HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes - 02.14.11 APPROVEDC CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
BURLINGAME APPROVED MINUTES
Monday, February 14, 2011 — 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers — 501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, California
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice -Chair Yie called the February 14, 2011, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00
p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Auran, Cauchi, Gaul, Lindstrom, Terrones, Vistica and Yie
Absent: None.
Staff Present: Community Development Director, William Meeker; Senior Planner Ruben Hurin; and City
Attorney, Gus Guinan
III. MINUTES
Commissioner Cauchi moved, seconded by Commissioner Auran to approve the minutes of the January
24, 2011 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, with the following change:
■ Page 7, move "there were no further comments and the public hearing was closed" to after the
section entitled "additional Commission comments".
Motion passed 7-0-0-0.
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There were no changes to the agenda.
V. FROM THE FLOOR
No one spoke from the floor.
VI. STUDY ITEMS
1. 221 PRIMROSE ROAD, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA B -APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A NEW FOOD ESTABLISHMENT (COFFEE HOUSE) (COOL CHEFS, INC., APPLICANT;
CORTLAND MORGAN, ARCHITECT; AND PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT CENTERS LLC, PROPERTY
OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Senior Planner Hurin presented a summary of the staff report, dated February 14, 2011.
Commission comments:
1
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
■ Imagines that the operator intends for the seating to spill out onto the sidewalk; wants to see what
the intentions are in this respect; would be nice to have this type of seating. An encroachment
permit may be required.
■ Are they planning to have the employees park elsewhere on the Safeway lot?
■ What are the other tenants that will be in the building? (Hurin — don't have firm ideas of other
businesses to be placed within the tenant spaces.)
■ How will the shared bathroom work for the customers?
■ Encroachment permits are handled by staff; there is a lot of public area provided for seating on the
plaza; don't necessarily need to be concerned about other seating in the public right-of-way.
This item was set for the Consent Calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed by
the Planning Department. This item concluded at 7:08 p.m.
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.
Vice -Chair Yie asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the
consent calendar. There were no requests.
2. 483 MARIN DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND
SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WHICH QUALIFIES
AS SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION AND A NEW DETACHED GARAGE (MICHAEL AND
FELICIA NG, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; NATALIE HYLAND, BLUE COAST
DESIGNS, DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Commissioner Terrones moved approval of the Consent Calendar based on the facts in the staff report,
Commissioner's comments and the findings in the staff report, with recommended conditions in the staff
report and by resolution. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Auran. Vice -Chair Yie called for a
voice vote on the motion and it passed 7-0-0-0. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at
7:09 p.m.
VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
3. 704 NEWHALL ROAD, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR ANEW, TWO-STORY
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (JACK PANOS, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY
OWNER: NATALIE HYLAND. BLUE COAST DESIGNS. DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated February 14, 2011, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin presented the
report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifteen (15) conditions were suggested for consideration.
Questions of staff:
None.
Vice -Chair Yie opened the public hearing.
2
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
Natalie Hyland, 585 Quarry Road, San Carlos; represented the applicant.
Addressed almost all of the comments made by Commissioners.
Didn't make the desired change (installing a porch or trellis) to the rear of the house since it is not
seen by others and are attempting to retain an open feeling, and the doors were changed to
windows.
Wrapped around the front porch, as requested.
Commission comments:
■ The rear elevation looks better with the windows than the doors.
■ Have done a nice job with the design.
■ Likes the proportion of the bay and the wrap -around porch.
■ There may be an opportunity for another coat closet under the stairway near the main entry.
■ Look closely at the closet off of the family room and nook; there could still be a way to connect the
living space to the porch in some way.
■ Gave up the mudroom transition space with the wrap -around porch; is there a way to move the wall
so that the porch wraps a bit less so that there can be a transitional space with an entrance.
(Hyland — the owner is adamant with not having an entry at that point; wanted it completely
removed. Wants all guests to arrive at the front door.)
■ Indicate what materials and sizes will be used on the two-story bay.
■ Be certain that the line for the sewer pump is outside the house, rather than inside the house.
■ Complimented the architect on the design.
Public comments:
None.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Auran moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions:
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date
stamped February 2, 2011, sheets Al through A8, L1.0 and L2.0;
2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height
or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or
Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff);
3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would
include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit;
4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's January 7, 2011 and November 5, 2010 memos,
the City Engineer's November 15, 2010 memo, the Fire Marshal's November 8, 2010 memo, the
Parks Supervisor's January 12, 2011 and November 8, 2010 memos, and the NPDES Coordinator's
November 4, 2010 memo shall be met;
5. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be placed
upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community Development Director;
3
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
6. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site
shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to
comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;
7. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction
plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the
Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved
plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required;
the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning
Commission, or City Council on appeal;
8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single
termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these
venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is
issued;
9. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance
which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste
Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure,
interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit;
10. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new
residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in
Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off -site sedimentation of storm water
runoff;
11. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
2010 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION
PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION
12. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property
corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on
the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by
the City Engineer;
13. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or
another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that
the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as
window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification
documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division
before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled;
14. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the
roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and
15. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built
5
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
according to the approved Planning and Building plans.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi.
Discussion of motion:
The design is nicely proportioned, very appropriate; nice job.
Vice -Chair Yie called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 7-0-0-0. Appeal
procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:17 p.m.
4. 307 PRIMROSE ROAD, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA A, BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA —
APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR CHANGES TO THE STOREFRONT OF AN
EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR INSTRUCTIONAL
CLASSES (INSTRUCTION/ACTIVITIES FOR CHILDREN) INCIDENTAL TO A RETAIL USE (WENDY
EGER AND VERONICA MONTES, APPLICANTS; DWIGHTASHDOWN, ASHDOWN ARCHITECTURE,
INC., ARCHITECT; RUTH MODISETTE TR, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated February 14, 2011, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin presented the
report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Twelve (12) conditions were suggested for consideration.
Questions of staff:
None.
Vice -Chair Yie opened the public hearing.
Dwight Ashdown, 1681 Folsom Street, San Francisco; represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Likes that the original window design has been retained on the second floor.
■ Not certain how the second floor access door is to be addressed; appears to be an attempt to hide
it; in the spirit of the architectural style of the building, it should be maintained with the door and the
vertical element. (Ashdown — though he understands the desire to preserve the original
architectural style; there is a desire to de-emphasize the second doorway so that it is not perceived
as a second entry.) Could still preserve a different treatment without emphasizing it as a primary
entry.
■ Believes that glass block below the windows should be installed, rather than the wood panels as
proposed. The glass block is a more desirable element. Too much is being taken away from the
important design elements of the building. (Ashdown — glass block only appears under the
windows on the left side; the wood panels appear elsewhere; not certain what is original. Are
attempting to de-emphasize the second doorway due to the conversion of the use of the building.)
■ Agreed with other comments regarding retention of the tile area on the tower element and the
glass -block elements; are very distinctive elements of the building.
■ The City owes the architect gratitude for attempting to preserve the building; however, there is an
opportunity to provide a more interesting mullion pattern on the windows, perhaps a more horizontal
mullion pattern that would be more in keeping with the style of the building.
M
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
■ Requested clarity regarding the muntins applied to the upper -floor windows; the windows should be
simulated true divided -light windows to provide the same muntin expression on the interior and
exterior.
■ There is a compelling case for retaining the design elements present on the tower element; the
proposal begins to strip away some of the character -defining elements of the building.
■ Feels that the recessed second door with the tower element would de-emphasize this doorway and
would not necessitate installation of an awning. (Ashdown — the new awnings extend entirely
across the fagade of the building; will be difficult to do so while retaining the tower element.) Could
either eliminate the awning, or provide a separate awning.
■ Can go either way with respect to the glass block element; both the glass block and wood panels
are present in the existing design of the building.
■ Would like to see a consistent material used below the windows, whether glass block or wood
panels.
Public comments:
None.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
Thinks that some direction has been provided to the applicant; wants to see the project continued.
Commissioner Vistica moved to continue the item.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi.
Comments on motion:
■ Has been convinced by the discussion that the tower element needs to be retained.
■ Can work the awning into the tower feature.
■ Want simulated true divided light windows to be installed.
■ Provide windows with a horizontal design theme.
■ Prefer glass block, but overall wants to see consistency.
■ Assess whether or not glass block is feasible; the more overriding concern is with consistency.
■ Concerned with the structural quality of the glass block.
■ The tile on the tower structure is the most important feature; can live with the proposed wood
framing of the windows.
Vice -Chair Yie called for a voice vote on the motion to continue. The motion passed 7-0-0-0. The
Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 7:44 p.m.
5. 50 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUBAREA D, BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA —
APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR INTERIOR AND
EXTERIOR CHANGES TO AN EXISTING AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP (KENT PUTNAM, APPLICANT
AND PROPERTY OWNER: HUGH HINES. ARCHITECT) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated February 14, 2011, with attachments. Community Development Director
7
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Nine (9) conditions were suggested for
consideration.
Questions of staff:
With respect to the Parking Variance; is the Parking Variance triggered by the need to designate
ADA spaces? (Meeker —yes, staff was required to calculate the number of parking spaces required
in order to identify the number of ADA spaces required.)
Vice -Chair Yie opened the public hearing.
Kent Putnam, 3 California Drive; represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Will the inventory really fill the parking lot? (Putnam — most of the inventory will be at another
location in the area.)
■ Seems that it would be useful to have the employees park off -site.
■ The employees walk, ride bicycles and otherwise arrive at work. (Putnam - the building will be a
LEED building; bike racks will be provided.)
■ (Putnam — can a different street tree be selected that can reduce irrigation. Meeker — can revise
the applicable condition to permit negotiation to occur with the Parks Supervisor.)
■ Mechanics are recruited, and the business assists them in locating nearby housing. (Putnam —
confirmed.)
■ Appreciates the effort being made to improve the building.
■ The trees on Broadway have a root barrier that is required, can request that the root barrier be
placed at the edge of the grate, not at the edge of the tree.
Public comments:
None.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Vistica moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended
conditions:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date
stamped January 27, 2011, sheets A.001 through A.401, EO-1 and E1.0;
2. that the City Arborist shall work with the applicant to select an alternative street tree (if feasible) that
will require less irrigation and permit the applicant to secure maximum LEED points for the project;
3. that any changes to the size or envelope of building, which would include changing or adding
exterior walls or parapet walls, shall require an amendment to this permit;
4. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height
or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or
Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff);
M
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
5. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the parking Variance as
well as any other exceptions to the code granted here will become void;
E
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
6. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site
shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to
comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;
7. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance
which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste
Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure,
interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit;
8. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance;
9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
2010 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; and
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION
PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION
9. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built
according to the approved Planning and Building plans.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Terrones.
Discussion of motion:
None.
Vice -Chair Yie called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 7-0-0-0. Appeal
procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:56 p.m.
6. 1409 ROLLINS ROAD, ZONED RR — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO INCREASE THE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING AUTO
RENTAL BUSINESS WITH A NEW OPERATOR (GENESIS CHEN, PAYLESS CAR RENTAL,
APPLICANT; HARVEY HACKER ARCHITECTS, ARCHITECT; HOWARD HONERLAH, PROPERTY
OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated February 14, 2011, with attachments. Community Development Director
Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eleven (11) conditions were suggested
for consideration.
Questions of staff:
None.
Vice -Chair Yie opened the public hearing.
Robert Dawe, 7150 Haven Street, Las Vegas, Nevada; represented the applicant.
10
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
Commission comments:
Is there a lot of business early in the morning, and later in the evening? (Dawe — people from the
hotel businesses in the area; the bulk of the business is during the middle of the day.)
Other businesses are open similar hours in the area? (Dawe — yes.)
Where are the vehicles currently washed? (Dawe — there are two car washes in the area. He
doesn't intend to begin washing cars on the property currently.)
Public comments:
None.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Cauchi moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions:
that the project shall be built and the site shall be configured as shown on the plans submitted to
the Planning Department and date stamped May 3, 2002, site plan and floor plan; and amended,
date stamped January 28, 2011, site plan and floor plan;
2. that the existing 1,830 SF of landscaping on -site (5.5%) shall be retained, automatic irrigation shall
be installed and it shall be maintained by the tenant regularly on a weekly basis;
3. that the car rental business shall have regular business hours from 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. seven
days a week;
4. that the car rental fleet operated from this site shall be limed to a maximum of 60 vehicles; all fleet
vehicles, employee and customers shall park on -site at 1409 Rollins Road; there shall be no
parking of fleet vehicles along Rollins Road or North Carolan;
5. that no off-loading or on -loading of vehicles from trucks shall take place on the public street or on
any public right-of-way;
6. that the applicant shall stripe the parking area on -site to accommodate all 60 rental fleet vehicles as
well as the 9 required parking spaces for the office and customer parking; and no employee or fleet
vehicles shall ever be parked on the public right-of-way or across the public sidewalks;
7. that there shall be no maintenance or washing of vehicles on the site unless approved by the City
Engineer;
8. that any on -site car -washing facility approved in the future by the City Engineer shall be equipped
with a sand/oil separator; and shall not encroach upon the on -site storage area for the 60 fleet
vehicles or employee or visitor/customer parking, or required landscaping or on on -site area used
for loading or off-loading rental vehicles;
9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
2010 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
10. that the conditions of the City Engineer's memo of February 11, 2002 shall be met; and
11
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
11. that crushed aggregate between 3/8" and %" shall be laid over the existing dirt/gravel area at the
rear of the lot to address NPDES concerns and to allow stormwater filtration.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Auran.
Discussion of motion:
Based upon the activities in the area and the need to better serve their clientele, the change is
justified.
Vice -Chair Yie called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 7-0-0-0. Appeal
procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:01 p.m.
IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS
7. 1420 CORTEZ AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT
FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN
EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JAMES CHU, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; DON AND KATHY
STEUL, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated February 14, 2011, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin briefly presented
the project description. There were no questions of staff.
The item was deferred until later on the agenda, since the applicant did not appear to present the project.
8. 390 LEXINGTON WAY, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT
FOR ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION (PAUL OWENS, OWENS
CONSTRUCTION, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; GARY ROSITANO, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF
CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated February 14, 2011, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin briefly presented
the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Vice -Chair Yie opened the public comment period.
Paul Owens, 2830 Bay Road, Redwood City; represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
Noted that the Commission strongly discourages vinyl windows; encourages wood -clad windows.
(Owens — there are other vinyl windows in the structure; are attempting to match existing windows
as close as possible. The original picture window exists in the front of the house, but not
elsewhere.)
Would like to see the picture window replaced with a wood window.
Can the entry door be centered? The door looks truncated and would look better if moved to the
left. (Owens — can be revisited, but it is shown at the current location; would impact a powder
room.)
12
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
■ On the master bathroom on the left elevation, there are bump -outs with no windows; could a
window be placed in the shower area? Could also reverse the toilet and the shower to permit the
window installation and break up this area. (Owens — had a window in the area at one point, and
would be willing to place it back on the plans. Will speak to the homeowners.)
• Seems that more windows are being replaced than retained; some are being relocated. Seems that
it would tie the project together to install wood, or clad windows into all openings; the vinyl windows
are typically frowned upon.
■ Massing is handled nicely.
■ There is a compelling argument for the attached garage; it is the predominant pattern in the
neighborhood.
■ Two roof forms are being brought together into a complex valley; may wish to look at that feature
again.
Public comments:
Roger Jackson, 430 Cavanaugh Avenue, San Mateo; spoke:
■ About 15 years ago, was prevented from constructing an addition on his property on Rollins Road if
it were destroyed by fire because it would have blocked views of the landing planes. Doesn't feel
that the proposal should be approved unless people on Rollins Road are permitted to construct
second stories as well.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Cauchi made a motion to place the item on the Consent Calendar when complete.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Auran.
Discussion of motion:
■ None.
Vice -Chair Yie called fora vote on the motion to place this item on the Consent Calendar when plans have
been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0-0-0. The Commission's action is
advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:21 p.m.
7. 1420 CORTEZ AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT
FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN
EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JAMES CHU, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; DON AND KATHY
STEUL, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER
No one appeared to represent the applicant.
Commissioner Terrones moved to continue the item to a future date to provide the applicant the opportunity
to present the proposal to the Commission.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi.
Vice -Chair Yie called for a vote on the motion to continue. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0-0-0.
13
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:22 p.m.
14
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes February 14, 2011
X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
There were no Commissioner's Reports.
XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Commission Communications:
Reminded Commissioners Yie and Gaul to reapply for appointment to the Planning Commission by
the March 4, 2011 deadline.
Actions from Regular City Council meeting of February 7, 2011:
None.
FYI: Peninsula Hospital Complaint Log:
Accepted.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Vice -Chair Yie adjourned the meeting at 8:23 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeff Lindstrom, Secretary
15