Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes - 11.23.09 APPROVEDC CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION BURLINGAME APPROVED MINUTES Monday, November 23, 2009 — 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers — 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California CALL TO ORDER Chair Terrones called the November 23, 2009, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Terrones, Lindstrom, Terrones, Vistica (arrived at 7:01 p.m.) and Yie Absent: Commissioner Brownrigg Staff Present: Community Development Director, William Meeker and Senior Planner Ruben Hurin III. MINUTES Commissioner Yie moved, seconded by Commissioner Cauchi to approve the minutes of the November 9, 2009 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, as submitted. Motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner Brownrigg absent). IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR None. VI. STUDY ITEMS Commissioner Cauchi noted that he would recuse himself from participating in the discussion regarding Item 1 (1430 Palm Drive), since he has a business relationship with the applicant. He left the Council Chambers. 1. 1430 PALM DRIVE, ZONED R-3 — APPLICATION FOR ANTENNA EXCEPTION FOR NEW WALL - MOUNTED ANTENNAS ON THE FAQADE OF AN EXISTING CHURCH BUILDING (T-MOBILE, APPLICANT; FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF BURLINGAME, PROPERTY OWNER; AND ZON ARCHITECTS. INC.. ARCHITECT) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Senior Planner Hurin presented a summary of the staff report, dated November 23, 2009. Commission comments: 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 ■ With respect to what appears to be exposed conduit; on the southeast elevation, there are electrical and telephone company conduit shown, noted that it will be painted to match adjacent wall; clarify if this is exposed; would have concerns if it is exposed. Perhaps box and stucco the conduit to blend better. ■ The building is a rather dignified, stately structure; would like to see a statement from the church indicating that the greater church community is aware of the project. ■ No problem with the antennae. ■ Not a good location for the antennae; the bell tower is the essence of the building; detracts from the architecture. ■ How long does the applicant anticipate that the installation will remain in place; will they be replaced at some point in the future. ■ Provide detailing of the mounting of the antennae and of the antennae themselves. ■ On page D1 of the plans; referenced the radiation emissions; does the City have any liability? (Meeker — regulated by FCC; as long as the emissions are within the FCC regulatory framework, there is no liability.) ■ Questioned the signage for the installation. (Hurin — signage required by the FCC.) ■ It would seem that there are better locations on buildings with flat roofs that would be a better location. (Meeker — the location is typically determined by the requirements for full coverage of the network and other requirements for transmission between sites. Hurin — will ask the applicant for information regarding the selection of the location.) 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. Commissioner Cauchi returned to the dais. 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. 2a. 1419 CARLOS AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR BUILDING HEIGHT AND BASEMENT FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, DETACHED GARAGE AND BASEMENT (JACK MCCARTHY DESIGNER, INC., APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; KIERAN J. WOODS TR, PROPERTY OWNER) TAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN 2b. 1340 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY, ZONED SL — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT (THERAPEUTIC MASSAGE) (FERENC PATAKI, APPLICANT; FOX INVESTMENTS, PROPERTY OWNER; AND LAM ENGINEERING, INC., ENGINEER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN 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. Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner Brownrigg absent). Appeal procedures were 2 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 advised. This item concluded at 7:16 p.m. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS 3. 1595 COLUMBUS AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO DESIGN REVIEW, SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE AND LOT COVERAGE VARIANCE FOR PROPOSED CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SINGLE STORY ADDITION AND RENOVATION QUALIFYING AS SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION (SERGE AND ALMA KARANOV, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND MARK ROBERTSON, MARK ROBERTSON DESIGN) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated November 23, 2009, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Twelve (12) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Terrones opened the public hearing. Mark Robertson, 918 East Grant Place, San Mateo; represented the applicant. Commission comments: What is the purpose for the bay window? (Robertson — originally had three bay windows in the original design; the property owner felt that the layout of the room was better with the bay window.) Why the change in the roofing material? (Robertson — the original roofing material could not be walked on; hence the composition material. The structure could not support a real slate roof.) Public comments: None. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cauchi moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped November 4, 2009, sheets 1 through 6; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first floor or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's June 1 and May 8, 2009 memos, the City Engineer's May 12, 2009 memo, the Fire Marshal's May 8, 2009 memo, the City Arborist's May 12, 2009 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's May 8, 2009 memo shall be met; 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; 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 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 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; 8. 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; 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; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION 10. 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; 11. 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 12. 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 Yie. Discussion of motion: None. Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1. (Commissioner Brownrigg absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:25 p.m. 4. 1441 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION QUALIFYING AS SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION (JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., E, CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; AND JAY TRYGSTAD AND THERESA HEI, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER (request to continue to December 14, 2009 Planning Commission Meetinq) Continued until December 14, 2009. Chair Terrones indicated that he would recuse himself from participating in the discussion of Item 5 (1425 Benito Avenue), since he has a business relationship with the applicant. He left the Council Chambers. 5. 1425 BENITO AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO DESIGN REVIEW FOR PROPOSED CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (B BG PACIFIC/BART GAUL, APPLICANTS; B/S BENITO LLC, PROPERTY OWNER; JACK MCCARTHY DESIGNER, INC., DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated November 23, 2009, with attachments. Senior Planner Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fourteen (14) conditions were suggested for consideration. Vice -Chair Vistica opened the public hearing. Jack McCarthy, 5339 Prospect Road, San Jose; represented the applicant. Commission comments: Is there a step missing on the front, from the porch to the grade? (McCarthy — there will be one step from the structure to the porch, then two to grade.) Public comments: Tracy Bowman, 1436 Alvarado Avenue; spoke: Concerned that the structure will block her view; will devalue the property. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Auran moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped November 13, 2009, sheets 2 through 7, 9, 12 and L1.0; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's July 24, 2008 memo, the City Engineer's July 28, 2008 memo, the Fire Marshal's July 28, 2008 memo, the City Arborist's July 30, 2008 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's July 28, 2008 memo shall be met; 5 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 5. 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; 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 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; 8. 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; 9. 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; 10. 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 11. 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; 12. 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; 13. 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 Department; and 14. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built M CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 according to the approved Planning and Building plans. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi. Discussion of motion: Vice -Chair Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-1-1. (Commissioner Brownrigg absent, Commissioner Terrones recused). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:34 p.m. Chair Terrones returned to the dais. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 6. 1510 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ATTACHED GARAGE AND VARIANCES FOR SIDE SETBACK AND FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MARK ROBERTSON, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; ROBERT BEAR, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report dated November 23, 2009, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Terrones opened the public comment period. Mark Robertson 918 East Grant Place, San Mateo; and Meg and Robert Bear, 1510 Drake Avenue: represented the applicant. ■ Site constraints necessitate the requested Variances. ■ The applicant wants the garage attached to the residence for security purposes. ■ Are lowering the garage and the driveway to reduce visibility from the street. ■ Integration between the garage and house result in a homogenous whole. ■ The owner desires a crawl -space under the structure for storage; this necessitates the FAR Variance. ■ The size of the storage space is dictated by the shear walls needed for the second -story; this space is not accessible from within the residence and not conditioned space; but is considered habitable by the Zoning regulations since it has a floor -to -ceiling height of greater than six -feet. ■ Hoping the design solution is not a square box for an addition at the rear. ■ The house will be the largest at the rear; there is a lot of landscaping at the rear of the lot. ■ The smaller homes adjacent to the property will ultimately be re -done. ■ Wants additional storage space that will allow easy access. Commission comments Noted that the crawl space adds to the existing mass and bulk of the house. The 700 square feet over the maximum FAR is puzzling; the real impact of the mass and bulk is from the addition of the second story. 7 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 ■ The addition to the house is somewhat disjointed from the rest of the house; needs to be tied together better; particularly the rooflines. (Robertson — owner is interested in photovoltaic systems, and requested flat roof area for this purpose.) ■ The massing and the forms for the additions "ramble"; not cohesive. The attached garage is done well. ■ The west elevation appears overly articulated; the original house has a "graciousness" to it; the addition feels large and not well balanced. ■ The profile of the addition is going to be visible since the adjacent home is lower. ■ Transition from the front of the house to the rear is abrupt; needs work. ■ The lowering of the driveway makes the crawl -space and the entire house appear even taller. ■ Need to better articulate how the addition is being attached to the existing structure. ■ The massing needs some additional work; particularly in order to approve the FAR Variance. ■ Feels there is justification for the Variance to permit the attached garage. ■ Better integrate the rooflines; perhaps the roofline on the rear could be flattened. ■ The house is going to be large, so the massing needs to be resolved. ■ There is a rationale for the Variance for the crawl -space, given the terrain of the lot. Public comments: None. 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 Lindstrom. Discussion of motion: None. Chair Terrones 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 6-0-1 (Commissioner Brownrigg absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:04 p.m. 7. 309 OCCIDENTAL AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR BUILDING HEIGHT FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; CRAIG SUHL, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report dated November 23, 2009, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Terrones opened the public comment period. Craig Suhl, 413 Edgewood Drive, ????; represented the applicant. Indicated his frustration with the historic evaluation requirement. Commission comments: CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 ■ Pretty nice job by James Chu; this project, however, is a bit scant in terms of details; could use a bit more embellishment. The house is large; there is a lot of stucco. ■ The number of gable roof forms is monotonous; could use more variety. (Suhl — attempting a French Country style of home. Other similar structures have been approved within the neighborhood.) ■ The mass and bulk is not too bad; but should do more than simply place shutters on the structure. ■ With respect to the articulation of the structure; concerned with respect to the Special Permit for the height; this is a new residence; there is nothing about the character of the lot that causes the need for the application for a Special Permit; the lot is fairly flat. The steeply pitched roof will be highly visible; should attempt to reduce the massiveness of the roofline. (Suhl — the lot is not a typical lot; have responded to this in the Special Permit application; the additional height does not infringe upon the neighbors.) ■ Could articulate the height at the second floor to break up the mass of the roofline. ■ With respect to the French doors from the dining room to the right side of the structure; why are they provided? (Suhl — just to add character to the elevation.) ■ The "in -swinging" French doors will impact the ability to arrange furniture within the interior. ■ The columns on the rear elevation adjacent to the patio appear very massive in relationship to the size of the space. ■ Have incorporated a lot of the details that the Planning Commission typically wants to see; but is disappointed in the size of the front porch; would like to see it larger so that it is more useable. ■ Could even extend a patio off of the front porch to add some life to the front -yard. ■ Noted a home at the intersection of El Portal and Santa Ynez, noted the curved roofs on the structure; may be a solution for the dormers on this home. Public comments: Frances and Scotty Morris, 1608 Ralston Avenue and Rebecca Knudsen, 315 Occidental Avenue; spoke: ■ Read a November 20, 2009 (received by the Planning Commission on November 23, 2009) letter from Rob Glickman, 301 Occidental Avenue; expressed opposition to the project, and suggesting modifications to the project to address concerns. ■ Summarized their concerns regarding the project, as outlined in their (Morris') letter received by the Planning Commission on November 23, 2009. ■ Would like to get together with the applicant to discuss his intentions with respect to addressing neighbor concerns; made a couple of phone calls to the applicant that were not returned. ■ Objected to privacy impacts upon the adjacent properties from windows that will overlook adjacent properties. ■ The proposed house will extend further back on the lot than the adjacent residences. ■ Where will the laundry room be vented; outside, next to the neighbor's bedroom at 315 Occidental Avenue. ■ Objected to the movement of the sidewalk. ■ The proposed house is too large for the area. ■ There is too much stucco; a new "cookie -cutter" home. • Should be designed to fit into the neighborhood. ■ There will be little yard in the rear of the lot. Additional comments from applicant (Craig Suhl): Noted that the Morris' told him they were happy about the cars being removed from the property. E CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 ■ Not against the neighborhood. ■ The proposal falls within the guidelines of the City. ■ Attempting to work with the neighbors. ■ Has tried to meet with the neighbors. ■ Noted that one of the speakers has a one-story home and a fence that may exceed City standards. ■ There will be a two car garage that will prevent anyone from looking into the adjacent property at 1608 Ralston Avenue. ■ Not opposed to meeting with the neighbors to attempt resolve the details; particularly the immediate neighbors. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: ■ Important to work with the neighbors to work out the details raised during the neighbors' comments. ■ Believe it is helpful to meet with the adjacent neighbors, but not necessarily all fifty parties that submitted letters. ■ Noted that with 50-foot wide lots there can be no assurance of privacy; plan your projects carefully to best preserve privacy. ■ There should be no interference with the adjacent neighbors' fence since the new garage will be off- set from the property line. Commissioner Vistica made a motion to place the item on the Regular Action Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner We. Discussion of motion: ■ The applicant needs to work on the additional design issues regarding the justification for the Special Permit. ■ The alignment of windows should be reviewed. ■ Look at the size of the front porch. ■ Review the size of the columns on the rear. ■ Review landscaping details. ■ Break up some of the stucco with other materials. Chair Terrones 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 6-0-1 (Commissioner Brownrigg absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:50 p.m. X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS There were no Commissioner's Reports. XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Commission Communications: None. 10 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION - Approved Minutes November 23, 2009 Actions from Regular City Council meeting of November 16, 2008: BevMo finding of Public Convenience and Necessity granted. Permit time limit ordinance amendment was adopted; will become effective on December 16, 2009. FYI: 1315 Edgehill Drive — requested changes to a previously approved Design Review project: ■ Accepted. FYI: 1837 Hunt Drive — requested changes to a previously approved Design Review project: Accepted. Miscellaneous: Chair Terrones noted that the Community Development Director will schedule a meeting of the Neighborhood Consistency Subcommittee in the near future to begin discussions of several items that should be brought forward to the Commission in the near future. XII. ADJOURNMENT Chair Terrones adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sandra Yie, Secretary 11