Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes - 03.14.11 APPROVEDCITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES Monday, March 14, 2011 — 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers — 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California I. CALL TO ORDER Vice -Chair Yie called the March 14, 2011, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Gaul, Lindstrom, Vistica, Yie and Cauchi (arrived at 7:08 p.m.) Absent: Commissioner Terrones Staff Present: Community Development Director, William Meeker; Senior Planner Ruben Hurin; and City Attorney, Gus Guinan III. MINUTES Commissioner Auran moved, seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom to approve the minutes of the February 28, 2011 regular meeting of the Planning Commission. Motion passed 5-0-0-2 (Commissioners Terrones and Cauchi absent). IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR No one spoke from the floor. VI. STUDY ITEMS There were no Study Items for review. 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. Vice -Chair Yie indicated that she would recuse herself from voting on Item 1 a (1108 Cabrillo Avenue), since she resides within 500-feet of the property. 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION —Approved Minutes March 14, 2011 1a. 1108 CABRILLO AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (ALFREDO REYES, STEWART ASSOCIATES; APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; THOMAS AND KAREN FEENEY; PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER 1 b. 1420 CORTEZ AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORYADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JAMES CHU, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; DON AND KATHY STEUL, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER 1c. 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 (CONTINUED FROMFEBRUARY 28, 2011 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) Commissioner Auran 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 Vistica. Vice -Chair Yie called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 4-0-1-2 for Item 1a (Commissioner Yie recused, Commissioners Terrones and Cauchi absent) and 5-0-0-2 for Items lb and 1 c (Commissioners Terrones and Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:03 p.m. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS 2. 1155 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, SUITE G, ZONED C-2 — APPLICATION FOR PARKING VARIANCE FOR A NEW FOOD ESTABLISHMENT IN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (JOE ZHEN, APPLICANT; JULIA WAN, DESIGNER; GREEN BANKER LLC, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated March 14, 2011, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Nine (9) conditions were suggested for consideration. Questions of staff: Noted that multiple parking variances have been granted on this property; they keep accumulating. (Hurin — provided a history of approvals on the property.) Will the current request eliminate the prior condition of approval to require that Suites G and H be a bulk merchandise use? (Hurin — yes.) If the City adopted reduced parking space standards, could more spaces be created? (Hurin — a parking designer would need to review the parking layout to make a determination.) Vice -Chair Yie opened the public hearing. Joe Zhen, 4388 El Camino Real, Los Altos; represented the applicant: Provided photographs of the property showing parking usage for the Commission's review. Feels there are plenty of parking spaces available during the lunch hour. There is plenty of on -street parking on California Drive in the evening, in addition to spaces available on -site after the closure of other businesses on the property at 5 p.m. 2 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION —Approved Minutes March 14, 2011 Also referenced the availability of additional parking at public parking lot north of Broadway. Commission comments: ■ How many people in the restaurant at one time? (Zhen — no more than six customers at a time.) ■ Calculated that there could be up to 44 seats within the space; seems like the anticipated number of patrons is low. (Zhen — there are not a lot of people on Broadway during the noon hour.) ■ Most people would drive to this location; not certain that parking is adequate. (Zhen — can fully occupy the parking lot once other businesses are closed. The parking lot is less than one-half full during this time. There is on -street parking on Broadway and California Drive, as well as in the public lot north of Broadway.) ■ Noted that it is easy to buy a voucher for parking at the CalTrain parking lot across California Drive; would consider requiring approval of off -site parking arrangement for parking at that location. ■ Essentially the proposed business will require more than half of the parking beginning at 11 a.m.; how will parking be accommodated? (Zhen — parking is first come, first serve; there is a lot of on - street parking in the area as well.) ■ Concerned that the restaurant will generate a much more substantial need for parking than currently exists; will not likely be a problem at night, but could be a problem during the day. ■ Could be conditioned to require employees to park at a public parking lot. ■ The other businesses in the building need to have parking available as well. ■ Some of the bank customers pull into the lot to use the ATM; there is also another vacancy in the building. Difficult to support the request. Public comments: Andrew Peceimer, 1109 Clovelly Avenue; spoke: Could have the employees park off -site to preserve on -site parking. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: ■ The landlord is advertising the space as a restaurant space even though a variance is required; this is misleading. ■ There is no logical reason to consider approval of a variance. ■ Asked if a parking in -lieu fee could be collected? (Meeker — would not be appropriate in this instance given that there are no opportunities to construct public parking garages in the area.) ■ The issue at hand is whether or not there is adequate parking available in the area to support the use; a conditional use permit is not required for the restaurant use. ■ Condition approval with a requirement that employees park at an off -site location; then during the lunch hour there should be adequate parking available. ■ There is a hardship that there is no opportunity to provide additional parking on the site to accommodate the use; supports the request. ■ Asked if the other tenants were aware of the request? (Meeker/Hurin — the property owner was notified; the tenants were not. The property owner is responsible for providing notice to tenants.) ■ Would be valuable to notify the tenants of the proposal; could this be done? (Meeker — could provide that direction to staff, but would need to continue the item to accommodate the noticing.) ■ The tenants are a critical part of the discussion. 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION —Approved Minutes March 14, 2011 Vice -Chair Yie moved to continue the item to a future date, with direction to: provide notice of the request to tenants on the property, provide a professionally prepared parking study for the site, identify an off -site parking location for employees of the business, and investigate and provide information regarding the use of the second floor of the shopping center. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi. Discussion of motion: None. Vice -Chair Yie called for a voice vote on the motion to continue. The motion passed 6-0-0-1 (Commissioner Terrones absent). The Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 7:37 p.m. 3. 1601 ADRIAN ROAD, ZONED RR, AUTOMOBILE SALES AND SERVICE OVERLAY AREA — APPLICATION FOR A NON -AUTO RELATED SHOWROOM AND WAREHOUSE USE (TILE AND MARBLE) IN THE AUTOMOBILE SALES AND SERVICE OVERLAY AREA (DOGAN TEZDOGAN, TEZ MARBLE, APPLICANT; DEVINCENZI METAL PRODUCTS, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report dated March 11, 2011, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Six (6) conditions were suggested for consideration. Vice -Chair Yie opened the public hearing. Dogan Tezdogan, 4445 Jensen Street, Oakland and Andrew Peceimer, 1109 Clovelly Avenue; represented the applicant. ■ Provided a history of the prior tenancy of the property. ■ Were not aware that the use of the property was targeted for primarily auto -related uses. ■ Have been marketing the building for over a year, and have not been able to find an auto -related tenant for the property. ■ In reality, the auto -related approach for the area is not successful. ■ Another tile company is nearby, as well as Lumber Liquidators. ■ Will hire ten employees from the area. ■ Noted that there are actually 21 parking spaces on the property, not 15. ■ There is a large existing sign on the property. Public comments: None. Commission comments: Is a good use for the area given its proximity to similar uses. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. E CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION -Approved Minutes March 14, 2011 Commissioner Gaul moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: that the tile and marble showroom/warehouse shall be limited to 1,285 SF of office area, 1,905 SF of showroom area, 16,994 SF of warehouse area and 3,083 SF of storage area at 1601 Adrian Road, as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division and date stamped February 11, 2011; 2. that the tile and marble showroom/warehouse business may not be open for business except during the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week; 3. that the number of people on site at 1601 Adrian Road at any one time, including the owner, employees and customers shall not exceed 10 persons; 4. that the maximum number of employees, including the business owner, in 1601 Adrian Road shall be limited to 5 persons; 5. that any changes to the floor area, use, hours of operation, or number of employees which exceeds the maximums as stated in these conditions shall require an amendment to this conditional use permit; and 6. that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes, 2010 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica. Discussion of motion: The auto uses were anticipated in the long term; acknowledge that uses such as that proposed will come in and out of the area over time. In the long-term, the auto row concept is good, but not in demand at this time. Likes the application. Vice -Chair Yie called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-0-1 (Commissioner Terrones absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:46 p.m. Commissioner Lindstrom noted that he would recuse himself from participating in the discussion regarding Item 4 (1541 Eastmoor Road) since he has a potential business relationship with the property owner. He left the City Council Chambers. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 4. 1541 EASTMOOR ROAD, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION AND MAJOR RENOVATION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (J. DEAL ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; STEVEN PARIANI TR, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated March 14, 2011, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. 5 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION —Approved Minutes March 14, 2011 Questions of staff: None. Vice -Chair Yie opened the public comment period. Alison and Steve Pariani, 1541 Eastmoor Road; represented the applicant: Would like to do less than 25% window area in the dormer so that it doesn't encroach into the bathtub/shower area. Commission comments: ■ Complimented the design. ■ Could consider raising the roof pitch above the 30-foot height to add more character to the design. • In general a nice design; however, on the right side elevation, installation of a window in the gable would relate better to the other windows. (Pariani — reviewed the plans with neighbors; the neighbor to the right requested that their privacy be maintained. The window was removed to appease the neighbor. Most of the neighbors, 28 of 29, approved the plans.) ■ Agreed that the dormer without the window looks blank; but doesn't believe that the closet needs a window. (Pariani — the dormer is not actually viewed from the street, it is blocked by the adjacent home.) ■ Could some stone veneer be provided on the chimney to break up the finishing? (Pariani — could possibly be done.) ■ Suggested installing a longer window, up higher in both dormers in order to provide interest while still protecting the neighbor's privacy, and install obscured glass of some type. (Pariani — would likely still black -out the window in the closet in order to protecting clothing.) ■ Could install a non-functioning window that is covered on the interior. • Are removing a lot of the garage; appear to only be retaining a small portion of the garage as a place -holder; could have been designed with a four -foot setback. (Pariani — are attempting to retain enough rear -yard space. Would have required removal of much of the living room and kitchen wall. The second story is proposed on the opposite side, where a five-foot setback can be provided.) ■ Comfortable with the variance. Public comments: None. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Auran made a motion to place the item on the Consent Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi. Discussion of motion: None. Vice -Chair Yie called for a 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 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner Lindstrom recused, W CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION —Approved Minutes March 14, 2011 Commissioner Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:07 p.m. Commissioner Lindstrom returned to the dais. 5. 1561 WESTMOOR ROAD, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MARK ROBERTSON, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; BARRY CHEN AND FAY DU, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report dated March 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. Questions of staff: None. Mark Robertson, 918 East Grant Place; represented the applicant. Commission comments: ■ Requested clarification regarding window design that is to be provided. (Robertson — the windows are as drawn, and by the manufacturer identified.) ■ Will the exterior color scheme be changed? (Robertson — yes.) ■ Feels like the side elevation is somewhat abrupt, doesn't integrate into the house. Would like to see if this could be addressed. ■ Perhaps pull a gable toward the front entry to better integrate the design; could create an entry element due to the presence of the courtyard. ■ Was there any thought to changing the wrought -iron to wood? (Robertson — were initially planning to match the existing, but willing to consider such a change.) ■ The existing entry design is a void in the mass of the building; look at a better integration of this feature. ■ Consider reducing the variance requests. ■ There is potentially another location for the laundry room other than in the garage. ■ Identify the stair material. (Robertson — will be concrete covered with tile.) ■ Doesn't think that the wrought -iron railing compliments the design. Public comments: None. 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 Regular Action Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom. Discussion of motion: 7 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION —Approved Minutes March 14, 2011 Trusts the applicant to attempt to eliminate the variances and look at design solutions suggested. Vice -Chair Yie called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the RegularAction Calendar when plans have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-0-1 (Commissioner Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:20 p.m. Commissioner Vistica indicated that he would recuse himself from participating in the discussion regarding Item 6 (307 Channing Road) since he has a business relationship with the project designer. He left the City Council Chambers. 6. 307 CHANNING ROAD ROAD, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, REAR SETBACK VARIANCE AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JESSE GEURSE, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; JOE HOWARD, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report dated March 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. Questions of staff: None. Jesse Geurse, 405 Bayswater Avenue; represented the applicant. Client wants to retain the traditional style of the home. Commission comments: ■ Well done, looks like an original part of the design. ■ Clarified that all of the windows will be replaced with windows of the same design as the original windows. ■ Noted that the space for the water closet is tight; be certain that the space is constructed as designed. ■ Hopefully the construction of the project remains true to the design. ■ Will the garage doors be changed? (Geurse — not at this time.) ■ Asked if the dentil molding will remain? (Geurse — will remain.) ■ Clarified the increase in height from the existing roof ridge to the new roof ridge. (Geurse — roughly a five-foot increase.) Public comments: None. Additional applicant comments: CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION —Approved Minutes March 14, 2011 Reviewed the concerns from the neighbor that submitted a letter; and provided a written response for the Commission. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Auran made a motion to place the item on the Consent Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom. Discussion of motion: Noted that the need for the parking variance is an existing condition, and the other variance is due to the orientation of the lot. Vice -Chair Yie called for a 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 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner Vistica recused, Commissioner Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:27 p.m. Commissioner Vistica returned to the dais. X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS There were no Commissioner's Reports. XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Commission Communications: None. Actions from Regular City Council meeting of March 7, 2011: None. FYI: Peninsula Hospital Complaint Log — February, 2011. Accepted. XII. ADJOURNMENT Vice -Chair Yie adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jeff Lindstrom, Secretary E