The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About125 Bloomfield Road - Staff Reportf/Y ��`/fy� �l/1u./ . . V _._"-_"_' ITEM City of Burlingame Special Permit to expand primary unit Address: 123-125 Bloomfield Road Meeting Date: 11/14/94 Request: Special permit to expand the primary residential unit on a R-1 property with two units (CS 25.50.025). Applicant: Philip Wilkinson Property Owner: John Steiner Lot Dimensions and Area: 50 x 150, 7500 SF General Plan: Low density residential Adjacent Development: single family residential APN: 029-272-090 Zoning: R-1 CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 - Class 1(e) Additions to existing structures provided that the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50 % of the floor area of the structures before the addition or 2500 SF, whichever is less. Project Summary: Philip Wilkinson, applicant, is requesting a special permit to expand a non-conforming use at 123-125 Bloomfield Road, zoned R-1. The use at the site is non-conforming because there are two single family dwellings where the zoning only allows one single family dwelling. Code section 25.50, non-conforming uses and structures, allows expansion of the primary non- conforming residence upon approval of a special permit (CS 25.50.025). Due to its size, the residence known as 125 Bloomfield has been determined to be the primary residence at this site. The site is also non-conforming because parking does not meet cunent code requirements for number of stalls and covered parking. Presently, there is no covered parking on site. However, there is a curbcut and non-conforming 6'-6" driveway. The City's records show that at one time there was a 16' x 17' garage located at the end of this driveway.' It is not known when the garage was demolished. This primary house (125 Bloomiield, the northerly structure) is cunently 1031 SF and has three bedrooms. Its main floor level is 5' above grade. The structure has two stories at the front of the house. The right side setback to the structure is non-conforming, but the non-conformity would not be extended (1'-6" setback where 4'-0" is required). The applicant is proposing to demolish the exisdng 140 SF kitchen at the rea.r of the structure and build a 918 SF, two story addition. Living area would increase to 1809 SF and a 200 SF carport would be added. The main floor level at the rear would be extended to provide a 459 SF kitchen and family room area (18' x 25.5'). A 459 SF floor would be built below this first floor extension, creating a split-level home. A portion of this lower floor would be 2.5' below grade. 1This parking conformed to code at the time these structures were built, but does not conform to current code. Although the entire parking situation does not have to be brought to conformity with these improvements, the applicant must at least provide the one covered parking space which existed at this site (CS 25.70.030). SPECIAL PERMIT TO EXPAND PRIMARY UNIT 125 BLOOMFIELD ROAD 1'he area below the first floor extension would have a concrete slab, 8'-0" ceiling height and would provide a laundry/mechanical room and a workshop/storage area. The workshop/storage room was considered a bedroom for pazking calculation purposes. In this case, one covered parking space must be provided because of the increase in the number of bedrooms. The applicant is providing a 10' x 20' carport. The second space serving this site would remain in the driveway. It is uncovered and in tandem. The second unit (123 Bloomfield) has two bedrooms and is approximately 936 SF. There are no alterations proposed to this structure. Front setback: Side (left): Side (right): Rear: Lot Coverage: FAR: (not applicable) Parking: * Height: DH Envelope: Accessory structures: PROPOSED 23'-3" no change 4'-6" . . 28.9 % (2167 SF) 3169 SF/.422 1 covered + 1 uncov. in driveway 15'-0" meets requirements none EXISTING 20'-0" 3'-0" 1'-6" 98'-3" 22 % (1648 SF) 2191 SF/.292 2 uncovered in driveway 27' n/a n/a MAXIMUM ALLOWED/REQ'D 15'/average 4'-0" 4'-0" 15'-0"-20'-0" 40 % (3000 SF) 3900 SF/.52 4 spaces, 3 must be covered 30'/2'h stories see code n/a Meets all other zoning code requirements. Staff Comments: The City Planner noted the carport roof must be solid to be considered covered parking. The Chief Building Inspector noted that if a solid roof is required by Planning, the roof must be Class B fire radng or better. The Associate Engineer noted the front property line is located 2' from from the back of sidewalk. The Fire Marshal had no comments. /ss cc: Philip D. Wilkinson, applicant 7ohn Steiner, property owner Barbara Steiner et al tr, property owners of record w 2 . �_ _____-�-��-_�-i�--______ 1-��-- 1 1 �� .,(�,� �.. -----------� --�-� `� —_ --,--- -- -_ _ _ - -- _ - ---- ----- -- -- _ - . . ---- -- l\ _ �/.� k h,� Q� /�,,^n.� _ U.__ - l�`.� 9 J " `-'V�/�-�_.._ _. . . - ^-- _ — f `'�-�i — �-�"-, l_�-�-L-...L-�--�.-� C� - ----_.--�(��;�-c.%L► � � c�-- ��.�a n-�: - - ---- - -- - ---- -- - _ - -- � �� (� ------ --- U . ---- _ _ _ � ��^--c�-1 c��_ _ _ �'��,".,� -_��_ _ — ��=�-�-- ` ,�t,�� . - , � --- ---- --- - - �'�. -- - c� �-�'--r��---- - �'�-t�L�.<..--- �- ---�'- _ � _ _ -- - -- -r-- -- -- -- - --�� --- c�-� � ---��-- �,, ��4----��.--------- -- — C�CS�t�s � h��'� o�- �- — ---------- - ---- -- -- - --�°�� :�----- � = � - � ---��-- -r�� _ , ^ - --_ _ ��_� r�� -. ��-�_�--_--- -_--__ __ �� _ . � � � � �� - _- �---i � � ,� --- - - _ __ m �' � �� u � n �-,__ — �� ? - .. _ �� ..--.��ar�-y�.., -�-�� =��- -��,��-- ' . � _. _ _ - ------ - v�^�}'- - - - �- — - � � - -'�-�' --� � -- -- -�'' ��-'-"�" - �/ �� - _ -/ . __�-� �-�^'---�� - — - -- - . -1-�--� —��--.-(�.nti�,�' - --�---�y�� 1_I�c'L��-�-�( - -�--�--�-_- -� �-i� - ---{�2s G��" -- -- - - __ _ _�-.'- c_ _ ` _- `� , _ _ - - --- \- -- ---- � Z _ - -� -------- ��,�--��`'`'` - � c'� ��ti--�,�- . b _____ __ �..�_ __-__ �,,�,_��__��. �-�� ---� � �� __ �.�- -��_____ _ _ _ _��L�� _ _ . _ � __ _--�-r��, '� ' - ��'- - ��---- - - -- -----�- - �-- ��. _ Z-►_ �.��x-� - �e.�-�� ,�--� ; � � � - - - __ _ _ _ _ _ ��.�- - � �.� � �-- __ _ - - _ __ __ _ �-_c�--- --_--��% `-�,— �. �i�_ __��-��, ?r -- -_ , � Z �' � �, �.. _ --- - --. c � � � —�� -��---�� (o _c _c�_ � - - _ _ �' _..___-__- i=-__ __. ..__. . -- _. _ .�_._ _ _. . _ . _ .. . _ _ _ _ _ ' ___'__ - ___. _-___. - _- ___'_"- '- --- _ -___ . . __ ��il-c.��/2� -- �— ---- ----- ---- ----- — I ,� - � - -- _ '�-�C/� __ - --- - - ��J � � � -_ _ �`�`}��--c- - --- - ` ., _ Yl�ti . .S __ �i'-�=-- - - -�- _ __-- - - --- - --�-- --- - — --- _ - . -- - -�--- - �- - - �� --`�- - t ` -' ---� -- -f�- - �--� `�-�-�t i . c 1 � . / ,� 1 ., „ . ,.� , f, � )1 D , _r:CJ� r" �� ~�� -- - _ - - -- - ---C-J- Gv � __ _--- ------ ----- � !1✓1/L - — � � �'�-'7 �-_ ��- _ _ — -- ----�'�'_✓_G��'?'�-�-�- - _ , 1��0 �I�,.-v �% i� J:___ _ . - �--- - --��"`�'- - �" - -�-"—_—t� L�{-•�'t'-L! __ � �f,�S�,c,,�-y �' �1� � --,.�i��1.,-'i, �-1 ---- - '/ �� -_—_�l J --- ��/�,__ __`��"_-' � �,�-- - -- l -- j) ---- --- -- -- - — -- . __ � �� - - - �--c�---�-1 �- -- - - �� -- �- �- - - 'f�� _ ____ __ __ _ ___ __ _ ____ ____ � � - - c.,�,�-�'-c'� ____ _ _ __ _ ---- _ __ ��.�}'_�� %` - ---4�- l'�_�J_. � -i=�' .------ - - � ��f _. .. ��/" !.._��- r . . . . .. . . . _ . _ _." -.... _. MEMORANDUM FROM : _ �/"�/f'� I �/ To: Pl�t� J FIRM/PHONE NUMBER: SUBJECT ADDRESS: TELEPHONE CONVERSATION TOPIC: CITY OF BURLINGAME - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 (4 15) 696-7250 PLAN COMM. STAFF MTG. COUNTER COMMENTS COMMENTS COMMENTS OTHER: �vi's�d , , ., ��Y DATE : �O� Z-¢ �� o� 3l� 8 - �� : %��DYJ �lll�1.GY' � � :\memorand.frm U7'' G)G�YGt G� , `� � CITY OF BIIRLINGAME PLANNING COMMIS3ION j 2� �I' /�'/�'"� /��/ - a r 7 � , i. / _ /� APPLICATION SIIBMITTAL RE UIREMENTS �^��(��f �%� �'j�-y�� U Applications to the Plnnning Commisaion must include certain minimum information bafora a projact can ba CJ,�(�j�`�� schaduled !or a Planning Commission hearing. Tha applicant is responsible !or submittinq this intormation /�/' as listed below, and as ahown on the attached sheet titled Minimum Reauirements for Tn�tial Review. All /7`i �`i,7�j �-7� aubmittals and inlormation muet ba clear, and easily readable. Iaoompl�t� or ill�qibl• information cannot /� � b� aocepte3 aaQ Mill aaue� d�lays in tb� proo�asinq o! th� application. ��% 7,iL,� • ��OMPL•ETED APPL•TCAT?ON FORM with both the applicant'B and property owner's siqnatures. Photocopies or faxed siqnatures cannot be accepted. Application without the property owner's consent to the application cannot be processed. Please write clearly in ink or type the application form. Nota the contact person for the project with an asterisk (*). This would be the one most knowledqeable about the project who can be easily reached by phone during work houra. [ x] gpppLEMENTAL FORM (Varianc Special Permit,�Commarcia�l Applications, Fence Exception, Sign Exception) [] LETTER OF EBPLANATION Can personalize your application to the Planning Commission. � '�- � /� � l � �X � FILINCi FE8 $ �i � �\� Of7RTFTf+LTTf1N oa rRopgRTY OWNERSHIP (if new property owner) [�] RLANB (4 sete at time of submittal; a total of 10 sets will be required befora the project goes to the Planning Commission.) ] 8�" 8 31" REDIICED 6ET OF PLANS (Hillside Area Construction and Minor Modification Permits) 1 set at time of submittal; OTHER SIIBMITTAL REOUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN APPLICATION TYYESi Condominium Permit [ ] Landscape Plan [] Proposed CC & R's - 1 copy [] Tentative Condominium Map Application to be filed with City Engineer. Fence Exaevtion [] Site plan showing location of fence on property. [] Fence elevation with height of fence measured from grade (on both sides of fence) noted on plans. • (4 sets of plans required.initially; an additional 6 sets of plans will be requested at a later date) AccessorY Structures [] Electricity/plumbing/water/sewer connections shown on floor plan, includinq fixtures, (toilets, sinks, showers, etc.) [] Floor plan of any proposed/existing loft/attic area in structure. [] Plate line height and height to peak of roof ineasured from grade shown on elevations of structure. [] Exterior as well as interior dimensions of structure shown on floor plan. Outlined below are ��g plan requirements. Additional 'information may be required Por your particular project. � �j BITB PLAN drawn to scale showing �, existing and proposed structures �` on tha property including, but not limited to, the followinq: 1. lot dimensions 2. diatanca between structures 3. setbacka 4. dimensione of structures � 3.- elevations at followinq locations for second story residential additions: a. top of curb in front of property corners; b. finished iloor at entry relative to top of curb; c. the property corners; d. the points where the 15' front and rear setbacks intersect with the side property lines; 6. dimenaions of parking spaces and back-up aisles 7. driveway width 8. landscaped areas and walkways 9. curb, gutter and sidewalk [X � FLOOR PLANS ehowing existinq and proposed floor layouts. Partial floor / v g�ans are not acceotable Floor plans should show the following: 1. Overall building and individual room dimensions. 2. All rooms identified. . 3. Window and door locations. ] BIIILDiNO ELEVATIONS showing the following: 1. All existing and proposed exterior building elevations, including all windows, doors and roof pitches. 2. Heiqht from qrade of finished first floor, top of second story plate line and top of roof ridge. 3. Averaqe elevation at top of curb & elevation at building location. 4. Declining Heiqht Envelope notation if project involves a second story addition in an R-1 or R-2 zoninq district. 5. Elevations o! adjacent houses at top of curb, ground floor and top of second story plate line. Commercial Aovlioationa [] Identify all tenant spaces on the property and provide a list of the other tenants as well as amount of area leased, type of business, hours of operation and number o! employees. [ J Amount and layout of on-site parking and any existing designations of parkinq apaces. FILINd FEES Below is a list of processinq fees for the most common application types. For a complete listinq of fees, reference Resolution No. 25-91, adopted February 20, 1991. VARIANCEi R-1 anc�&r2--d�stricts, $100.00; all others $150.00 SPECIAL PERMIT: $800.00 CONDOMINIDM PERMIR4-Residential: $100; Comm.$150; Conversion $150+ FENCE EBCEPTION: R-1 & R-2 districts, $100; all others $150 SIGN E%CEPTIONS $150.00 AMENDMENTB TO PERMITSi $100.00 AMBIGIIITY HEARINGBi S100.00 REZONING: $200.00p GENERAI. PLAN AMENDMENT: $200.00 M2NOR MODIFICAT HILLBIDE AREA CONSTRIICTION PERMIT: $100.00 INITIAL STODY $50� � CATEGORICAL E ION: $2 � NEGATIVB DEC.t $100) NEG.DEC. W/RESYONSIHLE AGENCY: $500 FIBH i GAMS FEESs Negative Dec. $1,250; EIR $850; COIINTY: $25 PIIHLIC NOTICEs R-1 & R-2, -$35;�'All others $60; Aillside Area Construction and Minor Modification Permits ; EIR $300; Rezone.$300 ctmm �a.FRM II2519t [] eIT$ eECTION(81 showing property linea, buildinq(s) on adjacent aites, roof ridqe lines and siqht linea (for existing and proposed buildinga). 0 � � � �iI ��+7 1 DATE : � � � � �� TO: � CITY ENGINEER CHIEF BIIILDING INSPECTOR FIRE MARSHAL PARRB DIRECTOR � CITY ATTORNEY FROM: SUBJECT: � AT CITY PLANNER/ZONING TECHNICIAN REQIIEST FOR Q�C,� � C�-��I�l � 1 �� u�i.��. (� ��m�� SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION �-MEETING: ��I� REVIEWED BY STAFF IN MEETING ON MONDAY : ��, �-�'_ �� i r THANKS, Jane/Sheri/Leah I� �G�(� �" Date of Comments . �-.--_ � �; ��z-� � � �'� ;� ��.�.: ; � � K.G � � � e � � �-��u� 1. ��-P� � .�, . � ��y-�-� � . +�, -fc�,�..��f' z wt-�C�.�'�s ha,.,�.��;-a �� , � , ,� --�,k �- ��`11.+�- � 1( -I� _ --f',,,t�- � �ti�,l'� 'S -� � � � O ��J , �l2ia C� u-el Gl //�'G�� -z S'G�'jzc�' i�� V �..f - -� � (' (� p p �;E,�a�, �C , � ✓`a �r � � � t�,�-- w�2.-'1 �o eK.s o�C � �v�.�z�t ��,cs�.q �, � �� J -�-� ,� c.� � � �� r G�. t �V� � �N��l`�Ill�� w l. � � �� - � � �� —_ , c�_ �.�� Cs�.�.�.-� �._;e__. �`�'`�,``'-� c� � � �� _ ��c, C�' ) �:�.. �� . � � �� c �--� a�oo�. �,e�� d . l �- S �3l001•,�,� (d l� d . x� y o �;• T b , � ,.yy ..�, • � ' C.� � '��7 � � ' � ; f".. n J,- . � �, � �l � ` • b� � �;, ,3rn w rn 4n,�'QW� � �„� .� `� � � � ` ' n � C r� Q w f�l - �,-� �1 � � � '_'. �; C7 � � N �� -� a � � U r � J _ � 1� �, o,. �) �r� C:ITY OT Y�'�` V/ , I ��G�E THE CITY OF BURLINGAME CONSTRUCTION PERMIT # 9404777 ' �PIRATION DATE: PARCEL NUMBER: 29-272-090 APPLICATION DATE: 10/18/94 Application Recvd By: ANTHONY BOUTTE Permit Issue Date: Permit Issued By: JOB ADDRESS 125 BLOOMFIELD ROAD PROPERTY OWNER STEINER BARBARA TR ET AL 2014 RAY DR BURLINGAME, CA 94010 CONTRACTOR CALic # 593759 WILCO CONSTRUCTION 222 SANTIAGO AVE REDWOOD CITY CA 415-386-9565 BusLic# 11161 WCExpDate Lic Class: B ■=Read & Understand. �=Initial (!) or check this line as appropriate. ARCHITECT/DESIGNER ENGINEER TENANT AS4-BGBLDPRMT Rev 8(94 �=Sign the Bottom Line; Sign others when applicable. ■ 0�1�NER-BUILDER: I hereby affirm that I am exempt fmm the Contractor's License Law for the following reaeon [§7031.5 Business & Professions Code: Any city or co�uiry �vhich requires a pernrit lo cons(ruct, al[er, improve, denwlish, or repair any structure, prior to its issuance also requires the applicant for such pernut !o ftle a signed slurenunr lhal he/she is licensed pursuan! to the provisio�u of the s1a1e Contractor's license Law, Chapter 9, com»tencing with �7000 of Division 3 of the Business & Professions Code, or t/:at he/she is erempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violalion oj §7031.5 by any app[icanl far a pernur subjects this applicmit ra a civi! penally of nat more thmt,five hundred dollars (.$500J]: •�! I, ae O�i'NER of the property, or my employees - with wagea as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale [§7044, Business & Professions Code: 7iie Contractor's L,Ice�ue Law does not apply �o an OWNER of property who builds or improves rhereon, and who does such ��rk him/herse(f or through his/her own employees, provided thnt t/ie stracrure �vifh such improvemenu is not inlended or offered for sale. /j, however, the building or improvement is sold within one ytar of romplerion, the OWNER-BUlLIJIX will have the burden of proving lhat he/she did not build or improve for 1he purpose oJsalt]. •'�! I, ae OWNER of the property, am exclusively contracGng with licensed Contractore to coustruct the project [§7044 Business & Professions Code: 7he Contractor's I.icense Lax� does not apply to an OWNER of property who bui[ds or improves thereon, and who contracts far such work with Contractor(s) licensed pursuant m die Caitrnctor's L,lcense Law.] Each such Contractor must obwin a City Business License. •�! I am eaempt under California Business & Pmfessions Code � for the following reason: !� SignaWre: Date: � 11'ORKERS COM£ENSATION: � I HEREBY CERTIFY that io the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall NOT employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers Compensation Law of California. -OR- I hereby affirm that I have: � a ceRifica[e of Workers Compensation Insurance, or � a certifica[e of consen[ to self-insure. And thar. Q a cenified copy is hereby Curnishecl, � a ceRired copy has been filed prcviously with the I3urlingame Building Depaetment. [§3800, Lab CJ � Signature: ■"�-! NOTICE TO APPLICANT ON CIiANGES TO EMYLOYEE STATUS DURING PROJECT: If, aher making this Certificate of Exemption from ihe Workers Compensation Law of California, your employees should become subject to said Law, you must forthwith and immediately comply with said Law by providing a ceRiGcate of Workers Compensation Insurance ar self-insurance to the Burlingame Building Depanment, or this pemtit shall be deemed revoked. Failure to comply may subject you to work stoppage, additional fees, etc. as provided by Title 18, Durlingame Municipal C«ic and state laws. ■`_-! [ UriDERSTAND tha[ all work to be performed under lhis permit shall be comple[ec1 within the time limit set forth above herein (Expiration llate). "1'his permit becomes null and void at the end of the Expiration Date unless all work has been complcted and Fival Inspection approval has been given and re:corded by the City on the project Inspection Record card, unless an extension of time has becn specifically applied for by the permittee and approved by the City Building Official. Thc application for this extension must bc submitted in writing prior to the permit Expiratio¢ Da[e. An expired permit shall be re�laced with a new permi[ prior to continuation of work. The new percnit will reyuire compliance with all codes and laws, and payment of all fees, in c(fect a[ the time of the new application. ■''-•'.! I CERTIFY that I have read this application and state that the information given is true and correct, 1 agre<: to comply with all local ordinances and state laws relating [o building construction, and I make this statement and agreement under penalty of law. I understand that aIl work performed under this permit must bc inspc;ctecl by the City, and the inspection recorded on the project Inspection Record card, prior to the work being covered or conccalcd. I hereby au�horizc representativcs of the City to enter upon thc above men[ioned propeRy for iospection purposes. Requests for inspcctions shall bc madc by 4:00 PM at least one working day prior to need. �-� Signature: Date: (] Contractor [] Agent for Contractor [] Owner [] Agent focOwncr � 1 OF BURLINGAME 125 BLOOMFIELD ROAD Type of Permit: 434 ALTERATION - All Residential Bldgs � Description of Work: TWO-STORY ADDITION AT REAR OF EXISTING DWELLING. PERMIT 9404777 (incl Decks - new/ Type of Construction: VN Type V Non Rated Occupancy Group: R3 Dwelling/Congregate Residnce/Lodging Hse/Dwellg use Use Zone: R1 Flood Zone: N New: No. Bedrooms Added: Add: X No. of Stories: 2 Alter: No. of Units: Repairs: Valuation: $80,000 Demolish: Historic: N Total New Sq.Ft.: 0 Unreinforced Masonry: Schl Tax New Sq.Ft.: 0 Hillside Prmt Area: N Lot Size-Sq.ft: Bay front Devlopmnt Area: Handicap Access Required: Prop Line Survey Date: ** F E E S U M M A R Y ** ITEM NAME CODE AMOUNT ITEM NAME CODE Building Permit Electrical Permit Plumbing Permit Mechanical Permit Plan Check Fee Zoning PC/Sign Fee Public Works Fee Microfilm Fee Bay Front Dev Fee Parking Permit Fee Deposit Trust Amt Sewer Connec.t Fee High School Tax ** GRAND TOTAL: $549.49 AMOUNT PAID: $549.49 AMOUNT DUE: $.00 85 86 87 88 89 84 91 92 93 95 96 97 78 357.17 .00 Elem School Tax Energy PC Fee ° Access PC Fee Seismic Fee 77 73 72 75 AMOUN7 192.32 . �' /' � ��,�,�t.�" I% . ,, I'I'EM City of Burlingame Special Permit to expand primary unit Address: 123-125 Bloomfield Road Meeting Date: 11/28/94 Request: Special permit to expand the primary residential unit on a R-1 property with two units (CS 25.50.025). Applicant: Philip Wilkinson APN: 029-272-090 Property Owner: John Steiner Lot Dimensions and Area: 50 x 150, 7500 SF General Plan: Low density residential Zoning: R-1 Ac�jacent Development: single family residential CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 - Class 1(e) Additions to existing structures provided that the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50 % of the floor area of the structures before the addition or 2500 SF, whichever is less. Project Summary: Philip Wilkinson, applicant, is requesdng a special permit to expand a non-conforming use at 123-125 Bloomfield Road, zoned R-1. The use at the site is non-conforming because there aze two single family dwellings where the zoning only allows one single family dwelling. Code section 25.50, non-conforming uses and structures, allows expansion of the primary non- conforming residence upon approval of a special permit (CS 25.50.025). Due to its size, the residence known as 125 Bloomfield has been determined to be the primary residence at this site. The site is also non-conforming because parking does not meet cunent code requirements for both number of stalls and covered parking. Presently, there is no covered parking on site. However, there is a curbcut and non-conforming 6'-6" driveway. The City's records show that at one time there was a 16' x 17' garage located at the end of this driveway.l It is not known when the garage was demolished. This primary house (125 Bloomfield, the northerly structure) is cunently 1255 SF and has three bedrooms. Its main floor level is 5' above grade. The structure has two stories at the front of the house. The right side setback to the structure is non-conforming, but the non-conformity would not be extended (1'-6" setback; cunent code requires 4'-0"). The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing 140 SF kitchen at the rear of the structure and build a 918 SF, two story addition. Living azea would increase to 2033 SF and a 200 SF (10' x 20') carport would be added. The main floor level at the rear would be extended to �This parking conformed to code at the time these structures were built, but dces not conform to current code. Although the entire parking situation dces not have to be brought to conformity with these improvements, the applicant must at least provide the one covered pazking space which existed at this site (CS 25.70.030). � � provide a 459 SF kitchen and family room area (18' x 25.5'). A floor would be built below this first floor extension, creating a split-level home. A portion of this lower floor would be 2.5' below grade. The area below the first floor extension would have a concrete slab, 8'-0" ceiling height and would provide a laundry/mechanical room and a workshop/storage azea. The workshop/storage room was considered a bedroom for parking calculation purposes. In this case, one covered pazking space must be provided because of the increase in the number of bedrooms. The applicant is adding a 10' x 20' carport. The second space serving 125 Bloomfield would remain, uncovered, in the driveway. The second unit (123 Bloomfield) has two bedrooms and is approximately 936 SF. There are no alterations proposed to this structure. Fmnt setback: Side (left): Side (right): Rear: Lot Coverage: (both dwellings) FAR: (not applicable) (both dwellings Parldng: Height: DH Envelope: Accessory structures: PROPOSED 23'-3" no change 4'-6" 81'-9" 28.9 % (2167 SF) 3169 SF/.422 1 covered + 1 uncov. in driveway 15'-0" meets requirements none EXISTING 20'-0" 3'-0" 1'-6" 98'-3" 22 % (1648 SF) 2191 SF/.292 2 uncovered in driveway 27' n/a n/a MAXIMUM ALLOWED/REQ'D 15'/average 4'-0" 4'-0" 15'-0"-20'-0" 40 % (3000 SF) 3900 SF/.52 this application: requires one covered cunent code: 4 spaces, 3 must be covered 30'/21/z stories see code Meets all other zoning code requirements. n/a Staff Comments: The City Planner noted the carport roof must be solid to be considered covered parking. The Chief Building Inspector noted that if a solid roof is required by Planning, the roof must be Class B fire rating or better. The Associate Engineer noted the front property line is located 2' from from the back of sidewalk. The Fire Marshal had no comments. � SPECIAL PERMTl TO EXPAND PRIMARY UNIT 125 BLOOMFIELD ROAD Study Meeting: At their regular meeting on November 14, 1994, Planning Commission asked the applicant to provide a dimensioned elevation of the carport and detailing the roof. The applicant submitted carport elevations, revised elevations of the house, and a clearer copy of the site plan. The carport would have a metal roof which would be concealed by a 2" x 8" wooden facia. The metal roof is has a Class A fire rating. This surpasses the Class B fire rating required by the Chief Building Inspector. The carport would be placed over a new concrete slab. In addition, a new driveway is proposed. The property owner responded to Commission's inquiries with two letters (both dated 11/ 18/94). One letter provides a history of the property. Mr. Steiner notes the property has been in the family for three generations and expresses the property's significance to him and his family. He notes that he chose to use redwood siding (which was more expensive) to maintain the character in the neighborhood. The second letter addresses Planning Commission's inquiries. Regarding conformance to the General Plan and Zoning Code, the applicant notes that the site is lazger than most single family lots and that the units are smaller than most single family dwellings. He also notes the single request before the Planning Commission is the special permit to expand the primary unit and that all other zoning code requirements have been met. The property owner and his family live in the primary unit. The unit at 123 Bloomfield is rented to a San Mateo Police Officer. Addressing why the existing driveway and rear yard could not be used to provide pazking, he notes the existing 6'-3" driveway is uncomfortably narrow to drive a vehicle through. In addition, he notes several lazge trees would ned to be removed to accomodate a garage in the rear yard. Required �ndings 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 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 and potential uses of properties in the general vicinity. Required �ndings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.52.020 a-c): 3 ., �� SPECIAL PERMIT TO EXPAND PRIMARY UNIT l25 BLOOMFIELD ROAD (a) the proposed use, at the proposed location, 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; (b) the proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Burlingame general plan and the purposes of this title; (c) the Planning Commission may impose such reasonable conditions or restrictions as it deems necessary to secure the purposes of this title and to assure operation of the use in a manner compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of existing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity. Planning Commi�cion 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 conditions should be considered: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped November 21, 1994, site plan, house and carport elevations; and other sheets date stamped November 4, 1994 including floor plan, foundation plan, building sections and electrical; 2. that the carport roof shall be of Class B fire rating or better in order to meet the requirements of the Chief Building Inspector's 11/7/94 memo; 3. that the primary unit shall be 125 Bloomfield and that any additional expansion of 125 Bloomfield shall require a special permit from the Planning Commission and that there shall be no expansion of the 123 Bloomfield structure; and 4. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame. %�/ ��ii/� �� . Sheri Saisi Planner cc: Philip Wilkinson, Wilco Construction Barbara Steiner et al tr, property owners of record 4 a i• f � . � B�:rlingame Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 1994 a:,. Chairman Galli an noted that there were n�vv �6 commissioners resent and asked a g p gain if anyone wished a continuance? There were no such requests. ACTION ITEMS �"'� 2. SPECIAL PERNIIT AT 123-125 BLOOMFIELD ROAD, ZONED R-1 (JOHN STEINER, PROPERTY OWNER AND PHILIP D. WII.KINSON, APPLICAN'I� (DBI�TIED WITHOUT PRFJUDICE AT NOVEMBER 28. 1994 PLANI�TING COMMISSION MEETINGI. Reference staff report, 12/12/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. An application to designate a primary dwelling on this non-conforming lot and for a parking variance at this location was denied without prejudice at the November 28, 1994 Planning Commission meeting. The applicant has returned with the same remodel plans for the dwelling and has chosen to relocate and redesign the carport. This is a resubmittal. Five conditions were suggested for consideration. Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. John Steiner, homeowner, 123-125 Bloomfield, and Philip Willdnson, applicant were present to explain the resubmittal. There was discussion about the amount and type of pavement in the front yard because there would be a lot of cement and it would be very visible with a carport instead of a garage. There are no cunent plans to go into the main portion of the house to do any work. They reviewed alternatives discussed by the commission and feel this cunent design is the most viable and affordable. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Deal noted this new design is more appropriate and the carport will appear to belong to the second unit. He then moved to approve this application, by resolution, with the conditions in the staff report. Motion was seconded by C. Kelly and failed on a 3-3-1 (Cers. Jacobs, Key and Mink dissenting and C. Ellis absent) roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. C. Key moved approval of the application, by resolution, with the conditions in the staff report and an added condition requiring 50 % of the front yard area between the property line and fence of the structure including the area in front of the dwelling at 125 be put into soft landscaping. The conditions are as follows: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 5, 1994, site plan, house and carport elevations; and other sheets date stamped November 4, 1994 including floor plan, foundation plan, building sections and electrical; 2) that the carport roof shall be of Class B fire rating or better in order to meet the requirements of the Chief building Inspector's 11/7/94 memo; 3) that in order to meet the requirements of the City Engineer's memo dated December 5, 1994, the curb cut for the driveway shall be relocated to a size and location approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit; 4) that the primary unit shall be 125 Bloomfield and that any additional expansion of 125 Bloomfield shall require a special permit from the Planning Commission and that there shall be no expansion of the secondary 123 Bloomfield structure; 5) that the project shall provide 50% softscape in the front yard between the property line and face of the structures and that the softscape shall be concentrated in the area in front of the dwelling at 125 Bloomfield; and 6) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame. -2- ". . Bu�tingame Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 1994 Motion was seconded by C. Galligan and passed on a 4-2-1 (Cers. Jacobs and Mink dissenting and C. Ellis absent) roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. ,, 3. SPECtAI. PERMIT, SIDE AND REAR SETBACK VARIANCES AT 1000 VANCOUVER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 (JOSEPH & JANETE BONFS, PROPERTY OWNERS AND APPLICANTSZ ICONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 28, 1994) Reference staff report, 12/12/94, with attachments. CP Monrce discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. 7oseph Bojues, 1000 Vancouver Avenue, the property owner and Brent Lords, the architect, addressed the commission and explained their revised plan which reflects a compromise with the neighbor to the rear. Mr. Lords also requested relief from condition #�2 which requires a framing survey since the site has been surveyed by a licensed land surveyor. CE confirmed the reason for condition #2 was to establish location of new construction and could rely on base data already establish in first survey. Ms. Clasmeier, 2005 Carmelita, discussed the loss of light and air as her main objections to the project. Mr. Lords presented an overhead projection on the screen and showed the direction the shadows would cast (worst case scenario December 22). He pointed out that the majority of shadows woulii be directed toward Ms. Clasmeier's garage and toward the Schafer property to the rear adjacent to Mrs. Clasmeier. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Deal explained the variance does indeed show exceptional circumstances and because of the creek and past improvements done with building permits this lot has a number of exceptional circumstances. In addition to build at front of house' �vould mean complete reconstruction. S'ince the large trees block the front on to the neighbors property the new addition will have little additionai` effect. He noted condition #2 should be retained. He then moved to approve this application, by resolution, with the following conditions, including condition #2: 1)'that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped December 2, 1994 sheets showing ground floor plans, second floor plans and building elevations; 2) that the framing of the first and second story at the rear shall be surveyed before the Building Department framing inspection to insure that the heig`ht of the structure and the rear setbacks match those which are prpposed; 3) that the requirements of, the Chief Building Inspector's memo dated October 31, 1994 shall be met; and 4) that the project°.;.shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire codes as amended by the C%ty of Burlingame. Motion was seconded by C. Mink and passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Ellis absent) voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 4. PARKING AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCFS AT 1237 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 (FERESHTEH & KEIHAN EHSANIPOUR, PROPERTY OWNERS AND APPLICANTS) (CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 28. 19941 Reference staff report, 12/12/94, with attachments. CP Monroe discussed the request for a parking variance for a 6 bedroom single family house, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Five conditions were suggested for consideration. -3- Cityi oi �urlingame Planning Commission Minutes - ITEMS FOR STUDY 1. SPECIAL PERNIIT AND pARKI1VG VARIANCE FOR BAYSHORE HIGHWAY, ZONED C-4 (HTKG DEVEL� � %>�xi*TL: D A*TTl C� A l! C1T171T�111Tf1 • TTT T/1 � 1TT\ November 28, 1994 MANENT TENT AT 1333 ASSOCIATES, PROPERTY Requests: present findings to help commission support ' reased parking , lot coverage and FAR; do they need a variance for lot coverage or FAR; be more s ific about number of parking spaces for variance; what is the parking arrangement with the One Ba laza Office Building; number and type of functions in the tent in the course of a year and what groups ould make use of it; how will public l�ow where to park; parking study of weekend count and impac . Item set for public hearing December 12, 1994 pending necessary responses in a timely manner. 2. SIDE SETBACK AND LAN�`CAPING VARIANCE AT 808 BURLWAY ROAD, ZONED O-M Reguests: If second story wer rebuilt, would existing nonconformity remain; where is on-site truck loading and unloading area; what i the extent of first and second floor fire damage; what will first floor ceiling height be; what is the e sting number of parking spaces assigned to this building; what would be the consequences of a lot erger; would they still need landscape and side setback variances; what are the existing circumstan that make this an unusual property to grant a variance with this reconstruction. If all information rec 'ved, item set for public hearing December 12, 1994. ACT�ON ITEMS SPECIAL PERMIT AT 125 BLOOMFIELD ROAD, ZONED R-1 (JOHN STBINER, PROPERTY OWNER AND PHILIP D WILKINSON APPLICANT� Reference staff report, 11/28/94, with attachments. Planner Saisi discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments, and study meeting questions. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. 7ohn Steiner, owner, and Philip Wilkinson, applicant were present to answer questions. They explained the project, the building materials and their space and budget constraints. The second unit on the property was built legally, with permits, in about 1930 by John Steiner's grandfather. The commission explained that they felt the carport diminishes the project and suggested the applicant explore other reasonable solutions. Jim Steiner, 326 Clarendon, brother of the property owner spoke in support of the project. There were no other comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Ellis noted there are other alternatives for this project that should be explored and suggested the applicant work with planning staff to move this application forward. He then moved to deny the project without prejudice. -2- �, , � lu l 1►`l�ll M �.� CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION November 28, 1994 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame w� called to order by Chairman Galligan on Monday, November 28, 1994 at 7:30 P.M. � i' A% ROLL CALL �` � PRESENT: Commissioners Deal, Ellis, Galligan, 7acob�; Kelly, Key and Mink. Chairman Galligan welcomed Commissioner Key back� ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jane Gomery, Planner; Sheri Saisi, Planner; 7erry Coleman, Attorney; Donald Chang, Associate Civil Engineer; Ken Musso,�%Assistant Fire Chief , � NIINUTES - The minutes of the November 14;; 1994 meeting were amended to reflect the amendment of the minutes of the �ctober 24, 1994 meeting to indicate: Agendize Freeway Oriented Signs �. '� for Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting, Saturday, Apri122, 19�Y5, 9:00 A.M. Also, Item #6, 459 Cumbei addressing requirements for staff misunderstood the mot were then approved. � l Road, p.4, paragraph 1, the text of Condition #4 iew of future bedroom additions is deleted because and Condition #5 is renumbered #4. The minutes AGENDA - Item #4, Parking and Side,'Setback Variances at 1237 Balboa Avenue, zoned R-1, and #5 Special Permit, Side `and Rear Setback Variances at 1000 Vancouver Avenue, Zoned R-1 are CONITNUED TO DECEMBER 12, 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIlVG. The order of the agenda was then approved. FROM THE FLOOR Henrietta Clasmeyer, 2005 Carmelita A��enue, spoke about the thick grove of trees at the rear of 1001 Bernal and asked that the commission note the possibility of fire if more construction occurs. Commission asked that she contact the applicant and if resolution is not possible, please come back to the commission for the public hearing on December 12, 1994. 6� , City'`oi' Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes - November 28, 1994 Commission noted for the record that if the modification of the primary residence is going to further increase the non-confornuty of the structure, that was not the intention of the code change allowing expansion of the primary unit in circumstances where this situation e�tists. The intention was to achieve a conforming structure that is the primary residence. This application has more problems than just the carport. Another concern is that with a new application there is a problem that goes back 55-60 years. Because with a 6' wide driveway between buildings there is simply no way to put a caz in the back of this property without destroying the other structure. Motion was seconded by C. 7acobs and passed on a 7-0 roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. 4. PARKING AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES AT 1237 BAL A AVENUE, ZONED R-1 ERESHTEH & KEIHAN EHSANII'OUR PROPERTY O S AND APPLICANTS . CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 12, 1994 PLANNING C SSION MEETING 5. SPECIAL PERMIT, SIDE AND REAR SETBACK/'�ARIANCES AT 1000 VANCOWER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 (JOSEPH & JANETEs' BOJUES, PROPERTY OWNERS AND CONTINUF.D TO DECEMBER 12, 1994 COMIVIISSION MEETING 6. SPECIAL PERNIIT AND PARKING VA CE AT 1525 ADRIAN ROAD, ZONED M-1 (GARY HIRSCH PROPERTY OWNER AND ESIGN-BUII,D SOLUTIONS APPLICA Reference staff report, 11/28/94, with at chments. Planner Gomery discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Planning Department comments d study meeting questions. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. Chm. Galligan opened the public h'ng. Larry Weinstein, Design-Build Solutions, was present to explain his clients project. The commiss' n's suggestions at study session were appreciated and the now proposed reconfiguration of the parking t for 29 spaces is preferable and allows more turnaround space. The two trees that are to be removed ill be replaced in the front of the building with two 30" box trees. There were no other comments the public hearing was closed. Commission noted this plication is in accord with the general plan. There is an abundance of on-street parking in this area. C. Deal then moved approval of this application, by resolution, with findings incorporated by refe nce and with the following amended conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans ubmitted to the Planning Department and date stamped November 21, 1994, Site Plan revised to show a cess to the roll up door with a total of 29 parking stalls (22 standard stalls, 5 compact stalls and 2 disa� ed accessible stalls); 2) that the conditions of the City Engineers' October 7, 1994 memo, the Chief Build'ng Inspectors' October 17, 1994 memo, and the Parks Directors' October 31, 1994 memo shall be met; �) that the business shall be open 8:00 A.M, to 5:00 P.M. Monday through Friday with a maximum of:�fifteen employees including the proprietor, on site, at any one time; and 4) that the use and any improvements to the building or site for the use shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame. -3- City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes - Motion was seconded by C. Kelly and passed on a 7-0 voice vote. November 28; �9�� 7. TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAPS TO RESUBDIVIDE EXISTING PARCELS INTO THREE (3) PARCELS AT 1500 TO 1650 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY, ZONED C-4 (CHRISTOPHER O. VEITCH. PROPERTY OWNER AND DAIVIEL G. MACLEOD APPLICANT) Reference staff report, 11/28/94, with attachments. ACE Chang discussed the request, reviewed criteria, Public Works Department comments, and study meeting questions. Two conditions were suggested for consideration. Chm. Galligan opened the public hearing. Dan MacLeod was present to answer any questions from the commission. There were none. There was no other public comment and the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs recommended approval of these Tentative and Final Parcel Maps to Cit� Council with the following conditions: 1) replace or repair a11 damaged sidewalk, driveway, and curb and gutter fronting these sites to the City Engineer's approval; and 2) approval should be as both the Tentative and Final Parcel Maps and staff will see that the proper Final Map is recorded. Motion was seconded by C. Mink and passed on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. PLANNER REPORTS Review of City Council regular meeting of November 21, 1994. �JOURNMENT Chairperson Galligan welcomed the new Mayor, Marti Knight. The meeting was adjourned in Loving Memory of Bill Key at 8:40 P.M. �rrasii.za Respectfully submitted, Mike Ellis, Secretary -4