Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1997.04.14CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION April 14, 1997 - 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order by Chairman Ellis on April 14, 1997 at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Coffey, Deal, Galligan, Key, Wellford and Ellis Absent: Commissioners Mink Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; City Attorney, Larry Anderson; City Engineer, Frank Erbacher; Fire Marshal, Keith Marshall MINUTES - The minutes of the March 24, 1997 Planning Commission meeting were approved as mailed. AGENDA - The order of the agenda was approved. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. ITEMS FOR STUDY APPLICATION FOR PARKING, SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT 860 PALOMA AVENUE, ZONED R-1, (JEFFERY T. AND C. L. FRANCESCONI, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNERS). Requests: since the garage is being replaced why is only one parking space being provided; what do you do with the existing extra 132 SF; there appears to be a basement in the house, where is the access to it; why can you not meet the side setback since the change to the structure on that side is substantial; it appears that the new porch is creating the problem which keeps you from providing two covered parking spaces, why not reduce the size of the porch, or outline the exceptional circumstances. Item set for public hearing on April 28, 1997. -1- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997 2. APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND MINOR MODIFICATION FOR LOT COVERAGE AT 1704 TOLEDO AVENUE, ZONED R-1, (LI YIN LIANG, PROPERTY OWNER AND JOHN STEWART, STEWART ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT). Requests: will this be noticed for a larger area than the HACP for the public hearing; recalculate the structural square footage, what is on the plans does not seem to scale with the staff report; potential problem seems to be where the 4 feet are added at the rear, please address impact of this part of the remodel on the neighbor. Item set for public hearing April 28, 1997. 3. APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT TO REBUILD AN EXISTING GARAGE (ACCESSORY STRUCTURE) AND CREATE A ROOM WHICH WILL BE USED FOR HOME OCCUPATION AND RECREATION PURPOSES AT 1205 GROVE AVENUE, ZONED R-1, (RICK AND ELSA KITTS, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS). Requests: how can we enforce a condition where the washer and dryer will only be top loaded; does the property owner have a home occupation permit now; address why are not building a detached garage and an addition to the house with an office, family room, laundry room; seem to be moving in the opposite direction of the code from two covered parking to one, please explain why this is better for the city; project as shown on plans seems to have at least two windows within 10' of property line, should be addressed. Item set for public hearing April 28, 1997. 4. APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING SPECIAL PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR THE REMOVAL OF ONE EXISTING COVERED PARKING SPACE AT 744 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED R-3, (WALTER MARKELOFF AND ALEX PARHOOTTO, APPLICANTS AND CHURCH OF ALL RUSSIAN SAINTS, PROPERTY OWNERS). Requests: what is the intent for the use of the rest of the site, do they intend to keep the dwelling unit for permanent use; can more information on access be provided, could one off-street parking space be added to the site to off set loss; how will the removed kitchen area be incorporated into the assembly room, provide floor plan; explain what is non -conforming, what is occurring is the loss of one parking space for the dwelling unit on site; residence is not being used regularly, can user stay elsewhere or could commit permanently to very limited use of living quarters, would mitigate impact; explain application of current nonconforming section of code as it addresses the fact that there never was parking for the church use on site. Item set for public hearing on April 28, 1997, if responses can be gathered in time. 5. APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR TAKE-OUT AT 577 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, ZONED C-4, (JOHN ALVERGUE, DBA JOHN'S, APPLICANT AND WILLIAM WILSON & ASSOCIATES, PROPERTY OWNERS). Requests: should not bring forward until BCDC has responded to the change in parking layout; staff report says 50 customers a day for each cart, application states 100, correct; is there a restaurant in either building; have trash receptacles been required for outside the building as well as inside; will ma Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997 there be tables and chairs in each of the lobbies. Item set for public hearing on April 28, 1997, providing we have the letter from BCDC in time. 6. APPLICATION FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR A 132 ROOM HOTEL AT 765 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, ZONED C-4, (765 AIRPORT BOULEVARD LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNERS). Requests: consultant should verify if the cumulative traffic impact includes the new building just approved at 577 Airport; provide a detailed discussion of the lagoon frontage improvements proposed, was the alternative of removing the rip -rap and replacing it with sandy beach addressed, is this an alternative; the project is a little short on landscaping on site and in the front setback, what mitigations are being included to off -set the short fall; provide the heights of the Red Roof Inn and the Embassy Suites hotels. Item was set for public hearing April 28, 1997 if responses are completed in time. 7. APPLICATION FOR TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR A CHURCH AT 1500 EASTON DRIVE, ZONED R-1 AND R-3, (BOB DAVIDSON, APPLICANT AND ARTHUR D. GIMBEL, PROPERTY OWNER). Requests: thought house next door was going to remain on a separate parcel, why has it been merged into the larger piece; has the church understood the problem caused by this merger if they wish, in the future, to sell the house separately; the city needs an easement for an old water vault found on the site when the survey was done. Item set for pubic hearing on April 28, 1997, providing the map can be adjusted and the questions answered in time. ITEMS FOR ACTION 8. APPLICATION FOR FRONT SETBACK AND PARKING VARIANCES AT 1112 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1, (DANIEL BIERMANN, APPLICANT AND ROBERT AND ANN HOEKSEMA, PROPERTY OWNERS). Reference staff report, 4.14.97, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Two conditions were suggested for consideration. A letter from Mr. O'Brien, 114 Balboa, in support of the project was read into the record. C. Ellis opened the public hearing. Dan Bierman, 1620 El Camino Real, the designer and Ann Hoeksema, 1112 Balboa Avenue, the applicant, were present to answer questions and explain the application. They noted that their data showed more than half the houses on the block have one covered off-street parking space, and many of these are larger houses than their proposal, they would like the same opportunity. A two car garage would have to be put further back on the lot which would reduce the useable rear yard area and cause removal of trees important to screening rear yard. Applicant noted, looked at different options this design is the least detrimental to the landscaping, i.e., the Persimmon, Cherry and Oak trees. Does provide for 4 parking spaces off the street because of the driveway. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. -3- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997 Commissioner comment: front setback variance justified since the block: is unique there are many one story houses that are a part of older housing stock being substantially remodeled or replaced, so the area is in transition; the garage is another issue since we are planning for 80 years and one covered space is not sufficient although this site has a long driveway; prefer not to remove the trees since this lot abuts multiple family zoning and the trees provide a privacy screen; if the parking is provided at the rear of the lot it will screen the single family use from the apartment; the placement of the house on the site is unique with an 8 foot side setback; if you made a bigger garage would take away useable rear yard; a large multiple family building overlooks the rear yard of this house and that is a bigger detriment than the 1 covered parking space, it is better to screen the yard; the placement of the existing building and its affect on the placement of the 2 car garage and the unique rear yard which is needed for family use cause justification for one covered parking space; agree if remove trees you would see one huge structure; trees may not be protected size, but its hard to get a tree that big; the exception on the front facade is not too big and the design of the front of the house includes a lot of features that make it attractive; the 50% rule for new construction works against houses that are small to begin with and needs to be considered here. C. Wellford moved approval of the front setback and parking variances based on the reasons stated and that the property is unique with a larger than normal side setback forcing the building into the middle of the lot making a 2 car garage difficult; also the adjacent multiple family structure looms over the lot and increases the need for screening vegetation; the motion is by resolution and with the conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 10, 1997 Site Plan, Existing Floor Plan, Proposed Upper and Lower Floor Plans; and 2) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Deal and approved 6-0-1 (C. Mink absent) roll call/voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 9. APPLICATION FOR HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AT 3008 HILLSIDE DRIVE, ZONED R-1;, (VIRGINIA M. WALKER, WALKER TRUST, PROPERTY OWNER AND OTTO MILLER, APPLICANT). Reference staff report, 4.14.97, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Five conditions were suggested for consideration. Commissioner asked how much of the new house would be visible from the street; staff noted that with the 40' setback, down slope some of the facade of the house would be hidden, indicative of the impact of the slope, the roof ridge rises 16' above the average top of curb. A lot of the front yard is paved, can this be reviewed, yes. Chairman Ellis opened the public hearing. Otto Miller, 520 San Ramundo, Hillsborough, applicant, spoke noting that he was appalled that this item was called up for review;, before designing the house he had written to all the neighbors, received input and designed the house with their concerns in mind; circular drive is included because of the poor site lines on Hillside at this location and therefore the benefits of entering the street in the forward direction. He was asked what the exterior finish material would be; Mr. Miller noted that it would be stucco and clay tile. Landscaping was also discussed, -4- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997 noting the need to cover up so much paving; Mr. Miller noted that they would put in trees, shrubs and grass. Staff noted that required uncovered parking could only be provided in the driveway between the street and the face of the garage. There were no other comments. and the public hearing was closed. C, Galligan noted that he was impressed with this location, it is remote relative to the houses across the street or next door, the second story roof will be hard to see, neighbors concerns seem to have been addressed and they have expressed no concern about view obstruction; Spanish motif is in keeping with the other structures in the area; because of the sight lines along Hillside at this location the curved driveway is appropriate for safety; based on the applicant's comments the paving will be appropriately balanced with landscaping in the front yard; for these reasons he moved approval of the Hillside Area Construction Permit. The motion was seconded by C. Coffey. In discussion on the motion commissioners noted that the stucco and clay tile along with the landscaping in the front yard were important to the action and suggested that the conditions be amended to reflect these two items. The maker of the motion and the second agreed. The chairman called for the vote. The motion passed 6-0-1 (C. Mink absent) on a voice vote, 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 March 24, 1997, Sheets Al, A2, A3, A4 and A5 with the double curb cut and circular driveway in the front yard where paving shall not exceed 68 % of the front yard area; 2) that the conditions of the City Engineer's March 31, 1997 memo regarding coordination with San Mateo County and the City for site drainage shall be met; a demolition permit and building permit shall not be issued until the City Engineer has accepted the drainage solution; 3) that the site shall direct all surface drainage from the lot to Hillside Drive:; 4) that the developer shall prepare an arborist's report identifying the trees to be removed and how those retained on the property and the City's street trees in front of the property are to be protected during construction as well as a Landscape Plan showing where the required replacement trees will be located; no demolition or building permit shall be issued until the City's Senior Landscape Inspector has approved both of these plans; 5) that instructions shall be added to the building plans; on sheets corresponding to Al, A2 and A3 of the schematic plans; instructions shall read, stucco exterior, tile roof and soft landscape to screen the driveway from the street in the front yard of the house; and 6) that this project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame, passed 6-0-1 (C. Mink absent) on a voice vote. It was noted that the action will become final at the close of the next City Council meeting, April 23, 1997. NEIGHBORHOOD CONSISTENCY. Chairman Ellis noted that the Commission met with the City Council on Saturday, April12, 1977, and received concurrence from the Council on the direction taken by the commission so far. He noted that the council. wanted the commission to be thorough in their study. It was also noted that the Council wished the commission to address some issues relating to food establishments and their regulation first. Staff was directed to focus on the food establishment issue and bring it forward as soon as it was ready; also because of the length of the next agenda to begin the next meeting at 7:00 p.m. corrected 4.22 -5- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997 noting the need to cover up much paving; Mr. Miller noted that they would put in trees, shrubs and grass. Staff noted that reqdured uncovered parking could only be provided in the driveway between the street and the face of a garage. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C, Galligan noted that he was impres with this location, it is remote relative to the houses across the street or next door, the second story f will be hard to see, neighbors concerns seem to have been addressed and they have expressed n concern about view obstruction; Spanish motif is in keeping with the other structures in the area; ecause of the sight lines along Hillside at this location the curved driveway is appropriate for safety, based on the applicant's comments the paving will be appropriately balanced with landscaping in area); yard; for these reasons he moved approval of the Hillside Area Construction Permit. The moti n was seconded by C. Coffey. In discussion on the motion commissioners noted that the stucco and clay tile along with the landscaping in the front yard were importaAt to the action and suggested that the conditions be amended to reflect these two items. The mak r of the motion and the second agreed. The chairman called for the vote. The motion ith the following amended conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans sub tted to the Planning Department and date stamped March 24, 1997, Sheets Al, A29 A3, A4 and A5 ith the double curb cut and circular driveway in the front yard where paving shall not exceed 68 % of a front yard area; 2) that the conditions of the City Engineer's March 31, 1997 memo regarding coo ination with San Mateo County and the City for site drainage shall be met; a demolition permit and ilding permit shall not be issued until the City Engineer has accepted the drainage solution; 3) that site shall direct all surface drainage from the lot to Hillside Drive; 4) that the developer shall prepay an arborist's report identifying the trees to be removed and how those retained on the property an the City's street trees in front of the property are to be protected during construction as well as Landscape Plan showing where the required replacement trees will be located; no demolition or b ' ding permit shall be issued until the City's Senior Landscape Inspector has approved both of these pl s; 5) that instructions shall be added to the building plans; on sheets corresponding to Al, A2 and A3 if the schematic plans; instructions shall read, stucco exterior, tile roof and soft landscape to screen a driveway from the street in the front yard of the house; and 6) that this project shall meet all requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995 Edition, as amended by the City of Bu 'ngame, passed 6-0-1 (C. Mink absent) on a voice vote. It was noted that the action will become fin at the close of the next City Council meeting, April 23, 1997. NEIGHBORHOOD CONSISTENCY. Chairman Ellis noted that the Commission met with the City Council on Saturday, pril 12, 1977, and received concurrence from the Council on the direction taken by the commission so He noted that the council wanted the commission to be thorough in their study. It was also noted t the Council wished the commission to address some issues relating to food establishments and their reg lion first. Staff was directed to focus on the food establishment issue and bring it forward as soon a3,•it was ready; also because of the length of the next agenda to begin the next meeting at 7:00 p.m. -5- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997 PLANNER REPORTS Review of City Council regular meeting of April 7, 1997 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. „II i rw 0 Respectfully submitted, Karen Key, Secretary