Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1962.08.27BURLINGAME CITY PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSION PRESENT Brauner Cistulli Edwards Moore Norberg CALL TO OR: August 27, 1962 COMMISSIONERS OTHERS PRESENT ABSENT Kindig City Attorney Karmel Stivers Mayor Lorenz City Planner Mann City Engineer Marr A regular meeting of the Burlingame City Planning Commission was held on the above Oiven date. Meeting called to order at 8:00 p.m., - Chairman Pro Tempore Brauner in the Chair. ROLL CALL A Roll Call and vetivers, MINUTES PREV The minutes August 13, 1 and adopted. 1 HEARINGS rded the above members present. Commissioners Kindig vacation, were excused. the regular meeting of Truly 23 and the study meeting of 1. submitted previously to members, were approved Hearings sche#uled at a prior study meeting and appearing on the Agenda on this date,lwere considered as follow;: 1. An applicatio for a resubdivision proposing the transfer of the common lot line be n the properties of "Edwards and Dilley," approximately twenty-six fe t northeasterly along Hillside Drive, to increase the area of the wards' property by approximately 1,600 square feet, was formally ackn ledged. _ Mr. Earl M. Dilley, in attendance, advised that the twenty-six foot transfer woul enable Mr. Edwards to add an additional room and patio to his home. The City Engren r advised that the tentative map reviewed by the Com- mission has revised slightly to exclude a road easement from the propertybe transferred. The City Plan0er, questioned by the Chairman, advised that the lot on Hillside Driv con-- to ordinance eguirements and the proposed plan will not affe t the low-lying properties. A motion intr aced by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner Norberg that he subdivision be approved, was unanimously carried by a Roll Call v te. 2. - AMERICAN MOTORS SALES CORPORATION A communicatio Signs, dated J the erection o its new locati a sign, design currently loca two story buil, erection of a Mr. Serlin, in identical with and attached ti tracks. from Mr. Paul Sirlin, Sales Representative, Coast Neon y 18, 1962, was read, requesting a variance to permit a neon sign on the American Motors building at on 15 Guittard Road. The communication advised that ing "Rambler" is erected on a one-story building d at 1565 Adrian Road and will be re -located on a ng at the new location. A variance to permit the irty-five foot sign was therefor requested. attendance, advised that the proposed installation, that erected on the former building, will be installed the rear wall of the building nearest the railroad The City Plan r advised that the application for a sign variance is before the ommission for the reason that the sign is neither a "roof nor a fr -standing" type sign. The proposed sign will be fifteen feet a ve the roof, mounted on poles that will be attached to the buildin The City Planner stated that there was nothing objectionable o the proposed sign. A motion was i sioner Norberg by the Coast N as unanimous. 3. A communicatio Coast Neon Sig the erection o be shortly loc "Mercedes-Benz south end of t "Studebaker" t "Rambler" is n between the tw was proposed b The City Pla with respect troduced by Commissioner Edwards, seconded by Commis - that the application for a sign variance as requested on Signs be approved. A Roll Call vote was recorded - STUDEBAKER CORPORATION was read from Mr. Paul Sirlin, Sales Representative, s, dated July 18, 1962, requesting a variance to permit two signs on the Studebaker Corporation building to ted at 1565 Adrian Road; one neon sign, designating and Star" to be erected on two steel poles on the e building and the other neon sign, designating be erected on existing poles upon which the sign w located, with an approximate distance of ninety feet signs. A height of thirty five.feet from the ground the applicants. recommended that the applicant advise the Commission the height of each of the proposed signs. In reply, Mr. irlin stated that the two signs'to be erected on opposite side4tudebaker" of the building proposes a height of fourteen feet for the "Merees-Benz and Star" sign and a height of twenty-two feet for the sign. Commissioner be limited to A brief discus motion that th, "Studebaker" s above the roof at a height no motion was sec, on a Roll Call we expressed preference that the "Studebaker" sign height of twenty feet. ion concluded with Commissioner variance be approved, upon the gn be erected at a height not t level and the "Mercedes -Benz to exceed fourteen feet above nded by Commissioner Cistulli a vote. -2- o Norberg introducing a condition that the exceed twenty feet and Star" sign be erected the roof level. The nd unanimously carried 4. . - COIT DRAPERIES A communicati n from the Bell Electrical Signs, Inc., dated July 16, 1962,was read requesting a variance to permit the installation of a sign in ex s of the twenty -foot maximum on the new Coit drapery building loca ed at 897 Hinkley Road. The City Pla er advised that in the interim between the study meeting and the regular meeting, the drapery concern has notified his office that the greater percentage of the business is wholesale and on that basis ordinance requirements pertaining to the retail use of property does not apply in this instance. Mr. George RTrise, SanFrancisco architect, representing the drapery concern, queoned the need for a variance and in referring to the peculiarity the building roof lines, stated that the sign, its declared heiof 38' 10" from ground level would be conforming. The City Pla r, by a blackboard illustration, outlined the building with its two istinct roof levels, stating that the ordinance makes no reference to eight limitation measurements on this type of building and the drape company was therefor requested to apply for a variance. Some discussion arose with Commission members determining thereafter that a sign mity be placed on the highest portion of the roof. A motion was introduced by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commis- sioner Norberg that the sign as indicated on the diagram is in conformance and that the procedure of filing a variance application is unnecessary. A Roll Call recorded the following voter Ayes: Commissioners: Brauner-Cistulli-Moore-Norberg Noes: Commissioners: Edwards Absent Commissioners: Kindig•-Stivers S. Formal acknow edgment was given to an application from R. P. Etienne Properties, I c., requesting a permit for the construction of a directional s gn for Hyatt House on a parcel of land located on the westerly ide of the Bayshore Highway Freeway, approximately fifty feet theasterly of the Burlingame Pumping Station. Cyrus J. MaMi Ian, Attorney, representing Hyatt House intereds, advised that the pres nt site has been sold and R. P. Etienne Properties, owners, have ffered a new location, approximately 1,000 feet to the south of the rent site. The sign will remain identical to that now in use. The City Pla r advised the Cow=tsion to consider (1) a permit for the use of i ustrial property for the purpose stated and (2) a variance to permit the increase in the height limitation. In reply to in which the that its vla A motion was rloore that b isioner Moores inquiry concerning the period of time will remain on the new location, Mr. McMillan advised would be contingent upon the sale of the property. roduced by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner the use permit and the variance from the height limita- - 3 - i tson be approved. A Roll Call vote was recorded as unanimous. 6. VARIANCE GRANITE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Communications from the Granite Development Company, dated July 31 and August 1, 1962, were read, requesting a variance to permit the construction f a triplex dwelling on first residential property at No. 9 Dwight ;oad. The latter co nmunication set forth in detail, reasons for which the variance was requested and called attention to its location, one block removed from commercial property and adjacent to property zoned apartment. Mr. James B expressed a an asset to Commissioner The City P opinion, g maintained between an on Dwight : The Commissi identical wi at 9 Clarend In reply to between the Mr. Jack G. advised that reduced six subject prop , representing his wife, owner of neighboring property, val to the plan and stated that the triplex would be neighborhood and the surrounding area. i reported that he had reviewed th4 area. er stated that the proposed construction is, in his usage of the property and compatible with a position the Commission with respect to an appropriate transition zoning on Peninsula Avenue and first residential zoning was advised by the City Planner that the plans are those prepared and used in the construction of a triplex Road by the Granite Development Company. mission inquiry concerning the three foot difference nth of the lot at 9 Clarendon Road and the subject lot, liams, representing the Granite Development Company, .e area in each unit in the new construction will be hes to conform to lot coverage requirements on the v. There being further comments, Commissioner Norberg moved that the variance be anted with the provision that the building plans be altered to i icate a three foot decrease in the depth of the dwelling to meet lot d-mensions and the construction thereafter to conform to plans submitt The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and on a Roll Call vote,, unanimously carried. Mr. Williams s advised that the variance becomes effective one day following the next Council meeting, or September 5, 1962, provided no appeal is received in the interim. 7. A comm►unicat Orack, submi Block 4, Eas to R-3 (Agar exterior eie application. The City P wherein a (1132 Capuchin) n, dated August 10, 1962, was read from I. Ed and Dorothy ing an application for a variance to rezone Lot 23, n Addition No. 1 (1132 Capuchin Avenue) from R-2 (Duplex) ent_.) Plans indicating a proposed five unit apartment including a plan of the tion requested at the study meeting, accompanied the er advised that the property is located in an area cy was established with respect to considering individual applications and building plans are in conformance with ordinance requirements Carl G. manager of an apartment house located at 1136 Ll Camino Real, .protes ed the granting of the variance, stating that the sewer €acili ies in the neighborhood are inadequate to accomodate the anticipated ncrease of residents. Questioned b the Chairman, the City Engineer advised that the two areas are no serviced by the same sewer main; however, he would investigate oomplaints registered by Mr. Somner. Following a variance be Commissioner present. A communic Lundquist, in the bag The communic occur on the applicant bo A petition owners on was acknow rief discussion. Commissioner Cistulli moved that the ranted in accordance with plans presented, seconded by Norberg and unanimously adopted on Roll Call of members dated August 6, 1962, was read from Arthur and Inez ing for a variance to permit the storage of merchandise of his home, located at 25 Highland Avenue. n stated that sales and business conducted does not mixes, there is no advertising nor signs and the a valid City business license at this address. the signatures of thirtyeen residents and property Avenue, signifying consent to the proposed use, A communication dated August 21, 1962, from the Fire Inspector, sub- mitted at the request of the Commission, advised of an inspection made by the Building Inspector and his Office, and the changes necessary in order that the use may qualify a"change in occupancy: requirement. The City Planner advised of his personal inspection of the property and indicated that the changea demmided are reasonable and proper. Chairman Brauner expressed coiwarn with respect to the possible expansion of the storage of stock and the employment of personnel. Mr. Lundquist gave assurance to the contrary and further assurance that corrections would be made to conform to building and fire requirements. Commissioner f took cognizance of the location of the area adjacent to a cocial area, the willingness of the applicant to comply with r ons imposed, thecontinuation of the business operation by alicant exclusively, the petition from residents in the neigh rhand moved that the variance be approved. W. R. G. Freal7ickson, 24 Lorton Avenue, questioned whether the variance would apply t the property or to the applicant and in reply, the City Planner ecommended that it be granted to the applicant during his occupancy of the subject property. Following a b ief discussion, Commissioner P7orberg amended his motion to include that the variance be granted to the applicant during his - 5 - occupancy of the premises, upon the condition that (1) there will be no posting of signs; (2) there will be no employment of personnel; that (3) alterations will be made within a period of ninety day to conform to building and fire standards. The I motion was s ed by Commissioner Cistulli and unanimously adopted on a oll Call of members present. 9. USE PERMI - FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH A communicati n dated July 30, 1962, was read from the First Baptist Church of Bur, ingame, applying for a use permit to convert a dwelling at 809 Fairfield Road for Sunday School purposes. The application indicated that an area at the rear of the dwelling would be improved to serve as a small parking lot to relieve congested parking areas on streets arOund the Church. A communication to the First Baptist Church from the Chief and the Inspector of :be Fire Department, dated August 9, 1962, was read, advising of tie changes that must occur to maintain the building in a safe and a sanitary condition for the use of the several church activities. Mr. Ernest H.101son, representing the applicant, confirmed that all corrections shall be made. Some discussion arose on the legal requirements with respect to "school occupincy." The City Planner referred to the Communication from the Fire Department wherein the Church was advised to "completely seal off and discontinue all second floor use." Mr. Olson ad sed that the use of the building would be limited and children will not be permitted lento the building unless accompanied by an adult. Commissioner Edwards moved that the use permit be granted upon the condition that (1) alterations conform to building and fire require- ments and (2) legal requirements pertaining to "school occupancy" are satisfactorily met. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and unanimously carried by a Roll Call vote. RECESS A recess at tie conclusion of the foregoing hearings was declared by the Chair at 9:50 p.m. Themeeting wa* recalled to order by Chairman Brauner at 10:00 p.m. 10. Consideration of Zoning Ordin ce 1962. an amendment to Division 6, Section 1926 of the was continued until the regular meeting, September 24, - 6 - 1. A commtmicati n from Fred D. Sperry, Jr., dated July 26, 1962, was read, wherein an additional extension of time on the temporary use permit to opwate a Contractor's equipment yard at 1421 North Carolan Ave nu , was requested. The Commission was advised that due to circumstances beyond its control, a delay in the removal to a new location is anticipated. The City Pla er advised that the continued operation of the Contractor's and by the Sperry Company is illegal usage of the property and should be abated. Action was wilbbeld until the next regular meeting at which time Mr. Sperry would be requested to be present. 2. in reply to t a Chair's invitation, the City Attorney briefly advised Commission wi respect to the procedure in the matter of the referral by the City C cil of proposed zoning amendments. The City Atto ney advised that public hearings conducted by the Planning C ssion and subsequently by the City Council have been declared conc uded; objections to the proposed zoning ordinance amendments s tted to the City Council have been referred to the Planning C ssion solely for the purpose of review, consideration and recommend tion. Communicatio setting fourth specific objections to amendments proposed and submitted to Council at an adjourned meeting, August 10, 1962, were read front the following: 1. William R. Ward, 120 Occidental Avenue, objecting to SECTION 1971.1 and urging th retention of a ten foot minimum width requirement for single g ages and carports; 2. Burling Suburban Protective Association of Burlingame, objecting to the el tion of newspaper publications as proposed in SECTION 1910; 3. The Burlingame Park Improvement Club, objecting to SECTIONS 1907, 1908 and 1910,I pertaining to Procedure and questioning the clarity of SECTIONS 1 71.1, 1971.2 (a), 1971.2 (b) and 1971.2 (c); 4. San Mateo Burlingame Real Estate Board and the Peninsula General Contractors sociation (jointly) objecting to and or requesting clarification on SECTIONS 1938, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1954, 1958, 1958.1 1960. 1966. 1067. 1971.1 and 1971.2. Reference was wade to a communication submitted to Council from the Chief of the ire Department objecting to sub -section "a" of Section 1971.2, perta ing to side yard parking spaces. - 7 - The City Pla er advised that he has prepared an amended Section 1971.1 "Dimensions o Spaces, Access" and an amended Section 1971.2, sub- section "a" lungs, apartment, apartment hotels" under "Require- ments for Particular Uses." Objections to sections, arranged in numerical order, were considered as follows: a The City Attorney, in reply to the Chair's inquiry, read excerpts from a number of sections of the Government Code and amendments thereto pertaining to procedure and the giving of public notice, indicating that the procedure proposed by the City is in conformance with statuatory requirements. It was noted at in addition to publications notice required under the current city ordinance, the City has maintained a policy of mailing notices to property owners within a 500 foot radius in an area in which a change is proposed. Mr. Fred W. Lehman, President, Burlingame Paris Improvement Club, stated that his Association has maintained a position that publications re necessary, not only to protect the citizens, but to protect the Council and the Commission as well. Commissioner Cistulli stated that on the basis of notification given to property owners within the 500 foot radius and the audience attendance at public hearings, one publication, in his opinion, would be sufficient. Chairs Bra observed that considerable investigation on the determination f legislative bodies prior to establishing statuatory requirements j stified the adoption by the City of a policy in conformance w State planning procedure. Following further discussion, in which an administrative policy to require notic to be posted in the City Hall was established, Commissioner C'stulli moved that Section 1907 remain as written. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Norberg and unanimously adopted by Rol Call vote. SECTION 1908 ar s Commission and Council" (Classifications and reclassifications) in nature Section 1908, imilaV� to that set forth in the foregoing Section 1907, Commissioner alwards moved that Section 1908 remain as written, seconded by Coomissioner Norberg and unanimously carried by Roll Call. SECTION 1910 The City Plan and special p classificatio Planning laws " to) advised that Section 1910, pertaining to variances its was separated from the section including and reclassifications in conformance with State d eliminates publication requirements. - 8 - )The City Attornel was in effect, tl 19S7 a statute w; municipality, at a publication, it if the city elect notice; the law i notice should oc< ,advised that at the time the City's Zoning Ordinance kere was no State statute with respect to notices; in is written and later re -written to the effect that a its discretion, may elect to publish; if there was to be should be published ten days prior to the hearing and :ed to publish the notice then it :rust also post a lid not stipulate, however, where the "posting" of a :ur, , A.G. Westcott, P#sident, Suburban Protective Association, urged that the public be appris d by at least one publication and more preferably, two, and stated that 'no public official has been injured by giving too much notice". In response to t e Chair's invitation to the Commission for comments, Commissioner Cis ulli recommended conformance with the State Planning law and Commissioner Moore expressed the opinion that the request for news- paper publicatio is a legitimate request. A discussion aro'a on the recommendation that notices to property owners be mailed by regstered mail, the cost to the City to provide the ser- vice and the publication -posting as set forth in the State statutes. Further discussi a report concern ,a return receipt additional infor notices. Cons! deration `o► the City Councsi ADJOURNMENT There being no f at 11:5S p.m., t ELA concluded with the City Planner requested to submit g the cost of mailing notices by certified mail with equested and the City Attorney requested to submit tion on the procedure of publication and posting of e remaining sections-•referred7'to_.-the Commission by s continued to the evening of Tudsday, September 11. -then business, the meeting was regularly adjourned reconvene on Tuesday September 110 1962. Respectfully submitted, Edward A. Moore Secretary