Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1961.05.22COMMISSIONERS Cistulli Diederichsen Kindig Moore Norbe rg Stivers CALL TO ORDER l CI.ly OF PIRE SEW' BURLINGATE" PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 1961 COMMISSIONERS ABSEiV OTHERS PRESEWr None City Attorney Karmel City Engineer Marr Plan. Cons. Mann Councilman Lorenz Councilman Martin A regular meets' g of the Burlingame Planning Commission was held on the above date.Meeting called to order at 8:00 p.m. Chairman Diederichson presiding. ROLL CALL The Secretary°s'roll call recorded the above members present. MIS The minutes of the regular meeting of April 24, 1961, Previously sub- mitted to memberrs of the Commission, were approved and adopted. Minutes of the study meeting of Foy 8, 1961, previously submitted to members of the Commission, were approved and adopted. HEARINGS Chairman Diederichsen announced that this was the time scheduled to conduct public hearings as follows: 1. RESVBDIVISIpN - Lands of J.C. Kilbourne., La Mesa Drive, -A resubdivision may pro osing a lot line change between the properties of J.C. Kilbourne and W.P. Rhoads, on the easterly side of La Mesa Drive off Hillside Drive having been reviewed at the study meeting of May 8$ was submitted to the Commission at this time for formal con- sideration, The City Engine r explained that the purpose of the resubdivision is to straighten t e common lot line between the two properties by con- veying from Kilbourne to Rhodes a small triangular parcel of .046 acres. The City rngineor stated that the map was examined and found to be satisfactory. l The Planning Co sultant expressed the opinion that thb change will improve both pr perties . There were no f rther comments and no protests, oral or written. A motion was Introduced by Commissioner Y,.indig, seconded by Commissioner Cistulli, approving the resubdivision In accordance with the map filed with the City Engineer. Motion carried unanimously on .roll call vote. 2. RESUBDIVISI N a Lots 4 and 5, Block 5,, Mills Estate No. 3. An application Filed with the City Engineer requested a resubdivision of Lots " and 5o Block 5, Mills Estate No. 3. The properties are lo- cated on Trousd le Drive near Marco Polo Way. Lot 4 is owned by Draper and Daley, Burlingame; Lot 5 by Sugarman Associates, San Francisco, The City Engineer stated, that the resubdivision proposes to delete the original lot lire and establish two new lot lines thereby dividing the two existing lots into three parcels. Reference was made to a City and County of San Francisco easement; which at present is entirely within Lot 5. The line change will place the easement partially in Parcel A and partially it Parcel B, as indicated on the tracings. The City Engineer stated that the lots appear to be of sufficient size and, with the eXception of installation of one sewer lateral, to which the owner has agreed, there are no problems of engineering or utilities. Morris Daley, Wner of Lot 4 was in attendance. He advised that by cha ing the lot siz s nd utilizing th ea amen area fo off- tree par ng, the owners iee they can provide attractive deveopmen s wh eh will be compatible with uses presently in existence in the district. The Plano Consu tant noted ?hat inafmuch as tPe ��o rties ar� in a oommercial istz+ie , "Cm iona Business , e . are no 0 sizelimitations. However, there are building setbacks and off-street parking requirements. There being no further comments, and no protests received, oral or written, a motion was Introduced by Commissioner Norberg, seconded by Commissioner Kindig, that the resubdivision be approved in accordance with the map on file with the City Engineer. Motion carried unanimously on roll call vote. 3o RESUBDIVISIOOK ® Lots 1 and 2�Block 1, Ray Park. An application was filed with the City Engineer to resubdivide Lots 1 and 2. Block 1, Ray Park Subdivision; owners, Reno D. and Letitia J. Falk, 1521 Albemarle Way. The City Engineer reported that the two lots border the cul-de-sac at Albemarle Way,. There Is a dwelling on each lot. The owner desires to change exists lot lines and establish a new property line along the southerly end of the lots to form a third parcel to contain 0.170 acres. There is''sufficient land area to meet the cityes requirements. The owner has been informed of the new utilities which will be required. The City Engineerr galled attention to an existing drainage easement which crosses the full length of the property at the location of the new lot. The Commission was informed that this is a recorded easement, dedicated to the city a number of years ago, but unused. The actual drainage chann¢l is at the north end of the lot. In the event the resubdivision Ohould be approved, it will be necessary for the ease - went to be aba4doned and a new easement granted at the creek site. The Chair reconized Hugh F. Connolly, attorney representing the ap- plicants, who advised that the owner will undertake the expenses in- volved In arra ing the abandonment of the easement and have pre- pared the docu$ents to accomplish delineation of the new easement. The Planning Consultant stAted that the suggested lot is a legal lot as to land area and street frontage. However, there is not a build- ing site due t the easement situation. If the Commission were to approve the wuaj, such approval should be conditional until the matter of the easamsn�s is resolved. In reply to the Chair, Hr. Connolly indicated that this would be agreeable. Following a review of the tracings, a motion was introduced by Commissioner Moore to approve the resubdivision in accordance with the map on file with the City Engineer, subject to an offer by the ow.ier and acceptance by the City Council of a new drainage easement and abandonment by the City Council of the existing drainage easement, Motion seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and unanimously carried,, 4. SPECIAL PE4MIT - Jerry D. Kelleher. Parkin , Lot, The Planning Consultant reported that the applicant has not completed negotiations with the City and County of San Francisco for the use of the street car right-of-way. He has requested that the matter be con- tinued to the next regular meeting. He will attend the study meeting on June 12. Upon agreement by members, the Chair declared the hearing continued as requested. 5. VARIANCE o Earl M. Dilley. Land Resubdivision. A public hearing, was scheduled at this time on an application filed by Earle M. and Jayne Z. Dilley, 3030 Hillside Drive, requesting a variance to permit resubdivision of their property into three parcels, two of which will not have frontage on the public street. The Planning Consultant in reply to the Chair, recalled that when the application was reviewed at the study meeting of May 8 1961, a group of neighboring propert owners declared their interest in join- ing with Mr. D9;lley in a unified subdivision of all of their canyon properties, and indicated that a proposal would be made at the present meeting to assure their participation. The Chair recognized Luther Carr, attorney, who advised that he was representing the owners of the three properties contiguous to the Dilley propert , northeasterly on Hillside Drive, all of whom have several hundred feet of undeveloped land which slopes into the canyon. The owners were identified as Driskell, 3022 Hillside Drive; Johnson, 3018 Hillside Drive; DeLoach, 3012 Hillside Drive. The fourth owner is Mrs. Virginia Doney who has approximately 5 to 5-1/4 ace --es with frontage on Adeline Drive. Mr. Carr recalled that in 1959 a plan was proposed to develop all i of the properties, including a street to provide access from Adeline Drive.' The program was not accomplished inasmu as there were certain features proposed by the developer which accept- able to the owners. The Commissio was informed that a petition for formation of an. assessment dis rict in the area, with a complete map attached, has ow a re a ed and has een gg��ned b the thre owners It is iopeg & Mfrs. Doney ana Ar. D 1.Tsy wi 1 accept �ts provisions. Mr. Carr stated that it is not the intention of his clients to oppose the Dil ey resubdivision. However, Mr. Driskell who is the adjoining owns is concernedaboutthe proximity of the new drive- way to his residency: and the removal of the guard rail fence from the Hillside Drive frontage. In conclusion.;Fir,, Carr requested that the hearing scheduled for this date be clontinued to the next regular Commission meeting to permit the property owners to meet and work out a plan which will be acceptable to all, The Chair recognized Hugh w. Connolly, attorney representing Mr. Dilley. ft-. Connolly stated that Mr. Dilley is aware of the advantages to be derived if the area were to be developed and im- proved as a whole. He is not opposed to his neigiiDorsa proposal. However,, lie has come to the conclusion, after a delay of two years during which time there has been no progress made, that he cannot wait indefinitely. He wishes to proceed on the basis of the resub- division map which he has filed with the City Engineer and objects to a continuance. Mr. Connolly stated that if the map were to be approved, Mr. Dilley would be willing to delay his project a reasonable length of time to await a commitment from his neighbors. The Chair recognized Mrs. Virginia Doney who advised that she has not had an opportunity to read the agreement which has been signed by three of the owners. She stated that she is most anxious to cooperate and agreeable to a meeting with the others. The Commission was requested to comment. JgTmievion?i finjjg stated th t from tthe infor tt p s ted at s uap a tha there l a oss i yo �ia owners working ogetr. Qi h s basis Comm s0 bner Kin g stated he would Be in favor of continuing the hearing to the next regular meeting. In a brief discussions Commissioners indicated eoncurrenoe. Mrs Dilley, in reply to the Chair, stated that he would not be starting .any of the work for another thirty days, therefore, would agree to the continuance. A motion was itroduced by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner M ore, to continue the hearing to the meeting of June 26, 1961,''at which time a firm commitment shall be made to in - al e all of the properties. Motion carried unanimously on roll CHI vote. Mr. Dilley was assured by the Chair that his application would not be delayed beyond the June meeting, -4- RECESS The Chair declared a Five minute recess. CALL TO ORDER i The meeting w�s called to order at 9:10 p.m. I EA R INGS (c onf o ) 6. VARIANCE Stanley P. Berne_ height variance in R-4 District, The Chair announced that this was the time scheduled to conduct a public hearing on an application filed by Stanley P. Berney for a va rianoe from the height restrictions in an R-4(Fou rth Residential) District, in i6onneetion with a proposed apartment construction on property located on Bellevue Avenue and Almer Road ( Lot 5 and a portion of I.ot 4, Block 9, Burlingame Land Company Subdivision. The application form stated as follows; "extension of current R-4 zoning limits (75 feet or six stories height) to 85 feet and eight stories, with roof garden and solaAlue . A 'Letter dated April 7, 1961, from Walter M. Sontheimer, architects advised that It is proposed to construct a "luxury apartment eom- pl.ex*. The communication stated that the variance is requested on the basis of (a) The height and location of a large apartment build- Ing immediately adjacent to the eastern property line of Lot 4; by providing the greatest possible side yard and maximum separation, the tenants In both buildings will be assured of adequate light and privaoy. (b) �yy constructing an additional two stories over the permitted hel&t, the side yard to the east will average 45 feet; the side yard to the west will be appreciably.increased. The Chair recognized Air. Berney who stated that following an exten- sive survey for the best possible location on the Peninsula for a luxury apartment, he is satisfied that the City of Burlingame can accommodate such a development. There were certain problems oonm neoted with the location at Almer Road and Bellevue Avenue. partiou- lafly the large apartment building to the east within ten feet of the property line. Mr. Berney stated that he felt he could best ae- eomplish his olbjeotive by building as narrow a structure as pos- sible and increasing the setbacks on all sides. A brochure prepared by the applicent,and filed as part of the ap- plioation, described details of setbacks, lot coverage ratio, number of apartments and parking spaces. A complete set of draw - Ingo was available, which were exhibited individually and described In detail. The Chair invited comments from the floor. In reply to quo stions from Mrs. L.D. Mathias, 1435 Bellevue Avenue, and Earl Garrison, 1445 �3ellevue Avenue, Mr. Berney stated that the building will be approximately ten feet higher than the Marion -5- Apartment buil ing on the neighboring property; there will be a total of 47 units an parking for 66 cars, 56 spaces under the building and ten open space$ on the grounds. Mr. Berney adv sed that this will be a "cooperatives' building. The units will ran�e from 1250 square feet to 2300 square feet, A.G. westcotta 843 Walnut Avenue, requested Mr. Berney to explain why he felt It nee ssary to build higher than the permitted 75 feet. Mr. Berney sta ed that originally a building of 60 units covering 60% of the lot eras considered. However, this would not permit the type of dev-elo�ment which he had in mind. He stated that he felt the tall narrow structure, large open areas attractively landscaped and luxurious dwellW, units would bring value and attractiveness to all of the properties in the neighborhood. In reply to eooments from Howard watkinson, 1544 Bernal Avenue, William Beckett, 1419 Montero Avenue, J.D. Carrolls 848 Walnut Avenue, H'. Stephens, 1341 Capuchin Avenue, ter. Berney stated that if the extra height were not permitted, the building would be redesigned there would be 'greater lot coverage, there would not be the amenities to the neighborhood. Sohn B .Cockcroft, 1345 Howard Avenuereal estate broker and developer, spoke In favor of the application. Ms. . Cockcroft stated that he felt the building would be a distinct asset to the city. He stated that far greater benefit would result to the oity and to the people in the neighborhood than from a maximum density structure, housing many more than the proposed 47 families. Neal Dougherty, 506 Almer Road and W.E. Chamblies, 518 Almer Road, spoke in favor of the project. Commissioner Norberg stated that as an architect he felt the pre- sentation made by Mr. Berney was the finest he had observed as a member of the Commission. He stated that he agreed with the position taken by Mr. Berney to provide fine dwelling smite for those people no longer interested in maintaining their own residences. Commissioner Norberg commented that the "layout is much superior to what is called for by our Coddl. The Planning Consultant, in reply to the Chair, advised that the plans submitted to the Commission showed rear and side setbacks at some locations which were less than those provided by the ordinance. The Chair questioned Mr. Sontheimer who advised that the setbacks were corrected. The Planning Consultant stated further that the plans show sufficient car spaces. However, there are perhaps four which may be difficult to manuever. Mr. Berney replied that it is the intent to restudy the complete park- ing situation _� that every consideration will be given to arrive at the best parking scheme ossible. Mr. erney advised that tY�is v ,ll be accomplished by the time final working plans are prepare it is possible to provide more than 66 spaces, this will be done. -6- A motion was i troduced by Commissioner Norberg to approve the variance to p_* mit the building to be constructed to a height of 85 feet from g ade to the top of the parapet; construction to be substantially accordance with the plot plan and drawings sub- mitted except that side and rear setbacks should be corrected to conform with tie ordinance requirements; parking scheme to be re- vised to provVe easy access to and egress from all parking spaces. Motion seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and unanimously carried on roll call vote. The applicant as advised that the variance would become effective June 6, 1961, rovided there was no appeal. The hearing we thereafter declared concluded, UNP INI SHED aUS I IqT S S- 1. Resubdiviston Orin C. Fi.eldsv oulevard The Planning; C sultant reported that the building is now about 80% complete and from information received from the building in- spector construction is proceeding according to J)lans. A sug- gestion that thb matter of the lot resubdivision be continued on the agenda untI1 the work has been completed and the building in- spected by the Commission was unanimously accepted, NEW BUSINESS 1. Election of Officers 1g61-19620 Chairman Diederichsen announced that this was the time scheduled to elect Commission officers for the ensuing year and declared nominations to be in order. 6n motion of Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and unanimously carried, the present officers were reelected for a second term. CHAIRMAN - W.H. Diederichseno VICE-CHAIRMAN Everett K. Kindig. SECRETARY - D.A. Stivers . ADJOURNMENT The meeting was regularly adjourned at 10:05 p.m, Respectfully submitted, D.A. ggtivers Secretary -7-