Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1960.02.08CITY OF BURLINC3AME PLANNING COMMISSION COHMISSIOIrERS PRESEI•lT Diederichsen Kindig Martin Moore Stivers CALL TO ORDER February 8, 1960 COEHISSIOIrT_W ABSENT OTHERS PR SEINT I-1anderson City Attorney Karmel Norberg City Engineer Marx, Plan. Cons. T ann Bldg.* InececObor Calviell The study meeting regularly scheduled for thie date was :lled to order at 8:05 p.m. d Chairman Kindig presiding. Commissioner Norberg having advised of his absence from the city on this date was excused. FOR STUDY: 1. Hobby Room Proposed To Be Constructed In Accessory Building�F.J.Dofsen) Mr. Floyd J. Dofsen, owner and resident, 16 Davis Court, Burlingame, ap- peared to discuss the possibility of including a hobby room in an accessory building which is presently under construction on his property. The Commission was informed that the building will contain dressing rooms and a bathroom to be used in conjunction with a swimming pool on the property. A plot plan and elevations were submitted by Mr. Dofsen who explained that there is sufficient space to include a small hobby room at the rear of the building. The Planning Consultant, in reply to the Chair® stated that Irir. Dofsen must file an application for a use permit and upon. approval from the Planning Commission may proceed with the hobby room, Mr. Dofsen was advised that a public hearing would be held at the next regular meeting of the Commission providing that an application is Filed In the Office of the City Clerk by Thursday, February 11, 1960. Chairman Kindig announced that because of the holiday on the 22nd, the regular meeting of the Commission would be held on. Tuesday, February 23. 2. Resubdivision Lands of 1:1leen T. Plate. (Vancouver Avenue) — An application proposing a resubdivision of the property of Eileen T. Plate was submitted to the Commission, said property containing one Care of land and being located on the southerly side of Vancouver Avenue, northwesterly from Broadway Extension. Mr. Dean Turner, manager of the San Mateo office of Fox & Carskadon-Jaas in attendance representing the applicant. The City Engineer noted that the lot is very large and the prc OC,'.i3. i,-s to develop three lots all with 50 foot frontages on Vancouver Avenue, There is ample area to meet the 7000 square foot lot size requirement, The City Engineer stated also that there will be agreements to be ar- ranged on the sewer lateral and water service lines, There being no further comments, the application was accepted for public hearing on February 23, 1960. 3. Variance Proposed 9 Clarendon Road. R-3 Use In R-1 District, Mrs. Noel Gough was in attendance to discuss a variance for construction of an apartment building or. ;property which she ov.Fns at 9 Clarendon Road, Burl inga e - tIjst residential district. Firs, Gough submitted a preliminary plan of the building ar3d exple ined that the lot is the first on Clarendon Road from the apart.Men1_" zorx,' or Peninsula Avenue. Mrs. hough stated that there is a very old diwelling on the lot in poor condition and beyond repair. Because of the location and the lot size,the property would lend itself readily to apartment use. In reply to questioning, Firs. Gough advised that the lot Was a frontage of 50 feet on, Clarendon by 157 foot depth. The proposed building is to contain 10 units. The possibility of duplex use was discussed and hrs. Gough was advised that in the past the Commission has not looked with favor on proposals to rezone first residential properties to multi -family use. Nrs,. Gough stated that she would file a formal variance application and, on that bass.., the public hearing was scheduled for February 23, 1960.. 4. Resubdivision - Portion of Lands of R.P. Etienn®._ An application proposing a resubdivision of a portion of thn lands of R.P. Elitienne, located on Marsten Road, was submitted. In reply to Chairman Kindig, the Planning Consultant stated that In August, 1959, the Commission approved a subdivision may dividing the property into four parcels. The present application proposes to divide one of these parcels in four, making a total of ? lots within a six months period. The Planning Consultant questioned whether this is a legal resubdivision under she provisions of the State Flap Act. After a brief discussion, the subject was referred to the City Attorney for study and report at the time of the public hearing on Februarys 23, 196C 5. Discussion In re Apartment Buildipgs: Development and Zoning. A discussion on the subject of controls to be exercised in the development of apartment buildo?,ngs in the city was initiated by the- Planning Consultant who reported that there is a growing interest in the subject among local groups. A copy of a letter which was written by the. Planni.ng Consultant at the request of a local business man, for presentation to a group of interested citizens, was distributed to members of the Commission. The commanfcation raised a numbeb of points coroce=ing present apartment zone class 1.floations and use regulations, also the possible need for additional apartment zones with provisions applicable to specific types of development. In the general comments, members agreed that the -re was need for a complete study of present regulations., considerations of lot coverages, height and area ratios, etc, The subject was held for further study at a later date. 6. Discussion in,re z01-114KE orcement. The Plazuiing Consultant reported that there is a constant d i scover,%r of zoning violations throughout the city. Reports axe recei.vcu. of such violations from the County Health Department and from the various f-lepart- ment.s of the city. However, there is no individual who is formally charged with the duty of zoning enforcement. The Planning; Consultant stated that there is a need for a central office where the detail connected with zoning violations can be processed and the necessary measures taken to control and/or correct. The suggestion was made that a city planner with the delegated authority to enforce the zoning laws would appear to be the answer. The Planning Consultant suggested that the position of planning advisor s:aould be ex- Vanded to that of city playLaer. The City Attorney stated that zoning enforc©men; is not properly the duty of the police or fire departments nor the building, inspector. All of these are concerned with enforcement of the laces peculiar to their octn departments. The City Attorney agreed that there should be an official in the city govem=ent who primartiily Is responsible for zoning policing and enf orce- ment and stated that there would appear to be nothing objectionable if such an office were to be connected with the city9 s planr_i.ng operation. The subject was held for further study at a later date so that a recom- mendation might be prepared to be sent to the City Council. ADJOURNMENT There being no further matters for discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, D.A . Stive rt"s, Seoretary -3