HomeMy WebLinkAbout1704 Toledo Avenue - Staff Report�� {
S
' II ii�
CITY OF BURLINGAME
HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND MINOR
MODIFICATION FOR 40.8% LOT COVERAGE
Address: 1704 Toledo Avenue Meeting Date: 4/ 14/97
Requests: Hillside Area Construction Permit and Minor Modification for 40. 8% lot coverage (CS
25.55.010, la) for an addition to the first floor at 1704 Toledo Avenue, zoned R-1.
Applicant: John Stewart, Stewart Associates
Property Owner: Li Yin Liang
Lot Area: 7,748 SF
APN: 025-082-110
General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1
Adjacent Development: Single Family Residential
CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1-(e) additions to
existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50 % of the floor
azea of the structures before the addition.
Summary:
The applicant, 7ohn Stewart, is requesting a hillside azea construction permit and minor modification
for 40. 8% lot coverage for a first floor addition at 1704 Toledo Avenue, zoned R-1. The minor
modification is required for 40. 8% lot coverage where 40 % is the maximum allowed (CS
25.28.071). The applicant is proposing to enlarge the existing family room, entry and living room
(574 SF), bringing the total floor area of the house to 3,155 SF (including the attached garage). The
remodel and addition includes adding a fourth bedroom and extending the front of the house forward
on the lot 10' . The new front setback to the living room area would be 19' -0" , where 16' -0"
(average of block) is required. Present front setback is 29'-0" for this part of the structure. The two
car garage which will not be changed has a 15'-0" front setback. No change is proposed to the height
or width of the roof ridge (17'-0" as measured from average top of curb). There is a 4' addition at
the rear to the side of the house.
This project does not meet the definition of New Construction (since only 43% of the length of all
walls is removed, 50% required) so Floor Area Ratio does not apply. All other zoning code
requirements have been met.
Any single family dwelling increased in size to four bedrooms must provide off-street parking for
at least two vehicles, one of which must be covered. The existing garage has 20'-0" X 20'-0" clear
interior dimensions which meets the parldng requirement. The project was called up for review after
Planning Commission, City Council and neighbors within 100' of the property were noticed.
/ w�.
Hillside Area Construchion Permit and Minor Modiftcalion for lot coverage I704 Toledo Avenue
History:
In 7anuary 1997, the Planning Commission denied a Hillside Area Construction Permit for a first and
second story addition on this site (7anuary 13, 1997 P.C. Minutes). In the January application, the
applicant proposed to enlarge the existing foyer and living room on the first floor (233 SF) and add
a new master bedroom and bathroom on the second floor (960 SF), bringing the total floor area of
the house to 3,709 SF (including the attached garage) and number of bedrooms to four. The new
height of the roof ridge was 25'-0". Planning staff would note that the plans for the previous
application indicated that the e�sting building height was 16'-0" above average top of curb while the
current application shows it at 17'-0". This is due to a discrepancy of 1'-0" in the measurement of
the top of curb elevations. The previous application established a higher average top of curb
elevation (100'-9") than the current application (99'-9"). The actual structure height did not change.
The project was denied on the finding that the second story construction obstructed the existing
distant views from habitable areas inside neighboring houses.
I�. / Clii�.y
�ont Setback (lst):
(2nd):
Side Setback (L):
(R):
Rear Setback (lst):
(2nd):
Lot Coverage:
Building Height:
Parking:
29'-0"
43' -0"
no change
no change
20' -0"
20' -0"
37.2 %
25' -0"
2 covered
Floor Area Ratio:
H.A.C.P.:
Declining Height:
Accessory Structures:
Fences/Hedges:
Trees:
(.50)
3,907 SF
' . I�Z17.`�7
19'-0"
none
7'-0"
no change
22' -0"
none
*40. 8 %
17' -0"
2 covered
(.41)
3,155 SF
� .� �
29' -0"
none
5' -0"
5'-6"
20' -0"
none
33 %
17' -0"
2 covered
(.33)
2,581 SF
*Requires Hillside Area Construction Permit
n/a
none
New 6'-0" high fence and gate at side yard walkways.
No trees to be removed.
* Minor modification for 40. 8% lot coverage required.
Staff Comments:
The Building Official, City Engineer and Fire Marshal had no comments.
�__�� 1 ' 1 1
16'-0" (average)
20'-0"
7' -0"
7' -0"
15' -0"
20' -0"
40 %
30' -0"
1 covered,
1 uncovered
(.51)
3,979 SF
2
s
Hillside Area Construction Permit and Minor Modifccation for lot coverage 1704 Toledo Avenue
Study Meeting:
At their meeting on April 14, 1997 the Planning Commission had several questions regarding this
application (P.C. Minutes April 14, 1997). All property owners within 300' of the property have
been noticed for the public hearing for this project (neighbors within 100' of the property were
noticed for the Hillside Area Construction Permit). There aze several reasons why the square footage
calculations on the plans do not scale with the staff report. First, there is an error on the plans in the
overall dimension along both sides of the house (should be 60'-0" and not 59'-0" as shown). Second,
there is a discrepancy in the existing square footage of the house which was provided by the architect
in the January, 1997 proposal. The current architect has verified a11 existing dimensions (except for
the enor in dimension along the side of the house). The correct existing floor area totals 2,581 SF
and not 2,516 SF as indica.ted in the 7anuary, 1997 proposal. Third, the architect did not include the
20 SF covered entry as part of the addition. Finally, planning staff included the existing front
covered porch as part of the addition when it shouldn't have been calculated as part of the new
addition. The combination of these factors caused the discrepancy in square footage calculations.
In summary, the correct calculations are; 2,581 SF existing floor area with a 574 SF first floor
addition bringing the total floor azea of the house to 3,155 SF. The Planning Commission was also
concerned with impact of the addition at the rear of the house. The applicant has submitted a letter
(dated April 21, 1997) along with pictures addressing the impact of the addition on the neighbor
adjacent to this part of the addition.
Required �ndings for Hillside Area Construction Permit:
Review of a hillside area construction permit by the Planning Commission sha11 be based upon
obstruction by construction of the existing distant views of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be
given to the obstruction of distant views from habitable azeas within a dwelling unit (Code Sec.
25.61.060).
Required Findings for Variance:
In order to grant a variance the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist
on the property (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d):
(a) there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property
involved that do not apply generally to property in the same district;
(b) the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant, and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unnecessary
hazdship;
(c) the granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements
in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or
convenience; and
(d) that the use of the property will be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character
of existing and potential uses of properties in the general vicinity.
3
Hillside Area Construction Perntit and Minor Modification for lot coverage I704 Toledo Avenue
Planning Commission Action:
The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be taken by
resolution and should include findings for both variance and hillside area construction permit. The
reasons for any action should be clearly stated. At the public hearing the following condition should
be considered:
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and
date stamped March 25, 1997, Sheets A1, A2, A3, A4, AS and A6 with no changes to roof
ridge height, footprint, window placement or building envelope without amendment to this
Hillside Area Construction Permit; and
2. that this project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995
Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame.
Ruben Hurin
Zoning Technician
c: 7ohn Stewart, applicant/architect
4
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1997
2. APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND 1VIINOR
MODIFICATION FOR LOT COVERAGE AT 1704 TOLEDO AVENUE, ZONED R-1, (LI
YIN LIANG, PROPERTY OWNER AND JOHN STEWART, STEWART ASSOCIATES,
APPLICANTI.
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
( ESSORY STRUCTURE) AND CREATE A ROOM WHICH WILL BE USED FOR
HOM OCCUPATION AND RECREATION PURPOSES AT 1205 GROVE AVENUE,
7.(1NRTl R_ 1 (RT(`K e rm �r c e YTTf•Q A DD7 7!� A ATTC� A�m nn nrr.nmv ��zn.rr�r cv�
Requests: how we enforce a condition where the washer and d will only be top loaded; does
the property owne ave a home occupation permit now; address wh e not building a detached
gazage and an additio to the house with an office, family room, laundry m; seem to be moving
in the opposite direction the code from two covered parking to one, please ex 'n why this is better
for the city; project as show n plans seems to have at least two windows within ' of property line,
should be addressed. Item set r public hearing April 28, 1997.
4. APPLICATION FOR AN ENDMENT TO AN EXISTING SPECIAL PERMIT AND
PARKING VARIANCE FOR HE REMOVAL OF ONE EXISTING COVERED PARKING
SPACE AT 744 EL CAMINO AL, ZONED R-3, (WALTER MARKELOFF AND ALEX
PARHOOTTO, APPLICANTS ND CHURCH OF ALL RUSSIAN SAINTS, PROPERTY
Requests: what is the��i�ntent for the use of t rest of the site, do they intend to keep the dwelling unit
for permanent use; can`'t�ore information on cess be provided, could one off-street parking space
be added to the site to o� set loss; how will e removed kitchen area be incorporated into the
assembly room, provide floo lan; explain what is on-conforming, what is occurring is the loss of
one parking space for the dwe ��g unit on site; reside e is not being used regularly, can user stay
elsewhere or could commit permai�ntly to very limited u of living quarters, would mitigate impact;
explai.n application of current nonco�.forming section of co as it addresses the fact that there never
was parking for the church use on site,,, Item set for public h'ng on April 28, 1997, if responses
can be gathered in time. �,,
5. APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL�,, PERMIT FOR TA -OUT AT 577 AIRPORT
BOULEVARD, ZONED C-4, (JOHI�• ALVERGUE, DBA OHN'S, APPLICANT AND
WILLIAM WII,SON & 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, conect; is there a restaurant in
either building; have trash receptacl�s been required for outside the building as well as inside; will
�
-2-
5�h�.+: �.- .. .
f• •
r
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERNIITS
PALOMA AVENUE, ZONED R-3, (KARA
1.
January 13, 1997
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT 1141
;IRCI, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY
Requests: Revise drawing o evation showing overall height since it does n seem to reflect
the height of the found ' n; what is the exact size and location of th oor; what type of
material will be the plywood; what are the special circumstance o justify the 9'-6" plate
height; what ctural divisions exist in the garage, provide a plan; what is the proposed
or intend use for the garage, in addition to two cars; fr outside the house appears to have
two st es, plans reflect only one, what is the sq e footage of the house; what is the
per ' sible lot coverage for the R-3 zone; plans sh a side setback of 4 feet, but neighbor who
di survey indicates that setback is less, what 's the side setback from the structure. If the
� formation can be gathered in time the it is set for hearing at the meeting of 7anuary 27,
�1997.
ITEMS FOR ACTION
APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AT 1704 TOLEDO
AVENUE, ZONED R-1, (LI YIN LIANG, PROPERTY OWNER AND GABRIEL Y. NG,
AIA, APPLICANT�
Reference staff report, 01.13.97, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed
criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Two conditions were
suggested for consideration.
Chairman Ellis opened the public hearing. Gabriel Ng, architect for the applicant, 1375 Sutter
Street, suite 311, San Francisco and Shu Re Liang, daughter of the owner addressed the
commission. Both spoke about the restrictions, caused by the lot and location of the house,
placed on the remodel attempt, noting communications with the neighbors and changes made to
the plans reducing the size of the second floor and changes made to the plans reducing the size
of the second floor and design of the front of the house. Commission asked if they were
informed of the need for a Hillside Area Permit in initial discussions with the Planning
Department prior to their purchase and told that there could be opposition from the neighbors
if the views would be blocked. Ms. Liang responded in the affirmative. Karlyn Schneider,
2705 Arguello, Susanne Bock, 2704 Arguello Drive, Hera Kostekoglu, 2708 Arguello Drive,
Henry Sommer, 2709 Arguello Drive, 7ohn Morgan, 2720 Martinez Drive and Alba Lopez,
2725 Arguello Drive, spoke against the application verifying the rooms in their houses from
which their distant panoramic views would be blocked by the second floor addition and the
probable negative impact on the value of their properties. The neighbors would prefer the
addition go out on the first floor not up. They also presented a petition in opposition to the
application with 60 signatures There were no other comments and the public hearing was
closed.
C. Deal then made a motion to deny this application noting the original CC & R's which limited
these houses to a single story had lapsed and had been supplanted by an addition to the zoning
ordinance requiring a Hillside Area Construction Permit. Noting the specified review criteria
-2-
s
, CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANMIVG COMMISSION MINUTES
January 13, 1997
aze obstruction, by construction, of the existing distant view from habitable areas within dwelling
units. Fach application is taken on its individual merit.
C. Galligan seconded the motion. Motion passed on a 7-0 roll call vote. Appeal procedures
were advised.
Commission complimented both the neighbors and the applicant's architect for their attempts to
resolve this issue.
APPLICATION FOR A NEGATIVE
Refer ce staff report, 01.13.97, with att�
criteria, lanning Department comments,
suggested r eonsideration.
TION AT 601 ANSEL AVENUE, ZONED
. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed
iy meedng questions. Eight conditions were
Chairman Elli opened the public hearing. Neil bay,19 South "B" Street, Suite 7, San
Mateo, architec for the property owner, presented a r dering and pictures depicting revised
elevations of the roposed building and the sunounding s tscape to the commission. There
were no questions r comments from the public and the h was closed.
Commission discuss the benefit of adding to the housing stock d noted for the record that
if this project is not bui t to the requirements of a condominium, i.e. parking and open space;
a future condominium co version without a variance would not be uo sible.
Commissioner Galligan then ved to approve the negative declazation, y resolution, with the
following conditions: 1) that th roject shall be built as shown on the lans submitted to the
Planning Department and date sta November 26, 1996, Sheet A.1 th ugh A.7, PL-1 and
T1. 2) that the conditions of the City gineer's November 14, 1996 memo, he Fire Marshall's
vember 12, 1996 memo and the Par Department's November 20, 1996 mo shall be met;
3) tha use and any construction for th use shall meet all the requirement of the Uniform
Building an niform Fire Codes, 1995 Edi 'on, as amended by the City of Burli ame; 4) that
the project sh be subject to the state-m ated water conservation program; complete
Irrigation Water agement Plan shall be sub 'tted with landscape and imgation pla�s at time
of permit applicati ; 5) that this proposal shall e required to meet the Tree Protection and
Reforestation Ordin ce passed by the City of Bur game in 1993 and enforced by the Parks
Department; 6) that all construction shall abide by t construction hours established by the
municipal code; 7) at all new utility connections to se e the site and which are affected by
the development shal be installed to meet current code s dards and diameter; sewer laterals
shall be checked and eplaced if necessary; abandoned utiliti and hookups shall be removed;
and 8) that should any ultural resources be discovered during co t�uction, work shall be halted
until they are fully inv tigated.
The motion was seconded�y C. Mink and approved 7-0 voice vote.
advised. �
procedures were
-3-
' . 04/22i97 08:�6 $ 415 5'31 9578 5TE41RRT RSSOC. P.02
� �TEWAR� tl�`7lJl��t"lrl,�•7
ARGl�ITECTUki�: INT�KIUIiS . Pl.A1VNIN(:
1351 LAUfiEL ST. j• $AN CARLOS, CA �34D7�
1�LEPHONE: (A15) �is�-azaa FAX: (415) 551-9578
�
city o� Buz�lingame
501 Pr�.mxa�e Raad
Burlingame,, CA �401U
� 14,.• � !�._-= 1 �9 � id
A P R 2 21997
9�ITY QF BURLINGA�IE
P(_HNNING DEPT.
April 21, 1997
Job Na. 9712
Attn: �].an 'itYq cammXssian 1��mY�er�
Re; Hill,��-de �ermat - 17U4 7'aledo Ave��ue
I
D@��` �].�iTYri]�ric� C4lttmit�SXbl1G'r:
At your st�dy sessian, you asked i'ar respdns�s to twa qu�s�ians.
Gomm�ss�oner A��� asked fi� �o Ch�Ck the area calculations. T
have verif i;�d �he area CAYCUI&'t.S.U]15 with kubin and have eorr��t�d
a dim�nsiar� Error which may have led to confusian,
Th� Secoitd ;���es�ion ask�d ior an -explanatidn vf -ti�� -imp��:�.s - uU.r
proposed 4'; ext�nsian a� �he f'am� ly r.aam wau�.d have on th�
n�ighbor a� 17b8 'roleda Aver,u� wl�o cr�lleci tl�e �aro�j�ct up for
r�view. P1�ase see the �t�achecl f�hatog�raphs and averall site
plan diagr m. The si.te plan has 1ett�rs and a�raws to il].u�t�'a�e
wri�r� �h� �ha��is wer� t�keri. Yl�as� f��l fre� t�U wa�k in L17� r.�ar
af our property and l.aok f�or yaurseli', a� the i�ame a.s vaaant.
i
Yl�bta A il �us�rates the vi�w from t�ur pra�rer�y in the area af the
corner of �he prapos�d additian. As yau can see, a E' fence
Ulacks mosti ot ti�e v�ew �.nta and aut of tkz� neighbor � s property .
Photo B il];ustxal:�s �.he v�aw a.n;to the ne�_g�bax's yaxd- As you can
se�, the hcime at 1/UF3 '1'oleci� l�►�is � lt�rqe �rrr�jecL-ing wirtg a� �h�
narthwest sid� r�f their prop�rty. Photd c shaws the cvndition
between �7];2 ax�d �7A�3 Tale�a Zau�?a��-, 7t i.-� la��^d ta te1�. �xom th�
photo th�t !the hbme a'� 17b8 �ro�ec'�s beyand 1712 �`oZedo. The
l��me at 177,2 block� tihe view in L-he same way i.tiat aurs wiil
black 1708'�s view. Finally, Yho�o U shows the vi.ew t�o �he re�r
�f bath prop��ties. As you r.an see, the vi�w is spect�cula�. T�iis
view will r�ot be af�ec�ed ks�, Qur.. px4pos�d addit�a�.
In sumtnary,? X f�el ti]at my Cl��T1t jlas �nade a SiriG�re a��eTrlpt to
me�t �h� neic�hUor'� ct�n�ern�. Utir Hdciitic�n is anly 1.-st�ary �rrd
dU�es na1� ac�d i:o tM� �xisting Y►�ic�Y►t of the home. �l'his was done
by usinq ��f1at roof instead af a less expensiv� sloping raof.
The acidi��on wi�]� hav� � v�ry minor ei'f�eat vn the iaome at i708
TaYedo. Thq addi�iori will ha�ve Ze�s �:�fe�t than an ex��nsion
ot a 6' fer}ce Y�etween �he praperties.
Und�r the di,rcu�us�ances, I feel it• would Le only fair far you to
$pp�ove th� �ddita.on as design�d. �l.eas� r.al,l me a.f yau h�ve ar►y
�u�st�s�ns�. �
Sincerely „
� �/ i
.�� ��_��-��
John L. St�war�, AIA
attach: Ov�r.al] Sf t� p7 ��t T�i agram
Ph4'�O� A-U
i
� � �� � ���♦ _��
. �• •� L
� '
I� IZ
�..
i��
..
� _ '•
�`.
A � �'�•
D �
�
I'1 � =
/
.
/�
..
��.
�. �
"'rDl� L� I�D P�/ L .
��������
dU ���.�. s� j�►N
N v �iGA1,�
I,IaN� �-�Mob�l.it�l,�
p,V�.�1 I��A M�. c.p .
APR 2 21997
CITY OF BURLINGA�IIE
PLANNING DEPT.
�-,T�W,o.�T a�a�.
41 Zol a7 � a? �2
�E��i�/ED
A P R 2 21997
CITY OF BCl� LINGAiv1E
PlAN[�6t� � UEPT.
e.
` -�.�_
� _ y '�a-
�� ,
�.
�
:
�1
�`� �� + ,t
t 3
t � �k `y `'� 9 r' �'y` •�
� c��,; �.a.it "+
�- _, F w � 1 - "i�
, �..�,a i I � � �
-t— � _ �'r+�� -.t�C
�'.` ���� �4F
.,� ^, �°k� '���
� � �� �
�C�s �.. _' � 1! � � ,��� ..
, : � �'� I ' '� ° �^.
,� �_
. , �?l , y , , . _ , I �; . � , I �
:K.,��: � j: ,, , , . � � �r,; ,
��,:.� .,: ,� , �. �
���ir .�,��.,� ,� , -.! , �.;. ; �� _
f . , �
�.'" � �'�`i �'`� ' ° +" ' �/•� ' � - - -.- _
. ,�/
4 � } '� ..if F �y� s� ��r��� r�Q ' �,'y` r-�"���! � + . ���
_ 11M � �.�s.� ! 1l , ��fiy ° �14��'ir i � AAY'1 qr �`� r . h. ; �' . . . ' `r
, ��i' . ��x t�. � Fk � : J , . 1� i .,L� L.�il�f }.G���i,�- 7i. �,�.`1�i �,.. . .k .q .J w.. �.. .. '��. 'L.� r"�li
A
_ . � _.
,,,���:. �� ����
�!
�r ��- �, '�., _ -z�
`'����.� ,,,, `'!�,.
.. . . �-�_ . . .--�;
a �t�'
�1�'
.K' • �� R� b '. . . � ' ' ' f :� . ��"ri i•, � � • 'a-- I :'f' � ' I
I
�I �r �,. .n � �
.� / i , f •y? `•.r��r
��� t _ ' :;� , _t �.�a,4���t�f���y� '��
. � . ; �„N.� arr�,..� !„ ,
c� �.e� f + 1�. . .. ,ii�/�''�� J , '!ty�ny
ir� � �':1{a'� � � �11,�` ;
. � .� -3' '
.
�' ,• i• ,'� I ' ,• ' ,! � �
���.�'' � � ��� .. � , � ;� '" '��}` I ��j�, . , (. , �I
O
�� �� RE��di�EC�
A P R 2 21997
"'T" "`- BURLINGAME
PLA�� NING DEPT.
OJ
�J
�
- ... -:�rr
r�
�_ ,
-___ y • '
�� 'h. -f"���� ,,•� -
• ��•�`. `�_ {S,.
•, �����y�� �. ��.' � ".ry.�
�_`
•
.L,x,a .i. .: .i� a h �:,,, .
1
1 �. ` ' �= �. y� ; �� r.��.. r _ _.
March 17, 1997
Burlingame City Hail
Attn.: City Planner
501 Primrose Rd.
Burlingame, CA 94010
MAR 1 7 �g97
� C I;`�._(i'� r�'si=
' ' i�,. . ..�F`!�..
RE: F�cpansion at 1704 Toledo Dr.
Dear Margaret Monroe;
In regard to the property at 1704 Toledo, I request that the project be reviewed at a
public hearing.
In my opinion the hill is very unstable. I have been in the area for 40 years and have
seen the houses built. The homes on Toledo are on fill while those on Karen Ct. are on
part rock and part fill.
Sincerely,
���� �� ��V
Doroth Rusc�
Y
5 Karen Ct.
Burlingame, CA 94010