Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1992.10.26CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 26, 1992 - �• • �.! _ A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Mink on Monday, October 2.6, 1992 at 7:30 P.M. :• •: Present: Commissioners Deal, Ellis, Galligan, Graham, Jacobs, Mink Absent,: Kelly Staff Present: Margaret Monroe, City Planner; Jerry Coleman, City Attorney; Frank Erbacher, City Engineer; Bill Reilly, Fire Marshal MINUTES - The minutes of the October 13, 1992 meeting were unanimously approved. AGENDA - CP noted Item 14, 850 Walnut, has been continued to the meeting of November 9, 1992 at the request of the applicant. Staff will renotice the item. Order of the agenda was then approved. There were no comments from the floor. • ZW19 kq-W Requests: translation of the Chinese characters; hours of illumination of the signage, concern about energy conservation; comparison of this application with the original (1973) signage application. Item set for public hearing November 9, 1992. Requests: how many employees did the previous tenant, Pacific Bell, have; where will applicant's vans be taking the airline personnel they pick up; clarify statement they will consolidate operations in five years; is all the office area on site used by this business. Item set for public hearing November 9,- 1992. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 October 26, 1992 ITEMS FOR ACTION 3. SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HOME OCCUPATION IN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OVER 500 SF AT 2835 HILLSIDE DRIVE, ZONED R-1 Reference staff report, 10/26/92, with attachments. CP Monroe summarized the request; she discussed original building plans for the garage which show boards across the ceiling of the loft area which would lower that ceiling to less than habitable height requirements, the boards are not in place today at 61. CP reviewed staff comment, study meeting questions, required findings. Four conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Staff/Commission discussed possibility of putting a breezeway between the two structures on this site to make one structure and eliminate the need for this application; height of the garage and how height is measured, variation in grade on the site; CBI's requirement for the exit from the loft space. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. Martin Dreiling, architect, was present. He said they would prefer to use the sliding glass door as an exit because it is more convenient, hopefully that will eliminate the need for a separate entry at the stairway, they will still do the occupancy separation at the stair, there are some collar ties that go across the attic area; the ambulance a Commissioner saw in the driveway is applicant's stepson's who works for Bayshore Ambulance and comes home for lunch; original plans show joists with plywood, architect assumed this was approved as storage space originally. A Commissioner commented on the original plans which he had looked at, they did not show a staircase, there was a drop down ladder, the staircase must have been put in sometime after 1988, collar ties are shown on the original drawing, the dormer is not on original plans; many times the Planning Department will require collar ties so area cannot be habitable space. The Commissioner asked if applicant would be willing to connect the house to the accessory structure with a breezeway, then only a building permit would be needed. Architect found a problem with this, a breezeway would connect to the family room and would affect the flow of the house. Heating will be by a small gas unit; height of retaining wall was discussed. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs made findings: the garage is in place, it is not in a congested area, it will not impact the neighbors, this is the 1990's and home occupations reduce traffic, are beneficial, and are allowed. C. Jacobs moved for approval of the application by resolution with the following conditions: (1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped September 10, 1992, Sheets A, B, C, D, E and F; (2) that the conditions of the City Engineer's September 14, 1992 memo (that no water or sewer Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 October 26, 1992 connections shall be allowed in the garage or office area) shall be met; (3) that the required exit for the loft space shall be .the existing stairs with the proper separation from the garage area and with a new exit door (uncovered) to the outside, as approved by the Chief Building Inspector; and (4) that the project small meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame. Motion was seconded by C. Graham. Comment on the motion: it appears this structure was originally built with this type of use in mind, have always been concerned about the 14' height limit but this is a classic example of where something more than 14' high will fit in and have no adverse impact, with very little maneuvering it could be made legal by being connected to the house and this is the most compelling reason to grant the special permit, it would be simple to resolve this situation with a breezeway but that would not be better for the neighborhood; have been increasingly concerned about traffic on the city's streets, applicant will not be driving to an office every day and will help reduce traffic. Motion was approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Kelly absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 4. SPECIAL PERMIT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE VARIANCE - 850 WALNUT AVENUE, ZONED R-1 Item continued to the meeting of November 9, 1992 at the request of the applicant. 5. HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR KITCHEN REMODEL AT 2752 SUMMIT DRIVE. ZONED R-1 Reference staff report, 10/26/92, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed details of the request, required findings for the variance, review criteria for the hillside area construction permit. Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. Barry Brown, applicant and property owner, was present. He commented that this is a very minor addition with no impact on any of the neighbors, he suggested an abbreviated procedure be set up for other projects such as this to save time and money. Staff advised when there is a variance needed in addition to a hillside area construction permit a full review is required. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Based on the information in the staff report and received at the hearing this evening, C. Galligan found this is a minor matter, it will not have a significant impact on the neighbors, when originally built a 5' side setback was allowed, addition will be built on an area which now serves as a deck, it is a reasonable request given the size of the existing kitchen. C. Galligan moved for approval of the side setback Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 October 26, 1992 variance and hillside area construction permit by resolution with the following conditions: (1) that the addition as built shall conform to the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped September 24, 1992, Sheets A-1 and A-2; (2) that the finish material placed on the roof shall be nonreflective as determined by the Chief Building Inspector and City Planner; and (3) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame. Motion was seconded by C. Jacobs and approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Kelly absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 6. FENCE EXCEPTION FOR HEIGHT IN THE REAR AND SIDE SETBACK CORNER AT 1157 CAMBRIDGE ROAD, ZONED R-1 Reference staff report, 10/26/92, with attachments. CP Monroe summarized the request, staff comments, required findings. Three conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Responding to questions, staff advised a fence exception is not considered a variance, if this request is granted applicant is given permission to trim the oleanders in the parking strip, should an accident occur when the oleanders are above 3' this property owner would be liable, not the city, they will have the obligation to maintain the bushes at 31. Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. Charles and Sharon Rider, applicants and property owners, were present. Mr. Rider stated the stop sign and light are well beyond the fence, the oleanders at this time are about 6' high; the Riders want to use the 40' x 70' yard --for their children, cannot build on it because of required setback from Highway Road; trash has accumulated by the oleanders, they will cut the bushes and plant ground cover; neighbors like the fence; apartment dwellers across the street park on Highway Road. Betty Daggett, 1149 Cambridge Road, spoke in support: she has lived two houses away from this property for 30 years, if she lived there she would want a 6' fence, El Camino is a very busy street, it is an attractive fence. There were no other audience comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Graham commented she uses this intersection many times a week and in the 14 years she has lived in the area has only seen one car a year driving along Highway Road; there are always cars parked there, it is more difficult to see over the cars than 41. high bushes. She found this would be a nice addition to the neighborhood and make the yard safe for this family. C. Graham moved for approval of the fence exception with the following conditions: (1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped September 24, 1992, Plot Plan, Fence Elevation and Section; (2) that the City Engineer's September 28, 1992 memo (oleander in parking strip and bush near handicap ramp on Cambridge Road to be Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 October 26, 1992 maintained at 31-0" height) shall be met; and (3) that the project shall meet all-Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Code requirements as amended by the City of Burlingame. Motion was seconded by C. Ellis and approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Kelly absent. Appeal procedures were advised. 7. HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AT 2907 FRONTERA WAY. ZONED R-1 Reference staff report, 10/26/92, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed this request for a revised project on this site, the enclosure of an existing covered courtyard, addition of a 90 SF breakfast room, alterations to the front entry and change in roof design of the existing structure. She noted review criteria for a hillside area construction permit. Four conditions were suggested for consideration at the public hearing. Responding to a question, CP discussed proposed changes to the roof line. A change to Condition 13 was suggested, "_. . . that the new roof over the breakfast room addition shall not exceed .5' ." Chm. Mink opened the public hearing. Joe Buizer, general contractor representing the property owners, was present. He stated the roof over the atrium would be 2.50, only 2.5' is above the door, poles have been put up to mark roof line; roof over the breakfast area will be about 9' finished, 9.5' maximum would be acceptable; the existing chimney which is low compared to the new roof lines will be replaced, they are putting in a new fireplace. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Deal commented this is a project which has changed considerably since Commission first saw it, applicant has talked to the neighbors, they are now happy with the plans, it is a big improvement over the previous two story request. Referencing information in the staff report, C. Deal moved for approval of the hillside area construction permit by resolution with the following conditions: (1) that the addition as built shall conform to the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped October 16, 1992, Sheets Al, A2, A3, A4 and A5; (2) that the finish material used on both the flat and sloping portions of the roof shall be nonreflective as approved by the Chief Building Inspector and City Planner; (3) that the highest point on the existing gable shall not exceed the existing 14. 11, that the new gables (perpendicular to the existing gable) shall not exceed 11.51 and that the new roof over the breakfast room addition shall not exceed 9.511 all of which shall be measured from the existing slab which represents ground zero; all framing shall be surveyed to confirm these elevations and the survey accepted by the City Engineer before the final framing inspection is called for and the roofing material is attached; and (4) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 October 26, 1992 Motion was seconded by C. Graham and approved 6-0 on roll call vote, C. Kelly absent. Appeal procedures were advised. Chm. Mink recognized in the audience citizen/councilmember Marti Knight attending the meeting as an individual. ACKNOWLEDGMENT - Planning Commission Schedule for 1993 was approved by the Commission. PLANNER REPORTS Commissioners and staff discussed the fact that schools are allowed with a special permit in every residential district except the C-R zone. There was consensus that a code amendment be recommended to City Council to allow schools as a conditional use in the C-R zone. CP Monroe reviewed City Council actions at its October 19, 1992 regular meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Michael F. Galligan Secretary