Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1998.06.25SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING June 25, 1998 7.00 P.M. Conference Room A CALL TO ORDER Chair Deal called the June 25, 1998, special meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Staff Present: &UMMITYLVESOU115M FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. Commissioners Bojuds, Keighran, Key, Luzuriaga, Vistica and Deal Commissioner Coffey City Planner, Meg Monroe; City Attorney, Larry Anderson The order of the agenda was approved. CP Monroe introduced Ruben Hurin a member of the Planning staff in the audience. APPOINTMENT OF SUBCOMMITTEES Chair Deal pointed out to the commissioners that at this time the commission has two working subcommittees, one working on revisions to the food establishment regulations which apply to Burlingame Avenue Subarea A and one that is continuing to work on implementing design review by revising the R 1 district regulations, making further refinements to the Design Guidelines and making a recommendation on how design review should be administered. The second subcommittee is working under a deadline because the current regulations will expire in November. He pointed out that C. Coffey had asked to be assigned to the Food Establishment Subcommittee. C. Key already sits on that committee. CA pointed out that no more than three commissioners can sit on a temporary subcommittee. C. Bojuds indicated that he would be willing to sit on this subcommittee as well. Chair Deal confirmed the subcommittee's membership as Cers. Bojuds, Coffey and Key. Chair Deal then reviewed briefly the status of the work of the Design Review Subcommittee to date. Seated on this subcommittee now are Cers. Deal and Luzuriaga. Cers. Keighran and Vistica both expressed an interest. After some discussion it C. Deal appointed C. Vistica to the subcommittee with direction that all documents to be discussed by the subcommittee also be sent to C. Keighran for her review and comment. It is expected that the committee will meet on selected Thursdays at 4:00 p.m. with the City Planner and City Attorney. Staff will mail materials for discussion to both subcommittees prior to their scheduled meetings. The members will select the meeting dates and times based on their convenience. NIIN[7TES6. u -1- City of Burlingame Amning Commission Minutes OVERVIEW OF PLANNING PROCESS June 25. 1998 CA Anderson and CP Monroe commented on the purpose of the session which is to provide the new members of the commission with an overview of the legislation which enables and circumscribes the actions of the Planning Commission, a synopsis of city planning legislation, the kinds of decisions the commission is asked to make and the criteria they are expected to use, what environmental review is, how and where it fits into the decision making process, and how the provisions of the Brown and Political Reform Acts apply to the commissioners and their assignments. The presentation by the CA and CP included where the authority to "plan and zone" comes from in State legislation, noting that Burlingame is a General Law city and limited in what it can regulate by the California Constitution. Briefly the history of state planning and land use law was reviewed including the Subdivision Map Act. The role of Burlingame"s General Plan and its mandated elements in establishing local planning and development policy was discussed; and the role of zoning in implementing the general plan policies. The unique role of the Specific Area Plan for the Bayfront which overlays both the general plan land uses and zoning regulations was noted. The fact that regulations which are implemented by the Planning Commission are scattered through out the municipal code was noted, and the various regulations identified and discussed briefly i.e. Subdivision, grading, sign, building and fire codes, urban reforestation, public nuisance. The names, title, and jobs of staff in the various departments in the city who have responsibilities in the planning process were identified. Staff reviewed all the types of actions which require findings, discussed what makes a finding good, and how findings are used by City Council and judges. The group went over the planning counter handouts, including fees schedule, and the template used for staff reports. We discussed the fact that the content of the public notice limits the exceptions the commission can take on a particular project. Some time was spent on a discussion of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and how it functions as an environmental disclosure report; how one determines which of the possible types of review is required was also noted. The CA concluded with some insights into the permit streamlining act and how it drives the preparation and hearing process on a project; and the Brown and Political Reform Acts and how they circumscribe commissioners actions. Finally the Commission and staff discussed commission procedures, what works and doesn't, what to do on a site visit and how to follow up at the meeting on the project, how to identify and avoid civil rights issues. ADJOURNMENT Chair Deal adjourned the meeting at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dave Luzuriaga, Secretary NUNUTES6.25 -2-