HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1971.03.08THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COi•1MI SSION
March 8, 1971
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT C014MISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT
Cistulli
Jacobs
Kindig
Norberg
Sine
Taylor
CALL TO ORDER
Mink (Excused)
City Planner Mann
The monthly study meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was
called to order on the above date at 8:05 p.m., Chairman Sine
Presiding.
ROLL CALL
All members present except Mink.
APPLICATIONS
1. RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1,2,3, BLOCK 9, MILLSDALE INDUSTRIAL
PARK #r5 (1700 BLOCK OF ROLLINS ROAD . )
Mr. John Bellevue, #r10 S. E1 Camino Real, Millbrae submitted a
proposal for resubdivision of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 9, Millsdale
Industrial Park -#5 with a plan prepared by Louis Arata, civil
engineer.. This resubdivision will combine three lots into one and
is in connection with the construction and operation of a private
"swim and acrobatic club" by Mr. Bellevue.
The plan was passed around to members of the commission, and after
some discussion Mr. Bellevue was informed his application was
scheduled for a public hearing at the regular meeting on March 22.
2. FENCE VARIANCE AT 1825 CASTENADA DRIVE
Mr. and Mrs. D. E. Sullivan of 1825 Castenada Drive submitted an
application for fence variance at this address.
A letter from Mr. and Mrs. Sullivan requested this variance because
of a change in grade level of adjoining property caused by contractor's
filling 3 feet of dirt against their then established 6 foot fence
along the northwest side yard of their_ property. This resulted in
the present height of 32 feet for the fence measured from the
sidewalk.
It is proposed that 22' fiberglas panels be added to the top of this
fence, thus returning it to its original height of 6 feet and
restoring the privacy it was built to provide.
Mr. and Mrs. Sullivan, present at the meeting, informed the Commission
that this fill was performed in 1957, and that there was no retaining
wall. The City Planner remarked that a 6' fence between proper�ies
is according to the code, and that the result of the proposed action
would be a high fence on the Sullivan side of the property, but a
conforming 6' fence on the neighbor's side. Upon being questioned
as to the neighbors' attitude toward the fence, the Sullivans said
that this matter had not been discussed since previous problems
regarding drain pipe had been met with a minimum of cooperation.
Chairman Sine informed the Sullivans that this request for variance
would be heard at the regular public meeting on March 22, 1971 in
the City Council Chambers.
3. VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT 3-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON LAND ZONED
R-2, LAGUNA AVENUE
Mr. Bob Edwards, representing Neil Vannucci, presented revised plot
plans for the Commission's consideration on this proposal. Mr.
Vannucci's application for a 4-unit apartment building on Lots 18
and 19, Block 12, Easton Addition had been rejected by the Planning
Commission at their hearing of February 22, with the provision that
a 3-unit structure might be considered. The revised plans covered
a 3-unit building with two 2-bedroom units and one 3-bedroom, but
adhering to the previous "townhouse" concept, with two stories
for each unit and a single garage.
The plans were examined and there was some discussion of setbacks
applicable, with Planner Mann reminding the Commission that the side
setback for a two story building is 6 feet. He also stated, with
regard to a comment that the 14' easement should be landscaped or
improved to some extent, that the concrete box culvert was so close
to the surface of the ground little could be done in the way of
planting.
This request for variance was also scheduled for a public hearing
on March 22.
4. VARIANCE TO CHANGE USEAGE OF MEDICAL -DENTAL BUILDING TO BUSINESS
AND/OR PROFESSIONAL OFFICES, LOCATED AT 1275 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
John-D. McPherson, 302 Baldwin Avenue, San Mateo, submitted an appli-
cation for variance to change the useage of 1275 California Drive
(Lots 1 and 2, Block 12, Burlingame Grove Subdivision) from that of
a medical -dental building to that of business and professional offices.
His letter with the application stated that this type of occupancy
would be more in accord with the needs of the present, since medical
and dental offices now exist in surplus in many areas. It also noted
that'the applicant planned to convert one suite for his personal
use as a private office to conduct business affairs. The point was
made that there are no major repairs contemplated other than painting,
carpeting and possible rearrangement of interior floor space with
dividing walls. The communication also noted that the present
useage of the building was effected by Resolution ;#72-52 dated
October 20, 1952. A photo of the building was enclosed.
Mr. McPherson was not present at the time this item was brought up,
- 2 -
although appearing later; and the City Planner reviewed the history
of the building. He stated that a variance was granted in 1952 at
a time when there were no medical buildings in the city; but that
now there are many. He mentioned that the structure, now for sale,
has three different office suites; that this is in a R-1 zone, and
it did not seem proper for the building to be torn down for lack of
variance. In reply to a question, he said that no change in the
General Plan with regard to this zone was contemplated.
Chairman Sine announced that this matter would be brought before the
public hearing of the Commission March 22, 1971.
5. SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE CAR WASH AT BROADWAY
AND CAROLAN, UNCLASSIFIED ZONE, S.P . PROPERTY, BY CABLE CAR WASH
COMPANY, INC.
The Cable Car Wash Company, Inc. of Napa, represented by Cyrus
J. McMillan, attorney, submitted a request for a special permit to
build and operate a car wash operation at the southwest corner of
Broadway and Carolan on land owned by the Southern Pacific Railroad.
The letter accompanying the application noted that the operation would
consist of two traffic lanes passing a single gasoline pump island.
Cars are driven to a building containing the washing machinery,
the driver remaining in the automobile throughout the washing process.
The point was made that the water is filtered and reclaimed for
reuse. The applicant pointed out that because of the narrow width
of the land involved (35') the property would be impractical for
any other use, and also stated that the facility would be attractive
and adequately landscaped, recommendations of the City's Park
Department being accepted. Photographs were included, showing the
type of,installation erected in other cities.
Mr. Cyrus McMillan was present as representative of his client, and
told the Commission that Cable Car Wash has a similar installation
at Davis, California which is also on Southern Pacific Property. He
mentioned that no variance would be needed for a sign, and that the
first block on Carolan opposite this property is zoned M-1.
There was Commission discussion., it being noted that there were similar
car washes in Belmont and Millbrae. It was brought out that it
would .be objectionable to have a turn-off from Broadway as an entry,
and Mr. McMillan said that a different entry would be established.
There was a question raised as to whether or not this establishment
would violate the 450' distance between gasoline stations code,
since there are service stations in the immediate area; and a
resulting discussion as to whether this car wash could be properly
classed as a gasoline station, since it does have a gas pump. The
City Planner informed the Commission that the property opposite the
site from Cadillac Way to the end of Burlingame Shoreland Company
property is zoned for R-4. He distributed to Commission members
for their further study copies of his report regarding zoning and
legal aspects of this proposed car wash operation. He noted that
under California codes all property leased must be subdivided, and
this is not.
- 3 -
It was announced by Chairman Sine that this request for special permit
would be considered at the public hearing of March 22.
GENERAL
The City Planner read to the Commission a letter from City Manager
Schwalm requesting recommendations and comments relative to the improved
functioning of city commissions from the particular viewpoint of
the Planning Commission. It was the Commission's desire that the
City Planner prepare the reply.
The question was raised as to whether the City had an ordinance
regulating "reader boards." It was stated that there was none.
There were comments on the reader board at the Tia Maria Restaurant.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:50 P. M.
Respectfully submitted,
Everett K. Kindig, Secretary