HomeMy WebLinkAbout150 California Drive - Staff Report' ' F, c�rr
. ' �1' o,�
BURLINGAME
�����:,���� STAFF REPORT
b•..
TO:
DATE:
FROM:
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
MAY 8, 1987
CITY PLANNER
� r` I (,?.
�..�'""...
AGENDA
ITEM #
MTG. G/1 O/O ^7
DATE '� 10 O /
SUBMITTED �,n
B Y ��1(/U'
APPROVED
6Y
S�B�E�T: COUNCIL REVIET�ni OF LIGHTING PLAN FOR AUTO SALES AREA AT
ARATA MOTORS, 150 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUB AREA D
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council hold a public hearing and take action.
Conditions on this action approved by the Planning Commission were:
1.
2.
that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's �pril 13,
1987 memo shall be met;
that as installed the lights shall conform to the plans submitted
to the Planning Department and date stamped April 9, 1987;
3. that the fixtures on the top parking deck shall be limited to 400
watt halide and the fixtures on the California Drive frontage shall
be limited to 1,000 watt halide;
4. that additional lighting for security including necessary shielding
will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department, Building
Department and City Engineer and will not provide direct light off
the site;
5. that this permit shall be reviewed six months after the lights are
installed to determine compliance and/or on the basis of citizen
complaint; and
6. that all display lighting be placed on a timer set to go on at dusk
and off at 10:00 P.M, daily.
Action Alternatives:
l. The City Council can uphold the Planning Commission and approve the
lighting plan with conditions.
2. The City Council can reverse the Planning Commission and deny the
lighting plan. The reasons for denial should be clearly stated.
3. The City Council can deny the request without prejudice, returning
it to the Planning Commission for further consideration. If this
alternative is pursued the Council should identify clearly the
items which need additional consideration or study.
-2-
BACKGROUND•
Blake Mason, architect, representing Arata Motor Sales, submitted a
lighting plan for the car sales area at 150 California Drive, zoned
C-2, Sub Area D. The applicant recently completed a four level parking
structure as a part of his auto dealership. The front 29' along
California Drive and top deck of the parking structure are to be used
as auto display and sales areas. The zoning code gives the Planning
Commission discretion to review lighting plans for car sales lots (Code
Sec. 25.74.010-f>. The applicant proposes to place eight 400 watt
halide light fixtures on three poles rising 18' above the top deck of
the parking structure. These lights will be shielded so that the
direct light is focused only on the parking deck. Along the California
Drive frontage they will place five 20' poles, each with 1,000 watt
metal halide fixture. These poles were existing and are now in place.
The fixtures are tilted to direct the light onto the site; there is
some small spillover of direct light onto the public sidewalk (see
plans date stamped April 9, 1987).
The applicant proposes to have the parking deck display lights on from
dusk to 10:00 P.M. The lights along California Drive will also be on
from dusk to 10:00 P.M. Both sets of lights will be placed on a timer.
Ten percent of the ceiling lights within the parking structure will be
kept on all night for security, as will the lights in the stairwells at
each end of the structure. The only lights left on all night on the
top deck will be the exit sign lights (required by code).
Commission Review
On April 27, 1987 the Planning Commission reviewed the Arata lighting
plan and voted 6-0 (Commissioner Shelley Graham absent) to approve the
lighting plan with conditions. The Commission discussion addressed the
height of the fixtures on the deck, their visibility and the visibility
of the cars parked on the deck, concluding neither would be visible
from the street; visibility of security lights on the third deck of the
parking structure to residents on Highland, security lights on this
deck could be shielded as top deck lights will be; discussed turning
off lights in stairwells, concluded not necessary because not bright
and stairs could become a security problem; security lights will be
only every third or fourth light fixture.
City staff had no specific comments other than the need to get required
permits and notation that the only effect would be indirect light which
would be visible off site but which would be greatly reduced at 10:00
P.M. The lighting plan and indirect light would have no effect on the
traffic on California Drive. With the light fixtures included,
structures on the top deck do not exceed 5$ of the roof area so that
light fixtures proposed do not affect the height of the building.
Staff would recommend one addition to the conditions, that all display
lighting be placed on a timer set to go on at dusk and off at 10:00
P.M, daily.
-3-
EXHIBITS:
- Monroe letter to Blake Mason notifying of Council review, May 5, 1987
- Planning Commission Minutes, April 27, 1987
- Planning Commission Staff Report, April 27, 1987 w/attachments
- Council Notice of Public Hearing, mailed May 8, 1987
- Lighting Plan date stamped April 9, 1987
MM/s
cc: Blake Mason, AIA
David James Arata, Arata Properties
,�'� e'"'�.....
C�,�.e C��� .a.� �a�x�.�ra�.��x�,� .
SAN MATEO GOUNTY
CITY HAI..L-501 aRINiROSE ROAD PLANNINGDEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME�CALIFORNIA 94010 (415)342-8625
May 5, 1987
Blake Mason, AIA
ARCH-1
60 East Third Avenue
San Mateo, CA 94401
Dear Mr. Mason:
At the City Council meeting of May 4, 1987 the Council called up for
review Planning Commission action on the lighting plan for Arata Motor
Sales, 150 California Drive. A public hearing will be held on Monday,
May 18, 1987 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road.
We look forward to seeing you there to present the project. Please
call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely yours,
�� � `b�C
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
cc: David James Arata, Arata Properties
City Clerk
w
Page 2
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes �lpril 27, 1987
use of the 550 SF rear of the kindergarten building at Ropsevelt School
shall be limited to classes with 14 students offered t��:'ce a week
bet een 7:00 P.M. and 9:15 P.M. with one instructor�-�'"�2) that the
dayt'me office use of the rear of the kindergart area shall be
limite to two days a week, Monday and Wednesd 9:00 A.M, to 4:00
P.M.; (3 that if a conflict over evening p ing for occasional use by
previously proved uses on site shall oc r between the students of
the childbirt classes and those other ses, the childbirth classes
shall be occasio lly temporarily re eduled to resolve the problem;
(4) that any change in the size of lass, the hours of operation or the
type of use in this 5 SF area ill require an amendment to this use
permit before the change an implemented; and (5) that this use
permit shall be reviewed compliance with its conditions in one year
(May 1988 ) . ��".
Second C. Garcia; mot,,�n approved �i a 6-0 roll call vote, C. S.Graham
absent. Appeal pro,,�'edures were advi�.
2. SPECIAL PERM�'�' - SATELLITE DISH ANTENN
1214 BURLINGAME AVENUE
Item withdr�wn by the applicant (Jeff May lette�., April 23, 1987).
3. SIG.�EXCEPTION - 1100 BROADW�Y �
_ �.
I�,�m continued to the meeting of May 11, 1987 at the requ`�,t,of the
applicant (Jeffrey L. Adams letter, April 23, 1987). ''^
4. REVIEW OF LIGHTING PLAN FOR ARATA MOTOR SALES, 150 CALIFORNIA
DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUB AREA D
Reference staff report (4/27/87) with attachments. CP Monroe discussed
details of the lighting plan, staff review, Planning staff comment,
applicant's letter. Five conditions were suggested for consideration
at the public hearing.
Discussion: overall height of the light fixtures on the top deck will
be 18'; tops of the cars on this level might be visible from California
Drive, light poles are in the center and might not be visible; this
lighting will be turned off at 10:00 P.M., there will be security
lighting which staff will review, security lighting will not be
approved if it can be seen off the site.
Chm. Giomi opened the public hearing. Blake Mason, architect
representing Arata, was present. Rick Sofos, 119 Highland �venue,
representing 119 and 115 Highland expressed concern: there is security
lighting now; security lights on the third parking deck on the
California Drive side can be seen from Highland, these lights were not
there before; apartment dwellers must pull their shades to watch TV;
this proposal appears to be a much more severe impact than what is
there now; buildings on Highland are at eye level with the third story
of the parking garage; there is a big impact during the day from the
auto row commercial area, would not want the impact to continue into
the nighttime hours; Ford agreed to tip their lighting when a complaint
w
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 27, 1987
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was
called to order by Chairman Giomi on April 27, 1987 at 7:30 P..M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Ellis, Garcia, Giomi, H. Graham,
Jacobs, Leahy
Absent: Commissioner S. Graham
Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Attorney Jerome
Coleman; City Engineer Frank Erbacher
Chm. Giomi welcomed Mike Ellis, newly appointed Planning Commissioner.
MINUTES - The minutes of the April 13, 1987 meeting were unanimously
approved.
AGENDA - The Chair noted Item #2 has been withdrawn and Item #3
continued to the meeting of May 11, 1987; she added
Resolution of Commendation and �,ppreciation to Charles F.
Schwalm following the action items. Order of the agenda
was then approved.
IT�SS FOR ACTION
l.� SP CIAL PERMIT FOR CHILDBIRTH CLASSES AND OFFICE USE AT
ROO VELT SCHOOL, 1151 VANCOUVER AVENUE, ZONED R-1
� �,_,,,
Reference s� ff report, 4/27/87, with attachments. Monroe reviewed
details of th request, staff review, applican ' letter, study meeting
questions. Fiv conditions were suggested consideration at the
public hearing. P confirmed each room restrooms.
�•�.
Chm. Giomi opened th�ublic heari . Kathryn Newburn, applicant,
responded to Commission� uestio : she considers two classes per week a
maximum, if there is a la e dinterest in the classes she would refer
people to other instructo the area; she is a registered nurse and
a certified childbirth ' struct and does not teach postpartum
classes; the office yv�`�' 11 be used t end out information and
registration forms write letters, so and file information, prepare
class manuals; e expected one to two vi 'tors per day would be those
interested in he classes requesting informa ' n. There were no
audience c ents and the public hearing was cl d.
Stati his approval of an applicant for a school sit whose proposal
is definitely a matter of instruction, C. H.Graham move ..�or approval
of the special permit and for adoption of Commission Resol't�tion
Approving Special Permits with the following conditions: (1> that the
Page 3
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 27, 1987
was made to them. It was pointed out that the suggested conditions of
approval include review in six months or on the basis of citizen
complaint. ,
Blake Mason commented that the new lights as proposed will have cutoff
shields so that the source of illumination will not be visible, it will
stop at the parapet wall and not go beyond the structure; regarding
existing security night light source, he felt the owners would be
willing to consider shielding to reduce the impact; the fourth level of
the garage has no security lights; with the exception of the exit signs
all lights will be turned off at 10:00 P.M.; after 10:00 P.M there is a
single security night light circuit which lights 10$ of the fixtures on
the parking deck except the top deck with no lights; exterior stairs
are lit, they could be taken off the night light circuit. A
Commissioner commented she could understand the concern of the people
living in the area with the change from a single level to this parking
structure but pointed out the lighting would be reviewed in six months.
There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was
closed.
Commission discussion/comment: possibility of shielding the security
liqhts and adding a condition to this effect; pleased with the location
of the lights in the center of the structure; should a requirement for
turning off the stair lights be added; this could be overkill, security
lights normally aren't that bright, have a concern about cutting off
security lights or even shielding them.
C. Jacobs moved for approval of the lighting plan with the following
conditions: (1) that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's
April 13, 1987 memo shall be met; (2) that as installed the lights
shall conform to the plans submitted to the Planning Department and
date stamped April 9, 1987; (3) that the fixtures on the top parking
deck shall be limited to 400 watt halide and the fixtures on the
California Drive frontage shall be limited to 1,000 watt halide; (4)
that additional lighting for security including necessary shielding
will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department, Building
Department and City Engineer and will not provide direct light off the
site; and (5) that this permit shall be reviewed six months after the
lights are installed to determine compliance and/or on the basis of
citizen complaint. Second C. H.Graham.
Comment on the motion: security lights are not generally continuous
lighting, only every third or fourth light. Motion approved on a 6-0
roll call vote, C. S.Graham absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
5:�S.�ECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW �UTO SALES AT 1028 CAROLAN AVENUE,
Z ON
Reference staff report (4/2�'%'°8'9'�-��w
details of the request, staf i
applicant's letter meeting
suggested f sideration at the
��;,���c ments.��CP Monroe reviewed
�..m.,
ew, propo�ec�•-���..i�.�iting plan,
questions. Six cond�itions were
public hearing.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 4
April 27, 1987
Commission inquired about the use of loudspeakers. Chm. Giomi opened
the public hearing. Mr. Miller, Miller Chevrolet and Remi Seremi,
applicant, were present. Their comments: applicant's bu� ness will be
open only when Miller Chevrolet is open, do not see the fieed for a man
gate in �he new fence dividing the front and rear uses on the site, the
gate woul� be open when the businesses are open, whe they are closed
do not se .the necessity of a man gate. Fire Marsha''1 Musso stated the
man gate i an exiting requirement of the Uniform;`Fire Code.
Applicant a vised they do not intend to install l;dudspeakers.
Mike Harvey involved in the subleasing arrange�ient) stated they are
leasing the ck of the lot for new car storag�, security is a big
problem and i a man gate is required this w��11 make it difficult to
secure the sto age area. CE commented on t�'e exiting requirements, two
exits with dir t access to a public way a�e required for the buildings
fronting on Rol ins Road; an alternative �aould be a one hour interior
corridor in the ollins Road building. $'`taff confirmed the Uniform
Fire Code require ent for two exits to a^�public way does take
precedence over se urity for the property owner. The Chair noted
Commission's conce is the Fire Code 'requirement. One Commissioner
felt security for t property owner was also important.
CE confirmed part of e fence is i�� place, the man gate could be put
any place in the fence cross the�driveway. Mr. Miller stated if the
gate were locked at nig t there �s an area where people could stand
100' away from the build g or ey could walk to the rear and to the
right to get to the stree . CF�not�d staff had looked at the site plan
through to Rollins Road, t re� is not the required clearances for
exiting without going onto other property; with the current plan it
would be possible to stand �' away from the building on the adjacent
property within the storag,� a a. Mike Harvey noted there is almost an
acre and a half of vacant�prope ty between the two buildings, one could
easily exit the rear of ,t�he Mill r Chevrolet building and be protected;
his concern was repeate� vandalis with the man gate there is no way
to secure the property�`and securit will be up to the Police
Department. ,` ��
Discussion continue,t� concerning possibl"� alternatives. Staff explained
again the nature of the problem: the bui ding at the rear of the site,
1025 Rollins Road��� was originally placed o close to the property line
to provide requi�ed fire exiting away from he structure for the
present use with'out adding interior fire cor 'dors; with the two lots
under separate;'use and with the fence blocking ccess from the Rollins
Road building fo Carolan a man gate is necessar for the Rollins Road
building to c,ontinue to meet exiting requirements iven the existing
use of this l�uilding. There were no further audien e comments and the
public hear�ng was closed.
Stating the applicant obviously wishes to use this area�,in that case
there is � need to make tradeoffs, the Planning Commissio� cannot grant
exceptio�s to the Fire Code, C. Jacobs moved for approval of the
special permit and for adoption of Commission Resolution Approving
Special Permits, with the following conditions because of its location:
(1) that the conditions in the Chief Building Inspector's April 6, 1987
P.C. 4/27/87
I t em # �i�-
MEMO T0: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CITY PLANNER
SUBJECT; REVIEW OF LIGHTING PLAN FOR ARATA MOTOR SALES,
150 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUB AREA D
Blake Mason, architect representing Arata Motor Sales, submitted plans
on April 9, 1987 for the lighting of the car sales areas at
150 California Drive, zoned C-2, Sub Area D(Auto Row) (Code Sec. 25.
74.010-f). These plans show the lighting fixtures and the light poles
for the car sales area on this site. It should be noted that the top
deck of the new four level garage structure will be used for car sales
as will an area at grade along California Drive. The top deck will be
illuminated by three poles placed at the middle of the deck which is
130.5' deep. The poles will be 94' back from the California Drive
property line and 65' from the adjacent Southern Pacific right-of-way
at the rear of the parking structure. The top of the light fixtures
will be 18' above the parking deck and 45.5' above grade. Each fixture
will be 400 watt halide and will be shielded to confine the direct
light to the parking deck area. There are no adjacent residential
uses.
�t grade there will be five poles with single fixtures rising 24' above
grade (these are existing poles). These fixtures are 1,000 watt
halide. Their light will be shielded to pool in the 29' area between
the property line along California Drive and the parking structure. At
the rear of the standards some direct light will spill over onto the
sidewalk.
All of these lights will be photocell and placed on a timer. Generally
they will go on at dusk and be turned off at 10:00 P.M.
Staff Review
City staff have reviewed this request. The Fire Marshal (April 14,
1987 memo) had no comments. The Chief Building Inspector (April 13,
1987 memo) notes that they will need engineering calculations on all
light standards and building and electrical permits. The City Engineer
(April 13, 1987 memo) comments separately on the fixtures placed on the
top deck and those at grade. Regarding the fixtures on the deck he
notes the proposed lighting exceeds that needed for security, if
properly shielded will only cause a large amount of indirect light,
will be highly visible at a distance but there are no residential uses
nearby to be affected. Regarding the lighting along California Drive
he feels there will be little effect outside of the commercial area and
the lights will not affect traffic on California Drive.
Planning staff would note that structures on the roof do not exceed 5�
of the roof area so that addition of these poles does not affect the
height of the structure.
-2-
Applicant's Letter
In his letter of March 20, 1987 Blake Mason notes that the proposed
lights are in addition to security lighting and will be regulated by
photocells and a timer. As a result these lights will go on at dusk
and be timed to turn off at 10:00 P.M. The 18' height level of the
poles on the roof is necessary in order to tell details and colors of
the cars on public display there. Adjustable light shields in the
fixtures will prevent spillover of the main illumination onto
California Drive and the S.P. right-of-way.
Planninq Commission Action
The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing and review the
proposed lighting plan. At the public hearing the following conditions
should be considered:
l. that the conditions of the Chief Building Inspector's April 13,
1987 memo shall be met;
2. that as installed the lights shall conform to the plans submitted
to the Planning Department and date stamped April 9, 1987;
3. that the fixtures on the top parking deck shall be limited to 400
watt halide and the fixtures on the California Drive frontage shall
be limited to 1,000 watt halide;
4. that additional lighting for security will be reviewed and approved
by the Planning Department, Building Departm�nt and City Engineer
and will not provide direct light off the sit;�; and
5. that this permit shall be reviewed six months after the lights are
installed to determine compliance and/or on the basis of citizen
complaint.
I `��J l�
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
cc: Arata Motor Sales
Blake Mason, AIA
PROJECT APPLICATION ���c�� °� 150 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
fr CEQA ASSESSMENT BURIJNGAME project address
��y�'��,,•°� Iproject name - if any
Application received ( 3/23 87 )
Staff review/acceptance ( 4/9/ 7 )
i. APPLICANT B1 ake �1ason, AIA, ARCH-1 340-7178
name tele hone no
P •
60 East Third Avenue, San Mateo, CA 94401
applicant s address: street, city, zip code
Same 340-7178
contact person, if different telephone no.
2. TYPE OF APPLICATION
Specia.l Perr�it () Variance* ( ) Ccndominium Pernit () Other Review
*Attach letter which addresses each of the 4 findings required by Code Chapter 25.54.
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
REVIEW of LIGHTING PLAN for new four story Arata Motor Sales
arkin structure at 150 California Drive. Proposed are three
pole mounted light fixtures 8 fixtures all together, 00 watts eacF�,
� above the arkin deck 45.5' above grade). Existing at grade
there are five pole mounted light fixtures 24' above grade ,
1�000 watt halide each. Liqhts will qo on at dusk and will be
turned off at 10:00 P.M.
(attach letter of explanation if additional space is needed)
Ref. code section(s): (25.74.010-f ) ( )
4. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
( 029-233-Q ) ( 1-11 ) ( 15
APN �/���6� lot no. block no.
( C-2/Sub Area D) ( 102,547±
zoning district land area, square feet
Arata Properties �
land owner's name C 0 dVl ames rata
Reauire� Date received
(.Y�) (�o) ( — )
�Y�s) ino) � — , )
( Town of Burlingame
subdivision name
Post Office Box �13
address
Burlingame, CA 94011
city zip code
Proof of ownership
Owner's consent to a�plication
5. EXISTIP�G SITE CONDITIONS
Existing Subaru facility, service building and GMC/Pontiac
facility, plus new four story parking structure
Required Date received
(yes) �rto� ( 4/9/87 ) Site plan showing: property lines; public sidewall:s and
curbs; all structur�s and improvements;
paved on-site parkino; landscaping.
(3��) (no) ( — ) Floor plans of all buildings showing: gross floor area
by type of us�`on each floor plan.
(yes) (�a� ( 4/ 9/$ 7 ) Building elevations, cross sections (if relevant).
(�re�) (no) ( _ ) Site cross section(s) (if relevant).
(otner) ( 3/23/87) letter of explanation
*Land use classifications are: residential (show # dwelling units); office use; retail
sales; restaurant/cafe; manufacturing/repair shop; warehousing; other (to be described).
6. PROJECT PP,�P�SAL (NO NEW CONSTRUCTION PROPOSED)
Proposed consi:ruction, 6elov� orade ( — SF) Second floor ( — SF)
gross floor area First floor ( — SF) Third floor ( — SF)
Project Cod�
Pr000sal RPquirement
Front setback
Side setback
Side yard
P,ear yaru
Project Code
Proposal Requirement
Lot covera;;e
P,uildin� height
Lardscaoed area
On•site ok�.spaces
�
PROJECT PROPOSAL (continued)
Full time employees on site
Part time employees on site
Visitors/customers (weekday)
Visitors/customers (Sat.Sun.)
Residents on property
Trip ends to/from site*
Peak hour trip ends*
Trucks/service vehicles
EXISTING
after
8-5 5 PM
I
*Show calculations on reverse side or attach se�arate sheet.
7. ADJACENT BUSINESSES/LAND USES
Auto related uses and retail services on all adjacent lots.
This use conforms to the General Plan.
Required
�R�) (no)
�yes) (no)
Date received
( - ) Location plan of adjacent properties.
( - ) Other tenants/firms on property:
no. firr,is ( ) no. employees ( )
floor area occupied ( SF office space)
( SF other)
no. employee vehicles regularly on site ( )
no. company vehicles at this location ( )
8. FEES Special Permit, all districts $100 () Other application type, fee $ � (X )
Variance/R-1,R-2 districts $ 40 () Project Assessment $ 25 ()
Variance/other districts $ 75 () Negative Declaration $ 25 ()
Condominium Permit $ 50 () EIR/City & consultant fees $ (
n0 fee RECEIPT N0. Received by
TOTAL FEES $ ro,,,,; ro,�
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is
true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Signature Date
Applicant
STAFF USE ONLY
NEGATIVE DECLARATION F;,e "°.
The City of Burlingame by on , 19_,
completed a review of the proposed project and determined that:
( ) It will not have a significant effect on the environment.
( ) No Environmental Impact Report is required.
Reasons for a Conclusion:
Cateqorica1ly exempt: Reference
Code Sec 15301 Existing Facilities
� -----
� ___ _ _ 9�u� �. ���--�
Sig ture of Processing Official itle Date Signeb—� �
Unless appealed within 10 days hereof the da.te posted, the deternination shall be final.
DECLARATION OF POSTIPIG Dai:e Posted:
I declare under penalty of perjury that I ar� City Clerk of the City of Burlingame and that
I posted a true copy of the above Neoa.ti�re Declaration at the City Hall of said City near
the doors to th� Council Chambers.
Executed at Qurlingame, California on
Apoealed: ( )Yes ( )P;o
19
JUDI�HT1. M�TTI, CITY CLERK, CITY ('.r= oURLINGAh1E
IP! 2 YEARS IN 5 YEARS
� after after
8-5 5 PM 8-5 5 PM
STAFF REVI EW
1. CIRCULATION OF APPLICATION
Project proposal/plans have been circulated for review by:
date circulated reply received
City Engineer ( 4�g�87 ) (yes) (no)
Building Inspector ( �� ) (yes) (no)
Fire Marshal ( " ) (yes) (no)
Park Department ( _ ) (yes) (no)
City Attorney ( _ ) (yes) (no)
2. SUMMARY OF STAFF CONCERNS/POSSIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES
memo attached
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
Concerns Mitigation Measures
Does the proposa1 meet a11 Request comments from the
Fire and Building Code Fire Marsha1 and Chief Bldg.
requirements? Inspector.
3. CEQA REQUIREP�EPlTS
If a Negative Declaration has not been posted for this project:
is the project subject to CEQA review? No - categorically exempt
IF AN EIR IS REQUIRED:
Initial Study comnleted
Decision to prepare EIR
Notices of preparation mailed
RFP to consultants
Contract awarded
Admin. draft EIR received
Draft EIR accepted by staff
Circulation to other agencies
�
i
�
�
�
�
�
�
)
�
)
)
)
)
)
)
Study by P.C.
Review period ends
Public hearing by P.C.
Final EIR received by P.C.
Certification by Council
Decision on project
Notice of Determination
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
4. APPLICATION STATUS . Date first received (3/23/87 )
Accepted as complete: no( ) letter to ap licant advising info. required ( )
Yes( X) date 4/9/�7 P.C. study ( )
Is application ready for a public hearing? (yes) (Tu� Recommended date (4/27/87 )
Date staff report mailed t aoplicant (4/22/87 ) Date Comni�s�on hearing (4/27/87 )
r/� � �. -� vP Ry
Application approved ( ) Denied ( ) �Cp{�ea�a Council � (no)
Date Council hearing ( � �f� � ) Apolication aporoved (j,��enied � )
/f/ �
si gned �Idate
March 20, 1987
■
Arch�h �r �I�'Plann� �c:
��(11 :i�,l llin�I /Ivr,rnn �
`-��u� M�ttr.���. C�lilornia �7d4U1
iis 3:�0 �i�s�
Ms. Meg Monroe
Senior Planner
Planning Department
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, California 94010
Reference: Arata Motors Sales
Lighting Plan
Burlingame, California
Dear Meg:
RECEIVEfl
iNAR 2 31987
CI � 0 �N1NG �E�Mf
In accordance with our telephone conversation of March 17, 1987,
enclosed please find a cross section of the new parking structure
and a plan of the roof deck showing light distribution of the
light fixtures.
All lights within the new facility except those on the security
light circuit will be controlled by time clock and photocell.
They will be turned on automatically at dusk and will remain on
until 10 p.m, in the evenings.
The height of pol�mounted fixtures at the roof level is required
to obtain sufficient footcandles to discern detail and color
within the roof level new car display area. The adjustable light
shields in these fixtures will prevent spill-over of main
illumination onto the California Drive and Southern Pacific
right-of-ways.
Sincerely,
ARCH.l
� 4.� Q.c�� ���'�.�c'�Y L_
. � � z--
J. Blake Mason, AIA
Principal
JBM/jmc
(86111)
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Al Arata
Mr. Bill Menta
sra„iey L F'�ir;icc. a � �",1
Mles S, Ii�nuk�itsut�o. /IJ A
J. Blake Mason, A I.A.
�
DATE :_ �/Ji�� � � %�'�'
�
MEMO T0: CITY ENGINEER ��� '�
CHIEF BUILDING SPECTOR
FIRE MARSHAL �'��v � ��„�,�.,,,,�.P,,,�-
DIRECTOR OF PARKS
FROM: PCANNING DEPARTMENT
/1 �'i'�
S UBJ EC T: �` UiL�Cr/� ,�-` G�,.�,�, � 1'r �'� �,�'.�'��'.t �
�
���/ ��/%�r! � c Ll� � � �J
�a�-G��-��2�-c�( �.% / ��
An application has been received for the above project for review by the
Planning Commission. The application will.be scheduled for �����
at their �/v����� Z%, %�/�%� meeting. We would appreciate having
your corrments by �%./�{� ,/� /���'� , �j,�' �USSi�f�/��
�--
Thank you.
Helen Towber
Planner
s/
a tt . �� CCOV1�l W1C 1nk S I C�,.�
4� 14 g�
0
.' I
I ( � �
DATE : /�i � /, / %C�'' � � .
�,'�
.�-
MEMO T0: CITY ENGINEER . �
CHIEF BUILOING INSPECTOR � �
FIRE MARSHAL ��
DIRECTOR OF PARKS ` � � �
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT ��
, , � .
S U B J E C T: �/( f.'G'�l"l�, �;,-e ��,�,... fz �r �'�/ �'r'/` Gi q�...,
.:/
%"Gr% �/C/� r' U�' < /�
��-�-c�� �'J�GC'� �. /.J/ G� _ .
/
An application has been received for the above project for review by the
Planning Commission. The application will.be scheduled for U7 C/!i%�
at their �����% �%�%C/�'�% meeting. We would appreciate having
your corrments by ���,;� /3 /�J�� . (��' �rJ>>i'f��� �
Thank you . � � ' �� . d .e �� f'� / � /.j � � �
TQ i �� "' I7 H / �l j' � �
/ ✓ . •
^ r �u / '/�I < K� �� �id / c� %� iZ � .
��L" � i
t.� I/'� C /%� L' "' / i
He 1 en Towb er ���i��n9 ��� �
Planner / / � /� o
^/ %� ,dy� f ��f.zy Gi',A� � // //q' �� �'/d n .f`a/� �°'
5 � ,�i 1 Y ��� �-' � � J / /
dtt.
/ ' ��o /� � � G,�o ��� .
r� � .,� /�
i7 �!� � � `�� ` ,
' • �</� ���/ � .
� �,,,z � �'�s �- ��.�� ��� � �
� ���� " - �
� ,
� ��
��
.
, � � �e;�� _r��
„
r
DATE : - �� 9 / j��
MEMO T0: CITY ENGINEER
CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR
FIRE MARSHAL
DIRECTOR OF PARKS
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
,
� /�' J i
SUBJECT: <�Tl.iir.`�'� '�`,� --'".i "�:�.L_r',,-.;� ;� �'`.:r��
e..
/ �l1% %--��i ;���/�i � �
-� ,� — � .� f71��'���� Gf� /�<
�. _ ���
r!�-��-� ��1'7%7 -G!'� ( .�=-�.�!�/ L/`� . .
An application has been received for the above project for review by the
Planning Commission. The application <<�ill be scheduled for ��� �
at tlieir ��/���� �� %����_meeting. We would appreciate having
your corrments by ��,�� ,/� / �Cj-��J . �i;�' �"%C7SSi�f���
��-
Thank you.
Helen Towber � �
� i�✓.n�' /� - 1H �j �?' �%„
Planner � � � � /
� / �, �' .
� / �,��y� �
S � �� l �` _ .
att. '
� �. C � ���% z1 ��z�r-'z-�
/.-�' � � . 'G!'� �4��C �� �� _ �
L� r o ��.� ����'
�.�'�' � _ _ � �_, � � �� � � .
, /% / y��” �`t�� , �,'
-----� ��' ,.yl�`— �y�i`�` `e.`."�t+-�a �"�`� � ti.. �/
r��.�,�����-°l � , ������-��� �,y����'-�' , 1'' �
, ����
j � ,�L� � ���v�.-� �-�� �
�1��� ���� � ��� �
,� ,/�'��%.� C�� /( - f ��'_����� �y�-�'� .
G�/ �.% '` i /
���r �"— `/� ,/ ,� �G/r�""� ✓��'" � , r '%Z �t°�L ��--� �
GJ�� �ucC�Cl� /� � , ,r � ��;��l�r��-�/G� ��'��r/I�='��
� �'�- /Z�u '� %� "� � ��'�� �r�� �
l �` , .C�- ,c� L.
�2 , <��'1��� T/' . �,,�. ��. . �z �'c ��'``� = �,-�/�"`zc� '
�� ���� l �-� ���r � U'e>� C. �� ��/ ,,. �
���,-�,. �'—( � [� / , ✓� '�`�� . �P �¢�.6�Ct � �*n�,��-�•�/
—/, y � L;,.,rfiC�/�l� �- C�iYr � � � . , ��/
G�����y���� '� /Jtl' � �� � "�j'`''�'��� ,.�i_�/�2 %L . C"Z-� � �c = Y>�u'�
� �,�C-�syL �Z � '�� �G' � � / , �
� � ������-t -� -
�_���� � _ ,
_ � � r
� ��� � � �; �-.P� �
�
�%L;,�`�
�.. —
�h� C�tt� �f �u�Itrt��xrtQ
SAN MATEO COUNTY
CITY HALL- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010 TEL:(415) 342-6931
NOTICE OF HEARING
Review of Lighting Plan
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Monday, the 27th day of April, 1987 , at
the hour of 7:30 P.M., in the City Hall Council Chambers , 501 Primrose Road,
Burlingame, California the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame will conduct
a public hearing on the application to review the lighting plan for the
new parkina structure at 150 California Drive, zoned C-2.
0
At the time of the hearing all persons interested will be heard.
For further particulars reference is made to the Planning Department.
MARGARET MONROE
CITY PLANPIER
April 17, 1987
�.�tr C�tt� IIf �uxlt�tr��tm�
SAN MATEO COUNTY
CITY HALL- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010
NOTICE OF PUBL,IC HEARING
REVIEW OF LIGHTING PLAN
TEL: (415) 342-8931
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Monday, the 18th day of May, 1987 , at
the hour of 7:30 P.M., in the City Hall Council Chambers , 501 Primrose Road,
Burlingame, California the City Council of the City of Burlingame will conduct a
public hearing on the application to review the liqhtinq plan for the new
parking structure at 150 California Drive, zoned C-2.
At the time of the hearing all persons interested will be heard.
For further particulars reference is made to the Planning Department.
MARGARET MONROE
CITY PLANNER
May 8, 1987
NOTE TO FILE: 150 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
I looked in the Building Department file for an electrical
permit for this new parking structure and found that no
electrical permits have been issued. The fees charged on
the building permit didn't include fees for electrical.
Helen Williams
3/13/87
• j
/�V l�C�.s.'7��%�t'X�l H`�--' Y °'P �
. ._.__ ....,.._.,......_�'.._..,.__n.��.
!
. , .�/ � .
��� /�',,, .- � /� ��v: � �N 3 - � _��7 . " ,(�.y,�� �,��, � :��'; _ . ��y,., �-- J
_�; . �, �.
J /2 -0 % : �4.1�„�N-u-/ �%'H-r'r�it.%�J QY/ GL�%��2.!-z ry.L �� //yiCG��'`1 i-�,
J l� �
� �,� �'�z�-� �: ,
/j��u,. �Lti� �i�fi �-I:,GF..��/ /�'�r,r� �'� � Q ,'j� �
/ C1
(�-4 � �s,�._C� �l.r �FL/�; �
/ '� , C � / /�� , y/.�.
C� :i�% , r C-. .'�-� r: -���r ef `,t�r �l''...��� � ���V . �s?.f� !
�� ���'�� � � � . � 7� . /
U � i'�
;�f%c_a y�G ,��"Ciu._.� � 2:�� '��.._; �,. �-#�� . ( �o�.�-�.....s� ,�G�.�
� ;� �; � �� /
�(.<c-y,_,, /1'=-� 7'��c� �, .- /� �o /vr7 C��wr `� �i2a-,�.k./ac /..��.�n�
J '. � ` :
r.+� p�+�;,,;'ai: _ ..mwM1r «p�^.'r,u%s .� r . . .
. � . .. . � � � .
- . .� 4�. =:r:,
` ( � „' l.li,� Ci {;"I;:•I ��n5��: �
1 t y>, � � � � . �. 1 1 ...' u ._ . . . ,
�,�M� 5
���"r x� �L';'.i;I;��; ^_?,;,,T,.-,�i '
' n�'T' V....' Phor,F. 342-3381 ... ,. � .
,� . EXT 81 , .
�� , . . � '' • ;
��; ' . � ;
� /�' P1an �i�eck C�rr:^�n�s �i
' YJob Address: �D '
�.Job Descriptien• � � ��tt �lans Suhmitted;
Plan Check ho: Date .]ans Che�_ker.: - ''
llse ! Zone: Pl cns ChecSced R� : '
Fi re Zone; � Da �e P1 ans Res ubr�i tted: • ��
tOccupancy: .. _ Uate Pl�:ns °echer_�;ed: � �
�` " —__ Plans Approved t3�:
�
=__ =_____________=__________________________________________--_______=___________- I
. ; � � � � � ��(i� !�j?�%� --, ---_
...� ` �
��, ������� � ,�- �
�� � � � � �
� � ' ����v �`��'��-� � �� � �
�� r �
�: ;
''�;�,1'.,� .
:��: -
�6-�l 2 y / 2
� _
� 6� X i�•.�
<
----
.�
G� C� ,,
�
x i
> - ��� '� �
_ �?
�� • y� �> ,��
���i � r''�;�n �>�;
X � = � a;-�� � �
?�/ �'�-, `�.�-�1-� .
���. �.S�r�C'� ==��.... /�-1� J �
� o;�,�j C�'C �{ � / � �
.��
/� /� L
/ (
��J� o _
� ���.��-��:�-� - �
�
— i
��
/2—,
� X2u= � �v�
�ra�� = ���-�
,�� v _ �
, _ j:�f
J . �'�
S iv �
; ��
1�
,
�
��� ;
..
� ° �xw,� ,, _ . } �.� na .� � : _ . , • �. �, a: � ��u, � ' � . . _
Jx.. : r „ ; .
. ,.r e�.,.�, .,.....�,. a..a ....�i__ "___ ..,,.. . > ._,.i�_�...,.
.s .
,,
�r�� /. �,
_�� � �l, �
�, .
_ , .. . ..� w. �
_ _._ , :. _ _
� ` , �� G���/ �,�.�.��' _ ����lj�'r..;�' ��i.�
, . �G� _'_""�,�
, - �v�?c1 /��j �� c�� �`�
� ��� / 6�
��� / � 6 �
�
�� � - ���7 �6 y
�,
,
� j ,� ����� � Z �"�
`
� �a - �� 2 ��
,I � y�s� �� ��� �
' �6 �'�� ���� �'�.�i����.� --- � � �o
� , �� � � ,•���..e,.�.� �` p� _ , , ...
� �:,�-�.f .�.� �'�.-�
S �' � � ���� �
I �G� G�
�,.��C %�' �:SS�'��� %�' �� S .�,�5 � �� �
G� � `i /" �,
(�C,� � � r /'..-
— 2 � — D /C� c� `%C� 9' ��� �..� �i�-G� �-' �����.,,.r' ,��
/ J � �� � ,
�,�.�������.� ,� , I . .
���� � /���5 , _ �
� ,�--- /. °� %� � � �. ��'- � .��: /,�/1��J�/y
/V�,�r( ✓ � ��� � U / � � � . �YiI �(�"'.
�" CQ�, �'/ �,�
���- � �y�c��-,- e= �t �,�� � �l
. �
� : �ir�� -- /� -�.C-�'/�`G�
�D/'� `/ ' �c_..� — �� �� " � � �- • � ` J � �
-����
�.� _ ��o- 92 X � s
�� � 3�y �-� = , �� �
� `.rvp
� . f` 7 �� �� ��;;;j./J �,/:+���I �✓'� y `� .+��� �,yr J. .L� .!� �, y/ ��C.Y(,, K�.� „�.� . v'" �.,� -
� ��.�4���� ' � ' . . . . . . . . , . ..
�,'// � ,.° i f r'�� � `' � �' � '�����.> � �
. � � ,r .' ��~�--�' �^'� � �n i_,,,� .,.�, i V '-.f'� �' � r/�/ C.". . / �� ��� .
I V �� /C.� � "f �,,,�,��..,= r..'�;'C� y�l�.� ���
, %�!�
� /�--f �'�_ � - � �'�
, � .
`� ,���5 �- �"� "� , ,� S � � �O �,,
, '�c�' Ct''%�� �rf �� ��' dJ� yC�� c. �—
�' f�` � ��,�;� � �"� �/�rv�� � '
v �`�7G�r�
_� � � f�,�.�il r' ��� �-�.
� ���C��S � � , � �� _
� � �. , , . ��.2 .� f -- ��1 -� --
� � �._`/ �- ��,
,�- �� ���,�� �- �� ,
�� �" � �,1!;..� 7. � �e"'�' � ,'f � l.- � � -i J ,.� ��'� �
�- y�� �. ��� s,�� ���.�� �'�
0 ��/�,� �� C/
°� G�/ / � �.w-�.�- � s��- � �
�/ �i/' �Cj ' � ,�eX f 2-� �-�L������� � �{f� �''' p D"�� i
�1-t-0 l�(c.t�-L.• ��C�� ����7a�i�-C �7�`�/ �i... Gn-vi �(i��.e'*'l �en , ��f
u� J o
9'- ��' �' � ��'�' � � �-'��
. __�. . � _�— _ �l ._ .. � ���. 1. ' � 1 . . —. _.,:. .- � � � �,—_ ., y, J . __ .1.. �:,e:+' - . ... .. .
. � .- . .. . . , � _ . J �, __. . .. . . . „.,, . ..
�7� b Y...: S A :`; � , . . . ' . . ' � . . . . . . . . . . . .. . : ...
� . . � � . .... . . ' . —�
�ic� �' • - - . ,
` �_��r�;���,.. � CiTI' C�� �U=,:. ',� .
. i . . .:',; , _ .
r�i:.li?:�� i �'_�''` I. _'� I ,
• . _ . �
• • •i
�,: , .
, ,r PhGr,E�: 342-3381 EXT. c31 . •. •
. .• ' ' � j.
f�y�_t� d �' . . • f
� Plan �� �
' ;eck Cc�r--an*_s •�
., , � ;
v�,,,=,� 'Job Address • ��� �G� • Date Pl �ns Su� ;ni t�ec:
`r� ' ,Job Descri pti en: � . �
Dzte ?laris Ct,e�_�pc.:
' ;Plan Check ho: Flcns Chnr_Ked'R'y'•
��'� � '�Use Zone: � ' ' � �
;: ,,, ,
Da�e P1ans R�.su��;i�ted:
� �.,o: ,� p• . � .
F� re Zon_ . Uate Pl �ns Pccher_�:ed:
Occupancy: Plans �pprovec+ ��:
,;; i
N, _______________________________________________—____________—__=_________________------
��'�!�'r%/ •r'/!� � ��^' /�T,' � l'-j� -,�., -- --,�
' � < < �` � .
,� - �'�',+�'�-'' _. �
I n' �''��;% rf �'/ ./ i'? ��_.� . c;J � a _.// :� F ,� � -'" ,,. . j-) ' , ' � � ' i�
. , � �� � ,� � � ��� ��.� v� i
� � ,� . �.. f,..
, ; -_ , I,
� �
, ��.,
`�•, . — � ^ / C� Ci� � v:/����� � '�% r'"a�r'�,,,,�'� �"-!�� i
' _. i
" i l'
I
,. i
� � �''� � � • �
� � � `•
�.,�� . .
' i
i,
h, i ,�;
� . . , �.,
• • �
_ �,
';�.`
�
,i' ,
�
0
i 'i,
I';
l�
;:�•,
� ��
❑
��rc
., �
City Council Minutes -
May 18, 1987
Mayor Barton closed the public hearing.
Councilman Pagliaro moved adoption of ORDINANCE 1344 as written.
SeMconded by Councilman Lembi.
Cou"•ncil discussed at length; having no percentage or nt�,ym"`ber
requirements; difference between setting specific sm�king area and
letti`ng restaurants move the area around at their �'ed; 50 percent
figure�'1,has been in ordinance for three months, w�didn't council
discuss`'�oncerns earlier; see nothing wrong wit��i`letting restaurant
decide sm�pking area size necessary; sav no pr.oblem vith giving non
smoker pre erence in work places; enforcem�,n't of work place policies
would go to uperior Court, city will not��enforce.
Councilman Lemb' withdrew his second ,¢�+the motion. The motion then
died for lack of second. �` '
Councilman Pagliaro�*�then moved t adopt ORDINANCE 1344 as revised to
delete the 50 percent� requirem t for restaurants but including the
provision that non smo 'ng ar a be provided in res[aurants r+ith
seating over 50 and tha pr erence be given to the non smoking
employee in any work plac smoking policy, Seconded by Councilman
Lembi, carried unanimous y-0 on roll call vote, Councilman Mangini
being absent.
PUBLIC HEARING - SE ND READIN - ORDINANCE 1345 - MAKING CLERICAL
CHANGES IN WEED AB EMENT PROCED E
City Attorney r viewed the City Cler 's memo of April 27 in which
recommended c ncil hold public heari and take actiQn. This
orctinance wi make clerical changes in eference to the time of
council me ings and the manner in which y assessments are place
the tax r 1, it will reflect our current p ctice.
Mayor arton opened the public hearing. There b'ng no public
comm ts, the hearing was closed.
C ncilman Amstrup moved adoption of ORDINANCE 1345. onded by
ouncilman Lembi, carried unanimously 4-0 on roll call vo
she
on
REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON LIGATING PLANS FOR AUTO SALES
AT 150 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
City Planner reviewed her memo of May 8 in which she recommended
council hold a public hearing and take action. The applicants, Arata
Motor Sales, are requesting lighting for the car sales area at 150
California Drive. There is a four level parking structure as part of
this suto dealership. The front 29 feet along California Drive and
the top deck of the parking structure are to be used as auto display
and sales areas. The applicant proposes to place eight 400 watt
halide light fixtures on three poles rising 18 feet above the top deck
of the parking structure. The 13ghts will be shielded so that the
direct light is focused on the parking deck. Along the California
frontag� they will place five 20 foot poles with 1000 watt halide
fixtures. These poles are existing and are now in place, the fixtures
are tilted to direct the light onto the site, there is a small
spillover of light onto the public sidewalk. The parking deck lights
will be on from dusk until 10 p.m., as will the lights on California.
The lights will be placed on a timer. Ten percent of the ceiling
lights in the parking structure will be kept on all night for'security
as will lights in the stairwells of the structure, the only lights
left on all night on the top deck will be the exit sign lights. The
Planning Commission approved the lighting plan vith conditions at its
me2ting of April 27, 1987,
Councilman PagZiaro noted he had called this project up for reviev and
that he had visited the four story parking structure and there are
some existing lights there; City Planner said if plan is approved
tonight only the lights on plan would be allowed.
Mayor Barton opened the public hearing.
Blake Mason, architect for the applicant, reviewed the placement of
lights and the fact that they would be shielded to reflect downvard;
�
;,
., -
the present lights are temporary and are used for sales; the
applicants want to improve the lights with the plan before council
tonight; Councilman Amstrup wondered about lights on other levels of
the structure shining out into neighborhood; Mason noted all lights
would go off at 10 p.m. and if there is problem they might be able to
shield them in some way; council noted its concern about complaints
from the neighborhood.
There being no other public comments, Mayor Barton closed the public
hearing.
Councilman Amstrup moved to uphold the Planning Commission and approve
the lighting plans with conditions. Seconded by Councilman Lembi.
Councilman Pagliaro again noted his concern about the neighboring
properties; the fact that they already have lights there; lie objected
to putting up 18 foot poles on the roof and felt the present lights
were adequate. In response to council, City Planner noted the projec[
rrould be reviewed in 6 months, or earlier if there are any neighbor
complaints.
The motion carried 3-1 on roll call vote, Councilman Pagliaro voting
no.
REVfEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON AUTO SALES LOT AT 1028 CAROLHAN
ir'ESOLUTION 42-87 - APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT .�
City lanner reviewed her memo of May 8 in which she recommend�,d�r
counci hold public hearing and take action. The applicants,�re
requesti a special use permit to operate a used car sales;��'�ot and
auto brok age business in the existing building on the f,Yont portion
of the sit at 1028 Carolan. The applicants are propos�•hg to operate
car sales fr m this site seven days a veek with three��ull time
employees on ite and 10 to 15 customers a day; press�ntly they have a
similar busine elsewhere in Burlingame. They pr,o`"pose to use the
existing lighti standards along the Carolan fr ntage, they will add
two 300 watt fixt res to each pole. The new f' tures will be shielded
to direct light do ward and they requested at the lights be on from
7 p.m, to 6 a.m, da y; Planning required t�at the lights go off at 10
p.m. but low level se urity lights will b allowed to remain on until
6 a.m. Previous use o this site was ti e repair and sales. The rear
100 feet of the site wo d be used by ller Chevrolet for new car
storage, Miller holds th lease on th,p'dentire site and is subleasing a
portion of the site to the applican s. At the Planning Commission
meeting there was concern a out th�fire exit access at the rear of
the site; applicants have me wi,H the Fire Department and a
satisfactory arrangement has worked out and is now included in
the conditions.
Councilman Pagliaro noted� obj tion to the lighting plan not being
reviewed before installat' n and wo ld only be reviewed if there were
neighbor complaints; he �• s concerne about spillover of lighting onto
neighboring properties.� Other counci members were satisfied that
review would take plac�e in six months, r with any complaints.
Mayor Barton opened he public hearing, ere being no comments, the
hearing was closed Applicants were prese and one walked out of the
meeting. Mayor B rton said questions brough up tonight could have
been answered by staff before calling the pro ct up for review.
Councilman A�rup wondered if car repairs woul be done on site, City
Planner said the use permit does not include car ervice and if there
were any ca,t services performed the applicants wou be in violation
of their s�ecial permit.
Council n Pagliaro moved to approve the use permit by doption of
RESOLU ON 42-87 with conditions and the additional con 'tion that
direc lighting be confined to the site. Seconded by Cou ilman
Lemb', carried unanimously by roll call vote.
AM]�SEMENT PERMIT — MARRIOT'
City Attorney reviewed his memo of April 9 in which he recommende�
granting an Amusement Permit for a disc jockey in the lounge of th
3
.'�