HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1971.01.25THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
January 25, 1971
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT
Cistulli None City Attorney Karmel
Kindig City Planner Mann
Jacobs City Engineer Marr
Mink Councilman Johnson
Norberg (8:20 p.m.) Councilman Mangini
Sine
Taylor
CALL TO ORDER
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
The above -named members responded to roll call. Commissioner Norberg,
attending a Library Board meeting, appeared at the time noted above.
AGENDA ORDER CHANGED.
Chairman Sine announced that Commissioner Cistulli, because of his
absence from the meeting of December 28, was ineligible to vote on the
two matters that were continued from the prior meeting to the present
time (Items Nos. 1 and 2 on the agenda) and that,to assure a full
complement of voting members,the matters would be held for the arrival
of Commissioner Norberg from the Library Board meeting.
HFARTNRC
1. SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVED FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND EXPANSION OF
STANDARD OIL COMPANY STATION. BURLINGAME AVENUE & EL CAMINO REAL.
Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of Standard
Oil Company of California for special permit to expand the area of
the existing service station at E1 Camino Real and Burlingame Avenue.
A statement accompanying the application reported that negotiations are
in progress for Standard Oil Company to acquire additional property
at the location, thereby increasing land area to 13,506 square feet
with 144 feet of frontage on both E1 Camino Real and on Burlingame
Avenue.
The communication stated that all existing
to be replaced with a new modern unit with
a single sign of minimum size and height.
further that it is intended to widen access
relocate Burlingame Avenue access away from
traffic safety.
facilities will be demolished
substantial landscaping and
The communication reported
from E1 Camino Real and to
the corner for purposes of
-1-
Plans, including landscaping detail, and a colored rendering of the
proposed improvement were filed.
Mr. E. L. Stewart represented the applicant.
In response to Chairman Sine, Mr. Stewart confirmed that Standard Oil
Company has acquired the property adjacent to the service station
where the arcade is located and that it is intended to utilize the
entire parcel in the proposed reconstruction.
The City Planner, at the Chair's invitation to comment, stated that
there is evidence to indicate that Standard Oil Company has occupied
the site since mid-1920's. Commenting that the location would probably
not be considered suitable in modern practice, he indicated no objec-
tion to the permit inasmuch as the company owns the property and that
adjoining, and proposes a completely new facility of modern design with
amenities of landscaping and a small attractive sign. He recalled that
the Commission a few years back permitted enlargement of the Shell
Station on the opposite corner of Burlingame Avenue and the El Camino.
There was no correspondence nor comments from the audience favoring the
application.
A letter dated January 20, 1971, from William C. McGowan, Jr., 1401
Vancouver Avenue deplored removal of the arcade --"a unique attraction
in the shopping area" --to accommodate expansion of a gasoline_ service
station.
There were no comments from the audience protesting the application.
The hearing was declared concluded.
During a period of Commission discussion, the City Planner, in response
to Commissioner Mink, confirmed that reconstruction of sidewalks, curbs,
driveways is subject to issuance by the City Engineer of an encroachment
permit.
Mr. Stewart, in response to Commissioner Kindig, reported that three (3)
on -site parking spaces will be provided, as permitted by code.
(Commissioner Norberg appeared)
Chairman Sine's reference to an access that has been available to
pedestrians to and from the city parking lot through the arcade
initiated a period of discussion; there appeared to be agreement that
space for a suitable walk -way did not exist and that it would be poor
policy to allow pedestrians access over the station site proper.
A motion introduced by Commissioner Mink, seconded by Commissioner
Cistulli and carried unanimously on roll call (Commissioner Norberg
abstaining) approved the application of Standard Oil Company of
California for special permit to reconstruct and enlarge the service
station at the southeast corner of Burlingame Avenue and E1 Camino Real
in accordance with plans, specifications and landscape detail on file.
- 2 -
la. RESUBDIVISION MAP - PROPERTY OF STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA,
EL CAMINO REAL AND BURLINGAME AVENUE.
A preliminary map of the above -described property, being a portion of
Lot 9, Block 1, Town of Burlingame Subdivision, prepared for the
land owner by Holm, Tait & Associates, Sun Rafael, California, for
the purpose of deleting internal parcel lines and establishing a single
large parcel, was accepted on a motion introduced by Commissioner Mink,
seconded by Commissioner Cistulli and unanimously carried on roll call,
Commissioner Norberg abstaining.
The Commission was informed that the engineers were preparing final
tracings for signature.
lb. AREA TO BE DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC USE - STANDARD OIL COMPANY
TO CITY OF BURLINGAME.
The City Planner referred to the area designated "Parcel 2" on the
resubdivision map, explaining that it was discovered recently that
Standard Oil Company ownership extends to part of the sidewalk and a
small triangle of the street, that at some prior time the sidewalks
apparently were widened but that the land never changed ownership
and that Standard Oil Company has submitted material to the City
Attorney whereby an offer of dedication will be prepared for acceptance
by the City Council.
Upon advice from staff that an action was required by Planning
Commission endorsing the dedication, Commissioner Mink introduced a
motion recommending to the City Council that an offer of dedication,
from Standard Oil Company to the City of Burlingame, of a small
triangle at Burlingame Avenue and E1 Camino Real for street purposes
be approved. The motion was seconded by Commission Cistulli and
unanimously carried, Commissioner Norberg abstaining.
The applicant was informed the use permit would be effective Tuesday,
February 2, 1971, if not appealed.
MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of December 28, 1970 and the study
meeting of January 11, 1971, previously submitted to members were
approved and adopted.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Chairman Sine acknowledged the presence of Councilman Charlotte Johnson,
accompanied by Mr. Johnson, and Councilman Victor A. Mangini.
HEARINGS (Cont.)
2. VARIANCE TO COMBINE P, 1 LOTS WITH R-3 LOT FOR MULTIPLE OCCUPANCY
DWELLING, RALSTON AVENUE AND EL CAMILNG, APPROVED.
Chairman Sine announced a public hearing continued from the regular
meeting of December 28, 1970, on the application for variance submitted
- 3 -
by David A. Nicolaides, 1009 California Drive, Burlingame, to improve
a parcel at the southwest corner of El Camino Real and Ralston Avenue,
partly zoned R-3 and partly R-1, with a twenty-seven unit apartment
building.
In response to the Chair, the Secretary reported no new correspondence
received since the prior meeting.
Two colored renderings of the proposed building were displayed --the
original, shown at the meeting of December 28, and the revision,
incorporating changes requested by the Commission.
Mr.Nicolaides, in response to Chairman Sine, reported that the plans
have been amended to include a slump -stone wall at the front of the
building to screen uncovered parking, the wall to be extended along
the westerly property line in the driveway area, thereby shielding the
adjoining property from reflecting headlights; additionally, the
driveway ramp will be moved further into the building.
The City Planner, in response to the Chair, pointed out that the
proposal to combine an apartment zoned lot on E1 Camino Real with
first -residential lots fronting the side street is not unusual, that
similar variances have been granted because the requirement of 20 feet
of setback on E1 Camino substantially reduces buildable area of some
lots. He indicated no objection to the variance, stating that there
are perhaps three or four comparable properties where similar
improvements may be attempted.
There were no comments from the audience in response to the Chair.
The hearing was declared concluded.
At Commissioner Jacob's request, a letter dated January 21, 1971, from
the Director of Public Works was read. The communication stated that,
at the request of the Commission, a study was made of existing sanitary
sewer and water distribution in the subject area, that, in general,
there should be no additional problems involved with sanitary sewers
but that fire flow is a matter of concern; presently, there is an
average of 1500 gallons per minute, which is adequate for R-1 zoning;
R-3A zoning would require a minimum fire flow of 2500 gallons per
minute at a cost of approximately $100,000. The communication recited
costs per square foot of lot area, assuming rezoning'in the area to
a higher density, in accordance with general plan proposals.
In concluding the communication, the Director of Public Works again
recommended that consideration be given to requiring deposits into
a city fund in situations of variance rezoning that may be used when
the need arises for upgrading of the fire flow system. The communica-
tion also noted that using the factors for R-3 and R-3A that a total
of 18 units can be allowed on the property.
Commissioner Norberg spoke in favor of the proposed construction as a
method of improving the property and replacing a dilapidated structure
with a modern functional building. Commissioner Norberg suggested
that it would be advantageous to.relocate the building toward the
rear of the property to allow for possible future widening of
Ralston Avenue and to redesign or eliminate the first -floor balconies
that project over E1 Camino Real.
An inquiry directed -by Commissioner Mink to the City Attorney concerning
proper procedure in a situation where the Commission elected to
apply the proposition advanced by the City Engineer, initiated a
period of discussion.
The City Attorney stated that the plan may not be applied in the
subject application, primarily because of the requirement of a
special fund whereby the city will accept and hold on deposit for
an indeterminate time private monies for a specific purpose; whether
or not such fund shall be created can be decided only by the City
Council. The City Attorney cited a number of areas where problems
of administration may arise and suggested that the Commission, with
the assistance of staff, present the subject to Council for considera-
tion and guidance in attempting implementation.
In response to Chairman Sine's inquiry whether the subject construction
will burden existing water installations, the City Engineer replied
in the negative, explaining, however, that the area will require
close attention because problems may result where new construction
wil substantially increase density.
In further comment, the City Engineer stated that the City's fire
rating could be adversely affected should the Board of Fire Under-
writers decide that fire flow improvements were not staying abreast
of expansion of areas of higher density.
Commissioner Taylor indicated no objection to multi -family use of
the property but to the number of units in the proposed building,
stating that the resultant density will be greater than is generally
acknowledged for the area, except on E1 Camino Real.
In response to Commissioner Kindig, Mr. Nicolaides clarified details of
height and type of construction employed in the first -floor balconies.
Chairman Sine stated that traffic flow proposed in the basement area
leaves much to be desired but that, in apartment houses, normally there
are a number of small cars and some tenants with no cars, which will
help to improve the situation. He stated that he was primarily
concerned with.the retaining wall and was satisfied with the revisions
prepared by Mr. Nicolaides.
The City Planner commended the City Engineer on his report on the fire
flow situation, concurring that some equitable method must be found
for financing the improvements.
A motion introduced by Commissioner Kindig, seconded by Commissioner
Jacobs, approving the application of David A. Nicolaides for variance
to construct a 27 unit apartment building on land partly zoned R-3
and partly R-1, at the southwesterly corner of E1 Camino Real and
Ralston Avenue, in accordance with amended plans dated November 23,
1970, including landscaping detail., was declared carried on the
following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kindig, Jacobs, Norberg, Sine
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Mink, Taylor
ABSTAIN CO:10IISSIONERS: Cistulli (absent at the initial hearing)
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None
Complying with suggestions from staff, the following motion was
introduced by Commissioner Taylor, seconded by Commissioner Kindig
and carried unanimously:
That the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that
consideration be given to some method of equitable financing of
improvements in the water system to upgrade the fire flow to support
higher density construction.
The applicant was informed the variance would be effective Tuesday,
February 2, 1971, if not appealed.
RECONVENE
Following a recess at 9:15 p.m., Chairman Sine reconvened the meeting
at 9:30 p.m.
3. VARIANCE APPROVED FOR MULTI -FAMILY CONSTRUCTION ON R-1 LOT
BLOOMFIELD ROAD
Chairman Sine announced a continued hearing from the meeting of
December 28, 1970, on the application of David Kron and George Parsons,
1005 Drake Avenue, for variance to construct a "5 unit garden apart-
ment" on first -residential property at 117 Bloomfield Road.
The City Planner, in response to the Chair, recalled that following a
lengthy hearing at the prior meeting, the Commission decided to
request the applicant's consideration to reducing the number of units
from five (5) to four (4) and, upon the latter's indication of
willingness to discuss the matter with the architect, the hearing was
continued to the present date.
Reporting that the requested changes were made, the City Planner
distributed copies of the original and the amended drawings.
The City Planner, in response to the Chair, reported that the revised
plans show a two-story building with two units on each floor; that
there is one less unit but the individual apartments are larger than
the original proposal; that carport parking for three (3) automobiles,
plus one (1) open space, is provided at the very rear of the property,
and that there are no garages at the front of the building.
r,�ommunications in favor of the variance received after the meeting of
December 28, were read from: John Horgan, 701 Howard Avenue,
Jean Ainsworth, resident, 133 Bloomfield Road, Gerald and Bridget
Rafferty, 121 Bloomfield Road (adjacent to subject property,)
William J. Moir, owner, 133 Bloomfield Road, Mr. and Mrs. Bernard Stack,
owners of duplex building at 105 Arundel Road and 600 Bayswater Avenue,
Mary Michniuk, owner, 108 and 110 Arundel Road and 211 North Humboldt
and from Anna Buckareff, owner, 6 Arundel Road.
6 -
The communications urged removal of the existing badly deteriorated
building, stating that the property creates a blight upon all other
properties on the street in its present condition, requested
consideration to an improvement that will enhance neighborhood and
property values, stated that the city should attempt to provide
moderate -rental units, and that the area in question is ideally
situated for development of small apartment buildings.
The Chair acknowledged the presence of Mr. David Kron, one of the
principals in the application.
There were no comments from the audience favoring the application.
Communications received since the meeting of December 28, 1970, opposing
the application were read from:
Mrs. Walter R. Hansen, 325 Bloomfield Road, John W. and Margaret
Burns, 464 Bloomfield Road, T. J. McNamara, 120 Arundel Road, Otto
Compagnin, 511 Bayswater Avenue, Mrs. G. Benedetti, 36 Bloomfield Road,
W. A. Vagt, 123 Dwight Road, Dominico Russo, 17 Arundel Road,
C. E. Flock, 215 Clarendon Road, 0. A. Sissass, 610 Bayswater Avenue,
Washington Elementary School P.T.A. Board, Augusta Carniel, 14 Bloom-
field Road and owner 115 Bloomfield Road, ;Michael F. Tarasoff,
129 Bloomfield Road, Mrs. Eleanor Keegan, 116 Arundel Road, Alice Fricke,
125 Arundel Road, Mr. and Mrs. R. C. Metzler, 100 Arundel Road,
Mrs. Celia Parker, 125 Bloomfield Road and owner 123 Bloomfield Road.
The Protestants stated that the area is predominately single-family
residential and should be permitted to remain so, that the narrow
streets and existing water and sewer facilities cannot support apart-
ment building density and that the cost of improvements will result in
additional burdens upon the home -owner, particularly those dependent
upon retirement incomes and on young -family budgets; that increased
traffic will create hazardous conditions on streets in the area of the
neighborhood elementary school, that approval of one variance for
apartment construction will establish a precedent for others to attempt
to follow suit, thereby discouraging home owners from maintaining and
improving their properties. Some writers indicated that duplex use
of the property would be acceptable.
The City Planner, at the Chair's invitation to comment, referred to
discussion at the last meeting in connection with the city's adopted
general plan and called attention to an enlarged copy of the general
plan map on display; he pointed out that the area under discussion
is designated for a higher density and, for that reason, so far as
the adopted general plan is concerned, it is the city's thinking that
the area will change in•time. He noted that a number of letters were
read and comments heard from persons living between Burlingame and
Howard Avenues and explained that there has been no consideration given
to changes north of Howard Avenue.
Referring to the block of Bloomfield Road between Bayswater and Howard
Avenues, where the subject property is located, he reported that
five (5) properties on the street are improved with two -unit residences,
all without benefit of variance,or rezoning.
- 7 -
The City Planner referred to a report on file of an inspection made by
the San Mateo County Health Department and the city building and fire
departments wherein it was stated that the property is not suitable
for human habitation and cannot be made so and that existing structures
should be demolished.
The City Planner stated that the land use study of the 18 lots fronting
on the 100 block of Bloomfield Road, made from external observations
only, revealed 3 properties in excellent condition, 6 good, 6 fair
and 3 poor. He noted that the result shows 9 properties rated "good
and excellent" and an equal number "fair and poor."
Comments were invited from the audience in opposition.
Mrs. Randal Wardlaw, 116 Bloomfield Road, requested acknowledgment of
the petition filed at the onset of the hearing.
A petition bearing approximately 115 signatures protested on the grounds
of overloading of utility installations, increased taxes to support
safety services, traffic congestion.
The petition stated that the subject property was purchased in 1964
by the present owners, was rented continuously without benefit of main-
tenance or repairs and that the practice of investing in rental
properties in residential areas for the sole purpose of eventual apart-
ment construction must be discouraged through denial of variances that
permit such construction in single-family residential neighborhoods.
Mrs. Susan Ferris, 616 Howard Avenue, Mr. Joseph Bacchetto, Sr.,
228 Bloomfield Road, Mr. J. Clyde Cross, 312 Howard Avenue, requested
clarification of the scope of hardship that must be established to
justify the city's approval to a variance, questioned costs of
reconstructing water and sanitary sewer facilies and providing adequate
fire protection for apartment dwellings.
A letter dated January 21, 1971, was read from the Director of Public
Works concerning fire flow to accommodate multiple dwelling rezoning.
The communication stated that a cost survey made in 1964, on the
occasion of a proposed rezoning of the area presently under discussion,
indicated a cost of 7(� per square foot of lot area, or $540.00 for
the average size lot of 50 by 150.
The communication stated that the only conditions that have changed
since the prior survey are in construction costs and that, on the
present market, it probably would be necessary to figure an increase
of at least 30%.
The communication recommended that in situations of approval of
variances to higher density that the applicant be required to deposit
with the city a fixed amount to be used at a future date when
improvements will be necessary to increase fire flow.
The City Planner, at the request of the Chair, and in response to an
inquiry from the floor, commented on the element of "hardship" in
applications for variance, pointing out that proper land use and orderly
development are of primary concern in every city and that guidelines
have been established to assist planners, members of planning commissions
and city councils to judge an application on its merits, to determine,
on an individual basis, whether a valid situation of hardship exists
and to render a decision accordingly. The code provides a guide but
each commissioner must make his own judgment whether the variance is
warranted.
The City Planner explained his position that there is a definite economic
hardship in the subject application, that the existing building is
valueless, and that the owner can claim legitimately that it would be
foolhardy to attempt to improve the property with a single-family dwelling.
The City Planner stated that he was convinced that the application
resulted from general plan recommendations for the area. He noted
that the City Council recently approved a similar type of improvement
on first -residential land west of E1 Camino Real where a desirable
property was literally wasted because an existing structure was not
habitable and valueless.
Commissioner Taylor referred to code conditions requisite to variance
grants, noted that the applicant, by admission, has neglected to maintain
the property and stated his position that there are no grounds to justify
approval.
Commissioner Taylor stated that the proposed density exceeds general
plan recommendations and suggested that the Commission consider initiating
an action to determine whether the entire area should be rezoned
according to general plan proposals.
Commissioner Mink pointed out that the proposed development coincides
with the comprehensive zoning plan of the city as determined by the
general plan, noted that the "garden apartment" type of development,
as defined in the general plan, is restricted to a rather limited area,
and that apparently some misunderstanding exists as many of the letters
of protest, signatures on petitions in opposition, and comments from
the audience represent properties in areas that are quite removed from
the subject property and where zoning changes are unlikely. He noted
further that protests were filed by persons living in an area of higher
density just two blocks removed from the subject property. Stating
that he was chairman of the Planning Commission when the general plan
was being developed, Commissioner Mink noted that prior to its adoption
by the City Council, every phase of the plan was studied in depth by a
citizens group, by the Commission and the Council. He stated that all
of the studies were directed to the time that implementation would become
a reality, that that time has come, and that the Commission must
recognize its responsibility to foster orderly development of the city
by observing guidelines recited in the general plan.
Commissioner Kindig stated that he was impressed with arguments advanced
by the opponents but that, from a practical standpoint, recognized that
it would be unwise to attempt single-family redevelopment in a neighbor-
hood of older homes where some properties are beginning to show evidences
of poor maintenance. Commissioner Kindig also referred to protests
that were received from areas some distance from the property.
Referring to the matter of precedent, raised by many of the protestants,
Commissioner Kindig stated that it was questionable that one 4-unit
building would materially affect the residential character of the
neighborhood or require costly expansion of utility systems. He
stated that he felt reasonably certain that changes in land use in
the area would be gradual, possibly extending over a period of years.
Commissioner Kindig spoke in favor of the proposed construction as
an alternative to allowing the land to remain unused.
Chairman Sine referred to comments voiced at the prior meeting wherein
objections were voiced to the variance procedure and pointed out that
the right to apply for variance is recognized by law. He stated that
existing conditions make single-family, duplex or triplex construction
economically unfeasible.
Chairman Sine noted that the City of Burlingame enjoys an excellent
structure, commenting that during a seven-year period the city taxes
on his home increased approximately $12.00.
In response to Commissioner Kindig, the applicants agreed that one
additional on -site parking space could be provided at the rear of the
property.
A motion introduced by Commissioner Jacobs to approve the application
of David Kron and George Pars ns for variance to construct a four-plex
building on first residentialM 117 Bloomfield Road, in accordance
with submitted plans, including the addition.of one parking space to
make a total of five on -site spaces, was seconded by Commissioner Kindig
and declared carried on the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Jacobs,Kindig,Mink,Norberg,Sine
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Taylor
ABSTAIN COMMISSIONERS: Cistulli (absent from meeting December 28)
The Chair announced that the variance would be effective Tuesday,
February 2, 1971, if not appealed.
RECONVENE
Following a recess at 10:30 p.m., the meeting was reconvened by
Chairman Sine at 10:40 p.m.
HEARINGS (cont.)
4. SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVED AUTOMOBILE REPAIRS, 1213 ROLLINS ROAD.
Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of Dale Whitt
1411 Floribunda Avenue, Burlingame, for. special permit to occupy an
existing building at 1213 Rollins Road for purposes of "mechanical repair
and/or storage."
The applicant's communication dated January 6, 1971, stated that he is
presently the operator of the D&M Arco service station at 1000 Broadway,
immediately adjacent to the subject building, that automobile repairs
-10-
constitute a sizeable part of the business and that the additional
space available in the building is considered essential to an efficient
operation.
A sketch was filed to indicate general location of the properties.
Mr. Whitt, in response to Chairman Sine, stated that attempting to
perform repair work on the service station site is difficult because of
limited space, thAt he is hopeful of remodeling and improving service
station facilities but cannot do so unless permitted to use the adjacent
building.
The City Planner reported that the city approved service station use of
the property by variance a number of years ago, that Mr. Whitt has been
in business there for approximately two years and that problems have
been created recently due to the extensive repair work undertaken by
Mr. Whitt.
The City Planner noted that the city has approved two use permitsfor
automobile repair shops in the immediate vicinity of the subject property
and that the city will benefit by permitting the building to be used
for Mr. Whitt's purposes to the extent that housekeeping and general
appearance of the service station will improve.
There were no comments from the audience in favor of the application.
Comments in opposition were heard from Mr. Robert G. Burger,
275 Kingston Hill Way, Los Gatos, who identified himself as owner of
the building.at 1221 Rollins Road, occupied by Typo Press, Inc.
Mr. Burger stated that he has received complaints from his tenants
about indiscriminate storage of wrecked vehicles on Whitethorn Way,
in front of the Typo Press office area. Mr. Burger reported that he
inspected the area earlier in the evening and observed cars parked on
the private access easement and two cars parked on an adjacent lot that
he owns. Mr. Burger stated that the building proposed to be used by
Mr. Whitt is set back 20 feet from the street and expressed concern that
the front area will be used for parking.
Mr. Burger stated that he would be willing to withdraw his objections
with assurance from the city that all wrecked vehicles will be stored
under cover and that the work performed inside the building will not
create a noise nuisance. He stated that Mr. Whitt operates an AAA towing
service and questioned whether there is sufficient space to accommodate
the variety of vehicles that Mr. Whitt services.
Mr. Whitt, in response to Chairman Sine, stated that every effort will
be made to improve the appearance of the service station and to arrange
for storage of wrecked vehicles at another location. He advised that
the building will be used for engine repair work and temporary storage.
In response to Commissioner Jacobs, the.City Planner confirmed that a
use permit can be revoked upon proof of non-compliance with the terms
of the approval.
Commissioner Mink stated that other similar operations in the general
area were permitted on the condition that the public streets would not
-11-
be used for vehicle storage and that on -site parking would be covered.
Commissioner Mink introduced a motion to approve the application of
Mr. Dale Whitt for special permit for automobile repair and/or storage
at 1213 Rollins Road, in conjunction with the operation of the service
station at 1000 Broadway, on the condition that there shall be no
visible parking of cars on the 1213 Rollins Road property.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Jacobs and unanimously carried
on roll call.
The applicant was informed the permit would be effective Tuesday,
February 2, 1971, if not appealed.
5. SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVED PRIVATE SWIM CLUB. ROLLINS ROAD.
Chairman Sine announced a public hearing on the application of
Mr. Jack Bellevue, #10 South El Camino Real, Millbrae, for special per-
mit to operate a "swim and acrobatic club" in the 1700 block of
Rollins Road (Lots 1,2,3, Block 9, Millsdale Industrial Park).
The applicant's communication dated January 6, 1971, described the
facility as a private swim club, offering swim and acrobatic lessons
(maximum of four children per class in swim lessons, per ieacher) and
possibly swim and exercise club for businessmen.
Drawings prepared by Melvin Rojko, Architect, were filed and a colored
rendering of the proposed building displayed.
The City Planner, in response to the Chair, stated that the only existing
facility in the city that is comparable is an ice skating rink on North
Carolan Avenue. He advised that the parking layout is similar to other
properties on Rollins Road --landscaping in front, parking spaces behind.
Mr. Bellevue, upon recognition by the Chair, stated that both he and
Mrs. Bellevue, vho has been associated with swim clubs for approximately
13 years, are aware that there is a need and a demand for the type of
facility proposed,that the operation can best be described as a family -
membership swim club, with swimming lessons available to the public on a
limited basis. He mentioned several similar clubs located on the penin-
sula and in the east bay.
Mr. Bellevue stated that the parking layout was patterned after that of
Millbrae Meadows Skimming Club, Inc.
Mr. Rojk_q discussed building design, provision for landscaping and
interior plan.
There were no comments from the audience in response to the Chair.
Commissioner Norberg discussed changes in architectural design on the
side elevations.
A motion introduced by Commissioner Jacobs to approve the application for
special permit of Mr. Jack Bellevue to operate a "swim and acrobatic
-12-
club" in Millsdale Industrial Park - Lots 1,2,3, Block 9 - facilities
to conform generally to drawings on file, was seconded by
Commissioner Norberg with a suggestion for revisions in the side
elevations to improve the appearance of the building. The motion was
carried unanimously on roll call.
The applicant was informed the permit would be effective Tuesday,
February 2, 1971, if not appealed.
The City Engineer requested that a resubdivision map be prepared,
deleting internal parcel lines, and filed with his office for processing.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting regularly adjourned at 11:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Everett K. Kindig
Secretary
-13-