Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1961.05.08CITY OF BURL INGAME PLANNING COMPUSS ION May 8, 1961 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Cistulli None City Attorney Karmal Diederiehsen (8:30) City Engineer Marr Kindig Plan. Cons. Mann Martin Councilman Lorenz Moore Norberg Stivers CALL TO ORDER' The study meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission, regularly scheduled for this date, was tailed to order at 8:00 p.m. - Vice -Chairman Kindig presiding in the temporary absence of Chairman Diederichsen. The following were submitted for study: 1. RES, UBDIVI§ION - Lots 1 and 2, Block is RayPark Subdivision.. A resubdivision map of Lots 1 and 2. Block 1, Rey Park Subdivision, prepared by Wilsey, Ham & Blair, Civil Engineers, proposed to create a new lot by relocating -existing lot lines and combining portions of the two lots to make a third parcels with frontage on Balboa Way. The Planning Consultant recalled that the proposal was before the Commission a short time ago and at that time included another property. However, the trap has been revised to include only the two lots which are owned by Reno D. and Letitia J. Falk. 1521 Albemarle Way. The City Engineer advised that the new lot is well over 5000 square feet in area and will provide an adequate building site. Reference was made to a 20 foot drainage easement which crosses the lot for the full depth. The Commission was advised that this is an existing easement which has been dedicated to the city but is not used for the purpose. The drainage creek is located at the north corner of the lot. Cyrus J. McMillan, attorney representing the owner, was in attendance. In reply to the City Engineers comments, Mr. McMillan advised that the oirner will request that the city abandon the existing easement in exchange for a new easement at the creak site. Mr. McMillan advised that the necessary legal documents will be prepared and submitted to the City Attorney and Engineer for verification. The application was ached -pled for b11gc hearing on May 22, 1961. Commissioners agreed to v1sitthe location. 2• A resubdivision map of the lands of J.C. Kilbourne,bordering on the easterly side of La Mesa Drive, was submitted to the Commission pro- posing to transfer a triangular"portion from'the Kilbourne property to the property owned by T,t.F. Rhoads, for the purpose of straightening the common loft line between the two properties. The City Eng eer indicated that the map was satisfactory and, inasmuch as the properties have been improved for some time, neither utilities nor building; Isites are involved. Following a review of the map, a public hearing was scheduled for May 22, 1961. 3. RESUBDIVI$ION - Lots 4 and 5, Block 5, Mills Estate No. 3 A resubdivisipn map of jots 4 and 5. Block 5, Mills Estate No. 3, was submitted proposing to divide the tw* lots into three parcels by deleting to original dividing line and establishing two new lot lines. The ;property is located on Trousdale Drive -at Marco Polo way. The Commission was advised that the zoning is C-3 (Professional Business). The City Engineer stated that the map appears to be in order. Following a brief review, the application -was 'scheduled for publio hearing on Maur 22 , 1961. 4; SPECIAL PIRMn! - Jerry D. Kelleher. Parking Lot, Jerry D. Kelleher, 1101 California Drive, was requested to appear on this date to diseuss a use permit for a parking lot at California Drive and Carmelita. Mr. Kelleher was not in attendance nor repre- sented. The matter was referred -to the meeting of May 220 1961. 5. RESUBDIVISMN Lands of Dilley, Hillside Drive_ Drawings of a resubdivis Ion of the lands of Earl M. and Jame Z. Dilley, Hillside Drive, prepared by James J. Breen & Associates, were sub- mitted to the, Commission. Mr. Dilley has met-with,the.Commission several times to discuss the project. The Commission was advised that the drawings at Viand repre- sent the final proposal. The property is to be divided into three parcels, only one of which will have street frontage. The Planning Consultant advised that.he has been informed that some of the other owners in the neighborhood were interested In -developing the canyon portion of their properties and were present to discuss their proposal in relation to the Dilley resubdivision. Mr. Thomas Carr, attorney, stated that he represents the owners of the four properties which are contiguous to the-Dilley property, north- easterly on Hillside Drive. The owners were identified as Driskell, Johnson, DeLoa4ch and Doney. Mr. Carr recalled that some years ago there was a proposal to develop the canyon properties and construct a street from Adeline Drive to La Mesa Drive. This was not accomplished. However, the owners are in agreement 1that a unified development, to include the Dilley property, is 'a better approach than dividing the lands individually. There has been discussion of a road to extend from Adeline Drive, across a section of the Doney property, to a turn -around at Dilley's. A side road end a second turn -around would be required to provide access to the lower area of Mrs. Doney's lands. Cyrus JMcMullan, attorney representing Mr. Dilley,stated that his i client s not opposed to the plan. However, inasmuch as his request to resubdivide his property has been pending for some time, he pre- fers to proceed on this basis. Should the other owners reach an agreement and present a proposal that is feasible, Mr. Dilley will cooperate. Mr. Carr stated that Mr. Driskell, who is adjacent to the Dilley property, feels that the driveway which is to serve the two lots at the rear, is'too close to his home. Reference was made to the guard rail,which was erected where the street takes a sharp turn,to pro- tect the Drislkell property. Mr. McMillan stated that this will not be removed except for the width of the driveway on the Dilley property. A public hearing on the resubdivision was scheduled to be held on May 22, at which time Mr. Dilley was requested to have available in- formation pertaining to drainage of surface water from the existing residence and methods of compact and support for the new driveway. Mr. Carr indicated that he would be prepared to submit a commitment from his clients at the time of the hearing.. 5. VARIANCE Stanley P. 9erney. Extension of height limitation in R-4 District. Stanley P. Berney, developer, and Walter M. Sontheimer, architect, were in attendance to discuss a variance from height limitations Im- posed in R--4 (fourth residential) districts., In connection with a proposed apartment building to be constructed on Lot 5 and a portion of Lot 4, Block 9, Burlingame Land Company Subdivision - Almer Road and Bellevue Avenue. The application dated April 7, 1961, stated that it is intonded to build an eight story building to a height of 85 feet. (The ordinance permits six stories and ?5 feet). A letter dated April 7, 1961, from Mr. Sontheimer stated that the ad- ditional height will ermit greater open area between the proposed building and the existing neighboring building, giving more light and privacy to each property. Detailed plans were submitted and were reviewed at length. The Com- mission was advised that there will be 47 apartments - 56 parking spaces under the building and 10 open spaces on the grounds. Mr. Berney agreed to try to work out additional parking. o�� Mention was made that all of the parking will be on one level. There will be drivel y completely around the building. Cars in the open area will be seven reet from the adjoining buildW,.at the closest point. There will be planting screen along the side property lines. The 85 foot he ght is from ground level to the roof. The Planning C nsultant requested that an enlarged pent be made of the garage lev 1 to permit setbacks and parking p?an shown thereon to be verified. The public hearing was scheduled for May 229 1961. 1. The Planning Consultant stated that he had been informed that one of the local gasoline service stations was engaged in selling meroh- andise not related to its usual operation. As the result of a letter directed to all of the service station operators, relating the restric- tions under whloh they may operate, the material was re- moved. 2. The Planning Consultant reported that Sidney Madden, owner of property at 96$ Bayshore Boulevard, has advised that he is preparing to remove existing uses to make way for an apartment building. 3. Commissioner Kindig announced that a dinner meeting of the Bay ,xh Area Federation of Planning Councils will be held at the Villa De La Paix, Oakland, on May 19, 1961. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was regularly adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, D.A . Stivers, Secretary