HomeMy WebLinkAbout716 Vernon Way - Staff ReportCity of Burlingame
Desigii Review, Parking Variance aiad Special Permit
Item # 2a
Consent Calendar
Address: 716 Vernon Way Meeting Date: 9/13/04
Request: Design review, parking variance and special permit for a basement, first and second story
addition.
Applicant and Architect: John Stewart, Stewart Associates APN: 029-171-490
Property Owners: Jeff and Jennifer Castello Lot Area: 5000 SF
General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1
CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exenlpt per Section: 15301 Class 1(e)(2) - additions to
existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 SF in areas
where all public services and facilities are available and the area in which the project is located is not
environmentally sensitive.
Summary: The existing single story house, with an attached one-car garage, contains 1,415 SF (0.28
FAR) of floor area and has three bedrooms. The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing first
floor, add a 759.5 SF second floor at the rear of the house and a 622 SF basement. With the proposed
addition, the floor area will increase from 1,415 SF (0.28 FAR) to 2,697 SF (0.54 FAR) where 2,700
SF (0.54 FAR) is the maximum allowed (proposed is 3 square feet less than the maximwn FAR). The
proposed 622 SF basement is exempt from floor area since it complies with basement criteria (C.S.
25.08.265, b2, b3E).
With this project, the number of bedrooms will increase from three to four. One covered (10' x 20')
and one uncovered (9' x 20') parking space is required a four bedroom house. The existing attached
one-car garage is substandard in width (8'-6"W x 17'-6"D clear interior dimensions). An existing
chimney encroaches into the required parking space by 1'-6" on the left side. With the remodeling, the
applicant is proposing to increase the covered parking space length from 17'-6" to 20' where 20' is the
minimum required, but there is no change proposed to the 8'-6" parking space width. A parking
variance for substandard covered parking space width is required (8'-6" width proposed where 10' is
required). One uncovered 9' x 20' parking space is provided in the driveway.
The applicant is also proposing a 622 SF basement at the rear of the house. Because the finished floor
above the basement is less than two feet above existing grade, all of the basement area is exempt from
the floor area calculation (CS 25.08.265, b, 2 and b, 3, E). A special permit is required for the
basement because it has a ceiling height greater than 6'-6" (10'-0" ceiling height proposed) (CS
25.28.035, fl. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The following applications are
required:
• Design review for a first and second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010, a, 5);
• Parking variance for substandard covered parking space width (8'-6" proposed where 10'-0" is
required) (C.S. 25.70.020, 2);
■ Special permit for basement ceiling height (10'-0" ceiling height proposed where 6'-6" is the
maximum height allowed) (C.S. 25.28.035, �; and
■ Special permit for a direct exit from a basement to the exterior of the structure other than a light
or window well (C.S. 25.28.035, g).
Design Review, Parking Vm�iance rn2d Special Pe�mit
Table 1— 716 Vernon Way
716 Vernor: Way
L
ot Area: 5,000 SF (50' x 100')
EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ�D ,
SETBACKS: '!
_.. _... _._ _. _ _ _..
Front (1s`flr): 15'-6" 17'6° (to porch) 16'-10" (avg.)
�2„a flr�: � --- , 35'-9" 20'
__ _ __ :
Side (left): ! 3' -0" 7'-7" 4'-0"
(right): ' 4' -0" ' 4'-0" 4'-0"
_
Rear (IS`flr): 29'-2" 28'-0" 15'-0"
�2„d flY�: ' --- 30'-0" 20'-0��
_ _
Lot Coverage: 1,415 SF 1,992 SF 2,000 SF
28.30% 39.80% 40%
_ _ _ __ ... _ _
FAR: 1,415 SF 2,697 SF 2,700 SF
0.28 FAR 0.54 FAR 0.54 FAR'
_ _ . _ _ : __..... __...;
# of bedrooms: i 3 4 ---
_. _. _ _.... . _ . . _: _._.... _... _
Parki�tg: ' 1 covered 1 covered 1 covered
�s�-6��w X i��-6�� D)� (s�-6��w X 2o�D�3 �io� X 20�)
1 uncovered 1 uncovered 1 uncovered
(9' x 20') (9' x 20') (9' x 20')
_ ___ __ .
Building He�gl:t: 25'-4" 25'-10" 30'-0"
_. _ . _..
DHE�ivelope: complies complies CS 25.28.075
' (0.32 x 5000 SF) + 1100 SF = 2700 SF (0.54 FAR)
Z Existing nonconforming covered parking space length and width (8' -6" X 17'-6" existing where 10'
X 20' is required).
' Parking variance for covered parking space width (8'-6" proposed where 10' is required).
Staff Comments: The applicant has obtained a tree removal permit to remove the existing Norfolk
Island Pine (29.3-inch diameter) as well as the Southern Magnolia (20.03-inch diameter). A copy of
the arborist report (date stamped June 30`h, 2004) and the approved Protected Tree Removal Permit
Application (dated July 215t, 2004) are included in the staff report. See attached.
Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on August
23, 2004, the Commission had several comments regarding both side elevations (August 23, 2004,
Planning Commission Minutes). The Commission inoved to place this item on the consent calendar
after the architect has responded to their comments. The applicant submitted a revised site plan, first
and second story floor plans, elevations and a landscape plan, date stamped September 1, 2004 (sheets
A1, A3, A6 and L1.0) to address the Commission's concerns. The following are comments made by
2
Design Review, Parking Va��iance and Special Permit
the Commission with applicant's responses:
716 Verno�x Way
1. Co�icern with tlae privacy of the neighbors and tlie lack of detail aloizg bot/z side elevations.
Suggestioizs to break up side elevatio�Zs iTzcluded adding a trellis witlz vines, addi�rg windows
along tlie garage wall and extendi�zg the stone veneer further along tlze sides toward tlze rear of
tlie property.
The architect revised the site plan and side elevations to show an extension of the stone veneer
along the left side of the house to the redwood side gate, a new window along the garage area
on the right side of the house and a new redwood trellis with vines on the right side of the
house.
2. A fe�ice along the riglit l:and side of tlze property would visually break up tlie side elevation.
• The revised site plan shows a new redwood fence with gate entrances along both sides of the
property.
3. A landscape pla�z sl:ould be subinitted as part of t)ze resub�nittal.
A separate landscape plan was submitted which reflects changes in the original tree species
proposed along the rear property line.
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: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Commission's August
23, 2004 design review study meeting, and that the addition is designed to preserve the character of the
existing house, the project is found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's five design
review guidelines.
Required Findings for Variance: In order to grant a parking variance for substandard covered
parking space width (8'-6" proposed where 10'-0" is required), the Planning Commission must find that
the following conditions exist on the property (C.S. 25.70.020, 2):
3
Design Review, Parkz�ng Varia�zce and Special Permit 716 Vernon Way
(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.
Variance Findings for Parking Space Width: The existing attached garage meets the dimensional
requirements (10 feet) for width except in an area 1.5 feet wide by 4.25 feet long where the chimney
projects into the garage. This is an existing condition and a car can be parked in the required space.
Based on these findings, and the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Commission's
August 23, 2004, design review study meeting, the project is found to be compatible with the variance
criteria listed above.
Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a special permit for basement ceiling height and for a
direct exit from a basement to the exterior of the structure other than a light or window well, 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 characteristics 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 line, 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 footprint 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.
Special Permit Findings:
Basement Ceiling Height: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning
Commission's August 23, 2004, design review study meeting and that despite the interior ceiling
height of 10' the proposed basement is less than 2'-0" above adjacent grade, and for that reason does
4
Design Review, Parking Variance anrl Special Permit
716 Vernon Way
not add to the mass of the structure and is not visible from the street, the project is found to be
compatible with the special permit criteria listed above.
Direct Exit from a Basement: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning
Commission's August 23, 2004 design review study meeting and that the exit and the stairwell are
entirely below grade and not visible from the street (the only portion of the exit that will be seen from
adjacent properties is the railing and gate surrounding the stairwell), the project is found to be
compatible with the special permit criteria listed above.
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 parking variance. The
reasons for any action should be clearly stated 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 Department date
stamped July 20, 2004, sheets A2 and A4-A5, and date stamped September 1, 2004, sheets A1,
A3, A6 and L1.0; and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require
and amendment to this permit;
2. that any changes to the size ar envelope of the first or second floors, which would include
adding or enlarging a dormer(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 certification 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 Building
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
permit 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 if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the parking vanance
5
Design Review, Parking Variance and Special Permit
here will become void;
716 Vernon Way
8. that the conditions of the City Engineer's, Chief Building Official's and Fire Marshal's July 6`h
memos, the Recycling Specialist's July 7`h, 2004 memo, and the City Arborist's July 215t, 2004
memo, shall be met;
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 applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and
11. 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.
Erica Strohmeier
Zoning Technician
c. John Stewart (Stewart Associates), applicant and architect
�