HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1966.09.12CITY OF BURLINCAME PLANNING COMMISSION
September 12, 1966
r
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Brauner
Cistulli
Edwards
Kindig
Norbert';
Pierce
CALL TO ORDER
COWISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT
None City attorney Karnel
Cigy Planner Mann
City Engineer Marr
Councilman Diederichsen
A regular meeting of the Burlingame
August 22, 1966, was celled to order
Chairman Pierce presiding.
ROLL CALL
Planning Commission, adjourned from
on the above date at 8:00 p.m.,
The Secretary's roll call recorded all members present.
PUBLIC HEARING
BURLINCAME SHORE LANES COM!IANY Rr.QiiEST FOR RECLASS? F1""CPAi IOi3 CONTIN€JED
Chairman Pierce announced a public hearing on the application of Bur-
lingame Shore Land Company, 102E Cadillac& Way, Burlingame, to reclassify
from Rao (Fourth Residential) District to C-1 (Retail Commercial) District
a 13 acre parcel of acreage bounded by Cadillac Way, Carolan Avenue and
3ayshore Boulevard, postponed from the regular meeting of August 22 to
the present date.
Declaring the hearing open, the Chair acknowledged %Or, Cyrus I%McMillar+,
Attorney for the proponents.
Mr. McMillan recalled that variances and rezoning were granted Burlingame
Shore Land Company approximately three years ago :for apartment use of the
property; he stated that the project failed to materialize for two
reasons: first, "she money market substantially changed" and, secondly,
My. Donald H. Stoneson, developer of Sto-nestown Shopping Center, one of
the most successful ir: the country, became interested in the local site
and the owners plans for a commercial development.
Mr. McMillan advised that the applicant proposes -to build a covered -mall
type community shopping center, comparable to developments in the cities
of Oakland and Honolulu; the location is considered highly suitable
because of accessibility o adjacent to a major freeway; important to
shopping centers; pxoxi.Y:ity to a prime market area Burl ingz: e, Hills-
borough and North San Mateo; cue to the areal. impact of the airport, .
and related industries. Burlingame's northerly, section is grating rapidly
with the econoutic center gradually shifting in that direction. He
stated that the firm of lr-�;Ang D. Shapiro & associates, A.T.A., Los
Angeles, professionals in the fie�'_as of arch, Lecture, urba::z land e ononics
and real estate:., visited and op -praised the s-, °te favorably for the
Proposed use.
Mr. McMillan pointed oua that when the apartment -complex was discussed
there were comments that the city services would lbe burdened because
of the size of the project and other service costs forced upon the city
because of the school age population; additionally, the matter of tax
revenue was explored. Mr. McMillan stated that the present proposal
obviously Will neither require extraordinary services nor involve the
schools in any way; experts in the field have estimated .a yearly sales
tax to the city of $1402000.00 from the site.
Mr. McMillan advised, in reply to Commission inquiry, that construction
of a high-rise office building is envisioned as a part of the complex,
but no residential use; he stated that prime merchandising tenants have
been approached and have indicated interest.:
Invited by the Chair to comment, the City Planner referred to a paper
entitled "Application of Burlingame Shore Lana Company" (previously
distributed to Commissioners), which was read in its entirety by the
Planners provided , in part, as follows: There is need for evidence to
prove that the land use change ys logical anc evolutionary and not at
the whim of a land owner or for his perscinal gain.; that the need for
more commercial zoning must be considered ane the effect of more such
Zoning on the three existing shopping centers in the city; that there
must be reasons why the apartment zoning is not proper or possible to
effectuate: and that differences it amount of traffic and ability of sur.
rounding streets to absorb such traffic shall be considered; that the
r€rata.ble floor area in the tentative drawings is very nearly the same
as all the re:nyable area in the Broadway shopping district; a. refer.-
ence was made to an existing signed and recorded contract between the
city and the property owner for apartment: use of the property and con-
struction of certain streets and utilities; a suggestion was made that
- the Commission not attempt to reach a. final decision on the applica-
tion without some indication that the City Council would be willing to
allow cancellation of said contract.
Following the -reading of the papers the City Planner informed the Com-
mission that the City Attorney disagreed with his suggestion as to pro-
cedure.
In reply to the Chair, the City Attorney recommended that since the
final decision on reclassification rests with the City Council there
would appear to be no reason for the Commission not to proceed with the
hearing; that if the action were favorable the Commission mould recom-
mend the reclassification to the City Council on the condition that the
existing agreement be terminated or: conditions acceptable to `ooth
Council and the applicant.
The Chair announced, with concurrence of Coreiissioners, that the hearing
would continue.
In reply to Commissioner Ci stulli rs request to elaborate on the po-<:ential
sales tax revenuer Mr. McMillan stated that the amount of $140,000
was based upon an exhaustfive study prepared by experts and predicated on
a mean amount of sales per square root of retail sales area; the proposed
project contemplates 240,000 square feet of retail sales area.
In reply to Commissioner Kindig's inquiry
industrial uses presently existing on the
conforming should the commercial zoning be
stated that these will be removes,
concerning certain light
site, which would become non -
approved, My. McMillan
-2-
At the Chair's request, the City }Manner located the site en the aerial
photograph mounted in the Chambers.
In reply to Commissioner Brauner°s inquiry concerning a site analysis
referred to by Mrs McMillan, the latter filed with the Commission a
copy of a letter dated September 6, 1966, from Irving D. Shapiro F
Associates, A.I.A.. Los Angeles, California.
In reply to the Chair's inquiry, there were no torments in favor of the
reclassification from the audience.
Opponents were invited to comment
Mr. A. Kaufmann, 261E Easton DriVe, and merchant on Broadway, protested
what the shopping center i 'Pout of place", that the city°s population
of some 27,000 does not now support existing shopping areas, evidenced
by the vacant stores on Burlingame Avenue and on Broadway and that an
additi.ona_ center would create more havoc; referring to the sizeable
financial investment in paring lots in the Burlingame Avenue area,
Mr. Kaufmann stated that the proposal is a "direct slap at the owners and
merchants who have tried to build up the town".
Mrs. Clarence Rusch, 1384 Hillside Circle, noted that the site is adjacent
to and bounded by industrial zoning, that considerable effort was expended
some gears ago to bring industry to the city to strengthen the tax base
and that .'- t would appear logical that the industrial and commercial sec-
tions of 4:he city should remain teas they are". Referring to the pro-
jected sales tax revenue mentioned by Mr. McPillan, Mrs. Rusch maintained
that this ,iced not necessarily be a goad estimate of revenue to the city
since receipts in the existing shopping areas may be affected; further-
more, the city owes some consideration to the people who have been in
Burlingame; as merchants for many years. Mrs. Rusch inquired whether
the project may affect the plans for the ove-rpass and grade separation
improvements.
Mr. PhiliD S. Newman, owner of Broadway Drug, 1300 Broadway, requested
some geneTal information from the proponents on the types of services
to be offtred and whether there would not be a duplication of facilities
already available in the city.
Mr. Harry Somers, Citadel Properties, 1849 Wshor.e Highway, replied that
the types of tenants approached thus far have: necessarily been limited;
he mentioned,as examples, Joseph Magnin Company and junior department
stores, a form of retailing not primarily existing in the city; he
stated there have been no discussions with service businesses.
Commissioner Edwards spoke of his personal knowledge of the mall shopping
center in the city of Honolulu, referred to by the proponents, stating
that he has information to the effect that travelling tourists and patron:
of nearby hotels account for 62-1/2% of all of the sales. He acknowledge,
improvements in the Broadway area completed by the Burlingame Shore Land
Company to serve the entire community but pointed out that in weighing
the merits of the application cognizance muss: be taken of the vacant
stores on Burlingame Avenue and Broadway and general evidences of poor
housekeeping in the former location.
Mr. Donald Nahrwold, President, Broadway Merchants association, repor-�ed
them, is a feeling of uncertainty among the ,s_yrchants to whoa he has
spoken; sovie feel it may help to increase business by attracting new
-3-
t
customers e others disagree; Broadway is principally a service
street but there are retail businesses which could suffer because of
the competition. He stated that it must be recognized that the
shopping center idea for merchandising is becoming more prevalent and
downtown shopping areas can suffer if there is no attempt Made to
meet the competition. Mr. Nahrwold stated that he personally is con-
cerned with the overpass reconstruction, that there should be some
decision here before a large commercial complex is permitted at the
location.
Mc. McMillanstated that existing businesses should benefit rather
than suffer since a shopping centers combined with three existing
shopping, areas, will provide a variety of merchandise to attract and
supply the needs of the local shopper.
Chairman Pierce mentioned that apparently lack of financing prevented
construction of the apartment complex,; the applicants were; requested
to comment on the availability of financing for the proposed project
in view of the present "tight money" situation.
Mr. Donald H. Stoneson, SIB Craig toad, Hillsborough, associated with
The 5tonestown Corporation,, assured the Commission that financing
would not be a. problem in the present instance.
Commissioner Kindig inquired whether the entire project would remain
in a single ownership and controlled by one management to which
Mr. McMillan replied in the affirmative, stating that there will be
no sales to other owners.
1 Mr. Harry Somers advised that Burlingame Shone Land Company, The Stones -
town Corporation and Citadel Properties have combined for the purposes
of developing and managing the project.
The City Planner informed the Commission that in the absence of a
written contract to the contrary there is no law to prohibit the sale
of indivieual parcels once the land is rezoned.
In reply to Commissioner Kindig, Air. Stoneson advised that there could
net be piecemeal development because in order to interest prospective
tena►rts t'be whole project must be designed. In Teply to Commissioner
Kindig's further comments concerning existing traffic congestion its
the area, the uncertain status of the overpass reconstruction, the
importance of providing ingress and egress with no congestion nor
st ing of traffic on the city streets, Mr. Sommers stated that the
developers are fully aware of the situation, that all of the planning
and the discussions with prospective tenants have been predicated on
the overpass as it exists, and, finally, the bulk of the parking will
be above ground level.
Mr. Stoneson, in reply to Chairman Pierce, advised that there would be
duplication of certain types of stores, offering shoppoTs a choice of
mEore than one source of supply.
mr, Frank Weis % Weimax Li quers 1178 Broadway, stated that he, persona E l
h Al no opinions pro or cons but tha¢ all of the local merchants should
be altOTted to the project: ap:d the public hearings and giver, an oppor un
to be heard.
Referring to a reference earlier in the hearing to the Town :d Courktr p
e4-
Shopping Center in Palo Alto and subsequent improvements in the down-
town shopping area., Ma. Weisl pointed out that in that city the
shopping center is considerably further removed from the downtown
\� area than this project is from Broadway. He referred to the com-
plexities of the overpass reconstruction, traffic congestion compounded
by the continuing development on the easterly side of the freeway and
stated that the "area around Broadway is growing like weeds, shooting
up here and there, with no effort made toward a master plan for the
area, including traffic corrections".
Commissioner Brauner referred to the paper read earlier by the City
Planner, including the statement that reasons should be presented to
:shows that the present zoning is improper, with the burden of proof on
the applicant. Noting that the discussion thus far has been confined
to difficulties of financing, Commissioner Brauner •requested that the
proponents present other evidence to substantiate their application.
Mr. McMillan advised that he was not prepared to state that the R-4
zoning was :improper but rather that a better land use would be commercial
He stated that 9eetor Motor Company will locate near by, that zoning
ordinance: and statutes are not intended to be static but are subject
to change, that the continuing growth in the northerly part of the
>i.ty, including the many and varied new commercial uses, would indicate
that multi. -family residential is probably not the best land use, that
-he proposed project will benefit existing; businesses, thereby creating
a stronger tax base for the city.
The City Planner, in answer to Commissioner Brauner, stated it was
possible that the words "improper and incorrect" as appliee. to the
present zoning and used in the statement read earlier, may not be com-
pletely correct but there was no question of the responsibility of the
property owner to prove to the satisfaction of the Commission that the
zoning should be changed. He noted that all of the arguments of the
proponents have been based upon financial hardship, that the apartments
were not built because of financing difficulties and, for that reason,
for the f",uncial benefit of the owner and others, the change in
zoning would prove more profitable.
Commenting that he was familiar with some of the work of the Urban Land
Institute, a highly qualified organization, particularly in the field
of shopping centers, and employed by the proponents to evade the
property, the City Planner stated that shopping centers generally have
to be spaced at such intervals that there will be support from the
intervening shopping area -- this is essential to the health of any
shopping center. Referring to Stonestown, he staged that `bits developed
as the result of the Stonestown Apartment complex and the Westlake
residential area., that the center was built to serve an entirely new
population which had not existed in the area previously; Hillsdale,
more or lass, followed the same pattern - after the Hillsdale Apartme-nts:
were completed and the new, residential areas tip to and beyond. the
Alameda, the stores followed, He stated that in this city the situat-C I
is different and rather difficu.,It, that there is a present populatio"
of approximately 27,000, with the total population capacity not
exceeding 33,500 - there is no space for expansion.
Continuing, the City Planner seated that in the original planning,
Burlingame Avenue and Broadway were considered sufficient to serve- the
city's needs and when the Mills Estate developed:, the Plaza follo td;
-5-
he mentioned that co«.si.derable commercial zoning romains r,:nde:velaped
in the Plaza area. He stated that from the standpoint of economics
of the city another shopping center is not warran�:ed, that merchants
in existence will suffer; that there is some doubt that the sales
tax revenue will be as great as Mr. McMillan indicates since it is a
fact that a certain number of people of all incomes will develop a
certain aer.ount of sales ability and purchases but the amount of pur-
chases does not increase because of a new store; that if the proposed
center is to be successful 2500 to 3000 cars will enter the area per
day, principally on Carolan Avenue, with the potential of a tremendous
impact on the evening commute traffic,
The City Planner expressed the opinion that a great deal more informa-
tion should be forthcoming from the applicants before a decision is
reached, that an urban feasibility study should be made to prove that
a shopping center is necessary.
Chairman Pierce stated that from personal exnerience he was acre of
local residents whe shop elsewhere than in the local sto, e' , that if
there were retail stores of the: .types described by the proponen`s
this would help to attract the local shoppers.
Commissioner Cistulli advised that he has been informed that the old
established Broadway shopping area in the City of Millbrae has
profited as a result of the Richmond Center.
Chairman Pierce referred to the Planner ° s comments concerning traffic,
stating that In shopping centers in nearby cities there appears to
be considerable after -dark shopping; since the same situation conceivably
could exist here it would Aot necessarily follow that there would be
weary congestion during the evening commute hours.
Mr. Oscar Person, President of Burlingame ShoreLand Corpany, stated
that the apartment zoning is practically impossible to use: today
because of the financing situation; during the 2• 1/2 years which
elapsed before the city finally approved the apartment use, the financing
market changed and there was no financial institution to be found to
finance: the project as a wholes accordingly, the complex Was covered
in th8 cuntra.r.,t with the city cannot be built.
Mr. Persons stated that he, personally, undertook to build the apart-
ment project, believing in all sincerity that it was a fit and proper
development at the time; now, because of changing: conditions :it is
neceyssax-; that he request a change of zoning to Permit a p-ractical and
feasible use of the land of mutual benefit to this city and the developerR.
Mr. IDonala Stanaway, owner and operator of St.anaway Food ftrkat,
1160 Broadway, stated that he was not particularly concerned with the
idea of the shopping center; however, there seems to be a chronic
situation of criticism directed toward the property ownars on Broadway;
he advised that he is financially prepared to improve tht building
which he owns and occupy! cs but will make no attest to do so until
the question of whether or not Broadway is to become a dead-end street
because of the overpass rerca=astructyon is resolved.
Commissioner Kindig stated that he was not prepared to react, a
decision in s;Pi.te Of t;'16 PTOPO'Peylts o presentation and the information
made available-: during tho gearing, that he would prefer tf<i consider
the matter further, to have 1"re of a public reaetioig, and suggested
6
continuing the, hearing for -two weeks to Che regular meeti.n€ .
Commissioner No -berg stated that if the proposed project is properly
Iccated,ard if there is proof of benefit: -Co the city, then it should
Le peranitted but a4 bhr's point there were sort„on questions to be
clarified; first, frog the standpoint of planning is the location
proper; second, what cai.11 be the effect on adjacent business cis
tyicts; third7 the matter of the overpass must be considered
ri.1l the property be involved in the final design. �.
C;o missiorer Norberg requested that the Commission be fu rra-ished additiOTkal
informatien, feasibility studies and maoye exact data as to whether the
pi, -eject will be suitable in the location.
Hr� Mc. °illj-.nv in reply to Chairman Pierce, indicated no objec"Zion to
the two-wceR continuance, agreeing to have available material requested
by the COmmissiono
Chairman Pierce asked the co*peration of the newspaper epTesental ve
'�u attend: ice in publicizing ihe-s continued hearing and thereafter
eleclare 1.h* hearing coytti -iued to the meeting of ;Septew'b,,P-}r 26, 1966.
i jg was a joca-z-_ od at1f :00 p.m a. to be- foll.owed b;� the study
psi€>zz sehe-ftxlod for this date
Respectfully submitted,
Jahn J, Braune , Secretary
7
IL
h�
CT TY nF Rt�nl F?.t('t�nli PT.AR)iT�;C' C'n"�"aTSSI(�d
September 12, 1966
(A5JnIYPNFD r'rrjTI.A►t "UT.TTNC ATIC'rTST 22, 1966) :
I CALI, To nPnrP
II nnl.L CALI.
III HEAPTINC;
1. Reclassification R-4 to Cn1 Miylinuare Shore Land CorRpanv
acreage.
Tjr AIMMIRNME T
STUDY "IF.LTINC
f
I. Pesubdivision of three parcels of acreage, Ponnelly Avenue.
"�2. Resubdivision of Lets 39, 40 and portion Rayshore Hi.ghwav in
Bast "Iillsdale Industrial Pari,.
✓3. Special Permit for lease and rental o-C autorobiles, 1669 Rayshore
Highway o Alfa Auto Pental of Palo Alto, Tnc.:, apt licnnt.
✓4. Special Permit for operation of retail car rental office and
erection of sign, 1849 Bayshore IIigliway - Kenneth C. Poster, Jr.,
applicant.
S. Special Permit for wholesaling and retailing masonry products in
rrml District, 1356 `iarsten Road - "lasonry Supply ro., Tnc., applicant.
L----6. Special Permit for Industrial Medical nfFi.ce, 1669 Bayshore ttighwav,
Pobert A. La.idlaw, r%% , applicant.
i. variance for rear setback, 1906 Taston Drive - Leo Kri loff, applicant.
B. Variance for Boardinp dome, 1249 Drake Avenue o Albert L. and
NIarjori.e �Iar.shall, applicants.
9. From the floor.
10. Ad i ournw.ent
STUDY' MEETING
The study meeting regularly scheduled for this date was called to
order at 10:05 porn,
1. Re,abdivi.sion of Three Parcels of Ac-•g Drone Avenue.
A map prepared by Howard G. Hichy, Civil. Engineer, proposed to combine
three existing parcels into a single large parcel., extending through
from Donnelly Avenue to Burlingame Avenue.
Mr, Stan Cates and Mr. K. Patchett,, the owner, advised that plans
for future redevelopment require deletion of property lines as indicated
on the map.
The City Planner referred to two existing cotAmerc:ial buildings on the
Donnelly Avenue frontage, stating that in tha commercial district
there is no legal objection to more than one building on a property.
M v Gates, in reply to the City Planner, advised that there no immediate
plans fox. changing the status of the driveway easement which serves the
property as well as the adjacent city parking loz:e
The application was scheduled for public hearing on Sept••=amber 2.6 e
Resubdivis ion of Lots 33 and 40, B loHk 3, East �1i 1.1:, 4 le lttdustra. all
Park.
A map prepared by Quinton Engineers, Ltd., Los Angeles, California foT
the owners, Sky Chefs, Inc., proposed to combine the above. -described
lots, and a portion of Bayshore Highway, abandoned, at the! northwesterly
corner of Hayshore Highway and Malcolm Road, into a single, parcel.
The Commission was informed that the owners intend to construct a
building for the preparation of food for one of the airlines, a permitte4
use in the Mm 1 District.
The gran was scheduled for nuh l i e h--r4 - er Og,"t&at hPr 94
:fie S �1al Permit for Lease and Rental of Automobiles
An application filed by Alfa Auto Recital of Palo Alto, 4212 El Camino
Remo Palo Alto, proposed to use existing office space Ptt 1669 Ba.yshore
Highway, Burlingame, between Stanton and ` also w Roads, for leasing and
renting of automobiles
=a sketch of the location was filed.
Mir. Martin Dusig advised that 20 to 22 caps will, be avi lab le for rent
from the Location., that there is on -site parkin; aAlable for 15 cars,
with oth=::r parking for their purposes in Millbrae where the Clara
are serviced; he stated that the nuviber of cars at the Bux1islgame
location will not exceed the number of parking spaces.
The application -was scheduled for hearing on September 26, the City
Planner agreeing to inspects ,;-nd report on parking facilities at the
location,,
-8-
S. S Eci 1 Fer i for Car Rental Office.
A request for a special permit was filed by Kenneth G. Foster, Jr.,
1849 Dayshore Highway, Burlingame, to operate a retail car rental office
at the above address, with outdoor parking for a maximun of. 1S automo-
biles.
A plat plan and a letter from the applicant dated September 9, 1956,
wege file,.
The application was scheduled for public hearing on September 26, in
the meantime, the City Planner to inspect on -site parking.
S. Special. Permit for Wholesale/Retail Sales in M-1 District.
An application filed by Masonry Supply Co., Inc., 1024 Cadillac Way,
to wholesale and retail masonry products from 1356 Marston Road was
held for the study meeting in October when it was determined that the
applicant was not in attendance nor represented and following advice
fron the City Planner that the applicant pwposes to use ;it temporary
building as the office, which is not permitted under any section of
the code,
6. ���c i.�l �er�aat for lndc�st ri al A4edica? Office.
An application filed by Robert A. La dla--vip M.D., 1649 baysh.ore Highway
requeste4 a use permit to establish an 'Industrial N9edic al e office at
Vie above address to offer a comprehensive type of medical. service to
the lndu--trial community.
A site plan and the applicant's communication dated September 1, 1966,
were filed.
Following a brief general discussion, the application was scheduled for
hearing at the September 26 meeting.
7. variances for Rear SeSetback and Addition to Rion-ConforasinR Dwellit
An application filed by Mr. Leo Kriloff, 231E Easton Drivo, Burlingame,
requested variances to rentodel and enlarge an existing nor -conforming
dwelling and to maintain an 11 foot rear setback at 1906 Easton
A sites Plan and -the applicant's co€rmunicatior accompanied. the: applica-
tion.
The Commission was advised that the building is situated the rear oi-'
the lot pith insufficient rear yard; quite~ a sheep bank, tearxaced and
landsca:p: d, slopes from the building to the street.
Mr. Kri.liff stated that he would prefer to continue tho rear line of
the building across .the rear of the lct to allow a better roof line
and a more pleasing structure, thereby usiaa; all of the available
building area on the upper terrace Without encro Ching into or dis-
turbing the landscaping toward the street.
Following a discussion duTin g which Commissioners agreed that a more
detailed plan would be helpful, the request was held for the study
meeting in 0cbber at the applicant's request.
-9-
8<, Variance for . Boarding Hoge in R-1 District.
An application_ filed by Air. and Airs. Albert L. Marshall, 1249 Drake
Avenue, Burlingame requested a variance to operate a boarding home
in a first -residential dwelling.
The statement of justification accompanying the: application advised that
the variance will permit a maximum of six adults, selected by County
of San Mateo social agencies, to become members of the fanily during
their re-babil i tation and time of need for a l inited amount. of super-
vision.
The City Planner advised that as the result of a. complete inspection
o = the property by the county sanitarian, tb.e city fire chief and
building inspectors the latter has prepared a lengthy pre: imintiry report
of inadequacies in the property and structural corrections which are
ziametat€ ry if the building is to be used to house persons other than
zie,mpb:rs of the family.
Pollo,wing the reading of the building; inspector's report, the applica-•
t_lor; a-.sas held for the stuey weet-ing in Octol>er at the Yeq.nes`,: of the
pp l i cna-_ .
9. Goneral Plan.
The City Planner reported thzt he has been
Planning Office that the city's application
Plan was on a non priority basis,which, he
that it may be some time before funds will.
10. 1116- al Election aisng.
informed by tho State
for fuzrds for .n Gene-r al
stated, would _isi0 cato,
be available.
T Ae City Planner advised of efforts that are being made t« remove
lectior. signs posted illegally throughout the city.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjdourned at 11:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitte, ,
John c1 . BT uner, SEv.0 r-_T--` ,c r `f
��a