The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1400 Alvarado Avenue - Staff ReportCity of Burlingame IT ,EM _ � Design Review for a Second Story Addition Address: 1400 Alvarado Avenue Meeting Date: 2/22/99 Request: Design Review for a second-story addition. Applicant: Torin Knorr, AIA, Knon Architects APN: 027-182-250 Property Owners: David & Regina McAdam Lot Area: 6000 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 Adjacent Development: Single Family Residential Date Submitted: This project was submitted to the Planning Department prior to October 23, 1998 and was reviewed under the R-1 District Regulations in effect at that time. CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15303 - Class 3- construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures including (a) single-family residences not in conjunction with the building of two or more such units. In urbanized areas, up to three single- family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption. History: This application was originally placed on the consent calendar for the the Planning Commission's January 25, 1999 meeting. The commission pulled the item from the consent calendar and noterl some discrepancies in the dimensions and locations of windows on the plans and elevations, and voted to continue the hearing until the applicant submitted revised plans. The applicant has revised the plans to correct the discrepancies (see attached plans date stamped February 10, 1999 and February 17, 1999). Changes were also made to the design of the addition on both the front and rear elevation. The project was resubmitted to the design review consultant, and her comments on the revised design are attached. Summary: The applicant is proposing a second story addition to a single family dwelling which is subject to design review at 1400 Alvarado Avenue, zoned R-1. The project meets all zoning code requirements. The e�cisting two-story house now contains 2776 SF of floor area, including a covered porch and two-car garage, and has three potential bedrooms. The 884 SF second story addition will add a master bedroom, for a total of four bedrooms. There is an existing attached two-car garage which measures 19'-0" x 24'- 8" interior dimensions. C.S. 25.70.030 (d) states that an existing garage not less than 18 feet wide and 20 feet deep interior dimensions shall be considered to provide two covered off-street parking spaces. The total floor area of the remodeled house will be 3560 SF (excluding 100 SF of the covered porch, which is exempt from floor area ratio calculations)). Because floor area of the main structure would increase by less than 50% (28.4% increase), the project is not considered new construction and is not required to meet current code requirements for setbacks, height, lot coverage, floor area ratio and parking. Staff Comments: The City Engineer notes (August 10, 1998 memo) that the roof drainage shall be addressed on the construction plans. The Chief Building Inspector notes (August 11, 1998 memo) that the stairway must meet all requirements for winding staircases. The Fire Marshal had no comments on the project. Design Review for a Second Story Addition PROPOSED � ' ,: ►. Front: 1 st, flr 2rtd flr no change 24'-9" Side (left), Ist flr: 2nd flr: Side (right): Rear: 1 st flr 2nd flr LOT COVERAGE FAR: PARKING: HEIGHT.• DH ENVELOPE: BEDROOMS: no change 23'-4" no change no change no change no change N/A, not new construction no change 26'-6" (from avg. top of curb) meets requirements 4 Ttiis project meets all zoning code requirements. EXISTING 17' -9" 71'-11" 2'-0" (garage) 9�2" (existing nonconforming) . � 28'-5" 28'-5" 40. 3 % (2419 SF) (existing nonconforming) 2 covered in garage (19'-0" x 24'-8") 23'-10" 3 ] 400 Alvarado Avenue ALLOWED/REQ'D 15' or block avg. 20' -0" 7'-6" 12' -0" 4'-0" 15' -0" 20' -0" 40 % (2400 SF) 3174 SF/0.52 1 covered + 1 uncovered 30' /2 'h stories see code N/A Design Reviewer Comments: In the revised comments dated February 16, 1999, the design reviewer notes that there are still some discrepancies in the plans regarding existing conditions. She notes that the west elevation does not illustrate the change in elevation for the front porch, and the east elevation is missing a first floor window. These comments were passed on to the applicant and Sheet A2.0, first floor plan, and Sheets A3.0 and A3.1, elevations, date stamped February 17, 1999 have been corrected. In her original comments the design reviewer notes that the existing residence is compatible with the neighborhood, although the style of the house appears to be newer than the adjacent residences. It has a stucco finish at the first level and the second level is wood siding. It combines the styles and materials utilized in a neighborhood of the stucco and wood finishes. With respect to parking, she nofes that the house is located at a corner lot, and the garage is located off Alvarado near the sidewalk. This is typical in this area for the corner homes, and there are no changes proposed in the parking. 2 Design Review for a Second Story Additio�r 1400 Alvarado Avenue The reviewer notes that the architect proposes incorporating the existing materials and roof slope in the addition, and is following the design of the original residence. The window patterns and style are in accordance with the existing home. Measures were taken to alleviate bulk caused from a second story addition: the addition is set back from the front of the house on both Alvarado Avenue and Hillside Drive; the addition incorporates the wood siding used on the existing second floor; and the addition is also buried in the first floor roof on the west side, therefore, reducing its scale. Due to the location of the property, there are very few homes which can see the addition. The design reviewer states that there is a lot of mature landscaping on the property and in the vicinity. The adjacent house to the east, 2714 Hillside Drive, is currently separated from the project by mature landscaping. Care should be taken to preserve this landscaping during the construction, therefore retaining the privacy of the two residences. Revised design: The reviewer notes that the revised design breaks up the roof line more than the originally proposed elevation, which gives it an even less bulky look. The transition between the new and existing second floors flow better with the new scheme than originally proposed. This scheme also allows for a more interesting rear elevation at the second floor. Design Reviewer Recommendations: The design reviewer originally noted that the addition is appropriate for the style of the existing residence. The addition will have little impact on the neighborhood, due to location of the property, consistency of design with the existing residence, and the mature landscaping on the property and in the neighborhood. The revised scheme is well thought out and lends itself to a nice second floor master bedroom addition. It is recommended that the landscaping on the east side of the property should be retained and should be protected during construction. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on Apri120, 1998 are outlined as follows: 1. Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. 3 Design Review for a Second Slory Additior: 1400 Alvarado Avenue Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be by resolution and include findings, and 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 date stamped February 10, 1999, sheets A1.0, A2.1 and A4.0, and date stamped February 17, 1999. sheets A2.0, A3.0 and A3.1; 2. that the landscaping on the east side of the property shall be retained, and shall be protected during construction by employing a program developed by a professional landscaper and approved by the City's Senior Landscape Inspector; 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the second floor, 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 4. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Maureen Brooks Planner c: Torin Knon, AIA, Knorr Architects, applicant � Design Review Comments City of Burlingame Property Owner: Applicant Name: Project Address: Date of Review: Dave & Gigi McAdam Torin Knorr AIA 1400 Alvarado Avenue 16 February 1999 Preface to Review: The elei�atiorrs arici plarls have discre�ancies. The west elevatiott does not illustrate the change in elevatiort for the front �orch. The east elevatiori is missing a first fZoor window. I was urzable to verify the north elevation as there was no one home, arTd the dog did raot wartt me to eriter the yard. Design Guidelines — new commerits rn italic 1. COMPATIBILITY OF THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE WITH THAT OF THE EXISTING CFIARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. No Change. The existing residence is compatible with the neighborhood, although the style of this house appears to be newer than the adjacent residences. It has a stucco finish at the first level, and the second level is wood siding. It combines the styles and materials utilized in a neighborhood of the stucco and wood finishes. 2. RESPECT THE PARKING AND GARAGE PATTERNS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. No chnnge. The house is located at a corner lot. The garage is located off Alvarado near the sidewalk. This is typical in this area for the corner homes. There are no changes proposed in the parking. 3. ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, MASS AND BULK OF THE STRUCTURE, AND INTERNAL CONSISTENCY OF THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN. The architect proposes incorporating the existing materials and roof slope in the addition. He is following the design of the original residence. The window patterns and style are in accordance with the existing home. There were measures taken to alleviate bulk caused from a second story addition. The addition is set back from the front of the house on both Alvarado and Hillside Streets. The addition incorporates the wood siding utilized on the existing second floor. The addition is also buried in the first floor roof on the west side, therefore, reducing its scale. The revised desigri breaks r�p the roof lirie more thara the origirrally�ro�osed e%vatiorr, therefore, givir�g rt arr ei�en less br�lky look. The trarzsitiorr betweerz the riew arid existirzg secorld fZoors are fZow better with the riew scheme thart Page 2 McAdams Residence 1400 Alvarado Avenue originally proposed. This scheme also allows for a more interesting �•ear elevatiorz at the second floor. 4. INTERFACE OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE WITH THE ADJACENT STRUCTURES TO EACH SIDE. No change. Most of the homes in the area are two-story. The house to the east, 2714 Hillside, separates the two homes with a driveway. This residence also has a second floor, therefore, is not dwarfed by a neighboring second floor addition. The house to the north, 1404 Alvarado, is an existing two-story home. It is located adjacent to the existing second floor of said property. The proposed addition is shielded by distance and landscaping. Due to the location of the property, there are very few homes visible from the property that will be effected by the addition. 5. LANDSCAPING AND ITS PROPORTION TO MASS AND BULK OF STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS. No change. The property and vicinity have a lot of mature landscaping. The addition will be shielded on the north by thick landscaping. The adjacent house to the east, 2714 Hillsdale is currently divided by landscaping. Care should be taken to preserve this landscaping during the construction, therefore retaining the privacy of the two residences. RECOMMENDATIONS: The addition is appropriate for the style of the existing residence. As previously mentioned, please retain the landscaping on the east side of the property during construction. I feel the addition will have little impact on the neighborhood, due to location of the property, consistency of design with the existing residence and the mature landscaping on the property and in the neighborhood. I feel this revised scheme is well thought ozit arzd lerlds rtself to a raice second fZoor master bedroom addition. �,��'"" % f �� 0 Catherine J.M. Nilmeyer AIA 1 hoz�r �� cir � �R� CITY OF BURLINGAME � APPLICATION TO Z� PLANNING COMIVIISSION �e� ..� Type of Application: Special Permit Variance Other Project Address: _ � �%U� �G(/�"z,9TJ4' � � Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 027 -- i82 - 2,5� APPLICANT �- Name: %l��/�t/ l�l/lSi2/Z �1/� Address:_ //� �/�'G� �'U� City/State/Zip: �/�/ /Lt,�� f YO Phone (w): ,3 `�'�'I � 7S� y (h): fax: 3 `� l � 7S-i� ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Name: �%C�/�/2 /��CC�/�—ZT� � Address: //� J�/�Gtil ,�}'j/L� City/State/Zip: � '� - �`E %� � Phone (w): ,� �%l1 � ?S� y (h): f�: 3y�-�s�� PROPERTY OWNER Name: T��'l/��"G"/C/ OU c�%/�'�% Address: / y�� /��`��D /�-' City/State/Zip: ��'//�Gtivlvil'I�'1 � Phone (w): �h� �- fax: Please indicate with an asterisk * the contact person for this application. PROJECT DESCRIP'rION:_ �Q��7Z�/�' /-� � 7U �T . ��//� �5��-' Y � /�-S � TL /��i��. /.�� AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and conect to the best of my knowledge and belief. �� t's Date I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. X �� 1 r.;�; Property Owner s Signature Date ----------------------------------------------FOR OFFICE USE ONLY -----------------------------------------� Date Filed: F�; ` ` � " � � " � � AUG - 6 199$ Planning Commission: Study Date: Action Date: CITY OF BURL�NGAME PLANNING DEPT. ROUTING FORM DATE: August 6, 1998 TO: �CITY ENGINEER CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL FIRE MARSHAL SR LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER SUB.TECT: Request for design review for a second story addition at 1400 Alvarado Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-182-250. SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING: September 28, 1998 STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON: Monday, August 10, 1998 THANKS, Maureen/Ruben � 1c' �� Date of Comments / /Z� �e - c�e.c i' - ..e �� r..� �- �-`��-�'�-�9�, � S " � �..�.�-�1, � ROUTING FORM DATE: August 6, 1998 TO: CITY ENGINEER �CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL _FIRE MARSHAL SR. LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER SUBJECT: Request for design review for a second story addition at 1400 Alvarado Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-182-250. SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING: September 28, 1998 STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON: Monday, August 10, 1998 THANKS, Maureen/Ruben S�{-��-w�� w r n�,e�s , ,��5� ��F �/ � � � ��Date of Comments r` ��C� � l/ c�� '. G� � e�d�';r� CITY OF BURLINGAME E PLANNING DEPARTMENT �501 PRIMROSE ROAD � BURLWGAME, CA 94010 TEL: (650) 696-7250 14�� ALVi?RAUO A6'EPdUE A�'�J:0�7-18�'-c�k Applicatian for design review for a second pUBLIC HEARING storY addition at 14�k'� Alvarado Avenue, zoned NOTICE R-i. The City of Hurlingame Rlanning Commission anno�_inces thE tollowing p�_�blic he�ring on Monday, January 25, 1999 at 7:00 �. M. in the ��y"'��iaTl o�_�nc—il—Cfiamber�s loeated at 5�1 F�r�imr-�ose Road, B�_�rlingame, Califor,nia. Mailed January 1�, 1999 (Plense refer to other side) .s� ., z ��. a � ; � �v t:, F�w�Y �:.'�'►`.��T� `.�, � s ^A �;,x"'x"' � :;.{.�'�"r !�S,> ;,��;; ?��..` ,.5% � _ $f=�, � ..r'� .. :a= �'a�. , .:d4�+r .fi�h' _ _ t ..as... � �'�i�,,�:,,�� : CITY OF B URLINGAME 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 conespondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearang, Property owners who receive ttus notice aze responsible for infonning their tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 696-7250. Thank you. `t� aa r � � w�:; y Y �� x � � �; s 3a #, � : it� '�,fa- Margaret Monroe ` � � � � �' ,� � Ciry Planner =��, �,� .� ,... _ r...�,.� . PUBLIC-HEARING NOTICE /, ; ;� (Please refer to other side) B��l i TO �� i • �, � � � ;� � Q � � AJEtiIJE " � � � ,■ •�• � �� ` r � � .♦, '+y ..:� . � � � �=-� ; - - �-� •, �• �. � . !• ,2 � ' �� 2704 ._1 2-tOs � Q ;'r' �. �. r � �� j.- � Z0� dl � 2'�O`f �- � � �, � � _. . 27 ► � S L�ll� t< _ !�• k. � 1 � � . � , i : '� ��t4 t*Iz. 1408 1404 �_ l400__ J .. AwaR.aoo AdE�.IVE - �------ — �` � ' ' �� a � � � •, � , �:. �.� , � F. i �„� _;� ^ ,u , � � ;� b �. � y %R ` j � �. .. , �� o � . ` . Q� �sid ��°9`' �qoo tsgY' � \r ' ♦ � , - - -; � - - - . � ... `� �/ 1 _ � ��`��'y / .� co � < v� "� �` .�+r � �s a 380 �� z 13�5 � : , -��r �� ,,• �pc ; . � �3��0 G►�G�f�i RFSOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND DESIGN REVIEW RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: ' '�• �� c- � •�• :� � .�� • �:- .�- • �- •� -. • • . •i� �� .�� •i 'Id : .�• : -� •�-_� . . . /. � .. ;- �. U L1.11 � ��'� �• 1' i�\ � : � WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on February 22, 1999 , 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 CEQA Article 19, Section 15303, Class 3, construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures including (a) single-family residences not in conjunction with the building of two or more such units 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, Dave L.�zuriaga , 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 22nd day of Februarv, 1999 , by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOE.S: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: SECRETARY EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval categorical exemption and design review 1400 Alvarado Avenue effective March 1, 1999 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped February 10, 1999, sheets A1.0, A2.1 and A4.0, and date stamped February 17, 1999. sheets A2.0, A3.0 and A3.1; 2. that the landscaping on the east side of the property shall be retained, and shall be protected during construction by employing a program developed by a professional landscaper and approved by the City's Senior Landscape Inspector; 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the second floor, 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 4. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1995 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. 2