The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1469 Benito Avenue - Staff Report (3)P.c. �l'� �s-- Item #, 3 ��E�10 T0: PLANNING COP�MISSION FROP1: CITY PLA(dNER SUBJECT: VARIAiVCE FOR A CA�'PORT FOR REQUIRED PARKIN� IN A SIDE SETBACK AT 14G9 BE�VITO AVENUE, ZONED R-1. Randy and Valerie Gibbs are requesting a variance to place a carport 1' into the required 4' side setback at 1469 Benito Avenue. (Code Section 25.70.030). The carport is required because the,y are removing the existing covered parking and must comply with the current code requirements of two off-street covered parking spaces for a three bedroom house. The second covered space is pro- posed to be placed at the front of the home in the basement below the first floor. The foundation slab will be lowered to provide the required 7' clear- ance for parking stall in this area. Since only one curb cut is allowed for a single family home and these two parking spaces are widely separated, there will be extensive pavin� in the front ,yard area. CITY STAFF REVIEI-J City Staff have reviewed the proposed proiect. The Fire P9arshal (7/29/85 memo) had no comments. The Chief Builr�inq Inspector (7/2�/35 memo) notes that the excavation and construction under the residence will require engineering by a license engineer and the retaining wall and framing will also require a li- cense engineer to design it. The Public ��dorl:s Director (7/29/35 memo) comments that this site will be allowed only one curb cut which will make it difficult for a car to enter/exit the garage. Planning Staff would comment that when a garage is difficult to access, the probability of it use declines. Also the extent of paving in the front yard which will be required for driveway access (not shown on plans) will be sub- stantial, and more than most homes have in this area. Although this lot is slopping from back to front, it is 22' deeper than a typical cit,y lot and the house was placed at the minimum front setback9 thus there is more rear yard than exists for many single family lots in the city. The placement of the existing garage on a benche� area at the rear of the house appears a far more appropriate solution than the pro�osed alternative. The remodeling of the home as proposed woulu� require this structure to be rebuilt to accommodate two cars. The plan shows the proposed carport area graded out and a 3' retaining wall placed at the rear of the structure. The plan does not accurately discribe the existing stairs from the first floor backdoor. �ased on a site inspection and the picture taken (included in packet) these stairs would have to be re- located for people to continue to use them. People could no longer pass through the sideyard on this side of the house to the rear door without climbing over the 3' retaining wall at the end of the carport. The plans do not seerrlto address accurately the front stoop and it appears from a site visit that if the opening to the carport is 9' wide only 2' 4" not 3' 6'° will remain for the first flight of stairs at the front of the build- ing. Uniform Building Gode and Uniform Fire Code requirements will have to be met for this entrance. _2_ These requirements may con�lict with providing the 9' onening for the carport. Planniny Staff also has serious concern about the use of the garage space in the basement. Code allows cars to back off a single family site, but this maneuver will be difficult to execute at best with this pronosal. APPLICA�TS LETTER The applicant submitted a letter (7/17/85) addressing the reasons for their re� quests. They note that putting the garage at the rear of the lot would consume a large part of the property and affect the value of the property removing exist- ing vegetation. The p1acement on the north side of the property is adjacent to the wall of a neighbors house which cannot be relocated closer to the property line according to the applicant. They feel that the variance will not affect the zoning plan for the city since the carport encroaches only 1'. VARIA�CE REQUIREC9ENTS To grant a variance the Planninq Commission must find that the following conditions exist (Code Section 25.5�.020 a-d) on the property and that the granting of a var- iance would not be an extension of special privilege or set a precident for the properties in the area where the project is located: a. that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property or class of uses in the district, so that a denial of the application would result in undue property loss; b. that such variance would be necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a property right of the owner of the property involved; c. that the granting of such variance would not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to the property or im- provements of other property owners, or the quiet enjoyment of such pro- perty or improvements; d. that the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the compre- hensive zoning plan of the city. PLANNING COP�P•�ISSIOPJ ACTIOrJ The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. In order to take affirmative action the Planning Commission must make findings relating to the property. The reasons for any action on this project should be clearly stated. The followin� conditions should be considered at the public hearing; 1. that the conditions of The Chief Building Inspector's (7/28/85 memo) and The Public l�lork Director's (7/2�/&5 memo) shall be met; 2. that the project as built shall conform to the plans submitted to the Planninc� Department and date stamped July 17, 1985; except as they shall be amended anc� condition 3; -3- 3. that the travel area of the front stairway shall not be less than 3' wide at any point and that the rear stair at the backdoor from the first floor shall be redesigned to a minimum width of 3' and to all the standards of the Uniform Building Code, plans showing how these standards shall be met shall be submitted to the Chief Building Inspector and approved by him prior to issuing a Building Permit; if these standards cannot be achieved then the variance in not effective. v WY , 0`�C fiargaret �1onroe City Planner P1M/dc N N i N a--� N O I •r � � N (� L •r ,_C N tn U� N�'CS I— E Z. U 'i3 S- "17 N � •r � � (� � �6 � -I-� �CS r p •r �-F�- U�•r� � � •�- cn c� � a� +-+ +� o � N 3 •r {� •r rCS O � � +� a c� -es � s L +,- �.�� -�s� 0 0 +� �s � r� � �, a� d-� �--� L N�--� O r � Ri �'CJ O N� O•r •r N -v zs n_ � o� E� a� a� a� a� •� o o•� -v � o� 'a L� > S.- U tC N 4- N� 'r •r a--� O Q_ 47 �.L? QJ 3� L L o L� > ��+- fl- cn a� o o+� o - � O •r � � 3 O •r CJ O� O� O I— +� r 3 i � +� I-- y- +� - O s � cn O Ql � •r t� � • � •F1 C�J r -C +� QJ • C (n O N •r N� i- �}� r-I--� L r� •r O O�� v N•r p.. � -a�� oo> 4-�� ¢ L �" . � � ca � +� O rtS L.�. N t Q� U • N �r- � Z U • N (n N rt5 �(6 •r (O C N� N Z (� N� U t� "O � d3 � tn O.� �•r r a--� 61 }� � i Q.. N-I-� N r LC ) � O O S- t C. C'r Q r--1 �..� 'r •r S- O I— �•r 3 i-� -FI rtf �-1-� O_4- � � � PROJECT APPLICATION ��"�" °� 1469 Senito Avenue �r CEQA ASSESSMENT euRUNc�e Iproject address _ �(' A lication received �- �''�+.now,.�'�• Project name - if any pp � %/1%/�� Staff review/acceptance ( ) i. APPLICANT Randy � Val eri e Gi bbs 343-2203 name telephone no. 1469 Benito Avenue Burlinaame 94010 applicant s address: street, city, zip code same (bJork) 922-1045 contact person, if different telephone no. 2. TYPE OF APPLICATION Special Perr�it () Variance* ( X) Ccndominium Permit () Other *Attach letter which addresses each of the 4 findings required by Code Chapter 25.54. 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Variance to construct a second required parking space (a carport) alon the side of the house which will extend 3'-0" from the si e property line 4' sideyard require . e irs par ing space is p�.posed to be constructed under the house b_y lowerin the floor which will reauire that a portion of the foundation be altered. Only one curb-cut is allowed so access to the space under the house will be,by crossing the front setback. *** (attach letter of explanation if additional space is needed) Ref. code section(s): (25.70.030 ) ( ( R-1 ) ( 57°5 ) zoning district land area, square feet Randy � Valerie Gibbs 14G9 Benito Avenue land owner's name address Burlinqame9 California 94010 Reauired �ate received city zip code (3�� (no) ( — ) Proof of ownershi� (y � (no) ( — ) Owner's consent to application 5. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Existing sinc�le family dwelling with one-car detached qarac�e 4. PROPERTY IDEPITIFICATION ( 027-182-060 ) ( 11 � � 13 � � Burlinghome APN lot no. block no. subdivision name Re�uired Date received (yes) �ra� ( 7/17/85 ) �YeS) �� " ) �YeS) �� i �� ) (other) ( �� ) Site plan showing: property lines; public sidewall:s and curbs; all str�ctures and improvements; paved on-site parkino; landscaping. Floor plans of all buildings showing: gross floor area by type of usc�`on each floor plan. Building elevations, cross sections (if relevant). Site cross section(s) (if relevant). Letter of Ex�lanation *Land use classifications are: residential (show # dwelling units); office use; retail sales; restaurant/cafe; manufacturing/repair shop; warehousing; other (to be described). 6. PROJEqCT PR�PO�a�AeI floors, including at-grade par{:ing areas and areas bP�ropo'Se�eo°;:e��to�, Lelow grade ( 545 SF) Second floor (�88 SF) grocs floor area First floor ( � 6 � SF) Third floor ( _ S�) Pro,ject Cod� Project Code Pronosal Requirer�ent Proposal Requirement Front setback 15 �-6�� 15' mi n Lot coveraae 32% 40% �idX. Side setback P'�A — Euildine hei9ht 30'* 30' ��dX. Side yard � � Landscaoed area n� — Rear yard 15' ± 15' P�lll �n��site pk�.spaces 2 6. PROJECT PROPOSAL (continued) Full time emaloyees on site Part time employees on site Visitors/customers (weekday) Visitors/customers (Sat.Sun.) Residents on property Trip ends to/from site* Peak hour trip ends* Trucks/service vehicles IN 5 YEARS after 8-5 5 PM r � � � � � •r r � `1 r � S. r� O �6 -I� "� S- Q O N •r �1 (n > 4J O �� o i 4- C Q N •r (O +� a� r� i 'a L a� � a� a� � U+� 3 L� U cC O C � � •r L �-aE� R3�•r }� � r U � O � � +� 3 s- c6 �J +� a�� i t� � c�� 3 c� +� � }1 � •r O cn C� E � +� c � U r� O � �6•r� �n..L� • � � r c o '3 'r— > U ,� - �c *Show calculations on reverse side or attach seoarate sheet. 7. ADJACENT BUSINESSES/LAND USES Single Family residences on a11_adjacent sites;_this,use conforms to the �eneral Plan. Required (3��) (no) (3'�g) (no) Date received ( — ) Location plan of adjacent properties. ( PJ/ A ) Other tenants/firms on property: no. firms ( ) no. employees ( ) floor area occupied ( SF office space) ( SF other) no. employee vehicles regularly on site ( ) no. comoany vehicles at this location ( ) 8. FEES Special Permit, all districts $100 () Other application type, fee $ () Variance/R-1,R-2 districts $ 40 ( X) Project Assessment $ 25 (X ) Variance/other districts $ 75 () Neoative Declaration $ 25 (X ) Condominium Permit $ 50 () EIR/City & consultant fees $ () TOTAL FEES $ 90,�� RECEIPT N0. OnQ( Received by M. Monroe I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signa EXISTING IPl 2 YEARS after � after 8-5 5 PM 8-5 5 PM _� -_ � • ' .� C�� ,__ te � �� — Cl J STAFF USE ONLY ND-378P NEGATIVE DECLARATION File No. The City of Burlingame by MARGARET MONROE on AUGUST 5 , completed a review of the proposed project and determined that: ( ) It will not have a significant effect on the environment. ( ) No Environmental Impact Report is required. 1985, Reasons for a Conclusion: Al thouqh thi S proposal i s merel v the remodel i nq of an existing dwelling, it does not qualify under CEQA exempti_ons, since the amount of floor area bein added will increase the floor area b more than 50% ±1598 S.F. of new and reconstructed space is proposed; the existinq house contains ±1424 S.F. of area); however, the changes ** ��i�� ,-�� )'/uy��,�. CITY PLANNER 8/5/85 Signat e of Pro sing Official Title Date Signed Unless appealed within 10 days hereof the d�te posted the deternination shall be final. DECLARATION OF POSTIPJG Date Posted: � ,i.l.�r �„/ C�`> I declare under penalty of perjury that I ar� City Cle� k oF he City of Burli� and that I posted a true copy of the above Neoa.ti��e Declaration at the City Hall of said City near the doors to th•a Council Chambers. Executed at 3urlingame, California on �(��(�.�— � , 19 �.� . Apoealed: ( )Yes ( )P!o �� , i� � . / � � � JU� . M LFAT , ITY CL RK, CI �.� B RLINGAPIE r� �a STAFF REVIEW 1. CIRCULATION OF APPLICATION Project proposal/plans have been circulated for review by: date circulated reply received City Engineer ( 7/18/85 ) (yes) (no) Building Inspector ( " ) (yes) (no) Fire Marshal ( ." ) (yes) (no) Park Department ( — ) (yes) (no) City Attorney ( — ) (yes) (no) 2. SUMMARY OF STAFF CONCERNS/POSSIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES memo attached (yes) (no) (yes) (no) (yes) (no) (yes) (no) (yes) (no) Mitigation Measures Con cern s Does the applicant meet the fou Review application -- make legal requirements to grant the findings. variance? Does the proposal meet all Fire Request comments from the Fire and Building Code requirements? r9arshal and Chief Building Inspector. ing may be costly and will need Request comments from City special engineering considera- Engineer; condition application tion. as approariate. 3. CEQA REQUIREMEPlTS If a Negative Declaration has not been posted for this project: Is the project subject to CEQA review? S E E N D -� 7� IF AN EIR IS REQUIRED: Initial Study comoleted Decision to prepare EIR Notices of preparation mailed RFP to consultants Contract awarded Admin. draft EIR received Draft EIR accepted by staff Circulation to other agencies � � � � � � � � ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Study by P.C. Review period ends Public hearing by P.C. Final EIR received by P.C. Certification by Council Decision on project Notice of Determination � � � � � � � 4. APPLICATION STATUS Date first received (]�1]�$5) Accepted as complete: no( ) letter to applicant advising info. required ( ) Yes( ) date P.C. study ( ) Is application ready for a public hearing? (yes) (no) Recommended date (S3/� ��) Date staff report mailed to anplicant ( -- ) Date Commission hearing �� j �'o�il'� 7—v Application approved ( ) Denied (�I Appeal to Council (yes ?� (no) Date Council hearing ( 4/�(o �J�) Application aporoved ( ) Denied ( ) I (rotir. � �� / -, � � ) � � � �� signed dat �_-_ July 17, 1985 TO: Planning Commission Board City of Burlingame Re: Application for Variance - Chapter 25.54 Dear Members of the Planning Commission Board, �� JUL i 7 i985 C�7Y OF BURUNGAME PI.ANNING DEPT. From: Mr & Mrs Randy Gibbs 1469 Benito Ave Burlingame, CA In accorda.nce with the Planning Commission regula�rions regarding the above; A: The placernent of the garage in the back lot would consume a major portion of our property, preventing any possibility for an adequate backyard, an essential need for our family. This reduce the value o.f: our home not only through the loss of backyard space, but a1_so because it would �e necessary to destroy heritage trees and foliage if the va..rizu�ce is not �.��n�:ec3.. B: The placement of the garage i,:. the ba.ck of our property is infeasible. it would consume so much space in the backyard that any possibility of a garden, play area for our children, or entertainment facilities would cut to a minimum. By permitting the addition of the carport on the side of ou.r property, we would have the full width of our lot allowing for the area to be utilized to the fullest. In addition, placement of the garage in the back o�_ the propea-ty would require the destruction of many beautiful tree�> which we would like to preserve for our enjoyment. C: The addition of the proposed car-port on the north wall of our house would be built on a side where there would be no need for future construction. The present set back and location of our neighbors house from the propertylines prevent this. The proposed car-port would be set back 26 feet from the sidewalk, therefore not affecting public health, safety, welfare, cause injury to, or prevent improvements of other property owners. D: The granting of such variance would not impare the zoning plan of the city. The car=port would be attached to the home such that it would be consistant with the existing design fo the structure. The distance from the property line would be 3 feet, a minimal 1 foot variance, which wauld not adversely affect the comprehensive zoning plan. The improvements to our home, including the addition of a car-por_t, would enhance its value and appearance. By eliminating the long drive way our home will harmonize with the existing homr•s in our heighborhood, speci- fically on either side of our property. We have informed our neighbor on the Page 2 side in which t.hF car-port shall be constructed and have their full support. These improvements and additions to our home will beautify our property and compliment the size and space of the homes in our neighbor- hood. They are done with the hope that we may live and raise our family in a comfortable home in which a backyard is an essential part of our plan. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, ��.' �' .. , '� .�..._ . . � �.:x-. ..� Mr. & Mrs. Randy L. Gibbs �: T ,�� :�,, .. : . Y ,� ,.y .. x . ,. �i. `� � . .. ~'�<' .,�.- �� . . �� Y . ..,� � .. . .. '. � � � ... Y-P? .!f* . � X. �' � PROJECT DESCRIPTION • 1. Basement to be converted to one car garage 2. First floor addition to consist of: A. Enlargement of existing bedroom, converting to den. B. Addition of laundryroom. 3. Second story addition to consist of 2 bedrooms, 1 bath. 4. Addition of car-port on north wall of house. K .��, � . �� ,� ��'� � ^ � c r �"� �' , r �.� �� * � . � � . �� ,�, .,� i �� r°s ` x ^k'�� . b �� -t,�� ' E ' ' I �ff �� '� �� _� . �� b; � �y � � r . � �+��. ,. � �'�� , �`�'b ��!",..r � � . `,,,r.g� w;, � �'('`€ �` ��.� �� _ � f i. � ; ,� � � ��m R � � �, p � � � ,� � ��,y �; ' .t� 1A� � � x . �-�'�� '� �° � ��+ �9 � r�. � � . � ,., �:_ , , . �� ,�:. � ' � � �" � �r�"` f� � � `�'� '�j�.yj`�"f` �,�1 '�°� � �� '�� :�/"'"r�� 4 � pq�.'f: ..� � '3 . ..�.`� �� 51t� .�. P." � �`�.�'�` t� < '�tr� � "� � � { a�` "� � �r 1" 8 v. u" f �;,.�# .. � ��t �.� F :�'}} �'� [/ " � � �� t �, !r. � � ,� � � '�v �� r� I�„ ' 4 � � . 1 F �� ..� ��+ . ru»� ��,:r .r�- Y .$�%,��,"# $' � ��+ � �"e .� f � ,�, � '�� gr� �� . .. .�e p� � �,. � . t �ap . ' �' '�t �,'� . �� ' . � _ r = , , � - � _— �* '� ' � � �� '��" �� —�. t � . .w7!�� {,��: + ,.....�. . . s # � � — , �� ,a � � � : �p �� .. �: �s » � ° �,', p�; r � x� ��. � � / .� . �, r �f �� \ —� , , � , � � .�i '. �� q/� R � �t'�a��'. `"'i� . ..�r o� . � �,�� e . � , . ° . . . �, � � � � �� . �� a4 c . .�� ti� � ; l ^�'"� � �� "` ,C ' r M.,' � •��' �• � ,�, �, .�r. . . . . �� . ` � � r � ia �. - . a + � ��i°r � �� t �. � ' 1 �� i ^.��. �'v .. �� — �`n 6'�"°\, �,� . ` � � S� �. ��`` � � �^� �`. �"� ��.. �s �� t � � e �� ° t < � .� M�� ' a `� .�`� � �` r':� � � , _ _ ,..� ., . . c .�v� t � � .. -, -- . �a r ;� _ � .Y„? , �.. Q �"�� ,sti �' / 6j y . �� . � .' kp � ., �µr `�' §m� .. w __ _ �� .. � � �/� aA1. , � . � ,� g � � e �.� �- �'.r. � � a�i"� ` � � � �'��r �+�� i�:� � y -�r.'�� r+y, "�,.% �t+ � � �� , � � �. � Y & ' � _ �. ' k . _v.� ��^� � . ,w \ �" ; :f { rY , i °� .,,� - '"'� b F t � � � �: ' � �"t.r.id �� r� �_� �� # � ��°� � �� p + i � ',� y!" �-•� . �4 '�+' i��:. , �� , �'�" `� � �' � 9 � �" � � �` r ; � e e w� �° ie. .�TF' � �� ; �°'� K �' .i a �i �.� �s` ti � i�. . � _ a � � � '�' � ' 1.. � d', -�$" r. , �6� �py;., '� y . .�!�r s' .3_, k� k � �� . 5'�, �� _ +�y', d' � "` %'.,,� � .t d �' . � � i� s' � �. i�: J � +l!"�"!' �''•$j. #' k,�' 3 ..� � � � �� . a�' f ��✓ ,�' � � yy� �: , � � � � � P T -a�� `� .. `�, � .. �� , Y�' +6.: a a � �_ /� '� �� '� '� .. 4 ....,.. � .,� y <�� . ',.:".♦ � � : . , IF eK :7' .: �� q� � t '�s n AF � ,*� � , „r .� , . � . .�,�..� � ' ' a -� ai` � �. f.�.. � , �� 4 � � �� ,�� a . � ' ... �" :^ . 4 . . � k fi, � `� � 'Y��$ . :g . z�� ` �e� �� 'l��.� �' � � �r . �� r �t.. e� �S�a� � �'. ' � R � � . x fit ��;h *R � i � g.: " , �y i r� ,� � . ° '. �� ^` � �e �� 'h '� ' �#. � {r t � � �� 'ii� u` � _. � �, � ��} ,�' i� w �'� � �� ,r � r � F �s � � � �'¢ } �' � � �`� f a� K•. ry�k' � � �' ' � '�(i` , , !� � � �� \� � � ��: � �. �°y�' r� ''� �� .. . . ,� > , . ,; , � w.. - . � "�`r�� '" '�i"'� � � � = a � � � �'� �' `�� - �"" � �a` �""a ' � � _��° 1�r . � � _a, � � � , � > , �� , � a� � � t � � M �, � „� . ,= � - � ., � : � •;� ` �F _ � �� ry � � >,� �, .�� , � �� S`r; � � $ �� > " a`x +�' .r� � • x . d . � �' } M '�^?z "� � � ..3'� �:� ' . � � .. � r' F �. � e#� a �� 'a'°''°. °Ei'f. � ,�! �. _ � ��... �; � '- ° . . .: , � �� i . , '� � ��µ� � 7 '-� � � � ,�,, , ., '� � e , � � �, ,� �# � � �. ,� ,� j , c� �� " r. �. } � ��«.. �� .� �: �k �� ',� _ �� .�` � <�,_ ! �9 � � � � �w�'�,, , ° �' � r ,, � ,.. ,� � _ �, � �,: t ��" �* ` � 9 ';� ;v. �" �b � —� � � �d"�' �,w Q " y .�' �, �, , � _ ,, �a - ,. �a �; p � . �` , ,, . �,a � �, `s� r .� �,, e �`� , , � ., . � , � , <. r � r_ - _ .. �r" � -� .�zb� . �, ` � � �� - � � . ; . .. �.a , �� lr � �� m � , r / � �:� ��i ,�� Y,i". � f }�� Y�`t. r (/^'� �' ��.� f� � y��. M �. .. . i E'. ' . , � ' �� ,, `,�� ,� . � : �. ' ��+ �� . , �`w., � r ,! — , . ?�,r �� ,.-�-! y. .: �`, � �a� � �� F� �� r � �� ° •� �.. �'� -� _ ' ,e� �`�s a ; ;��' '�� +�� ..r; � ,, � r , .� ^ . �'�' � '' �� ',; a = "'� �„ � - . �� ' � _ , ,, � - , i . � � ��, ��,�,,�.. _ ��-- �. . _"< �, .,r� �: . „ � r 4 , � � � � - �+� � .w;* � � � � ` ��'.� , { �` � x � 9 '« w m „ , a {/. � . . �+��,ex.- � + � s9 ...� .:� �..�,`, C..1 V x W . " '='a^ - � �. T ,,, � �'� ;� � � t �s . � � ;�''�`� �� ,�A �� , �, � � �,� . �� ,�' � �" � . ; , � - �� , � ,� . � „ , , ,° ' � ,� � � .,, - - — �� "+�I _„ ,� �, � � �� , , �. , � . � �� , •��;r , r '�e�! '�. "��' - ; : , ` . ,� , ; ,' ,_ � "�`j�,� • �w r»':. 'F . �.�'�`: J�� _ . '�.,3 Y � �''�s"`°� t .��. �h� C�tt� IIf �u�it��zm.� SAN MATEO COUNTY CITY HALL- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010 NOTICE OF HEARING ARIANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Monday, the 12 of Auqust 1985 the hour of 7:30 P.M., in the City Hall Council Chambers TEL�(415) 342-8931 at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame will conduct a public hearing on the application to allow a second required covered parking space at 1469 Benito Avenue to be built 3'-0" from the side property line (4'-0" required), by Randy Gi�bs (applicant and property owner). At the time of the hearing all persons interested will be heard. For further particulars reference is made to the Planning Department. MARGARET MONROE CITY PLAN�JER August 2, 1985