Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Large Residential Remodel topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission approves remodel, garage and landscaping at 25 Mirna Avenue; denies one side-yard structure variance

5440153 · July 22, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning Commission voted 4-1 to approve a remodel, new garage with bike storage, landscaping changes and related permits for 25 Mirna Avenue on July 17, but denied a combined side-yard setback variance for a proposed shade structure.

The Fairfax Planning Commission on July 17 approved with conditions a remodel and expansion at 25 Mirna Avenue, including a new garage with bike storage, an entry arbor, a replaced stairway, landscaping changes and removal of the existing pool. The commission adopted a resolution (2025-17) by a 4-1 vote that approved a conditional use permit, design review permit and a combined front/rear setback variance, but denied the requested combined side-yard setback variance for a proposed replacement shade structure.

Staff described the project as a multi-part renovation: remodeling portions of the house, replacing a one-car garage with a new one-car garage plus bike storage, replacing the stairway connecting lower and upper portions of the lot, removing the pool and replacing a shade structure relocated to the upper portion of the property, repairing and replacing some roof areas and exterior siding, replacing some impervious surfaces with permeable paving, and refreshing landscaping. Staff recommended approval for most requests but said the combined side-yard setback variance for the proposed shade structure could not be supported because the replacement shade structure could be relocated to meet the minimum 15-foot side-yard setback.

Commissioners and staff discussed multiple technical details during a lengthy hearing. Questions and clarifications included: a discrepancy between the plans and the staff report about the existing number of on-site parking stalls (plans show three tandem stalls; staff initially listed two), the lot-coverage calculations (staff said lot coverage would drop from about 55% to 37%), floor-area-ratio accounting for accessory structures, which features are excluded from FAR calculations, and which parts of the project would require sewer-district permits. Commissioners also scrutinized the landscape and tree-removal requests: the landscape architect said two trees were proposed for removal (an olive tree and a camphor tree) and that some proposed plantings follow Fire Safe Marin guidance; members of the commission asked whether more fire-resistant or native species should be used and whether tree-committee review should be conditioned.

The architect and landscape architect addressed design concerns. The applicant's team said the garage and storage are intended to consolidate accumulated outbuildings, provide bicycle storage and allow planting to remain at the street rather than a fence for security. Commissioners expressed mixed views about the garage facade length and suggested trimming the triangular portion of the garage to reduce the long, flat street-facing wall; the applicant argued that removing the triangular portion would require the addition of a fence and that the chosen design would allow more planting at the street. The commission discussed renumbering and clarifying many resolution paragraphs and added conditions for final plan submittals, geotechnical/building-plan checks, and clarifications on setbacks and parking counts.

At the end of deliberations Commissioner Petrone moved to adopt the red-line version of resolution 2025-17 (approving the CUP, design review permit and front/rear setback variance and denying the combined side-yard setback variance for the shade structure) with the drafting corrections discussed; the motion was seconded. Roll call: Swift, Petrone, Jansen and Chair Feffer voted yes; Commissioner Newton voted no. The motion passed 4-1. The resolution includes various conditions to be satisfied prior to building permit issuance, and the commission noted a 10-day appeal period.

Why it matters: The decision allows a substantial remodel and new accessory structure on a constrained lot while denying the nonconforming placement of a new shade structure into the combined side-yard setback. The approval includes conditions to address stormwater, parking and tree permits before construction proceeds.