Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 2017.02.27BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes Planning Commission 7:00 PM Council ChambersMonday, February 27, 2017 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Loftis called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Staff Present: Community Development Director William Meeker, Senior Planner Ruben Hurin and City Attorney Kathleen Kane. 2. ROLL CALL DeMartini, Loftis, Gum, Terrones, Bandrapalli, and GaulPresent6 - SargentAbsent1 - 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a.Draft January 23, 2017 Meeting Minutes Chair Loftis made a motion, seconded by Commissioner DeMartini, to approve the Minutes of January 23, 2017. Chair Loftis asked for a voice vote, and the motion carried by the following vote: Aye:DeMartini, Loftis, Gum, Terrones, Bandrapalli, and Gaul6 - Absent:Sargent1 - 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA There were no public comments on non-agenda items. 6. STUDY ITEMS There were no Study Items. a.Quality of Life Services presentation City Manager Lisa Goldman and Finance Director Carol Augustine provided an overview of the City's capital needs and encouraged the Commissioners and residents watching the meeting to take the City's on-line quality of life survey. Commissioner Terrones: would it be helpful to provide an exhibit that shows the assessed value versus the General Fund Budget over time. This would help to demonstrate the costs and benefits of living in Burlingame. (Goldman: believes this is a great idea. Would be an interesting comparison. Transient Page 1City of Burlingame Printed on 3/14/2017 February 27, 2017Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Occupancy Tax and Property Taxes are the top two revenue sources, followed by sales tax. Noted that there is some simple graphic information that shows where each "dollar" goes.) Commissioner Bandrapalli: appreciates the photos included in the presentation. Perhaps identify the risks of not funding the needed capital improvements. Commissioner Gum: asked where additional funding could come from? Is there anything that could be shown regarding additional sources of income? (Goldman: will need to go back and give this some thought and see if there is any way to represent this information. We are a pretty lean organization . Need to balance project funding with staffing required to carry out projects.) Chair Loftis: asked how priorities are set? By the City Council? (Goldman: the list provided came out of a survey that was administered. Information was prioritized based upon responses; weighted averages applied. Will get as many responses as possible, then evaluate and provide information to the City Council regarding the primary messages from the community regarding setting priorities. Then the Council will need to discuss these items in the context of revenue stream, staffing etc.) 7. CONSENT CALENDAR a.1430 Drake Avenue, zoned R -1 - Application for Design Review and Special Permits for basement ceiling height and direct exit from a basement to the exterior of the structure for a new, two -story single family dwelling (retain existing detached garage ). This project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (a). (Chu Design Associates, applicant and designer; Richard and Jennifer Sargent TR, property owners) (70 noticed) Staff Contact: Ruben Hurin Commissioner DeMartini made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bandrapalli, to approve the Consent Calendar. Chair Loftis asked for a voice vote, and the motion carried by the following vote: Aye:DeMartini, Loftis, Gum, and Bandrapalli4 - Nay:Gaul1 - Absent:Sargent1 - Abstain:Terrones1 - 8. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS There were no Regular Action Items. 9. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY a.1523 Columbus Avenue, zoned R -1 - Application for Design Review for a new two-story single family dwelling with a detached garage (TRG Architects, applicant and architect; Michael Brownrigg and Marty Burchell, property owners) (59 noticed) Staff contact: Catherine Keylon Chair Loftis indicated that he would be recused from discussion of this item, as he resides within 500-feet of the property - he left the City Council Chambers. All Commissioners had visited the property. Commissioner Terrones noted that he had greeted the property owner. Commissioner Bandrapalli noted that she had met the nanny at the property. Page 2City of Burlingame Printed on 3/14/2017 February 27, 2017Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Senior Planner Hurin provided an overview of the project. Questions of Staff: There were no questions of staff. Vice-Chair Gum opened the public hearing. Randy Grange represented the applicant. Commission Questions/Comments: >Have the plans been shared with the neighbors? (Grange: has spoke to some of the neighbors; no negative comments.) >Feels the gable seems a little stark, perhaps because the fascia boards are white. (Grange: two flat-roof details; one with an overhang, one without an overhang.) The thinner fascia board is present on the right-side elevation as well; doesn't see the cohesion. >Will the fence run a along the property lines? (Grange: yes, but will be fence between the garage and the neighbor's property.) >The garages look funny when the eave is chopped off at the property line; is there another way to treat this? (Grange: if the garage is moved over, then it wouldn't meet the 24-foot back-up. Hurin: the Building Division will allow the barge rafter to extend to the property line.) >What is the parapet height on the living roof? (Grange: is a short parapet, because of the higher ceiling height in the room below.) >Why such an imbalance with the distribution of landscaping? (Grange: the rear yard gets somewhat reduced by the front setback. The lesser landscaping in the front allows a play area for children.) >Why is the second floor plate height nine feet? (Grange: because of the way the roofs come together; trying to get these elements to line up.) >Noted that most homes have window grids; this may be the first house that doesn't have grids . (Grange: noted another home in the neighborhood without grids. The style lends itself to not having grids.) >What is the purpose of the blue stone down the center of the driveway? (Grange: owners liked the element as a means of breaking up the pavement.) >Likes how the left side has been articulated. Doesn't feel that the right side is as well articulated. Is there anything that can be done to add more dimensionality along the right side, particularly near the front? (Grange: can take a look at the windows to be installed in this area.) Public Comments: There were no members of the public wishing to speak on the item. Vice-Chair Loftis closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion: >Likes the design; is fresh approach. Fits in the context of the neighborhood. Has nice scale; now and current design. >With respect to the fascias, doesn't know if the fascias must be harmonized in terms of color. >A perspective may help to show the relationships between the fascias and the roof forms. >A little concerned about the nine -foot plate height on the front - would prefer to have the plate height reduced somewhat. >Feels that the landscaping at the front is very sparse. Too many elements have been removed that would allow it to better fit within the neighborhood. Needs more work - too plain. >Likes the design; looks much better than the existing home. Wishes to see more landscaping in the front; continue with a landscape plan that is consistent with the neighborhood. >Interface with the neighborhood is a concern. Page 3City of Burlingame Printed on 3/14/2017 February 27, 2017Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Commissioner DeMartini made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bandrapalli, to place the item on the Regular Action Calendar when ready for action. Vice-Chair Gum asked for a voice vote, and the motion carried by the following vote: Aye:DeMartini, Gum, Terrones, Bandrapalli, and Gaul5 - Absent:Sargent1 - Recused:Loftis1 - b.1453 Drake Avenue, zoned R 1 - Application for Design Review for a second story addition to an existing two and half story single family dwelling (Jeanne Davis, applicant and property owners; Chen - Quin, property owners) (61 noticed) Staff contact: Catherine Keylon Chair Loftis returned the dais. Commissioner DeMartini noted that he has a business relationship with the applicant and will recuse himself from the discussion of this item. He left the City Council Chambers. All Commissioners had visited the subject property. Chair Loftis noted that he had greeted the property owner and architect while in the lobby for the prior item. Community Development Director William Meeker provided an overview of the staff report. Questions of Staff: There were no questions of staff. Chair Loftis opened the public hearing. Jeanne Davis represented the applicant. Commission Questions/Comments: >With respect to the dormers, the small gables look a little unadorned. (Davis: can install leaded glass or similar feature.) >Thanked the applicant for sharing the plans with the neighbors. Public Comments: Lee Cheh, 1457 Drake Avenue: noted applicant's objection to his project in 2008 - read from minutes from that date. Had to reduce window size on his property due to privacy concerns. Concerned about privacy concerns related to this project related to the window facing his property. Response from Applicant: >Open to making the window smaller, but is the minimum size necessary to qualify as a dormer - is a window in a closet, but could put a limiter on it. Chair Loftis closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion: >Blends well with the neighborhood and with the existing architecture. >Asked what qualifies as a dormer? (Hurin: if the window area is less than 25% of the dormer, then a Page 4City of Burlingame Printed on 3/14/2017 February 27, 2017Planning Commission Meeting Minutes special permit would be required for the dormer.) >The leaded glass window shown would obstruct viewing into the neighbors property; other type of obscured glass could be provided. >Address the privacy concern of the neighbor. Commissioner Terrones made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bandrapalli, to place the item on the Regular Action Calendar when ready for action. Chair Loftis asked for a voice vote, and the motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Loftis, Gum, Terrones, Bandrapalli, and Gaul5 - Absent:Sargent1 - Recused:DeMartini1 - 10. COMMISSIONER’S REPORTS Commissioner DeMartini returned to the dais. Commissioner DeMartini noted the General Plan Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC) last week (February 22nd) - the discussion related to community character. He noted Senior Planner Hurin's idea that in order to encourage retention of existing housing stock, the maximum FAR would be available for renovations that preserved the original structure, whereas demolishing the structure would result in a lower allowable FAR. Commissioner Terrones noted that Planning Manager Gardiner is attempting to schedule a meeting of the Neighborhood Consistency Subcommittee. 11. DIRECTOR REPORTS Community Development Director Meeker noted that the City Council adopted the Accessory Dwelling Units ordinance at its meeting of February 21, 2017. The new ordinance becomes effective on March 23, 2017. a.1125 Bernal Avenue - FYI for review of proposed changes to a previously approved Design Review application. Accepted. 12. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Note: An action by the Planning Commission is appealable to the City Council within 10 days of the Planning Commission's action on February 27, 2017. If the Planning Commission's action has not been appealed or called up for review by the Council by 5:00 p.m. on March 9, 2017, 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 $533, which includes noticing costs. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Community Development/Planning counter, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Page 5City of Burlingame Printed on 3/14/2017