HomeMy WebLinkAbout1249 Bernal Avenue - Staff Report (2)Item No. �
Study Calendar
City of Burlingame
Lot Coverage and Side and Rear Setback Variances for a Single Story Addition
Address: 1249 Bernal Avenue Meeting Date: 4/26/04
Request: Lot coverage, side and rear setback variances for a single story addition at 1249 Bernal Avenue,
zoned R-1 (C.S. 25.28.065, C.S. 25.28.072 (c)(d))
Applicant/Property Owner: Linda Frye APN: 026-173-020
Designer: Mark Robertson Lot Area: 9,500 SF
General Plan: Low density residential Zoning: R-1
Summary: The applicant is requesting lot coverage, side and rear setback variances for a 61 SF single story
addition at 1249 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1. Easton Creek runs through the subject property, which is almost
square, 100 feet wide and 95 feet deep. The garage is built on the left side of the creek and the existing single
story house is built on the right side of the creek. There is a covered deck constructed over the creek that
connects the house and the garage. Portions of the deck that are over 30" above grade and/or are covered are
counted toward lot coverage.
The proposed single story addition is 61.25 SF of the master bathroom along the right rear side of the house.
Because of bridging the creek the existing site is already over on lot coverage at 41.3% (3,930 SF) where 40%
(3,800 SF) is the maximum lot coverage allowed. With the proposed addition the lot coverage will increase to
42.0% (3,991 SF), which requires a lot coverage variance. The floor area will increase to 3,344 SF (0.35 FAR)
where 4,140 SF (0.43 FAR) is the maximum floor area allowed. The areas below the deck (272 SF) over
Easton Creek that are more than 6 feet in height, measured from grade to the underside of the deck, are counted
in floor area, as well as areas under the covered portion of the deck (485 SF).
The existing right side and rear setbacks are non-conforming, with the right side setback at 3' 1" where 7' is
requireci, and the rear setback at 2' where 15' is required. The proposed single story addition will have a 4'8"
right side setback and an 11' rear setback, requiring both side and rear setback variances.
The proposed addition requires:
• Lot coverage variance, 42% (3,991 SF) proposed where 40% (3,800 SF) is the maximum lot coverage
allowed;
• Side setback variance for a 4'8" right side setback where 7' is required, and 3'1" for the existing right
side setback where 7' is required; and
• Rear setback variance for an 11' rear setback where 15' is required, and 2' for the existing rear setback
where 15' is required.
PROPOSED EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D
SETBACKS
Front: No change 12' 15' or block average
Side (left) No change 2' * 7'
Side (riglzt): 4'8"' 3'1" * T
Rear: 11, z 2, * 15'
-1-
Lot coverage, side anct rear setback variances 1249 Bernal Avenue
PROPOSED EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D
LOT COVERAGE: 42% 41.3%* 40%
(3,991 SF) (3,930 SF) (3,800 SF)
FAR: 3,344 SF/ 3,282 SF/ 4,140 SF/
0.35 FAR 0.34 FAR 0.43 FAR
PARKING: No change 1 covered in garage 2 covered in garage
(19' x 23')* (20' x 20')
+ 1 unc. in driveway + 1 unc. in driveway
HEIGHT: 10'6" 11'6" 30' or 2'/2 stories
* �xisting non-coraforming
1 Side setback variance for a 4'8" side setback where a 7' side setback is required;
2 Rear setback variance for 11' rear setback where 15' rear setback is required; and
3 Lot coverage variance for 42% lot coverage where 40% is the maximum allowed.
Staff Comments: See attached. Planning staff would note that this application includes variances for two
non-confonning setback requirements with the condition that should this property ever be re-used/constructed
or a major remodel occur that all applicable regulations required in the code at that time shall be met on the
site. The reason is that under current code if a house with non-conforming setbacks is demolished in a disaster
or by fire it can be replaced as it was originally on the lot. Given the extent of the current exceptions to the
code and since the property owner is requesting to make an addition which still does not conform to present
setbacks and increases the lot coverage, which also extends the life of the substantial existing nonconformity it
seems appropriate to have this property become compliant with the code should it ever need to be replaced.
Catherine Barber
Planner
c: Mark Robertson, designer
-2-