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