HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1961.01.23CITY OF BURLINGAME PI.ANNIIIG COMMISSION
January 23, 1961
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSE ANT OTH aRS PRESE14T
Cistulli None City Attorney Ka rmel
Diederichsen City Engineer Marr
Kindig Plan_ Cons. Mann
Martin Councilman Lorenz
Moore
Norbe rg
Stive rs
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was held on
the above date. Meeting called to order at 8:00 p.m.
Chairman Diederichsen presiding.
ROLL CALL
A roll call recorded all members present.
MINUTES
.Minutes of the regular meeting of Deoemher 29, 1960, previously sub-
mitted to members, were approved and adopted. Minutes of the ad-
journed meeting and study meeting, January 9, 1961, previously sub-
mitted to members, were approved and adopted.
HZARINGS
1. RESUBDIVISION o Lots 12 and 2� Block 7. Burlingame Land Company,
A public hearing was scheduled on this date on an application filed
by Lauder Properties, to resubdivide Lots 12 and 3, Block ?,
Burlingame Land Company Subdivision, the lots having frontages on
Oak Grove Avenue and Floribunda Avenue, respectively.
Mr. John Lauder, representing the applicant, and Mr. Bernard Nobler,
arehit4at, were in a ttendanoe.
Mr. Nobler explained that several years ago the two lots were re -
subdivided so that at present there are four lots, occupied by apart-
ment buildings, all under one ownership. The owners have decided to
Install elevators in three of the buildings, However, to accomplish
this, existing property lines must be revised.
Mr. Nobler stoted that it has been determined that the two buildings
on Oak Grove Avenue can 'he joined and serviced 'hy one elevator, by
remodeling; and combining the entry and lobby areas. The present ap-
plication proposes to remove the former lot resulid.ivision line, there-
by producing a single property. On Flori'bunda Avenue, an elevator
will be installed in the four story building. There is insuffioient.
clearance to maintain legal setbacks; therefore, permission is re-
quested to relocate a former re -subdivision line to provide approx-
imately four feet additional along the westerly side of the 'building,
The City Engineer, in reply to Chairman Diederichsen, stated that the
resubdivision was in orders
The Planning Consultant concurred but recalled the discussion at the
study meeting; of January 9, 1961, concerning two two-story frame
buildings,built some years ago, at the rear of the main structures on
Floribunda Avenue, which do not oonform to present 'building regula-
tions or setback restrictions. The owners have advised that these
are not considered permanent improvements and will *+e removed. The
Planning Consultant advised that any action by the Commission concern-
ing resubdivision of the property shall not approvd or condone the
rear 'buildings
Mr.`Lauder agreed that the rear buildings are not compatible with the
other improvements, however, it is not economically feasible to have
them removed at present. He stated that at some future time the
buildings will be demolished to make room for additions to the build-
ing at the front
1 A motion was thereupon introduced by Commissioner Martin approving
the resubdivision of Lots 12 and 3. Block 7, Burlingame Land Co.,
Subdivision, in accordance with the map submitted, with the under-
standing that such approval shall not extend to, nor alter the
status of, the non -conforming frame structures located at the rear
of the Floribunda Avenue properties. Motion seconded by Commissioner
Cistulli and unanimously carried on roll call vote.
2. RESUBDIVISION - Lands of -Mrs. C.H. Bessett (North Carolan A venue).
A public hearing was scheduled on this date on a resubdivision map
filed by Mrs. C.H. Bessett proposing to revise property lines on a
parcel of industrial land -located on North Carolan Avenue.
Mr. Buel Profitt was in attendance to represent the applicant and, at
the request of the Chair, advised that presently there is one large
parcel with a concrete warehouse building. Plans are under way to
erect a second building. The purpose of the resubdivision is to pro-
vide a new property line to divide the land into two parcels so that
each building will be on a separate lots
In reply to an inquiry from the Chair, Mr. Profitt advised that two
small 'buildings have been removed and work is progressing on demolish-
ing a third building, recently damaged by fire.
The City Angineer and the Planning Consultant advised that the resub-
division was in order.
Off-street parking was discussed. Mr. Profitt stated that there is
ample area at the front of the 'buildings; also, there would be space
along the driveway, if necessary.
-9
Reference was made to a "common driveway" on the property. It was the
majority opinion that this should not create a problem since the drive-
way was of sufficient width to he divided "tween the two parcels' in
the event of a change in ownership.
The City Engineer advised that he was in receipt of a communication
from the Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Company advising that within
approximately sixty days a decision will 'he reached eoncernirq; abandon-
ment of the ten foot easement located across the rear of the property.
Mr. Profitt advised that this area will be used for railroad spur track
purposes.
There being no further comments, a motion was introduced by Commissioner
Kindig that the resubdivision of the Iands of Mrs. C.H. Bessett be ap-
proved in accordance with the map submitted. Motion seconded by
Commissioner Norberg and unanimously carried.
3. VARIAiCE -Orin Ca Fields i Lot resubdivision and building addition.
The Chair announced that a hearing was scheduled at this time on the
application of Orin C. Fields to attach a portion of Lot 11 to Lot 6,
Block 3, Burlingables Subdivision, and to eonstn,at thereon an ad-
dition to an existing building to include three apartment units.
Mrs. Orin C. Fields was in attendance, also Mr. Ralph Button, Draftsman.
Mr. Button explained that a Large triangular area at the rear of Lot 11
has never been improved. It is presently inaccessible from the lot of
1 which it is a part. Mr. and Mrs. Fields have recently aoquired title
with the intention of attaching; it to Lot 6, which they own, and huild-
ing an addition to an existing duplex. Or. Button explained that there
would be one continuous huilding, inelvding the duplex, the carport
area and the new addition -of three apartment units.
Sketches of the new construction were submitted to the Commission.
The Chair invited comments from the floor.
Mr. C.B. Smith, 623 Trenton 14ay, protested that the owners were over-
crowding the property, that there was insufficient land area to ao-
commodate three additional dwelling units and the accompanying; increase
in automobile traffic. Mr. Smith stated also that the apartments
would overlook the gardens and patios of neighboring homes and inter-
fere with the owners' enjoyment of these areas.
Mr. &.M. Rozier, 624 Trenton Way, stated that he was the owner of
Lot 12 and felt that his property would tie affaoted to the greatest
extent. Mr. Rozier st-Ated that he was disappointed that the lot which
has been vacant for many years, was to.be developed as proposed. How-
ever, since the oun,3rs were within their legal rig;l:ts, it was hoped
that the building dosign would be compatible with neighboring residences
,Ind that the Commission would require landscaping of a type to screen
the property and deaden the noise somewhat.
Mr. Button was questioned concerning landscaping. Reference was made
to the sketches and the Commission was advised that the area originally
planned to be paved has been narrowed to provide a greater planting
space. Trses and a hedge will be planted to screen the property.
In reply to an inquiry concerning setbacks, the Planning Consultant
stated that the odd .shape of the parcel raises a question as rear
and side property lines. However, the natural rear property lime
here would appear to 'he at the apex of the triangle,, requiring
15 feet in that area.
The Chair referred to th'e discussion at the study meeting of
January 9, 1961, concerning the common driveway 'hetween Jots 6 and 7,
which.driveway would provide access to the garage area of the new
structuresand questioned the City Attorney concerning the extent of
the cityes interest in such easements.
The City Attorney expressed the opinion that this would be a matter
of concern only to the property owners. At the present time, both
lots are under one ownership.. However, in the event that one parcel
were to '+,e sold., it mould be the rosponsibllity of the parties in-
volved to protect their ingress and egress rights.
The Planning Consultant stated that there are certain situations
where street frontage is provided by means of driveway easements and
where the city.becomes the owner of such easements. However, this
is not the problem in the present instance. Upon examination of the
property deeds, there would. not appear- to 'he a 'basis for the city to
assume any interest.
In reviewing the drawings submitted by Mr. Button, it was -determined
that there were some corrections -to he made to 'firing the plans and
elevations into agreement. Commissioner Norberg stated that the
driveway clearances and.turn-around areas appeared to be satisfactory
but suggested that a proper set of plans be made available before
the Commission takiX formal action.
A motion was thereupon introduced by Commissioner Norberg that the
hearing be continued to the meeting of February 13, 1961. Motion
seconded by Commissioner Moore and unanimously carried.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Proposed Subdivision - Diller Pronertya Hillside Drive.
Mr. Earl Di13ey was in attendance in connection with a proposed sub-
division of property which he owns at 3030 Hillside Drive, which was
discussed at the study meeting of January 9, 1961.
The Planning Consultant, in reply to the Chair, ;stated that the
property Is similar to others in the area which have been subdivided
rea+ttly. The Commission has established the policy of requiring
that the one-half of Hillside Drive, which fronts the properties, be
improved to meet city standards. In addition, to reach the one lot
at the furthest end of the property, it will ',e necessary to provide
a driveway easement crossing the three .other parcels.
There was a 'Nrief discussion concerning the grade of the exists
driveway. Mr. Dilley'advised that while it is quite steep, delivery
and service trmacks use it regularly; also, the fire department has
experimented with its equipment. Per. Diliey stated that the exten-
sion of the driveway to.serve the new parcels will not be as steep.
-4-
Fir. Dilley agreed to secure maps of the canyon area and the properties
on Hillside Drive for the study meetinr of F®hruarq 13 m 1961. Also,
the City Engineer stated. that h- would contact Fire Chief P]oorhy concern-
ing t'.e .Fare Dapa.rtmen.lt:,°s `position on the DY'GaDOSeE Sifnd :fitislor
e
2. tS ecial-Studov
A special session wras. sclip -d led for ' ednesday;. February' 1, 1961, at
7:30 Pm,, to comb .nu.e t, Ja StUd r o� t1ib Ordinance and possible
amendments.
3. Tri-CountyLl nn rg DI- -r
The Fla n ng Consultant
reminded
--m-em'hers
that the City of Burl-ngame
z//{yy3yyi��ll 1-iost ther���`:7ri-County
Pl�y+aj?aUng, CAounell
Dinner k1leeting" to be held
on 1" ricda , el S.6 cry 17 V,
1 9'a 1 v at
4'ti .��. on
Br oC.CLJ �3,,Ta3 1i
ADJOUP Y13NT
There being no further business, the meeting was regularly adjourned
at ;' :45 p.m. to reconvene on February 13, 1961, at 8 : 4Q p.m.
R espeetx"ully su ,m .tter ,
D.A. Stivers, S"retary
-5-