HomeMy WebLinkAbout09.24.07 PC Minutes APPROVED
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVED MINUTES
City Council Chambers
501 Primrose Road - Burlingame, California
September 24, 2007 - 7:00 p.m.
1
I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Deal called the September 24, 2007, regular meeting of the Planning
Commission to order at 7:03 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Brownrigg (arrived at 7:09 p.m.), Cauchi,
Deal, Osterling, Terrones and Vistica
Absent: None
Staff Present: Community Development Director, William Meeker; Planner
Erica Strohmeier; and City Attorney, Larry Anderson
III. MINUTES September 10, 2007
Commissioner Osterling requested the following changes: 1) Page 4,
motion for Agenda Item 4; revise to state: “Commissioner Auran moved to
deny the application, with prejudice, by resolution”; and 2) Page 11, following
the second to the motion, insert statement that: “permitting the proposed use
(a financial institution) at this location extends commercial uses along the
side streets between Burlingame Avenue and Howard Avenue.”
Commissioner Cauchi moved, seconded by Commissioner Auran to approve
the minutes of the September 10, 2007 regular meeting of the Planning
Commission with corrections as noted by Commissioner Osterling. Passed
6-0-1 (Commissioner Brownrigg absent).
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda.
V. FROM THE FLOOR
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, Burlingame; requested that the Planning Commission review and
consider revising residential FAR, lot coverage, setbacks, basement exemptions, bathroom construction
exceeding 2 ½ bathrooms, and parking requirements. She further commended the City Arborist and Mr.
Putnam for the willingness to plant 3 trees in the City right-of-way adjacent to Putnam Toyota, noting that
she hopes other owners will take the initiative demonstrated by Mr. Putnam.
VI. STUDY ITEMS
There were no study items on the agenda.
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 Deal asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent
calendar. There were no requests.
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
2
1a. 412 BAYSWATER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR FRONT SETBACK AND LOT
COVERAGE VARIANCES FOR REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING FRONT PORCH ON A SINGLE
FAMILY DWELLING (GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; AND BOB
GLYNN, PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER
1b. 1100 HAMILTON LANE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR SIDE SETBACK, REAR SETBACK AND
LOT COVERAGE VARIANCES FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
(LISA WINSTON AND PHIL KENNEDY, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND DANIEL
RHOADS, YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS, INC., ARCHITECT) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA
WHITMAN
1c. 1315 EDGEHILL DRIVE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, FRONT SETBACK AND
LOT COVERAGE VARIANCES FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
(RAFI AND AIDA CHABO, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND FRED STRATHDEE,
ARCHITECT) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN
1d. 50 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUBAREA D OF THE BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL
AREA – APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A
REMODEL OF AN EXISTING AUTO DEALERSHIP (DOUG ROBERTSON, APPLICANT; KENT
PUTNAM, PROPERTY OWNER; AND PROTO INC., ARCHITECT) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA
STROHMEIER
Chair Deal indicated that he would recuse himself from voting on Item 1d due to a conflict of interest.
Commissioner Vistica moved approval of the Consent Calendar Items 1a through 1c, 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 Cauchi.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 7-0. Appeal procedures were advised.
Commissioner Osterling clarified that on item 1c he had requested larger scale plant materials, rather than
larger container size; revised landscape plan shall be brought back to Commission as an FYI after changes
are made.
Chair Deal recused himself and left the dais.
Vice-Chair Cauchi assumed chairing the Commission.
Commissioner Brownrigg moved approval of the Consent Calendar Item 1d, 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 Terrones. Vice-Chair Cauchi
called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 6-0-1 (Chair Deal recused). Appeal procedures were
advised.
Chair Deal returned to the dais.
VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
2. 1569 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR FENCE EXCEPTION FOR A NEW 7'-7"
HIGH FENCE WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK (JOHN AND LYNN RYAN, APPLICANTS AND
PROPERTY OWNERS) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated September 24, 2007, with attachments. Planner Strohmeier presented the
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
3
report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Four (4) conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chair Deal opened the public hearing.
John Ryan, 1569 Balboa Avenue, Burlingame; represented the applicant; noting that public Works has
requested that a portion of the fence be reduced in height, per the plans.
Commission comments:
None.
Public comments:
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, Burlingame; supported the project.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Auran moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended
conditions:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the site plan submitted to the Planning Department on
April 9, 2007;
2. that the applicant shall obtain a building permit for the structure;
3. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the fence exception as
well as any other exceptions to the code granted here will become void; and
4. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001
edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Brownrigg.
Additional Commission comments:
Happy that the applicant worked with public works to address safety issues at the corner.
Hoped this does not set a precedent; the fence is tall, but this is more of a side-yard and fence is
well built.
The applicant followed rules for installing the fence posts, but slope caused the height of the fence
to increase.
Planning should work with applicants on sloping lots to demonstrate height measurement for
fences.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 7-0. Appeal procedures
were advised. This item concluded at 7:23 p.m.
3. 1755 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY, ZONED IB – APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO ADD A PARK AND FLY PROGRAM AT AN EXISTING HOTEL (HAMPTON INN AND
SUITES, APPLICANT; AND ANOOP PATEL, PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA
STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated September 24, 2007, with attachments. Planner Strohmeier presented the
report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Thirty-Seven (37) conditions were suggested for
consideration.
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
4
Chair Deal opened the public hearing.
No one appeared to represent the applicant.
Commission comments:
Asked where are the three stalls that will be designated as park and fly stalls are located.
Noted that since the applicant is reaching 85% occupancy, the Commission needs to be certain that it
can call the item back for review if impacts occur.
Requested that striping will be done in a timely manner and verified by staff, with notation to file.
Noted that the Commission is relying upon information from applicant relative to the occupancy of the
hotel and parking usage.
Noted that similar applications have been approved for other hotels.
Public comments:
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Auran 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 and date
stamped April 15, 2005, sheet SD1 and date stamped September 13, 2000, Sheets A1, A2, A2B,
A2C, A3, A3B, A4, and L1 with an eight (8) foot sidewalk across the entire front of the property, that
the surface under the porte cochere shall be covered with pavers not concrete, that additional
trellises which match the design of the trellis at the front shall be placed over all of the pedestrian
entrances to the hotel located on the sides and rear of the structure, that all trees shown on the
landscape plan (L1) shall be replaced with trees of the same size at planting which would achieve
the same size at maturity selected from a list of trees which will flourish in the Bayside environment
and which the City Arborist has reviewed and approved for their environmental compatibility and for
their match for potential size at maturity; and that three parking spaces shall be designated for the
park and fly program at the rear of the hotel and shall be striped yellow in order to identify them;
2. that the conditions of the City Engineer’s May 23 and May 31, 2000 memos, the Chief Building
Official’s April 15, 2005 and November 1, 1999 memos, the Fire Marshal’s April 18, 2005 and
November 1, 1999 memos, the Recycling Specialist’s April 25, 2005 memo, and the Senior
Landscape Inspector’s May 30, 2000 memo shall be met;
3. that any changes to the footprint, floor area, setbacks, or height of the building shall require and
amendment to this permit;
4. that two lanes shall be striped or delineating through the porte cochere area; one of the lanes shall
be marked "Keep Clear" so that guests already registered at the hotel can circulate through the
porte cochere to parking spaces without having to stop and to allow departing vehicles to leave the
site unhindered;
5. that the applicant shall provide airport shuttle service for hotel guests, this shuttle service shall be
made available to hotel employees to connect to Caltrain, BART, and SamTrans at shift changes;
6. that the applicant shall be required to contribute a proportional share towards operation of the City’s
"FreeBee" shuttle service, based on a prorated share of the operating costs to be determined by the
City Finance Director, which provides transportation between this area and the transportation
corridor and commercial centers on the west side of the freeway (U.S. 101);
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
5
7. that the project shall be built and designed to conform to all seismic related requirements of the
latest edition of the California Building Code as amended by the City of Burlingame in effect at the
time a building permit is issued in addition to the limitations of hours of construction imposed by the
City of Burlingame Municipal Code (CS 18.08.035), and any additional seismic requirements
established by the State Architect’s office;
8. that seismic-resistant construction shall follow the recommendations of the site-specific
geotechnical investigations as approved by the City Engineer;
9. that the grading plan shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer and approved by the City
Engineer. All applicable requirements of the NPDES permit for the site shall be adhered to in the
design and during construction;
10. that all applicable San Mateo County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Best Management
Practices shall be adhered to in the design and during construction, including stabilizing areas
denuded due to construction prior to the wet season; erosion shall be controlled during and after
construction to protect San Francisco Bay waters;
11. that the project structures shall be built on piles, as mitigation for static and seismic forces as
approved by the City’s structural engineer, and the building shall be built on pads that raise their
first floor elevation to elevation to + 10 feet MSL as flood protection;
12. that all water and sewer lines shall be constructed from flexible material with flexible connections
with the degree of flexibility established by the City Engineer and with his approval and inspection;
13. that in the event that there is subsidence as the result of an earthquake, the site shall be repaired
as approved by the City Engineer;
14. that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site shall be required to
meet the applicable San Mateo County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Best
Management Practices for surface water runoff and Storm Drain maintenance;
15. that all runoff in the parking lot, including runoff from the landscaped areas, shall be filtered to
remove oil and grease prior to discharge by a method approved by the City Engineer and such
facilities shall be installed and maintained by the property owner, failure to maintain such filters and
facilities in working conditions shall cause this conditional use permit to be called up for review, all
costs for the annual or more frequent inspection and enforcement of this condition shall be paid for
by this project’s property owner;
16. that all site and roof drainage shall be directed to the street frontage;
17. that grading shall be done so that impacts from erosion and runoff into the storm drain will be
minimal;
18. that the applicant shall provide a complete Irrigation Water Management Conservation Plan
together with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application;
19. that low flow plumbing fixtures shall be installed and City water conservation requirements shall be
met at all times, including special additional emergency requirements;
20. that the site shall be periodically sprayed with water to control dust during grading and construction
as required by the BAAQMD and City Engineer;
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
6
21. that before demolition and construction, the applicant shall obtain appropriate permits from the Bay
Area Air Quality Management District and construction equipment emissions shall be in compliance
with their standards;
22. that payment of a Bayfront Development fee to the City of Burlingame for traffic impacts in the Anza
area shall be required to mitigate cumulative impacts of this and other projects on area circulation,
one-half due at the time of planning application and one-half due before the final framing inspection;
23. that any change to the park and fly program shall require an amendment to this conditional use
permit;
24. that if the hotel proposes to charge all customers or guests to park in the parking lot, an amendment
to the conditional use permit shall be required, and the conditional use permit shall include
conditions of approval which provide that employees can park for free, and that the rates charged
for short-term parking shall be limited and the rate charged geared to penalize those non-hotel
guests/visitors who would abuse the availability of parking;
25. that the developer shall pay for the installation of a median refuge area for vehicles turning left from
Cowan Road to northbound Bayshore Highway; the median refuge area shall be designed to meet
the current code standards and must be approved by the City Engineer;
26. that notwithstanding the Burlingame Municipal Code requirements, no piles shall be driven before
9:00 a.m. on Saturday, and none shall be driven on Sunday;
27. that the hotel shall be built so that the interior noise level in all rooms does not exceed 45 dBa;
28. that before a building permit is issued for the project, the applicant shall perform a study and
capacity analysis of the existing sanitary sewer system to analyze the impact of the proposed
project to the existing collection and processing system. The study shall include all the existing
flows and proposed flows, the capacity of the system using the peak factors governing the existing
conditions, increase in BOD/TSS (Biological Oxygen Demand/Total Suspended Solids) due to the
project volumes, and mitigation of impact to the system;
29. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall
be installed to meet current code standards and local capacities;
30. that sewer laterals from the site to the public sewer main shall be checked and shall be replaced to
city standards as required by the development;
31. that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed;
32. that the developer shall pay (proportional share) for the installation of any necessary sewer line
improvements. If the developer does not install the new line he will be required to pay for the
development=s portion of the installation cost. If the City Engineer determines that the pipe will not
be installed at the time of development, the developer will make a cash deposit to the City for a
portion of the estimated cost prior to issuance of a building permit for his construction. The City will
use this deposit at the time of the pipe installation for this development’s share of the cost;
33. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance;
34. that the project applicant shall pay a fee to the City per square foot of developed space to offset
costs of treating the additional wastewater and the project=s proportional share should the sewer
pump station serving this area require resizing;
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
7
35. that the developer shall, as a part of the demolition work on the site, prepare, have approved by the
City and implement a recycling plan for all material to be removed, prior to issuance of a demolition
or grading permit (Assistant City Manager, City Engineer);
36. that the proposed project shall comply with Ordinance 1477 limiting exterior Illumination; and
37. that should any prehistoric or historic archeological relics be discovered during construction, all
work shall be halted until the finding can be fully investigated and proper protection measures, as
determined by a qualified cultural resources consultant acceptable to the City, can be implemented;
all removal or restoration work shall be required to be supervised by qualified professionals
approved by the City Planner. Project personnel shall not collect cultural resources. Prehistoric
resources include chert or obsidian flakes, projectile points, mortars, and pestles; and dark friable
soil containing shell and bone dietary debris, heat-affected rock, or human burials. Historic
resources include stone or adobe foundations or walls; structures and remains with square nails;
and refuse deposits, often in old wells and privies. Any identified cultural resources shall be
recorded on forms DPR 422 (archaeological sites) and/or DPR 523 (historic properties) or similar
forms.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Terrones.
Additional Commission comments:
If the application is approved, they are diminishing the parking rate by a small percentage, but
haven’t observed problems; the Commission has the ability to bring the item back for review, if
necessary.
The Commission has endorsed other park and fly locations; though the supply of surplus parking
spots is tight.
Concern that the applicant was not present to respond to Commission questions.
Aerial photo shows that lot only 50% full.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner
Brownrigg abstained). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:35 p.m.
4. 1528 VANCOUVER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND
SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JEFF BAUER, APPLICANT AND
PROPERTY OWNER; AND DUNLAP DESIGN, DESIGNER) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
Commissioner Brownrigg recused himself since he lives within the vicinity of the project site.
Reference staff report dated September 24, 2007, with attachments. Community Development Director
Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Thirteen (13) conditions were
suggested for consideration.
Chair Deal opened the public hearing.
Mary Dunlap, P. O. Box 250, Belmont and Dolly Bauer, 1528 Vancouver Avenue, Burlingame; represented
the applicant.
Commission comments:
Asked why there were no existing conditions plans.
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
8
Make clarifications on the drawings, including: the windows flanking the entry (replace smaller
window with larger window), add the timber element over windows, add missing notes on plans,
new vents need to match existing, outrigger details need to be duplicated on the addition.
Reduce second floor plate height to 8’ 1”.
Select another variety of street tree; concerned about the current selection being prone to disease.
Public comments:
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, Burlingame; asked if the exemption for basement been verified and if an
egress window from basement is sufficient.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
The applicant is capable of making changes to drawings as requested.
Revised drawings shall reflect the changes enumerated.
Commissioner Cauchi 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 July 20, 2007, sheets 1 through 4, 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 plans shall be revised to show the replacement of the smaller window flanking the entry
with a larger window matching the other that is present, timber elements shall be added above the
windows; new vents shall match existing vents, outrigger details shall be duplicated on the addition,
missing notes shall be included on the plans, and the variety of street tree shall be changed to
another variety that is not disease-prone;
3) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's July 23, 2007 memo, the City Engineer's July 30,
2007 memo, the Fire Marshal's July 24, 2007 memo and the NPDES Coordinator's July 23, 2007
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 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;
6) 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;
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 project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
9
2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
9) 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;
10) 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
11) 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.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Osterling.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner
Brownrigg recused.). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:52 p.m.
5. PROPOSAL TO ADOPT A POLICY FOR ON-SITE NOTICING FOR RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW
PROJECTS
Reference staff report dated September 24, 2007, with attachments. Community Development Director
Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments.
Chair Deal opened the public comment period.
Commission comments:
The “blue card” noticing is inconspicuous; encouraged a bolder color, slightly larger with the same
postage.
Public comments:
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, Burlingame; informal neighborhood meetings rarely occur; better
noticing could prevent situations where building opposition brings more people out later in the
process. Encouraged adoption for a year trial period.
Mark Gaul, 232 Dwight Road, Burlingame; this would be just one more thing passed along to the
property owners; feels revised post-card noticing (larger cards, different color) will be a good move.
There were no further comments and the public comment period was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
Comments opposed to policy:
No need for a sign in front of a house in a residential neighborhood; current noticing practices are
sufficient.
Adds bureaucracy.
The current notification procedure (blue noticing cards) could be improved, as suggested.
Comments in support of policy:
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
10
The procedure is not intended to fix something that is broken; it is intended to enlighten citizens.
Neighborly interaction is not excluded by site posting.
There is a migration of people across the community every morning (school students), people are
moving through the neighborhoods daily because of school locations; postings would be readily
identifiable to these people and stimulate awareness of what is happening in the community.
Try the policy for a 1-year trial period to see the impact of the additional noticing.
Limit to only “new” residential projects.
Commissioner Vistica moved to adopt the policy for one-year trial for only new construction, residential
projects.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Terrones.
Further Commission comments:
Asked staff to determine threshold for “new” construction.
A recent example was cited where citizen input resulted in a better project.
Noted that examples could be provided where the neighborhood worked together to resolve a
conflict.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 4-3 (Commissioners
Auran, Osterling and Deal dissenting). This item concluded at 8:20 p.m.
IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS
6. 210 BAYSWATER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 – APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND VARIANCES
FOR LOT COVERAGE AND PARKING SPACE DIMENSIONS FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION TO A
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSIDERED TO BE SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION (JACK CHU,
APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; AND ED AND SUSAN DAHI, PROPERTY OWNERS) PROJECT
PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN
Planner Strohmeier briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Deal opened the public comment period.
Jack Chu, 55 West 43rd Avenue, San Mateo and Ed Dahi, 210 Bayswater Avenue, Burlingame; represented
the applicant. Noted that on Page A5, the existing living room should show a gable roof, not hip roof on the
existing condition.
Commission comments:
Why can’t garage be built to standard; could easily expand to meet requirement; enlarge to eliminate
Variance.
Small lot supports FAR variance.
Sheet A3; clarify existing rooms.
Stone wainscoting stops at a couple of odd places; stop stone veneer at interior corner of living room,
but continue along other side.
Porch roof; may want to add a small portico in place of existing porch; develop a front-entry statement
that doesn’t require a Variance.
Provide more detail on plans, particularly with respect to gutters, spark arresters.
Concern regarding lot coverage and encroachment into front setback; what is the justification.
Public comments:
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes September 24, 2007
11
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, Burlingame; now that foundation has been poured, could a new house be
built on existing foundation?
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Brownrigg made a motion to place the item on the regular Action Calendar when complete.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi.
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 8:47 p.m.
X. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS
Commissioner Brownrigg noted the September 19, 2007 Green Task Force Meeting. The group will
continue to work on green building issues over the course of the next year.
XI. DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Commission Communications - None
City Council regular meeting of September 17, 2007 – Director Meeker noted the Council’s Study
Session regarding Economic Development.
1592 Columbus Avenue – Requested changes to a previously approved Design Review project –
accepted by the Commission.
1336 Paloma Avenue – Requested changes to a previously approved Design Review project. – the
Commission requested that the matter be agendized for discussion, specifically regarding the stone
treatment on the building.
Noted Joint City Council/Planning Commission study session regarding Safeway on September 25,
2007.
City Attorney Andersen noted that new “City” e-mail addresses have been created for the Planning
Commissioners.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Deal adjourned the meeting at 8:51 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard Terrones, Secretary