Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 2012.01.23C CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION BURLINGAME APPROVED MINUTES Monday, January 23, 2012 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers - 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Yie called the January 23, 2012, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:02 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Cauchi, Gaul, Lindstrom, Terrones and Yie Absent: Commissioner Vistica Staff Present: Community Development Director William Meeker and Senior Planner Ruben Hurin III. MINUTES Commissioner Terrones moved, seconded by Commissioner Auran to approve the minutes of the January 9, 2012 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, with the following change: ■ Page 3, Public Comments - fourth bullet; revise to read "...the City Council unfortunately chose not to accept the exemption language suggested by the City Attorney". ■ Page 4, Additional Commission comments - second bullet, replace "though" with "thought' ■ Page 5, Discussion of Motion; revise to read: "Still concerned whether or not a third party review would be of value given the likely inability to obtain proprietary information". ■ Page 8, Commission comments - first bullet, second line; revise to read "...walking to the site will come from". ■ Page 8, Commission comments - seventh bullet; revise to read "...is disingenuous stating that the project is in close proximity to housing and that...". ■ Page 9, last bullet prior to Design Review Study Items; revise to read "Concerned that by allowing an FAR increase for this project site, the change will also be allowed on the adjacent site that is not part of the application". Motion passed 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner Vistica absent, Commissioner Cauchi abstained) IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR No one spoke from the floor. VI. STUDY ITEMS There were no Study Items for review. CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes January 23, 2012 VII. ACTION ITEMS Consent Calendar - Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted upon simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant, a member of the public or a Commissioner prior to the time the Commission votes on the motion to adopt. There were no Consent Calendar items for review. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS Chair Yie indicated that she would recuse herself from the discussion regarding Agenda Item 2 (712 Bayswater Avenue) due to a potential business relationship with the applicant. She left the City Council Chambers. 2. 712 BAYSWATER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MARK BUCCIARELLI, BAUKUNST, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND NEC HOLDINGS LLC, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated January 23, 2012, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fourteen (14) conditions were suggested for consideration. Questions of staff: None. Vice -Chair Gaul opened the public hearing. Mark Bucciarelli, 58 Fairlawn Avenue, Daly City; represented the applicant. Client wishes to use Milgard vinyl windows due to the cost savings. Wish to allow the option of using stone veneer rather than brick veneer. Willing to consider powder room change suggested by a Commissioner. Commission comments: ■ Is there a sample of the stone veneer material? Would be helpful to see the material sample. (Buccierelli — not certain yet.) ■ Could submit the final stone veneer choice to the Planning Commission as an FYI. ■ Doubtful that the brick veneer will survive the construction process — will likely be brick to match existing, or replaced with the suggested stone veneer. (Buccierelli — the structural engineer has indicated that it is unlikely that structural alterations will be required.) ■ Requested clarification regarding the window type — noted that the plans show wood windows with aluminum cladding. (Buccierelli — property owner wishes to seek approval of the vinyl windows.) ■ Appreciates the changes that have been made to the project; the divided lights, wood attic vents, the extra column on the porch, etc. ■ Be certain that the floor plan notes are consistent with the elevations. ■ Clarified that the window grids should be applied to the exterior of the window, not placed between the glass. Also suggested shopping around for the best window price. ■ Vinyl windows are not acceptable. 2 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes January 23, 2012 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes January 23, 2012 Public comments: None. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Terrones moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped January 12, 2012, sheets A0.0 through A8.1, G1.0 through G1.2 and L-1; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's November 14 and December 9, 2011 memos, the City Engineer's December 1, 2011 memo, the Fire Marshal's November 14, 2011 memo, the City Arborist's November 14 and December 14, 2011 memos, and the NPDES Coordinator's November 15, 2011 memo shall be met; 5. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be placed upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community Development Director; 6. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 7. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; 8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2010 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; E, CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes January 23, 2012 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION 11. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the applicant shall provide a certification by the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, that demonstrates that the project falls at or below the maximum approved floor area ratio for the property; 12. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 13. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and 14. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi. Discussion of motion: None. Vice -Chair Gaul called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner Vistica absent, Commissioner Yie recused). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:18 p.m. Chair Yie returned to the dais. 3. 2008 DAVIS DRIVE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR AS -BUILT CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN REVIEW PROJECT FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION QUALIFYING AS SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION (MARK ROBERTSON, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; KEVIN CHANG AND ELAINE CHOW, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated January 23, 2012, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Twelve (12) conditions were suggested for consideration. Questions of staff: None. Chair Yie opened the public hearing. Mark Robertson, 918 East Grant Place, San Mateo; represented the applicant. 5 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes January 23, 2012 All changes that were requested by the Commission have been made, except for replacement of the vinyl windows (they are simulated true divided light windows). The trim package is designed to eliminate the need to patch stucco. Will be replacing the front door and the garage door (replacing it with a carriage -style door). Commission comments: What will be the color of the trim? (Robertson — will be an accent color, but will likely be an off- white given the white color of the windows.) The garage and front door changes are an improvement. Public comments: None. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: ■ Doesn't understand the mind -set of a builder that ignores the approved plans — it places a financial burden upon the property owner to correct the non -approved changes. Wishes that the press was present in order to publicize that the project must be built as it was approved. ■ Have consistently stated that vinyl windows are not allowed. ■ Feels that there needs to be a statement made that the requirement for non -vinyl windows will not be accepted. ■ Looked at the minutes from the original approval — noted that the minutes stated clearly that any changes required pre -approval of the Planning Commission. When was the current property owner brought into the picture? (Robertson — unsure, but apparently after the approval.) ■ Noted that the neighbor's letter indicates that items within her view do not need to be changed since they are not visible to the public — there may be a compromise; change the windows on the front of the house. Concerned about the quality of the work that will be done to patch the stucco with the window replacement. Aluminum -clad wood windows should be installed on the front of the house. ■ The trim detailing will assist in concealing any modifications to accommodate the replacement windows. ■ Feels the compromise solution, to replace the vinyl windows with simulated true divided lite aluminum clad wood windows at the front of the house, will work in this situation. ■ The architect has done a good job trying to mitigate the situation. ■ This type of modification to an approved project cannot continue to occur. Commissioner Terrones moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped January 6, 2012, sheets A2.1, A2.2, A3.0 and A3a and date stamped June 11, 2009, sheets A1.0, A2.0, A4.0 and L1.0; 2. that the nine (9) windows on the front elevation and the one window on the side of the front entry area shall be changed to be aluminum clad wood windows with simulated true divided lights; M CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes January 23, 2012 3. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 5. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's September 12, 2008 memo, and the City Engineer's, Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's September 15, 2008 memos shall be met; 6. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 7. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; 8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2007 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION 11. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 12. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and 13. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. 7 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes January 23, 2012 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes January 23, 2012 The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi. Discussion of motion: None. Chair Yie called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1-0 (Commissioner Vistica absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:31 p.m. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS There were no Design Review Study items for review. X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS There were no Commissioner's Reports. XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Commission Communications: None. Actions from Regular City Council meeting of January 17, 2012: The Wireless Communications Ordinance was adopted as an urgency measure; the ordinance was also introduced and scheduled for a public hearing prior to adoption on February 6, 2012. Adoption of the ordinance as an urgency measure permitted the ordinance to become effective immediately, providing the City with needed regulations to allow processing of new applications if received in advance of expiration of the moratorium on processing new applications. XII. ADJOURNMENT Chair Yie adjourned the meeting at 7:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Tim Auran, Secretary E