Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1963.03.25CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION March 25, 1963 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Brauner Moore City Attorney Karmel ci.stuili City Planner Mann Edwards City Engineer Marr Kindig Norbert, Stivers CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called to order on the above date at 8:00 p.m., Chairman Kindig presiding. ROLL CALL In the absence of Commission Secretary, Edward Moore, Commissioner Cistulli was appointed Secretary pro-tem. The above named Commissioners answered the Secretary's roll call. Commissioner Moore, absent from the city on business, was excused. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting of February 25, the adjourned regular meeting and study meeting of March 11, 1963, previously submitted to Commissioners, were approved and adopted. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. VARIANCE - Burlingame Shore LanJ Company - Apartment Complex, Bayshore Boulevard. (continued from meeting of February 25, 1963.) Upon advice from the City Planner that the application for land reclassi- fication in connection with the Burlingame Shore Land Company proposed apartment house complex has not been heard by the City Council, the appli- cation for variances, on file with the Planning Commission, was continued to the meeting of April 22, 1963, on a motion introduced by Commissioner Edwards, seconded by Commissioner Norberg and unanimously carried on vote of members present. 2. RESUBDIVISION - Lot 1 and portion Lots 2 and 3, Block 36, Easton Addition No. 2. (Bernal Avenue & Easton Drive). A resubdivision map of the above -described property, prepared by Wilsey, Ham and Blair, Civil Engineers, reviewed at the last study meeting, was scheduled for formal consideration at this time. Mr. Clyde Cabrinha, engineer representing the owner,/applicant H. V. Burton, explained that the property consisting of two lots .and a small triangular portion of a third lot, fronts Easton Drive. The resubdivision proposes to delete the existing lot line, and establish a new line running north and south, causing both proposed lots to front Bernal Avenue. - 1 - In reply to an inquiry from the Chair concerning applicable lot area requirements, the City Planner advised that the legal minimum is '5000 square feet. Each of the proposed lots is well over the minimum. The Chair invited comments from the floor. Mrs. Marguerite C. Sanchez, resident/owner, 2013 Easton Drive, inquired concerning a second building on the property used for rental purposes. Mr. Wilson Dills, speaking in behalf of the applicant, advised that he is a member of the family and occupies the main house. The building referred to consists of a sleeping room, bath_joom, but no cooking facilities, and has been occupied by the same tenant for the past fourteen years. Mr. Dills stated that if the resubdivision is approved, a new residence will be built on the corner lot, a new carport built to serve the existing house, the small building vacated and reverted to the original use as an accessory to the garden and patio. The City Planner noted that the applicant proposes to change the property frontage from Easton to Bernal Avenue. From this standpoint, it is a good plan since all of the remaining properties on the street face Bernal. In further comment,,the City Planner mentioned conditions to be resolved and suggested to the Commission a time limitation for construction of a garage or carport for the existing dwelling and discontinuance of the rental use of the accessory building. It was pointed out that situations similar in nature have been matters of concern to the City Engineer in prior resubdivisions causing maps to remain unsigned until all of the legal requirements have been met. Chairman Kindig recognized Mr. Dills who advised that the old carport will be removed immediately to be replaced by a carport adequate for two to three cars in the rear yard where trdx-eis more than sufficient area. Mr. Dills stated that the rental use will cease by July 1, 1963. The City Engineer mentioned water and sewer services for the additional lot to be installed at the owner's expense. The City Engineer explained further that the resubdivision will not be consummated until the carport is built and recommended conditional approval at this time. A motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli and seconded by Commissioner Edwards approved the resubdivision map on file with the City Engineer conditional upon total abandonment of the rental use in the accessory building by July 1, 1963; construction of a carport or garage with proper street access -to serve the existing residence -within six months from the present date. Motion carried unanimously on roll call vote of members present. The applicant was instructed to notify the City Engineer immediately that the conditions are met to permit the resubdivision map to be returned to the Commission for final signatures. 2 3. SIGN VARIANCE - California Teachers Association. letter dated March 11, 1963, from the California Teachers Association requested permission to place a sign 4 feet by 8 feet on the lawn of the property at 1705 Murchison Drive for a period of six months to announce the centennial year of the association. Chairman Kindig recognized Walter Maxwell, Assistant Executive Secretary, representing the applicant, who displayed two architectural drawings a perspective of the sign and the main building; a sketch indicating location. Mr. Maxwell referred to the communication of March 11 proposing that the bottom of the sign be four feet above ground and advised that the architects have recommended one foot to blend with -the background of the building and the lawn. The City Planner explained that the zoning is C-3 (Professional Business) where sign limitations prohibit all but identification signs. A variance is required to permit the proposed sign. There being no protests recorded oral or written, a motion was introduced by Commissioner Cistulli to permit placement of a 4 foot by 8 foot sign on the property at 1705 Murchison Drive, for a period of six months, announcing the centennial year of the association; the bottom of the sign to be one foot above ground level; location to be in accordance with the drawing submitted by the applicant, said drawing to be filed in the Office of the Building Inspector. Motion seconded by Commissioner Brauner and carried unanimously on roll call vote of members present. The applicant was advised that the variance shall become effective April 2, provided there is no appeal. The hearing was thereafter declared concluded. 4. SPECIAL PERMIT - Doane Minto Ford Sales. used Car Sales Lot. An application filed by Doane Minto Ford Sales requested a special permit to operate a used car sales lot at 90 California Drive. The City Planner advised that the zoning is C-2 (Service Business) the use legal with a permit from the Planning Commission. Mr. James Minto, the applicant, was in attendance and upon recognition by the Chair advised that the area is actually an extension of an existing sales lot immediately adjacent. Mr. Minto described a cyclone fence to be constructed at the rear, and paving to city specifications. There being no protests recorded oral or by Commissioner Edwards and seconded by the permit as requested. Motion carried members present. 3- written, a motion introduced Commissioner Cistulli approved unanimously on roll call of 5. VARIANCE - Eugene C. Signarowitz. Gasoline Service Station. An application filed by Eugene C. Signarowitz requested a variance from the Regulations For R-3 Districts (Third Residential) to permit a gasoline service station to be operated at the northwest corner of Peninsula Avenue and Dwight Road. (Lots 1mA and 2. Block 31, Lyon & Hoag Subdivision). The -application -form included the information that an old dwelling known as 504 Peninsula Avenue occupies Lot 1=A; Lot 2 (corner) vacant. A letter dated February 15, 1963, from the applicant stated that the property has frontage on Peninsula Avenue, an important and heavily traveled street; and on Dwight Road, an important link between the Freeway and the San Mateo FidstamBay Meadows area. The communication stated further that the station will be attractive and clean v designed to use the latest in construction and lighting. By reason of the design, a service station would contribute to the safety of the intersection, giving an unobstructed view of traffic approaching from both streets. A letter dated March 18, 1963, from Gordon Brown, 118 Myrtle Road, favored the application. A petition in protest filed by 31 property owners was acknowledged. A statement from Mrs. Mary A. Viano, owner of property at the north- easterly corner of the intersection (across Dwight Road from the subject property) claimed preference for her property for a service station on the basis of continuing attempts during the past seven years to secure the necessary permit from the cityo Chairman Kindig recognized Cyrus J. McMillan, attorney representing the applicant. Mr. McMillan submitted the following to support his client's request: The location is on a main street or artery at an arterial stop intersection; the use directly across Peninsula Avenue is apartment and secondary commercial (small retail shops); the College of San Mateo property, catty -cornered from the site, is re- ported as a future apartment/commercial development. The property has a frontage of 104 feet on Peninsula by 100 feet on Dwight Road affording ample open space for landscaping and a buffer area between the station and the adjacent triplex property on Dwight Road. Mr. McMillan stated that there will be no major repair work; no wash rack, nor rental parking. The sign will be reduced to a minimum. The lessee oil company recognizes that the Commission has authority to stipulate conditions of operation. An artist's rendering was submitted to illustrate building design, location on the property and landscaping. A diagram of existing neighborhood uses, prepared by the City Planner, was posted and explained in detail.. Reference was made to Code requirements for service station permits, specifically, "that both sides of the street are in either commercial or industrial district". -4- The; City Planner stated that this is a residential area with the majority of properties in flood condition. Excepting some fairly new apartment construction on Peninsula Avenue and the triplex dwelling, permitted by variance, which adjoins the subject: property, the use is single-family residences. Mr. Alfred Lawson, owner/resident of the triplex: dwelling at 19 Dwight Road, expressed strong opposition to the variance, claiming that the activities incidental to a service station operation will rove injurious to his income rim atsy b detracting from the rental P 3 P.-..�., r Y g value of the units. Mr. Hugh Smith, representing the Viano family, stated that his clients originally -approached the city in 19SS through legal representation to discuss service station use of their p3operry. They are of the opinion that they are entitled to first consideration in any commercial development in the area. The following persons were heard protesting that a service station will detract from the residential character of the neighborhood and prove injurious to neighboring properties: C.Y. Elmgreen, 16 Dwight; M. Vial, 508 Peninsula Avenue, immediately adjacent to the subject property; Edwin S. Coakley, owner of property at 408 Peninsula Avenue; Eva E. Fink, 404 Peninsula Avenue. Mr. McMillan filed a petition with a total of 30 signatures approving the application v 24 signatures representing owners within 500 feet of the subject property. Mr. R.S. Craig, 30 Stanley Road, spoke in favor, noting the commercial district directly across Peninsula Avenue in San Mateo. In reply to an inquiry from the floor, Chairman 1Kindig announced that approximately 24 persons within the 500 foot area have petitioned to approve and 29 to deny. In reply to a statement from Commissioner Brauner that the application does not meet Code requirements for a variance; particularly that of "undue property loss", Mr. McMillan questioned whether or not the property is desirable for apartment house use in view of existing com- mercial uses on Peninsula Avenue in San Mateo; heavy traffic on Peninsula Avenue and Dwight Road and the possibility of a sizeable commercial or apartment development on the College of San Mateo property. The City Engineer, in reply to Commission inquiry, advised that Dwight Road is 60 feet right-of-way; 35 feetAiurb to curb. Commissioner Edwards stated that the applicant has failed to prove conditions requisite to a variance grant and thereafter introduced a motion to deny the application. Motion seconded by Commissioner Stivers. On the question, there was considerable discussion concerning the ad- visability of continuing the hearing to permit a study to be made for possible rezoning. It was noted that there are a number of potential situations on the San Mateo side of Peninsula Avenue which could affect the City of Burlingame zoning plan. Upon advice from the City Planner that to complete such a study would take possibly as long as six months, Mr. McMillan stated that the -5- applicant cannot delay beyond 60 days. The above -stated motion "to deny' was there..Rfter carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Brauner, Edwards, Kindig, Stivers NOES: COMMISSIONERS: 01stulli, Norberg ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: Moore The applicant was advised of his right of appeal to the City Council. The hearing was thereafter declared concluded. RECESS A recess was declared at 10:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 10:40 p.m. NEW BUSINESS 1. Park Commission request for landscaping plans to be included on building plans. The regular order of business was interrulted briefly at the request of Park Commissioners A. Woods Giberson and John Fisch, who referred to a communication addressed to the Planning Commission from the Park Commission concerning incorporation of landscaping detail on building plans. Upon advice from Chairman Kindig that this is not properly a matter to be determined by the Planning Commission, the communication was withdrawn. PUBLIC HEARINGS (cont.) 6, VARIANCE - Alfhild J. Blumer. Commercial Use - Third Residential District. An application filed by Alfhild J. Blumer referred to property zoned third residential at E1 Camino Real and Primrose Road, site of a commercial office building permitted under a variance grant several years ago. Lot 1@A, Block 2, Town of Burlingame Subdivision P 100 E1 Camino Real. The application requested permission to redesign the existing building and construct a new two story commercial building; of the same design northerly of the present building. A letter of justification dated February 14, 1963, from Robert L.Clarke, agent for the owner/applicant, and a rough sketch of the property accompanied the application. Mr. Clarke and Mr. Rainey, architect, were in attendance. A plot plan was submitted, including an off-street parking layout. Mr. Clarke advised that the project proposes approximately 7920 square feet of building. Twenty parking spaces will be provided, slightly in excess of Code requirements. -6- In reply to an inquiry from the floor concerning, the status of the property and the recently formed Burlingame Avenue Area Off -Street Parking District, the City Planner advised that the lot is not within the boundaries of the District. The owners must supply their own parking. Reference was made to the parking plan and there was some discussion concerning realinement of approximately five parking spaces, which Mr. Rainey agreed to consider. The City Planner, in reply to the Chair, advised that the lot is difficult to develop because of the irregular shape. If properly treated, the existing building can be improved through redesign and there is sufficient area for the proposed new building. The City Planner suggested, should the Commission so decide, that the application be approved conditionally, subject to review of architectural plans. Following discussion with Mr. Clarke concerning •the project and in- dication of his willingness to return with detailed plans, a motion was introduced by Commissioner Norberg, seconded by Commissioner Cistulli tentatively approving the variance as requested, subject to submission at the meeting of April 22, 1963, of completed sketches showing architectural improvements for the existing building and proposed elevations for the new building. Motion unanimously carried on roll call vote of members present. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was regularly adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Frank Cistulli Secretary - Pro Tempore -7-