Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1960.08.22CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION �August 22, 1960, COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Cistulli Moore City Attorney Karmel Diederichsen Assn.. City Engineer Kindig Rebarchik Martin B1dg.Insp.Calwell Norberg P1an.Cons.Mann- Stivers Councilman Lorenz CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Burlingame City Planning Commission was held on the above given date. Meeting called to order at 8:00 p.m., - Chairman Diederichsen presiding. ROLL CALL A roll call recorded the above members present. MINUTES IVETINGS The minutes of the meeting of July 25, 1960, submitted previously to - } membersD were unanimously approved and adopted fo]:lowing a correction on - page one, changin§ the name of the Morris A Daly representative from Klein` t o " Rime . The minutes of the study meeting of August 8, 1960, submitted previously to members were unanimously approved and adopted. PETITIONS 1. APPROVAL SIGN TO ADVERTISE "BURLINGAME MOTEL" An application, submitted to the Commission at the: study meeting, August 8, 1960, from Osvaldo Benedetti, owner of the Burlingame Motel, 811 Bayshore Boulevard, requesting a permit to erect a directional sign 24" z 18 and approximately 6 feet in height, was formally heard on this date. A letter dated July 262 1960, received from Person Rc Wik, Inc., bearing the signature of Oscar F. Person, indicated approval to the request of Mr. Benedetti for permission to erect said sign (W x 18") on that firm's industrial property located at the intersection of Broadway and the Bayshore Highway Service Road. A brief discussion arose on amending the application to provide for the installation of a larger sign. Mr. Benedetti, appearing in his own behalf, advised that a small reflectory�-type sign to attract the headlights of automobiles would be appropriate to direct motorists to the location of the motel -apartments. A motion waa introduced b C N y Commissioner orberg, seconded by Commissioner Cistulli, that the applicant be granted a permit to erect a sign to -�,comply with thedimensions stipulated in the application and on the }site approved by the firm of tt Person P•: Wik. The motion carried, with Commissioner Martin voting no, HEARINGS to RESUBDIVISIOI'N POR. LOTS 5 & 6. BL. 11. RAY PARK. APPROVED A resubdivision map, filed with the City Engineer by Howard Watkinson, 1544 Bernal Avenues proposing a resubdivision of Lots 5 and 6, Block 11, Ray Park Subdivision, was presented formally to the Commission on this date, The Planning Consultant advised that the applicant proposes to Join the rear portions of Lots 5 and 6 to his unproved property (Lot 13) on Bernal Avenue; that there are no sewer or water facilities on the unimproved property and should be considered as a "single lot." In reply to Commissioner Martinis inquiries, the Commission was advised that the combined area of both portions of Lots 5 and 6 exceeds 7,000 square feet, A motion was thereafter introduced by Commissioner Martin that the sub- division be approved, seconded by Commissioner Kind.ig and carried unan;mously following a roll call vote. 2. SETBACK VARIANCE GRANTED FRANKLIN KNOCK, 19 FL QIIANITO WAY A variance application from Franklin and Ruby M. Knock; owners of property located at 19 E1 Quanito Way, was presented for formal hearing on this date. The applicants,, in their petition; advised that a circumstance affecting an adjacent dwelling (17 E1 Quanito Way) prompted an investigation of their home, subsequent to which it was discovered that a building construction error had created a violation in the building front setback and the boundary lot lines code requirements. Mr. Franklin Knocks in attendance, referred the Commission to a chart with markings: (1) Point "A" - indicating a side lot boundar variance of 1.61 feet and (2) Point "B" - indicating a variance of 2.4 feet from the front of the curb line of El Quanito Way, both points being the front two corners in the southwest front bedroom of the dwelling. The Planning Consultant advised that a variance as :requested by the applicant was the only recourse to rectify the situation in this instance, In the discussion that followed, Commissioner Martin observed that no reference was made to a variance from the front of -the curb line of E1 Quanito Way at Point "A" and recommended that consideration be given to that point. Mr. Knock thereupon amended his variance application to state `that a variance is requested'for both the front and the side setbacks at - 2 - Point 'At and for the front setback at Point 1B1o11 The Commission concurred and a motion introduced by Commissioner Martin that the variance request be granted, was seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and unanimously carried -on roll call. 3. VARIANCE RE: APARTMENT 137 LORTON AVE. GRANTED WITH SERV T ONS The Chair announced that this was the time and the place in which to conduct a public hearing on an application submitted by Roland F. Zillmer and Saxe and Yolles Development Company for a variance to reduce the rear yard setback requirements from fifteen feet to nine feet on property located at 137 Lorton Avenue in the City of Burlingame. Reference was made to a letter received from Saxe t Yolles Development Co., dated August 17, 1960, setting forth reasons and an accompanying statement to justify the request for said variance. A drawing indicating the relation of the property to the surrounding properties was exhibited and viewed by interested parties. Mr. Douglas Pringle, Contractor, was present to acquaint the Commission with the intention of the applicants to improve the property, advising that the lot in question was purchased in order to place an eight unit apartment building being removed from its present location on Clark Drive and El Camino Real in San Mateo. Mr. Pringle stated that the apartment house is approximately three years old, is in excellent condition ? and because of its size, requires a lot with an area over 55 feet in width by 150 feet in depth. The Commission was also advised that other locations have been inspected since the last study meeting; however, the lot at 137 Lorton Avenue was -determined to be the most appropriate. Mr. W. H. Langton, owner of property at 111 Lorton Avenue, objected to one property owner permitted more land upon which to place a building than another property owner. Questioned by members of the Commission, Mr. Pringle .stated that if the variance were approved, the total lot coverage will be lees than 53%. Commissioner Stivers expressed the opinion that the plan was not in the Interest of "good planning and appeared to "crowd" the lot. Questioned also regarding the possibility of reducing the size of the building, Mr. Pringle admitted that the building could be "shrunk" approximately three feet; however, it would impair the functional use of the building. In reply to other inquiries, the Contractor stated that three garages will front Lorton Avenue, closed off by doors and the remaining five (carports) will be located on the side of the building. Commissioner Norberg stated that the building will be an asset to the City but in his opinion, a 12 foot rear yard setback would be more desirable. -3 ,F A The Planning Cowultant suggested an alternate pZE;n whereby the 15 root rear yard setback would be maintained and the front yard setback would �be reduced, stating that the corner property is zoned commercial, re- quiring no front setbacks; the lot in question lies adjacent to the corner and a lessened setback would result in a graduated area of open space. The Consultant further advised that since the rear of the property also abuts commercial property, the most appropriate manner in which to insure open space at the rear of the apartment house is to provide for it on the subject property. Some discussion arose on whether the front of the property would be driveway area entirely if the setback were lessened. The Planning Consultant advised that the building as proposed will create more side- walk than driveway area. Some objection waa expressed to having the entire area cemented and thereby creating "an out of line" pattern with the surrounding properties. i Commissioner Norberg recommended that the variance be approved, provided the following alterations were made: (1) the reduction in length of the building, (2) the retention of required rear and side setbacks and (3) a reduction.of the front setback. The Commission concurred and a motion was thereupon introduced by Commis- sioner Norberg, seconded by Commission Martin that the length of the building be reduced to 124 feet or less, with a rear yard setback of 15 feet, a front yard setback of 11 feet and a southerly six foot side )setback and a northerly 10 foot aide setback; that in addition, planters, 6 feet in length, be erected between each garage, measured from the columns of the building; the above subject to compliance with the City's fire -and building codes. The motion was unanimously carried on roll call and the hearing declared to be concluded. COMMUNICATIONS 1.. PROPOSED STREET NAME CHANGE A communication dated August 3, 1960, was read Prom. the City Clerk, advising of a request received from J. P. Sinclair, Assistant State Highway Engineer, that the City consider changing the nacre of Old Bayshore Highway to the name of Airport Boulevard or South'Airport Boulevard to conform to the name selected by the Cities of San Bruno and South San Francisco. In compliance with the law pertaining to "Street Name Proc®durs" a public hearing was scheduled by the Commission at the next regular meeting, September 262 19600 with interested property owners to be so notified, on motion of Commissioner Kindig, seconded by Commissioner Martin and unanimously carried. -4 - 2. PROPOSED LOCATIONS NEW POLICE STATIOR The Planning Consultant advised that the City Council has requested that the Planning Commission be informed of the locations proposed in the selection of the new police station and announced that a meeting of the Civic Center Site Committee had been scheduled for Monday., August 290 196o, 8 o'clock, p.*., Council Chambersm City hall., at which time the Committee would also be informed of the proposed locations of a now police station. Members of the Commission were invited to attend the scheduled meeting. UNFINISHED BUSI!RS 1. STUDY SESSION ON ZONING AMENDMENTS Wednesday, September V4# 1960, Council Chambers, City Hall, 8 o'clock, p.m., was scheduled for a Commission study meeting, at which time proposed amendments to the z oning ordinance would be :studied. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was regularly adjourned at 9.40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, D. A. Stivers, Secretary