HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1970.08.24CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Cistulli
Jacobs
Kindig
Mink
Norberg
Sine
Taylor
CALL TO ORDER
August 24, 1970
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT
None City Attorney Karmel
City Planner Mann
City Engineer Marr
Councilman Mangini
A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called
to order on the above date at 8:00 p.m., Chairman Sine presiding.
ROLL CALL
All members were present.
MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of July 27 and the study meeting
of August 10, 1970, previously submitted to members, were approved
and adopted.
HEARINGS
1. OFFICE BUILDINGS APPROVED IN EAST MILLSDALE INDUSTRIAL PARK.
Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the special permit appli-
cations of Ryan, Marocco and Company, Burlingame, for office building
use of two separate properties in the industrial district, as follows:
(a) Two-story building at the corner of Malcolm and Gilbreth Roads
(b) One-story building Malcolm Road between Gilbreth Road and
Bayshore Highway
A communication from the applicant dated July 10, 1970, signed by
Charles E. Boone, Manager of Properties, submitted four (4) sets of
drawings showing proposed plot plan, floor plan and elevations of
both buildings, and stated that quality of construction, design and
landscaping will be similar to the office buildings recently completed
by the company at 1799 Bayshore Highway and 1818 Gilbreth Road.
The City Planner, in response to the Chair, stated that office
buildings are a conditional use in M-1, requiring a special permit
from the Commission. He reported that the plans were examined for
proper setbacks, parking and related zoning matters.
Mr. Charles E. Boone, upon recognition by the Chair, stated tr►at the
company has been successful in developing office buildings in the
industrial area, with emphasis on extensive landscaping, and parking
facilities, for the most part, exceeding city requirements, and that
it is intended that the proposed developments will be of equal
quality.
.In response to the Chair's inquiry, there were no comments from the
audience favoring or protesting the applications.
The hearing was declared concluded.
(a) A motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Com-
missioner Jacobs, approving the application of: Ryan, Marocco &
Company, 1799 Bayshore Highway, Burlingame, for special use permit
"to construct a two-story precast reinforced concrete office building"
at the corner of Malcolm and Gilbreth Roads, Mots 24 and 25, Block 3,
East Millsdale Industrial Park), conforming generally to drawings on
file, was carried on the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli,Jacobs,Kindj!g,Mink,Norberg,Sine,Taylo:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
(b) A motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Com-
missioner Kindig, approving the application of Ryan, Marocco &
Company, Burlingame, for special use permit "to construct a one-story
precast reinforced concrete office building" on Malcolm Road between
Bayshore Highway and Gilbreth Road (Lots 32,33,34&35, Block 3, East
Millsdale Industrial Park), generally in accord with drawings on file,
was carried on the following roll call:
---- AYES:- COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli,Jacobs,Kindic_;,Mink,Norberg,Sine,Taylor
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
The Chair announced that the Commission's action would be effective
Wednesday, September 9, 1970, if not appealed,.
2. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR TRUCK STORAGE, ROLLINS ROAD. (continued)
Chairman Sine announced a continued hearing from the meeting of
July 27, 1970, on the application of west Bay Express & Drayage
Company, 1368 Rollins Road, for special permit: to maintain a secondary
off-street parking area at 1330 Rollins Road.
A communication from the applicant dated August 21, 1970, signed by
R.E. Moore, advised of his inability to appeal- on August 24 and
requested a continuance to the regular meeting in September. In the
communication, Mr. Moore offered to oil and rock the area that he is
renting at 1330 Rollins Road within 45 days of Commission approval to
the use.
A suggestion from the City Planner that the matter be continued for
30 days for Mr. Moore to be present and personally state his intentions
for the property was accepted by the Commission.
Chairman Sine thereafter declared the hearing continued to the meeting
of September 28, 1970. -2-
3. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR EQUIPMENT STORAGE YARD, BAYSHORE HIGHWAY,DENIED.
Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application for special
permit filed by J&J Backhoe Service, 221 Milton Avenue, San Bruno,
"for storage yard for trenching equipment" on property located at
1554 Bayshore Highway.
A letter dated August 20, 1970, from Real Estate Division of
Reynold C. Johnson Company, Pleasonton, California, signed by
John S. Muirhead, Property Manager, was read opposing the use "for the
general benefit and preservation of the neighborhood."
Invited by the Chair to initiate the discussion, the City Planner
reported that the property is a large parcel of unsubdivided acreage
owned by Mrs. Melba Moore Riley,who operates a small nursery there;
additionally, there are warehouse buildings that date back a number
of years and a storage yard occupied by an excavating and dirt
hauling contractor, which is the subject of a report from the fire
inspector in connection with fire hazards on the property.
The City Planner stated that he found the premises in very bad con-
dition on the occasion of a recent visit and that the situation
probably will not improve as long as the present ownership continues.
He advised that the property has been on the market for some time,
consequently it would appear reasonable to assume that changes will
occur eventually and that, under the circumstances, he had no
objection to J&J Backhoe Service on the property.
The City Planner mentioned that the applicant was located at the
southerly end of the Oscar Person property on Bayshore Boulevard until
recently, when all of the tenants were requested to vacate.
Mr. John Furrer, owner J&J Backhoe Service, upon recognition by the
Chair, stated that the space reserved for his purposes extends
generally to the bay, northerly of the existing contractor's storage
yard and that he would be willing to attempt to screen his equipment
by fencing and landscaping.
In response to the Chair, Mr. Furrer stated that of the six (6) pieces
of equipment, perhaps three (3), or at the most four (4) would be
stored at one time, plus tool boxes and a fuel tank. He advised that
normally equipment remains at the job site.
Chairman Sine commented on the "atrocious housekeeping" observed when
visiting the property, visible mainly only from the bay.
In response to Commissioner Mink, the City Planner confirmed that the
property is within the Waterfront Commercial (C-4) District.
There were no comments from the audience favoring the application,
in response to the Chair.
Mr. H.R. O'Hara, Hillsborough, owner of land adjacent to the subject
property, stated that he would have no objection to the use per se,
except that vehicles entering and leaving the property drive across
-3-
his land. Mr. O'Hara explained that the Riley property has no
frontage on Bayshore Highway, that 15 feet of access easement granted
the owner a number of years ago has never been improved, and that
traffic moves at will over the entire property causing heavy dust and
resultant problems of maintenance at his place of business.
Mr. O'Hara stated that there is a paved road :30 feet in width from
Burlway Road to the Riley property, which the applicant should be
required to use if permitted on the property; or, alternatively, the
access easement be improved with a hard surface.
The City Planner pointed out that restricting J&J Backhoe Service
to the Burlway Road access will not cause other tenants to follow.
There being no further comments from the audience, the hearing was
declared concluded.
Commissioners were invited to comment.
Commissioner Kindig referred to a prior time when Mr. Furrer was
required to appear before the Commission, because of locating in the
city without benefit of proper permits and questioned his reasons
for disregarding procedure in the present situation.
Mr. Furrer explained that there was insufficient time upon receipt
of the notice to vacate, that he was forced to relocate the equip-
ment without delay.
Commissioner Kindig referred to Mr. Furrer's offer to make certain
improvements to the space that he occupies, requesting clarification
of the lease arrangement.
Mr. Furrer stated that he has no lease but would be willing to
install a fence and plant trees, because of advantages in the location.
In response to Commissioner Cistulli, Mr. Furrer stated that he
occupies a space approximately 150 feet by 70 feet.
Commissioner Cistulli stated his position that it would be unfair
to approve the use conditionedpupon the improvements, since
Mr. Furrer's arrangement with the owner appears to be somewhat nebulous
Commissioner Mink commented that the use should be considered in
relation to the purpose and intent of the Waterfront Commercial
District zoning classification, fiamely',_controlled development of the
land bordering the bay and that he, personally, was unable to
reconcile approval of the use with benefit either to the city or
to the applicant.
A motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli to deny the application
of J&J Backhoe Service, 221 Milton Avenue, San Bruno, for special
permit to maintain a storage yard for trenching equipment at
1.554 Bayshore Highway, was seconded by Commissioner Taylor and
carried on the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli,Kirdig,Mink,Norberg,Sine,Taylor
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Jacobs
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
The applicant was informed of the right of,appeal to the City Council.
-4-
4. SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVED FOR MODEL HOME, LANG ROAD.
Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application for
special permit filed by Lindal Homes of California to add a new
model home to its existing display at 310 Lang_ Road, Lots 5 and 6,
Anza Airport Park No. 2.
The City Planner, in response to the Chair, stated that the appli-
cant was granted permission at the last meeting to add a single
model, that'a verbal request to revise the application to two (2)
models was made after the notices of hearing were mailed and, for
that reason, a separate formal application was required.
The City Planner explained that the operation is a form of retail
use in the industrial district, requiring approval of a special
permit; the original permit granted conditionally approximately
two (2) years ago provides that the use may not be extended except
through the special permit procedure.
Mr. Charles Dixon, Manager, Lindal Homes of California, upon recog-
nition by the Chair, stated that the company manufactured cabin or
secondary -type homes primarily and that the structure which is the
subject of the present application is the first of a new line of
permanent year-round residences that the company is anxious to
display.
In response to Commissioner Kindig, Mr. Dixon discussed off-street
parking facilities, advising that their lease includes an area
for 30 to 35 cars, presently unusable because of truck parking by
Anza Pacific Corporation, and that efforts to have the area cleared
have been unsuccessful. Mr. Dixon stated that there may be as many
as 36 cars during office hours on Sunday, rarely more than a dozen
at other times, and that there has never been an occasion when
parking has created problems.
There were no comments from the audience favoring or protesting the
application in response to the Chair.
The hearing was declared concluded.
A motion introduced by Commissioner Mink, seconded by Commissioner
Jacobs, approving the application of Lindal Homes of California,
310 Lang Road, for special permit to include the "RICHMOND" in the
model home display, in accordance with plot plan and specifications
on file, and on condition that utilities not be connected that would
allow residential or office use of the structu:re,was carried on the
following roll call:
AYES:% COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli,Jacobs,Kindig,Mink,Norberg,Sine,
Taylor
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
The -Chair announced that the permit would be effective Wednesday,
September 9, 1970, if not appealed.
-5-
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Chairman Sine acknowledged the presence of Councilman Mangini.
5. VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT FIVE UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING IN FIRST -
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT DENIED.
Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of
William E. Jenkins c/o David A. Norwitt, Bank of America Building,
San Francisco, for a zoning variance.
The applicant's statement of justification for a zoning change from
R-1 to R-4 cited the poor condition of the existing building on the
property, the number of non -conforming multi -family dwellings in the
immediate area, and benefits deriving to the neighborhood by replace-
ment of the existing old structure with a five -unit "garden apart-
ment" building with parking facilities for eight automobiles, con-
forming to general plan proposals for the area..
Plans and specifications prepared by Beebe, Hersey/Architects,
San Francisco, were filed.
The City Engineer questioned a statement in the applicant's communi-
cation indicating that the general plan proposes R-4 uses in the
subject area.
The City Planner, through the Chair, explained that the statement is
incorrect, that the general plan proposes low -density multiple
developments, that the city's closest zone classification is R-3A,
and that the proposal meets the requirements of that zoning of 1500
square feet per unit.
A land use study of Newlands Avenue from E1 Camino Real to Central
Avenue, prepared by the City Planner, was displayed.
Chairman Sine recognized Mr. Jack L. Markle, Homestead Financial Cor-
poration, 650 California Street, San Francisco, representing the
applicant.
Mr. Markle stated that negotiations are in progress for purchase of the
property and ultimate development by Homestead Financial Corporation,
that the proposed building will consist of one large owner/occupant
unit and four rental units, and that the company has had success with
similar projects in the cities of San Carlos, Belmont and San Mateo
on the Peninsula and in San Francisco. He stated that there appears
to be a need for the type of multi -family dwelling that will provide
a comfortable residence with off -setting income for persons no longer
interested in maintaining large homes.
Mr. Markle stated that the proposal is 1500 square feet per unit, in
accordance with "garden apartment" developments, including generous
use of decks and landscaping; the "owner -unit" will be large and
modern in all respects, the others smaller but designed to be func-
tional and meet rental needs of the community.
Mr. Markle stated that there would appear to be justification for a
-6-
change in zoning in the area, because of the existence of neglected
properties and evidences of deterioration. -
The Chair invited comments favoring the application.
Mr. Paul Constantino, owner Town & Country Realty, Burlingame, stated
that he is familiar with the subject area, that he was a member of
the citizens general plan study group and that; in his opinion, the
proposed improvement will introduce a suitable form of multi -family
use in an area where slow but eventual transition from single-family
to apartment buildings appears to be inevitable.
RECESS
Following a ten minute recess for interested persons to view the land
use map, Chairman Sine reconvened the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
HEARING (cont.)
Further comments in favor were heard from Mr. William E. Jenkins,__
owner of the subject property. Mr. Jenkins stated that in March.
1964► his application for variance for apartment use of the property
was approved by the Planning Commission and that, in a subsequent
hearing before the City Council, he agreed to withdraw until the
city's general plan was adopted. He stated that he intended to
improve the property but was unable to do so for health reasons and
that during the past seven years continuing efforts to sell have
been fruitless because of the zoning classification. .
Mr. Jenkins referred to a number of properties on the street used for
multiple occupancy, despite the zoning, stated that there is a hard-
ship in the property created by the zoning and requested favorable
consideration to the variance, explaining that. Homestead Financial
Corporation offer to purchase is predicated upon the city's approval
to the proposed construction.
There were no further comments in favor.
A communication dated August 20, 1970, signed by seven property owners
in the 1500 block of Howard Avenue and one owner at 1561 Newlands
Avenue petitioned favorable consideration to at form of zoning classifi-
cation permitting variances from R-1 to "garden apartment zoning,"
rather than total rezoning, in the area westerly of El Camino Real,
bounded by Occidental Avenue, El Camino Real, Newlands Avenue and
Burlingame Avenue.
The petition stated that "it is the hope of the undersigned that what-
ever plan is adopted, those who wish to keep their property as first
residential will not be penalized by said zoning."
A communication dated August 17, 1970, from the City Planner referred
to the land use map showing properties and their use on the first
block of Newlands Avenue -the portion of the street affected by the
current request for variance -stated that the zoning is entirely R-1,
single family zone, with the exception of `_he R-3 lots fronting E1
Camino Real. The communication discussed deviations from the
-7-
established zoning that, for the most part, crept in without benefit
of either Commission actions or building permits, the conditions in an
area that can be considered the basis for a variance or for reclassifi-
cation to a proper zone and commented on relationship of the proposal
to the city's general plan.
A communication was read from William E. Hansen, Atherton, California,
protesting the variance, because of the large number of R-3 parcels in
the city that remain undeveloped.
Comments were invited from the audience in opposition.
Vaughn Janssen, 121 Crescent Avenue, E.J. Rogers, 1575 Newlands Avenue,
Anthony Benevento, 1561 Newlands Avenue, William R. Ward, 120 Occidental
Avenue, Mrs. Adolph F. Hansen, 1551 Newlands Avenue an3-representing
owner of 1540 Newlands Avenue, objected to resulting increased traffic,
to statements inferring that properties are neglected and the area
deteriorating, to variance grants resulting in "spot zoning" to the
detriment of neighboring properties and urged that existing conditions
not be changed; a question was raised as to Homestead Financial Corpora-
tion's interest in other properties in the immediate area for similar
variance applications.
Mr. Jack Markle, upon recognition
associated with mortgage financin
years on the Peninsula, including
He referred to his comments earli
the properties, agreeing that the
confined to the subject property,
a small structure of little value
by the Chair, stated that he has been
g in various forms for the past seven
the cities of San Mateo and Burlingame.
er in regard to condition of some of
statements properly should have been
which is virtually a vacant lot with
at the rear.
Mr. Markle stated that, for the present, his company is interested only
in the subject property for low -density quality apartment development,
providing residences for mature persons, primarily in the 40 to 60
age bracket. He advised that the owner/occupant unit will consist of
1450 square feet of living space, the two bedroom, two bath 900 to
1000 square feet, and one bedroom, one bath 700 to 800 square feet.
In response to Mr. Fred E. Andersen, 1545 Howard Avenue, concerning
other "spot zonings" in the 'neighborhood, the City Planner stated
that Howard Avenue was not studied but that he discovered on Newlands
Avenue a duplex building at 1527, not a conversion but built for the
purpose -- he stated he had no knowledge of the actual zoning at the
time of the construction; additionally, a single property consisting
of two lots is improved with two single-family dwellings, one behind
the other, that at least three buildings, originally single-family
in use, have been converted without benefit of building permits --
one to four units, one to seven units and another to either four or
five units.
The general plan diagram was displayed in response to comments from the
audience.
Commissioner Mink referred to comments from the audience concerning
"spot zoning," stating that the term i is incorrect, that where
a variance is approved in a zone, the city exercises considerably
-8-
greater control of the use of the property than is possible under
total rezoning. He stated that the general plan recognizes areas
in transition withnthe City of Burlingame and provides the density
formula for their reconstruction, that the general plan proposal of
9 to 20 dwelling units per acre is very close to the R-3A zone
classification but that he would prefer the variance method to
total reclassification.
Mrs. E.J. Rogers, 1575 Newlands Avenue, stated that the apartment
zoned areas of Highland and Lorton Avenues appear to be in need of
refurbishing and suggested that the city directs its attention there,
away from established single-family neighborhoods.
In response to comments from Commissioner Mink and an inquiry from
Commissioner Jacobs, the City Planner stated that a variance for a
temporary use would be granted to an individual; for something of
long-standing, construction of a building, as an example, the variance
would run with the land.
Commissioner Cistulli referred to the area in North Burlingame,
Capuchino Avenue between Broadway and Carmelita Avenue, where variance
grants proved highly successful in fostering improvement of individual
properties.
The hearing was declared concluded.
Commissioner Taylor questioned whether the proposed construction con-
forms to general plan proposals of 9 to 20 dwelling units per acre.
Commissioner Mink responded to Commissioner Taylor, stating that his
computations indicate between 25 and 30 dwelling units per acre,
despite compliance with R-3A requirements of 1500 square feet per
unit.
Commissioner Norberg commented that the project appears to be well
conceived and properly designed.
Mr. Markle, in response to Commissioner Kindig, confirmed that 15 feet
of frongetback will be maintained and that the building will be two-
story from ground level, with surface parking.
Commissioner Mink stated that the project appears to be reasonably
attractive and probably would not be harmful to neighboring properties
but that he would prefer the number of units be reduced to four, to
agree with density recommendations of the general plan.
A motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli to deny the application
failed 'to receive a second.
A motionw/IRtroduced by Commissioner Mink, seconded by Commissioner
Norberg, to approve the application of William E. Jenkins for variance
to improve the property at 1511 Newlands Avenue with a five unit
apartment building generally in accordance with architectural drawings
on file.
Prior to roll call, Commissioner Kindig explained that his vote would
-9-
be based on conditions in the subject property only and that another
property, differently situated on the street, would be judged on its
merits. .�
A roll call was recorded as follows:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kindig, Norberg
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli, Jacobs, Mink, Sine, Taylor
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
In declaring the application denied, the Chair informed the appli-
cant of the privilege of appeal to the City Council.
COMMUNICATIONS
1. BEVERLY ENTERPRISES REQUEST FOR VARIANCE EXTENSION APPROVED.
A letter dated July 27, 1970, from Beverly Enterprises, Pasadena,
California, signed by J. Shirl Cornwall, A.I.A.., Corporate Architect,
referred to a height variance granted Baywood Medical Building, Inc.,
on August 18, 1969, for a four story building on Marco Polo Way,
and requested extension of said variance for one year to August,1971,
as it is anticipated that construction cannot begin prior to the
expiration of the original variance.
The City Planner, in response to the Chair, confirmed that any changes
in the original plans will require a new application.
A motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli and seconded by Com-
missioner Mink, approving extension of the variance granted Baywood
Medical Building, Inc., in accordance with the communication dated
July 27, 1970, from Beverly Enterprises, Pasadena, California, to
__...August, 1971, was declared carried on the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONER: Cistulli, Jacobs, Kindig, Mink, Norberg, Sine,
Taylor
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
2. MCNAMARA CORPORATION RE: CONSTRUCTION TRAILER.
A letter dated August 12, 1970, was read from D.N. Erickson, Manager,
McNamara Corporation of California, 801 Mahler Road, Burlingame,
advising that a trailer formerly parked at 1499 Bayshore Highway has
been relocated and expressed appreciation to the Commission for
cooperating with the company in its attempts to relocate.
NEW BUSINESS
I.. RECLASSIFICATION -- CORBITT TRACT.
The City Planner reported that he received some reaction from property
owners in the Corbitt area, following the recent meeting when the
area was discussed and changes 'proposed in land uses. He suggested
that the Commission consider initiating public hearings at the
regular meeting in October.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting regularly adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
-10- ]Everett K. Kindi�ecretary