Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 2024.11.25BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes Planning Commission 7:00 PM Council Chambers/OnlineMonday, November 25, 2024 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers/Online The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. Staff in attendance: Community Development Director Neda Zayer, Planning Manager Ruben Hurin, and Assistant City Attorney Scott Spansail. 2. ROLL CALL Comaroto, Horan, Lowenthal, Pfaff, Schmid, Shores, and TsePresent7 - 3. REQUEST FOR AB 2449 REMOTE PARTICIPATION There were no requests. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Pfaff noted that she was not present at the October 15, 2024 meeting but reviewed the draft meeting minutes and meeting video. a.Draft October 15, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Draft October 15, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting MinutesAttachments: b.Draft November 12, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Draft November 12, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting MinutesAttachments: Commissioner Schmid made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Comaroto, to approve the October 15, 2024 and November 12, 2024 meeting minutes. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Comaroto, Horan, Lowenthal, Pfaff, Schmid, Shores, and Tse7 - 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA There were no public comments on non-agenda items. 7. STUDY ITEMS There were no Study Items. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Page 1City of Burlingame November 25, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes There were no Consent Calendar items. 9. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS a.Consideration of City of Burlingame Municipal Code Text Amendments to Title 25 (Zoning) Related to Accessory Dwelling Units Including Amendments to Chapter 25.40 (Parking Regulations), Chapter 25.48 (Standards for Specific Land Uses and Activities), Chapter 25.60 (General Provisions), Chapter 25.88 (Permit Implementation, Extensions, Modifications, and Revocations ), Chapter 25.98 (Appeals and Calls for Review), and Chapter 25.100 (Public Hearings and Notice). The proposed amendments are Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section 15282 (h) of the CEQA Guidelines. Staff contact: Ruben Hurin Staff Report Amendments to Title 25 - clean version Amendments to Title 25 - redline version Resolution Attachments: Planning Manager Hurin provided an overview of the staff report. Chair Lowenthal opened the public hearing. Public Comments: >There were no public comments. Chair Lowenthal closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion/Direction: >Spansail: Statewide exempt ADU means that since you are following what the State says must be allowed, you get the exemptions from the regular requirements of our zoning code. With the 1,000 sf ADU, those will have to comply with some of the rules in our zoning code. ADUs that are 800 sf or less is where the State rules control completely so we don't have any push back we can give to make them comply with our code. >Hurin: The big picture that the State is saying that we can't have any barriers that would preclude someone from building an 800 sf ADU. 850 sf was the maximum allowed for a one -bedroom ADU and at that time we let the applicants have that additional 50 sf. Since we are now requiring 4-foot side and rear setbacks and regulation the building height, we want to fall more in line with the State laws and make sure applicants comply with that. If they want to do more, they are allowed to build up to 1,000 sf, but at that point it is no longer is a statewide exempt ADU. >What if an unpermitted ADU does not have a kitchen or a bathroom? (Hurin: By definition, an ADU must have a kitchen and bathroom. If the homeowner says they don ’t want to do that, then we will most likely be processing them for a Conditional Use Permit for a recreation room in an accessory structure . We will go back to our underlying zoning standards because the structure is no longer an ADU.) >On the ADU guidelines, suggests providing a table of contents where the answers to most commonly asked questions are identified like the size of the ADU, setbacks, heights, etc. >For the kitchen requirements, the code states, “a food preparation counter and storage cabinets that Page 2City of Burlingame November 25, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the ADU ”. That statement is very subjective. Is it possible for us to specify the guidelines for counter space and refrigerators? (Hurin: We want the applicant to propose a kitchen that they will use, and we don ’t want to get in a situation where we are requiring a certain size counter, but they don ’t have enough room for a full counter. We would prefer to keep that flexible and have staff work with the applicant on meeting that requirement. For JADUs, an efficiency kitchen is required, which is defined in the state law.) (Spansail: The efficiency kitchen is state mandated. We are required to have a certain countertop proportional in size with the ADU. It is vague but we have to carry that language to our code. We can be a little bit more specific, but since this is being tested and is constantly changing, we are sometimes hesitant to make something too specific because we can then be in violation of what the state is trying to ask us to do.) Commissioner Tse made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Schmid, to recommend approval of the Ordinance to City Council. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Comaroto, Horan, Lowenthal, Pfaff, Schmid, Shores, and Tse7 - b.Proposed Rules of Procedure of the Planning Commission Staff Report Current Rules of Procedure Proposed Rules of Procedure Attachments: Community Development Director Zayer provided an overview of the staff report. Chair Lowenthal opened the public hearing. Public Comments: >There were no public comments. Chair Lowenthal closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion/Direction: >For distant views on hillside areas, will staff be going into the homes to make their recommendations? (Zayer: Staff has been hands off in that regard. When we start doing staff recommendations, yes we would strengthen our analysis of those types of reviews to justify what the recommendation the staff is bringing forward.) >For public records, anything sent or received after 4 pm won't be part of the public record, is the correct? (Zayer: We will be moving the deadline to submit public comments from 5 pm to 4 pm and will be in line with what the City Council is doing. Any public comment received before 4 pm will be sent to the commission for your consideration and will be posted online. This is a Brown Act body, so anything that you have as material as part of your decision -making needs to be available to the public. We post those public comments online so the public is aware and both the commission and the public will have the same information. If anyone wants to provide a comment after 4 pm, they need to do it in person .) (Spansail: If someone submits a public comment after 4 pm, they will receive a reply email that will direct them to provide the public comment in person.) >Zayer: The public has the ability, as it always has, to attend meetings in person, make public comments at the hearing, and listen to staff and commission presentations. The addition of written public comments is to allow another way for members of the public to communicate with the Planning Commission that the commission is using as consideration for your action on that item. We are just saying that this avenue is available to the public until 4 pm so that the commission and the public has the ability to review that written public comment before an action is taking on the item. If they are unable to make that 4 pm deadline, they will need to come in person to provide that public comment. If they miss Page 3City of Burlingame November 25, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes the 4 pm deadline and are not able to attend the meting in person, then it will not be part of the record . Right now, when the commission gets emails after 5 pm, reading and considering them as part of your decision-making process does provide a potential gap in the Brown Act because the public is not aware of those emails you are getting and reading, but they are not. >Spansail: One thing to note is that the Brown Act does not require remote participation. We do welcome people to come in and make a public comment. A lot of these came out from the pandemic and we wanted to make sure that people can provide their comments in a safe space. Of course, we still want to do that, but moving it back an hour before that isn't actually making a meaningful change in the Brown Act compliance, it is just trying to find a way that we can better compile these to make sure that it is done in an orderly manner. There will be accommodations made if someone make a request through the City Clerk that they have a disability and may not be able to come in. We are going to make sure that we accommodate all those kinds of requests, this is just for the ordinary written public comment. >Hurin: Public hearing notices are sent out 10 days before the meeting and agendas are posted online on Thursday or Friday before the meeting. There is enough time for the public to review if they are interested in an agenda item and be able to submit an email before the 4 pm deadline or come to the meeting and speak in person. >It is a big change; I understand where this is coming from. We have lost a lot of participation over the last several years unless it is a huge project. It is really important, as what my fellow commissioner said, to do a big outreach on this. It should also be part of the recommendation that is will be part of the e-News or post it somewhere where the public will have knowledge of this change. People like to participate; they will be upset. It is important that the public know that if they don't get their comments in before the 4 pm deadline they have to come in person. >Consider putting this information in the blue notice post cards. >Zayer: We can certainly put that information on our city website, the e -News and our noticing so it is very clear. Again, there is no intent to stifle public participation, but it is so that we can get the commission the information in time and post it for the public so they can read it. We will do everything we can to get that word out. We do want people to participate in these discussions. Commissioner Tse made a motion, seconded by Vice Chair Horan, to adopt the proposed updates to the Planning Commission Procedures. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Comaroto, Horan, Lowenthal, Pfaff, Schmid, Shores, and Tse7 - 10. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS There were no Design Review Study items. 11. COMMISSIONER’S REPORTS There were no Commissioner's Reports. 12. DIRECTOR REPORTS There were no reportable actions from the last City Council meeting regarding Planning matters. 13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS No Future Agenda Items were suggested. 14. ADJOURNMENT Page 4City of Burlingame November 25, 2024Planning Commission Meeting Minutes The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Page 5City of Burlingame