City of San Bruno Recorded Meetings February 2011, 15 Feb 2011

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: San Bruno Planning Commission Meeting February 15, 2011 5A. 1301 Santa Lucia Ave.

Description

San Bruno Planning Commission Meeting February 15, 2011
5A. 1301 Santa Lucia Ave.

A

Okay with that we'll move on to item 5a, which is 1301 Santa Lucia, a venir request for use, permit to allow an addition which increases the gross floor area by greater than fifty percent, cumulatively, which is actually one hundred twenty one percent for sections. 12 230 be one of the san bruno Municipal Code staff report. Please.

B

Thank you and good evening, as stated, the FN has applied for a use permit to construct an addition that increases the floor area of the greater than fifty percent. The subject site is located on the corner of santa lucia avenue and balboa way and is currently developed with a one-story single-family dwelling. The project proposes 14a 1,440 square foot, addition to the first and second story. The first story would be remodeled and expanded to create a more open floor plan.

B

Additionally, it will accommodate a new two-car garage and an internal stairwell that will connect the first and second floor living areas. The second-story addition will contain two bedrooms, and one bathroom additionally will also contain one office. The project would result in a home that amounts to 2637 square feet and will contain three bedrooms: three bathrooms and one office. The Architectural Review Committee did review the proposal at their January meeting at that meeting. The Architectural Review Committee forded the project on to the Planning Commission, with a favorable recommendation.

B

They did have one minor recommendation and that was to add more detail to the front entrance which the applicant has done. So they have increased the width of the porch and added a guardrail feature as well.

B

Regarding the use permitted entitlement, it is important to note that the request before tonight is strictly for fifty percent expansion. The addition is meeting all other development standards since meeting the FA are requirements lock, coverage requirements, setbacks and height standards staff does support the project. We do find that the second story is well integrated with the existing single-family home.

B

The architect is utilizing. Second-Story setbacks from the first story below which is a recommended facade articulation technique within the residential design guidelines. Additionally, the applicant will be utilizing, hardiplank, siding and horizontal siding is a common feature which, in the neighborhood all window and door trim, will also be consistent on all elevations.

B

I would like to point out that staff did receive a number of comments from the neighborhood when we originally sent the courtesy notice out when the project was originally submitted in april, 2010, an adjacent property owner on balboa way expressed concern with the second-story addition and felt that the second-story addition was going to block his view of the tree-lined streets to the north staff.

B

Did explain to the property owner that the city of san bruno does not have a view ordinance that the second story addition was meeting all set back and height requirements and was utilizing a 312 roof slope which minimizes the overall height of the structure.

B

Since that time, the applicant has revised the southern elevation to include more articulation specifically. The second story is now step back from the first story below apply. One foot and the FN has also introduced a more consistent window pattern on that south side. Elevation that property owner is no longer concern with the addition is in support of the reef and is in support of that revised southern elevation.

B

Additionally, staff recently met with to property owners I'm discussing the details of the project, I actually met in person with those property owners and discussed all the details. Development standards, everything the property owner adjacent directly to the rear, did express some concern regarding privacy impacts. How, after after meeting with staff and realizing that the second story was set back eight feet from the first story below along that I believe the West elevation. She did not have any issues with the ignition at that time.

B

With that step does recommend that the Planning Commission approved the use permit request subject to findings affect one through seven and conditions of approval, one through twenty-four within this time, I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have. Thank.

A

You very much does the Commission.

C

To have any questions, Commission was.

D

Real equipment and I know it's a minor thing, but on condition 23 on the hardwired smoke detectors. Should we start, including this Hardware smoke, detector plus CO detector? That's a January I was a January first requirement right. Yes,.

C

It will be required anyway, so we.

D

Actually put it on here since just a memorial white stuff yeah, we can update that condition.

A

I, like to add staff, if you've considered the condition that that I commented at the last meeting about about groundwater and surface water that could enter the ground and pass under a property.

B

We could add that language to that specific condition, if you would like ok.

A

But please send me a copy of it when, when you come up with it, okay.

B

A

I brought it up I'd like to see if I underst, if you and I had the same understanding, you can definitely thank you very much any other Commission questions for staff before the public here: okay, that I'll open the public hearing and ask the applicant please to come to the podium first and give your name and make any comments you'd like to make on the application.

A

E

Name is William Lim and I'm, the architect for Alice, Young and I. Think that did a great job describing the project and just like to add that we worked with Matt I. Think more than a year on this on this project and we've looked at various floor plans and elevations and we've looked at the building setback and the configuration of the property. As you know, the property has an unusual footprint, it's not a straight rectangle by any means, and we had to get a survey crew to survey the property.

E

So we pretty much put all that to to rest, and I think that the owners committed to meeting all the design guidelines and we certainly followed all that in designing this project. So if you have any questions I'm here to answer that other then.

A

Thank you any Commissioner questions for the African. If.

C

I'm sku John, sorry to.

A

C

You're familiar with all the conditions of approval and all that in your agreement with everything there you've seen it all.

E

Yes, I have seen it and I've read through them and there's nothing unusual in there that I can see. Thank.

C

A

Thank you very much. Are there any other members of the public would like to comment on this application, seeing none I'll close the public hearing and bring a matter back to the Commission for discussion.

D

Which air marshal I move that we approve use? Permit 1007 based on five flex, one through seven and revise conditions, approval conditions of 14 24? Second,.

A

Okay on the question I'd like to comment that I think staff is with each meeting doing a better job on the write-ups on the applications and it makes it possible if members of public here don't realize it makes it possible to make a judgment without you ask a lot of questions, because so many are answered with that. I'd like to call for the question, all those in favor say: aye aye,.

C

A

Motion carries unanimously and there is a 10-day appeal period.