Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1972.03.13THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION March 13, 1972 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Cistulli Kindig Mink Norberg Sine Taylor CALL TO ORDER The monthly study called to order on presiding. ROLL CALL Jacobs - excused City Planner Swan City Attorney Karmel City Engineer Marr meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was the above date at 8:00 p.m., Chairman Sine All members of the commission were present except Commissioner Jacobs who was excused. APPLICATIONS Chairman Sine announced that the agenda would be revised to allow the Anza Pacific sign application to be heard first, since one of the principals must leave. 1. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR MODIFICATION OF EXISTING ADVERTISING DISPLAY FOR ANZA PARKING. David Keyston was present as representative of the applicant. City Planner Swan reviewed this application. He stated that it was for a 10' x 16' addition to an existing sign on the Anza Airport Parking lot at 615 Airport Boulevard. The old sign is 10' x 40' and the addition would be attached at an angle of 45 degrees. The extension also would have a time and temperature indicator with a total sign height of 23'. The existing sign is 20' high. He stated Anza Pacific is having difficulty directing people to their parking area, hence the request for the sign, which would also direct traffic to Airport Boulevard. He noted the difficulty of classifying this sign with respect to the sign ordinance - whether it was a direction- al sign, pole sign, - it is on wooden posts - or ground sign. He also stated that no sign variance should remain in effect longer than the business the sign advertises. The City Planner displayed drawings of the existing sign and the proposed extension. The sign will face Bayshore Freeway and be located at the rear of the Anza Pacific lots which front on Airport Boulevard. He questioned whether signs should be permitted at the rear of lots and there was some discussion about signs being erected on each lot in a row of lots. - 2 - Mr. Keyston addressed the Commission and gave his opinions on a proposed sign ordinance for the waterfront commercial district. He thought there should be a time limitation on signs, and no signs on the back of lots. He stated that pole signs should tie in with the project and felt that common white plastic pole signs in this area are negative. There was Commission question regarding the length of the sign, and Mr. Keyston stated he was informed by former City Planner Mann that there were no limitations on length in the Waterfront Commercial District. The present sign is lighted all night and the extension will be also. Mr. Keyston indicated a personal preference for the time and temperature gauge, and stated he would purchase one at a discount to justify its short 5-year useage. - Chairman Sine informed Mr. Keyston this application would be scheduled for the public hearing of March 27, 1972. 2. VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 14-UNIT APARTMENT IN R-1 DISTRICT AT 255 ROLLINS ROAD WITH LESS THAN REQUIRED YARDS, BEING REMAINDER OF LOTS 3, 6 AND 7, BLOCK 46, TOWN OF BURLINGAME. G. C. JOHNSON. Chairman Sine reported to the Commission that this application had been continued to this meeting to allow the applicant to modify plans which had been rejected at a previous study meeting. Mr. Johnson gave Commission members a set of new plans for their inspection, stating he had surveyed the neighborhood and had signatures from several areas indicating no objection to this apartment building. The City Planner reviewed the application and stated that after a conference with Mr. Johnson his designer had revised the floor plans and came up with a 12-unit apartment. This is greater density than is permitted in R-3A. The garage should not be underground, since this is an area in which flooding occurs. The City Planner had shown the plans to Fire Inspector Pearson who made recommendations: 1. The stairway in a three story building must be fully enclosed. This stairway is not; and it cannot be approved by the Fire or Building departments until it is enclosed. 2. The distance between exit stairs must be 20% of the perimeter of the area served. 3. Apartment 106 needs a fire escape. City Planner Swan commented on the change in rear yard setback to 15' and in side yard to 8'+. He noted the overall footage of the lot as being about 11,527 square feet, of which 524% is covered under the new plans. With the new plan for parking, 4 autos would still have to back into the street. He recommended that Mr. Johnson discuss the plans with tle Fire and Building inspectors, and revise them to meet their regulations, rather than have the application set for a public hearing. There was Commission discussion of the excess coverage of the lot. Mr. Johnson remarked that all apartments have two bedrooms except one; there are 16 parking spaces under cover plus 4 on the lot, so this should be ample. The City Planner made a sketch of the lot for the Commission, showing - 3 - the setback difficulties because of its irregular shape. The Chairman suggested that possibly an eight -unit apartment would be acceptable, but Mr. Johnson said that would not be economically feasible, and he would prefer to use the lot as a storage yard, getting a variance for that. City Engineer Marr commented that this is a low area with flooding conditions, especially true with a sub -grade basement for parking. He stated that while mains are adequate in this area, Mr. Johnson should look into the other aspects of fire protection. Chairman Sine suggested that Mr. Johnson work closely with the City Planner to come up with acceptable plans, and if this is not possible, withdraw the application. Public hearing for this application was not set. 3. VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A 6-UNIT APARTMENT ON AN R-2 LOT AT 1131 CAPUCHINO, BEING LOT 7, BLOCK 5, EASTON ADDITION. LESLIE T. ALEXANDER. Chairman Sine informed Commission members that this application had been referred back to the Planning Commission by the City Council for consideration of revised plans. New plans submitted by Mr. Alexander were distributed. City Planner Swan commented on the changes in the plans. Less floor area was possible by reduction of the 3-bedroom apartment to a 2-bedroom. One to three extra parking spaces are obtained by placing the building close to the apartment next door and providing two driveways with a combined width of 24'. Mr. Alexander told the Commission he had also made the carports wider by 8" each, the carport area now being 18' x 20'. Garbage container area has been moved inside from the side of the building, providing more space. Commissioner Norberg thought there should be more landscaping around the building, and Mr. Alexander agreed that more planting would help. There was discussion of landscaping the driveway area, possibly with planter boxes. Commission comment was that this revised plan was a definite improvement. Chairman Sine set this application for public hearing on March 27, suggesting to Mr. Alexander that he contact the adjacent property owner, Mr. Fiory, with regard to the joint driveway. 4. REQUEST TO REMODEL DETACHED BUILDING INTO GARAGE, ONE BEDROOM, ONE BATH. ANGELO DELACASSA. 141 VICTORIA ROAD. Chairman Sine read the letter from the applicant. However, due to misunderstanding, the applicant had not presented application or plans for this remodeling. Mr. and Mrs. DeLacassa were present and the Chairman suggested they confer with the City Planner and bring in appropriate material for consideration at a subsequent study meeting. 5. SPECIAL PERMIT TO USE UNCLASSIFIED LAND AT THE BURLINGAME STATION (PER SECTIONS 25.12.040 AND 25.16.120) BY FRANCES FENA, LESSEE ON LANDS OF SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMP City Planner Swan announced this item had been tentatively scheduled - 4 - for hearing, but no application had yet been received. He commented this application would concern lease of part of the Burlingame Avenue S.P. Depot,, which will be used as a business license address and as living quarters for her son. A special permit is required for use of unclassified land. There was discussion of Mrs. Fena's lease of part of the Broadway station for use as a restaurant. 6. RE SUBDIVISION MAP, LOTS 10,11,12, BLOCK 20, EASTON NO. 2 MICHAEL J. KALEND The City Planner reported to the Commission that this resubdivision map is to prepare for the eventual construction -of a 30-unit apartment building at the corner of Broadway and El Camino. All three lots are R-3, and the map deletes the lot lines. This will be a four-story building with two levels of parking. The main entrance will be on Broadway, with a narrow exit driveway to E1 Camino. City Planner Swan noted that apparently the apartment building conforms to code regulations. City Engineer Marr was asked if there were any restrictions on the location of driveways, and he replied there were none to his knowledge, except they must be at least 20' from a corner. This application was scheduled for the public hearing of March 27, 1972. (At 9:30 Attorney Karmel entered the meeting) NEW BUSINESS: 7. TENTATIVE SYSTEM OF CODE ENFORCEMENT City Planner Swan presented some of his ideas to the Commission on this subject. He emphasized his concern with illegal residential units. These units provide revenue to the landowner; and they receive public services without contributing much of the cost, e.g., water, waste water treatment, etc. There is need to recover some of these added costs. Another concern is the practice of giving permits for overnight parking. There are cases where the illegal unit has no parking space: so, the occupants go to the Police Department and get a permit to park on the street. He thought that, basically, a procedure should be established to build up documentation so the Commission could make recommendations to the City Council. Based on informal review, the Commission could sanction staff to get an inspection warrant and make an interior inspection and report. The Planning Commission could then enforce penalties, charges, or abatement procedures. He felt it desirable to prevent new illegal residential uses, and suggested some type of service charge so that it would not be profitable, possibly $50.00 per month. Commissioner Kindig questioned whether this could be done, and there was comment that the charge should be $50.00 per day. Attorney Karmel commented that the City would put itself in a difficult - 5 - situation by charging people when they have some kind of illegality. The illegality should either be corrected or terminated, thereby making the illegal legal. In effect, when you accept a charge, you are saying that you are condoning it. Commissioner Taylor suggested inserting a code section which would specify meter use,limiting the use of the meter to a single family, since several units in an illegal building could operate off one meter. City Engineer Marr commented that this method had been employed several years ago, where the branch service went into a master meter service. The City Planner pointed out a prime example of an illegal building at 1528 Newlands. The illegal unit was discovered when additional telephone service was installed. There were three inspections with a subsequent report from the building inspector of violations. Building Inspector Calwell then met with the owners who stated they would not take the unit out. The owner and the realtor were asked, "What will you do?" They said they would use it for their own household purposes and for a children's playhouse, but they would evict the present tenant The Planner reported that he and the building inspector will go back and check this unit on April 5, and commented there should be some realistic way to charge for man hours spent to abate this. Commissioner Mink suggested a very punitive fine or charge to recover the cost of the enforcement. Attorney Karmel stated that all illegalities must be treated on an individual basis and emphasized that there must be a definite policy. As an illustration, the City has a regulation setting a curfew in the park. Recently the police attempted to enforce this and cited several young people. The City Attorney then received a call from the District Attorney's office reporting the municipal judge wished to know what penalties could be set. Since there had been no policy set, a conference with the judge had to be called. He pointed out that the same kind of thing will happen on almost any kind of city misdemeanor. If the City instigates a criminal prosecution in a municipal court for building code violation, there is an education job with the judge. The alternative is to go into superior court to stop the illegal use and compel the razing of the illegal structure. He commented that this is not simple, either, noting that the Thompson case has not yet come to trial. Commissioner Taylor suggested a policy of working with insurance companies to deny home owners policies to people in illegal dwellings. It was pointed out that this would involve much time of investigative personnel. Commissioner Cistulli suggested a Commission Board of Appeals. It was decided that this, too, would involve much staff time. Where was a suggestion of filing a complaint with the Assessor's office. The City Attorney commented that this could be done; a complaint of a zoning violation filed and recorded which would act as a cloud on the title until it had been corrected. However, this action would be effective only in the event of sale of the property. Chairman Sine commented that the Commission will lose the faith of citizens who report violations if nothing is done about them. Commissioner Mink suggested cooperation with insurance companies toward restrictions of fire insurance policies for illegal dwellings. Commissioner Kindig commented that the first step should be to set up a series of penalties. The City Attorney stated that he had no authority to contemplate an action of any kind except a criminal action in the name of the City of Burlingame. He suggested that the Planning Commission might look into the possibility of giving the City Attorney authority for building and zoning code regulations. There was discussion of what outside physical evidence could be used as a basis for issuance of an inspection warrant. This could include extra phone lines, setback violations, building irregularities, lack of building permit. City Engineer Marr questioned the use of an inspection warrant if the outsideevidence indicated a violation. The City Attorney commented that it would be necessary to get all information possible with respect to violations both inside and outside. This would influence the judge's decision. He suggested another approach: the City Attorney could have a citation sent out to violators stating that a complaint had been made. There could then be a meeting with them, and the possibility of amicable agreement. Discussion followed, and it was agreed that there would be further study of possible code enforcement. COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RULES Chairman Sine introduced a letter from the City Manager to all Commissions regarding attendance rules, and there was discussion. LIST OF POSSIBLE TOPICS FOR 1972 TASKS The City Planner briefly reviewed this list, and requested that the Planning Commission express the priorities for planning studies. - LANDSCAPING PLANS There was discussion of the Beautification commission's request that they be allowed to review landscaping plans. The comment was made that approval of landscaping plans is a follow-up type of procedure in that landscaping is never approved at the beginning of a project. It was considered that this commission's ideas might be helpful; however, delaying the plans until the commission had inspected them would be an additional step in the procedure. It was suggested that the Beautification Commission send a member to the Planning Commission meetings; and it was decided to send this commission a copy of all regular meeting minutes so that they could maintain a follow-up on landscaping. Mt CODE AMENDMENTS The City Planner suggested a number of code amendments. It was late; the ideas were new; and the Planning Commission gave no expression of actions to be taken. (See attached preliminary draft of Suggested Code Amendments.) ADJOURNMENT The study meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Everett K. Kindig Secretary