The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2517 Easton Drive - Staff Report� CITY � : �1 • �=�,e CITY OF BURLINGAME Community Development Department MEMORANDUM DATE: April 17, 2013 TO FROM Planning Commission Ruben Hurin, Senior Planner Director's Report Meeting Date: April 22, 2013 SUBJECT: FYI — REQUESTED CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN REVIEW PROJECT AT 2525 EASTON DRIVE, ZONED R-1. Summary: An application for Design Review, Side Setback Variance and Special Permit for declining height envelope for a first and second story addition to an existing single family dwelling at 2525 Easton Drive was approved by the Planning Commission on June 11, 2012 (June 11, 2012 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes attached). A building permit was issued in January, 2013 and construction is underway. The originally approved project included enlarging an existing deck, which was part of a first and second story addition at the rear of the house. Now that construction is underway, the property owners would like to modify and increase the amount of uncovered decking at the rear of the house. In a letter dated April 15, 2013, the applicant notes that "their house is on a sloped lot and they would like to increase the area of useable level space adjacent to the house in the � back yard. The proposed deck extension is stepped to minimize its impact and there is established screening between their house and the adjacent properties." Letters of support were submitted by neighbors at 2517 and 2601 Easton Drive, which are immediately adjacent to the subject property. With the increased deck area, the lot coverage would be increased by 621 SF from 21.7% (3257 SF) to 25.9% (3878 SF) where 40% (5980 SF) is the maximum allowed. Since a portion of the area under the deck exceeds 6'-0" in height (206 SF), the FAR,would increase from 0.30 FAR (4470 SF) to 0.31 FAR (4676 SF) where 0.39 FAR (5884 SF) is the maximum allowed. The proposed lot coverage and FAR are well within the maximum allowed. The designer submitted a letter accompanied by originally approved and proposed site plans, landscape plans and building elevations, date stamped April 16, 2013, to explain the proposed changes to the previously approved Design Review project. Other than the proposed revisions listed above, there are no other changes proposed to the design of the house. Planning staff would note that because the proposal includes increasing the size of a previously approved uncovered deck, that the immediately adjacent neighbors are in support of the change to the deck, that the property is not located within the Hillside Area Construction Permit zone and that the decking would be screened by existing mature vegetation, it was determined that the project could be reviewed by the Commission as an FYI item. If the Commission feels there is a need for more study, this item may be placed on an action calendar for a second review and/or public hearing with direction to the applicants. Ruben Hurin Senior Planner Community Development Department Memorandum April 22, 2013 Page 2 c. Ruth Brown, applicant and landscape architect ATTACHMENTS: Explanation letter from applicant, dated April 15, 2013 Letters of support from adjacent neighbors, date stamped April 16, 2013 June 11, 2012, Planning Commission Minutes Originally approved and proposed Site Plans, Landscape Plans and Building Elevations, date stamped April 16, 2013 ,SIVIALLPj R�1�'N LANDSCAPE �F�CHITECTS 1010 CHIILA VISTr1 RVE\llE � BURL]NGAAAE CAL[PORNIA 94010 voice 650.4589i8G Fax 65Q458.9182 SVIALLBRObvNLACONI April 15, 2013 Members of Planning Commission Community Development Department City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Raad Burlingame, Ca1ifornia 94010 Re: 2525 �ast�tl Drive Dear Planning Commission Members, � - - � ') � � �. - � _�- APR � � 20 �:J �_,�,�� c��- ��_��=,�.,e„^;�,� ';:. ` L�,;, �� .�::,:,� .'J,J'; __`i;�fE.Iii.. �;�1,^ The Owners t�f?�25 Easton Drive are requesting approval to increase the size of a deck that was previo�usly approved by the Planning Commission in conjunction with a house addition. Their house is on a sloped lot and they would like to increase the area of useabie level spaee adjacent to the house in the back yard. The proposed deck extension is stepped to r�l�nimize its impact and there is established screening between their house and the adja�entproperties. Their neighbors have no objections to the proposed design (see attached si�ed letters). Thank you for }�4�u� consideration. Sincerely, ��"�'"! ��15�'/�2._"_.___1 Ruth Brown Smal� Brown Landscape Architects ��RAH SbIALL CALIF LIC #? 3334 RUTH $ROWN CALIF LIC # 2433 ,' , _�- r - �- _ ` , ._ - - _.� .� aPP N �� 2� �:� � - , _ �.. To: Planning Commission Members, City of Burlingame RE: 2525 Easton Drive, Burlingame, California I/We have reviewed the attached landscape plan prepared by Small Brown Landscape Architects, dated 4/11/13 and have no objections to the location of the proposed deck extension. � �' � �'�' ;e � NAME J �t��f �Cr'�3� � � . ADDRESS �/�� SIGNATURE � y la � �� DATE �� , -, <,, APR � � ��;.� __.._ ,. T - To: Planning Commission Members, City of Burlingame RE: 2525 Easton Drive, Burlingame, California I/We have reviewed the attached landscape plan prepared by Small Brown Landscape Architects, dated 4/11/13 and have no objections to the location of the proposed deck extension. �. __ - � �� V V��1 i� �� r � � NAME �..; , �j i -�--- �-�� --��.� _�� - ��-�c�� o, � � � ��Z �61� SIGNA' DATE . BBQ Lflti(E OF (1V) CONCRETE PATH & COUNTER � APPROVED �ECK STEPS, REGRADE AS � C�.�, � REQUIRED.. _ — -;'�, ,• . � �� d ".: � (E) ENGLfSFi LAUREL HEDGE` � .l 1 - :� . n I /I I ,.. •� i �D�• Q,_ ° ... D , •b •. .. • ' . . _ i'Z$$.7. - � RAfSED � , • I o� PLANTERS � � � , ` ` � DECK . } .' _ � �''�9� � DECK � +994 � J . . a ,:q> � e -� / A ^ y e O,� , �. L'. • ,STEPS.. . ;p.. '`' O .'.�(�?'.W ` � � .. '� . D ... , •b? • � A�KS � � � a:� . . l �. I ° �' ;- � QECK I o �E) SPA . . '.',/ +196 �� •. � � . J{/ �/ •� p : ... 'p � , ' _ ' � / / . /�.. � {E) J --�---�_ / • . `\� OAKS � � ° %�: � , . � /� 4., : • (E) BARK --- — -- --- - -- --- ----,� . ' MULGH . f �/ t I " `� ! � • 6 ' � ._.. _ .. / l , . � 0 '; ..� /� I �� , I / • ii�i � (Ej STONE � / � . � ' RET/aIfVING WALL Q' ----- ----—f-------{\ i .. . ' �. � . • (E) GRAVEL � � MULCH C° I �� . T i r._J �\\ i / � � .. I � I � {E) PODOCARPUS - GROVE _ -- ,_ — — --I--�' � � � �. ` + � �7C14i..� t `i"�' � t,�4n — �. ' l.. �t�V �� f`�� . �U t�.11G�fi jZ�St�j�1GE �f • I l• t� 2h� �5i�1 D�i u�' �,�...� I�,It�u r,tc�-t� R,r._ ;'�i� 4 -��.: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ° 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 9401 O p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org �ri��i.rf-� 1 I�IV T� �1�9� �L�lltlltl��6� ��IHII�I��I�fV Type of application: ❑ Design Review ❑ Variance ❑ Parcel #: OZ' ' I�I� ' D� ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit ❑ Ofher: �'Y I PROJECT ADDRESS: 2��J ��S TbI� ��l V� . APPLICANT project contact person ;.«i' Payor of DSR depositlhandling fee ❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents �' Name: �'�� J��.UG�i Address: ��(i! C��'1%L14 l%f,5`�� (�.�rl�U� City/State/Zip: [�}��(�-�� , Gd� �(�D(U Phone: �P�' �� D Fax: IpLJ� ` �� -� � �2 E-mail: Y`�i�'b (�UVI (li? SVi�.�l �� /JVVY�GUVI �i. Cb1M ARCHITECT/DESIGNER project contact person ❑ Payor of DSR deposif/handling fee ❑ OK to send elecfronic copies of documents Q' Name: PROPERTY OWNER project contact person ❑ Payor of DSR deposif/handling fee ❑ OK to send elecironic copies of documents ❑ Name: G�-121 � P�T�Iz- �A�(�IIC{-} Address: �J ��'% ��4g[�'C} N �l2-1, lI� City/State/Zip: 6��1.{��, C(� ��o�O Phone: �2 SO- �j� - ZC�`�8 Fax: E-mail: G i�t(.l.I�t.lC�il �^ UGt-�1.UC�, G2IIM 5 Nl �-� C3Ro t,u 1�! t--�l r� ��f(�� r2GN'l�c"�-�S Address: �o I D G�-I-UL.,,� V lST'��• F�U ETIUL� City/State/Zip: �( )�( il.(� ,d.l�-GE; C� LL �D12-6�.I1 ��'D L D Phone: ��" �'�� ' `� ��d n � � �� fv :�,i , , - ��'.j Fax: %�" �('`'��'��`�� ,_.._ ,,, ,� E-mail: V'�V`bU�v�/. `�(ii/1.G( ��/Jl/�LtJvl �G(.Gv1�t� � Burlingame Business License #: 2' � �7�j� PROJECTDESCRIPTION: �CT��4�10(`l c��' � C'2��lLOUSL.�'f �Pi�i2-�U� l�C.�., r(:f�- ��vr.��e 1`�`� �.�Py�rz.6U� �.- �,a�S �� ca��uD�1�T� orv. �rc�-�l- �IDV�IZ.�U�c• �p2. A �USc �-�DDI.�o�, AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and beli Applicant's signature: �� Date: �T� �� 2D��7 , I am aware of the proposed applic ion and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property owner's signature: Date: � 2.0 Date submitted: T � � �� k Verification that the project architect/designer has a valid Burlingame business license will be required by the Finance Department at the time application fees are paid. s:�HaN�ours�vcapPir�oero�.do� This Space for CDD Staff Use Only � Project Description: Ke1/: �4bbreviation T'erm: � CUP Conditional Use Permit DHE Declining Height Envelope DSR Desi n Review E Existing N New SFD Single Family Dwelling SP Special Permit � CITY '`I';�ll � ,� ��,��': ; h � aPoaa, CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES Monday, June 11, 2092 — 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers — 509 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 3. 2525 EASTON DRIVE, ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MOMENTUM BUILDERS, APPLICANT; BRITT ROWE, ARCHITECT; PETER AND CHERYL JAUNICH, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated June 11, 2012, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Twelve (12) conditions were suggested for consideration. Questions of staff: None. Chair Gaul opened the public hearing. Jamie Pantuso, 2762 Filbert Street, San Francisco; represented the applicant. Commission comments: ■ Believes there may be more cross-support necessary, but as presented is an acceptable solution. ■ Was the outdoor shower removed? (Pantuso — owner asked for the walls and the roof to be removed to make it more streamlined. There will be no walls.) Can stipulate that the outdoor shower will not be walled-in. ■ Expressed concern regarding privacy of the outdoor shower. (Pantuso — the privacy is protected by the heavy vegetation.) Public comments: ■ None. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cauchi moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped June 4, 2012, sheets A3.1, A3.1, A4.1, A5.1 and A5.2, and date stamped May 2, 2012, sheets A0.1 through A2.6, A3.3, A3.4, Boundary Survey and Topographic Map, GPR and L1; 2. that the outdoor shower shown on the approved plans shall not be enclosed by walls; 3. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staffl; 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 91, 2012 4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement level, lower level, main level an second level, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 5. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's May 15 and February 24, 2012 memos, the City Engineer's February 29, 2012 memo, the Fire Marshal's February 13, 2012 memo, the City Arborist's February 22, 2012, and the NPDES Coordinator's February 14, 2012 memo shall be met; 6. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be placed upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community Development Director; 7. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 8. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; 9. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 10. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 11. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2010 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION 12. prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; and 13. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. The motion was seconded by CommissionerAuran. Discussion of motion: 2 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISSION — Approved Minutes June 11, 2012 ■ Will changes to the structural bracing need to come back? (Meeker— no.) ■ Accepts the justification for the variance. Chair Gaul called fora voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1-0 (CommissionerYie absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:24 p.m. 3