Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN - PC - 2000.08.28 Minutes CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA August 28, 2000 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER Chairman Luzuriaga called the August 28, 2000, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Bojués, Deal, Dreiling, Keighran, Osterling, Vistica and Luzuriaga Absent: None Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; Senior Planner, Maureen Brooks; Zoning Technician, Erika Lewit; City Attorney, Larry Anderson; City Engineer, Syed Murtuza MINUTES The minutes of the August 14, 2000, regular meeting of the Planning Commission were approved as mailed. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The order of the agenda was approved. FROM THE FLOOR Enoch Yeung, 1745 Sebastian Drive, asked that item 6b, 1785 Sebastian Drive be called off the consent calendar. Helaine Darling, 3100 Margarita Avenue, asked that 1568 Alturas Drive be called off the consent calendar. Anastasia Cole, 341 Occidental Avenue, noted she wished to speak regarding 1548 Ralston Avenue, and was concerned in general with construction going on in her neighborhood. She is surrounded by tall stucco walls, and is concerned with the construction dust, noise and the size of construction equipment needed for structures over 30 feet in height and asked that the commission consider bulk and mass of additions and the scale of the existing neighborhood. This item concluded at 7:15 p.m. STUDY ITEMS 4 KAREN COURT - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION (DAVID GUO AND MYLA PUYAT, APPLICANTS; NORI KANDA, DESIGNER; WESTCHESTER N.Y. INTL INC, PROPERTY OWNER) CP Monroe presented the staff report. Commissioners asked: City Engineer notes that all drainage must be taken to the street, does this include sump pump if the structure is lower than the curb; yes. Commissioner asked that this item be placed on the consent calendar. Chairman Lurzuriaga set the item for the consent calendar on September 11, 2000. This item concluded at 7:17 p.m. 2900 ADELINE DRIVE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND SPECIAL PERMIT TO ATTACH AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE TO THE MAIN DWELLING (R.C. City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2000 Approved Minutes -2- SMITH, APPLICANT; J.D. & ASSOCIATES, DESIGNER; JAMES E. AND MARY TOMLINSON, PROPERTY OWNERS) CP Monroe presented the staff report. C. Deal noted that he had a business relationship with the applicant so he would abstain from discussion on this item and would step down during action. There were no questio ns from the commission and the item was placed on the consent calendar for the September 11, 2000, meeting. This item concluded at 7:20 p.m. 1337 PALOMA AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR A NEW DETACHED GARAGE (ALEX AND GLORIA HIDCHENKO, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; J.D. & ASSOCIATES, DESIGNER) CP Monroe presented the staff report. C. Dreiling noted that he lived within 300 feet of the proposed project so would abstain from discussion tonight and step down for the action. C. Deal noted that he had a business relationship with the applicant and he would abstain from discussion on this item and step down for action. Commissioners asked: if grant these requests for the garage could a condition be added requiring the garage to be converted from storage to parking if two covered parking spaces were required in the future; staff noted that parking in a tandem configuration requires a conditional use permit but the conversion requirement could be worked into a condition for this project; has a mitigation for the large pine to be removed been included in the project proposal; does the 1 line for the sink refer to the waste line, if so should it be limited to a 2 inch maximum; would prefer the entire structure to be pushed back 2 feet further on the site to increase the distance between it and the existing structure. There were no other comments from the commissioners. Chairman Luzuriaga set the item for the consent calendar for the September 11, 2000, meeting if the requested information is submitted to the Planning Department in time. This item concluded at 7:25 p.m. 931 CAPUCHINO AVENUE - ZONED R-2 - APPLICATION FOR PARKING VARIANCES FOR ONE COVERED PARKING SPACE AND FOR PARKING IN THE FRONT SETBACK FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (THOMAS MCCARVILLE, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; MATTHEW & CYNTHIA D. TRAGOUTSIS, PROPERTY OWNERS) CP Monroe presented the staff report. Commissioners asked: this is the only house on the block without a garage, if we granted this variance for covered parking would we be setting a precedent; would staff identify other similar projects which have been approved in the past an the characteristics of their requests; a condition should be added that if this house is ever demolished or has an extensive remodel the variance for covered parking should expire, and it should be required that covered parking to code be provided; when was the portion of the house that looks as if it was placed in the driveway built, was it original or an addition; concerned about the precedent being established in a case like this where substantial construction is being done on the house, applicant should address that issue in making findings for a variance; is it possible at all to get a car between the house and the property line on the side where the structure appears to be built in what would have been the driveway; feel it is imperative to provide some covered parking on site, given the problems in the area with parking on the street; doing a lot, asking for a variance for covered parking is a huge request, would the applicant address why they chose not to provide covered parking on site; they are doubling the size of the house, why not remove the porch and provide covered parking. There were no further questions and the item was set for action at the September 11, 2000, meeting providing all the information is submitted to the Planning Department in time and there is space on that agenda. This item was concluded at 7:32 p.m. 1755 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY - ZONED O-M - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, FRONT SETBACK AND LANDSCAPING VARIANCES TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW FOUR-STORY, 77-ROOM HOTEL WHICH EXCEEDS THE BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENT IN THE O-M ZONE, AND TO VARY FROM THE FRONT SETBACK AND FRONT SETBACK LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS OF THE DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR BAYFRONT DEVELOPMENT AT 1755 BAYSHORE City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2000 Approved Minutes -3- HIGHWAY, ZONED O-M (SATURN INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; LEE GAGE & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT) CP Monroe presented the staff report. The Commissioners asked: intention of moving the building closer to the street was to achieve a better human orientation and less auto-oriented, with the porte cochere at the front the pedestrian accessibility is lost, need to move porte cochere to side where it was before and provide 12 foot wide pedestrian access from to property line with a pedestrian oriented entrance to establish pattern for future development in the area; would like to see additional store front windows in the breakfast and lobby areas to increase the activity at the street level, moving the porte cochere to the side will facilitate this; appreciate all that have done and effort to understand the pedestrian and increase the potential human scale of the street scape; expected the building to be closer to the street not the porte cochere , explain why it will be pedestrian oriented to have the porte cochere at the front; would like to see fenestration on the larger windows at the breakfast and lobby area to enhance their visibility; would like the plans to better show site development features such as paving patterns, what areas are permeable and impermeable; where will deliveries be made; will run off water be filtered; there are metal balconies all over the building, is there a way to use different types of metal balconies to increase the variety and add interest; what is the status or respon se to the letter from the City Engineer regarding drainage; need more detailed landscape plans. Chairman Luzuriaga noted that there is a lot of information needed to respond to commission’s questions and it should not be done hurriedly, so set this item for action at the meeting of September 25, 2000, provided all the information is complete and to the Planning Department in time to check and prepare the required documents and there is space on that agenda. This item concluded at 7:45 p.m. 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. Chairman Luzuriaga noted that item 6b, 1785 Sebastian Drive and item 6d, 1568 Alturas Drive, would be removed from the consent calendar and set as the first and second items on the regular calendar. He asked if anyone i n the audience or any commissioner wished to take any other items off the consent calendar. C. Deal asked that a condition be added to item 6a, 1532 Burlingame Avenue, that the trim around the second floor windows shall match the trim on the existing first floor windows. There were no further requests. 1532 BURLINGAME AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION (ROBERT AND JESSICA FELLOWS, PROPERTY OWNERS AND APPLICANTS; JOHN MATTHEWS ARCHITECTS, ARCHITECT) 1349 VANCOUVER AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR A NEW TWO-STORY HOUSE (JAMES CHU, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; RON GROVE, PROPERTY OWNER) (65 NOTICED) (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 14, 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) 218 CALIFORNIA DRIVE - ZONED C-1, SUBAREA D - APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RETAIL USE (RUG SALES) IN AUTO ROW (AL HERIZ, APPLICANT; ISAAC AND EVELYN BAUMELGRUEN, PROPERTY OWNERS) C. Bojués moved approval of the consent calendar based on the facts in the staff report, commissioners comments and the findings in the staff reports with recommended conditions in the staff report and the condition added to 1532 Burlingame Avenue, by resolution. The motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 7-0. Appeal procedures were advised. The consent calendar concluded at 7:47 p.m. City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2000 Approved Minutes -4- REGULAR ACTION ITEM 1785 SEBASTIAN AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION (BAY AREA SUNROOMS, APPLICANT; CHUNG-KUN WANG, PROPERTY OWNER) Reference staff report, 8.28.00, with attachments. Senior Planner Brooks and Commission discussed the report, reviewed criteria and Planning Department comments. Two conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission had no questions of staff. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public hearing. Chung Kun Wang, 1785 Sebastian Drive noted that the proposed construction is a sunroom attached to the rear of the house on the flat part of the lot over an existing paved patio; tried to resolve the issues with the neighbor and got no response. Enoch Yeung and Cheung Yeung, 1745 Sebastian Drive, submitted photos with sight line facing north from bedroom, as long as the addition is not in line of view and dust and noise is not excessive, would be acceptable; noted that whole block had a landslide 18 years ago, house built too close to hill, may hurt whole block. Chung Kun Wang, 1785 Sebastian Drive responded that as shown in the picture the sun room will be attached to the family room, will be distant from the slope. There was no further comment and Chairman Luzuriaga closed the public hearing. Commission comment: commissioners are well versed in methods of construction, this addition will take place on a flat part of the lot, will not affect the hill, it is a first story addition that will not affect sight line; would like to make the point that commission’s responsibility is to make sure project conforms to planning and zoning, not construction; building and engineering staff will make sure it is a safe structure that will not cause a landslide. Chairman Luzuriage 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 date stamped July 18, 2000, sheets 1 and 2; and 2) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Dreiling. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. The item concluded at 7:55 p.m. 1568 ALTURAS DRIVE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION (ROBERT A. GERMAN, PYRAMID DESIGN GROUP, APPLICANT; ANDREAS R. HILDEBRANDT AND ANNIE FLANNERY-HILDEBRANDT, PROPERTY OWNERS) Reference staff report, 8.28.00, with attachments. Senior Planner Brooks and Commission discussed the report, reviewed criteria and Planning Department comments. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission asked if the pictures in the report were taken from the proposed deck level or the widow’s walk; the applicant clarified that they were taken from the deck level. There were no further questions of staff. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public hearing. Robert German, 462 Sterling Road, Mountain View, project architect, noted that story poles were put up where the widow’s walk will be, changes had been made to the plans as requested by the commission, and explained the proposal. Helaine Darling, 3100 Margarita Avenue, lives next door to proposed addition, presented photos and a letter addressing concerns; how high will the addition be, appreciated that story poles had been put up, can see impact of addition, concerned with impact on her view, have been able to come to an amiable solution, request that applicant landscape City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2000 Approved Minutes -5- and maintain the west corner of the property to obscure views of the chimney and widow s walk , would like the placement of trees and bushes to be made a condition of approval of the project; asked if conditions were added how would it be enforced if future owners wanted landscaping removed. CA Anderson noted that landscaping is not enforceable unless it involves a heritage tree, can ask applicant to plant landscaping, but maintenance would take good faith effort of neighbors. Andreas Hildebrand, 1568 Alturas Drive, project gave him chance to meet neighbors, showed them the plans, had no objections, additional landscaping is reasonable request, have hired a landscape architect and will come up with a plan. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner comments: visited the site and talked to the neighbors and applicant, commend applicant for putting up story poles, when look out neighbor’s side window, do see a small portion of the addition, since applicant willing to install landscaping will add condition; design is nice, blends well with existing house and neighborhood. C. Keighran 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 date stamped August 17, 2000, Sheets P1 through P5, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2) that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, 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 design review; 3) that the conditions of the City Engineer’s June 30, 2000 memo shall be met; 4) that the western corner of the property adjacent to 3100 Margarita Avenue, shall be landscaped and maintained with trees and bushes that will obscure the view of the addition from the neighboring property; and 5) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Deal. There was no discussion on the motion. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. The item concluded at 8:15 p.m. 833 LINDEN AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A NEW SINGLE-CAR DETACHED GARAGE WITH A RECREATION ROOM (PATRICK MATTOS, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JOHN CURRY, DESIGNER) Reference staff report, 8.28.00, with attachments. City Planner and Commission discussed the report, reviewed criteria and Planning Department comments. Three conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission had no questions of staff. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public hearing. Patrick Mattos, 833 Linden Avenue, noted that the main concern appeared to be the full bathroom, there would be a portable spa next to the recreation room, would like to use the bathroom as a changing area; room will open up back yard for outdoor entertaining, will have a pool table and be a place to watch football; did not want to add on to the house because it was just remodeled completely. Commission comments: look at this proposal, recreation room could be added on the house and avoid problems, is supposed to be accessory structure, entertainment room close to property line is an extension of living space into rear yard a couple of feet from neighbors yards with big impacts, could still have a garage and workbench, but the rest should be added to the house; concern that it could be a second living quarters in the future; full bath and fireplace, everything for someone to rent; not troubled by project, live in neighborhood with lots of accessory structure, gives City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2000 Approved Minutes -6- yard arrangement a sense of privacy, texture to property line, have trouble with second unit argument, hard to say someone would use it that way. C. Bojués made a motion to deny the application for the reasons given. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a roll call vote on the motion to deny. The motion passed on a 5-2 (Cers. Dreiling and Luzuriaga dissenting) roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. The item concluded at 8:30 p.m. 1548 RALSTON AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION (IQBAL A. SERANG, ARCHITECT AND APPLICANT; JEREMY AND WENDY VERBA, PROPERTY OWNERS) (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 14, 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) Reference staff report, 8.28.00, with attachments. Senior Planner Brooks and Commission discussed the report, reviewed criteria and Planning Department comments. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission had no questions of staff. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public hearing. Wendy Verba, 1548 Ralston Avenue, noted they had left the last meeting with specific direction, have complied with suggestions, hopeful project can now be approved. Anastasia Cole, 341 Occidental Avenue, noted that this project is small compared to other projects, the height and size is reasonable, when height goes over 30', have to use big equipment and there is a lot of noise. There was no further comment and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner comments: looked at plans, house has beautiful and not so beautiful aspects, this is a reasonable solution taking into account what they have to work with, did good job. C. Deal 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 date stamped August 17, 2000, sheets A-1 through A-3, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2) that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the plate height, roof height, or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official’s April 10, 2000 memo and the City Engineer’s April 10, 2000 memo shall be met; and 4) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Dreiling. There was no discussion on the motion. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. The item concluded at 8:35 p.m. 1441 BERNAL AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR A NEW TWO-STORY HOUSE (MARK ROBERTSON, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; LINDA FRYE, PROPERTY OWNER) Reference staff report, 8.28.00, with attachments. Senior Planner Brooks and Commission discussed the report, reviewed criteria and Planning Department comments. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission noted that the FAR in the staff report at one point is listed as 3020 SF, should be 3335 SF. There were no further questions of staff. City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2000 Approved Minutes -7- Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public hearing. Mark Robertson, 135 Arroyo Court, San Mateo, project designer, noted that he kept the same design as was previously reviewed, but made the garage detached, was mindful of neighbor to the right, kept the driveway where it now is to separate from neighbor. Commissioners asked: on south facade, it seems that there is an easy way to break up the mass by cantilevering the stair from the landing up, would help the mass, realize there is a landscape buffer on that side. The applicant noted that he is willing to make that change, would like to see it as a condition because he is on a tight time line. Public Comment: Ann Marie Flores, 1436 Bernal Avenue, notes that this as a custom home designed for the lot, why does it need variances; understand construction will keep happening, on this block there is an elementary school and lots of construction traffic, could the block be designated a construction zone to reduce traffic problems; design meant to fit in with neighborhood but will look like a new home, can we request a plaque noting the date of construction; would like clarification on the plans, states it is set back further than average, but will line up with house next door, appears this is the average of the block. Commissioners response: the requested increase in height is a special permit, not a variance, allows for a more traditional roof slope, can be granted based on architectural character; the request for a construction zone should be made to the Public Works; Traffic Engineering; hope with this design and review, the date of construction is not apparent as it is with 1970's vintage construction. Planning staff noted that the block average is based on the setbacks on the entire length of the block, in this average case is 19'-10", proposed setback is 27'-6". Mary Packard, 1445 Bernal Avenue, would like to thank applicant for efforts on revisions to plans, need to provide architectural consistency with neighborhood, house on one side is 2100 SF, one on other side is 1200 SF, do not mind if it is big, just that it is not in our face; would like the project flipped so the bulk is in the back, not in the front, even if garage is attached toward the back; understand privacy is a sensitive issue, but thought it could be addressed. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner comment: as a point of clarification, there are quite a few gestures in this design toward a traditional style, this avoids it being a 70s house, in terms of whether it is flipped, need to understand that the front steps back alot, the part that does come forward has a small scale; if the stairwell is popped out on the south side it might offer relief; do not think rooms should be rearranged, has a traditional arrangement; project is in keeping with the neighborhood. C. Vistica 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 date stamped August 4, 2000, sheets 1 through 4, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2) that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the plate height, roof height, or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3) that the conditions of the City Engineer’s July 24, 2000 memo shall be met; 4) that the stairwell on the south elevation shall be redesigned so that it projects from the landing up as a cantilevered bay and breaks up the long south side of the house; and 5) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the Calif ornia Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Bojués. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. The item concluded at 9:00 p.m. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 711 CONCORD WAY - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR SUBSTANDARD PARKING SPACE DIMENSIONS FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2000 Approved Minutes -8- (STEWART ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; JEFFREY S. AND JENNIFER L. SANDERS, PROPERTY OWNERS) CP Monroe presented the staff report. There were no questions about the project from the commission. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public comment. John Stewart, architect 1351 Laurel Street, and Jennifer Sanders, property owner, represented the project. Commissioners identified the following concerns: felt that given the extent of the work to the house the garage should be made wider and longer to meet current code requirements; there is interesting detail on the existing house, will the new match the corner window detail; concerned about the flat portion of the roof, provide detail showing what the transition would be from the flat to sloped roof; garage requirements should be met inside existing structure so roof line does not change; its all right to revise the front entrance to extend a covering over the door to protect people from the weather. C. Deal made a motion to put this item on the consent calendar for September 11, 2000, provided the variance for parking were removed and the plans adjusted to address commission concerns. Motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion which was approved 7-0. This item concluded at 9:15 p.m. 1541 LA MESA DRIVE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (KEITH BORRALL, APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND DESIGNER) CP Monroe presented the staff report. There were no questions of staff about the project. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public comment. Keith Borrell, property owner and applicant, represented the project. Susan Chon, 1547 La Mesa Drive, next door neighbor also commented on view. Commissioners identified the following concerns: there is a problem with the roof plan, it needs to be completely revised, applicant should get professional advice; important to install story poles so effect of this addition, even though it is at the back of the building, can be determined by neighbor; horizontal view of neighbor to the left from their bedroom could be affected by addition. C. Osterling moved, in the interest of keeping this project on track, to place this on the action calendar for the next meeting if roof revisions could be made so the story poles could be installed in time and there was space on that agenda. The motion was seconded by C. Deal. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion which passed 7-0. This item concluded at 9:35 p.m. 1127 EASTMOOR ROAD - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (RANDY POTTS, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; LEOPOLD VANDENEYNDE, DESIGNER) CP Monroe presented the staff report. There were no questions of staff about the project. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public comment. Randy Potts, 1127 Eastmoor Road, represented the project. Commissioners identified the following concerns: the north elevation presents a monumental wall without any articulation or softening, space should be rearranged to soften the impact of the addition on the adjacent neighbor; need to provide consistent detail throughout the structure for eave, fascia, window detail; might consider rearranging closet within master bedroom to take advantage of nice creek and tree views in rear yard, addition of windows at rear would increase light and air as well; a review of the residential design guidelines would clarify commission concerns. City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2000 Approved Minutes -9- C. Vistica noted that the consensus was to refer this project to the design reviewer for the reasons mentioned. C. Bojués seconded the motion. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion which passed 7-0 . This item concluded at 9:45 p.m. PLANNER REPORTS -REVIEW OF AUGUST 21, 2000 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CP Monroe reviewed the actions taken by the City Council at their meeting on August 21, 2000. -FYI - REVISIONS TO THE ROOF PITCH AND HEIGHT OF AN APPROVED SECOND STORY ADDITION SUBJECT TO DESIGN REVIEW AT 709 WALNUT AVENUE, ZONED R-1. Commission discussed the issue of substantial roof redesign from what approved at design review, directed that such revisions should be placed on commission preliminary design review agenda. Suggested that this one be placed on the next agenda if there was room. Felt in this case the applicant should find a way to get a continuous roof line, could this be done by lowering the plate. -FYI - REVISIONS TO PROPOSAL AT 1420 BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED C-1 SUBAREA A. Commission noted that this was a notable building to town , that the rear of the building looks good now, like the back of a building, not favor adding all the accouterments proposed, expressed concern that had no way to address this change without the commercial design review; feels back should be left as it is, unembellished with industrial canopy over loading dock, the back of Chapin should continue to look like the back of Chapin; concerned about the removal of the two support columns at the front, they are a part of the architecture of the upper floors. Commissioners noted that the FAR basement committee would meet next Tuesday, September 5, 2000, at 8:30 a.m. in city hall. CP Monroe will meet with them. It was noted that staff is working on getting the Planning Commission agenda on the city’s web page. The minutes will be the next effort. ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Lurzuiaga adjourned the meeting at 10:25 p.m. unapprovedmin8.28.00