam property or proper recorded easements must be filed; 4) provide
ventilation calculations for existing open parking garage; 5) parapet required at railroad right-of-way;
and 6) define fire separation from parking garage.
Planning staff would note that these special permits and variance would go with the land if the parking
structure which provides some of the required parking should be removed, those spaces would have to
be replaced on the site or the use pernut would be subject to review bacause it becomes non-conforming.
However, the pazking variance goes with the land whether the parts warehouse use continues on it or
not. If the pazking variance were denied, the applicant could provide all the required parking in the
adjacent garage since it is on the same site. If the issue is that the parking requirement for warehouse
use is too large for a parts warehouse, then the code requirements for parking need to be adjusted. In
that way, a future change in use can be addressed by requiring more parking.
3
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCE
*USE:
SETBAC%S:
Front:
Side: Howard Ave. :
Bayswater Ave. :
Rear:
EXISTING
Auto Sales &
Service
0'
0'
0'
0'
None
PROPOSED
Auto Parts
Distribution, Auto
Sales & Service
AUTOMOBILE SALES
LOT LANDSCAPING
REQUIREMENTS
FLOOR AREA RATID
*BUILDING HEIGHT
REVIEW LINE
*PARKING
108'
no change
0'
�
2'-6" wide landscape
area along California
& Bayswater, planted
w/ 2' high box hedge
100 California Drive
ALLOWED/REQ'D
Special Permit Req'd
for use similaz in
character to permitted
uses
none req'd
none req'd
none req'd
none req'd
Fence, wall or
evergreen hedge not
less than 2' or more
than 6' high
1.51 FAR (143,464 1.8 FAR (172,386 SF 3.0 FAR (285,120 SF
SF Floor Area) Floor Area) Floor Area)
35' -0"
385 in garage (73
marked for req' d
employee &
customer parking)
42'-0" Special Permit Req'd
for Height over 35'
5 New Spaces + 8
employee spaces in
parking garage
1 Sp./1000 SF
warehouse = 40
1 Sp./300 SF auto
sales office = 6
* Special permits for automobile parts distribution use and for 42'-0" building height where 35' is the
maximum height. Parking variance required for number of spaces (13 proposed where 46 is the
minimum required.
This project meets all other zoning code requirements.
Study Meeting: At the June 23, 1997 Planning Commission study meeting the commission asked the
applicant to clarify why he is asking for a 41 space parking variance and not providing parlcing in the
parking garage on-site. The applicant has responded in the attached letter dated June 27, 1997. The
applicant has indicated that 8 spaces will be designated in the parking garage for use by employees of
the new building at 100 California Drive, and 5 spaces are shown for employee parking in front of the
new building. Therefore, the parking variance is for 33 spaces (providing 13 on-site parking spaces
where 46 is the minimum number of spaces required). The applicant also states that the request for the
variance is based upon the actual number of employees which will work at this facility. The applicant
states that the City of Burlingame dces not have a pazking ratio designed for the proposed use.
n
�
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCE I00 California Drive
The Commission notes that the City has allowed off-site parking for another site in the parking garage,
now a building on-site cannot put its required parking in the structure, why? The applicant has included
a chart which outlines the parking requirements and the parking provided for the other uses on the site
(150 and 198 California Drive), and for the off-site parking provided in the parking garage for the car
dealership at 3 California Drive. All of the parking for these uses is designated for employee parking
on the fourth floor of the parking garage (see Sheet A7 date stamped 7une 11, 1997). In addition, the
applicant is proposing to designate an additional 8 spaces on the fourth floor for employees of the new
facility. The applicant states that these designated spaces, together with the 5 on-site spaces provided
for customer parking, will provide sufficient parking for the proposed use.
The Commission asked that the applicant provide information on the schedule of vehicles delivering
parts, frequency and hours. The applicant states that the new facility will provide for storage of parts
for both GMC and Toyota dealerships. GMC receives one shipment a day between the hours of 6 a. m.
and 10 a.m. Monday through Friday. Toyota receives at most one shipment a day in the evening hours.
Because this distribution facility provides parts for Putnam dealerships only, there will be at most 5
outgoing deliveries in the morning and 5 in the afternoon. Therefore, the ma�cimum total number of
deliveries is 12 per day. All five delivery trucks are parked in the parking lot on the corner of
Bayswater and Anita, as shown on the map date stamped 7une 30, 1997 provided by the applicant.
The Commission stated that it dces not seem that this car sales and parts business will survive on 11
customers a day with a maximum of ten people on the site at a time for both activities, would the
applicant clarify. The applicant states that the used car facility has a detailed tracking system for the
number of customers which visit the site, and provides a summary of the number of customers in the
first four months of 1997 in the attached letter dated 7une 27, 1997. Assuming a maximum of 7
employees and a maximum of 3 customers on site at any one time, the total number of people on site
at any time is expected to be 10.
The Commission aslced that the applicant provide the actual number of parking spaces within the parking
structure and a table showing how they are presently used. The applicant states that there are 385
parking spaces in the existing parking garage, and has provided a table showing the designaterl 73
employee parking spaces on the fourth floor. The remainder of the pazking spaces are used for storage
of new and used car inventory. The Commission also asked where the cars for the used car lot will be
loaded and unloaded, and stated that this has been a problem in the public right-of-way in the past, has
it been solved with this project. The applicant has submitted a map date-stamped 7une 30, 1997, which
shows the proposed location of the loading and unloading of used cars. There is an abandoned railroad
spur adjacent to Putnam's auto repair facility at 925 Bayswater Avenue. The applicant states that no
on-street loading or unloading of used cars will be required.
The Commission dces not understand the parking variance request, if the employees will park in the
structure, how will the rest of the structure be used? The applicant originally requested the variance for
41 parking spaces, with 5 spaces designated for customers in front of the new facility. Based upon
staff's request to provide employee parking in the garage, the applicant has revised his request, and will
designate 8 spaces in the parking garage for employees of the new building. There are an additiona173
parldng spaces designated in the garage for required pazking for 3, 100 and 198 California Drive. The
5
0
0
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCE l00 California Drive
remaining 306 parldng spaces are used for storage of new and used car inventory. The Commission also
asked how will the five parldng spaces in front of the new building be used, and what was meant by "if
accept more than 5?" The five parking spaces in front of the new building are intended to be used by
customers of the car sales lot ('The parldng requirement for this azea of car sales with office is 6 spaces).
As noted above, the applicant intends to designate 8 spaces in the parking garage for the employees of
both the warehouse and car sales business in the new building.
The Commission asked how will the used car lot be operated, and where will the customers for this lot
park? The offices for the used car lot will be located inside the new building, and the used car inventory
will be displayed in the front of the building, as shown on the site plan date stamped 7une 30, 1997.
The customers for the used caz lot will park in the 5 spaces shown in front of the new building. The
Commission also asked where the parts delivery trucks will be parked over night. The applicant states
that the delivery trucks are parked in the parldng lot of the Putnam auto repair facility at 925 Bayswater
(see attached map date stamped 7une 30, 1997).
The Commission also asked if the parts facility will serve only Putnam dealerships or will it be open
to the public. The applicant states that this facility provides parts for Putnam dealerships only, and is
not open to the public. The Commission asked if the parts will be delivered to dealerships or will
people from the dealerships come to pick up parts. The applicant states that deliveries are made to the
dealerships. Up to 5 outgoing deliveries to the dealerships will occur in the morning, and 5 deliveries
will occur in the afternoon.
The Commission asked the applicant to provide a history of the pazking garage and variances applied
for to support other uses. The parking garage originally provided spaces to meet the parking
requirements for the uses at 100 California Drive, the spaces required for the parking garage use, and
for the auto dealership and repair facility on the property at 198 California Drive. In September, 1996,
a parking variance was granted for the caz dealership at 3 California Drive. A condition of approval
of this variance required that 25 parking spaces be designated in the parking garage at 150 California
Drive to provide employee parking for the 3 California Drive site. The remainder of the parking spaces
in the garage are used for storage of new and used car inventory.
The Commission asked what is the height of the parking garage? The parking garage is 34'-0" in
height, with a penthouse which extends 5'-0" above the roof. Overall height of the structure is 39'-0";
but visible height from California Drive is 34'-0". The parking garage is set back 30'-0", and the new
wazehouse is set back 108' -0" .
The Commission asked what will happen at the Anita/Peninsula facility when the parts operation moves
out, how will the space be used? The applicant states that the existing automobile repair facility will
be expanded into the space now used for parts storage. New paint spray booths are required in order
to meet Environmental Protection Agency requirements, and the new booths will require more space
in the facility.
F'indings for a Negative Declaration: For CEQA requirements the Planning Commission must review
and approve the negative declaration (ND 487-P), finding that on the basis of the Initial Study and any
�
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCE I00 California Drive
comments received in writing or at the public hearing that there is no substantial evidence that the
project will have a signiiicant (negative) effect on the environment.
Required �ndings for Variance:
In order to grant a variance the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on
the property (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d):
a) there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property
involved that do not apply generally to property in the same district;
(b) the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant, and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hazdship;
(c) the granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements
in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or
convenience; and
(d) that the use of the property will be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of
existing and potential uses of properties in the general vicinity.
�ndings for a 5pecial Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit the Planning Commission must iind
that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.52.020 a-c):
(a) the proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general
welfare, or convenience;
(b) the proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Burlingame general
plan and the purposes of this title;
(c) the Planning Commission may impose such reasonable conditions or restrictions as it deems
necessary to secure the purposes of this title and to assure operation of the use in a manner
compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of existing and potential uses on
adjoining properties in the general vicinity.
Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative
action should be taken by resolution and should include findings. The reasons for any action should be
clearly statsd. Please note that the conditions below which are in italics are mitigation measures taken
from the negative declaration. If the commission determines that these conditions do not adequately
address any potential significant impacts on the environment, then an Environmental Impact Report
would nced to be prepared for this project. These conditions may not be amended without preparation
of an EIR. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered:
7
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCE 100 California Drive
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and
date stamped 7une 11, 1997, Sheet A 1 and A3 through A7, and date stamped 7une 30, 1997,
Sheets A2 and A8;
2. that the conditions of the City Engineer's June 2, 1997 memo, the Fire Marshal's June 2 and
June 16, 1997 memo, and the Chief Building Inspector's 7une 2, 1997 memo shall be met;
3. that this project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire
Codes, 1995 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame.
4. that the overall height of the building as measured from the grade the top of curb shall be 42'-0";
5. that the used car lot use shall be subject to review should the property owner lose the right to
load and unload car carriers in the abandoned railroad spur adjacent to 925 Bayswater Avenue.
6. that the at-grade automobile display area at the front of the site shall not exceed 7820 SF as
shown on the site plan date stamped 6/30/97;
7. that the project shall be subject to the state-mandated water conservation program. A complete
Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time
of permit application;
8. that the applicant shall obtain a permit from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District for
demolition of the existing structure;
9. that there shall be no on-street loading or unloading of trucks delivering or picking up parts or
merchandise by customers or employees of the various Putn.am dealerships, or the applicant shall
obtain approval from the Tra,,��c, Safety and Parking Commission for an on-street loading zone
on Bayswater Avenue. If approved, the applicant's use of this area for deliveries to the parts
warehouse shall be limited to the hours of 6: 0�0 a. m. to 10: 00 a. m. , and the loading zone shall
be marked with a 30-minute time limit for loading and unloading; no car carriers shall use the
loading zone or shall load or unload in any public street;
10. that all employees of the parts distribution facility and car sales lot shall park in designated
spaces in the adjacent parking garage, and their cars shall bear stickers identifying their place
of employment;
11. that this proposal shall be required to meet the Tree Protection and Reforestation Ordinance
passed by the City of Burdingame in 1993 and enforced by the Parks Department and the City's
landscape requirement; .
12. that the applicant and property owner shall coordinate with the San Mateo County Health
Department to ensure that this project does not impact ongoing remediation for removal of a gas
storage tank on the site;
:
NEGATIVE DECI.ARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCE I00 California Drive
13. that there shall be no outdoor public address or ampl�cation system used on the site for any
purpose;
14. that all construction shall abide by the construction hours established by the municipal code;
15. tlwt all new utility connections to serve the site and which are afj`'ected by the development shall
be installed to meet currenx code standards and diameter; sewer laterals shall be checked and
replaced if necessary; and abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed;
16. that all on-site illumination including the car sales lot lighting shall be shielded and directed only
on to the site; and
17. that should arry cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until
they are fully investigated, and appropriate methods of removal determined by appropriate
professionals acceptable to the City and completion approved before work commences.
Maureen Brooks
Planner
c: Ronald Morris, Moms Engineering
L•�
Burlingame Planning Commissiort Mirattes Jurse ?3, 1997
access driveways in the ciry, what has been the experience both legally and operationally; the house
next door has sold, was it bought by the same property owners as this project, if common ownership
could lots be merged and development handled differently. Item was set for public hearing on 7uly
14, 1997.
APPLICATION FOR A TENTATIVE MAP FOR A 4-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1408 EL
CAMINO REAL. ZONED R-3. (RON GROVE, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER �
Requests: CE noted that a CalTrans permit would be required for this development. Item was set for
public hearing on July 14,1997.
APPLICATION FOR A RESIDENTIAL CONDOMI1vIUM PERMIT, FRONT SETBACK, BACK-UP
AISLE AND PARKING MANEUVER VARIANCES FOR A 4-UNIT CONDOMINILTM AT 38
LORTON AVENUE, ZONED R-4, (DALE MEYER ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND RICHARD
BALUSHIAN. PROPERTY OWNER).
Requests: What is the hardship on this property which is 50'x 150', 30' longer than many lots on El
Camino developed within all code requirements, to justify the variances requested; each variance
should be addressed specifically as it relates to hardships on this property; the location of the support
posts should be clarified on the site plan. Item was set for public hearing on July 14,1997.
APPLICATION FOR A TENTATIVE MAP FOR A 4-TJIVIT CONDOMINIUM AT 38 LORTON
AVENUE, ZONED R-4, (DALE MEYER ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND RICHARD
BALUSHIAN. PROPERTY OWNERI.
Requests: No additional comments were made. The item was set for public hearing with the project
on 7uly 14, 1997.
�'
APPLICATION FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND PARKING
VARIANCE FOR AN AUTO PARTS DISTRIBUTION FACILITY AND CAR SALES LOT AT 100
CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED, G2, SUBAREA D, (PUTNAM BUICK-PONTIAC-GMC TRUCK,
APPLICANT AND 7. P. PROPERTY. L.L.C., PROPERTY OWNERI �
Requests: clarify why asking for a 41 space pazking variance and not providing pazking in pazking
garage on-site; city has allowed off-site parldng for another site in the pazking gazage, now a building
on-site cannot put its required parking in the structure, why; provide information on schedule of
vehicles delivering parts, frequency and hours; does not seem that this car sales and parts business will
survive on 11 customers a day with a maximum of ten people on the site at a time for both activities,
would the applicant clarify; provide the actual number of parking spaces within the parking structure
and a table showing how they are presently used; where will cars for the used car lot be loaded and
unloaded, this has been a problem in the public right of way in the past, has it been solved with this
project; do not understand the parking variance request employees will park in the structure, how will
the rest of the structure be used; how will the five parldng spaces in front of the new building be used;
explain what was meant by "if accept more than 5. .."; how will the used car lot be operated; where
will the customers for this lot park; where will the parts delivery trucks be pazked over night; will the
-3-
�s1Li8ame Planieing Cwnmisskn Minutus
lw�e ?3, 1997
parts facility serve only Putnam dealerships or will it be open to the pubic; will parts be delivered to
dealerships or will people from dealerships come to pick up parts; provide a history of the parl�ng
garage and variances applied for to support other uses; what is the height of the parking garage; what
will happen at the Anita/Peninsula facility when the parts operatio� moves out, how will the space be
used. Item was set for public hearing on 7uly 23, 1997, providing all the information requested has
been submitted in time.
APPLICA ON FOR A SPECIAL ERMIT' AND PARKING VARIAN E FOR A MONTESSORI
PRE-SCHO AND KINDERG TEN AT 525 CALIFORrIIA DRIVE ZONED G2, SUBAREA
72 /T VA��rr, O_ TTT � � � ,,... . _ � . - — -- �
Requests: this is a busy corner close to Oak G ve, ask city traffic engineer to gi e his comments on
the impact of this pro sed use; parking on C'fornia is some times used by auto epair uses nearby,
will this be a probl for employees, where will they pazk; will the garage spa in the building be
useri for parking ' the future; how will drop off and pick-up of children be done afely, how will the
children be h led. Item was set for public earing on July 14, 1997.
APPLICATIO FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A
MAGNOLIA A E, ZONED G1, (MIKE YOUNES
This item was withdrawn from�t�ie agenda.
A�'PLICATION FOR SPECIAL ERMITS FOR AN ACCE
A GARAGE AT 834 WAL AVENUE, ZONED R-1,
NCIAL INSTITUTION T 1802
APPLICANT AND DAV R& C
STRUCTURE TO REPLAC�,
C WITH, APPLICANT AND
Reference staff report, 6.23. 7, with atta.chments. CP Monroe discu the request, reviewed
criteria, Planning Departme comments, and study meeting questions. r conditions were
suggested for consideration.
(. - an Key opened the public h' g. The applicant was not present. Commission iscussed the
need r additional conditions regardin e fill, grading, drainage and the eaves to be at the discretion
of the ity Engineer and in accordance wi e Building Code as amenderi by the City f Burlingame.
Ther were no further comments and the pub 'c hearing was closed.
c;o mission asked how the 18" of fill will aff
that ' age from all structures be carried to t
right and r eaves will have to be eliminat
these eaves n to be changed. The conditio s
consistent with the Building Department's r
California Buil ing and F`ire Codes as amended
City Engineer ould review the grading and d
:t the drainage of the overall property Code requires
ie street. Plan check approval was di cussed and the
The building may not look as it does ' this plan if
should be modifietl to include; approval o ese plans
uirement on the eaves and in accordance 'th the
'athe City of Burlingame. It was also noted tha e
u`"�plans before the building permit is issued.
-4-
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
�i- Name: Ronald Morris/Morris Engineering
Address: 1 04 F.1 C:ami no Real
Clty/State/Zlp: San Carlos, Ca. 94070
Phone (w); �415) 595-2973
(h):
f�; (415) 347-1650
Please indicate with an asterisk * the
contact person for this application.
(h�; (415) 594-9754
f�; (415) 595-2980
/BURLIN9AMi CITY OF BURLINGAME
��APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING CONIlVIISSION
���
Type of Application: Special Permit x Variance Other
Project Address: 100 California Drive, Burlingame
Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 029-233-080
APPLICANT
Name:Putnam Buick Pontiac GMC Truck
Address:900 Peninsula Ave
PROPERTY OWNER
N1ITle:_J.P. Property L.L.C.
Address: 3 California Drive
City/State/ZlP: Burlingame, Ca. 94010 City/StSte/ZiP:Burlingame, Ca. 94010
Phone (w): (415) 342-4321 Phone (w): (415) 347=4800
(h):
f�: (415) 342-1426
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Demolish existing URM facility, construct new wholesale parts
distribution facility with used car sales department.
A�'FIDAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under �enalty of perjuY,� that ti�e information given
herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
- � �-_��_ �� RECEIVE�
Applican s Signature Date MAY 2 8 1997
CITY OF BURLINGAME
I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant Qi4�b�f1�t �R��
application to the Planning Commission.
,`-a 7 - �' ?'
Pro Owner s ignature Date
----------------------------------------------FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ------------------------------------------
Date Filed: Fee:
Planning Commission: Study Date:
Action Date:
` w c�rr
, R'�' ��:
BURLJNGAME
a
�� , : ;
CITY C�)F :U�LI(`JGHI�,�IE
;�PECI,�L F'Er�I�IIT /�F'F'LIC;I�TIC�)NS
The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's ordinance
(Code Section 25.52.0201. Your answers to the following questions will assist the Planning
Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request.
Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these
questions.
1. Exp/ain why the proposed use at th proposed /ocation wi// not be detrimenta/ or. injurious
to property o� iinprovements in th vicinity or to pub/ic hea/th, safety, gene�a/ we/fare, or
convenience.
MDVin�G EX�ST/qly WHoGESA�LE P9� TS D/57"�[/S,/ra�J CEN� 7D Pa-oPos�o C.cGg7-��I
wl4 E9Sf CDivJEST►vnl De/ aK.77� �O�tv. f�2uposE4 F�F�i��Ty w�cc. oE[�cE�}sE TiCq,Fp„��
NoifE F�20�'7 I�IE«afoit��f. 2EsioEnl7i.1� PiGdP�a�y oN ATt�r�9 1Co9�p. StlN[I4HT /SEtiADE
�rc nre�akaoR��✓�, P/ts�Eitrrls
ATf/� VrEhJs�SlM(JLp rBE /Mt��'�J'EO MrnI�M�Ft,a7 StKCE NE�.I/=AGtCtr+� LOC.K£o �T Ke`�►'R
0�= PiLe/E2TY �:OJs�cENT 7'o R��L��l�v T�4c.K5 ,�i'opc�'d 4 P/yR.7� STO/Lqt. E� f Kd N'
/�f+4'LN?20�dt ,
NEw �cc *Yr� w�c.c. �-�-,rv� a Puc�y �9-vro��e� sp�u•�rc.c.Ert S�ST�M, fxesT�^�G
/�''�'C.�4c�►y �DaGS ivaT'. EK�ST�^�5 !-'�c.�tr�Ty �S �Y Kaow�! U.CM 8c�rc.o�.J4� �}r pe�cocrt�y
�$cl�c.�or�/4 T� 7`7ta�EyT rp c,�� S.rpEr� �t REkovto, Ti�� usE Fo,,. s�vTo�conv�
S�1tt's A�o w�v�t�}-c,E PR�TS s`r��.� i,s Ca�t'tt��./'i �.✓trrl c.�ry�,� zonic�4 c�co��✓9�rc.,�.
NEw Srx.dc�vtiE w1c.c. caMpc,Y w�r+�,� �1-D�F �ccE,ss�aic��'7 S"�o�s �
2.
How wi// the proposed use be /ocated and conducted in accordance with the Bur/ingame
Genera/ P/an and Zoning OrdinanceT
Ek�sT�•�r� za���S Fo2 P/�/E2rY ��Eo C z su�.�,c.ER !� . P2apos�o vsE
/ S CD�S�S7�•�i !.v/ �-r�TnMoT �vE sy-�E.! S SEavc r,F .
a
3.
How wi// the proposed project be compatib/e with the aesthetics, mass, bu/k and character
of the existing and potentia/ uses on adjoining properties in the genera/ vicinity7
/�E�tJ �"i/rf-GlL�y'►) �+ ,BLENO f'�//J'if EX/STlnIl� %fOJd?'CEN? P/��QKt�/� ST2dGT'i'7GE .
LOj /f�EA OEaicq7L� TG UJEo G.q-,� Sy-��t �S Gervs�s��✓? �•//� itl�/��fso2sl�'4
f��q9�7'� E 5 .
RECEIVEL�
, 2/82
sp.frm
MAY 2 8 1997
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANfVING DEPT.
1. Exp/ain why the proposed use at the proposed /ocation wi// not be detrimenta/ or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity or to pub/ic hea/th, safety, genera/ we/fare, or
convenience.
How will the proposed structure or use within the structure affect neighboring properties or structures on those
propertiesT If neighboring properties will not be affected, state why. Think about traffic, noise, lighting, paving,
landscaping sunlight/shade, views from neighboring properties, ease of maintenance.
Why will the structure or use within the structure not affect the public's health, safety or general welfare7
Public health includes such things as sanitation (garbape), air quality, discharges into sewer and stormwater systems,
water supply safety, and things which have the potential to affect public health (i.e., underground storage tanks,
stora�e of chemicals, situations which encourage the spread of rodents, insects or communicable diseases).
Public safetv. How will the structure or use within the structure affect police or fire protection7 Will alarm systems
o� sprinklers be installed7 Could the structure or use within the structure create a nuisance or need for police services
(i.e., noise, unruly gatherings, loitering, traffic) or fire services li.e., storage or use flammable or hazardous materials,
or potentially dangerous activities like welding, woodwork, engine removal).
General we/fase is a catch-all phrase meaning community good. Is the proposal consistent with the city's policy and
goals for conservation and developmentl Is there a social benefitT
Convenience. How would the proposed structure or use affect public convenience (such as access to or parking for
this site or adjacent sites)7 Is the proposal accessible to particular segments of the public such as the elderly or
handicapped7
2. How wi// the proposed use be /ocated and conducted in accordance with the Bur/ingame Genera/
Plan and Zoning OrdinanceT
Ask the Planning Department for the general plan designation and zoning district for the proposed project site. Also
ask for an explanation of each. Once you have this information, you can compare your proposal with the stated
designated use and zoning, then explain why this proposal would "fit" accordingly.
3. How wi// the proposed project be coi»patib/e with the aesttietics, mass, bu/k and character of the
existing neighborhood and potentia/ uses on adjoining properties in the genera/ vicinityT
How does the proposed structure or use compare aesthetically with existing neighborhood7 If it does not affect
aesthetics, state why. If changes to the structure are proposed, was the addition designed to match existin�
architecture, pattern of development on adjacent properties in the neighborhood? If a use will affect the way a
neighborhood or area looks, such as a long term airport parking lot, compare your proposal to other uses in the area
and explain why it "fits".
How does the proposed structure compare to neighboring structures in terms of mass or bulk7 If there is no change
to structure, say so. If a new structure is proposed, compare its size, appearance, orientation etc. with other
structures in the neighborhood or area.
How will the structure or use within the structure change the character of the neighborhood? Think of character as
the image or tone established by size, density of development and general pattern of land use. Will there be more
traffic or less parking available resulting from this use7 If you don't feel the character of the neighborhood will change,
state why.
How will the proposed project be compatible with existin� and potential uses in the �eneral vicinity7 Compare your
project with existinfl uses. State why you feel your project is consistent with other uses in the vicinity, and/or state
why your project would be consistent with potential uses in the vicinity.
� zres
w.rrm
+� ��� CITY ��
. BURLJNGAME ��� ��(-' ����������
. .,�o j== ; -_ ,,o N/�I�O�f�C�C� �f�pL��C��`���(��
The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's ordinance
(Code Section 25.54.020 a-dl. Your answers to the following questions will assist the Planning
Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request.
Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these
questions.
a. Describe the exceptiona/ or extraordina�y circumstances or conditions app/icab/e to you�
property which do not app/y to other properties in this area.
E'x�5r���, gu,c�o�,v� Q�SlC,Nf�iCO �S �'^/ UN,CE/•✓F�RCEO M/ii-Sa^/�y ST2vL7Z/2.c
��1.�'.M.) , Exisr��c, a.eo��v.q,vcE 2E�v��s a��cv'^fS m 8E �'D�MOUIHto a2
StrStirrc��.y RET2aF�rTF'o,
b. Exp/ain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantia/ property right and what unreasonab/e property /oss or unnecessary ha�dship
might �esu/t from the denia/ of the app/ication.
�O ,O�Drc.�� Sv�-��c«=�vT LD�'A-�CEA- T+� �-v7aMo6«E S�9-��S ,/ZE'SncrcTS A.eEA AVA�C/�6cE
%u'f- WNrSLEtsfcE ��Frt�S STe9rcNFt,E . T� �2e�lirJf Sd�=�c�c«..�j L'EiL��/c� y�t�,.f-1- �f T' I�+�Sf
�c.o02 /--dz oFf'-SrnE�T LaN�v��✓c, i�vc�GEASES 2EQv�2Eo .S�r��-o�•�ry �er4�,�T. /F �fEcGCF-�-
V�4/<<� LC NoT q�pP2oVE0 NL�� k/f�GESfIc.E P�rs A�srRravn� F�����T''J w�� ��T BG
F/Nsrn,(G�,4.LLy GEf1S��cE r-0 Scrr�c sf-q' �2o�oJEv LQC.47�a^�.
c. Exp/ain why the proposed use at the proposed /ocation wi// not be detrimenta/ or injurious
to property or improvements in the vicinity or to pub/ic hea/th, safety, genera/ we/fare, or
convenience. Mov��S �x�sr��� lN�LGESA[c PfiQTS Di57R/6tJTttr�/ C,ENTE2 'y-p pic,opc-sto
���� w�« ERSE Ti�.4�—cc � NoitE A�niO Co,v✓EST�u�I oN niE�4N600cr�lt, RES�oEn�'7�-.t�
��%PE2TY ��NtT%! R0.4D�. SuNGIC*sfi�Sy.�,+oE A'NO YiErn/S 'Ta NE/C,/f.doRi.�/C� P�CO�E2TY
Sffvc/c.o gE in���t�cT�o tiein/�.tiAC�y Fiy LoG.¢�inlG �v�w �tc�Lrr> �n �c.Esr-.� ar- P2or��c�-�j . Ro✓RC��T
� r2.�•� �t �.s . �"a000 s� o�MM� rS S7o 2p-q �� s.v-e n� -�-�-�.ir-,c oo vs . Ex � 5 r� � c, r3 r/i �-a i�! 4
�5 � U.�L. M. ST2�/c.T✓zE w�TNa u� �'I N�h/�aM�o SP2���cc.62 SK S7Ltit. ME,,.i /'-,�rc.cry w ic.�
��t, f} !�/�!G[NlCLE2 f�Jfl'�M �'►✓� 4�SC�NEo TU /gETTi�2 /2�'St j% SElSMcG FQeGES.
MEr� F.�uc.�� wrc.c �oM,oc. y r.v r�-E+ <FpF� A-CCESSig/C� ty 5�"�rvog�,eoS .
d. Ho w wi// the proposed project be compatib/e with the aesthetics, mass, bu/k and character
of the existing and potentia/ uses on adjoining properties in the genera/ vicinityT
N��J �A-c r�r rY 7D �3 c�v o w i rrf ex� Sr��IS A-o,rR-cE�T ?�t�c r�4 ST�e vcTv�cg . Lo T
�i'�ER DEp/G<I'�D ?O USEO L�R SR-L�S /5 L0�/SlST�i�1j �✓�r� �vEi4�aoR��g
PstoPE�eT��s.
�ECEivE�
M AY 2 8 1997
12/s2var.frm CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
a. Describe the exceptiona/ or extraordinary circumstances or conditions app/icab/e to your,
property which do not apply to other properties in this area.
Do any conditions exist on the site which make other the alternatives to the variance impracticable or
impossible and are also not common to other properties in the area? For example, is there a creek cutting
through the property, an exceptional tree specimen, steep terrain, odd lot shape or unusual placement of
existing structuresl How is this property different from others in the neighborhood?
b. Exp/ain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantia/ property right and what unreasonab/e property /oss or unnecessary hardship
might resu/t from the denia/ of the app/ication.
Would you be unable to build a project similar to others in the area or neighborhood without the exception?
(i.e., having as much on-site parking or bedroomsl) Would you be unable to develop the site for the uses
allowed without the exception7 Do the requirements of the law place an unreasonable limitation or hardship
on the development of the property?
c. Exp/ain why the proposed use at the proposed /ocation wi// not be detrimenta/ or injurious
to property or improvements in the vicinity or to pub/ic hea/th, safet�, genera/ we/fare, or
convenience.
How will the proposed structure or use within the structure affect neighboring properties or structures on those
propertiesl If neighboring properties will not be affected, state why. Think about traffic, noise, lighting,
paving, landscaping sunlight/shade, views from neighboring properties, ease of maintenance. Why will the
structure or use within the structure not affect the public's health, safety or general welfarel
Public health includes such things as sanitation (garbagel, air quality, discharges into sewer and stormwater
systems, water supply safety, and things which have the potential to affect public health (i.e., underground
storage tanks, storage of chemicals, situations which encourage the spread of rodents, insects or
communicable diseasesl.
Public safetv. How will the structure or use within the structure affect police or fire protection7 Will alarm
systems or sprinklers be installed7 Could the structure or use within the structure create a nuisance or need
for police services (i.e., noise, unruly gatherings, loitering, traffic) or fire services (i.e., storage or use
flammable or hazardous materials, or potentially dangerous activities like welding, woodwork, engine removal).
�eneral welfare is a catch-all phrase meaning community good. Is the proposal consistent with the city's
policy and goals for conservation and developmentl Is there a social benefit?
Convenience. How would the proposed structure or use affect public convenience (such as access to or
parking for this site or adjacent sitesl7 Is the proposal accessible to particular segments of the public such as
the elderly or handicappedt
d. Ho w wi// the proposed project be compatib/e with the aesthetics, mass, bu/k and character
of the existing and potentia/ uses on adjoining properties in the genera/ vicinityT
How does the proposed structure or use compare aesthetically with existing neighborhood? If it does not
affect aesthetics, state why. If changes to the structure are proposed, was the addition designed to match
existing architecture or pattern of development on adjacent properties in the neighborhood? If use will affect
the way a neighborhood/area looks, compare your proposal to other uses in the area and explain why it "fits".
How does the proposed structure compare to neighboring structures in terms of mass or bulk7 If there is no
change to structure, say so. If a new structure is proposed, compare its size, appearance, orientation etc. with
other structures in the neighborhood or area.
How will the structure or use within the structure change the character of the neighborhoodl Think of
character as the image or tone established by size, density of development and general pattern of land use.
Will there be more traffic or less parking available resulting from this use? If you don't feel the character of
the neighborhood will change, state why.
How will the proposed project be compatible with existing and potential uses in the general vicinity? Compare
your project with existing uses. State why you feel your project is consistent with other uses in the vicinity,
and/or state why your project would be consistent with potential uses in the vicinity. 12/B2 vr.frm
4�� 0*
; °�"""�""" COn��RCIAL APPLICATIONS
t�°•��� °' PLAI�TNING COMMISSION APPLICATION SUPPLEMENTAL FORM
b.
1. Proposed use of the site. Wholesale Parts Distribution Facilitv & Used Car Sales
Wholesale Parts Used Car Sales UsedCar-Sat.&Sun.
2. Days and hours of operation.Mon-Fri. 8:OOAM-5: OOPM Mon-Fri-9:OOAM-9:OOPM 9:OOAM =-�
:OOPM
3. Number of trucks/service vehicles to be parked at site (by type). �
4. Cunent and projected maximum number of employees (including owner) at this location:
Existing In 2 Years In 5 Years
Hours of : ppAM- After ; ppAM- After AM- After
Operation : oOPM 5:00 PM : OO pM 5:00 PM PM 5:00 PM
Weekdays
Full-time 6 3 6 3 7 3
Part-time
Weekends
Full-time 6 6 6 6 7 �
Part-time
5. Current and proi�t� maximum number of visitors/customers who may come to the site:
Existing In 2 Years In 5 Years
Hours of 9; ppAM- After AM- After AM- After
Operation 5; oopM 5:00 PM PM 5:00 PM PM 5:00 PM
Weekdays 5 2 � 2
Weekends
6. What is the ma�cimum number of people expected on site at any one time (include owner,
employees and visitors/customers):
10
7. Where do/will the owner & employees park? on s i t e p�('� � �\/� j'�
8. Where do/will customers/visitors park? on s i t e& S t r e e t .•.�� � i �n'
(:ITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
9. Present or most recent use of site. Used car Sales
10. List of other tenants on property, their number of employees, hours of operation (attach
list if necessary).
Information not available from current tennant
r
- - MORRIS ENGINEERING
Ms. Meg Monroe
City Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Subject: Variance Application:
New Wholesale Parts Distribution Facility & Used Car Sales
100 California Drive, Burlingame
Dear Ms. Monroe,
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
May 28, 1997
Project No. 97024
[File: 97024-1 ]
f�l..��L� i/ ��
MAY 2 8 1997
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING �EPT.
This letter is meant as a written clarifcation of the proposed new Wholesale Parts Distribution Facility to be
located at 100 California Drive. As you are aware, the used car facility which currently occupies this site has
been designated as an Unreinforced Masonry Building (URM) because of the existence of unreinforced brick tile
infill and wall parapets. Our office submitted plans which were approved by the city to retrofit the existing
structure. The project however, has been on hold pending the acquisition of the building by Putnam Properties.
After a long legal battle, that acquisition has finally occurred, prompting the reconsideration of tlle use of the
site.
It is the desire of Putnam Properties to maintain the current site as a used car sales lot. However, in considering
the most economical solution regarding either retrofitting the existing building, modifying the existing building
(demolishing the front portion of the building and retrofitting the rear), or building a new facility, the latter was
found to be most practical.
Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck currently uses the building located at 925 Bayswater and Anita Road for
their Wholesale Parts Distribution Center (see letter from Rick Corso dated 5-22-97). Recently General Motors
has mandated increased stocking requirements for their major distribution dealers. As Putnam Buick, Pontiac,
GMC is currently the largest wholesale distribution center in San Mateo and S.F. counties, the construction of
a new facility with increased storage capacity is desirable. To construct the facility as planned (see enclosed
drawings), meetings with the planning department have determined that three separate variances be approved:
1) Conditional Use Variance, 2) Building Height Variance, and 3) a Parking Variance. The following is a brief
explanation defending the need for these variances.
CONDITIONAL USE VARIANCE: Currently, the subject property has been zoned for Automobile relateci
sales and services. The proposed use of the facility will remain associated with automobile services. However,
the zoning criteria does not include provisions for wholesale parts distribution. We respectfully request that a
conditional use variance be approved allowing the site to be developed for this use. Please understand that this
facility is not a retail sales facility but strictly an in-house distribution center.
104 EL CAMINO REAL, SAN CARLOS, CA 94070, (415) 595-2973, FAX (415) 595-2980
L �
May 28, 1997
Page 2 of 2
BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCE: As stated earlier, it has been decided that economically, it is more
desirable to construct a new building rather than retrofit a known high-risk (earthquake) facility. We believe that
a new facility would have the following advantages:
1) Eliminate a known high-risk structure: Even though retrofit plans have been approved by the city,
seismic strengthening is meant only to meet minimum code provisions to reduce the risk to life safety.
A new facility would be built to current code requirements to resist earthquake forces far better than the
existing building structure (based on history of performance of similar structures). In addition, the new
building would have a new fire suppression system (fire sprinklers on every level) installed per current
code, which is not present in the current facility.
2) Lnprove the aesthetics of the site: The proposed building plans provide for a new structure which blends
with the existing parking garage (located at 150 California). In addition, the increased used car sales lot
in our opinion more closely matches similar uses of surrounding properties.
3) Reduced traf�c and noise along Anita Road: Please see letter from Rick Corso dated 5-22-97.
Finally, it is not desiraUle to construct a larger building (plan dimensions) to reduce the overall height of the
building. Primarily, we believe the site location is best suited for auto sales and providing more of the lot for
auto display more closely matches similar services on California Drive. By pushing the new building to the rear
of the property and adjacent to the train tracks, we believe the affect of the increased building height will be
minimal.
PARKING VARIANCE: The current parking ordinance does not have an allocation for parking requirements
for wholesale parts distribution. As you can see by the enclosed letter from Putnam Buick, despite the size of
the building (in square feet), the employee density is very small. Because the operation is wholesale, there is
no parking requirement for customers. We recommend that the parking requirements for the new facility be
limited to 3 spaces for employees of the distribution facility and cunent parking ordinance requirements for the
used car sales department (i.e. based on office square footage). It is our plan to provide employee parking in the
adjacent parking garage (as is currently in force) and new handicap and customer parking on site.
If we can be of any further assistance, or answer any questions regarding this variance request, please call.
Sincerely,
MORRIS ENGINEERING
/ �
j � :
Ronald G. Morris, P.E.
„,
eu�cx
�
PONTIAC
�
MAY 2.8 1997
May 22, 1997
Ms. Meg Monroe
City Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, Ca. 94010
Dear Ms. Monroe:
RECEIVED
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
Thank you for the opportunity to summarize Putnam Buick's proposed changes
regarding our Wholesale Parts Distribution and Used Car Sa1es Department. Currently, our
Wholesale Parts Department is located at 925 Bayswater and Anita Road. This location is
responsible for shipping and receiving parts. This area is located on the west side of Anita
Road, adjacent to a number of homes on Anita, and is staffed by two full time employees.
The scope of operations in our Wholesale Parts Department includes customers
ordering parts via phone to our Parts Department at 900 Peninsula Avenue. These orders are
then directed to our current distribution center located on Anita Road. Our personnel then
process these orders and deliver them to the customer's place of business (i.e.: body shops,
mechanical shops, rental car companies, Avis, Hertz, Alamo etc.)
Putnam Buick's Used Car Department is currently located at 100 Califomia Drive and
is staffed by five salespeople, plus a manager. These employees all drive company vehicles
and park on site.
Our proposal would be as follows: Demolish e�sting structure located at 100
California Drive. Construct a new facility that would greatly enhance the image of Auto
Row. Our mission would be consistent with providing a facility that aesthetically blends
commercial utilization with an emphasis on Burlingame's unique image. Our proposed
facility would be located along the eastem property line and would provide office space for
our Used Car Department as well as house our Parts Distribution Center. The design would
incorporate features to a11ow our delivery trucks to be loaded off street. This feature would
greatly reduce the congestion as well as enhance the residential environment of our neighbors
located on Anita Road.
PUTNAM BUICK, PONTIAC, GMC TRUCK
"Home of Red Carpet Service”
P.O. Box 588 900 Peninsula Ave. • Telephone 342-4321
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94011-0588
� `, � �
BUICK PONTIAC
. �
We appreciate your consideration in this matter and welcome your comments. Please
contact me should you have any questions.
Very Truly Yours,
Rick Corso
Vice President & General Manager
0
ROUTING FORM
DATE: �v�CLU �-B� ��� !
TO: � CITY ENGINEER
CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR
FIRE MARSHAL
PARKS DIRECTOR
CITY ATTORNEY
FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR
G�S
_ .
( �1- I , <f r1 � S� F3c.� �)
A-r i o o c.�u r-o� � a� ���v �
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING:
STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON MONDAY: � UhQ o� , I,�� `/
THANKS,
Jane/Sheri/Maureen/Ruben
I�
z.
�
��2� �� Date of Comments
a w�-�,r�.-�� ,c�,�u�.e�. ,�,t;� ..P� ' �� 0..11.Q ��,�.�,� .
U �
��� � � � �� .
�c�.�- ��� .-�.�.� - � a.�.�, .
.�
�,� ,,�, �, ; �,e. u,�' , � c,c,� v,.rvv.�, , ��'� x ��.u-t-�.�
/1 (i
D
��
��x���.c�.�
t
ROUTING FORM
DATE: M_CI.0 �B � L �� /
TO: CITY ENGINEER
' CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR
� FIRE MARSHAL
PARKS DIRECTOR
CITY ATTORNEY
FROM: CITY PLANNERIPLANNER
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR �,PU . �e.L ��i'X�'.tGLC �2X%.u�` � ��NI.G'�Gtfl1S
_1�, A� ,.. . �,t� , � n U, n_ . ��_ � . . .
(-4�,�7a s� r3W�� -
AT i o a c� r-o� c a� ��.�" E
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING:
STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON MONDAY: � UhB a, L�� �
THANKS,
Jane/Sheri/Maureen/Ruben � �'Date of Comments
E�1/�� ��-�
�`�Ll���l� '(`��S"� �� `�P�U �S�G� w �`� �N �� c,t��� C_
.
F��� �� �i N� �. S�-f 5� t� rC�-�z c� U��.���
Z.
��T��_ �v � � � � �v �
►�.c� S � ��I� �- Cc7 rti-c PL�.�
�-
��
� � � � �'c�-�-r--`
�`-�( 5`�� .
1 'C�(.�.5 � �►� � Z S �t-Fl Lc_- C3 � (�t o � IT�SY�_� '�',�
� �2P�-��� ���rz�� �,� i�lo�
� � � � ����SS ��,� � �S ; � �, 2a
� V � �D�-D
+ s2c7 u� �-� S�� 2. �--� C��, �c� � N 1�� P_ 1 U�.
I�-� l S '-PCiZ � Y�� ��S �C� Q� l G��1 j� � 1��
��� I�� �`c_� �\ P�� ���-�(f�� - �'�-2� L�N ��� a
0
ROUTING FORM
DATE: �N�� �Z . ����
TO: CITY ENGINEER
CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR
� FIRE MARSHAL ,
PARKS DIRECTOR
CITY ATTORNEY .
FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING:
STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON MONDAY: �% I
THANKS,
Jane/Sheri/Maureen/Ruben
/
� . Z� �-�..SS ���i�s �
�-
t�.�9ex..�,�p �� �..� ��-,
�� Date of Comments
��. ���P� �y�
��
P�� SS uo P�.��
� 2 , ��sO� �� P�.��ss � � N . N a �.�� �� ��.
Cs�'�.��.�
�. ����
� ��
,, .
5 g�r ���
��� ��.� ��� � a �� � � �
���`v��� e
,.,
AT _ �0� �Q�I�Orh�Q �LV�.
,
ROUTING FORM
DATE:
M-a.� � ( ��I �l
T0: CITY ENGINEER
� CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR
FIRE MARSHAL
PARKS DIRECTOR
CITY ATTORNEY
FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER
SUBJECT: REa.UEST FOR �I.P� �Q.C. f Q,C �QXI�.c.c�` �`[�CNIG�cffls
,-. u
��' !��I r7 a S� F3t�t� C��
AT I O C3 C�' �rC�l F0�.1�1 l P. �D f21�! E
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING:
STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON MONDAY:_� U 1�4 0� , L�� �
THANKS,
Jane/Sheri/Maureen/Ruben
/�
y�
S�
ate of Comments
� �o �� �� �l�a�
�o �n�t�h��r�-., 6-F ar�ui2y3 �'� c�r �r� �
��� �s na� r��� � 6� sry�eD�
/��t� G�p /0 a r K� a� S� �
Gas rh�� rh�s� lo� r��oGi�� �.��o �/��tiaH, ��Ujoe��Y
�... Pr��oer re c D��e� �ysc��s �v5t� be �G�/ec�
C� • �r �'+�l 0�2 I�C��( �B �D+'1 G`aiC d � a �7 0.� S �p✓� E.t�lS �"�� ���'`� �`'rK/�
�J �v as� /
d� Para�v`�- r'�ryrc¢�� /'a/l✓'Da�/' �'��1�'�`�'��
y f d.�t �.y �(iLf�/N � 9v�%�'d � �
�� l�e�jNc° �'�,� SEyara � pG'" � V �
G1� �
i
• Y 11 1 ; 1: I► :►I 1
►I ► 1 D :: Y 1►
I - . �I� � : /' 1.1 • �� . � � -
1fie City of Burlingame by M�Igaret Monroe on 7une 13,1997, completed a review of the proposed
project and determined that:
(X� It will not have a significant effect on the environment
(XX) No Environmental Impact Report is required.
ptpject Descri�tion: The project is construction of a new, four-story, 41,472 SF building for wholesale
automobile parts distribution and a car sales lot for Putnam Buick at 100 California Drive, zoned C-2,
Subarea D. The parcel is located on the east side of California Drive between Howard and Bayswater
Avenues, is 95,040 SF in area (2.18 acres), and is now developed with a car dealership building, a used car
sales and auto detailing building, a service building, and a four-story parking garage which is used to store
inventory from the dealerships and to provide employee and customer parking. The 12,550 SF used car
sales and service building on the, corner of California Drive and Bayswater Avenue is to be demolished as
a part of this project. The auto dealership and service buildings on the corner of California Drive and
Howard Avenue and the parking structure in the center of the lot will remain. The parking garage contains
the required parking spaces for the car dealership, the service building, a parts storage area in the garage
and for an auto dealership located at 3 California Drive. The required parking for these uses (85 spaces)
is located on the fourth floor of the parking gazage. The applicant is providing five parking spaces for the
new building. The required parking for the building is 46 spaces (39,705 SF of warehouse at 1 space per
1000 SF = 40 spaces; 1767 SF of car sales office at 1 space per 300 SF = 6 spaces). The applicant is
requesting a parking variance for 5 spaces where 46 spaces is the minimum required. Special pernuts ar�e
required for the auto parts distribution use and for a building 42'-0" tall where 35'-0" is the maximum height
allowed.
Reasons for Conclusion: This project is consistent with the General Plan. Fxcept as noted above, all
zoning code requirements have been met through the project design. Referring to the initial study for
all other facts supporting findings, it is found that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment, if the mitigations included in the initial study are met.
�i� f� _
Signature of Processing Official
� ���
Title
` �s
Date Signed
Unless appealed within 10 days hereof the date posted, the determination shall be final.
Date posted: �� �3, �i'`l,
�
5 ''
Negative Declaration
100 California Drive
Declaration of Posting
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am City Clerk of the City of Burlingame and that I posted a true
copy of the above Negative Declaration at the City Hall of said City near the doors to the Council
Chambers. __._
Executed at Burlingame, California o , 1997.
A_gg�aled: ( ) Yes� � No . ,
A MALFATTI, CtT�''"¢'�ERK, CITY OF BURLINGAME
E
INITIAL STUDY SUMMARY - ENVIItONMENTAL CHECKLIST
100 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
Project Title: Construction of a four-story, 41,472 SF wholesale automobile parts distribution
building and car sales lot
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Burlingame, Planning Department
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Margaret Monroe, City Planner
(415)696-7250
4. Project Location: Parcel with an address of 100 California Drive, Burlingame, California
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Ronald Moms, Morris Engineering
104 El Camino Rea1
San Carlos, CA 94070
6. General Plan Designation: Commercial, Service and Special Sales
7. Zoning: C-2, Subarea D
APN: 029-233-080
8. Description of the Project: The project is construction of a new, four-story, 41,472 SF buiIding
for wholesale automobile parts distribution and caz sales for Putnam Buick at 100 California Drive,
zoned C-2, Subazea D. The parcel is located on the east side of California Drive between Howard
and Bayswater Avenues, is 95,040 SF in area, and is now developed with a car dealership building,
a used car sales and auto detailing building, a service building, and a four-story parlcing garage
which is used to store inventory from the dealerships and to provide employee and customer
parking. The 12,550 SF used car sales and service building on the comer of California Drive and
Bayswater Avenue is to be demolished as a part of this project. The auto dealership and service
buildings on the corner of California Drive and Howard Avenue and the parking structure in the
center of the lot will remain. The parking garage contains the required parking spaces for the car
dealership, the service building, a parts storage area in the garage and for an auto dealership located
at 3 California Drive. The required parking for these uses (85 spaces) is located on the fourth floor
of the parking garage. The applicant is providing five parking spaces for the new building. The
required parking for the building is 46 spaces (39,705 SF of warehouse at 1 space per 1000 SF =
40 spaces; 1767 SF of car sales office at 1 space per 300 SF = 6 spaces). The applicant is
requesting a parking variance for 5 spaces where 46 spaces is the minimum required. Special
permits are required for the auto parts distribution use and for a building 42'-0" tall where 35'-0"
is the maximum height allowed.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The site is surrounded by other auto-related commercial buildings. The surrounding area is planned
for service and special sale commercial, and is zoned C-2, Subarea D. Subarea D is the auto row
commercial area, which encourages auto-related uses.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: A permit will be required from the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District for demolition of the existing structure. The applicant shall
coordinate with the San Mateo County Health Department regarding ongoing remediation for
underground storage tanks.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTlALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one im act that is a"Potentiall Si 'ficant Im act" as indicated b the checklist on the followin a es.
Land use and Planning Biological Resources X Aesthetics
Population and Housing Energy and Mineral Cultural Resources
Resources
Geological Problems Hazards Recreation
Water X Noise Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Air Quality Public Services ` , :
Transportation and Utilities and Service ' ` ' ` ; ``' ~ �":`: :
st
X Circulation S ems
y
DETERD�TATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency).
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COiTLD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added X
to the project A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1)
has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has beea
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is
a"Potentially 5igcuficant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL
IIvIPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WII.L NOT
be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed in an earlier
EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,
including revisions or mitigation measures that ere imposed upon the proposed project.
Mazgaret onroe, City Planner
���,�.�. l3� ��
Date .
s
Issues and Supporting Information Sources so,�,r� PotentlaDy ro�naeny �.� No
Si�niHcant Si�niflcant Si�niBcant Impact
Issues Unless Imp�ct
� MiHQaHon
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 1,2 X
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted
by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? 1 X
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? 1 X
d) A$ect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or 1 X
farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established 3 X
community (including a low-income or minority community)7
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections? 3 X
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either direcdy or indirectly
(e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or major 1,3 3�
infrastructure7
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing7 3 X
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or ezpose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? 5,7 X
b) Seismic ground shakingT 5,7 X
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? 6>7 X
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? 1 X
e) Landslides or mudflows? 6 X
fl Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill? 1,7 X
g) Subsidence of the land? 1>6 X
h) Expansive soils? 6,7 X
n Unique geologic or physical features? 5,9 X
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources PotentieDy Potentlal�y Less TLsn No
SI�niIIcant SI�tBcsnt SI�IHcaut Impaet
Issues Ualese Impoct
Mlti�aHon
Incorporated
4. WATER Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff'l 12 X
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as
flooding? 12 X
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water 1 X
quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity7
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body7 1 X
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? 1 X
fl Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by 1 X
cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater
recharge capability7
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? 1 X
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? 1 X
n Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise
available for public water supplies? 1 X
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the prnposal:
a) Violate any sir quality standard or contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation7 1 X
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants 1 X
c) Alter sir movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change
in climate? 1 X
d) Create objectionable odorsT 1 X
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? 1 X
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm 1 X
equipment)?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? 8 X
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? 8 X
e) Hazards or bairiers for pedestrians or bicyclists7 8 X
fl Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative
transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)7 1,8 X
Issues and Supporting Information Sources ��� Potentlally PotentlaDy �,.� No
si�s��c sc��t s���t ��,,,�,M
Isaues Unless Lnpaet
Mtd�atlon
Incorpotated
g) Rail, waterbome or sir traffic impacts7 1 X
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including 1 X
but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals or birds)?
b) Locally designated species (e.g, heritage trees)? 1 X
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal
habitat, etc.)7 1 X
d) Wefland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool? 1 X
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration comdors? 1 X
8. ENERGY AND MIIVERAL RESOURCES. Would the prnposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plansT 1 X
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? 1 X
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
would be of future value to the region and the residents of the 1 X
State7
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or 1,8 X
radiation)7
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? I 1 X
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard7 1 X
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards7 1 X
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass of trees7 1 X
10. NOLSE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels? 1 X
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels7 1 X
11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal Lave an et%ct upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government aervices in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? 1,11 X
b) Police protection? 1 X
c) Schools7 1 X
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads7 1 X
Issues and Supporting Information Sources sa�� Potentially Potentlally �Tn� No
SlPniticsnt SlgniBcant SignlBcant lmpsct
Issues Unless Lqpact
MIHYatlon
Incorporated
e) Other govemmental services7 1 X
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the pmposal result in a need for new syatems or'uppliea, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas7 1,8 X
b) Communications systems? 1,8 X
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities7 1,8 X
d) Sewer or septic tanks and water supply7 1 X
e) Storm water drainageT 1 X
fl Solid waste disposal? 1,8 X
g) Local or regional water supplies7 1,8 x
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposai:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? 1 X
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? 8 X
c) Create light or glare? 8 X
d) Block views from adjacent development7 • 1,8 X
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources7 1>g X
b) Disturb archaeological resources? 1,8 X
c) Affect historical resources? 1,8 � X
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values7 1,9 R
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area? 1,8 X
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other
recreational facilities? 1,8 X
b) Affect e�tisting recreational opportwuties? 1,8 X
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGIVIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sastaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, 1 - X
r�educe the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory7
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-tern►, to the 1 X
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable7 ("Cumulatively considerable" means that
the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in 1 X
connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable fuhue projects)
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, eitl:er directly or 1 X
indirectly?
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING SUMMARY: The General Plan designates this site for special sales
and service commercial use. The C-2, Subarea D zoning places a priority among C-2 uses on automobile
sales and service. The proposed automobile parts distribution facility is proposed to replace Putnam's
Wholesale Parts Department located at 925 Bayswater Avenue, at Anita Road. The distribution center is
an in-house operation which supplies parts to Pumam's automobile facilities throughout the Peninsula. The
C-2, Subarea D does not list a wholesale distribution center as a permitted use. A special pernut is required
for uses which are similar in character to other C-2 uses which will not be obnoxious or detrimental to the
neighborhood in which they are located. The proposed parts distribution center is an auto-related use, and
as long as it is limited to providing parts to Putnam's other facilities, and all related activities including
loading and ofi loading of parts occurs inside the building, it can be considered similar to other uses
pernvtted in the G2 district. The proposed structure is 42-0" in height, and a special permit is also required
for any structure that is more than 35' in height. A parking variance is required for providing 5 parking
spaces where 46 spaces are the minimum number requued.
Mitigation: The applicant shall obtain special pernuts for the automobile parts distribution use and for a
structure 42'-0" in height where 35'-0" is the maximum height allowed. The applicant shall obtain a parking
variance to provide 5 on-site parking spaces where 46 is the minimum required. The automobile display
area shall not exceed 7820 SF as shown on the site plan date stamped 6/11/97.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING SUMMARY: This site and the surrounding axea are planned for
commercial uses, service and special sales. The proposed development conforms to the City of Burlingame
General Plan and Zoning Code regulations and does not represent any alteration to the planned land use
in the area. The project is consistent with the City's Housing Element, since the area is not planned for
residential use.
3. GEOLOGIC SUMMARY: The site is flat and located in an urban setting which has been developed
with commercial uses for about sixty years. There will be less seismic exposure than present, since the
existing building is unreinforced masonry construction, and the new building will be built to current
standards.
Mitigation: The project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995
Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame.
4. WATER SUMMARY: This is a commercial in-fill development project which is not located near or
adjacent to waterways. The site is tied into existing water main and storm water collection distribution lines
with adequate capacity in the system. All of the surface water will be required to have the conect site
drainage to the site. There should be no change in storm water runoff as the site is now primarily covered
with impervious surfaces. This project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program. A
complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted witi� landscape and irrigation plans at time
of permit application.
Mitigation: The project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program. A complete
Imgation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and imgation plans at time of permit
application.
5. AIR QUALITY SUMMARY: This is a 41,472 SF automobile parts distribution building and
automobile sales lot replacing a 12,250 SF automobile sales and service building cunently on the site. The
change in emissions generated as compared to emissions generated by all development in Burlingame is
insignificant. The site is within easy walking distance of County-wide bus and rail service. This parcel is
zoned for commercial use and the proposed project will not create any deterioration in the air quality or
climate, locally or regionally. The demolition of the existing structure will require a permit from Bay Area
Au' Quality Management District and will need to comply with the district's requirements for dust control.
Mitigation: The applicant shall obtain a pernut from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District for
demolition of the existing structure.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION SIJMMARY; The e�sting auto sales use of the site is
expected to generate about 355 vehicle trips per day (VTD). The proposed 39,705 SF automobile parts
distribution facility (wazehouse) is expected to generate about 200 VTD, and the proposed 1767 SF used
caze sales facility is expected to generate about 88 VT7�, for a total of 288 VTD to the site. This represents
a reduction in vehicle trips generated of about 67 trips per day. Therefore, the change in use is not expected
to create a substantial increase in the traffic generation in the azea. All arterial, collector, and local roadway
systems have the capacity to accommodate the traf�c or trip generation produced by this project. There
will be additional truck traffic to the site to deliver and pick up parts to be distributed to other dealerships.
The applicant proposes two roll-up doors along Bayswater Avenue, and delivery trucks will be able to pull
into the building to load and unload. There is room for three trucks to park inside the building for loading
and unloading.
Mitigation: There shall be no on-street loading or unloading of trucks delivering or picking up parts or
merchandise, or the applicant shall obtain approval from the Tra,ffic, Safety and Parking Commission for
an on-street loading zone on Bayswater Avenue. If approved, the applicant's use of this area for deliveries
to the parts warehouse shall be limited to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., and the loading zone shall
be mazked with a 30-minute time limit for loading and unloading; no car carriers shall use the loading zone
or shall load or unload in any public street.
6. (d) PARI�NG SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a parking variance to provide 5 on-site
parking spaces where 46 spaces are the minimum required for these new uses. The 40 on-site parking
spaces required for the other uses on the site, and the 25 spaces required for the auto dealership at 3
California Drive are provided on the fourth floor of the parking garage. The parking requirement for the
39,705 SF of auto parts storage is 40 spaces (1 space for each 1000 SF of floor area), and the parking
requirements for the 1767 SF car sales office area is 6 spaces (1 space for each 300 SF of floor area). The
applicant has stated that the current sta$ng of the existing wholesale parts facility on Bayswater and Anita
Road is two full-time employees, and the staffing is expected to be the same at the new facility. The
existing used car department now located in the building to be demolished is staffed by 5 salespeople and
a manager, for a total of 8 employees working on this part of the site. This staff is to be relocated to the
used car sales facility in the new building. The applicant has stated that the employees of the used car sales
facility will drive dealership cars from current inventory and they will park them in the parking garage. The
applicant states that the five parking spaces shown in front of the new building will be sui�icient for
customer parking. .
Mitigation: All employees of the parts distribution facility and car sales lot, a total of 8, sha11 park in
designated spaces in the adjacent parking garage.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SUNIlVIARY: This project is replacing a structure of similar intensity
and will not alter any existing animal habitats in the area. There are no record of rare or endangered plant
or animal species for this developed urban site. No native plant life exists on site. Any indigenous plan
species located on this property have been introduced by previous uses. This proposal will be required to
meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance to landscape car sales lots and the Tree Protection and
Reforestation Ordinance passed by the City of Burlingame in 1993 and enforced by the Parks Department.
New trees required by the Pazks Director will not alter the diversity or number of species of plant life in the
area. There is no farmland in Burlingame.
Mitigation: This proposal is required to meet the Tree Protection and Reforestation Ordinance passed by
the City of Burlingame in 1993 and enforced by the Parks Department.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES SUMMARY: All gas and electric services are in place
with capacity to handle the addition of this development to the City of Burlingame. The incremental use
of energy is insignificant; the new structure will comply with Title 24 requirements, while the structure
removed were built before these requirements.
9. HAZARDS SUMMARY: This project has been proposed within all applicable zoning regulations,
except for the variance required for the building height. This project will not be releasing any hazardous
materials into the environment and will not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans the
City of Burlingame may need to implement. According to the San Mateo County Health Department
records, there was an underground gasoline storage tank located under the existing parking garage which
has been removed. The site is under remediation, and is being monitored by the Health Department. The
applicant and property owner need to coordinate with the County Health Department regarding how the
project will impact the remediation plan. The Health Department advises that if any monitoring wells are
to be placed on this portion of the site, their placement should occur after the demolition of the building.
The Uniform Building and Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame will ensure that people in the
new structure are not exposed to health hazards or potential health hazards.
Mitigation: The applicant and property owner shall coordinate with the San Mateo County Health
Department to ensure that this project does not impact ongoing remediation on the site.
10. NOISE SUNIlVIARY: The project is adjacent to the main line commute Caltrain railroad tracks. The
new building will be constructed on the side of the property closest to these tracks. The height of the
building will act as a bamer to the noise from the trains. The new proposal will not increase the existing
ambient noise levels because it is replacing structures of similaz use with compliance to current construction
standards. A condition of approval of this proposal shall be that a public address system for the car sales
lot shall be prohibited. All construction must abide by the construction hours established by the municipal
code.
Mitigation: There sha11 be no outdoor public address or amplification system used on the site for any
purpose. All construction must abide by the construction hours establi'shed by the municipal code.
11. PUBLIC SERVICES SUMMARY: All existing public and governmental services in the area have
capacities which can accommodate the addition of the propbsed project.
12. iTT�TI'IFS AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SUMMARY: All new utility connections to serve the site
and which are affected by the development will be installed to meet cunent code standards and diameter;
sewer laterals will be checked and replaced if necessary. Abandoned utilities and hookups will be removed.
Mitigation: All new utility connections to serve the site and which are a.i�ected by the development will
be installed to meet current code standards and diameter; sewer laterals will be checked and replaced if
necessary. Abandoned utilities and hookups will be removed.
m
13. AESTHETICS SUMIVIARY: The proposed project is replacing currently developed property with
similar intensity of use. In this particular location the land is flat and the area fully developed. The 42'-0"
height of the building may have a minor impact on distant views or vistas compazed with the required 3 5'-0"
height limit. By complying with the same requirements as applied to other structures in the area this
building has been designed in a manner that is consistent with the size and mass of the area. The existing
building to the north of the site is a four-story parking structure which is 35'-0" in height. The site is
bordered on the east by the Caltrain railroad tracks, on the south by Bayswater Avenue, and on the west
by California Drive. Other buildings along California Drive are typically one and two sfory commercial
buildings. The proposed 42'-0" height of this structure will be offset some by the fact that it has a 108'
setback from California Drive where the adjacent 35'-0" tall parking structure is setback only 30 feet. The
setbacks along California Drive in the vicinity of this proposal vary from buildings directly on the sidewalk
to auto dealership buildings behind car display areas. The front of the building facing California Drive will
primarily consist of glazing, with 11 rows of windows. Three of the rows will consist of opaque panels to
match the adjacent parldng deck, and two of the rows will be clear glazing. The remaining six rows, close
to the top of the building, will consist of mirrored glass. This may result in an increase in glare from on-site
onto California Drive. Due to the 108' setback of the building from California Drive, and the orientation
of the building, any glare from direct sunlight reflecting off the glass is not expected to reach California
Drive. Therefore, the mirrored windows do not present a traffic hazard. All on-site illumination will be
required to use shielded lighting fixtures.
Mitigation: All on-site illumination including the car sales lot lighting sha11 be shielded and directed only
on to the site.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES SUMMARY: The site involved in this project has been developed in
commercial use for many years prior to this proposal. The project will not include extensive grading or
digging. Any archeological or historic, cultural, or ethnic sites which may have been in or near these
locations were disturbed or destroyed by previous development prior to this proposal. Should any cultural
resources be discovered during construction, work will be halted until they are fully investigated.
15. RECREATION SUMMARY: The proposed project does not replace or destroy any existing
recreational facilities, nor does it displace any proposed or planned recreational opportunities for the City
of Burlingame. The site involved in this project is not zoned or used for recreational uses.
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES:
The applicant shall obtain special permits for the automobile parts distribution use and for a structure
42'-0" in height where 35'-0" is the maximum height allowed.
2. The applicant shall obtain a parking variance to provide 5 on-site parking spaces where 46 is the
minimum required. �-
3. The automobile display area shall not exceed 7820 SF as shown on the site plan date stamped
6/11/97.
4. The project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995 edition,
as amended by the City of Burlingame.
m
�
5. The project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program. A complete Irrigation
Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit
application.
6. The applicant shall obtain a pernut from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District for demolition
of the existing structure.
7. There shall be no on-street loading or unloading of trucks delivering or picking up parts or
merchandise, or the applicant shall obtain approval from the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission
for an on-street loading zone on Bayswater Avenue. If approved, the applicant's use of this azea for
deliveries to the parts warehouse sha11 be limited to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., and the
loading zone shall be marked with a 30-minute time limit for loading and unloading; no car carriers
shall use the loading zone or shall load or unload in any public street.
All employees of the parts distribution facility and car sales lot shall park in the adjacent parking
garage.
9. This proposal is required to meet the Tree Protection and Reforestation Ordinance passed by the City
of Burlingame in 1993 and enforced by the Parks Department.
10. The applicant and property owner shall coordinate with the San Mateo County Health Department
to ensure that this project does not impact ongoing remediation on the site.
11. There shall be no outdoor public address or amplification system used on the site for any purpose.
12. All construction must abide by the construction hours established by the municipal code.
13. All new utility connections to serve the site and which are affected by the development will be
installed to meet current code standards and diameter; sewer laterals will be checked and replaced
if necessary. Abandoned utilities and hookups will be removed.
14. All on-site illumination including the car sales lot lighting shall be shielded and directed only on to the
site.
15. Should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work will be halted until they are
fully investigated, and appropriate methods of removal determined by appropriate professionals
acceptable to the City.
�2
n
18. SOURCE REFERENCES
1 The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
2 City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 25 - Zoning, Burlingame, California, 1995 edition.
3 City of Burlingame City Council, Housing Element, Ciry of Burlingame, Burlingame, California, 1994.
4 1990 Census
5 Departrnent of the Interior, U. S. Geological Survey, San Francisco Bay Region, Sheet 3, 1:125,000, Revised 1981.
6 E. Brabb, E. Pampeyan, and M. Bonilla, Landslide Susceptibility in San Mateo County, San Mateo County, California, 1972.
7 Perkins, Jeanne, Maps Showing Cumulative Damage Potential from Earthquake Ground Shaking, U.S.G.S. Map MF, San
Mateo County: Califomia, 1987.
8 May 28, 1997 plans, Sheets A-1 through A-6, Site Plan, Floor Plans and Elevations.
9 Engineering Memo dated June 2, 1997.
10 Chief Building Inspector Memo dated June 2, 1997. .
11 Fire Department Memo dated June 2, 1997 regarding sprinklers and fire alarm system.
12 Map ofApproximate Locations of 100 yearFloodAreas, from the National Flood Insurance Program Flood Insurance Maps,
September 16, 1981 iooca��fis
�
13
- - MORRIS ENGINEERING
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
June 27, 1997
Project No. 97024
[File: 97024-2]
Ms. Maureen Brooks
Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Subject: Variance Application:
New Wholesale Parts Distribution Facility & Used Car Sales
100 California Drive, Burlingame
Dear Ms. Brooks,
I�E�EI�'��
JUN 3 0 1997
CITY OF BURLIN�AME
PLANPIING DEPT.
This letter is in response to your request for additional information regarding our variance application.
Specifically, we would like to further explain our reasons for a parking variance of 34 spaces as well as
address your concerns regarding the operation of the new proposed parts distribution facility.
EXPLANATION OF REQUEST FOR PARKING VARIANCE:
Attached, please find a summary of the required parking spaces for APN 029-233-080. Please note that
the parking ga.rage (addr� a 150 California Drive) is to provide employee parking for the entire parcel as
well as 25 spaces for 3 California Drive. A review of the available documents on file at the Planning
Department agrees with the calculated required spaces. There is no record of any parking agreement, or
designated parking spaces for 100 California Drive.
Please understand that our request for a parking variance is not an effort to avoid providing employee
parking spaces. Specifically it is because the City of Burlingame does not have a parking ratio designed
for the proposed use. As an example, the County of San Mateo provides for similar use a ratio of 1
parking space per 6000 sf. Based on the actual number of employees projected to work at this facility (6
used car sales and 2 parts distribution facility), 8 parking spaces are being designated for employee parking
within the garage structure. In addition, 5 spaces + 1 handicap spaces are being provided in front of the
new facility for customer parking.
Enclosed, please find "demonstrator agreements" for the six cunent employees for the used car facility at
100 California Drove. It is the policy of Putnam Buick, Pontiac, and GMC Truck to provide sales
automobiles to their employees. The six used car employees drive home autos for sale and return them to
the sales lot the following morning. Therefore, although 8 spaces are being provided for the proposed new
facility, at most 2 will be used.
l04 EL CAMINO REAL, SAN CARLOS, CA 94070, (415) 595-2973, FAX (415) 595-2980
June 27, 1997
Page 2 of 3
Finally, there are 385 parking spaces in the existing parking garage. This garage is used for the storage
of new and used car inventory. Assigning spaces to be used for employee parking only directly impacts
the number of cars which may be stored within the facility. As seen on our drawing A7, we are
designating 79 spaces + 3 HCP on the fourth floor of the parking garage. This essentially eliminates
almost 25% of the available garage structure for new and used car inventory. We have not made an effort
to evaluate the actual number of employees for 150 and 198 California Drive (Saturn Dealership is not
owned by J.P. Property and employee count etc. is privileged information), however we strongly believe
that the parking ratios for the type of use are significantly greater than the actual employee count.
EXPLANATION OF DELIVERIES FOR NEW WHOLESALE PARTS DISTRIBUTION FACII.ITY:
The new Wholesale Parts Distribution Facility will provide for storage of parts for both GMC (33,712 sf.)
and Toyota (4,883 sf.) dealerships. The schedule of deliveries is that GMC receives one shipment a day
between the hours of 6 a. m. and 10 a. m. Monday thru Friday. Toyota receives at most one shipment a
day in the evening hours. Because this distribution facility provides parts for Putnam dealerships only,
there will be at most 5 outgoing deliveries in the morning and 5 in the after noon (right after lunch).
Therefore the maximum total number of deliveries per day is 12 (2 incoming and 10 outgoing). All five
delivery trucks are parked in the parking lot on the corner of Bayswater and Anita (see enclosed map).
EXPLANATION OF PROJECTED 11 CUSTOMERS PER DAY WITH A MAXIMUM OF 10
PEOPLE ON SITE AT ONE TIME FOR BOTH ACTIVITIES:
The used car dealership has a very detailecl tracking system for the number of customers which visit the
site as well as the number of autos sold. The following is a summary of the number of customers for the
iirst four months of 1997:
January 1997: 244 customers
February 1997: 218 customers
March 1997: 220 customers
April 1997: 240 customers
30 days (closed New Years Day)
28 days
30 days (closed Easter)
30 days
8. lcustomers/day
7.8customers/day
7.3customers/day
8.Ocustomers/day
As previously explained, it is projected that the maximum number of employees at any one time will be
7(maximum number of employees during the weekday or weekend day). The maximum number of
people on site at any one time is believed to be 10, assuming 3 customers on site at any one time.
EXPLANATION OF LOADING AND UNLOADING USED CARS:
Please note that Putnam Dealerships have been allowed to load and unload cars on the abandoned railway
spur adjacent to their auto repair facility located on Bayswater (see enclosed map). No on-street loading
or unloading of used cars will be required.
7une 27, 1997
Page 2 of 3
EXPLANATION OF HEIGHT OF EXISTING GARAGE STRUCTURE:
The existing garage structure is 34'-0" in height with the penthouse exceeding the height by 5 ft. (allowed
because less than 5% of the building area). Enclosed, please find our drawing A8 showing a perspective
of the new building viewed from California Drive (heading north).
EXPLANATION OF THE PROJECTED USE OF THE EXISTING AlvITA/PENINSULA FACII.ITY:
Due to Environmental Protection Agency requirements, new paint spray booths are required for the
automobile repair facility (which currently shares space with the existing distribution facility). The planned
use is to convert the existing storage area into more space for the current automobile repair facility.
If we can be of any assistance, or answer any further questions regarding this variance request, please call.
Sincerely,
MORRIS ENGINEERING
;"� .
� LrZ�c�
.,
Ronald G. Morris, P.E.
- - MORRIS ENGINEERING
1206
1792
7740
PARKING SUMMARY - PARCEL # 029-233-080
ADDRESS
(Calif. Dr.)
198
DESCRIPTION
AREA
(st�
Main Building
First Floor Show Room
First Floor O�ces
Second Floor Offices
Service Building
Service & Parts Storage
Office Area
2449
1952
1952
3752
600
150 Parking Garage
O�ces
Storage
Front Display Area*
K]
100
Notes
Per Agreement with City of Burlingame 9-17-96
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
PARHING
RATIO
1/600
1/300
1 /300
SPACES
REQ'D.
5
7
7
1/800 5
1/300 2
Total 26
(Provide 26 + 1HC)
1/300 4
1 /800 3
1/600 13
Total 20
(Provide 20 + 1HC)
Total 25
(Provide 25)
Proposed New Wholesale Parts Distribution Facility
Offices 1767 1/300 6
Parts Storage 38595 1/1000 40**
Total 46
(Provide 12 + 1HC)
* Represents covered display area in front of existing garage structure (i.e., not actually inside
of garage) aproximately 30 ft. x 258 ft.
** Request parking variance for actual employee count + customers. 8 employee parking
spaces (6 used car sales + 2 parts distribution facility) provided in garage structure. 5+ 1
HC customer parking spaces provided in front of new building.
104 EL CAMINO REAL, SAN CARLOS, CA 94070, (415) 595-2973, FAX (415) 595-2980
.� r5 . J. Y : �. .. . .. ._ ._.. .. . ;... . .. . .:, .... : . . .' f:
. . ....1.�' Ry i<::.: '�t�° fi, ��,: v -� } a �� ♦.�p +� ,[Ck....oAh�Fyy �j ��9y�i�,�� ��Gj,pLg y� f� �'"' .ch..�'a}�',�k>� ,�-ri:a-,-a» +�t'
; �'��� � ���.����i ��X"'.M �`�.ly���F3. � „'r�"'.s4�'4.� "Ti]'�:<N�1"�"#��.'�a�.'-�.�-. l��r"'�:i)' W� dYSYW. •!li?
/ i
, . 1 r �!.,'!� i. ' �"' : .
. . . �::. ,". � ::; t. u, q j 1 L �. . J � n';• \ � l M r� �'Cf�1 _- _ _" ____ — — -- �. .
. _ . �...., r . . . �,: ..^� . ..
. . . �
.�. . ...:. . . .-� ' �
., �,. ���; . . . . .;:
. .' ..' : . , . . _ . ". t _ . . '.' . �. . �
�� Sn ' .5�� SQ� J�.z• �� .fQ� ��. . I .: - I . . � � ��" � _. �' :';. ,:''.�.
q I.l� , ,/oa ioo sv so so• 40• b so • sc
2 �2� �'l �►� �. �3 . c � . �. � i� �
t _ . . � � 2 A9, �, ,, ., 9 :.: �� ,�;:.,
_ ao
� . r� ��'� �� — 1 � - � , r p � � � 3 �1.
I � 1 . I 6.. �I � �ry :>'
r� ,�.
8 7. 6 5: 4 �'",3 ����� _ �� q ��; g� 7`i ���r 4'� 3
. , ,� :. -o ,i. �•
-� � �
_ I , , -i - - - -` -a � � 9 -1; � �;
� � _ : __ - , �
. ._
- -_- . - � 9Oe ; - N I 0 � , i -. • ; j
.
_.,,�-»_ �;: . � � -�
, - —_ . _. .o— i�p . so• L 5,�• r � 53.5
, . .. _ — —� j-- ' .
_ 200 � —� P I 5°
��. 5� �
. 4�c�j 2 2 :� Z 3�Et.iYE2`f �TZVGK 8� 5;'� -
t� /DO ' _ _ _ W' Q� � � Ph4rt+�iCn 5 =, _ `!' �
I 9
6 I 7 I 8` 1 9 �2 0 a 2 I I� '�` �. � ;_ .�
�
- 920 � � � G� . ,'�� �r3.5
0 g �. � ;-�
13 ��k �tio ��� �•'0 `��`Z �D �', - - fo, ,��
3 33.33 s3.s�' S:�' Sn' S6' SO" � /� s}.
_ � � ,.�► � .� - ��� ' "-S� � �
�� A i� b dF FTrcJ `�5 � P� t'� P ,���� 5g.5� I . 6 � 5 � 4
� �• S 3. 50 ' I ,`�y �
�G.r�• _
i- J : C
53 5�. s� ; i I� 7 n � 4 � �_ _
, , �
� �' 8 j s
� • ;�' �. v� 9 � � � . - ,p' S'
_' � P``' `� ���� s3��° �i %' I� `� I� � �0 c'lsj'
� 5
i/_ J ,,,�� 53.5� �I i �` � � � i i � 3,C, i=
�
_ .�•,' J� 5�. I 4i 9-18.__ ��. �' I 53 5� 5
� -
IT� � J� �
'_�' S3.5� � -. ly 7 �^ I �{ �
_ _ �y.5� � � ��, 2 �� � . I �;'S� R � "
d�
S3 � � 3 I �3 5� � ' � ,.-
, �
.5° I 6 � n Op l _ J07 �
i � �4 � �► �
� � Jr� rj ( , � 5;:5�� 5� 5v � p�, 65 � 3:. � �ot��
I % � `5d S� �D ; . � S j SU� ����2
;� � 5., a� s�s g5. � 3 2
� �
� � �,. 5� �"t� _ � " m � co � � Y
� .sa �� s' S� � ,.• .s3ti? , 5 B �5 � � 4 ° � '�" Y
, �j . � . 53,5� ml�l N � . O ±h \ �
S � , - . p" It� � � er _'GV
. 53'� I °' � �SO�: ss' • �sl�
� �ea �' , S3`s� �� - I � /00• - - — — -
svb - .��' S��o �. � �2 S0- ;;.��5 C � � :
✓ �U. �� �Z _ \ ,� . I o _ _- � . -n.
�
. 5 � •,� a � � � b
50 \,� _ � � ,.3.. �Qo' • o l0(�3
6 �a � __ k-- ; -- � _:, - E� IV �- �
, 1 I
_ 7 i2 5 �� ,� : -� . . � . ,; � �^�
;N ,� ;�t :, o�� Ii12r . . .: �; .� ��IUN 01 7 �
� , f y,� o." o N � o+ . p
N .
. ` a ^ ° : ., ° p o � . __1J ` t: � :. rV ITY OF URLlN AME
�2 . ` /�20: . . .� ` I ' ; _ - � . . 'y P LPQ9� I IVG}� E T: t �o : 1� .
: so : �. so' . so'.: 50' �. 3a'. 60". . :_ So' , ; . S0: :Sa' /00' SO• . 5O, " �n'' ''SU.
�•. , -..;, .. ,. , ._ � s - -- - -
;.C.
� ������tt�������� '� ' -
�__ _� - _- - .R��- AVEt�U'E
�$' iso'i s�'� � so� so• so� .. � �o' ioo� �-;.
.f � �v i I I ' ..�� .�. ! , .7S I % . , ( so • !oo • so• so'
�
BU�CK
�
�,,.�
�
PUTNAM BUICK, PONTIAC, GMC TRUCK
"Home of Red Carpet Service"
P. O. Box 588 900 Peninsula Ave. • Telephone 342-4321
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94011-0588
DEMONSTR.ATOR AGREEMENT
Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is providing a vehicle for you to
use for commuting betweefl home and work. Putnam Buick, Pontiac,
GMC Truck is doing this to provide market exposure for the vehicles
that we sell.
I agree to conform to the following policies for the use of the
vehicle:
1. The vehicle is to be available for demonstration to customers
when the employee is at work. The vehicle is also to be available
for business use.
�
2. The employee is not permitted to use the vehicle for personal
purposes other than commuting and minor personal use, such as a
stop for lunch between two business stops, or a personal errand on
the way home, and not to drive the vehicle over a 50 mile radius
from Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck without management approval.
3. I agree to be responsible for the first $500.00 in damage to
the vehicle whether attended or unattended.
4. I agree to be responsible tor any and ail maintenance of
vehicle while assigned to me.
5. I agree to keep the vehicle clean and available for sale at al1
times, and to keep it free of personal effects.
6• I authorize Putnam Buick Pontiac GMC Truck to deduct from my
pay $75.00 per month for rent of the demonstrator assigned to me.
7. Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is required to include in your
compensation an amount of $1.50 for each one way commute. This
amount will be reflected in your W-2 at the end of the year. The
only documentation that you need to compile is the number of
commutes that you make in the subject vehicle during the year if
the policy is followed.
8. I agree to make a statement, under penalties of perjury, that
the employee has conformed to these conditions at the end of the
year or at termination, whichever occurs earlier.
I agree and understand t terms and conditions listed above.
Signed: � Date: � �
Print e: �' ., ��� _,,
y�` +I
GMC
JUN 3 0 1997
CI7Y OF BURLI�IGAME
PLAN�IING l�EPT.
.
`' O,;
B@ICK
�
PONTIAC
�
PUTNAM BUICK, PONTIAC, GMC TRUCK
"Home of Red Carpet Service"
P. O. Box 588 900 Peninsula Ave. • Telephone 342-4321
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94011-0588
DEMONSTRATOR AGREEMENT
Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is providing a vehicle for you to
use for commuting between home and work. Putnam Buick, Pontiac,
GMC Truck is doing this to provide market exposure for the vehicles
that we sell.
I agree to conform to the following policies for the use of the
vehicle:
1. The vehicle is to be available for demonstration to customers
when the employee is at work. The vehicle is also to be available
for business use.
2. The employee is not permitted to use the vehicle for personal
purposes other than commuting and minor personal use, such as a
stop for lunch between two business stops, or a personal errand on
the way home, and not to drive the vehicle over a 50 mile radius
from Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck without management approval.
3. I agree to be responsible for the first $500.00 in damage to
the vehicle whether attended or unattended.
4. I agree to be responsible for any and all maintenance of
vehicle while assigned to me.
5. I agree to keep the vehicle clean and available for sale at all
times, and to keep it free of personal effects.
6. I authorize Putnam Buick Pontiac GMC Truck to deduct from my
pay $75.00 per month for rent of the demonstrator assigned to me.
7. Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is required to include in your
compensation an amount of $1.50 for each one way commute. This
amount will be reflected in your W-2 at the end of the year. The
only documentation that you need to compile is the number of
commutes that you make in the subject vehicle during the year if
the policy is followed.
8. I agree to make a statement, under penalties of perjury, that
the employee has conformed to these conditions at the end of the
year or at termination, whichever occurs earlier.
I agree d der �and the terms and conditions listed above.
S igned : "' Date : �-�l ( ��
Print Name: L) r•� �, _ RE�E��J��
JUN 3 0 1997
,1-i1 � � CITY OF BURLlf�G,4ME:
W° PLAN�JING DEPT.
BLICK PONTIAC
� +
. �
� BUICK
�
PONTIAC
�
PUTNAM BUICK, PONTIAC, GMC TRUCK
"Home of Red Carpet Service"
P. O. Box 588 900 Peninsula Ave. • Telephone 342-4321
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94011-0588
DEMONSTRATOR AGREEMENT
Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is providing a vehicle for you to
use for commuting between home and work. Putnam Buick, Pontiac,
GMC Truck is doing this to provide market exposure for the vehicles
that we sell.
I agree to conform to the following policies for the use of the
vehicle:
1. The vehicle is to be available for demonstration to customers
when the employee is at work. The vehicle is also to be available
for business use.
2. The employee is not permitted to use the vehicle for personal
purposes other than commuting and minor personal use, such as a
stop for lunch between two business stops, or a personal errand on
the way home, and not to drive the vehicle over a 50 mile radius
from Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck without management approval.
3. I agree to be responsible for the first $500.00 in damage to
the vehicle whether attended or unattended.
4. I agree to be responsible for any and all maintenance of
vehicle while assigned to me.
5. I agree to keep the vehicle clean and available for sale at all
times, and to keep it free of personal effects.
6. I authorize Putnam Buick Pontiac GMC Truck to deduct from my
pay $75.00 per month for rent of the demonstrator assigned to me.
7. Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is required to include in your
compensation an amount of $1.50 for each one way commute. This
amount will be reflected in your W-2 at the end of the year. The
only documentation that you need to compile is the number of
commutes that you make in the subject vehicle during the year if
the policy is followed.
8. I agree to make a statement, under penalties of perjury, that
the employee has conformed to these conditions at the end of the
year or at termination, whichever occurs earlier.
I agre and nde tand the terms and conditions listed above.
Signed Date : / / _ Z�� cr _
Print Name: � �LrQ�? , �R;R�p�4.,� y``1 �E�EIVE�`�
J U N 3 0 1997
� �
sutcx PONnnc �
CITY OF BURLINGAfVIE
PLAN�IING UEPT.
. _ �
�, UICK
�
aoNnnc
�
PUTNAM BUICK, PONTIAC, GMC TRUCK
"Home of Red Carpet Service"
P. O. Box 588 900 Peninsula Ave. • Telephone 342-4321
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94011-0588
DEMONSTATOR AGR�EMENT
0
T O: N A M�O�-��'� O-7►Yl \\ `\� ��,�
Putnam Buick,Pontiac,GMC Truck is providing a vehicle for you
to use for commutiny between home and work. Putnam Buick,
Pontiac, GMC Truck is doing this to provide market exposure for
the vehicles that we sell.
I agree to conform to the following policies for the use of
the vehicle:
1. The vehicle is to be available for demonstation to customers
when the employee is at work, the vehicle is also to be available
for business use.
2. The employee is not permitted to use the vehicle for personal
purposes other than commuting and minor personal use, such as
a stop for lunch between two business stops, or a personal errand
on the way home, and not to drive the vehicle over a 50 mile radius
from Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck without management approval.
3. I agree to be responsible for t}ie first $1000.00 in damage
to vehicle whether attended or unattended.
4. I agree to be res�>c�nsiUile Lvr at►y a�id all maintenance of
vehicle while assiyned to me.
5. I agree to keep vehicle clean and available for sale at all
times, and to keep it free of personal effects.
6. Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is required to include in
your compensation an amount of $1.50 for each one way comute.
This amount�will be reflected in your W-2 at the end of the year.
The only documentation that you need to compile is the number of
commutes that you n�ake iii the subject vehicle during the year
if the policy`is-followed.
7. I agree to make a statement, under penalties of perjury,
that the employee has confo.rmed to these conditions at the end
of the year or at terminaL:i.on, whichever occurs earlier.
I agree and understaiid t11e terms aiid conditions listed above.
Signed: �����V��
Date: -' JUN 3 0 1997
� `� � i,ITY OF SURLINGAIVIE
�9 PLANNING DEPT.
BUICK PONTI4C
.
0
' suicx
� ��
aonn.c
�
PUTNAM BUICK, PONTIAC, GMC TRUCK
Home of Red Carpet Service"
P. O. Box 588 900 Peninsula Ave. • Telephone 342-4321
BURUNGAME, CALJFORNIA 94011-0588
DEMONSTRFITOR AGREEMENT
Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is providing a vehicle for you to
use for commuting between horae and work. Putnam Buick, Pontiac;
GMC Truck is doing this to provide market exposure for the vehicles
that we sell.
.
I agree to conform to the following policies for the use of the
vehicle: .
1. The vehicle is to be available ior demonstration to customers
when the employee is at work. The vehicle is also to be available
for business use.
2. The employee is not permitted to use the vehicle for personal
purposes other than commuting and minar personal use, such as a
stop for lunch between two business stops, or a personal errand on
the way home, anci not to drive the vehicle over a 50 mile radius
from Putnam Buick, Pontiac, Gi�iC Truck without manageraent approval.
3• I agree to be responsible for the first $500.00 in damage to
the vehicle whether attended or unattended.
4• I agree to be responsible for any and al1 maintenance of
vehicle while ass�gned to me. �
�
5• I agree to keep the vehicle clean and available for sale at all
times, and to keep it�free of personai effects.
6• I authorize Putnam Buick Pontiac GkC Truck to deduct from my
paY $75.00 per month for rent oz the demonstrator assigned to me.
7• Putnam Buic?c, Pontiac, G�fC Truck is required to include in your
compensation an amount of $1.50 for each one way commute. This
amount will be reflected in your W-2 at the end of the year. The
only.documentation that you need to compile is the number of
commutes that you make in the subject vehicle during the year if
t�e policy is followed. .
8• I agree to make a statement, under penalties of perjury, that
the employee has conformed to these conditions at the end of the
year or at termination, whichever occurs earlier.
I agree and unde an e terms and conditions listed above.
Signed: .,� Date : - � --� �
��
Print Name: � � � (Z� �'z�s� �3 tN S
� 1
sutcK oonn..c �
� � � I�.:, � V � �
JUN 3 0 1997
CITY OF BURLIfVGAtv�E
PLANNING DEPT.
' � PUTNAM BUICK, PONTIAC, GMC TRUCK
B"'c" "Home of Red Carpet Service"
� P. O. Box 588 900 Peninsula Ave. • Telephone 342-4321
°OMn"� BURLINGAME� CAUFORNIA 94011-0588
� DEMONSTRATOR AGREEMENT
Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is providing a vehicle for you to
use for commuting between home and work. Putnam Buick, Pontiac,
GMC Truck is doing this to provide market exposure for the vehicles
that we sell.
I agree to conform to the following policies for the use of the
vehicle:
1. The vehicle is to be available for demonstration to customers
when the employee is at work. The vehicle is also to be available
for business use.
2. The employee is not permitted to use the vehicle for personal
purposes other than commuting and minor personal use, such as a
stop for lunch between two business stops, or a personal errand on
the way home, and not to drive the vehicle over a 50 mile radius
from Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck without management approval.
3• I agree to be responsible for the first $500.00 in damage to
the vehicle whether attended or unattended.
4• I agree to be responsible for any and all maintenance of
vehicle while assigned to me.
5• I agree to keep the vehicle clean and available for sale at all
times, and to keep it free of personal effects.
6. I authorize Putnam Buick Pontiac GM_C Truck to deduct from my
Pay $75.00 per month for rent of the demonstrator assigned to me.
7. Putnam Buick, Pontiac, GMC Truck is required to include in your
compensation an amount of $1.50 for each one way commute. This
amount will be reflected in your W-2 at the end of the year. The
only.documentation that you need to compile is the number of
commutes that you make in the subject vehicle during the year if
the policy is followed.
8• I agree to make�a statement, under penalties of perjury, that
the employee has conformed to these conditions at the end of the
year or at termination, whichever occurs earlier.
I agree and
Signed:
Print Name:
� �
su[cx po�n.ac �
tand the terms
{u 1 �
and conditi ns listed above.
Date : � �,
� t� f�( �=�) ��
JUN 3 0 1997
CITY OF BURLINGA�vit
FLANf�11NG DEPT.
- - MORRIS ENGINEERING
Ms. Maureen Brooks
Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Subject: Variance Application:
New Wholesale Parts Distribution Facility & Used Car Sales
100 California Drive, Burlingame
Dear Ms. Brooks,
June 27, 1997
Project No. 97024
[File: 97024-4]
� �� � � a/ � �,o.�'
JUN 3 0 1997
CITY 0�" BURLf�vGk�Vj�
PLAN�JING L�EPT.
This letter is in response to items 7 and 11 of the conditions identified in the Negative Declaration
presented at the study meeting on 6/23/97.
Item 7: "Ttiere shall be no on-street loading or unloading of trucks delivering or picking up
parts or merchandise by customers or employees of the various Putnam
dealerships."
The proposed facility has been designed with (3) overhead doors on Bayswater and a first floor ceiling
height of 10 ft. to accommodate the loading and unloading of parts. However, the maximum size of
the largest delivery truck which delivers parts from GMC (one delivery per day between 6:00 a. m. and
10:00 a.m. - approximately 15 minutes to unload) cannot be unloaded inside the new building. We have
asked Keith Dellaway (City of Burlingame Traffic Civil Engineer) for a loading zone to be designated
in front of the new facility on Bayswater. This loading zone will accommodate the one delivery from
GMC so that traffic will not be impeded.
Item 11: "There shall be no outdoor public address or amplification system used on the site
for an purpose."
Although there presently is no public address system at 100 California, we respectively request that this
restriction not be a condition for granting the variance request. It is common within the automobile
sales industry to use public address systems since the sales area is outside. We believe that by restricting
the use of a public address system, when it is common practice by other auto dealerships along auto row
to use these systems, we could be placed at a competitive disadvantage. Please note that 100
104 EL CAMINO REAL, SAN CARLOS, CA 94070, (415) 595-2973, FAX (4] 5) 595-2980
June 27, 1997
Page 2 of 2
California Drive has been zoned for automobile sales and related services and is currently bordered on
all sides by commercial property (unlike other neighboring dealerships), and we believe that a public
address system would not present a significant disturbance to the surrounding community.
If we can be of any assistance, or answer any further questions regarding this variance request, please
call.
Sincerely,
MORRIS ENGINEERING
�l�C�����
�
Ronald G. Morris, P.E.
.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
euRu� ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT
�501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
TEL: (415) 696-7250
10(? CALIFORNiA nRIVE APN:Oz9-233fi�0
s
Applicadon far a negative declaration, spc;cial
pemuts and parldng variance for an auta parts P U B L I C H E A R I N G
distribution facility and car sales lot at 100 N OTI C E
Calitorni$ Drlve, zoned C-2, Subarea D.
The City of Burlingame planning Comrnission
e,nnolmoee the follnwing publio heariug on
Monday. Julv 14 1997 at 7:00 P.M, in the City
Hall Couacil Chambers located at 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingeme, California.
Mailed Taly 3. 1997
(Please refer to other side)
CITY OF B URLINGAME
A copy of the application and plans'for this project may be reviewed prior
to the meeting at the Planning Department at 501 Primrose Road,
Burlingame, California.
If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to
raising only tt�ose issues you or sorr►eone else raised at the public hearing,
described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city
at or prior to t�e public hearing.
Property c
tenants ab
696-7250.
Mazgaret Mi
City Planner
rs who receive this notice are responsible fvr ��forming their
this notice. , For additional informatron, p1e�;se call (415)
ank you
��� F
s F
•W � F�
F, -� w°;�;��°'
PUBL�C°`HEARING NOTICE
(Please refer to other side)
Burlingame Planning CammLssion M�utes luly I4, I997
�. Deal stated that looking at the new project, it is an improvement, understand the desire not to cantilever
the building , but the solutiori works, offers parldng and satisfies requireme�ts. C. Deal then made a motion
to an�nrove the condo ''um permit, by resolution, and recommended a�proval of the tentative map, subject
to conditions in staff eport as follows; 1) that the project shall be b�ilt as shown on the plans submitteii to
the Planning Dep ` ent date stamped 7uly 2, 1997, sheets A1 th gh A8, sheet L1, and Vesting Tentative
and Final Parcel Map sheet 1 of 1(date stamperl7uly 2, 199 , 2) that lot coverage shall not exceed 50 %
of the lot azea�d any increase in the`-lot azea will require a�i amendment to the Condominium Permit and
Tentative Ma �'and a variance from the Planning Commis�ion; 3) that the maximum elevation at the top of
the roof ridge shall not exceed elevation 34'-9" as mea}sured from the average elevation at the top of the curb
along Lorton Avenue (36.65�), and that the top o�k"each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed and
approved by the City Engi�eer as the framing p�ceeds and prior to final framing and roofing inspections.
Should�any framing exceecl the stated elevatio�'�at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that the final
height of the structure ;riuith roof shall not e eed the ma�cimum height shown on the approved plans; 4) that
the conditions of the ``Chief Building Of , ial's June 2, 1997 memo and the Fire Marshal's June 2, 1997
memo shall be met;� `5) that one (1) gue parking stall (9'x21') shall be designated at the rear of the site and
rilarked on the fi�1a1 map and plans, all not be assigned to any unit, but shall be owned and maintained by
�the condomini � association, an e guest stall shall not be enclosed; 6) that the final inspeetion shall be
completed 3 a certificate of o upancy issued before the close of escrow on the sale of eaeh unit; '� that
the develo er shall provide : e initial purchaser of each unit and to the board o£ directors of the
condomi um association, owner purchaser manual which shall contain the narn�' and address of all
contrac rs who perform work on the project, copies of all warranties or guar . ees of appliances and
,:
fixtur s and the estimat � life expectancy of all depreciable component parts of � property, including but
not mited to the roo painting, common area carpets, dra�s and furnitur ) that the on grade parking
g ges shall be de gned to city s�andards and shall be managed and , aintained by the condominium
association to pro de parking at no additional fee, solely for the condominium owners, and no portion of
any parking ar and the egress aisles shall be converted to any other,..use or any support activity such as
storage or u'` es; 9) that the trash receptacles, furnaces, and water heaters shall be shown in a legal
eompartmen utside the required parlcing an�:landscaping and in;conformance with zoning and California
Building Fire Code requirements befor � building permit i�- issued; 10) that theproject shall meet the
require ts of the M�unicipal Code C pter 15.14 Storm. Water Management and Discharge CoMtrol
inclu ' g the Storm'Water PollutionF revention guidelin�s; and 11) the this�,project shall mee ;�all the
r ements of t�ie California Buildin and Fire C es 1995 edition �}
g qd , ,�s amended by t. r City of
lingame. °' '`'
���
��
,, _ +��¢:
The motio as seconded by . Wellford and w passed on a voi �°�ote 6-0-1 (C. M k absent). The
Chairm , dvised the app li�of the appeal ri : s and procedure.�
APPLICATION FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMITS AND PARKING VARIANCE
�FOR AN AUTO PARTS DISTRIBUTION FACILITY AND CAR SALES LOT AT 100 CALIF012NIA
DRIVE, ZONED, G2, SUBAREA D, (PUTNAM BUICK-PONTIAGGMC TRUCK, APPLICANT AND
7: P. PROPERTY. L.L.C.. PROPERTY OWNERI
Reference staff report, 7.14.97, with attachments. Planner Brooks discussed the request, reviewed criteria,
Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Sixteen conditions were recommended for
consideration. �
-12-
Burlingame Planning Cammission Minutes
July l4, 1997
Chairman Key opened the public hearing. Ron Morris, Morris Engineering, 7oe Putnam and Rick Corso,
Putnam Buick, Pontiac and GMC Truck, applicants were available for comments. Mr. Morris stated that
the ��arking issue is confusing, but is clarified in staff report. The building to be removed is Unreinforced
Masonry, could retrofit building, but it would still not be up to cunent code. New building will enhance
property, will blend with look of adjacent garage. C. Deal noted that the code requires 46 parking spaces,
plan is to provide, 13, why? Rick Corso responded that this will not be a full service dealership, no service
work, just used car sales. There aze only two employees for the parts warehouse on-site. There will be 5-
6 sales people, and they drive company cars and park on site. C. Deal stated that the new building would
have 40,000 SF of warehouse, code requires 1 space per 1000 SF, asked applicant to address why this
requirement is not needed. Mr. Morris stated that other cities have a different code requirement for bulk
warehousing of 1 space per 6000 SF, notes that there is no usage by general public. C. Deal asked if
consideration had been given to ramping from parking structure to roof of new structure for additional
parking? Mr. Morris stated that this had been considered, but there is a 14' difference in height and it is
not feasible. C. Galligan stated that normally if a property doesn't have enough space, then it can't support
the use. This case is a request to make a determination that use doesn't relate to the formulas in the code.
Asked CA if this is the essence of request, is a variance the proper vehicle. CA outlined options, including
code amendment, stated variance request could be tied to the use with a limited number of employees, and
the variance could be limited to stay only as long as the use stays. Joe Putnam requested the Commission
consider changes to the conditions, specifically last part of Condition No. 9 which states no loading or
unloading of car carriers in the public street, and No. 13, that there shall be no outdoor public address
system. Stated that none of the other dealerships have such prohibition, but some have limits on hours and
noise levels, would agree to such regulation.
Commission discussion: has the applicant considered using pagers. Mr. Putnam stated that it had been
considered but was costly compared to speakers. Stated other dealerships have speakers, seems inequitable
to prohibit; asked about the gro.und floor plan, is there area in the building for dropping off and picldng up
materials; Mr. Moms indicated yes; further clarification of site plan; Mr. Morris responded noting the used
car display sales azea; conflict with the parldng variance for 30+ cars, building could be made smaller;
asked if car carriers could load and unload on site; Mr. Putnam responded that car carriers are 60' long and
would require a huge turnaround, if make such requirement it should apply to all properties; asked if they
have a lease for the spur line where car carriers are currently unloaded; applicant stated that this is not a
leasable parcel; regarding the unloading of car carriers in the street, the issue came up before and the CA
stated it was illegal in the vehicle code; would like to change condition so that they shall not use a travel
lane; would also like to see conditions that applicant provide parking plan of all operations, that car carriers
shall not block a public street, and that the variance shall go with the auto parts distribution use. There were
no further comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
C. Galligan then stated the mitigated negative declaration is consistent with the use, not an abuse of the
property with mitigations in staff report, no benefit from EIR or focuserl EIR. Special permit for use and
height seems to be a fair and reasonable use consistent with sunounding properties, height is congregated
so it allows more parking and circulation. States that it is appropriate regazding the variance to make a
determination that imposition of the 1 space per 1000 SF is inappropriate , and is a hardship as it relates to
the use, and is a reasonable request. He then made a motion to approve the Negative Declaration, Special
Permits and Variance, by resolution, amending the conditions as follows: a) with an amendment to number
nine which states that no car cazriers shall use the loading zone nor shall they block any public street;
Amendment to No. 13 that any outdoor public address system be approved by Planning and Engineering
Department staff, with conditions similar to those applied to other car dealerships in the area; add condition
No. 18 that the applicant shall designate spaces in the parldng structure and other spaces on site, and shall
provide a data sheet to show how these are allocated to the various uses; add Condition No. 19 that the
-13-
Burlingame Planntng Commisxion Minuus July 14, 1997
variance for the parking determination shall run with the special permits; and add Condition No. 20 that if
parking spaces in the garage are rented to uses not associated with Putnam, the rental agreement shall be
reviewed and approved by staff. The amended conditions are: 1) that the project shall be built as shown
on fhe plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped 7une 11, 1997, She�t A1 and A3
through A7, and date stamped June 30, 1997, Sheets A2 and A8; 2) that the conditions of the Ciry
Engineer's June 2, 1997 memo, the Fire Marshal's 7une 2 and 7une 16, 1997 memo, and the Chief Building
Inspector's 7une 2, 1997 memo shall be met; 3) that this project shall meet all the requirements of the
California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 1995 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; 4) that
the overall height of the building as measured from the grade the top of curb shall be 42'-0"; 5) that the used
car lot use shall be subject to review should the property owner lose the right to load and unload car carriers
in the abandoned railroad spur adjacent to 925 Bayswater Avenue; 6) that the at-grade automobile display
area at the front of the site shall not exceed 7820 SF as shown on the site plan date stamped 6/30/97; '� that
the project shall be subject to the state-mandated water conservation program. A complete Imgation Water
Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; 8)
that the applicant shall obtain a permit from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District for demolition
of the existing structure; 9) that there shall be no on-street loading or unloading of trucks delivering or
picking up parts or merchandise by customers or employees of the various Putnam dealerships, or the
applicant shall obtain approval from the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission for an on-street loading
zone on Bayswater Avenue. If approved, the applicant's use of this area for deliveries to the parts
warehouse shall be limited to the hours of 6:00 a. m, to 10:00 a. m. , and the loading zone shall be marked
with a 30-minute time limit for loading and unloading; no caz carriers shall use the loading zone nor shall
they block any public street; 10) that all employees of the parts distribution facility and car sales lot shall
park in designated spaces in the adjacent parldng gazage, and their cars shall bear stickers identifying their
place of employment; 11) that this proposal shall be required to meet the Tree Protection and Reforestation
Ordinance passed by the City of Burlingame in 1993 and enforced by the Parks Department and the City's
landscape requirement; 12) that the applicant and property owner shall coordinate with the San Mateo
County Health Department to ensure that this project does not impact ongoing remediation for removal of
a gas storage tank on the site; 13) that the speakers for any outdoor public address or amplification system
shall be oriented only toward California Drive and the system shall be of such quality that the amplification
be the lowest level of sound possible, that in no case shall the public address system be used after 7:30 p. m.
daily, and that the operator shall be responsive to complaints about amplification levels by nearby residents;
14) that all construction shall abide by the construction hours established by the municipal code; 15) that all
new utility connections to serve the site and which are affected by the development shall be installed to meet
cunent code standards and diameter; sewer laterals shall be checked and replaced if necessary; and
abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed; 16) that all on-site illumination including the car sales
lot lighting shall be shielded and directed only on to the site; 17) that should any cultural resources be
discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated, and appropriate
methods of removal determined by appropriate professionals acceptable to the City and completion approved
before work commences; 18) that the applicant shall designate the spaces in the parldng structure and on the
property which are required parlcing spaces for this use, other uses on the property, and required parking
which is provided on this site for any other site; and that the applicant shall provide a data sheet which
outlines the parking requirements for each of these uses and where the required parking for each is located;
19) that the parking variance shall run with the special permit for the auto parts distribution use, and any
change of use on the property (100/150/198 California Drive) shall be required to conform to the parlflng
requirements of the zoning ordinance and requires approval of the Planning Commission. The auto parts
distribution use is defined as an in-house, wholesale parts distribution warehouse to auto dealerships owned
or controlled by the owner of the distribution center; in addition, the used car department may have offices
in the parts center; there shall be no more than eight (8) employees of the center and the used car department
working at any one time in the center; and 20) that if any parking spaces in the parking garage aze to be
-14-
Barlingame Plannin8 �rrunissiart Minuter
.luly l4, 1997
rented, leased, or used by businesses not associated with the owner's dealerships, the owner
aubmit a copy of the rental agreements to the Planning Director for revie Sh� �'st
req�iirements of the special perniits and variance for the ro e �' for conformance with the
� P P rty•
Commissi�n discussion: agreed regazding the Negative Declaration and height limit but
the fact that the configuration buys extra pazking when only five stalls are shown �d m�e exception to
� � ore spaces in the
garage could be designated for this use. In terms of the determination, doesn't think there is
information to justify why auto parts warehouse is less intense than other warehouse. enough
The motion was seconded by C. Ellis and was passed on a roll call 4-2-1 (Cmsrs. Coffe
dissenting and C. Mink absent). The Chairman advised the applicant of the appeal ri hts y�d Wellford
APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF A HILLSIDE �,�q g and procedure.
KENMqR Wqy ZONED R-1 JOEL M. WEISE. APPT .Tr� e t�rr �* CONSTRUCTION PERMI'I' AT 3
� - — . . a � LL\ .
eference staff report, 7.14.97, with attachments. Planner Brooks discussed the request, review
Planning Departrnent comments, and study meeting questions. Two conditions were recom � �nteria,
consideration. mended for
Chairman Key opened the public hearing. The applicant was not present. There were no fu
and the public hearing was closed, rther comments
C. Galligan moved approval noting that this one year extension of a hillside area construction
keeping with the original action, noting the following conditions: 1) that the project shall be buPermit is in
on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped July 30, 1996, sheets 1 throu
lt as shown
Plan, floor Plans and Elevations; and 2) that the project shall receive a buildin gh 4, site
1998, and the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire
g permit before August 12,
edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Codes, 1995
The motion was seconded by C. Ellis and passed on a voice vote 5-1-1 C.
absent). The Chairman read the appeal rights. � D� abstaining and C. Mink
PLANNER'S REppRTS
- Planner Brooks reviewed City Council's regular meeting of July 7, 1997
ADJOURNMgNT
The meeting �,as adjourned at 12:10 p.m.
�.s�.ia
Respectfully submitted,
Jerry Deal, Secretary
i:
t
;�
-15-