The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1101 Vancouver Ave - Staff Reportr, Item No Regular A� ion PROJECT LOCATION 11�1 VancouverAvenue City of Burlingame Item No. Variances for Lot Coverage and Front Setback Regular Action Address: 1101 Vancouver Avenue Meeting Date: February 27, 2012 Request: Front Setback Variance and Lot Coverage for bay window additions to an existing single family dwelling. Applicant: Paul Hing Mak Designer: J Deal Associates Property Owner: Sylvia Sow-Wai Mak Trust General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 027-360-150 Lot Area: 4,883 SF Zoning: R-1 Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section: 15301 (e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that additions to existing structures are exempt from environmental review, provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition. Project History: On May 6, 2005, the Building Department issued a stop work orderfor unauthorized installation of a new roof, new windows, new doors and other various changes without building permits. On June 7, 2005, the property owner submitted an application to the Building Department for dry rot repair to the garage and electrical work. This permit was finaled by the Building Department on December 5, 2005. On July 19, 20�6, the Building Department issued another stop work order due to furtherwork being conducted without a building permit. The work being done on the house included two new tiled roof overhangs (bay windows), new pillars to support the roof and replacement of the existing roof with hot tar and tiles. On September 18, 2006, the property owner applied to the Building Department for a building permit for the two already installed bay windows, one at the front of the house along Carmelita Avenue and the other at the exterior side along Vancouver Avenue, and for a re-roof. Planning staff commented on the building permit application, noting that Lot Coverage and Front Setback Variances are required for the additions. No building permit has been issued at this time for the work done because the Planning Commission approval of both a Lot Coverage and Front Setback Variances is required before the building permit can be issued. On May 29, 2007, the Planning Commission reviewed the project as a Study Item and had several comments and suggestions regarding this project and moved to place the item on the Regular Action Calendar when all requested information had been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Division (May 29, 2007, Planning Commission Minutes). The applicant submitted a response letter and revised plans, dated stamped February7, 2008, to address the Commissions questions and concerns. On February 25, 2008, the Planning Commission reviewed the project as a Regular Action Item and made comments and suggestions regarding the quality of the windows and voted to refer the project to a design reviewer with specific direction to review the window and door design and trim details (February 25, 2012 Planning Commission Minutes). The applicant, the Associate Planner and the design reviewer met on-site on June 23, 2008, to discuss changes to the existing windows and window trim on the house. After the on-site meeting the applicant worked with the design reviewer to choose new windows for the faCade's facing Carmelita Avenue and VancouverAvenue. After several reviews, the design review decided that Marvin, wood, aluminum-clad, simulated true divided lite windows would be acceptable to move forward with the project. After several months of no communication and many attempts to contact the property owner, planning staffwas notified that the house fell into foreclosure and that it was no longer owned by the original applicant. Over the next three years the Associate Planner and the Chief Building Official met with many potential buyers and real estate agents to discuss the necessary steps to bring this property into compliance with the City's zoning and building codes. During this time, the Chief Building Official made a visit to the site with one of the listing agents Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances 1101 Vancouver Avenue and noted that the kitchen was remodeled, the bathrooms were remodeled and the laundry area was remodeled, all without building permits. On January 4, 2012, the designer submitted an application to the Building Division for an interior remodel to legalize all of the interior work that was done without Building Permits. At this time, the Associate Planner and the Chief Building Official scheduled a meeting with the new property owner and the designer to discuss the necessary steps that needed to be taken to bring this property back into conformance. On January 31, 2012, the applicant submitted paperwork to the Planning Division which requested moving forward with the originally submitted Variance applications. The applicant notes in their plans and their letter of explanation that they wish to remove all existing windows along the Carmelita Avenue and Vancouver Avenue frontages and to replace them with Marvin wood windows with true or simulated true divided lites. Project Description: The existing single-story residence with an attached one-car garage contains 2,035 SF (0.42 FAR) of floor area and has three bedrooms. The existing house (before the work that was completed without a building permit) had a nonconforming lot coverage of 44%, where 40% is the maximum allowed. The addition of the bay windows increased the nonconforming lot coverage from 2,148 SF (44%) to 2,172 SF (44.5%) and therefore a Variance for lot coverage is required. The new front bay along Carmelita Avenue is located 17'-3" from the front property line. The required front setback is either 15'-0" orthe average of the block, whichever is greater. In this case, the average of the block along Carmelita Avenue is 18'-10", which is greater than 15'-0". Therefore, a Front Setback Variance is required (17'-3" proposed where 18'-10" is the minimum required). With the as-built addition, the floor area has increased from 2,035 SF (0.42 FAR) to 2,060 SF (0.42 FAR), where 2,463 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed (project is 403 SF below the maximum allowed FAR). There is no change to the number of existing bedrooms (3) with the as-built bay window addition. Two parking spaces, one covered (10' x 20') and one uncovered (9' x 20') are required for the three bedroom house. Because there is no increase in the number of bedrooms, the existing, nonconforming one-car garage (10' x 17'-11" interior dimensions) may remain as-is and there is one 9' x 20' uncovered parking space in the driveway. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following applications: ■ Variance for exceeding the maximum allowable lot coverage on site (2,172 SF (44.5%) proposed where 1953 SF (40%) is the maximum allowed) (CS 25.28.065); and ■ Front setback variance for a bay window addition (17'-3" proposed to bay window, where 18'-10", block average, is the minimum required) (CS 25.28.072). 1101 VancouverAvenue Lot Area: 4,883 SF Plans date stam ed: Janua 31, 2012 Existing Proposed Allowed/Required SETBACKS . _.... _.. ... Front: 17'-0" (to porch)' 17'-3" (to new bay) 2 18'-10" (block average) Side (left): 3'-0" no change ' 4'-0" (right): 11'-6" 12'-0" (to new bay) ' 7'-6" Lot Coverage: 2,148 SF 2,171 SF 1,953 SF 44% 3 44.5% 4 40% FAR: 2,035 SF 2,060 SF 2,463 SF 5 0.42 FAR 0.42 FAR 0.50 FAR # of Bedrooms: 3 no change --- -2- Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances 1101 VancouverAvenue Existing Proposed Allowed/Required Parking: 1 covered 1 covered (10' x 17'-11") no change (10' x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9' x 20') ; (9' x 20') ' Existing nonconforming front setback. 2 Front Setback Variance for a first f�oor bay window addition (17'-3" proposed where 18'-10", block average, is the minimum required). 3 Existing nonconforming lot coverage. 4 Variance for exceeding the maximum allowable lot coverage (44.5% proposed, where 40% is the maximum allowed). 5 4,883 SF x 0.32 + 900 SF = 2,463 SF (0.50 FAR) Staff Comments: See attached memos from the City Engineer, Chief Building Official, Parks Supervisor, Fire Marshal and NPDES Coordinator. 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 hardship; (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 an potential uses of properties in the general vicinity. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the application, and consider public testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action should include specific findings supporting the Planning Commission's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the Planning Commission. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped January 31, 2012, sheets A-1 through A-4, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. 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; 3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's January 20, 2012 and December 16, 2011 memos, the City Engineer's December 19, 2011 memo, the Parks Supervisor's December 14, 2011 memo, the Fire Marshal's December 15, 2011 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's December 15, 2011 memo shall be met; 4. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date, the Front Setback Variance and Lot Coverage Variance, as well as any other exceptions to the code granted here, will become void; 5. 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 -3- Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances 1101 VancouverAvenue 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; 6. 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; 7. 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; and 8. 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. Erica Strohmeier Associate Planner c. J Deal Associates, 880 Mitten Road #102, Burlingame, CA 94010, designer Paul Hing Mak, 1639 15`h Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94122, applicant Attachments:' Application to the Planning Commission from new applicant, date stamped January 31, 2012 Variance Application and letter of explanation from new applicant, date stamped January 31, 2012 S#aff Comments Fax to DSR Consultant from applicant concerning proposed replacement windows, dated July 3, 2008 Niinutes from the February 25, 2008 Planning Commission Regular Action Meeting ApplicanYs Response to Commission's comments, date stamped February 7, 2008 Mlinutes from the May 29, 2007, Planning Commission Study Meeting Original Application to the Planning Commission Original Variance Forms Photographs of both bay windows Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed) Natice of Public Hearing — Mailed February 17, 2012 Aerial Photo � r'' fi��'i � a`�� = COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 50'I PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010 p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Type of application: ❑ Design Review � Variance ❑ Parcel #: �' � � - � �v d �- � �J �1 ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit ❑ Other: PROJECT ADDRESS: I I�� VanCta�le� �:rl„ amA CA � Please indicate the contact person for this projed APPLICANT project contact person J� OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ Name: Pa,,i N:nn M��' Address: I 1�3R -1 ��' �r� nuG City/State/Zip: �oh F�ray,;��;,0 C/� � N 12� Phone: ��-�� 0�-008'3 Fax: ( �i15) �.�3 -�a$,S E-mail: �Cr�aK2� ��'ah,�,. G�(�'> PROPERTY OWNER projectcontact person ❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ Name: S�rlvtQ �vvv�Wa. Mal� �i�,F Address: � 101 V�ncsJVP f Ciry/State/Zip: � • ri,� �ar�e (;A Phone: �N15) l•53•2$Il� Fax. � �I IS ) "1� 3 - il �� E-mail: ,`h.M�l�2i� � �rr� hu�.Cvr� ARCHITECT/DESIGNER pro�ect conuct person OK to send electronic copies of documents�� Name: � a��-- � ssa � � �1 ( �=_S Address: ��' �� I� l �� R��i`�_ S�-i IT� i � 2 Ciry/State/Zip: � U �L' � ^��'� `'n � . Phone: `� �� — 1 �% o Fax: � 4� 5�) Co � % - % � 3 � ��-c�)� E-mail: ��7-i�_� j��e-�I�SSccfG�--S, co�� JAN 31 2Q ' * Burlingame Business License #: �� S S C��,� Q� a��i_��.arnE �C�-Pf..ANN;�lG D1V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: �--� I G�V��-G �; �. (=�'��r��S ��-� V� 1�In1�( C�-�' r'`� l� lrO Di� (3.�-�'� tnl r�.('I� �.,� ��f>> �T�r,J , c�?cGSr�G ��!�S'7�1s,�� -W�S 1J z GJ O�G+�fl �f� /'j�A�� S� T�� I S i�`-' 'R� i�% m.v `�iI 1�� }2�'�—il� C�i% , AFFADAVITlSIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury at the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. % ApplicanYs signature: � � Date: � I�7 f Ii r I am aware of the proposed applica i n and hereby authorize th applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property owner's signature: �,,,�n ��2�,i�. Date: 11;3�`'/lZ Date submitted: * Verification that the project architect/designer has a vatid Burlingame business license will be required by the Finance Department at the time application fees are paid. ❑ Please mark one box above with an X to indicate the contact person for this project. S:\Handouts\PC Application 2008-B.handout This Space for CDD Staff Use Only Project Description: � t�( � a �n cn J -� �,� !�� a �� .�. � � � n� _()V-Pra �- e lt r e� ��G`� �'- -'`�P i i!IG C�. i � �i '� ��a�„>>>� 3�� Key: Abbreviation Term CUP Conditional Use Permit DHE Declinin Hei ht Envelo e DSR Desi n Review E Existin N New SFD Sin le Famil Dwellin SP S ecial Permit 9/ARIANCE APPLICATION ?�roperty: 1101 Vancouver Ave. Burlingame, CA 94010 Falfowing is our response to Variance Application questions a,b,c,d a. 1101 Vancouver is a corner property which is allowed less square footage than its adjoining neighbor and other homes in the area. Allowance of the greater square footage on the first floor will reduce the amount of second floor square footage available with a resulting decrease in second floor bulk. Therefore any second floor (none proposed at this time) would have less square footage than allowed by others. b. The additions that were made and windows that were added without a permit were by a previous owner. We are willing to correct that situation by securing a building permit, a variance and installing expensive MARVIN wood windows with either true or simulated divided lights on both street frontages. The existing windows are vinyl and will of course be removed. The extra lot coverage does not appear to be detrimental to the neighborhood and therefore removal would equate to a substantial loss. The variance is for 24 square feet and removal of the two bay windows would not influence the mass of the building to any noticeable degree but would to a large degree remove two important architectural components of the fa�ade. c. The lot coverage over the allowable has been there for an indeterminate amount of time. The variance application is for two existing bay windows (built by a previous owner without permits) that only contribute 24 square feet of lot coverage. The 24 square feet of bay windows is an asset to the fa�ade and would not be injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. d. The proposed project ( two bay windows and new wood windows on two street frontages) will be an asset to the architectural character of the corner residence. The neighborhood has several similar architectural styles. Additionally all first floor square footage reduces any allowable second floor square footage which would have the effect of reduced bulk compared to other second stories. �� JAN 31 20i2 CITY OF BURLWGAME CDD-PLANNING DIV. Variance application information Property: 1101 Vancouver, Burlingame CA 94010 We recently purchased this property which has issues regarding code enforcement and variances which were applied for and denied by the Planning Commission in 2008. All of these issues were the result of the previous owners. It is our intent as the new owners to follow all necessary processes in order to receive building permits and approvals. Reading the minutes of the Planning Commission minutes of 2006 the following is noted: Commission comments from February 25, 2008 • The windows (which include imitation mullions) are not of an acceptable design; if the windows were of a higher quality design (simulated true divided lights) perhaps the Variance could be supported. • The residence is at a prominent location ( on a corner lot ), the design of the windows is critical since the site is so visible. • The window placement is acceptable, but the window type is not Discussion on motion: • Approval of the Variance may be warranted since the modifications create visual interest. In order to resolve these issues the new Owners propose the following; • All work done by the previous owner and any new work by the current owners will obtain a building permit and conform to all building permit requirements. • All windows along the street frontages will be replaced with MARVIN wood windows with true or simulated divided lights. • The bay windows will stay in their current locations, albeit with MARVIN wood windows. • Make a new application for approval of the lot coverage and front setback variance. FRONT SETBACK All seven properties in this block fronting Carmetita have been measured with the result that the average of the block is 183 feet and not the 20'-11" dimension noted in the Commission documents. We do not know who performed the previous measurement. Proposed variances: • Variance for exceeding the maximum allowable lot coverage on site (2,183.6 SF (44.7%) proposed where 1953.2 SF (40%) is the maximum allowed. • Front setback variance for a bay window addition (18'-0" proposed, where 18.3 feet is the minimum required) �.�� JAN 31 2�12 CITY OF BURLWGAME CDD-PLANNING DIV. Project Comments Date: �f•� From February 1, 2012 � City Engineer (650) 558-7230 ❑ Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ City Arborist (650) 558-7254 ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 ❑ Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 ❑ City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for Variances for lot coverage and front setback for legalizing two existing bay windows at 1101 Vancouver Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-360-150 Staff Review: 1. Replace all displaced/damaged sidewalk, driveway, curb and gutter. 2. Sewer backwater protection certification is required if any sewer fixtures are replaced with this project. Contact Public Works — Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information. Reviewed by: V V Date: 2/15/2012 Date To: February 1, 2012 ❑ City Engineer (650) 558-7230 X Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ City Arborist (650) 558-7254 ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 ❑ Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for Variances for lot coverage and front setback for legalizing two existing bay windows at 1101 Vancouver Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-360-150 Staff Review: 1) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2010 California Building Code, 2010 California Residential Code (where applicable), 2010 California Mechanical Code, 2010 California Electrical Code, and 2010 California Plumbing Code, including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1856-2010. Note: If the Planning Commission has approved the project prior to 5:00 p.m. on December 31, 2010 then the building permit application for that project may use the provisions found in the 2007 California Building Codes including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1813. 2) On the plans provide a copy of the GreenPoints checklist for this project at full scale. 3) Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2008 California Energy Efficiency Standards. Note: Remove all references to the 2010 Energy Code. 4) Place the following information on the first page of the plans: "Construction Hours" Weekdays: 7:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m. Saturdays: 9:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. Sundays and Holidays: 10:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. (See City of Burlingame Municipal Code, Section 13.04.100 for details.) 5) On the first page of the plans specify the following: "Any hidden conditions that require work to be performed beyond the scope of the building permit issued for these plans may require further City approvals including review by the Planning Commission." The building owner, project designer, and/or contractor must submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically illustrated on the Job Copy of the plans prior to performing the work. 6) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business license. 7) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 8) Provide a fully dimensioned site plan which shows the true property boundaries, the location of all structures on the property, existing driveways, and on-site parking. 9) Provide a complete demolition plan that indicates the existing walls, walls to be demolished, new walls, and a legend. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not be issued and, and no work can begin, until a Building Permit has been issued for the project. 10) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 11) Provide lighting at all exterior landings. �. Reviewed by• � — Date: 2-2-2012 v � � � �� Date: To: From: February 1, 2012 � City Engineer (650) 558-7230 0 Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 X City Arborist (650) 558-7254 0 Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 � Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 0 City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for Variances for lot coverage and front setback for legalizing two existing bay windows at 1101 Vancouver Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-360-150 Staff Review: 1. No comments Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 2/6/12 Project Comments Date: February 1, 2012 To: 0 City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 � City Arborist (650) 558-7254 From: Planning Staff 0 Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 ❑X Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney Subject: Request for Variances for lot coverage and front setback for legalizing two existing bay windows at 1101 Vancouver Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-360-150 Staff Review: No comment at this time. Reviewed by:� � L� Date: b�'�Y `Z Project Comments Date: February 1, 2012 To: 0 City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 � City Arborist (650) 558-7254 From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for Variances for lot coverage and front setback for legalizing two existing bay windows at 1101 Vancouver Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-360-150 Staff Review: No Comment For assistance please contact Stephen D. at 650-342-3727 Reviewed by: SD .r�'�j � Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 � Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 X NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 0 City Attorney Date: 02-06-2012 Fax T�ransmitta� Cover Date 07/03/O8 %/� �' � (� TO Jerry L. 'VJ�inges, AIA — Principal OPC 650.343,1101 PAX 650.343.1291 FROM Marissa Ramos Cell:650-576-9665 6/i RE: Windows Replacement for City of �urlingame Planning Dept. Pages 8 (Jn.c�uding this cover) COmmEnts: Hi Jerry, I am sending you the following information from Collier Warehouse (MARVIN Windows): � Clad Casemaster — Section Aetails: Picture/Casings • Clad Cssemaszer — Secrion Details: Operating /Stationary • Price Quote • Marvin Window Quote for 1Vlari,ssa Ramos —1101 Vancouver Ave. Burlingame (4 i'ages) Let me know if you have any questions. Otherwise, have a nice vacation and I will talk to you later. Regards, �� v Marigsa i r . ££9805L5Tb d4� aSfl�S Wd Sb�Zi 800Z-LnC•6Z CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISS/ON — Unapproved Minufes February 25, 2008 4. 1101 VANCOUVER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR LOT COVERAGE AND FRONT SETBACK VARIANCES FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MARISA RAMOS, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND ONI RAMOS, DESIGNER) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report dated February 25, 2008, with attachments. Zoning Technician Lisa Whitman presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Seven (7) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Cauchi opened the public hearing. Marissa Ramos, 1101 Vancouver Avenue; represented the applicant. Commission comments: ■ On Variance application form, clarificaty the exceptional circumstances that warrant approval of a Variance. • The windows (which include imitation mullions) are not of an acceptable design; if the windows were of a higher quality design (simulated true divided lights) perhaps the Variance could be supported. ■ The residence is at a prominent location (on a corner lot), the design of the windows is critical since the site is so visible. ■ The window placement is acceptable, but the window type is not. Public comments: ■ Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; noted that the applicant has been caughttwice forworking without Building Permits. She believes that the owners probably knew of the need for a building permit. W ho is the contractor that did the work without a permit? She supports requiring the windows to be changed. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Osterling moved to refer the project to a design revrewer with specific direction to review the window and door design and trim details. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Brownrigg. Discussion of motion: ■ Approval of the Variance may be warranted since the modifications create visual interest. Chair Cauchi called for a voice vote on the motion refer the matter to a design reviewer. The motion passed 6-0-0. This item concluded at 8:05 p.m. 5. 2508 LSIDE DR , ZONED R-1 — APP CATION FOR DESIGN EVIEW, VARIA CES AND SPECIAL PERMIT F A FIRST AND SE ND STORY ADDITIO (MGS CONS UCTION, APPLICA � DAVID HI EL, DESIGNER; LEN AND DOMINIC CHANG, ROPERTY O NERS) RB�rence staff T�port dated F pres�nted the rep�. reviewed consi ary 25, 2008, with att'd�ments. Zoning TechniZ4fln Lisa Whitm� ry� and staff comments. �elve (12) conditions we�suggested for N Date: January 5, 2008 To: City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame CA 94010 From: Marissa A. Ramos 1101VancouverAvenue Burlingame CA 94010 RE: Building Permit / Variance Request How was a permit issued to put windows in before it came to the Commission for review? I apologized for my mistake. The window was replaced/installed without a building permit. All work was done and completed without a building permit. We were fixing the roof with black tar and repairing cracks on walls when a work stoppage was issued. After a"work stoppage" was issued , I came to the Planning Department to apply for a building permit and required variances for the two installed (without Permit) bay windows. Would like clarification on open ended comments on sheet A-4 concerning metal roof and posts to be replaced; When we purchased the house, the original structure of the porch/balcony (along Carmelita Avenue) was the metal roof awning with three (3) wrought iron posts that was built approximately over forty years ago. We had it removed because it was dilapidated, and weather beaten. The metal roof was raised, uneven, rusty (brown not white), and leaks when it rains. The wrought iron was bent, missing design parts and loose from the main support. Plus, my neighbor across the street has complained to us that the metal awning looks ugly and awful, every time she looks out the window from inside her house. In replacement of the metal awning/roof—we decided to build a permanent roof over the balcony to match the rest of the house for elegant style and improved curb appeal. We intend to paint (with texture or restucco) the entire house to cover the patches, cracks on walls and blend in with the existing stucco with a clean and new look. We plan to use a earth tone colored textured paint (adobe or sandstone) with the existing stucco to ensure the structural integrity of the surfaces of the house and adds beauty to neighborhood. FEB � ': 2008 C�T' OF EUF.LIh'=„-.,.._ PL�NNI�u DE=T. Date: January 5, 2008 To: City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame CA 94010 From: Marissa A. Ramos 1101 Vancouver Ave Burlingame CA 94010 RE: BUILDING PERMITNARIANCE REQUEST Would like clarification on open ended comments on sheet A-4 concerning metal roof and posts to be replaced; and The original structure of the porch/balcony (Carmelita Avenue) inetal roof awning with wrought iron posts that was built over twenty (20) years ago. We had it removed because it was old, leaky roof, rusty posts and I received a complaint from the neighbor across the street. So we decided to remove it and built a permanent roof to match the rest of the house and posts with matching stucco of the building. We intend to paint (maybe re- stucco) with texture finish to the entire house. We have the interest of saving or preserving as much as possible ofthe historic stucco.We intend to use texture finish painting to cover patches, and blend in with the existing stucco with a clean and new look. The replacement we used for the balcony has better look to improve curve appeal by matching structure with rest of house using bricks and stucco posts with Spanish style to augment the windows. s The existing stucco is completely prepared in order to ensure that structura] integrity of the surfaces are re-established. State of the art crack repair treatinent includes thirty-five year caulking to seal the crack and remain flexible. Then, fiberglass mesh or galvanized steel mesh is applied over the crack to reinforce the weakened area. Any damaged or broken area: are likewise restored to structural integrity before the recoat process begins. Now prepared, the existing stucco receives our unique three step stucco application process. �� FEB � 7 2008 CITY OF BI.�RLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. CALL m ROLL C the Planning ran, Brownrigg, D" I, Osterling an� uchi and Vistica e lopment Director, �liam Meeker; ier, City Attorney, Lar ', Anderson; Pre `. nt: Commissioners � Abser�.� Commissioners: Staff Pre�ent: Community D Technici�'�,i Erica Strohme Engineer;��oug Bell. � ing iior NUTES The minutes of the May 14, ` 07 regular meeting � f the Planning Commission �i�!ere reviewed and co tinued until a time wh' C. Brownrigg has had the opportunity to review the , with the following ch ,nges: page 3, third paragraphj;.line three, correct ' to significant;�page 7, fifth bullet from bottorrl� insert "and that the imal, while in the care °f the SPCA, shall be neutered �k,ihen it is safe"; page�, bottom of page, item �), correct to lighting;, page 10, item 20, i et "replaced with an uivalent s ecies, and befor�� the issuance of a`; Building Permit, the anning \ IV. PPROVAL OF AGE V. FR THE FLOOR VI. STUDY ITEMS C mission shall review the revised lands pe plans as an FYI ite '� page 15, 'tem 64, remove 5��gallon and add follo „ing drums "up to 55 ga ns"; and age 17, item 75, the statement "for indivi ual or combined constru tion sites larger than four ae�:res" is irrelevant bec se the site is less than four acres i size. � �, There we no changes to tl� agenda. Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa A�nue, spoke to FYI � 212 Hiliside Drive, concerned th t changes went forward as an FYI; equested that the Commission gi thought to a win ow instead of a door in sunken garden 1�ecause that exi hould be used o ly in case of an emergency. 1. 1101 VANCOUVER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR LOT COVERAGE AND FRONT SETBACK VARIANCES FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MARISA RAMOS, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND ONI RAMOS, DESIGNER) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER ZT Strohmeier presented a summary of the staff report. Commissioners asked: • How do we know when a Building Permit is issued? In future, should notify neighborhood when a Building Permit is issued; could discuss with Neighborhood Consistency Sub-Committee; suggest posting schematic diagram on-site if project is up for review; • If proposal had come to the Commission before installation, Commission would have required simulated true divided light windows; project would look better with simulated true divided light windows; • How was a permit issued to put the windows in before it came to the Commission for review? • Would like clarification on open ended comments on sheet A-4 concerning the metal roof and posts to be replaced; and • Would like to see a full landscape plan. CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 501 Primrose Ro d, Burlingame, CA May 2 , 2007 Council ambers � ORDER air Deal called the' May 29, 2007, reg lar meeting C,mmission to order at :00 p.m. This item was set for the Regular Action Calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department. This item concluded at 7:15 p.m. City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlin ag me.org �r� ciT. oT BURLlNGAME APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION �� Type of application: Design Review Conditional Use Permit Variance Xxx Special Permit Other Parcel Number: Projectaddress: 1101 VANCOUVER AVE. BURLINGAME CA 94C1U APPLICANT N3ri10: MARTSA A. RAMOS ***** Address: 1101 VANCOUVER �VE. City/State/Zip: BURLINGAME CA 94010 Phone (w): 650-=369-4821 �h�: 650-401 -8600 �fl: 650-369-2780 ARCffiTECT/DESIGNER Name: 6ni Ramos Address: 1114-A Buena Vista Ave. City/State/Zip: Alameda, CA 94501 Phone (w) (h) �� 510-384-7059 510-814-9947 510-814-9947 PROPERTY OWNER Name: ENRICO & MARISSA RAMOS Address: 1101 VANCOUVER AVE City/State/Zip:BURLINGAME CA 94010 Phone(w): 650-703-8600 [Enrico] �h�: 650-401 -8600 650-369-2780 �fl � Please indicate with an asterisk * the contact person for this project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: WINDow REPLACEMENT. The original window was one piece (5'x5') to a Bay Window with same dimensions (3-pieces) AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my wledge and belief. �,�, - r Applicant's signature: (�f/ t ��vfi�'k� � �� Date: �� I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property owner's signature: G�te: ,�- vZ � �" Date submitted: PCAPP.FRM t� �� 2v�-y�n -�./ L,at (m,�ru. e'1� �`l N°Cn ,� ,,�, �o c��( � U,)y�4,�re, Lf D`�e i S � �A�� i'�ttM� ql+0u�� . City of Burlingame Planning Deparhnent 501 Pr.mrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlinQame.org y rb, CITY Q < � BUWJNGAME k�� cl�� o�Rt��r�l.�c�:��c �-T�k� �ti�°� A�>�r1�c.�,T��v , � � � � � . . � .. �. � . � . . . . ` The Platuiuig Commission is required by law to malce fmdings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Plaruiing Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to your property which do not apply to other properties in this area. I apologized for replacing the window without getting a building permit. I made a mistake in assuming my contractor acquired/ received a building permit before installing the new bay window. b. Explain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right and what unreasonable properly loss or unneeessary hardship might result form the denial of the applieation. Again, I apologized for not getting a building permit and will be responsble in following city ordinance. The two houses north of my property has seven (7) feet front setback from lot line along Vancouver Ave and my property is 12-13 feet front setback from lot line along Vancouver Avenue. Therefore, my bay window has not exceed or extended the existing property line. The bay window is still within guidelines of lot coverage and setback lin2s. c. Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or to public health, safety, general welfare or convenience. The window replacement will not be detrimental or injurious to the property or the public. As a matter of fact, the window makes the house looks pleasant to our neighbors. d How will the proposed project be compatible wifh the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of the existing and potential uses o� adjoining properties in the general vicinity? There are several houses that have the same window improvements and more compatible with other homes in the neighborhood. The bay window falls within the same type of architecture of the house.and makes the house more attractive than the original window. . •►[.�:��.isi City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7:'.50 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlineame.org a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to your property which do not apply to other properties in this area. Do any condirions exist on the site which make other altemarives to the variance impracticable or impossible and are also not c.ronunon to other properties in the area? For example, is there a creek Cutting through the property, an exceptional tree , speciuiev, steep terrain, odd lot shape or unusual placement of ex.isting structures? How is this property different &om others in the neighborhood? � b. Ex�lain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a s�bstantial property right and what unreasonable property loss.or unnecessary hardship might result form the denial of the application. Wou4dyon be unable to build a project similaz to others in the area or neighborhood without the exception? (i.e., having as much on-site parking or bedrooms?) Would you be unable to develop the site for the uses allowed without the exceprion? Do the req�rements of the law place an unreasonable limitation or hardship on the development of the property? c. Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or to public health, safety, general welfare or convenienc� How will the proposed structure or use within the structure affect neighboring properties or siructures on those properties? If neigi�oring properties will not be affected, state why. Think about traffic, noise, lighting, paving, landscaping sunlighdshade, views from neighboring properties, ease of maintenance. Why will the structure or use within the structure not affect the public's health, safety or general welfare? Public health includes such things as sanitarion (gazbage), air quality, dischazges into sewer and stormwater systems, water supply safety, and things which have the potential to affect public health (i.e., underground storage tanks, storage of chemicals, situations wkuch encourage the spread of rodents, insects or communicable diseases). Public safetv. How will the strubture or use within the struchue affect police or fire protection? Will alarm systems or sprinklers be installed? Could the structure or use within the shucture create a nuisance or need for police services (i.e., noise, unruly gatherings, loitering, traffic) or fue services (i.e., storage or use of flammable or hazardous materials, or potenrially dangerous acriviries like welding, woodwork, engine removal). General welfare is a catch-all phrase meaning community good. Is the proposal consistent with the city's policy and goals for conservation and development? Is there a social benefit? Convenience. How would the proposed strscture or use affect public convenience (such as access to or parking for this site or adjacent sites)? Is the proposal accessible to particulaz segments of the public such as the elderly or handicapped? � How will the proposed project be eompatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of the existing and potenfial uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity. How does the proposed structure or use compare aesthetically with existing neighborhood? If it does not affect aestherics, state why. If changes to the shucture are proposed, was the addirion designed to match existing architecture, pattern of development on adjacent properries in the neighborhood? If a use will affect the way a neighborhood or area looks, such as a"long term airport parking lot, compare your proposal to other uses in the area and explain why it fits. How does the proposed structure compare to neighboring structures in terms of mass or bulk? ' If there is no change to the struchsre, say so. If a new structure is ptoposed, compaze its size, appearance, orientarion, etc. with other structures in the neighborhood or area. How will the stracture or use within the struchue cl�ange the character of the neighborhood? Thiuk of character as the image or tone established by size, density of development and general pattern of land use. Will there be more trsffic .or less parldng ava�lable resulting from this use? If you don't feel the character of the neighborhood will change, st�dte �vhy. How will the propo�sed project be compatihle with exist'tng e�d poten�ial uses in the general viGirtity? CompsY� ypui praj�et v�itift , existing uses. State why you feel your project is consistent with other uses in the vicinity, andlar sfate w�y your project weuld be consistent with potential uses in the vicinity. ►m �� ,FRLiM :. CASA DE REDWOOD FAX N0. : 650 ?69 275N May. 07 2007 99:5EPM P2 , �. Ramos — 1101 Vancouver Ave. Ci;y of Sur;ingame Planninc Dcpartment �61 Y�imrose Road P(650) 5�3-7250 ^(650} 696-?790 www.burl�n ame.a: <�crrr __—. . . .- , . . . "� °" CITY t�F BIJRLLtiTG�ME: B"R""`aM� VARI�;1� CE APPLTC'ATT4. N 4 . � � �� . �� . . . . ._: . . ,. .. 'L " ... . : .. ._ . �� " �()� �,��t.�, FRpNT SETBACK R�QUEST �� The Pianning Comzx�ission is required by law to make findings as dehned by the City's Ordinance (Codc Section 25.54.420 a-d). Your answers to the following questians can assist the Planning Cammission in z�ialdng the decision as to ��ether the findings can be made for youx zequest. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the hack of this form for assistance with these questions. a. Describe rhe exceptconal or extraordircary circumstances or canditions ap�licable to yortr property which do not apply ta other praperties ix this arec� I apoZogized £or replaCing the window wi�hout getting a building permit. I made a mistake in dssuming my contractor has acquir�d or received a building permit before instalJ.zng the new bay window_ b. .�.�plQirc why tlze variance requesi is necessary for the preservatian and enjoyr�sent af a substantial pro.per�� ribht and x�hat unreasanable property loss or unnecessary har�lship might result form the denial of the application. Again, Y apologized for not getting a builing permit and will be maxe responsible in�following city ordinance. The variance r�quest for front setback to the new bay window (along Carmel�.ta Ave.) was extended by 2-feet, but it is sti11 inside the outer wa11 of the balcony as an original structure. The new bay window beside the balcony adds beauty �nd enhances the old architecture of the house from different angles. c. Fzplain why the proposed use at the proposed locatian will not be detr'irnental or injrtrious tn �rope.riy or z�raprovemenis iri the vieinity or to public. healtls, safety, general welfare ar convenience. Th� window replacement wi11 not be detrimental or injurious to the property or the public. As a matter of fac�, the window makes the hous� looks pleasant to our neighbors. rl How will the proposed project be compatiLle with the aestheties> mass, bulk and charact�r �f the e.Yisting ¢nd pozential uses �n adjoining properties in the general vicinixy? There �re s2veral houses (new or exista.ng) that have th� same window iltiprovemerits rahiCh is more compatible with other homes in the neighborhood. The bay window f�lls wi.thir. the same type of architeCture of the hpuse and makes the house �nor� attractive than the original (flat) window. : 3i��. � M^� � •' ��'l�lidouts\vunance Apyticatior: CITY O� 6Ui'._:� � ;f,Irt� PLANNING DEPT. � �. � ._ , � �� _ : _ �,��,�-�.. _ �- _ - - _ � � � =- " " :�� -- �' "" - G' , �� i� �� _ �i I� E � _ .� �; k �'; + �<r; �: �� _,��i — � � e•.;zt..., �� "" :.+i4' 1':='. - �'�? a'� _: S-'- - _ _ 3 '�. q , g - - .d � �5�;_ F es ... � _ _ .� F ,3�•� R. . � � :.z.,_ - - — --ti Bay window at front — Carmelita Avenu� �a 7�•�� , � ;� �.~. , m �� F - �.r. ,� .� : l .�;. - E-�. . _ ,� � �� :-� '--�,--`, _ ' . , :. %-, ---� '� - + . . �� : ' t � �� ' � ; ��, � � �� . � ,� � i � � 9 ��Y„ yp�' . , - � A� s � '�>: ,._ � s k a .* _ 3` x.a : �. _.�_�,'3n.�`-��"c�d.--,'�3r� . �. ..:�� p.' � . . . � � - }{�!1 � � .. f.? � 'Qr' � �_ .X} 1. . � .,;e '1.-� "�d _ :4i��t�� k �_ : "- - � .. `'�. Bay window at e�terior side — Vanco�nver Avenue a G�7 - 36 34 - - - � " �' z � -- -- �, A �� E, a�' �, d %i.i .4 - �'a0' � C i�� i '�� " � c o � � ` � <- �� :=__ .�,j iv. _ � _ . � m m � ,��.—io� , � � 4 � `� 1 � � !�' A.E. �43 ��' A.c. tia' � �� , ` .� NA � , 6 5 ,�� o�, 0 5�� - � ;o��, b 2 `:� N 1 � �`� � O � � ` 0 �, A�, U O 29 �� 5 1 �,o' �� . � `'�0 30 � \ 6� \ ". ��j�A�' � A1/�- � �'.�,, , -ia.�a, g_, N �b 0 �� a' ��, �,,> �.� �E�1" o q5 /� 3 3� c �,, R�pSE Z�o �o� �3 �4 � � O v� O � `t _ o /2 �'1 cA %, m � � a5�. . � �.�� .,p`-' ,�o' // 1 � z �!`�� o <G /0 �, � �2 ih 32 3 G'23" O9 ` �� T`. _ T � �o� �3-G ` �O \ \1� q ' , 9 \ � _ �,� _= � �p ,i � 33 34 �� 1 . � �a � % 1 � � 4 ,��, � �� 8 � - � � /3 f" �, 5 �, 7 ..�_ � �a ��, A� �. N � `� ��- - " �, 1 /4 � � ��, �, 6 \ _, � l5 �� =•� , --- ` ` , ,R_e. � -- �?7,� o' ,_ —� � � l6 ', \ �,, - o.. i7a 9` ..__ --- »<'i' G �7 /6 , l5 � O 3 6� 0 q � A , �8 '�, � � �, r, ' ` /7 f G 7 �` � 1' �8 ` � `�� 'C 1 �� 9 \ �� i0`rt3 /4 � 'r'� � o � ° 20 26 `� 35 ` '' � s�'' `�` � A�E' �, � 1 O ,�' �o, S. � 5�' y9� i A.(" ,� 13.�a'.. �a z Q �;o' l8 � �r / 7Z 7/' �v' /7 � R?sBaG� �r _ A _ � v �6 N 1 0 6G' � �5 `� � �' �� '� �'>� i� y,,, R� a-ti. �.Q� A�� °�� /g (�4 0 � 2/ N � �'._ R' 1 �p5.75' A� G� � �� ?. �S 48, ---- Gd.//� � 22�. 5<:—_ '�3 �s— /2 �, A E ==,-..�� %2 '- �� 3 /3 W : � � _� �;; �, RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND VARIANCES RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for Variances for front setback and lot coveraqe for bav window additions to an existinq sinqle familv dwelling at 1101 Vancouver Avenue, zoned R-1, Svlvia Sow-Wai Mak Trust. propertv owner. APN: 027-360-150; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on February 27, 2012, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19, Section 15301 (e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that additions to existing structures are exempt from environmental review, provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition. 2. Said Variances are approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Variances are set forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. Chairman I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 27`h dav of Februarv, 2012 by the following vote: Secretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption and Variances. 1101 VancouverAvenue Effective March 8, 2012 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped January 31, 2012, sheets A-1 through A-4, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. 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; 3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's January 20, 2012 and December 16, 2011 memos, the City Engineer's December 19, 2011 memo, the Parks Supervisor's December 14, 2011 memo, the Fire Marshal's December 15, 2011 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's December 15, 2011 memo shall be met; 4. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date, the Front Setback Variance and Lot Coverage Variance, as well as any other exceptions to the code granted here, will become void; 5. 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; 6. 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; 7. 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; and 8. 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. ��CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD �BURLINGAME, CA 94010 a!' � PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org Si#�: 1 j 01 il�N�OUiI�R AVENUE The City of Burlingame Planning tommission announces the following public hsaring on MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2012 at 7:00 P.M, in the City Hall Council Chamhers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, (A: Application for Front Setback Varinnce and Lot Coverage Variance for bay window additions to an existing single family dwelling at 1101 VANGOUVER AVENUE zoned R-l. APN 021-360-150 Nlailed: February 17, 2012 (Please refer to oiher side) -. .-� � - 4 �`�ii ti ._: — PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Citv of Burlingame A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Community Development Department at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. If you challenge the subject application{s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director (Please refer to other side) PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE �� . .r � . . ' . .��= , �4�' � I ..� tii � m , i° , '� • � � \ f � � ` � �� E�s�� _ 2 � � / � i^ ` , �, � �� _ ., , �. s , _�} 1 �. � ✓ ' 6 ,� a. y� �i -.c _ . _ �"�, \ tty " � � �?,,s � �� ; "q p� � - �, ;� � ", � :� �F �.�y,,' .} _ b'f - �� '�� b ��` ��4ah � f {.L ♦�� ?� ��+:` la$� ��. I. \ �. . ." . , p . ly #_i I" � -+,Y,., � .. ( - - '', �R�p t� � 2'.l � i '"^7 . , � 4 .•- -. . �" _' � Y3" Y Y � � � � ' � ' � �. � ,, � '� �,�i t,�', � ; S , 4 � �'*' � �• �!' .�s "�, � �� 7 , �.,- , � Y� .i � �,,�+ !� . � � . % � `��a �� `�� :� �i �'' � �e� ` �,� � ' � ; � - . �` ; �� - _ � y:� � �'r, � r , � �" `'(�'' �` � ' ,� � , i � `' � � - �� `� #.. �� .� �' �„ `�� '�'_ j `�`+ * '�, � � r �:l I �,� �� ':�� .�'�� ,��` � �.. ,�. .�' �.� - � � � � f.� \ . `��• - _ �`� � ' . . 1 ;�� ' � 1 �'{ � }}}"111�� F � . {' �� _�' �� • �r .� ��.� ��,.. � � �9 � ` t. � �! � -.{� d 1 � _ , ��3.�' � .� �'' ' 1 � 4 � �'� �. 7 � i� _�t - �fi y� y ; ��_f Y� i d . ;�_. ' «\. � � f r �s ai:' _ � R r� 1. ��'' � I " { � �� .,'.�� ' _ � 7''a`� .. 4,, . ` -�Ji� .� -. .!.-.:_ i � � � �i'�., • ' � , _ �.. . r" � r ��, , � � � , }.,� �F : �,�.�:.- _ � �A �'', �. -- ' S��'� � � •k ' � _ �0�� _ •�� , •4� ' �� . *� �� 'h ` ��rll ��4� � 't i . � � . �. __t � _ -- 'yt � � ` � . � � �, � �� : ' �, r i, '' � f' �s�y �� I. , rF � � ` � � � � � y' ' �. r 1� 1�� di". � r. - ti � � �i � � i i .�•' , • -9�.�*� � `�,e ` � �,,, . ��y� �F-, ..� °r3 '� . . 1R, � , + � � � � � `� �;�`�°� . � �� y ��' �- _ � . � � � ;� �7` �� , , y, � -_ � .,� � : ,� ��- , ��5,� ti ,� � * %r' - r +� � '� "�' �� a _ ��'� ��r�r �' •: -_ - � � - i / �. � H � J' � � /. ' . ` � +� . �' /� ��.� 1 y�A L _ ��-t �- � t"e � �� +. t.., (o�' _ �� J 1 � �.. � � � �a � � � _z � . x y�.. ti �.i, �� y�� IP� " 3 `s �Mp� ��' � �� i �l� - � � ' �. , � >��'} � . _ - '� 7 �`-�'.•. I'� `. � '�., � � � � _ � • ' � �.� � �� .� �y� Y r �.. :�i, Z•k. .` � ri. .! �_ � y� „i 1 '� � � �� rs► � � J�"�f , � - � `� 4, � �_ � , . ,;r� „y; , F� , � . � ; � ' � �+: � � �. ,� � _ . i. ,� �'e'�'-,� }� � � r � � ' - � . �`� - �� '� �fi� \,�,��{ � � � . �-ia — ' . � � _ � �� ..� 4• �:�,;�, . __ � '• ` ' ' � ,�- ' , ,�. ^ '� ^� � . , �� P -' I� . i•: � �l• ` �•',' � ` � �'ie� - . ��. � � � � - �� :✓� � +� <` / .. ` • � .�i y� . _ �� i_• � � . Its .^ l �^ i'� ��. ' - i ' _ ��'t� ' . � a'�4 �v q .,y - � r..�- . :� z = �.p �:� :��'.�• o �" '_��_ �, ?��' ��' � .�' , . � �� ,> � ,i �� •£ ��'� � � � _ ' �i � `-�� _ 1 Y�N L' � . �� t y � �.. . - -.. T t•+ s. � _ _ t°.� � = - �r ��'i� y�'�' . . . . , . r J'.�.:� �' i . Ye_ F. .,�� - _ . � _ .. � : ^.'3� - �+' - , ' �. �` _ : �� , � � '��' , , � -� � �= - � �� ", ° :� t ,� ��.'�'� � �`� � �1''� � ' -�'� � �:�, y , � R� >7�.��3 f , '=�- .. f �:#' .,�,� � :: - r.' t=:..- ,l� 4-7-- �p`sG�S R�. �`�� .�/'�,*�� " - � � � , �'�'�' - � �. �i,. Z,,. s -.� � . . . . _ , . . i. � . : , _ . .. �' �'� � �.. �" �' � �� 'i 101 Vancouver Av�nue � - � '�� ,.� I�!�` 4r . - '' ' � - �-� =�� _ r� `� ; .� �_� . :. � ;�� p� City of Burlingame Planning Department (650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax) Plan Review Comments Job Address: 1101 Vancouver Avenue (revised plans submitted January 31, 2012) Job Description: Variances for lot coverage and front setback for two existing bay windows. Lot Area: 4,882.5 SF Zoning: R-1 1. Setbacks Front (1st fl�r): Side (left): (right): Existing _ 17'-0" (to porch) _. _..... 3'-0" 11 '-6" Proposed 17'-3" (to new bay) no change 12'-0" (to new bay) Rear (1 st flr): !, 10'-6" no change 15'-0" : _._. _ _ ; ➢ Please note that the block average for front setback is 18'-10", not 18'-3" as is listed on the plans, because both the existing house at 2116 Carmelita and 2132 Carmelita were excluded based upon the Planning Divisions block average setback policy. That policy is that "when a setback average is being calculated for a property, that lots containing the greatest and least setbacks be excluded from the calculation of the average, since including these properties would unnecessarily skew the average". ■ The applicant submitted a revised Variance application for front setback to the Planning Division on January 31, 2012. 2. Lot Coveraqe 40% x 4,882.5 SF = 1,953 SF inaximum allowed _... __ _ , Existing Proposed Allowed/Required _ Allowed/Required __ _ 18'-10" (block average) _ _ _ __ 4'-0" 7'-6" Lot Coverage: ; 2,147.9 SF 2,172.4 SF 1,953 SF 44% 44.5% 40% _.. _... ■ The applicant submitted a revised Variance application for lot coverage to the Planning Division on January 31, 2012. Floor Area Ratio (0.32 x 4,882.5 SF + 900 SF = 2,462.4 SF inaximum allowed (0.50 F Existing Proposed ' Allowed/Required . _ Floor Area Ratio: ' 2,035.2 SF 2,059.7 SF 0.42 FAR 0.42 FAR Project complies with floor area ratio requirements (calculations attached). 4. Buildinq Heiqht (as measured from adiacent qrade) • N/A — no change to overall building height proposed. 5. Declininq Heiqht Envelope (DHE) ■ N/A — no second story proposed at this time. 2,462.4 SF 0.50 FAR 1 City of Burlingame Planning Department (650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax) Plan Review Comments 6. Parkinq No increase in number of potential bedrooms (3 existing). Existing & Proposed: 1 covered (10' x 17'-11 ") + 1 uncovered (9' x 20', as measured to interior edge of sidewalk) Required: 1 covered (10' x 20') + 1 uncovered (9' x 20') ■ Complies with parking requirement because there is no increase to the number of potential bedrooms. 7. Landscapinq ■ Based on Calculated FAR (2,060 SF), two landscape trees (non-fruit or nut bearing) are required on the property. ■ Site plan indicates that there are two existing "non-fruit" trees and one proposed 24" box size "non-fruiY' tree on the property. Project complies with landscape requirements. 2 City of Burlingame Planning Department (650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax) Proiect: 1101 Vancouver Ave —(REVISED 1/31/12) Lot Coverage and FAR Calculations �D-i- �DV� �� e � ��(-l0 ��o �t �� : � � ': - r,� . _ � � � n i 5fi he� } n*Fo ;c � V �� Siv.ZS ��4'�4 x1�2�`i��`. Z,14�.q� - !c�� r�,�r.c 14 �} �H� 1�,25 �i� ��x 1 � f� _ ? �n}. Z��3� � ZK-' I,l3ag �3�� , ��9 �i��'` �ZXI`i� � 147. , _. �—� � ��. � ' S 1 � `� � � , - �.. ? I � = �� {�-1.'�' °!, a. � / �leo� F`v�� Tr,.�0,52 �: �'�;� �.-iC-�z_.��. � 0�50 ��.� �lir.,,� -� � x-St-:v�•� i�vr �ao1�� Z,i�?,. � —(�\ �,��,� 2,i4�•1 - ' � 11�t% I I OV-'(E�{ n�.ILv� 9�� y ' � �N� J - I .� ��1,'r ��L �,.F) ` I IZ-} ��`f'"K Pr��-��{"� �, 7 i I�Z�`� ,��zc Z �±��.u? �;=�� — �oo `", ,, . - , . _ — i�.� �rvc pi,a�e cx�v„�1=ti�,\ '' ��a. f � �._?:. � .� Item # r� Regular Action PROJECT LOCATION 1101 VancouverAvenue � City of Burlingame Item No. � Variances for Lot Coverage and Front Setback Regular Action Address: 1101 Vancouver Avenue Meeting Date: February 25, 2008 Request: Lot Coverage and Front Setback Variances for a first floor bay window addition. Applicant Property Owner: Marisa Ramos APN: 027-360-150 Designer: Oni Ramos Lot Area: 4,883 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section: 15301 (e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that additions to existing structures are exempt from environmental review, provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition. History: On May 6, 2005, the Building Department issued a stop work order for unauthorized installation of a new roof, new windows, new doors and other various changes without building permits. On June 7, 2005, the property owner submitted an application to the Building Department for dry rot repair to the garage and electrical work. This permit was finaled by the Building Department on December 5, 2005. On July 19, 2006, the Building Department issued another stop work order due to further work being conducted without a building permit. The work being done on the house included two new tiled roof overhangs (bay windows), new pillars to support the roof and replacement of the existing roof with hot tar and tiles. On September 18, 2006, the property owner applied to the Building Department for a building permit for the two already installed bay windows, one at the front of the house along Carmelita Avenue and the otherat the exterior side along Vancouver Avenue, and for a re-roof. Planning staff commented on the building permit application, noting that Lot Coverage and Front Setback Variances are required for the additions. No building permit has been issued at this time for the work done because the Planning Commission approval of both a Lot Coverage and Front Setback Variances is required before the building permit can be issued. Project Description: The existing single-story residence with an attached one-car garage contains 2,048 SF (0.42 FAR) of floor area and has three bedrooms. The existing house (before the work that was completed without a building permit) had a nonconforming lot coverage of 44.3 °/o, where 40°/o is the maximum allowed. The addition of the bay windows increased the nonconforming lot coverage from 2,161.5 SF (44.3%) to 2,183.6 SF (44.7%) and therefore a variance for lot coverage is required. The new front bay along Carmelita Avenue is located 18' from the front property line. The required front setback is either 15'-0" or the average of the block, whichever is greater. In this case, the average of the block along Carmelita Avenue is 20'-11", which is greater than 15'-0". Therefore, a front setback variance is required (18'-0" proposed where 20'-11" is the minimum required). W ith the as-built addition, the floor area has increased from 2,048 SF (0.42 FAR) to 2,070 SF (0.42 FAR), where 2,463 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed (project is 393 SF below the maximum allowed FAR). There is no change to the number of existing bedrooms (3) with the as-built bay window addition. Two parking spaces, one covered (10' x 20') and one uncovered (9' x 20') are required for the three bedroom house. Because there is no increase in the number of bedrooms, the nonconforming one-car garage (10' x 18' interiordimensions) complies with the covered parking space requirement and there is one 9' x 20' uncovered parking space in the driveway. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following applications: ■ Variance for exceeding the maximum allowable lot coverage on site (2,183.6 SF (44.7 %) proposed where 1953.2 SF (40%) is the maximum allowed) (CS 25.28.065); and ■ Front setback variance for a bay window addition (18'-0" proposed, where 20'-11" is the minimum required) (CS 25.28.072). Front Setback and Lof Coverage Variances 1101 VancouverAvenue 9101 VancouverAvenue Lot Area: 4,883 SF Plans date stam ed: Ma 4, 2007 and Februa 7, 2008 Existing Proposed Allowed/Required SETBACKS _ _ . ..._.. _........ Fronf: 17'-10"' 18'-0" 2 20'-11 block average Side (left): 3'-0" no change 4'-0" (right): 12'-6" 14'-4" to porch 7'-6" Lot Coverage: 2,161.5 SF 2,183.6 SF 1,953.2 SF 44.3%3 44.7% 4 40% FAR: 2,048 SF 2,070.1 SF 2,463 SF 5 0.42 FAR 0.42 FAR 0.50 FAR _ # of Bedrooms: 3 no change --- _ ._ _._ .... ... _.. __.... _._... _ ..__.... _...... . Parking: 1 covered 1 covered (10' x 18') (10' x 20') 1 uncovered no change 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') Heighf: approx. 27'-9" from curb i no change 30'-0" �o�niy iivn�viii�iuiiiiy iivivacwa�n. Z Front setback variance for a first floor bay window addition (18'-0" proposed where 20'-11", block average, is the minimum required). 3 Existing nonconforming lot coverage. 4 Variance for exceeding the maximum allowable lot coverage (44.7% proposed, where 40% is the maximum allowed). 5 4,883 SF x 0.32 + 900 SF = 2,462.6 SF (0.50 FAR) Staff Comments: See attached. Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission study meeting on May 29, 2007, the Commission had several comments and suggestions regarding this project and moved to place the item on the RegularAction Calendar when all requested information had been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Division (May 29„2007, Planning Commission Minutes). The applicant submitted a response letter and revised plans, dated stamped February 7, 2008, to address the Commissions questions and concerns. Listed below are the Commissions' comments and responses by the applicant. 1. How do we know when a Building Permit is issued? In fufure, should notify neighborhood when a Building Permit is issued; could discuss with Neighborhood Consistency Subcommiffee; suggest posfing schemafic diagram on-site if projecf is up for review; • Staff would note that because a building permit is a ministerial action and therefore requires no discretionary review, notices are not typically sent out to the neighbors or to the Commission. Staff wouid also note that the Planning Division is now posting elevation drawings and notices on Design Review project sites prior to the public hearing for such projects. 2. If proposal had come to the Commission before installation, Commission would have required simulafed frue divided light windows; project would look better wifh simulafed frue divided light windows; • Staff would note that the applicant had no response to this comment. -2- Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances 1101 VancouverAvenue 3. How was a permit issued to puf fhe windows in before it came fo the Commission for review? • Staff would note that there was a typographical error in the previous staff report and that no building permit has been issued for this project at this time. A building permit shall not be issued until the Planning Commission approves both the Lot Coverage and the Front Setback Variances. 4. Would like clarification on open ended commenfs on sheef A-4 concerning the metal roof and posts to be replaced; and � The applicant stated that the original metal roof and wrought iron posts were removed because they were dilapidated and weather beaten and because the wrought iron posts were bent and were loose from the main support. She also stated that they were replaced with more permanent materials to match the rest of the house and for improved curb appeal and that she intends to re-stucco the entire house to blend and cover cracks and patches (response letter from applicant, date stamped February 7, 2008). 5. Would like fo see a full landscape plan. • The applicant submitted a full landscape plan to the planning Division on February 7, 2008 (Refer to Sheet LP-1). 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 forthe preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship; (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 an potential uses of properties in the general vicinity. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the application, and consider public testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action should include specific findir�gs supporting the Planning Commission's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the Planning Commission. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped February 7, 2008, Landscape Plan and date stamped May 4, 2007, sheets A-11 through A-5, and that any changes to footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date, the Lot Coverage and Front Setback Variances as well as any other exceptions to the code granted here will become void; 3. 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; -3- Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances 1101 VancouverAvenue 4. 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; 5. 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; 6. 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; and 7. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2007 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Erica Strohmeier Planner c. Marisa Ramos, applicant and property owner. Attach ments:' Applicant's Response to Commission's comments Minutes from Study Meeting — May 29, 2007 Application to the Planning Commission Variance Forms Photographs of both bay windows Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed) Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed February 15, 2008 Aerial Photo � Date: January 5, 2008 To: City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame CA 94010 From: Marissa A. Ramos 1101VancouverAvenue Burlingame CA 94010 RE: Building Permit / Variance Request How was a permit issued to put windows in before it came to the Commission for review? I apologized for my mistake. The window was replaced/installed without a building permit. All work was done and completed without a building permit. We were fixing the roof with black tar and repairing cracks on walls when a work stoppage was issued. After a"work stoppage" was issued , I came to the Planning Department to apply for a building permit and required variances for the two installed (without Pernut) bay windows. Would like clarification on open ended comments on sheet A-4 concerning metal roof and posts to be replaced; When we purchased the house, the original structure of the porch/balcony (along Carmelita Avenue) was the metal roof awning with three (3) wrought iron posts that was built approximately over forty years ago. We had it removed because it was dilapidated, and weather beaten. The metal roof was raised, uneven, rusty (brown not white), and leaks when it rains. The wrought iron was bent, missing design parts and loose from the main support. Plus, my neighbor across the street has complained to us that the metal awning looks ugly and awful, every time she looks out the window from inside her house. In replacement of the metal awning/roof—we decided to build a permanent roof over the balcony to match the rest of the house for elegant style and improved curb appeal. We intend to paint (with texture or restucco) the entire house to cover the patches, cracks on walls and blend in with the existing stucco with a clean and new look. We plan to use a earth tone colored textured paint (adobe or sandstone) with the existing stucco to ensure the structural integrity of the surfaces of the house and adds beauty to neighborhood. Date: January 5, 2008 To: City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame CA 94010 From: Marissa A. Ramos 1101 Vancouver Ave Surlingame CA 94010 RE: BUILDING PERMIT/VARIANCE REQUEST Would like clarification on open ended comments on sheet A-4 concerning metal roof and posts to be replaced; and The original structure of the porch/balcony (Carinelita Avenue) metal roof awning with wrought iron posts that was built over twenty (20) years ago. We had it removed because it was old, leaky roof, rusty posts and I received a complaint froin the neighbor across the street. So we decided to reinove it and built a permanent roof to match the rest of the house and posts with matching stucco of the building. We intend to pault (maybe re- stucco) with texture finish to the entire house. We have the interest of saving or preserving as much as possible of the historic stucco.We intend to use texture fmish painting to cover patches, and blend in with the existing stucco with a clean and new look. The replacement we used for the balcony has better look to improve curve appeal by matching structure with rest of house using bricks and stucco posts with Spanish style to auginent the windows. s The existing stucco is completely prepared in order to ensure that structural integrity of the surfaces are re-established. State of the art crack repair treatinent includes thirty-five year caulking to seal the crack and remain flexible. Then, fiberglass mesh or galvanized steel mesh is applied over the crack to reinforce the weakened area. Any damaged or broken area: are likewise restored to structural integrity before the recoat process begins. Now prepared, the existing stucco receives our unique three step stucco application pro cess. � � �✓ 3�:� � ��% �: �..s � FB C� � 2008 CITl' ON BL!RLWGfi.�tE ?IANNI(�!G CcP1. I� I � CALL CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 501 Primrose Ro d, Burlingame, CA May 2 , 2007 Council ambers '' ORDER hair Deal called the'' May 29, 2007, reg`Jar meeting C��mmission to order at .:00 p.m. the Planning ROLL CAL Pre �. nt: Commissioners uran, Brownrigg, D",I, Osterling an `Terrones �� Ll Abseri%: Commission e r s: C u c h i a n d V i s t i ca � `\� �� Staff PreSent: Community De �elopment Director, �lliam Meeker; ning Technici�� Erica Strohmeier�City Attorney, Lar ', Anderson; S ior �'� Engineer;� oug Beli. '�. NUTES � The minute§,� of � Commission u�erf has had the oppo third paragraph;��l bulletfrom bottorr shall be neutered ' to lightir s ecies, and be \ 1V. PPROVAL OF AGE V. FR THE FLOOR VI. STUDY ITEMS the May 14, 2�007 regular meeting `bf the Planning � reviewed and co� tinued until a time wh��' C. Brownrigg rtunity to review the`�n, with the following ch` ;nges: page 3, ine three, correct ' to significant��age 7, fifth i, insert "and that the `.n�hile in the care �the SPCA, � �u,vhen it is safe"; page��, bottom of page, item c), correct ig; page 10, item 20, i�y,set "replaced with an \, uivalent fo� the issuance of a�8uilding Permit, the anning CD�nmission shall revi�w the revised lands pe plans as an FYI ite '� page 15,"'tem 64, remove 5�gallon and add follo�,ing drums "up to 55 ga ns"; and age 17, item 75, th' statement "for indivi �u,al or combined constru tion sites larger than four a`�res" is irrelevant bec�`y� se the site is less than four acres i size. `�, \<. There we no changes to tf�e agenda. ' Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa A�nue, spoke to FYI ' 212 Hillside Drive, concerned th t changes went forward as an FYI; equested that the Commission gi thought to a win ow instead of a door in sunken garden t�ecause that exi hould be used o ly in case of an emergency. 1. 1101 VANCOUVER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR LOT COVERAGE AND FRONT SETBACK VARIANCES FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MARISA RAMOS, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND ONI RAMOS, DESIGNER) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER ZT Strohmeier presented a summary of the staff report. Commissioners asked: • How do we know when a Building Permit is issued? In future, should notify neighborhood when a Building Perrr�it is issued; could discuss with Neighborhood Consistency Sub-Committe°e; suggest posting schematic diagram on-site if project is up for review; • If proposal had come to the Commission before installation, Commission would have required simulated true divided light windows; project would look better with simulated true divided light windows; • How was a permit issued to put the windows in before it came to the Commission for review? • Would like clarification on open ended comments on sheet A-4 concerning the metal roof and posts to be replaced; and • Would like to see a full landscape plan. This item was set for the Regular Action Calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department. This item concluded at 7:15 p.m, City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlin�ame.org �r�, ciTr p� � BURIJNGAME APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMI�SION ��„ Type of application: Design Review Conditional Use Permit Variance xXx Special Permit Other Parcel Number: Project address• 1 1 01 VANCOUVER AVE. BURLINGAME CA 9401 0 APPLICANT Name: MARTSA A_ RAMOS ***** Address: 1101 VANCOUVER AVE. City/State/Zip: BURLINGAME CA 94010 Phone (w): 650-=369-4821 �h�: 650-401 -8600 �fl: 650-369-2780 PROPERTY OWNER Name: ENRICO R• MARISSA RAMOS Address: 1101 VANCOUVER AVE City/State/Zip:BURLINGAME CA 94010 Phone(w): 650-703-8600 [Enrico] (h): �fl�- ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Name: 6ni Ramos Address: 1114-A Buena Vista Ave. City/State/Zip: Alameda, CA 94501 Phone(w): 510-384-7059 650-401-8600 650-369-2780 Please indicate with an asterisk * the contact person for this project. �h�: 510-814-9947 �fl; 510-814-9947 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: WINDOW REPLACEMENT. The original window was one piece (5'x5') to a Bav Window with same dimensions (3-pieces) AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my kddwledge and belief. �i . Applicant's signature: �`/��'Q'd'� �� -��`2� '� � � � � / Date: I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. � , , -� . Property owner's signature: % � ��Date: "'�" � / e C� � i � Date submitted: PCAPP.FRM City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Pr.mrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 69h-3790 www.burlinQame.orQ �� cirr o � � BURIJNGAIAE � � The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Platini.ng Coiiunission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made far your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. a. Describe the exceptional or Pxtraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to your property which do not apply to other properties in tliis area. I apologized for replacing the window without getting a building permit. I made a mistake in assuming my contractor acquired/ received a building permit before installing the new bay window. b. Explain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyme�zt of a substantial property right and what unreasonable property loss or unnecessary Izardship might result form the denial of the application. Again, I apologized for not getting a building permit and will be responsble in following city ordinance. The two houses north of my property has seven (7) feet front setback from lot line along Vancouver Ave and my property is 12-13 feet front setback from lot line along Vancouver Avenue. Therefore, my bay window has not exceed or extended the existing property line. The bay window is still within guidelines of 1ot coverage and setback lines. c. Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be detrinzental or injurious to property or improvements in the viciniry or to pub[ic l:ealth, safety, general welfare or convenience. The window replacement will not be detrimental or injurious to the property or the public. As a matter of fact, the window makes the house looks pleasant to our neighbors. d. How will the proposed project be compatible with the aestl:etics, mass, bulk and character of the existing and potential uses o�: adjoining properiies in the ge�zeral vicinity? There are several houses that have the same window improvements and more compatible with other homes in the neighborhood. The bay window falls within the same type of architecture of the house.and makes the house more attractive than the original window. VAR.FRM � FROM : CASR DE REDld00D FAX N0. : ES0 36� 27�� May. �7 2�J�7 �'�:55Ph1 P2 � M. R�mos - 1101 Vancouver Ave. City of Burlingame Planning Dcpartment SOI Yiitnrose Road P(�50) 5�8-7250 r(6�0} 696-z 19d '�vww.burlin ame.or . ��r7 9llRLINGAM� "`�..,� '-VARIA��'�ICE'� + FRpNT SET$ACK R�QUEST The Plannin� Comttlission is requirec� by law to make findings as de�ined by thz City's Ordiz�ance (Codc Section 25.54_Q20 x-d). Your ansrxrers to the faIl�wing ques�ions can assist the Planning Conunission in znalcin� thc; decision as Co w�,ether the findings can be rraade for ��ur req,uest. PIease type br wt'1te neatly i11 ink. Refe�• to the back of this form for assistance with these queshons. a, Describe the exceptiona! or �Ytr'uordinar}� circufnstances or Canditions applicable to yor�r property which r%,zot apply tp other praperties in tliis arer� I apologized �or replacing the window w�.thout getting a building p�rmit, I made a mistake in �ssuming my contractar has acquir�d or received a building permit before instal].xng the rlew bay window_ b. .�'iplain svliy the variance xequest is necessary for tlaepreservatinn a�ad er�joy��cerat of Q substunlial pro,perty r� ; fet a�t[1 yvh.at uru•errso�xable properly loss or u��necess¢ry hardship naight resudt fo�'�t the der�ial ofthe applfcatior�. again, Y apologiz�d io� not gett�.ng a builing permit and wil1, be maxe responsible in �following city ardinance. Th� variance r�quest far front setback to the new bay window (along Carmeli�ta Ave.) was extended by 2-feet, but it is sti1l inside the ou�er wa11 of the balcony as an original structure, The new bay window beside the balcony adds beauty and enhances the old architecture of the hause from different angles. c. Ecplaita why ihe pr�rposed use at the propnsed locatior� will not be det�•inaental or injuriotas to pro,pe.rty or improvenser:ts irt tlte vici�zity or to, public 12ea1#la, safety, generul welfape or corcvenienCe. The window replacement wi11 not be det�imental pr injurious to the property or the public. AS a matter of fa�'�, the window makes the hous� looks pleasan.t to our neighbors. d Haw wiZt the proposerl projeet be compatibte wiih the aestftetics> mass, bulk and character of tfie existing a��d potential uses nn adjoinirzg prop�rties in the general vrcinity? There �re s2veral �iouses (new or existing) that have th� same window imp�'ov8m�rits r,,�}��h is more compatible wit11 other homes in the neic�hborhoocl_ 'Phe bay wintibw f�Ils wi.thir. the sam2 t�pe pf �rphitectu�ce af the. hpuse and makes the house more �ttr3ctive than the original (flat) window. ��` �� I�iruiduuts\Vananeenp�lic:.tion I,ITY (;= '.. ._ ?U��JNi{�:� �r�;- i . �!.' --`� �' .�� =. '3 "� � + -1 � : �/��ti� , .�°` ` - � ! ;,; ..:._ ,r� � , � :� I �� i Ft�l�11I� � .. :.p f�``' �',"'�; ,y,, �,,� :�� v �� . l - - ��t � .r ��- � -^1 • {F =x-� � � ;� k i s h� � �T� '� �: r. x.:... �,�1 ,� � _..:'ii� � l� `^,- �., - .,--� .. �" � '�- �� •a��.a< a , � ' � � -_ . � ` , � ' �4 �V,� �ti � ; . �=�.!' �� :-�.��3� � ! , - j _.�. , ' �. }�y � ^ �.. ��. +� � i , ��I� � f � ��+ f R��' F L � ` � P � �,� � h� �u� V� F .�- s � � d; i v� � j.�, ��:l�A� �� rY i +'T :-,�� v ,. + a; -. ..< ,�' . �y�',y, � -' '�v �.�.y,. IQ'�t il�i`,,.. • I ti!"' � .°� �� ' ��z�J .�-4� :L�f£�f�' �,.�:.r !�� 'Cy�tf � ' Y�,� t��r 6 1 ;A} `'��r, ��`,!' Y" . . �� .'�. � . � ��1' . .. �'��'I} ��e � �r � �(�� , `�Y f , ,r. ic" ' �`� + � Q � ?'i �,� ' � � - r,'Y}4� �i4 �. -� �ll,� .' _ ` � �-; VM� r�¢ �( � ' ' - .. � J ��-. 15.. .+! �I � �.. . . � • t1/� ' F�4�..�� 1af P 3 f�',ity ' 4�.,�� ,� � .':t-ae^,�..': �:�j " `t1 _ � r - � c � t� �. 1t. fi �IY :�� . �^ .�. `� _ sf� . ! � y� �. � �. ; � r ��a'� Y �. � .. �}�'�� ' r .. �_*1 �_.� � ... , y� rJtc!" ,'^.^:-�.t��il.., -_ �� 5�;�:� i��.'+ � .. r -<�-:-�a � :, � �"' , k1 �� , � � ;� t ,; y M.#e . . _ .. _ � Bay windo�v at front — Carmelita Avenue �.=�" � = �*�� ;t,� �1:: `� � (�� `— � � �F�. P`,� . . . " � Y- y-.. ' . .a � .. p�.`:�:L'"�rw.�-_3 C _ . . � -, Z Yr` i7 s., - - . �� --- Bay window at exterior side — Vaucouver Avenue _ �. �7 - �� 34 � = ,�� z n A 2�� E, a s' � O 3�.�� ° � y C 1�- „ � oo �, _, �� =�<; u,y•� w. _ _ ; ;�" 3 � �► ' 7�.Iv' � 1 1 � �_ � ,�� A E 43. =�A� fj.G. S��' ' N A.G _ / 6 5 � o� o� 50� , � z �� N _ � � O �,;, � �`�, � �� 29 _ a 5�' `� '�02 30 ��`' O O ��,��° � AvE � � �, � ��,- g � � � , � \ �D - �o' N � �'-`'' �°; �, E�T �� 3 3� o� v� ROOSEV Z�D° -5°' �3 /4 0 i m � , o . /2 O � � �� ,�' �p� // � � � j� �o, R 3 r-G �0 \ lG � � 32 � � 2 � �9 / � T / �� 3G �� \� � � � � tiA� 33 34 °�` 8 � Q �� - o` 7 '�, /3 _ -� �, a. �. ;' S N � l4 ��a ��, ' � 6 ��i� ` 1 /5 1 �� _•� a c. -- '= x 7, - o� � 16 \ - o �7_,r yt��_ �7;�,�, � 1 �� 1 ` � � /.5 � � � � .R. �. A � � - �8 , �� 1 � l7 /6 , �r� 111 � o� ` ` 1 B � s4-� � I �4 0 �, �9 50 '��(0'ti, �, � Zo , � �b ° 3s , ,. �� d�, �.L,.,� AVE D �� 5� 5- - 5�� `�-a� , v, A � ,� 13.°�k... G �o' l8 z �. /7Z �/' o� l7 � � 258a�- o , � �6 N -�.� o� �➢ � u � � /5 9 � �v, � a' 1 �''' /25 7�, �P �-al. �a' �s� ° � � /9 /4 O 20 � N � _ m Joti.-rs� A " o, - �l 22 � �Rs`�ra� �� \ -- ?2c. !— � � _ -5J 42 � /2 �, S2 A E 5�. �2 � f� � , �� a_. �3 /.? �°�nP ; . : RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND VARIANCES RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for Lot Coveraqe and Front Setback Variances for a first floor bav window addition to a sinqle family dwellinq at 1101 Vancouver Avenue zoned R-1 Marisa Ramos property owner APN� 027-360- 150; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on February 25, 2008, at which time it reviewed and considered the sta�fi report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per Article 19, Section: 15301 Class 1(e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition. 2. Said Variances are approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Variances are set forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. Chairman I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25`h dav of Februarv, 2008 by the following vote: Secretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption and Variances. 1101 Vancouver Avenue Effective March 6, 2008 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped February 7, 2008, Landscape Plan and date stamped May 4, 2007, sheets A-11 through A-5, and that any changes to footprint or floor area of the building shail require an amendment to this permifi 2. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date, the Lot Coverage and Front Setback Variances as well as any other exceptions to the code granted here will become void; 3. 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; 4. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the pro�eci. 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 shal{ 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; 5. 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; ar�d that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 6. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycl`ng 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; and 7. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2007 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. _��,—=� CITY OF BURLINGAME �� •"� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 6URLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD `=, A'-=��;}1.�"p`,," }� � BURLINGAME, CA 94010 � °�,} "�;� � �.,��. PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) E963�Q � � � www.burlingame.org ��`'��=•-��`�� ''" r ,y s�r'� ' � � "��=aa; =� ��-� a � :�� s ��r :��: Site: I 101 iI.�NC0U1iER AVENUE The City of Burlingane Planning Commission announces the following puhlie hearing on NIOPIDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2008 at 7:00 P,M, in the City Hall Council Cham6ers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA: AQolication for Lot (overage and Front Sethack Variances for a first floor addition to a single family dwelling at 1101 VANCOUVER AVENUE zoned R-1. APN 027-360-150 Mailed: February 15, 2098 (Please refer to other side) +:iiC'� ,v,'.?L �:.i Lw � _-,. �^- ^ n �. �.ii�.�-�"o,�`*,o'.� °iiadie��:or;e n1;J�'`J i 1� .,..�e'��'�'_�#�� PUBLIC HEAf�ING NOTICE Cifv of Burlinqame A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Community Development Department at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. If you challenge the subject application(s) in courtey� amay be limited to g raising only those issues you or somec,� �e e�� ; u,�� _t thP public hearin described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director PUBLIG t�IEARING NOi10E (Please refer to other sideJ .� , . : e • � � a e}"Sy' i r, � \ 7R�` 1. i �,��i �� g��s �S, 1 � �3��;r�.r�'',�R �, � h { E,�"'; ,�� _�.� � � . :,, � ~ , A. � s' � � -'� � ,� fr�,,. �1>: p ` � ;i_ `�� s„?�`s;'' . .�. �q`t I�_ ! � : .� � .�' ,r� � ..y�r i � � � ��, ,-� �;• ��. �, ��,: T '�`;:,��'�" � � ' .7 >2 '` �,� • .,� ' �r t � � '" t k 'iy ; r'� `� . r' � _ { ..: J��ry , a � �' _ � - :?! �' ', � , 1 `��s' �r, t ' �s,�� ._� { ' � s .�. ' � � �y.� ti. � . � . � �,�. ,... � -g-. . i } , � � �� '�� • � f'~ �� ,`ry'Y , }�•� . . �� '.� € _�Sf �V� �^ i�` t.-�- . �r L'��'f�'� � ._.� ;R� a( �'z� . 1"- 'f� ,y � �.,.an . `'• � ��,,.��.. , - �;?� � - � . .� t'�.Y�. �i .$". �C'c�"s3+-��7'�'� -i � � . L. '��"� � �'� . �� i, ±� �{ f; �� ,� Ft a .� � �''•� ��' i i . a� ,1 , f ,� /�, . � � ` M ;�S��S .3:' .'a '..� -r -:r !� � 4 _-� ( r� �s. :.�, L i r'�,�" a �,+' . `' s 3 �a E � `'� �'4 , j 4�.. , . ' '��"�� ! C' � $` t r�� lt �� x �� 5 � / f�f��3t'� �. i, x `,��y� �.� ' `.� YR'�"?3 ��v�{�r ,� '!v'�'� I .. � �:�' �. , t t + �• � T� .l'. � ""`�� i.K. ti � ��. ,r� � � ; � . �-�. � � t : +�� . f J.�- i: �'RR !, yp �t� �:'r` j y"v �_+�'� � ' t .�.. �_:� � � � � 1�1.�� . 1.� � `.,� �� ' ' �..' r � _ _�� t � 14 � J�� ;y. � it � ,� Y"`..' y. � n � 7 � = � - �' ''t � �� , � f �� . L ' , > tq � � �, `. � ;- ; � �' '' ';�= , i �``�� a 7' ,�,, �`��,� ,� j f �` —y., f � �_' .,� >.- _ �� f �. _ � �' ,� �'� � � , ., .� ,� ;.`` ' .� � :-� ° T : �.- � � t ' '�n?+� �t'i ? �da-�` � _ 1. ' . � �"• _ ` 'r �'f` �-�. �y _�. j�P+�. yl�� .:� �F' j`� �t.� � rr � '*a \ �i ` �,'IF i -' w .' , � .e'� P" � � r • Fy`�y� �s � � ,i,�y � ^�Nhc4r-:. � �� - � � . Y', -. �,. . �f � \� ` i" �' ,•i t .�3� �� _ � � V� :�� ..� �.` J � `�.� �, '�. � . . �� . �.#� � '.�1�. ss ✓�, �_ . � � � . �x i_� . � . 1. }' �r��, . k �e `,� � '� � ' � �� •7"� , �; � � c s �-•v�. ,A.a d "�^ �'�, .. � . ��y�.y�' . s'. � } '/ ! .� � y. . `• � ,F ` -� '*+�. � .. � �` �" rq �� . � \_ J �l ' �� - ;/ �- _� 'f � 1 ✓,r � �� s { +�. ;- t i±��t� �-`� ��"x.� �� .�s fi � ��. • -y brd � �' t � ;'v � Z � , ` _ . :- _ �� p f ,rf. � �.� , f_ . .'`+� � �~,�k� k, =F . z`+ "t tss�� .. � , w ,Y < j "."!�� l< " ' � �'�f, r 'rS .r -4 � xi M. ' N �° 1 � .' � • �, 9�ih.1 �. + . �:�`a. ,:�p �`j � �. � - i*' �l. K ' 'F} �'� : ��. � :�'':` -, .�4 .�f' �' -� �, �,_�. �� .�`� .`� �' ,� � a� � . � p, � � . ,�..��' , �:. � � ••f � 1 i 5i 'A %LL.t � F��T p � ! � +, � E t _ .' v �/ , � � �4 ��'� . 4, t � t� yc A . � � � � f� ".� � � � �� ii" f,�� r �?S ,��t + ��`� �' � � # "`�'a i` � � �1 ,�;r�' '�� ' ' 1 � i � .. �• � 11 � . . ��. "� � � � ..�� d � ,.r� �' §.- -!" " �'� . . � ! •� / .., ..'� i. � �,1 .. . . - � f ``' ��F' / �' . �� , ,:a m� � ��' �r,� �r � �`� c� ,�:�.� ,�"� ° `' � , � : `^,+L � � � . � � ,. . r� � . }� .'� F(� - . �t,.r" � � �I '�' � � /� '7 � � � �. � �... �' �� '& I �� . � .� t n- 36,}�' `F ` ►. . � � '� h �� a � `r �.. �'-'ct1- -r .t�:. .'¢� n � , , a► t J _ y �� t �� .� � tQ y� 9� ' • ` a �," 3, y, �• y � , � r � '. , � .. ..;,:f `"y � � +� �.-.}?,{t � Yp �.� � . '� +i� �Ai . ' Yh � � � r`�, e s'� +� � � � 1 ��,,. J �� tk" .y� . � jii� "'F. . . \ . i�•�"/ �s�� ,��,4 e.� � ��.?�� a. �'L`' t�" �' � �- �t'�,� , , �` �� _ ' t. "� �i � '}� ,a � 4-� , r+ :.4'. ��`�'F��,� �� t� ,r 9 L � rL� � i ',� . J!'..: '' vo. �i 1.' n ` . �-�.I '' ,� .;;�' � �, r ri . , �� - � $� �� :� ��} �; . � � '`�j � a ; � 7 �F t � • . . � � ' v ,"'' � � . ��'•'F '�_ � . , ' � � :'� �L�.�� ` ?tl "8 + 1� .�� a� � y , �� t;. ��+� I . � � . � � - ..�y� _ ... . �_Y � 1 � �y, ' . .. � . � � '�. f �+y � .. r "5.` . '��,�f t _ ., s . .y � ''�, y� 1�.�� .s. � a _ .�j a i ��''�r�" �' . �`'., �+ . l _ . �, „r � �� . �� * i � � ..�'� {{�,,.� � -' . . SI.�I � 7'i. x.iS � ''�� k.3' �'�'P,� '�.`- , �~� f,' �,,:�'} ��t �� i k ^ , t'. �� ,��' �101 VancouverAvenue R��F �� i�' � � �;�-• / � �.,� ��`' � y. �' , �G 4 , � .r ♦ .t.GS �. � �� :. ,�p . . .,_ 9e.,Pir :�i�_� Item # 1 Studv Cale�idar PROJECT LOCATION 1101 Vancouver Avenue City of Burlingame Variances for Lot Coverage and Front Setback Item # ,�, Study Item Address: 1101 Vancouver Avenue Meeting Date: 5/29/07 Request: Lot coverage and front setback Variances for a first floor bay window addition. Applicant and Property Owner: Marisa A. Ramos APN: 027-360-I50 Designer: Oni Ramos Lot Area: 4,883 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 History: On May 6, 2005, the Building Department issued a stop work order for unauthorized installation of a new roof, new windows, new doors and other various changes without building permits. On June 7, 2005, the property owner submitted an application to the Building Department for dry rot repair to the garage and electrical work. This permit was finaled by the Building Department on DecemUer 5, 2005. On July 19, 2006, the Building Department issued another stop work order due to work being conducted without a building pern�it. The work being done on the house included two new tiled roof overhangs (bay windows), new pillars to support the roof and replacement of the existing roof with hot tar and tiles. On September 18, 2006, the property owner applied to the Building Department for a building permit for the two already installed bay windows, one at the front of the house along Cannelita Avenue and the other at the extenor side along Vancouver Avenue, and for a re-roof. This permit has been issued, construction has been coinpleted and the property owner is awaiting Planning Commission approval of both a lot coverage and front setback variance befare the building permit can be finaled. Summary: The existing single-story residence with an attached one-car garage contains 2,048 SF (0.42 FAR) of floor area and has three bedrooms. In September, 2006 a building permit was issued for work already completed, including a remodel/addition and a re-roof. The existing house (before the work that was completed) had a nonconforming lot coverage of 44.3 %, where 40% is the maximum allowed. The addition of the bay windows increased the nonconforming lot coverage from 2,161.5 SF (44.3%) to 2,183.6 SF (44.7%) and therefore a variance for lot coverage is required. The new front bay along Carmelita Avenue will be located 18' from the front property line. The required front setback is either 15'-0" or the average of the block, whichever is greater. In this case, the average of the block along Carmelita Avenue is 20'-11 ", which is greater than 15'-0". Therefore, a front setback variance is required (18'-0" proposed where 20'-11" is the minimum required). With the proposed addition, the floor area will increase from 2,048 SF (0.42 FAR) to 2,070 SF (0.42 FAR), where 2,463 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed (project is 393 SF below the maximum allowed FAR). There is no change to the number of existing bedrooms (3) with the proposed bay window addition. Two parking spaces, one covered (10' x 20') and one uncovered (9' x 20') are required for the three bedroom house. Because there is no increase in the number of bedrooms, the nonconforming one-car garage (10' x 18' interior dimensions) complies with the covered parking space requirement and there is one 9' x 20' uncovered parking space in the driveway. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following: • Variance for exceeding the maximum allowable lot coverage on site (2,183.6 SF, 44.7 %, proposed where 1953.2 SF, 40%, is the maximum allowed) (CS 25.28.065); and Variances for Lot Coverage anrl Front Setback 1101 vancouver Avenue • Front setback variance for a bay window addition (18'-0" proposed, where 20'-11" is the minimum required) (CS 25.28.072). 1101 Carmelita Avenue Lot Area: 4,883 SF Plans date stam ed: Ma 4, 2007 Existing Proposed Allowed/Required SETBACKS Front: 17'-10" � 18'-0" Z 20'-11" block average _ _ __ __ __- .. Side (left): 3'-0" no change 4'-0" (right): 12'-6" 14'-4" to porch T-6" _ _ . _ . _ ,.... .... ____.__ . _..__ _ ._. _ _.._ _.... _ _ Lot Coverage: 2,161.5 SF 2,183.6 SF 1,953.2 SF (443%)� (44.7%) 4 (40%) FAR: 2,048 SF '' 2,070.1 SF 2,463 SF 5 0.42 FAR ' 0.42 FAR 0.50 FAR _ _.. __ _.._ # of Bedrooms: 3 no change --- Parking: 1 covered ' 1 covered (10' x 18') ' no change (10' x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') _ ___... . . _ __ _.. -._ _ _ _ Heiglzt: approx. 2T-9" no change 30'-0" from curb 1 r__ � _�t _ r_ ._ i.n.o�.ii5 iivii�.viiiviiiiiiis iivii� o�.��a�.n. ' Front setback variance for a first floor bay window addition (18'-0" proposed where 20'-11", block average, is the minimum required). 3 Existing nonconforming lot coverage. 4 Variance for exceeding the maximum allowable lot coverage (44.7% proposed, where 40% is the maximum allowed). ' 4,883 SF x 0.32 + 900 SF = 2,462.6 SF (0.50 FAR) Staff Comments: See attached. Erica Strohmeier Zoning Technician c. Marisa Ramos, property owner. 2 Bay window at front — Cavmelita Avenue Bay window at exteruor side —�'ancouver Avenue City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlinQame.org � QT7 � �.j� A BURIJNGAME APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ��:. Type of application: Design Review Conditional Use Permit Variance XXX Special Permit Other Parcel Number: Projectaddress: 1101 VANCOUVER AVE. BURLINGAME CA 94�J10 APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER N311►0: MARTSA A_ RAMOS ***** Name: ENRICO R MARISSA RAMOS Address: 1101 VANCOUVER �VE. Address: 1101 VANCOUVER AVE City/State/Zip: BURLINGAME CA 94010 Phone(w): 650-=369-4821 �h�: 650-401 -8600 �fl: 650-369-2780 City/State/Zip:BURLINGAME CA 94010 Phone(w): 650-703-8600 [Enrico] �h�: 650-401 -8600 650-369-2780 �� ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Name: 6ni Ramos Address: 1114-A Buena Vista Ave. City/State/Zip: Alameda, CA 94501 Phone (w): 51 0-384-7059 Please indicate with an asterisk * the contact person for this project. �h�: 510-814-9947 �fl, 510-814-9947 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: WINDOW REPLACEMENT. The original window was one piece (5'x5') to a Bay Window with same dimensions (3-pieces) AFFADAVIT/SIGnTATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my wledge and belief. /� / / / Applicant's signature: l�f/ ��'� �y� Date: �� I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this appiication to the Flanning Commission. /� . . ! G��L�'d/ ,�- �-� Property owner's signature: Date: � Date submitted: PCAPP.FRM 0 City of Burlingame Pla„n;ng Depazhnent 501 Pnmrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 69�-3790 www.burlinQame.orQ r� CITT 0 t � BUR1Jti('aA47E � � The Planning Corrunission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planriing Comtnission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this fortn for assistance with these questions. a. Describe the exceptional or �xtraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to your property which do not apply to other properties in this arec� I apologized for replacing the window without getting a building permit. I made a mistake in assuming my contractor acquired/ received a building permit before installing the new bay window. b. Explain why. the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial proper[y right and what unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship might result form the denia[ of the application. Again, I apolo'gized for not getting a building permit and wfl�_]se responsble in following city ordinance. The two houses north of my property has seven (7) feet front setback from lot line along Vancouver Ave and my property is 12-13 feet front setback from lot line along Vancouver Avenue. Therefore, my bay window has not exceed or extended the existing property line. The bay window is still within guidelines of 1ot coverage and setback lines. ,_ c. Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be detrimental or injurious to propeKy or improvements in the vicinity or to public health, safety, general welfare or convenience. The window replacement will not be detrimental or injurious to the property or the public. As a matter of fact, the window makes the house looks pleasant to our neighbors, d How will the proposed project be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of the existin� and potential uses on adjoining properties in the gener�l vicinity? There are several houses that have the same window improvements and more compatible with other homes in the neighborhood. The bay window fa11s within the same type of architecture of the house.and makes the house more attractive than the original window. VAR.FRM FROM = CRSA DE REDW00➢ FAX N0. : 650 369 2780 May. 07 2007 �9:56PM P2 , M. Ramos - 1101 Vancouver Ave. City of Burlingame Planning DcpaRmet�t 501 Yiimrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650} 696-379Q www.burlin ame,or � �'�� I C`ITY' OF BIJ:RLII'��AME_; VARTANCE A�i'LTC�iTi(�N , - FRpNT SETBACK R�QUEST The Pianning Cornmission is required by law to make findings as de�ined by t1�e City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d). X'our answers to the foIlowing questions can assist the Plauning Commission in rnaldng the decision as Co whether the findings can be made fbr youx zequest. PIease type or write neatly in ink, Refer to the back of this form for assistauce with these questions. a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or canditions applacable to your properry which do not apply ta other prop�rties in this arec� I apologized £or replacing the window wa.thout getting a building permit. I made a mistake in assuming my contraCtor has acquir�d or received a building permit before instalJ.7.ng the new bay window_ b. .�xplain why the vuriance request is necessary far thepreservation and enjoyment of a substa�tial pro,perty ribht and tivhat unreasonubleproperly loss or unnecess¢ry hardship might result for»t the denial af the a�plication. Again, Y apologized for not gett.ing a builing permit and will be more responsible in following city ordinance. The variance �equest for front setback to the new bay window (along Carmeli.ta Ave.) was extended by 2-feet, but it is sti11 inside the outer wa11 of the balcony as an original structure, The new bay window beside the balcony adds beauty and enhances the old architecture of the house from different angles. c. Ezplain why the proposed use at the praposed location will not be detrirnental or ittju►'ioccs to .pro,perty or improvesnenis in the vicinity ar to public health, safety, general welfare ar convenience. The windaw replacement wi11 not be detrimental or injurious to the property or the publiC. As a matter of faC�,, the window makes the hous� looks pleasant to our neighbors. d Hnw wilt the proposerl projeet be campatible with the aestheties, mass, bulk arcd character of the existing ¢nd potential uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity? There are saveral �iouses (new or existing) that have the same window improvements Wh�Ch is more compatible with other homes in the neighborhood. `i'i1e bay window falls w7.�hin the same type of ar�hitectu�e of tne, hpuse and makes the house more attractive than the original (flai) window. f _ �. +�� k/ 6 � �doum\vurianee Apyt;catioe 0 ��r,- �.,- _ -._..._, . .� p�'-�;vtifC�:;� L'L`''+_ , � . . . ��\ � / ' 1 � � 4� VAN��U�vER,�'. � •1 �� 8 � 0 � � � �� ,�� f ^