Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1960.02.23CITY OF BURLINGAME PLAN:dIi3G COMMISSION COMMISSION-TRS PR :SENT Kindig Martin Moore Norberg Stivers CALL TO ORO .R COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Diederichsen Henderson February 23, 1960 OTHERS PRES311iTT City Attorney Ka rmel City Engineer Ma rr Plan. Cons. Mann A regular meeting; of the Burlingame Planning Commission was held on the above date. Meeting called to order at 8:15 p.m. -p Chairman Kindig presiding. Commissioner Diederichsen, having advised of another commitment, was excused. MINUTE'S PR3VIOUS M ETIN( Minutes of the regular meeting of January 25, 1960, and study meeting of February 8, 1960, were unanimously approved and adopted. HEARINGS, a Public hearings, pursuant to published notice, were held as follows: 1. R -sSUBDIVIS ION - Lands of Eileen T. Plate (Vancouver A venue ) An application proposing a resubdivision of the lands of Eileen T. Plate was submitted to the Commission for formal consideration by Robert Dean -Turner of Coldwell--Banker Company, representing the owner. Mr. Dean Turner advised that there is approximately an acre of land and the three parcels that are proposed represent the most economical division of the property. - In reply to a question from Commissioner Stivers concerning utilities, the City Engineer advised that the gas and water lines which serve the existing house cross that portion of the property where the two new lots are proposed. The lines will be relocated thereby eliminating the need for easements across the new lots. The City Engineer confirmed that the map had been verified and indicated no objection to the resubdivision. Chairman Kindig invited comments from the floor. Mr. L.C. Gilliland, owner of property at 1225 Vancouver Avenue, raised a question concerning lot sizes and was advised that the proposal meets the city°s requirements for street frontage and lot area. There being no further comments,, and no protests •received, written or oral, a motion was introduced by Commissioner Martin that the resubdivisior. be approved. Motion seconded by Commissioner Moore and unanimously carried on roll call vote. The hearing was thereafter declared concluded. 2. R _S_UBDIVISION_Portion of Lands of R.P. Etienne Properties, Inc An application proposing a resubdivision of a portion of'the lands of R.P. Etienne Properties, Inc. to establish four parcels with frontages on Marsten Road was submitted for formal consideration. Chairman Kindig referred to a discussion at the ,study meeting of February 8, 1960, questioning the legality of the resubdivision. It was noted that by virtue of the present application, the owner has divided his property into a total of 7 lots within a six months period. The City Attorney, in reply to the Chair, advised that after careful study of the provisions of the State of California "Subdivision Map Act" It would appear that the application would be best treated as a subdivisioh:m'ap, that the map presently before the Commission be pro- cessed as a tentative map and the applicant be required to comply with established procedures for filing tentative and final subdivision maps. The Planning Consultant suggested that since the applicant had not ap- peared before the Commission to discuss the proposal, either at the time of the study meeting or on the present occasion, that the matter be continued for a period of one month to the next regular meeting. Members of the Commission indicating concurrence,, the hearing was oon® tinued to the meeting of March 28, 1960. 3. SPECIAL P*iRMIT o Floyd J. Dofsen, Hobby room in accessory building. An application for a use permit for a hobby room, filed by Mr. Floyd J. Dofsen, owner of property at 16 Davis Court, Burlingame, was submitted for formal consideration. Mr. Dofsen was in attendanoe and, in reply to Chairman Kindig, advised that a bath house, including dressing rooms and toilet facilities, is under construction to be used as an accessory to an existing swimming pool. Mr. Dofsen stated that he would like to include a hobby room, the building to'be divided approximately half for the bath house and half for the hobby .room. Plans of the structure were submitted to the Commission. In reply to a question from the Chair concerning lot coverage, the Planning Consultant reported that the building department has verified that the coverage is legal. In further comment, the Planning Consultant advised that the bath house and related accommodations are legal, however, under the provisions of the ordinance, the hobby room involves a hearing 'before the Commission and approval of a use permit. Chairman Kindig invited comments from the floor. Mr. William J. Logue, ovmer and resident, 14 Davis Court, adjacent to the Dofsen property, advised that after studying the building plans and discussion with Mr. Dofsen, he had no objections to the proposal. There being no further comments, and no protests received, oral or written, a motion was introduced by Commissioner Stivers that a use permit be granted for construction in accordance with the plans on file -2 with the City Building Department. Motion seconded by Commissioner Martin and unanimously carried on roll call vote of members present. The hearing was thereafter declared concluded. i 4. VARIANCE - Mrs. Noel Gough, apartment use in first residential distric' 9 Clarendon Road. Burlingame) A publio hearing was held on an application for a variance filed by Mrs. Noel Gough for apartment construction on property which she owns at 9 Clarendon Road, Burlingame, said property raving a first residential zoning. A letter dated January 9, 1960, was read from the applicant presenting a preliminary plan of the proposed building. Attached to the letter and submitted for filing was a clipping from the San Mateo Times dated November 17, 19599 with reference to a public hearing before the Burlingame City Council on an application to rezone the subject property, along with six other properties, for apartment us�a. Mrs. Gough was in attendance and, upon questioning by Chairman Kindig, stated that the plan proposes a total of ten units.. However, this could be reduced to 8 without working an economic hardship. The Commission was advised that the lot, 50 feet -on Clarendon Road by 157 feet deep, abuts the rear of three lots on Peninsula Avenue which are zoned for and used as apartment house sites. Because of the size of the lot and the adjacent apartment houses, Mrs. Gough maintained that her property is not desirable for single family use. Chairman Kindig invited comments from the floor. Eugene Signarowitz, San Mateo, spoke in favor of the application, citing the adjacent apartment zoning on Veninsula Avenue and the commercial district directly oppose*.e _a thv ;pan R, t000 s1dle in,' NN&iL isuiar Aven%i. Mr. Signarowitz noted *L:.f- t marry of the apartment zoned lots on Veninsula Avenue are considerably smaller in area than the Gough property and the other similarly situated properties from Dwight Road to Anita Road. Mrs. Josephine M. Thayer, speaking as a private citizens advised that she was familiar with the Gough property and felt because of the excessive depth of the lot that there would be a more advantageous use than single family, but less-thail the 10 unit building proposed by Mrs. Gough. The Chair invited discussion from members of the Commission. In reply to a request directed to the Planning Consultant by Commissioner Martin, Section 1944 of the Ordinance Code, providing conditions for variance grants, was reviewed. In addition, the Planning Consultant confirmed that at the time a use survey was made in the neighborhood the use generally was in accord with the R-1 zoning. The Planning Consultant stated that he found the properties to be in good repair, with one or two exceptions. (Commissioner Norberg appeared at 8:55). Mr. Signarowitz again addressed the Chair and informed the Commission that in addition to the Gough property there are six other properties, -3- from Dwight Road to Anita Road, lying adjacent to the apartment zone on Peninsula Avenue and all of these owners have the same idea of using their properties for apartments. --Mr. Signarowitz, recalled that at the time of the public hearing on the application to rezone the properties 1 none of the owners in the district appeared to protest and, on the 1 present occasion, there had been no protests heard. Commissioner Martin expressed the opinion that a change from R-1 District to R-3 was not necessary to alleviate the hardship claimed by the applicant and suggested a continued single-family use, or possibly a change to R 2 District (duplex). Commissioner Martin mentioned that if the present application should be approved, the Commission could expect at least six similar requests, with each owner claiming equal justification. Under present regulations, the City was not prepared to permit intrusion of multi -faintly dwellings into first residential neighborhoods. In a general discussion which followed, Mrs. Gough reviewed the building plans, describing parking facilities, scat -backs, -etc. Commissioner Norberg expressed sympathy with the applicant and stated that he was in favor -of the proposal to replace a dilapidated struc- ture with a modern building which would be an asset to the area. Commissioner Stivers reported that he had visited the neighborhood and found the properties generally well kept and compatible with the existing zoning...Commissioner Stivers expressed the opinion that the proposed use was "too Duch crowding of the land". A motion was introduced by Commissioner Martin that the variance be denied on the basis that the application does not: meet the four require- ments for variance grants, as provided in the Ordinance Code. Motion seconded by Commissioner Moore and carried on the following roll call vote: AY9S : COMMISSIONERS: Kindig, Martin, Moore Stivers IOSS: COPIMISSIONdERS : Norberg ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: Diederichsen, Henderson Chairman Kindig advised the applicant of the right of appeal to the City Council prior to March 8, 1960. The hearing was thereafter declared concluded. RESOLUTIONS f 1. AME IDMENJTS TO ORDINAN10E CODE PART X. ARTICLE 50 (Zoning) Sec.1926D Chairman Kindig announced that at the regular meeting of the Commission held under date of January 25, 1960, a public hearing was held in the matter of amending Section 192 6D of the City's Ordinance Code to pro- vide for minimum lot sizes within the present city boundaries and to provide lot size limitations in residential areas to be annexed in the future. Said amendments having been approved by unanimous action of the Commission, Chairman Kindig stated that this was the time and place scheduled to enact a resolution of adoption for transmittal to the City Council. Commissioner Martin introduced and moved adoption. of RESOLUTION NO. 1-60 -4- ` RECOPJA I-iDING ADOPTION OF E�Mat'a0IfS.3T OF 5:�0'i3�J�d € �v� C��' `s'i- ..0 (Ol°�g� ��®:R©2L SE;J�?C_[ b� bJEL�^S 0YF;i400 �. �;i-:OAOk�i% . �s3- - o�fii�vd�:i xG�I �::� i. i�s��El t„ l�t[:-4 �=�' pZ'����:ti> COATI+ UN IC.A s-.1011S 1. John B. Cockcroft & Co., requesting time extension variance grant apartment house construction. A letter dated February 18, 1960, from John B. Cockcroft & Co., 1310 Howard Avenue, Burlingame, referred to a variance granted by the Planning Co©riiss4oA on Farah 17, 1959, in connection with apartment house construction at Bellevue Avenue and El Camino Real, and advised that.to date substantial progress has been made on the preliminary items related to the project. The letter requested clarification concerning the present status of the variance, whether on the basis of the work completed the variance has been aoeomplished, or whether a time extension is required. In reply to Chairman Kindig, the Planning Consultant expressed the opinion that in the present instance, because of the progress made, It would be correct to assume that the variance could not lapse. How- ever, as a matter of record, a time extension should be made. The City Attorney suggested that the best treatment, from the stand- point of the City.. also the property owner, by to gn ..r_t_ ar, ex_t sr".- sion. There being no ft)rther etomTercts , a Gti.:2r, NS S iht1zreduced, by C'amapi ssi :nrPr korb:r& apnrolting a time extenei :n of one year-, to March 1'%, 1961, on tze variance grantee to Joh-114 B. Ccck.-roft :. Co..,, it acec-rd',ane-t-, with *Z.-heir 'le tear of Pebvuary 16, 1960. Motion seconded by Co=_r_a .r .jnois Martin and unanimously carried on roll call. v^tc 47.9-ambers 2. A.& J. Sno�tcr. inC.,.,requestir `con i�.e _tern rL8.ubd1vision map. A letter dated February 17, 1960, from „ , x .r c�;;oa� :�;- 1? J. ► : Jl�.: _ . ".i..., i' �lCi S"[:�� the C Omm1S91on toi �3:5 ers-31 tt.q u;"U-1 4x,1a;1'.a lag study of a aresrat th- regular meeting of February 23, 1960, and formal action at the study meeting of March 14, 1960. Mr. Glazer, representing the applioant, was in attendance and advised, In reply to Chairman Kindig, that the resubdivision proposes a division of the lands of A. Palen, located on the westerly side of North Carolan Avenue, north of Broadway overpass. The City Engineer confirmed that the map had been filed and oopies were available for Commission review. Members reviewed the map and were advised that all public improvements are in order. The application was scheduled for public hearing at an adjourned meet- ing on March 14, 1960. PLA WIING CO 1STJT=TJ1.3T REPORT 1. The Planning; Consultant advised that the material on proposed amend .. Jb ments to the Ordinance Code concerning "PROCEDM* has not been completed and requested that the subject be continued on the agenda ? for an additional month. 2. Progress was reported in compiling material in connection with enforcement of the Zoning laws. 3. Considerable time has been spent in preparing a study of regu- lations for apartment house districts, which will be available for Commission study at an early date. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was regularly adjourned at 10:10 p.m., to convene at 8:00 p.m. on March 14, 1960. Respectfully submitted, D.A. Stivers, Secretary <6�