Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves 340 Beach Road addition amid conditions to remove sauna and east-side deck
Summary
The Belvedere Planning Commission approved design review and an exception to total floor area for a 193 sq ft addition at 340 Beach Road, with conditions to remove a proposed sauna from the plans and to remove a small east-side deck at or before final inspection.
The Belvedere Planning Commission voted to approve design review and an exception to the total floor area for a residential addition at 340 Beach Road.
Staff described the proposal as a primarily first‑story infill totaling an additional 193 square feet at the rear plus a 23 square‑foot east elevation addition and the enclosure of an existing 116‑square‑foot covered patio; the applicant seeks a total floor‑area exception to allow 4,133 square feet where 3,094 is permitted. Staff said the proposal is CEQA‑exempt and recommended that the findings for design review and the floor‑area exception could be made.
Architect Cedric Paregr said the work is intended to create two bedrooms for the homeowners’ young children by building on existing pilings and that the team discovered mid‑process that an existing covered patio already counted toward floor area. He told the commission, “So, I’m happy to, have that, be a condition of approval,” referring to removing the sauna from the scope of work.
Commissioners asked about safety and the small freestanding deck near a side yard; the architect agreed the small deck could be removed before final inspection. Several commissioners said the addition is largely ‘tucked’ under the existing massing and cited the site’s steep slope, surrounding vegetation, and prior variances in finding the project would not unreasonably impair views or privacy.
Commissioner Watson made the motion to approve design review with two added conditions — removal of the sauna (condition M) and removal of the east‑side deck at the end of construction (condition N) — and moved separately to grant the floor‑area exception based on the findings listed in the resolution. Both motions passed with affirmative votes.
The commission’s decision is subject to the conditions contained in the adopted resolution; the record notes staff received two letters of neighborhood support and that one earlier city council variance (1979) allowed a deck within the rear setback that remains in place.
