The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About839 Walnut Ave - Approval Letter(`�1�� f�i#g af �LtXlixi��izttE CITY HALL - SOi PRIMROSE ROAD rE� (415) 696-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMEN7 BURLINGAME, CA�IFORNIA 94010-3 99 7 Fnx (415) 342-8386 August 6, 1996 Deborah Hall 839 Walnut Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Ms. Hall, Since there was no appeal to or suspension by the Ciry Council, the July 22, 1996 Planning Commission action to deny your 6 special permit applications without prejudice became effective August 5, 1996. This application was to allow for the reconstruction of an existing 480 SF accessory building at 839 Walnut Avenue, zoned R-1. A denial without prejudice allows you to return to the Planning Commission with a revised project within a reasonable time (60 days - October 7, 1996) as determined by Planning staff. Sincerely yours, V1�,��.�'�,��. Margazet Monrce City Planner MM/s .839WALNiJ.dwo c: Chief Building Inspector A �,"�a"��. ii Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 1996 3. APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR ALTERNATIVE PARKING LOCATIONS FOR EMPLOYEES AT 3& 150 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED, G2, SUBAREA D, (JOSEPH D. & MARY L. PUTNAM, TRS, PROPERTY OWNERS AND 70SEPH PUTNAM APPLICANTI Requests: why can't they reverse the situation and have the auto storage off site and the employee parking on site; what do they intend to store in the office space; where will the office uses be relocated; what commitments for other businesses is the 150 California already meedng; provide plan showing each dealership and how they relate to one another in terms of the usage, employee pazldng, inventory storage, etc. At the request of the applicant this item set for public hearing September 9. 1996. 4. APPLICATION FOR A SIGN EXCEPTION AT 1218 BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED, C-1, SUBAREA A(M. H. PODELL COMPANY, PROPERTY OWNERS AND BANANA REPUBLIC. APPLICANT ) Requests: will Banana Republic use the entire tenant space, if not, how will the rear of the building be used, it will affect signage; how will the banners be stabilized so they will not blow in the wind; check number of sign exceptions on this block of Burlingame Avenue; Item set for public hearing August 12, 1996. 5. APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AUTO STORAGE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE CALTRAIN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF WAY NORTH OF BROADWAY, SUBJECT PROPERTY ZONED UNCLASSIFIED, (JOINT POWERS BDARD, PROPERTY OWNERS AND RECTOR MOTOR CAR COMPANY, APPLICANT.) CONTINUED FROM JULY 8, 1996 - WITHDRAWN. ITEMS FOR ACTION 6. APPLICATION FOR 6 SPECIAL , PERMITS FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF AN EXISTING ACCESSORY BUILDING AT 839 WALNUT AVENUE, ZONED R-1, (DEBORAH HALL, PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT). CONTINUED FROM TFIE TUi Y g 1996 Reference staff report, 7.22.96 with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Five conditions were suggested for consideration. Chairman Ellis opened the public hearing. Deborah Hall, 839 Walnut Avenue, the property owner was present to answer quesdons. She noted all structures will be exactly where they aze now. The rear will serve as a new fence. It was noted that electric heat and hot water would be provided in the structure. If an addition were made to the house it would be too close to the garage. Jeff Wall, 822 Newhall Road, asked questions regazding the location of the property line; it is unclear where the structure is; if it is set further back will she build a fence on property line; how long will construction take, does the city have any control over that? The applicant noted 14 feet of rear -2- Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 1996 fence will be replaced exactly where it is now. The City Attorney noted the property owner on Newhall is free to build a fence on his property any time he wishes. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioners noted that cunent construction regulations will probably not allow radiant heat so would need a gas line, would be opposed to gas service to a detached room, therefore heat may be a problem; this building began as a garage converted into a garden shelter, now going to a living area, this is not a gradual maintenance over time but an application to legitimize somethin g that does not need to be done at all; there will be a problem if the cunent garage, which is substandard in width, needs to be made conforming; the location of the present garage limits the ability to add on to the house; here an euisting nonconforming condition is being interpreted as something one is entitled to, repair is acceptable, reconstruction is not; objection is not to using e�cisting small room at rear for recreation purposes; problem is demolition and reconstruction which is what condition of structure requires; presence of a bath room in structure is also a problem for future use; concerned about size and concept of this as a"guest cottage" which implies use for living purposes beyond recreation; neighbor at rear can place a fence on his property line at any time; repair could be done gradually over time without coming to Planning Commission, use could not be changed without permit. C. Wellford noted that there are six exceptions to the code required for this application, the azea is very big for a hobby room, reducing the size would also reriuce the number of exceptions to 3 or 4 and eliminate the possibility of it becoming a guest cottage, and allow the current garage to be replaced to present dimensional standards. He then moved to deny this application without prejudice. The motion was seconded by C. Galligan and passed on a 6-1 roll call vote (C. Ellis dissenting). Appeal procedures were advised. 7. APPLICATION FOR THREE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCFS FOR 1ST AND 2ND STORY ADDITIONS TRIGGERING NEW CONSTRUCTION AT 132 COSTA RICA, ZONED R-1, CRAIG AND CAROL ROSSI PROPERTY OWNERS AND APPLICANTS� Reference; staff report, 7.22.96 with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. It was noted that a request for a variance for declining height envelop was not requested as a part of this application, so one cannot be considered tonight. Chairman Ellis opened the public hearing. Craig and Carol Rossi, 132 Costa Rica Avenue, the property owners were present for questions. They noted that they were requesting variances for the existing condition on the property. Noting that they were unaware that they needed a declining height exception but would meet that setback if they needed to. It was noted by staff that the declining height exception came to light when the applicant provided additional site elevations after study. If no variance has been noticed and the project is approved the applicant would be required to redesign the project to meet the declining height requirement for the site. Susan Scott, 137 Costa -3-