Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1963.05.13CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Brauner Cistulli Edwards Kindig Moore Norberg Stive:s CALL TO ORDER May 13, 1963 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT None City Attorney Karmel City Planner Mann City Engineer Mary An adjourned regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission, from April 22, 1963, was called to order on the above date at 8:00 p.m. Chairman Kindig presiding. ROLL CALL The Secretary's roll call recorded all members present. HEARINGS., 1. VARIANCE - Alfhild J. Blumer request for commercial use in third residential district. 100 El Camino Real at Bayswater and Primrose, (Lot IA, Block 2, Town of Burlingame). (continued from April 22,1963). Chairman Kindig announced that the applicant's request for a variance to remodel an existing commercial building and construct a second building on the above -described property was tentatively approved at the meeting of March 25, 1963, subject to the applicant's submittal of a final building design and a revised plot plan with parking layout. Chairman Kindig recognized Robert Clarke, reprepsenting the applicant. A plot plan and an architectural rendering of the proposed construction, presented by Mr. Clarke, were examined and accepted by members of the Commission. A motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner Norberg and unanimously carried on roll call vote approved a variance for the property to be developed according to the building sketch and plot plan on file. The applicant was advised that the variance would become effective May 21, 1963, provided there was no appeal. The hearing was thereafter declared concluded. 2. SPECIAL PERMIT o Victor E. Grover. Day nursery and child care 1 center. 525 California Drive at Floribunda Avenue. (Lot K. Block 5, Burlingame Land Company„ Map No. 2). Chairman Kindig announced that this was the time and place scheduled to conduct a public hearing on an application for a special permit, filed by Victor E. Grover, for Paragon Enterprises, Inc:., to remodel an exist- ing residence at 525 California Drive, for the purposes of a nursery school and child care center. A proposed plot plan and floor plan accompanied the application. A petition in protest, filed by 21 residents and property owners in the immediate area of the subject property, was read and accepted for filing. Upon determination by the Chair that the applicant was not in attendance nor represented, on a motion introduced by Commissioner Edwards, seconded by Commissioner Moore and unanimously carried, the hearing was continued to the meeting of May 27, 1963, the applicant to be notified accordingly by mail. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission at this time, the meeting was regularly adjourned at 8:30 p.m., to be followed by the study meeting regularly scheduled for this date. Respectfully submitted, Edward A. Moore, Secretary -2- CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISS]ON May 13, 1963 CALL TO ORDER A study neeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission, called to order by Chairman Kindig at 8:3S p.m., at the conclusion of an adjourned meeting, was held on the above date, all members in attendance. FOR STUDY 1. RESUBDIVISION - Parcel B. Lot 2, Block 2. Millsdale Industrial Park Unit No. 1 A resubdivisi.on map of the above -described property, prepared by Wilsey, Ham & Blair, for the owners, Adolph Blaich, Inc., proposed to divide the property int570arcels by establishing a new parcel to be designated "E", having an area of 15,000 square feet MoL, with frontage of 70 fret on Rollins Road. Richard Lavenstein of the firm of Ritchie & Ritchie, Industrial Real Estate, advised that the owners occupy the major portion of the property, with the exception of an area at the northerly end which is not used for any purpose and which the owner has decided to sell. A public hearing was scheduled for the meeting of May 27, 1963. 2. RESUBDIVISION - Lots 5 through northerly 1/2 of 10, Block 2. East Millsdale Industrial Park, Unit No. 1. A resubdivision map prepared by Bill S. Ingram, Civil Engineer, for the owners, East Millsdale Investment and Mitten Investment, proposed to divide the above -described properties into two parcels laving frontage on Mitten Road. Robert Ryan, one of the owners, advised that the lots originally were subdivided into 60 foot widths. The present: proposal will delete interior lot lines and combine Lots 8, 9, and northerly 1/2 of 10 into parcel "A", having street frontage of 1S0 feet; the second parcel, "B", consisting of Lots 5, 6, and 7 will have front- age of 180 feet. Following a discussion with Mr. Ryan concerning his plans for developing the properties, Commissioners scheduled the hearing for the meeting of May 27, 1963. 3. RESUBDIVISION - Southerly 1/2 of Lot 10 through Lot 14, Block 2. East Millsdale Industrial Park, Unit No. 1. A resubdivision map prepared by Bill S. Ingram, Qivil Engineer, for the owners, East Millsdale Investment and Mitten Investment, pro- posing to combine all of the above -described properties into one large parcel, having frontage of 310 feet on Mitten Road, was scheduled for public hearing at the meeting of May 27, 1963. 4. RESUBDIVISION - Lands of Haas and Haynie. Easterly of Bayshore Highway. A preliminary drawing of a proposed resubdivision of the lands jointly owned by Texo Realty Company and Haas & Haynie, Inc., easterly of Bayshore Highway, was submitted. The Commission was advised by the Citr Engineer and City_Planner that the` greater portion of1t'WJr8perty is presently -'under water but the owners have decided io"divide-ownership. A ptoperly drawn resubdivision map showing exact dimensions and acreage will be prepared and filed with the City Engineer prior to the time of the public hearing. The property extends from Mills Creek to the Millbrae City limits line; the zoning is industrial. There are no impx3vements and actually very little filled area. The City Engineer stated that street improvements will be necessary in time as the land is filled and some provisions should be made to require this work to be performed by the developer. He advised that the City of San Mateo requires such improvements to be com- pleted prior to issuance of a building permit. In a period of discussion, it was agreed that the resubdivision would be heard at the meeting of May 27, 1963. The matter of regulating installation of street improvements was referred to the City Attorney, the City Engineer and City Planner for study and report at a later date. S. VARIANCE - Gordon R. Strocher. Resubdivision of P;trcel B, Lot 8, Burlingame Manor No. 2,. (La Mesa Drive). An application for a variance submitted by Gordon R. Strocher, IS06 La Mesa Drive, proposed to divide the above -described Parcel B into four new parcels, three of which will not meet lot frontage re- quirements. A map prepared by Howard G. Hickey, Civil Engineer, and a communi- cation from the applicant, dated May 13, 1963, were acknowledged. Mr. Strocher advised that his home is located on Parcel "A'• on the map, with frontage on La:M4psa Drive, but this parcel is not a part of the present application. Parcel B. representing all the remainder of the property, is proposed to be divided into Parcels C,D,E, and F. Parcel C will have street frontage on La Mesa Drive, the remaining three parcels to be served by a private roadway, approximately 450 feet long,, having access on La Mesa Drive, and a turn -around having a radius of 32 feet. The Commission was advised that all of the proposed lots conform to lot size limitations for the area and will provide satisfactory building sites. The City Engineer mentioned matters of public utility installations of concern to his department and advised Mr. Strocher that the map must be revised to include location of drainage easements, water service to each of the four proposed lots, and location of sewer laterals. The City Planner stated that should the application be approved, an agreement will be executed between the city and the property owner to provide .for a.perpetual roadway easement to the lots which do not have, street frontage. A suggestion from the Commission that the roadway be widened from 16 feet to 18 feet was concurred in by Mr. Strocher. In reply to Commission inquiry, the City Engineer advised the 7MI be discussions with the Chief of the Fire Department concerning fire safety requirements. The application was scheduled for public hearing at the meeting of May 27, 1963. 6. RESUBDIVISION - Lots 10 and 11, Block 6. East Millsdale Industrial Park, Unit No. 2. A resubdivision map of the above property, prepared by W.T. Black, Civil Engineer, for the owner, Batton $ Company, proposed to delete the.common lot line between the two lots to create one large parcel having frontage of 175 feet on Mahler Road. The City Planner advised that the map was filed at the request of the city whea it was discovered, in checking the owner's improvement plans, that the building was on one property and the parking on another. The application was scheduled for hearing on May 27, 1963. 7. Trousdale Construction Company request to continue tract office 2500 Trousdale Drive. A letter dated May 2, 1963, was read from Paul W. Trousdale, President Trousdale Construction Company, requesting permission to continue to occupy the dwelling at 2500 Trousdale Drive for the purpose of a tract office for a twelve month period to May 13, 1964, subject to conditions of operation previously stipulated by the Commission. A letter dated May 1, 1963, from Cyrus J. McMillan. attorney, - advised that he is representing clients in opposition to the office use and requested that he be notified of the time that the application for renewal of the permit will be heard. Carl Snyder, representing the applicant, stated that there are possibly 300 parcels to be processed and it was his estimate that the Trousdale people will conclude in the Mills Estate in 1964. -3- For. Snyder, in reply to Commission inquiry, advised that he was not aware of any complaints or objections to the office. The City Planner referred to Code sections providing for the use, subject to approval by the Planning Commission. The matter was referred to the meeting of May 27 for formal considera- tion. 8. Mrs. D. Stematis v Apartment Construction, .1500 Hillside Drive. Rrs. Stematis, owner of a property at 1500 Hillside Drive, asked for an opportunity to be heard. Plans for an apartment building on the lot were commenced in 1962 but were not completed prior to the adoption of Code changes. Many revisions were made in the plans but she now finds that she cannot construct the building in accordance with the revised plans principally because the unit cost is excessive and financing im- possible. It was the opinion of the Commission that it was legally unable to allow Mrs. Stematis to redraw the plans and apply the outstanding building permit to a new proposal. It was suggested that she discuss the matter further with the Building Inspector. 9. VARIANCE - Harry J. Hardy. Duplex dwelling in first residential district. (Lot 21, Block 32, Lyon & Hoag Subdivision). Harry J. Hardy, builder, requested a variance to convert a four bed- room, 2-1/2 bath, single family residence which he owns at 518 Bayswater Avenue to duplex use. Mr. Hardy advised that he is in the process of remodeling for single family purposes but with very little additional work, the building will adapt to a duplex dwelling. Mr. Hardy, stated that he has held up completing the project in the hopes that the proposed use will be approved. Commissioners agreed to visit the property and scheduled a public hearing for the next regular meeting, May 27, 1963. 10. SPECIAL PERMIT v Pacific Gas & Electric Company. Public Utility Electric Substation. East Lane and Myrtle Road, between Burlingame and Howard Avenues. (Lots 3-A, 3-B, 3-C, 3-D, 4-A, 4-B, 5-A, Lot 17, Block 17, Lyon $ Hoag Subdivision) ZONE: C-2. A Special permit application filed by Pacific Gas $ Electric Company requested a permit to construct and maintain a public utility electric substation on the above -described property. A set of drawings - "Preliminary Landscaping" and "Proposed Ultimate Arrangement" - were filed. -4- - . Representatives of the P.G. and E. were in attendance and advised that the properties extend from East Lane through to Myrtle Road, having frontages on both streets. The major portion is vacant land; an existing sheet metal and plumbing contractors yard will be vacated to become a part of the site. The City Planner advised that the use is permitted in the district with a permit from the Commission. Commissioners reviewed landscaping plans and were informed concern- ing placement of high voltage wires and poles. The application was scheduled for public hearing on May 27, 1963. 11. Roy Nelson, Contractor re: Middleton Property, 130 Arundel Road. Wylie E. Middleton, owner of property at 130 Arundel Road, and Mrs. Inez Hagens, real estate saleswoman, were in attendance on behalf of Roy E. Nelson, contractor who has purchased the Middleton property subject to rezoning or variance to permit multiple family construc- tion. Mrs. Hagens advised that Mr. Nelson was in attendance but was unable to regain due to another commitment. The City Planner referred to a variance application filed by Mr. Middleton, requesting apartment use of the property which was heard by the. Commission at a public meeting on Monday. April 22,1963. With the consent of the applicant, the hearing was continued to October 28, 1963, to permit a land use survey of the easterly area of the city to be completed. The City Planner stated that Mr. Nelson has prepared a set of plans for an apartment building and is requesting that the Commission ad- vance the hearing from the October date to the regular meeting to be held this month. In a period of discussion, Commissioners referred to an action taken at the meeting of April 22, 1963, when all persons in attendance were advised that the Middleton application would be heard in October. In consideration of legal ramifications# it was the majority opinion to maintain the originally scheduled continuance date to permit the City Planner to conclude the land use survey, 12. C.B. Hathaway re: Laundry business - 115I Broadway. �_.. C.B. Hathaway, owner of Safeway Cleaners, southwest corner of Chula Vista Avenue and Broadway discussed a variance in connection with a proposed extension of a laundry service operated in conjunction with the dry-cleaning plant. Mr. Hathaway stated that he wishes to build a second story on a por- tion of the building to expand the laundry. The City Planner advised that the zoning is C-1, the dry-cleaning use is legal in the district. However, the laundry requires a C-2 zoning _5_ and the present operation, in existence for some years, is non- conforming. The proposed expansion is not possible without a variance grant. .. Mr. Hathaway was informed concerning procedures for filing the variance application. 13. Pringle Construction Company: Revised Parking Plan -- Office Building. Bayswater Avenue $ El Camino Real. Commissioners reviewed a revised off-street parking layout, prepared in connection with a new office building to be constructed at 1381 Bayswater. Avenue, at E1 Camino Real, for Burlingame Investment Company, and scheduled for formal consideration at the meeting of I<4ay 279 1963. 14. Pringle Construction Company: Exterior Alterations - Apartment Building Burlingame Avenue $ E1 Camino Real. (Southwesterly corner). The City Planner advised that at the request of members of the Com- mission he contacted the owners of the new apartment building at the above location and requested some modifications to be made to the stairwell cap on the roof of the building. A drawing prepared by Mogens Mogensen, architect, proposing charges in the structure was reviewed and approved by Commissioners. The City Planner advised that the owners of the building have requested that they be permitted to make certain changes at the south side of the building] which exposure will be open to public view when the adjacent property becomes a municipal parking lot within the Parking District. The owners wish to build a screen lattice on the property line and re- vise the stairway arrangement. It was the opinion of Commissioners that this is a situation requiring a formal variance application and the City Planner was requested to inform the owners of the property accordingly. 15. Resolution Of Policy On Waterfront Development. A resolution prepared by the City Planner, for transmittal to the City Council, was presented to members of the Commission for comment and editing. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was regularly adjourned at 11:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Edward A. Moore, Secretary -6-