The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About615 Vernon Way - Staff Report, � item # q- �i Action Item PRo.rccT Loc�Trov 615 Vernon Way � City of Burlingame Design Review and Special Perniit Item #4 Action Calendar Address: 615 Vernon Way Meeting Date: 8/23/04 Request: Design review and special permit for declining height envelope for a second story addition. Applicants and Property Owners: David and Arleen Cauchi APN: 029-183-030 Designer: Pierluigi Serraino Lot Area: 5000 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1(e)(1) - 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. Summary: Tl�e existin� split-leve] house, with an attached one-car garage, contains 2,483 SF (0.50 FAR) of floar area and has four bedrooms. The applicant is proposing to enlarge the existing master bedroom on the second floor at the rear of the house by 197 SF. With the proposed addition, the floor area will increase from 2,483 SF (0.50 FAR) to 2,680 SF (0.53 FAR) where 2,700 SF (0.54 FAR) is the maximum allowed. There is no increase to the lot coverage or building height with the proposed addition. A special pennit for declining height envelope is required for the second story addition along the right side of the house. Approximately 28 SF (3'-6" x 8') extends beyond the declining height envelope at the proposed addition. With this project, the number of bedrooms (4) is not increasing. One covered (10' x 20') and one uncovered (9' x 20') parking spaces are provided which meets the parking requirement for a four bedroom house. The existing attached garage was built as tandem parking, but today does not qualify as a two-car garage. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The following applications are required: Design review for a second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010, 5); and Special permit for declining height envelope along the right side property liue (3'-6" x 8'-0", 28 SF extends beyond the declining height envelope at the proposed addition) (CS 25.28.075, b, 1). Table 1— 615 Vernon Way Lot Area: 5,000 SF (50' x 100') Setbacks: '' Side(2"d flr right): : Rear (2„a flr�: Lot Coverage: ', FAR: '' EXISTING 5'-4" 41'-0" 1,589 SF 31.8% 2,483 SF 0.50 FAR PROPOSED 5'-4" 46'-3" ALLOWED/REQ'D . � 20'-0" no change 2,000 SF 40% 2,680 SF 0.53 FAR 2,700 SF 0.54 FAR' ` (0.32 x 5000 SF) + 1100 SF = 2700 SF (0.54 FAR) Design Review and Special Per»ait Table 1— 615 Vernon Way Lot Area: 5,000 SF (50' x 100') # of bedrooins: '' Parking: ' Ex�sT�nc 4 1 covered (10' x 20') 1 uncovered (9' x 20') PROPOSED 4 1 covered (1 O' X 2O') 1 uncovered (9' x 20') __ _ 25'-7" _ __ __ Buildi�:g Height: ' 25'-7" _ DHEnvelope: '' does not comply special permit required2 615 Vernon Way ALLOWED/REQ�D 1 covered (10' x 20') 1 uncovered (9' x 20') _ 3 0'-0" CS 25.28.075 Z Special permit for declining height envelope along the right side property line (3'-6" x 8'-0", 28 SF extends beyond the declining height envelope at the proposed addition). Staff Comments: See attached. Planning staff would note that a letter in support of the project was submitted by Chris and Kerrie Ronan, 608 Concord Way (neighbors located behind project site). Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on July 12, 2004, the Commission had several comments (July 12, 2004, Planning Commission Minutes). The applicant submitted revised plans, date stamped August 6, 2004 (sheets A.03-A.06) and a letter from the structural engineer, dated July 27, 2004, to address the Commission's concerns. The following are comments made by the Commission and how the applicant responded: 1. Clarify the window detail on the new windows, should �natch the existing dormer windows; windows sl:ould be true divided liglzt wood windows, proposed wrizdows should be more horizontal tlzan veMical to matcli t/ie existing tivirzdow pattern. • The revised plans, date stamped August 6, 2004, indicate that the new windows will be true divided light and will match the existing dormer windows. The window panes were revised to be more horizontal to match the existing windows. In addition, the window in the second floor bathroom was reduced in size from 7'-0" x 5'-6" to 3'-0" x 3'-0". 2. Co�icer�:ed about the seco�:d floor blank wall on tlze west elevatio�:, lliglz wiiadows should be added in t/:e c[oset to break up the wall, could also move the shed dormer irr by o�ae to two feet a�:d e_rtend roofline to tlie first floor roof. Ok to keep the window o�: tlie west wall, but also noted tlzat if the »:ass is broke�z up by extendi�ig tlze roofline down tlie window in the closet would �:ot be needed. 2 Design Review and Special Permit 6!5 Vernon Way The applicant followed the Commission's recommendation and retained the existing window in the closet on the west elevation to help break up the wall. In regards to offsetting the shed dornzer, the structural engineer notes in a letter dated July 27, 2004, that moving the shed dormer in by one to two feet is not advisable because lateral and vertical load paths need to be maintained in their existing geometry. He also notes that by offsetting the wall, a vertical discontinuity will be created for both the ]ateral and gravity force resisting systems. This would not insure that a direct load path would be established as it is now. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on Apri120, 1998 are outlined as follows: 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 a Special Permit: In arder to grant a special permit for declining height envelope, the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.51.020 a-d): (a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural charactenstics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood; (b) the variety of roof ]ine, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood; (c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and (d) removal of any trees located within the footpnnt of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is appropriate. � Desig�a Revieiv and Special Pern:it 615 Vernon Way Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be by resolution and include findings made for design review and special permit. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated far 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 Department date stamped J�me 16, 2004, sheets A.O1 and A.02, and date stamped August 6, 2004, sheets A.03 througl� A.06; and ihat any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this pennit; 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the Frst or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dornier(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certifieation that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Buildiug Department; 4. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 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 pennit is issued; 6. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 7. that the conditions of the City Engineer's June 1, 2004 meino and Recycling Specialist's June 2, 2004, memo shall be met; 8. that the project shall comply with the Constniction 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 deinolition of a structure, ii�terior or exterior, shall require a demolition pern�it; 9. that the applicant shall conlply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 4 Design Review and Special Pennit 615 Vernon Way 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Ruben Hurin Planner c. David and Arleen Cauchi, applicants and property owners 5 i' City of Burlingame Design Review nnd Special Per�nit Item #10 Design Review Study Address: 615 Vernon Way Meeting Date: 7/12/04 Request: Design review and special permit far declining height envelope for a second story addition. Applicants and Property Owners: David and Arleen Cauchi APN: 029-183-030 Designer: Pierluigi Serraino Lot Area: 5000 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 Summary: The existing split-level house, with an attached one-car garage, contains 2,483 SF (0.50 FAR) of floor area and has four bedrooms. The applicant is proposing to enlarge the existing master bedroom on the second floor at the rear of the house by 197 SF. With the proposed addition, the floor area will increase from 2,483 SF (0.50 FAR) to 2,680 SF (0.53 FAR) where 2,700 SF (0.54 FAR) is the maximum allowed. There is no increase to the lot coverage or building l�eight with the proposed addition. A special permit for declining height envelope is required far the second story addition along the right side of the house. Approximately 28 SF (3'-6" x 8') extends beyond the declining height envelope at the proposed addition. With this project, the number of bedrooms (4) is not increasing. One covered (10' x 20') and one uncovered (9' x 20') parking spaces are provided which meets the parking requirement for a four bedroom house. The existing attached garage is tandem, but does not qualify as a two-car garage. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The following applications are required: • Design review for a second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010, 5); and • Special permit for declining height envelope along the right side property liue (3'-6" x 8'-0", 28 SF extends beyond the declining height envelope at the proposed addition) (CS 25.28.075, b, 1). Table 1— 615 Vernon Way Lot Area: 5,000 SF (50' x 100') ' (0.32 x 5000 SF) + 1100 SF = 2700 SF (0.54 FAR) Design Review ancl Special Permit Table 1— 615 Vernon Way Lot Area: 5,000 SF (50' x 100') 615 Venzaz Way EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D # of bedrooms: i 4 4 --- __ _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ Parking: 'i 1 covered 1 covered 1 covered (10' x 20') (10' x 20') (10' x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered 1 uncovered �9� X 20�) (9� X 20�� X 20�) _ . __ _ : _ Buildiizg Height: ; 25'-7" 25'-7" 30'-0" DHE�:velope: does not comply '; special permit requiredz i CS 25.28.075 Z 5pecial permlt for declining height envelope along the nght side property line (3'-6" x 8'-0", 28 SF extends beyond the declining height envelope at the proposed addition). Staff Comments: See attached. Ruben Hurin Planner c. David and Arleen Cauchi, applicants and property owners 2