Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1970.07.27v THE CITY OF BURLINGAVE PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Cistulli Kindig Jacobs Mink Norberg Sine Taylor CALL TO ORDER July 27, 1970 COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT None City Attorney Karmel City Planner Mann City Engineer R'arr Councilman Johnson Councilman Kangini A regular monthly meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called to order on the above date at 8:00 p.m., Chairman Sine presiding. ROLL CALL A roll call recorded all members present. MT MIITF The minutes of the regular meeting of June 22, 1970 and the study meeting of July 13, 1970, previously submitted to members, were approved and adopted. MAPS 1. PARCEL MAP - INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY. ADRIAN ROAD. A Tentative Parcel Map prepared by Wilsey and Ham for William J. Lowenherg, owner, proposing to resubdivide Lots 1,2,3 and portion 4, Block 6, Unit No. 3 Millsdale Industrial Park, and portion. of 140 foot drainage and P.G.E. Towerline RI , was reviewed at the study meeting and scheduled for formal consideration on this date. The City Planner, in response to the Chair's invitation to comment, explained that the purpose of the map is to rearrange existing interior lot lines to divide the property into three (3) parcels with a new cul-de-sac street providing frontage for all of the parcels. fie stated that the map now includes building setbacks requested by the Commission at the study meeting, namely, 15 feet on Parcels B and C and 10 feet on Parcel A. The City Planner reported further that the owner, through his engineer, has furnished a proposal for completion of all of the public improvements, subject to acceptance by the City Council.; accordingly, the Comr:;ission's action will be in the form of a recommendation to the City Councilman the map. The City Planner stated that the method proposed for performance of public improvements has been verified by the City Attorney as proper, in accordance with provisions of the code. The City Engineer stated that, in addition to building setbacks, the map was revised to include considerable engineering detail requested by his department and to correct alignment of certain property lines requested by Commissioner Norberg. He stated that the project engineer is aware that detail in connection with street improvements and underground utilities, and estimates of figures for the bond must be on file with the city when the Council takes its action. The City Engineer reported that he had not received copies of the map in proper form for signature by the Commission. Mr. Frank Finney, Wilsey and Hain, and Mr. Max Gruenberg represented the proponents..Stating that he was unaware that the final tracing had not been delivered, Air. Finney volunteered to attempt delivery prior to adjournment of the meeting. There were no comments favoring or protesting the resubdivision in response to the Chair's inquiry. A motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs, approving the Parcel reap filed with the City Engineer, resub- dividing Lots 1,2,3, and portion 4, Block 6, Unit No. 3 Millsdale Industrial Park, and portion of 140 foot drainage and P.G.E. Towverline R/18, prepared by Wilsey and Ham, dated July, 1970, and recommending adoption of said map to the City Council, was carried unanimously on roll call: AYES: Commissioners Cistulli, Kindig, Jacobs, Mink, Norberg, Sine, Taylor NOES: None ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None ACKNOWLEMIENT Chairman Sine acknowledged the presence of Councilman Mangini, ex-officio member of the Commission. HEARINGS 1. STREET NAME CHANCE RECOT,flRENDED TO CITY COUNCIL: "BAYSHORE BOULEVARD" TO "TULARE BOULEVARD." Chairman Sine announced that, at the request of the City Council, the Commission scheduled a public hearing for this date in the matter of renaming Bayshore Boulevard. At the Chair's request to review the background of the subject for the benefit of interested persons in attendance, the City Planner, first, requested a showing of hands from the audience of those who received notices of the hearing, mailed to property owners on the street, and expressed appreciation for their interest. The City Planner referred to a request submitted to the City Council several months ago by a group of property owners on the street to consider a new name for Bayshore Highway; noted that problems have - 2 - existed throughout the years, because of three prominent thoroughfares within the city being designated "Bayshore" -- Bayshore Highway, Bayshore Freeway and Bayshore Boulevard --and stated that, as a result of consider- able discussion in connection with a name change on the east side, the Commission was requested by the City Council to propose a completely new name for Bayshore Boulevard excluding "Bayshore" and, furthermore, to recommend a single name for the continuous street that extends from the Millbrae/Burlingame boundary southeasterly to a junction with Lang Road in Anza Airport Park. The City Planner acknowledged participation by students of the city's elementary schools, who offered substitute names for "Bayshore Boulevard", in response to the city's invitation, and a communication from the San Mateo County Historical Society suggesting the name "Stock Farm Road°. The communication stated that all of the area was once part of the Corbitt Horse Farm. The City Planner pointed out that the city has attempted to maintain a tradition of using street names of Spanish derivation and has been successful to a large degree. He stated that the Commission recognized that problems will be created for residents and businesses on the street and that any recommendation to the City Council will provide for a period of time for the change to be accomplished. Chairman Sine invited comments from the audience. Mr. Sidney P.I. Afadden, owner Bayshore Plumbing Company, 965 Bayshore Boulevard, questioned the length of time that will elapse before the change will become effective, pointing out that in addition to the inconvenience of changing the address on business forms and stationery, he will be faced with the added expense of relettering on his fleet of service trucks. Chairman Sine assured Mr. h;adden that the Commission is aware of the problem and intends to request the City Council to delay implementation for at least one year. Mr. S. Intragni, owner �ental property at 617 Bayshore Boulevard, questioned if property deeds and insurance policies would be affected and requested clarification of the precise area involved. The City Planner responded in the negative to the :inquiry concerning deeds, suggested that insurance policies probably should be revised and described the areas east and west of the freeway where the changes are proposed. In response to the Chair, there were no further speakers from the audience. Commissioners were invited to comment. Commissioner Cistulli indicated agreement i:,ith two of the names sub- mitted by the City Planner in a memo to the Commission dated March 42 1970, namely, "Tulare" and "Ortega." Commissioner Cistulli offered his personal selections: "Chavez," "Linda ,'far," "Mar Bella." - 3 - Commissioner Mink stated that, with the exception of "Linda Mar," any one of the remaining four (4) would be acceptable. Commissioner Kindig expressed preference for "Ortega" or "Tulare." Commissioner Jacobs mentioned "Bolinas." There being no further suggestions, Chairman Sine summarized the suggestions, as follows: "Ortega," "Tulare," "Chavez," "Mar Bella," "Bolinas." A motion introduced by Commissioner Cistulli to recommend to the City Council that the name of Bayshore Boulevard be changed to "Tulare Road" and that the change take place at least one year from the date of adoption by the City Council, was seconded by Commissioner Kindig. The City Engineer, upon recognition by the Chair, suggested that "Boulevard" or "Avenue" would be preferable to "Road," since the latter appears to connote a minor street, where the subject street is, in fact, an arterial, so designated by the State and the City. There being no objections voiced, the Chair declared the above motion amended to recommend to the City Council the name "Tulare Boulevard,'' in lieu of "Tulare Road." A roll call was recorded as follows: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT Commissioners: Cistulli, Kindig, Sine, Taylor None None Jacobs, clink, Norberg, Ia. STREET NAME CIIANGE RECOMINENDED EAST OF FREEWIAY: "OLD BAYSHORE HIGHWAY." At the Chair's invitation, the City Planner initiated the discussion, recalling that the City Council furnished the Commission with guidelines in the matter of changing the street name east of the freeway, as follows: (a) That a single name be selected for the entire street commencing at b;illbrae Avenue at the northwest, extending beyond the short section designated "Extension. of Broadway" along the city's park area, through Anza Airport Park to a junction with Lang Road; and (b) That the name "Airport Boulevard" not be selected. The City Planner recalled that in prior discussions on the subject, the Commission generally recognized that "Old Bayshore" appears to be the commonly accepted name, not only by persons in business in the area but by residents of the city; furthermore, directional signs installed by the State on the freeway recognize the name. The City Planner suggested that'the Commission consider "Old Bayshore" as its recommendation to the City Council. He advised that in discussions with the City Engineer the matter of a further title was explored for purposes of mapping and to eliminate the possibility that the word "street" may be appended by the public and become common usage, contrary to the city's long-established practice of using titles other than "street." He referred to the phrase frequently heard "there are no streets in Burlingame." - 4 - Commissioner Mink recommended that the word "Boulevard" not be used and expressed preference to "Old Bayshore Highway.'' Commissioner Kindig indicated agreement. Commissioner Taylor stated his position that the name "Old Bayshore" connotes that the street was originally the old Bayshore that existed prior to the freeway and that the implication becomes clouded should the name be applied to Anza Airport Park, which was never a part of old Bayshore. A suggestion was heard from Mr. Madden that the two streets be called simply "East" and "West" Bayshore, respectively. There were no further comments. A motion introduced by Commissioner Mink recommending to the City Council that Bayshore Highway from its beginning at Millbrae, a short section now shown on the maps as "Extension of Broadway," the unnamed road on the perimeter of City of Burlingame property and the present Airport Boulevard to its junction with Lang Road be named "Old Bayshore Highway,'' and that the renaming become official sometime more than one year after adoption by the City Council. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cistulli. A roll call was recorded as follows: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli, Kindig, Jacobs, Mink, Norberg, Sine, Taylor NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None ACKNOWLEDGMENT Chairman Sine acknowledged the presence of Councilman Johnson, accompanied by Air. Johnson. 2. SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTED LINDAL HOMES TO EXTEND OPERATION. Chairman Sine announced a public hearing, continued from the meeting of June 22, 1970, on the application of Lindal homes of California, Inc., 310 Lang Road, to extend its operation to an adjoining property. A plot plan accompanied the application. The application on file recited as follows: "Special Permit applied for -- Model Home for display only, in conjunction with present three models nol•: existing, new model to be located on adjoining lot to the east." The City Planner, in response to the Chair, recalled that the Commission previously approved the construction. of three (3) structures on the property on Lang Road, one building to be.completed with foundation and utilities for purposes of a sales office, as well as display, the other two (2) strictly display structures placed on blocks. - 5 - The City Planner stated that, to his knowledge, there have been no problems associated with the operation. Chairman Sine recognized Mr. Charles Dixon, Manager Lindal Homes in Burlingame, who advised that the proposed structure is a new model, not currently displayed and confirmed there will be no utilities, with the exception of electricity for lighting purposes. Mfr. Dixon, in response to Commissioner Kindig, stated that the model t•,ill be two -stories and that two (2) of the existing are two -stories. 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, and seconded by Commissioner Kindig, approved the application of Lindal Homes of California, Inc., for special permit to construct one model home for display purposes only on vacant property to the east, adjoining the principal display at 310 Lang Road, subject to the condition that utilities that would allot,., the structure to be used for residential or office purposes not be connected. A roll call vote was recorded as follows: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli, Kindig, Jacobs, Mink, Norberg, Sine, Taylor NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None The applicant was informed the permit would become effective Tuesday, August 4, 1970, if not appealed. 3. FIAT-ROOSEVELT 'N'OTORS. INC.. DENIED SIGN VARIANCE. Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of Federal Sign and Signal Corporation, San Francisco, on behalf of Fiat -Roosevelt Motors, Inc., 1565 Adrian Road, for a variance from the sign ordinance to permit a double faced, free standing sign to an overall height of 48 feet 1 inch. Plot Plan and Elevations were filed. The sign ordinance limits pole (free-standing) signs in the industrial area to an overall height of 35 feet measured from sidewalk level. Mr. Ernest Freese, Federal Sign and Signal Corporation, was present. Mr. Freese, in response to the Chair, stated that the existing sign on the Fiat property is 55 feet gross height, that the proposal is to place a substitute sign, larger in total dimension but seven (7) feet less in height, that the existing pole will remain and a second pole installed to support the proposed display. - 6 - Air. Freese referred to drawings before the Corii(mission, pointing; out that comparative dimensions are shown of existing and proposed displays in relation to building height. He pointed out that the new sign will be blue plastic background with white letters, non-moving, non -flashing and elecfric illumination. Commissioner Cistulli recalled that at the study meeting the proponents indicated that a new display was considered essential for exposure above the tree line bordering the freeway. He stated that lie experienced no difficulty in observing the existing sign when travelling the freeway on several occasions recently and expressed the opinion that the replacement sign was intended for advertising purposes only; that the existing sign would appear to provide adequate identification, since the building is restricted to office use, with no warehousing involving pick up and delivery of merchandise, nor customer services. Mr. Freese stated that there are two reasons for the variance request, first, sight problems created by the height of the trees and, second, Fiat Roosevelt Motors adopted a new standard design for their signs employing horizontal, in lieu of the former vertical, lettering, and are conducting a national advertising campaign based on the new signs. Commissioner Kindig commented that he was able to read the Studebaker sign which appears to be 35 feet in height, when driving the freeway. Commissioner Kindig raised a question concerning dimensions of the two signs and was informed by Mr. Freese that the proposed ivill be 36 feet 6 inches in length by 8 feet 8 inches in height, the existing 14 feet 2 inches in length by 9 feet 8 inches in height. Commissioner Jacob's inquiry concerning difference in area established that the existing display is approximately 137 square feet, the proposed approximately 315 square feet. Mr. Freese commented that the proposed height of 48 feet is less than other existing signs in the area. In response to Commissioner Mink's inquiry -regarding the nature of the business, Mr. Freese stated that the Northern California Distribution Office for Fiat -Roosevelt, serving seven (7) western states including Hawaii, occupies the building. In further response to Commissioner Mink, Air. Freese advised that there are no customer services offered and that clients ordinarily would have no reason to make a personal visit to the building. Mr. Freese stated that if the variance is approved there is an excellent possibility that Fiat Roosevelt will have the Studebaker sign, no longer in use, removed from the premises. Chairman Sine stated that he, also, observed the Studebaker sign in driving the freeway. Mr. Freese, in response to Chairman Sine, acknowledged that he was the authorized representative of Fiat -Roosevelt in the subject application. - 7 - Commissioner Taylor referred to code conditions for variance grants, requesting Air. Freese to justify the application on the grounds of preservation of property rights. Mr. Freese stated that, in his opinion, every businessman has the right to publicize his business in the best way possible and that in the present instance the company has the right to ask for a particular sign at a particular height, if considered essential to a successful operation. He stated the request for variance is not without precedent, that others of a similar nature have been approved in the surrounding area of Fiat - ,Roosevelt building. There were no comments from the audience favoring or protesting the application. The hearing was declared concluded. Commissioner hank introduced a motion approving a variance to Fiat - Roosevelt "Motors, Inc., 1565 Adrian Road, for a free-standing sign to a height of 48 feet 1 inch, as per specifications on file. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Jacobs. A roll call vote was recorded as follows: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Jacobs, Norberg NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli, Kindig, Mink, Sine, Taylor ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None The motion to approve was declared defeated. The applicant was advised of the right of appeal to the City Council. 4. SIGN VARIANCE APPROVED COhIMERCIAL BUILDING, BURLINGAMiE PLAZA AREA. Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of Karl G. Pedersen, owner of a commercial building located on the northeast corner of Trousdale Drive and Magnolia Avenue, for variance from the sign ordinance to place signs on the face of the marquee on the Trousdale and Magnolia frontages. The applicant's comr,:unication dated July 9, 1970, stated that the intent is to place 10 signs, five (5) on Magnolia Avenue and five (5) on Trousdale Drive, measuring 24 inches high, lengths varying up to 14 feet, depending on front footage of the individual shop. The communication stated that the marquee projects eight feet over the sidewalk from the building facia, entailing approval of a variance from code section (22.52.040) for the signs to be placed as proposed. The communication stated that an effort is being made to affect a uniform design of all signs on the building, that signs on E1 Camino frontage are in place on the face of the marquee and that a similar treatment on Trousdale and Magnolia frontages will create a symrietrical appearance. A group of colored snapshots of the building showed new signs in place on E1 Camino frontage and proposed location of signs on Magnolia and Trousdale. - 8 - Mr. _David Pedersen, co-owner of the building, was present. The City Planner, in response to the Chair, explained that signing on the entire Plaza shopping area has been rather difficult, because of the number of owners and the individual preferences of tenants in the various shops. He stated that the marquee is a permanent part of the building on all three frontages, that the code restriction does not apply to the section on the Plaza side, this being private property, and that the request for variance affects only Trousdale and Magnolia frontages. Noting that signs against the building or on top would be legal but invisible, the City Planner commended the efforts of the owner for attempting to obtain some uniformity in signs and suggested approval of the variance. In response to the Chair, there were no comments favoring or protesting the application from the audience. The hearing was declared concluded. Commissioners were invited to comment. Commissioner Norberg indicated concurrence tvith the Planner's position that the variance be approved, expressing the opinion that the provision barring signs upon marquees beyond a certain distance from the property line would appear to be an arbitrary rieasurenent. Commissioner Taylor also approved of the owner's efforts to improve the area. He questioned the status of the signs on the Chinese food shop and the large globe at the dry-cleaning establishment. Mr. Pedersen stated that tenants cannot be forced to remove their signs but that, hopefully, at the time of lease renewal or change of tenants, they will be replaced. Commissioner Kindig introduced a motion to approve the application for variance of Karl G. Pedersen to install signs of the dimensions indicated in the applicant's letter on' the building marquee at the northeasterly corner of Trousdale Drive and Mlagnolia Avenue. , The motion was seconded by Commissioner Taylor. A roll call was recorded as follows: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli, Kindig, Jacobs, Wink, Norberg, Sine, Taylor NOES: COIM'MI SS ONE RS : None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None DISCUSSION RE PROCEDURE: APPLICATIONS FOR SIGN VARIANCES Chairman Sine invited comments from members in connection with a change in procedure on applications for sign variances that would require an -owner or his authorized agent, other than a representative of a sign company, to appear personally at both study and regular meetings, thereby - 9 - providing the principal in such applications an opportunity to become aware of regulations or policies of which he may be totally uninformed. Following comments from Commissioners Mink and Norberg and from the City Attorney,- Commissioner IMink inquired of the latter if it would be appropriate to request a written statement from the applicant, in a situation where a sign company is representing a business firm, as evidence of authority to represent and act for the principal. The City Attorney replied in the affirmative, indicating that a letter from the landlord or the tenant would be acceptable. In response to Chairman Sine, the City Planner reported that the procedure will be followed in future applications. HEARINGS (continued) 5. (a) WEST BAY EXPRESS TRUCKING OPERATION, ROLLINS ROAD, APPROVED. (b) SECONDARY PARKING AREA (continued) Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of (lest Bay Express for special permit to maintain a trucking operation at 1368 Rollins Road and to use a portion of the premises at 1330 Rollins Road for additional truck parking. The applicant's letter dated July 10, 1970, signed by R. E. Moore, stated that the company is engaged in general trucking transferring, holding and hauling commercial freight, operates an average of 10 to 15 pieces of equipment, primarily small two -ton trucks, and employs, on an average, eight (8) drivers. A plot plan was filed. Mr. Ray jkioore, operator of West Bay Express, was present. The City Planner, in response to the Chair, stated that there are two separate locations involved, which should be considered independent of each other: the property at 1368 Rollins Road, where West Bay 'Express actually operates, was originally built for a trucking company and has been used continuously for the purpose; the unimproved area adjacent to a building at 1330 Rollins Road, where Mr. Moore stores a part of his trucking equipment, is part of the property, once occupied by Coca Cola Company, has never been improved with fencing, landscaping or paving. The City Planner stated that Mr. Moore's rights of- tenancy, on a month to month basis, would preclude his being required to improve the lot at 1330 Rollins Road but some form of seal coat should be applied to the paving rock that has been placed there over the years. In response to the Chair, there were no comments from the audience favoring or protesting the application. There were no objections heard to Commissioner Mink's comment to consider the two locations separately. - 10 - A motion thereafter introduced by Commissioner Mink to approve.the application of 41lest Bay Express for special permit to operate a trucking business from 1368 Rollins Road was seconded by Commissioner Kindig. A roll call vote was recorded as follows: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli, Kindig, Jacobs, plink, Norberg, Sine, Taylor NOES: COMIMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: Commissioners: None (b) PARKING AREA, 1330 ROLLINS ROAD. Through a series of inquiries directed to Mr. Moore, Commissioners indicated reluctance to approve unlimited use of the property in its present condition. Mr. Moore stated that the principal reason for renting the lot was to provide off-street storage of semi -trucks and that, hopefully, the lot will be vacated within a period of three months. He requested permission to continue occupancy for that period, subject to review by the Commission. He expressed willingness to investigate the feasibility of applying a seal coat. Mr. Moore, in response to Commissioner 6ink, agreed to return in one month prepared to make a firm commitment, either on his or the land- lord's part, on application of a seal coat in the area being used for storage of his trucks. A motion introduced by Commissioner West Bay Express for special permit to the regular meeting of August 24, Cistulli and unanimously carried. RECONVENE: i-Iink to continue the application of to store trucks at 1330 Rollins Road 1970, was seconded by Commissioner Following a ten minute recess, the Chair called the meeting to order at 9:50 p'.m. 6. RYAN AND MAROCCO COMPANY SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATIONS (continued On a motion introduced by Commissioner Taylor, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs and unanimously carried, public hearings scheduled for this date on two (2) applications filed by Ryan and Narocco Company, 1799 Old Bayshore, for special permits to construct two (2) office buildings in the East Millsdale area, on Malcolm Road and at the corner of Malcolm and Gilbreth Roads, were continued to the regular meeting of August 24, 1970, when it was determined by the Chair that the applicant was not present nor represented. 7. LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY VARIANCES APPROVED FOR APARTD'ENT COMPLEX, CAROLAN AVENUE AND CADILLAC WAY. Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of Lincoln Property Company, Nienlo Park, for variances in connection with a proposal for the "Oscar Person Property" at Carolan Avenue, Cadillac Way and Bayshore Boulevard. Zone R-4 (Fourth residential). The application form recited variances applied for as follows: 1) To construct 48 separate buildings on a single parcel of land. 2) To provide separate parking (garage) facilities from the residential buildings. 3) To include a commercial use in the form of a restaurant. The applicant's communication dated July 9, 1970, signed by Danny VcLarry, Partner, Lincoln Property Company, stated that the variances are requested primarily for the following reasons: 1) To enable the property to be treated in a similar manner to a planned community development, thereby allowing a large parcel of land to be under one control rather than divided into separate units. 2) To provide community recreational facilities and central open areas for the total complex. 3) To eliminate vehicular traffic within the residential community. The communication stated that approximately 0.90 acres are proposed for the commercial use, 11.8S acres residential uses. A fact sheet dated June 10, 1970, concerned "site area," "density," "site coverage," "parking statistics," "planned population." Preliminary plans prepared by Frank A. L. Hope and Associates, San Francisco, were filed. The applicant's representatives in attendance included: Mr. Quentin Cooke and Mr. Cyrus J. McMillan, Attorneys, Air. Denny VcLarry and Mr. Preston Butcher, Partners, Lincoln Property Company. Chairman Sine recognized Mr. Cooke who reported that there is a firm agreement between Burlingame Shore Land Company, the land owner, and Lincoln Property Company for acquisition of the property, contingent solely upon granting of the variance. Mr. Cooke stated that Lincoln Property Company is one of the largest developers, nationally, of multi -family projects; local projects include Sharon Green in AWN Park and Meridian Court, under construction in San Jose. Mr. Cooke presented to the Commission Air. Dan Crosby, Vice -President, Frank Hope and Associates. Mr. Crosby stated that the development in the City of Burlingame proposes 504 dwelling units on a parcel of land encompassing a total of 12.75 acres, approximately one (1) acre reserved as a restaurant site, 11.8S acres multi -family residential use; density 42.53 units per acre, site coverage for apartment buildings and parking structures 51.30, landscaping and recreation 48.70; planned or projected population based on units, 780 persons. Mr. Crosby commented on a series of slides: Master Plan, included parking, recreation, location of residential units and restaurant site, the latter to be developed by a separate developer from the residential units. Vehicular and Pedestrian Circulation Plan, Land Use Plan, Building Elevations, Perspective View, and slides showing interior plan of two and three-story buildings. Mr. Crosby stated that the residential units will range from the efficiency units of 450 square feet, single -bedroom from S40 to 640 square feet, taro -bedroom, one bath, and two -bedroom, den and two bath. He stated that certain units will include private balconies or patios. - 12 - Mr. Crosby stated that a meeting was held with representatives of the city fire department, subsequent to the study meeting and to the time that building sections and material lists were furnished to the Commission Chairman, at his requestb that during the discussion with the fire -department it was discovered that charges will be required, and will be made,in some phases of the construction and the type of materials to conform to specifications of the building and fire depart- ments. Chairman Sine acknowledged receipt from the architect of the particular information that he had requested at the study meeting, and reported also that he had discussed the project informally with Air. Oscar Person upon the occasion of a casual meeting. A paper prepared by the City Planner dated July 23, 1970, "Analysis of Lincoln Property Company Plan for Burlingame Shore Land Parcel" was read, wherein there were comments on the reasons for the variance requests,the contract in force between the city and the property owner for development of the property, similarity of the suggested development to a "planned unit development," land use, parking provisions, traffic, and population density. The material noted further planning considerations of interest to the Commission --- "possible alternative uses of the property, question of need for additional housing in the city, possible results of project on surrounding areas." The City Planner, in response to the Chair, stated. that the city is rapidly becoming a labor importing community and that there appears to be a tremendous market for housing, extending over the entire range from low-cost to expensive. He stated that practically any land use of the subject property will involve a traffic problem and that, of the three proposals that have been made, the present is the first that he is willing to accept. In response to Chairman Sine, there were no comments from the audience favoring or protesting the application. The }gearing was declared concluded. Commissioners were invited to comment. In response to Commissioner Taylor's inquiry regarding the impact on the city's school system, Mr. Crosby advised that the development is intended for adults exclusively, that the units are designed for childless families, that landscaping, recreational facilities are geared to adult living, and that the general leasing pro -ram will exclude children from the project to the age of 21. Mr. McLarry stated that there are no children at either Sharon Creen or Lincoln Careen, projects similar to the proposal. Ile advised that at Sharon Green there are 390 units and at Lincoln. Green 120 units. Commissioner Mink commented on traffic, noting that the project will move the vehicles in three specific directions, causing heavy con- version at the service station. Coj;ariissioner M-ink stated that furnishing this type of housing will offer the opportunity to renew other sections in the city in a - 13 - different fashion, that reconstruction of other areas may be affected by the proposed number of apartment dwelling units, that he was impressed by the financial ability of people to rent such units but that, hopefully, builders can be encouraged.to build for people of more modest means. In response to Commissioner Kindig, Mr. Crosby stated that the entire project %•ill be under one management, that the major portion of the tol; level of the parking structures will be guest parking and that restaurant parking will be separate and not inter -usable with the remainder of the parking within the complex. In response to Commissioner Cistulli, the City Planner stated that the parking conforms to code at 1-112 to 1. indic ted Air. McLarry, in response to Commissioner Cistulli/tiat the total project should be completed witld--i two-year period, that 280 units will be con- structed in the first phase, including social activity buildings, and 224 units in the second phase. Ile stated that tenants will be permitted to occupy units in the first phase as soon as completed. Commissioner Jacobs stated that the Broadway shopping area should benefit from the project. The City Engineer reported that there are adequate off -site utilities for the project. In response to the Chair, the City Engineer stated that the need for traffic signals carrot be determined until the project is completed and there is information available on the number of traffic movements. The City Engineer commented that the reconstruction project at the Broadway interchange should go to contract in two (2) to three (3) months. In response to Chairman Sine's inquiry if the developer would be willing to share the cost of a future traffic signal, Mr. Preston Butcher stated that if the cost were justifiable the matter would be given adequate consideration. In response to the Chair, Mr. Crosby described location of the elevators and advised that access for delivery trucks is some distance from the residential units. Commissioner Norberg expressed personal satisfaction with the proposed development, noting that there appears to be proper provision for ample and pleasurable- living. He stated that the two-story architectural design appears to be attractive and suggested additional embellishment on the cornices of the three story buildings. Commissioner Norberg thereafter introduced a motion recommending to the City Council that the application of Lincoln Property Company for variances to alloy, construction of an apartrent cor,„plex on Burlingame Shore Land Company property, bounded by Carolan Avenue, Cadillac Way and Bayshore Boulevard, generally in accord with drawings on file, anci subject to Commission review of architectural drawings of the restaurant, be approved was seconded by Commissioner Cistulli. A roll call vote was recorded as follows: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NEW BUSINESS Cistulli, Kindig, Jacobs, blink, Norberg, Sine, Taylor None None. 1. MEETING SCHEDULED RE: CORBITT TRACT On a motion introduced by Commissioner Taylor, seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and unanimously carried, Monday, Autust 10, 1970, at 8:00 p.m. was selected as the date of a public meeting for purposes of discussing land use in the Corbitt Tract, notices of the meeting to be mailed to all affected property owners. ADJOURNMENT The meeting regularly adjourned at 11:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Everett K. Kindig, Secretary -15-