Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Min - PC - 1957.05.27
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COWU-4ISSION MINUTES Regular f4ea e 4_ -ng COIkE,1LISSIONERS PRESENT ::'OI:'11ISSI()NERI S ABBEIT' OTHEFS Die derl bsere Finger City A t �0'rney —4s,-0::L a. Henderson. 1'lar;, Gonsi;lt. Kindig City i4arr Martin Covaic_ lman Thayer X,orberg Stivers Meeting called to order at 8:05 p.m,.; Chairman Martin presiding. Minutes of the regular meeting, April 22, 1957, special meeting anal study meeting, May 13, 1957, were approved as written. RECLfkSSIFICATION AND VARIANCE LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 101 BURLINGAIMET-, VILLAGE SUBDIVISION n EL CAMINO REAL AND DUFFERIN AVENUE,`. A letter dated May 14, 1957, was read front Edward R. FitzSiirfinons, attorney for the applicants, requesting that the hearing opt -the above matter be continued to the regular meeting of the Commission, June 24, 1957. Chairman Martin noted this to be the second postponement requested' by the applicants. There being no objections, the hearing was con- tinued to the June 24 meeting and the applicants to be so notified and advised that no further extension of time shall be granted. VARIANCE - WEE TOTS NURSERY SCHOOL. A letter dated May 27, 1957, was read frora Mrs. Betty Cook, ap- plicant, requesting that the hearing on the above matter be continued to the regular meeting of the Commission, June 24, 1957. There being no objections, the hearing was continued as requested. HEARINGS: 1. RE:SUBDIVISION v Portion Lots 4 and 5, Block 52, Easton Subdivision No. 5. (Nicholas Bogoslovskv. owner.) Mr. Nicholas Bogoslovsky, owner, in attendance, stated that the resubdivision has been proposed to permit a sale of part of the property, In reply to Chairman Martin, the City Engineer advised that there is a problem relative to sewer service. The second lot will require construction of a new sewer lateral extending from the closest sewer main, which is approximately 55 feet distant. Questioned by the Cpmmission, Mr. Bogosliovsky stated that he was not prepared to undertake this construction at the present time and requested approval of the application conditi;;nal on the installation of the new lateral Reference was made to a small cottage presently located at i_.;he rear of the property and the owner advised of his in -bent to remo-%Te tha_<, should the resubd,.ivisi on be approved, in ensuing discuss' -on, Members ex -pressed reluctance to apppove the resubd4vis}on as submitted and the matter was tabled for a period of 120 days to pprmit t1he applicant. to make tDe necessary provisions for sewer service. 2. VARIANCE -- Mansfield Garratt, Sr., 13 Hayward Court, to permlr construction on side property line within front 70% - of prgperby _�_____ Mrs Mansfield Garratt, Sr., in attendance, advised that he wishes to construct a small frame structure to serve as a pool shelter, A plan of the proposed construction was submitted anal., in reply to Commission. questioning, Mr. Garratt stated that due to the topography of the property, the rear 30% is not feasible for building. The swimming pool is located on the front 70% of the lot and, to be a usable and convenient structure, the proposed shelter has been sited ad jacent tD the swimming pool, thereby e.xtend�ng into the side property set -back, A "Statement of Justification", submitted. by the applicant, was read and accepted for filing. There being no objections voiced from the floors Chair -man Martin questioned the Planning Consultant who reported that after viewing the property, in his opinion, the proposed structure should offer no hard- ship to surrounding properties and it was his recoramendation that the application be approved. Observing that the applicant was seeking a means to the full en- joyment of his property without interference to neighbors, Commissioner Norberg moved that the variance as requested be granted, seconded by Commissioner Henderson and carried unanimously on roll -call of members present. 3. VARIANCE ® Neon Sign - Frank Edwards Company. The Planning Consultant advised that the Coast Neon Sign Company, Redwood City, has contracted to locate a sign on the Frank Edwards Company building in the Millsdale Industrial Park. The sign is of legal size but because of the weight there is it problem relative to the installation. In discussing the matter with Mr. Edwards, he has stated that the roof of his building will not bear the weight of the sign. Therefore, the proposal has been made that the sign be sup- ported by_ steel poles embedded in concrete and attached to the side wall of the building, extending above the office portion of the build'® ing. This method of attachment is not included in the provisions of the ordinance, necessitating the variance application. -2- Chairman Martin acknowledged the presence of "r� Fred Nielsen,, representing the Coast Neon Sign Company, who cI scussed with Com- missioners the location of the sign in relation to the roos' of the building and the buildi r g parapet. A letteA dated May 27, 1957, was read from Fire Chief' .`g�. ! d uE Vt0©?�'t?tr 3t7 g that �3E;r� :: : '=� e°i3'':7 �; '. �'` �?i` C ` �^ { 3 I,z, A�art_, I.�iei! _ J . i'- J.1J c LJi on to the proposed construction or location,, 'There being 'no ob sctions. a. mot, -.Lon ._ntrocllucod by Commissioner H dens sec it ded— i, y v�) F}:T �siorer .C�C3 -i7:� � C', r , s F ? „ .�' �h�. G ":� �'IE; ,, JTTi.T11 7 4 i 0.1 wend to the City approval of the a:.c .a.r_co as submitted era s carried unardmouslv on roll call of merTbers present. . VARIANCE - Morton Nude requesting area-MLssion 6c build withi{z sic: set -back line extending, into Front :`0%of Mr. Morton Rude, in attendance, advised that he proposes to erect a 50 unit apartment building on property owned by him at the southwest corner of Trousdale Drive and Marco Polo VJ1ay. The lot is irregular in shape and in order to provide the required pa.rk.ing spaces for tenants cars with adequate ingress and egress some of the carports must be built within the side set -back extending into the front 70Y of the lot along the southerly boundary. Mr. Rude stated further that the proposal would offer no inter- ference to the adjoining property presently under development as an apartment house site with no dwelling units on the ground floor along the side facing the proposed carports. In reply to Chairman Martin, the Planning Consultant observed that the proposal did not conflict with the purposesof the side set -back re- strictions, i.e., open space provided by the open roof area of the car- ports and sufficient access for fire department; equipment. Chairman Martin invited comments from the floor and the following citizens were heard: Donald J. C:arth, 1010A Paloma Avenue, property owner in the Mills Estate area, objected on the grounds that the tenants overlooking the carports from 'the adjacent building would be penalized. Mr. E. Sugarman, owner of property on Trousdale Drive, urged Commission approval of the variance declaring the development proposed by Mr. Rude to be an asset to the community. Jack Glang, contractor and developer in the Mills Estate, stated that in his opinion there should be no necessity for a variance if the building were designed for the available buildable land. Commissioner Norberg expressed his approval of the proposed build- ing and stated that such endeavors merit encouragement and thereafter introduced a motion that the variance be granted to permit constr!.-,�,tion of carports within the side set -back for the entire length along the southerly boundary of the property, provided that the height of the carport roof line shall not exceed 6 feet above existing ground elevation for the front 70% of the property. Motion seconded by Commissioner ®3_ Henderson and carried unanimously on roll call. of members present.. Chairman Martin thereupon announced that the order of the Com- mission shall become final providec? that :no appeal is directed 45o the City Council, prior to Tuesday, June . PETITIONS: 1. TENTATIVE Pt P �-_ "Ure kside" c t t"su�t'.'� �s Frank ana- :die � h� Kennedy,., ,_ qp 1.., rU. d dLPs Y"�1��f�� ...,......m.-....�...��...�.,.m�..,R.,�.�.._.,,�.,..,..�.m_.a.d..,e..-e.e.,...m "wF+J-S.. �% .4. ,'4&'. and; 'Clara V i! Xl "� �� .i.i .Y' e } ` t:fl area tJ. L a g3�1 t�7` ;iiaT•g ?:'S �91`.% ? �?oC ., a 0- 'fl0 Ru?y Pei'±'k recreation area. Mr. Robert- Parlett—, angineer ra rt°.�°ec�..j3iting ±ha ommars, advised o_.' a proposal to subdl.vide the land i nrsG 6 lots. In reply to Chairman Martin, the City Engineer reported progress on the various problems relative to water service and storm drainage and expressed assurance that these matters could be satisfactorily re- solved prior to presentation of the final map„ In reply to a question raised by Chairman Martin, the City Attorney stated that the subdivision as submitted does riot comply with the City s s requirement that all lots steal F haire frontage on a public street. Mr. Karmel referred in particular to Lot 2 as described on the map. Commissioners discussed the proposal. at 'Length with fir. Parlatt and Mr. Frank Kennedy and it was unanimously agreed that several revisions could be made to improve the general lay -out. There being no objections, the matter was thereafter continued to the study meeting of June 3.0 for presentation of a revised map. COPvU,,',UNICATIONS: 1. Resubmission American Standard Motel Corporation Application. A communication dated May 23, 1957, was read from the City Clerk advising that by City Council action the application of the American Standard Motels Corporation, proposing to use the property at the northeast cornier of Bellevue Avenue and E1 Camino Real as an apartment - hotel, was resubmitted to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation on the basis of revised plans submitted by the applicant. Mr. Robert Rose, representing the applicant, outlined the various changes made to eliminate previously objectionable features and stated that every effort has been exerted to create an attractive operation compatible with neighboring properties. Mr. Rose further advised that the proposed identification sign measures five feet in height, twelve feet in length to be mounted on a pole and the combined height of which shall not exceed twenty feet, In reply to Commission query, the City Attorney referred to the zoning ordinance providing that signs within El residential district shall not exceed three square feet and declared that there may be -4- no variance granted from this restriction. Mr. Rose thereupon advised that the sign was necessary to the proposed use and should permission to erect the sign be denied, the applicants would not proceed with the construction of the apartment - hotel. Commissioner; Henderson, referring; to Mr. Rose's statement .and to the opinion of the City Attorney that the sign as requested was not legally possible, introduced a motio7_z that tag: Commission thf.). City Council that the application for the variance be Genie d- seconded by Cnmmi ani QrtAv, .1",t:i zra3rr; n-n d osa"z ed uraansmousl y NEW BUSINESS 1. Preliminary Highway Plan - County Master Plan. In reply to Chairman Martin, the Planning; Consultant explained that ae a.part of the proposed San Mateo County Master Plan, a pre- liminary outline plan of future highways in tkie county has been com- pleted by'the County Planning Commission and that body has requested an expression from the various cities on the proposal. Mr. Mann stated further that this is a general over-all plan, including north -south and east -west routes, none of ,Nhich directly affect the City of Burlingame. Commissioner Kindig expressed his approval of the plan and sug- gested as a matter of policy,to insure proper and adequate roadways for future County development, that the City endorse the plan. Commissioner Diederichsen concurred and introduced a motion that the Commission recommend that the City Council take an affirmative position on the preliminary outline plan and so advise the San Mateo County Planning Commission, seconded by Commissioner Kindig and carried unanimously on roll call of members present. 2. Junipero Serra Freeway. Chairman Martin announced that this was the time, previously scheduled by the Commission, to formulate a recommendation for pre- sentation to the City Council on the proposal of the State of California Highway Division to extend Junipero Serra Boulevard. A copy of a resolution adopted by the Town of Hillsborough, rejecting the proposed Route "A" and endorsing; the proposed Route "B", with certain revisions, was read and accepted for filing. In response to Chairman Martin, the Planning Consultant read a prepared report recommending: (1) That the City of Burlingame oppose the proposed Route "A"; (2) That the City of Burlingame express a preference for Route "B" and request of the State Highway Department that serious consideration be given the possibility of locating said Route "B" so as to by-pass the constructed areas of the City. -5- s The Planning Consultant noted that the recommendation adopted by the Town of Hillsborough proposes that Rouibe "B" be routed to `Ghe west at a point located approximately in San Bruno and questioned the advantage resultant to the citizens of Burlingame should the road be so remote. Commissioner Norberg referred to an. a:lte:�-nate Route "C", paralleling the Skyline Boulevard somewhat to the west, and cited the advantages of retaining Sikyline Boulevard as as service or ron_tLCD cre road Chairman Martin w pressed a desire to present a united. fro "-. other Peninsula communities and suggested that the C_S.ty, of Burling ,:1, ze take a position in agreement with the Totifn of Hillsborough, Corinnissionor Henderswon and ► ommissi onei= ,':pieder obaen aonczs� Chairman Martin recognized -Dr. Joseph H. Lorenz, in attendance, who urged that the City of Burlingame take an independent stand and recommend the route to serve the best interests of its citizens. Dr. R. to Condit, in attendance, addressed the Commission, and stressed the need for a community -wide approach. A statement read. by Dr. Condit, favoring a freeway routed parallel to the Skyline Boulevard and retaining the present Skyline Boulevard, was accepted for filing,, After further discussion', Commissioners agreed to accept the report as prepared by the Planning Consultant (1) Opposing the proposed Route "A"; and (2) Amended to recommend that the State High- way Division consider the location of a route paralleling Skylino Boulevard and west of that highway and that the present Skyline Boulevard then become a frontage or service road. A motion was introduced by Commissioner Henderson that the re- port as amended be forwarded to the City Council for adoption, seconded by Commissioner Diederichsen and carried unanimously on roll call of members present. There being no further business, the meeting was regularly adjourned at 11:4,0 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Everett K. Kindig Secretary