HomeMy WebLinkAbout1112 Cabrillo Avenue - Approval LetterMap ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation
Site
MAP FINDINGS
CLIC LLC DBA ANDRESEN (Continued)
Institutional Control Indicator:
Human Exposure Controls Indicator:
Groundwater Controls Indicator:
Operating TSDF Universe:
Fuil Enforcement Universe:
Significant Non-Complier Universe:
Unaddressed Significant Non-Complier Universe:
Addressed Significant Non-Complier Universe:
Significant Non-Compiier With a Compliance Schedule Universe:
Financial Assurance Required:
Handler Date of Last Change:
Recognized Trader-Importer:
Recognized Trader-Exporter:
Importer of Spent Lead Acid Batteries:
Exporter of Spent Lead Acid Batteries:
Recycler Activity Without Storage:
Manifest Broker:
Sub-Part P Indicator:
Handler - Owner Operator:
Owner/Operator Indicator:
Owner/Operator Name:
Legal Status:
Date Became Current:
Date Ended Current:
Owner/Operator Address:
Owner/Operator City,State,Zip:
Owner/Operator Telephone:
Owner/Operator Telephone Ext:
Owner/Operator Fax:
Owner/Operator Email:
Owner/Operator Indicator:
Owner/Operator Name:
Legal Status:
Date Became Current:
Date Ended Current:
OwnerlOperator Address:
Owner/Operator City,State,Zip:
Owner/Operator Telephone:
Owner/Operator Telephone Ext:
Owner/Operator Fax:
Owner/Operator Email:
Historic Generators:
Receive Date:
Handler Name: CLIC LLC DBA ANDRESEN
Federal Waste Generator Description:
State District Owner:
Large Quantity Handler of Universal Waste:
Recognized Trader Importer:
Recognized Trader Exporter:
Spent Lead Acid Battery Importer:
Spent Lead Acid Battery Exporter:
Current Record:
Database(s)
No
N/A
N/A
Not reported
Not reported
No
No
No
No
Not reported
2019-02-22 19:42:08.0
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Operator
JOHNFRANCO
Other
Not reported
Not reported
855 STANTON RD STE 300
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94010
415-421-2900
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Owner
MICHAEL HICKS
Other
Not reported
Not reported
855 STANTON RD STE 300
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94010
415-421-2900
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
2019-01-04 00:00:00.0
Not a generator, verified
Not reported
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
EDR ID Number
EPA ID Number
1024873563
TC6362151.2s Page133
CITV
; �i.irn� oe
JUNEb
/
\%��V Y �YN� �� ���M�'� Y��� YN
� r� �%
SAN MATEO COUNTY
CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLiNGAME� CALIFORNIA 94010 TEL:(415) 342-8931
July 6, 1983
Ms. Martha Costa
1112 Cabrillo Avenue
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear t4s. Costa:
Since there was no appeal to or suspension by the City Council, we wish to
advise the June 27, 1983 Planning Commission approval of your variance
application became effective July 6, 1983.
This application was to allow an addition to a single family residence with a
nonconforming side yard at 1112 Cabrillo Avenue. The June 27, 1983 minutes
of the Planning Commission state your variance was approved with the following
condition:
1. that the project be developed according to the plans date
stamped May 31, 1983.
All site improvements and construction work will require separate application
to the Building Department.
Sincerely,
Iti���,���)�
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
MM/ s
cc: Chief Building Inspector
Steven Graf, Foster City, CA.
Assessor's Office, Redwood City
(Lot 18, Block 27, Easton Addition No. 2; APN 026-163-180)
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 27, 1983
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was called to order
by Chairman Graham on Monday, June 27, 1983 at 7:32 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Cistulli, Garcia, Graham, Leahy, Schwalm
Absent: Commissioners Giomi, Taylor
Staff Present: City Planner Margaret Monroe; City Engineer Frank C. Erbacher
MINUTES - The minutes of the June 13, 1983 meeting were unanimously approved and
adopted.
AGENDA - CP noted the applicant for Item #6, Agency Rent A Car, 903 California Drive,
had requested a continuance to the meeting of July 11, 1983. She then
advised other applicants in attendance that only five Commissioners were
present this evening and four affirmative votes were necessary to approve
an application.
ITEMS FOR ACTION
1. SIGN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW TWO AWNING SIGNS AT 327 LORTON AVENUE, BY THOMAS VANNONI
Item continued to the meeting of July 11, 1983 at the request of the applicant.
Request: staff check out neon lights around the building, are they counted as part
of the signage?
2. VARIANCE FOR AN ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WHICH HAS A NONCONFORPIING
�- SIDE YARD, AT 1112 CABRILLO AVENUE, BY MARTHA COSTA, APPLICANT
CP Monroe reviewed this request for a family room/bath addition. Reference staff
report dated 6/21/83; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 5/31/83; "no
comments/objections/requirements" memos from the City Engineer (6/3/83), Chief
Building Inspector (6/6/83) and Fire Marshal (6/6/83); May 23, 1983 letter from the
applicant; aerial photograph of the site; and plans date stamped May 31, 1983.
CP discussed details of the proposal, code requirements, staff review, applicant's
justification for variance, Planning staff comments. One condition was suggested
for consideration at the public hearing.
The applicant, Martha Costa, was present. Chm. Graham opened the public hearing.
Judith Hansen, 1108 Cabrillo Avenue, spoke in favor: the addition will be an asset
to the neighborhood. There were no further audience comments and the public hearing
was closed.
Discussion: addition will bring lot coverage to 40% which is the maximum permitted
by code; Building Department will check details of bearing walls on the final plans;
if the existing porch were removed the house would be without a rear exit.
Pa ge 2
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes June 27, 1983
C. Schwalm found there were exceptional circumstances in that the side yard was
allowed under an older zoning ordinance; that to require the applicant to remove
the porch would be a hardship; that the va riance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a property right of the owner, and the addition is within permitted
lot coverage; that it would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare
or injurious to the neighbors; and it would not adversely affect the comprehensive
zoning plan of the city. C. Schwalm then moved for approval of this variance with
one condition: (1) that the project be developed according to the plans date stamped
May 31, 1983. Second C. Leahy; motion approved on a 5-0 roll call vote, Cers Giomi
and Taylor absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
3. FENCE EXCEPTION TO ALLOI� A 6' FENCE WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK AND WITHIN 15' OF
THE CORNER AT 1545 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE, BY CARL GOLDSTONE FOR JEAN GOLDSTONE
CP Monroe reviewed this request for two fence exceptions. Reference staff report
dated 6/21/83; Project Application & CEQA Assessment received 5/25/83; "no comments/
objections" memos from the Chief Building Inspector (6/2/83) and Fire Marshal (5/30/83);
May 31, 1983 memo from the City Engineer; May 25 and June 10, 1983 letters from Carl
Goldstone; photographs of the Floribunda/E1 Camino Real intersection; aerial photograph;
Planning staff suggested redesign; and plans date stamped May 25, 1983. CP discussed
details of the request, code requirements, staff review, applicant's justification,
Planning staff concerns/suggested redesign/comments. One condition was suggested
for consideration at the public hearing.
Carl Goldstone was present, representing Jean Goldstone, the applicant. He agreed
with staff's suggestion to curve the wall at the corner, noted pictures provided
which he felt showed there was good visibi�ity at the intersection, discussed the
need for a permanent replacement of the existing wall and privacy for the four patios
located at-grade. The possibility of locating the fence so that the existing acacia
tree would be outside in the front setback landscaping was discussed. Chm. Graham
opened the public hearing. There were no audience comments and the hearing was
closed.
Discussion: staff's suggested revised proposal would improve visibility, the number
of trees along E1 Camino do provide some sightline blockage, there is a signal at
this intersection; would prefer placing the fence behind the acacia tree; revised
proposal would be curved and 4' back from the existing corner of the wall; concern
about visibility for cars and pedestrians at this corner with a 6' fence as proposed.
Another proposal was suggested to address the safety factor and open up the corner,
pulling the fence back 15' from the corner of the property and leaving the height at
6'. Applicant commented the corner has a good accident record and none of the
residents want to lose more of their patios than is necessary. The need for full
visibility of traffic coming either way on E1 Camino was stressed. Commission
acknowledged the tenants' need for privacy but safety considerations at this
intersection were a concern.
C. Garcia moved to grant a fence exception, allowing a 6' high fence located 15'
back from the property line at the corner. He found there were exceptional
circumstances because of the condition of the wall and how long it has been there;
tha t with this proposal public hazard would be eliminated; that neighboring properties
would not be materially damaged; and that the regulations cause unnecessary hardship
upon the petitioner. Motion seconded by C. Cistulli and approved on a 5-0 roll call
vote, Cers Giomi and Taylor absent. Appeal procedures were advised.
:::�
a