HomeMy WebLinkAbout247-251 California Drive - Staff ReportTO
DATE:
� �� ���
1 / r n /�
E cirr o ( i ; f�?,r' I +� J �..�'—_
:
,�.t� .� r � __ �.. ,� � 1 e « (
AGENDA
BURLJNGAME ITEM 7t
�,�����:,� STAFF REPORT MTG. 9_9-92
�.,.. ,,,,,, D A T E
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBMITTED
AUGUST 31, 19 9 2 e Y ��t--~
CITY PLANNER APPROVED
FROM: BY
REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON A NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
S�B�E�T: SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A LIVE THEATER AT
247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-1 BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL
�REA. SUB AREA B
RECOMMENDATION•
City Council should hold a public hearing and take action. Affirmative
acti�n should be by resolution with findings first for the negative
declaration, then for the special permit and variance. These actions may
be taken together or separately so long as the findings for each are
clear. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the
record. Facts in the staff report may be included in findings for the
record. (Action alternatives and legal requirements for findings are
attached at the end of the staff report.)
Conditions recommended by the Planning Commission:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to
the Planning Department and date stamped May 21, 1992, Sheets P-1
and P-2i _ - -
2. that the conditions of the City Engineer's May 26, 1992 memo and
the chief Building Inspector's May 22, 1992 memo shall be met;
3. that there shall be a minimum of a one hour time interval between
shows on the Saturdays when two shows are scheduled; addition of
more days with two shows or extending the number of days with
�• s�iows_s�ll require an amendment to this use permit;
��
4. that any pedest�an q�e�u� ng shall occur on the sidewalk to the
south of 247 California Drive and the theater operator shall be
� responsible for ensuring the queuing is orderly and allows other
pedestrians room to pass;
5. that a passenger loading zone shall be provided in front of the
theater on California Drive to the approval of the City Engineer
and this loading zone shall be monitored and enforced for use, for
loadinq only, before and after performances enforced by the
theater managers;
6. that the theater shall operate four evenings a week, Thursday
through Sunday, with one show 8:30-10:30 P.M. Thursday and Friday,
two shows 7:00-9:00 P.M. and 10:00-12:00 A.M. (midnight) Saturday
and 7:00-9:00 P.M. Sunday with the maximum seating of 99 patrons
and maximum employees of 12, and no food service except beverages;
�
2
7. that the theater premise shall not be used or leased for other
kinds of theatrical, social, charity or civic events outside of
the hours permitted herein for shows, without amendment to this
use permit;
8. that the project as built shall meet Uniform Building and Uniform
Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame and all necessary
improvements shall be made and building permits finaled and an
occupancy permit issued before any tickets shall be sold or
performances scheduled;
9. that the operator shall receive and maintain an entertainment
permit from the City Council prior to selling any tickets or
holding any performances;
10. that this use shall be reviewed for conformance in nine (9) months
(May, 1993) and every two years thereafter or upon complaint;
11. that this action shall not be final until the parking variance has
been acted upon;
12. that the applicant shall submit to the city before receiving a
building permit a written lease agreement coterminous with the
time period of his lease on the theater site with the San Mateo
Union High School District for the use of up to 50 spaces in the
Burlingame High School parking lot Thursday, Friday, Saturday and
Sunday evenings from 6:00 P.M. to 12:30 A.M. 52 weeks a year;
13. that if, for any reason, the school district voids this lease
agreement, the use permit for the theater shall be reviewed by the
City of Burlingame within 30 days and the theater use may� be
revoked if alternative parking is not provided;
14. that the applicant shall provide security in the high school
parking lot Thursday through Sunday evenings from 6:0o P.M. to
12:30 A.M.;
15. that the theater operator shall provide shuttle bus service from
the Burlingame High School parking lot to the theater and back in
a continuous circuit far one-half hour before and one-half hour
after each show; and R
16. that the parking arrangement and use including shuttle service
shall be reviewed for compliance with these conditions and public
safety six months after the theater opens and each year thereafter
or upon complaint.
3
�lanning Commission Action
At their meeting on July 13, 1992 the Planning Commission held a public
hearing and voted 5-2 to approve the negative declaration (Commissioners
Deal and Jacobs voting no) and the special permit for a live theater
(Commissioners Ellis and Jacobs voting no) at 247 California Drive. In
their action on the negative declaration the Commission found that this
proposal was a significant reduction from the previous proposal (150
seats reduced to 99 seats, 34$ reduction with corresponding reduction in
vehicle trips), the traffic study appears satisfactory if off-site
parking and shuttle service is provided. Concern was expressed that the
parking-shuttle approach may not work.
Regarding the use permit and variance the Commissioners commented about
the off-site parking, its availability for those who arrive early to eat
downtown, inducement to use lot, inclination of people to park as close
to their destination as possible; cannot act until know where off-street
parking will be located, would favor if within walking distance;
dependence on a shuttle could discourage people from using other downtown
facilities before and after shows. Suggested continuation on parking
variance so applicant can locate a specific lot. However Commission felt
action on the negative declaration and use permit was appropriate so the
applicant would know the Commission's position on the project,
understanding that there is a problem with parking.
Subsequently, at their meeting on August 10, 1992 the Planning Commission
held a continued public hearing and voted 4-1-2 (Commissioner Jacobs
dissenting, Commissioners Ellis and Mink absent) to approve a 74 space
parking var-iance for a live theater at 247 California Drive. The hearing
focused on the parking proposal submitted which allowed the applicant to
use 50 parking spaces at Burlingame High School Thursday through Sunday
nights. The applicant noted full shuttle service would be provided to
patrons both ways, to and from each show. He noted he would use
incentives to encourage patrons to park at the high school. In their
action the Commissioners noted the applicant has provided off-site
parking and shuttle service as requested, if parking is a problem people
will not attend the theater and the problem will work itself out, the
site is unusual in that it faces California Drive and has no parking,
public or private, behind it.
BACKGROUND•
Harry DeOrnellas, applicant, is requesting a negative declaration, use
permit and 74 space parking variance in order to convert a 4,999 SF
retail space with a mezzanine to a live comedy theater at 247 California
Drive, zoned C-1 Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area, Sub Area B. The
proposal, as revised from the original submittal, is for a 99 seat live
theater, open four evenings a week Thursday through Sunday with
performances between 7:00 P.M. and midnight. On Saturday there will be
two performances with all other nights, a single performance.
4
The structure is built lot line to lot line so no on-site parking is
provided. The previous use was retail sales. The 99 seat theater will
generate a parking demand for 74 spaces (1.5 persons per car). A higher
demand will be generated when shows are offered back-to-back on Saturday
(a maximum of 148 spaces, some reuse of first show patron's spaces can be
expected). After the Planning Commission continued action on the item
the applicant proposed to provide 50 off-site parking spaces in the
Burlingame High School parking lot. He also proposed a shuttle service
one-half hour before and after each show to transport patrons to and from
the theater. Since the Planning Commission's action on the parking
variance on August 10, 1992 the Superintendent of the San Mateo Union
High School District has notified Mr. DeOrnellas and the city that he
will be unable to use 50 spaces in the Burlingame High School parking lot
(Nicholas Gennaro, Superintendent, San Mateo Union High School District,
August 28, 1992 letter).
The City Council's action on this matter is a new hearing. The fact that
the off-site parking is no longer available should be considered.
However, the change in facts does not require that this item be returned
to the Planning Commission before the City Council may act.
History
In January, 1992 the applicant submitted a proposal to develop this site
with a 150 seat live theater to operate four nights a week Thursday
through Sunday between 7:00 P.M. and midnight. The proposal required a
108 space parking variance. The Planning Commission denied this request
March 9, 1992. It went to the City Council or� appeal on April 20, 1992.
At the end of the public hearing before the City Council the applicant
requested a denial without prejudice so he could go back to the Planning
Commission with a 30� reduction in the project and secure nighttime
parking from the banks in the area to mitigate parking concerns. The
City Council denied the project without prejudice unanimously.
Councilmembers did note that the project was a good idea but not located
in this area; members expressed serious concerns about parking impacts
and the size of the parking variance needed.
The applicant resubmitted this proposal with a 34� reduction in seating
and no parking mitigation. The Planning Commission acted on July 13,
1992 and approved the negative declaration and the special use permit for
the reduced (99 seats, 12 employees) project. The Commission continued
for two meetings action on the 74 space parking variance to allow the
applicant to come up with an off-site parking area to mitigate the
parking variance. On August l0, 1992 the Commission held a public
hearing on the parking variance and reviewed the applicant's proposal to
provide parking for 50 customer cars with shuttle service at Burlingame
High School. The Commission granted the parking variance with the
Burlingame High School 50 space off-site parking and shuttle, completing
their action on the project.
5
EXHIBITS•
- Action Alternatives, Findings for a Negative Declaration, Findings
for a Variance and Special Permit
- Monroe letter to Harry DeOrnellas, August 18, 1992, advising of
Council project review hearing
- Nicholas Gennaro, Superintendent, San Mateo Union High School
District letter to Harry DeOrnellas, August 28, 1992
- George Huggins, District Manager of Operations/Grounds, San Mateo
Union High School District letter to Harry DeOrnellas, August 6,
1992
- Planning Commission Minutes, August 10, 1992
- Planning Commission Staff Report with attachments from all
previous reviews of this item
- Notice of Public Hearing mailed August 28, 1992
- Council Resolution
- Project Plans
MM/s
cc: Harry J. DeOrnellas, Jr. (applicant)
Eugene & Mary Ivani/Louis & Albina Ivani (property owners)
ACTION ALTERNATIVES
1. City Council may vote in favor of an applicant�s request.
If the action is a variance, use permit, hillside area
construction permit, fence exception or sign exception, the
Council must make the findings as required by the code.
Findings must be particular to the given property and
request. Actions on use permits should be by resolution. A
majority of the Council members seated during the public
hearing must agree in order to pass an affirmative motion.
2. City Council may deny an applicant's request. The reasons
for denial should be clearly stated for the record.
3. City Council may deny a request without prejudice. This
action should be used when the application made to .the City
Council is not the same as that heard by the "Planning
Commission; when a Planning Commission action has been
justifiably, with clear direction, denied without prejudice;
or when the proposed project raises questions or issues on
which the Council would like additional information or
additional design work before acting on a project.
Direction about additional information required to be given
to staff, applicant and Planning Commission should be made
very clear. Council should also direct whether any
subsequent hearing should be before the Council or the
Planning Commission.
FINDINGS FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Prior to acting on a project the City Council must approve the
Negative Declaration finding that on the basis of the Initial
Study and any comments received that there is no substantial
evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the
environment.
VARIANCE FINDINGS
(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 hardship;
(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;
(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..
SPECIAL PERMIT FINDINGS
(1) 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;
(2) the proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner
in accord with the Burlingame general plan and the purposes
of this title;
(3) 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.
�.�.E V�x.� .0".� ��.C�'�.���1"C.e
CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME� CALIFORNIA 94010 (415) 342-8625
August 18, 1992
Mr. Harry J. DeOrnellas, Jr.
6031 Meridian Avenue
San Jose, CA 95120
Dear Mr. DeOrnellas:
At the City Council meeting of August 17, 1992 the Council called up
for review your project at 247 California Drive, zoned C-1, Sub Area
B. A public hearing will be held on Wednesday, September 9, 1992 at
7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road.
We look forward to seeing you there to present your project. Please
call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely yours,
��i�G� 1�/l��_
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
cc: Eugene & Mary Ivani/Louis & Albina Ivani (property owners)
City Clerk
San Mateo Unior� High School District
Nicholas J. Gennaro, Superintendent
650 North Delaware Street
San Mateo, CA 94401-1732
(415) 348-8834
August 28, 1992
Mr. Harry Deornellas
6031 Meridian Avenue
San Jose, CA 95120
Dear Mr. Deornellas:
I have been reviewing district correspondence which encumbers the district to
meet certain obligations. This letter is inform you that I must rescind the
district's decision to allow your business permission to use parking spaces on
the Burlingame campus for the Melodrama Vaudeville Playhouse Live Comedy
Theater. In my judgment, it is not appropriate for the district to commit its
resources which may be needed for other activities occumng on the campus,
be they campus or other community events.
I regret having to inform you of this decision, but I believe it to be in the best
interest of the district.
Sincerely yours,
�
Nicholas J. ennaro, Ed.D.
Superintendent
pc: Mr. Huggins
Mr. Teshara
Mr. Mahaffy
Mr. Mohr
Members, Board of Trustees
;
. Mr. Argyres, Burlingame City Manager
Adult School — Aragon — Burlingame — Capuchino — Hillsda/e — Mills — Peninsula — San Mateo
(�' _ �� �- , ��
FROM DRLRND NI55qN
0Bi06i1992 14�48 FROM F�OM SAN MAtEO ADU�T SCN. T� 6?7.2�93
F. 1
_ P.02
. ;, , . „ ,. ,., . ,� ,,.�
San Mateo Unio� 1�'2g►h Sehaal �.��stri�t
�
Nichola� J. Ge,eno�o, S�cpsri��andan� s�o Norch Deiaware screec �
$�n Mateo. C�liforniu 84qp1
. (41b? 84$ - 8884 .
roY�...i'io:iloW �flCl..C1Yt.a
�u4ust b, 19�Z
N�rry aeprnell�f
603] Meridian Avenu�
9an �egp, CA 43120
'��R PREPARATION
R*i M�lQd�am1� Vaud�vlll• Pl�yhotti�
L11re Cnmedv Th��tier
��r,`:
� H������� y
f ' � , �� � 199?
CITY OF f�URLINGAME �•
P1�1111�:ING [)�.I� �T, .:
This is to confi�m eh�t th• I��lodrxna V�ud�vill� Pliyhoue� Livr Cp�pQdy Th�ater
have Aer�izsion ta use 9G parkinp SAecas at th� 9uriiog��pe Fiigh gchaal z�ta,
four {4a niqhti a Na�k, Thur�dRy �nd Frid�y f�om ��00 p.�n. to Ii:Od p;�e.�
Saturday f�a�n 6t30 p,m. ta 12:do d,��� Sunday frvm b=30 p.a, Co 9t30 p.m.
�l�ase phonp �n� �t f41�) 348-8834 Fxt, Z11, tu wark out fih� �final ��tasls.
81R ��ly,
,
6eorqe HUqq=n � .
Di�tritt M1lflaq�r of O�Q�atiCns16rnund9t
[t: Mau�iea 6on��1�:
La�ry Tpshara
Hstnan AlirCon
;
.i
p
.�
►d�t Sci�ooi -- Ara�an � Bu�inp�ame � Cdpcecii� — Hil,ladale —1�Izlts — Penineula — Sc�n Ma�lac�
. _ .,.IorA�_P. ez
RECEIUED FRon F. 2
�
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 14
August 10, 1992
the'terms of this pernait and that these lots shall not have a separate
gate on Airport Boulevard without amendment to this use permit; (4)
that the property owners of all parcels including those in.the original
permit shall be r��s�onsible for the installation and- maintenance of all
landscaping shown on the,,approved plans; failure-�to reasonably maintain
landscaping and public access as determined'by the Parks Director and
City Attorney shall result 3n.,revie`w of this permit and possible
revocation; (5) that as built�`'�e project shall meet all the
requirements of the Uniform`lBuilding'"Code and Uniform Fire Code as
amended by the City of�-�Burlingame; and (6j�-t,hat this permit shall be
reviewed for compliarice with all its conditions Yn�luding public access
and landscapir�g�' maintenance; in August, 1993 and�.., each two years
thereafter,.a� upon complaint. �� w,
.�., ,.. ,.
Mot�'�► as seconded by C. Galligan and approved 5-0-2 on roll call
�te, Cers Ellis and Mink absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
14. CONTINUED ACTION ON NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMIT AND
PARKING VARIANCE FOR A LIVE COMEDY THEATER AT 247 CALIFORNIA
-_ DRIVE, ZONED C-1 SUB AREA B
Reference staff report, 8/10/92, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed
details of the request, applicant's letters addressing provision of a
parking area and shuttle service to the theater, letter from San Mateo
Union High School District (August 6, 1992) giving permission for the
use of 50 parking spaces at Burlingame High School, required findings
for the variance. Six conditions were suggested for consideration at
the public hearing. A Commissioner requested applicant provide the
city with copy of his lease agreement with the school district prior to
receiving a building per�nit.
Chm. Deal opened the public hearing. Harry DeOrnellas, applicant, was
present. He advised his agreement for shuttle service was for full
service both ways, he could give the city a revised copy of letter.
Commission felt 50 parking spaces was adequate and questioned how he
would get people to go to the high school lot. Mr. DeOrnellas said he
would use incentives such as two for one beverages, directional signage
will be provided. There were no audience comments and the public
hearing was closed.
C. Graham found applicant has provided off-site parking and shuttle
service as requested at the meeting when the special permit was
approved, she did not believe all patrons would use the shuttle, if
parking is a problem people won't go to the theater, it will work
itself out; applicant has mitigated his problems, it is an unusual site
facing California Drive with no parking behind. C. Graham moved for
approval of the parking variance by resolution with the following
conditions: (1) that the applicant shall submit to the city before
receiving a building permit a written lease agreement coterminous with
the time period of his lease on the theater site with the San Mateo
Union High School District for the use of up to 50 spaces in the
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 15
August 10, 1992
Burlingame High School parkinq lot Thursday, Friday, Saturday and
Sunday evenings from 6:00 P.M. to 12:30 A.M. 52 weeks a year; (2) that
if, for any reason, the school district voids this lease agreement, the
use permit for the theater shall be reviewed by the City of Burlingame
within 30 days and the theater use may be revoked if alternative
parking is not provided; (3) that the applicant shall provide security
in the high school parking lot Thursday through Sunday evenings from
6:00 P.M. to 12:30 A.M.; (4) that the theater operator shall provide
shuttle bus service from the �urlingame High School parking lot to the
theater and back in a continuous circuit for one-half hour before and
one-half hour after each show; (5) that all the conditions for the July
13, 1992 Planning Commission action for the use permit shall be
included as a part of this action and the conditions of the August 10,
1992 action shall be considered a part of the action on the negative
declaration and use permit; and (6) that the parking arrangement and
use including shuttle service shall be reviewed for compliance with
these conditions and public safety six months after the theater opens
and each year thereafter or upon complaint.
Motion was seconded by C. Galligan. Comment on the motion: would like
to see a condition providing some incentive to park at the high school;
applicant knows what Commission would like, don't believe incentive
would be enforceable; suggest some type of brochure to focus people on
the high school parking.
Motion was approved 4-1-2 on roll call vote, C. ,7acobs dissenting,
Cers Ellis and Mink absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
�20M THE FLOOR
The� were no
comments from the floor.
�'
.,�'''`��
CITY PLANNER REPORTS
- CP noted�,,copies of minutes of the City Council regular meeting of
August 3, 1992 were at Commissioner's seats this evening.
- Review of Draft, Ordinance or�.:�idonconforming Second Units in
R-1 District '
r
CP Monroe reviewed her me�no` of 8-10-92 which summarized the proposed
draft ordinance and ide�tif'i�ed the key points: criteria and procedure
for designating the;.-primary'�dwelling unit on such lots, allowing
improvements to des�ignated primary units with a special permit, and
allowing no expansion, only maintenance/repair, to identified secondary
units. Commission approved the draft ordinance and directed that the
draft ordinance be forwarded to City��ouncil.for action.
,�
� �
� � �'
, � r
P.C. 8/10/92
Item #14
MEMO TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CITY PLANNER
SUBJECT: CONTINUED ACTION ON A NEGATIVE DECLARATION SPECIAL USE
PERMIT FOR A LIVE THEATER AND A PARKING VARIANCE AT 247 CALIFORNIA
DRIVE. ZONED C-1 BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA, SUBAREA B.
On July 13, 1992, Harry DeOrnellas, the applicant, requested a
negative declaration, use permit and 74 space parking variance in
order to convert a 4,993 SF retail space with mezzanine to a live
comedy theater at 247 California Drive. The Commission approved the
negative declaration and special permit for theater use. However,
the Commissioners did not act on the parking variance and
continued the item for two meetings to allow the applicant
additional time to address an off street parking mitigation for the
74 parking space variance requested.
History
The original project was denied without prejudice by the City
Council in April. The request resubmitted to the Planning
Commission on July 13, 1992 was a 34$ reduction in the number of
seats in the theater (150 to 99) and a corresponding 31� reduction
in vehicle trips generated by the project (1.5 persons per car). At
their July 13 meeting the Planning Commission approved the negative
declaration and use permit for live theater with the condition that
a parking variance be approved. The action on the parking variance
was continued for two meetings in order for the applicant to secure
off street parking for his patrons; an action he had proposed to
the City Council and they had included in their denial without
prejudice.(City Council minutes April 20, 1992).
Applicants Letters
Mr. DeOrnellas submitted two letters one addressing providing a
parking area and a second addressing providing shuttle service from
the parking area to the theater. In the letter regarding parking
(August 3, 1992, DeOrnellas) he state that he has verbal approval
from Mr. John Mahaffy (Director of Finance) at the Burlingame
School Board that he may "use sufficient spaces at the Burlingame
High School to meet the departments stated requirements". The
letter also noted that written agreement would not be available
until early August. The second letter was from Matthew Andress,
sales manager of Super Shuttle San Francisco. The letter included
a shuttle schedule at 30 minute intervals. The letter acknowledges
Mr. DeOrnellas' inquiry and proposes a price (blanked out). (Note:
the letter appears to be a response to proposal.)
��aff Review
Planning staff contacted several parties who would be affected by
use of the Burlingame High School Parking lot on Thursday, Friday,
Saturday and Sunday evenings. Mr. John Mahaffy, Director of
Finance for the San Mateo Union High School District, noted in our
conversation that there was lots of parking at the high school now
used by a variety of people, including those in the city park. The
school district could use the money and the security proposed by
the applicant. They were not going to guarantee a number of
spaces; the agreement was on a space available basis. He did note
that the School Board met at Burlingame High School on Thursday
night twice a month. Also he observed that the school, City (corp
yard and park) and tennis club all use the lot regularly.
Staff then contacted the City Recreation Director to inquire about
the parking lot use. He noted that there are night baseball games
at the baseball diamond Monday through Friday nights 6 P.M. to 10
P.M. from April to October. In addition the school runs an adult
education program at night week days virtually year round. These
students park in the school lot and on Carolan. He felt that the
time of greatest parking impact would be Thursday night. His
observation was that on some Thursday evenings there were as few as
10 to 15 spaces left in the lot.
The Parks Director commented that the 20 or so spaces facing the
park in the south portion of the lot (by the baseball diamond and
corp yard) were on City property. He noted that when the ballpark
lights are not on, the adjacent school parking area is poorly lit
and has no security. The remainder of the parking area is also
poorly lit after dark.
From the aerial and a site inspection staff determined that there
were about 292 parking spaces at the high school in the three lots
(by the park 109, at the rear of the school, 100; on the east by
the gym on the Oak Grove side, 83). During the day these spaces
are shared by the students, administration and teachers, the park
department corporation yard, and the Peninsula Tennis Club. At
night these spaces serve the adult education students and their
teachers, the Board of Education meetings and any other groups who
meet at the school, social activities at the tennis club, and
people using the facilities at the park. Based on the applicant's
proposal his customers would compete on an equal basis with the
other users for available space in these lots. The shuttle
schedule provided does not address the system to be used for pickup
and delivery, nor does it provide delivery service on Thursday and
Friday evenings.
In his August 4, 1992 memo the City Attorney expresses concern
about the location of the off street parking spaces. He notes that
they are located on the east side of California Drive. On Thursday
and Friday shuttle service is to the theater only, so patrons must
walk back across California, South Lane, the railroad tracks, and
Carolan. In addition in some cases patrons may choose to walk for
a variety of reasons. He is concerned about this increase in
pedestrian activity across California Drive and the e�cposure the
city might have.
Findings for a 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 hardship;
(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;
(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.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission should reopen the public hearing with
specific attention to the parking variance request and testimony
regarding it. Since action the negative declaration and use permit
have been completed, affirmative action on the parking variance
should be by resolution and should include findings. The City
Attorney advises that the affirmative action on the special permit
is only valid if the parking variance is granted. The reasons for
any action should be clearly stated for the record. At the public
hearing the following conditions should be considered:
1. that the applicant shall have a written lease agreement
coterminous with the time period of his lease on the theater site
with the San Mateo Union High School District for the use of up to
148 spaces in the Burlingame High School parking lot Thursday,
Friday, Saturday and Sunday evenings from 6 P.M. to 12:30 A.M. 52
weeks a year;
2. That if, for any reason, the school district voids this lease
agreement, the use permit for the theater shall be reviewed by the
City of Burlingame within 30 days and the theater use may be
revoked if alternative parking is not provided;
3. That the applicant shall provide security in the high school
parking lot Thursday through Sunday evenings from 6 P.M. to 12:30
A.M.;
4. That the theater operator shall provide shuttle bus service
from the Burlingame High School parking lot to the theater and back
in a continuous circuit for one half hour before and one half hour
after each show;
5. That all the conditions for the July 13, 1992 Planning
Commission action for the use permit shall be included as a part of
this action and the conditions of the August 10, 1992 action shall
be considered a part of the action on the negative declaration and
use permit; and
6. That the parking arrangement and use including shuttle service
shall be reviewed for compliance with these conditions and public
safety six months after the theater opens and each year thereafter
or upon complaint.
VI� r�%���.---
Marga�t Monroe
City Planner
/'
i
.- �
�.�".e l'�Z.�� .U�.0 ���"��YC.��CC�'YC.e
CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME� CALIFORNIA 94010 (415) 342-8625
July 20, 1992
Mr. Harry J. DeOrnellas, Jr.
6031 Meridian Avenue
San Jose, CA 95120
Dear Mr. DeOrnellas:
The Planning Commission in their action on July 13, 1992 gave you two
meetings, or until August 10, 1992, to appear before them with a
parking alternative. Materials for the staff report must be submitted
no later than August 3 to be included in the packet.
Planning Commission's action on your application for a negative
declaration, special use permit for live theater and a parking variance
at 247 California Drive will be finalized at the meeting on August 10,
1992.
Sincerely yours,
� J�� �,
���'
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
cc: Eugene & Mary Ivani/Louis & Albina Ivani (property owners)
- . �- h� ''1�. � ��--'�i,�� l ^ �
��' C��—��/' . --�Q �P���-e.� i, �— vP cc�'
-�. �Ql.t�h. C��. rY-,e����en �,,, �--� .
�� � �� ���� �� ��� ���
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 8
July 13, 1992
C.`�ha,�n�found since there was no opposition to this request it did
not appear �it would be injurious to the neighbors anc}- °if will be in
accord with the Burlingame general plan and zoning���rdinance. She then
moved for approval of the special permit.,to���install a satellite dish
antenna in the rear yard with the fol.l-dwing conditions: (1) that the
antenna shall be placed as shown orr°'�he plans submitted to .the Planning
Department and date stamped�•June il'; 1992; �(�) that the existing
rooftop antenna shall b.�.-removed and building.permits for the antenna
shall be obtained w�.t�irin 30 days of the date of this action; and (3)
that this proj t''shall meet all Uniform Building and Uniform Fire
Codes as ame ed by the City of Burlingame.
Motio as seconded by C. Jacobs and approved 7-0 on roll call vote.
A al procedures were advised.
Recess 9:25 P.M.; reconvene 9:35 P.M.
14. NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE.FOR
A LIVE COMEDY THEATER AT 247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-1
f BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA, SUB AREA B
Reference staff report 7/13/92, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed
details of the request, previous theater proposal for this site which
was denied without prejudice by the City Council, negative declaration,
staff review, Planning staff comment, required findings, study meeting
questions. Eleven conditions were suggested for consideration at the
public hearing.
CP conf irmed there wi 11 be one hour between shows on Saturdays when two
shows are scheduled, a parking study was completed for the previous
proposal, the negative declaration assumed no off-site parking. The
Chair suggested a condition be added that a contract for parking for 50
cars and necessary shuttle service be completed before an entertainment
permit can be granted. A Commissioner asked if this use were granted,
but the business failed, could another kind of theater use go in this
location, she was concerned about X-rated theater. Staff noted that if
another theater could operate within the conditions, the use permit
went with the land and it could use this site.
Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. Harry DeOrnellas, applicant, was
present. He thought the need for an entertainment permit from City
Council would address the commissioner's concern about X-rated theater.
They have attempted to mitigate al the concerns of the Commission and
Council to the extent possible; they appreciate the new traffic lights
at California and Burlingame Avenue providing safe pedestrian crossing;
shuttle service to parking will reduce potential danger to their
patrons; patrons will receive literature with their tickets about the
availability of parking lots and/or shuttle service; he felt people
would prefer and use an organized parking facility as opposed to
hunting for parking nearby; they will provide an attendant and there
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 9
July 13, 1992
will be no charge for the parking or shuttle; he was asked if he had
considered the possibility of a discount on a future show if patrons
parked in his lot.
Commission discussed with applicant why there was no firm proposal for
a leased parking lot and shuttle service at this time; applicant said
this would be completed before occupancy, they understand it is
important; they are still investigating possibilities but should have
a firm proposal within 30 days; they understand all signage will
require a separate application at a later time.
Jeff Schubiner spoke in favor of this live theater use: it will be a
benefit to the community bringing people to the downtown restaurants
and shops, it will be better and safer for people on the Peninsula who
now must go to San Francisco for live theater; parking is not such a
problem in downtown Burlingame in the evening, a lot of restaurants in
this area are closing, live theater would bring people to these
restaurants.
Berry Hurley, property owner in the 200 block of Highland Avenue, spoke
in opposition: he thought this was an inappropriate location, there are
no lights, a shuttle bus will not work, people will not drive downtown
to use a shuttle, where is a 50 space parking lot going to be found.
There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was
closed.
C. Galligan found this proposal is a significant reduction from the
previous proposal, the traffic study appears to be satisfactory,
attaining an off-site shuttle system is important, traffic would be the
most significant impact. With these findings and including the
mitigations as conditions to any further approval, C. Galligan moved
for approval of Negative Declaration ND-450P, seconded by C. Kelly.
Comment on the motion: do not think shuttle parking will work and
cannot vote for the negative declaration without a parking solution.
Motion to approve the negative declaration passed 5-2 on roll call
vote, Cers Deal and Jacobs voting no.
Commission discussed their concern about the parking situation: would
a 50 car off-site parking lot with shuttle when necessary be
acceptable; would shuttle be available for people who park early and
eat out; what will induce people to use the 50 space off-site lot;
cannot predict what the public will do with regard to parking and
certainly applicant cannot require patrons to park in his lot; people
generally park the closest they can to their destination; cannot
consider this until Commission knows where the lot or lots will be; if
lot were close enough for people to walk to the theater would be in
favor of the proposal; people using the shuttle bus will be stuck at
the shuttle lot, not downtown in a restaurant, don't think a shuttle
will work.
Burlingame Planning Commissi.on Minutes Page 10
July 13, 1992
The Chair noted Commission has determined that the negative declaration
is a reasonable and acceptable document. He suggested Commission act
next on the special permit to determine if it wants to allow the
theater and then continue action on the parking variance; this would
allow the applicant to know Commission's position on the theater
understanding there is a problem with parking.
C. Galligan moved for approval of the special permit for a live comedy
theater with findings as indicated in the staff report, he found this
use would not be detrimental to the area and is in accord with the
general plan of the city. The motion was made by resolution with the
following conditions: (1) that the project shall be built as shown on
the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped May 21,
1992, Sheets P-1 and P-2; (2) that the conditions of the City
Engineer's May 26, 1992 memo and the Chief Building Inspector's May 22,
1992 memo shall be met; (3) that there shall be a minimum of a one hour
time interval between shows on the Saturdays when two shows are
scheduled; addition of more days with two shows or extending the number
of days with shows shall require an amendment to this use permit; (4)
that any pedestrian queuing shall occur on the sidewalk to the south of
247 California Drive and the theater operator shall be responsible for
ensuring the queuing is orderly and allows other pedestrians room to
pass; (5) that a passenger loading zone shall be provided in front of
the theater on California Drive to the approval of the City Engineer
and this loading zone shall be monitored and enforced for use, for
loading only, before and after performances enforced by the theater
managers; (6) that the theater shall operate four evenings a week,
Thursday through Sunday, with one show 8:30-10:3o P.M. Thursday and
Friday, two shows 7:00-9:00 P.M. and 10:00-12:00 A.M. (midnight)
Saturday and 7:00-9:00 P.M. Sunday with the maximum seating of 99
patrons and maximum employees of 12, and no food service except
beverages; (7) that the theater premise shall not be used or leased for
other kinds of theatrical, social, charity or civic events outside of
the hours permitted herein for shows, without amendment to this use
permit; (8) that the project as built shall meet Uniform Building and
Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame and all
necessary improvements shall be made and building permits finaled and
an occupancy permit issued before any tickets shall be sold or
performances scheduled; (9) that the operator shall receive and
maintain an entertainment permit from the City Council prior to selling
any tickets or holding any performances; (10) that this use shall be
reviewed for conformance in nine (9) months (May, 1993) and every two
years thereafter or upon complaint; and (11) that this action shall not
be final until the parking variance has been acted upon. Motion was
seconded by C. Kelly.
Comment on the motion: am not concerned with the theater use but it is
located on California Drive and am concerned about people crossing
California Drive mid block using the existing crosswalk which is very
dangerous, especially at night; people including many Burlingame High
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 11
July 13, 1992
School students cross California Drive all the time; students are young
and are not crossing at night.
Motion was approved on a 5-2 roll call vote, Cers Ellis and Jacobs
voting no.
C. Galligan moved to continue parking varianc�'consideration for two
meetings (August 10, 1992) at which time applicant must submit a final
plan for off-site parking and shuttle system. Motion was seconded by
C. Kelly and passed 5-2 on voice vote, Cers Jacobs and Graham
dissenting. It was pointed out that Condition �11 approving the
special permit stated action was not final until the parking variance
has been acted upon, it is not appealable at this time, it will become
appealable when there is action on the parking variance.
. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEALTH SERVICE USE AND A PARKING VARIANCE
\ 1408 CHAPIN AVENUE SUITE 3 ZONED C-1 SUB AREA B1
Refer ce staff report, 7/13/92, with attachments. CP Monroe:reviewed
details f the request, staff review, required find'ings. Six
conditions�,were suggested for consideration at the public''hearing.
���
Commission/staff�,discussion noted the title com ,any in this building
did receive a spe�i,al permit, tenants of the bui-i�ing and their clients
are using the five �-site parking spaces; the'two applications for the
building this evenini��are all the tenants�"�to date who need special
permits and do not have`��.�one, owners are ��`ill remodeling the building;
wording of the suggested�4conditions of.�approval was discussed.
Chm. Mink opened the publiQ,,,�hear�tig. Jamie Hanna and David Levin,
counselors and applicants, �`aQr��* present. They requested they be
allowed to hold group session�*,�for 10 or less people and stated all
counselors in the building wp�ild"`�not be holding group sessions at one
time; they all work for�rSan Ma eo County and have their private
practices in this build�g, they enerally work after 5:00 P.M.;
parking in this area d�.es not seem be a problem after 5:00 P.M.
Three of the applicant� are interested��n group sessions in which two
of them would work t��gether, this might�occur three to four times a
year for six to e,�'9�ht weeks once a weel�• Applicants advised the
estimate of clie� r�s at 60 to 70 in fiv�years was a worst case
scenario, it prc�}5ably wouldn't happen. They-�ywould prefer 10 minutes
between sessior}� since their typical billing ho� is 50 minutes. There
were no audie�ice comments and the public hearing�was closed.
'*..
Based on th�e information in the staff report as wel'� as that received
from the a�pplicants, C. Galligan found this use is an��;,appropriate use
for the building, use is less intense since its hours are.off peak when
there is available parking in the area. He then moved for.,approval of
the sp'ecial permit for health services and the parking �iariance by
resolution with the following conditions: (1) that 1,230 SF of office
CITY OF BURLINGAME
TO: Planning Commission DATE: August 4, 1992
�
FROM: City AttorneX �`1- �
i �-�
SUBJECT: 247 Cali� rnia Dr' e
The City Planner has described to me the proposed parking
arraignments for the theater/club at 247 California Drive. I must
express two concerns. The first is that I do not feel comfortable
with only an oral agreement between the applicant and the School
District. My experience is that contracts with large public
agencies are not real until they are in black and white and signed.
My second concern is the city liability aspect of the proposal. As
you know, I usually discount concerns that "the city will be sued".
However, in this case I do have such a reservation. We currently
have two lawsuits against the city from persons who were struck by
autos while crossing California Drive in crosswalks. In theory, a
suit by someone racing across the street to catch a train, or in
this case, to get to or from the theater, does not have great
liability. However, when that person breaks almost every bone in
their body the litigation is expensive and the pressure for a large
settlement is considerable.
This applicant's proposal is for parking at the high school lot,
which is across California Drive, across North Lane, across the
railroad tracks, and across Carolan Avenue. A shuttle is proposed,
but not after the Thursday night show, and there is no certainty
that everyone will take the shuttle even when it is provided. I
have particular concern about crossing North Lane and Carolan, and
the fact that this will be at night. It is unlikely that a city
would be liable for approving an activity that encourages people to
cross the street; however, we are sued because we do not have
crosswalks, we should not have a crosswalk, we do not have a yellow
light at the crosswalk, we have a yellow light but not a signal,
and so forth. Based on our current litigation and similar cases
elsewhere I believe this proposal has the potential for suits
against the City.
osasr�u��� u�S ���}nygaedng
a�B�eu�y� s�i��
SS�J�3U M9l���EW
.�.
'�t�a�a�u��
'E6�6-895 (51�i�) IIE� � ani6 0� ea�� �ae� as�:a�d `y�tnn no�S hceu
u�o � suor�senb �(us en�t� no�( ao seBu�uo �(u� eaE 2a2y� �I '��inaas
�nisn��x� �na }naq�e �(ainbui ano�( s��e�oaadd� a��nySaednS �e a/N
Wd 00�01. • OE�6
Wd (?C?�OR - Wd 08�6 Wd OO�L - QE�9
Wd QD�L - Wd DE�9 Wd OE�� G- OO�Z � Wd Q£�Q - 00�8
� .
:snna��a� s� oB p�non� e�npeu�s eul
•�u�wBas ��nuiuu OE �a�a aad aq pinann a��a anp •�ny anoa�
�t�0 Pu� eny eut�oae� ;� �aoyog y�tH aw�fiu��an� �o �o� Bui�aed a�{�
o� eu.��Bui{an8 ur an�.�� ��u�o����� ��z woa� aq p�nonn saa�suEa� eyl
��aann � s�t�p ana� `s�uew�es e�nuiva 0� u! y�o� �uE �a�q ��d�u�e�;
u�n e���nu�aedng � Buin�y ui pa}ssaa�ui aa� no�t `uoi�rsasnuo� �no aed
`s���auape� �aW aEep
'ld�tl rJM��9�����i��
3WtlJf�!�,�r, �' � ��.+.�J
C', `);
�:�ii����►�l�i
OEOti6 1�� `a�'aQl{!W
�r�2a ourw�� I� 09�
����eaWl dAW
SB��9UaQ8Q /tJUaH �aVV
�66 l ` lE �I�f
** TOTAL PAGE.002 **
RECEIVED FROM 5528696 P. 2
��
R�C�e!!!�D
1992
CITY OF iJURLINGAME
PI A�[NING DEPT.
AUG. 1, 1992
CITY UF BURLINGAME
PLAN:VING DEPT.
BURLINGArtE, CA. 94010
RE: PARKING FOR M.V.P. THEATER
DEAR SIRS;
MVP THEATER HAS SECURED VERBAL APPROVAL AND CONFIRMATION
FROM MR. JOHN MAHAFFY OF THE BURLI[vGAME SCHUOL BOARD
THAT WE MAY USE SUFFICIENT SPACES AT THE BURLINGAME HIGH
SCHOOL TO MEET THE llEPARTMEIv'TS STATED REQUIRE�IENTS. THIS
APPROVAL WAS RECIEVED BY ME JULY 29, 1992, HOWEVER MR.-
-MAIIAFFY STATEll THAT THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT WOULD NOT BE
READY UtVTILL THE END OF TtiE FIRST WEEK OF AUGUST. I WILL
ENDEAVOR TO OBTAIN A COPY SOONER, IF PUSSIBLE, AND TURN
IT OVER TO THE DEPARTMENT. r1R. MAHAFFY'S PHONE NUMBER
IS 415-348-8834. IF ANY FURTHER I[�FORMATION IS NEEDED
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CUNTACT ME AT ANY TIME.
SINCE ,'
HARR . DEOR:vELLAS
OW E./GENERAL MGR.
MELODRAr1A VAUDVILLE PLAYHOUSE
� /�/�'.
_----
P.C. 7/13/92
Item #14
MEMO TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CITY PLANNER
SUBJECT: NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR LIVE THEATER AND
PARKING VARIANCE AT 247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-1
BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA. SUB AREA B
Harry DeOrnellas, applicant, and Louis and Albina Ivani, Eugene and
Mary Ivani, property owners, are requesting a negative declaration,
special use permit and parking variance in order to use as a live
comedy theater the 4,993 SF structure at 247 California Drive, zoned
C-1 Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area, Sub Area B.
The proposed theater will provide seating for 99 patrons and employ 12
people, including actors. The theater will be open for performances
four days a week, Thursday through Sunday. Performances will occur
between 7:00 P.M. and midnight with two performances on Saturday. Two
performances each month will be for minors. There will be no matinees.
The ticket office will open during the day and before performances.
The 4, 993 SF structure is built lot line to lot line so there is no
parking provided on site. The previous use was for retail sales. The
proposed 99 seat theater use will generate a parking demand of 74 cars
during performances (assuming 1.5 persons per car) and a higher parking
demand when performances are offered back to back (148 spaces although
there will be some turnover between first and second show patrons).
Since there is no parking provided on site, a 74 space parking variance
is required. The applicant has suggested mitigating the parking impact
by leasing parking lots of nearby businesses which are closed at night.
A shuttle service could be provided from these lots to the theater. An
attendant would be present to ensure only theater patrons use these
lots. He has not, however, identified any specific lots to be used for
this patron parking or a proposal for shuttle service.
History
In January, 1992 the applicant submitted a proposal to develop this
same site as a live theater with 150 seats, needing a parking variance
for 108 spaces. In that proposal there would be five shows a week,
Thursday through Sunday (two on Saturday) between 7:00 P.M. and
midnight. Since liquor would be sold at all shows no minors would be
allowed.
The Planning Commission reviewed this request on March 9, 1992 and
approved a motion to deny the project 5-0 (Commissioners Galligan and
Kelly absent). In their action the Commissioners expressed concern
about the location because of the large number of people it would
attract and the size of the parking variance needed, the fact that
because the people would not walk very far the immediate area would be
2
impacted, it is particularly dangerous to cross California Drive at
this location (street is wide, dark, cars come at high speeds), this
use will absorb most of the flexibility created in the parking by the
other types of business in the area.
Planning Commission action was appealed to the City Council where,
after a public hearing, they made and approved (5-0) a motion to deny
the request without prejudice. In their action the City Council noted
that the project was a good idea and would benefit Burlingame but not
in this particular area; they expressed concern about heavy traffic and
increased incidence of accidents in the area; they noted people will
not walk far in this area and that will impact the immediate
businesses; employees also will not park far away; it was a very large
parking request.
The applicant asked for a denial without prejudice at the close of the
hearing. He wanted to reapply with a 30� reduction in the project and
secured parking from banks in the area to address parking concerns. He
asked to be able to go back to the Planning Commission. (Note: The
new proposal represents a 34� reduction in seating, a 31$ reduction in
automobile trips generated assuming 1.5 persons per car, the same
number of employees (12) and the same number of shows each week (5), at
the same hours.)
Negative Declaration
Negative Declaration ND-450P addresses the original larger project.
Since the revised project represents a reduction in the number of
patrons (150 to 99), a reduction in the amount of parking demanded (108
to 74 spaces) and a change in Sunday show hour times from 8:00 P.M. to
10:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M., there is no substantial revision
needed to ND-450P. The mitigation measures proposed are still
appropriate and are reflected in the conditions suggested for the
project. A copy of the parking study is included in this packet for
your reference.
In order to approve ND-450P the Planning Commission must find that on
the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is
no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant impact
(an impact not acceptable to the community) on the environment.
Staff Review
City staff have reviewed the revised project. The Chief Building
Inspector (May 22, 1992 memo) comments that access for handicapped
persons needs to be provided to the Green Room and makeup room, some
corridor construction will need to be upgraded to achieve proper fire
ratings, structural loading information is needed for the second floor.
All of these requirements will need to be met before a building permit
can be issued. The City Engineer (May 26, 1992 memo) notes that if all
parking requirements are met by areas off street leased by the
applicant or on-street parking he has no comments. The Fire Marshal
3
(May 26, 1992 memo) had no comments. Planning staff would note that if
approved the applicant would have to submit full and detailed plans to
the Building Department for a building permit. These construction
plans would be fully reviewed by the City Engineer, the Fire Marshal
and the Chief Building Inspector to ensure that the proposed
construction meets all the more specific requirements of the Uniform
Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame.
Use of this site by the public will not be allowed until all
construction is completed, fully inspected and an occupancy permit has
been signed.
Findings for a Special Permit
In order to grant a special permit the Planning Commission must find
that certain conditions exist on the property (Code Sec. 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.
Findings for a Variance
In order to grant a variance the Planning Commission must find that
certain conditions exist on the property (Code Sec. 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 hardship;
(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;
4
(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.
Study 4uestions
The Planning Commission reviewed the revised project at their study
meeting on June 22, 1992 and asked several questions (June 22, 1992
Planning Commission Minutes).
In his letter date stamped July 6, 1992 the applicant notes two
possible off-street parking lots for patron usage on performance
nights. One is located at 210 Primrose Road (Glendale Federal Savings'
parking lot). If this lot were used he would provide a shuttle bus to
take patrons to the theater on California Drive. The shuttle would be
leased from a private company and would be stored by them. The
alternative lot being considered is on the corner of Highland and
Howard (1100 Howard). He is trying to lease this lot from Mike Harvey
Honda or its owner. If he got this lot patrons could walk to the
theater since it's about 100 feet away and on the same side of the
street.
He also notes in his letter crossing California Drive is not a problem
because new signals have been installed at California and Burlingame
Avenue. People can cross California safely at that location.
Planninq Commission Action
The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. The use permit,
variance and negative declaration can all be included in a single
public hearing and action. However, affirmative action must include
findings for each. Affirmative action should be by resolution. The
reasons for any action should be clearly stated for the record. At the
public hearing the following conditions should be considered:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to
the Planning Department and date stamped May 21, 1992, Sheets P-1
and P-2;
2. that the conditions of the City Engineer's May 26, 1992 memo and
the Chief Building Inspector's May 22, 1992 memo shall be met;
3. that there shall be a minimum of a one hour time interval between
shows on the Saturdays when two shows are scheduled; addition of
more days with two shows or extending the number of days with
shows shall require an amendment to this use permit;
4. that any pedestrian queuing shall occur on the sidewalk to the
south of 247 California Drive and the theater operator shall be
responsible for ensuring the queuing is orderly and allows other
pedestrians room to pass;
5
5. that a passenger loading zone shall be provided in front of the
theater on California Drive to the approval of the City Engineer
and this loading zone shall be monitored and enforced for use, for
loading only, before and after performances enforced by the
theater managers;
6. that maps and literature shall be provided to all patrons through
promotional flyers and ticket sales indicating available parking
lots around the theater;
7. that the theater shall operate four evenings a week, Thursday
through Sunday, with one show 8:30 - 10:30 P.M. Thursday and
Friday, two shows 7:00 - 9:00 P.M. and 10:00 - 12:00 A.M.
(midnight) Saturday and 7:00 - 9:00 P.M. Sunday with the maximum
seating of 99 patrons and maximum employees of 12, and no food
service except beverages;
8. that the theater premise shall not be used or leased for other
kinds of theatrical, social, charity or civic events outside of
the hours permitted herein for shows, without amendment to this
use permit;
9. that the project as built shall meet Uniform Building and Uniform
Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame and all necessary
improvements shall be made and building permits finaled and an
occupancy permit issued before any tickets shall be sold or
performances scheduled;
10. that the operator shall receive and maintain an entertainment
permit from the City Council prior to selling any tickets or
holding any performances; and
11. that this use shal2 be reviewed for conformance in nine (9) months
(May, 1993) and every two years thereafter or upon complaint.
��� ,�;--u,� �
MargaYet Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
cc: Harry J. DeOrnellas, Jr.
Eugene & Mary Ivani/Louis & Albina Ivani
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Page 2
June 22, 1992
these findings; provide more detail about what is happening in the
kitchen remodel and making the breakfast area bigger; address
equivalent fixture units, eight seems a large number for a single
family residence. Item set for public hearing July 13, 1992.
3. HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR
FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR ADDITION AT 13 HAYWARD COURT ZONED R-1
Requests: put up a frame to show where the addition is located and how
it would affect view; what is the height between the bottom of the
addition and the ground below; what is declining height envelope
exception #6; what will occur under the structure, will the area be
enclosed, what kind of storage will occur there. Item set for public
hearing July 13, 1992.
4. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR INSTALLATION OF A SATELLITE DISH ANTENNA AT
2667 SUMMIT DRIVE, ZONED R-1
Requests: in the past all satellite dishes have been required to face
south and have that orientation unobstructed, can this dish receive
with the proposed orientation; what is the color of the dish, will it
be reflective. Item set for public hearing July 13, 1992.
�5. NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR 74
STALLS FOR A LIVE COMEDY THEATER AT 247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED
' C-1 SUB AREA B
Requests: would like to see location of off-street parking lots
proposed, people are not easily directed, people in the area should not
suffer; some unnamed parking lots which may or may not be leased does
not help to address the potential impacts, need to know location and
shuttle bus routes; include a copy of the traffic study in the packet;
concern about safety of pedestrian access across California Drive, may
be mitigated by shuttle and leased lots but need detail to ensure
people crossing the street would not be a problem. Item set for public
hearing July 13, 1992.
6. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR RETAIL SALES FOR A BRIDAL SHOP AT 1608 GILBRETH
ROAD. ZONED M-1
Requests: explain how this wholesale/retail activity is different from
a similar retail use in downtown Burlingame; if the use were wholly
retail how would the use of floor areas change; break out percentage of
retail and wholesale sales; why is so much space required for so few
employees and customers; do a survey of available parking on site on
weekends. Item set for public hearing July 13, 1992.
r- r-� /t,i` �:' A�1 A I!� B�A
MQlodrama VaudQvill¢ 171ayhousQ �
"The MVP of Bay Area EntertainmenY' �p�R
,,. --1�
CI�1�Y Vr _ i� ,:..:;,.<�.,-.�v�E
PLANRING DEPl:
JUNE 28, 1992
PLANNING DEPT.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
RE: RESPONSES TO JUNE 22, 1992 MEETING
ON USE AND PARKING PERMITS FOR MVP THEATER
247 CALIFORNIA DR. BURLINGAME, CA. 94010
WITH REGARD TO THE STORAGE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED
SHUTTLE BUS, IF MVP IS SUCCESSFULL IN NEGOTIATING THE
USE OF THE GLENDALE BANK PARKING AREA AT 210 PRIMROSE,
BURLINGAME THE SHUTTLE WILL BE CONTRACTED FROM A
PRIVATE COMPANY AND STORED AT THEIR LOCATION. IF MVP
IS SUCCESSFULL IN SECURING THE LOT AT HIGHLAND AND
HOWARD FROM MIKE HARVEY HONDA OR IT'S OWNER THEN NO
SHUTTLE WOULD BE NECESSARY AS THIS LOT IS APPROXIMATLY
l0U FEET FROM MVP AND LOCATED ON THE SAME SIDE OF
CALIFORNIA DR. MVP WOULD IN EI�'HER CASE PROVIDE A
LOT ATTENDANT FOR CONTROL AND SECURITY OF THE PATRONS.
AS FOR PATRONS WHO, FOR WHATEVER REASON, CHOOSE TO
PARK ACROSS CALIFORNIA DR. THERE ARE NEW LIGHT CONTROLLED
CROSS WALKS AT CALIFORNIA DR. AND BURLINGAME AVE. THAT
SHUULD PROVIDE FOR THE SAFE CROSSING OF THIS INTERSECTION.
IF ANY FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED PLEASE FEEL FREE
TO CONTACT ME AT ANY TIME.
SINCERELY,
`���J .
HARR DEORNELLAS
VP THEATER
247 California Drive • Burlingame, CA 94010
��._'
s�l�ggested the Chamber write letter to papers. Councilwoman
Kn �ght said it looks like too many no votes to approve the BIDs;
goo to see all people here again and interested; they are the
key p ayers, they will benefit; now is time to make a dec,is�ion.
Counci �an Lembi hated to see all this work dropped; h�3ed they
could pu2-�omething together and continue dialogue; annot hurt
to continu this item. Mayor Pagliaro said he wa istressed by
the negativis� ; he would like to see the qroup e up with some
positive alter?� tives; if he does not see som positive alterna-
tives he would v e for the SID with condi ' n the Soard was not
controlled by cert 'n individuals and fu were used for proper-
ly identified items, an alternative is o have council raise tax
and council would dec de where the mQrf`ey would go.
Councilman Harrison movec3'�
decision until June 1, 199
carried 4-1 on roll call v
Councilman Harrison moved
n nue the Broadway BID zone A
conded by Councilwoman O'Mahany,
Councilwoman Knight •voting no.
�t the protests from Broadway
BID zone B. Seconded by ouncil man O'Mahony, carried 5-0 on
roll call vote. Counci an Harri n moved to continue the
Burlingame Avenue Are BZD zone A u il June 1, 1992. Seconded
by Councilman Lembi carried 4-1 on 11 call�vote, Councilwoman
Knight voting n�ouncilmaq Harrison moved to accept the
protests for Bur ngame Avenue BZD zone B and C. Seconded by
Councilman Lem , carried unanimously by oll call vote.
Councilm Harrison announced he and Councilw an
attend a dinner given by Envirotech Operatin
the c' y on the 20th anniversary of joint operat
was water treatment plant; he presented a clock
to he Mayor. Mayor Pagliaro suggested it be hung
amber so council can see the time.
O'Mahony had
ervice honoring
n of the
p que from EOS
a rear of the
PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL P�>RMIT
AND PARKZNG VARIANCE FOR LIVE THEATER AT 247 CALIFORNIA DRIV$ -
DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
City Planner reviewed her memo of March 25 which recommended
council hold a public hearing and take action. The appellant,
Harry DeOrnellas, is requesting a negative declaration, special
permit and parking variance to use a 4,993 square foot site for a
live theater at 247 California. A mitigated negative declaration
is required because of the potential traffic and parking impact
of this use which will brinq at least 162 people on Thursday,
Friday and Sunday evenings and almost twice that number on
Saturday. There is no on-site parking; a parking variance is
required for all the parking generated at the site; the proposed
theater use would require 108 parking spaces. The special use
permit is required because live theater use is not specifically
permitted but similar in character to'other uses permitted in the
zone. They plan to have 12 employees and use the theater four
evenings a week; offices and ticket sales would be open seven
days a week from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. There would be 150 seats
on the first floor and mezzanine. No prepared restaurant food
would be served; drinks would be sold. They plan to sell t-
shirts, mugs and other souvenir items on the mezzanine during
shows; there would also be offices and dressing rooms on the
mezzanine. The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to deny the request
and the applicant appealed to council. Councilwoman Knight asked
if there was an ordinance against having theaters in this area.
Staff said theaters are allowed with a special permit.
Mayor Pagliaro opened the public hearing.
Joe Starr, resident and future employee of this site, said this
would be a unique business; he was familiar with a similar
business in another city which does very well.
City Council Minutes -
April 20, 1992
Ed Ferrari, future manager, said this would be a melodrama/vaude-
ville theater; it would be a positive addition to the area; they
would donate time and talent to city events and make facilities
available to students, drama clubs and performing arts classes.
Councilwoman O'Mahony wondered where props would be built and
materials stored for plays; Ferrari said would be built ihside
the facility, be small scale, nothing like the opera house sets.
Harry DeOrnellas, applicant and owner, said they would be an
asset to the co�nmunity; he knew parkinq was critical but parkinq
is not a problem in evenings; it would only be four eveninqs a
week, no day programs; the city recently installed a new cross-
walk and lights in the area; he believed people would walk to the
site; merchants are enthusiastic about the project; he presented.
three letters in support from merchants at Pasta Bravo, Califor-
nia Bar & Grill and Glendale Federal Bank.
Councilman Harrison asked about day time office operations;
DeOrnellas said tickets would only be sold half hour before the
show, retail operations would be during show; mail and phone
. orders would take place during office hours; employees would park
' far away.
Mary Ann Titus, resident and business owner, said her 22 year old
son travels to San Francisco to see similar shows; she would like
to see this approved so her son does not have to go so far; it
would be good thinq for the young people in the city. Dr.
Jeffrey Schuler, 1715 Ralston, was also in favor, he did not
think parking would be impacted in evenings.
DeOrnellas spoke again, stating he would like council to deny
this project without prejudice so he could present a 30 percent
reduction in project and secure parking from banks in area to
mitigate parking concerns; he would like to go back to the
Planninq Commission.
Mayor Pagliaro closed the public hearing.
Council members commented this project was a good idea and
something needed in Burlingame, but not in this particular area;
wondered if Deornellas considered looking for a site in Bayshore
area; Highland/California area has heavy traffic, concern about
accidents; in this area people are not willing to walk far to an
establishment; were concerned employees will not park far away;
this is an enormous parking variance, could not approve.
Councilman Harrison moved to deny without prejudice as requested.
Seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony, carried unanimously.
�t1Ai.T(" fIF�DTIAf_ � LDDL`SL L`!1D CDL•r+T7�7 nrvvrm nvn orvc f111[fTaft�c�n�
City P nner reviewed her memo of April 10 which ommended
council ld a public hearinq and take action obert Larratt
and Philip senberg, applicants and prope owners, are re-
questing five variances and one special rmit in order to retain
an existing 53 quare foot garage r deled from a carport and
garage into a gar e without a b' inq permit. These changes
were brought to the ttention Planninq by Building Department
code enforcement. In 88 e owners began repairs to an exist-
ing carport located in t of an existinq qarage. Both provid-
ed required parkinq b we substandard for then current parking
dimensions; a buil ' q permi was not souqht at the beqinning of
these 1988 repai to these no conforming structures; in late
1988 they obtay�ned retroactive b'lding permit and paid penal-
ties. Appa�,e �itly in the last four five months, without a
buildinq eY"rmit, the applicant added qarage door to the carport
and re ed the garage door on the gara behind (the garage and
carp have a common roof) makinq a sing garage of 535 sq�are
fe and expanding the non-conforminq struc re. The Planning
� mmission voted 6-o to deny the request. Co cilwoman Kniqht
asked about a discrepancy in a condition in the umber of days to
comply with ruling; staff said it should be 60 da not 90 days,
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 4
March 9, 1992
7. NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR
A LIVE COMEDY THEATER AT 247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-1
SUB AREA B
Z-T Dreger reviewed details of the request, staff review, applicant's
statements in the submittal, required findings, study meeting
questions. Eleven conditions were suggested for consideration at the
public hearing. Minor changes to these conditions were noted.
Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. Harry DeOrnellas, Jr., applicant,
was present. He responded to Commissioners' questions: they expect the
theater to operate as presented in the application, they will
discourage people lingering in the bar facility, the bar will close 15
minutes before the show ends; they have agreed to separate the two
shows on Saturday evening by one hour as suggested by staff; it is
their hope people will go to Burlingame Avenue to eat before and after
the show; there are no intermissions, just brief periods when people
could buy T-shirts, mugs, etc. inside the building; they must exclude
anyone under 21 years of age because of the conditions of the liquor
license, if they had applied for a license to serve food with beverages
they could allow people under 21; many comedy theaters do serve food,
they feel serving food would make the operation too complex.
Berry Hurley, property owner, 231 Highland Avenue, spoke in opposition:
there are two businesses in this immediate area now with liquor
licenses, there have been businesses at these locations which broke his
windows every two months, it was a real problem, the area is congested
at present, two existing businesses trying to �make a living seems
sufficient. The Chair advised applicant will have to go to the City
Council for an entertainment permit for the use if Planning Commission
approves the application.
Dan McCarthy thought all seats should be assigned in advance, he had
gone to comedy clubs where people were lined up an hour ahead of time
which in this case means they would be there at the same time the
others are leaving, he suggested presale of tickets and assigned seats.
The operator of the California Bar and Grill, next to the proposed
theater site, had no problem with the comedy show itself but stated
parking is a big concern, he has been there for 10 years and has always
hoped the city would alleviate the parking situation, need to solve the
current problem before adding a comedy club. Mary Mackie spoke in
favor of the application: she noted California Bar and Grill is open
only until 3:00 P.M., they will be performing in the theater in the
evening when there is plenty of available parking. It was noted by the
Commission that Christie's, a restaurant on the same block, is open
only until 3:00 P.M., California Bar and Grill serves dinner.
Responding to a Commissioner question applicant advised when possible
he would presell and assign seats but this may not always be possible
and they would sell tickets at the door. There were no further
audience comments and the public hearing was closed.
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 5
March 9, 1992
Commission comment: think comedy clubs are a positive good for the
community, people could go to dinner elsewhere and walk to the show,
but am concerned about parking, in this particular area people are not
willing to park across the tracks or to cross California Drive on foot,
farther up Burlingame Avenue where there are more city lots available
people seem more willing to walk; also concerned about the evening
parking in light of the proposed business improvement district, if and
when it becomes active evening activities on Burlingame Avenue would
draw more people and increase the demand for parking by retail
establishments, this proposal at this location could be a bottleneck;
think 162 people at one time on California Drive will be a problem,
there are other places in the city which could possibly handle two
shows, with this much impact question whether people will be happy with
the theater.
Incorporating the staff report, testimony this evening and Commission's
comments, C. Jacobs found this is not the place for a comedy theater
because of the large number of people and the need for a substantial
parking variance. She then moved for denial of the application,
seconded by C. Ellis.
Coiament on the motion: congestion will be a problem, would like to help
this theater use but the figures are too big, people will not walk from
very far away, a parking variance for 108 spaces may be somewhat over
done, think there will be more than 1.5 persons per vehicle, but still
it is too much for that area; have the same concerns as when Commission
considered a theater on California Drive off Broadway, parking is a
problem for a business on California, people will park on the other
side of California and will have problems getting across the street, it
is a wide street and dangerous, cars sometimes use high speeds, this is
not the right location for this operation; downtown is always shifting
its uses, with this number of cars there will be no accommodation in
the downtown area, the theater won't shift as other businesses
sometimes do, there will be no flexibility downtown; layout of the
streets in the area makes it particularly difficult for pedestrian
traffic across California Drive in this area, it is a wide street and
it will be very dark; this is the wrong location and will intensify the
existing parking problem.
C. Jacobs amended her motion to deny the negative declaration, special
permit and parking variance for a live comedy theater at 247 California
Drive, seconded by C. Ellis, motion approved 5-0 on roll call vote,
Cers Galligan and Kelly absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
FROM THE FLOOR
There were no comments from the floor.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
- Hillside Area Construction Permit - 1401 Hillside Circle
Burli
�
Planning Commission Minutes
Hillsid� Area Construction Permit - 2412
Page
Mar 9, 1992
,
,
i
ildivia Way
The Hillside ea Construction Permit for �'`1 Mills Canyon Court was
called up for r view by the Planning Comm�sion.
- Special Permi� site review - 875 S�tanton Road (TNT Skypak, Inc.)
- Special Permit site review - 1461 Bayshore Highway (Stelvio
Distributors, In .) -(Staf was asked to check this company's
signage.) ,
PLANNER REPORTS
CP Monroe reviewed City C il actions at its March 2, 1992 regular
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT /
� .
Commission expressecl�/ its appre 'ation to the City Council for the
Commissioners' Dinn�r at the Marr'ott hotel March 6, 1992.
The meeting was /adjourned at 8:55 P.�.
Respectfu�lly submitted,
��
'�
Jerry L. Dea1,���,Secretary
�
CITY OF BURLINGAME
SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE
Special Permit and Parking Variance for a Live Comedy Theater
Address: 247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE Meetinq Date: 6/22/92
Request: Special Permit for use and Parking Variance for 50 stalls
and Negative Declaration for a live comedy theater at 247
California Drive, zoned C-1 Subarea B.
Applicant: Mr. Harry DeOrnellas
Assessor's Parcel �- 029-211-050 Lot Area: 3,112.3 SF
General Plan: Commercial; Service and Sales Zoninq: C-1 Subarea B
Adjacent Development: Existing restaurants and retail sales
establishments. All are zoned C-1 Subarea B with Service and
Special Sales General Plan Designation.
CEQA Status: Negative Declarations ND - 450p for 247 California
Drive. Negative Declaration, incorporated by reference, remains
the same as shown. The changes in the project, including the
reduction in number of seats from 150 to 99 and the change in
Sunday hours from 8:00 pm - 10:00 pm to 7:00 pm - 9:00 pm, are not
significant enough to change the content of the Negative
Declaration or the Mitigation Measures. All Mitigation Measures
are still applicable even though some project impacts are less.
Summary: The existing 4,993 SF building was previously used as a
retail surf shop. The proposed use is live comedic melodrama for 99
patrons with 12 employees (including cast members) to operate the
theater and serve the patrons beverages. The parking requirements
for this use are based on a vehicle occupancy of 1.5 persons per
vehicle. There is a maximum occupancy of 111 people per show which
would create a parking need for 74 vehicles per show. Since there
is no on-site parking available the total parking variance required
is for 74 spaces. For a complete breakdown of the changes in the
proposed business operation and change in hours, please refer to
the attached memorandum.
PROPOSED
Buildinq Heiqht:
Chanqe in Footprint:
Front Setback:
Side Setback:
Rear Setback:
Lot Coveraqe:
24 '
none
N/A
N/A
N/A
100%
EXISTING
24 '
100$ lot coverage
N/A
N/A
N/A
100$
Parkinq: NONE ON-SITE* NONE
* Parking variance required for 50 parking spaces.
MEMORANDUM
247 California Drive - Comparison between the proposal of
Jaauary 23, 1992 with the new proposal of May 21, 1992.
Jan. 1992 May 1992
1. Number of employees 12 12
2. Number of patrons 150 99
(based on � of seats)*
3. Total # of people on site
(at any one time)
4. Required Parking Variance
(based on 1.5 people per car)
5. Location of parking spaces
6. Patron access
7. Patronage (age)
162
108
On street;
public lots
walking
21 & older
111
74
Leased pvt.
lots **
Shuttle Bus
8. Iiours of operation
Thurs. & Fri. > > > > > 8:30 - 10:30pm
Saturday > > > > > > > 7:00 - 9:OOpm
9:30 - 11:30pm
Sunday > > > > > > > > 8:00 - i0:0opm
2 shows per
month will be
for minors
8:30 - 10:30pm
7:00 - 9:OOpm
10:00 - Midnight
7:00 - 9:o0pm
* ND - 450p at 247 California Drive, dated Feb. 19, 1992, applies
to the new project and all the new information submitted in the
May 21, 1992 proposal.
** The private lots to be leased have not been specified by the
applicant.
CITY OF BIIRLINGAME
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
File No. ND - 450p at 247 California Drive
The City of Burlingame by MARGARET MONROE on
February 19, 1992 , completed a review of the proposed
project and determined that:
(xx�
(xx)
It will not have a significant effect on the environment
No Environmental Impact Report is required.
Reasons for Conclusion:
The proposed development of this site is for a live comedy theater
whose operation is limited to four evenings a week. This project is
compatible with the surrounding uses as long as certain mitigation
measures are met to reduce the impacts on pedestr.ian�and vehicular
circulation. The previous use of this site was retail sales of
sailboards and the building is now vacant. The proposed theater
with bar is compatible with existing uses in the area which include
food establishments and retail shops. There will be no available
on site parking for this use creating some traffic and circulation
impacts. To reduce these impacts the following mitigation
measures shall be part of the conditions of approval for this
project: a one hour time separation between shows on the days that
two shows are scheduled; pedestrian queuing to the south of 247
California so that other existing food establishments will not be
affected by the people waiting in line for the shows; a 50 foot
passenger loading zone in front of the theater; and maps and
diagrams shall be given to all customers outlining available
parking in Burlingame.
Existing public facilities including water, sanitary and storm
sewer, have appropriate capacities to serve this development.
Existing public parking facilities will accommodate parking
demands so long as the hours of operation do not overlap with
retail peak activities. In the prime shopping season public
parking lot availability may not be adequate.
All potential environmental impacts can be mitigated to levels
acceptable to the community through conditions of approval. There
is no substantial evidence from the Initial Study and City review
that this project will have significant effect on the environment.
�c�. �Q. , l� 2
Si a re of rocessing Official tle Date Signed
Unless appealed within 10 days
determination shall be final.
hereof the date posted, the
Date posted : _ � — / �% — � �
CITY OF BIIRLINGAME
NEGATIVE DECLARATION February 19, 1992
File No. ND - 450p at 247 California Drive Page Two
Declaration of Postin_g
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 on �� �
Appealed: ( ) Yes ( ,�Te-� A „„
, 1992.
JUDITH A MALFAT�I,/CITY CLERK, CITYG�F BURLINGAME
�
INITIAL STIIDY SUMMARY
The INITIAL STUDY determined that the project, as proposed, will
NOT cause the following environmental impacts:
�(O EARTH: This proposal will not result in;
�� Unstable earth conditions, displacements or compaction of soil,
destruction of unique.geological features, increased water or wind
. erosion of soil, changes in a beach ecosystem, exposure of people
to hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, or ground failure.
�,lO AIR: This proposal will not result in;
IV Deterioration of ambient air quality, creation of objectionable
odors, or alteration of climate, locally or regionally.
� O WATER: This proposal will not result in;
Changes in directional course of marine or fresh waters, changes in
absorption rates, drainage patterns or rate of surface run-off or
alter the course of flood waters, alter the direction or flow or
ground waters, changes in quantities of ground waters by any means,
�changes in the amount and availability of water to the public,
exposure of people to water related hazard.
�D PLANT LIFE: This proposal will not result in;
Changes in diversity or number of any species of plants including
endangered species, introduction of new species of plants into the
area, or reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop.
,(�� ANIMAL LIFE: This proposal will not result in;
%�� Changes in diversity or number of any species of animals including
endangered species, introduction of new species of animals into the
area or result in the barrier of normal migration of any species of
animals or deterioration of existing fish or wiidlife habitat.
NOISE: This proposal,will not result in;
� D Increases in existing noise or exposure of people to severe noise
levels.
LIGHT & GLARE: This proposal will not result in;
�� Extreme increases in the amount of light and glare in the
environment.
LAND USE: This proposal will not result in;
�� Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of the
area.
{�� NATURAL RESOURCES: This proposal will not result in;
ry Any increase in rate of use of any natural resources.
RISK OF UPSET: This proposal will not result in;
�� Any risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances or
materials ( including but not limited to, oil pesticides, chemicals
or radiation ) in the event of an accident or upset situation,
possible interference in an emergency response or evacuation plan.
POPULATION: This proposal will not result in;
� � The alteration in location, distribution, density or growth rate of
the human population.
, ilv HOUSING: This proposal will not result in;
�� Displacement of any residents or create a demand for additional
housing.
�A,In� TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION: This proposal will not result in;
ft7a Generation.of substantial increase in vehicular traffic, strains on
� existing parking facilities or new parking, substantial impact on
G�1"�existing transportation systems, alterations in present patterns of
circulation or movement of people or goods, increase in traffic
�� hazards to motor vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians.
�� PUBLIC SERVICES: This proposal will not result in;
The need for new or altered governmental services, such as, fire
protection, police protection, schools, parks or recreational
facilities, maintenance of public facilities, including roads
and/or any other type of governmental services.
ENERGY: This
N � The use of
increases in
develop new
proposal will not result in;
substantial amounts of fuel or energy, substantial
demand upon existing sources of energy, the need to
sources of energy.
� O UTILITIES: This proposal will not result in;
The need for new systems or substantial alterations to the
following utilities ( not including initial hook-ups to existing
systems ) power or natural gas, communication systems, water, sewer
or septic tanks, storm drainage, solid waste disposal.
N b HUMAN HEALTH: This proposal will not result in;
Creation of health hazards or potential health hazards or the
exposure of people to potential health hazards.
N � AESTHETICS: This proposal will not result in;
The obstruction of any scenic view or vista open to the public, or
the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to the public.
�� � RECREATION: This proposal will not result in;
Any negative impact on the quantity or quality of existing
recreational opportunities. -
,�/ Q CULTURAL RESOURCES: This proposal will not result in;
�Y The destruction of prehistoric or historic archaeological sites,
the destruction of any unique ethnic or cultural values or restrict
any existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact
area.
A:\INSTDSU.FRM (short form summary)
r� �'hi �7�-i� �A� S�tf'A T" � Lr' ��;f,Ue� rq-12:� Sf./t f� jJ j.[ (�D _
(�Cl�t�,(hi(,� Q'� 1����5�'�A�it/S �RY C;�US� S�D�w�Z-K- �o�J�G-SI�On�l 7��1� r�1u�
��T � f��l�tt�nr� �a� �� �T� s� mt�-1-S
�04' C�� �� �R�s�.����s La��.l� �� �P��t��.eLtS ��Tl-t�u�' TE� A-tr��,'
0� � QA�t�NC�7z- LOl4 CJ � tJ C.�--� 2t�l�I�
�(� l� �t�� `T�"�G�lc �J �'1 �vIJ �t=� � �U-RL� t.�,�j li'('(� � , L5�(2-TOIJ , \�1>�,Ji�RP �rNO I�- � C�I��/�'1�.1�
�1/�Tl� � 5 'N� �+�� ��}�� ��'�5 �� l..f� 1��! � t�1 �'�Y-ZU`�Y� UNI= ��,,,� �-�,% o o�nk�; �'-5 1��--�
y l r? � , � i t � � i� ..—' ..� •Ti� 1--�. A �`� "i �l i 1 h.J i � 1 1■ 'a 1 �,-/ :C�i,-I'��� t r � . . � �f`� -�� , � e - �„ ��-.�, �C ,� � �� /i>u./�
� � ��
_ MITIGATION MEASURES FOR ND 450p AT 247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
After completing the initial study it was found that this project
would require a mitigated negative declaration. The following
mitigations are proposed:
1. It is proposed that a one (1) hour time interval between shows
(on days that two shows are scheduled) would allow for less
congestion in the parking areas and on the sidewalk in front of the
theater as the theater patrons are exiting and entering for the
consecutive shows. The current proposal for this project is only
one half (1/2) hour between shows. This only allows fifteen (15)
minutes for exiting and fifteen (15) minutes for entering for the
next show when patrons must walk up to 800' - 1500' to their cars.
The proposed one (1) hour between shows would give patrons a longer
interval within which to arrive and leave between shows which in
turn would cause less pedestrian and vehicular congestion on the
streets, parking lots and the sidewalk.
The traffic study proposes that each show will have
approximately 200 patrons coming to the theater at 2.0 persons per
vehicle, and 20 employees coming to the site at 1.75 persons per
vehicle. Based on these assumptions approximately 111 vehicles
will come to the area to park before a show. On days that two
shows are scheduled approximately 111 vehicles will be departing
the surrounding parking areas, while 111 vehicles will be arriving
at relatively the same time. This brings together 222 vehicles
traveling the same street in a one half (1/2) hour time period. A
longer interval between shows would mitigate this circulation
impact by allowing a longer transition time between arriving and
departing vehicles. After receiving updated information the number
of patrons has decreased from 200 to 150 and the number of
employees has increased from 9 to 12. This will create a parking
impact of 108 vehicles per show at 1.5 persons per vehicle and 216
vehicles on the days with two shows.
2. Tickets for the shows are sold by advance sales which will
force people to arrive early to pick up their tickets and wait in
line for seats. This will cause congestion on the sidewalk and
potentially inconvenience patrons of existing food, retail and
other establishments in the area. Pedestrian queuing should only
be allowed to occur on the sidewalk to the south of 247 California
Drive and then turning down the block to Highland Avenue. This
would avoid pedestrians blocking the entrances to existing eating
establishments to the north.
3. As suggested in the traffic study a 50 foot passenger loading
zone should be provided in front of the proposed theater. The
loading zone will eliminate approximately five (5) existing parking
spaces between 6:00 pm and Midnight. The exact location of the
loading zone should be determined by the City Engineer. This
loading zone will facilitate passengers arriving and departing from
the shows. It can still provide parking during the day for
customers purchasing tickets. This passenger loading zone is also
necessary for those people who will inevitably be dropping off a
member of their party to hold a place in line and it will be
helpful for disabled patrons.
4. As suggested in the traffic study by RKH, maps and other
diagrammatical literature should be provided through promotional
flyers and mailed tickets showing the location of the nearby public
parking lots. Also directions to the theater from both Highway
101, E1 Camino Real and Highway 280 should be provided. These
visual aides will help patrons, who are unfamiliar with Burlingame
to find available parking.2
CITY OF BURLINIiAMM• CITY HALL -��1 ��IMHUSt nvA�
APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION , gURLINGAME. CAUFORNIA 9401C
A"'E C�ECEI1lED
Type of Applicati
�t 4°��Special Permit Variance Other
�T�p JVNi�, G � JAN 2 3 1992
Project Address ��%y� �/�.�-'��/9 �-�
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Assessor's Parcel Number( s) Q,� i a/� Q�� "�vEPT.
APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER� AL�1� � S�At�I i
.r� . ° � � '
Name • � d - RN���ame : �.t � ' �
Address :�l„�''��,Q�f',�/.���! ��� • Address : C% � la�/£ TL ST_
City/State/Zip ,q T.� �•9�l'�OCity/State/Zip a i - ,�,�,.,(������Y ��T
/ � �
Telephone : ( Work �/�/�%�� 9 % Telephone ( Work ) ( yiS,%Sd'g--7:3at� - AC�t;vT' �
��^ I
( Home ��/O�j ��b � 90�� ( Home ) .
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
Name: AMd.S /�A�(.�-�%n/ ��Si9/✓ Please indicate with an
asterisk (*) who is the
Address: �� � contact person for this
�o� �L� �I�,.IC proiect.
l��,rE 6l, � � � j ,,l,(�r
Telephone ( daytime ) : l��s� ��� �" `��y�
PROJECT DESCRIPTION L'd N ✓ �i�' � �.�'/f T�✓�' -r/��fC%�v� � %?1 /!7�'��-
v ,
r.�
�
x
AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATURE:
v�
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given
herein is true a correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
/ �_o7U._9�—.
App ican Si ure Date
I know about the proposed application, and hereby authorize the
above applicant to submit this �pplication.
,
`l �'l� ' l' I
,��u�, �;�.� c • � ��C, � s � /�,�.iL � � j�� tii, � � " i,, i;1/ � '� � -` .ti
,, , Prop rty Owne �s Sig ture Date
,..
, , � ' !
C�.�G�ir�CL' =-/C`�-'�C_-----_'�----- OFFICE USE ONLY --
Date Filed:
Fee
Receipt #
P.C. Action -
Appeal to Council? Yes No
Council meeting dat Z_Council
Letter(s) to applicant advising application incomplete:
Date application accepted as complete:
P.C. study meetin date) - _ Z P•C. public hearing (date) 3-- 9- ��-
Action ,Q�/�D kJ�l��ldU f
G'/�� J r. �tC�'
��, ciTv o
4 �
BlJRUINGAME
��
CI?�
F�
CITY OF BURLINGAME
SUPPLEMENTAL TO APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
CONII�RCIAL APPLICATIONS
1. Propos d use of site: ���jr= �/%i = <<" �/��Yy�f-1 -C �'r,,r��"["�, -
l L�.�TiZ
�
2. Days/hours of operation: uT �; Ii1Zi 8.' ��� �.�r� �- �c�- �
�',T� 7'>>l n�r� r� `i'c�,����) { l!�'c'�Co,r� Tt /"�'tt' n.r� i:�.�; - 7"�'C -
3. Number of trucks/service vehicles (by type): �/� GN�=
4. Current and Projected maximum number of employees at this
location:
Existina In 2 Years In 5 Years
After After After
8AM-5PM 5PM 8AM-5PM 5PM 8AM-5PM 5PM
Weekdays
fulltime �- �` � �-- � �
artime � / � � / � � / '�
Weekends �_ � -�- �.- �_ �; _.
fulltime
artime -� / �-. �=- 1 � -E--- / �-
5. Current and Projected maximum number of visitors/customers
who may come to the site:
rl� c rz �s �'
�,�; . �, �v�y
Weekdav:
F�r � /Sfl� ;,:,
6.
7.
8.
9.
Existina
8AM-5PM
�
In 2 Years
After After
5PM 8AM-5PM 5PM
�� � �= � ��'
� � �� � � -�- � c�
In 5 Years
After
8AM-5PM I 5PM
� t �� �
_�,.- I ��
Maximum number of employees and visitors/customers which can
be expected to be on the property at any one time: ///
Where do/will the employees park? p;2 �U� z ��- �.�,� z�:` -� �.�5 L�?
�i�12►: in`�� UT�
�'
Where ,do/will customers/visitors park?�-�f�rv,a7� ��cc�l��L� -L�'/-+5"z=v�
��l=K�n;C� C�c"Is
Present or most recent use of site:��%Q�C,
10. List of other tenants/firms on the property: nIC�N �
CITY OF BURLINGAME
SUPPLEMENTAL TO APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR
'���/'k�� VARIANCE APPLICATIONS
In order to approve an application for a variance, the Planning
Commission is required to make findings (Code Section 25.54.020
a-d). Please answer the following questions as they apply to
your property and application request to show how the findings
can be made. A letter may also be submitted if you need
additional space or if you wish to provide additional information
for the Planning Commission to consider in their review of your
application. Please write neatly in ink or type.
a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or .
conditions applicable to your property which do not apply to
other properties in the area.
- - r- • ---, �: ,� �
5�� ,4-1-�� �^/. � � .
M S �Y ? 1 1992 .
� r-
b. Explain why the application request is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
and what unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship
might result from the denial of the application.
�
c. Explain why 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.
d. Discuss how the proposed 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.
�
�
" �- � -.., J :� :_..:
��1aY 2 1 1992
A'1"I'1�C11MI;N'P 'I'O V11RI1�NCI"s 11F1'L]:C11'1'ION �'��'vM-�3URL(�UGq�(E
PL�I�II�INu DEPT
A• THE GEN�RIIL A�'PEIIRANCr OI' 'I'fIL: I3UILDING L�NDS I'I'5ELF
ATs'I'!i�'i'ICALLY '1'O '1'fl� PROPOS�D USE. TIIr GEN�RAL PHYSICAL
11PF�ARnNCr 11ND LOCIITION IS DO'I'iI UNIQUr AND SPECIAL WIIIL�
CONSIST�IN'I` WITI� 'I'HG OVrRALL SPECInL QUIILITIES OF THE DOWN-
TOWN ARC11.
B. TFi� BCN�I� ITS 'I'O �iE brRIV�J� DY 'I'IlE i3ilRLINGAME BU5INESS
UIS1'I2ICT' I�ND RIiSIbEN'1'S T3Y VIR'I'UC OF IIRINGING COMM�RCE
11ND POSI'I'IVL' IDGN'1'I'1'Y WOULD �XEME'LIFY NO HIGHER OR
BET'1'GR US� OF A PROPERTY. Tli� EXISTING BUILDING IS
VACAN'T ANI) IN ITS PRESENT CONllITIO1V AN �Y$ SOR� A[�1D
U�'I'R11C'i'ION TO 'I'II� POSITIV� QUIILITY CIIARIICTER OF THE
T3URLINGIIME DOWN'I'OWN ARrA. DrNInL WOULD RGSULT IN THE
i3UILll��111G,r� CON'I'INUED V1ICANT S`I'A'I'US, 1�S WITiiOUT 'I'fIIS
V11KI�. „�I�CE TI11; PRUPOS�D i1SE WOULD I3E IMPOSSIBLE. THIS
WOi1LD�"it�SULT IN LOST OF REV�NUr TO OWN�R OF THr PR�PERTY,
RrUbGED 'I'nX IZ�VENUE FOR TIIE CITY AND COLLIITERIAL LOSS OF
NI;T'D�D Rf VrNUE TO SURR�UNllTNG I3USINESSES.
C. 'I'IiI� PROPS�D US� 11S A LIVr 'I'flGn'I'R1: WII,L IN NO WAY I3r
UE'I'RIM�N'1'11L OR INJURIOUS '1'O TII� SURROUIVDING AREA,
BUSINrSSES OR GEN�RIIL PUI3LIC. TIIIS IS A CLOSED PER-
FORMnNCE TIIEATRG FOR AbUL`1' PUBLIC CONSUMP'1'ION. PER-
FORMIINCES ARE FOR SPECIFIC 'I'IME IN1'�RVALS IN LATE EVENINGS
11CCOMPLISII�b �NTIRELY WITIIIN 'I'HC CONE'INDS OF TI�E FACILITY
11ND GEN�RA'PING NO H1IRMFUL PFiYSIC1�L DY PRODUCTS.
�'�I�f)iI'ION�I,i.v i,ui: •rc� •r�ir, t,nci: c�r t�o�rn otastri; PnRhCPJG
r\P1U 'I'll� LP(I'/1C'C Of' 1'11"1'RUfd.; CRO;;SfPJC fl�f?.A:1'.�II';I) STF;1';1;'I'°>
UUI:; I'<) 'C{il:l l� USI; OI' PUf;L,LC I'r1!t1:1.P•1G, �dVP IS COiJ'1'{?AC1'Ifl(�
1�01%. YR LV�'CI: V�I;I: J P;c: ;;UPF IC 1. f;[J7' TO �1CCor�rto�n�rr•, AL,I, I'I" S
I'A'1'1'0[dS ANI) I�;Ii�'1.,OYP,I�.S. rtr�ni.,l.,Y I�IVf? {JILL ALSO 1'T?UVIUE:
n siii��r�rr,r, �,r,RVI�:I, CO 7'F;AfJs�i�c��cr i�n'I�i;o�aS t�Rul�1 'I'itl�; 1�ItI��A'1'I;
Pl�I:I; [tdC /�IZI;r\:; fri '1'lll; 'I'III;n1'I;I: ANI1 lii\(;I' AGAIN FOI; ALL
1'i;l'f�URIIAIiCI.�.S, '1'11I5 SIIUiII,I) VICI'U?�LLY f;LihIIPJA'1'I; AP1Y
li;f�nc�r c�r� r�t�rl,ic; PAI��;Ir�rr, n:� wcr,r� n;; i��;:;u�it; �r��r snrE:7�Y
�.cr� nl,t, I'r17'I�ORs i�i�r-.�z r r!c; �rac;��r;ss r�r�i� i,c[:�,�s.
• ., �,
,i��.
D. TIIE PROPOSED USE AS 11 T11F.,11TRE WiLL LEND I'I'SF,LF TO THE
GfiNERAL APPEAL AND CHARIICTER Or THE BURLINGAM� BUSINESS
DISTRIC'I'. TFiE COLL11'I'ERAI, EFFECT TO TIiE COMMERC� OF THE
AREA WITEI REGARD 'PO R�STIIUR�INTS 11ND SIMILAR BUSINESSES
CANNOT T3r IGNORI;D. 11DDITIONIILLY 11S THF.RE IS NO SUBSTANTIIIL
CHIINGE `1'0 'I'fIE PHYSICAL 11REA OCCUPIED BY THE EXISTING BUILDING
11ND ITS PROPOSi;I) CONVERSION EXCrPT 'I'0 UPGRADE AND ENHANCE
TIIF, GENERAI� 11PP�ARIINCE Or 'I'ilr OVERALL DOWNTOWN ARE11.
l'Ul''I.�ti:;l'.i'OI;k'� �Vl' I;ILI, (:i'i:". Cl,'I(;I'; ;�i0,d7'iILY' I'U Pl1'I'l'..(if�:S lifvL)I�G
'Clil'. ��(�I; Oi� "?1 �l'�1 1'(;rtiVll)i', t?iJTC•;I��CAIivP�I:i1T 'TU 'I'f1:17' VER.1
IhiPU�l''1'/1iJ':I' ;�I��,:_�ill?;�'1' Oi' Ciif�, POI'Ul..r�l'[Oi: 'ffii�T 11l�VI�, �Fld OPTIOf�IS
l'(�l'. (!U�\L11'Y P:�J'T'P,i:Tr1I;J�'I•,:: C.
... . �;��
CI il� OF ��URLfUGAME
PLANf�1NG DEPT .
r �
ROUTING FORM
DATE : ' �jl " � � __ Cj �_
TO: CITY ENGINEER
�— CHIEF BIIILDING OFFICIAL
FIRE MARSHAL
PARRS DIRECTOR
CITY ATTORNEY
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY PLANNER/ZONING TECHNICIAN
REQIIEST FOR L/ �" �". �Cl� lE= ,� �� +��"��= t`� /�=" %�
AT �¢� C�i(���C����f/� U� -
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING: J U L��I � J i���fj �
/°.,LL�'-G'�(.Cry L'- �� _�.
REVIEWED BY STAFF IN MEETING ON I�A1DA'�.d �C�U� ��- ,% J 7
�
THANKS,
�-1� �.
Jane/Sher' Leah'
?-s' Date of Comments
� ��J�� ��� . �
� , G. ���v �:'� ���. �1- �
� . � '�`�` � �
, ��.�-
L���.1s.z/.t.P��c.. J �-- • J �� '
S ` y ��
�� / i ' //!'��`' ` \
�.� O ��� �r''`'vj"`
`�` / ` •
� :��� ���� r� j%��� .� �� .
G�yz� '� �t�-2.. � �%�� �3� .
`� �
• ���,,.P�L
���- ���p.�...� 'w`' � ..
� . � �� _ " " o�,u�
�` ,
�
�
. � �
w`' �`�- • ` , � J
!/ � _ _ _ {,� .f � I
�/ �.� /J�l��� �f�'" _
` j�� ,(� , ,"� �,
�� ,.
t,t�r �' �— � S 5 � --�
ROUTING FORM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
� �</-�r��-
��_ CITY ENGINEER
CHIEF BIIILDING OFFICIAL
FIRE MARSIiAL
PARRS DIRECTOR
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY PLANNER/ZONING TECHNICIAN
SUBJECT: REQIIEST FOR �1��'�`-
:)
,L%���72 �
� , �.
AT -T`� � C� ��'�'/�IL%I �'�/<�
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING: J �� 1e �'
_ �/������� � ,, �- �
REVIEWED BY STAFF IN MEETING ON D��J�A�': I Y'C�,��, % �`n�`
�
✓
THANKS,
�__
Jane/Sheri/Leah��
� �
���_ _ �.
� ; �f`�t �qflJ
�
/`�i'Y! s �" ` f
S `�' � z--��'Date of Comments
n
_ � � ���
�� � I
w ,/
`-'�- "��(ilA �rC�` i��� �
������ �� Bu..,
G�-� G�� �Jti%�� .����� Q�_ � ° � �
._ ���� �.�� �
�� `
Q:�" � � . �
/ � � � ' �.
� �� .,: -
ROUTING FORM
DATE : ' �)� �� i �— �I�.x.
TO: CITY ENGINEER
CHIEF BIIILDING OFFICIAL
_^�_ FIRE MARSHAL
PARRB DIRECTOR
CITY ATTORNEY
FROM: CITY PLANNER/ZONING TECHNICIAN
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR �-� /y �L�- C�G �'� �=,�(.�i ���I i
/1,�j �
AT ��r � ( /�l'��/ �t� i���m- %fy /�C. �
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING: —1 L-�� �� ����
REVIEWED BY STAFF IN MEETING ON �'ct���� : �Z',�i:L '� ,;�t. f��
� �
THANKS,
� �l
Jane/ Sheri/�a� �
�d • r �'MN�~ G
-,�,E, h • �F�- 1`�"�`-�4 L
�(/�'N S
Fn����"
�
S 2� 2- Date of Comments
��►-r+�-- ��� ��� � �q z. � �`' �"'�'�- �
,q,,� o � w�- i��`�`'� ��'o �+ c�� �,
,�.�p� ss
�� ,;
,
�
�,
��� . .��
C�.�.e C�� .a.� �axx�.[xa�.�axxrr.e
CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME� CALIFORNIA 94010 (415) 342-B625
April 21, 1992
Harry J. DeOrnellas, Jr.
6031 Meridian Avenue
San Jose, CA 95120
Dear Mr. DeOrnellas:
At their meeting of April 20, 1992 the City Council held an appeal
hearing on your application to allow a live comedy theater at 247
California Drive, zoned C-1 Sub Area B.
Following a public hearing Council denied your application without
prejudice. A denial without prejudice allows you to come back to the
Planning Commission for reapplication without another fee within a
reasonable time (for example, three months) as determined by Planning
staff .
Sincerely yours,
�C't-�..
Marg ret Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
cc: Eugene & Mary A. Ivani/Louis & Albina M. Ivani (property owners)
City Clerk
Chief Building Inspector .
_ :.�
,
�•
�
`
:-
M �
�
`- '��-
�� � ' �' . _ �
_�.� _ ..-
S�e A#�A � �j��
i� �� �� � � �
,
�w �, - , ' 11�
��'� �T-; ,� � �
� ' �- _ � , '1,�z
� � � ...f,—.r
�r _ :;-� .
` �� .�� jn' '�
� R � ��, ^ � � �.# =
�
:,• �i� '+ �a -'1 • �i, �' _ .
-_ , G _ . � •
� � . ,� � � ��� �
,. � ,� . � V �
� �.: '` ` *� ,a1� � ���� �+� y �
' �`� ' � ��. a � .S� ' " .r � �`�
� -� -� . , - �,P . �" �,� ,�. .,�'
.���
R'�� , ��,.�.
� . - _ g •Q� �, , ; -�,
�
..�' -
� -- �� - � �
.
. �
.��� _`'�� r -
� .:�� . - . . � � � . ^
� 3�P, Y�DRPOT i� �� f� .� `� � � � -
_ QR'�� ,. . .
e-Z , .
' N,A =A�EN�E=
C � I � ��,FoR _--� : - -----
'�.,�� � ���I��` � , . •r � �
� � ,.
'� � i � � _
' � " - -- --.�,�ue p1RtA B
_. _. , �
_ . . _ � � • 1 ' -
. r. ' �'0 � . - •
, � � _ � � �� � � �� '� � � �
i • � .R�' { . _ � � ' ' � �
' �.�� - �
� - ��� _ - - - � .
� � • • • � �
a '
� �'�'1 ' �
� ���� � � ���• - � �
!` . , � �-�-
� ���� .. , �
.. ,. � j .
� .� �....� - .
� � � � �
■� '" . �, � ' _ . - � , -_ • _ � �
, � ��
i .. . � �. . • s, ' _, �. ' •✓
��a � V �� N N �� N ='` t 7 f"� �
--,� �" ,� _�r ' aL
— .1.� �•.
� � RTo�I �'�N � 3
� Lo 0
� - - • � .
.�,� S�� AR�q A - � _ � - ��
'� � �k � �- i - � -
�. . —r ' . ` _ _ _ r . � r � +�a+�.�•�..a �
� ' � � �� y . I '
� �
. �� +
CITY OF BIIRLINGAME
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BORLINGAME, CA 94010
(415) 3�2-8931
NOTICE OF HEARING
The CITY OF BIIRLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION announces the
following public hearing on Monday, the 13th day of July, 1992, at
7:30 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingame, California. A copy of the application and plans
may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Planning Division at
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California.
247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
APN: 029-211-050
APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT, PARRING
VARIANCE FOR 74 STALLS AND A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR A LIVE COMEDY THEATER AT 247
CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-1, SIIBAREA B.
If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at
the public hearing described in the notice or in written
correspondence delivered to the City at or prior to the public
hearing.
MARGARET MONROE
CITY PLANNER
July 3, 1992
1
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE
RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame
that:
WHEREAS, application has been made for a special permit and
parkina variance for a live comedy theater
at 247 California Drive (APN 029-211-05,0� ;
(propertv owners: Euaene & Mary A Ivani Louis & Albina M Ivani
96 Chester Street. Daly City CA 94014 ); and
WHEREAS, this Commission held a public hearing on said
application on July 13, 1992 , at which time it reviewed and
considered the staff report and all other written materials and
testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this
Planning Commission that said application is approved, subject to the
conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
It is further directed that a certified copy of this
resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San
Mateo.
CHAIRMAN
I,
, Secretary of the Planning
Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of
the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of Julv ,
1992 , by the following vote: �
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
SECRETARY
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLIITION APPROVING NEGATIVE DECLARATION� SPECIAL PERMIT
AND PARRING VARIANCE
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a negative declaration has been proposed and application
has been made for a special permit and a parking variance for a live
comedy theater at 247 California Drive (APN: 029-211-050); (property
owners: Eugene & Mary Ivani); and
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the
City of Burlingame on August 10, 1992, at which time it reviewed and
considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony
presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning
Commission that:
1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted
and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it
is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project
set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and
Negative Declaration is hereby approved.
2. Said special permit and parking variance is approved, subject
to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for
such special permit and parking variance is as set forth in the minutes
and recording of said meeting.
3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution
be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo.
CHAIRMAN
I, , Secretary of the Planning
Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of
the Planning Commission held on the lOth day of August ,
1992 , by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
SECRETARY
CITY OF BIIRLINGAML
501 PRIMROS$ ROAD
BIIRLINGAME, CA 94010
(415) 342-8931
NOTICE OF HEARING
The CITY OF BIIRLINGAME CITY COIINCIL announces the following
public hearing on Wednesday, the 9th day of September, 1992
,
at 7:30 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. A copy of the application
and plans may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Planning
Division at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California.
247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
APN 029-211-050
APPLICATION FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION� SPECIAL
PERMIT FOR A LIVE THEATER AND A PARRING VARIANCE
AT 247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE� ZONED C-1 SIIB AREA B
If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may
be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised
at the public hearing described in the notice or in written
correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public
hearing.
MARGARET MONROE
CITY PLANNER
AUGUST 28 j 1992
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE
RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a negative declaration has been proposed and
application has been made for a special use permit for a live theater
and a parking variance at 247 California Drive (APN 029-211-050),
(Property owners: Euqene & Mary Ivani�Louis & Albina Ivani. 96 Chester
Street, Daly City, CA 94014 ); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
said application on July 13 and Auqust 10 , 1992 , at which time
said application was approved;
WHEREAS, this matter was called up for review and a hearing
thereon held on September 9 , 1992 , at which time it reviewed
and considered the staff report and all other written materials and
testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this
Council that:
1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted
and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this council, it
is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project
set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and
Negative Declaration ND-450P is hereby approved.
2. Said special permit and variance are approved, subject to the
conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such
variance and special permit are as set forth in the minutes and
recording of said meeting.
3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this
resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San
Mateo.
MAYOR
I, JUDITH A. MALFATTI, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,
do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced at a
regular meeting of the City Council held on the 9th day of
September , 1992 , and adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
CITY CLERK
Burlingame City Council Minutes - July 19, 1993
$400,000 for capital improvements. Other than Foster City, we have the lowest rates of nearby
cities. Finance has requested a penalty of 1.5 percent be added to bills 30 days or more overdue,
this has been included in the resolution.
Councilman Lembi moved adoption of RESOLUTION 48-93. Seconded by Councilman Pagliaro,
carried unanimously by voice vote. Councilwoman Knight commented on a recent water bill with
an "overdue in 20 days" statement. Councilman Lembi also saw that notice and found it threaten-
ing. Finance Director explained the wording has been revised.
REOUEST FROM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO SELL BEER AT COMMUNITY PICNIC
City Manager reviewed his memo of July 14 which recommended council review this request from
the Chamber to serve beer at the Community Picnic on Sunday, September 19, 1993 from noon to 5
p.m. The police will be present in the park so no additional security is needed. The cost for park
cleanup and opening the recreation center for the event will be approximately $350. Last year
council approved payment for those costs. The city will also require a certificate of insurance from
the Chamber. Councilwoman Knight asked for separate votes on the sale of beer and the payment
of $350; she thought the Lions Hall was a good location for sale of beer because it is separated from
center of the community picnic area and family entertainment. Councilman Lembi moved to
approve payment of $350 in costs related to the community picnic. Seconded by Councilwoman
O'Mahony and carried unanimously. Councilman Lembi moved approval of the sale of beer at the
community picnic. Seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony and carried 4-1 on roll call vote,
Councilwoman Knight voting no.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Pagliaro asked removal of two encroachment permits for discussion, items "h" and "i. "
h. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR PLACING FURNITURE FOR SALE ON THE
SInEWALK IN FRONT OF 247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
Public Works memo of July 13 recommended council approve a permit with standard
conditions and additional conditions that the furniture be removed at the end of each day, and
the "a-board" sign be removed.
Councilman Pagliaro did not think it appropriate for a business to display its wares on the public
sidewalk. He moved to deny this permit. Seconded by Councilman Lembi, carried unanimously.
� ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR PLACING A BIKE RACK WITH BIKES FOR SALE
NEAR THE CURB IN FRONT OF 1111 BURLINGAME AVENUE
Public Works memo of July 13 recommended council approve this permit with standard
condition and additional conditions that the rack be from 10 to 16 inches from curb and be
removed at the end of each day.
Councilman Pagliaro disagreed with allowing bikes for sale being displayed on the sidewalk. He
moved denial of this request. Seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony, carried 4-1 on voice vote,
Councilman Lembi voting no.
STAFF REPORT
TO:
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
�ATE: JULY 13, 1993
�
CITY OF B URLINGAME
AGENDA
ITEM # g H
""Tc. 7/19/93
� narE
SUBMITTED :. ' %
;
r" -
*� %
BY , � � l��-�-c� -
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS �� BY
sus�ecT: SPECIAL ENCROACHMENT FOR PLACING FURNITURE FOR SALE ON THE SIDEWALK IN
FRONT OF 247 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
RECOMMENDATION•
It is recommended that Council approve the attached permit in accordance
with the standard permit conditions and the following conditions:
1. All of the furniture shall be removed at the end of each business day.
2. The "A-Board" sign placed on the sidewalk is to be removed.
BACKGROUND•
In the past few months, Fat Cat Antiques (247 California Drive) has
displayed their furniture for sale and an "A-Board" sign on the sidewalk
without a permit.
Staff has visited the site and found the sidewalk clearance to be adequate
at this location. However, the A-Board sign is prohibited on the public
right-of-way under Muni Code 22.48.030. Should Council concur with the use
of the sidewalk area for sale of furniture, staff can recommend this
application. The A-Board sign is prohibited by the sign code and must be
removed.
EXHIBIT: Permit, Sketch and Picture
,, ,
�,� �.�C � %��L,_ ,
Donald T. Chang, P. .
Assoc. Civil Engin er
Aa ,
cc: City Attorney, City Clerk
b:�za���;t�.gr�
WHEN RECORDED RETURN T0:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF BURLINGAME
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME CA. 94010
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
July 13, 1993
(Date)
TO OWNER: Frank Chavez/Phillip Sheldon
483 Manor Drive
Pacifica, CA 94044
In compliance with your request of June 23, 1993 and
subject to all of the terms, conditions and restrictions set forth
herein, permission is hereby granted to place furniture for sale in
front of "Fat Cat Antiques" with the followin condition•
1. All furniture shall be removed at the end of each business day.
AT 247 California Drive
Block No. 11, Town of Burlinqame
(Lot, block and subdivision or legal description)
Assessor's Parcel No. 029-211-050
General Provisions
1. Definition; Revocabilitv.
The term "encroachment" is
used in this permit to mean any structure or object of any kind or
character which is placed in, under, or over, any portion of the
right-of-way of the City of Burlingame. This permit is revocable on
fifteen (15) days notice.
-1-
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
2. Acceptance of rovisions It is understood and agreed
by the permittee that the doing of any work under this permit shall
constitute an acceptance of the provisions.
3. No precedent established This permit is granted with
the understanding that this action is not to be considered as
establishing any precedent on the question of the expediency of
permitting any certain kind of encroachment to be erected within
rights-of-way of the City of Burlingame.
4. Notice rior to startin work Before starting work on
which an inspection is required, or whenever stated on the face of
this permit, the permittee shall notify the Director of Public Works
or other designated employee of the City. Such notice shall be given
at least three (3) days in advance of the date work is to begin.
5. Permit on remises. This permit shall be kept at the
site of the work and must be shown to any representative of the City,
or any law enforcement officer on demand.
6. Protection of traffic. Adequate provision shall be made
for the protection of the public. Al1 work shall be planned and
carried out so that there will be the least possible inconvenience to
the public.
7. Stora e of material No material shall be stored on the
City right-of-way.
8. Clean up. Upon completion of the work, all brush,tim-
ber, scrap and material shall be entirely removed and the right-of-
way left in as presentable a condition as before work started.
9. Standards of construction. All work shall conform to
recognized standards of construction.
-2-
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
10. Supervision of city. All the work shall be done subject
to the supervision of, and to the satisfaction of, the City.
11. Future movinq of installation. It is understood by the
permittee that whenever construction, reconstruction or maintenance
work on the right-of-way may require, the installation provided for
herein shall, upon request of the City, be immediately removed by and
at the sole expense of the permittee.
12. Liability for damages. The permittee is responsible for
all liability for personal injury or property damage which may arise
out of work herein permitted, or which may arise out of failure on
the permittee's part to perform his obligations under this permit in
respect to maintenance. In the event any claim of such liability is
made against the City, or any department, officer, or employee there-
of, permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold them, and each of
them, harmless from such claim. �
13. Care of draina e. If the work herein contemplated shall
interfere with the established drainage, ample provision shall be
made by the permittee to provide for it as may be directed by City.
14. Location plan. Upon completion of the work under this
permit, the permittee shall furnish a plan to the City showing
location in detail.
15. Maintenance. The permittee agrees, by the acceptance of
this permit, to exercise reasonable care to maintain properly an
encroachment placed by it in the City right-of-way, and to exercise
reasonable care in inspecting and immediately repairing and making
good any injury to any portion of the right-of-way which occurs as a
result of the maintenance of the encroachment in the right-of-way, or
-3-
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
as a result of work done under this permit, including any and all
injury to the right-of-way which would not have occurred had such
work not been done or such encroachment not placed therein. Main-
tenance shall include any damage that may be caused by roots of City
trees.
16. Commencement of work. This permit shall be void unless
the work herein contemplated shall have been completed before
October 19, 1993.
17. Recordinq. This permit shall be recorded by the City
Clerk with the County Recorder of the County of San Mateo.
18. This permit shall be binding on the heirs, successors and
assigns of the parties hereto.
19. Sketch. See attached one (1) sketch.
ACCEPTED:
OWNER (S):
ATTACH NOTARY STATEMENT.
THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
BY:
-4-
F I L F. : F:\ W p\ F I L E S\ M I S C\ E N C R P R M T. S P L
�,p�T CA�
�k �-
���
247 California Driv� • Burlingamc, CA 94p1 U•(415) 348-1119
�����' ��������' ���' u ���������' ���' ����
�
0
-P
�
Ga���oR t�� A r� ��v E
F�G
y� DEW ALk
r
10
�v21-> >
1
s—
"AMG ��
-51 GAI.I�ORuta
,,. ��,
Z'v �,�,
�o�E�oNr
3�
�
10
_ ��v�
1 S �TYP.
�N ��
c������
N�,ar �ar q►� i 1Q.��s M
247 Gal��'ORNIA pRIVE
.
, �
�
2
� �
�
�, Q
� �
at �
� .�.
� N
!� - ^
I� � ; �- ,
, ` �■rei
:j =
��
- - � �.c
_� _ �
2�� C� � i��rhi Q`3?�,
�/� /q3
busy, applicant should make signage more simplif,��d: The motion
carried unanimously 5-0 on roll call vote. .-- ""
CONTINUE APPEAL FOR PARKING VARYA'�CES FOR A NEW STRUCTURE AT 701
CALIFORNIA DRZVE
Mayor Pagli�.d'continued
request�.ef the appellant
uance'�for this project.
this appeal until October 19 at the
and noted this would be the last contin-
�PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED REVIEW OR NEGATIVE DECLARATION USE
PERMIT AND PARKZNG VARIANCE FOR COMED CLUB AT 247 CALIFORNIA
DRIVE - DENIED
City Planner reviewed her memo of August 31 which recommended
council hold a public hearing and take action. Harry Deornellas,
applicant, is requesting a negative declaration and use permit
and a 74 space parking variance in order to convert a 4,999
square foot retail space with a mezzanine to a live comedy
theater at 247 California, zoned C-1 Burlingame Avenue Commercial
Area, Sub Area B. The proposal is for a 99 seat live theater,
open four nights a week Thursday throuqh Sunday with performances
between 7:00 p.m. and midnight. On Saturday there would be two
performances, with all other nights single performances. The
building is built lot line to lot line with no on-site parking;
the previous use was retail sales. The 99 seat theater would
generate a 74 space parking demand (1.5 persons per car). The
applicant proposed to provide 50 parking spaces in the Burlingame
High School parking lot with a shuttle service before and after
each show. The Planning Commission's action of August 10 grant-
ing the request was based on this high school parking; since then
the Superintendent of the School District has notified the city
and DeOrnellas that parking would not be available at Burlingame
High School. In response to council, she said the Planning
Commission's consideration included the assumption that this
project also would make use of public parking lots in the area.
Two letters were received after preparation of the staff report
from SamTrans regarding use of the Caltrain parking lots.
Mayor Pagliaro opened the public hearing.
Harry DeOrnellas, applicant, said the School District Superinten-
dent's concern about use of the school lot was possible conflicts
with school activities; he was still negotiating with the school
district and in addition he was negotiating with SamTrans for use
of the Caltrain parking lots but would not know for several
weeks. Mayor asked if the applicant would be paying for use of
the private lots; he also wondered about hours of operation on
Sunday. Applicant affirmed that beer and wine would be served at
the site.
Joseph Villa, consultant for the project, said he was a former
Burlingame resident; they would forgo serving liquor every other
Sunday so minors could attend; asked council to consider the
community service aspect of the business allowing uses of sets
for high school drama students, both Burlingame and San Mateo
High Schools could participate; he saw two concerns regarding the
project, parking and location. Regarding parking, they are going
before the school board for permission to use school parking and
going before SamTrans board for use of train parking lots. The
location he felt was good, some people think the theater should
be located on the bayfront, but this site is closer to schools
and city restaurants, which will benefit; he has spoken to other
businesses in the area and they approve. He asked if council
cannot give affirmative vote tonight, would council continue the
matter until after these meetings where parking will be decided.
Eddie Ferrari, artistic director for the project, explained the
live melodrama and vaudeville theater; felt it would help other
business in the area, local restaurants and nightclubs will
benefit as will all the hotels; they will work with the high
school drama classes; he saw the project as a great opportunity
for the city.
City Council Minutes -
September 21, 1992
Mayor Pagliaro closed the public hearing.
Councilman Lembi was enthusiastic about the theater but very
concerned about parking; another qroup, softball leagues, use the
high school parking lot 9 months of the year, there are also
users such as recreation department which coordinates uses of
park facilities exclusive of the high school; the project is in a
congested area which lacks parking; not sure there is a solution
to parking problem. Councilwoman Knight thought theater was
great idea, would benefit hotel conventioneers but would be
better if it were on bayfront and they could walk to site;
Thursday night is high school board meeting at Burlingame High
and parking lot is needed; Friday night is school dances, plays
and other school activities; if parking variance were granted
would set precedent for future use of site if theater left the
area; she moved to deny the project. Seconded by Councilman
Harrison who commented on his concern about parking and traffic;
the letter from SamTrans is only a recommendation from a single
staff inember, the Samtrans Board still has to vote to approve and
there is no guarantee they would do so. Councilwoman O'Mahony
was sorry this project has gone on for such a long time; she had
looked at parking in the area and found plenty of parking spaces;
locating the project by the bay would also make sense, but this
proposed location would benefit local restaurants; she worried
about people crossing California but she would vote against
denial. Mayor Pagliaro said all speakers had good points to
make; the applicant has made an honest effort to find parking; he
thought the project belonged on the other side of the freeway.
The motion to deny carried 4-1 on roll call vote, Councilwoman
O'Mahony voting no.
BLIC COMMENTS
May r Pagliaro asked for any public comments on items remaining
on t e agenda, or on any other item of interest to the publi-c.
Councilman Harrison commented on the wonderful community picnic
organiz��i by the Chamber of Commerce on Sunday, September 20; he
congratulated the Chamber and the citizen of the year, former
council me�uber Gloria Barton. Karen Key, Director of the Cham-
ber, said Dtaug McGeorge, President of the Chamber, deserves much
credit for the event. Councilman Lembi asked if there were any
problems with'the serving of beer and wine at the event; Police
Chief respondec� he was not aware of any problems.
RESOLUTION 85-92 - INCREASZNG REFUSE COLLECTION RATES
Finance Director reviewed his memo of September 15 which recom-
mended council (1) a,pprove a resolution increasinq refuse collec-
tion rates 15.17 percent for the 12 month period effective
october 1, 1992, (2) �,irect staff to prepare modifications to the
collection franchise agreement, recycling agreement and transfer
station agreement, and (3) increase the city�s refuse collection
franchise fee from 2.5 to,.5 percent. Last year Browning Ferris
Industries (BFI) waived a xate increase pending a decision to
relocate their recycling fa�ility from Belmont to San Carlos;
they have since moved to the•new site adjoining the San Carlos
Transfer Station; the new facility has the capability to function
as a Materials Recovery Facili�y (MRF) which is an integral part
of AB 939 Source Reduction and tiecycling Element (SRRE) recently
adopted by council. It is expected to account for 18.5 percent
of Burlingame's waste diversion by the year 2,000. A rate
analysis was prepared by JPA audito�s, Hilton Farnkopf and Hobson
and compar�son of rates with other cf;�ties shows Burlingame is
still the lowest. The franchise fee increase will be dedicated
to a special reserve fund for dump closyre; it will be increased
2.5 percent each year until it reaches 10 percent. BFI has also
submitted a request for an increase in the garden pickup rate
which will be presented to council at a future meeting. He
responded to council questions and commended BFI on its commit-
ment to meet AB 939 requirements.
Councilman Harrison moved adoption of RESOLUTION 85-92. Seconded
by Councilman Lembi, carried unanimously by voice vare.
10. Special Permit to allow the servicing and installation of marine engineThor
the C-1 District at 247-251 California Drive (APN 029-211-040/05and Eu ene
(aPP R. A. White (�wner of 251 California), 9
Thorstenson licant),
and Louis Ivani (owners of 247 California).
_ - - -_ - '/ �� - -��
�
-�� '��
� _ . ,r �
, �� _
__. :�
�_ - _ - . . �..�.._
- -� ,..-.-.�.�,-.. ------,...k-