The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Minutes - 11.08.10 APPROVEDAv I � �X" % CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION BURLINGAME APPROVED MINUTES Monday, November 8, 2010 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers — 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Vistica called the November 8, 2010, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:03 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Gaul, Lindstrom, Terrones, Vistica and Yie Absent: Commissioner 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 A uran to approve the minutes of the October 25, 2010 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, with the following change: ■ Page 6, bottom of page (vote on motion to deny without prejudice); replace "...vote on the motion to approve" with "...vote on the motion to deny without prejudice". Motion passed 4-0-2-1 (Commissioners Vistica and Yie abstaining, Commissioner Cauchi absent). IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR Angela Valles, 1437 Balboa Avenue and Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; spoke: ■ Encouraged the owners of 1441 Balboa Avenue and 1445 Balboa Avenue to reach an agreement regarding the common fence between properties without attorneys. ■ Requested that the FYI for 1441 Balboa Avenue be scheduled for a full public hearing. ■ The common hedge between 1441 Balboa Avenue and 1445 Balboa Avenue has been removed, the applicant has violated the terms of the agreement with the Commission. ■ The applicant failed to bring the item forward as an FYI before the hedge removal. VI. STUDY ITEMS 1. 370 LANG ROAD, ZONED IB — APPLICATION FOR VARIANCES FOR FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK FOR NEW CANOPIES ON AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (RANDY GRANGE, TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; 370 LANG ROAD LLC, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 8, 2010 Community Development Director Meeker presented a summary of the staff report, dated November 8, 2010. Commission comments: ■ Excited about the application; provided good justification for the variances. ■ Provide more information regarding the purpose of the steel panels (sun screening?). ■ Is there a color scheme in mind for the building? ■ Need to "celebrate" the approach being used for this building. ■ The property fronts on the freeway, it should be subject to different requirements from the typical setbacks applied to the area; the variances are justified. 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 7:14 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. Chair Vistica asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. There were no requests. 2a. 1325 LAGUNA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR ASECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (IAN F. REAM, IFR DESIGN STUDIO, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; KEVIN F. AND ALISON V. LEMIRE, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN 2b. 1440 CHAPIN AVENUE, SUITE 200, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA B-1, BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR EXPANSION OF A REAL ESTATE BUSINESS (ALAIN PINEL REALTORS, APPLICANT; SJ SUNG & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT; TRISH MACLEAN/CORTINA INVESTMENTS, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER Commissioner Terrones 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 Lindstrom. Chair Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 4-0-1-2 (Commissioner Cauchi absent, Commissioners Vistica and Yie abstaining) for Item 2a and 6-0-1 for Item 2b (Commissioner Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:17pm. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS 3. 2012 CLARICE LANE, ZONED R-3 — APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE FOR REAR SETBACK TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SECOND STORY DECK (PHIL ACKER, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; TLC CONSTRUCTION, DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated November 8, 2010, with attachments. Community Development Director 2 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 8, 2010 Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Six (6) conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission questions: Did the existing deck comply with setbacks at the time it was built? (Meeker — considered to be legal non -conforming, so presumably it complied with standards in place at the time.) Chair Vistica opened the public hearing. No one was present to represent the applicant. Public comments: None. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Lindstrom 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 1, 2010, sheet A-1 and that any changes to the footprint, location or configuration of the second story deck shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that the conditions of the Building Official's, City Engineer's and Fire Marshal's November 1, 2010 memos, and the Parks Supervisor's and NPDES Coordinator's November 2, 2010 memos shall be met; 3. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the rear setback variance, as well as any other exceptions to the code granted here, will become void; 4. 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; 5. 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 6. 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 motion was seconded by Commissioner Terrones. Discussion of motion: There will be no impact from building the deck at its original location. Will be built to current building code standards. 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 8, 2010 Chair Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:24 p.m. Commissioner Auran noted that he would recuse himself from the discussion for Item 4 (303 Primrose Road) since he has a business relationship with the property owner. He left the City Council Chambers. 4. 303 PRIMROSE ROAD, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA A, BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA - APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR CHANGES TO THE FRONT FAQADE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL STOREFRONT (ELIAS JWEINAT, APPLICANT; JONATHAN WARD, CHESTNUT COMPANY, ARCHITECT; AND UMLAND TRUST, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated November 8, 2010, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Ten (10) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Vistica opened the public hearing. Elias Jweinat, 303 Primrose Road and Jonathan Ward, 3030 Bridgeway, Sausalito; represented the applicant: Provided samples of the materials to be used in the construction. Haven't yet resolved the restroom issue; is continuing to work with the Chief Building Official. May need to incorporate the restroom space into the tenant space. Commission comments: Asked why the copper color finish was selected? (Ward — Was the Commission's direction.) Public comments: None. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Gaul 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 September 17, 2010, sheets A-1 through A-3; and that the color of the aluminum storefront shall be "Classic Copper" as shown on the color board, date stamped October 25, 2010; 2. 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; 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 the conditions of the Chief Building Official's July 30 and September 17, 2010, memos, the City Engineer's August 6, 2010, memo, the Parks Supervisor's August 2, 2010 memo, the Fire Marshal's August 2, 2010, memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's July 29, 2010, memo shall be met; M CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 8, 2010 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 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; 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, 2007 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 10. 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 Vistica. Discussion of motion: None. Chair Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-1-1. (Commissioner Cauchi absent, Commissioner Auran recused). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:34 p.m. Commissioner Auran returned to the dais. Commissioner Terrones indicated that he would recuse himself from the discussion of Item 5 (310 Pepper Avenue) since he has a business relationship with the applicant. He left the City Council Chambers. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 5. 310 PEPPER AVENUE, ZONED R-1- APPLICATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING, DESIGN REVIEW,_ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LOCATION OF GARAGE, SPECIAL PERMITS FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND FOR A BASEMENT WITH AN INTERIOR CEILING HEIGHT 5 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 8, 2010 GREATER THAN 6'-6" AND VARIANCES FOR FRONT SETBACK TO DETACHED GARAGE, FRONT SETBACK TO COVERED FRONT PORCH, SIDE SETBACK TO DETACHED GARAGE AND FOR PROVIDING THE REQUIRED UNCOVERED PARKING SPACE BETWEEN A STRUCTURE WHICH IS NOT THE GARAGE (STORAGE AREA) AND THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (RICHARD M. TERRONES, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; ERIC AND DONNA COLSON, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report dated November 8, 2010, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier briefly presented the project description. Commission questions: How many of the special permits and variances are required due to the replacement of the garage? (Strohmeier — four of the requests.) With respect to the declining height envelope request, doesn't the existing structure encroach much further into the envelope? (Strohmeier — yes, the existing home encroaches much more than the addition.) Chair Vistica opened the public comment period. Stuart Grunow and Diane Marquez, Dreiling-Terrones Architecture, 1103 Juanita Avenue; represented the applicant. Provided an overview of the proposed additions and the rationale for the approach. Have communicated with both neighbors; have worked out any issues with them. Commission comments: ■ Is the garage being moved forward on the lot somewhat? (Grunow — was moved due to a discrepancy with the survey of the property; also will allow additional plantings to be installed. Will also allow the neighbors to preserve ivy along that side.) ■ Does the new patio off of the dining room count in the setback? (Strohmeier — is not covered area so it does not count toward floor area or setbacks.) ■ Happy that the house is being preserved. ■ On the southeast elevation; it feels like the columns should be framing a door. (Marquez— will be a swinging bench installed at that location.) ■ Noted that the steps into the patio area from the kitchen seem to consume a lot of the patio space. Suggested putting steps down the side of the patio to preserve patio space. (Grunow — the steps are needed due to code requirements.) ■ Feels the master bathroom is somewhat choppy. ■ Understands the approach to the project; should be a better way of addressing replacements of like -for -like without necessitating multiple requests for variances and special permits. ■ Consider a window design for the garage doors that more directly relate to the design of the windows in the house. ■ Concern regarding the southeast elevation; the chimney looks plain and bulky; is there something that could be done at the cornice at the top, or perhaps a decorative medallion? Also the wall to the right of the chimney is somewhat plain. 0 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 8, 2010 ■ Will the exhaust for the bedroom fireplace be hidden by the parapet around the roof? (Marquez — owners don't want it to show from any angle, will work on this portion of the design to ensure that it is not visible.) ■ Appreciative of replacing all of the windows with true divided light windows. ■ Perhaps consider matching the garage roofline to the house. ■ The landscaping is such that there is no reference point for the setback with the neighbor; so there is no impact attributable to granting the variances. ■ The special permit for declining height envelope is supportable since the encroachment is not visible from the front of the property. ■ There is a meandering creek in the area that affects the setbacks in the area; further justifies the variances. ■ The cinder -block wall doesn't enhance the appearance of the property; will it be replaced? (Marquez — a new wall will be installed; it will be pushed further back into the property and will be finished to match the house.) Public comments: Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; spoke: Will be an elegant building; everything has been taken into consideration. Likes that the design has been worked out with the neighbors. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Vistica made a motion to place the item on the Regular Action Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Yie. Discussion of motion: None. Chair Vistica called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the Regular Action Calendar when plans have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-1-1 (CommissionerCauchi absent, Commissioner Terrones recused). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:03 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 1, 2010: 7 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 8, 2010 ■ Adopted a finding of public convenience and necessity to permit wine-tastings at Wine Stop Liquors, 1300 Burlingame Avenue. FYI: 1124 Bernal Avenue — review of required changes to a previously approved Design Review project: ■ Accepted. FYI: 1441 Balboa Avenue — review of required changes to a previously approved Design Review project: ■ Staff was directed to schedule a public hearing regarding the amendments. FYI: Peninsula Hospital Complaint Log — October, 2010 ■ Accepted. XII. ADJOURNMENT Chair Vistica adjourned the meeting at 8:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jeff Lindstrom, Secretary