Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 2019.04.22BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes Planning Commission 7:00 PM Council ChambersMonday, April 22, 2019 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Staff in attendance: Planning Manager Ruben Hurin, Senior Planner Erika Lewit, and City Attorney Kathleen Kane. 2. ROLL CALL Sargent, Comaroto, Gaul, Gaul, Terrones, Gaul, Gaul, and LoftisPresent8 - Kelly, and TseAbsent2 - 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There were no meeting minutes to approve. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA There were no public comments on non-agenda items. 6. STUDY ITEMS There were no Study Items. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar Items. 8. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS a.834 Crossway Road, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review Amendment for a previously approved project for a new, two -story single family dwelling and detached garage. This project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section 15303 (a) of the CEQA Guidelines. (Tony Leung, applicant; John Nguyen, designer) (114 noticed) Staff Contact: 'Amelia Kolokihakaufisi 834 Crossway Rd - Staff Report 834 Crossway Rd - Attachments 834 Crossway Rd - Plans Attachments: Page 1City of Burlingame Printed on 5/14/2019 April 22, 2019Planning Commission Meeting Minutes All Commissioners had visited the project site. Chair Comaroto had met with the applicant. Senior Planner Lewit provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff. Chair Comaroto opened the public hearing. John Nguyen, represented the applicant. Public Comments: There were no public comments. Chair Comaroto closed the public hearing. Commission Comments/Direction: >Confirmed that header height of doors and windows will remain the same and not be increased. >Confirmed that standing seam metal roof color will be pewter gray. >Confirmed that exterior siding will have mitered corners. >Confirmed that plate height at front porch will remain at 8 feet and plate height for house will increase to 9 feet. >Verify if set of three second floor windows are being lowered. >Don't see any issues with proposal to increase plate height on first floor; 9 foot plate height on first floor and 8 foot plate height on second floor is within parameters of projects we usually approve. >Cautiously okay with the proposed changes. We look very closely at plate heights. Generally resist 10 foot plate heights, in this case the first floor plate height is 9 feet. Proposed plate heights would have been acceptable if originally approved. Reason for being cautiously okay with changes is that the neighborhood still contains many single story, quaint homes. Remember a comment made during original review of the project that it seemed a little tall for the neighborhood, but project was approved. >Don't see any problem with raising the plate height, however am skeptical that header height of doors and windows will not be raised along with the plate height. >If applicant would like to increase header height of windows and doors, project will need to return to the Planning Commission for review. >Front and rear facades are nice and compact, real impact is along the two side facades which are broader and taller. Commissioner Terrones made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Gaul to approve the application with the following amended condition: >that the front porch plate height (8’-1”) and header heights of all windows and exterior doors shall be built as shown on the plans date stamped April 16, 2019; and that any change to these heights shall require an application for design review amendment. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Sargent, Comaroto, Gaul, and Terrones4 - Nay:Loftis1 - Absent:Kelly, and Tse2 - 9. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY Page 2City of Burlingame Printed on 5/14/2019 April 22, 2019Planning Commission Meeting Minutes a.1244 Laguna Avenue, zoned R -1 - Application for Design Review for a new, two -story single family dwelling (existing detached garage to remain). (J. Deal Associates, applicant and designer; James and Lisa Hong, property owners) (144 noticed) Staff Contact: Catherine Keylon 1244 Laguna Ave - Staff Report and Attachments 1244 Laguna Ave - Plans Attachments: Commissioner Terrones was recused from this item because he owns a business within 500 feet of the subject property. All Commissioners had visited the project site. There were no ex-parte communications to report. Planning Manager Hurin provided an overview of the staff report. Chair Comaroto opened the public hearing. James Hong represented the applicant, with designer Jerry Deal. Public Comments: There were no public comments. Chair Comaroto closed the public hearing. Commission Comments/Direction: >Design is a bit jumbled. >Sunroom windows seem out of place and are not in keeping with the rest of the house; these are large windows while the rest of the house has smaller scale windows and doors; needs a little more work. >Used to seeing long flat walls, so like how second floor is broken up, maintains the architecture of the house. >Appreciate that a lot of the architectural details from the original house are remaining and are being repeated on the second floor addition. >Okay with window in sunroom, but concerned about whether it's possible to get a piece of glass that large, appears to be one piece of glass; applicant should verify before resubmitting plans. If not possible, then plans should accurately reflect the proposed window configuration in this room. Commissioner Sargent made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Comaroto, to place the item on the Consent Calendar when the plans have been revised as directed. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Sargent, Comaroto, Gaul, and Loftis4 - Absent:Kelly, and Tse2 - Recused:Terrones1 - b.110 Loma Vista Drive, zoned R -1 - Application for Design Review and Special Permit for attached garage for a new, two -story single family dwelling. (Victor Song, applicant and property owner; Bill Guan, architect) (62 noticed) Staff Contact: Erika Lewit Page 3City of Burlingame Printed on 5/14/2019 April 22, 2019Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 110 Loma Vista Dr - Staff Report 110 Loma Vista Dr - Attachments 110 Loma Vista Dr - Plans Attachments: All Commissioners had visited the project site. There were no ex-parte communications to report. Senior Planner Lewit provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff. Chair Comaroto opened the public hearing. Bill Guan, represented the applicant. Public Comments: There were no public comments. Chair Comaroto closed the public hearing. Commission Comments/Direction: >Don't have an issue with a modern style in this neighborhood, agree that there is an eclectic mix. >Concerned that it is a large, blank box; design is very blank and stark. >Scale is out of proportion with neighborhood. >Tall plate heights on first and second floors are making blank spaces even bigger and greater. >Large second floor windows on front facade fill the void, but they will be very large windows in private spaces on second floor. >There are some detail issues, for example the building elevations show the first floor window on the left side as a corner window, however the floor plans indicates that it contains a corner post. >Front elevation consists of simple sheds and a token gesture of materiality with the stone detail. >Side elevations are very blank and large. >See an opportunity, particularly in the living room space, to add some windows and a chimney expressed on the exterior. >In well-crafted modern design, often see an elegant expression of materials and a break down of massing with alternate materials. However all we have here is stucco and a belly band. >Good candidate for a design review consultant. >Neighborhood can support a modern design and attached garage. >Look closely at ways to mitigate double -wide garage door, perhaps by off -setting with two single -wide doors. >Plate heights are way out of proportion for neighborhood; several new houses have been built in this neighborhood but probably with 9-foot first floor and 8-foot second floor plate heights. House as proposed will appear much larger than the floor area indicates. Great room plate height meets letter of code, but not the spirit. >Space above front entry complies with code requirements, but could easily be converted to useable space. Commissioner Sargent made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Loftis, to refer the application to a design review consultant. Discussion of Motion: > Uneasy with the proposed double lean-to roof design. We have approved several houses with this design and feel that not one of them has been very successful. Feel that Page 4City of Burlingame Printed on 5/14/2019 April 22, 2019Planning Commission Meeting Minutes this is awkward 1970's architecture, it's not real modernism. >Concerned with house fitting in with this compact neighborhood. This is not your typical hillside area neighborhood, feels more like a Burlingables neighborhood on the flats. >House needs to be more in scale with houses in the neighborhood. >Concerned with size of second floor deck at rear of house, although it backs up to Highway 280 still have neighbors on either side; consider reducing size of deck. > A newer Eichler style house might work. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Sargent, Comaroto, Gaul, Terrones, and Loftis5 - Absent:Kelly, and Tse2 - c.133 Clarendon Rd, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review for a first and second story addition to an existing single family dwelling. (Jesse Geurse, applicant and designer; Matt Rossen, property owner) (118 noticed) Staff Contact: Michelle Markiewicz 133 Clarendon Rd - Staff Report 133 Clarendon Rd - Attachments 133 Clarendon Rd - Plans Attachments: All Commissioners had visited the project site. There were no ex-parte communications to report. Planning Manager Hurin provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff. Chair Comaroto opened the public hearing. Jesse Geurse, represented the applicant. Public Comments: There were no public comments. Chair Comaroto closed the public hearing. Commission Comments/Direction: >This is a very nice project, just needs to work out some details. >Configuration of chimney along left side of house is awkward, doesn't feel right; should revisit design. >On Right Side Elevation, there are three different roof styles and materials on the first floor. For consistency, consider changing the existing clipped roof above the bump -out to a shed roof and change composition shingle roofing to metal roofing. Should also consider changing material of roofing on first floor bump-out along left side of house to metal. >Concerned with mix of existing and new windows, suggest replacing the existing windows with simulated true divided lite windows, would help project. >Odd to have mix of grid patterns on windows, existing windows contain full grids while new windows only contain grids on upper sash; should revisit grid pattern. >Generally, have some objection to foam trim, but there is so much of it on the existing house that it would be acceptable in this case to carry it through the rest of the house. >Encourage applicant to replace the existing windows at the front of the house with windows that are more in scale with the house, existing windows seem very small. Page 5City of Burlingame Printed on 5/14/2019 April 22, 2019Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Commissioner Sargent made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Loftis, to place the item on the Regular Action Calendar when the plans have been revised as directed. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Sargent, Comaroto, Gaul, Terrones, and Loftis5 - Absent:Kelly, and Tse2 - d.2305 Poppy Drive, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review for a first and second story addition to an existing single family dwelling. (Jerry Deal, J Deal Associates, applicant and designer; Elizabeth Watson and Alex Para, property owners) (132 noticed) Staff Contact: 'Amelia Kolokihakaufisi 2305 Poppy Dr - Staff Report 2305 Poppy Dr - Attachments 2305 Poppy Dr - Plans Attachments: All Commissioners had visited the project site. There were no ex-parte communications to report. Senior Planner Lewit provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff. Chair Comaroto opened the public hearing. Elizabeth Watson and Alex Para, represented the applicant, with designer Jerry Deal. Public Comments: There were no public comments. Chair Comaroto closed the public hearing. Commission Comments/Direction >Very well layed out and planned addition; matches architecture of existing house. >This is a big improvement on the rear elevation. >New windows should match existing simulated true divided lite windows. >Revise existing and new right side elevation to correctly show grids on existing dining room window. >May want to consider filling in gap in between existing and proposed dormers along right side of house. >Feels like you're adding a lot of space, but ending up with a small bathroom in the master bedroom; this might be opportunity to get a larger bathroom. >Great design; fits in with neighborhood. Commissioner Gaul made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Comaroto, to place the item on the Consent Calendar when the plans have been revised as directed. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Sargent, Comaroto, Gaul, Terrones, and Loftis5 - Absent:Kelly, and Tse2 - 10. COMMISSIONER’S REPORTS Page 6City of Burlingame Printed on 5/14/2019 April 22, 2019Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Commissioner Comaroto reported that she attended the Burlingame Talks Shop event on April 17th, where property owners, tenants, business professionals, residents and others gathered to discuss our current retail environment and how to evolve our retail districts over the next ten years to keep them vibrant and relevant. 11. DIRECTOR REPORTS a.1104 Clovelly Lane - FYI for requested changes by the Planning Commisison to a previously approved Design Review and Special Permit Application. 1104 Clovelly Lane - Memorandum 1104 Clovelly Ln - Plans Attachments: Accepted. b.1547 Los Altos Drive - FYI for proposed changes to a previously approved Design Review, Special Permit, and Hillside Area Construction Permit Application. 1547 Los Altos Drive - Memorandum 1547 Los Altos Drive - Plans Attachments: Accepted. 12. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:12 p.m. Note: An action by the Planning Commission is appealable to the City Council within 10 days of the Planning Commission's action on April 22, 2019. If the Planning Commission's action has not been appealed or called up for review by the Council by 5:00 p.m. on May 2, 2019, the action becomes final. In order to be effective, appeals must be in writing to the City Clerk and must be accompanied by an appeal fee of $551, which includes noticing costs. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Community Development/Planning counter, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Page 7City of Burlingame Printed on 5/14/2019