Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1971.02.22THE CITY OF BURLINGAMF PLANNING COMMiISSION February 22, 1971 CONt,tISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Clstulll Kindig Jacobs Mink Norberg Sine Taylor CALL TO ORDER None City Attorney Karmel City Planner Mann City Engineer �iarr Councilman Mangini Four students from Burlingame High Schoc A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planninc, Commission was called to order on the above date,at 8:00 p.m., Chairman Sine presiding. The above -named members responded to roll call. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting of January 2S and the study meeting of February 8, 1971, previously submitted to members were approved and adopted. Commissioner Kindig made reference to a motion carried during the meeting of January 2S that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council consideration of some method of financing improvements to the water system for the purpose of upgrading the fire flow to support higher density construction. He asked regarding a followup. The Citv Planner informed the Commission that he intended to suggest to the City Council that some general fund money in addition to monies from the water sinking fund be used for this financing. HFARTNC;q 1. VARIANCE APPLICATION POSTPONED FOR NEIL VANNUCCI ON CONSTRUCTION OF 4-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING, LAGUNA AVENUE Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of Neil J. Vannucci for a variance to construct a 4-unit apartment building on Laguna Avenue, an area zoned for R-2. Received with the application was a letter from Mr. Vannucci describing the deluxe features of the proposed 2-bedroom apartments which, with attractive construction and appropriate landscaping, would make such a building an asset to the neighborhood. The communication also stated that the size and value of the lot economically warranted more than duplex construction; and in addition the land coverage would be only 37.40, less than the allowable 40o for R-1 and R-2 construction. Mr. Neil Vannucci was present, and in response to Chairman Sine gave as his rationale for this type of building the fact that the site is unusually large in comparison to the usual R-2 site in this area, also that there are easements on the rear and left side of this property, so that it will not abut the neighboring property. These factors would contribute to less actual density in the area. lie stated that this apartment building would be the best in the neighborhood insofar as size and quality are concerned. Mr. Vannucci brought out that the easement on the left side of the property is 14 feet and the one in the rear is 10 feet. The City Planner, upon invitation to comment by the Chair, stated that this is quite an unusual property because of Terrace Creek easements through the tract; that in the early 1930's the city had acquired this easement in order to construct the box culvert. The easement states that everything "below, within and above" belongs to the city. One result of this lot pattern is that the purchaser of a lot would have, in effect, also bought another small amount of land and creek. He noted that the City has approved triplexes on two similar properties since it is felt they do not increase the density. Chairman Sine requested comments from the audience favoring this variance. Air. Dan Thurston, 1530 Burlingame Avenue, present owner of the property, stated he approved this construction since the apartments will be very attractive and have so much open area around them. The Chair asked for correspondence opposing this construction. A letter from Edgar and Amy McElhany, 1009 Laguna Avenue, was read, the gist of which was that apartments in -a residential area make poor neighbors, add to street congestion, etc.; and that the use of a variance in this instance would create an uncertainty as to the planning within the city. Another letter was received from ?'r. and Mrs. H. J. Carter, 949 Laguna Avenue, citing the facts that there are no exceptional conditions applying to this property; there is no unnecessary hardship involved; the variance is not necessary for preservation of a substantial property right; the granting of the variance will be injurious to property in the vicinity; the variance will not be in harmony with the purpose of the zoning ordinance; there is not presently sufficient off-street parking, and the building of this apartment would aggravate the situation; and finally, a variance would constitute spot -zoning which is illegal. Upon invitation for comments from the audience opposing this construction, Margaret Miller, 934 Laguna, responded. She also mentioned the lack of parking, but her main concern was the sewer - 2 - problem in the area. She stated that there had been a great deal of trouble already with the sewers backing up; that her neighbor sometimes could not use her lower unit because of this and that the sewer also cones up on her own property. She felt that this construction would add to the difficulty. The City Engineer, upon query, replied that he personally did not know of any specific problems in this neighborhood, since repair work is delegated to the crews responsible, but that this would be checked out. He mentioned that houses in this area are built on lower ground not higher than the grade of the sewer line, and in some cases less than the minimum grade. This naturally causes back-up problems. fie noted that 6" mains are the minimum used. A period of Commission discussion followed. Commissioner Norberg felt that the room sizes were minimal and that the lot was overcrowded. Commissioner Mink agreed with this opinion, feeling that even though the structure would cover only 370 of the lot, 300 of the lot is actually covered, taking into consideration the paving, and patios. He felt that the easement was not to be considered as open space unless the owner is going to maintain it. It was his feeling that since this area is already having run-off problems, the addition of this structure would only compound them. Commissioner Kindig was of the opinion that in this particular location it,is doubtful if anyone would build a duplex, and that perhaps three units would be better. He was concerned more about the sewa�-e.situation, feeling that the problems of other owners might be intensified. In reply to his question as to the type of box culvert, he was informed by the City Planner that this was a concrete box, covered with dirt, no shrubbery. With regard to the sewage and run-off situation, Commissioner Cistulli noted that sometimes more people live in a duplex than in an apartment building of this size, since only a couple might occupy an apartment, but a family of five or six could be in either side of a duplex. fie mentioned that he preferred cement to the asphalt coverage on the driveways. Commissioner Taylor questioned the general make-up of the area, and the City Planner told him that in general it was SO-60% single family and the balance duplexes, that possibly the single family to duplex ratio might even be 50-50. Commissioner Jacobs was concerned with the stater;ent that "spot zoning" - so, called - was illegal. He was assured by the City Planner that a variance, if approved, was not illegal. Chairman Sine felt that more pertinent information on the sei:,er was desirable, stating that although technically there is proper coverage he questioned whether it is feasible for even a triplex. - 3 - Mr. Vannucci, granted permission to address the Commission, stated that he felt the sewage lateral problem could be solved. He stated that all the surplus water drains to the rear easement. In reply to a suggestion by the Cite Engineer that the lot be graded to drain to the street, he said that the water could also be pumped out by means of sump pump. Mr. Vannucci went on to say that the apartment rooms were not minimal in that a 2 bedroom 1,100 square feet apartment is not small. With regard to the pavement, a town house effect was desired, meaning one garage specifically for each apartment. In the matter of maintenance of easements, tie felt that since they will nevpy be used or built on, it is not his part to maintain them. He conceded that he would be willing to redo the apartment design if wished, and would agree to more landscaping and less concrete patio. A motion introduced by Chairman Sine, seconded by Commissioner Mink, approving the application of Neil J. Vannucci .for variance to construct a 4 unit apartment building on land zoned R-2 in the 900 block on Laguna Avenue, was declared denied on the following roll call: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: JACOBS NOES: COMIMISSIONERS: CISTULLI, KINDIG, MINK, NORBERG, TAYLOR# SINE The Chair informed ?sir. Vannucci that he had the right to appeal the action to the City Council. Mr. Vannucci then requested the Commission for an inforrial opinion as to what type of construction he could put on his lot. During the discussion which followed, the question was raised as to whether the Commission could now entertain a request for variance on a three -unit apartment. It was the opinion of the City Attorney that, while the City Council could deny the variance for a 4-unit and no action could be taken for a year, if the majority of the Commission felt they might reconsider on the basis of a 3 unit building, it would be proper to enter into further discussion. Commissioner Cistulli moved and Commissioner Jacobs seconded that the Commission reconsider the action on the basis of allowing the applicant to come before the Commission one month from date with a revised plan. This motion carried on the following roll call: AYES: CONMMISSIONERS: CISTULLI, KINDIG, JACOBS, MINK, NORBERG, SINE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: TAYLOR The Chair informed the audience that they mould not be notified by mail from City Hall of this next hearing, which would be held the 4th P`onday in "-larch, March 22. - 4 - 2. APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL, PERMIT APPROVED FOR CUSTOM OFFICE. SUPPLY TO "MERCHANDISE OFFICE SUPPLIES AND PRINTING AT 847 COS;'AN ROAD. Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of. Custom Office Supply Company for a special permit to furnish office supplies and printing services at retail in the industrial area at 827 Cowan Road. The letter received with the application stated that this would not be a retail operation in the ordinary sense of the word, but rather, a type of stockroom for servicing clients in the industrial area with charge accounts and phone orders. Only office supplies and printing would be sold, no accessory items. There will be no display windoi,:s. The printing will be of the type known as "Instant Printing." The communication mentioned that Bell F, Howell, located in the same building, and selling Xerox copy service, had been given a use permit. The letter stated that a sign, meeting city requirements, would be needed and it was also desired to paint a sign on the plaster facade above the front door. Photographs of the property and the sign presently on the building were furnished. Mr. Richard Costa was present at the hearing as representative of Custom Office Supply. He reiterated their desire to serve the industrial area, and stated that the present sign would be taken down and replaced with another hanging sign. There were no comments from the audience either favoring or opposing this application. The City Planner stated that in his opinion there should be no objection to this type of retail business which would service our important industrial area. During the Commission discussion which followed Commissioner PFLink stated he felt the service was needed in the area. Commissioner Kindig voiced concern about the appearance of the sign, since he felt that many of the signs along this particular street were unattractive, and hoped that this sign would be one of the better ones. The City Planner mentioned that possibly all the property owners along the street could be contacted and urged to display more attractive signs. It was moved by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Mink that Custom Office Supply be issued a special permit to sell office supplies and printing at 827 Cowan Road. Motion carried unanimously. Chairman Sine told the applicant that failure to comply with City regulations regarding this special permit would result in the matter's being brought before the Planning Commission. - 5 - Mr. Costa was informed that the special permit would become effective one week and one day from date, if not appealed. ACKNOI{ILEDGEMENT Chairman Sine acknowledged the presence in the audienrce of four students from Burlingame high School and invited their questions and comments. 3. VARIANCE FROM SIGN ORDINANCE APPROVED FOR UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA ON PROPERTY AT EL CAMINO REAL AND MURCHISON DRIVE Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application for sign variance by Union Oil Company of California .for service station located at E1 Camino Real and T4urchison Drive. Height of sign requested to be 25' instead of regulation 20'. The letter received with the application cited the extraordinary circumstances of the service station location because of its elevation and the distance from the main thorouplifare, E1 Camino Real. These factors, it was stated, contribute to the insufficient visibility of the present 20' sign. A sketch of the proposed sign was attached. A representative of the Union Oil Company, Nfr. Norman "Tiller, was present at the hearing. Upon being invited by the Chair to comment, he stated that the main problem was that of visibility in that the station itself is on a service road, which is at a lower elevation than that of El Camino Real. He felt that this increased sign height would make the service station competitive with others in the area. The City Planner commented that the sign ordinance does provide for 20' signs and the applicant should prove actual harm to the business because of lack of visibility of present sign. The Chair asked for comments from the audience favoring the application. Robert Knops, 233 Santa Lucia, San Bruno, operator of the station, made the point that since the station is on a secondary road, with many trees along it, the visibility of the sign is poor. There were no comments from the audience opposing the application. During the period of Commission discussion following, Commissioner Taylor commented that during the period of time since Union Oil had originally requested a sign variance he had made a study of the sign problem and was more receptive to the idea of a variance. Commissioner !Mink commented that the sign projects 4' over the property line, and was informed by the City Planner that this was allowable. Commissioner Kindig ouestioned if the diameter of the round part of the sign would be increased because of the increase in height and was informed the diameter would be 1 foot more, and that the higher sign would have t%10 rows of neon lights rather than one. He felt that the height would not be much of an improvement because of the trees. Commissioner Cistulli felt that this lack of visibility was a hardship on the service station and that a sign of 5 feet more would be an improvement. fie commented on the continuing growth of the trees along the service road. In reply to a question from Commissioner Mink regarding the street elevations, it was brought out that there is approximately a 4 foot drop from E1 Camino to the site of the service station, which is a mitigating circumstance. Commissioner Cistulli introduced a_motion that the application for sign variance from a height of. 20' to 25' be granted Union Oil Company for their service station at E1 Camino Real and Murchison. Commissioner Mink seconded the motion. This was declared carried on the following roll call: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CISTULLI, JACOBS, MINK, TAYLOR NOES: COMMISSIONERS: KINDIG, NORBERG, SINE The Chair informed the applicant that this variance will become effective March 2, 1971, if not appealed. NEW BUSINESS: The City Planner informed the Cormission that he would like to have a motion calling for a public hearing before the Commission in 1.Iarch concerning 117est Bay Express $ Drayage Company and their use of an area at 1360 Rollins Road for truck parking. IIe stated that the issuance of a special permit to them was contingent upon their surfacing and maintaining this lot and that this has not been done. A motion was initiated by Commissioner Cistulli, seconded by Commissioner ?Mink, that the special permit issued to West Bay Express be considered at the regular meeting March 22, with the possibilities of revocation. notion carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT The meeting regularly adjourned at 9:30 P. M. Respectfully submitted, Everett K. Kindig Secretary 7 -