HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1959.11.0226
Burllngame, Cal-i f ornla
Novembor 2, l-959
A regular meeting of the Burl lngane
above gLven date. Meetlng caIled to
Johnson ln the Chal r.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALI,EGIAN3E TO TIIE FLAG
Clty Councll was held on the
order at 8: O0 P . m. , - IdaYor
At word from the Chair,
Pled,le of AIle giance 1;o
ROLL CA].,L
Present -
Absent
ln the Councll Chamber arose and Save the
F1ag.
afl
the
Councllmen: Byrd - Johnson-Morgan -Root h-Thayer
CounclLmen: None
f
hIINIIIES IREVIOUS ;,{T:dTING
The mLnutes of the prevlous rEeting of October 21 , 1959r as submitted
to CounclL were unanlmously approved and adopted on motlon of Councll-
man Morgen ard seconded by Councl]man Roottr.
HT[.RINGS
APPEAL VARIANCE BY PTANNTNG COM}ITSSION TO ERECT TEN STORY
APARTI{IilIT ARC WAY . EL CAI{II'IO REAL
ldayor Johnson, in addressing the large assemblage, announcod that thls
was the tlme and the place to conduct a pub1lc hearing on appeals re-
celved to reverse actlon taken by the Pfanning Commlsslon In grantlng
a variance appJ-lcation permlttlng the erectlon of a ten-story apart-
mont house on Arc lfiay and El Carnino ReaI , sald heanlng having boen
contlnueci from lts scheduled apDearance on the Councll Agenda, October5, l-959 , at th€ request of Eobert Cornell, Attornay, representlng the
opponents. The Chalr advlsed that the three apie a1s hav6 been con-solldated.
A Letter dated Scctember 29, 1959, from tlio Pl-annlng Comrnlsslon,advlsed that a fuI1 and complete pub1lc hoarlng had been conducted
on Septomber 28, 1959, subsequent to wnich the Conr-nLsslon had votedto lrant tho '.'arlance, with one member op,oosod, one rBmber abstaln-ing from voting and one member absent.
The co mnunl cati on a<ivised inl-ots wl th a total area of 25,
Camlno Real arid Arc 1Tay. It
: trThe property consists of three
square feet, frontlng on both E1
one d R-3 and nas been zoned for:
part
520ls z
apartinent use for nany years. At present, the lots are occupledslngle-famlly resldences and the appllcant proposes to bulld an
6nnt buildlnr:, using the three lots as a slngle property. "
by
apart-
rTho varlance requostod ls to build hl$rer than the allowed llmlta-tlon of four storles or 55 foet but cover less than the allowab1e 65f.
The proposal- ls to cover 38. A'fr and to exchange that coverage for ad-ditlonal- height. The resultant number of apartngnt s or usabl-e f1oor.
area would be the same ln either case. tr
Lettors from Robert C. Meyer, 822 Walnut Avenue, d ated Septer&er 29,
1959, from Erances M. Watklnson, dated September 29, 1959 ard apetltlon beerin:l the slqnatures of twonty-slx property owners wlthln
the area, dated Septer*ter 23, 1959, appeallng the di,clslon of the
Planning Commissl.on were acknowledged ard read.
A cotnqunlcation dated October 28, 1959, from the P1annln,: Conmlssion,
advlsed trret 'iSince an apIE al hes b6en made to tne Councll to reverse
the grant of a height llmitation ',.'ariance made to E. Ilugene umland,
the appllcant, lt ls deemed proper to further advlso the Councll of
the Corn:nlssionrs reasons for allowlng th€ variance ln splte of the
opposl ti on of ad Jolning resldents. "
27
t.....tne Commlsslon was facod with a cholce ol having the app,licantconstruct a four-storlr frame buildlng coverlng 65/ of the property,nhlch he can legalJ.y do under exlstlng regulations, or grant hlm avarlarce to bul1d a Cl-ass A, Lo-story flreproof structure. Thlsbulldlng would cover less that 39ft of tlre ]-ot area w:rich would a1 1owfor the wldening of Arc Way and provide for the on-street parklng of20 cars, ln addltlon to the garage parkLng requlred for the tenants.
'rThe advantages to the surrounding area and to the Clty of Bur.lLngameof havinq a perrnanent flreproof buildinn, more than ample adJacent
landscaplng and open space as part of the property, were more thansufficlent reasons to grant the requested varlance.
"In additlon, vrldeninq Arc TIay to provlde 2OO added parkinq spaces
would be a rreat help ln allevlatins the trafflc condltlons.....n
and 'tslnce the City of Burl lngame has nowhere to ,-xpand except upln the alr, lt ls felt that the hieh-class nultl-stor5r flrep:roof
structure wl th smalI €!round coverage and practlcally no obsolescense
is the Qrpe of bulldtng that shoulC be encouraged.rr
Corr:unl cat i. ons from James E. and Helen S. Carro1l, 848 l'!'alnut Avenue,
Harrlet Ol-lver Peter, 1508 Ar.c tVay, the Burl lngatrc Park Irnprovenent
C1ub, l1? Occldental Avenue, MLrlam li. Pedeuboy, l-600 Tr'lllovl Avenue,
R. C. Lombard, ZllE Easton Dplve, Alfred W. Ke1br, 1257 Drake Avenue,
M:rs. A. F. Castle, 1O2I Capuchi.no Avenue, ltlr. and Mrs. 1!. C. Roberts,
?4O Palonra Avenue, Phy11ls l{eyer, SzAiafnut Avenue, Ju1la S. Rosa,
1148 Drake Avenue and !tr. anc lhrs. Alcert Loratz, 1260 Bernal Avenuue,
oxpressl.ng thelr lndivldual obJection to the grantlng of a psrdt to
erect a proposed ten-storTr apartment bullding on Arc Way and E1
Camino ReaI, rser6 r.ead andplaced on fi1e.
A reproductlon of a communLcati.on, dated October 21 r 1959, addressedtTo our neighbors and other friends ln the City of Burl ingame n
bearlng the slgnatures aTd msiled by the appllcants, E. Eugone and
Paullne S. Urnland, together wlth an attachment lndicatlng the
perimoter of the propos ed apartment developnent as approved by the
Burl lngame Planning Commlsslon, a perlmoter of a proposod apartlc nt
development 1f sald varlance were gnnull-ed by the Clty Councll and
a reproduced copy of the Plannlng CommLsslonr s report to the Clty
Counc11, was read and fl1ed.
Comqunicati ons f rom Hamy M. Lehrf eld , 1611 V{lI1ow Avenue,
Theuer, 621 Burl lngamo Avenue and 'Vm. !r1. ltran Bokkelen, 0.D
Burllngane Avenue, were read ald acknowledged as belng ln
the ppoposod ten stcs.y apartvnent bulldlng.
R. C.., 12l'.7
favor of
Acknovrledgrent was funther glven to postcards recej.ved by the Councllrnlled by and ln response to the appllcantrs nequest that resldentsof the Clty of Burl lnga re indlcate the plan ln theLr oplnlon that
would best servo ths lnterests of the communlty.
Postcards, in support of tae propos6d apartnent constructlon, were
recelved from the follculng:
fnene Bortho1d, E. Robert Davls, 19 Hlghland Avenue; ELlse B. Sindicl,
-ljnrif e A. Lieutard, Edythe and Duard O. Meeken, 526 Francis co Drlve;F. i,l. Schreckengast, 1335 Callf orrla Drive; llrs. F. T. Ross, BerthaIdarie Chars, E. R. Winchester, 1450 Ll-nco1n Avenue; John Hampton,
George Anderson, t{r. and llbs. Hamy Gettins, seven unsLgned ln favonthereof and two unslgned ln oppositlon thereto.
A Petitlon, bearlng the s1:inatunes of approximately 1,OI5 citi.zensand property onners, datod NovemUer 2, 1959, rocited the follovd.ng:
'T{HEREAS, ttre Plannlng Commlsslon has granted a varlance to E. ilugene
Umfand allowing the erection of a lo-story apartrEnt bulldlns, I15feet ln helght, at 15O1, I5O9 and 1515 Arc TIay; and
Wi{llREAS, the Clty Ordlnanco provldes a maxlmum hetght limltatlon offour stor"Les or 55 feet; and
VIIIEREAS, the granting of the varlanceCouncll by cltlzens of Burllngane and
has been appealed to thels nor: before tir e Council;
28
Ye the undersll3ned cltlzens ol Burl lngame, petltlon the
to revense the decislon of the Plannlng Commlsslon and
varlanee of height llmltatlon now beforo the Council-'
Clty Councll
to deny the
Proi6ction Assocl-
the lnauguratlon of
tho people of
Itie further vrLsh t o presont to tho Cor"urcl l our obJection to any
,".i.r.. or changp in t1e present heig;1t llmltatlons that would change
tie nature of our city by allowlng the erection of skyscraper or
tower apartflEnts in our Citlr'r was aei<novt led,3ed for flling'
Idayor Johnson announced that ln addltion to cummunlcations, sl:e has
re-ceived peraonal calls f rom )ilrs. Mary Jane Foltz, 1i25 Wlf low Avenue
and lvlr. RoUert C. i,!eyer, 822 Vralnut Avenue, expressin8 theLr personal
ob Je ct lon.
The Chair lnvlted the appellants to ronder tholr presentation.
Janes $J. HalJ.ey, Attorney, representing tlreSuburban Protectlve Assocl-
atlon, addnessed the Councll, advislng that Lre had been retainod to
serve as spokesman for and ln behalf of the appellants and the petl-
tioners protestin€! the construction of the ten-story ap ant ment house.
A po11 ol those standi ng and of those soatod, as requosted by Mr.
HaIIy, indicatetl that a large percentage were ln attendance to oppose
the proposod c ons truc t i on.
t,lr. i{aI]-y stateC that the Suburban Protectlve Assoclatlon of Bu::l-ln-
gane had boen recontly formed and lncorponated as a result of thecontroverslal issue concerning the granting of the varlance by the
Planning Conrrlsslon and it is anticlpated that tho organlzatlon shall
contlnue to senve ln the best interests of the Clty.
The Councll was advlsed by l'{r. Hal-ly that the objections were sevoral
--(I) The qroup was opposed to the partlcufar use of thls partlcularplot of land; that it is a dlstrlct of suburban homes and the proposed
use would be unslghtly relatlvo to the klnd of dlstrict Lt is Ln;"(2) The proposed construction imposes an nj-nvaslon of property;r(5) The pro-cosed park ing 1ot on Arc l'Jay vroula be unslghtly, destroy
the beauty of he neighborirood, and the trafflc probl-em would createan lncreased detrirent; (a) If tue 'rdoorwayt were opened to permlt
th€ construction of 'towerlnr{r structures, s€wer, ieater, flre and
school sysiems wo:il,1 be imposed upon; that "thls is one step 1nrequiring :noro services ln the future; t (5) If per"eitted, the t€n-story construction would create a rharsh mark on the skyllne of theCity;{ and (6) Contrary to the staterEnt that the clty would boneflt
fina-ncla1ly by the taxes dosived from the proposed constructlon, the
appell-ants are of the reverse oplnlon, ln tnat surroundlng property
values reo uld decrease.
Mr. Hal 1y spoke brlefly on the term fivarlancei and queetlonod theactLon taken by the PlannLng Commlsslon, when, 1n the opinlon of theappelants, the roquLrements of the City's variance code were notfulftlled.
Reference vias made by }1r. Ha11y to a property covenant entered Lnto
on March l, 191-0, and partlcul-arly to a section whereLn the property
owner inay not conduct or carry on at or on said premlses eny factory,
manufactory, business, trade or occupatlon, whlch sca11, can or may
be ln anywlse off ensl-v6 to the nelghboring lnhabltants.. . . . n Mr.
Hal1y stated that the aprrallents were of the oplnlon that the proposed
apa:.tnent hou.se may be well classlf led as a rtbusl ness.'r
ObJectlng on a technlcal basis, Iilr. Hal1y stated that tho notlce of
hearins on the applicatiorLfor*a,vafianco nalled to the prop€rty
o*ners"shotrrd ha;;/lflet"8B&rlnBSBoaB?[ir ; that t:re propurty bw.eers
should have received notico to appear at the tine the applLcatlon was
sub:nltted by the applicarlt to tbe Pl-anning Cont"tlssLon; and lastly,
it v:as 'unusual for an roptLoneen to have appeared ard to have
recuested a variance.
In concrusion, [Ir. tial1y advlsed that the Suburbanatlon, speaklng for the Clty, woulC prefer to saeradvanced planninp3 coropatlblo with the thinking of
Bur'l lngame. '
29
Mrs. Phyllls l{eyer, 822 $Jalnut Avenue, ln ilreeting her remarks to
the Couircl1, stated that the proposed change was drastlc^and 'rdis-
tunbing rarrd an atternpt to destroy a beautiful suburban clty with 1ts
suburban chanm.
copy of tho property lndenture and a
the heliSht of the proposed construction
of the Eucalyptir.s trees ard the sumoundlng
as exhlblts ln suppont of the posltlon taken
Photographs, a photostatic
sc:rf ed mode1, l11ustrat1ng
ln relatlon to the he igfrtpropertles, were submlttod
by the appellants.
I,tlayor Johnson lnvlted I{r. E. Eugene Umland, the app}lcant, to make
his pres6ntatl on.
Iltr. Umf arld s tated that the mal.n ob Je ctL on apparently ls centered
prlmarlly on the trafflc problem and submlttod photographs takon on
Arc Vtlay at Z p.m., Friday, October 30, 1959, lllustratlng thercrowdsdr parklng condt tion. libP. Um.l-a rd advlsed that hls plan provldes
fon the wldentng of Arc l9ay ani the establlshlrent of a parkLng lot
facl11ty.
Mr. Umland advlsed that tf t lre varLance, approved by the Plannlng
Comrnlssion, were to be annul-Iod by the Councl1, an apartnent house,
cover lr4-r 65fi of the lot woulc be constructed, the trees Lntersectlng
the bulldlng 1lne would have to be destroyed and the present narrow
wldth ol Arc Way would remaln unchanqed.
In concluding h1s prosentatlon, Mr. Uml- and advlsed that four out of
tle slx proporty owners on Arc T"ay have voiced thelr approval to
hls plan to construct a ten story apartnent house.
lrtr. tJarron S. Coclcan, 1524 Arc Vr'ay, owner of the property rvithln
tho area, verbally oxpressed hls approval- to the proposod constructLct.
Mr. Herbert Lauder, a locaf bul}cier, Mr. Emile Lleutard, a local real
estate bnoker and irlr. Peter obermeyer, 823 EI Camino iiea], eaco spoke
ln favor of the proposaJ..
There being no further discusslon, the Chair lnvlted Councll comments.
fn repLy to Councllman Byrdr s lnquirlesr lilr. Umland advlsed that there
w111 be a total of forty-elght apartnent s ln either the ten story or
the four story apartlEnt; thet the three forty-slx year old homes
cumently on the lots vrl ll- be removed and that all- the treos ln the
sidewalk area shall be nemo.red to provlde for the four stony apartmentwith three trees to be retalned ln the ovent the ten story aparttrEnt
ls co irstruc ted.
fn reply to Councllman Roothrs lnqulrles, the applicantthe co st t o lriden and l rpr.ove A::e I,Vay sould be borne byanl the p:,opos ed. wldenlng would lncrease the eurrent widfeet.
advlsed thatthe dsvol-operth by sixteon
Councllman Rooth also questlon6d whether addltlonal evldence has beenpresented on this occasion, to whlch lnquiry, Corn-mLssloner Dioderichsen,
who senved as actlng Chalrmn at the hearlng before the Plannlng Com-mlssion, replLed to negatl vely.
FoJ-lowlng a brlef perlod of rebuttal and lnqulrles dlrected by the
Chair to the appllcant eoncerning his abl1lty to comply with varlancerequlrelrrnts, the hearlng nas declared conc.l-uded.
Councl1man Rooth moveri that tiro Coun:lf inlorrnal ly dlscuss aL1 of thefactcrs at a scheduled study noetin3, Thursday, November 12 and thata f lnal- decislon be rendered at the next negular meeting, Monday,
Nol,..:mbor 16, 1959. The motl on was soconded by Councllman Morgan andfollowlng a brief dlscusslon on the question, the motlon was unanimou s]ycarrled.
RECESS
A reeess vras declared by the Chain at 10:O5 p.n.
30
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting reconvened at lO:15 p.m.
FNEI RICE, UNITq2 NATIOI,IS DAY CHATRMA]'I HONORED
Mayor Johnson acknowlodqed the presonce of Fred Rlce, Unltoil Natlons
Day Chalrman, Clty ol BurI ingame, ald presented lrtr. Rlce wl th a
Distlnetlve Merlt Award, in appreciation and recognltion of his pub1lc
servlce ln promotlng a nati onr.r'lde observance of Unlted Natlons Day,
0ctober 24, 1959. Ii!r. Rice acccpted the certiflcate on behal.f of thoc:'tizens vrho asslsted and expressed the wish that the annual obser-
rrance wouLd create more lnterest amon51 tho cl-tizens of tlre City of
Bur.l lngane in the future.
RESOLUTI O]{S
RiiSOLUTI0i,l N0. 94-59 rrDlrecti ng the Glvlng of NotLce of Proposed An-
nexati on to the City of Burl lngame of Certaln Untnhablted Terrr.tor1r
Designated as the tldcMillan Propertyt and Fixin,3 the Tlme and Place
l?here Any Person L{ay Appal- and Show Cause Why Suc:r Territony Should
Not Be Annexedi was lntroduced fcn passage on motlon of Councilman
Morgan, sec )nded by Councllman Rooth and unanlmous Iy carnted on r.olLcall of nembers. (Ilearing December ?, 1959)
BRADLEY-BIfiNS UNIirORll SALi;S TAX ltuETfNG' COUNCILI{A}I BYRD DELEGATE
Refer:ence
County ofto send a5, 1959, a
I{al I of Justice and Rocords, Redwood Clty and that sald represen-tatlve be in a position to negotlate a falr and equltable dlstrlbutlon
of a sales tax.
The Councll noteC that lt was the unanimous oplnlon of the Board of
Supervisors that from a sal-es tax collected withln the cltLes of San
ldateo County not less than ten percent should be dlstributed to the
county and the remalnd.trr dLstrlbuted to the cltles.
Cor-rncl l-man Rooth lnitlated Councll <iiscussl-on on t he issue, s ttrtlngthat he was in favor of a sales tax to assist the clty ln lts flnan-clal obJ.lgations; however, he personally, was not in favor of sharlng
the revenue derlved vdth the County. Council-man Rooth observed that
lf t:re County were to colle ct ten pcrcent of the revenuer the Clt'"'
of Burllngami wouLd be rerluireci to forfeit a pproxi mstely-l!+? r 5OO.00
annual 1y.
Coun rllman Byrd also expressed hls obJectlon to the City of Burllnga:ne
belng placed in the posttlon of [belng a tax eol]e ctLon agency fon
the County of San Mateorn statlng that ln hls oplnlon, the County
should not share ln any additlonal taxes and that 'revery c6nt of sales
tax revenue should be lnvested ln the Clty of Burllngame.tr
was
San
desi
tB:
mede to a comnunlcatlon fron the Board of SupervLsors,
Mateo, dated October 21 , 1959, roeuesting the Councll
qnateal repf6sentatl.re to a meetlnr 'lhursday, liovember
OO p.m., fh t,he Chambers of the Board of Supervlsors,
CounclLman Byrd observe,:i that no response $as
County of San Mateo to the Cltyts request for
relmbursenent of the trroad tax fund. "
received fnom the
consLderatlon ln the
Counclfman Thayer stated that she was cognizant of the sltuatlon and.
ln her opinlon, there should be sone forn of compromise.
Councl lman }dorgan stated that he was opposed to a sales tax and
therefore hd was opposed to the County recelvlnr3 a share of the proceeds.
Mayon Jolurson expressed her rel-uctancc to state that the County
should not share ln the dlstrlbution and ln her oplniol, lt would be
difflcult, to vote on an lssue that ls not yet ln exlstence.
FoJ-1o',,ing further d.lscusslon, Oounellman Hooth moved titat the
Burlingane Clty CounclJ- ':o on recorci as beini; opposed to the County
of San i[ateo sharing ln tbe distrlbutlon of sa].e s tax revenue. The
moti on was seconded by Coulcll-rnan Idorgan and camleC by tire f olJ-owingnoll- call- vote:
.31
Ayes: CounclLmen: Byrd -Morgan-lloo t h
Noes: Councllmen: JohnsonAbstelning: Thayer
Councllman Rooth further moved that Councllman Byrd r.epresent thoClty ol Burl lngame at the forthcoming 'lounty Board of Supervlsors
meetlng, November 5, l-959, and that CouncL l- rnan Byrd be lnstructedto notlfy the Board of the action taken by the Clty CouncLl. The
motlon was seconded by Councilman Morgan and carled by the fol1ow-
1ng- ro11 call vot e:
Ayes: Counci Lmen:Noes: Councllnpn:
Abstalning:
Byrd -Lrlongan-R oo th
Johns on
Thayer
AD J(TIANED I'rlEET ING AN ]'IOUNCED
Cor.rncl lman Morgan moved that the balance of the CounclL agenda be
hcard at an adjourned meeting, Wednes<iay, November 41 1959r at 8:OOp.m. The motion wss seconded by CounclJ-aan Rootn an ri unanlmously
carrled.
ADJOIMNI,'IE}IT
The meeting was regularly adJourned at 10:4O p.re. to meet YJednesday,
November 4, 1959, at B:OO p.n.
Respe ctfully submltted,
te
Ciiy Clerk
I,layor