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