Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 2024.06.10BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes Planning Commission 7:00 PM Council Chambers/OnlineMonday, June 10, 2024 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers/Online The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. Staff in attendance: Interim Community Development Director Ruben Hurin, Senior Planner Erika Lewit, and Assistant City Attorney Scott Spansail. 2. ROLL CALL Horan, Lowenthal, Pfaff, Schmid, Shores, and TsePresent6 - ComarotoAbsent1 - 3. REQUEST FOR AB 2449 REMOTE PARTICIPATION There were no requests. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a.Draft May 28, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Draft May 28, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting MinutesAttachments: Vice-Chair Horan noted that he was not present at the May 28, 2024 meeting, but watched the meeting video and feels comfortable participating in the vote. Commissioner Pfaff made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Schmid, to approve the meeting minutes. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Horan, Lowenthal, Pfaff, Schmid, Shores, and Tse6 - Absent:Comaroto1 - 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA There were no public comments on non-agenda items. 7. STUDY ITEMS There were no Study Items. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar Items. Page 1City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 9. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS a.Adoption of Resolution Updating the Guidelines for Determining the Level of Review Required for Changes to Approved Design Review Projects. Staff Contact: Ruben Hurin Staff Report Attachments Resolution Attachments: Interim Community Development Department Director Hurin provided an overview of the staff report. Chair Lowenthal opened the public hearing. Public Comments: >There were no public comments. Chair Lowenthal closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion/Direction: >I feel that 25% change to a window is a lot, in particular if it is cumulative. People may change just one window, but it could be a lot of windows of 25% in any direction. As my fellow commissioners who are builders said typically it wouldn ’t be in the width because of sheer and engineering issues. But we have seen a developer here who has often come with windows that go all the way up to the header and we ’ve repeatedly caught those in time, but those wouldn ’t need to be re -engineered. My concern is that windows don’t look great when made smaller all over, nor made larger all over. The increase in light pollution cumulatively can be major and we won ’t even see those again. It will just happen. They can go up to the header and I have an issue with that. I appreciate that you are dealing with the stairwell because those windows tend to be massive. We need to be careful. It’s not usually just one window, especially if we are talking about supply issues and do not get the specified window from a certain brand. For me, it is major change to allow window to change by 25% more. If you are going to have some flexibility on it, I will feel much better with 20% or 15% just to have guardrails on it. >On the landscaping issue, we really didn ’t discuss this in the last session. I’m getting the impression that the direction we are going is to be handling landscape as green infrastructure, which is great. It is a good thing. Green infrastructure has certain space needs and performs a certain function. If we are now going to say that “you can now have changes to landscaping that don ’t affect concerns expressly stated …” that would mean that someone would have shown up to the initial meeting that has something bad, and we would have caught it. Let’s say they had a plan that was acceptable to us or the neighbors, but they changed the privacy hedge to a deciduous hedge which has an effect on the neighbors all around them, that would go through and also not be checked because it was just fine when it came to us. In the same way that we have restrictions on the roofing materials. To be consistent, if you really want to have something for the landscaping, not to be as rigid, we don ’t need to wait for neighbors to complain. People don’t come to public meetings anymore. They don ’t participate much unless there is something that they are very passionate about. We should not be dependent on neighbors seeing or not seeing something because it might have been fine when it came through the Planning Commission the first time. In that example when something was changed from deciduous to smaller or an evergreen to a deciduous, there is a cumulative effect on the neighborhood. If it was originally planned to be deciduous, yes you can change to another deciduous hedge, but you cannot change into a different species that will suddenly change the nature of the landscape completely or a ground cover. It is fine if it is consistent with what was first approved, but personally I don ’t like the way it is written, it can cause more problems than what we currently have. We are trying to be holistic about how we plan structures together with landscape. I just Page 2City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes don’t think this is a good item to have unless it has restrictions on it. >With regards to the window comments, do you think it would be prudent if we add changes to window location, because it is not listed here? If you have a 3’x3’ window built 3 feet off the ground and then they change it and put it up by the top plate, that wouldn ’t change the size of the window but certainly changes the aesthetics. >We are setting parameters for staff; none of these things are automatic. >I trust the staff. I’m not trained in windows, but I know what light pollution is because I live around it. It does make a difference. >We are asked to comment specifically on vinyl windows and their application to our discretion, correct? (Hurin: Right now, any changes to a vinyl window automatically comes back to the Planning Commission for review. Over the years we have seen better quality vinyl clad wood windows. We just wanted to see if there is a distinction, or would you like to bring any vinyl windows or vinyl clad wood windows back for review? We have some vinyl clad wood windows that have been approved in the past.) >If it was approved as something else, then it is coming back as an FYI and is downgrading to a vinyl or a potential vinyl clad that staff is not already aware of that we have been approving regularly, it should come back because there is a change in quality that is being proposed which is detrimental rather than just an even swap. (Hurin: The tricky part is that we cannot specify a manufacturer name.) >If it is an obvious downgrade from one type of window to another that we have already seen, then we need to ask the question. It is fair to bring back to the commission rather than put that on the staff to evaluate. (Spansail: It is consistent to what is written now, any changes to vinyl, correct?) Yes. >A vinyl clad wood window downgrading to an all -vinyl window should come back to us. We don ’t need to talk about manufacturers, but with that type of a downgrade versus a vinyl wood clad window of one brand to another brand is not something that we would need to weigh in. (Hurin: Correct. The change to vinyl only is very clear. The question would be for a typical aluminum clad wood window, and they are changing to a vinyl clad wood window. This comes up more often.) >In my experience, it does not change the exterior aesthetics. The problem with vinyl is thermal expansion. That’s where we see a lot of window -fixing calls. The vinyl fails around the seal and the windows fail. That does not change anything with the vinyl wood clad and it is not in our purview to comment on that. If the exterior is the same material as what was approved, I suppose it does not matter what happens in the inside of the window. I think there are only a few cases. >If we go back five years, they were not making good vinyl composite windows then. So, we can easily say “no vinyl”. Today, that is evolving. There are a few manufacturers which have put out a new product that we can accept the vinyl composite. There’s probably out there that looks cheap. It is fair that if we are switching from something that was proposed as a higher -end material in the initial approval and there ’s a perception of trading down, then it is worth asking questions. It is safer that way on something as important as windows. We do seem to have a lot of challenges with windows. >Even though it is not in our purview to talk about color, often times we see a house presented to us in a certain color scheme, aluminum clad and fiberglass clad windows common colors. Fiberglass can be painted whereas vinyl windows can ’t. Vinyl windows come in different colors other than white now. For so many years it was only available in white and was very obvious. That would be something to be aware of also, the colors and what kind of change happened by going to an all-vinyl window. >Hurin: Whether it is a vinyl or vinyl clad wood it will come back for your review, and they can present the type of window they would like to use, typically they will bring in a sample or brochure. Page 3City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes >Regarding the percentage of the window size change, what happens on my own projects sometimes, a window is originally approved as a 36” wide window, like a 3’x4’. Along the way, a 32”x40” window might be more appropriate for whatever reason. Doing that calculation tends to be 20%-25% change in window size for a standard 3’x4’ window. The other change that can be happening is a 30” window going to a 24” size window or something in between, which tends to be at the range of 17%-20%. These are some examples of what the percentage might relate to in real window sizes. >I did the same calculation, but if it is a 5’x5’ or larger window, then that 25% gets a lot bigger. It is imperceptible in smaller increments. At a bigger window, the percentage multiplier becomes a much bigger risk. >So that means a 3’x5’ window becomes a 3’x6.5’. You can add almost 18” to every window in the house and still make that an administrative change. That seems too much. >Hurin: If I recall, during the Study Session we were discussing moving to a 10% change. >It says 25% here now. (Hurin: I believe we had not finished the discussion.) >My fellow commissioners who are builders were not sure about the 10% so we left it at 25% and took the stairwell window away. I don ’t build, but I think it is a lot when it gets a quarter larger. (Spansail: Not that we want to get into the details much and make it too complicated, if you want to delineate versus a larger size window by percentage like smaller windows under a certain dimension will be approved up to 25% and then others will be 10%. There are options. Again, we don ’t want to force you to get too creative, but if it is something you’d like to consider that is certainly something we can write in here.) >It is a helpful guideline for staff. When staff sees something odd, they can send it back to the Planning Commission to make the decision even though it is within the percentage that we gave away it does not mean that it will automatically be approved. It still needs to be reviewed. >I like guardrails on stuff, but I will leave it up to my fellow commissioners who are builders. >25% does sound large; 15% sounds more reasonable, I am fine with something around that range. >It is a good point on landscape design to not have that predetermined in terms of going to design review based on somebody saying something about it. We have seen many landscape plans that we made very little comment on because they were either great or fine. That means a lot of important things can change without any kind of review. If there is a way to put in some language similar to a like -for-like change, changing a deciduous to another deciduous or similar configuration like adding a giant flower bed to the middle, things that seem like a drastic change. But it still leaves a lot of common -sense things like when the applicant can’t find specific plants in stock and a similar plant is fine if it does the same job. >I agree with that. As a contractor, I come across quantity issues. For instance, you have 15 trees that need to be planted and at the same time you have a large drainage system that you also need to put in, but you can’t plant a tree on top of the drain or a big basin. Since there is no way to put in all these trees, you are now downgrading to 12 trees. Should that come back to us for approval or should the city have a say on that? It can’t be done, it’s one of those things that are part of the building process. >How is that same example being handled now? (Hurin: We make sure that they meet the minimum requirements, and we also review the meeting minutes to see if specific items were discussed. For example, if there was a suggestion that a tree be planted in the rear corner and they are not planting it, then we bring it back as a change. We don ’t get into the flower beds and one -gallon size flowers. There has to be a little bit of discretion otherwise our agenda would be full of Design Review Amendment items, and we don’t want to do that. Significant changes to landscape concepts and designs are things that we Page 4City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes do bring back to the Planning Commission. We can come up with some language for you to consider that will capture the design intent if there is a significant change.) (Spansail: To clarify, the city arborist does take a look at these especially if it is impacting trees. They will look to see if there is a feasible planting of where they proposed it and if not, where they can move it to make sure the tree is able to grow.) >Regarding the siding, I am ok with wood and cement fiber. If they are painted it is hard to tell the difference, but not any other type of material substitution. >I am not ok with the corner trim being substituted because that is an architectural detail. It changes the look of the house if you have a corner trim versus a mitered trim, so I don’t want that to come back. >I don’t think it is a bad product. We have seen good projects with it, but it can be a bad project too if they do the details wrong. The change from wood siding to vinyl siding is a risk. >Not vinyl, composite or cement board. >Interestingly, when I walked the neighborhood, I noticed more and more wood siding that is cupping and warping. It looks worse than the cement fiber siding. Sometimes wood looks great the first couple of years. These are fairly new homes that are having these issues. >Is that good enough direction? (Hurin: It was clear on the corner trim. Sometimes we approve projects with the corner trim in place. If the mitered corner got approved and they now want to change to corner trim, that is coming back. I am still unclear on the change from approved wood to fiber cement.) >In a lot of these we are saying, if you come in with one thing and you are presenting the A -type material and you come back and bring in a C -type, try to sneak it through and doing it poorly it, then it will be impactful. >Are we allowed to comment on stain versus paint? If you are using real wood, you can stain that material. If an applicant decides to use fiber cement boards, that you cannot stain, it must be painted . You can hardly tell the difference between painted wood and painted fiber cement board if it is done well . (Hurin: If we had a project approved with stain wood and they come back with fiber cement, we would bring it back to the commission because it can no longer be stained. Although we cannot look at staining versus color, that would be considered a change into the exterior. Any change to fiber cement or any type of material will be brought back to the commission.) >It sounds like they are the same thing but are not executed the same way. >Hurin: Would you like to make a determination on the percentage of window change? >I believe 15% is the consensus. >Hurin: We can go with 15%. If we start to see that it is a significant change and starts to look odd, then we can revisit that. This gives us good direction. We will not act on the resolution tonight. We will make the changes and perhaps bring it back at your next meeting as a Consent Calendar item, you can approve it then or pull it for further discussion. >In the staff report, the stairwell is listed but it is not in the amended documents. (Hurin: I will make sure that it is in the amended documents for the next meeting.) Interim Community Development Director Hurin thanked the Commission for their input and noted that this item will return to the Planning Commission for action at a future meeting. 10. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY Page 5City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes a.2108 Carmelita Avenue, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review for a second story addition to an existing single -unit dwelling. (Sherman Yan, applicant and designer; Chi Li, property owner) (46 noticed) Staff Contact: 'Amelia Kolokihakaufisi 2108 Carmelita Ave - Staff Report 2108 Carmelita Ave - Attachments 2108 Carmelita Ave - Renderings 2108 Carmelita Ave - Plans Attachments: All Commissioners have visited the project site. Senior Planner Lewit provided an overview of the staff report. Chair Lowenthal opened the public hearing. Chi Li, property owner, represented the applicant regarding the application. Public Comments: >There were no public comments. Chair Lowenthal closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion/Direction: >Is it correct that there is no bedroom limit to house with a one -car garage? (Lewit: Correct. Previously, if you were increasing from four bedrooms to any number of bedrooms beyond that you had to provide two covered parking spaces. Now, for additions and remodels, we cannot additional required parking spaces per Assembly Bill No. 1308.) >The second story design is not working for me at all. It looks like it was just stacked on top of the first floor. It doesn ’t look like there was an attempt to turn it into one building like the neighbor to the left who recently redid their house. >The lack of consistency in the windows doesn ’t help turn this into a good -looking project, although I understand keeping the existing windows and having new windows on the top. That is a detriment. It is matching the existing, but the existing is not adding value to the neighborhood. A lot of the other houses in the area are quite nice and it is not doing it with this expansion. The side elevation is just a large expansive wall, it is not what we would have approved for any project. >I don’t know enough about the names of the trees that are in the site plan, but I don ’t see three decent size non-fruit trees that meet our criteria for landscaping. There’s a lot of work to be done on this project. I don’t see being able to approve it. >I agree. Depending on what my fellow commissioners say, this is a great candidate for a Design Review Consultant. >I agree with my fellow commissioners. On the windows, I understand the requirement to try to meet egress in the bedrooms, but it does not mean that a grid can be added to the windows very simply to look more like the main floor. >I also feel that the second story looks like a different house. It doesn ’t seem to go with the main floor . One element that should be addressed is the roof style. Going from a nice big gable being a defining Page 6City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes element at the front of the house to hipped roofs receding back does not show any prominence to the second story. The side elevation almost looks like an apartment building. It needs more details and improvements to enhance the use of the yard. >I love the massing of it, I like the way it is set back. I agree with my fellow commissioners that it does not look like a cohesive home. It needs work. It depends on whether the architect wants to try again or go to a Design Review Consultant. >I agree with my fellow commissioners. The house is charming the way it is, but when you add this block on top, as my fellow commissioner said, it becomes very apartment looking. Unfortunately, the choice of materials is not helping. With flat stucco, flat T 1-11 siding, there’s nothing much happening . Review by a Design Review Consultant should be the next course of action. Commission Schmid made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Pfaff, to refer the application to a design review consultant. The Commission directed that this application be brought back as a Design Review Study Item after the analysis is completed by the design review consultant. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Horan, Lowenthal, Pfaff, Schmid, Shores, and Tse6 - Absent:Comaroto1 - b.2750 and 2300 Adeline Drive, zoned R -1 - Application for Environmental Review (CEQA Exemption), Amendment to Conditional Use Permit, Commercial Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and Variance for building height for a new gymnasium on the Mercy High School property (Natalie Cirigliano-Brosnan, applicant; DevCon Construction, Inc., architect; Mercy High School, property owner (334 noticed) Staff Contact: Erika Lewit 2750 and 2300 Adeline Dr - Staff Report 2750 and 2300 Adeline Dr - Attachments 2750 and 2300 Adeline Dr - Renderings 2750 and 2300 Adeline Dr - Plans Attachments: All Commissioners have visited the project site. Commissioner Lowenthal was recused as he lives within 500 feet from this project. Commissioner Shores noted that he spoke with Denise Severi, Kohl Mansion Coordinator, during the site visit. Commissioner Schmid noted that he attended one of the community outreach meetings and he has been in communication with one of the applicants. Senior Planner Lewit provided an overview of the staff report. Acting Chair Horan opened the public hearing. Natalie Cirigliano-Brosnan, applicant and Jeff Berg, architect, represented the applicant and answered questions regarding the application. Public Comments: >Christina Habelt, 1531 Coumbus Avenue: I am very supportive of Mercy High School getting a gym. It is beautifully designed. The main thing that I would request from the Planning Commission is to consider the traffic. I don’t know about the details of their Conditional Use Permit; I just ask that we be very conservative in applying maximum cars because although we are only talking about the Mercy High School gym, the gym does not exist in a vacuum. Everybody knows that there is a lot more in the works at Page 7City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes that facility. In addition to that, with all the ADU ’s coming to these neighborhoods, we don ’t need any garages anymore. In the evenings, there are cars parked along the street. From the Hoover Avenue exit, we must consider that the street is very narrow. Even driving down Adeline Drive, there ’s a lot more cars parked on the street for the past two years, where you have to stop to make room for a car to drive one at a time. Let’s remember that if it is only the high school gym is what we are talking about, it is not in a vacuum. Let us be conservative and think about the future events that will be happening in the neighborhood. The shuttle option is great, but it does not run after 6 pm. For any evening events, the shuttle is not an available transport option. >Lynn Israelit, 1560 Columbus Avenue: We are supportive of this project. The school has gone out of its way to communicate with us, was very transparent and worked with us to allay our anxieties and fears . They have bent backwards to try and take into consideration the neighborhood when they were preparing their plans. However, I do have three issues that I feel are very important that I ’d like to the commission address. Currently, the Conditional Use Permit will be modified to have an end time at 10 pm. I do believe that the school will unlikely have an event that goes that late and they were probably asked to envision a worst-case scenario when coming up with this proposal. The problem is if Sunday through Saturday there really are events that go until 10 pm in a very dense neighborhood with very narrow streets. This high school is not on Carolan Avenue, Murchison Drive or Ralston Avenue like Notre Dame of Belmont. This is in a very quiet neighborhood. I would ask that you change that to reflect what will actually happen. Most of their games are going to be over by 8:30 pm. We would be happy to have exceptions for special events; CCS, championship games, Christmas at Khol, back to school night or open house. But I am very leery of having a blank back for 10 pm. When this administration may move on, there may be other administrations who see this as a legal document that says they can do whatever until 10 pm and may decide to take advantage of that. I feel like we are handing a blank check to the future. I would like more restrictions that shall always be revisited if needed to protect the neighborhood. You probably have seen how narrow and quiet the streets are around this property. It may be a technicality, but on page 11 of Hexagon’s traffic study indicates that it should overflow parking be used for larger events when there are also athletic events. That cars be directed to leave or enter that overflow parking through either the gate on Hoover Avenue, which is at a hairpin turn on the street that can barely accommodate two or three cars wide or at the gate at Hoover Avenue and Adeline Drive which is a blind intersection with near -miss accidents all the time. The driveway enters at an angle and is on a hill. I’ve had my car almost get hit multiple times. It is not a place to send traffic out. I am not sure if that was intended. Traffic should leave by the main gate up by Alvarado Avenue and have somebody conduct traffic for safety reasons. I really feel strongly that those lower gates are not used. >Karen Dittman, 1495 Columbus Avenue: I live at the corner of Adeline Drive and Columbus Avenue, where a hundred cars go through my intersection twice a day. I agree with everything that my neighbor had to say about concerns for the traffic. I am glad that Mercy High School is going to have better quality buildings and sports complexes. I would like you, as my fellow speakers said, to keep this in context . Over the years, Mercy has increased their enrollment. Maybe one year it is only 4% and then the next year it is only 5% or 2%. But as what Commissioner Pfaff said, it is cumulative. It is very cumulative to our neighborhood. We are the ones who are dealing with it. I’d like to see not just more conservative ending times; I’d also like to see some numbers on how many events you can have late and what the consequences are if you run over. We can talk about it, say you ’re not going to do that again and they will agree, but we need consequences also. >Joe Nezwek, 2335 Adeline Drive: We have lived across the Mercy High School for a really long time. I have to say that they have been a tremendous neighbor. Not only do they keep that parcel of land up, but they let the neighbors walk through there. We walk our dog there all the time. It is really a gem for Burlingame. I truly support what they are doing. They took their time to come up with a design that looks, feels and fits into the architecture. I support it completely. The only issue I have with the whole project is the parking for the construction is on Adeline Drive. Anybody who lives in Adeline Drive either has or knows somebody who’s car has been side swiped or who ’s rearview mirror has been torn off. Mine has twice. It is a narrow street. Thank you for the speed bumps, that helps. Having construction workers park Page 8City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes right on Adeline Drive for a year and a half is a danger to the community. I’d like to see them find another area in those 36 acres to park. As far as the project is concerned, this is going to be a dream project for the City of Burlingame. I appreciate Mercy High School for being so open with all the neighbors. Please take a look at the construction parking. >Public comment sent via email by Katie Riggs, 2341 Poppy Drive: I was unable to attend the June 10th public hearing but would like to add a comment. I have lived on Poppy Drive for 20 years and in that time have found the Sisters of Mercy and Mercy High School to be wonderful neighbors. I have no reason to suspect that they will be any less great neighbors while they pursue an exciting and much needed facilities update. I fully support their plans for the construction of a new gym, a project that I know has been in the works for a long time. >Public comment sent via email by David Greene, 2020 Adeline Drive: I am all for Mercy's improving their facilities. I just think they need to respect the neighborhood and the already nightmare traffic situation by planning an earlier closing time than proposed (be in line with other Catholic high schools at 8:30 pm) and not using Hoover gates as main entrance. The access and traffic is bad already. Be reasonable and everything will work out fine. >Public comment sent via email by Shirin and John Coleman: We are 37-year residents of Burlingame and will continue to make it our home. We have an interest in the beauty and well -being of our community and its future. We live in the neighborhood near Mercy High School. Our children attended Morning Glory Montessori, we have donated to the care and maintenance of the Labyrinth, attended offerings at Mercy Center and Music at Kohl Mansion. Regarding the Mercy High School gym, pool and student center project, we advocate for the following: 1)Set a curfew cutoff of 8:30 pm for weeknight activities. This matches up with current Catholic high school schedules in Mercy ’s league. We need to keep in mind the residential neighborhood where Mercy is located; a 10 pm curfew is too late. 2) On special occasions an exception can be made to the 8:30 pm curfew to 9 pm for specific and limited dates such as Christmas at Kohl, Open House, Back to School and championship games. The exception is not to become the norm . 3) The Conditional Use Permit needs to limit the number of cars attending events on the property to not exceed 75 which is in line with the current proposal. More cars is not better. Managing traffic, road congestion and ensuring safety is essential to an ongoing cooperative relationship between the high school and neighborhood. May the City take this seriously and consider this reality: On a Sunday evening at 6 pm, 108 cars were parked on neighborhood streets near and around Mercy High School. The streets were quiet and only one youth spotted riding his bike. These cars are parked on yield streets, thoroughfares around Mercy. From living in the neighborhood, we are aware that on weekdays there is more traffic and pedestrians: neighbors going to and from work, the commuter shuttle, dog walkers, construction/service vehicles, children and caregivers going to and from Lincoln, BIS and Franklin on foot, bike or car. Adding 75 more cars going to and from Mercy is significant and adds to congestion, more yielding and need for heightened pedestrian safety in the neighborhood. 4) Specify the approved entrance and exit for cars to be at the upper gates of Adeline and Alvarado. The lower entrances on Adeline at Hoover/Columbus and Hoover /Columbus/Marion Oaks are not suitable for handling a volume of traffic. 5) Preserve the wooded nature of the property and protect the old, majestic trees. If trees are failing and need to be replaced, replace them with the same species that will provide stature and canopy on the property. Replace trees in equal numbers or more than the number lost. >Public comment sent via email by Robert Smith, 2856 Hillside Drive: As a nearby resident of the Mercy campus, I support this reasonable improvement of facilities. We are vigilant and active neighbors who value the High School but strongly oppose any entity that would attempt to monetize the property with development out of character with our R-1 residential community. >Public comment sent via email by Brian and Marsha Lee, 1468 Benito Avenue: We submit this email to be read at the meeting on Monday, June 10, 2024 and we have the following comments and requests : 1) Require additional on-site parking. We believe that increased traffic and numerous events at the New Student Center will create a larger parking problem for the residents in close proximity to Mercy, as we Page 9City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes have already had students and drop -off and pick-up parking on Benito Avenue near our home. The busy Activities Schedule plus existing ongoing activities on the MHS /SOM property show the need for additional on-site parking. 2) Emergency Access only for Poppy /Adeline Drive (Re: Figure 5 Project Parking Plan) This access point is identified as Pedestrian and Automotive General Access Easement in Figure 5. Design the road to prohibit pedestrian access, vehicular access and turn -around. (Too tempting for visitors/students to park on neighborhood streets (Adeline, Poppy and Benito) and walk to the gym). 3) Provide a Drainage Plan that addresses stormwater impacts to Benito Avenue /Hale Drive where stormwater runoff is severe .4) Provide a Lighting Plan. Show the type and location of all lights including the Floodlights, Wall Mount, and Decorative Poles. 5) Maximum Capacity for the New Student Center . What is the Maximum Capacity for the New Student Center/Gymnasium Building? >Public comment sent via email by Jim Murphy: The subject of a gym at Mercy HS is a Title 9 issue. The girls at Mercy need the same facilities as Burlingame and Mills HS. The 40 acres of the property allow for construction, especially given the plans that are in the interior of the site. Public access to Mercy will not be impeded. Neighbor concerns about traffic should be mitigated by the fact that we ’re not talking about football games with 5,000 fans but girls basketball, volleyball etc. with at most a few hundred fans . The real benefit is for the 14 to18-year-old girls in our community, who will get the same resources as the boys at other schools. This is a no brainer. >Public comment sent via email by Sue Fuller, 2210 Poppy Drive: Sadly, I am unable to attend the meeting this evening. As a 30+ year resident in the Mercy area, I am saddened that any of these changes have to occur but hope that the changes can be made on an effort to keep our neighborhood like it is. I would strongly suggest that mercy keep in line with other catholic schools in our area and have completion times of activities at 8:30, for less neighborhood disturbance. Using the Hoover gate for such activities with as many cars as are proposed to be allowed is just not viable. That gate couldn ’t and shouldn’t withstand that kind of traffic. And while on the subject, it seems crazy to allow for the number of vehicles they are proposing. Seems like 50-75 should be max in my opinion. I’m hopeful that these changes can be considered in a way that keeps the neighborhood a neighborhood. >Public comment sent via email by Brian Manca: I am writing to express my support for the Mercy High School Athletic and Student Life Facility project. I am a parent of a current Mercy student, an active participant with the school, and the son of a Mercy graduate from the Class of 1961! I am also a proud financial supporter of Mercy ’s capital campaign to construct this facility. Mercy High School is a organization that cares deeply in its mission to educate the hearts and minds of young women; it is one that is respectful and considerate of its surroundings and neighbors; and the Athletic Center that MHS seeks to build will directly support one of the most important aspects of Mercy: Creating a fair and equal opportunity for Mercy students to engage in Athletics and Student Activities, without having to rely on other facilities; bus students to far -away locations; or not offer certain athletics or opportunities at all. I do not live in Burlingame, but I am a homeowner; and my one -way street is a thoroughfare for parents, students, and teachers to our local public elementary school. I experience and understand what are likely concerns by the local community near MHS about traffic or noise. But I can attest to the diligent and thoughtful approaches that MHS leadership applies to traffic and other concerns. Since my daughter has been at Mercy, I have seen Juan, our traffic control assistant, help to effectively navigate the confluence of cars at the corner of Adeline and Alvarado. I have read the authoritative emails from MHS leaders providing parking and traffic guidance (and what not to do!). And all of this has shown to me the respect that MHS has for its community and neighbors. I wish my street had less traffic too! - but I love seeing and hearing all of the little kids learning and having fun in a place they enjoy. Similarly with Mercy, I love the immensely positive and supportive impact Mercy has on the young women of its student body. I am supporting this project - now and in the future. And I ask that you also consider supporting it too; and helping Mercy continue to expand its wonderful influence on the women. Acting Chair Horan closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion/Direction: Page 10City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes >Were you aware of a previous proposal in the early 80’s that involved putting the gymnasium next to the tennis courts? (Cirigliano-Brosnan: I have heard stories about it, but I have never seen it.) Curious because there is a sizeable area next to the tennis courts. I understand that it is steeply sloped. Do you know if the project was approached at the beginning to be sited by the tennis courts or if there was a configuration explored where you build something next to the tennis courts on the slope or something like that. (Cirigliano-Brosnan: I can speak to what I know that in 2010 there was a plan to have a balloon -tent type of gym and it was always by the tennis courts. If it was the land directly behind the pool, I am not that the footprint is large enough for a gym. I have to look into that.) >Is there any potential use of the swimming pool in the summer or other times of the year for youth recreation besides the high school use? (Cirigliano-Brosnan: Right now, we are focusing on the school . Currently, Burlingame Aquatic Center (BAC) rents out a few evenings for water polo. We want to work with the city and our neighbors to keep them happy with anything that may be happening. If the city is interested in that and comes to us, we would be open to pursuing that, but we want full transparency with our neighbors as well. I know that some neighbors have asked if they will be able to have access to that . We would like to find creative ways to be able to provide our facilities to them.) >In the rare cases that Kohl Mansion hosts large events, and you happen to be a championship team, where would you anticipate holding your games? (Cirigliano-Brosnan: We addressed this in one of our documents. We know that if there is a Kohl Mansion scheduled rental that has to take priority, we can ’t postpone that booking. If there is an important game on the same day as a huge wedding, we would have to take serious consideration if we can accommodate parking. While it will break our hearts if we couldn ’t and have to use a different gym that evening, even if the Sisters of Mercy have ample parking we don ’t want to assume that we have access to that parking, there is always a desire to talk to the sisters if there is an opportunity to use their parking. There have also been other ideas about using a bus or shuttle to transport people in from another local site. The reality is if there is a wedding for 300 guests and a huge CCS game, we might have to look for a different gym on that day because we want to honor the agreement with the city.) >Are you using those facilities now? (Cirigliano-Brosnan: Serra High School is where we go for volleyball and College of San Mateo for basketball.) >Is there soundproofing in the gym that would prevent the noise to be heard by the neighborhood? (Berg: Yes, we have fixed windows in the gym. We also have a large lobby that acts as an ante space before entering the gym. It is essentially a double containment for sound. >Are the yellow zones on Alvarado Avenue and Hillside Drive, which allows students to walk to a loading zone to be picked up, used effectively on a daily basis? (Cirigliano-Brosnan: That just started this year. They are being used. As we continue to have them, more students will use them. I know that some parents have commented that they were happy to not be able to drive in, they can continue to drive up towards highway 280 rather than having a detour into the school. I will have to study at the beginning of the next school year and have somebody out there to count how many students are actually using it.) >Is it correct that there are approximately 30 cars that can back up to Alvarado Avenue inside, right before school is out? (Cirigliano-Brosnan : We can queue inside about 30 cars inside and for about 10 minutes on average, there is a line outside on Alvarado Avenue and Adeline Drive per the traffic study.) >Does that mean that the residents on those streets cannot leave or come home during that time period? (Cirigliano-Brosnan : In the morning, it is not an issue. In the afternoon, it can be. That is why we have somebody out to assist with the traffic and are constantly trying to get everybody in as much as they can before allowing them out. He was given those directives during our traffic committee measures last year. That has helped. Again, we are looking at doing a secondary pickup time next school year to see if that can help to not have that queuing out on the neighboring streets.) Page 11City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes >Have you considered two traffic guards? (Cirigliano-Brosnan: We only have one right now.) >Have you tried to keep the cars in motion, keep moving around the block so that the street is not as congested? (Cirigliano-Brosnan : We have never tried that. I would be interested in talking to the City Traffic Engineer if it will potentially help. The streets are so narrow, and we do have neighbors on Alvarado Avenue that park on both sides, so it makes it a bit of a maze when you are driving through. That did come up in our community meeting, if there is a potential of having parking on one side of the street. It is something that I have reached out today to see how we can explore other opportunities. I found working with the City Traffic Engineer a very pleasant experience, so I welcome bringing all our comments to him to see if there are additional pieces that we could look at for traffic issues.) >Do you have the same type of queuing on Adeline Drive? (Cirigliano-Brosnan : We do have queuing on Adeline Drive, but because it is a wider street, I don’t think it is disrupting the neighborhood.) >I like the project. It fits well with the Kohl Mansion and the property as a whole. I can support the height variance as the slope of that lot does not make it viable to hit 30 feet when you're already starting 20 feet below on the top of curb. I like the design. >There's a lot of talk about the CUP hours, but what I've heard most is the traffic. Although the CUP hours might be longer than people would like, I don't know if that negatively impacts traffic going up and down Adeline Drive. I lived on Adeline Drive for 30 years and I've dealt with the traffic too of Mercy High School and BIS and Lincoln, so I understand that. The area of focus is the traffic at drop -off and pickup, where there's an intense amount of traffic. What we've heard is Mercy's desire to work on their transportation plan to continue to alleviate that using scheduling and other aspects. >I have a question for City Traffic Engineer, Andrew Wong, on what the viability of restricting parking on Adeline Drive and Alvarado Drive during high commute times for the school? Those streets are difficult to get up and down when there's parking on both sides. In years past I'd not seen this in Burlingame, but now we're starting to see it on streets like Carmelita Avenue and other areas where we're introducing either one-way traffic or a timed one -way or a timed parking. Maybe it's an opportunity for us to revisit that because it's really the City's issue to help alleviate some of that traffic, it's not Mercy's issue. >I'm kind of at a loss because I'm not that familiar with after -school activities, sports and such. I don't know when Burlingame High School or any of these other public schools typically end their events. I feel like there's a compromise here. I agree that it should not be so open -ended, maybe there's compromise time in there where we see how things work and have them come back if they are having trouble with it . That way there's more input, and by then maybe some solution has come up with this traffic. With traffic I'm very familiar with similar issues where I live, but I'm not familiar with the traffic patterns with the schools. The times where you can't get out of your driveway, I totally get it. I don't want to discourage the idea of looking at an end time for their conditional use permit. >I have no complaints in terms of the design of the building. It's a textbook compatible building next to a very distinctive historic building, even though this proposed building isn't on a historic site, they took a lot of precautions. I really don't have anything I could offer to improve on it, I think it's perfect. >The site plan could be improved a little bit. I've already mentioned that at one time there was a plan for the gymnasium just east of the current proposed site down the slope. That would theoretically be a little bit better because this facade wouldn't show as prominently from the Kohl Mansion, but I'm sure that's also much more expensive being on the side of the slope. So, a much less expensive thing is right now on the site. There is a tree line along the outside of those tennis courts which does a pretty good job of obscuring the tennis courts from the front of the Kohl Mansion when you're sitting on the lawn. Right now, it looks like there's only two trees being planned to be planted in front of the Athletic Center . Consider adding another two trees to provide a little bit more masking so it doesn't quite feel like you're in Page 12City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes a courtyard. The front of the Kohl Mansion isn't a courtyard, it's a giant manor -like estate yard. A little bit of extra landscape screening would be an improvement. >In reference to a comment about construction parking on Adeline Drive, looking at the construction plan, it looks like there's already a dozen construction parking spots on the Grassili entrance and the 16,000 square foot construction parking lot. I didn't see anything mentioning construction parking on the street, but that does sound like it would be an issue. Is it something that we have prerogative over on the Planning Commission, or is that something more for the Building Department? (Hurin: I believe what may have been mentioned was not street parking on Adeline Drive, but on a lot off Adeline Drive. Like construction staging, construction parking for work.) That's what I'm seeing, just making sure I wasn't missing something. >Maybe this can be another opportunity with the parking on Adeline Drive and the side streets, is to do permit parking for the 18 or 24 months surrounding construction. That would hopefully discourage worker use of the neighborhood and still protect the parking for the residents. That would just encourage the workers to park on site where they're supposed to be. Could they do a temporary, two -year parking permit within city regulations? (Spansail: It is something we could explore. I think going through the traffic plan and the conditions of approval, we can try to see which ways we could go to ensure that traffic for the construction crew is limited.) Any kind of creative opportunity in which we can manipulate the process is going to help. (Lewit: This is also something we could address to the applicant. I'm sure Devcon has dealt with this before with other projects, and they can tell us what they do to ensure that doesn't happen.) > Thank you for the very nice presentation and all the thorough conversations that Mercy High School is having with the neighborhood and community members. I like hearing that the community members are saying that they'd like to have you as a neighbor and continue to. It seems like overall there's a lot of support for the project. The design is great and is aligned with the mansion. I can see approval for the Commercial Design Review aspect, the Hillside Area Construction Permit and even for the Variance on the building height for this structure. I also hear a lot of concern about traffic, which is partly under our discussion and if there is a possibility that we look at that Conditional Use Permit. Reading the notes on the dates that a 10 pm timeline is needed for those home games and practices potentially, seems like it ends generally by 9 pm. But there are those home matches that the CUP is being proposed to potentially address in case a game gets started late or whatever it might be. I don't know if the Conditional Use Permit could be written in a manner to accommodate the home game dates for the school year. That obviously would change from year to year, but adding them up, it's about 15 days out of the year that we're looking at the 10 pm CUP timeline. I don't know if that's even something that can be done or we can like write it that way. (Spansail: It's certainly legal to do. We'd have to come up with a number and an exception of process that they could go through, but it's certainly something that could be done.) > I'm not really sure if the neighborhood's worried so much about the 10 pm time frame or more about traffic, but rather than a blanket Monday to Friday every day until 10 pm, that could be pretty extensive if they're allowed to have that, even if they don't want to. Maybe we can look at limiting the CUP to certain dates. It would be great to continue to be creative and think about how to move traffic through Alvarado Avenue in particular. It would be really hard on the residents on that street to not be able to park on that street at certain times of the day, morning and afternoons. But if we can keep traffic moving, at least people can get out of their driveways, get on with their business and not have to wait beyond that 15 -minute time frame every day. Our first home was on Trousdale, and I never noticed that there was all this traffic around Franklin Elementary because there are two lanes on both sides of the street. Traffic was always moving, and it never affected us. But I can see how difficult it can be for those residents on Alvarado Avenue. It could be very helpful if we can keep things moving, not have people just park there and find a way to make that happen. >I also saw that there is parking for construction on the property, that's going to be very helpful. It is a good idea to have a limited time permit to allow residents only to park on Adeline Drive during construction hours. As we see often in cities like San Francisco, to appease everybody and make sure that residents Page 13City of Burlingame June 10, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes are happy and have their parking. Even with a single home under construction, there are many trucks and cars parked in front of a house. >I'm in support of the project and all the conditions per the staff report, and maybe there's some creative use of the creative way to write the Conditional Use Permit. >I'm supporting the project as well. It was interesting with the public comments. I tallied 10 in favor, one not in favor. But everyone in favor had a little bit of a hesitation and it was around traffic, the conditional use curfew, and around parking. There is room to improve all three of those. Certainly, it's a big site when you include the Sisters of Mercy, parking does seem like something that could be further increased, the traffic flow and the traffic patterns to get cars off the road. I agree with my fellow commissioner, I do like the idea of providing a specific number of days, maybe 20 days a year, that it can exceed 9 pm or 8.30 pm and go to 10 pm as exceptions. When they hit that 20th day, then there's a consequence to be determined. Other than that, the design looks great. I don't have a problem with the Hillside Area Construction Permit or the Height Variance. >We thank all the neighbors for coming out tonight. We thank the applicant also for their presentation, and for holding the recent meeting they had with the neighbors. This sounds like a pretty collaborative project, so we look forward to continuing processing the application. Interim Community Development Director Hurin noted that this application will return to the Planning Commission as regular action item. 11. COMMISSIONER’S REPORTS Commissioner Shores noted that he recently attended a Preservation Conference, which included a seminar in new housing laws. He will be providing a written summary to the Commission. Commissioner Tse noted that she attended the Planning Commissioner's Training where the discussion focused on housing and sustainability issues each jurisdiction was facing. Commissioner Schmid noted that he and two other commissioners attended the Volunteer Fair on Saturday at the Community Center. 12. DIRECTOR REPORTS Interim Community Development Director Hurin noted that at the June 3, 2024 City Council meeting, the Council reviewed the parklet fee structure and term of agreement for the parklet program beginning on July 1, 2024. 13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS No Future Agenda Items were suggested. 14. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Page 14City of Burlingame