The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1532 Burlingame Avenue - Staff Report� . . , �. . � . : prr. �, � � � ' � � �6 fC��f e e��, . . t � � C{.i ,�e t� f��. ' �! ; � t� �'� '1� , �v�,.lt � : 's�f. �� r j� :� 1 .�, �, , , , ,r. , �, ,� <, , � *�� r~`. �� ='� �,; i . �� Y� � .,p�',� � 1 � .''i .�.� , �.�j � ` ~ ` ` :i . ` . T .If � �� tQ M1>/ . _ /� •�' S�.N��.1 „ � �� ! t f ;'. ty . 3 a rt, �'��N�`�� ... ti : ,� fi ~ .r ',+ � '�: '.� r" .' ' l�vk`- �^ : LK !� � o :.. t �{ r =:�t • ��_A Cr+ � } ..�L�,j� i� t } ",� i ti � ' � J �f�`t i, t �`� : - t - � � f + ' . �► ' . . .�i , i � y�� ` h . (.'.!i � '�1. ..�` t I - � ti� ` �T -`Y 1 '. � t . a�.'�t. k -- : e, : �� ^ , . ..� - .. ..�i�... �: r ��;,;. � �'. �} �� r} +� e�� '�.� .. _ - - . .�'�,��°��'�'��,�`;��'I►��I�'��+ � : - - _ -� �� : _.� . _�.__ _ _ _ _„��_!� _.,. � ,.,.,-� .. --�=-,.��.__.--�� - �—=-�.-- ' ,� y __� ,— _ _ trc _ , — _ � _ _ ...: �,.�...,.;..--- •-�r ---�— - : = �-- ;,,; �a+r �, . -4►.:zi �. ..�. w ,i' _ `�'.+:: Tv.n.1^ �r.+��' ;.�' . , _ �r�_ y�� . �.i.» c"'7R , ... .r�%�:xv. . __ ��Y City of Burlingame Item # Design Review Address: 1532 Burlingame Avenue Meeting Date: 8/28/00 Request: Design review for a second story addition at 1532 Burlingame Avenue, zoned R-1 (C.S. 25.70.020, 2 & 25.70.030, 1, c). Property Owners: Robert M. and Jessica H. Fellows APN: 026-171-090 Applicant and Architect: Jack Matthews Lot Area: 7,033 SF General Plan Designation: Low density residential CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1-(e) additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50 % of the floor area of the structures before the addition. Summary: The existing two-story house contains 2,721 SF of floor area (.38 FAR), including a detached single-car garage, and has four bedrooms. The applicant is proposing a 629 SF second floor addition (master bedroom and bathroom), increasing the floor area ofthe remodeled house to 3,350 SF (.47 FAR), where 3,658 SF (.52 FAR) is the maximum allowed. There is no increase in the number of bedrooms. The first floor will be remodeled but no new floor area will be added. The existing nonconforming detached garage provides one covered parking space and meets the requirement for the four bedroom house. Staff would note that there is enough floor area remaining (308 SF) on this lot after the project, with the 341 SF in the existing garage, to accommodate a code compliant two-car garage in the future. St1ff Comments: Attached Front Setback - 2nd floor: Height: DHE: Lot Cover�ge: FAR: # Bedrooms: Parking: Staff Comments: See attached. Proposed 29'-6" 27'-10" complies no change .47 FAR 3,350 SF no change no change Existing 54'-0" 26'-11" complies 28.4% 2,000 SF .38 FAR 2,721 SF 0 1 covered (17'-5" x 19'-7") 1 uncovered (9' x 20') Maximum/Req'd 20'-0" 30'-0" see code 40% 2,813 SF .52 FAR 3,658 SF n/a 2 covered (20' x 20') 1 uncovered (9' x 20') Preliminary Design Review Study Meeting: On July 24, 2000, the Planning Commission reviewed this project for preliminary design review and recommended that this item be placed on the consent calendar for action once corrections have been made to the plans (July 24, 2000, P.C. Minutes). The Planning Commission asked if the second floor rooms could be reconfigured and one door eliminated so that one of them no longer Design Review 1532 Burlingame Avenue meets the definition of a bedroom, and therefore would not require a parking variance. The applicant submitted revised plans, dated July 31, 2000, eliminating the door from the hall into the office. With the revision, the office is not considered a bedroom and a parking variance is not required. The Commission also noted that shape of the two second floor windows on the front and right side elevations are out of character with the rest of the windows. The applicant revised the window type so that it is consistent with the existing and proposed windows throughout the house. The architect revised the outriggers so that they are shown at the correct scale, and revised the stairway width so that it is consistent on the first and second floors. Design Review Criteri�: 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. Arch�itectural 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 July 24, 2000, preliminary study session for the project, the project is found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's five design review guidelines. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. �rmative action should be by resolution and include findings made for design review, and the reasons for any action should be clearly stated. 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 31, 2000, sheets A-1 through A-5, 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 or 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; and that the project sha11 meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Ruben G. Hurin Planner c. Jack Matthews, applicant/architect . ._ __ _ • . ... . _. . �.,..,.M�.�e�,.�,:z:.:f.� �.. :.:a;,�. :. :: _ >_ -�=...�.;;«.;:�;, City ofBurlingame Planning Commission Unnppro��ed Mnrates plans on the next ail le action calendar. The vote. The mmiss' n's action is advisory not July 24, 2000 passed on a 5-0-2 (Cers. Dreiling and Osterling absent) voice �ject to appeal. This item concluded at 8:50 p.m. 134 E SOT AVENUE - ZON R-1 - APP ATION FOR DESIG VIEW FO A FIRST AND SECOND ORY ITION TO EXISTING O-STORY HOU (JOSEPH JE1�tNIFER ADDIEGO, C. De noted that h ad a business relat' nship with the a icant and would a� tain from this item. He ste ed down fio the dais. Monroe reviewe the staff repo . Chairman Luzu 'arga opened the pub ' omment. ennifer A�. iego, 134 eSoto, represent the project. � �Ues�gn oncerns identified: d ign blends ell with the house a three bedro s does not require a�Go car garage; �f o er wishes to have a t car gara in the future there is ot enough F remaining to do so 'thout a variance, �,condition pointing this ut shoul e added for future b ers. C. Keighran move to pl this application on t consen calendar. The motion as seconded by C. Bojues. Chairman Luzuria call for a voice vote on the m tion to ace the project on the c sent calen e moti n was approved 4-0-1- (C. eal abstaining, Cers. Dreil' g a Osterling absent). The ommis ' s action is advisory and not subject to appeal. This item concluded at 9:0 p.m. 1532 BURLINGAME AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND pARKING VARIANCE FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING TWO-STORY HOUSE (ROBERT AND JESSICA FELLOWS, PROPERTY OWNERS AND APPLICANTS; JOHN MATTHEWS ARCHITECTS, Planner Brooks presented tlie staff report. Commissioners asked how the number of bedrooms was determined, staff noted that both the office and family room had separate entrances off the hall so the house was five bedrooms; elimination of one of these separate entrances would reduce the number of bedrooms by 1 since one would have access through another room. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public comment. Robert Fellows, 1532 Burlingame Avenue, and Nan Crowley, architect, 127 N. San Mateo Drive, represented the project. There was no public comment on the project and the public hearing was closed. Design concerns identified: could the upstairs rooms be reconfigured and one door eliminated so that one of them is no longer a bedroom and a parking variance is not required; variances are granted on the basis of hardships having to do with the physical attributes of the property, encroachment on a pool is not a hardship nor is cost. Applicant responded he is willing to eliminate door from hall into office so that it will not be considered a bedroom. There are two windows, one on the second floor front and on the right side elevation that are not in continuity with the rest of the windows; concerned about the shape of the windows they are out of character with the lower windows, should maintain shape of windows throughout; the outriggers are a nice detail, they should be shown in correct scale; the stair case on the first floor is a different size than the one on the second floor; the windows in master bedroom and office should meet emergency egress requirement; need to show details on the plans, the new should match the existing. C. Vistica mad a motion to set the item on the next available action calendar, with the corrections made to the plans and comments addressed, including reducing the project to four bedrooms so there will be no variance required. The motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a.voice vote on the motion to rear the item to the consent calendar with comments addressed. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 voice vote (Cers. Dreiling and Osterling absent). The commission's action is advisory and is not subject to appeal. The item ended at 9:20 p.m. 7 . . . . . . _ . . . , .. .. _.. _.. _ . . .....a.a.e.. �i._ �J..iv^.� n_.»_ s:.fr_..: � A ROUTING F0�2M DATE: June 16, 2000 TO: �CITY ENGINEER � ,�CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL �C FIRE MARSHAL _SR. LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER SUBJECT: Request for Design Review for a second-story addition at 1532 Burlingame Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-283-080. SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING: date to be determined STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON: Monday, June 19, 2000 THANKS, Maureen/Janice/Ruben �� Date of Comments %�p � (�e, n .�. : � -�-, ,a,.a•Y, � . .eair►�� s��-e s G�..o `,�-' J�--o-Q o(��,c. i' -c a�� r� CG �� , �.p� �"� �, � � ��.t.a.� � � � ct / 2 � W '� `-�-� � .� d' r -�a � 7-c-�-r. � � � � �,2� L P 2 - J'-e C�t� 2 �./ � .� '�' �� • 3- � �l �� Q � � ��,e «M � � � �P/ ac�, 9' � �° /� . J � G�'�L � , P,e�a�-c- / �� -�"� ' � � � a�.cc.o��►'tc.2 � � � �C�� . ��C..Q LQ. V -2�-�-� % / � ��-�� /�'- �-� � � if t� ♦ � i�r� CIT O� BURUNC�AMii CITY OF BURLINGAME �� °° _.� APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMIVIISSION �e• ..._� Type of Application: Special Permit Variance Other 1�1 �N V 1��/ ProjectAddress: l'S�2 '�1�i�Ll ��siV1R'� �V'`�, Assessor's Parcel Number(s): �'L �� 2f�%3 • 080 APPLICANT Name:�o b � ��SS r cG �e �cx�� Address: / u �' ,� �}iyle Ve City/State/Zip: .� �C � `� ` a��—_, Phone (w): 0 � Z � �h):�� i 3 �f 7— S�� b f�:_r 6�-�� 3�3 - �� z -� � ARCHITECT/DESIGNER PROPERTY OWNER Name: _ �C o � P�` �- ��Si � � Q'��(o S Address: —' -SCl /f? -e �' City/State/Zir: Phone (w): �h� �- fax: - .� . ► �� r��.r. �:' � � �� .�� ," � � � � /C'1� e► , v - � i'ou v �. '� �► — • ' � Phone (w): �D ✓�� p-1 � O� �n�: N /A f�: Cn�"o ��v 4c� - l fo Please indicate with an asterisk * the contact person for this application. � � , 1 � 1 � / � /�, c `r �� .� �L'� �r� �� • �' � � t � �� J�� AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and conect to the best � my knowledge and belief. s Signature Date 6 l 4'�ao I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Plannin� Comm�ssj.pn. Property Owner' 1 �-/�--c��0 Date FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ------------------------------------------ DateFiled: (��4�b0 �3to+��c�o+-�Sbo RECE�'�E� Fee: Planning Commission: Study Date: �'Z¢• oa Action Date: 8•28•oo�UN 1 4 2000 CITY OF BURLINGAMF PLANNING DFPT .� PROJECT DESCRIPTION Re: Remodeling 8 Addition to the residence at 1532 Burlingame Ave The intent of the addition is to expand the upper floor at the front of the house of an already existing two story residence. The addition is 627 S.F. at the upper floor and has been designed to mask the existing second story. The roof has been worked out to keep most of the existing as is and the materials are to match existing. The project also incorporates a remodeling of the interior spaces of the kitchen and the dining area at the lower floor. No area has been added on the lower floor. REC,�IV�p ��UN i 4 2000 CITY OF BURLINGAME PI ANNING DEP7. John A. Matthews Architects, 127 N. San Mateo Dr. San Mateo, CA 94401 CITY OF BURLINGAME 501 Primrose Road Burlingame CA 94010-3997 (650) 558-7250 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE 1532 BURLINGAME AVENUE APN: 028-283-080 ACTION ON AN APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION AT 1532 BURLINGAME AVENUE, ZONED R-1. The City ofBurlingame Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Monday, August 28, 2000, at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Planning Department at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. Margaret Monroe City Planner Mailed August 18, 2000 CITY OF BURLINGAME A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the iT�eeting at the� Plannin� Depa��meut at ��501 Prinlrose Road, Burlin�anle, California. If you challenge the subject application(s) in court; you may be li►nited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at thefpublic hearing, described in the�<notice Qr in �wrilten corresponden�e deliuer�d to the city at or prior to th.e:pub�li�'laea`ring. ?' :_ � 5 E' .f� , � <r?, r A Y �� ,��.��, m., �N�� , Pro ert o ers �ho reeei�e this notice are responsi�� or i�forming their tenants abo�t thi��rio�ii� ��or additional information; ple�se call (650) � 558-7250. ��ank �c�u. � ,a�'` � P �„� �' � r, ar�.:r f � '"�.�m�s ��. �� .� `. � ` � �, �'° � � "ti ` t f Margaret M�b �o� 1 � %�� ` �� 4 �' ` � City Planner � t � -�-�� ' � ��,�� , � �- � ��. PU . � �.w�gll�.�; _�f ICE m (Please refer to other side) ��4, ciTr o� CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT B4JRLJNS'iAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 A°'+b,.�e ��•'•� TEL: (650) 558-7250 l�s� BURLIN(�AME AVENUE AF'N:Q+�g'�83-08� 5tudy af �n application for design review and parking variance for a second stary additian to �n,�existing two—story house at 1�3� Burlingame �venue, zoned R-1. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The City of Hurlinga�e Planning Co�anission announces the following public hearing on �j�J,,�.(1), Manday, July 24, �000 at 7:00 P.M. in the ��,p;,{�(21. C i t y Hal l Counci 1 Chambers 1 ocat ed at 501 �'��3)' Rrimrose Road, Burlinga�e, California. Mailed July 14, 2008 (Please referto other side) RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND DESIGN REVIEW RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for desi�n review for a second story addition at 1532 Burlingame Avenue, zoned R-1, APN� 026-171-090; Robert M and Jessica H. Fellow , propertv owners; WI�REAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on August 2g, 2000, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and Categorical Exemption, per Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1-(e) additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area. of the structures before the addition, is hereby approved. 2. Said design review is approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such design review are as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. CHAIRMAN I,_Ann Kei_hran , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 28th day of Au ust, 2000 , by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: CONIMISSIONERS: SECRETARY EXHIBTT "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and design review. 1532 BURLINGAME AVENUE effective September 5, 2000 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped July 31, 2000, sheets A-1 through A-5, 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 or 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; and that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. . � � t , . r : ; � /� �'>-^+t � �Y� � , .. ' . � , =, � . :`� � .5. ,. _ \ �.. ,� �.r�L .. •' . ' .� '^.�. ' �... � a, . % � e �. , „ . . , : � . . : �. . v. b... . ' a ; a x ` r ,. � $aR. � �•� . i � . ly- � k � - ��+`�..� `� F �� ' �r � � / �' �� t .. � � r � � "Z h° � . �. ��,�� F - � � , `'m"' �; � � 3'!u� �. ° � �`` '�-� � � � � �� ,.�, ��, : _ � f �� ' �1 . � , . �� ., � �'� .� f ,�.. � � �- _��, �. . , , ��. , �� .�� ,� F .j � �. \ , r T4i� � � ' S ..t v i �t:' � �� t �. ;�. . " 7 -^§�-. `"�k' ' . -,� t � �! " . t, � . � 4. . .,x . ��." t . '�y4^ ��" rrtt .� _.1.- � �9• . � ��" �� ..� F�. � � t f�� `� :� . '�:l . . �'� .: 4,H. Y�; � � � ?t F ''+ `� - . :�w, �,�, . ; � P_ ' ��.. , �, l� �Y ��. ;� � . � . �� 4 � ": �, s z� "� � : tt y,��: � ,� � .t� `f � �' � + . ., -. A � �.'� �," d ��#§ y ,'r e F ^n� v 4� . S �S w.*.'.,�ai .' �' .Y..-.y � !h F 9 �� " ' � . � � r � � ��M �p d... '.'E,�� }� .� ,Y�' Y �.rf�� - . .v .. .... �, .w � 'h ��.� � _ ��x. ,� c.. r °''� � ... y .. r• ..;�, �� & ,� � "`: � ' , � ��i �r�$'*. �"' .,�� ^�k��p � �~; �f� � * i { *5;� � s��. ��kY , i� ' a �� ,� .. —� ,__ t - . a�� . •' �'r°�*�` , �. — - : '� � ., a-.t -# �' {S' *C .>.. � 1ti . , � � �� L .�C' � � . .. . � y �� ^�.�'"` �'�� " �� o � ��' , �� h �f` S �. ��:�'�.;. .,�, � ~ �� , .� ,� � � '�� -�.� �� , -� � � �'�'�� _ ��,� � � �� s'� � �u�,, � , � � � � �� . �" � � � • � �,. �� p �' ` � � ��"`�`"� � �a`'� � � � � �"��. , .. ,. `�,�� ,�, �_ � t r �� .� �, � � . a �'� '�, , '�� +,. � �r !� e .� �,�,� � �� , + �� ,._� � � ,� � , I � � ^� �, �� :� :�: f: ��q � � 4��4 #.`.f. \� ,�' � 1 k � � ± � ` � ' YF nn � � � � $:ro ' ��i. � ��. �� • �. , �. , ,� '� 4 � , �� y . � � - ,., ° . '^ - : . .-�3 �sr, ��i' .�` •�+^�, �,� '� �y � � (.� } �X%so �G ...p. � a ., �'� . n 1�' �� , �� .,' y. �:�. . > ` k 4 .�+ .�, +C R �' ; �(� �(: '� � �' .?R �> '� �. +i�`s� � � �( ♦ . '$. (�Nr . � . � � � . ' ' +l T ° � .f ' .: � _: °i jj�. .A' . � . '4� �"y�� '63- E � � �� `. 3 .Y.: �� -��'�d j(! a /�� e ^�� .4 � 3 `!a"`Mt-n"ro � . �l� .T . � . . . r T� � ..' . e �i f . f �. \ �+ #� . ' " r .. � rT � �.,. +i Y . �` . . ��' w. �a`'�* � } � . . � ,y,� . . w , . � ,- .. . . „.. . '�. +�� . � . , . , �, 2n , , . . ��,b . ; <. i t4_ .. , ,Ae:�' '> { , �� -x . d. . p� - .e >,�}'�* . `x�`#� � � � �:: � � � � � . � a � _ p,QE�`'d'� � �, . � �,^;.�� .'!S" ,�, �?��H� , � � � Y . `� �':. .�� ,� . , `� °-� � ��, `:t : • � ' V � � f�'i.+§. � ��' . t, .� , °�'� � ,. _ t, , Yf � � . ti x� 5�' . �. �� 6 � � � � � ... �� Y" � .r ��: � � � � �� . �� ; .. �.f � �,� , R� �, `�(/ � o�° '� � �,, .� - . y ` ��' � ,�c -�" � � �? '� ` �s �`J �,''� � � �� , y�. �i- `� 6� t � .0 � t . n: _� "s. " �= " ..` '4.. � f ,Ptr,.¢ �r� � � � d� /� jyy tl�� " ' ��: 4s i » � .:$'t_. � ¢�� '��'� �'� � .�y�`i, F�� ' �� " r� ''ybn' T.. � 4' � . I' . y "e,� ��p " � �+'�,. a,� ��4 �� ' `� � ,�� {� � � ' t � � / 2 � * r�.�e i � k . �� .��/ �� ` . � ia . � ,.. r. y , � # � �✓ " � �i' .., �t.v . �� "x '`, �, � �� , �v�iT'► 3+ �`° `.�� , ,. � � �^t �' �< � v�� .,r , K ;.�,. � . ' � a � r,;r�� .,» ' : � J . /. ..r � . ' � + a \ � �a ; �,� -._ ,� . � � , , , , �i. . . .,+- ,. ..�' . .iY-� 4� §� . ;�� . . . � `� .. � �w ." �` ' �� +P t. � r ' �, �� ' . +r°d ' �.+� �: .m •�: , �� f j , �V .yt ��tt n �.` -� g[,��4��. -z�'i • qt��:. �M ::.� G'� �-.� �� >�$ " � � `� � �� -� "�� {��,�tY.: �p i � c � a '.�. `� 7� � :�,� . , ,�� ' �,� �� i .�n f ' f� � � ` i . r ) , -r i� . .. . ` �`'�'� {, � . .� . ... . -e.. _ � � i :- � . .. ��' . City of Burlingame Preliminary Design Review and Parking Variance Item # Address: 1532 Burlingame Avenue Meeting Date: 7/24/00 Request: Design review and parking variance for existing substandard parking space dimensions for a second story addition at 1532 Burlingame Avenue, zoned R-1 (C.S. 25.70.020, 2& 25.70.030, 1, c). Property Owners: Robert M. and Jessica H. Fellows APN: 026-171-090 Applicant and Architect: Jack Matthews Lot Area: 7,033 SF General Plan Designation: Low density residential Summary: The existing two-story house contains 2,721 SF of floor area (.38 FAR), including a detached single-car garage, and has four bedrooms. The applicant is proposing a 629 SF second floor addition (master bedroom and bathroom), increasing the floor area of the remodeled house to 3,350 SF (.47 FAR), where 3,658 SF (.52 FAR) is the maximum allowed. The first floor will be remodeled but no new floor area will be added. The existing detached single-car garage provides one covered parking space. A parking variance is required for existing substandard parking space dimensions (17'-5" wide x 19'-7" deep, clear interior dimensions, where 20' x 20' is required for a house with five potential bedrooms). Staff would note that there is enough floor area remaining on this lot after the project to accommodate the square footage needed to build a code compliant two-car garage in the future. Staff Comments: Attached Front Setback - 2nd floor: Height: DHE: Lot Coverage: FAR: # Bedrooms: Parking*: Proposed 29'-6" 27'-10" complies no change .47 FAR 3,350 SF 5 no change Existing 54'-0" 26'-11" complies 28.4% 2,000 SF .38 FAR 2,721 SF � 1 covered (17'-5" x 19'-7")* 1 uncovered (9' x 20' ) Maximum/Req'd 20'-0" 30'-0" see code 40% 2,813 SF .52 FAR 3,658 SF n/a 2 covered (20' x 20' ) 1 uncovered (9' x 20' ) * Parking variance required for existing substandard parking space dimensions (17'-5" wide x 19'-7" deep, clear interior dimensions, where 20' x 20' is required for a house with five potential bedrooms). Ruben G. Hurin Planner c. Jack Matthews, applicant/architect CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT TEL. (G50) 558-7250 FAX. (650) 696-3790 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: Jack Matthews Ruben Hurin, Planner COMPANY: DATE: John Matthews Architect, AIA 07/25/00 FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES: (650) 340-1677 2, including the cover sheet R�: 1532 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame ❑ URGENT � FOR REVIEW ❑ PLFASE COMMFNT ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ I�LEASE RECYCLE, Mr. Matthews, Attached please find the July 24, 2000, Planning Commission Minutes regarding the project at 1532 Burlingame Avenue. Concerns raised by the Planning Commission must be addressed in wriring or by revising the plans. There is limited space on the Planning Commission's ne� agenda. When we receive 10 sets of revised plans and determine they are complete, you will be placed on a waiting list. Projects will be scheduled on the Planning Commission's calendar based on when complete plans are received. As soon as the schedule is determined, we will let you know the date of the hearing. Please note that I am out of the office this week. If you have any questions regarding the minutes, please call Meg Monroe at (650) 558-7255.. Sincerely, Ruben Hurin Planner 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME CA • 94010 1532 BURLINGAME AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A SECOND �TORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING TWO-STORY HOUSE (ROBERT AND JESSICAFELLOWS, PROPERTY OWNERS AND APPLICANTS; JOHNMATTI�WS ARCHITECTS, ARCHITECT). Planner Brooks presented the staf�report. Commissioners asked how the number of bedrooms was determined. Staff noted that both the existing family room and office on the second floor are counted as bedrooms, since they each have separate access, for a total of 5 bedrooms. If one of the hallway doors were eliminated, then the office would not count as a bedroom because access to it would be through the family room. There were no further questions of staff. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public hearing. Robert Fellows, 1532 Burlingame Avenue, applicant and Nan Crowley, 127 N. San Mateo Drive, architect, noted that the project complies with the existing ordinance, there is an existing second floor, this will improve the street appearance, will match the first floor bungalow look, the garage is only deficient because of length and width for a two-car garage; the applicant submitted pictures showing two cars parked in the existing garage. Commissioner comments: could the upstairs rooms be reconfigured so that it is not counted as a bedroom to avoid the variance; variances are granted based on site-specific hardships, encroachment on pool is not a hardship. The applicant noted that to comply would have to reconstruct garage, the expense is a hardship; the office area is used as a home office, it is necessary to be secluded, do not want to open up to the family room, the office is not used as a bedroom, the existing garage accommodated two cars. The commissioners explained how the variance affects property, and asked if the interior can be adjusted to make the variance go away, could close off door to the hallway. Applicant responded that he is willing to eliminate door into office so that it will not be considered a bedroom and asked if there are any other issues. Commissioners noted they are not advocating expanding the garage, the variance affect will be permanent, can design be adjusted to make variance go away. Commissioner comment continued: there are two windows, one on the second floor front and on the right side elevation that are not in continuity with the rest of the windows, concerned about the shape of the windows, they are out of character with lower windows, should maintain shape of windows throughout; the outriggers are a nice detail, are the really as small as they are drawn, if they are bigger, they should be shown in correct scale. The applicant noted that the new outriggers will match the existing, probably 4" stock. Commissioners noted that the staircase on the first floor is a different size than the one on second floor; and asked the applicant to make sure the windows in master bedroom and office meet emergency egress requirement, would have to come back to design review if what is approved.cannot be built; need to show details on the plans, that new will match existing. Applicant noted they can provide drawings to show changes discussed and to clarify. There was no public comment on the project and the public hearing was closed. Commissioners reiterated the importance of ending up with 4 bedrooms, once variance is granted could come back with another bedroom and still not have to meet code required dimensions; think in general is a good project, but technicalities need to be addressed, parking variance is a big deal; if applicant can address concerns and do away with the fifth bedroom and correct the plans, can bring the project back to action. C. Vistica made a motion to set the item on the next available action calendar, with the corrections made to plans and comments addressed. The motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Commissioners noted that the item could be sent to consent calendar if all issues, including elimination of the variance, are addressed. Chairman Luzuriage called for a voice vote on the motion to refer the item to the consent calendar with comments addressed. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 voice vote (Csrs. Dreiling and Osterling absent). The Commission's action is advisory and is not subject to appeal. The item ended at 9:20 p.m. CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT TEL. (650) 558-7250 FAX. (650) 696-3790 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: Jack Matthews Ruben Hurin, Planner COMPANY: DATE: John Matthews Architect, AIA 07/21/00 FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES: (650) 340-1677 3, including the cover sheet RE: 1532 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame ❑ URGENT Q FOR REVIEW ❑ PLEASE COMMENT ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE, Mr. Matthews, The purpose of this fax is to remind you that your project, request for design review and parking variance for a second floor addition at 1532 Burlingame Avenue, is scheduled for a Planning Commission public hearing on Monday, July 24, 2000, at 7 p.m. A staff report and agenda has been sent to you. Please note that I will be out of the office next week. The minutes of the meeting will be faxed to you as soon as they are available. If you should have any questions regarding the meeting, please contact Meg Monroe, City Planner, at (650) 558-7250. Sincerely, Ruben Hurin Planner :Y�7i � rl:� � � � :�ily �:Zi7:\ �n Y�l:i rl � � [el•� � � oti1:Q+1 [�i [�] CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT TEL. (G50) 558-7250 FAX. (G50) 696-3790 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: Jack Matthews Ruben Hurin, Planner COMPANY: DATE: John Matthews Architect, AIA 07/07/00 FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES: (650) 340-1677 5, including the cover sheet RE: 1532 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame ❑ URGENT Q FOR REVIEW ❑ PLEASE COMMENT ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE, Attached please find my plan check comments for the project at 1532 Burlingame Avenue. In the comments, you will find requests for additional informarion required on the plans. and/or clarification (asterisked items). Once the asterisked items have been addressed, please submit 10 sets of revised plans to the Planning Dept. In order to be placed on the July 24 agenda, the plans will have to be submitted no later than July 13. A parking variance is also required for the garage width and length dimensions (see attached notes). Please complete the attached variance form and submit an additional $100 variance filing fee. If you should have any quesrions regarding my comments, please feel free to call me at (650) 558-7256. Ruben Hurin Planner 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME CA • 94010 � 0 ROUTING FORM Maureen/Janice/Ruben � % �d Date of Comments V� � C�.,,� ..1,�_� C�30 DATE: June 16, 2000 TO: �CITY ENGINEER �CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL �C FIRE MARSHAL _SR. LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER SUBJECT: Request for Design Review for a second-story addition at 1532 Burlingame Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-283-080. SCHEDULED PLANNING COMIVIISSION ACTION MEETING: date to be determined STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON: Monday, June 19, 2000 THANKS, _ .. .. ..._� _� .ti.�.��..........�..:r.:.,.�:. :.: : . �a:�. � � ROUTING FORM Maureen/Janice/Ruben -' I I Date of Comments �� DATE: June 16, 2000 TO: �CITY ENGINEER �CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL �C FIRE MARSHAL _SR. LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER SUBJECT: Request for Design Review for a second-story addition at 1532 Burlingame Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-283-080. SCHEDULED PLANNING COMIVIISSION ACTION MEETING: date to be determined STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON: Monday, June 19, 2000 THANKS, �,�, ciTi o � BURLINGAME � "��tmJur�E``0o0 Job Address: 1532 Burlingame Avenue Date of Plans: �une 14, 2000 Job Description: Design Review Lo-r f� �Eq : �, 033 � I. Se�-IoAc ks ��c; s-h"n �ro P� s e d A I lo�,,.e �I/ 2r�` � - — ------� -- ----- 1�Un7�C.nd/ `�T' L 11'�� —O'� � COw�O �� e S �' CnrvfC� �Calc o� Sr-}� plan �-o S�ow �lYJ = ( �-0��. 2, �o+ COveVAqe (�'O�lv )C ,C�JJ �= 2� �3 `� vv�Gy, al�vw<d � X � S'i� r 30-j City of Burlingame PLANNING DEPARTMENT (G50) 558-7250/ fax:(G50) G9G-3790 Plan Review Comments I(o�-10'� � �P�-3h� �8, q„ � �a,� �Za'- t'' x 3i'- q�� . Lm'-I' x Z�'-3") /gi_ � �� ,� �q�.5.,� 8�, �� 54, 5 �'��5 Izs raRe. 1"rtjPpSe 2oov �nd c �nar �- IS (��-(D'�r 1�'-3"� �ca.,+�'IP�eri -- ---- .__._..__ 2oc�o� �2g� �°l�1 ' Cow�o 1�'25 3, ��ov✓ /�r� �A.��O (�J2X �1D33�) �-1100� + 3o"l`p = 3�105$� � �2 TA�2� �X� S-h � l�ru C>Se �I — - - -------- ----- _ _ z-o n o 2-r z ��' C-e-) �ib G'- 4" x iS��2�� 5 �V�I �i�'-8" �c zC�'- 8") -- - - - -- - _ Co`f' L�_S„ X io') ��$ S`�' + l g (q' y q'- �o ") --�---------- ----------- -1' loz�s �►0'-3"�c io) _ 33Zn� + L�3�5 �I�t�-1"� 3r�_4„� 335a� � cj-! F�21 F--- fi 2O �3'-�o"x s'- 4") _ G�w-�I,�-eS. Z"►21 �' .3 & F<I�� , . . .... . .� . � _.a - ... . . .� , m.,,:�,,.....,. . ....,,�..�...�--.�-�z..x. ..a-�:--,-�---.-��..' _-- -.. . ... . .------ -- 1 . City of Burlingame Plan Review Process Buiiding Departme+ 8AM — 5PP1 696-160 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 696-72so PAGE: 2 <e� Job Address: ��32 $�Q�-��iCa qME �'J� Application Number: Job Description: 4, Pa r �c 'n ;, � n C r e aS� � -�-n 5 o i-e n-h a. I Io.P d v b o� S . 1=x�Si�'ng: I co�evcd �1(o'-In" �,J x �$'-3" r�}�, ��hco„eved ��t��2o'i �n� osved � �^v L�an A'Ilpw-C cI.I��'CI'd ' 2 c.c��ere d (�2r�' � 2c�'� I� vn�o�eve d �9� x 20� `/� Par�c,r� Jar�ar,� req�;re�L -�� park��q sp_ac.e., W�'d-��i ct�d 5� ��ei �� r l \ � A�q, ivn o-h cvrb'� I4��(o4'+ Q5�1 -Z� 45,32� �x,5-h��, . 4S•32' + 2�! u"= -�2, z �- PYoPast d; �s,3a' + z�, g3' --ts, �5' (2-,�- �o-�) - , MAX� m�v+� 1 �'S. 32� -4' 3a� = 75 �32 � �� P�CCiS2 S�ow 2X�S'i1n� pve�al� �P,�� p� S"h(U��tVC ,. _ C�. 7ecl;��,..q I-E�,,�� el��e �D,N,.E.� I�o;�+ o� I�Fpar-Fuves (L� ', r�fo,�'+ 4�.�')=z_ 4�.(vs' . �I�) � ��iS��i� + �}5i-1� �2= �S�Lc� � QSe s1�ow D,H��, S.e-�b�cl ��✓�e (8�-Co�� ,.e��bAcici a�o �4-�� S;de P��ev-4� ��ne o� �;�� lah, `1 -1, I�1� gc� Ilc�neo�t ✓ i� prov � cle I�+eVlO�'' G�PGLr a vaq.e_ C�, ✓v�Q n Sion�j �t^9�� x.. w�c�i �\ `i � � � v� n S-I- ��«-f5 -F � e C� w, ,.-. ," s s�' �� I� a S r e ��e S�-e d -} G, �< f � sk 1,1 l�%5 �e -h��}Tol. Pl�as� �d� �oie �i� s� I�� .-{- �� 1�Q �,� 1-e- �l , � Sent By: CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING; 650 696 3790; Jul-/-UU �2:2�NM; rage 4/� ��r ��; �u�i:in�� . : � 1/�Q�IA��E ��Pl:9C�4T00N� The Plann{ng Commiss�on is required by Isw to make flndings as defined by the Clty's ordinance (Code Sectlon 25..54.Q20 a-d). � Your ahswers to the followinq"queatib�s. wili �asstst the Planning Commiss{on �n mekiCla..the .declsiori as .to..whether the fi�dings can be made for you� request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back af this form for assistancs wlth these questior�s. a. DescNb� th� oxceptione/ or oxti�or�inary ra�r+cwnatare.ys a�r eondl�bni appAc�bl. to yo�r proparty which do not appl�r to odrs,r p�roperues in thls s�ea. � The existing detached garage provides a cleat interior space (as measured from the faces of the interior wall finish), of 17'-5" wide�by 19'-7" deep. This space is only 7" in width and 5" in depth less than ihe minimum 18' x 20' perrnitted for existing garages. The existing garage size is also integrally related to and constrained by the adjacent swimming pool and its patio. b. Exp/aln wh y the varFame �+squest !s necessary for tho p�rro�rarvat;on ond , s� yment of a subste�tlal . proporty. �ght. �ind whet uqr,easonab/o property /o;s or unnacessary bardahlp inlght iesult fro�ri .the de .ni�s/ of the epp!lca�on. , Compliance with current minimum standards would require the construction of a new garage with a clear interior space of 20' x 20'. Enlarging the width of.the garage from its current size would create an very undesirable encroachment toward. the existing pool, reducing the patio between the garage wall and the pool coping.from 6'-8" to approximately 4'-8". This would create a highly undesirable condition in ferms of both safety and reereational use around the pool area. c. Explaln whY �a P�'Posed use �t tho p�opo��d �r�tJon v�6►`�otb�r�detNmentel v�l�/uNous � P�aP�Y vr lrtrpravev»enta �ii !he �olclrrlty or tQ ,pi+bll� hea�lt/i, sal�ety, gseerp/ w�e/fer�e, or cvnv@nleACe. Although moderately s.ubstandard in size, the current garage is capable of functioning as a two- car garage as required, anct the existing driveway easily accommodates the third parking space as permitted. Allowing the garage to remain would not affect public health, safeiy, welfare or convenience. ,. . ... ., . . . . .. d, :.. How rv�l.�e, p�opased proje�t be..cav�pstlbl�t 4vhh.t�is sosthstf�s,, msss,. b�lk and aharacter of rhe: exis�tJ�ig and poren�ol.ua+�s on adjoinferiq: propertJes /n..thQ genewa/ v!clnftya The �arage is an existing structure, and its mass and a'rchitectural character is compatible with the existing site plan, dwelling and neighborhood. - � 12lY2 vr.inn