►
Description
San Bruno Planning Commission Meeting June 19, 2012
5B. 100 Acacia Avenue
B
A
C
You
and
good
evening,
as
stated,
the
applicant
has
applied
for
a
use
permit
and
minor
modification
to
add
onto
an
existing
single-family
dwelling.
Decide
itself
is
located
on
the
northeast
corner
of
acacia
avenue,
santa
lucia
avenue
and
is
currently
developed
with
a
one-story
single-family
dwelling
consisting
of
730
square
feet
of
living
area
and
a
345
square
foot.
One
car
garage,
the
applicant
is
proposing
a
first
and
second
storey
expansion.
The
first
floor
will
contain
one
family
room
steady
in
one
bathroom.
The
second
floor
will
contain
two
bedrooms
in
one
bathroom
in
total.
C
This
would
amount
to
a
four
bedroom
home
with
two
bathrooms
and
a
steady
consisting
of
1823
square
feet
of
living
area
and
a
one-car
garage
I
would
like
to
point
out
that
the
applicant
is
converting
a
small
portion
of
the
garage
into
a
hallway
to
create
the
required
required
internal
circulation
between
the
existing
single-family
dwelling
and
the
proposed
expansion
at
the
May
tenth
architects
review
committee.
Several
commissioners
expressed
concern
with
the
existing
internal
circulation
and
felt
that
the
floor
plan
could
easily
be
converted
to
a
second
wall
unit.
C
Now
the
commissioners
were
primarily
concerned
that
the
current
property
owner
would
convert
it,
but
was
definitely
more
concerned
that
a
future
property
owner
may
see
the
layout
and
may
convert
that
to
a
second
unit.
Staff
has
added
two
conditions
of
approval:
I'd
like
to
point
your
attention
to
conditions
of
approval,
number
six
and
number
seven
condition
of
approval
number
six
is
our
standard
condition
that
we
include
on
all
single-family
homes,
and
it
reads
that
the
residents
shall
be
used
only
as
a
single-family
residential
dwelling
unit.
C
No
portion
of
the
resident
residents
shall
be
rented
out
as
a
secondary
residential
devonian.
Any
attempt
to
construct
illegal
dwelling
unit
will
result
in
court
code
enforcement
action
by
the
city
and
we've
also
included
condition
of
approval
number
seven,
which
is
a
custom
condition
strictly
for
this
application
and
record
states
that
a
deed
restriction
shall
be
recorded
against
the
property
prior
to
building
permit
final,
the
deed
restriction
shall
prohibit
the
conversion
of
any
portion
of
the
home
into
a
separate
living
unit
without
first
obtaining
planning,
division
or
approval.
C
C
The
architectural
review
committee
also
recommended
that
the
applicant
incorporate
wood
window
trim
throughout
the
home
and
include
a
green
building
statement
describing
the
green
building
measures
that
they
plan
to
incorporate
during
the
construction
phase
of
the
project
the
applicant
has
since
followed
up
with
those
recommendations.
The
applicant
also
has
made
some
very
minor
recommended
changes
to
the
plan.
Since
the
architectural
review
committee
meeting,
specifically,
they
say,
made
some
minor
window.
C
Changes
to
the
second
floor
plan
made
some
minor
adjustments
to
the
floor
plan
on
the
second
floor
as
well
and
increase
the
ceiling
height
from
eight
feet
to
90
staff
did
send
a
courtesy
notice
to
all
adjacent
property
owners
and
the
required
public
notice
to
all
property
owners
within
300
feet
of
the
site,
and
we
did
receive
one
email
from
a
concerned
property
owner
directly
across
the
street.
They
were
more
concerned
with
the
second
floor
expansion
and
felt
that
the
second
floor
expansion
could
potentially
block
a
morning
sunlight
that
they
currently
enjoy.
C
They
asked
staff
if
a
shadow
study
would
be
required
for
this
application
staff
responded
and
stated
that
a
shadow
step
shadow
study
typically
would
not
be
required.
Given
the
fact
that
the
second-story
expansion
is
meeting
all
setback
requirements,
it's
less
than
the
28
foot
height
limit,
it's
coming
in
at
23
feet
and
it's
meeting
the
daylight
plane
requirements
or
criteria
outlined
in
the
residential
design
guidelines.
C
Overall
staff
finds
that
the
addition
is
consistent
with
the
existing
single-family
dwelling
and
the
residential
design
guidelines.
The
second
floor
is
set
back
from
the
first
story
below
which
is
a
common
facade,
articulation
technique
outline
of
the
residential
design
guidelines.
Additionally,
as
previously
stated,
the
second
floor
expansion
will
be
meeting
the
daylight
playing
crying
outlined
in
the
guidelines
as
well.
I
would
like
to
point
out
that
the
existing
single-family
home
does
have
substandard
setbacks.
C
The
front
setback
currently
measures
11
feet,
7
inches
where
15
feet
is
required
and
the
street
side
setback
varies
from
five
feet
to
8
feet.
This
is
a
common
design
feature
within
the
neighborhood
and
is
present
on
many
homes.
Within
that
specific
major,
there
are
a
lot
of
substandard
setbacks.
As
stated,
the
African
is
applying
for
a
minor
modification
to
expand
the
first
floor
directly
north
of
the
garage,
and
this
would
continue
the
8-foot
non-conforming
setback
staff
is
in
support
of
this
expansion.
C
It
is
consistent
with
the
existing
single-family
home
and
the
development
standards
within
the
neighborhood.
I
would
like
to
point
out
that
the
addition
meets
all
other
development
standards
of
the
zoning
district
overall
staff
is
supportive
of
the
use,
permit
and
minor
modification
requests
and
recommends
that
the
Planning
Commission
approved
the
project
based
on
findings.
Effect
1
through
9
and
conditions
of
approval
1
through
25
I'd,
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
might
have.
Thank
you
any.
D
C
Is
it
is,
but
this
the
commissioners
were
concerned
about
future
property
owners
if
they
looked
at
the
floor
plan
and
the
way
was
laid
out,
they
felt
that
potentially
this
could
be
converted
to
a
second
dwelling
unit.
So
essentially,
what
this
does
is
put
future
property
owners
on
notice
and
they
because
it
will
be
recorded
against
the
property.
They'll
know
for
a
fact
that
it
can't
be
a
second
dwelling
unit
unless
they
received
planning
division,
approval,
I.
D
Think
we're
kind
of
singling
out
for
I
mean
we
should
do
this.
This
bigger
condition
on
every
project
I
mean
that's
just
one
more
problem
on
a
point
of
sale,
I
just
I,
don't
think
it's
necessary
gets
in
our
codes
is
in
our
regulations.
It's
in
our
I
mean
everybody
who
buys
a
house
should
know
that
they
can't
rent
out.
D
You
know,
use
a
part
of
their
house
as
a
second
everything
and
I
think
unless
we
have
a
findings
of
approval
because
of
a
certain
layout
of
this
house
in
the
easy
access
for
a
second
unit,
I
mean
care,
I
think
we're
just
kind
of
I,
don't
like
it
myself,
I
just
unless
we
do
it
with
everybody.
I,
don't
like
it
with
this
way,
I
understand
why
you're
doing
it
I,
I
I'm
not
saying
I
disagree
with
it.
I
just
I
think
we're
being
I,
don't
know,
I,
don't
know
what
the
wort
word
is.
E
I
think
the
middle
ground
is
something
that
you
you
touched
on
is
that
we
haven't
recommended
this
before,
but
it
is,
there
are
certain
plant
floor
plans
that
lend
themselves
to
potential
buyers
that
are
saying:
hey.
Let's
set
up
a
second
unit.
I
see
this.
This
floor
plan
would
work
well
with
the
second
unit.
So
I
think
if
we
do
apply
this
condition
of
approval
in
the
future,
we
should
apply
it
to
projects
that
also
have
similar
floor
plans
and
then
incorporate
that
language
within
the
findings.
E
That
way,
we
do
have
some
nexus
and
we're
not
just
saying
you
know
this
one.
You
know
to
win
putting
this
condition
on,
but
it
is
something
that
has
to
be
applied
consistently,
and
this
could
be
a
starting
point,
but
I
do
agree.
Some
type
of
language
should
be
added
to
the
findings
of
approval
so
that
down
the
line,
we
make
sure
we're
consistent
with
other
applications
or
similar
floor
plans.
F
Through
the
chair,
cushion
I'd
like
to
second
permission,
Marshalls
objection
to
that
a
condition
of
approval,
because
I
think
it
could
have
been
easily
applied
to
lots
of
other
applications
in
the
past
and
I
think
it
unfairly
singles
at
this
one.
The
deed
approval,
the
deed
restriction
aspect
is
what
I'm
objecting
to.
Is
that
what
you
were
like
to.
D
See
and
I
can't
speak
for
fact
upon,
transfer
or
sale.
This
house
like
the
way
the
lenders
are
these
days
when
they're
looking
at
everything,
if
they
see
a
deed
restriction
on
here
that
you're
going
to
open
you're
going
to
open
up
a
can
of
worms,
for
you
know
I'm
10
years
from
now.
If
they
try
to
sell
the
house,
and
the
new
lender
says-
and
why
is
this
house
I
verdes
restrict
I've?
D
Never
you
know
I,
just
don't
want
to
put
them
in
jeopardy
that
so
I
think
some
verbiage
on
the
in
the
findings
of
fact
could
help
on
that
and
I.
Just
I
don't
want
to
make
it
look
like
if
they
go
refinance
the
house.
If
there's
an
issue,
an
issue
here,
yeah
you
put
things
in
deeds
these
days
and
everything's
I
don't
want
to
make
third
life
miserable
later
I'm.
Just
trying,
though
I
think
verbiage
in
the
findings
of
fact
find.
The
findings
could
help
Bella
Garros
a.
A
B
Dinuka
decision
that's
out
of
the
range
it
does
have
to
have
some
level
of
hardship
or
some
level
of
issues
that
would
make
that
decision,
and
in
this
case,
unless
there's
some
historical
issue
and
some
background
findings
I
find
that
this
particular
time
to
have
maybe
a
nod
hoc
committee
or
something
to
take
a
look
and
to
say
this
is
some
of
those
going
to
be
moving
forward.
I
think
that,
to
start
off
with
someone
and
to
help
something
on
record
of
this
sort,
it
does
feel
a
bit
a
bit
stringent
and
so
I.
B
I
would
agree.
I
would
agree
that
putting
it
on
a
due
to
trust,
it's
just
another
level
and
I
think
that
it
doesn't
feel
like
it's
part
of
a
planning
commission
decision,
I
believe
that
it
requires
another
I
think
it
requires
some
some
future
discussion
and
at
least
from
my
point
of
view
before
it
comes
to
making
a
decision
of
this
nature.
G
C
B
Through
the
chair
Russia,
my
other
comment
was:
if
there
is
a
concern
in
this
particular
property,
is
there
something
within
the
layout
or
within
the
development
of
this
project
that
might
need
to
have
attention
two
min
to
minimize
the
size
so
much,
but
asked
to
take
a
look
at
this
disease
or
something
that
needs
to
be
looked
at
to
restructure
the
drawing?
So
it
doesn't
have
that
potential
of
a
future
concern.
C
Do
have
to
street
trees
that
played
into
the
design
of
the
proposal
before
us
tonight,
so
they
are
limited
and
they
have
to
the
only
way
to
really
create
that
internal
circulation
is
to
convert
a
portion
of
the
garage
into
a
hallway
space
to
connect
the
existing
single-family
home.
With
the
proposed
addition
given
site
constraints,
an
extreme
measure
would
be
to
completely
relocate
the
location
of
the
garage.
However,
that
would
be
a
huge
expense
and
we
would
lose
a
street
treat
which
the
city
doesn't
like
to
do.
C
C
D
D
E
E
D
A
A
H
Good
evening,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
thanks
for
spending
the
time
to
review
the
project,
my
name
is
Jason
Chen,
the
architect
of
the
project,
and
he
is
the
owner.
Mr.
Wang
and
I
think
met
the
painting
department
staff
out
pretty
well
explained
the
project,
another
one
that
we
keep
the
same
thing
again.
I
think
he
already
explained.
Why
are
we
putting
a
hallway
that
connect
with
a
new
edition
from
the
existing
building?
Because
the
limit
of
the
narrow,
lock
and
also
the
the
garage
in
the
middle
between
two
big
trees?
H
And
then
the
cur
cut
will
be
relocating
the
garage?
Then
we
had
to
cut
down
that
big
tree
on
the
sidewalk
and
then
we
had
to
redo
the
color
cut
again.
So
that's
why
we
keep
the
old
garage,
and
rather
they
go
around
the
back
of
the
garage
with
a
new
edition,
and
this
is
a
small
home
and
then
there's
only
730
1
square
feet,
and
then
they
have
a
to
go
up
kit.
A
H
We
don't
mind,
I
mean
there's
no
intention
of
the
owner
to
create
secondary
unit.
You
know
and
as
I
say
earlier,
they
you
have
to
blow
up
kit
and
husband
and
wife,
and
then
they
want
a
bigger
house
and
then
they
want
to
stay
there
for
a
long
time,
and
so
they
don't
mind
if
the
city
feel
comfortable,
they
have
that
deep
help
them
design.
You
don't
mind
decided,
but
I
think
that
the
pending
Cole
have
the
title
for
single
family
unit
already.
H
H
H
A
A
A
B
E
If
it
weren't
for
the
Architectural
Review
Committee's
discussion
at
the
previous
meeting,
we
probably
wouldn't
have
included
it
I
think.
If
we
do
want
to
include
it,
we
should
include
it
consistently
going
forward
and
not
just
had
this
be
a
one
time
thing.
I
spoke
to
the
city
attorney
about
this.
When
we
first
drafted
the
conditions
of
approval,
he
said
some
cities
do.
This
is
pretty
of
it.
He
used
to
work
for
the
city
of
belmont.
That
was
something
that
the
city
of
belmont
did
quite
often
when
they
were
concerned
about
the
potential
for
conversion.
E
It
hasn't
been
our
practice
to
include
this.
So
if
the
Planning
Commission
is
comfortable
not
including
this-
and
you
know
just
letting
our
normal
zoning
laws
take
effect
on
our
own
normal
building
code
laws
take
effect,
I
think
we'd,
be
you
know,
the
staff
would
be
comfortable
eliminating
that
condition,
but
if
we
do
choose
to
put
it
in,
let's
do
consistently
from
now
on.
My.
B
Concern
is
that,
if
we
were
to
make
this
decision
is
leaving
without
some
some
discussion
or
some
new
research
on
it,
it
would
not
just
would
lead
to
my
point
of
view
doesn't
feel
it
would.
It
would
be
doing
my
best
thought
with
us
thinking
on
this.
So
my
my
point
of
view
is
that
I'd
like
to
eliminate
it
from
from
the
expedition
through.