Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC- 2021.06.14BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes Planning Commission 6:00 PM OnlineMonday, June 14, 2021 STUDY SESSION - 6:00 p.m. - Online a.Zoning Code Update - Review of Parking Regulations and Historic Resources Chapters Staff Memo Draft - Parking Regulations Chapter Draft - Historic Resources Chapter Attachments: 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:07 p.m. Staff in attendance: Planning Manager Ruben Hurin, Community Development Director Kevin Gardiner (Study Session only), Associate Planner 'Amelia Kolokihakaufisi, and Assistant City Attorney Scott Spansail. 2. ROLL CALL Comaroto, Terrones, Tse, Gaul, and LariosPresent5 - Loftis, and SchmidAbsent2 - 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a.Draft May 10, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Draft May 10, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting MinutesAttachments: Commissioner Comaroto made a motion, seconded by Acting Chair Larios, to approve the meeting minutes as amended. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Comaroto, Terrones, Tse, Gaul, and Larios5 - Absent:Loftis, and Schmid2 - 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Planning Manager Hurin noted the Item 7a - 2013 Easton Drive has been continued to the June 28, 2021 meeting due to a lack of quorum. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA - There were no public comments. 6. STUDY ITEMS Page 1City of Burlingame June 14, 2021Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - There were no Study Items. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR a.2013 Easton Drive, zoned R -1 - Application for Design Review and Special Permit for attached garage for a new, two -story single family dwelling and attached garage. This project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (a). (Alicia Ader, Dreiling Terrones Architecture, applicant and architect; Bart and Carol Gaul, property owners) (83 noticed) Staff Contact: Erika Lewit (THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE JUNE 14, 2021 MEETING) 2013 Easton Dr - Staff Report 2013 Easton Dr - Attachments 2013 Easton Dr - Plans Attachments: - This item was continued to the June 28, 2021 meeting due to a lack of quorum. b.1349 Cabrillo Avenue, zoned R -1 - Application for Design Review 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. (Tim Raduenz, Form + One, designer; Cabrillo Ave LLC, property owner) (78 noticed) Staff Contact: 'Amelia Kolokihakaufisi 1349 Cabrillo Ave - Staff Report 1349 Cabrillo Ave - Attachments 1349 Cabrillo Ave - Plans Attachments: Commissioner Comaroto was recused from this item for non-statutory reasons. Commissioner Terrones made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tse, to approve the application. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Terrones, Tse, Gaul, and Larios4 - Absent:Loftis, and Schmid2 - Recused:Comaroto1 - 8. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS - There were no Regular Action items. 9. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY a.1235 Paloma Avenue, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review for a new, two -story single family dwelling and detached garage. (James Chu, Chu Design Associates, Inc ., applicant and designer; Chung Lee, property owner) (179 noticed) Staff Contact: 'Amelia Kolokihakaufisi Page 2City of Burlingame June 14, 2021Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 1235 Paloma Ave - Staff Report 1235 Paloma Ave - Attachments 1235 Paloma Ave - Plans Attachments: All Commissioners have visited the project site. Associate Planner Kolokihakaufisi provided an overview of the staff report. Acting Chair Larios opened the public hearing. James Chu, designer, represented the applicant and answered questions about the application. Public Comments: > There were no public comments. Acting Chair Larios closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion/Direction: >It is a well-crafted house and the massing is well done. >Would like to see a 3D rendering to further understand the massing, and in particular, the flat roof to the left of the gable above the front door. >Left elevation needs to be revised so that it correctly shows a simple shed roof above the porch roof. Commissioner Terrones made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tse, to place the item on the Consent Calendar when the plans have been revised as directed. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Comaroto, Terrones, Tse, Gaul, and Larios5 - Absent:Loftis, and Schmid2 - b.1233 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review for a new, two -story single family dwelling and detached garage. (James Chu, Chu Design Associates Inc ., applicant and designer; Mickey Ou, property owner) (108 noticed) Staff Contact: Catherine Keylon 1233 Drake Ave - Staff Report 1233 Drake Ave - Attachments 1233 Drake Ave - Plans Attachments: All Commissioners have visited the project site. Planning Manager Hurin provided an overview of the staff report. Acting Chair Larios opened the public hearing. James Chu, designer, represented the applicant and answered questions about the application. Public Comments: > Christopher Labrecque, 1245 Drake Avenue: I live next door to the project site. The design looks great. I have two young children and our seating area is located immediately next to the project. Will there be some mitigating measures installed for dust control during demolition and construction to prevent Page 3City of Burlingame June 14, 2021Planning Commission Meeting Minutes debris and dust from coming onto our property? Acting Chair Larios closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion/Direction: >The project is well-crafted, nicely detailed, and will fit in with the neighborhood. >On the left elevation, the entry gable pediment over the porch abutting the stair bay is odd. Consider adding a pilaster at that edge to abut the stair; would create a better finish for the pediment. >The second floor window above the front entry seems top heavy. Consider changing the sill height of this window. If this window is changed, then consider changing same -sized windows on right and rear elevations. Commissioner Terrones 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:Comaroto, Terrones, Tse, Gaul, and Larios5 - Absent:Loftis, and Schmid2 - c.1204 El Camino Real, zoned C-1, Broadway Commercial Area - Application for Commercial Design Review for exterior facade changes to an existing commercial building and Parking Variance for a change in use from automobile shop to retail and personal service uses. (1480 Broadway Properties LLC , property owner; Suheil Shatara, Shatara Architecture Inc., architect and applicant) (150 noticed) Staff Contact: Michelle Markiewicz 1204 El Camino Real - Staff Report 1204 El Camino Real - Attachments 1204 El Camino Real - Plans Attachments: All Commissioners have visited the project site. Commissioner Terrones was recused from this item because he has a business relationship with the property owner. Associate Planner Kolokihakaufisi provided an overview of the staff report. Acting Chair Larios opened the public hearing. Suheil Shatara, designer, represented the applicant and answered questions about the application. Public Comments: >Jennifer Pfaff: Most commissioners know that the El Camino Real right -of-way would normally have required at least a tree to be prepared in a planter strip. It’s all concrete now, but typically there would be a planter strip. This doesn't sound like a permanent project, but simply for the record, with facade changes and such there probably would have been a tree required here. Maybe later on, when the El Camino Real renewal project is done, there will be a planting strip here around whatever egress you have. >Darell Mathis: I have submitted written comments already, but I just wanted to emphasize a few things for public consideration. The parking in this area has always been a problematic issue. People make free use of the driveway on our property to get to the parking area in the back. They try to park there and basically do whatever they want to do hoping they get away with it, despite the fact that we post signs that say they're subject to being towed. That area is also an easement for some of the businesses on Broadway that need access to the back of their space. Parking is a big issue for us and that's our primary concern. The potential congestion and inappropriate usage of the property, the associated potential safety Page 4City of Burlingame June 14, 2021Planning Commission Meeting Minutes issues when you have people coming in and out of that narrow access way, and the potential for a number of people that may be present in this proposed business. I would point out that the parking situation is a little different here than in other areas of the commercial strip. Most other businesses on Broadway have parking on any direction you go. This business, at the edge of El Camino Real, has very limited parking facilities and El Camino Real itself has no parking at all and is a very busy street. The parking issues there are more critical than they might be elsewhere in Burlingame. So I would emphasize that needs to be taken into consideration. It also seems to that we only had a week to really consider this proposal and it's rather a short amount of time to fully evaluate it. So perhaps some additional time for consideration would be in order. Acting Chair Larios closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion/Direction: >Having a tough time with the Parking Variance. Other businesses in Burlingame also use the perimeter parking, but they have parking in front of their business along Broadway, which is hopefully accessible to them and they have a place to drop off. Daily delivery and pickup is a concern, especially because there would not be parking along the curb on El Camino Real. Not seeing the hardship for a variance because the building has always had a tenant and has only been vacant for short periods of time . We need to see a landscape plan and some kind of a communication with Caltrans to see what's going to happen in front of the building. That's going to be critical about how this whole thing plays out and how businesses can work there. The parking issue has not been resolved with this application. >Would like to see what Caltrans will do. Also need to see a landscaping plan. Worried that we're going to see a lot of congestion there. >Want to see this business succeed and have a nice space, but worried about typical human behavior and what might happen to this stretch on El Camino Real with all the customers and visitors who may be coming to this business. >Should revise the Variance Application to include stronger findings for the Parking Variance. >The landscape plan needs to be addressed in a very aggressive fashion; should include some landscape features in front of the building that would help prevent customers wanting to park on the sidewalk in front of the building. Would like to see a response from Caltrans that this is indeed what they would approve. Commissioner Gaul made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tse, 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:Comaroto, Tse, Gaul, and Larios4 - Absent:Loftis, and Schmid2 - Recused:Terrones1 - 10. COMMISSIONER’S REPORTS >Commissioner Terrones noted that the Zoning Ordinance Update Subcommittee held a meeting on June 9, 2021, to discuss and provide direction with regards to community benefit options, streetscape design in the Bayfront area, and objective design standards. He noted that staff will be working on these discussion points and incorporating them into the Zoning Code Update. 11. DIRECTOR REPORTS Planning Manager Hurin noted that at the June 7, 2021, City Council meeting, the Council declined to introduce the Zoning Amendment Ordinance to allow health services uses on the ground floor in the HMU District, and as a result did not proceed with the related Conditional Use Permit application for a dialysis center at 220 Primrose Road. The Council had the same concerns expressed by the Planning Page 5City of Burlingame June 14, 2021Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Commission. Planning Manager Hurin noted that there will be a Study Session on June 28, 2021 to discuss Zoning Code Update chapters. a.1548 Balboa Avenue - FYI for review of requested changes to a previously approved Design Review project. 1548 Balboa Ave - Staff Memo 1548 Balboa Ave - Attachments 1548 Balboa Ave - Plans Attachments: Pulled for further discussion. Commissioner noted the following concerns: >Skylight/sun tunnel over porch (not shown on plans); >Exterior lighting on the side (not shown on plans); and >Numerous roof vents that are not consolidated – looks awkward with multiple terminations on the roof. b.728 Lexington Way - FYI for review of revisions requested by the Planning Commission to a previously approved Design Review project. 728 Lexington Way - Staff Memo 728 Lexington Way - Attachments 728 Lexington Way - Plans Attachments: >Accepted. c.1431 Capuchino Avenue - FYI for review of revisions requested by the Planning Commission to a previously approved Design Review project. 1431 Capuchino Ave - Staff Memo 1431 Capuchino Ave - Attachments 1431 Capuchino Ave - Plans Attachments: >Accepted. 12. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:24 p.m. Notice: An action by the Planning Commission is appealable to the City Council within 10 days of the Planning Commission's action on June 14, 2021. If the Planning Commission's action has not been appealed or called up for review by the Council by 5:00 p.m. on June 24, 2021, 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 $1,075.00, which includes noticing costs. Page 6City of Burlingame