Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1965.05.24CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS PRESENT B.rauner Cistulli Edwards Kindig Norberg Pierce Stivers CALL TO ORDER "!ay 24, 1965 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT. OTHERS PRESENT None City Attorney Karmel City Planner Mann City Engineer fiarr 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 The Secretary's roll call recorded all members present. MINUTES Minutes of the regular meeting of April 26 and the study meeting of May 10, 1965, previously submitted to members, were approved and adopted. MAPS 1, RESUBDIVISION OF LOT S, EL QUANITO ACRES NOo_2. (Approved) A resubdivision map of Lot S, E1 Quanito Acres No. 2 Subdivision, located at Canyon Road and E1 Prado Drive, prepared by Louis A. Arata, Civil Engineer,for the owner, Allean Dacus, was reviewed at the study meeting and scheduled for Commission action at this time. Air. Arata, upon recognition by Chairman Kindig, stated that the resubdivision will divide the property into two lots; the one lot will have an area of 13,071 square feet, the other, an area of 30,736 square feet. He pointed out that both lots will have street access over a 20 foot ingress and egress easement from El Prado Drive, the easement situated within the boundaries of Lot 5 and held mutually by the City of Burlingame and the owners of Lots 5 and 6. In reply to Chairman Kindig, the City Engineer indicated his approval of the map, stating that it was a better plan for the property than in two previous proposals. In reply to Commissioner Brauner, the City Engineer confirmed that water and sanitary sewer installations will create no specific problems. Chairman Kindig invited comments from the floor. Mr. Walter Lerner, 2736 El Prado Road, informed the Commission that he is the owner of Lot 4, adjacent to the subject property, that the existing paved driveway is the only means of ingress and egress for 1 his garage and that he is primarily concerned that the proposed resubdivision and the resultant improvements of the lots will not render the driveway unuseable for his purposes. The City Planner recalled that at the time of a prior hearing Mr. Lerner was alerted to the fact that the driveway is not within his property, that it is his, not the city's, responsibility to take the necessary measures to insure his rights by legalizing his entry. The City Planner noted that this is the third request to divide the property and, without a doubt, is the most acceptable. Mr. Lerner stated that he will consult with his attorney since, apparently, the subdivider did not pursue his declared intention of creating an easement for the purposes of a driveway to the property. Air. Lerner requested and was granted permission to review the map. Chairman Kindig recognized Mr. William Murray of If. Kent Atwater, Real Estate, representing the owner of Lot S. who stated that the plans for the property will not in any jeopardize Air. Lerner's entry to his garage. The City Attorney, in reply to the Chair, stated that it is his recollection from previous hearings that there is a driveway used by Air. Lerner which is partially, if not wholly, on another's property; the city does have an easement but not a public Easement, nor where the driveway is; it is a recorded easement but not carved out on the land. The City Attorney stated that there was never a private ease- ment to ;sir. Lerner. There were no further comments in favor of, nor protesting, the appli- cation. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Com- missioner Pierce and unanimously carried on roll call the resubdivision of Lot S, E1 Quanito Acres Subdivision No. 2 was approved in accordance with the map filed with the City Engineer. 2. RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 2.3,27928 BLOCK 44, MILLS ESTATE NO. 23. (Approved) A resubdivision map of the above -described properties, filed with the City Engineer by George S. Nolte, Consulting Civil Engineers, Inc., was reviewed at the study meeting and scheduled for Commission action at this time. Mr. James Roemer was in attendance representing Eichler Homes, Inc., the original subdividers, and the owners named on the,: -map. Air. Roemer informed the Commission that when the land was graded there were some banks which were cut improperly, resulting in flat areas or pads on the wrong lots. Referring to the map before the Commission, Fir. Roemer stated that by shifting the rear lot lines as indicated the additional pads will -2- be transferred to Lots 2 and 3 at'no cost to the property owners. The City Engineer and the City Planner indicated no comment; there were no comments from the audience favoring or protesting the appli- cation. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli, .seconded by Com- missioner Pierce and unanimously carried on roll call, the resub- division was approved in accordance with the map on file with the City Engineer. 3. RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 8.9,10,19,20, BLOCK 44, MILLS ESTATE NO. 23. (Approved) A resubdivision map of the above -described properties, filed with the City Engineer by George S. Nolte, Consulting Civil Engineers, Inc., was reviewed at the study meeting and scheduled for Commission action at this time. Mr. James Roemer represented Eichler Homes, Inc., the original.sub- dividers, and the owners named on the map. Mr. Roemer stated that the map has been filed at -the request of the individual owners of Lots 8,9,10, for the same purpose as the resub- division just discussed, to realign lot lines to conform to the slopes as they were graded. Mr. Roemer noted that the map proposes two small changes in side lot lines, in addition to shifting the rear line of Lot 10. The City Engineer and City Planner indicated no comment. There were no comments from the audience. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli, :seconded by Com- missioner Pierce and unanimously carried on roll call, the resub- division was approved in accordance with the map filed with the City Engineer. COWWUNICATIONS 1. PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY GRANTED EXTENSION OF SPECIAL PERMIT. A letter dated April 26., 1965, from Pacific Gas and Electric Company, bearing the signature of L.J. Brundige, Division Manager, concerned a Special Permit for an Electric Substation on East Lane between Howard and Burlingame Avenues approved by the Planning Commission in May,1963, and subsequently extended to June 4, 1965, and requested a further extension to June 4, 1966. The City Planner recalled that at the time of the original hearing when the applicant indicated it would be a few years before the substation was actually built, the Commission approved a permit for one year, subject to renewal. Mr. Richard Alves, representing Pacific Gas and Electric Company, stated that construction in 1966 appears to be reasonably certain. -3- In reply to Commissioner Brauner, Mr. Alves stated that the property has been fenced and landscaped according to the Commission's require- ments. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Brauner, :seconded by Com- missioner Cistulli, and unanimously carried the .Special Permit was extended as requested to June 4, 1966. 2. BURLINGAME SCHOOL DISTRICT TO ENLARGE McKINLEY SCHOOL PLAYGROUND. A letter dated May 17, 196S, from the Burlingame School District, signed by George V. White, District Superintendent, reporting that the District will acquire property at 724 Fairfield Road, immediately adjacent to the McKinley School for the purposes of enlarging the school playground area, requested the Planning Commission's approval of the use of the property. The City Planner advised that the State Education Code requires school boards to confer with Planning Commissions where additions to an existing school or new school construction is contemplated. The City Planner stated that removal of the existing residence will square the school property lines and add to the yard area. Mr. Ceorge White informed the Commission that the plan is to acquire the property about the first of July, 196S, and commence improvements after the first of September, when it is expected that the present owner will vacate. There were no comments from the audience. Commissioner Norberg introduced a motion to approve the use, noting that the enlarged playground area surely will prove a desirable addition to the school. Motion seconded by Commissioner Edwards and declared carried unanimously. HEARINGS Pursuant to public notice, hearings were conducted as follows: 1. FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCE GRANTED L.E, BOSTROM, '749 LEXINGTON WAY. Mr. L.E. Bostrom submitted a request for a variance to fence a por- tion of his property at 749 Lexington Way to a height of eight feet. A sketch filed by the applicant of the areas proposed to be fenced showed the property bounded by the Peninsula Tennis Club, an existing public easement and Washington Park. A communication from the applicant dated April 2!), 1965, advised that a swimming pool will be installed on the property. Because of tennis balls constantly dropping into the yard and persons climbing the existing fence to retrieve them, the greater fence height is con- sidered essential to privacy and seclusion at the swimming pool. 4- Chairman Kindig recognized Mr. Bostrom who stated that he proposes to fence approximately 4S feet along the park line and 40 feet at the easement. The City Planner reported that after visiting the property it is his opinion there is good basis for the request inasmuch as Mr.'Bostrom's property adjoins what is practically an entire public area. fie stated that the legal six foot limitation. is rather a hardship where it might not be if there were two private properties adjoining each other. There were no comments from the audience in response to the Chair s inquiry. Replying to Commissioner Brauner's inquiry whether the present appli- cation is for the fence along the easement only, MT. Bostrom requested. a variance for the areas shown on the drawing, explaining that he intends to use cement block to a height of eight feet at the easement and tongue and grooved redwood, or similar material, against the park. Commissioner Cistulli stated that after personally inspecting the situation he felt the valiance was justified and thereafter introduced a motion approving a variance for the fencing eight feet in height described by fir. Bostrom and indicated on the drawing on file. Motion seconded by Commissioner Pierce and approved unanimously on roll call. 2. VARIANCE APPROVED FOR LIVING QUARTERS IN COMMERCIAL BUILDING 1156-S8-60 CAPUCHINO AVENUE. Belle Goldsmith and Marion M. Kaufmann, 1333 Jones Street, San Fran- cisco, requested a variance to allow living quarters on the second story of a commercial building, 1156-58-60 Capuchino Avenue, Lot 27, Block 4, Easton Addition. The application showed improvements existing: "'Two story frame building containing two stores on ground floor with apartment on second floor". A letter dated April 23, 1965, from the applicant stated that the property was acquired in December, 19640 with the idea that it would be used in conjunction with the Wells Fargo Bank building, which is immediately adjacent and owned by the applicants. However, the bank showed no interest; subsequently, when it developed that upstairs oommercial offices were not in demand in the Broadway area, it was decided to remodel the second story and rent as an apartment, since there was evidence that it had been lived in for many years. The communication stated that the city's building department refused to issue a permit for the alterations on the grounds that the build- ing may be used only for commercial purposes. A site plat and a contractor's estimate for improvements to the park- ing lot were filed. The City Planner, in reply to the Chair, reported that the second story was a non -conforming apartment for years but the use had ex- pieed; therefore, it was not possible for the building inspector to issue a permit for the use proposed by the applicants. -5- In reply to an inquiry from Commissioner Pierce, firs. Goldsmith stated that the apartment is vacant. b- In reply to Chairman Kindig's comments concerning off-street parking for the apartment, the City Planner pointed out that the applicants have stated they intend to pave and mark the existing parking lot, which serves the subject property and the bank building. He suggested including these improvements as a condition of the variance and reserving one space for the apartment. fie stated that since the property is in a first fire zone it would be a definite hardship to require a garage building for the apartment; construction would be very costly. The City Engineer suggested,as another condition of the variance, that plans for the parking lot improvements, particularly the drainage, be approved by the City Engineer's office prior to construction. Airs. Goldsmith indicated that the conditions recommended by the Planner and the Engineer were acceptable. There were no comments from the audience favoring or protesting the variance, nor communications filed. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Edwards, seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and unanimously carried on roll call the variance to allow apartment use of the second story of the building at 1156-1158-1160 Capuchino Avenue was granted, subject to approval by the City Engineer of the parking lot improvements, including drainage, prior to construc- tion, also, one parking space to be designated apartment parking. r 3. VARIANCE FOR APARTMENT BUILDING IN R-2 DISTRICT DENIED. 1420 OAK GROVE AVENUE. A variance application was filed by Johann F.K. Hufnagi, 709 Farringdon Lane, for 11R-3 zoning for a 6 or 7 unit apartment building" on property zoned R-2 at 1420 Oak Grove Avenue, Lot 3-Block 10, Burlingame Terrace Subdivision. The application showed improvements existing: "Very old 2 bedroom house". A communication from the applicant dated April 15, 1965, requested favorable consideration of the application: (a) to permit the highest and best use of the land, based on today's market value; (b) new multiple construction on the opposite side of the street, in the exist- ing R-3 zone, has upgraded the area by replacing older buildings; (c) the proposed improvement will be advantageous by increasing the value of the property, thereby reflecting a new and higher tax basis. A pencilled sketch of a two story 7 unit apartment building, with 8 parking spaces was filed. Lot dimensions were shown as 50 feet on Oak Grove Avenue by 130 feet deep. Communications opposing the application were read from Airs. William Duffy, 1495 Oak Crove Avenue and Airs. Ethel Hughes Denley, 1432 Oak Grove Avenue. -6- A drawing of existing uses in the R-2 zone fronting flak Grove Avenue, between Acacia Drive and Farringdon Lane, prepared by the City Planner, showed all single-family residences, with the exception of one duplex dwelling on the corner; the subject property was rated "fair", all others, "good". Chairman Kindig invited comments from the audience. Mr. D.B. Daly, 70S Farringdon Lane, protested the variance, stating that he has lived in his present home for 2S years during which time he has improved the property considerably; the proposed building will be injurious to his home and the quiet enjoyment of the rear yard. Mr. R.W. Booth, 728 Farringdon Lane, commenting that he has lived in the area for 31 years, protested that, if granted, the variance will provide the impetus to other requests for apartment construction in the Burlingame Terrace Subdivision, which is primarily an area of well maintained single-family residences. fie questioned whether there is not ample land within the city already zoned for apartment con- struction without intruding into an established residential district. Replying to Chairman Kindig, the City Engineer nested that at the present time the city is deficient in fire flow water supply in the apartment area, bordering the area under discussion, which includes a six inch water main on Oak Grove Avenue. He stated that studies are under way to upgrade the water flow and brink; some of the mains to flow capacity; the present proposal certainly will not help the water situation. Chairman Kindig invited comments from the applicant. bliss. Marie DeBusk of A.V.R. Realty Company, speaking for thy: applicant, stated that the proposed building will be no higher than tw( stories; therefore, should not interfere with nor disturb the privacy of neigh- boring properties; further, a new modern building, replacing the exist- ing old residence, will be a desirable addition to the neighborhood. Commissioner Brauner noted that the application refers to a "six or seven unit building". Mrs. DeBusk replied that seven units are pre- ferred. Mr. Hufnagl, in reply to Commissioner Cistulli, stated thEt during the three years he has owned the property it has been rented to tenants. He stated that it is now vacant but he intends to sell and has been approached by a buyer interested in building apartments. Commissioner Cistulli introduced a motion to den), the application. Motion seconded by Commissioner Edwards. On the question, Commissioner Brauner referred to the legal conditions requisite to a variance grant, inviting Mr. Hufnagl to comment. Following Mr. Hufnagl's statement that he would not wish to have the property developed in such a way to cause harm or injury to his neilh- burs, the motion to deny the variance was thereafter declared carried unanimously on roll call. The applicant was advised of his right of appeal to the City Council. -7- 4. SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED THE HERTZ CORPORATION CAR RENTAL SERVICE. An application filed by Hertz Rent A Car, 433 Mason Street, San Fran- cisco, requested a permit to operate "a car rental service from Bell Captain's Desk at Myatt House hotel, 1333 Bayshore Highway". A letter from The Hertz Corporation, dated May 4, 1965, signed by James E. Saunders, San Francisco ?Manager, reported:,, The services will be handled from within the Myatt house by the individual bellman from the bell captain's counter; the only display sign is located at the beliman's desk; there are no exterior signs at the location; automobiles are kept in the Hyatt [louse parking area but are serviced by the Hertz maintenance facility at the San Francisco Airport. Mr. George Monds, Assistant Manager of the Hertz Corporation, repre- sented the applicant. The City Planner in reply to Chairman Kindig, recalled that the original permit to the Hyatt House Corporation was for the 'hotel use only and not to be presumed to extend to other types of businesses using the hotel for their activities. He stated that the Hertz Corporation was informed concerning the use permit procedure and, subsequently, filed an application to legalize their operation from the Hyatt House Hotel. The City Planner stated that he finds no objection to the proposed use noting that a car rental service would be a reasonable adjunct where the hotel is oriented to the airport to a large extent. Chairman Kindig recognized Mr. Monds who reported that.the llertz Cor- poration serves Hyatt House in approximately twenty of its locations; in Burlingame, due to the proximity to the Hertz facility at the air- port, it is possible to deliver an automobile, upon request, within ten minutes. He explained that there is a contract drawn between his company and the Hyatt [louse Corporation, but as far as Burlingame is concerned there is a verbal agreement that only four cars will be kept on the hotel grounds. Mr. Monds agreed that on occasion there could be a greater number of cars but checks are made twice daily and any in excess of four are removed to another location. lie stated that more than four cars is considered an overload at Burlingame. In response to inquiries from Commissioners Brauner and Cistulli, Mr. Monds stated that. the cars are parked in the rear of the hotel; Commenting that parking at the hotel has always been a problem because the parking layout was improperly planned from the beginning, the City Planner stated that there is an agreement of record between the city and the Hyatt [louse whereby the entire parking area will be resurfaced and re -marked. In reply to Commissioner Norberg and Chairman Kindig, the City Engineer advised that his office recently approved improvement plans for curbs and gutters on the street frontage of the hotel. He stated that it is his understanding this construction will commence during the summer but to his knowledge there have been no improve- ° go 1 vents to the parking area. Mr. Monds, in reply to Commissioner Brauner, agreed to a limitation of five on the number of cars to be parked on the hotel grounds. There were no comments from the audience. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Brauner, seconded Edwards and carried unanimously on roll call, the Special approved to The Hertz Corporation as requested, providing excess of five cars shall be maintained at the hotel at RECESS The Chair declared a recess at 10:00 p.m, CALL TO ORDER Chairman Kindig called the meeting to order at 10:10 p.m. HEARINGS (continued) by Commissioner Permit was that not in one time. S. AMENDMENT TO MUNICIPAL CODE: TO ADD TIDAL PLAIN (TP) DISTRICT REGULATIONS. Chairman Kindig announced that this was the time and place scheduled to conduct a public hearing forthe purpose of considering an amend- ment to the Municipal Code of the City of Burlingame providing for a new chapter entitled "Tidal Plain (TP) District Regulations". Requested by the Chair to initiate the discussion, the City Planner recalled that the subject was considered at a prior time by the Commission but was dropped from the agenda with no positive action taken due to certain circumstances, which at the time appeared to resolve the matter to the Commissions satisfaction. He stated that subsequently the City Council requested the Commission to hold hear- ings and submit its recommendations. Commissioners having been furnished copies of the proposed ordinance at the regular meeting in April, the City Planner noted one change, suggested by Commissioner Brauner and accepted by members: removal of the phrase "Extraction of chemicals from sea water" under "Per- mitted Uses". Referring to prior discussions in the matter, the City Planner stated that there were differences. of opinion among members of the Commission whether or not the ordinance was essential, some members expressing their opinions that since there are no uses designated for the area, development under any conditions is impossible unless the city issues a use permit. The City Planner stated that it is his opinion the proposed ordinance should be adopted, thereby providing to the Planning Commission and the City Council the criterion for judging what is correct for the tidelands area. The City Planner referred to the stand taken by the Association of -9- Bay Area Governments (ABAG) in support of a moratorium on Bay filling, pointing out that the "Tidal Plain Ordinance" developed when the question was raised by the ABAG attorneys whether controls by the Joint Powers Agreement would extend to privately owned lands; the matter of bay fill became particularly significant to this city with the re- sult the City Council felt there should be some type of local control. The City Planner pointed out furher that the proposed ordinance will not accomplish rezoning but simply provide the guide lines with which to rezone property,if the city so desires. A letter dated May 4, 1965, from Ideal Cement Company, Denver, Colorado, owner of tidelands within the city limits of Burlingame, referred to their letter of January 15, 1965, which was read at the Commission meeting of January 25, 1965, requesting that the proposed ordinance not be enacted at this time. The City Planner quoted from a copy of the Ideal Cement Company communi- cation dated January 15, 1965, as follows: "There is no present need of, or advantage to the City of Burlingame to be obtained by the adoption of the proposed regulations at this time ....... It is our under- standing that the properties of the City and County of San Francisco and of Ideal Cement Company which lie within the city limits of Burlingame are presently "unclassified" as to zoning and that any developments of these properties would first require that a Use Permit be obtained from the City of Burlingame. Thus, the City already has control over the use of these tidelands." Commenting that the Company is correct in its statement that a use permit would be required for any development in the area under exist- ing conditions, the City Planner reiterated his position that,if there were no regulations to guide, theCommission would be forced to search for a basis on which to approve or disapprove an application for use. The Chair invited comments from the audience. Air. Gilbert Rodli, spoke for Ideal Cement Company, confirming the Company's position that the proposed ordinance is unnecessary. Air. Rodli stated that the crux of the problem is "what is the proper use or the future use of the bay land area?". lie proposed that a general plan is the only proper basis upon which a proposal may be evaluated and recommended preparation of such a plan by the city in cooperation with neighboring owners. The City Planner reported that the firm of William Spangle and Associates has been appointed by the City Council to prepare a general plan. In a period of Commission discussion, Commissioner Brauner expressed approval of the proposed regulations, commenting that inasmuch as the entire bay area is involved with widespread public interest, regu- lations for its proper use and development are quite necessary. Chairman Kindig agreed that the ordinance will provide an essential st�-adard to the Commission for controlling the use of the area. -10- Commissioner an ordinance tidelands. Edwards stated that he did not believe the adoption of would materially affect the eventual development of the Commissioner Norberg referred to the land presently being developed along the city's bay front and expressed the opinion that the uses proposed by the ordinance were inconsistent with what has been per- mitted to date, lie questioned the reason for "such definite restric- tions on this additional piece of property", stating that there will be a line of demarcation beyond the present developments. Chairman Kindig recognized Mr. John tleacham, Assistant General Manager for Operations, San Francisco International Airport, who in- formed the Commission that the airport's master plan study is progressing but there is nothing definite to report. He stated that "we are growing and will continue grow and believe in the future we will be before you with a proposal". lie stated that he was present at this time because of the airport's interest in the Com- mission's deliberations and recommendations. There were no further comments heard. The Chair thereupon declared the hearing closed. On a motion introduced by Commissioner Brauner, seconded by Com- missioner Cistulli and unanimously carried on roll call, the City Attorney and City Planner were directed to prepare and submit to the Commission the Findings, Summary and Res lution whereby the Commission shall recommend to the CityuNfftfon of the Tidal Plain (TP) District Regulations. RESOLUTIONS 1. RESOLUTION NO. 2-6S "Recommending The Adoption Of An Ordinance Amen ing The Regulations In M-1 (Light Industrial) Districts" was introduced for passage on motion of Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner Edwards and unanimously carried on roll call. NEW BUSINESS 1. Capital Improvement Budget. Following an announcement from the City Planner that not all of the material is available for Commission consideration, a discussion on the Capital Improvement projects for 1965-66, scheduled for this time, was held for the study meeting, June 14. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was regularly adjourned at 10:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, John J. Brauner Secretary 01-1 -- -- -- -- -. CV.- 4+&49- ----- -- - O" CA, 01 C-.-