Loading...
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