Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1966.02.14CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 1966 CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called to order on the above date at 8:00 p.m., Chairman Kindig presiding, ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Brauner, CistuliiE Horwitz, Kindig, Norberg, Pierce Commissioners Absent: Edwards STUDY MEETING dairman Kindig announced, with concurrence of Commissioners, that the lengthy study meeting agenda would be considered first; the :adjourned meeting called for this date, from the regular meeting of January 24, 1966, to follow immed- iately thereafter, 1e RESUBDIVISION. Lots #6 and4931,, Block No. 1, Burlingame Park #4,,, A resubdivision map of the above properties, prepared by Howard Go Hickey, Civil Engineer, for the Seventh Day Adventist Church, 707 E1 Camino Real, Burlingame, proposed to enlarge the area of the church property (Lot 31) by annexing a portion of a privately ovrned lot immediately adjacent at the rear -(Lot 6). Ira Hickey stated that the owner of Lot 6 has tentatively agreed to sell the rear 40 feet and neither set backs nor area will suffer since the lot is very deep, he advised that the church plans an expansion of its property, pro- posing to build a playground immediately and, possibly in the future, to extend a classroom building; specifically, the area to be acquired is 40 feet deep by Sty feet side, The City Planner pointed out that any extension of the school use will require approval of a use permit but, for the present, the application.to resubdivide is in order. In reply to Mr. Hickey, the City Planner stated tha, the church property is zoned R-3,00the area to be added will assume the same classification. A public hearing was scheduled for the meeting of February 28; Mr. Hickey agreed to file the proper drawings with the City Engineer in the meantime. 2, RESUBDIVISION, Acreage Northeasterly Side of La Mesa Drive, n A resubdivision map prepared by Howard G. Hickey, Civil Engineer, proposed to divide acreage, as described above, owned by Mr, Edward R. Johnston, into three parcels, each having an area in excess of 10,000 square feet; Parcel A. the site of an existing duelling, with frontage on La Mesa Drive; Parcels B and C to have access over a common driveway proposed to be constructed in an unimproved portion of the street right-of-way. The City Engineer explained that the city owns the 30 foot strip at the end of €.a Mesa Drive beyond the area of the paved street:; the applicant's pro- posal to build a private roadway there involves certain legal ramifications to be Investigated by the City Attorney. )The City Engineer reported that the public improvement plans, covering drainage and water installations, required further study. The City Planner referred to a grant deed of record wherein Panama Realty Company granted the City of Burlingame a strip 30 feet in width --the northeast one-half of La Mesa Drive --for the use of the general public; however, there is no gray of putting in the complete! street in the area where Mr. Johnston proposes the driveway because one-half was vacated several years ago by the then City Council and reverted to private owner - shin. The City Planner advised that he has discussed the matter of the city's responsibility if the driveway were permitted with the City Attorney, Mr. Hickey stated that it is intended that the owners shall assume full responsibility for the driveway's maintenance. The City Attorney pointed out that than city does not hold fee title, there- fore, may not transfer ownership, and as long as the status does not change from a public street the city is responsible for maintenance; he suggestedr as an alternative, that vacation by the city would cause the land to revert to private ownership, thereby giving Mr. Johnston an opportunity to negotiat for its purchase. The City Planner pointed out that If the strip were privately owned. the city would lose a means of access into the Mills Estate canyon area. During a period of Commission discussion, it was the consensus that the applicant and his engineer should confer with mombers of the city staff to resolve the problems of public improvements and access before the Commission attempted to wake a decision on the land division. Mr. Johnston indicating agreement, the Chair annowaced that the applica- tion would be held to the study meating of March 1.4. 3. RESUBDIVISI©N. Acreage Northeasterly Side of La Mesa Drive. A resubdivision map prepared by Howard G. Hickey, Civil Engineer, of the above -described acreage owned by Mr. W.F. Rhoads, 1530 La Mesa Drive, pro- posed to divide two existing parcels into four, each having* an area in excess of 10,000 square feet. Parcel D, where the dwelling is located, has frontage directly on La Mesa Drive; a common driveway easement off La Mesa Drive will give street frontage to Parcels A.B.C. The City Planner pointed out that the driveway is wholly within -the propert', and privately owned; therefore, to insure perpetuity, the city becomes a one-third owner, The Commissions -action on the resubdivIsion will. be con- ditional, subject to the City Council's acceptance of the owner's offer of easement. The City Engineer.reported that the map will be referred to Fire Chief Moorby for comments. Commissioner Norberg suggested redesigning the driveway and eliminating "dog -leg" lot lines. The maxi was scheduled for hearing on February 28, 1966. -2- 4, SIGN VARIANCE. Ramada Inns, Inc, A letter dated February 3, 1966, from QRS Company, San Francisco, Designers and Manufacturers of Plastic and Neon Signs, requested a variance in behalf of Ramada Inns, Inc., for construction of the typical Ramada Inn sign at the site of the 1S4-room motor hotel at 12SO.Beyshore Highway, Lot 4- Beari.nt Industrial Park Subdivision, Burlingame. The letter described the sign: 38 feet long, 13 feet tall, underneath which is another panel 30 feet long by 4 feet 6 inches tall. The communication advised that the site is approximately 300 feet back from the freeway and to assure identification to freeway traffic it will be necessary for the bottom portion of the large section of the sign to be SO feet above ground., A Plot plan, including the proposed location of the sign, and a sign detail were filed. The City Planner stated that he computed gross height as 63 feet from grounc level. Mr. Barney Mac&all, Vice President QRS Company, represented the applicant. He advised that neon tubing lighting will be used, similar to intensity of the Hyatt house Hotel sign. In reply to Commission inquiry, the City Planner stated there were no other variances involved except height, Commissioner Brauner referred to code provisions concerning sign variances, questioning whether the Commission may legally approve a "height" variance, Following discussion, Commissioners -agreed to schedule the application for public hearing on February 28, requesting the City Attorney to clarify the points raised by Commissioner BrauneT4 S. SPECIAL PERMIT. Detached rumpus room, 1620�Forest View_ Avenue. A special permit application filed by V.C. Winters, 1620 Forest Viow Avenue,, Burlingame, proposed construction of a detacMd rumpus room. The applicant's letter dated February 11, 19660 stated that the proposed structure will replace an existing building.at the rear of the lot in extremely bad repair, and.aill serve as a recreation or family room. Mr. Thomas Martin, contractor, represented the applicant, lie advised that the building will be one story, include a half bath, probably a hot water heater and portable bar -but no facilities for sleeping. A public hearing was scheduled for the meeting of February 28o 6o VARIANCE. Remodel dwelling in R-1 District for nursery school use, 740 Fairfield Road, An application filed by Harriet Giacotini, 1929.St. Francis Way, San Carlos, requested a variance to remodel an existing residence for nursery school purposes at 740 Fairfield Road o Lot Y and portion of Lot X, Block 8, Burlingame Terrace Subdivision.„ ..First Residential District, -3- A letter from the applicant dated January 20, 1966, advised that the city's plans for improving Carolan Avenue later this year made it necessary to find a new location for the school, -which has been operating at Oak Grove and Carolan Avenues since 1946. The property at 740 Fairfield Road was selected since it is large enough to accommodate the S0 children for which the school is licensed. The letter stated that the children range in age from two to seven years; the school is in operaation from 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., after 6:30 P.M.', the premises are unoccupied. The letter described at length the school operation and services available to parents who must find day care facilitie: for young children. The City Planner stated that the building has not yet been investigated, nor have plans been presented for rer.odeling,which the applicant may be con- sidering; however, before there can be occupancy the building must be brough to building and fire department standards. Mrs. Giacomini reported that a representative of the State of California agency concerned with nursery school operations approved the building. Mrs. Gincomini stated that there is a large open area for outdoor play; they first floor of the building will be used exclusively m the upstairs area not at all. She stated that she intends to purchase the property and do whatever remodeling is necessary to comply with the city's requirements and the State agencies. The public hearing was scheduled for the meeting of February 29. 7. SPEC AL PERMIT, Auto rental agencyt 1288 BMshore Highway. A special permit application filed by Mr,, William F. Meck proposed to establish a Thrifty Rent-A-Car agency, including office space, at 1288 Bayshore Highway -Lot 2; Bearint Industrial Park Subdivision. A letter from the applicant dated January 26, 19661, stated that the propert will be used for the rental of automobiles; there is ample area to store cars not in use. Office space in the building not required for their pur- poses will be leased to others. The City Planner stated that the -applications proposes a retail use in an M-1 District;, requiring the Commissions approval of a use permit. He requested that the applicant file a plot plans and parking layout to show where the cars will be placed and the designated spaces; he recommended, if the use is approved, that the applicants be required to paint the black - topped area to designate actual parking spaces. In reply to Commission inquiry, Mr. Meck reported that there will not be a wash rack on the premises. The application was scheduled for public hearing on February 28; Mr. Meck agreed to submit the plot plan to the City Planner prior to the hearing. RECESS o CALL TO ORDER Following a recess at 9:30, the meeting was called to order by Chairman gindig at 9:35 p.m. -4- 9. SPECIAL PERMIT, Church use of dwelling, 12S8 El Camino Real. Zone R-3, ! American Turko-Tatar Association, Inc., filed a special permit application to use an existing residence at 12S8 E1 Camino Real as a place of worship (a Mosque) and to conduct Church business, Lot 1S, Block 17, Burlingame Grove Subdivision, Zone Rm3. A communication from the applicant dated February 7, 1966 advised that the Association is a lay group representing the Moslem Religion for residents of Turko-Tatar origin in this general area, and has been recognized by the State of California as a religious organization. The communication stated further there are approximately forty active families in the organization with approxiately one third participating in activities at any one time. The building will be used for Friday religious services; t daily evening services during the month of Ramadhan (once a year); occasional religious lectures and study groups; reading and library facilities; Sunday School for approximately 15 children; Board of Directas meetings. A plot plan, with parking spaces indicated, was filed. Mr. Fuat Sadri, representing the Church, and Mr. Paul Davis, real estate salesman, were present. Mr. Davis advised that eight parking spaces can be provided on the property with maximum maneuverability, and possibly six additional spaces with limited maneuverability. He stated that for the most part the gatherings are small, except during Ramadhan when members will come from outlying areas to services; the Association has not had a central meeting place for its religious meetings but assembling in private homes. Commissioner Brauner expressed concern that parking will not be adequate, that traffic generated during religious services will create congestion on the El Camino Real and suggested that a better location might be selected. The City Planner stated that the building and fire Inspectors will be requested to -visit the property and submit their comments, The application was scheduled for hearing February 28, 1966. 9. VARIANCES To permit new apartment construction at 212 Anita Road. A variance application filed by Joseph and Gladys E. Arnaudo proposed to attach a new structure containing eight apartment units to an existing three unit apartment building at 212 Anita Road (portion of Block 22, Lyon €, Hoag Subdivision). The City Planner advised that the existing building is located on the rear property line o there is no rear yard; on both sides. the building is approximately six inches off the property line m there are no side setbacks as required by.code. The drawings submitted by the applicants of the proposed construction in dictate -there would be a total lot coverage of 74.141; the code permits 501 ; a total of 11 apartments is proposed with 14 garages. The applicants are proposing two buildings on the lot; the code provides that only one b uildi used as a residence may be erected on any one let. .S_ r Commissioners reviewed the drawing submitted by the applicant's architect and discussed the property at some length; it was pointed out that the 1 existing building is nofi-conforming, •having been moved from another location, and permitted by the then building inspector to be placed on the rear property line a number of years ago. Mr. and Mrs. Arnaudo agreed to revise their plans to decrease the number of units in the new construction and attempt a new building design to decrease the lot coverage percentage. The application was held for the study meeting of March 14. 10. VARIANCES. Front yard set backs, Sk):11ne Boulevard.. An application filed by Alpha Land Company requested as follows: Mills Estate No. 25, Block 43 - allow following front set back variations: Lot 37 front setback of 14.6 feet Lot 38 i9 04 ii 13.5 feet Lot 39 si oil of 6.75 feet Lot 40 " r' i' 6.75 feet Lot 41 o0 00 of 14.3 feet The property addresses: 16S2, 1664, 1672, 1680, 1688 Skyline Boulevard, Zone Rm1. A communication from the law firm of Anderson, McMillan and Connolly, in behalf of the applicants, advised that violation of the set back require• ments occurred due to inadvertence on the part of the applicant, its agents or sub -contractors; because of the existence of the city -owned buffer strip at the front of the properties, the deviation from the required set backs is not obvious, nor are other homes in the area materially affected. The communication stated also that all of the lots are improved; four of the hoses have been sold and are presently occupied. There would be extreme hardship involved if the buildings were required to be relocated. The City Planner distributed engineering drawings :showing the set back variations on each of the properties; he read from a statement , which he prepared, describing the conditions of the properties, including some of the driveways which were! paved beyond the easement; loss of perhaps 1S trees from the city-owned.'strip and suggesting a number of alternative actions available to the Commission. Following a period of discussion, Commissioners agreed to visit the area and scheduled the application for public hearing on February 28. 11. VARIANCE. Boarding home for ambulatory patients in R-2 District. An application filed by Mrs. Nancy Lazar requested a variance to operate a boarding home for six aged ambulatory persons in her residence, 922 Capuchino Avenue, Zone R-2. Chairman Kindig stated that he Is aware from personal experience th*t Mrs. Lazar is presently licensed to care for three people. Since one of the patients is his mother-in-law, he advised that he would participate in the discussion but refrain from voting at the time of the hearing. -6- t "', `�' 'aA � bti '!' `lt`?.,r �:f� c9 � cn r.•a -v+s y > i¢' � Ra!d f �,�.ra er�, by .� use is R-4; however, because the city's R-4 area $as limited, practically all of the boarding houses and homes for the aged sire in other districts. The City Planner stated that he would refer the property to the building and fire inspectors for their comments. Mrs. Lazar advised that there are four bedrooms in the home o one for her use, as shewill live in the house; the other three bedrooms will serve the patients, two 'to aroom. The application was scheduled for public hearing on February 28. 12. TENTATIVE ?AP -_Mills Estate No. 27. A tentative drawing of a proposed subdivision,_ Mills Estate No. 27, was submitted by Mr. James Schupp, engineer with Wilsey Nam and Blair, The map was drawn to include 14 residential lots, it cul-de-sac in excess of 2SO feet, street width less than the city's requirements; the proponents suggested that parking be eliminated on the north side of the street, where no houses were proposed. Mr. Schupp advised that all of the lots were in excess of the 700.0 square foot minimum required in the Mills Estate Subdivisions. During the general discussion, Commissioners Norberg and Cistulli maintained that the number of lots should be reduced to 12 and the cul-de-sac shortened Commissioners Brauner-and Norwitz took the position that the 14 lots were not excessive, Mr. Schupp and the developers, Drs. Franzi and Smooker, agreed to restudy the project and attempt to ,lake some changes which would bring the develop- ment more in conformity with the city's requirements. ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING Chairman Kindig-called the adjourned meeting, from January 24, 1966, to order at ll:SS p.m. BROADWAY OVERPASS The City Engineer advised that the plan submitted by the State engineers is a revision and refinement of plan No. 8 prepared by the Consulting Engine3er� York & Dady, employed by the city, He explained the map and the various routes of the State plain. In reply to Commissioner Norberg's comments concerning York and Dady plan No. 7, which the planning Commission recommended to the City Council, the City Engineer, advised that No. 7 would not accemplish all of the required traffic movements. Following some discussion, a motion by Commissioner Cistulli that the Commission wait for the model to be available for study before eommiting itself to.a recommendation, was seconded by Commissioner Pierce and carried, PAXgRONT REPORT On a motion by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner Brauner, and carried-, the Commission agreed with the recommendations of the Bayfront Commi.tee of the San Mateo County Regional Plannin3 Committee and recommend( to the City Council that the report be adopted. ADJOUgNMENT Respectfully submit The meeting was regularly adjourned at 12:30 m,,m. John J. Brauner See:. etary