Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout17 Valdivia Ct - Staff ReportItem #1 CITY OF BURLINGAME Hillside Area Construction Permit and Design Review Address: 17 Valdivia Court Meeting Date: 1/11/99 Requests: Hillside area construction pernut (C.S. 25.61.020) for a first and second stary addition subject to design review (C.S. 25.57.010) at 17 Valdivia Court, zoned R-1. Applicant: Robert and Jennifer Morse Property Owner: same as applicant Lot Area: 15,332 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Adjacent Development: Single Family Residential APN: 025-182-160 Zoning: R-1 CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15303 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures Class 3(a+e), Single-family residences not in conjunction with the building of two or more such units. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption. Requests for this project: 1fie applicants, Robert and Jennifer Morse, are requesting a hillside area construction permit for a frst and second story addition subject to design review. The proposed addition will increase the house from three to five bedrooms. This project was reviewed under the new R-1 District Regulations (effective October 23, 1998). The applicant is requesting the following: • Hillside area construction permit for a first and second story addition (C.S. 25.61.030). Summary: The applicants are proposing a frst and second story addition to an existing single story house at 17 Valdivia Court. The project includes demolishing approximately 819 SF of the rear of an e�cisting single family dwelling and a 78 SF breezeway connecting the garage to the house. The applicants are proposing to replace/relocate the existing kitchen and dining room and add a family room, laundry room and powder room on the first floor (1,034 SF). The applicants are also proposing to add a master bedroom, office (potential bedroom), bathroom and walk-in closet on the second floor (843 SF), bringing the total floor area of the house to 4,081 SF (.27 FAR) (FAR calculation includes the detached garage and exempts the 100 SF of covered porches and chimneys, CS 25.08.265), where the maJcimum allowed is 6,406 SF (.42 FAR). The number of bedrooms will be increased from three to five. The proposed office room on the second floor qualifies as a potential bedroom. Lot coverage would increase from 19.8 %(3,032 SF) to 26.5 % (4,056 SF) with the addition of decking and stairs over 30" above grade and exempting an 83 SF trellis (C.S. 25.28.065, a), where 40% (6,133 SF) is the maximum allowed. Because of the downward slope in the rear yard the decks will be on two levels. The proposed uncovered deck Hillside Area Constructio�t Permit and Desig�t Review 17 Valdivia Court area which measures more than 30" above grade totals 791 SF (shown on Sheet 1, Site Plan, Deck Square Footage). This deck area counts in lot coverage. The present structure is single story and 19'-2" tall, measured from average top of curb. The proposed height to ridge is 28'-6" as measured from average top of curb. The lot slopes downwazd from front to the rear corner of the lot approximately 18'-3" (8%). There is a creek located at the rear corner of the property. The existing three bedroom, two bathroom house is 2,725 SF (including an existing patio, attached garage and breezeway). The first and second floor addition would increase the floor area of the dwelling by 1,356 SF (50%), from 2,725 SF (.18 FAR) to 4,081 SF (with exemptions) to .27 FAR (.42 FAR allowed). The applicants are proposing to remove the existing breezeway which connects the garage to the house. The existing garage has a 4'-8" side setback. With the removal of the breezeway, the detached garage would be free standing with a nonconforming 4'-8" side setback. The applicants are also proposing to change the existing flat garage roof to a 5/12 pitch hip roof to match the proposed addition. Since there is no expansion proposed to the garage itself a variance is not required for the nonconforming side setback. The roof work proposed will not affect the footprint of the structure and is considered maintenance work. The proposed garage has a 20'-0" wide X 22'-6" deep clear interior dimensions which meets the parking requirement for two covered vehicles, where two covered parking spaces are required (five potential bedrooms proposed). A 9' x 33' uncovered space is provided in the driveway. All other zoning code requirements have been met. �.�.� 1 EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D Front Setback (2nd): Side Setback (L): Rear Setback (lst): (2nd) : Lot Coverage: Floor Area Ratio: Building Height: Parking: 70'-0" 7' -0" 15'-0" to deck 36'-0" 26.5% (4,056 SF) .27 (4,081 SF) 28' -6„ no change none 3' to chimney 49' -0" none 19.8% (3,032 SF) .18 (2,725 SF) 19'-2" 2 covered (20'-0" x 22'-6") 1 uncovered (9' x 33') 2 20' -0" 7' -0" 15'-0" 20'-0" 40 % (6,133 SF) .42 (6,406 SF) 30' -0" 2 covered (20' x 20' ) uncovered (9' x 20' ) Hillside Area Constructiora Perniit arul Desig�i Review *H.A.C.P.: Requires Hillside Area Construction Permit Declining Height: Complies using C.S. 25.28.075, 6 Accessory Structures: Double car detached garage Fences/Hedges: no change Trees: no trees to be removed *Hillside area construction permit required for this project. Meets all other zoning code requirements. 17 Valdivia Court Staff Comments: The City Engineer notes in his September 21, 1998, memo that drainage shall be addressed at the time of building permit submittal. The Building Ofiicial notes in his September 21, 1998, memo that this project constitutes new construction. The Senior Landscape Inspector notes in his October 14, 1998, memo that the three existing trees (24", 24" and 36" diameter) shall be protected during construction. He also notes that removal of more than 1/3 of the canopy of a tree requires a permit before work starts and that significant root removal may require an arborist report and mitigation measures. The Fire Marshal reviewed the project and had no comments. Design Review Comments: In his comments the design reviewer notes that the addition makes no major changes to the street side of the property and is therefore entirely compatible with the neighborhood. The addition increases the bulk of the building as viewed from the rear yard and side yard to the east. The architectural style of addition is compatible with the adjacent homes. The reviewer notes that the site and its neighbors have notable tree cover from existing oaks and other native species. This factor reduces the impact on all neighboring structures. The style of the addition is generally consistent with the style of the existing residence. The reviewer notes that the new decks will become a major architectual component at the rear yard as seen from the creek. The lattice work on the decks should include full frames, perimeter stops and modulation to insure durability. Lattice should occur at the face of the deck or only slightly inset to make the deck appear more substantial and less like it is projecting out into the landscape. This, in conjunction with the landscaping, will help to reduce the visual impact of the decks. In regards to interface with adjacent structures, there appears to be no direct conflict other than the height of the new second story. The second story, however, is relatively compact and falls within the expectations of what might occur in these neighborhoods. The reviewer notes that several significant trees occur in the rear yard area of the property that are important to the neighborhood. Measures should be required to ensure that these trees are protected during construction and that the construction will not pose a long term threat to the trees. The reviewer suggests a certifed arborists report. Signiiicant shrubs should be added to bury the house, visually, in the hillside. 3 � Hillside Area Canstruckon Permit a�ul Desigri Review 17 valdivia coun The reviewer concludes that this application dces not appear to generate signiiicant impacts on the street. The impacts occur at the rear and side yard ares and on the creek trail. The reviewer recommends approval with the following conditions: • Contract an arborist to review the health of the trees affected by this work. The review should include study of staging areas, site access during construction, and care of trees during and after construction. The report should be submitted at the time of building permit submittal. • Require rear deck elevations showing all trims and lattice work at time of building permit submittal. The applicants have revised their plans to show all trims and lattice work on the rear deck elevations. • Require landscape plan for rear and side yard immediate to decks showing substantial shrubs to assist in screening decks and expanses of cripple walls. The design reviewer recommends native species. The applicants have revised their plans to show landscaping at the rear and side yards to screen the proposed decking. Ruben Hurin Zoning Technician c. Robert and Jennifer Morse, applicants and property owners 4 ,. � Item #3 CITY OF BURLINGAME Hillside Area Construction Permit and Design Review Address: 17 Valdivia Court Meeting Date: 1/25/99 Requests: Hillside area construction pernut (C.S. 25.61.020) for a first and second story addition subject to design review (C.S. 25.57.010) at 17 Valdivia Court, zoned R-1. Applicant: Robert and Jennifer Morse APN: 025-182-160 Property Owner: same as applicant Lot Area: 15,332 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 Adjacent Development: Single Family Residential CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15303 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures Class 3(a+e), Single-family residences not in conjunction with the building of two or more such units. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption. Requests for this project: The applicants, Robert and 7ennifer Morse, are requesting a hillside area construction permit for a first and second story addition subject to design review. The proposed addition will increase the house from three to five bedrooms. This project was reviewed under the new R-1 District Regulations (effective October 23, 1998). The applicant is requesting the following: � Hillside area construction permit for a first and second story addition (C.S. 25.61.030). Summary: The applicants aze proposing a first and second story addition to an existing single story house at 17 Valdivia Court. The project includes demolishing approximately 819 SF of the rear of an existing single family dwelling and a 78 SF breezeway connecting the garage to the house. The applicants are proposing to replace/relocate the existing kitchen and dining room and add a family room, laundry room and powder room on the first floor (1,034 SF). The applicants are also proposing to add a master bedroom, office (potential bedroom), bathroom and walk-in closet on the second floor (843 SF�, bringing the total floor area of the house to 4,081 SF (.27 FAR) (FAR calculation includes the detached garage and exempts the 100 SF of covered porches and chimneys, CS 25.08.265), where the maximum allowed is 6,406 SF (.42 FAR). The number of bedrooms will be increased from three to five. The proposed room designated as an office on the second floor qualifies as a potential bedroom. Lot coverage would increase from 19.8% (3,032 SF) to 26.5 %(4,056 SF) with the addition of decking and stairs over 30" above grade and exempting an 83 SF trellis (C.S. 25.28.065, a), where 40% (6,133 SF) is the maximum allowed. i HilLsede Area Construction Permit and Design Review 17 Valdivia Court Because of the downward slope in the rear yard the decks will be on two levels. The proposed uncovered deck area which measures more than 30" above grade totals 791 SF (shown on Sheet 1, Site Plan, Deck Square Footage). This deck area counts in lot coverage. The present structure is single story and 19'-2" tall, measured from average top of curb. The proposed height to ridge is 28'-6" as measured from average top of curb. The lot slopes downward from front to the rear corner of the lot approximately 18'-3" (8%). There is a creek located at the rear corner of the property. The existing three bedroom, two bathroom house is 2,725 SF (including an existing pario, attached garage and breezeway). The first and second floor addition would increase the floor area of the dwelling by 1,356 SF (50%), from 2,725 SF (.18 FAR) to 4,081 SF (with exemptions) to .27 FAR (.42 FAR allowed). The applicants are proposing to remove the existing breezeway which connects the garage to the house. The existing garage has a 4'-8" side setback. With the removal of the breezeway, the detached garage would be free standing with a nonconforming 4'-S" side setback. The applicants are also proposing to change the existing flat garage roof to a 5/12 pitch hip roof to match the proposed addition. Since there is no expansion proposed to the garage itself a variance is not required for the nonconforming side setback. The roof work proposed will not affect the footprint of the structure and is considered maintenance work. The proposed garage has a 20'-0" wide X 22'-6" deep clear interior dimensions which meets the parking requirement for two covered vehicles, where two covered parking spaces aze required (five potential bedrooms proposed). A 9' x 33' uncovered space is provided in the driveway. All other zoning code requirements have been met. 'C• �� 1 D , 1► . � � l /: • 1 Front Setback (2nd): Side Setback (L): Rear Setback (lst): (2nd): Lot Coverage: Floor Area Ratio: Building Height: Parking: 70'-0" 7'-0" 15'-0" to deck 36'-0" 26.5 % (4,056 SF) .27 (4,081 SF) 28'-6„ no change none 3' to chimney 49'-0" none 19.8% (3,032 SF) .18 (2,725 SF) 19'-2" 2 covered (20'-0" x 22'-6") 1 uncovered (9' x 33') 2 20'-0" 7'-0" 15'-0" 20' -0" 40 % (6,133 SF) .42 (6,406 SF) 30' -0" 2 covered (20' x 20' ) 1 uncovered (9' x 20' ) Hillside Area Construction Permit and Desigri Review *H.A.C.P.: Declining Height: Accessory Structures: Fences/Hedges: Trees: Requires Hillside Area Construction Permit Complies using C.S. 25.28.075, 6 Double car detached garage no change no trees tb be removed *Hillside area construction permit required for this project. Meets all other zoning code requirements. 17 Va/divia Coun Staff Comments: T'he City Engineer notes in his September 21, 1998, memo that drainage shall be addressed at the time of building permit submittal. The Building Official notes in his September 21, 1998, memo that this project constitutes new construction. The Senior Landscape Inspector notes in his October 14, 1998, memo that the three existing trees (24", 24" and 36" diameter) shall be protected during construction. He also notes that removal of more than 1/3 of the canopy of a tree requires a permit before work starts and that significant root removal may require an azborist report and mitigation measures. The Fire Marshal reviewed the project and had no comments. Design Review Comments: In his comments the design reviewer notes that the addition makes no major changes to the street side of the property and is therefore entirely compatible with the neighborhood. The addition increases the bulk of the building as viewed from the rear yard and side yazd to the east. The architectural style of addition is compatible with the adjacent homes. The reviewer notes that the site and its neighbors have notable tree cover from existing oaks and other native species. This factor reduces the impact on all neighboring structures. The style of the addition is generally consistent with the style of the existing residence. The reviewer notes that the new decks will become a major architectual component at the rear yazd as seen from the creek. The lattice work on the decks should include full frames, perimeter stops and modulation to insure durability. Lattice should occur at the face of the deck or only slightly inset to make the deck appear more substantial and less like it is projecting out into the landscape. This, in conjunction with the landscaping, will help to reduce the visual impact of the decks. In regazds to interface with adjacent structures, there appears to be no direct conflict other than the height of the new second story. The second story, however, is relatively compact and falls within the expectations of what might occur in these neighborhoods. The reviewer notes that several significant trees occur in the rear yard area of the property that are important to the neighborhood. Measures should be required to ensure that these trees are protected during construction and that the construction will not pose a long term threat to the trees. The reviewer suggests a certified arborists report. Significant shrubs should be added to bury the house, visually, in the hillside. � Hil[side Area Constntction Permit atd Design Review 17 Valdivia Coun The reviewer concludes that this application dces not appear to generate significant impacts on the street. The impacts occur at the rear and side yard ares and on the creek trail. The reviewer recommends approval with the following conditions: • Contract an azborist to review the health of the trees affected by this work. The review should include study of staging azeas, site access during construction, and care of trees during and after construction. The report should be submitted at the time of building permit submittal. • Require rear deck elevations showing all trims and lattice work at time of building permit submittal. The applicants have revised their plans to show all trims and lattice work on the rear deck elevations. • Require landscape plan for rear and side yard immediate to decks showing substantial shrubs to assist in screening decks and expanses of cripple walls. The design reviewer recommends native species. The applicants have revised their plans to show landscaping at the rear and side yards to screen the proposed decking. Study Meeting: At their meeting on January 11, 1999, the Planning Commission moverl to place this item on the January 25, 1999 consent calendar (P.C. Minutes January 11, 1999). Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1602 are outlined as follows: 1. Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Findings for Design Review: Based on the comments of the design reviewer's analysis of the project as summarized in the staff report and in the design reviewer's memo dated October 17, 1998, the project has been found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's design review guidelines. 4 Hillside Area Construction Permit and Design Review 17 Valdivia Coun F'mdings for Hillside Area Construction Pernut: Based on the summary in the staff report and the record ofthe Planning Commission, the project is found to be compatible with the requirements of the city's hillside area construction pernut guidelines based on the following findings: 1. that the placement ofthe proposed first and second story addition shall not have a substantial impact on the views from the adjacent properties because along the right side property line the addition is setback 60' and 66' on the first and second floors, respectively, and 7' and 8' on the first and second floors, respectively, along the left side property line; and 2. that the addition shall not have a substantial impact on the character of the neighborhood because the first floor addition will not be visible from the street and the second floor addition is at the rear of the lot and set back 70' from the front property line; and 3, that the addition shall not obstruct distant views from habitable areas within the adjacent dwelIing units because 31' of the 46' extension at the rear of the house contains an uncovered deck which steps down following the natural downward slope of the lot, therefore having no substantial impact on the view lines of the canyon to the west from adjacent properties, and because neighbors within 300' of the property were notified of the proposed addition and did not call if up for review by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be taken by resolution. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated. At the public hearing the following condition should be considered: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 22, 1998, Sheets 1-6 and G1 with a maximum roof ridge height of 28'-6" as measured from average top of curb (elevation 100.56'); 2, that the conditions of the City Engineer's September 21, 1998 memo, the Senior Landscape Inspector's October 14, 1998 memo and Chief Building Official's September 21, 1998 memo shall be met; 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include changing window placement, adding windows or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 4, that any changes to the footprint, building height, window placement or building envelope shall require an amendment to this Hillside Area Construction Permit; 5 Hillside Area Construction Permit a�ul Desig�i Review 17 Valdivia Court 5. that the applicant shall contract an arborist to review the health of the trees affected by this addition. The review should include study of construction staging areas, site access during construction, and care of trees during and after construction. The report should be submitted at the time of building permit submittal and shall be approved by the Senior Landscape Inspector prior to issuing a building permit; and 6. that this project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Ruben Hurin Zoning Technician c. Robert and Jennifer Morse, applicants and property owners 0 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES January 11, 1999 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER Chairman Deal called the January 11, 1999, regular meeting of the Pl order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Staff Present: to Commissioners Bojues, Coffey, eighran, Key, Luzuriaga, Vistica and Deal None City Planner, Meg M oe; City Attorney, Larry Anderson; City Engineer, Fra rbacker MINUTES The minutes of t December 14, 1998 regular meeting of the Planning Co ssion were approved. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The order f the agenda was approved with request for continuan noted. FROM THE FLOOR Mr. ttfried Brun, 1312 Vancouver, He commented about how e supported the commissions interest in design review and ho d that they would look at the design of this house too since h lives in the neighborhood. He then requested Item #6, 2104 aston be pulled from consent calendar and returned to the regular calendar for discussion. STUDY ITEMS �_ APPLICATION FOR HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW /� FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION AT 17 VALDIVIA COURT, ZONED R-1. (ROBERT S. & JENNIFER K MORSE APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS) CP Monroe presented an over view of the project and the commissioners asked that the item be placed on the consent calendar for the next meeting, January 25, 1999. AYYL N FOR SIDE SETBACK VARIA ND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND SPECIAL RMIT FOR A NEW SINGLE-CAR GE AND WORKROOM AT 1516 FOREST VIEW VENUE, ZONED R-1) (CHRIS & JA KEELE, APPLICANTS AND TTlIATTT�� �i�i�• �... CP Monroe presented an ove 'ew of the project and the commiss; hardship for not placing the garage within the rear 40 percent of the r's asked: what is the ; how far back can the -1- ' �� - � �� � ..�,. - - _ � �:-; �;;� :�. . � _ � - . '. •�T _ — ' '�� "L--- _ � i �i�' �.__ ..� r'� ` i i _ � if ''�„ - #: c � - - -�+' i� _ ';ea' lF�p } . ��.{� i-"Yj i ���i. e- 3 � '-� � �. �� �� -, .� _ � T�- LyW j}i�, �..�.Sr' r _ �..K ��: .� ! ,�.� .�.� �.: - }�T���__ ; --f � '�'� _.�".� fa� � — i�. , - � _� _ . ,,,1 r � 3. ��,� ��� . '� My, ' ' t r "�► � '� 'a x- _���-j6 �''i. r s �� � y • �,t 9 rt.��� �► •".�y /i.�� �`%• ' .*.- �••�,• ,'�:•'So-' • �� - - '?�� '� .Y- � ..'h. � • .� \ � .�• - • •.` . y�` � i� . '!r�� .3' r. ���_ ti��,^ . , ' ` � '.c�•`�. _ '�. j - � � i �. ,`��� f w � � r � 1 w{y�� '.��5��.. '. - , -' � . • .� - � ,y�•: !� ' s - _.: :� .. - °,� � � j� _ . 1 Y I !. _ �ffi .: � ` .�•.� `• P. - �_ . . -I�., i�' �` . +. ��. � • - -� i j.'y -.-_ �.;,-_;�... ���� -�+ � , - ,�+C�- _ .. ,- � . n. � r`- �` ^ - . aa.A,�'�� . _ . . . ;� r SJ • 4 Es �r�>_;� . _ � . . - �.<=ai�p. . � � -x . . ��.. . . -�� 4r� cir a_ �R�NQ,,r.i CI'I'Y OF BURLPi TGAME �``. ;. .: . APPLICATION TO �HE PLANNING CONIlVIISSIOI�I - - Type, of Application:_Special Perniit_Variance Other_ �/G�S/,D� G�S'F ��`-//� -.- Project Address: � 7 �/i�0///l.4 G%i Assessor's Pazcel Number(s): 0��—/<P L-1 d O APPLICANT f Name: �f3 � �G�1/�/�_ /��2�'E Address:_ ! 7 �/�}L �}lUI�4- Cr c�ryis�r.�z�P: �XJ/t�l,cl,E,4� c,¢ j�jo�o PROPERTY OWNER Name: ��A�12�' , Address: c�ryis�teiz�P: Phone (w):�i���o —(o3So� . Phone ( �n):� �' 7� 355 2 fax: .. ARCHITECT/DFSIGNER Name:� � �� SQ'; j �T-�� � Arldress:_ �Z2�3 P./�l.l��1� �./aU� City/State/Zip:�f�U/1LG� /� C1� ��GLI�' Phone (w):_ ��3 —Caal � m�: Please indicate with ari asterisk * the contact person for this applicatiori. (h): fax: 3 7 � `�Q-� g PROJECT DESCRIPTION: �����n,v' 7"0 �l�S � S �Zo�cr�a � /t��l �laf� ��� AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to th� best of my knowledge and belief. ' ,- ; � ��� ! 2 z � = .. Applicant's Signature Da I,lrnqw about the proposed applicarion and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commissiori. � l Property Owner's Signature Date �, � ---- ------- FOR OFFICE USE ONLY -----�-��-��-�� II�.DO a.»., Date Filed: .°� ' ��' �`� � Fee• S E P 1 4 1998 Planning Commission: Study Date: Action Date: C��Y 0� BUR�+���,�+r�,�� _ iv r� DEPT. ROUTING FORM DATE: Septeinber 14, 1998 TO: �CITY ENGINEER CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL FIRE MARSHAL SR. LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER SUB,TECT: Request for hillside area construction pennit for a first and second floor addition subject to design review at 17 Valdivia Court, zoned R-1, APN: 025-182-160. SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING: November 9, 1998 STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON: Monday, September 21, 1998 THANKS, Maureen/Jani ce/Rub en l/ L(�V b Date of Comments ' �i�, y�¢-�-d�- � � � . � ��G+�, ���-��� .� C��G� O ��. l , ROUTING FORM DATE: 0��6� 1�( � 1�`�� TO: CITY ENGINEER CIDEF BUILDING INSPECTOR FIRE MARSHAL ZC PARKS DIItECTOR -�\C_.}.�- �,J�D�-1 � S� �� CZ Tct�E �r)S�C`rt-u�tZ . CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER C(� ��� SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR �.E-J�� e� � Li�.r�l S� of� �p P c�s� Z - S� 2-vi -t- .���.K- �NJD 1�10 AT ��- v�-�1J1L� ��(-'. �x� sn � �. �-� . .�PE�T � SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING: ��T�I �'1 g STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON MONDAY: ^ �'1 I 1 H� R� THANKS, Mauree ' uben .T�`� �d �� Date of Comments 3 tree5 �� �, 2� �, � 6�� �-e � v-� �c�' o�u a-�I �-9 �ti S (�(r'c�c�i a�u . '��-�rdv� i / o � ,�o,� r�� �3 B�� ���y ���«5 0. ����F ��� �ork .s�r-�s . 5����r�� c� p�o'f �_�,covc� f�ar te��crc�e a� C� y' %oc' i 5� I`2 7 o L" I Gt��f% /Lt r�(~ -�'jCc i`j p�v �c.�5 G f�� - ! � W �-n-�- � M��- o � \ �_ �,��____-�;. % C ROUTING FORM DATE Septeinber 14, 1998 TO: CITY ENGINEER �CHIEF BUII.DING OFFICIAL FIRE NIARSHAL SR. LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNERl1'LANNER SUBJECT: Request for hillside area construction pennit for a first and second floor addition suUject to design review at 17 Valdivia Court, zoned R-1, APN: 025-182-160. SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING: November 9, 1998 STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON: Monday, September 21, 1998 THANKS, Maureen/Jani ce/Rub en ��� Co �S�-r J�ri ��S n � � �(i` D C� w �..r�Pi%��-1 ` ����1� Date of Comments � ��� �,�,�� ; CD- s /�� . / G� ( From: Martin Dreiling To: Janice Jegalski Date: 10118l98 Time: 3:52:5B PM Page 1 of 2 CSS �-y �- �a•; � � r� � q•�� :�s .�'� � � OCT191ggg Architectural Review A R C H I T E C T U R�iTY �� BUF.Li�:Gr^,iv1E ��HNNING D'tPi- CSS Associates Architecfs 1 1 0 3 J u a n i t o A v e n u e B u r I i n g a m e C o I i f o r n i a 9 4 0 1 0 Planning Department Date: �7 October 1998 City of Burlingame Project: Morse Residence 501 Primrose Road 17 Valdivia Court Burlingame, CA 94010 Applicaticn Number Distributed Vla Noted Method Only Mail Fax ■ Net Dist. Code Review Time 1.5 hours App Applicant Own Property Owner ■ CB Agency Ciry of Burlingame Compliance With Guidelines Item Subject Compatibilitywith Neighborhood Style This addition makes no major changes at the street side of the property and is therefore entirely compatible. The addition comprises a substantial increase to the bulk of the building as experienced from the rear yard and side yard to the east. The style of the addition is compatible with the adjacent homes, as all homes in this development are somewhat similar. The impact of the size is questionable. Additional photos submitted directly by the applicant show that no direct conflicts will occur. The site and its neighbors have notable tree cover from existing oaks and other native species. This factor reduces the impact of all neighboring structures. The result is that the trees are a critical component and care must be taken for their survival. It also appears that the creek trail passes near the rear of these properties. For this reason, the appearance from the creek becomes a neighborhood concern. 2• Parking and Garage Patterns Refer to Planning Staff review for quantities. Design components not applicable. 3• Architectural Style, Internal Consistency The style of the addition is generally consistent with the style of the existing residence. The window pattern appears to change from casement with picture window at the front, to multiple casements at the addition. This is not significant. Existing decks are noted for removal and new decks are being added. The new decks will become a major architectural component at the rear yard as seen from the creek. These decks should be built substantially. Lattice work should include full frames, perimeter stops and modulation to insure durability. Additionally, lattice should occur at the face of the deck or only slightly inset to make the deck appear more substantial and less like it is projecting out into the landscape. This, in conjunction with landscaping will help reduce the visual impact of the decks. 4• InterFace with Adjacent Structu�es Refer item 1 above. There appear to be no direct conflicts other than the height of the new second story. It is, however, relatively compact, and falls within the expectations of what might occur in these neighborhoods. 650 696 1200 Fax 650 343 9685 dreilingQpacbell.neT From: Martin Dreiling To: Janice Jegalski Date: 10/18/98 Time: 3:52:58 PM Page Z of 2 Architectural Review Date: � 7 October 1998 Project: Morse Residence 17 Valdivia Court Compliance With Guidelines continued Item Suhiect 5• Landscaping and Its Relation to Proposed Building Several signiflcant trees occur in the rear yard area of the property that are important to the neighborhood. Most of the residences in the neighborhood are set against a backdrop of native trees that line the canyon. This is a significant component of the neighborhood character. Measures should be required to ensure that these trees are protected during construction and that the construction will not pose a long-term threat to the trees. The inclusion of a certifed arborist should be required Also, as mentioned above, the rear yard is visible from the creek and the rear decks will become an important visual component. The lattice work on these decks will help reduce the impact of the built components, but significant shrubs should be added to help bury the house, visually, in the hillside.. Conclusion This application does not appear to generate significant impacts on the street. The impacts occur at the rear yard and side yard areas and on the creek trail. Recommended Action: Approval With Conditions: +� 3. Contract the services of an arborist to review the health of the trees affected by this work. Included in study should be staging areas and site access during construction. The services should include recommendations for care during construction as well as after. The changes in environment endured by the trees shall be accounted for, including changes in exposed ground and rain penetration. A report should be submitted with a Building permit Application and significant components of the report should be shown on the plans. Require inclusion of rear deck elevations showing all trims and lattice work with building permit submittal for review by Planning and/or Design reviewer. Include construction details. Lattice should be continuous to ground and should include solid perimeter frame and stops at all sides. Lattice plane should occur at or near the face of the deck fascia to make the decks look more substantial and less like they are projecting into the air. Require Landscape Plan for rear and side yard area immediate to decks showing substantial shrubs to assist in screening deck s and expanses of cripple walls. Recommend native species. Martin Dreiling CSS Architecture 650 696 1200 Fax 650 343 9685 dreilingQpacbell.net � -; ��- - . �' �,� <, � �� "�,� - � $ ` �� �� �� � �. �:�.� � � ��¢� �, � � .`µ'x�,+� 5' ' � t n, �. ��� . �, e�, �.- Q' ,� .• �.. � :vt`�* �- . .3 �5 �' ?t-' � k sa`':< � `�fi.; s .� �--� 3x, i��� - �p, y .,�r+. . � . �. �-ti^- C' � ��, ,q .�-,i� 1 £Fr-' r�.IIx_' �F-� "�, ✓,` � - '�' ���t `���a . .,+.�,s�� �. � . .. S . . . . . ' . � r LL i'_",i. �'�ti : l."�4 _ „%� �-aFg.� `w'':�. -:�_ �� ;'� 't,t�.._. �� _ 'M �`��� e4�''3� = �$.. � . .'. ...- . ..: . . . . _ £ .. . _ .. . _ . � . �_ ' :�. - "' _ �. �. t��.a -�-� �. �"�. .� . � �� � s� �t:.� { -s � p3� �'� � �s'"�'ZC'��`�` ^� , - �� - a.:�.. 4,t��.� � _ -%� S-�g �-���'" x� .ri'� �i,.r"�v .w��4� � =' g s . . �_ S�-�.� . �n''- , . �s-,�e'�'�� �s.�r�`�.�-� � r�-. ='''' �`-'�'iq., ?� �' �-,:�.. -�_� ` .�:_; � ,�- . - :.�. x .; g� � _ . _ . -.,,,`i.�` _ F ' '$ _ . ' a._ . c+. .-�. � ��� �.r.i�� •- e�. �� � - . ���` 'i- ��.,.�� �. . ���,� �iTr§ � �. = y � S °�„-�'c:�, �T�-'�`F�` � .- �X._ "-�� i . . .J� -'.s„yc-aE 'i` : � x�T � �j `� - $i' " � -r _:' - �.('Jt � �'" {� - +3 -�F� � �; F "� -�.� � �a__ �c '� � -` ` _� _ _ � � � �� ��'`�' -i�=; � � .T 'rt. ,." p-c . � t � g � � z' _ _, � . � . _ _ � . � • s .� � . -..�� .�: /�`i �'_,� �� a j'�-�� � ^� � �� � � � z:='�� � ��� � --,�.� �� �: � `�.� � �- �_ �� _ -,� "� -���� ,�.�- ���=�� ���`,cE� q� q .`� ''�'-�'�'�" °�.� __ _ � :� '�.��- � -, ��,� p s � ' ,� s t�s � �`r �r �h � ,�A .. '�"7�+�;c t �� '�-�- f . � �- --�0_.., . � �; 6 �� �" � ���� ��� �' :� - � �;,��5 � �'� : � � � �� �'�' � �- � � --" �' �"� �`�'.� �` - 's_ __ `� �'- '� r`� ` �-�-,�,. �'�"x", �� � � �x,�.r � . '�s�'q.... � -'� ''� .� -��� .-.w.e = � ��' ��_ ��C�'�.� �. � �*��:' �`-„�"� � �* � 7'� �`�y�'.,' �f � � Et � �-�-..�_� : _ � �' .F � ''-� .� ' . ' � �S �-�- ,� s � � "� ""�� �-� - i ' �. #�" "`�' �� �,��"; ;_�'�.,�- � _ �` �`��3 � �'�-����'� � ��� �� j. YYSrkR'i/f . +�S �":-'�'��, '•,ts' "�" ' ,_� .;-'� ->-�, �� ��`�"�'��' `��{�t si �" �5 P �e� E di "`E-� �� 'i. s ` �rtC���� k�r...� * : �- ` 9. �� J_.� �`e � _ �.-}_ . �c. . - L� Z . � ^� , ,� _ � �� � j '� _ =-�r T � � � � �! �, x � ��� �` � �� � ,_ . . ' ' ( s � _ �• � � �a`� � _ �? �� �S =�� �� -� �� x� « -'`��- ''��- �. � p°� �' y-�; - Q �' �� � �v1 ��' ��'�'� � � � � � _ �' }�`.� ����� _ � - t/ �. � , � :; � � � f ��� � � . � � `�.� � _ �' �' � i' �, ��- � � , � ` �a ; �' `""� � � �. � _,�r� �.� ���F -s "-�s �c • - � -•� € - �� � '`�. ��"..� � .- � �� � - � �°` = � ��+������ "r�''� "'� � . . ��� . �_�. � � y,. � `� :- � -��`�-- : �.�a�v �' �: �'�� .x��. �..� _'�ee_.,.'� ST -_ �Y.: _`�� �' -�3 � #...._: t�.,�. � � g ac. _ �` s-v.� #'���3'�. R ��Ea � ��-� :, �,^ -� v� �'a�, >�-� i - �c�u- `�'� " _ "�".�. . yc ��� , . - ,� 4 � " � - r �� '�- �� # - � w'� w-�� 3 ,F .:: a^- _ .tx- '� -i. �. -�_� z 3��'�`_'��`.��'r �`z � _ - � - � 'a-` ' � �"" �'�' �_ � � :- �- ;9 -T t _ r 4t-�at�' '`"' -.: � }.-- .i'z. �3�.� . � -' �} �-ie. 3 �'�� � - .,� 1 �e-x_-'� S s= c �= - �r-i _ � ��` Z#`e��s'-i"=-�� -� .-`�"� � " . ��P �� '�='1 � � -- -z ��s `� }- _ t � "z"'��;q�'�^tr �r Al�� _ � s?"���'{ ,*,n" '�,� �.-f � - '� .�. -5e: � - ,y��� _ Y � � � ` �-rti - g E c" ' p1y�"•O} ��� _ �� �� z��c .c �` ' _} « `�"�� '^�- ' aF'� S � -r �".a, �ji`� '� � ; �' {;€i" � � 2 � i 'm` .�N� '� : q i `*� � ^��.-z's. �_ '+F - ��ss""� R �:� ^�r�"t =` . i�r _ �' � �3�- _..'� _ .-� €: ' = yt��'# a',�� `- �,,:�. ,�� � ,�s-4 s.V �`� � r � ���-,� _ ' --}'+'" .Y - �^e.-^r,*'�?s' �,"'`� --�'�� ���F:_;L-�"^-� �"?� '� ��� � : ��'���"* `�-'� " � - �^'-'_ _� -'� ��-, `�k;,i1-.'�•.'z� Y� F-`' "`+-s: _ � ` _- �f "- Y ��# �•`�'39 _ � � g � ` tJ:.3�' '�.� = �s�� �"-� t'G=�� - .F��gr�: _ .._�C. % �. � . _ "4�.'- � � �sc'�-� �... �' - � �<' � �� _ _ _ - : -' S i � .. . � - � y� - '� � - - " . . � A -, . � � ��, � = -sr � ��.�,� .�,,���� '-� �'�s� , =r ' �" ' s ,- K�, � � � ; `� �}�� a ar�.�' �'�.;� �` � , �,��` � � _ � K ` >' �'. = r�+ ���- �,� s � , � �-; � ; �- ����,��; � �._ �`�� ���' ' �� ��� � ' `r �-�� �����`.' �z � .v � � � �' - R _ . .� . t � �..���� �, �. R;'� .� ` � �i � '��" 's �*'�'���.F��i4j��5' �y R` ;� � .:. .. � , � -. � . . . "�, •�+ �� "�` . !+ 3 �s S'+�--..� � �€� . - y�` e"s+� � -�a `',-� _ .� �Y � � r�� Y .:+�- s 'x'^��-' '�`-�� . �. � � " ..� � .��, ,• � �. +� T€' xnn��'� � �,�" � � �„ � t '.-"+ a.>. -� c _x,,.��s�--'� � .r` �' ' �t- 'C �r . p� a � � . � :� � 5�... :_ _ � �� ��� �' - � �� �`d �� �-��' �:� • � � e `� s �+� _� . �5� .� -� ,S .._ ,�-� -� . � � �� t _ �q `aY�< . �+f- � � . .� � F � �z`.�_ � `� �?'- 'i "�'�u",`�=-��� `�-+>'3��Y .. . � ' "� ti v�R�`�:�-�, _ � �. ss ! S'('g �� �`� M ER C `` � - � � � � � -- � _r � � .� �' Y .� - �, � �:� � �: � �`� �.��T � �� � � e � =*� � �_�.�,�-� -� - �' . � � � '. `�r l �:�i .. . ��� pa ; _>�'" s `�,-,`a�-^':�- - � _..--c 4� - ' ' _ T r � .,, -�/ -.S' ,� - ��-�a� ��,.,._ � � � � c _ .,F �. �.1 . �' J - ,r -y�� _ _��'- a �^' m. ,�.�„ �ze.; � • �. � �+ � "� ` . � � ' "��', `�"�. . . a� 3 '° � � :' � � ���,�' -.� §" { �: `�z`�--k����z�,ti. � , � " � � . ,�l. �`r ti t .+s � =� .� _ .�.�- "��. .�? c c��4'.s.�''�r _ �`-- _ � `; "-�s" �� � �y ' � 3 � .. -� ss�a�� �t`" �"�"�rf �� .L � � - -.tt � � ��. �.�. � �_ ' � �. � P _' }� �� � " e ^ . _ � y�� ¢'"} . . _ �L= {` .�; �r' �.:.a.. '^c�� :� 4' k '�j �i � '�^�_ � �� ::� j � - -. -.. -. : � _� . i -' - "} y -'.�R� _ . 7 - � Y'= , � � -_ � _ ._ . A �_. .. a ..- . �a � � c�+`.-.__ �g',} -s_" �� � �Z � z' �'� � � •s �s'� �, �.,-� ,� ;� ��-�j�' :� �''� ��4�- � f"Las.���- a:� � � - s - t `'�, - - r _ �t , - �+�%,b� s=�'�. , ; ,� �: _ . ;: < j-. _ ; , .:,� : : x :,; .. <.. _ _ : . ` ���.:� _. � . �� _ . __ �u �...�. __ • CITY OF BURLINGAME rc�ls � p�qNNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD l BURLINGAME, CA 94010 `� TEL:(650) 696-7250 17 VALDIUTA COURT ARN:4.7c5-18�-160 Application for� hillside area constr��.�ction pet•mit and design reviEw for a fir•st and second stnry additian at 17 Valdivic Co�_ir,t, �oned R-1. The Gity ot A�.iriingame Planning Commission anno�_mces the following public hearing on Monday, January �5, 1999 at 7:00 G.M. in the �Cify�fa 1 o�_inci �ers located at 5�h1 F�r,imr�ose Road, Rtir�lingame, Californi�. Mailed January 15, 1995 (Please refer to other side) PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE ':�:: ++" v" e �. +�. .�� S . x - .-c:r �c. � -.+. `�•-• �< .:a` � �W � �;� �,� ,r'%.�� . '1r '+'�_���.:,.;`�` x f ,�:5 ia - .:�: t ��` �':�^�.', � � �.?;�� _ <:is -" � �i�"_ CITY OF B URLINGAME A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at.;:fhe Planning 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 ui: the no,rice or in .written conespondence delivered to the city at or prior to ttie" public.heaiing;; :'` . Property owners who receive this notice are responsible'for inforrning their tenants about this' nouGe. . For�additional information, please call (650) 696-7250. Thank you � } z � -. . � . ... .. ,' � Yi_ � t Margaret Monroe " �'� yr ��� � City Planner � � �. �� ,_ '�, PUB�L=�C `1-1Ep►RtN�} NOTICE (Please refer to other side) ;� RFSOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMP'I'ION AND HII.LSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT RFSOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: • •. - - . • .-- � .�• -. . ... . �-- ..- • � �- . r: .�� �� �.r �: m � , � ,�. �.,��� i�.� .�� ��� � � � �- •� . � � � •�-. ; .•� 1 : ..i C��-■ ,�• -�� u• r �r:■ •.�' WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on J�x 25,�999 , 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: 1. 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: 15303 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures Class 3(a+e), Single- family residences not in conjunction with the building of two or more such units. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemprion is hereby approved. 2. Said hillside azea construction permit is approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such hillside area construction permit is as set forth� in the 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, Dave LuzuriaQa , 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 25th day of�ant�, 12Q2, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOFS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: SECRETARY ERHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and hillside area construction permit 17 VALDIVIA COURT effective FEBRUARY 1, 1999 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 22, 1998, Sheets 1-6 and G1 with a maximum roof ridge height of 28'-6" as measured from average top of curb (elevarion 100.56'); 2. that the conditions of the City Engineer's September 21, 1998 memo, the Senior Landscape Inspector's October 14, 1998 memo and Chief Building Official's September 21, 1998 memo shall be met; 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include changing window placement, adding windows or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 4, that any changes to the footprint, building height, window placement or building envelope shall require an amendment to this Hillside Area Construction Permit; 5. that the applicant shall contract an arborist to review the health of the trees affected by this addifion. The review should include study of construction staging azeas, site access during construction, and care of trees during and after construction. The report should be submitted at. the time of building permit submittal and shall be approved by the Senior Landscape Inspector prior to issuing a building permit; and 6. that this project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame.