Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1962.03.261 y ITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION COM4ISS?ONERS Brauner Cistulli Edwards Kindig Norberg Moore CALL TO ORDER A regular mee to order on t March 26, 1962 ENT COMMISSIONERS ABSEPIT OTHERS PRESENT Stivers City Attorney Karmel Councilman Johnson City Planner Mann City Engineer Marr Councilman Martin g of the Burlingame City Planning Commission was called above date at 8:00 p.m. - Vice Chairman Kindig presiding. ROLL CALL In the absence of Commission Secretary D.A. Stivers, Chairman Kindig appointed Commissioner Moore Secretary pro tem. A Roll call recorded the above members present. Commissioner 4iveP92 absent because of illness, Baas excused. Tr � The minutes of the regular meeting of February 26, 1962, and the study meeting of Maroh 12, 1962, previously submitted to members of the Com- mission, were 4pproved and adopted. HEARINGS Public he 1. V. A communicatio cant in the ma ties proposed that a comprom likely. The c for the presen time, the park mendation on t: There being no Moore, and sec scheduled for , pursuant to published notice, were conducted as follows: ION. NICHOLAS A CRISAFI. 220-2ia0 EL CAMINO. dated March 16, 1962, from Nicholas A. Crisafi, appli- �er of a variance for apartment construction on proper - be included in the Central Parking District, advised e with the proponents of the parking plan appears un- munication requested that the public hearing scheduled meeting be continued for at least 60 days. By this g committee should be in position to submit a recom- feasibility of the District, tests heard, on a motion introduced by Commissioner d by Commissioner Brauner, the application was meeting of June 11, 1962, for further study. 2. RESUBDIVI ION - LOTS 1 AND 2 BLOCS 2 EAST MILLSDALE INDUSTRIAL PARR NO. 1, teontinued from meeting February 26 (C ONTI - -- -- Upon advice om the City Engineer that the applicant has not filed a revised map the hearing on the application to resubdivide the above-deseri d property was continued to the meeting of April 23,1962. 3, RESUBDIVI ION - LOTS 12 AND 13, BLOCK BURLINGAAIE VILLA PARR. (APPRO An applicatio for a resubdivision of Lots 12 and 13, Block 3, villa Park Subdivis on (southeasterly corner of Laurel and Morrell Avenues), having been r viewed by the Commission at the last study meeting, was submitted for formal action at this time. mr. John E. illips, owner, was in attendance. Mr. Phillips advised that the exis ing house, which is very old, was built across the original lot ine and occupies a portion of both lots. There is a large area at the rear of the property which is not used. Air. Phillips :I*area plained that by deleting the existing property line and establishing new line to parallel Morrell Avenue, there will be two parcels of eq fronting on Laurel Avenue instead of Morrell. >> The existing use and garage will occupy one parcel. The second par- cel will be i proved for sale purposes. The City Engi eer advised that there is sufficient land area for two legal lots. sewer lateral and water service will be Installed to the new lot a the owner's expense. The Planning onsultant stated that the rear property lines will be changed but s ee there was no established lot pattern in the original subdivision, nd there are lots facing on both Laurel and Morrell, the present oposal will conform to the general character of the neighborhood, There being n protests received, oral or written, a motion was in- troduced by C mmissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner &award$, to approve t resubdivision of Lots.12 and 13, Block 3, Burlingams Villa Park S ivision, in accordance with the map on file with the City Engine Notion carried unanimously on roll call of members present. 4- RESUBDIV ION - LOT 1,1 SMALLCOMB INDUSTRIAL PARR. CO A resubdivisinto on map filed with the City Engineer by Smallcomb Motor Company, proerty owner, proposed to divide Lot 1, Smalleomb Indus- trial Park, two parcels. Mr. R.A. Welge was in attendance representing the applicant. The -2- Commission waeo advised that at present there are two buildings on the lot. The owners propose to sell the portion designated as "Parcel B" bul require approval of a resubdivision map which will define the legal boundaries of the parcel, The Planning Consultants in reply to the Chair's inquiry concerning off-street parking, advised that he had visited the property. The building on Parcel A has been in. existence For many years, long be- fore the city required off-street parking. The building Parcel B was built in 1957 but by some circumstance, there was no f-street parking provided. The Planning Consultant stated that t re is ample open space on the property at present. There are ease ants for ingress and egress which provide room for parking. However', there is not any area which has been designed nor reserved foroff-street parking, In reviewing the map, Commissioners discussed with Mr. Welge ways.and means of providing the required parking. Mr, Frank Browns owner of property directly across Burlway Road, stated that th3 on -street parking on the north side of Burlway Road could lead to mongestion at a later date when the area is fully developed, The City Attorney, In reply to the Chair's Inquiry, advised that the -�` Commission may reject a resubdivision map upon determination that the applicant falls to meet the requirements of the Ordinance Code, In a period of disunssion, Commissioners indicated that there should be some effort by the applicant to provide parking, The comment was made that other owners In the area will be expected to comply with the rules when their properties are developed, A motion was introduced by Commissioner Norberg, and seconded by Commissioner Eftuner to continue the hearing to the next regular meet- ing of the Co ssion (April 23, 1962) to permit the applicant an opportunity to investigate the parking situation. Motion carried unanimously. 5. RESUBDIVISXON - LOT 1. EL QUANITO ACRES SUBDIVISION. An application filed with the City Engineer by Mr. Richard C. Knight, owner, proposeo a resubdivision of property at 2727 E1 Prado Road; Lot 19 E1 Quan to Acres Subdivision, Mr. Knight was ferred to the t particularly tt be performed b3 bible for the s siderable work In attendance and, upon recognition by the Chair, re- [amage on E1 Prado Road caused by the recent heavy rains, ie damage to his property. He stated that the work to r the city will correct some of the conditions respon- ilide damage but in order to protect his property con - will be required in the creek bed. -3- Mr. xaight exp: lot line divid: existing house; It is proposed teat the area , same operation; Canyon Road. The City Engin requirements t building site. Mr. Knight ag architectural The Planning C standpoint the house that wou to the neiAhba Commissioner B work in the or acceptance. The City Attor cation, the Co -- a determinatio the ordinances There being n0 Norberg, and S, division of Le file with the vote. 60 aired that the resubdivision will establish a new ng the property into two parcels. Parcel A, with the fronts on E1 Prado Road. Parcel B is the creek bed, to lay a pipe or culvert and sufficient fill to pro- gainst the possibility of future slides and, in the create a legal building site having frontage on or stated that Parcel. B meets area and street frontage t there is some doubt that there will be a satisfactory that it would not be a simple matter to build. An ign would be required to adapt to the natural terrain, ultant expressed the opinion that from an aesthetic operty should not be permitted to be subdivided. Any be built on the new lot certainly would not conform od pattern* uner commented that if the resubdivision were approved k bed would be subject to the cityts approval and y advised that in the matter of a resubdivision pli- Usion is bound by the provisions of the -Code. UUon that the applicant has met all of the requirements of the resubdivision must be permitted, further comments, a motion was introduced by Commissioner conded by Commissioner Cistulli, to approve the "sub- 1, E1 Quanito Acres, in accordance with the map on Ity Engineer. Motion carried unanimously on Pon call CJ An application filed by Swanson Construction Company requested a variance to permit construction of a free standing sign measuring 35 feet, 4 ii1cles , from ground level to the top of the sign, on propert7, located at 860 Burlway Road. Ordinance No. tion. A oomraunicatioi Amao reign Comp: the property w] cation stated high enough to line. Wo. Noifing of , Section 1861, establishes a 20 foot height lialta- k from the applicant dated March 69 1962, advised that any of Palo Alto has been employed to erect a sign on Lich will provide adequate identification. The oom nmi- rhat to be read from the Freeway the sign should be be visible above the tree line and above the building �Amao Sign Company was in attendance to represent the applicant. a Commission was advised that the proposed sign will be attached t the building wail, will rise at least eight feet above the roo line, and extend 15 feet b�rond the building to with- in one foot o the property line. Lettering will be removable to permit the wo ding to be changed. The sign will contain the firm name and iden ification of the firmts activities, Type of lettering and method of lighting were described. Mr. Neifing s ated that the present sign will be removed and there will not be a4y other signs on the building, Commissioner Brauner stated that identification signs are a natural part of an incustrial area and pointed out that roof signs may rise to a height ol 20 feet, Commissioner Moore stated his position in opposition to signs of excessive heiAht and size. The Planning Consultant stated that there is justification in the re- quest to repl ce the existing sign with a free standing sign. How- ever, the poi t of concern in the present application would appear to be the mat er of projection 15 feet beyond the building to attract Freeway traff e. The privilege of identification or advertising cannot be denied to business but there are controls to be exercised. The Planning Consultant recalled the city's agreement with the State of California concerning Freeway signs. He stated "we promised the State of California if you do the landscaping, we will keep the signs down'. The Planning Consultant stated that where it is possible to control the signs, this must be done, The Chair Invited comments from the floor. There being none, a motion was introduced by Commissioner Brauner, seconded by Commissioner Norberg, approving Swanson Construction Company application for a variance to permit construction of a sign in accordance with the plan submitted. The motion was declared defeated on the following roll call vote: AYES:- COMMISSIONERS: Brauner, Norberg NOES: COMMISSIONERS; Cistulli, Edwards, Kindig, Moore ABSEINT.CO SSIONERS: Stivers Pr. Neifing w instructed by the City Attorney that an appeal from the decision o the Planning Commission must be filed with the City Council withi five days from the date of the Commission meeting. The hearing 7. UNION thereafter declared concluded, PANY SIGN VARIANCE APPROVED, An application from Union Oil Company of California requested a variance from the provisions of the Sign Ordinance, Section 18610 establishing height limitations for pole signs, to permit a sign 14 feet 4 inches higher than the legal maximum, to be installed at the Union Oil Company Service Station, 1147 Bayshore Boulevard. _5� 1 A communicati n from Parker Engineering and Construction Company, dated March 1 , 1962, advised that Union Oil Company contemplates some moderniz tion of the station, including a free-standing canopy and a new sipx.. The communication stated that the station has been successfully operated and Union Oil Company feels that in order to assure the con- tinued operation, the site should be identified to Freeway traffic. The present signs which is 16 feet high, is not considered adequate. Chairman Kindig recognized Mr. Leonard G. Bremier of Parker Engineer- ing and Construction Company, which company will construct and install the sign. A complete set of drawings and a photograph were submitted. The Commission was advised that the post supporting the canopy will extend bZ.4 and he roof of the canopy to support the sign, which will measure ches from ground level to the top of the sign. There will be a spat of approximately eight feet between the roof of the canopy and the bottom of the sign. The Planning Consultant pointed out'that there could be some question as to the exacb designation of the sign - whether it is a roof sign or a pole sign However, on the basis that the sign is supported free of the canopy, and would remain in position if the canopy were to be removed, it must'be assumed that it is free-standing and treated as such. For his reason, the variance is necessary to permit the excessive height over the 20 foot limitation. y` Commissioner C stulli expressed the opinion that the proposed height was not justified, He stated that the location is not convenient to the freeway and the suggestion of the applicant that the larger sign will attr et freeway traffic is debatable. Commissioners Brauner, Moore and Edwards also objected to the excessive height. It was agreed that the proposed alterations will be of benefit to the station and to the neighborhood. Commissioners igcussed with Mr. Bremier the possibility of lowering the sign. It as suggested that a height of four to five feet above the canopy, ra her than the eight feet proposed, would serve the purpose and -be, more acceptable to the city. A motion was i troduced by Commissioner Brauner and seconded by Commissioner C stulli approving a variance' to the #nioa Oil Company of California o permit installation of a sign on the service station site at 1147 B yshore Boulevard; the sign to conform to the plan sub - muted, Drawin No, F 20B22; not to exceed a height of 31 feet 4 inches from ground le el to the top of the sign; the distance between the curb of the c opy to the bottom of the sign not to exceed five feet, Motion declare carried on the following roll call votes AYES: COMM SSIONERS: Brauneir, Cistulli, Kindig, Norberg, Moore NOES: COMM SSIONERS: Edwards ABSENT COMM SSIONERS: Stivers. The hearing wa thereafter declared concluded. r 6r .&^ NEW BUSINESS 1. W Chairman Kind g referred to the recent appointment to the San Mateo County Grand ury of former Planning Commission Chairman W.H. Diederic en and his subsequent resignation from the Planning Commission. Chairman Kind g expressed the appreciation of the Commission for Fes. Diederich en's many years of service as a member of the Commission. n a motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli, and seconded by G mmiasioner Norberg, and unanimously carried, an appropriate 1 tter was directed to be sent to Mr. Diederiehsen, 2, Planning Oonsultant Report: Tideland Properties. The Planning Consultant reported that he attended a meeting of a citizens' cowlttee formed under the auspices of the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce for the purpose of exploring the various uses of the shoreline area. The Chamber of Commerce is interested generally in the possib a Industrial uses, The Planning Consultant reported also of a meeting with Mr. Frank Skillman, San Mateo County Manager, and Everett Kincaid, Planning Director of the City of San Mateo. Mr. Kincaid indicated that he would discuss with the San Mateo Planning Commission the advisability of postponing action on the dispostion of the tidelands until mora inflormation is available on their eventual use. 3• Vice -Chairman Ondig volunteered to continue to act as Commission Chairman until, the new officers are elected, ADJOURNMENT Prior to ad Councilman The meeting meat, the Chair acknowledged the presence of on and Recreation Commissioner Arnold. regularly adjourned at 10:15 p.m, Respectfully submitted, Edward A. Moore Secretary Pro Tom. q��