Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.09.08 PC Minutes - APPROVEDCITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES City Council Chambers 501 Primrose Road - Burlingame, California June 9, 2008 - 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Cauchi called the June 9, 2008, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Cauchi, Lindstrom, Vistica and Yie Absent: Commissioners Brownrigg and Terrones Staff Present: Community Development Director, William Meeker; Zoning Technician Lisa Whitman; and City Attorney, Larry Anderson III. MINUTES Commissioner Auran moved, seconded by Commissioner Vistica to approve the minutes of the May 17, 2008 Joint Meeting with the City Council and the May 27, 2008 regular meeting of the Planning Commission. Motion passed 5-0-2 (Commissioners Brownrigg and Terrones absent). IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR ►�= VI. STUDY ITEMS 1. 1524 ROLLINS ROAD, ZONED RR — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL RECREATION USE AND VARIANCES FOR PARKING AND LANDSCAPING FOR AN INDOOR BASKETBALL FACILITY (NOTHING BUT HOOPS, APPLICANT; EDWARD AND MADELINE ROBERTS TRUST (LINDA MENON AND FLORENCE KREBS, CO -TRUSTEES), PROPERTY OWNERS; AND JERRY WINCES, ARCHITECT) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN Zoning Technician Whitman presented a summary of the staff report, dated June 9, 2008. Commission comments: Can consideration be given to off -site parking (City Attorney— may be considered as a Variance, with a lease of off -site spaces as mitigation)? CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 ■ If a contractual obligation is broken, what happens with the Variance (City Attorney — may be brought back to the Planning Commission for review). ■ Ensure that the applicant has a lease for at least 25 spaces. ■ Have there been complaints at the current location? • Ensure that off -site spaces are not required spaces for the occupant of that property; need to demonstrate that a surplus of parking exists at the off -site parking location. ■ Current location has a lot of drop-off and pick-up; has consideration been given to this aspect of the use. ■ What is the City's parking requirement based upon; is our parking standard based upon the sort of parking that is being observed as required by other commercial recreation uses. ■ Not clear in application how children are a part of the operation; mostly about adults; for children, will there primarily be a drop-off? ■ Would like to find a way to make it work; but if parking is problematic, will not be successful. ■ Consider the whole picture for parking, circulation and drop-off. ■ The use is child -intensive; there will be a lot of parents also staying to watch the games. ■ Have applicant take a closer look at the number of participants that will be at the location prior to 5 p.m. on weekdays. ■ Take a closer look at staff accommodations; will be three times the size of the current facility, and more intense; is proposed staffing level adequate? ■ There may be volleyball tournaments; when will they take place; what will be the impact upon circulation and parking during those times? ■ There may be a way to get additional parking spaces in the corner near the electrical service area. ■ Are limited retail sales a part of the use; is this permissible in the zone? 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 7:15 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 Cauchi asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to pull any item off the consent calendar. Item 2a (2520 Valdivia Way) was pulled from the Consent Calendar by Stephen Wilson, attorney for Brian Philip, 2524 Valdivia Way. 2b. 1219 BROADWAY, ZONED C-1, BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENTS AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING FOOD ESTABLISHMENT (DES ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND DAVID ARMANINO, PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER Commissioner Auran moved approval of the Consent Calendar (Item 2b) based on the facts in the staff reports, 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 Yie. Chair Cauchi called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 5-0-2 (Commissioners Brownrigg and Terrones absent). Appeal procedures were advised. 2 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 Commissioner Lindstrom recused himself from participation in the discussion regarding Agenda Item 2a (2520 Valdivia Way), since he has a business relationship with the applicant; he left the Council Chambers. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS 2a. 2520 VALDIVIA WAY, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A SINGLE STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (ROBERT MEDAN, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND LEE AND MARGIE LIVINGSTON, PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN Reference staff report dated June 9, 2008, with attachments. Zoning Technician Whitman presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eleven (11) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Cauchi opened the public hearing. Lee Livingston, 2520 Valdivia Way and Robert Medan, 1936 Los Altos Drive, San Mateo; represented the applicant. The neighbor's impacted views are secondary views, not from primary living space within the residence. The neighbors removed the glass patio door from their master bedroom and closed up that space with a stucco wall. They also replaced a four -foot fence with a six-foot fence; the new fence blocks the view when seated in the patio area. Spoke to Mr. Philip yesterday and was told that his representative would not be speaking this evening. Commission comments: ■ Seems that the height difference between existing and proposed is roughly 11-inches (applicant - actually 12-14 inches); the story poles seem to show a greater height than proposed on the plans (applicant - story poles are accurate, based upon 2" x 8" rafters, but could be 2" x 4", which would reduce height). ■ There is a false ceiling in the living room; could it be altered to reduce impact (applicant - needed to use the current design to resolve roof lines adequately); Did architect look at roofline options to reduce its height? ■ Views from the outdoor area should not be considered as "primary" views. ■ Encouraged use of 2" x 4" construction to reduce height impacts. Public comments: Stephen Wilson, 500 Sansome Street, San Francisco, attorney for Brian Philip, neighbor at 2524 Valdivia Way; and Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue spoke: ■ The Philips have not had an adequate opportunity to consider alternative solutions given that story poles only recently were installed. ■ While no one is guaranteed a view, it is an important amenity; agrees that the views are secondary, but are a significant secondary view. ■ Concerned with uncertainty about where the roofline will actually be when constructed. ■ Philip is willing to spend his own money to identify alternatives for consideration. 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 Recommend a postponement for two meetings to provide the neighbor an opportunity to review alternatives. Asked if this the second or third time that this item has been reviewed by the Commission; if it is the second time, then perhaps there hasn't been enough opportunity by the neighbor to review the proposal. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: There would be a view blockage of the East Bay hills from the living room; should be continued to allow a review of options. Views from outdoor space are not protected; there is some view blockage from interior of home, but not certain if it is significant enough to be considered a substantial impact. Would be important to have all Commissioners view the property and the view impacts in advance of action regarding the proposal. Commissioner Auran moved to continue to the June 23, 2008 regular Meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica. Discussion of motion: None Chair Cauchi called for a voice vote on the motion to continue the item until June 23, 2008. The motion passed 4-0-1-2 (Commissioner Lindstrom recused, Commissioners Brownrigg and Terrones absent). This item concluded at 7:40 p.m. Commissioner Lindstrom returned to the dais. 3. 2673 MARTINEZ DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR MAIN AND LOWER LEVEL ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MARWAN ZEIDAN, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND DAVID MIRAFLOR, DESIGNER) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN Reference staff report dated June 9, 2008, with attachments. Zoning Technician Whitman presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eleven (11) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Cauchi opened the public hearing. Marwan Zeidan, 2673 Martinez Drive; represented the applicant. Commission comments: On proposed first floor plan; two sinks in the bathroom are in an L-shaped configuration; would not be workable. On front elevation, three windows to right of door, a trim detail is shown that seems to go behind the shutters; this detail is not shown elsewhere on the house; should be consistent and spelled out on the plans; there is a "typical window detail" called out; the Commission assumes that treatment on 51 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 all of the windows on the building; provide a clear representation of how the windows are being treated. The wrought -iron detail on the garage is overdone. A more consistent theme than previously; but need to have plans drawn accurately. Public comments: Byron and Miriam Maldonado, 1 Toledo Court spoke: Concerned about the size of the addition at the rear; with construction, they will lose their view and will be looking at the deck. Have requested that neighbor trim his bushes, haven't seen the story poles because of the bushes. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: ■ Needs to be continued to allow window details to be correctly represented; and the property owner needs to trim the trees. ■ Concern about railings; calm them down a bit, too ornate; and provide missing railing on steps. ■ Doesn't believe that the impact on the neighbor is that great, given the location of the addition. ■ Bring back as Consent Calendar item when ready. Commissioner Vistica moved to continue the application to bring back on Consent Calendar when trim details modified according to reduction; trim trees prior to bringing the item back and review railing details on front and rear. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Yie. Discussion of motion: None Chair Cauchi called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-2 (Commissioners Brownrigg and Terrones absent). This item concluded at 8:05 p.m. 4. 2537 HAYWARD DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR A CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (PATTY AND ANDREW JORDAN, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND GEORGE SKINNER, ARCHITECT) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report dated June 9, 2008, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Twelve (12) conditions were suggested for consideration. Noted that a revised window plan was submitted to the Commission at the meeting. Chair Cauchi opened the public hearing. Patty and Andrew Jordan, 2537 Hayward Drive, and Victor Zvarich, building contractor, represented the applicant. 5 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 When they reviewed the window designs at the window showrooms, felt that the grid pattern would impact views; only want grid pattern on upper part of windows on the full house. Commission comments: Appreciated the design of the plan submitted at the meeting; front window was the primary concern. Need to match the grid pattern on lower window above the garage. Public comments: None 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 Department date stamped May 6, 2008, sheets A3 and A4, and date stamped June 11, 2007, sheets Al, A2, A5 through A8 and Landscape Plan, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that the final design of the windows shall be returned to the Planning Commission as an FYI; 3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's, City Engineer's, Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's March 5, 2007 memos shall be met; 4. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the Floor Area Ratio 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 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), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 7. 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. 8. 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; 9. 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 according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 0 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 10. 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; 11. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; 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 the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica. Discussion of motion: ■ May look cramped to have the same grid pattern on the upper window over the garage. ■ Believe that the design will likely work. ■ Important that the vertical mullions line up; if not the design will not look right. ■ Bring back final design as an FYI. Chair Cauchi called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-2 (Commissioners Brownrigg and Terrones absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:14 p.m. 5. 1459 OAK GROVE AVENUE, ZONED R-3 — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, REAR SETBACK VARIANCE AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A NEW THREE-STORY, THREE - UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM (DALE MEYER APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND MIKE PRESCOTT. PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated June 9, 2008, with attachments. Zoning Technician Whitman presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Thirty-six (36) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Cauchi opened the public hearing. Commission comments: None Lynne Le, 851 Burlway Road; represented the applicant. The current architect took over the project from a prior architect for preparation of construction documents. Additional Commission comments: 7 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 ■ Requested explanation of need for Variance (applicant - lost dimension of parking due to moving exterior wall for shoring purposes). ■ Thought fagade changes were going to return to what was originally approved. ■ Was a door added that was not part of the previous approval? ■ Variances are tough to grant when the hardship is not readily apparent. ■ Door on west elevation doesn't match the original approved, or the revised; which is to be installed? ■ Brought e-mail from neighbor to applicant's attention. ■ Circular windows on west elevation; the original submittal design appears to work better; the door would likely fit in better with that configuration, if trimmed out correctly. ■ Clarified need for rear setback Variance (applicant - due to enclosure of rear stairway). Public comments: None There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: ■ "Ok" with rear setback Variance; stairway encouraged to provide access to rear -yard for greater usability. ■ Vehicles are likely to get smaller; parking requirement may be excessive; compact spaces are "ok". ■ Side doorway needs to be trimmed out. ■ Unfortunate that the Commission must consider a parking Variance at this late date in the process. Commissioner Vistica moved to continue the application to June 23, 2008 with the following direction: West elevation shall revert back to the window arrangement originally approved plans (sheetA7 of original drawings). The exit door from the stairway shall be incorporated into the window pattern and augmented with a trim package that relates to the windows above. The main entry door design is acceptable. The matter should be placed on the Consent Calendar when it returns on the agenda. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Auran. Discussion of motion: Have the door be an architectural door that will add light to stairway, if possible. Chair Cauchi called for a voice vote on the motion to continue to June 23, 2008 and place the item on the Consent Calendar. The motion passed 5-0-2 (Commissioners Brownrigg and Terrones absent). This item concluded at 8:30 p.m. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 6. 2700 SUMMIT DRIVE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND SECOND FLOOR FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (ORA HATHEWAY, APPLICANT AND 0 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 DESIGNER; AND ADIB AND SYLVIA KHOURI, PROPERTY OWNERS) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated June 9, 2008, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Cauchi opened the public comment period. Ora Hatheway, P.O. Box 150432, San Rafael; represented the applicant. Met with neighbors, nine did not object. Two objected. One person was concerned with view blockage; Commission comments: Would be appropriate to have wood siding along both Kenmar and Summit elevations. Reusing a lot of windows (applicant - only the double -paned windows). Concern regarding enlargement of the rear deck; the existing deck is rather large, but seems to be a bit of a privacy impact upon the neighbor; doesn't see the need for the enlarged deck (applicant - client is willing to eliminate this aspect of the design). Public comments: Anne and Cliff Reghetti, 2705 Summit; and Edna Steele, 18 El Quanito spoke: Asked if there will there be story poles (Commission — yes). Asked if this is the second time a Variance has been requested? There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: ■ Regarding the second -floor Variance, there are several other homes on Kenmar that have similar conditions with similar additions due to the down slope of the lots; none of the other homes have the two -foot offset; it is a prevalent condition in the neighborhood. ■ Feels that massing of the addition on Kenmar may block some of the sun for the homeowner; will feel pretty massive; bulk and mass will be facing Summit and Kenmar; consider pushing back the master bedroom suite to reduce impact. ■ Deck expansion should be eliminated; there is probably a way to incorporate a door to the existing deck from the master bedroom suite; will require a review of the roofline of the addition. ■ Wood siding should be provided in lieu of stucco. Commissioner Vistica made a motion to place the item on the Regular Action Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Auran. Discussion of motion: Install story poles. 9 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 Location of the master bath on the upper level is not directly over the bathroom below. Is this a design error? Rearranging the bedroom so that the bathrooms can be stacked would be less expensive to construct. Chair Cauchi 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 (Commissioners Brownrigg and Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:48 p.m. Commissioner A uran recused himself from the discussion regarding Agenda Item 7 (1277 Balboa Avenue) due to a business relationship with the applicant; he left the Council Chambers. 7. 1277 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FORA NEW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (JAMES CHU, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; AND BOB AND CINDY GILSON, PROPERTY OWNERS) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN Reference staff report dated June 9, 2008, with attachments. Zoning Technician Whitman briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Cauchi opened the public comment period. Commission comments: Provide information regarding setbacks on other side of the street. James Chu, 55 West 43rd Avenue, San Mateo and Bob Gilson; represented the applicant. Variance requested due to shallow depth of lot; wish to preserve a useable rear -yard by bring house forward; second floor setback is still over 20-feet; the Variance relates to the location of the porch. Have reviewed the plans with the neighbors. Commission comments: ■ Front door looks like it is recessed, but not so on plan; which will it be (applicant - will be recessed); don't recess it so much that it opens into the living room. ■ A good design solution, given the size of the lot. ■ Style is appropriate given the style of other homes in area. ■ Trim piece on top of entry door appears to be similar to treatment of top of dormers; should probably be a bit heavier to work better with the columns. ■ Noted concern that every bedroom doesn't need to have a bathroom; perhaps more closet space and a "Jack and Jill" bathroom between bedrooms. ■ Be cognizant of maximum height limit so as not to exceed it. ■ On the right elevation, look at the consistency of shutter arrangement. ■ Consider making the porch brick to match the columns. Public comments: 10 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 Ron Daher, 1273 Balboa Avenue; Wayne Walden, 1613 Easton Drive; and Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue spoke: ■ Support the project; would like the Commission to approve the Variances; moving the house closer to the street provides more privacy for neighbors. ■ Thinks that some of the other Colonials around town are designed better; eyebrow dormers should be placed back into the roofline. ■ The front porch should have the columns extending down to the ground. 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 Consent Calendar when complete, noting the following: ■ The small size of the lot supports the Variances. ■ The existing homes are atypically placed further from the street since they are larger lots. ■ Consider removing brick bases on entry column. ■ Increase depth of arched windows over the entry. ■ Consider location of front door in relation to the front wall. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Yie. Discussion of motion: ■ None. Chair Cauchi 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 4-0-2-1 (Commissioner Auran recused, Commissioners Brownrigg and Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:06 p.m. Commissioner Auran returned to the dais. X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS There were no Commissioner's Reports. XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Commission Communications: ■ None Actions from Regular City Council meeting of June 2, 2008: ■ Community Development Director Meeker noted the study session regarding the draft Historic Resources Inventory for the Downtown Specific Plan. FYI: Peninsula Hospital Complaint Log — May, 2008: 11 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 9, 2008 Accepted. Commissioner Vistica indicated that, in response to neighbors' complaints regarding vibration from the hospital construction, there may be other methods to address concerns from neighbors. The Commission noted the impending retirement of City Attorney Anderson and praised him for his work with the Commission. XII. ADJOURNMENT Chair Cauchi adjourned the meeting at 9:09 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Stanley Vistica, Secretary 12