Commission approves additions and setback exceptions for 380 Ashton Avenue amid neighbor concerns about shade and seismic bracing

The City of Millbrae Planning Commission on Dec. 15 voted 4–0 to approve a design review permit and a conditional use permit for work at 380 Ashton Avenue that would add a 7.87‑square‑foot first‑floor entry and a 51‑square‑foot second‑floor addition, extend an existing nonconforming upper‑story right‑side setback, and preserve other nonconforming setbacks.

Consultant planner Claire May told commissioners the property is on a triangular lot in the Highlands neighborhood and that the project would increase the building height in places and enclose an existing upper‑level deck. May said the application requires a conditional use permit to extend an existing nonconforming upper‑story right‑side setback (the application cited a proposed 7 ft. 3 in. setback where the code requires 13 feet) and a setback exception for a nonconforming upper‑story front setback (staff materials cite 23 ft. 6 in. proposed where 33 ft. 6 in. is required). May described exterior finish changes and a landscape plan that replaces artificial turf with sod.

Staff materials state that eight adjacent owner consultation forms were mailed; those materials list multiple responses, including forms returned in support and some requesting conditions. (The staff report text in the record contains inconsistent counts across lines; the summary above attributes those numbers to the staff presentation.) One neighbor at 731 Taylor Boulevard asked that the roof not be extended northwest; plans were modified to address that comment and to include a condition addressing partially obscured windows requested by a different neighbor.

Commissioners asked why certain items — roof color/material matches and an attic cross‑brace inspection — appeared in the conditions of approval. City planner Brad Meisner said those items were recommended at his direction and that the cross‑bracing requirement arises from plan‑check and building code requirements rather than being discretionary. Commissioners also reviewed a shadow study; one commissioner said the study showed shadows were "identical between the existing and proposed, or minor enough" to be not obviously visible.

During public comment, Tony Giovannini of 360 Ashley raised concern about an unreinforced masonry fireplace adjacent to his property and asked whether seismic bracing would be required; staff responded that the building code and plan check will require seismic strengthening of the fireplace when plans proceed to building review. A neighbor identified as Mario of 390 Ashton Avenue said he had signed the neighbor consultation form but as the household gardener worried that the roofline changes and enclosure could substantially reduce sunlight in the backyard at certain times of year and asked about construction noise mitigation.

After deliberation and with conditions to address neighbor comments and required plan‑check items, the commission adopted a resolution approving the design review permit, the conditional use permit to extend the existing nonconforming upper‑story right setback, and exception requests for the nonconforming upper‑story front and left‑side setbacks. The motion passed 4–0. Staff said the approval is final pending a 10‑day appeal period and the payment of a required appeal fee.