HomeMy WebLinkAbout Min - PC - 2011.11.14CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
BURLIrvGAME APPROVED MINUTES
Monday, November 14, 2011 — 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers — 501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, California
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice -Chair Gaul called the November 14, 2011, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at
7:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Auran, Terrones, Vistica, Lindstrom and Gaul
Absent: Commissioners Yie and Cauchi
Staff Present: Community Development Director, William Meeker; Associate Planner Erica Strohmeier; and
City Attorney, Gus Guinan
III. MINUTES
Commissioner Terrones moved, seconded by Commissioner Auran to approve the minutes of the October
24, 2011 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, with the following change:
Page 12, "Discussion of motion" first bullet, revised to read: "Believes there could be ways to revise
the project to make it work with the design guidelines without major reconfiguration. "
Motion passed 4-0-2-1 (Commissioners Yie and Cauchi absent, Commissioner Vistica abstained).
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There were no changes to the agenda.
V. FROM THE FLOOR
No one spoke from the floor.
VI. STUDY ITEMS
Commissioner Vistica indicated that he would recuse himself from the discussion regarding Agenda Item 1
(261 California Drive) since he has an unresolved business matter with the property owner.
1. 261 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED HMU - APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
YOGA, PILATES AND DANCE BUSINESS WITH RETAIL SALES (COMMERCIAL RECREATION USE)
(DEANA LLOYD, APPLICANT; HERA LLC, PROPERTY OWNER; AND SAMONSKY + POMETTA
ARCHITECTS, LLP, ARCHITECT) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Community Development Director Meeker presented a summary of the staff report, dated November 14,
2011.
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
Commission comments:
■ Provide some indication of what a typical customer brings with them to a session. Provide some
indication of how customers may arrive at the site.
■ Where is the clientele to be coming from; Burlingame or outside the area?
■ Use is complementary to the area.
■ Would like to see if something can be done with the rear door to the business to make it more
appealing to users. (Meeker— is problematic given the right-of-way extends to the building wall. The
door at the rear cannot be used as a required entry or exit.)
■ Noted that there have been discussions regarding enhancing the appearance and utility of Hatch
Lane in the future.
■ Could maybe provide artwork or a mural on the rear of the building.
■ Does this open the opportunity for another restaurant? (Strohmeier — no.)
This item was set for the regular Action Calendar when all the information has been submitted and
reviewed by the Planning Department. This item concluded at 7:15 p.m.
2. 1200 HOWARD AVENUE, SUITE 106, ZONED HMU —APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A NEW FOOD ESTABLISHMENT IN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL
BUILDING (DAVID J. ELLIOTT, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; ICHINYOSHA INTERNATIONAL USA
INC., PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Community Development Director Meeker presented a summary of the staff report, dated November 14,
2011.
Commission comments:
■ Can the number of restaurants be expanded in the area? (Meeker — the property is not in the
former "Sub -Area A". Food service uses are allowed in the Howard Avenue Mixed -Use zone
without a maximum cap.)
■ How will signage be handled? (Meeker — will be dealt with administratively, is not part of the
application.)
■ Subway is tote -able food — is encouraged, though somewhat tentative because of the variance
application and the access to the property.
■ Need to provide a better idea of how customers/pedestrians will access the location.
■ Asked the applicant to provide adequate justification for the variance request.
■ Would like to see how waste will be handled — needs to be addressed adequately.
■ Would like to see a floor plan of the entire first floor— how does the proposed business interact with
other businesses on the same level particularly given the shared restroom.
■ Provide a more detailed site plan and building elevation.
■ Could the two parking spaces on the alley be eliminated?
■ Encouraged development of some sort of landscaping at the front of the building — develop as a
visual cue from the street of the presence of the business, and to serve as an area for customers to
gather to eat their meal.
This item was set for the regular Action Calendar when all the information has been submitted and
reviewed by the Planning Department. This item concluded at 7:23 p.m.
3. 1626 ROLLINS ROAD, ZONED RR —APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A
LUXURY MOTOR COACH SERVICE (MOTOR COACH OPERATION, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES AND
2
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
VEHICLE INSPECTIONS) (DWAYNE KENNEDY, APPLICANT; SARAH GRONQUIST, LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT; DIANE L. SCHILDBACH TR ET AL AND JANET M. OFFENSEND TR ET AL, PROPERTY
OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
This application was withdrawn by the property owner (in writing) prior to the meeting.
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.
There were no Consent Calendar items for discussion.
VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
4. 1526 LOS ALTOS DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND HILLSIDE AREA
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED
GARAGE (JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; TONY LEUNG,
PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated November 14, 2011, with attachments. Community Development Director
Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Seventeen (17) conditions were
suggested for consideration.
Questions of staff:
None.
Vice -Chair Gaul opened the public hearing.
James Chu represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
Noted that the revised plans were not provided in the packet. (Meeker — indicated that the
Commission cannot proceed with consideration of the request absent the plans.)
Indicated that the Commissioners should pay particular attention to the project massing
comparisons prior to discussing the item on the next agenda.
Public comments:
None.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Terrones moved to continue the request until the meeting of November 28, 2011 since the
latest project plans had not been provided to the Planning Commission.
The motion was seconded by Commission Auran.
3
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
Discussion of motion:
None.
Vice -Chair Gaul called for a voice vote on the motion to continue. The motion passed 5-0-2-0
(Commissioners Yie and Cauchi absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not
appealable. This item concluded at 7:30 p.m.
5. 270 EAST LANE, ZONED MMU — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO PARKING VARIANCE FOR
CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONVERSION OF USE FROM AUTO REPAIR TO OFFICE
TO INCLUDE A NEW MEZZANINE ADDITION (GARY COHN, CA DEVELOPMENT, APPLICANT AND
PROPERTY OWNER; BR COMMERCIAL, DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated November 14, 2011, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier
presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Seven (7) conditions were suggested for
consideration.
Questions of staff:
None.
Vice -Chair Gaul opened the public hearing.
Gary Cohn, 1408 Chapin Avenue and Josh McFarland, CEO of TellApart, 1409 Chapin Avenue;
represented the applicant:
■ The business has just under 25 employees.
■ Employees were polled — everyone wants the business to stay in Burlingame.
■ Access to CalTrain is crucial for employees — over one-half of employees take the train to work —
one-third of the employees don't own a car.
■ Don't anticipate outgrowing the tandem parking on the roof.
■ Addition of a mezzanine level is crucial to the business's use of the space — this area will be a
common use space, not office space.
Commission comments:
■ Will TellApart be taking over the entire building? (McFarland — initially 8,000 square feet, but will be
able to occupy other portions of the building as the business grows.)
■ Will it be possible to assign tenant spaces with the major tenant to ensure that that spaces work
together? (Cohn — All parking will be assigned. There will be a board containing keys that allow
access to cars in shared spaces. So many people use the train that the parking will likely never fill
up.)
■ Very important that the spaces be assigned — want to be certain that it works out well — believes the
tenant can make it work well.
■ CalTrain is a civilized means of getting to work.
■ The use will bring more people to Burlingame — means more shoppers, etc. CalTrain may even
provide better funding for the station.
■ Assumes that the business will not have rigid work hours — could be very congested if everyone
arrives at the same time. (McFarland — confirmed the flexible work hours.)
Iv
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
Confirm that the rooftop can support the parking. (Cohn — has been reviewed by a structural
engineer and can support the load.)
Public comments:
None.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Additional commission comments:
Continues to be supportive of the application.
Commissioner Terrones 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 November 8, 2011, Site Plan, Building Elevations, Floor Plan and Parking Plan, and that
any changes to the floor area, use or parking which exceeds the maximums as stated in these
conditions shall require an amendment to this Parking Variance;
2. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's November 8, 2011, November 7, 2011 and
October 18, 2011 memos, the City Engineer's May 26, 2011 memo, the Parks Supervisor's
November 4, 2011 memo, the Fire Marshall's October 24, 2011 memo and the NPDES Coordinators
October 24, 2011 memo shall be met;
3. that a bike rack shall be provided on the property;
4. 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;
5. 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;
6. that prior to issuance of a building permit for any construction on the building, 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; and
7. 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 motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica.
Discussion of motion:
Fully supportive, particularly given the proximity to the train station.
5
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
Vice -Chair Gaul called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-2-0
(Commissioners Yie and Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:50
p.m.
6. 1409 ROLLINS ROAD, ZONED RR — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FORCHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AUTOMOBILE RENTAL BUSINESS AND
VARIANCES FOR FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK TO A NEWLY CONSTRUCTED AWNING (GENESIS
CHEN, PAYLESS CAR RENTAL, APPLICANT; HARVEY HACKER ARCHITECTS, ARCHITECT;
HOWARD HONERLAH. PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated November 14, 2011, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier
presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Twelve (12) conditions were suggested for
consideration.
Questions of staff:
Clarified the dimensions of the awning.
Asked who owns the vehicles parked on the street? There is no confirmation who owns the
vehicles. Counted roughly 20 vehicles — this is a problem.
Vice -Chair Gaul opened the public hearing.
Robert Dodd, 1409 Rollins Road and Genesis Chen, 734 San Bruno Avenue East, San Bruno; represented
the applicant.
■ The vehicles parked on the street are not owned by the applicant — they are rental vehicles, but do
not belong to the applicant.
■ The awning was installed because the employees work outside; there is a lot of rain and a good
work environment was desirable.
■ Aesthetically, the awning has helped the appearance of the property. Would be an impact to the
employees if it must be removed.
■ The awning's location does not impact customers that come and go.
■ A lot of local customers use the facility.
■ Could probably fit double the cars that Payless is requesting upon the property.
Commission comments:
■ Not clear what is the current request — are they planning on off-loading on the street? (Dodd — no.
Will do off-loading at their other location.)
■ The site plan shows 90 fleet vehicles, employee parking and a "reserve" area — where will the
vehicles used for picking up customers be parked? (Dodd — are included within the 90 vehicles.)
■ If all activity can be contained on site, could support the request as long as it is not impacting the
neighborhood.
■ With respect to the variance; there was an error in not having the plans being routed to the Planning
Division — has a tendency to accept as an "existing condition". It does not impact the neighbors.
■ Observed that the site seemed pretty congested with around 70 vehicles on the property observed
today. 90 vehicles may be too much for the site. (Dodd — can dovetail with the other site and
reduce impacts. There are times during the year when an off -site location is necessary. Busy
0
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
during the summer months. There are only certain times during the week that the additional spaces
will even be necessary.)
Concerned that the use was expanded previously and that the conditions of approval will not be
complied with.
If the other application isn't approved, what will happen? (Dodd — will need to find another location
— want to reduce the commuter time.)
Public comments:
None.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Additional commission comments:
■ The intensification of use will be owner driven — there will only be as many cars on the site as is
manageable.
■ Must anticipate whether or not the cars will overflow into the street — need to be aware that there
will be problems if they overflow to the street.
■ If they can remain contained on this site as much as possible, it can benefit the neighborhood.
■ The awning is not an impact on the neighbors — the applicant made a good faith effort to secure
proper approvals for the awning.
■ Can support the application given that the applicant must ensure that all activities occur on the site.
■ Concerned that vehicles are stacked too deep and makes it difficult to maneuver vehicles on the
site. Feels 90 vehicles may be too many for the site.
■ Doesn't see how the increase in the number of vehicles can work effectively.
■ Noted that will need to be monitored (Meeker — will be monitored by Code Enforcement staff and
brought back if problems occur.)
■ Feels that there is a potential for the applicant to come back and seek an additional expansion.
There could be some form of mechanized parking approach, or structure that could be used to
resolve potential problems.
■ Concerned about vehicles flowing onto the street. Doesn't want to see the site unused.
■ This is a complimentary use to the airport.
■ The following application for 1616 Rollins Road would provide additional parking for this use.
■ Need to ensure continued attention by Code Enforcement and the Police.
Commissioner Auran 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 September 2, 2011, Site Plan, and date stamped January 28, 2011, 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 90 vehicles; all
fleet vehicles, employee and customers shall park on -site at 1409 Rollins Road; there shall be no
7
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
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 90 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 68 90 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 if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the Front and Side
Setback Variances, as well as any other exceptions to the code granted here will become void;
10. 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;
11. that the conditions of the City Engineer's memo of February 11, 2002 shall be met; and
12. 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 Terrones.
Discussion of motion:
None.
Vice -Chair Gaul called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-2-0
(Commissioners Yie and Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:16
p. M.
7. 1616 ROLLINS ROAD, ZONED RR — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO AMEND ALL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO PARKING IN THE DRAINAGE
RIGHT-OF-WAY AT 1616 ROLLINS ROAD DUE TO A CHANGE FROM AN OVERFLOW PARKING LOT
FOR AN AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP TO AN OVERFLOW PARKING LOT FOR AN AUTOMOBILE
RENTAL BUSINESS (GENESIS CHEN, PAYLESS CAR RENTAL, APPLICANT; DAVIS LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated November 14, 2011, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier
presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Ten (10) conditions were suggested for
consideration.
Questions of staff:
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
Noted that there was no updated site plan. (Strohmeier— confirmed that the site would be used as
before — no changes.)
There is a gate that appears to open up to the BMW portion of the site — it sounds like BMW may be
using this gate for access.
Vice -Chair Gaul opened the public hearing.
Robert Dodd, 1409 Rollins Road and Genesis Chen, 734 San Bruno Avenue East, San Bruno; represented
the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Parking within the easement was previously approved — there is potential for Payless to be a better
neighbor than others — is it possible to have vehicles dropped off only at night and on week -ends?
(Dodd — yes.)
■ Vehicles would be taken between the two sites; could this activity be programmed to occur at off -
hours? (Dodd — possible, but is based upon demand.)
■ Is three employees the maximum on site? (Dodd — typically there is no one there, except when
vehicles are being retrieved.)
■ Noted that only operational vehicles can be present on the site.
■ Would like to see a revised site -plan to clarify ingress, egress, etc.
■ There ought to be gate to control where vehicles may be parked so that they don't flow onto the site
beyond 1616 Rollins Road. Need to create a line of demarcation by installing a gate. (Stohmeier—
would require a conditional use permit to install additional fencing in the area.)
Public comments:
Joseph DiMaio, 1616 Rollins Road; Cheryl Young, Community Gatepath, 1700 Trousdale Boulevard; and
Tom Chakos, Timpac, Inc., 1600 Rollins Road; spoke:
■ Referenced letter submitted to the Commission.
■ No objections to the application as long as the hours are limited as discussed by the Commission —
evenings and week -ends only.
■ Have objections if the lot is accessed during peak hours — would endanger people in the area.
■ Hours for other tenants are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Activities of the Community Gatepath tenant are
primarily in the front of the building, but people do access busses and transportation at the rear of
the site. Not a problem if not occurring during normal business hours.
■ Community Gatepath has over 40 developmentally disabled persons at the site. Concerned about
additional traffic on site. Pick-up and drop-off from busses occurs on site between 8:00 am and
9:00 am in the mornings and 3:00 pm to 5:30 pm in the evenings. Also concerned about traffic
conflicts with the resale shop for the enterprise.
■ Concerned about the number of vehicles coming in and out of the property that may conflict with
traffic on the prescriptive easement. The use of the area for parking is acceptable, but concerned
about traffic flow.
■ Clarified the joint use of the easement between 1600 Rollins Road and 1610 Rollins Road — adding
more traffic during peak hours will be problematic.
■ Concerned about conflicts with Community Gatepath participants.
Additional applicant Comments:
E
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
Can work to ensure that most of the traffic occurs during non -peak hours — can schedule carriers
during non -peak hours, but must be able to have access during any time of day for vehicles.
(Commissioner — will need to continue for additional information, and a better site plan, and to
address neighbors' concerns. Be specific regarding activities that may occur during the day — will
fleets of cars be moved during the day?)
Can easily restrict the hours for car carriers. Can devise conditions that can work for all parties.
Additional public comments by Tom Chakos:
Clarify how many trips per day will occur from the site.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Terrones moved to continue the request with direction to the applicant as outlined in the
Commission's discussion.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gaul.
Discussion of motion:
None.
Vice -Chair Gaul called for a voice vote on the motion to continue. The motion passed 5-0-2-0
(Commissioners Yie and Cauchi absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not
appealable. This item concluded at 8:50 p.m.
IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS
8. 819 MITTEN ROAD, ZONED IB — APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR AN
ADDITION AND CHANGES TO THE FAQADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (NOEMI K.
AVRAM, AIA, GUMBINGERAVRAM ARCHITECTS, INC., APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; FRIEDEBERG
FAMILY 2002 TRUST, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated November 14, 2011, with attachments. Associate Planner Erica Strohmeier
briefly presented the project description.
Questions of staff:
None.
Vice -Chair Gaul opened the public comment period.
Noemi Avram, 60 East Third Avenue, San Mateo and Dan Friedeberg, 1350 Bayshore Highway;
represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
Is a nice facelift — the architecture is handsome.
10
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
■ The approach from Mitten works well to draw pedestrians. Suggested revisiting the entry approach
from the parking lot area — perhaps celebrate the entry a bit more and make the landscaping work a
bit better with the people walking through the area. (Avram — the clients will be parked at the front
of the property. Friedeberg — most people are consulted via phone; there are few people that
actually visit the site.) Ensure a nice experience for people walking from the parking area.
■ Since there are extra parking stalls, is it possible to remove a couple of stalls to create planting
islands in the parking lot? (Friedeberg — currently a multi -tenant building; the firm will actually
occupy very little parking.)
■ Could also sacrifice parking spaces to create an outdoor seating area that could be used by
employees or by the cafe use on the property.
■ Noted that the existing ground cover is gone — encouraged opening up the area a bit more to the
Hampton Inn parking lot and provide more attractive landscaping in the area.
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 Terrones.
Discussion of motion:
None.
Vice -Chair Gaul 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 5-0-2-0 (Commissioners Cauchi and
Yie absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at
9: 07 p.m.
X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
There were no Commissioner's Reports.
XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Commission Communications:
None.
Actions from Regular City Council meeting of November 7, 2011:
None.
FYI: 1116 Drake Avenue — review of requested changes to a previously approved Design
Review Project:
Accepted.
11
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes November 14, 2011
FYI: 310 Pepper Avenue— review of requested changes to a previously approved Design
Review Project:
■ Accepted.
FYI: 8 Vista Lane — review of requested changes to a previously approved Design Review
Project:
Accepted.
FYI: Peninsula Hospital Construction Project Update:
Accepted.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Vice -Chair Gaul adjourned the meeting at 9:08 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Tim Auran, Secretary
12