Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2620 Summit Drive - Approval Letter� `; __ --t ,.j fr• g i ' , �. r _ _` �s c . C�.C�e C�x�� a.� ���Zzxr.���rC.e SAN MATEO COUNTY CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME� CALIFORNIA 94010 May 10, 1984 Mr. William Garibaldi 2620 Summit Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 Mr. John Moran 2616 Summit Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 Gentlemen: �a 6 � c; �,/Y. `T ,V.�i_ ��'.. �e. Sv'�,r� � l TE�:(415) 342-8931 At their May 7, 1984 meeting th.e City Council approved your request to adjust property lines at 2616 and 2620 Summit Drive. Council concurred with Planning Commission recommend.ation and approved the tentative and final parcel map for Lot 21 and a portion of Lot 22, Kenmar Terrace. Sincerely, � ����!,i��G�,�_ �"��i1� Margaret Monroe City Planner MM/s cc; Y.avanagh Engineering . � � CITY �a O� BURLINGAME ��...�� STAFF REPORT To: Honorable.Playor & City Council_ DATE: Md�/ l, 1984 FROM: DPCIt_ 0'P PUh�I(' Works - Fn�_ �iv_ 5„a,E�T: Tentative and Final Parcel Map to ��: SUBMITTED � BY APPROVE BY ��p AGENDA p L ITEM fi MT�. 5/7/84 DATE ��.�t.�.-fl lines, Lot 21 and portion of � h�lan R4_F, Recommendation. It is recommended that Council concur with the Commission and approve this Tentative and Final Parcel Map. Background. The Commission at their April 23, 1984 meeting reviewed the attached staff memo and map. The purpose of this map is to exchange 171 square feet of land by adjusting property lines around pool decking and equipment. The _ Commission recommends that Council approve this map. -- Exhibit. Staff inemo and Map; P.C. Minutes _ i / / F ank C. Erbacher City Engineer FCE/ls Att. cc: Mr. Garibaldi Mr. Moran Chas. Kavanaugh, P. E. 0 % ,1 t 1 � AGENDA MEMO T0: Planning Commission FROM: Dept. of Public Works - Engr. Div. April 3, 1984 �SYsf�� '*w.e-.� �.�'� Re: Tentative and Final Parcel Map to adjust property lines, Lot 21 and portion of Lot 22, Kenmar Terrace 2616 and 2620 Summit Drive - Map 84-6 The attached Tentative and Final Parcel Maps show the proposed lot line ad- justment between these two lots. The pool and equipment installed by Permit in 1961 for 2620 Summit encroach into the property of 2616 Summit Drive. This lot line adjustment places all of these improvements entirely within Parcel 21-A (2620 Summit) leaving Parcel 22-A (2616 Summit). The total exchange of property is 171 square feet. Staff has reviewed this proposal and it meets all zoning and planning requirements. It is recommended that this Tentative and Final Parcel Map be forwarded to Council for approval. '' ' i j' Frank C. Erbacher City Engineer FCE:mg Encls. (T. Map and F. Map, Notice of Exemp.) cc: Mr. Garibaldi 2620 Summit Drive, Burlingame Mr. Moran 2616 Summit Drive, Burlingame Chas. Kavanaugh, P. E. 708 Carolan Ave. Burlingame, Ca. r� . � � � , PROJECT APPLICATION ����'T" °� 2616-2620 Summit Drive �r CEQA ASSESSMENT B"R""�"""E project address ��_�' e,'� project name - if any Application received ( 3122�84 ) Staff review/acceptance ( ) 1. APPLICANT Wi 11 i am Gari bal di 344-4641 name telephone no. 2620 Summit Drive, Burlinqame, Ca. 94010 applicant's address: street, city, zip code contact person, if different telephone no. 2. TYPE OF APPLICATION Specia.l Perr.:it ( ) Variance* ( ) Condor;i^i�m Pernit ( X) Other parcel Mdp *Attach letter which addresses each of the 4 findings required by Code Chapter 25.54. 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION I_ot line adjustmentto move lot line. Pn�l �nd ool e uipment�installed in 1961 are partially into 2616 Summit Drive. Lot line ad,lustment to correct problem. No new construction. (attach letter of explanation if additional s�ace is needed) Ref, code section(s): ( ) ( ) 1 W& B Garibaldi - J&J Moran 2620 & 2616 Summit'Drive land owner's name address Burlingame, Ca. 94010 Reouired Date received city zip code (yes) (no) � ������� � Proof of ownership ) Owner's consent to application 5. EXISTING SITE CON�ITIONS Existinq sinqle family dwellings each parcel 4. PROPERTY IDEP�ITIFICATION (027-271-060 &-220)!21&ptn 22)( -- ) ( Kenmar Terrace APN lot no. block no. subdivision name ( R-1 ) (13,068 S.F.& 17,13�1 s.f.) zoning district land area, square feet Reo,uired Date received (yes) (� (3/22/84 ) �YeS) (3/22/84) (�) (no) ( ) (yes) (no) ( N/A ) (other) (n�) ( N�A j Site plan showing: property lines; public sidewall;s and curbs; all structures and improvements; paved on-site parking; landscaping. Floor plans of all buildings showing: gross floor area by tyae of us� on each floor plan. _Building elevations, cross sections (if relevant). Site cross section(s) (if relevant). *Land use classifications are: residential (sho�.v ; dwelling units); office use; retail sales; restaurant/cafe; manufacturing/repair shop; warehousing; other (to be described). 6. PROJECT PP,�POSAL NO change Proposed censtruction, Below orade ( SF) Second floor ( SF) gross floor area First floor ( SF) Third floor ( S`) Project Code Pr�ject Code Front setback Side setback Side yard Rear yard Proposal Requirement Lot coverage P,uildinq height Landscaoed area On-site pkg.spaces ` \ � .-i ' 6. PROJECT PROPOSAL (continued) Full tir�e em�loyees on site Part tir�e emoloyees on site. Visitors/customers (weekday) Visitors/customers (Sat.Sun.) Residents on property Trin ends to/from site* Peak hour trip ends* Trucks/service vehicles IN 2 YEARS after 8-5 5 PM � *Show calculations on reverse side or attach separate sheet. 7. ADJACENT BUSINESSES/LAfdD USES " - Required �jces�, (no) (�ces.) (no) IP! 5 YEARS after 8-5 5 PM Date received ( ) Location plan of adjacent properties. ( ) Other tenants/firms on property: no. firms ( ) no. employees ( ) floor area occupied ( SF office space) ( SF other) no. employee vehicles regularly on site ( ) no. comoany vehicles at this location ( ) 8. FEES Special Permit, all districts �100 () Other application type, fee $ 53 (X ) Variance/R-1,R-2 districts $ 40 () Project Assessment $ 25 () Variance/other districts $ 75 () Neoative Declaration � 25 () Condominium Permit $ 50 () EIR/City & consultant fees $ () TOTAL FEES $�.0� RECEIPT N0. - Received by Frank C. Erbache I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature not appl i cabl e oate Aoplicant STAFF USE OPlLY NEGATIVE DECLARATION File No. The c;ty of Burlingame by Frank C. Erbacher or, April 2 , i984, completed a revie�•i of the proposed project and determined that: ( X) It will not have a significant effect on the environment. ( ) No Environmental Imoact Report is required. Reasons for a con�iUs;or,: categorically exempt C.E.Q.A. Section 15105 (a.) "Minor Lot Line Adjustment" �� City Engineer 4/2/84 _ gnature of Processing Official Title Dai;e Signed Unless appealed within 10 days hereof the d�te oosted, the d/et�erminationn shall be fina�l.// DECLARATION OF POSTIMG Date Posted: (�'�.�/j� x J�� �%O "'r I declare under penalty of per.jury that I ar� City Clerk oF th City of 6ur1'ngame and that I oosted a true copy of the abov2 Neoa.tive Declaration at the City Hall of said City near the doors to ih� Council Chambers. "executed at ¢urlingame, California on Q�� � � 19�• Apoealed: ( )Yes ( )P;o EXISTING after 8-5 5 PM JUD A. MALFATTI, ITY CLERK, CI f?F 6U�IN�E C+- ]CG� s �.4 1 . � ��Q C�i�� a� ��tx�t�t��xrt� SAN MATEO COUNTY CITY HA�L- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 TEL:(415) 342-893I NOTICE OF HEARING TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL P•1AP NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Monday, the 23rd day of April, 1984 , at the hour of 7:30 P.M., in the City Hall Council Chambers , 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame will conduct a public hearing on the application to realiqn the common lot line between 2616 and 2620 Summit Drive; by Kavanaqh Enqineerinq for William Garibaldi and John Moran (applicants and property owners) At the time of the hearing all persons interested will be heard. For further particulars reference is made to the Planning Department. MARGARET MONROE CITY PLANPJER April 13, 1984 . i... , � , . � . . K�. Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 April 23, 1984 ��n. u� aiiaui uNen o urb and gutter would improve safety, there was curb�previously�which was demo 'shed when street was raised; is trying to subdivide according to city regulations and no asking for any exceptions. There were no audience comments in favor. Those spea 'ng in opposition: Margaret Gilderbloom, 2845 Canyon Road; Charles Iverson, -- 2841 Canyon ad; Nat Repetto, 2109 Summit Drive; John Khouri, 2849 Canyon Road; Jim Eckels, 28 Canyon Road. Their concerns: destruction of the environment for a profit, would 1 er property values in the area, impacts on the creek and increased flooding conditions, would like to see consistency of city and county minimum lot sizes in this area. licant spoke in rebuttal: there is no consistency in existing lots in the county, can a�nderstand concern of new own�rs who just moved in and experienced the worst floo in years, with a 10,000 SF lot and required setbacks for the area can build a thre bedroom home/two car garage without affecting the creek; farther up the canyon a use was built right over the creek, maybe he's not a very good neighbor and now the ighbors want to get even, but dirt should be left in the neighborhood and let sti . There were no further audience comments and the public hearing was closed. Discussion: home built over the creek is in he county; creek is all on private land, city can only look at the improvements placed n properties to assure they are good practice; is there any way the city or county c increase capacity of the creek or alleviate flooding problems; city looks at good en ineering conditions, would ask to have capacity confirmed and try to keep developme out of regular flow areas; this is a flat parcel, proposed land division will not .xacerbate conditions; existing garage is wide enough for two cars parked tandem, it is a essed off.Summit Drive; city is requiring paved backup area on Canyon Road with a c� ek berm or wall if necessary; applicant's property was annexed to the city and �should be allowed to develop this large parcel to city standards; can appreciate the�eelings of residents of the hills area. � C. Schwalm moved that this tentative and final parcel map be recommend �to City Council for approval with the three conditions listed in the City Engineerts agenda memo of April 17, 1984; second C. Garcia. Comment on the motion: concern about development on the newly created parcel, staff advised city will closely moni �r any development of this parcel. Motion passed 6-i on roll call vote, C. Taylor 7 ri�� 2. TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP TO ADJUST PROPERTY LINES AT 2616 AND 2620 SUMMIT i DRIVE (LOT 21 APdD PORTION OF LOT 22, KENMAR.TERRACE), BY KAVANAGH ENGINEERING � FOR WILLIAM GARIBALDI AND JOHN MORAN Reference CE Erbacher's agenda memo of April 3, 1984 with attached map, Project Application & CEQA Assessment dated 3/22/84 and Notice of Nearing mailed April 13, 1984. CE reviewed this proposed realignment of common lot line which would place all pooi and equipment improvements installed in 1961 at 2620 Summit entirely within this parcel rather than encroaching into the property at 2616 Summit Drive; proposal meets all zoning and planning requirements. CE recommended the map be forwarded to Council for approval. Chm. Graham opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Garcia moved that this tentative and final parcel map be recommended to Ci�y Council for approval; second C. Leahy, Motion approved unanimously on roll call vote.