The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1509 Howard Avenue - Approval Letter�� CITY p � � BIJ�INGAME m 'y�,� 90 NnT[.c �tmc �• The City of Burlingame CTTY HALL 501 PRA�ROSE ROAD TEL: (650) 558-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX: (650) 696-3790 JanUary 8, 2002 Jirayr and Kohar Kourouyan 1044 Lorne Way Sunnyvale, CA 94087 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Kourouyan, Since there was no appeal to or suspension by the City Council, the December 10, 2001 Planning Commission approval of your application for design review and a front setback variance became effective January 7, 2002. This application was to allow a first and second story addition at 1509 Howard Avenue, zoned R-l. The December 10, 2001 minutes of the Planning Commission states your application was approved with the following amended conditions: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on ihe plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped October 12, 2001 Sheets Al,A2, A4, and date stamped November 29, 2001 Sheets A3 and Ll; 2. that the conditions of the City Engineer, Lnief Building Official and Recycling Specialist memos dated October 22, 2001 and November 15, 2001 shall be met; 3. that any increase to the habitable basement floor area and any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure, replacing or relocating a window (s), adding a dormer (s) or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 4. that all the windows on the approved plans, shown as true divided light windows, shall be installed as the true divided light windows; and 5. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Reimbursement of the balance of the design review deposit has been processed and will be mailed to you under separate cover. January 8, 2002 1509 Howard Avenue page -2- All site improvements and construction work will require separate application to the Building Department. This approval is valid for one year during which time a building permit must be issued. One extension of up to one year may be considered by the Planning Commission if application is made before the end of the first year. The decision of the Council is a final administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. If you wish to challenge the decision in a court of competent jurisdiction, you must do so within 90 days of the date of the decision unless a shorter time is required pursuant to state or federal law. Sincerely yours, ��m�� Margaret Monroe City Planner CAK\s 1509HOWA.cca c. Dynamic Design, Kamal Tabib, designer Chief Building Inspector Chief Deputy Valuation, Assessor's O�ce (LOT 3 BLOCK 5 BURLINGAME PARK NO 2 RSM B/17;APN: 028-292-260) ROUTING FORM DATE: October 22, 2001 TO: ✓City Engineer Chief Building Official Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist Sr. Landscape Inspector City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for design review for a first and second story addition at 1509 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-292-260. � ROUTING FORM DATE: October 22, 2001 TO: _City Engineer ✓�Chief Building Offieial Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist _Sr. Landscape Inspector _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff � SUBJECT: Request for design review for a first and second story addition at 1509 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-292-260. STAFF REVI�W: Monclay, October 22, 2001 -Tti,3 �s a ��- s��r ��r�y . �o��e 5�..�0 eki f�a-� �ii�O �looy a�GD �v�s s w ry ��►S r"t �oas��.,t,1'� G nclo.s�i roa�s . _ � .�e �� J�'l�s��.%:s f�jy/ w N BD "-► �UG)! �� T�' 1` 1 �1 I � �r� y��,� � f ��v� s�o�s � l��l� r rl ,SD/ Y�� Reviewed By: Date of Comments: �, � 2�T d � G�id -�j N7,�vV %, 1 b�s��c.� �� -� r�z�� v�e C��, •tie � a�i� n Pe� � e� S�ee�—.e�G�f f� . ROUTING FORM DATE: October 22, 2001 TO: City Engineer _Chief Building Official Fire Marshal ✓Reeycling Speeialist _Sr. Landscape Inspeetor _City Attorney FROIvI: Planning Staff SUBJ�eT': Request for design review for a first and second story addiaon at 1509 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-292-260. STA�F REVIEW: Monday, October 22, 2001 e l� c S S. � . �/�/- \ � 4�' � �. �livV �O Reviewed By: a �. / . �� v \ � R _ , �'�.�,f �� . ' � " �v � ` `E-..�.�, " r G �—.� aJa r �� —s '�-�-� r u,,... � � � c� Date of Comments: ) b .1 C,4iry of Burlingame Planning Commission Minuies .L C. Keighran moved to project shall be built as 15, 2001, sheets A-E1 the conditions of the � 2001, memos shall � n Code and Califorr�ta �' seconded by C. Aiir�n. December 10, 2001 a rove the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: 1) that the own on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped November A-E2, A= 1, and A-3.3, and date stamped November 29, 2001, sheet A-3.1; 2) that ity �ngir�er's, Chief Building Official's, and Recycling Specialist's November 5, Zef; and �) that the pro�ect shall meet all the requirements of the California Building ire Coc��, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was Chairman Vistica called for;�i vois�°vote�on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1 (C. Osterling absent). Appeal procedures�w�re advise�:--''This item concluded at 7:52 p.m. 1509 HOWARD AVENUE — ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (JIRAYR KOUROUYAN, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; KAMAL TABIB, DYNAMIC DESIGNS, DESIGNER) (65 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER• CATHERINE KEYLON Reference staff report, 12.10.01, with attachments. ZT Lewit presented the report, reviewed criteria and Planning Department comments. Four conditions were suggested for consideration. Chairman Vistica opened the public hearing. Kamal Tabib, designer, was present to answer questions. The Commission asked if the windows shown are true divided lights. The designer noted that the window type true divided lights was included on the revised plans and that hopefully the owner would install the correct windows. The Commission commented a condition of approval should be added to insure that true divided light windows are used. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: the applicant has made many changes to this project and has complied with the requests for a 6'-0" porch and landscaping. C. Bojues moved to approve the application, by resolution and with an added condition that all windows be true divided light windows, with the following amended conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped October 12, 2001 Sheets A1,A2, A4, and date stamped November 29, 2001 Sheets A3 and L 1; 2) that the conditions of the City Engineer, Chief Building Official and Recycling Specialist memos dated October 22, 2001 and November 15, 2001 shall be met; 3) that any increase to the habitable basement floor area and any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure, replacing or relocating a window (s), adding a dormer (s) or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 4) that all the windows on the approved plans, shown as true divided light windows, shall be installed as the true divided light windows; and 5) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Comment on the motion: approval includes findings for the proposed front setback variance; the variance is justified because it is less of an encroachment than the original project and because the design of the house I and its fit in the neighborhood are improved by the presence of a porch. C. Bojues agreed to the amended motion. -4- • C.�iry of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes 6. December 10, 2001 Chairman Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Osterling absent). Appeal p�ocedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:00 p.m. 1509 LOS MONTES A HILLSIDE AREA CO DWELLING AND DE A FRED STRATHDE F. PLANNER: ERIKA — ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND STRUC ION PERMIT FOR A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY C�Y�D RAGE (RON GROVE, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; �ST HDEE & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT) (45 NOTICED) PROJECT Reference staff report, 12.10.0 , with attachments. Chair Vistica noted that he would abstain from voting because of a business relations ip with the applicant. He stepped down from the dais Vice Chair Keighran proceeded with the hearing. P Monroe presented the staff report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eight conditions were sugg sted for consideration. Commission asked if staff knew the height of the existing structure. Staff ref red the question to the applicant. Vice Chair Keighran opf questions. He noted that made an effort to make � hearing was closed. the public hearing. Ron Grove, applicant and owner was present to answer �roposed,Iu�o--stpry house is just 3'-0" higher than the existing house. He has ;�s-t�`the plans ��p address Commission concerns, including installing story poles and re-routing the driveway to save the�ay tree on the lot. He pointed out that there are numerous two-story houses in the neighborhood and that�the floor area of the proposed house is 500 SF less than the amount the code allows. He noted that no vie�vs will be blocked by the proposed house. Susan Smith, 1515 Los Montes Drive, spoke concerning the proposed house. She feels that the story poles do not show the whole picture or imp�ct of the new house; she will lose a view from the living room of her house, looking south; the house c�oes not fit into the neighborhood; 90% of the homes have attached garages and this house has a detached garage. There were no further comments and the public Commission discussion: story poles were a gre�t help in evaluating the project; the proposed height is only 3'-0" higher than the existing; the Bay tree has been savedpfi thet,property; there are other homes of this size in the neighborhood. - � i C. Auran moved to approve the application, by resolution. There was no second on the motion to approve. Further Commission discussion: height of the proposed project is not greatly increased over the existing height; the roof lines of the house are blended w�ell; an attached garage would make the house look massive; the proposed detached garage is pedestrian friendly; the design of the house is still too massive; a smaller project would be more appropriate to the fabric of the neighborheod; not having an attached garage with doors on the street is an asset to the neighbarhood; the project lias been greatly improved by the design review process. Vice Chair Keighran moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plan� submitted to the Planning Department date stamped November 3 0, 2001, sheets A 1, A4 and L 1, and date stamped October 3, 2001, sheets A2 and A3, and date stamped October 12, 2001, sheet A7, 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 basement, first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and -5-