Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning And Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission continues Poppy Drive ADU/garage project after neighbors press privacy, drainage and garage‑setback concerns
Summary
The planning commission paused a proposal at 2110 Poppy Drive that would convert an attached garage to an ADU and add a front‑facing garage that requires a variance from the 6 ft side setback. Neighbors objected to the new front garage, privacy impacts and drainage; the applicant was asked to return with options that avoid creating a new nonconforming garage.
The Burlingame Planning Commission continued consideration of a design‑review application for 2110 Poppy Drive on Sept. 22 after residents raised privacy, drainage and neighborhood‑character concerns tied to a proposed front‑facing attached garage that requires a variance.
Staff said the project would add first‑ and second‑story floor area and convert an existing garage to an ADU, which triggered a variance request for a first‑floor left‑side setback (3 ft proposed where 6 ft is required for the garage). For ADUs the side setback minimum is 4 ft, but staff clarified that the garage addition is part of the primary dwelling and thus is subject to the 6 ft standard.
Project designer Tim Reddance and owner Jessica Phillips told the commission the scheme preserves the home's character and provides usable garage parking; Reddance said the parcel's pie‑shaped geometry and existing driveway configuration informed the team’s push to keep a functional garage. He also described site mitigation such as a proposed dry well to address some drainage concerns.
Neighbor Kathy Golami, who submitted a written letter, told the commission the block's charm relies on rear garages and that seven of nine houses on her block have garages in back. "The proposed design widens as the lot narrows," she said, and she raised privacy concerns about new windows and the proximity of the proposed garage to her dining area. Golami also said the area has poor soils and historic flooding at the low point; she questioned whether a dry well alone would resolve runoff and urged more neighbor outreach prior to formal filings.
Commissioners discussed alternatives: keeping the existing ADU at a 4‑ft ADU setback and foregoing a new usable garage; rotating the garage to better align with the property line; pulling the garage forward; or reducing garage depth so that it conforms without a variance. Several commissioners said creating a new nonconforming garage in a context where rear garages predominate would set an undesirable precedent.
On a motion by Commissioner Schmid, seconded by Commissioner FA, the commission voted 6‑0 to continue the project and asked the applicant to return with design options that avoid a new nonconforming setback (for example, omit or reconfigure the garage) and to simplify massing and materials in response to staff comments. The continuance was not a denial: it gives the applicant a chance to present alternatives that better preserve neighborhood character and address drainage and privacy concerns.
