Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1965.11.22CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION COMP-IISSIONERS PRESENT Brauner Cistulli Edwards Kindig Norberg Pierce CALL TO ORDER November 22, 1965 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT None City Attorney Karmel City Planner Hann City Engineer Marr Councilman Diederichs A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called to order at 8:00 p.m., on the above date o Chairman Kindig presiding. ROLL CALL The Secretary's roll call recorded all members present. The minutes of the regular meeting of October 2S and the study meeting of November 8, 1965, previously submitted to members, were approved and adopted. COH'MUN I CAT IONS 1. Palo Corporation Requesting One Year Extension Of Variances (continued) A letter dated November 9, 1965, from Barry Lehrfeld, Burlingame Realty Company, agents for The Palo Corporation, requested a one year extension from the expiration date, December 8, 1965, to exercise the variance granted for an apartment building at the northwiast corner of Bellevue Avenue and Primrose Road, The City Planner recalled that the variance was granted approximately one year ago to a particular set of plans but the project was never started due to internal financing problems. fie stated that when Mr. Lehrfeld broached the question of an extension he was told it would have to be on the basis of the approved plan with no changes,, The City Planner reported further that one building remaining on the property is in rather bad repair and of concern to the city's building department. Upon determination by,the Chair that neither Mr. Lehrfeld nor John Calwell City Building Inspector, were in attendance, the subject was held for consideration later in the meeting. 'kV }iEA� R_ INGS 1. Application of Oscar F. Person to Resubdivide Acreace Withdrawn. A resubdivision map of acreage at Broadway and Bayshore Boulevard (service road), owned by Oscar F. Person, was reviewed at the study meet- ing and scheduled for public hearing at this time. In reply to the Chair's request for comment, the City Engineer reported there are problems pertaining to service easements not yet resolved; also, the owner has not furnished a title report on the 20 foot roadway, which was requested at the study meeting. Chairman Kindig recognized Mr. Person who requested permission to with- draw without prejudice, explaining that the map was Prepared to establish a site for a car wash facility, the subject of one of the applications before the Commission on this date, but since the persons involved have decided not to proceed there is no reason to disturb existing property boundaries at this time. In reply to the Chair's inquiry, there were no comments from the audience. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli and seconded by Com- missioner Brauner the request to withdraw without prejudice was unani- mously approved. 2. Special Permit Application For Coin Operated Car Wash Withdrawn. An application for a special permit to operate a "coin car wash" on a portion of acreage owned by Oscar F. Person at Broadway and Bayshore Boulevard, was scheduled for public hearing at this time. A letter dated November 17, 1965, from the applicant, T.C. Strain, Santa Cruz, California, was read requesting, permission to withdraw "due to existing circumstances". Hembers of. the Commission indicating agreement, and there being no com- ments in opposition from the audience, Chairman Kindig declared the application withdrawn. 3. Re -subdivision Lot_23. Kenmar Terrace Approved. A resubdivision map proposing to divide Lot 23, Kenmar Terrace, into three lots, prepared by Louis A. Arata, Civil Engineer, for the owner, Paul Constantino, reviewed at the study meeting, was scheduled for pubes lic hearing on this date. Chairman Kindig recognized Mr. Arata who described the property as follows: an existing large lot, slightly in excess of five acres, located in the center portion of Kenmar Terrace Subdivision with access at two separate locations to Summit Drive; at the upper level, a 30 foot road will give street frontage to two of the proposed lots, the third lot containing within its boundaries a driveway 50 feet wide and several hundred feet long to Summit Drive, adjacent to Hoover School. -2- In reply to Chairman Kindig, Air. Arata confirmed that the areas shown for ingress and egress are actually contained within the property, with owner- ship in fee. The City Engineer referred to a four inch water maiTi and a fire hydrant designated on the map to serve Lots 23-A and B and, on I.ot 23-C, another four inch water main with hydrant to be installed at: the street end, which satisfies the requests of the fire department. The City Engineer reported that the fire department is asking also, in the area of the proposed 30 foot road, that at least 20 feet be cleared for fire equipment. lie explained -that when the property is developed the road will not be dedicated for public use but remain privately owned with responsibility for maintenance in the owners of Lots 23-A and B. He expressed the opinion that as a matter of safety and convenience an "ail - year, all-weather" road would be installed, but,in the meantime, there should be some clean-up as requested by the fire department. Mr. Arata questioned the urgency for fire equipment access at this time, pointing out that conditions of the property from a fire protection stand- point will not change. He explained that ultimately,when there is a dwelling.a finished road of some type will be constructed. INTERMISSION Upon determination by the Chair that a group in the audience were interested, a recess was declared at 8:25 p.m. for public review of the map. CALL TO ORDER The meeting reconvened at 8:45 p.m. The City Planner, in reply to Chairman Kindig, reported that Lots 23-A and 23-C are legal lots; 23-8 does not conform in that portion which touches the street where there is 15 rather than 50 feet of frontage. lie stated that in all other respects the subdivision is legally correct. Replying to questioning by the Chair concerning a potential traffic hazard in the 1S feet of entrance to Lot 23-B from Summit Drive, the City Planner stated that 15 feet is ample; usually, a driveway measures 10 to 12 feet. Stating it is his understanding that the developer intends cross ingress and egress easements to the two properties, the City► Planner reported dis- cussing the matter with the City Attorney and it was his opinion the city need not be made an owner of the easement in this instance. The Chair recognized Dr. W.H. Lambert, 2660 Summit Drive, owner of Lot 19, Kenmar Terrace Subdivision. who stated that the driveway to his garage lies within the area of the proposed road, a condition existing at the time he purchased the property and now creating a situation whereby he may be without legal entry to his garage. Dr. Lambert requested information concerning grading of the road explaining that the former owner from whom he purchased built out somewhat into the area; also, there are fruit trees planted there. -3- -Or. Lambert was advised by the Commission that he must negotiate with the owner of the land on which the driveway is located; the city has no juris- diction in the matter. Air, Arata, in reply to Chairman Kindig, stated there will not be excessive grading in the road site nor encroachment on the adjoining property. fie stated that he is not aware of trees on the property described by Dr. Lambert, The City Engineer, in reply to comments from the audience, stated that inasmuch as this will not be a dedicated street but privately owned, the engineering data need not necessarily come to the city for approval; how- ever, no owner has the right to excavate nor grade to cause another owner damage. The City Attorney commented that when the access road is cut the owner of the property on which it is cut owes a duty of lateral support to the adjoining land. Air. II. Hahn, 16 Kenmar Terrace, speaking in opposition to the resubdivision, requested the Commission to delay its action to permit owners in the area to study the proposal further. In reply to an inquiry from Mrs, J.J. Zucca, 2628 Summit Drive, owner of ',ot 20, Kenmar Terrace Subdivision, concerning maintenance of the road, ,he City Engineer repeated that since it is a part of the lot, the city has no legal requirements for type of paving or maintenance. There were no further comments from the floor. A motion was introduced by Commissioner Cistulli approving the resubdivision into three lots as shown on the map conditional upon installation of fire hydrants and water mains within one year from date, in accordance wit 11 t map; also, installation of some type of pavement,/Z�i esit in width, to either Lot 23-A or 23-B at the time a building permit issues. Motion seconded by Commissioner Norberg and carried unanimously on roll call. The City Engineer reported that final approval of the map, requiring the Commission's and his signatures,will be withheld until the installations are completed. 4. Sign Variance Granted Ramada Inns,,, Inc A letter dated November 1, 1965, from Ramada Inns, Inc., signed by Mr. Lee Larson, requested a variance to install their regulation advertising - identification sign, 10 feet by 40 feet, and used only during construction, at the Burlingame site on the northeasterly line of Bayshore Highway. The letter stated the sign will be removed upon completion of construction or thirty days prior. plot plan, sign detail and photographs of the proposed sign were filed. Chairman Kindig recognized Mr. Joseph Brown of National Advertising Company, sign manufacturers, and representing the applicant, who reported that the sign will be free-standing, not lighted, mounted ten feet above the ground, to a gross height not exceeding 20 feet. -4- �he City Planner stated that a variance is required because site signs permitted by code are limited to 4x8 or 32 square feet. In reply to Commissioner Norberg's comments that the detail indicated the sign may not withstand wind pressure at the location, the Building Inspector reported that prior to issuing a permit, engineering calculations are verified in his office. In reply to the Chair's inquiry, there were no comments fron the audience. A motion introduced by Commissioner Norberg approving a variance for the sign in accordance with the drawing and the applicant's letter of November 1, 196S, and engineering specifications subject to building department approval, was seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and declared carrie4 unanimously on roll call. Chairman Kindig informed Air. Brown that approval of the construction site sign carries no implication of approval of the "regulation electric sign" mentioned in the applicant's letter of November 1, 1965. S. Special Permit granted Birch Van and Storage Company. An application filed by Birch Van and Storage Company, John Relie, owner, LOSS Holly Street, San Carlos, requested a special permit to ol.er4.te %from a new concrete warehouse and office building at 859 Cowan 2oai, )Burlingame, East Millsdale Industrial Park. A letter from the applicant dated November 1, 196S, reported that the business has been located in San Carlos since 1949 as agents for l'orth American Van Lines and in general transfer and storage; since 19S6, a sales office has been maintained in the City of Burlingame: at 146S Burlingame Avenue. The letter stated that at the request of the Public Utilities Commiss'on and North American Van Lines the sales office will be discontinued to tie replaced by a fully staffed and equipped operation in the industrial aiea. A photograph of a portion of the building on Cowan Road and a site plan were filed. In reply to an inquiry from Commissioner Pierce, the: City Planner stated that the warehousing use is legal in the industrial area - the trucking phase requires approval of a use permit. Chairman Kindig, stating that he visited the property, questioned Mr. R;he concerning on -site parking, particularly in the area where freight will be handled in and out of the warehouse. A1r. Rehe reported that with the exception of an occasional truck which iiay be stopped for several hours, all other parking in the area will be on a temporary basis; he stated that there are designated parking spaces for his equipment.at the rear of the property. In reply to Commissioners' comments concerning a "trash yard" indicated -in the drawing at the rear of the property and the small area which has bees prepared for planting, Mr. Rehe stated it is his understanding the building _S_ is not completed; he mentioned he is not the owner but is leasing; just the .,lrear one-half. she City Planner reported that while parking will not be easy, the building does meet code requirements. In reply to Commissioner Brauner, the building Inspector confirmed that building construction meets all fire requirements. There were no comments from the audience. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Pierce, seconded by Commissioner Edwards and unanimously carried, the special permit application was approved in accordance with the applicant's letter of November 1, 1965. 6. Variance Approved to Reconstruct Dwelling on City -Owned Lot. A request for variance in the name of the City of Burlingame, as applicant, recited as follows: "To remove portion of existing dwelling, reconstruct on remainder lot of less than required size; construct to less than required side set backs"; property located at 1035 Morrell Avenue, portion of Lot 10, Block 1, Burlingame Villa Park Subdivision. Zone R-1. A site plan and plans of the proposed reconstruction were filed. The City Engineer, in reply to Chairman Kindig, advised that the city con- templates improving Carolan Avenue from Larkspur to Oak Grove Avenue within the coming year; there are four city -owned houses, all rented to tenants, which will be affected, including the property which is the subject of the present application. Ile stated that a portion of the building can be reconstructed and the city proposes to sell the remaining area of the land not needed for street improvements to the present occupant, Mr. John Calwell. Variances involved were quoted -as follows: Lot area less than 5000 square feet; set back on Carolan Avenue, S instead of 7-1/2 feet; on the opposite side, 3 instead -of 4 feet; less than required lot width. The City Engineer stated that if the variance were not approved, the city would be forced to raze the entire .building. The City Planner noted that by reason of the city's action in removing a substantial portion of the lot for municipal purposes, the remainder por- tion becomes less than a legal lot, which in itself would be a proper subject for a variance. lie mentioned that there are two alternate pro- cedures: remove the building and attempt to sell the remainder lot or, as Air. Calwell suggests, remodel the building by removing one entire wall and reconstruct. The City Planner stated also that the set back on the opposite side from Carolan is presently three feet, which will remain when reconstruction is completed, instead of the required four feet; the rear yard meets code requirements. In reply to Commissioner Brauner•s inquiry whether of'hPr dwellings will be similarly affected and whether there is an area for precedent in the present application, the City Engineer replied in the negative, explaining that of the four homes within the street right- of-way, three will be removed or demolished. -6- The City Planner stated that a number of were explored. There is insufficient area for a large recreational area or any sizeable Mivic use; if reserved as open space, the city would be responsible for aintenance, or if the building were demolished certainly some type of residential structure could be built to accommodate to the available space. There were no comments from the audience, in response to the Chair's inquiry. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Brauner, seconded by Commissioner Cistulli, variances requisite to reconstruction of the existing dwelling at 1035 Morrell Avenue, in accordance with the plans submitted, were unanimously approved on roll call. NEW BUSINESS 1. Christmas Tree Lot, Dwight and Peninsula Avenue A letter dated November 15, 1965, was read from Mr. Cary At. King, Portland, Oregon, requesting approval of the use of a lot at Peninsula Avenue and Dwight Road for the sale of Christmas Trees under the same conditions approved by the Commission in November, 1964, for the same location. A memo from the City Planner to the Commission dated November 17, 1965, reported that at the meeting of November 15, the City Council agreed to allow the temporary use but referred the matter to the Planning Commission to define conditions. ,Included in the Planner's communication were the following conditions, ,attached to the permit in 1964: 1. All lights to he turned off at 11:00 p.m. 2. Property to be cleared immediately and :lot cleaned when the operation is completed. 3. The temporary nature of the use does not set a precedent for future use or zoning of the property. In addition, two conditions offered at the City Council meeting were noted: Councilman Diederichsen requested installation of a chemical toilet; the Building Inspector suggested a cash deposit of $25.00 with the city to insure the clean-up, deposit to be returned when the lot is cleaned. Upon recognition by the Chair, - the applicant's representative, Mr. Schaefer, stated that he was authorized to accept conditions imposed by the Commission. Chairman Kindig initiated a brief discussion concerning, the chemical toilet, during which members of the Commission commented pro and con. Councilman Diederichsen, in response to the Chair, related his reasons for the request. There was a period of discussion concerning the cash deposit. Members of the Commission who patronized the lot in 1964 commented favorably and it was the consensus that the deposit be waived. A motion was introduced by Commissioner Edwards, seconded by Commissioner Cistulli approving the proposed use, subject to the identical conditions stipulated in 1964, and the installation of a chemical toilet. Motion carried unanimously on roll call. -7- COWHINICATIONS (cont.) )Palo Corporation Request For Variance Extension. The communication from Harry N1. Lehrfeld for an extension of the variance granted to Palo Corporation for apartment construction to December 8, 1966, continued from earlier in the meeting,, was introduced by Chairman Kindig. The City Planner, in response to the Chair, reported that the Building Inspector is concerned about the one remaining building on the property which is falling into disrepair; if an extension of one year is granted, the situation may worsen. tie suggested that there should ,be some explanation from Mr. Lehrfeld of the owners' plans for the property, or at least the building. Chairman Kindig recalled that the variance was for :high-rise apartment construction to a particular applicant and an approved set of plans, thereby restricting development of the property. Ile noted that the present owners may benefit financially by transferring the -property prior to expiration of the variance but questioned the position of a new owner bound by the terms of a variance granted to another. The City Planner advised that if the property were sold it would be legally impossible to change the terms of the variance to permit a different building, because of the procedure of public hearings; persons who saw the original plans might be completely dissatisfied with any revisions. Commissioner Norberg agreed with the Chair's comments , pointing out that the present owners will enjoy a decided advantage in offering the property for sale when there is a valid permit for high-rise construction; however, in accordance with the Commission's established policy, the extension of the variance would preclude any but the approved building plan. City Building Inspector John Calwell reported that the building on the property has created several rather serious health and safety hazards which have been discussed with Mr. Lehrfeld on several occasions. Ile stated that it is his understanding the owners are reluctant to invest in repair work since the building is to be demolished. Commissioners agreed that the subject should be Pursued with Mr. Lehrfeld and on a motion introduced by Commissioner Norberg, seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and unanimously carried the matter was continued to the meeting of December 13. CHAIRMAN REPORTS Chairman Kindig reported his attendance at the recent general meeting of the San Mateo County Regional Planning Committee where fir. Lars Anderson, Assistant Planning Director, San ?Mateo County, spoke of the countywide interest and participation by lay people in varied planning studies and committees and the continuing efforts throughout the county directed toward mutual planning problems. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m., to Monday, December 13, 19659 at 8:00 p.m. 08- Respectfully submitted, John J. Brauner, Secretary lfe-� �t�a.-e�.�-c�, _ —�`-cam------------- ----------- - -------------- __-��%Cj. - \ -- - - - - _ -_ _ _ -----