HomeMy WebLinkAbout616 Vernon Way - Staff ReportItem No. 8c
Regular Action
PROJECT LOCATION
616 Vernon Way
City of Burlingame
Design Review
Address: 616 Vernon Way
Request: Design Review for first and second story additions.
Applicant and Designer: Jerry Deal, J. Deal Associates
Property Owners: Joshua and Hilary Henshaw
General Plan: Low Density Residential
APN: 029-182-140
Lot Area: 5,000 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 Description: The subject property is an interior lot. The existing single story house is U-shaped, with an
attached garage at the front of the house and a courtyard at the right side of the house.
The applicant proposes first and second story additions. The total proposed floor area is 2,700 SF (0.54 FAR),
where 2,700 SF (0.54 FAR) is the maximum allowed (including covered porch exemptions). The proposed
house is at the maximum allowable floor area ratio for the lot.
The existing attached garage will not be altered. The existing parking on site is non-conforming in the number of
spaces (2 spaces required where 1 space exists). There is 1 parking space (10' x 18') in the garage. There are
no code compliant uncovered parking spaces in the driveway leading to the garage because the length
measured to the inside edge of the sidewalk does not meet the minimum code requirement (17'-2" existing,
where 17'-6" is required to be counted as a non-conforming space and 18'-0" is required to meet the code
minimum for an existing full-length space). The existing house has 2 bedrooms and the number of bedrooms on
site will be increased to 4 with the proposed additions. Because the number of spaces for a 2 bedroom house is
the same as a 4 bedroom house (up to 4 bedrooms requires 2 on-site parking spaces), the increase of
bedrooms in this instance does not trigger an increase in parking spaces. The number of required parking
spaces is not being increased, and the existing, non-conforming parking conditions will remain.
The existing house is non-conforming in lot coverage, exceeding the allowable lot coverage maximum by 55 SF
�41 % lot coverage exists where 40% is the maximum allowed). There is no record of permits for the 144 SF
detached structure in the rear of the lot, so this structure is not counted in existing lot coverage and with the
proposed project, the structure will be demolished. The applicant will not be increasing the existing non-
conforming lot coverage on site. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met.
The applicant is requesting the following applications:
■ Design Review for a second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010 (a) (2)).
616 Vernon Way
Lot Area: 5,000 SF Plans date
EXISTING
SETBACKS
;_
Front (1st flr): 24'-9"
(2nd flr):
Garage:
15'-0" '
PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED (July 6,
PROPOSED 2015 plans)
; . __
19'-6"
31'-5" '
No chanae
23'-7"
No change
No change
Item No. 8c
Regular Action
Meeting Date: July 27, 2015
�ed: July 6, 2015
ALLOWED/REQ'
D
17'-11"
20'-0„
25'-0"
Design Review
Side (left): ';
(r�ghtf .� .
Rear (1st flr): ',
(2nd flr): ;
Lot Coverage: ;
FAR: '
# of bedrooms: i
Parking: ;
EXISTING
4'-6"
2'-10" z
_
12'-6" 3
2,055 SF 4
41%
__ _ _
2,090 SF
0.42 FAR
2
1 covered
(10' x 18')
0 uncovered'
PREVIOUSLY
PROPOSED
No change
No change
__
No change
21'-1"
2,157 SF 5
43%
2,700 SF
0.54 FAR
' 4
No change
PROPOSED (July 6,
2015 plans)
No change
No chanpe
No change
No change
2,055 SF 4
41%
2,626 SF
0.53 FAR
No change
No change
616 Vernon Way
ALLOWED/REQ'
D
4'-0"
4'-0"
15'-0"
20'-0"
2,000 SF
40%
2,700 SF 6
0.54 FAR
1 covered
(10' x 18')
1 uncovered
(9' x 20')
__ __ _. _ _ __
_
Height: ' 16'-4" 26'-3" No change 30'-0"
_ __ _ . , __ _ __.
DHEnvelope: ' --- complies , C.S. 25.26.075,b,2 CS 25.26.075
: applied
' Existing, non-conforming setback to the attached garage.
2 Existing, non-conforming right side setback.
3 Existing, non-conforming rear setback.
4 Existing, non-conforming lot coverage (does not include accessory structure in rear yard).
5 Variance requested for 43% lot coverage where 40% lot coverage is the maximum allowed (C.S. 25.54.020).
6 (0.32 x 5,000 SF) + 1100 SF= 2,700 SF (0.44 FAR).
' Existing, non-conforming number of parking spaces (2 spaces required where 1 space exists).
Staff Comments: See attached memos from the Chief Building Official, Fire Division, Engineering Division,
Parks Division, and Stormwater Division.
�esign Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on June 8, 2015, the
Commission had comments and suggestions regarding this project and voted to place this item on the regular
action calendar when all information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Division.
The applicant submitted a response letter dated June 23, 2015, and revised plans date stamped July 6, 2015, to
address the Planning Commission's comments. Please refer to the copy of the June 8, 2015, Planning
Commission minutes included in the staff report for the complete list of Planning Commission comments and the
a�plicant's response letter all of the revisions made to the plans. Listed below are the Commission's comments
and responses by the applicant.
1. There do not seem to be unique circumstances for this property to justify the requested lot coverage
variance.
• Revisions have been made to the garage and porch that eliminate the variance application.
2. The porch seems jammed in the corner and is not an e/egant solution.
• The garage width has been reduced to increase the width of the proposed porch.
-2-
Design Review
616 Vernon Way
3. The ba/cony is a privacy issue for the neighbor to the rear. The first floor of the house already has
an existing, non-conforming setback and impacts the neighbors
• The proposed balcony at the rear has been improved.
4. Consider upgrading the landscaping to bring it to the scale of a two story house.
• The applicant has revised the plans to show a total of two new landscape trees to be planted in the rear
yard in the location of the shed that will be removed. There is a third, existing tree at the right rear corner
of the lot.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the
Council on April 20, 1998 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.
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 July
6, 2015, sheets A1 through A7, GBM and Boundary Survey;
2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or
pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning
Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staffl;
3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would
include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit;
4. thatthe conditions ofthe Engineering Divisions March 31, 2015 memo, the Building Division's March 18,
2015 memo, the Parks Division's March 23 and June 1, 2015 memos, the Fire Division's March 25, 2015
memo, and the Stormwater Division's March 24, 2015 memo shall be met;
5. 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;
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;
-3-
Design Review
616 Vernon Way
7. 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;
8. 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;
9. 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;
10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2013
Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION
PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION:
11. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another
architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the
architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window
locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting
framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final
framing inspection shall be scheduled;
12. 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 Division; and
13. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division 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.
Erika Lewit
Senior Planner
c. Jerry Deal, applicant
Attachments:
ApplicanYs Response to Commission's comments, dated June 23, 2015
Minutes from the June 8, 2015 Design Review Study Meeting
Application to the Planning Commission
Staff Comments
Letter and photograph from the neighbors at 615 Lexington Way, date stamped June 3, 2015 (3 pages)
'Received After' Items from neighbors (2 items)
Photographs of Neighborhood
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed July 17, 2015
Aerial Photo
�!
�
PROJECT LOCATION
616 Vernon Way
Item No. 9b
Design Review Study
Address: 616 Vernon Way
City of Burlingame
Design Review and Variance
Item No. 9b
Design Review Study
Meeting Date: June 8, 2015
Request: Design Review and a Lot Coverage Variance for first and second story additions.
Applicant and Designer: Jerry Deal, J. Deal Associates
Property Owners: Joshua and Hilary Henshaw
General Plan: Low Density Residential
APN: 029-182-140
Lot Area: 5,000 SF
Zoning: R-1
Project Description: The subject property is an interior lot. The existing single story house is U-shaped, with an
attached garage at the front of the house and a courtyard at the right side of the house.
The applicant proposes first and second story additions. The total proposed floor area is 2,700 SF (0.54 FAR),
where 2,700 SF (0.54 FAR) is the maximum allowed (including covered porch exemptions). This proposed
house is at the maximum allowable floor area ratio for the lot.
The existing attached garage will not be altered and the existing parking on site is non-conforming in the number
of spaces (2 spaces required where 1 space exists). There is 1 parking space (10' x 18') in the garage. There
are no code compliant uncovered parking spaces in the driveway leading to the garage because the length
measured to the inside edge of the sidewalk does not meet the minimum code requirement (17'-2" existing,
where 17'-6" is required to be counted as a non-conforming space and 18'-0" is required to meet the code
minimum for an existing full-length space). The existing house has 2 bedrooms and the number of bedrooms on
site will be increased to 4 with the proposed additions. The number of required parking spaces is not being
increased (up to 4 bedrooms requires 2 on-site parking spaces), therefore the existing, non-conforming parking
conditions are allowed to remain.
The existing house is non-conforming in lot coverage, exceeding the allowable lot coverage maximum by 'S�SF
(41 % lot coverage exists where 40% is the maximum allowed). There is no record of permits for the 144 SF
detached structure in the rear of the lot, so this structure is not counted in existing lot coverage and with the
proposed project, the structure will be demolished. The applicant will be increasing the lot coverage on site with
the first floor additions of an entry porch and stairs leading to the new second floor, and a second floor overhang
at the master bedroom. A Variance is requested for the proposed lot coverage of 2,165 SF (43%) where 2,000
SF (40%) is the maximum allowed. The proposed project is 165 SF over the maximum allowable lot coverage.
The neighbors at 615 Lexington Way, behind the subject property, have submitted a letter and a photograph for
the Commission's review (refer to attachments dated June 3, 2015). All other Zoning Code requirements have
been met. The applicant is requesting the following applications:
■ Design Review for a second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010 (a) (2)); and
■ Variance for lot coverage (C.S. 25.54.020).
616 Vernon Way
Lot Area: 5.000 SF
SETBACKS
Front (1st flr):
(2nd flr):
EXISTING
15'-0"
PROPOSED
19'-6"
31'-5"
Side (left): ; 4'-6" No change
(right): ; 2'-10"' No change
Plans date stamped: May 8, 2015
ALLOWED/REQ'D
17'-11"
20'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
Design Review and Variance 616 Vernon Way
EXISTING PROPOSED ' ALLOWED/REQ'D
Rear (1st flr): :. 12'-6" 2 No change 15'-0"
(2nd flr): --- 21'-1" 20'-0„
__ . _ _ _._ g -- _.. _. . _. _ .
Lot Covera e: . 2 055 SF 3 , 2,157 SF 4 2,000 SF
41% 43% 40%
_ . _...._.. __ . _ _
FAR. ; 2,090 SF 2,700 SF 2,700 SF 5
' 0.42 FAR 0.44 FAR 0.44 FAR
# of bedrooms: ' 2 4 ---
Parking: : 1 covered ; 1 covered
(10' x 18') No change (10' x 20')
0 uncovered 6 1 uncovered
(9' x 20')
Height: ' 16'-4" 26'-3" 30'-0"
DH Envelope: ! --- complies CS 25.26.075
' Existing, non-conforming right side setback.
Z Existing, non-conforming rear setback.
' Existing, non-conforming lot coverage (does not include accessory structure in rear yard).
4 Variance required for 43% lot coverage where 40°/o lot coverage is the maximum allowed (C.S. 25.54.020).
5 (0.32 x 5,000 SF) + 1100 SF= 2,700 SF (0.44 FAR).
6 Existing, non-conforming number of parking spaces (2 spaces required where 1 space exists).
Staff Comments: See attached memos from the Chief Building Official, Fire Division, Engineering Division,
Parks Division, and Stormwater Division. Planning Staff would note that there are additional Parks Division
comments that must be addressed by the applicant before this project can go fonnrard for an action hearing.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the
Council on April 20, 1998 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.
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 properry 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;
-2-
Design Review and Variance 616 Vernon Way .
(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
and potential uses of properties in the general vicinity.
Erika Lewit
Senior Planner
c. Jerry Deal, applicant
Attachments:
Application to the Planning Commission
Variance Form
Staff Comments
Letter and photgraph from the neighbors at 615 Lexington Way, date stamped June 3, 2015 (3 pages)
Photographs of Neighborhood
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed May 29, 2015
Aerial Photo
-3-
� City of Burlingame
Planning Division
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
Project Address: 616 Vernon Way
Application: Design Review for first and second story additions
Date of Review: 7.7.15
Lot Area: 5,000 SF
1. Design Review (Code Section 25.57.010)
• Proposed addition is subject to design review- application submitted.
2. Setbacks (Code Section 25.26.072)
Front (1st flr)
(2nd flr):
Existing '
__ _
24'-9"
(Garage): ' 15'-0" * :
_.. __ _ .
Side (leftj: ' 4'-6" ;
(right): ': 2'-10�� "
_ .. __ _ _ _
Rear(1stflr): ; 12'-6"'
(2nd flr): '; ___
Proposed
_ _ ___ , . _ _.
23'-7"
31'-4 Yz "
No change
Zoning: R-1
AllowedlRequired
17'-11" (is the block average)
20'-0"
25'-0"
No change ',
No change '
__ _ : _ __
No change
21'-1"
4'-0"
4'-0"
15'-0"
20'-0"
* Existing, non-conforming setbacks to the first floor at the right side and the rear and to the face of the
single-car garage door.
• The proposed project complies with setback requirements.
3. Lot Coverage (Code Section 25.26.065)
40% x 5,000 SF = 2000 SF inaximum allowed
_ _ _ __ _
_
_
Existing Proposed Allowed/Required
_ __ _ __ _
_ _ _
_.__.
Lot Coverage: : 2055 SF ; 2055 SF 2000 SF
j 41% � , 43% 40%
_. __ _ _ __ _ !.
' Existing, non-conforming lot coverage. The original house and attached garage constructed on site exceed
current code maximums for lot coverage.
4. Floor Area Ratio (Code Section 25.26.070)
(0.32 x 5000 SF) + 1100 += 2700 SF inaximum allowed (0.54 FAR)
_ _ _. _ _
_
Existing Proposed Allowed/Required
__ _
_ __ __ _
Floor Area Ratio: 2090 SF 2626 SF : 2700 SF '
: 0.42 FAR 0.53 FAR ' 0.54 FAR
__ __ _ _ __
1
� � City of Burlingame
Planning Division
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
• The proposed project complies with floor area ratio regulations (calculations are attached).
5. Building Height (Code Section 25.26.060)
Average top of curb: (16.46' + 15.71')/2 = 16.09'
Existing: 16.09'+ 16.35' = 32.44' (16'-4" above average top of curb)
P�oposed: 16.09'+ 26.25' = 42.34' (26'-3" above average top of curb)
Allowed: 16.09'+ 30' = 46.09' (30'-0" above average top of curb)
• The proposed project complies with overall building height regulations.
6. Declining Height Envelope (DHE) (Code Section 25.26.075)
Points of Departure - Left Side: (16.79' + 17.65')/2 = 17.22'
- Right Side: (16.57' + 17.44')/2 = 17.01'
• The proposed project complies with declining height envelope regulations.
7. Parking (Code Section 25.70.030)
2 bedrooms existing, 4 bedrooms proposed.
Existing: 1 covered (10' x 18') + 0 uncovered (only 17'-2" to the inside edge of the sidewalk) "
Proposed: no change
Required: 1 covered (10' x 20') + 1 uncovered (9' x 20')
` Exis4ing, non-conforming parking (2 spaces required, 1 of which must be covered, where 1 covered space
and no uncovered spaces exist). The on-site parking requirement is not being increased with the proposed
number of bedrooms
• Project complies with on-site parking requirements.
8. Accessory Structure (Code Section 25.60.010)
The existing detached 144 SF (8' x 18') shed in the rear yard has no record of permits. This structure is not
included in the existing lot coverage calculations unless a record of permits can be provided this Division.
Please contact Erika Lewit if you have questions regarding these plan check comments:
elewitCa�burlinqame.orq or (650) 558.7254
E
y City of Burlingame
Planning Department
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
Job Address: 616 Vernon Way
Job Description: Design Review for first and second story addition
Date: 4.23.15
Calculations �o-} S�'Le = S� X i Oo =>, ��j �_�_� __ —�_,
�Icrt covc,-� ya/�' x 5,��� - 2,000 � -�d��,�ta � Zg'� �,
�-�c9 �.
�E�M�� Shad rez✓ Yav� (Q�� I�� = I`i�(,d `s�. � loo� C�O�" 'S ✓
��i ,(� �
hc� w5e— ( � 5 il'►d'6"i =[9� �•S �� S�� 1Lil
f l5 �I(��'x Hi �1 ", = "1"_5�' ' � ��w S�4d<< S ��'S"xa� _ -�- �i' U �, .
'� '�CD, � �rJ
� 3 �Ca' � n f O � = 3 � , Q � � e r h 'a-�'�--�( \ 1( '� � � � �
.� �, , � P� � �.. C s� ► ��h r� ��� = � 0 2� •S .�
o .� �� �o�c1n - 52.5`'
cod. o� c,t� (`'i1"�33'/o"i = 2�3•`�
� c 5 � � � x � � = 5g � �_�,� 3 �--s . 3 �
. , ,i.2
(q��-, ��i'�''� = 38•0 �' � v
L 0
��,,, a� (►��,�,, ,���i•8�> = 3�-5.3 cv�b�� 13 0
2 l�I.�l �t �h� h a s
c�Ve�r b�j
ho �e °."',� - , � �
' H 1(�5
� �na+ �ciJni2 � /c7;S
; .; . `' , . . . . V ehisi'�� 2; l+�r � Z.O��
V
�bo� A��a R�� 32�'o x 5,� -� I►�o = Z,� oo�h %D�SH
I- -_ _ --- � - --- —�---
� ���j c� .�o� c h e.2c er►-��t-
�Ex�Sk,) �o-� c�� 2.t�L°� � �,, e �,r,cc '
� � .�,�����.- — 8 �q � '� �-S. 3
._ CD'y pp r c.b� ' � O Z� � � �4 � — -- - � �, . Gj
'6
IUO �� �Jle•�" � ! `'� � �oa /
���5 X �Q�3��� � � � � 0
2-O�t'O � t2�q�-X Ic�'�''� yS�H
U� �t2-- F�� �3-g �� x 2-���1 g.c�
�3.�,, x ����� 1 2�, o
1��9" x`� "�'"� ��I� �3
2''� -���� 3�b�, c� �SH�
� �-o ��t
2 �cx� �j � 0,5 �1 � ,h� .