HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.11.07 PC Minutes APPROVEDCITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA
June 11, 2007
Council Chambers
I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Deal called the June 11, 2007, regular meeting of the Planning
Commission to order at 7:04 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Brownrigg, Cauchi, Deal, Osterling,
Terrones and Vistica
Absent: Commissioners: None
Staff Present: Community Development Director, William Meeker, Senior
Planner, Maureen Brooks; City Attorney, Larry Anderson
III. MINUTES The minutes of the May 14, 2007 and May 29, 2007 regular meeting of the
Planning Commission were approved as mailed.
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda.
V. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments.
VI. STUDY ITEMS
1. 1569 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR FENCE EXCEPTION FOR A NEW SEVEN-
FOOT, SEVEN-INCH HIGH FENCE WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK (JOHN AND LYNN RYAN,
APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER__________
CDD Meeker presented a summary of the staff report. Commissioners asked:
Proposal is for fence 7'-7" tall, would consider support of the project if the height were reduced to 6 feet
with one foot of lattice and total height of 7 feet; that would be the height allowed if it were a side yard
fence.
Was the fence built by the property owner or a contractor?
There may be justification for the Variance based on the location on Ray Drive near the school, is highly
impacted corner.
This item was set for the regular action calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed
by the Planning Division. This item concluded at 7:15 p.m.
2. 857 PALOMA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMITS FOR GARAGE EXEMPT
FROM SETBACKS IN THE REAR 40% OF THE LOT AND GREATER THAN 28 FEET IN LENGTH FOR A
NEW DETACHED GARAGE (DAVID ARANA, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND MIKE
PIZZOLON, DESIGNER) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER
SP Brooks presented a summary of the staff report. Commissioners asked:
What is the intention for the use of the garage, there are a lot of GFI electrical outlets proposed;
Application indicated Mike Pizzolon is the designer for the project, but some pages of the plans appear
to be prepared by an engineering firm, please clarify;
Clarify why the floor plans for the house show an addition, but staff report indicates there are no
changes proposed to the house;
Provide an accurate description of the doors and windows proposed for the accessory structure
including materials and finish;
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
2
Site plan shows garage located one foot from side property line and a minimum of one foot from rear
property line, clarify what the roof overhang will be, Building Code may not allow overhang that close to
the property line;
The existing accessory structure is two-story, clarify that this two-story structure will be removed, or is
there another accessory structure in the rear yard that is not shown on the plans, clarify what will
remain when project is completed;
Drawings need to be revised to show the gutter on the accessory structure and to indicate that the walls
adjacent to property lines will be one-hour construction; and
Provide a notation on the floor plan that indicates where the cross section on Sheet S2.2 is taken.
This item was set for the regular action calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed
by the Planning Division. This item concluded at 7:22 p.m.
VII. ACTION ITEMS
Consent Calendar - Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on
simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant, a member of the public or a
commissioner prior to the time the commission votes on the motion to adopt.
There were no consent calendar items.
VI REGULAR ACTION ITEM II.
3. 2212 HILLSIDE DRIVE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO AN APPROVED DESIGN
REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS RELATED ONLY TO THE DIVIDED LIGHT WINDOW PATTERN FOR
THE NEW TWO-STORY, SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING (BEN BEHRAVESH, APPLICANT AND
ARCHITECT; KENDRICK LI, PROPERTY OWNER) (61 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
C. Osterling indicated that he lives within 500 feet of the project, recused himself from the proceedings and
left the chambers. C. Brownrigg indicated that he would abstain because he opposed the project
previously and therefore would not participate in the discussion. Reference staff report June 11, 2007, with
attachments. CDD Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Twenty-five
conditions were suggested for consideration. He noted that the topic of discussion would be limited to the
divided light window pattern for the project.
Chair Deal opened the public hearing. Kendrick Li, 2212 Hillside Drive, project applicant, represented the
project. Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, Dolores and Dennis Huajardo, 1400 Columbus Avenue, and
Florence Allen, 1411 Columbus Avenue, spoke. Issues noted: concern with exit from basement,
erosion/dust control measures, preservation of tree roots, prefer consistent window grid pattern throughout.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioners noted concern with the site condition, should be kept clean, leaves raked, not necessary to
have mullions on picture window, should have consistent window pattern on remaining windows, prefer the
horizontal grid pattern.
C. Deal moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date
stamped March 14, 2007, sheets DD-1 through DD-7.0, and date stamped May 21, 2007,
sheets DD-1 through DD-6; that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or
floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; that the spiral staircase
from the sunken garden shall be eliminated and replaced with a ladder per California Building
Code requirements; and that only the lighting along the left side shall be landscape lighting
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
3
directed to the ground, with the cone of light kept on the site as required in the Burlingame
Ordinance;
2. that based on the requirements of Burlingame Municipal Code Section 25.28.037, the basement
area shall never be used for sleeping purposes as a bedroom;
3. that if it is possible under the regulations in the California Building Code, the egress door from
the basement area shall be replaced with an egress window;
4. that any street tree roots of one inch diameter or larger that are encountered during installation
of the new sidewalk and driveway are not to be damaged or cut prior to inspection and approval
by the City Arborist or the Park Department Supervisor;
5. that if it is determined during construction or after that the two existing Magnolia street trees
need to be removed, they shall be replaced at the property owner's expense with an appropriate
species selected from the City's street tree list as determined by the City Arborist, the tree
selected shall be the largest sized determined appropriate by the City Arborist;
6. that all windows except the picture window on the front elevation shall be simulated true divided
lite windows with a consistent horizontal grid pattern;
7. that an automatic gate shall be installed in the driveway a minimum 20'-0' back from the front
property line;
8. that all skylights shall be tinted to reduce night glare;
9. that the property owner shall be responsible for implementing and maintaining all tree protection
measures as defined in the arborist report prepared by Arborlogic Consulting Arborists, dated
August 3, 2006;
10. that construction protection measures shall also be determined and installed before a building
permit is issued for the existing Pittosporum hedge along the left side property line on the
neighbor's property at 1400 Columbus, and these measures shall remain in place until the
occupancy permit is issued for the project;
11. that landscaping shall be added along the right side of the house in protected planter bays
wherever possible to maintain a 9'-6" clear driveway width, plant materials shall be selected to
provide screening;
12. that the conditions of the City Arborist's March 21, 2007 memo, the Chief Building Official's
November 27, 2006 memo, the City Engineer's November 27, 2006 memo, the Fire Marshal's
November 29, 2006 memo, the Recycling Specialist's November 27, 2006 memo, and the
NPDES Coordinator's June 12, 2006 memo shall be met;
13. 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;
14. 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;
15. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
4
corners and set the building footprint;
16. that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the
new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer;
17. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed
professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window
locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional
involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under
penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department;
18. 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;
19. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff shall 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;
20. 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;
21. 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;
22. 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;
23. 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;
24. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and
25. that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program and a complete
Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at
time of permit application.
The motion was seconded by C. Vistica.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 5-0-1-1 (C. Brownrigg
abstaining, C. Osterling recused). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:48 p.m.
4. 1351 HOWARD AVENUE, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA B – APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN
REVIEW FOR A SUBSTANTIAL REMODEL OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (LYNN
BETEAG, APPLICANT; TODD LEVINE, POLLACK ARCHITECTURE, ARCHITECT; AND STANLEY LO,
PROPERTY OWNER) (33 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
5
Reference staff report June 11, 2007, with attachments. CDD Meeker presented the report, reviewed
criteria and staff comments. Ten conditions were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of
staff.
Chair Deal opened the public hearing. Todd Levine, Pollack Architecture, 2584 Folsom, San Francisco,
and Kimberly Smith, Comerica Bank, represented the project.
Commissioners commented on the project design, discussed options for the canopy over the ATM, whether
it should be flat like the other canopies or sloped glass as proposed; noted that the windows appear to be
punched openings in a solid wall and need some work; would like to see the stone feature at the base of
the wall extended up the wall to the same level as the lower muntin bars of the windows; would like to see a
real door installed in the blank opening on the Primrose side of the building. There were no further
comments and the public hearing was closed.
C. Terrones moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date
stamped June 5, 2007, Cover Sheet, Site Plan, Existing Floor Plan, Demo Plan, Proposed Floor
Plan, Exterior Elevations and Finishes, any changes to the exterior materials shall require
review by the Planning Commission; and the following changes shall be incorporated into the
project:
a. the stone base along the perimeter shall be increased in height to the level of the bottom
muntin bars of the windows;
b. an aluminum storefront door shall be added in the existing opening along Primrose;
c. the awning over the ATM on Howard shall be flat to match the style of the other awnings;
d. the applicant shall bring back to the Commission as an information item a revised design
for the windows;
2. that prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall consult with the City Arborist to
choose an appropriate tree species to be planted in the right-of-way along Primrose Road; the
tree grate design shall be consistent with the Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Plan design
criteria; and that the tree species chosen and grate details shall be included on the plans;
3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's March 5, 2007, memo, the City Engineer's
March 5, 2007, and March 2, 2006, memos, the Fire Marshal's March 5, 2007, memo, and the
NPDES Coordinator's March 5, 2007, and March 5, 2006, memo shall be met;
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 any changes to the size or envelope of building, which would include changing or adding
exterior walls or parapet walls, moving or changing windows and architectural features or
changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review;
6. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or designer, or another
architect or 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;
7. 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
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
6
according to the approved Planning and Building plans;
8. 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;
9. 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
10. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance.
The motion was seconded by C. Vistica.
Chair Deal called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve with amended conditions. The motion passed
on a 4-3 (Crs. Brownrigg, Osterling and Deal dissenting). Appeal procedures were advised. This item
concluded at 8:30 p.m.
5. 1611 ADRIAN ROAD, ZONED RR – APPLICATION FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A COMMERCIAL RECREATION USE
(INDOOR BADMINTON FACILITY) (JEFF LEA, DAROSA & ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT & DESIGNER;
AND JOEY LO AND FRANCES HUANG, PROPERTY OWNERS) (13 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER:
RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report June 11, 2007, with attachments. SP Brooks presented the report, reviewed criteria
and staff comments. Thirteen conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chair Deal opened the public hearing. Ben Lee, 761 Maybury Road, San Jose, represented the project.
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa spoke in support of the project.
Commissioners noted that the parking study provided compelling evidence that the parking supply would
be adequate for the facility, the mitigated negative declaration is well reasoned in its findings, and given the
mitigation measures incorporated into the conditions of approval, can make findings that the project will
have no adverse impact on traffic, circulation and parking.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
C. Brownrigg moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date
stamped April 23, 2007, sheets A1.1 through A1.9;
2. that demolition or removal of any existing walls 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. that the existing and proposed landscaping shall be installed and maintained as shown on the Site
Plan, date stamped April 23, 2007, and that all areas of landscaping shall be irrigated by an
automatic sprinkler system on a timer and shall be maintained by the property owner in good
operating condition at all times;
4. that the indoor badminton facility shall only be open seven days a week from 9:30 a.m. to 11:00
p.m., with a maximum of five full-time employees and a maximum of 62 people on-site at any one
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
7
.
time, including the owner, employees and customers; that any changes to the floor area, use, hours
of operation, or number of employees or people on-site which exceeds the maximums as stated in
these conditions shall require an amendment to this conditional use permit;
5. that there shall be no gambling or wagering on this business premise and no alcoholic beverages
shall be served, stored in lockers or private use, or sold on the site;
6. that the indoor badminton facility shall be limited to 40,419 SF in area with 2,085 SF of office, 493
SF of retail, 1,765 of storage and 36,076 SF for the 16 indoor badminton courts and associated
activities including a lounge, children's play zone, stretching zone and restrooms; that outdoor areas
shall not be used for any activities associated with the badminton facility;
7. that this Conditional Use Permit shall only apply only to an indoor badminton facility; that if a
different type of commercial recreation facility is proposed at this site in the future, a new application
for a Conditional Use Permit shall be required;
8. that the parking variances for on-site parking spaces and parking space dimension shall expire with
the termination of the conditional use permit for the indoor badminton facility; shall be reviewed with
any amendment to the Conditional Use Permit granted to the indoor badminton facility; and shall
expire should the building on the site be deliberately demolished or destroyed by a natural
catastrophe or disaster or should a major remodel of the building be proposed;
9. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official’s December 15, 2006, memo, the City Engineer's
December 15, 2006, memo, the City Traffic Engineer's January 25, 2007, memo, the Fire Marshal's
December 18, 2006, memo, and the Recycling Specialist's November 28, 2005 memo shall be met;
10. 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;
11. that while the badminton facility operates in this building, the current and future office/warehouse
businesses in this building shall only be open for business from morning until 6 p.m. on weekdays
and shall not be open on weekends; any changes to hours for the office/warehouse use shall
require an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit;
12. that there shall be a maximum of two tournaments per year at this facility; the tournaments shall
only be held on weekends (Saturday and Sunday) and holidays and shall be limited to a maximum
of 60 players; and
13. that spectators who wish to attend the tournaments shall be encouraged to arrive in the same
vehicle as the tournament player, shall arrive by carpooling or taking public transportation and
walking to the facility.
The motion was seconded by C. Cauchi.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 7-0. Appeal
procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:46 p.m.
IX DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS
6. 2516 HALE DRIVE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR
HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
WITH DETACHED GARAGE (JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGINEERING, INC., APPLICANT AND
DESIGNER; AND STEVE SPINA, PROPERTY OWNER) (72 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA
STROHMEIER
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
8
SP Brooks briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Deal opened the public comment. James Chu, 55 W. 43rd Avenue, San Mateo, and Steve Spina, 330
Primrose Road #312, represented the project. Victor Subbotin, 2519 Hale Drive, spoke. Issues raised
include: size of project compared to neighborhood and increase in number of cars, predominate styles in
neighborhood are Spanish and Tudor with stucco exterior.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner comments:
Add handrail at the steps leading to the porch at the front of the house;
Include an automatic gate across the driveway located at the front of the dining room wall to allow room
for a car to pull up in front of the gate;
Existing Crepe Myrtle street tree should be replaced with a larger scale tree such as Evergreen Pear;
Encourage revision to the first floor plan to combine the family room and nook with a smaller footprint to
allow for a larger back yard;
Revise front entry porch to be lighter and more open wood detailed elements instead of a shingle wall,
something not so closed in, could also be expanded toward the front of the lot;
Type of shingles used shall be stain grade;
Clarify if there will be a window above the entry porch and the area shown with bars on the second
floor, it appears on the elevations that it is a frame over shingles;
Provide existing elevations in outline form to compare existing and proposed height; and
Look at the chimney in the family room, it may seem towering to the neighbors, if it is a gas fireplace it
may not need to be that tall.
C. Vistica made a motion to place this item on the regular action calendar at a time when the above
revisions have been made and plan checked. This motion was seconded by C. Auran.
Chair Deal called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the regular action calendar when plans had
been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is
advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:15 p.m.
7. 2925 FRONTERA WAY, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, LOT COVERAGE
VARIANCE AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A SINGLE STORY ADDITION TO A
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSIDERED SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION (CLEMENT HUNG,
APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND JERRY DEAL, JD & ASSOCIATES, DESIGNER) (29
NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
Chairman Deal noted that he has a business relationship with the applicant, recused himself from the item
and left the chambers. CDD Meeker briefly presented the project description, and noted that there were
two desk items submitted, one from the applicant regarding the requested variance and one from a resident
at 2919 Frontera Way. There were no questions of staff.
Vice-Chair Cauchi opened the public comment. Stuart Grunow, JD & Associates, project applicant,
represented the project. Kevin Karl, 2931 Frontera Way, Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue and Tom Reed,
2916 Dolores Way, spoke. Topics discussed include: Courtyard is integral to Eichler style to provide light
and air to the interior; in Eichlers can do pressure test of pipes in the floor, if they are fine can replace
boiler; loss to community to destroy an Eichler, fabric of the neighborhood should be respected; two foot
additional height will impact views; this is one of four original Eichler model homes; concern with drainage,
should drain to the street
Commissioner comments:
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
9
Expanse of stucco finish reeks of economy;
Concern with parapet finish, consider solution that has more of an overhang;
Should celebrate that this is an Eichler, that is not being done, Eichlers typically use three materials,
wood, brick and glass;
Recommend that project stay within the Eichler style and make it an update; Eichlers take advantage
of the flow between the indoor and outdoor space;
Find it difficult to grant variance for lot coverage, this is considered new construction, would be hard to
find justification;
Should be egress from the right side bedrooms into the garden area on that side of the lot;
Existing courtyard is not covered, is open to the sky, should not be included in the existing lot coverage
calculation to establish the baseline condition;
If the project comes back with height increased over existing structure, would need to erect story poles.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
C. Osterling made a motion to send this project to a design reviewer with the comments made. This motion
was seconded by C. Terrones.
Comment on the motion: make sure design reviewer listens to the tapes, need to look at conserving
Eichlers if we can and that should be taken into consideration; applicant should recognize that we don't see
any compelling reason to grant a lot coverage variance, whether the house is preserved or modified, the
variance needs to be eliminated; suggest that this design doesn't have to be taken to the design review
consultant, can rework design to go along the lines of an Eichler, could withdraw application and resubmit
or restore the existing structure.
Vice-Chair Cauchi called for a vote on the motion to refer this item to a design review consultant. The
motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-0-1 (C. Deal recused). The Planning Commission's action is advisory
and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:45 p.m.
Chair Deal returned to the dais.
8. 1324 MONTERO AVENUE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND
SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (IGOR ELGART, APPLICANT; DAVID
BINMAN, PROPERTY OWNER; AND KEVIN WEINMANN, ARCHITECT) (67 NOTICED) PROJECT
PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER
CDD Meeker briefly presented the project description. Commissioners asked about the email submitted
regarding weeds, trash and rats on the site, the site is still not completely cleaned up. CA Anderson noted
that the building materials that had been stored there for other job sites have been removed.
Chair Deal opened the public comment. Kevin Weinmann, 4005 Alameda De Las Pulgas, San Mateo, and
Igor Elgart, 1115 Bromfield, Hillsborough, represented the project. Bob Currie, 1320 Montero Avenue, and
Rick Quintana, 1321 Montero Avenue, spoke. Topics discussed include: appreciate the design comments
of the Commission, concern with second floor deck and privacy, tarp placed over structure is pulled tightly
and is very noisy when it is windy, has looked unsightly for a full year, would like to see it resolved, needs
some work, should follow Commission direction, concern with what it will look like from across the street, is
very heavy on top, would like to see the project completed.
Commissioners asked what can be done to encourage prompt completion of this project. CA Anderson
advised that last year an ordinance was adopted that imposes penalties, can use the Housing Code
standard to require the property be secured with sheathing plywood while the project is being processed, if
there is no progress with the design review process, could proceed with civil action and go to court.
Commissioner comments:
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
10
Site is currently unsightly, should be cleaned up and landscaping maintained within next two weeks;
The existing half timber on the right front is not done well, should not be emulated on the second floor;
half timbers not handled well throughout, looks like cheap tract home in Oklahoma, could be done
better, this is a cheap looking attempt at a Tudor style;
There are no details on the porch;
Brick wainscot around the perimeter is discontinuous;
Chimney and brick wainscot appears to float, need accurate representation of grade, brick needs to go
all the way to the ground;
Window style in back doesn't fit with others;
Second floor deck is in odd place, hidden behind roof, doesn't conform to the style of the building,
generally discourage large second floor decks with a gathering area, would like to see it removed;
Chimney is too big, is five feet wide at the top;
Tacked on dormer on second floor doesn't fit with the style;
There is a closet with a ceiling height of five feet, need to rethink;
Should include details such as vents and gable ends;
Drawings are difficult to read, clarify the finish on the wall below the finished floor line of the first floor;
Hodge-podge of trims and details;
Massing is okay, is broken up fairly well;
Concerned with some of the massing, needs work, look at proportions;
Cantilever over bay window on east side is awkward;
Concerned with rear landing from family room, it is too small, would like to see family room smaller and
a larger deck that fits the door opening;
Birches on the left side of the house should be protected;
Provide a landscape plan that is meaningful, the one provided is incomplete.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
C. Auran made a motion to send this project to a design reviewer with the comments made. This motion
was seconded by C. Osterling.
Comment on the motion: The design review consultant should listen to the tape to better understand the
Commission's concerns.
Chair Deal called for a vote on the motion to refer this item to a design review consultant. The motion
passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item
concluded at 10:25 p.m.
9. 446 MARIN DRIVE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR
DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE
FAMILY DWELLING (TED AND CYNTHIA CROCKER, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND
MARK PEARCY, ARCHITECT) (71 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
SP Brooks briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Deal opened the public comment. Ted Crocker, 446 Marin Drive and Mark Pearcy, 1650 Barroilhet,
project architect, represented the project. Commissioners noted that this is a wonderful application,
beautifully put together and informative. Commissioner comments:
Look closely at the placement of the bed wall in the master bedroom to be sure that changes to
windows and doors are not triggered later on;
Show the handrail on the rear steps, may be hard to integrate into design; and
Propose galvanized steel attic vent to match existing, recommend replace with wood but keep the
narrow and vertical shape.
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
11
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
C. Brownrigg made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar at a time when the following
revisions have been made and plan checked. This motion was seconded by C. Osterling.
Chair Deal called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when plans had been
revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is
advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:38 p.m.
10. 102 VICTORIA ROAD, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND
SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JEFF AND CHRISTINE OBERTELLI,
APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND JOANN M. GANN, DESIGNER) (57 NOTICED)
PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
SP Brooks briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Deal opened the public comment. JoAnn Gann, 111 Glenn Way #9, San Carlos, represented the
project. Commissioner comments:
Entry door is not prominent, it does not look like a "front", might want to consider using a rounded tower
on the corner with steps from both Victoria Road and Bayswater Avenue;
Concerned with the crown of the Holly tree, it is only four feet from the ground, will have to be trimmed
to allow clearance for use of the front walk way;
The treatment below the bay window should be changed from the sloped bottom to a square bottom
with corbels supporting it;
Details and character of the garage door should be noted on the plans;
Consider adding trees on site along Victoria Road or street trees in the planter strip to provide privacy
and shade;
Gable end beams are noted as 4 x 6, which would be small, they look larger on the plans, should
indicate the appropriate size;
Show second floor ceiling height as actual height of 8'-1";
Make sure the existing chimney is 10 feet from eave not just measure to face of building;
Roof tiles should be a blend of colors, not just solid red or orange tiles;
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
C. Brownrigg made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar at a time when the above revisions
have been made and plan checked. This motion was seconded by C. Auran.
Chair Deal called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when plans had been
revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is
advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:50 p.m.
X. COMMISSIONER’S REPORTS
- There were no Commissioner's Reports for review.
XI. PLANNER REPORTS
- CDD Meeker reviewed the actions of the Council meeting of June 4, 2007.
- FYI: Update to a previously approved design review project at 3121 Margarita Avenue.
Commissioners asked that this item be placed on the Regular Action Calendar for discussion.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes June 11, 2007
12
- Chair Deal adjourned the meeting at 11:04 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
David Cauchi, Secretary
S:\MINUTES\unapproved 06.11.07.doc