Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1963.12.23CITY OF BURLINGA"E PLANNING COWfISSION CONDMISSAONERS: PRE'SEINVII" Brauner N r; An e r Gi 712 C01W1ISSI0NF--'RS ABSENT Edwards Ki di.g Slivers December 23, 1963 OTHERS PRESENT City Ma -nnn City Engineer Mary .4 re�gulav im,:�c;: i�iig o ` e &. r•lingarne^r Planning, Comkirt ssion was called to ordef. at 3:09 r:, m. , on t.,e -above date Chairman Brauner presiding. ROLL CALL The above. -nnigod. members answered the Secretarb-'s roll call Comm .ssi.one rs ".adig and Stii ers, having advised previously that they would be away from the city, were excused. MINUTES lvFiinutes of the meetings of November 25 and 26, 1963, and December 9,1963;, previously submitted to members, were approved and adopted. HEARINGS Chairman Brauner announced that Item No, B on the agenda tinder Ilearings would be considered first, to be followed by the regular order of business VARIANCE - Joseph M, Peterson. Off-street Parking for hotea, 1209 Howard Avenue. (continued from November 26, 1963) An application filed by Joseph M. Peterson requested a variance from the off-street Parking requirements of Section 197102d of the Ordinance Code in connection with a 55 room hotel proposed to be constructed at 1209 Howard Avenue (Por4 Lots 10 and ll, Block 7,, Town of Burlingame Subdivision) , A let4-er dated November 13, 1963,, to the Burlingame Parking rQmreis5i.an setting forth facts pertinent to the application and requesting a reCom— mnndation from that Commission to guide the Planning Commission ill its corsi.de_a.tlon of the variance request was read by the City It was toted that the; application is to allow no on -site code ¢he rol3ose:d building wou.sfl require 37 sl;ac+��.�. The zoning .1.s C and the hotel a legal r-iuse. The applicant intends to provide part:. ng 'Uy means o a .5wt'i�i,- ?! puil.�c off-streetparking lot. The City Planner advised that there has been no reply frog the Parking Co-mnissiona however, the minutes of its meeting of November 26, 1963, __..� recite as follows: "Letter again read from City Planner re Peterson Hotel project, Attorney Cyrus McMillan spoke for the hotel project, Motion by Refvem, 2nd Blumberg; €aasscc_=o Ci'ye notice to Planning Commission that any particular sna:^es will not be reserved for any one property owner qo�[r� tenant, .t 'r F =?�' 12 i s t x Lot i 8 i R Ged as cc S._7.me, y-, a n C � ! c� :a r :: ��,. E....... _t _>. �, S. i3 c`3. e, s 6. S' �`e` .�_ �. � E.% { i r. his Mai be veve"-"Sarl at, any time,5,. Upon rec2ga'`_ _a. r_<n Brauner, Cyrus lava, attorney repro �ued of his attendance at the November meeting � f 1, L3�4-.._... f 1.�`yiT; _.: c� ._ i°i 3 L i2 me `c �' ^�z E :l{)n •.JuS c��zked if it � ? � n e,� "o3 ry `s a e ?Aces reserved Fo:� the use of Vhe hotel in he oni Pork ;toad (Lot F) Mr. Mc?.9_ill'an Stated Lhat it wfto t Cye 0 i ar_ C� ? ''i3iM'sc _..on r s "r:ho were pre -sent- that a.ss:ignmenl: oS for a paz- ca s.ar p?°caper ty owner would establish a dangerous precedent, Mr,, McMillan stated further that it was his understanding that it is the thinking of the Commission that since Lot F is a peripheral lot it would remain open at all tirues, not subject to two-hour paTki%g or metering. Correspondence relat-ing to the application was read as follows: A Statement of Justification, filed by the applicant, contended that the proposed use could be a com-mere al use with -in S:cat-±on 19710Zf of the code and therefore exempt from parking requirements under Section 1971.3. rA letter sated October lag. 1963, from HazrieE. A. Benneser:, 110 Lorton Ave., in opposition to "just a`-nott e rooming house ty-pe hotel". A letter dated December 19, 1963, fro, BuTl.ingame Chamber of Commerce, signed by Robert J. MacDonald, President, in opposition on -he grounds •tha.t if the variance were granted the Parking District would in effect be providing an exclusive parking lot for the applicant and the proposed hotel. Petitions s? gned by ten property owners "directly affected by thegranti.ng of the variance" were filed in protest. The City Atto:duey, , an reply to Commission inquiry, stilted that -it is his interpretation of the rode that the applicant is required to furnish the 37 parking spscesa Proponents were invited by the Chair to speak Mr. McMillan s tatted that the proposed structure;, costing in excess of $250,00MO wii' fz l_l a definite need in the community for a first- class residential hotel; the development will. Prove as asset to the con- me- cial -area on Howard Avenue and possibly lead to further rejuvenation of properties on the street, The developer has had considerable exper- ience with triis type of hotel and owns others in Palo Alto, San ,lose, zgadl one under cor str=wction in Redwood City where in each city the require - :lent of on -site parking was waived. Mr. McMillan stated that there mould appear to be some inequities in the parking provisions of the code, since any commercial use would be per- mitted on land within the parking district without off-street parking, -2- in the pve. ent application, the owner proposes to build a hotel on his property, which is a commercial use. He has pai an assessment into the parkinu d- riot but under code he ss required to provide off-street j parking, pia Mead an maintained that a situation of hardship and undue property loss resulted. Mr. Mcfri Ilan ^tsited' tbat :he public narking lot, on Park Road, which the l ; u; s est abli-shed f4 cr long-time parkers and +a not. to dews: o,,pers, f e�s�.ated that tha lot would be used by tenants 0� the %? ?"a E''- . 1.3s1 a�"s ! �'" at night :dhe— 1'.}S£" ��Y3u� f�ai1--time parker s would +dJ� use a ie" S PV s _ ^pjt was made to acquire (additional land OCi �-ghe Corun4:i. ssoa`�i. was advised also that the v a s, 11S`? >o 'r -ti fiace the nu3i1`ElE'r £7f rooms fTon 55 LG 40. were i-iivit-ed to comment, i loe t ;x 3 d, -Pros dent of the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce, and o nel 0 c Py o+pe 6 v' ap Park Road, spoke in opposition to a Variance >jbat,t purm?tp_L - iilization of the Parking District public loft orit o t err^y other parking. The fe-i-lowing peTsons spoke it opposition, aepeatinb objections raised by Mr. {4ars..l)on.-.:ld� Walter Schaefer, represen-l:ing iN+1asonic Hall Association, n, owner of property on € .ward Avenue and Park Road; Mrs. T.E. Erickson, 1205 Howard Avenue; PSG. S,fos, 115 Highland Avenue; Mrs, Harriet Bennesen, 110 Lorton Avenue, In a period of general discussion, Mention was made of the possibility of the city-s commercial areas expanding so that parking lots which are now considered peripheral may at a future date provide essential parking, Reference was :jade to the original legislation enacted to create the parking district which was defeated in the courts. It was pointed out that 3t was riot an oversight but part of the design that hotel construc- tion was not made one of the exempted uses, Mr. McMillan, upon recognition by Cha i rmain Brauner,, advised that the developer, Mr, E.T: Haas believes that sere on -site parking can be pro- vided by reducing the number of rooms from 5S to 35. firs N ?Tillan thereupon requested a continuance to permit his client to prepare a new presentation. There be";ng no protests heard, the hearing was thereafter declared con- tinued to the meeting of January 27, 1964, REGULAR ORDER OF BUSINESS RESUMED. 1e RESUBDIVISICN - Lot 26 and southeast portion Lot 27, Block 4, Laston Addition. An application filed by Glen W. Allen, agent for the owner, to resubdivide the above -described property on Capuchino Avenue by deleting a common let ling: to combine two lots inl:o one parcel., was continued to the meet i;�g of January 27,- 1964, upon determination by tiie Chair that the app�_i.. cant was not -En attendance not represented. -3- ~ - Rj suBD� v!S!wi Loy: 190 B i ock % East i l lsdale Indus tri J Park A map prepared by Wilsey Ham and Blair for Stanford Gluck, agerct for the owners, was f led with the City Engineer to divide the above -described r- property at Gilbreth and Mitten'Roads into two parcels by Establishing ., a new lot 3_ine.o !��r •y:r 4 �::_' -.:; a 71i essay flan and Blair '3"eFpresenit'"ing the c`lpp" scant advised firs::= ther v is a b:z:l s ding on one sine of the property leaving a . 4�?L✓ Ct 1. C_ ". GC..:r %h.�.�, c71 GLI: be ii33de in"Co d separate C.e lot`,, The Cityt- __. .� c.c 71'..c.ed I - hat the trap -meets code requirements. The ._ 1 e Htion of the property »r vc; :. �n.s that the .'ee'.�hd.:3 `. 31 `vile building r.o`r the pa-fk? ng, �.s r<'?3.'4+u6 t:r»Eil or Written and on a i'if f` _cep 33_ `. s:. _.._,s : _ it e, C i s-f ul ! i and seconder`; by Commissioner Norberg the *RN==subc('� .`�V_.o_�_ p��f�, llni o s:�y approved ;�n accardar:cc with .jae reap filed l . t.h G.he 4 ` i-.j� ETA-J.LYteer. � CURDf��€.`�M, - Proper of Adolph Blaicng Inc,,, and Parr is Kay,ln .�.. R (Rollins Road) A resubdivision map prepared by Philip B. Lygron, Civil Engineer, entitiod "Lot E" Resubdivision Parcel L, Resubdivision of Loy: 2, Block 2, Uni.t. No,. 1, Millsdage industrial Par: , Burlingame, California", .filed with the City Engineer proposed to increase the width of Lot F by u.d-ding eight feet at the southeasterly ride and add to Parcel B an area includ- ing a railroad spur, 7 Ass Richard lzar.:�enstPkji, of the Im of Ri-chie & Ritchie, Industrial Rear Estate, represented the applicants. The Commission was advised that an exchange of p soporty is involved Mhereby Parcel E, heretofore having a frontage of 0 fFeet on Rollins Road, will acquire an additional eights feet of frontage. The northeasterly or rear portion of said Parcel E will be 'ransf emed to the larger Parcel. Mr, Lavenstein advised that: the resubdi sior, wi Si improve _-he parcel for the 11building on Lot E The City Engineer advised that the map is in. order and presents no problems 6f concern to his department, The City Engineer noted that the exchange ei ll allow the larger parcel to acquire ownersh p of the spur track. There being no protests recorded oral or written a notion introduced by Commissioner Ci.s,tulli and seconded by Commissioner Moore approving the resubdivision according to the map on file with the City Engineer was unanimously c:gried on roll call vote. 1 4. RESUBDIVISI©N - Lots 3 and 9 and portion Lot Z, Block 3® Burlingame II1 its, San Mateo County, (Hillside Circle). A resubdivision map of the above -described property, prepared by Wilsey, Lan, and Blair for the owner, James Co Causey, filed with the City Engineer and reviewed at the study meeting of Decembgr 9. 1963, was -3 hearing on this date. scheduled oz ,.�sr_r C;?y ie abx--no re-present;'ng the applicant, advised that the property cluoes three iegaa lots but the existing residence crosses lot lines -4 a so that i_•� is not possible to The resubdi vi_sion will revise owner three legal lots. use all of the lots as building sites. existing lot boundaries to give to the Mr. Cabrino referred to the discussion at the study meeting when the Commission suggested revisions in the proposed boundaries of Lot 2 to create a better pat-2--ern, g113ro Cabrino seated that the changes were made, The pr•esenz- map :is a revised map and includes one lot having less than �:he legal minimum of 10,000 square feet area. The Ci s b a no- In ropply bto the Chair, ads fsed that the land is not r ... h i.Ii LZ_ `.�r 43_ ._.. .i �'f [-.'.3;.e a ld cant exa h__5-c-n nr� d :. ,• n n cee ngs will be `.—_zcen by the Comm-i:+ssion at this tine will be _s al a i2e.rat ion by the Cst ;r Counc l 3� _ j�a_.led that the Commix discussed certain con th., ow: -new should meet of the resubd ��vision were to be I?j .'� ^ ?Ertl: .. ,if die'>G i�drzv made 1-o an existing garage which should be fi- :mop ec' a-nde e w G?_= Y e w?;' zor a new garage to be provided on the same propeyt-y witr-h the house Chairman Brauner invited comments from those in attendance. Mr. A.H. pontant-, 1381 Hillside Circle, adjacent t:o the subject property, advised that from his knowledge owners -In the neighborhood have no objection to the Causey property coi-ning into the City of Burlingame but the matter of a lot size variance is of some concern, a,r, o;�tia:.�=t,ated that should the property be annexed by the city, he and his neighbors would want to be informed of any applica`cion-for variance, Mr. Cab, iiio suggested owners advantage to establish lot lines as indicated on the revised :nap, however. it would appear that a better approach would be to proceed on the basis; of the original crap wherein tree legal lots were proposed if the Commission would consent: to consider tare origina: map then, upon approval of annexation, an application for variance could be filed with the Planning Commission. The City &t c7ncy, in reply to Chairman Brauner suggested that the Commission on approve the map conditional upon favorable action by the City Council on the petition to annex, and following annexation, the developer to apply for a lot size variance to conform with the ideas of. the Commission as to proper development of the property. Chairman Brauner, in reply to an inquiry from Mrs. Clarence E. Rusch, 1385 Hillside Circle concerning the Commission's interest in a variance r;rocedure, explained that it is the position of the Commission that a better loon design and general improvement of the property will result if certain changes are made in the boundaries of -Lot 20 Copies of the maps were placed on display to be viewed by those in s a period of discussion, Commissioners agreed to proceed on -the 4'the o:4i2�} :hc??�F�CsesEd��di$C?Eeob CcdG '�ELLZeTsl: s f:e'~i and land area. 5 - A motion introduced by Commissioner Norberg approved resubdivision of the property Into t1hree legal lots as indicated on Wilsey, Mani and Blair drawing; No. 170-0101-10--,C-1, dated December, 1963; approval con- ditioned upon approval by the City Council of the natation to annex and i. with the further condition that the existing garage constructed to the front property line shall be removed and a substitute garage for the existing building to be constructed upon its own lot. Mation seconded by Commissioner Cistull i and carried unanimously on roll call vote. 5. FINAL MAP - Mli lls Es ate No. ZS. The final mar, of Es 'ate Ne.. 25., represerg-Ling the last of the lands was reviewed at stud,➢ meeting of for "arn c cops deration at this t1i,4o, jw.._..s R.eme^ Ci'Et. developer.. The City Engineer, in reply ::o Chairman Brauner, advised that the map appears to be iii orde? and complies with the tentative snap as originally submitted. The City Planner called attGtion to the following-. Lot 35, Block 39 will be deeded to the city for access to the canyon area; Let S2b Block 19, and Lot I' , Block 43, will be the tree belt on Skyline Boulevard, to be deeded to the city. hot 14 will continue arouI-Id to Trousdale Drive to allow for highuray construction and will provide the one foot non -access strip in the last block of Trousdale Drive. The 10 foot pedestrian ;gay from Marguerita to Arguello 3s dedicated on the title sheet and Jimprovements will be included in the improvement plans. "he City Attorney advised than the matter of the driveway easements to the lots on Skyline Boulevard will be resolved with legal representatives of the developer, Following a review of the map and there being no corments heard, pro or cony, a motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli approved the Final Map of Mills Estate No. ZS and recommended its acceptance by the City Council Motion seconded by Commissioner Norberg and declared carried unanimously on roll call vote. 6. TENTATIVE: MAP - El Quanito Acres No. 3. Upon advice from the City Planner that there has been a transfer of title in the above -described property and the new owner wishes to dis- cuss his plans with the Commission and requests an opportunity to be heard at a future meeting, the matter was declared continued to the regular meeting in January, 1964. 7., VARIANCE o Lauder Bros. Multi -Family dwelling in R-I District. S6—Arind—e T2oado The application of Lauder Bros, for a variance to cons' fnuct' an apart. - gent building on first residential property, scheduled for F<nAring on this date, was continued to the regular -meeting or January , r , 1964, to permit the applicants to appear at the study meeting or .ea.-,urxy 6./3 will a representative set of plans and erevar:-ons. -6- 9. gROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE: CODE: Regulations For R-3A District. A public hearing continued to Ordinance Code to provide for meeting of January 27, 19640 NEW BUSINESS this date on a proposed amendment to the R-3A District was continued to the to permit attendance of a full Commission. I..A._R. Carpenter Variance A21!Iication (referral from City Council]. The City _Planner, in reply to Chairman Brauner's request to review circumstances pertinent to the subject, advised that the application for a variance which came to the Commission to permit apartment con- struction with certain setback and parking variations and inclusion of an R-1 lot, upon which the Commission voted favorably, was appealed to the City Council by a property owner within the area of notice. When the drawings were checked by the Building and Fire Departments, a number of changes were required so that the present plan is not that approved by the Commission. The building has,been reduced in size; variances for setbacks and parking have been eliminated; the only variance remaining is for the use of the R-1 property. The City Council requests the Commission -to review the proposal and submit its report. The City Planner explained further that when Mr. Carpenter appeared before the City Council a suggestion was made that some consideration be given to the widening of Willow Avenue at:: the! intersection of E1 Camino Real to provide a holding lane for cars; entering the highway. Chairman Brauner recognized Mr. Carpenter who stated that when the City Council suggested widening of the street a comparison was made with a -similar improvement on Burlingame Avenue and E1 Camino in connection with a new apartment construction at that location. Mr. Carpenter maintained that construction of a holding lane on Willow Avenue would not solve the problem of entry to the highway. It was his contention that two large eucalyptus trees on. the north and south sides of the intersection interfere with visibility and are contributing factors to the hazardous conditions of access to the El Camino, 1r. Carpenter rientionoc that he has received cost figures from the r _ ..__ a 0-AItc+71_ and the Pacific Telephone Company to a total amount of $5100.00 to remove and relocate an existing utility pole in the planting strip on the Willow Avenue frontage. fie stated that to widen the street would cost possibly an additional $1000.000 and it would be economically unfeasible for the project to assume these added costs. Commissioners reviewed the plans agreed that the traffic situation dangerous and some consideration hazards. -7- submitted by Mr. Carpenter and at the intersection is extremely should be given to eliminating the A motion was thereupon introduced by Commissioner Norberg approving the present plan, including use of the R-1 lot, but due to the cost of moving the pole and the matter of the eucalyptus trees a recommendation would not be made on the street widening. Motion seconded by Commissioner Moore and carried unanimously,, ADJOURNMENT The meeting was xegalarly adjourned at 10 35 pou. Respectfully submitted, Edward A. Moore, Secretary o O o