HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1965.04.12CITE' OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Brauner
Cistulli
Edwards
Norberg
Pierce
Stivers
CALL TO ORDER
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
Kindig
Aptil 12, 1965
OTHERS PRESENT
City Attorney Karmen
City Planner Mann
City Engineer Ma.rr
The monthly study meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was
called to order on the above date at 8:00 p.m., Chairman Cistulli
presiding.
ROLL CALL
The above -named members answered the Secretary°s roil calla
Commissioner Kindig, absent due to illness, was excused.
FOR STUDY:
1. SPECIAL PERMIT, Landscape Contractor Yard and Shop., Marsten Road.
Brown and Bottari Company, Landscape Contractors, filed an application
for a special permit to operate a yard and shop in the Easton Industrial
Tract at 1320 Marsten Road,
A site plan was filed and a letter from the applicant dated April 6,1965,
stated that there will be an office building, a repair shop for the
equipment used in the business, and overnight storage of four trucks and
two tractors,
The City Planner mentioned that the property is owned by Fisk_, Firenze
and McLean, Inc., who maintained headquarters there for several years
until moving to San Carlos.
Air, Brown, one of the applicants, reported that there is covered parking
for three of she trucks, one truck will be parked in the open, tie
stated that most of the equipment is kept at the job sines and brought
into the shots for servicing and repairs.
In reply to Commission inquiry, Mr. Brown stated that there will be a
ground cnver of red rock, six inches deep, with oil on top; the site
will be fenced or, all sides, in grapestake or a similar type of
fencing.
In reply to Mr. Brown's comment that the company hopes to purchase the
IT
property eventually, the City Engineer and City Planner mentioned that
l the property actually does not have its own street frontage; there is
access over a private easement to Marsten Road recorded by John If. Dore,
the prior owner, to Fisk and Firenze.
The application was scheduled for public hearing at the regular meeting
of April 26.
2. RECLASSIFICATION: R-1 TO R-3 160S SANCHEZ AVENUE.
An application filed by Mr. L.C. Smith, 46S Concar Drive, San Mateo,
requested reclassification from R-1 (single-family) District to
R-3 (multi -family, third -residential) District of Lot 17, Burlingame
Park Subdivision No. S; property address, 160S Sanchez Avenue.
A sketch prepared by the City Planner indicated the R-3 zoning on the
El Camino frontage, R-1 on all of Sanchez Avenue westerly from the
highway; the subject property is eight lots removed from E1 Camino Real.
The application was scheduled for public hearing at the meeting of
April 26.
3. MISCELLANEOUS.
1. BROADWAY PARKING. STUDY. Commissioners were furnished copies
of a report prepared by the City Planner for the City Council
on off-street parking in the Broadway commercial district.
2. MUNICIPAL COSTS: APARTMENTS VERSUS DWELLINGS, a paper pre-
pared by the City Planner, considering the questions of tax
revenue and municipal costs relating to apartment dwellings in
contrast to single-family dwellings, was distributed to
Commissioners.
3. YORK AND DADY, CIVIL ENGINEERS, REPORT ON BROADWAY INTERCHANGE
AND RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATION. In distributing copies, the
City Planner announced that the City Council referred the report
to the Planning Commission for review and comment. Commissioners
agreed to pursue the subject at the study meeting on May 10.
The City Engineer discussed the report briefly, stating he con-
curs with the recommendation of the consulting engineers that
Scheme VIII will satisfy for the most.part the entire traffic
problem in the location. fie pointed out that there are a number
of alternative plans offered, some cost estimates and a suggested
method of financing; whatever the design, there will be consider-
able property acquisition involved. He -stated his position that
it would be unwise to attempt to do the work piecemeal; it should
he dote lWoverly or not at all.
Commissioner Norberg stated that he too is concerned that the
project will be property designed and executed. lie questioned
whether the city, in the meantime, can proceed independently to
alleviate the existing situation in the location without inter-
fering with the overall design.
-2-
.1
4. TIDAL PLAIN (TP) DISTRICT REGULATIONS.
The. City Planner reported that at the meeting of April S the City
Council directed the Planning Commission to conduct public hearings
and to submit findings and recommendations on a code.amendment to
provide for the Tidal Plain zone.
Referring to the Tidal Plain District regulations recently con-
sidered by the Commission, Commissioner Brauner suggested certain
revisions; namely, include a definition of the "Tidal Plain" classi-
fication; under "Permitted Uses", include only parks and recreation
areas and facilities; all other uses requiring filling of the bay
waters to require a permit from the Planning Commission thereby
giving to the city absolute control.
The subject was thereupon referred to the meeting of April 26, at
which time the date for a public hearing would be selected.
S. M-1 DISTRICT REGULATIONS.
An amended version of a proposed amendment to the ordinance code
applying to uses of land within the city's industrial areas was fur-
nished Commissioners in connection with the public hearings on the
subject scheduled to continue at the regular meeting of April 26.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
John J. Brauner, Secretary
-3-