Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1949.01.27M I N U T E S Vice Chairman Shattuck presiding. Present Absent Coles None Brown Shattuck Macomber Stivers Mitchell CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Burlingame, California. Regular Meeting January 27, 1949 - 8 p.m. Others Present City Attorney Karmel City Clerk White City Engineer Fitch City Building Inspector Watson At this meeting was held a public hearing of an application for variance signed by Leo W. Meyer, dated January 11, 1949,relating to Lots 8 and 9, Block 17, Town of Burlingame. The Chairman read the Notice of Hearing of Petition for Variance of Zone on the above -mentioned lots for use as a parking lot and invited anyone present to speak for or against the variance. The petitioner, Leo W. Meyer, was present and stated that the proposed parking lot would be added to or used in conjunction with Lots 12 and 13 facing on East Lane and that the combined area would provide parking space for approxi- mately 125 cars. He related that from his own observations there was a great need for parking facilities in that vicinity and if the variance is granted, he would clean up and pave the parking lot with gravel or asphaltum in a manner suitable for the use of a well - maintained and supervised parking lot. The Chairman read two communications which had been filed with the Commission in favor of the variance, and two letters of neighboring residents in protest thereof. Mr. Homer Stack, owner of the vacant lot across the street on Myrtle Road, appeared as did members of his family who reside in the neighborhood, and stated that they did not believe there is sufficient need for addi- tional parking space in this immediate vicinity and that such a development would be a detriment in this residential area which is zoned for apartments. They further inquired if the lot actually would be utilized for used car sales, or as a parking lot, and they urged against this type of development on this property. Mrs. Frank Pohl appeared and stated that she owns a home and property on Myrtle Road and protested granting a variance for a parking lot. Mr. Clare Kemp, local merchant, not owning property in the area under discussion, ap- peared and spoke of the well-known need for a great amount of addi- tional parking space in downtown Burlingame, and urged the granting of the variance for this purpose. Mrs. Bouret, a property owner in the neighborhood, appeared in protest. In the discussion which ensued the members of the Planning Commission acknowledged the need generally for additional parking space, which is recognized as a real problem in the community, but at the same time it is believed that the wishes of the property owners should be known and taken into full consideration. Commissioner Coles made a motion that the variance be granted, which motion died for lack of a second. It was decided that the matter should be tabled for further study and consideration at the next meeting February 24, 1949. In the meanwhile the City Engineer has been requested to prepare a plat of the lots embraced in the area which received notices of this public hearing, and to note there- on the responses for and against as a result of this hearing and further investigation. The Chairman read a letter January 27, 1949 from the City Clerk as follows: - 1 - Continuation - MINUTES - Burlingame City Planning Commission January 27, 1949 "Attached herewith is a letter received from the St. Francis Investment Company which was addressed to the City Council in regard to the widening of Chapin Avenue. The matter is being referred to the City Engineer, the City Attorney, and to your Commission for consideration and your recommendation on the request made by the Investment Company." The letter above referred to from the St. Francis Investment Company was read by the Chairman - "The St. Francis Investment Company is currently constructing the Lucky Store on the corner of Chapin Avenue and El Camino Real, which will be completed in approximately April, 1949. Our plans have provided for the eventual widening of Chapin Avenue, in accordance with the City requirements. We do not know whether any definite date has been set for the widening of Chapin, but we feel that there are several compelling reasons why the widening should proceed as soon as possible. The first is that we are afraid that if the street is widened after Lucky Store is in operation, there will be a serious traffic problem --both to Lucky and to the general public on E1 Camino Real. Secondly, we have hired Thomas Church, landscape architect, and the present indecision makes it difficult for him to complete his plans. We would like to urge you to seriously consider commencing the widening of Chapin Avenue at the very earliest moment that seems feasible. The engineer- ing plans are all completed, and as far as we know, there is nothing that stands in the way of beginning the work. However, if there is some obstacle unknown to us which would mean a delay in the widening beyond the opening date of the store, we would appreciate your permission to widen the 358 feet of our side of Chapin Avenue under private contract, in accordance with the plans and specifications prepared by the City Engineer. This would constitute our con- tribution in lieu of assessment. Naturally if there are any additional con- siderations, such as compensation to any particular lot holders, which will be shared by other property owners og the street in addition to the regular widen- ing assessment, you can count on us to do our share. Hoping that this matter may be conveniently discussed at your meeting oft Monday the 17th, and looking forward'to an early reply, -we remain, Respectfully yours, ST. FRANCIS INVESTMENT COMPANY By F. C. Whitman Vice President." City Engineer Fitch was present and reported on the status of the engineering plans for the widening of Chapin Avenue. Commissioner Coles asked the City Engineer if it would be feasible to widen a portion of the street pending completion of the final details, and the Engineer expressed the belief that all of the work on the project should be done at the same time. Ed. McDonald, Chapin Avenue property owner, was present and stated that he understood the desirability of having the work all done in its entirety and said that the matter has been under discussion for a long time, and he urged that the project should be completed in accordance with the wishes of the property owners. City Attorney Karmel explained the procedure which will be necessary which requires that 25% of the Chapin Avenue property owners should get together and present a petition to the City Council to widen and repave the street and he advised that the City of Burlingame, as a municipal corporation, has no power to enter into an agreement such as proposed in the letter January 13, 1949 from the St. Francis Investment Company. A motion carried instructing. the Secretary to inform the City Council that the Planning Commission does not recommend - 2 - Continuation - MINUTES - Burlingame City Planning Commission January 27, 1949 granting the request of the St. Francis Investment Company to widen 358' on the South side of Chapin Avenue under private contract and recommends that,the project of widening Chapin Avenue should be done at one time. The Chairman read a communication from The Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company dated January 21, requesting permission to erect a fence, improve the appearance, and provide parking area for the company's vehicles on the vacant lot adjoining their building on Burlingame Avenue. After discussion, a motion was carried instructing the Secretary to report to the City Council that the Planning Commission recommends the grant- ing of this request. The Chairman read a communication dated January 27, 1949 from Clare Kemp, Industrial Realty Co., as follows: "We hereby make application for the approval of your body for the construction of 2 Butler Type Steel Buildings 50'x 100' 1 n n n n 50' x 110' 120' 1 it it n n 50' x 120' - 130' to be located on our property North of Broadway near Rollins Road. Buildings to be of new type aluminum covering with dull finish." After being advised by the Building Inspector that the proposed construction complies with the Building Code, the Planning Commission indicated its approval. Commissioner Macomber however asked that it be made a matter of record in the Minutes that he has protested be- fore and continues to protest the existence of only a single road to provide ingress and egress to this industrial area. A motion was made by Commissioner Mitchell and seconded by Commissioner Coles that the permit, as requested by Clare Kemp, be approved. This mo- tion on roll call carried. Building Inspector Watson presented plans for the proposed construction of a warehouse for the storage of lumber on the Dord property in the Broadway industrial area. No plat was provided so that the exact location could not be determined at the meeting. City Engineer Fitch advised that in the immediate vicinity of the proposed structure there is at present no sewer or water supply. After discussing the subject with the Building Inspector, the Planning Commission voted that permit should not be granted until and if a satisfactory plat plan is submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Also, the permit should not be issued until the City Engineer has estimated the cost of installation of the necessary sewer and water pipes and the funds for the payment of the same are deposited. Building Inspector Watson presented plans for the proposed construction of an apartment house by E. L. Jett on Lot 7, Block 2, Burlingame Park #4. Approved. Building Inspector Watson presented plans for construction of an apartment house by David A. Nicolaides on Lot 10, Block 3, Burli.ngables in vicinity of Bayshore and Dwight Road. Approved. Building Inspector Watson presented plans for the proposed construction of an apartment house by J. H. Dore'on Lot 9, Block 19, Easton No. 2, El Camino between Broadway and Carmelita. Approved. Building Inspector Watson presented plans for the proposed construction of an apartment house by J. H. Dore'on Lot 8, Block 19, Easton No. 2, El Camino Real. Approved. - 3 - U Continuation - MINUTES - Burlingame City Planning Commission January V, 1949 Commissioner Mitchell brought up for discussion the subject of commuter park- ing in the vicinity of Broadway and Chula Vista Avenue and the possibility of utilizing the abandoned street car track area pending other development. City Engineer Fitch re- ported that the City of San Francisco owns the right-of-way in fee and that certain plans are under discussion which will include a system of traffic lights connected with the railroad crossing gates, and he suggested that this matter be put over for 30 days, which was done. In reponse to the request from the City Council, the Planning Commission re- viewed its recommendation October 15, 190 for a variance affecting the creek area in the vicinity of Howard Avenue and El Camino Real. After discussion, it was requested that the City Engineer prepare a report on the subject and refer the same back to the Commission. The City Clerk reported that the Council has held up communication August 27, 1948 relative to resubdivision of Lots 21, 22, and 23, Block 5, Burlingame Manor, pending clarification of description of the property to be resubdivided. This is in the area where the proposed changes are made necessary to correct a ground water condition in a slide area. ' 'he City Engineer reported that changes have been made in the original proposal and that further changes may be necessary, and he requested that no action be taken until further request is received from the owners of the property, California Constructors, Inc. DAS:LB The Meeting adjourned 11 p.m. A. Stivers, Secretary. -4-