Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes - 05.24.10 APPROVEDC CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION BURLINGAME APPROVED MINUTES Monday, May 24, 2010 — 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers — 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Terrones called the May 24, 2010, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:02 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cauchi, Gaul, Lindstrom, Terrones, Vistica (arrived at 7:03 p.m.) and Yie Absent: Commissioner Auran Staff Present: Community Development Director, William Meeker; Associate Planner, Erica Strohmeier; and Civil Engineer, Doug Bell III. MINUTES Commissioner Yie moved, seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom to approve the minutes of the May 10, 2010 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, with the following change: Page 6, Item 1 b, Discussion of Motion, first bullet, insert `of debris boxes" after "issue" in first line; Page 17, Item 7, Commission Comments, third bullet; insert "of the family room facing the yard" after "side" in the second sentence. Page 17, Item 7, Commission Comments, fifth bullet; insert "to help screen the mass of the addition" to the end of the second sentence. Motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner A uran absent). IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue and Randy Grange, 21 Dwight Road; spoke: ■ Commented regarding window designs; the Commission has expressed a preference for "simulated true divided -light" windows; it has been assumed that these windows would be wood. ■ People have been coming forward with requests that included vinyl -clad windows; not desirable due to environmental factors and durability. ■ The understanding has always been that the windows would be wood, not vinyl clad; though not specifically called -out; referenced development project at 1441 Balboa Avenue. ■ The project plans for 1441 Balboa Avenue noted "simulated true divided -light casement windows with wood trim"; the builder is intending to install vinyl -clad windows. ■ This subject should be referred to the Planning Commission subcommittee for discussion and recommendation to ensure that the Commission's intent is complied with. CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 24, 2010 Noted a post on "Burlingame Voice" regarding demolition of a house on Newlands Avenue showing a large piece of construction equipment shown on the driveway; need to revisit the driveway issue; nine and one-half foot wide driveways are not adequate. Noted that ninety-nine percent of new windows are clad, wood windows; they are not fully wood construction. 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. Chair Terrones asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. There were no requests. 1. 1269 CORTEZ AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND VARIANCE FOR INTERIOR ACCESS FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A NEW ATTACHED GARAGE (RANDY GRANGE, TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; NICK AND ERIKA PIANIM, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Commissioner Cauchi 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 Vistica. Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner Auran absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:17 p.m. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS 2. 1117 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ABASEMENT FOR ANEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (JING LING LO, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; LI SHENG FU, ARCHITECT) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 26, 2010 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) Reference staff report dated May 24, 2010, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifteen (15) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Terrones opened the public hearing. Julia Kong, 180 Martingale Drive, Fremont; represented the applicant. Commission comments: One of the window details shows a removable interior grid; the Commission wishes to have simulated true divided -light windows. 2 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 24, 2010 ■ On the first floor plan, is it possible to find another location for the fire department backflow device where it is not so visible? ■ The soils report was performed during a dryer period; be certain that the information regarding the groundwater table is accurate, particularly since it has been a wetter year. ■ Requested clarification regarding the window grids; are there removable grids on the interior and exterior? (Julia — there is also a grid on the exterior.) ■ Regarding the sump -pump; what type of noise attenuation will be provided to ensure that the noise does not disturb neighbors? The pump will need to be in an enclosure of some sort. ■ Show the location of the sewage ejector pump. Public comments: None. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: Address the location of the sewer ejector pump, backflow preventer, the sump pump location and sound attenuation, in addition to clarification of the window design as an FYI. 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 May 12, 2010, sheets A-1 through A-7, Landscape Plan and property survey; 2. that revisions to the project plans showing the location of the sewer ejector pump, the relocation of the backflow preventer to a less visible location, the location and sound attenuation measures for the sump pump, and clarification of the design of the windows (they shall be of a simulated true divided light design, not vinyl clad) shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission as an FYI item prior to issuance of a building permit; 3. 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); 4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 5. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 10, 2010, and December 23, 2009 memos, the City Engineer's January 11, 2010 memo, the Fire Marshal's January 4, 2010 memo, the City Arborist's January 4, 2010 and February 11, 2010 memos, and the NPDES Coordinator's December 28, 2009 memo shall be met; 6. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be placed upon the private property, if feasible; 7. 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; 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 24, 2010 8. 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; 9. 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; 10. 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; 11. 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; 12. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2007 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 13. 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; 14. 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; 15. 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 16. 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 Gaul. 121 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 24, 2010 Discussion of motion: None. Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner Auran absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:30 p.m. 3. 1744 ROLLINS ROAD, ZONED RR —APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCES FOR A COMMERCIAL RECREATION FACILITY (INDOOR TRAMPOLINE AND DODGE BALL) (TIM AND KELLY MANNING, APPLICANTS; WINGES ARCHITECTS, ARCHITECT; MP BUILDING INVESTMENTS. LLC. PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report dated May 24, 2010, with attachments. Associate Planner Stroh meier presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Ten (10) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Terrones opened the public hearing. He noted that he and Commissioner Vistica met at the site today and had the opportunity to discuss the project with the applicant. Jerry Winges, 1290 Howard Avenue; represented the applicant. ■ Noted that his May 10, 2010 letter details all responses to Commission comments. ■ Have added bicycle parking; will prepare a landscape plan for the entire site; and will completely paint the building. ■ Mechanical equipment will be shielded. ■ The entire site will be cleaned up. ■ With respect to the circulation pattern; it is felt that if someone wishes to re-enter the property if parking is not immediately found, you can only do so if movements are in a clock -wise direction. The proposed circulation pattern is also felt to be more compatible with the neighboring use. ■ Parking has not been moved to the rear of the property in order to preserve an area suitable for an outside waiting area at some point in the future. Is also felt to be greener to keep parking near the street to reduce the amount of paving on the property. Commission comments: ■ What will happen on the north side of the building; there appears to be a gravel strip at that area that could be more landscaping or at least pervious materials. (Winges — could landscape in the area not required for exiting, but currently propose to keep it paved.) ■ Would like to see a commitment that the outdoor area at the rear of the property to be a useable area included in the landscape plan; also ensure that access is possible without having to squeeze through parking spaces; willing to reduce parking by one space to allow this. The benefit to providing the area at the rear is that it will not be affected by the drive aisles. ■ Can see the logic to the circulation pattern. ■ Nice project. ■ Where did the "Scarlet Oaks" come from; from the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan? (Winges — recommended by the City Arborist.) ■ Suggested having proper signage at both the drive entrance and drive exit to eliminate confusion and assist people driving onto the site. ■ How is access from the building to the landscape area to the rear achieved? (Winges — all entry and exit is from the front of the property for security reasons.) 5 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 24, 2010 ■ Is it possible to have a limited -term loading zone from Rollins Road? (Winges — would be nice; can pursue.) ■ How soon will the facility be open? (Winges — by the end of the year.) ■ Is there a possibility to create a drop-off area within the site, or create a longer term drop-off space on Rollins Road? Concerned about congestion from drop-off activity. Drop-off parking on Rollins Road would require approval of the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission. (Winges — anything that is done will increase the amount of asphalt on the site. Could place time limits elsewhere along Rollins Road to permit longer -term drop-off.) ■ Can handicapped parking be placed on Rollins Road? (Terrones/Meeker — no, required to be on the property; cannot count on -street parking towards parking requirements.) ■ Would it be possible to have a drop-off area designed within the landscaped area in the front of the building? (Winges — would reduce the landscaped area further, may require a landscape Variance.) ■ Can a drop-off area on Rollins Road be a condition of the project? (Meeker — can include a condition requesting the applicant to seek approval of an area from the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission; but cannot make it a requirement since the decision is not within the Planning Commission's purview.) ■ Encouraged improvement in access to the landscaped area at the rear of the site in order to improve its usability. ■ Likes the idea of creating a nicer landscaped area at the rear of the building; will set a new pattern that may promote more landscaping on other sites in the area. ■ If the parking was pushed to the rear; could the landscaped area be placed closer to the middle of the property? (Winges — would place people in the midst of the traffic circulation, plus not as aesthetic. Would also add to the amount of paving on the property.) Public comments: Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue and Ray Jungwirth (Prime Time Athletic Club), 1730 Rollins Road; spoke: ■ Appreciated the open space area. ■ Moving the open space to an area in the center of the parking lot would not be desirable. ■ Doesn't recall that the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan anticipated the recreational uses in the area; but has become an amenity in the community. ■ The Millbrae Parks and Recreation Department rents some of the space within this area for activities. ■ Supports the use in general; but is concerned regarding persons attending aerobic classes at the location (as advertised in the "Daily Journal") would not likely carpool. To allow the Parking Variance is a concern; could adversely impact neighboring businesses. Prime Time sought a one - space parking space Variance for a day-care center previously, but was denied. Additional Applicant comments: Kelly Manning, 1744 Rollins Road; spoke: The aerobics classes are offered only three times per week, and are quite different from the classes offered by Prime Time; is to be limited and geared to parents and their children. The activities are limited to certain times and are within the smallest area; and fall within the overall occupancy for the facility. Additional Commission comments: W CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 24, 2010 ■ How many employees are on -site at any given time? (Winges — the parking study took into account employee parking and is based upon the experience of the same use at other locations. The parking proposed exceeds the number of spaces suggested by the parking study.) ■ Sensitive to the fact that a large Variance is requested; also that with such a large facility could increase traffic in the area. ■ Could some parallel parking spaces be provided at the rear for use of employees? (Winges — access to the area is not possible from a public right-of-way. The type of facility does not fall into a category addressed by the City's parking standards; this is why a parking study was performed.) ■ Might it be possible to design the landscaping so that it is pushed over to the far right of the landscaped area to provide a potential future area for drive -through to the rear of the building for additional parking and circulation? (Winges — that area is somewhat of a land bank that could be used for additional parking. Can design the landscaping to ensure that this can be done at some point in the future.) There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Further Commission comments: ■ Asked if there is a means of monitoring the use of the property and to re -visit parking if necessary? (Meeker— attaching a monitoring condition is problematic, but the City always has the ability to call the item up for review if problems do occur. Must consider the facts presented to the Commission at the hearing and act accordingly.) ■ Based upon observation of how this type of use operates, does not see a likelihood of parking problems; though can seen the potential for circulation problems, but believes it will work itself out. ■ In favor of the project; likes what the area has become. ■ Anxious to have the landscape plan be brought back to the Commission for review; look at the functionality of the area. ■ Landscaping should also be considered in the area to the north of the building to reduce asphalt in that area. ■ Require a report on the functioning on the parking facilities one-year following opening of the business. Commissioner Cauchi moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions: that the indoor trampoline facility shall be limited to 22,420 SF of commercial recreation space within the existing 30,596 SF commercial building at 1744 Rollins Road, as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division and date stamped May 11, 2010, sheets A1.1 and A3.1 and date stamped April 16, 2010, sheets T-0, A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, A4.1 and Boundary and Topographic Survey; 2. that the landscape plan for the facility, including treatment of the outdoor space at the rear of the site, including access to the area, shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval as an FYI, prior to issuance of building permits for project construction; 3. that the applicant shall seek approval of a drop-off zone on Rollins Road from the City's Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission, and if approved, shall implement the drop-off zone as a condition of this permit. Failure to receive approval of the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission shall not invalidate the approvals granted herein by the Planning Commission; 7 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 24, 2010 4. that the functioning of the parking on the property shall be monitored for a period of one-year from the date the business is opened, with a report back to the Planning Commission as an FYI, providing an assessment of the effectiveness of the parking plan, including any complaints received regarding parking associated with the business' operation; 5. that the existing and proposed landscaping shall be installed and maintained as shown on the Site Plan, date stamped May 11, 2010, and that all proposed street trees along Rollins Road shall be irrigated by a bubbler irrigation system; 6. that the Conditional Use Permit and Parking Variances shall apply only to an indoor trampoline facility and shall become void if the indoor trampoline facility ceases, is replaced by a permitted use, is ever expanded, demolished or destroyed by catastrophe or natural disaster or for replacement; 7. that all activities associated with the indoor trampoline facility shall occur indoor only; no portion of the exterior of the site shall be used for activities associated with the indoor trampoline facility; the outdoor open space at the rear of the site shall be used only for passive use, no active recreational activities shall be permitted within this area; 8. that the indoor trampoline facility shall only be open seven days a week from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m., with a maximum of two full-time employees and eleven part-time employees and a maximum of 150 people on -site at any one time, including the owner, employees and customers; 9. that any changes to the floor area, use, or hours of operation which exceeds the maximums as stated in these conditions shall require an amendment to this Conditional Use Permit; 10. that the conditions of the Traffic Engineer's March 4, 2010 memo, the City Engineer's December 22, 2009 memo, Chief Building Official's April 15, 2010, March 4, 2010 and December 23, 2009 memos, the Parks Supervisor's March 19, 2010 and January 4, 2010 memos, the Fire Marshal's March 4, 2010 and December 23, 2009 memos, and the NPDES Coordinator's December 22, 2009 memo shall be met; 11. that interior demolition or removal of the existing structures 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; 12. 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; and 13. that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes, 2007 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom. Discussion of motion: Condition 4 will need to be modified to allow passive, and no organized recreational uses. Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner M CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 24, 2010 Auran absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:22 p.m. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 2525 ADELINE DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, FLOOR AREA RATIO VARIANCE AND PARKING VARIANCES FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (ADRIAN HURIN, CHALK LINE DETAIL, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; AND ALFRED AND NANCY JOE. PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER Chair Terrones noted that the item will be continued to June 14, 2010 due to a noticing error. Commissioner Cauchi made a motion to continue the item to June 14, 2010. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Yie. Discussion of motion: None. Chair Terrones called for a vote on the motion to continue the item. The motion passed on a voice vote 6- 0-1 (Commissioner Auran absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:23 p.m. X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS There were no Commissioner's Reports. XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Commission Communications: Review of current policy for placement of construction debris boxes: Commission comments: Community Development Director Meeker provided an overview of the current Public Works Department policy regarding debris boxes. Commission comments: ■ Noted that the requirement for an encroachment permit is not consistently required, nor is a fee collected. No protection is required under the debris box. (Meeker — can check to determine why policy isn't being administered.) ■ If larger debris boxes are ordered, then the deposit may not be large enough. ■ Could force more cars on the street during construction, but better than having the debris boxes on the street. ■ Suggested "piggy -backing" implementation of the debris box policy on top of the current recycling deposit requirement. Commission action: E CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 24, 2010 Staff was directed to immediately include the following condition as a "standard" condition of all permits: "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." Community Development Director indicated that staff would continue to work with the Public Works Department and the Building Division to ascertain why the Public Works Department's policy is not uniformly applied; and to determine a means of ensuring that the policy is consistently applied in the future. The results of these discussions will be reported to the Planning Commission at a future date. Actions from Regular City Council meeting of May 17, 2010: None. FYI: 1401 Grove Avenue — review of required changes to a previously approved Design Review project: Accepted. XII. ADJOURNMENT Chair Terrones adjourned the meeting at 8:34 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sandra Yie, Secretary 10