HomeMy WebLinkAbout1315 Edgehill Drive - Staff ReportItem #�
Consent Calendar
PROJECT LOCATION
1315 Edgehill Drive
City of Burlingame
Design Review and Variances
Item # ('/
Consent Calendar
Address: 1315 Edgehill Drive Meeting Date: 9/24/07
Request: Design Review, Front Setback Variances, and Lot Coverage Variance for second story
addition to a single family dwelling.
Applicants and Property Owners: Rafi and Aida Chabo APN: 029-015-040
Architect: Fred Strathdee Lot Area: 2910 SF
General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1
CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1(e)(2) - additions to existing
structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 SF in areas where
all public services and facilities are available and the area in which the project is located is not
environmentally sensitive.
Summary: The existing one-story house with a detached garage contains 1,183 SF (0.41 FAR) of
floor area and has two bedrooms. The applicant is proposing a remodel and addition which would
increase the floor area to 1,966 SF (0.68 FAR) where 2,275 SF (0.78 FAR) is the maximum allowed,
309 SF below the maximum allowed FAR. The current lot coverage is 1280 SF (44%) where 1164 SF
is the maximum allowed. Although no change is proposed to the building footprint, the applicant has
submitted a Variance application for lot coverage since the front steps will be removed (thereby
removing the existing nonconforming lot coverage) and replaced.
With the addition, the number of bedrooms will increase from two to three. One covered parking
space (10' x 20') and one uncovered parking space (9' x 20') are required on site. The existing on-site
parking is nonconforming because the clear interior dimensions are substandard (11'-8" wide x 19'-0"
deep). Since this is an existing nonconforming condition and no changes are proposed to the
detached garage, no variance is required for the parking space dimensions. One uncovered parking
space (9' x 20') is provided in the driveway.
Additionally, the applicant is requesting first and second story front setback Variances. The front
setback to the existing front steps (above 30") is 11'-0", where the block average (of the three houses
on the subject block) is 18'-6". The applicant is proposing to remove and replace the steps, which
requires a Variance. The proposed front setback to the second story is 13'-0" where 20'-0" is required.
All other zoning code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following:
• Design Review for a second story addition (CS 25.57.010, a, 5);
• First Story Front Setback Variance (11'-0" existing/proposed where block average of 18'-6" is
required) (CS 25.28.072, b, 1);
• Second Story Front Setback Variance (13'-0" proposed where 20'-0" is required) (CS
25.28.072, b, 3); and
• Variance for lot coverage (1280 SF proposed where 1164 SF is allowed) (CS 25.28.065).
Design Review and Variances 1315 Edgehill Drive
1315 Edgehill Drive
Lot Area: 2,910 SF Plans date stam ed: Se tember 10, 2007
Existing Proposed Allowed/Required
SETBACKS
__ . ...........................................................................................__........................................................................................._.............;.........................................................................................................................................._;................................................................................_.................................
Front (1sf flr): 11'-0" to front steps' ; 11'-0" to new front steps 2 18'-6" (blk average)
_.
(2nd flr): n/a 13'-0" (to MB) 20'-0"
Side (left— 1St floor): 0'-4" (to chimney)' (no change) 3'-0"
(left— 2"d floor): n/a 3'-0" (to stairwell) 3'-0"
(righf— 1St floor): 9'-9" (to kitchen) (no change) 3'-0"
(righf — 2"d floor): n/a 9'-9" (to BR2) 3'-0"
_. , .............................................. � ��.....................
Rear (1st flr): 22'-4" (no change) 15 -0
(2nd flr): n/a 22'-4" 20'-0"
� ; ....................................................................................................................
.................................................................................. ...............................
Lot Coverage: 1280 SF' 1280 SF 3 1164 SF
44% 44% 40%
. ........................... ................................................................... ................................ .... ...................................................................................:.....................................................................................
FAR: 1183 SF 1966 SF 2275 SF
0.41 FAR 0.68 FAR 0.78 FAR
. ................................................................................................................................................:..............................................................................
# of bedrooms: 2 3 ---
. ......... ..... .... .. ........................................................................................................................................................................................
Parking: 1 covered ' 1 covered
(11'-8" x 19') (no change) (10' x 20')
1 uncovered 1 uncovered
(9' x 20') (9' x 20')
Height: 16'-6" , . 24'-1..1"..__.._ .............................................. 30,_0,,._...._ .. . ...... ..
_. .......................... ......_................................................................. ..........................................................................__........................................................,........................................................................................._5_.............................................._ :...............................................................
DH Envelope (left): exempt
n/a (per CS 25.28.075, b, 2) ; see code
(right): complies
' Existing nonconforming condition.
2 Front setback Variance required because existing nonconforming front steps will be removed and
replaced with new steps of the same footprint and configuration.
3 Lot coverage Variance required because existing nonconforming lot coverage will be altered when
front steps are removed and replaced.
4 (0.32 x 2910 SF) + 1,100 SF + 244 SF = 2275 SF (0.78 FAR)
6 Proposed project complies with Declining Height Envelope on the right side. Encroaches into the
Declining Height Envelope on the left side, but exempt because the area of encroachment is a
window enclosure that creates no more than 35 SF of floor area, has a length no greater than 10
feet, and at least 25% of the face of the enclosure is window area (C.S. 25.28.075, b, 2).
Staff Comments: See attached .
Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on August
27, 2007, the Commission commented on the project and placed this item on the consent calendar
(August 27, 2007 Planning Commission Minutes).
-2-
Design Review and Variances
1315 Edgehill Drive
The applicant submitted a response letter and revised plans, both date stamped September 10, 2007,
in response to the Commission's comments. Listed below are the Commission's suggestions and
responses by the applicant.
9. Propose taller shrubs and other materials on landscape plan to break up the mass of the
addition.
• The applicant notes that the size of the plants proposed on the landscape plan has been
increased from 5 gallon to 15 gallon (see applicant's letter dated September 10, 2007, and
revised landscape plan, Sheet L.1).
2. Simulated frue divided lite wood windows are required.
• A note has been added to the plans that indicates true divided lite vinyl clad wood windows will
be used (see applicant's letter dated September 10, 2007, and revised elevations, Sheet A.2).
3. The bedroom egress windows on the leff elevation appear too small. Revise.
• The applicant notes that the egress windows in the front second story bedroom have been
clarified via a note on the plans to indicate that egress requirements will be met (see
applicanYs letter dated September 10, 2007, and revised upper floor plan, Sheet A.1).
4. Clarify spacing on balusfrade on front steps.
• The applicant notes that the elevations have been revised to show the 4" spacing of the
balustrade at the front steps (see applicanYs letter dated September 10, 2007, and revised
building elevations, Sheet A.2).
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted
by the Council on April 20, 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.
Findings: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Commission's August
27, 2007, design review study meeting, that the first and second floor addition is well-designed, and
that the revisions requested by the Planning Commission have been incorporated into the design
including revised landscaping that is in proportion to the mass and bulk of the structure, the project is
found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's five design review guidelines.
-3-
Design Review and Variances 1315 Edgehill Drive
Required Findings for a Variance: In order to grant lot coverage and front setback variances, 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;
(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.
Findings for Lof Coverage Variance: Based on the fact that this exceptionally small lot is unique in
this area and in Burlingame in general and that the property owner is not proposing to increase the lot
coverage with this application; the current lot coverage is existing non-conforming and the footprint of
the structure will not change, the proposed project will not affect the character of the neighborhood
and is compatible with the above variance criteria.
Findings for Front Setback Variances to fhe first and second story: The existing front setback to
the front step is non-conforming with a front setback of 11'-0" where 18'-6" is the block average.
Although the front steps will be replaced, the current conditions will not be intensified by the proposed
project. The front setback as proposed is compatible with the setbacks of other homes in the
neighborhood. Based on these findings, and the findings stated in the attached minutes of the
Planning Commission's August 27, 2007 design review study meeting, the project is found to be
compatible with the variance criteria listed above.
Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative
action should be by resolution and include findings made for design review, special permit and parking
variance. 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 September 10, 2007, sheets A.0 through A.5 and L.1, and that any changes to
building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an
amendment to this permit;
2. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's March 23 and August 13, 2007 memos, the
City Engineer's March 23, 2007 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's March 26 memo shall be
met;
Z�
Design Review and Variances 1315 Edgehill Drive
3. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the lot coverage and
front setback variances, as well as any other exceptions to the code granted here, will become
void;
4. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the
site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required
to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;
5. that any changes to
which would include
architectural feature
Commission review;
the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage,
adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and
s or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning
6. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single
termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these
venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building
permit is issued;
7. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance
which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste
Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure,
interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit;
8. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire
Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION
PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION:
9. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or
another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification
that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing,
such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural
certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the
Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled;
10. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of
the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; and
11. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the
according to the approved Planning and Building plans.
Lisa Whitman
Zoning Technician
c. Rafi and Aida Chabo, property owners
Fred Strathdee, architect
note compliance of the
project has been built
-5-
Cify of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes
August 27, 2007
9. 1315 EDGEHILL DRIVE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, FRONT SETBACKAND
LOT COVERAGE VARIANCES FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
(RAFI AND AIDA CHABO, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND FRED STRATHDEE,
ARCHITECTI PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN
Community Development Director Meeker briefly presented the project description. There were no
questions of staff.
Chair Deal opened the public comment period.
Fred Strathdee, 147 Leslie Drive, San Carlos, represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Complemented design.
■ On landscape plan, look at shrubs and other materials. Taller materials would be beneficial to break
up mass of addition.
■ Require wood clad windows with simulated true divided lights.
■ On the left elevation, the bedroom egress windows appear to be too small, need to revise on the
plans.
■ Clarify spacing on balustrade on front steps.
Public comments: none
There were no other comments from the floor and the public comment period was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
Stated that the Variance request could be supported because homes in the area look like they have
been built to the property lines, the proposed design is consistent. To require differently of this
property owner would deprive him of property rights.
Noted that the size of the lot is also a factor in considering the Variance.
Commissioner Auran made a motion to place the item on the regular Consent Calendar when complete.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi.
Chair Deal called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the regularAction Calendar when plans had
been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (Commissioner Terrones absent). The
Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:55 p.m.
10. 2000 RAY DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND LOT COVERAGE
VARIANCE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (DII
LEWIS, AZUL WORKS, APPLICANTAND DESIGNER; AND CATHERINE WONG, PROPERTYOWNER)
PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER
Senior Planner Brooks briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Deal opened the public comment period.
Dii Lewis, 531 44th Avenue, San Francisco, represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
Asked if the applicant is selling the property.
0
- F._R_S_TRATHDEE___ - � --- ---- -
ARCHITECT
� - -- ______-- _----
�.
�� �
DESIGN ANll I�EVELOPMENT
SEP. 9, 2007
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
5O 1 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 9401 O
RE: CHABO RESIDENCE
1 31 5 EDGEHILL ROAD
ATTN. LISA WHITMAN:
� �!� �.�'�,!� �
i� �_. (' 1 � 200 r
f;IT`( OF Bl!R! II�;GAME
P�,I�i�IVil�l� � L��PT,
AITACHED ARE THE REVISED DRAWINGS FOR THE CHABO RESIDENCE.
-NOTES INDICATING TRUE DIVIDED LITE AND LINYL CLAD WINDOWS HAVE BEEN ADDED.
-THE ELEVATIONS HAVE BEEN REVISED TO SHOW THE 4" SPACING OF THE BALLASTERS
AT THE FRONT PORCH.
-THE SIZE OF THE PLANTS HAVE BEEN INCREASED.
-THE EGRESS WINDOWS HAVE BEEN CLARIFIED AT THE FRONT SECOND FLOOR
BEDROOM.
SINCERELY,
��i�/, �!i%!y'
FREDERICK R. STRATHDEE
ARCHITECT
FRS:E�s
C-1 �'� �.�-� 5 R�+�� �;:.. 3.,�
SEP 1 U 2007
crrr oF sv��wcn,ME
PLp,fJNII�IC DEPT.
147 Lcslic Dr - San Carlos, Calil�ornia 94070 - TcL (Gj0) 637-1R20 - Fax: (650) 631-776R
Dec 18 06 12:1zp Strathdee Hrchitecture 650-631-7768
City of Hurlin�mc Pl:uu�ing pcpattmcnt SOl �cimrosc (toad P(GSO) 558-7250 T�(650) G96-37yU
p.l
�'��`�i�`L D
. � e,�
AP��,ICA,TIQN' TO �'HE PLANNI'NG COM1Vr�'�(�l'� 2007
�,,,. f - / CITY OF BURLINGAPv1E
/ PLANNING DEPT.
Ty�t� of ap�lication. �c�ign Rcvic;w �� Condit�onal Uxc Pcrmit Variancc
S�eciAl Percnit Other Parcel Nurr�ber:
l'roject nddretis:
AP�'�,ICAN'�'
Namc:�f� �C �7.,� �j l�
Address: �...�%.�_r� / � )�� I y,!�
City/Statc/7ip: �� L�' � ��,�,� q yo/o
Phvnc (w): � SS3 6/, �R
�h��-�z � t' `i�d �
(4:�/�" �G'o /X� �°�t�/
�
/1►RCH�'X'ECT/qES iCNE R
rv�,�: � ���� 7`�-��j�C c,_
Addre.,�- I47 4�.5 t,--1 � .,���
Ciry/State/"Lip:_ SI�N cpq,�� �[U7o
Phone (w): G sG -�, 7 -
P1tOPFR'f'X OWNER
Narnc: j��i�i�,►�,,����%%► l�a
Addre:sti: '
C�ty/State/7..'xp:1�u f'� �i ndar z C'�'4 �5/0/ �
I'honc (w):
(h): o �� vd�% `
(t):�/s bd/S'�� c�
Please iad�c�tc �w�ith an asterisk *
thC contact person for this projcct.
(h): G�` G37_ 1 fC?,b ,
(�: G"U-G ��
PktU.1F.C'�'DESCR(I'TrO1V: ADDLTIa T"C� a\ SIWGrC.E r',�H[Ly' /2��[QIE!�c�,
AFFAUAVIT/SIC.NA'I'URE: 1 hcrc:by ccrtify undc:r pcn:�lty of �crjury that thc inform�tion
given hercin is truc and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Applicant's sibn:tturc: Utdc: f o%- /�� -� �
1 know about thc ��ropuscd a�plication and hcrcby authc>riic thc ahovc applic�nt to subnait tt�ix
application to thc P(anning Commission.
Pmperty uwncr's sibnature: D�tc: �� -�v � d�
Datc: submiltcd:
ItiAI't'.I�kM
�
�� ���
'� � r-� �
�;f.� � #��_ 5����
�
c� `���:�
5�V �' � ,�-�� �p w�-�--t n�'� t�
�
tl!/ld/'LMl7/ 1.i:4l3 b5tlbyb:ifyb
NAc;t eaiid
v l� r�-ti ar� c.� �o ►�. N�w �. u� n.y s'CA i rc, s C iY� ►S� 5�.�-� �
C9ty of Burlinga+ne Plan�ing Dcpa*tmai+t 501 �imrosc Aoad P(650) 556-7a50 F(650} 696-379D � m� o-�
��������
�.-u ;, .. �.;:'
T � r: ••..; . . 'i : �i . � ' , 'a � •- �' .i:,7!:� -.�: : �• ���o . :
;;I�;��r, �x•��:�� 4 2�� (
- . . . - :.:;�` � .. . � . �i�..�:y
���:y �� . �,.:.i... ., ,... � i,� i_ 2
- . t 't���.:>=:
> �� �:�
. . . ,.� �
., .��'�._,-.:=r .��<--: � s.tc�'�u --,-:,y.;,�t �-• ,'�,:: �� :Y'< �-i
� • ... :,':r ��?R"�::�^�.'S';�:: ;�:: -: ... �Cx•� ...=�5.., r�,"'�'�'' l'�
-:��-�' �•' CITY OF EIJRI_I�G�ME
PIANNING DEPT.
The Planning Gomm�ssion is requir�l bY 1aw to mal�e fmdings as defined by the City'a Orddnance (Code
Section 25.54.020 a-3i). Your a�aswers to the foUowuig questioz�s can assist the klanning Commission in
n�aldng the decision �s to whether the fladings can be msde for yowr tequest. Please type or wcite neatly iun
ix�c. Refcc to the bacic o�this �arm for essistaace witki these questioas.
a. D�scrib� thc l�xcuytwn�al or �trao►•diieary circu►xstanees or condi�o�.�r applicable to your prnp¢�ty
which dn yeaH appl'y to othet pro,p�rties en tAtis area.
TN�S S1Z'�. tS SMA1.�.re.w ��j�a1a N@ARt,� �A�.t� bTHc�2.
SL'T8. l►.� ?t��. t�1G�c��.� Bon.1-}vOD .
b. ,�,1ain why�the vae�aeece request is �ecc�ssary for thepre�crvation axd enjnymant of a substantial
P�'�'P�Y �'�'I!t antl wJwt unrtasnnabl� piopertv [es:c or unn,eeessary hrtre��hip might resa�t forna the
d�nial of theiappticatior�.
U V rt- n.��rt.4T �S '�Co A��o w rH�, t�����. �n.�T
A U D/o K- ���p� ��- o�'' T K c. E.X IsT � W c.T 'F 1s-o N � SThi iz-S .
S'tAIYz.S l�.Yt.� u�.�AED �orL �cccsS Ta �}0 uSC ,
a F�cplaire wh� tlie pro,�osad r�e at Nee p�'oposed loeation will not bs da4�i�ieei�tbl or irij�riorls to
propeMy or i�prnvemBnts ir� the vicit�ily ot [o pabLic health, safetJ', 8e�ceral wel,�rre or cor�verrier�ce.
�vr� j�r+.opacnc. Jv-�-� Rdt�•P�1cS 'TH� G..X►sTtNc� sTAtr�.s.
w�.�� R N�.W N�ov+-�c. �TT�.acT ►v L EN't�.Y .
c!.
�low wi�T �rhd ,propos8d project be cbrnpadble witl� the aesthetics, mass, bulk a►ed charac�er of tl�e
ex�Pting rr�dlpoteattal usea o� adjoaning pro,perties in ti�e generot vicenil�T
pn,pppspz. � l� rJvs7' TO lA'1JnwoVE ��lJ b?�lST/�t1G�r GouDIT'�DIU
� �1 I� p!LO V � ra �.5
1'1 A SS A 1� � i3 V t...K,
Ai�GtSS,Q�YLv ACGESs �T'd HOu� .
� � x� o-Y- ,q., ► ssv c
�uo�v.riaace n.ppl;e.Hon
07/13/2007 13:48 6506963790 PAGE 08/10
�i �! IZ.. �, A 1•� G� �O Y�. �- 0 T G D V CYLA C,� �
C�fty of Butlitigntne Pltutnknfi Dcpartmont 501 �r.imrosc Road P(650) 556-7250 F(650) G96-3790 wvvw b�tl►nglme o_rg
�:. : ; �
��.�-�,�..�-`,�
�` rG�
� ?*,
.jUf_ 2 4 200i
• ` �, ,:;;.,_ ; ....: ,. . ..: •�,-. •.- -�.. . . „ .. , .. . .. _ _ _ CfTY GF rIIR!_h1GAM�
PL.ANl�ING DEP7,
The Planning Commyssion is rec�uired by law to make findangs as defined by the City's Ordinwce (Code
Section 25.54.020 s-�i). Your a�awers to the fo�towing c�uesti„ozes can assist the Alanniug Commission in
r��aking the decision �s to whether the findimgs car► Ue xnade for yowr xequest. Please type or wzite ncatly xu
aza.�c. Refcr M the bac% o� this form fo� assistance witk� these questions.
a. ,Describe tle� b_xc�ptional or �ctraordinarY circurnstances or cendi�ioRs app�icable to your prnperry
�+kRcl'i dn ►ior apply to other prop�r�i.ees en this area.
't" k1 � S g►'�'�„ ��+► i r� �� �, t..� -r �t A�.7 N��t�- ��{ A L tr o�' �t'olL.
StZ'i,S lw! 'r�i�. Ne-�<i�'�z'���
b. ,Ex,�tain wl:y i�he variarece request is necessary for the presarvation and enjny»eent of a su6stantial
pro,�erty rigMt anit what unreasnaabl� prn,perty 1os.r or unR�ecessary hard�hip might resr�l� fornt the
denia! of thelapplication.
�`1`A.�a2.s �►r1.� xJecESSAn `� �ori.. q cc�sS To � � us� .
�,�.� t�cElvtiBNT OF �x tsTl JUy- sT,9►�S w�c.L NoT
{1v G- I�RSE. C—X�'S�'! Il�� L.c�'j' �c V�lt.A GtE .
c. Explain wkyl the pro,(�osed icx� a1 ehe propos•ed lneation will not b� d�etri�,tentdl ar inaurio�is to
ptop4►rt�� or i�r;prove►nents in the vicanity or to public health, safety, ger�eral we�re ar convenience.
�T�tn-S fi►2-£ IV �CL`�5/��'LY �4 N D N� D'�.T1z.� �t. �uT?�L .
'1"H�SE. STPt L�'L-S W t�-�- N AV �. 1U � 1!� r 1�c'1' O N
l IJl ��•v vE.v► �� l 1U TC) ��4lL� •
ct How will thd prdposed,�roject be cbmpatible w�tJ� the aesthetics, mass, bulk and cbaracter o,�'the
existing a.nd�ot�nNal ►�ces on adjor:ning pro,�ert�es in th� general vicinilyT
S � h«�an- STRI�S �.X �s� o�u M ktiY �1F�i2.P�Y
n,�s'�D��IcBs . o't'Nc�l2. ?NAN A1V �MJ��-ov�D DES/GrN�
�V�,w sT,q�KS w �c.[� �V oT c�AN GrE "'t'N� P,�ULIc., oF
7'N I 5 t-� 0 u s�. q�N D wi L � p, c co M pA� �i � c. s w�� N
DTH�- � o vS�S I►U �'y � v � G 1�� t`� }ianda�lVatiatKe Applicetlan
06/13/2007 16:30 6506963798 �� �/'n� � G�—� �p,_� r�. tl��l°
, � ldp _`A,y G T O �Cb .�Ct-� i�
VT��""`-'
� �� � s�,,m� ,��:,�' �.�i
� �'y (.lty O��Ut'i1fl�R1E �ef11
�i
� ��
. L-�- :R'�;;�
� _-:.,. F�
�;.� � .
T1ae �lan�nit►g ComMission is required by law to make fndings as defined by the City's t?rdinancE (Code
Section� 25.S4A20 a�d). Your answers to the foltowiag quesNons can assiat the Planning CoAuniasion in
making the decisic�ai �s to whetb�er the �6ndi�aga can 1ie tnade for youx request. Please'type or w�te neady in
ink. Refer to the badk of this fo�om for assastance with these questions.
a. Describe th� kxceptionat or exlrao�i�►y circWarst�neas or cond�tloRs gpplicable m yourproperty
which do no� qpp�j► to otlier,pro,p�ertxes i� t�S �
TH� suPsJ�G'i'" p�ors.R-rY �S SN/�LI..A�!!J N�2��• TNIS Cra.s/�TL�
L►NRS �HE►t,� /�DAIT�ou�<. SpAG�a. GAt� P�c L.oGATBD. A VA�t.iANC£
wo �� l�o�" F3F lV�ssSA�t..y �F' Ti}1 s wc�R� /� s7Al���K-D
�iZ e. p►z..o p�TY,
6. �Exptain why �he variance regasst is n�cessary jor the prsservation and enjoyment of a substantial
P►oPerty righM` a�d w/�at we►�+easonable property Loss o� u�ersecessary kardahip might result forn� the
atenial of the �app�ori. .
t3+�ch�c� oF �rh� �-t�►1T�i� SpRcE. aV�iC.�13�fi. FoK- TtfC
��Co�a� Fc.00�. A.DDtT�aN T�tG roC.Dn.00� rx.o���.r�vN �S
Necccshn.�r To Aa.oV � a� �lu A�DcQv��~� s�a� Il-ooh. Tt�f�
I4�ow�Taa� wovc.� o�,cy �xpArv� Tt�E t$ovs� F�n TW �
P��.1�n.vov�S To 7 Hn.�� . M�sT oT�t�n— 1�pK� LN P�u�a.�.tuGrAr4t A1¢.�
1�1L.1'�A y A�` �EhS. 1s. � a�s
c. Explairi why �ie ,proposad rssT e a� �prop��se�ocaiaon w1�1 �tot be dek�ime�et,at or iri}urfous m
, property nr iil�eprovanee�ets in tJ�e vici�ei�V or ta public Ik�a�rh, saf� ger�al welfare or convenie+�c�
� 'rH� pnopos� pno.►s��, �oN o� Tttc secuND Fc,00rL wt�,c.
N°'�' � 6 L► LSTIz.t M@NTAL To J�ug[.l G 1'� EA LTH.. Ty C t1 SC ��'j1��
P/1-dp+�n-T� MhTU��S /�D�jqc��tfT !lS�S AAi/J Zod1/IVGt
Fr�'t- 4'hR�. /�2o ps,tz.7-Y,
d hTow witl tbeipro,posed project be compahble witle tl�� aesthe�, inass, bWlJt arid cJearacter di th¢
existiag ared �otsntid[ r�sas ox adjoiriing properties iri tbe generat vicinityT •
���L'N4AM.� HAs A vAR.t�Ty o� S/L6 AND S?yc.� o�c
�¢oM c.S ��t � HouSC i S t�e�st clM� To s�'�h /�►1 AA�v
oV-�' To �/Z.�s�9?�s /NT�.EsT 4JlylLG ,4�AX/r11Z� NC.� V��y�E
Spfi�-C l.��TH /IU A 5MA[L 54��1t-C �'DoTA�F= ."T�1�5 1�a►t6,A�S
u�o �ry� �►.Ass A��v� /3v�-,l� A.a� /L�pvc�s ?H� l�ty�c7-
U N � DJ �4 G� T' p�op cs,�c.T � E S. H�ao�m�vn�o� n�uo��«,
F.RSTRATHDEE ��` , ARCHITECT
- -------
, �-- --
DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
Ma.Y 31, 2007
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
5O 1 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 9401 O
RE: CHABO RESIDENCE
1315 EDGEHILL ROAD
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
WE ARE PROPOSING A REMODELING OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE WITH A NEW SECOND
STORY ADDITION.
WITH A SITE AS SMALL AS THIS ONE, IT IS A CHALLENGE TO CREATE AN ESTHETICALLY
PLEASING STRUCTURE AND YET PROVIDE NEEDED SPACE FOR THE CLIENT. 1 HAVE
ATTEMPTED TO CREATE A STRUCTURE WHERE THE EXTERIOR WALLS STEP IN AND OUT
IN ORDER TO BREAK UP THE TWO STORY "BOX LOOK". WITH THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF
AREA TO WORK WITH, I AM PROPOSING AND REQUESTING THAT THE FRONT BEDROOM
BE ALLOWED TO CANTILEVER OUT PAST THE FIRST FLOOR WALL.
I FEEL THAT THIS ALLOWS FOR THE BEST ARTICULATION OF THE FRONT WALL AND
THEREFORE OFFSETS THE PROTRUSION INTO THE REQUIRED FRONT SECOND STORY
SETBACK.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
SINCERELY,
������ ����
FREDERICK R. STRATHDEE
ARCHITECT
FRS:ELS
�; � � . . _ _ �. . . `. ....�'
��IAY F� I 2007
!�I (Y �F [�UFiLl''ti��=:fJi4t
Dl_i�NNli`'G DF_i'T.
id7 Leslic Dr - San Carfos, California 94070 - Tcl: (65U) (37-1820 - Fax: (6�0) (31-77fi8
�
51T�.
� � 3
1C�
v
� � n
�
r
v
EDGEI� i � L
C�-1 �F� U RE.. S 11� �.�1 C�
I 3�� EDG� H i LL 'p tZ l�l E.,.
F�ECEIVED
MAR 2 2 2007
CITY OF BURLINGP,ME
PLANNING DEPT.
�:
�
'°«
x�
s..
/'N •
' � !
�;
�
�`'
��� �i
��
�
�
M
��I
�I
��E�4/Ei�
7`�
� ��p?i
��N � �. � �..re
�
� .
�
����� � � 20��
w;-�- �� ����������
�LREdFdEt`v�Ca ��r�?-
�
i��
�
� �
���R 2 2 2���
�.�� o� e��€������,����
�U;rvt�lr�G ���t.
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
March 23, 2007
d City Engineer
(650) 558- 7230
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558- 7260
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558- 7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for design review for first and second story addition and
remodel to single-family dwelling at 1315 Edgehill Drive, zoned R-1,
APN: 029-015-040
Staff Review: March 26, 2007
1. Storm drainage shall be designed to drain towards the street frontage or to the
City storm drain system.
2. The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public
improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway and other necessary
appurtenant work.
3. The sanitary sewer lateral shall be tested in accordance with City's standards.
4. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works —
Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information.
Reviewed by: V V f'�� i
Date: 3/26/2007
Project �omments
Date:
March 23, 2007
To: � City Engineer
{650) 558-7230
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ City Arborist
(650} 558-7254
From:
Subject:
Staff Review:
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7279
❑ Fire Marshal
{650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
Request for design review for first and second story addition and
remodel to single-family dw�elling at
1315 Edgehill Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 029-015-040
March 26, 2007
8/r�/v
_ . _�%�c_ �.�.i r_�--��A�__����,�c�� ---_��-��-��—. ----___
,i�'�:C.._ ��u�_Q'r,.l�/�...UtJ.----..� �--l�,���--����"-�'
_ __ 1-1-i�---���--��� �---•�'���r1�-���L�%i.—_l��- --- ..--
_ _ _ _ _. _. .. _ _ _ _ ._. _ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ -- __._ _ _ _..__ _ __—. --------- _ _ -----
Rev[ewe y: Date:
� /,�,��--
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Staff Review
March 23, 2007
❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
Request for design review for first and second story addition and
remodel to single-family dwelling at
1315 Edgehill Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 029-015-040
March 26, 2007
�'Am���
�
L �i , �' r�..�� ��
� / _!�1 .r -�.%�
�_
__ ��
Reviewed b� Date: �� . �
�� ����
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Staff Review:
March 23, 2007
❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
Request for design review for first and second story addition and
remodel to single-family dwelling at
1315 Edgehill Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 029-015-040
March 26, 2007
���R� ����� ��-��-�.�� �.3 � �
,s S � � � i . _ �� �� 1i.�r �
_?� � � �/o �
Reviewed by.�—' _ Date: � /j3� �
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
March 23, 2007
❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
X Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
Planning Staff
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Subject: Request for design review for first and second story addition and
remodel to single-family dwelling at 1315 Edgehill Drive, zoned R-1,
APN: 029-015-040
Staff Review: March 26, 2007
�
: _ _. .. _ .---_...
_...
_ __, � S� �%� �%�-.�%-�
�..___..-.._ _ __�
1) All construction must comply with the 2��Califo�nia� Building �6des (CBC), the Burlingame
Municipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal requirements.
2) Provide fully dimensioned plans.
�3) This project appears to include a complete demolition. When you submit your plans to the
Building Division for plan review provide a completed Supplemental Demolition Permit
Application. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not be issued until a Building Permit is
issued for the project.
4) According to the City of Burlingame Municipal code "when additions, alterations or repairs
within any twelve-month period exceed fifty percent of the current replacement value of an
existing building or structure, as determined by the building official, such building or structure
shall be made in its entirety to conform with the requirements for new buildings or structures."
Therefore, this building must comply with the 2001 California Building Code for new
structures.
5) Due to the extensive nature of this construction project the Certificate of Occupancy
will be rescinded once construction begins. A new Certificate of Occupancy will be
issued after the project has been finaled. No occupancy of the building is to occur until
a new Certificate of Occupancy has been issued.
6) Comply with the new, 2005 California Energy Efficiency Standards for low-rise residential
buildings. Go to http:/lwww.enerqv.ca.Qov/title24 for publications and details.
7) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the property line.
8) Roof eaves must not project within two feet of the property line.
9) Exterior bearing walls less than three feet from the property line must be constructed of one-
hour fire-rated construction and no openings are allowed.
� 10) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that
complies with the egress requirements.
11) Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are
considered in calculating the allowable floor area. Consult the Planning Department for details
if your project entails landings more than 30" in height.
12) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers.
13) Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
14) NOTE: Plans that specifically address items 3 and 10 must be re-submitted before this
project can move forward for Planning Commission action.
Project Comments
Date:
March 23, 2007
To: ❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
From: Planning Staff
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
� Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Subject: Request for design review for first and second story addition and
remodel to single-family dwelling at 1315 Edgehill Drive, zoned R-1,
APN: 029-015-040
Staff Review: March 26, 2007
No comment at this time.
Reviewed by: �� Date: z 7��p �
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
March 23, 2007
� City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
� Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
� City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
� Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
� Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
� NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for design review for first and second story addition and
remodel to single-family dwelling at 1315 Edgehill Drive, zoned R-1,
AP N : 029-015-040
Staff Review: March 26, 2007
1) Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City
NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution including but not
limited to ensuring that all contractors implement construction Best Management
Practices (BMPs) and erosion and sediment control measures during ALL phases
of the construction project (including demolition). Include appropriate stormwater
BMPs as Project Notes. These BMPs include but are not limited to the following:
• Store, handle, and dispose of construction materials and wastes properly
to prevent contact and contamination of stormwater;
• Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including
pavement cutting wastes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemicals,
wash water or sediments, and non-stormwater discharges to storm drains
and watercourses;
• Use sediment controls or filtration to remove sediment when dewatering
site and obtain all necessary permits;
• Avoid cleaning, fueling, or maintaining vehicles on-site except in a
designated area where wash water is contained and treated;
• Protect adjacent properties and undisturbed areas from construction
impacts using vegetative buffer strips, sediment barriers or filters, dikes,
mulching, or other measures as appropriate;
• Perform clearing and earth moving activities only during dry weather;
• Limit and time application of pesticides and fertilizers to prevent polluted
runoff;
• Limit construction access routes and stabilize designated access points;
• Avoid tracking dirt or other materials off-site; clean off-site paved areas
and sidewalks using dry sweeping method;
• The Contractor shall train and provide instruction to all employees and
subcontractors regarding the construction BMPs.
1 of 2
Project Comments - Con't -1315 Edgehill Dr., 1St and 2"d story
addition and remodel.
2) The public right of way/easement shall not be used as a construction staging
and/or storage area and shall be free of construction debris at all times.
3) Implement Erosion and Sedimentation Controls:
a. Install and maintain all temporary erosion and sediment controls
continuously until permanent erosion control have been established;
b. Address method(s) for diverting on-site runoff around exposed areas and
diverting off-site runoff arount the site;
c. Address methods for preventing erosion and trapping sediment on-site.
4) Provide notes, specifications, or attachments describing the following:
a. Construction, operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment control
measures, including inspection frequency;
b. Methods and schedule for grading, excavation, filling, clearing of
vegetation, and storage and disposal of excavated or cleared material.
Brochures and literatures on stormwater pollution prevention and BMPs are available for
your review at the Planning and Building departments. Distribute to all project
proponents.
For additional assistance, contact Eva J. at 650/342-3727.
Reviewed by: �� Date: 03/26/07
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW,
AND VARIANCES
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for
Desiqn Review Variance for lot coverage, and Variances for first and second story front
setbacks for a first floor remodel and second story addition to a sinale family dwellinq at 1315
Edgehill Drive, zoned R-1, Rafi and Aida Chabo, property owners, APN: 029-015-040;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
September 24, 2007, 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:
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: 15301 Class
1(e)(2) - additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an
increase of more than 10,000 SF in areas where all public services and facilities are
available and the area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive, is
hereby approved.
2. Said Design Review and Variances are approved, subject to the conditions set forth in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review and Variances 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, , 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 24th day of September, 2007 by the following vote:
Secretary
�:cn:3��_r�
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review, and variances.
1315 Edgehill Drive
Effective October 4, 2007
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning
Department date stamped September 10, 2007, sheets A.0 through A.5 and L.1, and
that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the
building shall require an amendment to this permit;
2. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's March 23 and August 13, 2007 memos,
the City Engineer's March 23, 2007 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's March 26
memo shall be met;
3. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the lot
coverage and front setback variances, as well as any other exceptions to the code
granted here, will become void;
4. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on
the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall
be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District;
5. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or
garage, 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 Planning Commission review;
6. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a
single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and
that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans
before a Building permit is issued;
7. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling
Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects
to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full
demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit;
8. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform
Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION
PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION:
9. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential
designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an
architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design
which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as
shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing
compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the
final framing inspection shall be scheduled;
-2-
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review, and variances.
1315 Edgehill Drive
Effective October 4, 2007
10. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the
height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building
Department; and
11. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance
of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has
been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans.
-3-
�
. CITY OF BURLINGAME
; COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • � '�`�j�
_ ; � � BURLINGAME, CA 94010 � �:
PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) c�
www.burlingame.org �, • �
� °
.` � �
.,� ` ,� J �
.�ye� �•
Site: 1315 EDGEHILL DRIVE
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the
follawing public hearing on Monday, September 24,
2007 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA:
Applicatian for Design Review, Front Setback and Lot
(overage Variances for a second story addition to a single
family dwelling at 1315 EDGEHILL DRIVE zoned R-1.
029-015-040
Mailed: Septemher 14, 2007
(Please refer to other side)
016H16504325
�0'0.2�� ,
117ailed Frorn 9�010
!3S POSTAGE
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE
City of Burlina�
�
A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to
the meeting at the Community Development 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.
William Meeker
Community Development Director
(Please refer to othe� side)
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
�� � � ��`�� , ' �� � ��' .
�.` � � ,,�,�,+ � " '�°�
'�»_ / '*
� :��" � ���. �a -`� '��� .. �. t.�'� _ . .�n �� r�. _ ,� .
'%°` � M �* �rr ,s`, �, ,��' ��r �"° �?
� /�v , ,. �" . `.
� � �.y � � ` :k���4� ,f �;t�y :r '%��
6 ,�� � � � � f.
��� � -' �z'�c '�� ,� ''�w ��^`� � �
."�. �'^ �' . �� '� � /� � . < eA �.� .. .*" -``` _ q '�'.� `�' �
� �' S�, y�� � %. # '=«.� �: �''�i. � � �.
�. �� �a,�. q z t � ' .��y. r:�„ � /� �. ''`�'`,
� � r � �: .� � � � 'ae �,. , ' �
�, � y��i �� 1�.,,.� �' � 4 � � ��'�...:'� .r$�"i� � � , x'\ ♦ � iq�
� ,..
, -�� ��Y� Y •,, � V `�' �� :'� �� � � .:K ��� � -��
:
.
.
� .
� tn � � °�� �. A, ,.a .�}, � s*
„ � •
`A' � e""'.F'�
, , ..: r ��_ r�y`�z
.4, r
� � ' ' .'"� ^r��i"` �".'- . , ' � � . .
`� 4� ••. � t � � 2 ; ��, Jc
,��� ~ f c!+¢ - ������ �i n� , ,�.�•. k{- r � "��, ���y�r z"�'� , �� , ,��' �Y.
%Ks. � w � `� �..� �: �c ,.x ^�.: r �;�' � 'r;� a. _ +.n.'d ti `%
� £ . � '�� x � " x � +a q <ya; �
, �/ �,f� �'., 'p r, i� rfi:�°� � „ �. +g,,..� � "��,x«a+� .A
w v, a .♦ '"�•"
°�a � : � � r a '� �..s�+ - �y •� ' � `' � � ,y0 �,��+§ ,,. .r � � '��' � ' •
1 �.� .+� � � � �� ,r � "� ti � � ' � '�; � �� � .� � � �;: � .i.
:� ,�?�'�} ';' �,.5���.,,, � .0 +�.� 'Y.;� �'�';�:. . .� ^ai.+;,.�r� b�° �� � ;$Y � x }�' �.
V -�.�. ft mS� � $ V' .P �'��` �f . .
I : ` ... .�^ ,�,, �� t . ;:.
<
. � .
, ,
�,.�-� '� :��� � '.� �,€ � F ' � � � � °b/ '���
r '§ a =, ,
.
,�, �
j x , � ,
: p a ! v:
r . . .: ,
���s. �
_ ..� � .
� �� .c � � x� "� r.y s �./`s ' � � /' ��� y
�
, ,_ . •
� ¢� . . � ,� , r "�`�
. � , � , . �, . . � � • ��":�
.
. n ..
.
. �w: � � � � � ���
y,,�;�, . ,� , � ..
'� �� �. S i' � �
I G'.' 'i �rb 1��� ''ti., � i f . �� ,�' ��. F C. �• ` �� �jf� ,.Z#
�� . �,.n = "i r. �., s s ;�,� �+� �1 -c Y ���a `��d �" 9 .�..,s w �, � b� 'm i }1� � _
1� ���� A , �' i�V � ,,. �e.."�" „�, �� �m ' �4.
'� �' , , - '�i.
. r -
p �""� �� ° y'� . ff�-,''�,` �,,�� � � : .` ��:s .;�� . ,w�y�����W�,�'�� � .�y�j �,� _
:
,
.,.
. 1 N
� y
s .. w� .�. � a � , � ��. ` ,r Y � 1 � .. 'Ty�t'�'"!�i.v�'� WK 't�' , � �
,• ,.� �
� ��
�r '��' � � 4 �.h�: • � '���'��,*a,�,�;�. ` ✓ � ,� ,i� � T :
�`�?° �' � \ �e �„��,; ; "i1 . A .,` g.� .� ., :W �':':
;. - t ': �
� .r 1 ka� .+ � .� 'y p�. � �': 'ti " ,.�v � � _�- � ���`�
, `u`� �� y �6' �.?�'��FYT;. 3 '' . ,�� � f� ,'�X �V�
,,
� �..: i • �� 4 � �i ��j �, „ , ��`. � '� ��� ��. ,r,� ; , � �� �� .
�; � ��'� ��� ,�� ' � .t ' 7��� n., '�� ,�r ��
r
• �� � w� � ��`� 1
. :, , k a ;� r a '�` t � y, "• ``��r'�, . , '+' � ,k�.�>r
.; �
� � �,y �r,%� � 8� �L . � ' ��',r� 4�i�
� t %'" �'a. ��, }� "� ,,� � � s�:r,����. "� '� �� ��'�.M?1"�� t� ��✓'
�� �r+ � � �„ � � / ��.�; �"�>
,A �C� � � � . .? .�.�, f�� ��. .;� �
,. A � � ' , r �j ;°�' �, � :� � S V; �� '{� , � •
{� ko . ��a . �' .� � � 4 ,� �r2 '��a�b�_
2y %t " � � � r� �3 �,
� � . � d� �'`� v >
� . � w � � �3?
� � � � a � � � � � ,. � � � 4 ,�.:. , ';
e' i � i 'R
... � a �� �� � - b'at ,�z'v .. r��'�'� � ', fF �' � S . ��+ �.;3
,' �� fr � t ,p�'�* �.�,� � �.a ,i
,� .y,r, ,, r`± a'�: .� � � ���. .g - .
,,��,� �* �+� � � , � ,° � �.�^,��,� +��^,#e�' �w't �� a ;.; � m � � y\ � a ,� { , i .
, ` ..�
� a�; �i:� � . . � .,� �8� � �'� �s� , t ��i�i ,; �"'
Y
h � �
� .fi � ..rsc. .' t�t�ss*-- . r, � � 4 � ,, ' � ,. �r��.�� F i* �
R
� '�t
�p_ ��
.` ,
� o- �' �- �R��-'" �in a � 9.�.� '' Y � ,�� �
f ` r�A'�' ♦ E •- '.� � �` �;;. �� 'V�'� ,��. ` �` .�' � ,al�. � � , � � � � �` �' '�r.;.
,« ''' r�.r � ��+�" , ,�' � �1 ��� � � 2§ .r '9�.���
� � ` � �. •� tl �y � �f ���
'� � ���� � � � �� � � ,� �
: 4f := r �' . 4�, •fr ,. '1 �� � `w✓ ;� 4 .�� P 1 e'i' - � "'� �,. �.:
�,: � �C . � �� ,.
I ; i.' v � �(� � � � � s .� . ; • ` �� � �',� � n'4 4.'�' � uiR
. � ,. ..M � � s .e ae . �� s�'
. �a
r
. ;
.� ,�a r � x� � 1g�. ` - , d?p '�y � �. � �' �� � � � t � ..
. �t �. `� /�_�. � ,p�aa� �t'+ y��/ �
`� YpY � N , � �' 4 .:�y� � S/I��'��i2. .�? a! �, i 1['�� � +Y,h�:t � ` I � `�4' �.i...
q�„r :� u' R ,( .: A, &. � ,�. �1d1 �
•�. � ',6yy' � � '��i _ `1'�a��a =��7���:. 4:. .•�, S'�^ ,` 'YF Y�
�, .� @.' 4M'^k °L � � `x j �`h� ��+*� �}' y,. - 'T
t�, . '"��'R ,� ' ,� �' s'. ' . � ,�, . c hr� � a-�' � � � .B� �r`ax,"` i.,�. ,.�"���� � ,�� �' l�" i ,��` F� c.:
/�. ��2. �l � t:�. �f+C .� a ° 4 �r .s�. �y �.� •,� �,.�" n .�
S �
�¢� � �L Y 1� . y a f x,�, ¢.t
w�ff " � � . "� £ e.
� � aa� . +�% .�
� t . `k �i�t ,�< � 4'" C � � S �? i'y '� �"� �"'+
� � ,��
� �'., r � ► cyr . s � �(�, �, , �'
" � r `, � �,at��� � "f `t`>� �. /.s`` z � �la �� ��^� ���� �^� �
�-. ,f, ko� � * `�6d�� �*s Y�r��f �4�`4"�,.. ! �',�,�. � �.3^.�'.'1: '� r�ti4'�,AB► .,.A'�`+ua+ k,� v�E�:'�j "'l++
'�F�''' : t ^ . . �: � *' ';. j'\,
h 'VY �(� �(��'�°f 1,
.�,. .� � F 4 'xt" , • - , _ P.�".� • % .,.
. ,.
a � L ��
� � t .. �.. J w Og� w ���k.
5 � y* "� �s"
.
� � ��� 6' a a : � �! F � �_� •, "�'�, �{�'a '� a ��,.� '\' 1
�'`%� ;r��j �� :.'� � u,,�+�"`+.< p�yr �� �'►� , ��`'r.,����� . ��� �
�;� ( �`ti � n'" �
�. �' "� �, ' �� F � �^ ' � 4', � �,� � ` �,,, „� a .
. !'rc^` " � i, � � � - u�st¢ ��Y"4< t��`� � ,�i � � ��' i�� � ; '�I� � �.i � � �. .
t �, Zti . � .;,1� �, �x' ,a f ,,'�2' �" "` .�4.: ' -�, .� .'', �"'�, nr � � 1�`�� �yti.�" �
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes
Sepfember 24, 2007
1a. 412 BAYSWATER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR FRONT SETBACK AND LOT
COVERAGE VARIANCES FOR REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING FRONT PORCH ON A SINGLE
FAMILY DWELLING (GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; AND BOB
GLYNN, PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER
1 b. 1100 HAMILTON LANE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR SIDE SETBACK, REAR SETBACK AND LOT
COVERAGE VARIANCES FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (LISA
WINSTON AND PHIL KENNEDY, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND DANIEL RHOADS,
YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS, INC.. ARCHITECT) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN
1 c. 1315 EDGEHILL DRIVE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, FRONT SETBACK AND
LOT COVERAGE VARIANCES FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
(RAFI AND AIDA CHABO, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND FRED STRATHDEE,
ARCHITECT) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN
1d. 50 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUBAREA D OF THE BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL
AREA — APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A
REMODEL OF AN EXISTING AUTO DEALERSHIP (DOUG ROBERTSON, APPLICANT; KENT PUTNAM,
PROPERTY OWNER; AND PROTO INC., ARCHITECT) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER
Chair Deal indicated that he would recuse himself from voting on Item 1 d due to a conflict of interest.
Commissioner Vistica moved approval of the Consent Calendar Items 1 a through 1 c, based on the facts in
the staff reports, Commissioner's comments and the findings in the staff reports with recommended
conditions in the staff reports and by resolution. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi. Chair
Deal called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 7-0. Appeal procedures were advised.
Commissioner Osterling clarified that on item 1 c he had requested larger scale plant materials, rather than
larger container size; revised landscape plan shall be brought back to Commission as an FYI after changes
are made.
Chair Deal recused himself and left the dais.
Vice-Chair Cauchi assumed chairing the Commission.
Commissioner Brownrigg moved approval of the Consent Calendar Item 1 d, based on the facts in the staff
reports, Commissioner's comments and the findings in the staffreports with recommended conditions in the
staff reports and by resolution. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Terrones. Vice-Chair Cauchi
called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 6-0-1 (Chair Deal recused). Appeal procedures were
advised.
Chair Deal returned to the dais.
VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
2. 1569 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR FENCE EXCEPTION FOR A NEW 7'-7"
HIGH FENCE WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK (JOHN AND LYNN RYAN, APPLICANTS AND
PROPERTY OWNERS) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated September 24, 2007, with attachments. Planner Strohmeier presented the
report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Four (4) conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chair Deal opened the public hearing.
2