HomeMy WebLinkAbout100 Bloomfield Road - Staff Reporto�f ����� '� . �/
��.
ITEM 1
City of Burlingame
Lot Coverage and Parking Variances
& Special Permit to expand primary unit
Address: 100 Bloomfield Road
Meeting Date: 2/27/95
Requests: Special permit to expand the primary residential unit on a R-1 property with two
units (CS 25.50.025). Lot coverage variance for 42% where 40% is the maximum allowed by
code (CS 25.28.071). Parking variances for number of covered stalls, substandazd stall width,
substandard stall length and to allow parking between the structure and front property line (CS
25.70.020, 030).
Applicant: Ray Viotti Jr.
Property Owner: Rudy & Katharina Froehlich
Lot Dimensions and Area: 57.5 x 150, 5750 SF
General Plan: Low density residential
Adjacent Development: single family residential
APN: 029-273-180
Zoning: R-1
CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 - Class 1(e) Additions to
existing structures provided that the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50 % of
the floor area of the structures before the addition or 2500 SF, whichever is less.
Site Information:
This is a corner lot with two structures and two dwelling units (a non-conforming situation).
The main unit (100 Bloomfield Road) has been determined to be the primary residence because
of its size (1734 SF). It was built in 1947. It has two bedrooms, one bathroom and a dining
room with a closet. In addition, it has an attached one-car garage with a non-conforming carport
extending from the garage to the right side property line. Both the garage and carport are
accessed from Bayswater Avenue. A 1955 San Mateo County Assessor's ofiice appraisal report
shows the carport as a concrete parking area for a house trailer, completed in 1955. It is not
clear whether this concrete parking area was covered; but the report also refers to the area as
a carport. A copy of the report is attached.
The second structure is a detached, 590 SF two car garage with a one bedroom, 590 SF unit
above. It has an address of 102 Bloomfield Road (according the City's address map) and is
considered the secondary unit. It was completed in 1950, according to the San Mateo County
Assessor's appraisal report. The appraisal report also shows that the apartment above the gazage
existed in 1950.
The lot is also non-conforming because lot coverage is 45.3 % even though there is no record
of a variances granted to increase lot coverage over 40%. Also, there is no record of a side
setback variance granted to allow the carport to extend to the right side property line.
SPECIAL PERMIT, LOT COVERAGE & PARKING VARIANCES I00-102 BLOOMFIELD ROAD
Proposed Improvements:
There are no improvements proposed to the detached garage/secondary unit (102 Bloomfield).
Improvements are proposed for the primary structure only. The 253 SF carport would be
demolished and the attached garage would be expanded and converted to a family room. The
family room would extend to the required 6'-0" side setback. (This would be a 3'-6" expansion
beyond the wall of the existing attached garage). The living area for the primary structure
would increase by 407 SF (32 %) from 1286 SF to 1693 SF.
These improvements eliminate a non-conforming side setback and reduce overall lot coverage.
The carport cunently extends to the side property line (0'-0" setback where 6'-0" is required).
In addition, the removal of the carport would decrease lot coverage from 45.3 %(2608 SF) to
42% (2443 SF).
Summary of Requests:
1. The applicant is requesting a special permit to expand the primary residential structure on
a lot zoned R-1 which has two dwellings on it (CS 25.50.025).
2. A lot coverage variance is required for 42% where 40% is the maximum allowed by code
(CS 25.28.071). Non-conforming buildings can only be expanded or extended if the entire
building is made to conform to all the physical dimensional standards of the district (CS
25.50.080). Since no variance was previously granted and because the proposed work is
considered "expansion", lot coverage would be 42% and a lot coverage variance is required.
3. Parking variances are required because the proposed parking would not meet current code
requirements (two covererl + two uncovered provided; three covered + one uncovered required)
There are presently six parking spaces on site (four covered, plus two uncovered spaces in the
driveway leading to the detached garage). The garage and carport to be removed presently meet
cunent code requirements, while the detached garage does not. The parking variances are
required for:
a. Number of covered spaces. Two covered spaces are proposed where three are required.
b. Parking stall width. The two covered spaces are substandard in width (19'-4" where 20'-0"
required).
c. Parking stall length. The uncovered spaces are substandard in length (18'-6" where 20'-0"
required).
d. Parking between the structure and front properry line. The applicant would like to keep the
existing curb cut and 21' x 15' concrete driveway off Bayswater Avenue even though the
covered parking spaces would be removed and the remaining 15' length is so short it is not long
enough to qualify as parking stalls. Vehicles are not allowed to park between a structure and
2
�
SPECIAL PERMIT, LOT COVERAGE & PARRING VARIANCES 100-102 BLOOMFIELD ROAD
the front property line unless in a garage, driveway leading to a garage or other Planning
Commission approved parking (CS 25.70.030 (b)). Commission approval is therefore required
to allow this area (21' wide x 15' length) to be retained for parking.
There are two separate garage doors on the detached garage. This allows each living unit one
covered stall in the garage plus one uncovered stall in the driveway.
Front setback:
(Bayswaier)
Side (left):
(Bloomfield)
Side (right):
Rear:
Lot Coverage: *
(both dwelli�gs)
FAR: (not applicable)
(both dwellings)
PROPOSED
no change
no change
6'-0"
no change
42 %
(2443 SF)
3063 SF/.533
EXISTING
15'-0"
15'-6"
0'-0"
3'-0"
45.3 %
(2608 SF)
3197 SF/.556
MAXIMUM
ALLOWED/REQ'D
15'/average
7'-6"
. �
0'-0" to acc. struc
40%
(2300 SF)
3040 SF/.529
2 covered,
Parking: * substandard width +
2 uncovered,
substandard length
Height:
DH Envelope:
Accessory
structures:
± 16'
n/a - one story
no changes
2 covered meeting
dimension standards;
+ 2 covered w/
substandard width;
+ 2 uncovered w/
substandard length
± 17'
n/a
n/a
4 spaces, 3
must be covered
all must meet code
dimensions
30'/2'/z stories
see code
n/a
Also, a special permit is required to expand the primary unit and to expand the non-conforming
parldng use. Meets all other zoning code requirements.
3
SPECIAL PERMIT, LOT COVERAGE & PARKING VARIANCES 100-102 BLOOMFIELD ROAD
5taff Comments:
The City Engineer recommends in his 7anuary 18, 1995 memo that the driveway on Bayswater
Avenue be abandoned and the driveway ramp replaced with a sidewalk, curb and gutter. An
encroachment permit is required for the sidewalk, curb and gutter work. Planning staff would
require the paved driveway be replaced with soft landscaping, such as grass. (Note: The
applicant is requesting approval from the Planning Commission to keep the curb cut and concrete
pad.) The Building Official and Fire Marshal had no comments.
Study Meeting:
Planning Commission reviewed this item at their regular meeting (see February 13, 1995
minutes). The applicant responded to Commission's inquiries with a letter dated February 17,
1995. Commission asked about stairs which appear to cross the property line and whether the
adjacent property owner on Bayswater is related. The applicant notes the adjacent property
owner on Bayswater is related (daughter) and that both property owners often use their back
door as entrances. He also explains why the property owner wishes to keep the curb cut.
Regarding the covered stall dimensions, staff notes the parking regulations for duplexes were
applied to this project (CS 25.70.030-b). The exception allowing an existing 18' x 20' gazage
to be considered as adequate two covered parking spaces applies only to single family dwellings;
duplexes, apartments and condominiums are not allowed this exception. Staff notes the lot
coverage variance is required because no variance was granted for the present 45 % lot coverage;
even though the proposed project is less than 45%, it exceeds 40% and needs a variance to
comply with cunent regulations. This would also simplify disclosure if there is ever a sale of
the property.
Required Findings for Variance:
In order to grant a variance 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; and
(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.
4
SPECIAL PERMIT, LOT COVERAGE & PARRING VARIANCES 100-102 BLOOMFIELD ROAD
Planning Commiccion Action:
The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be taken by
resoludon. 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 6, 1995, sheets A0, A1 and A-2 except that the curb cut and
driveway from Bayswater to the face of the structure shall be removed;
2. that the requirements of the City Engineer's memo dated 7anuary 18, 1995 shall be met
and that the former driveway area shall be replaced with soft landscaping such as grass;
3. that the primary unit shall be 100 Bloomfield; any additional expansion of 100
Bloomfield shall require a special permit from the Planning Commission and there shall
be no expansion of the secondary structure (102 Bloomfield); and
4. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire
Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame.
/;�y���t'2
. S�G�
Sheri Saisi
Planner
cc: Rudy & Kartharina Froelich, property owners
Ray Viotti, Jr., designer
5
CITY OF �URLINGAME
APPLICATION TO THE FLANNING COMMISSION
TyQg��nnlication: Special Permit �,Variance Other
Project Address �bA '�,dC�MF��b'ICD.
Assessor's Parcel Number(s) OLq • 2'l �•/80
APPL/CANT
Name: �� V��� �_*
Address: 'y�G� �_ �
City/State2ip: Ad�l MA�1'�d �. 4�Z
—Tr—
Telephone:(work) ��57�%��(�'Q_
(home) ��5�' •
ARCH/TECT/DES/GNER �aX ��� l��
Name: � Ab �DI�LIC�1.1"r.
Address:
City/State2ip:
PROPERTY OWNER
�Name: �1QlT�� � El�<�..�1•�
Address: /Ab �LG�M�jELb qj�
City/State2ip: �LJIt. ��[•��ME. Le•
Telephone:(work) '�2�l1��0
(home)
P/ease indicate with an aste�isk f"1 who the contact nerson
is foi this vroiect.
Telephone (daytime):
' - I / I �► _ . k� �r '7 � .' . . - � .i � . - � ( /
• ��i.. •.�,u �.. � � _ � � �■ .� (� - Ir, +
AFF/DA V/T/S/GNA TURE:
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and
Applican s Signature at
I know about the proposed ap�lication, ancLh�r���c authorize the above applicant to submit this
application. = �" � i' � ;, � ,
�' � '��e���� ;`�o�•���Y.� � /- /.Z -- `�;.� -
Property Owner's Signature Date
--------------------------------------------------OFFICE USE ONLI�j ----- ---- ----------- -- - ; _--- - - ----
�'%�';�-0�-��' -i;�''�, ,-•-„`,- ,- �j2�%�i.f
� �'f fi%S- �1'_
Date Filed: � S Fee 2� Receipt # r 3
Letter(s) to applicant advisin a lication inco �� ���� '�7 ��` �'� Q�
g pp plete: ,_„�r�Xod ca.,�m «'/�
Date application accepted as complete: ' 2� � S
P.C. study meeting (date) 2� �� ��� P.C. public hearing (date) ��' �'z �
P.C. Action
,s�as Appeal to Council? Yes No
projapp.frm Council meeting date Council Action
January 12, 1995
City of Burlingame
Planning Department
501 Primrose Rd.
Burlingame, CA 94010
January 12, 1995
Variance Request For: Rudi and Katy Froehlich
100 Bloomfield Rd.
Burlingame, CA 94010
This variance request is to convert an existing single car attached garage into a family room. In
converting the room, the home owners would also like to move the North wall out three and half
feet. This remodel and addition require a two part variance, one being a substandard garage
dimensions and the other an increase in maximum lot coverage.
Currently the house has a detached two car garage with outside dimensions of 20'-0"x 29'-6". The
twenty foot exterior width leaves a clear interior width of nineteen feet and one inch, where current
zoning requires a twenty foot clear interior dimension. The garage is inadequate only by definition
of the current zoning requirements. It currently houses two cars. This aspect of the variance will
have no affect on the exterior aesthetics or the general health, safety, and welfare of the
ne:ghboring properties, because the garage is existing and compliments the existing neighborhood
by following the proportions and material vocabulary. This can also be seen in the existing and
proposed building elevations.
We also are requesting an increase in lot coverage. The current lot coverage is forty five percent.
This includes the garage, house, and carport/storage area. With the existing floor plan, an interior
remodel widen the room isn't feasible due to the fireplace and heater location. The only option left
to expand the family room is to move the exterior wall out (as shown on the drawings). In adding
the three and a half feet of interior space, the home owners are giving up their two hundred fifty-
three square feet of storage space. This addition will conform to current zoning requirements, as
the existing storage space is now built to the property line. By conforming to the current setback
requirements there will be easier access to the backyard by the police and fire department. Also,
by removing the storage space it decreases the lot coverage to forty two percent.
Presently the storage/carport looks like it is tacked on to the side of the house, which can be seen
on the variance drawings. The family room addition will keep with the local vocabulary, by
matching the existing finish materials on the house as well as the proportions. The addition will
also be in line with single family dwellings in the neighborhood. The finished remodel will look like
it was built with the original house. The gutter line will be continuous, the same roof slope will be
used, as well as a stucco exterior finish. Thus the property will have a better aesthetic
appearance.
ROUTING FORM
DATE: I ' I2��
TO: 1�� CITY ENGINEER
CHIEF BIIILDING INSPECTOR
FIRE MARSHAL
PARRS DIRECTOR �
CITY ATTORNEY
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY PLANNER/ZONING TECffiJICIAN
REQIIEST FOR
Q/�/
��
/ i ♦r �/ . / � "/
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING:
REVIEWED BY STAFF IN MEETING ON MONDAY: �' I�o "� �
THANKS,
Jane/Sheri/Leah
�
�� i�� t S Date of Comments
�(j,� �=��.�, �,,, p� �,-�.� � SaG�( -G'�.e
�"' a�`�Q'`
�
h� � �'�-�� � .�..��-
C�,,,(��,.,� �'�(;�t�Lwr:�"
���✓V� �
w/ �,` d.��.� ,
� .��,�.� .
�
��� `
�m-�
Y
a� ,.-�
.c�.�- �-
1 �
ROUTING FORM
DATE: �• �2'�%�
TO: CITY ENGINEER
-�� CHIEF BIIILDING INBPECTOR
FIRE MARSHAL
PARRS DIRECTOR •
CITY ATTORNEY
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY PLANNER/ZONING TECHNICIAN
REQIIEST FOR _
!� i/G�if'�'/ �
�
/ � ♦ / t/ . /I J �/
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING:
REVIEWED BY STAFF IN MEETING ON MONDAY: �'I�'o '� �
THANKS,
Jane/Sheri/Leah
r 7/�� Date of comments
�� ,
o�n�
Y
/1� o c� w..�..,IL o-n �a�r r�� e� �4 !/ t,�d.-cc. � ��-�r�Y w'�`
Gu rY� 5� � 13ti� I�� � �- �
C�S ►
ROUTING FORM
DATE : I ' I2'�/ �
TO: CITY ENGINEER
CHIEF BIIILDING INSPECTOR
G-� FIRE MARSIiAL
PARRS DIRECTOR �
CITY ATTORNEY
FROM: CITY PLANNER/ZONING TECHNICIAN
- . � • • EJ�I�/�L%�/l� /iL�/
/�/� r // f / _�. / ✓ // � �
/1 � ♦/t/ � /I � �� �� -
SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MEETING:
REVIEWED BY STAFF IN MEETING ON MONDAY: �' I f'O '� �
THANKS,
/
Jane/Sheri/Leah — �-�S Date of Comments
�; 0 COti���i��
_ ��
c
s
�
/'
,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 13, 1995
�ALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Burlingame was caIleri to order by Chairman
Galligan on Monday, February 13, 1995 at 7:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Deal, Ellis, Jacobs, Kelly, Key, Mink and Galligan
Absent: None �
Staff Present: City Planner; Margaret Monroe, City Attorney; Jerry Coleman, City Engineer; Frank
Erbacher, Fire Marshal; Keith Marshall
MINLTTES - Page 4, paragraph 4, line 9, of the minutes of the January 23, 1995 meeting were
amended to read: small variances no one will have a place to �1� park; as a
successful restaurant there will be more than 37 customers" , the minutes were then
approved as amended.
AGENDA - The order of the agenda was adjusted, items #5 (50 California) and #6 (405 Primrose
Road were reversed in an effort to hear two requests from the same applicant. The
order of the agenda was then approved.
FROM THE FLOOR
There were no public comments.
ITEMS FOR STUDY
� 1. SPECIAL PERMIT, LOT COVERAGE AND PARKING VARIANCES AT 100 BLOOMFIELD
.' ROAD, ZONED R-1 (RUDY & KATHARINA FROEHLICH, PROPERTY OWNERS AND RAY
VIOTTI. 7R., APPLICANT).
Requests: are this property and the property next door, on Bayswater, owned by the same person, there
is a stairway between them; identify the reasons why the curb cut should not be closed, explain why
variance necessary. Item set for public Item set for hearing February 27, 1995.
2. PARKING VARIANCES AT 2011 DAVIS DRIVE, ZONED R-1 (MR. & MRS. STEVEN WILK,
PROPERTY OWNERS AND KEN IBARRA, APPLICANT)
Requests: item D of Ibarra response dated January 25 - would like pictures to show the referenced
"other" like construction in the area; same page item A, not "every" dwelling has the same problem;
clarify whether the issue is a parking variance for number of spaces since the driveway is 8'-6" long or
a dimension issue; explain how dimensions of garages are made to determine parking; why was the
narrow dimension allowed when the garage was built? Item set for hearing February 27, 1995.
City of Burlingame
Planning Department
501 Primrose Rd.
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: Variance Request For
100 Bloomfield Rd.
Attn: Sheri Saisi
February 17, 1995
�
J�� � � �
. rz_� r? �l'�'
T�
�-,
�,,�.,� � � % �995
OF �- � .
�`�:��o- �
-N��
This letter is in response to the fax I received on February 14, regarding Planning
Commission comments from their meeting on February 13, 1995.
In response to the first question, regarding the existing stairs and no fence between 100
Bloomfield and the neighboring property on Bayswater, is that the property owners are
related,
(mother and daughter). They use the back-door of the homes as an entrance, when
going between houses.
The home owners would like to retain the Bayswater curb cut, because they use the
back door to the house more than the front, and when coming and going by car during
the day. At night, it is parked in the garage. When they have guests over, they have
them park there as to not block the other driveway. The main reason is that they do all
their own guardening, and it is getting harder to maintain the existing front yard area
(currently the grass area is continuous form one driveway to the other), now that they
are getting older. However, they are willing to continue the existing hedge to the edge
of the building. This would stop the driveway from running continuous up to the house.
n erely, �
�/�c�J` �.
Ray Viotti
�
i . � �
� �i
�;�
.
VO
. , -,. . . __--- -. _ . r . '
. ,� :. , _ 1,'r ' _. -.y . - i: S. . '-
,. ,
.-- . . �. . . . ...... : .. , , : _ . - .. : ., . ., -
APPRAISAL REPORT--ASSESSbR'S OFFICE--SAN MATEO COUNTY, C�LIFORNIA ; "� , .,,�� .
� �. W � �� . ,
APPRAISER ./,(�. �', DATE APPRAISED <3��E�::'.f OCGUPIED o�,v�2%
;� CODE No. �- -� ✓ ' �
/ J � �f `�-7� LAND VALUE $
G hf is � � sa � l/�'�e 5 ; : - - .�v--�10 - ------
� •
-�' 7� ' ' IMPROVEMENTS��-����-
� � dr: � ' a L"�� �Y ° , _ _ � . _ � /03_ao -3�
S�G.O�_cTa.�� k'N=� PERSONAL PROPERTY S
1 B�oc . ; ,'� ASSESSED LAND IMPROVEMENTS PERSONAL PRO�PERTY i
.- --- ._..... ._; 1✓ALU E �y��� _ "' J
/• a
-/� � �/ �'TvIT/`�:!O�i!"�" �/o�/ ,:�)
BLOCK _ . _ - �-Cc.vcs .f s � '
, _ p.re,u..✓G . �� f �� � f " ~ '� ti
� ,j-Y , .a.ca.o
� 9 ; ;r - INTERIOR
.._..�__----�--- -- •_�-_..--- --_J____\ . C`�A)P�6F'- ;\. _.. _' TRIM GONDITI
ON ,
LOCATION OF 1MPROVEMENTS ON PROPERTY � D-� i ,
� '. m' PINE � 70 13
' l-.STA�Q)'� � i �, h�
; .f
�O FLOORS
�__-.'-- -- ---i -f--S.TQh,Y_ _ .--- - CONDITION
��, „ 6-
STORIES USE. .F�L- 2L � 'N HAP.DWOOD fxG �f" .w i r :; ; _�.•,/ , � `� � f
� S� ' � � `!�G"' '
•r Roo'rre �n.actit � �
NO. `OF ROOMS ` �
�! ' ' , . ... . ., _ '
_. -Z-O ; - .. _ . _ .. . . . _ . ,:S' g
EXTERIOR WALL FINISH � CONDITION � WALLS CONDiTII�IV
� � c�c� D
. �}
�� o D I
` CEILINGS CONDIT'jD �` �
ROOF PITCH` CONDIT�ON ��
- /�✓ �� ��C !� I
FOUNDATION _ —�
CONCRETE �'' -- �
_ , . �
� • _J �
CONSTRUCTION � NO.�v/- -- ~';/p���-,j%�� Io`� �C� � BATHS—No. I FLOORS T/LE .
WOOD FRAME "� _ i
BASEMENT EXCAVATED GRADE LEVEL VALUE ES'%IMATE—COST APPROA�H—EQUALIZING FACTORS WAINSCOTING WALLS �; �.:� �� i
BUILDING c:osT %�000 VALUE L `
�� , / PLUMBING FIXTURES No.,- �
'_' �.�7,o SQ- FT. � f � 'j�S �oG S' .c' • � ,'"U/? ;
BASEMENT SHOWERS �
GARAG£ /j X 23- DOORS /^O�`��,��� �� �� •• � L D �L L�sr �'7�-45 Om
5X GARAGE . _
ROOF FLOOR �a " " �. �. I � S, c�- LIGHTING FIXTURES WIRING ��c J---
WALLS �
_� A�'F o �'o� :��o - Si>i.�G C�o � � /��.'L� -
YEA�t SUILT 'NEW GOOD MEDIUM POOR '�r/�f HEATING , J��Nv�� �,��--
Q Q � S �, �, ,. ., ., „ `� • 3 I � /
4�
v �. <7.c."",�iE.wT WATER HEATER i
fUNCTIONAL AND EGONOMIG DEFECTS � " " " " / ; � ' � ��? _
_ �.
� n �a;_�.o..v'
o,,ii ,�. �.�:.,� ti � 4�:�a � FIREPLACES �. _
,. ,� ,� �� � I L.-� / � j°�Cir/1'
� OUTBUILDING �. / Go�n-�o sn•
�y . d c . .
/. //
• � � . �� L r / C!'i ! il �///t �
�� .� fi � l�u�a - G
.o �ra t 4 �ti s.,� = ra
i i
. .• (�% ftJ?IC� - �'
L IZE ZO PRAISED
s
REMARKS �o.a� .CE7"G' �2,rl:.ti'c,i =%�=� ';� � �_Ln��s,c
72.�%..�:4 - �- :=� :�, �,� ;.��,�_ G�: � �...:F-, �_ �G� a -
�i.✓. FT, ,S ��/li/-/ `=5��.,_l��/F_x'�GG�: �'Y �LG..
--- s � Z � � �- ,��w
i��- _._ � ■
�� �� .� ..
RENTALS
TAL ,� �-t ?D �.323- _
PRAISER'S OPINION OF MARKET PRICE
TAlNABLE FOR PROPERTY s
DITIONS
P. No. DATE AMOUNT f FOR !
�/ � �- �----- ---�---- _�-� � ---��
" � - - - -- ,.Z A �% � f _ U !r�"'✓ � ,o� .:� . �.7�',:s G . •
'' ��- J /
7�� "/� 9/s�� � � ���' � . ���, � r ��� /'` � ;
� �i � �'���4L�/ ci " " _
U t' � /, � ��5.� :i' �) � ' �=-�.,f--'
�;'�vil� �',�'9 _ s v, �.�'.'5�--- - -- � - `- �
/3 - -- • 3ao � �� ar - q Y�.x — ..4/;� i�,> . �•• L� , ✓i� ,v�� - SEc 2�r-�..�.e-e.�
- r_ --- � ■ �r-
�
�
� �. �
1 � ,�
� � � A
. ,i +
.� �- _ ,+
, , , ,� � �-
� �� -
., .�.-.-- .
Dw�GHT � �: RoAa
, ��� �� � � ��' , � +�
,
r � � ,
� � . - `� �- � � �
, �
;� `�' _ � �. � � � _ �� �' �
'- ,�'�� _�� �
�'� „ � :
�
- i= �
��
GI�ARBNOo►J
�� �
i. v_
' ��
�� � i
.�i' _� �
��=
�
� ���
�, �
�
� ,a �...,
�� � ' ,w„� � � �
� �, �. . �
� ` ;
� •
� �
� � � �
� -�
� .. � .1 ,� r�-� �
„�- �,.— �, �
• f __ ��� .`;
_,a`� �i �
� � �
'a � � �7
W �'F + . �
� � � � ,
Q �1 1 �
�� � � y �� �
��y- a � �
� �
� V�0
#� �,?'! .; :
. ,�a (o � �v
� 114 lio ���
.
�LooM F 1�Irb
�,� � _ �
. � � .
, � �
. �a � �
� . F y ^ �
� � �
, �
� t � �. .
'1�ZvAD
' � �
` , - �,_� _-:r�.t
� . . � ��
RcAc �
�09 ,� �
� _. � '� • �l
� � !
� .� S�IiL' � . '
l� I I -
y � I 1: '
i �.
i0�5
�
4
� ; 40 3� ��}
' �.'
.. �i � �• �
x�
��1 ,
e � �_r f
��� �� �. � . _ _
�i ' �.�� ,
CITY OF BIIRLINGAME
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BIIRLINGAME, CA 94010
(415) 696-7250
NOTICE OF HEARING
The CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION announces the
following public hearing on MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF FEHRUARY, 1995
at 7:30 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. A copy of the application
and plans may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Planning
Division at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California.
100 BLOOMFIELD ROAD APN: 026-273-180
APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT, LOT COVERAGE AND
PARRING VARIANCES TO EBPAND THE PRIMARY UNIT AT
100 BLOOMFIELD ROAD, ZONED R-1.
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.
The property owner who receives this notice is responsible for
informinq their tenants about this notice. Please post this notice
in a public place on your property. Thank you
MARGARET MONROE
CITY PLANNER
FEBRUARY 17, 1995
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION,
SPECIAL PERMIT, LOT COVERAGE AND PARKING VARIANCES
RRSOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for lot
coverage variance for 42% where 40% is the maximum allowed by code and a parking variance for
_number of covered stalls, substandard stall width. substandard stall len�th and to allow parkin� between
the structure and front property line and a special �ermit to ex�and the primary residential unit on a
R-1 pro�erty with two units at 100 Bloomiield Road, zoned R-1, APN: 029-273-180 ; property owner:
Rudy and Katharina Froehlich. 100 Bloomfield Road ; and
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
Februar,y 27, 1995 , 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 Section: 15301 - Class 1(e) Additions to existing structures provided that the addition will not result
in an increase of more than 50 % of the floor area of the structures before the addition or 2500 SF,
whichever is less is hereby approved.
2. Said special permit, lot coverage and parking variances are approved subject to the
conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such variances and Special Permit 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, Mike Ellis , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby
cerdfy that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regulaz meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 27th day of February , 1995 , by the following vote:
AYFS: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
SECRETARY
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval categorical exemption, special permit, lot coverage and parking variance
100 BLOOMFIELD ROAD
effective MARCH 6, 1995
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department
date stamped February 6, 1995, sheets A0, A1 and A-2 except that the curb cut and
driveway from Bayswater to the face of the structure shall be removed;
2. that the requirements of the City Engineer's memo dated January 18, 1995 shall be met
and that the former driveway area shall be replaced with soft landscaping such as grass;
3. that the primary unit shall be 100 Bloomfield; any additional expansion of 100 Bloomfield
shall require a special permit from the Planning Commission and there shall be no
expansion of the secondary structure (102 Bloomfield); and
4. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire
Codes as amended by the City of Burlingame.