Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 2012.09.12CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES City Council Chambers 501 Primrose Road - Burlingame, California October 9, 2012 - 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Gaul called the October 9, 2012, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Cauchi, Gaul, Sargent, and Yie Absent: Commissioner Terrones Staff Present: Planning Manager, Maureen Brooks; Associate Planner Erica Strohmeier; and City Attorney, Gus Guinan III. MINUTES Commissioner Gaul moved, seconded by Commissioner Sargent to approve the minutes of the September 24, 2012 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, with the following changes: ■ Page 6, 4t" to last bullet, change to "Expressed concern about the environmental impacts created in the manufacturing of the vinyl windows and the toxins released into the environment." ■ Page 7, Additional Commission comments, 5t" bullet, change to "may wish to consider asking the Council to create a policy regarding the use of vinyl windows. ■ Page 7, Additional Commission comments, 5t" to last bullet, change "accept" to "keep" regarding vinyl windows ■ Page 9, Commission comments, 4t" from bottom, add: "suggestion was made to extend the porch to the right" Motion passed 5-0-1 (Commissioner Terrones absent). IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR There were no comments from the floor. VI. STUDY ITEMS There were no Study Items for review. CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes October 9, 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. Chair Gaul asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. There were no requests. 1. 315 PRIMROSE ROAD, ZONED BAC —APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORA REAL ESTATE USE (TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY) ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (FRED FREEMAN, CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPLICANT; TIM RADUENZ, FORM + ONE, DESIGNER; RONNIE E. GOLDFIELD TR, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Commissioner Yie moved approval of the Consent Calendar based on the facts in the staff reports, Commissioner's comments and the findings in the staff reports, with recommended conditions in the staff reports and by resolution. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Auran. Chair Gaul called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 5-0-1 (Commissioner Terrones absent). Appeal procedures were advised. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS 2. 2504 HILLSIDE DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (RICHARD M. SARGENT, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; CHU DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC., DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN (ITEM CONTINUED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 24.2012 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) Chair Gaul noted that the applicant has requested that this item be continued, and that the matter has been continued to the Commission's October 22, 2012 meeting. 3. 1395 BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED BAC —APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORA NEW FULL SERVICE FOOD ESTABLISHMENT (THE PLANT) AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR CHANGES TO THE EXTERIOR FAQADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (RIYAD SALMA, APPLICANT; RCUSA CORPORATION, ARCHITECT; KARIM A. SALMA TR ET AL, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated October 9, 2012, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eleven conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Gaul opened the public hearing. Riyad Salma, 1105 Burlingame Avenue, Nori Kanda, T Square Design Group, and Mark Lewis, the Plant, represented the applicant. Regarding the difference from the previous application, we now have an operator, now have plans developed specifically for this operation, layout slightly different than before, but general concept is the same. Noted that the owner and architect are here to respond to questions. 2 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes October 9, 2012 Commission comments: ■ What used to be the entrance to Aida Opera Candy, now a trash receptacle there, and door to kiosk, is that a customer area? (Salma — single door entrance to kiosk, left side of existing door will now be a fixed element because of the interior counter layout, put trash receptacle in alcove in front of left side because the Building Department required it.) ■ Should show that part of the building on the elevations. (Salma - It is an existing double door, outside will look the same, that portion of the fagade is not being altered. • Will you have outdoor seating on the Primrose side of the building? (Salma — will be applying for an encroachment permit for that separately.) ■ How much take out business do you do? (Lewis - with full service dining about 10-20% during busiest hours.) ■ Overall project looks good. ■ Have a path on floor plan where trash would be brought through atrium, concerned because you have to go through dining area, another solution might be a new door out to trash area. (Salma — not possible, there is another tenant space at that location.) ■ Concern about trash area in rear, there is a roof to be put on it? Should be a modification made to trash enclosure to make it bigger to fit the trash bin; bins don't fit with electrical panel located at rear. (Salma - we can look at it to make sure that it meets all requirements and fits trash receptacles; required to be covered to meet storm drain runoff requirements.) ■ Why isn't there more seating in the atrium space? (Salma - Fire needs 48" wide aisle in atrium space — not a lot of seating, but will bring vibrancy to interior space.) ■ Elevations for Burlingame Avenue side? (Salma - Nothing is changing, all doors and windows will remain the same.) Floor plan shows single door. (Salma - One panel of the door will remain fixed.) Public comments: Deborah Bassett, Bassett Production, Primrose Road, thank the commission for looking at this project, look forward to this opportunity for organic dining. There is a need for this type of business in this area. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission Comments: Think it is great project; don't understand location of trash enclosure need to discuss with staff. Commissioner Yie 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 September 18, 2012, sheets T1.0 and A1.0 through A3.3; 2. that this business location to be occupied by a full service food establishment, with 1,061 SF of customer seating (851 SF within the tenant space and 210 SF in the interior common courtyard of the existing building), may change its food establishment classification only to a limited food service food establishment or bar upon approval of a conditional use permit amendment for the establishment, and the criteria for the new classification shall be met in order for a change to be approved; 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes October 9, 2012 3. that the 1,061 SF area of on -site seating of the full service food establishment shall be enlarged or extended to any other areas only by an amendment to this conditional use permit; 4. that the applicant shall work with appropriate City staff regarding the location of the trash enclosure near the Primrose entrance to the kiosk, and the item shall be brought back to the Commission as an "FYI" item on a future Planning Commission agenda. 5. that this food establishment shall provide trash receptacle(s) as approved by the city consistent with the streetscape improvements and maintain all trash receptacle(s) at the entrances to the building and at any additional locations as approved by the City Engineer and Fire Department; 6. that the business shall provide litter control and sidewalk cleaning along all frontages of the business and within fifty (50) feet of all frontages of the business; 7. that an amendment to this conditional use permit shall be required for delivery of prepared food from this premise; 8. that there shall be no food sales allowed at this location from a window or from any opening within 10' of the property line; 9. that if this site is changed from any food establishment use to any retail or other use, a food establishment shall not be replaced on this site and this conditional use permit shall become void; 10. that any seating on the sidewalk outside shall conform to the requirements of any encroachment permit issued by the city; 11. that the conditions of the Building Division's September 27, September 14 and August 22, 2012 memos, the Engineering Division's September 6, 2012 memo, the Fire Division's August 24, 2012 memo and the Stormwater Division's August 28, 2012 memo shall be met; and 12. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2010 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame, and that failure to comply with these conditions or any change to the business or use on the site which would affect any of these conditions shall require an amendment to this use permit. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sargent. Discussion of motion: Add condition regarding the location of the trash enclosure and bring back to the Commission as an FYI item. Chair Gaul called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-1. (Commissioner Terrones absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:30 p.m. 4. AMENDMENT TO TITLE 25 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING CODE) — AMENDING THE REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS WITHIN THE BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL (BAC) ZONING DISTRICT. STAFF CONTACT: WILLIAM MEEKER Reference staff report dated October 9, 2012, with attachments. Planning Manager Brooks presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. EJ CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes October 9, 2012 Chair Gaul opened the public hearing. Commission comments: With regards to the other cities surveyed, some of them do not seem to be comparable to Burlingame, but are much larger downtown areas. Many of the cities on the list are comparable, such as San Carlos and Los Altos. What is meant by "permitted by right"? (Brooks — would not require Planning Commission approval; that is not proposed, would still require a conditional use permit.) Public comments: Kirk Sime, 330 Primrose Road; and Riyad Salma, 1105 Burlingame Avenue; spoke: ■ Commission recently approved medical use on second floor at 329 Primrose; first floor has been vacant for about four years. ■ The only serious interest has been from full service restaurants. Problem has been with timing of the availability of open slots for food establishments, had a tenant who started the process, by the time application ready, the open spot was taken. ■ Interest recently has been from upscale SF restaurants which would add flavor to downtown, have a problem as the owner that can't target restaurant with slots not available, what is being proposed fixes the problem for full service restaurants. ■ Very few spaces that can accommodate the 4500 SF needed for some of these restaurants; encourage you to move it forward. ■ Own and manage several buildings on Burlingame Avenue; there is value created by the limitations on food establishments, but are in favor of proposal. ■ Retail is going through difficult transition, and may not ever be what it was; not a lot of growth; choice between keeping vacancies and service oriented businesses; by not offering food establishments tied our hands on opportunities. ■ The interest we have seen is in service businesses; food establishment opportunity provides a more sought after service. ■ Did our own studies on Belmont, Walnut Creek, etc, no other cities had such restrictions; needs to be rethought. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Support the concept; will give more street life at night, it is how we keep the downtown alive. In favor as well, trying to limit the number made sense at the time; with the lack of retail growth, this change makes perfect sense now. Commissioner Cauchi moved to recommend approval to the City Council of the amendment to the zoning code amending the requirements related to food establishments. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Yie. Chair Gaul called for a voice vote on the motion to recommend approval to the City Council. The motion passed 5-0-1 (Commissioner Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 7:44 p.m. 5 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes October 9, 2012 IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 5. 1552 VANCOUVER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW, TWO- STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (MARK ROBERTSON, MARK ROBERTSON DESIGN, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; D & W DEVELOPER LLC, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated October 9, 2012, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Gaul opened the public comment period. Is there a limit on the amount of hardscape area? (Strohmeier — there are no specific restrictions.) Mark Robertson, 918 East Grant Place, San Mateo; represented the applicant. House will be viewed at an oblique because it is at the end of the block, last house on street. Commission comments: ■ How old is current house? (Robertson - Mid-50's.) Current residents actually appreciate the mid- century qualities of the house, it's a shame for it to be torn down; blends in to landscape; what is great about creekside lots is the trees. ■ Maybe from the end of Vancouver it won't be seen, but it's going to be big, would like to see something less obtrusive. ■ Had some of the same concerns as seen in the letter submitted from neighbor, seems large, tough cul-de-sac, street just ends. ■ Would agree if house was done in similar style to existing, which would embrace the creek. Would like to see a wraparound porch on that side. ■ Had a concern about location of electric meter, pole is on left, meter on right? (Robertson - It's actually in dead center and box is in same location as it is now.) ■ Faux chimney looks flat; would like to see something more than a box added on. Rather see it developed as a chimney; should look like more than a water heater shed; have better clearances, looks like a fireplace with chimney hacked off. ■ Love idea of wrap around porch, could expand the entry; front door looks lost between the two columns. ■ Like the layout; there is a lot of roof massing on the south elevation, could it be simplified or consolidated, there is a lot going on. ■ East elevation, bay window for tub, looks awkward how it fits in, needs to be resolved. ■ Love Eichlers, but whether they fit in Burlingame or not, don't know, don't have the presence on the street we seem to like so much. ■ Regarding porch, not much detailing on front elevation, wainscoting and timber details would improve it. ■ Love the setting, take advantage of the creekside setting to bring the outside in, with large overhangs and outdoor spaces, design the house so it has more indoor/outdoor feel. ■ Front porch entry is minimized, detail is missing from the front; nicely detailed on left side; on right side there is just a window and stucco, right side will be more visible. ■ Most desirable thing about the site is the creek, need to take advantage of the outdoor space near the creek. • Living and enjoyment should take advantage of dead end street and creek. 0 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes October 9, 2012 The eaves on the garage are cut off because of its proximity to the property line; have an 8,000 square foot lot, could move garage off the property line and have the eave the same on both sides, and have room for maintenance. Public comments: Bob Hirth, 1543 Vancouver; Marsha Parrish, 1548 Vancouver; and Charles Bona, 1551 Bernal Avenue; spoke. ■ Appreciate the process, applauds the comments made by the Commission; is a unique house and property on a unique street; it is at end of street and is tight, will impact everybody on the block, would like to have an understanding of the process and timetable. ■ People park on both sides of street, need to work with builder to accommodate large trucks; concerned with dirt and dust during construction. ■ Two symmetrical structures on front elevation, and seem to be a lot of triangles; lot is clearly large, opportunity to create larger footprint, but may be overwhelming on block. ■ House is very dramatic and imposing; what would be a house on hill for us, we are downhill from property, we would be sitting on the east dimension of property, as it is now, we can look across our neighbor through cyclone fence. Wondering if owners would consider a wood fence on east section of property behind the garage. Fence would break up the imposing view from down the hill. ■ Share property line, in relationship to current garage, where would new garage be? (Gaul — new garage would be near the back of the property, current garage is attached to house. Best thing to do is start discussions with the architect and contractor, to understand how construction will occur). There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Could reduce the amount of hardscape to be more compatible with the setting. Consider revising the layout downstairs, may want to think about how it ties into creek and open space and orienting the dining room and family room towards that space and built out from there. Commissioner Cauchi made a motion to place the item on the Action Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Sargent. Discussion of motion: May want to change the orientation so entrance is on side. May be talking about a completely new design, might want to see as a study item again. Want design to be more respectful of the site. Chair Gaul called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the Action Calendar when plans have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0- 1 (Commissioner Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:17 p.m. X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS Discuss Subcommittee Assignments. — This item will be discussed at the Commission's October 22Id meeting. XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Commission Communications: 7 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes October 9, 2012 1►reMW Actions from Regular City Council meeting of October 1, 2012: 824 Cowan Road — Application by New England Lobster Company to amend Conditional Use Permit to increase the hours of operation and add sales of alcoholic beverages and make a finding of public convenience and necessity regarding the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license was approved. 1250 Bayshore Highway — Application for Tentative and Final Parcel Map for lot split and variances for floor area ratio, parking and landscaping (Holiday Inn Express and Max's Opera Cafe) was approved. FYI: 1423 Paloma Avenue — review of as -built changes to a previously approved Design Review Project: Accepted. FYI: Peninsula Hospital Complaint Log — September, 2012: Accepted. XII. ADJOURNMENT Chair Gaul adjourned the meeting at 8:21 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Rich Sargent, Secretary