HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - PC - 2018.09.10Planning Commission
City of Burlingame
Meeting Agenda
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Council Chambers7:00 PMMonday, September 10, 2018
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Draft July 11, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting Minutesa.
Draft July 11, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting MinutesAttachments:
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA
Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to
suggest an item for a future Planning Commission agenda may do so during this public comment period .
The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the Planning Commission
from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak "
card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision of a name, address or
other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Chair may adjust
the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers.
6. STUDY ITEMS
General Plan Update - Historical Preservation Policiesa.
Staff Report
Attachments
Attachments:
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on simultaneously unless
separate discussion and /or action is requested by the applicant, a member of the public or a
commissioner prior to the time the Commission votes on the motion to adopt.
8. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
Page 1 City of Burlingame Printed on 9/6/2018
September 10, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Agenda
1433 Floribunda Avenue, zoned R -3 - Application for Design Review, Condominium
Permit, Conditional Use Permit for building height and Tentative Condominium Map for a
new 4-story, 8-unit residential condominium building (Melinda Kao, applicant; Levy Design
Partners, architect; Accelerate Holdings LLC, property owner) (370 noticed) Staff Contact:
Ruben Hurin
a.
1433 Floribunda Ave - Staff Report
1433 Floribunda Ave - Attachments
1433 Floribunda Ave - MND Addendum
1433 Floribunda Ave - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1433 Floribunda Ave - Plans - 09.10.18
1433 Floribunda Ave - Memorandum - Tentative Condominium Map
1433 Floribunda Ave - Tentative Condominium Map
Attachments:
133 Crescent Avenue, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review for a new two -story
single family dwelling and detached garage. The project is Categorically Exempt from
review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section 15303
(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. (Tim Raduenz, Form+ One, applicant and designer; Greg
Gambrioli, 133 Crescent LLC, property owner) (113 noticed) Staff contact: Erika Lewit
b.
133 Crescent Ave - Staff Report
133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
133 Crescent Ave - Historic Resource Evaluation
133 Crescent Ave - Plans - 09.10.18.pdf
Attachments:
9. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY
2 Kenmar Way, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction
Permit for a first and second story addition to an existing single family dwelling (Tim
Raduenz, Form One, applicant and designer; Eric and Serena Fong, property owners) (71
noticed) Staff Contact: Ruben Hurin
a.
2 Kenmar Way - Staff Report
2 Kenmar Way - Attachments
2 Kenmar Way - Plans - 09.10.18
Attachments:
Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 9/6/2018
September 10, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Agenda
1408 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review and Special Permit for
Declining Height Envelope for new construction (major renovation) of a two and a half story
single family dwelling with the existing detached garage to remain. (Young & Borlik
Architects, applicant and architect; Holli and John Rafferty, property owners) (107 noticed)
Staff contact: Catherine Keylon
b.
1408 Bernal Ave - Staff Report
1408 Bernal Ave - Attachments
1408 Bernal Ave - Plans - 09.10.18
1408 Bernal Ave - Rendering
Attachments:
10. COMMISSIONER’S REPORTS
11. DIRECTOR REPORTS
- Commission Communications
- City Council regular meeting September 4, 2018
1337 California Dr - FYI for changes to a previously approved Design Review project.a.
1337 California Dr - Memorandum
1337 California Dr - Plans - 09.10.18
Attachments:
12. ADJOURNMENT
Note: An action by the Planning Commission is appealable to the City Council within 10 days of the
Planning Commission's action on September 10, 2018. If the Planning Commission's action has not
been appealed or called up for review by the Council by 5:00 p.m. on September 23, 2018, the action
becomes final. In order to be effective, appeals must be in writing to the City Clerk and must be
accompanied by an appeal fee of $551, which includes noticing costs.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on
this agenda will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours at the
Community Development/Planning counter, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California.
Page 3 City of Burlingame Printed on 9/6/2018
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
City of Burlingame
Meeting Minutes
Planning Commission
7:00 PM Council ChambersWednesday, July 11, 2018
General Plan Study Session
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. Staff in attendance: Community Development Director Kevin
Gardiner and Planning Manager Ruben Hurin.
2. ROLL CALL
Sargent, Loftis, Comaroto, Terrones, and TsePresent5 -
Kelly, and GaulAbsent2 -
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There were no minutes to approve.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA
There were no public comments.
6. STUDY ITEMS
a.Draft General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Overview
Staff Report
Exhibits A and B: Comments Logs
Draft General Plan - August 2017
Draft EIR - June 2018
Attachments:
Community Development Director Gardiner introduced the consultant team: Dan Amsden, Laura Stetson,
and Lillian Jacobsen of MIG.
Dan Amsden and Laura Stetson made a presentation to the commission.
Commission questions/comments:
>In the General Plan list of figures in the Table of Contents the figures noted under Community
Character (CC-63, CC-64, CC-65) are mislabled.
>CC-17 "Badlands" should be "Baylands."
>CC-46 discusses Broadway mix of uses but the diagram shows downtown. Should show the Broadway
diagram.
Page 1City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
July 11, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
>EIR inconsistency with 2017 Clean Air Plan and 2017 Scoping Plan is noted, with updated Climate
Action Plan underway. Does the Significant Unavoidable Impact need to go to Council? (Stetson: It is a
process issue. The Climate Action Plan is not finished but it will be finished by the time the plan goes to
public hearing. The mitigation is to do a Climate Action Plan, so the impacts will no longer be significant
and unavoidable.)
>EIR page 210 indicates two alternatives, not three. (Stetson: That is a typo.)
>Recalled in previous discussions that environmental justice is an emerging element. Where is it
referenced? (Stetson: The Legislature has passed legislation to require General Plans to address
environmental justice. If there were census tracts that were identified as disadvantaged it would need to be
addressed, but Burlingame does not have any of those ares that would be considered impacted due to
income or exposure to environmental hazards. As such there is not an explicit addressing of
environmental justice in terms of complying with State Law, unless the Commission or Council sees an
issue that requires policy to be to be addressed.) It is addressed under Community Character in the plan,
so is there something that should clarify in the EIR why it is not included? (Amsden: It is a clarification
that can be made in the Final EIR.)
>The amount of land designated for Institutional development is being reduced because of
redesignation. What does that mean? Particularly since the Existing Land Use Map does not have an
Institutional designation. (Jacobsen: It relates to whether the Mercy property should be designated as
Institutional or Residential. Ultimately it was decided to designate it Residential, which would provide them
with more flexibility. The base line is what is on the ground, not what is shown in the previous General
Plan.)
>Would Institutional uses be allowed in those neighborhoods with a Conditional Use Permit? (Gardiner:
Yes. There were discussions whether or not to designate an Institutional use with the underlying land use .
The decision was made to retain the underlying land use to allow more flexibility in the future.)
>Table 12-81 on page 12-8 mentions Policy CC-3.1 - comprehensive historic surveys should indicate
policy CC-3.2. (Stetson: Will fix that.)
>Page 17-7 Burlingame School District should be abbreviated as "BSD" not "BUSD."
>Regarding wastewater collection and treatment, are the cumulative effects of growth in the Town of
Hillsborough included? (Stetson: Will need to check. Does not anticipate Hillsborough will have significant
growth.)
>Page 21-11 of the EIR mentions noise impact on Broadway between El Camino Real and Bernal
Avenue, and attributes it to new residential units in the hillside neighborhood west of the road segment. Is
that really the reason, the right description? Or is it better described as hillside residents accessing
Broadway and the Broadway interchange? (Stetson: Correct, it is the latter. It is due to regional traffic.)
>Does Policy CC-3.1 indeed require historic resource evaluation of any project that significantly alters a
building that is more than 50 years old? Is it really intended to be that broad? (Stetson: CC-3.1 addresses
the City initiating surveys for historic districts to get a baseline for evaluating projects rather than
continuing to do things on a case by case basis. The aim is to have a more rigorous assessment of
projects for buildings that have been designated as potentially significant.)
> If the requirement is to evaluate every building over 50 years old that would significantly effect
everything that is done in the city. It would be a waste of money and time. (Stetson: The commission can
provide guidance on this if it is not clear or providing the desired direction. Can tie the two historic
measures together.)
>How would traffic be reduced through the bicycle network? (Stetson: The idea is to make it easier for
people to do a mode shift. If someone is hesitant to ride a bike, the bicycle master plan and the
associated improvements to the network might encourage them to make more trips on bikes.)
>What would be the potential impact to circulation with shifting to more bikes? (Ollie Zhou, Hexagon
Transportation Consultants: The traffic model analysis assumes bike mode share would remain 2 percent
of the total. Traffic is projected to increase overall, and the bike share would increase proportionally and
remain at 2 percent.)(Stetson: The potential could be greater, but the analysis is conservative.)
>Not clear what the Rollins /Road mixed use live/work zone would be comprised of, and how successful
it has been in other areas? (Stetson: There are emerging examples of live /work. The district would not
need to be fully mixed use buildings, but the district itself could have a mix of uses. For example a small
office or commercial building with a residential building adjacent. Or it could be where there is a work
Page 2City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
July 11, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
space on the ground floor and a residence above, with the same owner of tenant using both. It has been
shown to work in urban areas .)(Amsden: The proximity to the BART station would allow the area to
become more urbanized, with a live/work mix. There could be either horizontal or vertical mixed use.)
>Would it just be a change to the land use designation in Rollins Road, but it would be up to the land
owner to make the application for the development project? Or would the City do anything to encourage
that change? (Stetson: It is up to the property owner. The City could be proactive in education if it wanted
to move it along, but could not force anything. An example is the "funk zone" in Santa Barbara, which is
an older industrial district that is changing fairly quickly. There is re -use of industrial buildings, as well as
new buildings. There are wineries, restaurants, and maker spaces mixed in with residential uses .)
(Amsden: Fourth Street in Berkeley, and the west side of Santa Cruz are other examples.)
>Could a use such as an artist studios, cabinet shop, and furniture shop go into one of the spaces, but
also have an apartment associated with it? (Gardiner: The approach would acknowledge the existing
industrial uses and allow those uses to stay if the property owners choose. However multiple uses could
coexist, so the environment would be different than a more conventional residential neighborhood which
would expect industrial uses to be phased out. In this instance the expectation is the residential and
live/work uses understand they are moving into an area with eclectic mix of uses. It could evolve over time
organically, or could be more defined though the zoning and possibly a specific plan.)
>The San Francisco design area is slowly seeing tenants being pushed out by new housing and
commercial buildings. Is there was a design center like that here, there would be a number of gallery
spaces and design spaces to support the showrooms. Would the FAR be sufficient to support that type of
development? (Stetson: The FAR may not be as high as in San Francisco, but we can re -evaluate it to
make sure it could accommodate the concept.)
>Ferry service is mentioned. Is it being considered as a transportation option for the Bayfront?
(Stetson: It is not excluding the possibility, but because of the dredging that would be considered it would
be a fairly complex undertaking. It could be considered in the future but the implementation would be a
challenge.)
>Rollins Road has high -power lines requiring development to stay away from power lines. How far does
development need to be from the power lines to accommodate housing? (Stetson: Can bring a more
detailed response back in the public hearing.)
>Could the threshold for historic review be 100 years, not 50? There were so many homes built in the
1950s and 1920s. (Gardiner: There is the CEQA threshold, versus a city policy threshold. A 100-year
threshold would be a city policy choice .)(Stetson: 50 years is a standard threshold used throughout the
country.)
>Would be difficult to have a 50-year historic evaluation threshold since most homes in Burlingame are
more that 50 years old. (Stetson: Some communities have begun designating mid -century homes such as
Eichlers as representative of certain eras. While 50 years is a standard practice, a community could
decide to have a two -tiered system.)(Gardiner: The framework in the plan intentionally emphasizes historic
preservation. This was the direction of the Community Advisory Committee, to have a higher, more
rigorous level of evaluation than exists currently.)
>There is a difference between historic and nostalgic. Believes it would be hard to make the case that
many of the buildings that are more than 50 years old are actually historic. In the Burlingame Park
neighborhood, most of the evaluations have come back as not being eligible. If this practice is applied
citywide, it would have an impact that would unnecessarily constrain the city.
>Believes the intent is have a more comprehensive analysis of the city. Right now there is a limbo that
there was an historical evaluation survey of Downtown, and then Burlingame Park has a status where each
individual project has to prepare its own evaluation. The goal here would be to have a more comprehensive
evaluation, sponsored by the City, which would remove the burden from the individual property owner.
>Earlier the modest 2 bedroom/1 bath houses were the ones being torn down and replaced, but those
are all gone now. Now those being torn down include some very nice houses. The potential tear -downs now
include more substantial houses that could be potentially historic, but there is no recourse to ask for
something other than allowing it to be torn down, or to consider incentives for the homeowner to preserve
and add on instead and do something through the Mills Act.
>Even the properties that have been determined to have historic merit have been allowed to do
substantial projects, while maintaining their historic nature. Does not say that something cannot be done
Page 3City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
July 11, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
to a house.
>Would prefer to look at the historic issue more holistically. Concern with the existing practice of
individual evaluations; does not feel like there is a lot of return, and it is a burden. Only a handful end up
being deemed significant.
>The focus should be on the character.
>Has anyone looked at the typical lot sizes of lots in Rollins Road for the types of projects being
intended? Should make sure the FAR being proposed is going to work for the types of projects
envisioned. (Stetson: There is no typical lot size in the area, but the FAR would likely apply only to the
non-residential development.)
>Given the water table in the area, underground parking may be difficult in the Rollins Road area. Not
convinced 1.0 FAR will be sufficient to encourage change.
Public Comments:
>Florence Wong: Is on the School Board for the Burlingame School District. Demographers project for
every 100 new single family units there will be 20 more students, with 7% middle school students. If by
2040 there would be 3,000 new housing units, that would be 600 new students. Even with the new school
recently added, all elementary schools are at capacity except for Franklin. BIS already has 1,100
students. Is not opposed to adding housing units, but in the future will need some help from the city to
identify land for a new school, a big school. There are rules for where schools can be located, minimum
distance from highways. Could not build a school in the North Rollins area. Needs to be able to have the
funding and be able to identify land for future schools.
>Kamran Ehsanipour: Owns land at corner of Adeline Drive and El Camino Real. Property was originally
zoned R-3, and surrounding area is R -3. Property was used as a commercial use as a grandfathered use .
In 1984 the zoning changed to C -1. At that time mixed use was allowed in C -1, but not allowed now .
Wants to be able to develop mixed use. Mixed use can add to quality of life and beauty to city. Opinion is
C-1 should be considered to allow mixed use. Would like the North Burlingame Mixed Use designation for
this property.
>Cynthia Cornell, Housing for All Burlingame: Concerned with 3,000 units. Burlingame Point will bring
4,000 new jobs. The old Hyatt movie theater redevelopment would add more jobs, as well as possibly two
new hotels and Top Golf. Jobs will be low income. Burlingame continues to develop commercial properties
without housing. Needs to consider where people will live in the future, and will need another school .
Renters are at risk of losing their housing once Burlingame Point opens.
>Jennifer Pfaff: Concern with not having a height limit on the northern end, concerned how the city
intends to handle design. How to get good design with overreach from the State, which does not allow
design standards to be imposed on projects? Not understanding how the two pieces will go together .
Historic preservation was a concern of the Community Advisory Committee given how much is being torn
down and the character changing; Burlingame Park was treated in a certain way from its characteristics .
Different areas of the city are treated in different ways, which is not equitable. There are older areas of the
city besides Burlingame Park, but they are not being treated the same. In Burlingame Park while most of
the surveys have shown the building to not have significance, there were more than a couple that were
designated as special. There were also some that were considered contributors to a district, but we do not
consider districts. Would like to look at what other cities do; some of it is legal. Should be equitable but
not be a nuisance to owners and developers.
>Tim Donnelly: Impressed with the plan: it is comprehensive and well thought out. A lot of effort has
gone into it. Don't let it get watered down.
>Leslie McQuaide: Has lived in Burlingame for 41 years, and was on the Community Advisory
Committee. Has fear of the city losing its character. People redevelop houses but then move on .
Concerned with traffic; there is a line of cars on Broadway heading to the freeway. Needs another way to
Page 4City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
July 11, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
get to the freeway. Rollins Road will add more traffic. SFGate had an article quality of life, with South San
Francisco and San Carlos featured as being concerned with changing quality of life.
Community Development Director Gardiner noted that there will be meetings in the future to provide further
input and discussion.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:52 p.m.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on
this agenda will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours at the
Community Development/Planning counter, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California.
Page 5City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Community Development Department
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: September 10, 2018
TO: Planning Commissioners
FROM: Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: General Plan Historic Resources Approaches
In March 2015, the City of Burlingame initiated a multi-year process focused on a community-
led effort to update the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, called “Envision Burlingame.”
The General Plan and Zoning Ordinance are the City’s two documents that regulate all land
use, environmental and transportation decisions made by City leaders.
On July 11, 2018, the Planning Commission held a special meeting to receive an overview of
both the Draft General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). In the meeting the
Planning Commission was able to questions and provide comments on the draft plan and EIR,
and, and receive public input (draft meeting minutes attached).
In the meeting there were a number of questions and comments regarding the approach to
historic resources presented in the Draft General Plan. Given that the approach was developed
in consultation with the General Plan Community Advisory Committee (CAC), staff and the
consultant team thought it would be helpful to share with the Planning Commission the
presentation that was originally made to the CAC regarding historic resources. The presentation
to the Planning Commission will be further expanded to include references to the practices of
other municipalities.
The following attachments are included for reference:
Slides from CAC Meeting #11 (July 27, 2016), in which historic resource approaches,
programs and policies were discussed
CAC Meeting #11 Summary
The Planning Commission will be invited to comment on the material in the presentation, and
suggest recommendations for refinements or changes as applicable.
GENERAL PLAN ADOPTION STATUS
The designated comment period for the EIR concluded on August 20th. A total of 10 EIR
comment letters were received from the public and from public agencies. The consultant team is
in the process of preparing responses to each comment letter, to be included in the Final EIR.
The letters may be viewed on the City’s General Plan web page at
www.burlingame.org/generalplan.
Separately, 20 comment letters have been received on the Draft General Plan document since
its release in August 2017. While the comment period for the EIR has concluded, comments on
the Draft General Plan may continue to be submitted through the public hearings. Letters
received to date may be viewed on the City’s General Plan web page at
www.burlingame.org/generalplan.
Planning Commission Study Session – September 10, 2018
General Plan Historic Resources Approaches
Page 2
The Planning Commission public hearing to recommend adoption of the General Plan is
tentatively scheduled for the October 22, 2018 meeting. The Planning Commission will be
making a recommendation to the City Council, including any recommended changes to the Draft
General Plan.
The City Council is tentatively scheduled to have a study item (staff presentation) on November
5th to receive an overview of both the Draft General Plan and Draft EIR, and review the Planning
Commission recommendations. A public hearing to consider adoption of the General Plan and
EIR is tentatively scheduled for November 19th.
Attachments:
CAC Meeting #11 (July 27, 2016) slide excerpts
CAC Meeting #11 Summary
Draft July 11, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
Community Advisory Committee #1July 22, 2015 | Park and Recreation CenterHISTORICAL RESOURCES
Historic Preservation OverviewHistoric preservation can:Enhance a community’s overall sense of place and quality of lifeHelp residents and visitors appreciate local history Help revitalize and stabilize downtowns, business districts and neighborhoods
Resource Evaluation ProcessDocumentation of who the primary owners have been and their contributions to history (if any)Documentation of any important eventsAssessment of the architecture of a structure to determine if it is a fine example of a particular style or periodDetermination of whether a structure has “integrity” to its historical periodConclusion on whether the structure meets the criteria for National (NRHP) or California (CRHP) Registry listing
Current Resource ListingBuilding Name/Description AddressYear DesignatedRegisterBurlingame Railroad Station 290 California Drive 1971/1978 National/StateKohl Mansion 2750 Adeline Drive 1982 NationalHoward-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree RowsEl Camino Real 2012 NationalSevern Lodge Dairy Wallscape 220 California Drive 2004 Point of Interest
Limitations on ChangesIf a structure is determined to be historic, there are limitations on future changes to the structure:Historic structures cannot be demolished if there is a feasible alternative to demolition.Additions and alterations can be allowed but should meet preservation standards.Dividing the lot may also be allowed if the “setting” of the historic structure can be preserved.
Downtown SurveyIn 2008, the City prepared an inventory for Downtown. The survey identified 23 structures potentially eligible for the CRHR and NRHP, and 51 structures that convey important aspects of Burlingame’s history.)
Resource Protection OptionsConduct a Citywide SurveyConduct a full survey of the city either as part of the General Plan process or as a near-term implementation action.Considerations: Time and cost. Also, the survey would need to be regularly maintained and updated to remain effective.
Resource Protection OptionsExpand the City’s Existing OrdinanceExpand the City’s historic preservation ordinance to cover more portions and/or all of Burlingame.Create a local historic preservation program.
Resource Protection OptionsDevelop a Process for NominationsCreate a local process for nominating buildings and sites that includes an application form.Allow buildings and other resources to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, either through an application or as part of a development review process. Identify a point person at City hall (staff or consultant) who would make a determination when an application is submitted.
Resource Protection OptionsFinancial IncentivesProvide low-cost bonds to support the restoration of historic properties.Reduce permitting fees for historic rehabilitations.Encourage the use of Mills Act funding.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
City of Burlingame
Meeting Minutes
Planning Commission
7:00 PM Council ChambersWednesday, July 11, 2018
General Plan Study Session
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. Staff in attendance: Community Development Director Kevin
Gardiner and Planning Manager Ruben Hurin.
2. ROLL CALL
Sargent, Loftis, Comaroto, Terrones, and TsePresent5 -
Kelly, and GaulAbsent2 -
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There were no minutes to approve.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA
There were no public comments.
6. STUDY ITEMS
a.Draft General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Overview
Staff Report
Exhibits A and B: Comments Logs
Draft General Plan - August 2017
Draft EIR - June 2018
Attachments:
Community Development Director Gardiner introduced the consultant team: Dan Amsden, Laura Stetson,
and Lillian Jacobsen of MIG.
Dan Amsden and Laura Stetson made a presentation to the commission.
Commission questions/comments:
>In the General Plan list of figures in the Table of Contents the figures noted under Community
Character (CC-63, CC-64, CC-65) are mislabled.
>CC-17 "Badlands" should be "Baylands."
>CC-46 discusses Broadway mix of uses but the diagram shows downtown. Should show the Broadway
diagram.
Page 1City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
July 11, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
>EIR inconsistency with 2017 Clean Air Plan and 2017 Scoping Plan is noted, with updated Climate
Action Plan underway. Does the Significant Unavoidable Impact need to go to Council? (Stetson: It is a
process issue. The Climate Action Plan is not finished but it will be finished by the time the plan goes to
public hearing. The mitigation is to do a Climate Action Plan, so the impacts will no longer be significant
and unavoidable.)
>EIR page 210 indicates two alternatives, not three. (Stetson: That is a typo.)
>Recalled in previous discussions that environmental justice is an emerging element. Where is it
referenced? (Stetson: The Legislature has passed legislation to require General Plans to address
environmental justice. If there were census tracts that were identified as disadvantaged it would need to be
addressed, but Burlingame does not have any of those ares that would be considered impacted due to
income or exposure to environmental hazards. As such there is not an explicit addressing of
environmental justice in terms of complying with State Law, unless the Commission or Council sees an
issue that requires policy to be to be addressed.) It is addressed under Community Character in the plan,
so is there something that should clarify in the EIR why it is not included? (Amsden: It is a clarification
that can be made in the Final EIR.)
>The amount of land designated for Institutional development is being reduced because of
redesignation. What does that mean? Particularly since the Existing Land Use Map does not have an
Institutional designation. (Jacobsen: It relates to whether the Mercy property should be designated as
Institutional or Residential. Ultimately it was decided to designate it Residential, which would provide them
with more flexibility. The base line is what is on the ground, not what is shown in the previous General
Plan.)
>Would Institutional uses be allowed in those neighborhoods with a Conditional Use Permit? (Gardiner:
Yes. There were discussions whether or not to designate an Institutional use with the underlying land use .
The decision was made to retain the underlying land use to allow more flexibility in the future.)
>Table 12-81 on page 12-8 mentions Policy CC-3.1 - comprehensive historic surveys should indicate
policy CC-3.2. (Stetson: Will fix that.)
>Page 17-7 Burlingame School District should be abbreviated as "BSD" not "BUSD."
>Regarding wastewater collection and treatment, are the cumulative effects of growth in the Town of
Hillsborough included? (Stetson: Will need to check. Does not anticipate Hillsborough will have significant
growth.)
>Page 21-11 of the EIR mentions noise impact on Broadway between El Camino Real and Bernal
Avenue, and attributes it to new residential units in the hillside neighborhood west of the road segment. Is
that really the reason, the right description? Or is it better described as hillside residents accessing
Broadway and the Broadway interchange? (Stetson: Correct, it is the latter. It is due to regional traffic.)
>Does Policy CC-3.1 indeed require historic resource evaluation of any project that significantly alters a
building that is more than 50 years old? Is it really intended to be that broad? (Stetson: CC-3.1 addresses
the City initiating surveys for historic districts to get a baseline for evaluating projects rather than
continuing to do things on a case by case basis. The aim is to have a more rigorous assessment of
projects for buildings that have been designated as potentially significant.)
> If the requirement is to evaluate every building over 50 years old that would significantly effect
everything that is done in the city. It would be a waste of money and time. (Stetson: The commission can
provide guidance on this if it is not clear or providing the desired direction. Can tie the two historic
measures together.)
>How would traffic be reduced through the bicycle network? (Stetson: The idea is to make it easier for
people to do a mode shift. If someone is hesitant to ride a bike, the bicycle master plan and the
associated improvements to the network might encourage them to make more trips on bikes.)
>What would be the potential impact to circulation with shifting to more bikes? (Ollie Zhou, Hexagon
Transportation Consultants: The traffic model analysis assumes bike mode share would remain 2 percent
of the total. Traffic is projected to increase overall, and the bike share would increase proportionally and
remain at 2 percent.)(Stetson: The potential could be greater, but the analysis is conservative.)
>Not clear what the Rollins /Road mixed use live/work zone would be comprised of, and how successful
it has been in other areas? (Stetson: There are emerging examples of live /work. The district would not
need to be fully mixed use buildings, but the district itself could have a mix of uses. For example a small
office or commercial building with a residential building adjacent. Or it could be where there is a work
Page 2City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
July 11, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
space on the ground floor and a residence above, with the same owner of tenant using both. It has been
shown to work in urban areas .)(Amsden: The proximity to the BART station would allow the area to
become more urbanized, with a live/work mix. There could be either horizontal or vertical mixed use.)
>Would it just be a change to the land use designation in Rollins Road, but it would be up to the land
owner to make the application for the development project? Or would the City do anything to encourage
that change? (Stetson: It is up to the property owner. The City could be proactive in education if it wanted
to move it along, but could not force anything. An example is the "funk zone" in Santa Barbara, which is
an older industrial district that is changing fairly quickly. There is re -use of industrial buildings, as well as
new buildings. There are wineries, restaurants, and maker spaces mixed in with residential uses .)
(Amsden: Fourth Street in Berkeley, and the west side of Santa Cruz are other examples.)
>Could a use such as an artist studios, cabinet shop, and furniture shop go into one of the spaces, but
also have an apartment associated with it? (Gardiner: The approach would acknowledge the existing
industrial uses and allow those uses to stay if the property owners choose. However multiple uses could
coexist, so the environment would be different than a more conventional residential neighborhood which
would expect industrial uses to be phased out. In this instance the expectation is the residential and
live/work uses understand they are moving into an area with eclectic mix of uses. It could evolve over time
organically, or could be more defined though the zoning and possibly a specific plan.)
>The San Francisco design area is slowly seeing tenants being pushed out by new housing and
commercial buildings. Is there was a design center like that here, there would be a number of gallery
spaces and design spaces to support the showrooms. Would the FAR be sufficient to support that type of
development? (Stetson: The FAR may not be as high as in San Francisco, but we can re -evaluate it to
make sure it could accommodate the concept.)
>Ferry service is mentioned. Is it being considered as a transportation option for the Bayfront?
(Stetson: It is not excluding the possibility, but because of the dredging that would be considered it would
be a fairly complex undertaking. It could be considered in the future but the implementation would be a
challenge.)
>Rollins Road has high -power lines requiring development to stay away from power lines. How far does
development need to be from the power lines to accommodate housing? (Stetson: Can bring a more
detailed response back in the public hearing.)
>Could the threshold for historic review be 100 years, not 50? There were so many homes built in the
1950s and 1920s. (Gardiner: There is the CEQA threshold, versus a city policy threshold. A 100-year
threshold would be a city policy choice .)(Stetson: 50 years is a standard threshold used throughout the
country.)
>Would be difficult to have a 50-year historic evaluation threshold since most homes in Burlingame are
more that 50 years old. (Stetson: Some communities have begun designating mid -century homes such as
Eichlers as representative of certain eras. While 50 years is a standard practice, a community could
decide to have a two -tiered system.)(Gardiner: The framework in the plan intentionally emphasizes historic
preservation. This was the direction of the Community Advisory Committee, to have a higher, more
rigorous level of evaluation than exists currently.)
>There is a difference between historic and nostalgic. Believes it would be hard to make the case that
many of the buildings that are more than 50 years old are actually historic. In the Burlingame Park
neighborhood, most of the evaluations have come back as not being eligible. If this practice is applied
citywide, it would have an impact that would unnecessarily constrain the city.
>Believes the intent is have a more comprehensive analysis of the city. Right now there is a limbo that
there was an historical evaluation survey of Downtown, and then Burlingame Park has a status where each
individual project has to prepare its own evaluation. The goal here would be to have a more comprehensive
evaluation, sponsored by the City, which would remove the burden from the individual property owner.
>Earlier the modest 2 bedroom/1 bath houses were the ones being torn down and replaced, but those
are all gone now. Now those being torn down include some very nice houses. The potential tear -downs now
include more substantial houses that could be potentially historic, but there is no recourse to ask for
something other than allowing it to be torn down, or to consider incentives for the homeowner to preserve
and add on instead and do something through the Mills Act.
>Even the properties that have been determined to have historic merit have been allowed to do
substantial projects, while maintaining their historic nature. Does not say that something cannot be done
Page 3City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
July 11, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
to a house.
>Would prefer to look at the historic issue more holistically. Concern with the existing practice of
individual evaluations; does not feel like there is a lot of return, and it is a burden. Only a handful end up
being deemed significant.
>The focus should be on the character.
>Has anyone looked at the typical lot sizes of lots in Rollins Road for the types of projects being
intended? Should make sure the FAR being proposed is going to work for the types of projects
envisioned. (Stetson: There is no typical lot size in the area, but the FAR would likely apply only to the
non-residential development.)
>Given the water table in the area, underground parking may be difficult in the Rollins Road area. Not
convinced 1.0 FAR will be sufficient to encourage change.
Public Comments:
>Florence Wong: Is on the School Board for the Burlingame School District. Demographers project for
every 100 new single family units there will be 20 more students, with 7% middle school students. If by
2040 there would be 3,000 new housing units, that would be 600 new students. Even with the new school
recently added, all elementary schools are at capacity except for Franklin. BIS already has 1,100
students. Is not opposed to adding housing units, but in the future will need some help from the city to
identify land for a new school, a big school. There are rules for where schools can be located, minimum
distance from highways. Could not build a school in the North Rollins area. Needs to be able to have the
funding and be able to identify land for future schools.
>Kamran Ehsanipour: Owns land at corner of Adeline Drive and El Camino Real. Property was originally
zoned R-3, and surrounding area is R -3. Property was used as a commercial use as a grandfathered use .
In 1984 the zoning changed to C -1. At that time mixed use was allowed in C -1, but not allowed now .
Wants to be able to develop mixed use. Mixed use can add to quality of life and beauty to city. Opinion is
C-1 should be considered to allow mixed use. Would like the North Burlingame Mixed Use designation for
this property.
>Cynthia Cornell, Housing for All Burlingame: Concerned with 3,000 units. Burlingame Point will bring
4,000 new jobs. The old Hyatt movie theater redevelopment would add more jobs, as well as possibly two
new hotels and Top Golf. Jobs will be low income. Burlingame continues to develop commercial properties
without housing. Needs to consider where people will live in the future, and will need another school .
Renters are at risk of losing their housing once Burlingame Point opens.
>Jennifer Pfaff: Concern with not having a height limit on the northern end, concerned how the city
intends to handle design. How to get good design with overreach from the State, which does not allow
design standards to be imposed on projects? Not understanding how the two pieces will go together .
Historic preservation was a concern of the Community Advisory Committee given how much is being torn
down and the character changing; Burlingame Park was treated in a certain way from its characteristics .
Different areas of the city are treated in different ways, which is not equitable. There are older areas of the
city besides Burlingame Park, but they are not being treated the same. In Burlingame Park while most of
the surveys have shown the building to not have significance, there were more than a couple that were
designated as special. There were also some that were considered contributors to a district, but we do not
consider districts. Would like to look at what other cities do; some of it is legal. Should be equitable but
not be a nuisance to owners and developers.
>Tim Donnelly: Impressed with the plan: it is comprehensive and well thought out. A lot of effort has
gone into it. Don't let it get watered down.
>Leslie McQuaide: Has lived in Burlingame for 41 years, and was on the Community Advisory
Committee. Has fear of the city losing its character. People redevelop houses but then move on .
Concerned with traffic; there is a line of cars on Broadway heading to the freeway. Needs another way to
Page 4City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
July 11, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
get to the freeway. Rollins Road will add more traffic. SFGate had an article quality of life, with South San
Francisco and San Carlos featured as being concerned with changing quality of life.
Community Development Director Gardiner noted that there will be meetings in the future to provide further
input and discussion.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:52 p.m.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on
this agenda will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours at the
Community Development/Planning counter, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California.
Page 5City of Burlingame Printed on 9/5/2018
PROJECT LOCATION
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Item No. 8a
Regular Action Item
Item No. 8a
Regular Action Item
City of Burlingame
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit
and Tentative Condominium Map
Address:1433 Floribunda Avenue Meeting Date:September 24, 2018
Request:Application for Condominium Permit, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit for building height and
Tentative Condominium Map for a new four-story, 8-unit residential condominium with at-grade
parking.
Applicant:Melinda Kao APN:029-112-050
Property Owner:Accelerate Holdings LLC Lot Area:9,320 SF
Architect:Levy Design Partners
General Plan:High Density Residential Zoning:R-3
Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan (R-3 Base District)
Adjacent Development:Multifamily Residential
Current Use:Vacant (site previously contained five residential units in two separate buildings).
Proposed Use: 8-unit residential condominium building.
Allowable Use:Multifamily, duplex, and single-family dwellings.
Environmental Review Status:The proposed 8-unit residential condominium project falls within the scope of
the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the previously approved 10-unit residential condominium
(ND-569-P) and Addendum prepared for the project.
History:An application for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Condominium Permit, Design Review, Parking
Variance and Tentative Condominium Map for construction of a new four-story, 10-unit residential
condominium at 1433 Floribunda Avenue was approved by the Planning Commission on February 24, 2014
(see attached February 24, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes). An application for Design Review
Amendment for approval of a variety of exterior changes to the building, as well as changes to the landscaping
along the right side property line, was approved on May 11, 2015 (see attached May 11, 2015 Planning
Commission Meeting Minutes).
A building permit was issued in May 2016. Shortly after the existing buildings and vegetation were removed,
the property was sold to a new owner. The new owner would like to build a project which includes a different
design, contains two fewer units (reducing from 10 to 8) and a parking garage that is located at grade rather
than below grade. Since the previously approved project will not be built and the proposed project is different
in design and configuration, it is considered to be a new application. Plans for the previously approved 10-unit
project have been provided as a reference.
Design Review Study Meeting:At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on August 13,
2018, the Commission had several comments regarding the proposed project and voted to place this item on
the regular action calendar when all of the required information has been submitted (see the attached August
13, 2018, Planning Commission Minutes).
Please refer to the attached applicant’s response letter, dated August 27, 2018, and revised plans, date
stamped August 28, 2018, for responses to the Commission’s comments. In summary, the following changes
were made:
The front stairway was reconfigured to allow for change to the front entry design (see revised floor
plans, building elevations and renderings, sheets A2.1 through A3.3).
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
2
The front entry element was changed from a rounded from with stucco siding to a square form with
horizontal wood siding (see revised floor plans, building elevations and renderings, sheets A2.1 through
A3.3).
The forms on the West Elevation were changed to be more subdued and regular (see revised West
Elevation, sheet A3.2).
Project Summary:The applicant is proposing a new, four-story, 8-unit residential condominium building with
at-grade parking at 1433 Floribunda Avenue, zoned R-3. The project site is currently vacant, but previously
contained five residential units in two detached buildings. The existing buildings were not identified on the
Draft Inventory of Historic Resources of the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan. The site is bordered by a
two-story multifamily building to the west and three-story multifamily buildings to the north, south and east.
The proposed building would contain eight residential units in four floors and an at-grade parking garage.
Each of the eight condominium units will contain an entry, living and dining areas, kitchen, two bedrooms, an
open den, two bathrooms and a space for a washer/dryer. One unit is proposed at grade behind the garage,
while the remaining units will be located on the upper three floors. The average unit size proposed is 1,152 SF
(1,250 SF average maximum unit size permitted). An enclosed room for trash receptacles is provided at the
front of the building.
The following applications are required for the proposed project:
Design Review for the proposed design of the new residential condominium (C.S. 25.28.045 and
25.57.010, and Chapter 5 of the Downtown Specific Plan);
Condominium Permit for a new, four-story, 8-unit residential condominium building (C.S. 26.30.020);
Conditional Use Permit for building height (46’-0” proposed where a Conditional Use Permit is required
for any building exceed 35’-0”; 55’-0” maximum building height allowed) (C.S. 25.28.060); and
Tentative Condominium Map.
Design Review:The proposed project is subject to Chapter 5 of the Downtown Specific Plan (Design &
Character). Section 5.3 (pages 5-17 through 5-21) provides design guidelines specifically for residential areas
within the Downtown Specific Plan area. Section 5.4 (pages 5-22 through 5-27) provides more general design
guidelines that apply to all areas of the downtown, including residential areas. The relevant pages of the plan
have been included as an attachment for convenience of commissioners.
Materials proposed for the exterior of the building include stucco, composite wood and cement panel siding,
solid and perforated metal panels, and aluminum projections. Aluminum clad wood windows and doors would
be used throughout the building. The overall height of the building is proposed at 46'-0" above average top of
curb level where 55’-0” is the maximum allowed. However, an application for a Conditional Use Permit is
required if the building exceeds 35’-0” in height and is being requested by the applicant. On sheet A3.3, two
visual simulations are provided looking north-east and south-west along Floribunda Avenue.
Off-Street Parking:The code requires 12 parking spaces for the residents of the units (1.5 spaces for each
two-bedroom unit) and an area for a service/delivery vehicle. There is no guest parking required on-site for
properties located within the Downtown Specific Plan. The at-grade garage provides a total of 13 parking
spaces (12 resident spaces and one service/delivery vehicle space). Eleven of the required parking spaces
would be provided by way of a puzzle car stacker system. Access to the garage would be from Floribunda
Avenue by way of a driveway at the east end of the property.
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
3
The property is an existing lot with a public street frontage of 49.63’ where 55’ is required, and the property
narrows to 44.83’ at the rear of the lot. Given the narrow width of the lot, accommodating all of the required
parking spaces, service vehicle space and backup areas is challenging, even with the reduced parking
requirements of the Downtown Specific Plan. The proposed project includes a puzzle car stacker system to
provide 11 of the required parking spaces. The car stacker system provides room to accommodate a service
vehicle space on the site and also eliminates the need to dig underground to provide parking (with the
exception of the pit for the car stacker system).
The applicant is proposing to use a puzzle car stacker system by CityLift (Model No. 2LP3W6, see attached
specifications) and is able to accommodate passenger cars and medium size SUVs. The proposed system
can accommodate vehicles up to 6’-6¾” wide x 19’-0¾” long. Building Sections 1 and 2 on sheet A4.1 show
that the proposed floor-to-ceiling garage height in the area where the parking lifts are located is 15’-0”. This
height would be sufficient to accommodate the car stacker system, which requires a clearance of 11’-11¾”).
The Municipal Code does not include specifications for parking lift systems, so the City currently does not have
a standard mechanism for review and approval. For the previously approved project, a parking variance was
required for the mechanical lifts (the parking lifts were considered a mitigation measure for the requested
parking variance). However, because as a policy the Downtown Specific Plan encourages “creative
approaches” to providing on-site parking and the car stackers have been considered “creative approaches” to
providing the required on-site parking and therefore consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan, parking
variances are no longer required. To date, the City has approved several commercial and residential projects
with parking lift systems.
Common and Private Open Space:There is a total of 1,067 SF (133 SF/unit) of common open space
proposed for the condominium project where 800 SF (100 SF/unit) is the minimum required. Of the required
common open space, a minimum of 50% must be in soft landscaping (400 SF); 594 SF of the provided
common open space is proposed to be landscaped and therefore is in compliance. There is 100 SF to 200 SF
in private open space per unit (75 SF/unit is the minimum required) provided in balconies and at grade. The
applicant is proposing 50.4% (404 SF) landscaping in the front yard where 50% (401 SF) is the minimum
required. The project meets all other zoning code and condominium permit requirements.
Landscaping:The site has been fully developed and used for residential uses since at least 1907. The
project site was previously covered by several buildings, paved and landscape areas prior to their demolition in
2016. A number of large trees on or adjacent to the property, including two oak trees (9-inch and 11-inch
diameter) along the left side property line, two oak trees (32-inch and 34-inch in diameter) along the right side
property line and a palm tree (29-inch diameter) in the front yard were removed with approval of a Tree
Removal Permit issued by the Parks Division.
Proposed landscaping and fencing throughout the site is shown on the Landscape Plans (see sheets L1.1,
L2.1, and L3.1). The applicant is proposing 50.4% (404 SF) landscaping in the front yard where 50% (401 SF)
is the minimum required.
In accordance with the City's requirements, each lot developed with a multifamily residential use is required to
provide a minimum of one 24-inch box-size non-fruit tree for every 2,000 SF of lot coverage. Based on the
proposed project, a minimum of two landscape trees are required on site. The proposed landscape plan for
the project complies with the on-site reforestation requirements by providing two 24-inch box Fern Pine trees
(Podocarpus gracilior) along the right side property line, four 24-inch box Hop Bush trees (Dodonaea viscosa)
along the left side property line, and three 24-inch box Crape Myrtle trees in the rear yard. A total of nine new
trees are proposed on site, where a minimum of two landscape trees are required. Two new Red Maple street
trees (Acer Rubrum ‘October Glory’), will be planted as part of the project.
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
4
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Lot Area: 9,320 SF Plans date stamped: September 4, 2018
Proposed Allowed/Required
Front (1st flr):
(2nd flr):
(3rd flr):
(4th flr):
19'-0”
19'-0”
24'-6”
26'-6½”
16'-4” (block average)
Left Side (1
st flr):
(2nd flr):
(3rd flr):
(4th flr):
7'-3"
7'-3"
7'-3"
8’-6”
5'-0"
6'-0"
7'-0"
8’-0”
Right Side (1st flr):
(2nd flr):
(3rd flr):
(4th flr):
5'-0"
7'-2½"
7'-2½"
8’-2½”
5'-0"
6'-0"
7'-0"
8’-0”
Rear (1st flr):
(2nd flr):
(3rd flr):
(4th flr):
24'-6½”
23'-3½”
23'-3½”
24'-6½”
20’-0”
20'-0"
20'-0"
20’-0”
Lot Coverage:4,620 SF
49.6%
4,660 SF
50%
Building Height:46'-0” ¹55'-0" maximum allowed; CUP
required to exceed 35’-0”
Off-Street Parking:12 spaces for residents (11 spaces
provided in car stacker system)
1 service/delivery vehicle space
No guest parking provided
Total: 13 total spaces
100% covered
12 spaces (8, 2 bdrm units x 1.5)
1 service/delivery vehicle space
required
No guest parking required
Total: 13 total spaces
80% must be covered
¹ Conditional Use Permit for building height (46’-0” proposed where a Conditional Use Permit is required for
any building exceed 35’-0”; 55’-0” maximum building height allowed).
Development table continued on next page.
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
5
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Lot Area: 9,320 SF Plans date stamped: June 4, 2018
Proposed Allowed/Required
Front Setback Landscaping:50.4%
(405 SF)
50%
(401 SF)
Private Open Space:100 SF – 200 SF/unit 75 SF per unit
Common Open Space:
SF Landscaped:
1,067 SF
594 SF (55.6% of required)
800 SF
400 SF (50% of required)
Staff Comments:None.
Affordable (Below-Market Rate) Units:The previously approved project was subject to the Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance, which required that one affordable unit be provided as part of the project. The City’s
previous Inclusionary Housing Ordinance has been replaced by a Density Bonus Ordinance consistent with
State Law. The Density Bonus Ordinance is discretionary, and projects are not obligated to provide affordable
units unless they seek to utilize development standard incentives offered by the ordinance. The applicant has
not chosen to apply any of the development standard incentives offered by the Density Bonus Ordinance and
therefore is not providing any affordable units as part of the project.
Public Facilities Impact Fee:The purpose of public facilities impact fee is to provide funding for necessary
maintenance and improvements created by development projects. Public facilities impact fees are based on
the uses, the number of dwelling units, and the amount of square footage to be located on the property after
completion of the development project. New development that, through demolition or conversion, will eliminate
existing development is entitled to a fee credit offset if the existing development is a lawful use under this title,
including a nonconforming use.
Based on an 8-unit residential condominium project and providing a credit for the five residential units that
previously existed on the lot, the estimated Public Impact Fee for this development project is $16,611.00. The
Public Impact Fees payment will be required at time of building permit issuance. One-half of the public
facilities impact fees payment will be required prior to issuance of a building permit issuance; the second half of
the payment will be required before the final framing inspection.
General Plan/Specific Plan:The Burlingame General Plan designates this site for High Density residential
(51+ dwelling units per acre), which allows 11+ units on the site (8 units proposed). In 2010 the City Council
adopted the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan (amended in 2011), which serves as an element of the
General Plan. The subject property is located within the boundaries of the planning area for the Downtown
Specific Plan, specifically in the R-3 Base District. The Plan describes the R-3 Base District as follows:
On the north side of Downtown, the area is bounded by Oak Grove Avenue to its north; the rail road
tracks to its east; El Camino Real to its west and portions of land to the south of Floribunda Avenue is
designated for medium-high density residential (R-3) uses. The land uses are predominantly multifamily
residential including some lower intensity residential uses such as single family homes, duplexes,
apartment homes, multifamily homes and accessory buildings. Uses in this district also include public
buildings, public parks and playgrounds, and religious facilities. These areas will continue to be
regulated by the same zoning standards that apply to R-3 properties citywide.
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
6
Design Review:Design review is required for new construction of multi-family residential developments in the
R-3 and R-4 Districts. The following considerations shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission (Code
Section 25.57.010 (b):
(1) Compatibility with the existing character of the neighborhood;
(2) Respect the mass and fine scale of adjacent buildings even when using differing architectural styles;
(3) Maintain the tradition of architectural diversity, but with human scale regardless of the architectural style
used; and
(4) Incorporate quality materials and thoughtful design which will last into the future.
Suggested Findings for Design Review:That the proposed condominium building will be compatible
with the existing character of the neighborhood with the use of a variety of quality materials including
stucco, composite wood and cement panel siding, solid and perforated metal panels, aluminum
projections and aluminum clad wood windows and doors. The new four-story building respects the mass
and scale of this portion of Floribunda Avenue which has a mix of two, three and four-story multifamily
residential buildings with a variety of architectural styles. The building includes articulated front, side and
rear façades that provide visual interest. For these reasons the project may be found to be compatible
with the requirements of the City’s four design review criteria.
Criteria for Permitting a Residential Condominium: The following condominium standards shall apply to all
land and structures proposed as a part of a condominium project and shall be evaluated and processed
pursuant to the procedural requirements set forth for conditional use permits in Title 25 of this code. No
condominium project or portion thereof shall be approved or conditionally approved in whole or in part unless
the planning commission, or city council upon appeal or review, has reviewed the following on the basis of their
effect on:
(a) Sound community planning; the economic, ecological, social and aesthetic qualities of the community;
and on public health, safety and general welfare;
(b) The overall impact on schools, parks, utilities, neighborhoods, streets, traffic, parking and other
community facilities and resources; and
(c) Conformity with the general plan and density permitted by zoning regulations.
Suggested Findings for Condominium Permit:
Sound community planning; the economic, ecological, social and aesthetic qualities of the
community; and on public health, safety and general welfare in that the eight-unit residential
condominium project is scaled to be compatible with existing multifamily buildings along Floribunda
Avenue and features ample landscaping with usable common open space;
The overall impact on schools, parks, utilities, neighborhoods, streets, traffic, parking and other
community facilities and resources in that the project site is located in an urban area and is
surrounded by residential development which is served by utility and public services; that the two
buildings which previously existed on the lot and contains five residential units will be replaced with
a four-story building containing eight residential units on the same lot and therefore can be
adequately served by required utility and public services since the proposed project is only
contributing three net new units on the site; and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for
the previously approved 10-unit multifamily residential building analyzed potential impacts of new
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
7
infill development and included standard conditions of approval to mitigate potential environmental
impacts, and with incorporation of these standard conditions of approval, the project would not
result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and
Conformity with the general plan and density permitted by zoning regulations, in that the project
provides three additional residential units (8 total) consistent with the applicable general plan and
zoning designations.
Findings for a Conditional Use Permit:In order to grant a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission
must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.52.020, a-c):
(a) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or
convenience;
(b) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Burlingame general plan
and the purposes of this title;
(c) The planning commission may impose such reasonable conditions or restrictions as it deems necessary
to secure the purposes of this title and to assure operation of the use in a manner compatible with the
aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of existing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general
vicinity.
Suggested Findings for Conditional Use Permit:That because the multifamily residential
condominium building is a permitted use and the stepped back third and fourth floors and well-articulated
building facades of the 46-foot tall building respects the mass and scale of this portion of Floribunda
Avenue, which has a mix of two, three and four-story multifamily residential buildings with a variety of
architectural styles, the proposed use and building will not be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or
convenience; and that because the proposed eight-unit building is 38 units per acre and is consistent with
the General Plan land use designation, the proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in
accord with the Burlingame general plan. For these reasons the project may be found to be compatible
with the requirements for a Conditional Use Permit.
Findings for Tentative Condominium Map:In order to approve a tentative condominium map, the
Commission and Council must find that the proposed tentative condominium map, together with the provisions
for its design and improvement, is consistent with the Burlingame General Plan and consistent with the
provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, and that the site is physically suited for the proposed type and density of
development.
Suggested Findings for Tentative Condominium Map:That the proposed tentative condominium map,
together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the Burlingame General
Plan, the Downtown Specific Plan and consistent with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act; that the
site is physically suited for the proposed type and density of development in that it provides residential uses
in an area identified as suitable for such use in the Burlingame General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan
(R-3 base district); that the project provides ample vehicular and pedestrian circulation to serve the project,
and is consistent with required development standards including setbacks, lot coverage, open space and
parking; therefore the project may be found to be compatible with the criteria listed above.
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
8
Planning Commission Action:The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action on
the following items should be taken separately by resolution including the conditions representing mitigation for
the Mitigated Negative Declaration (in italics below) and any conditions from the staff report and/or that the
commissioners may add. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated.
1. Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
2. Tentative Condominium Map (recommendation for approval by City Council).
Please note that the conditions below include mitigation measures taken from the previously adopted mitigated
negative declaration (shown in italics). The mitigations will be placed on the building permit as well as
recorded with the property and constitute the mitigation monitoring plan for this project. At the public hearing
the following mitigation measures and conditions should be considered:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped
September 4, 2018, sheets A0.0 through A0.7, Topographic Survey, C0.1 through C3.0, L1.1 through
L4.1 and A1.1 through A5.3;
2. that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall pay the first half of the
Public Facilities Impact fee in the amount of $8,305.50, made payable to the City of Burlingame and
submitted to the Planning Division;
3. that prior to scheduling the final framing inspection for the condominium building, the applicant shall pay
the second half of the Public Facilities Impact fee in the amount of $8,305.50, made payable to the City
of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Division;
4. that during construction, the applicant shall provide fencing (with a fabric screen or mesh) around the
project site to ensure that all construction equipment, materials and debris is kept on site;
5. that a Protected Tree Removal Permit shall be required from the Parks Division for removal of any tree
on the property with a circumference of 48 inches or larger when measured fifty-four (54) inches above
natural grade;
6. that this proposal shall comply with all the requirements of the Tree Protection and Reforestation
Ordinance adopted by the City of Burlingame in 1993 and enforced by the Parks Department; complete
landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted at the time of building permit application;
7. that the maximum elevation at the top of the roof ridge shall not exceed elevation 71.55' as measured
from the average elevation at the top of the curb along Floribunda Avenue (25.55') for a maximum
height of 46’-0", and that the top of each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed and approved by
the City Engineer as the framing proceeds and prior to final framing and roofing inspections. The first
floor finished floor shall be elevation 25.55’; second floor finished floor shall be elevation 41.55'; third
floor finished floor shall be elevation 51.22’; fourth floor finished floor shall be elevation 61.89’. Should
any framing exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that the final
height of the structure with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the approved plans;
8. that any changes to the size or envelope of the building, which would include expanding the footprint or
floor area of the structure, replacing or relocating windows or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be
subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by
Planning staff);
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
9
9. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans
shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning
Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans
throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the
conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning
Commission, or City Council on appeal;
10. that storage of construction materials and equipment on the street or in the public right-of-way shall be
prohibited;
11. that the ‘service vehicle stall’ shall be marked on the service parking space and designated on the final
map and plans, this stall shall not be assigned to any unit, but shall be owned and maintained by the
condominium association, and the service vehicle stall shall always be accessible for parking and not
be separately enclosed or used for resident storage;
12. that the Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the condominium project shall require that
the service vehicle stall shall be reserved for service vehicles only and shall not be used by
condominium residents;
13. that the final inspection shall be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued before the close of
escrow on the sale of each unit;
14. that the developer shall provide to the initial purchaser of each unit and to the board of directors of the
condominium association, an owner purchaser manual which shall contain the name and address of all
contractors who performed work on the project, copies of all warranties or guarantees of appliances
and fixtures and the estimated life expectancy of all depreciable component parts of the property,
including but not limited to the roof, painting, common area carpets, drapes and furniture;
15. that the trash receptacles, furnaces, and water heaters shall be shown in a legal compartment outside
the required parking and landscaping and in conformance with zoning and California Building and Fire
Code requirements before a building permit is issued;
16. that any security gate system across the driveway shall be installed a minimum 20'-0' back from the
front property line;
17. that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new
structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer;
18. that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site shall be required to meet
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards;
19. that the applicant shall submit an erosion and sedimentation control plan describing BMPs (Best
Management Practices) to be used to prevent soil, dirt and debris from entering the storm drain system;
the plan shall include a site plan showing the property lines, existing and proposed topography and
slope; areas to be disturbed, locations of cut/fill and soil storage/disposal areas; areas with existing
vegetation to be protected; existing and proposed drainage patterns and structures; watercourse or
sensitive areas on-site or immediately downstream of a project; and designated construction access
routes, staging areas and washout areas;
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
10
20. hat methods and procedures such as sediment basins or traps, silt fences, straw bale dikes, storm
drain inlet protection such as soil blanket or mats, and covers for soil stock piles to stabilize denuded
areas shall be installed to maintain temporary erosion controls and sediment control continuously until
permanent erosion controls have been established;
21. that construction access routes shall be limited in order to prevent the tracking of dirt onto the public
right-of-way, clean off-site paved areas and sidewalks using dry sweeping methods;
22. that if construction is done during the wet season (October 15 through April 15), that prior to October 15
the developer shall implement a winterization program to minimize the potential for erosion and polluted
runoff by inspecting, maintaining and cleaning all soil erosion and sediment control prior to, during, and
immediately after each storm even; stabilizing disturbed soils throughout temporary or permanent
seeding, mulching matting, or tarping; rocking unpaved vehicle access to limit dispersion of mud onto
public right-of-way; covering/tarping stored construction materials, fuels and other chemicals;
23. that common landscape areas shall be designed to reduce excess irrigation run-off, promote surface
filtration and minimize the use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides;
24. that trash enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface
drainage and that if water cannot be diverted from these areas, a self-contained drainage system shall
be provided that discharges to an interceptor;
25. that this project shall comply with Ordinance 1845, the City of Burlingame Water Conservation in
Landscaping Regulations, and complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be provided at the time of
building permit application;
26. that all site catch basins and drainage inlets flowing to the bay shall be stenciled. All catch basins shall
be protected during construction to prevent debris from entering;
27. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall be
installed to meet current code standards and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems
shall be increased at the developer’s expense if necessary;
28. that all utilities to this site shall be installed underground. Any transformers needed for this site shall be
installed underground or behind the front setback on this site;
29. that sewer laterals from the site to the public sewer main shall be checked and shall be replaced to city
standards as required by the development;
30. that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed;
31. that all drainage (including water from the parking garage) on site shall be required to be collected and
pumped to the street as determined by the Public Works Department;
32. that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required
to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;
33. that the applicant shall install fire sprinklers and a fire alarm system monitored by an approved central
station prior to the final inspection for building permit;
34. that all construction shall abide by the construction hours established in the Municipal Code;
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
11
35. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1645, the City of Burlingame Recycling and Waste
Reduction Ordinance, and shall submit a waste reduction plan and recycling deposit for demolition and
new construction, before receiving a demolition permit;
36. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; and
37. that the project shall be required to comply with all the standards of the California Building and Fire
Codes, in effect at time of building permit issuance, as amended by the City of Burlingame.
The following four (4) conditions shall be met during the Building Inspection process prior to the
inspections noted in each condition:
38. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners,
set the building envelope;
39. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed
professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window
locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional
involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of
perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department;
40. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof
ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division;
41. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural
details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the
approved Planning and Building plans;
Mitigation Measures from Initial Study
Aesthetics
42. The project sponsor shall be subject to the design review process to evaluate the aesthetics of the
construction of a residential condominium in the Downtown Specific Plan R-3 District.
Air Quality
43. During construction, the project sponsor shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation
measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved
access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
c. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power
vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry sweeping is prohibited.
d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
e. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building
pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
12
f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting off equipment when not in use or reducing the
maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure
Title 13, Section 2485 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be
provided for construction workers at all access points.
g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and
determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency
regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours.
The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations.
44. The project sponsor shall implement the following GHG reduction measures during construction
activities:
a. Alternative-Fueled (e.g., biodiesel, electric) construction vehicles/equipment shall make up at least
15 percent of the fleet;
b. Use at least 10 percent local building materials; and
c. Recycle at least 50 percent of construction waste or demolition materials.
45. The project shall include a common facility for trash disposal, recycling, and composting as shown on
the project plans date stamped September 4, 2018.
46. The project sponsor shall participate in all residential recycling and composting programs offered by the
solid waste provider to multifamily residential customers. This shall include the composting program,
currently offered as an optional service.
Biological Resources
47. The applicant shall comply with the City's on-site reforestation requirements as approved by the City
Arborist.
48. Construction under the Downtown Specific Plan shall avoid the March 15 through August 31 avian
nesting period to the extent feasible. If it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, a survey for nesting
birds shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than 7 days prior to construction. The
area surveyed shall include all clearing/construction areas, as well as areas within 250 ft. of the
boundaries of these areas, or as otherwise determined by the biologist. In the event that an active nest
is discovered, clearing/construction shall be postponed within 250 ft. of the nest, until the young have
fledged (left the nest), the nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts.
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
13
Cultural Resources
49. In the event that any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground
disturbing activities, all work within 100 feet of the resources shall be halted and after notification, the
City shall consult with a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative to assess the
significance of the find. If any find is determined to be significant (CEQA Guidelines 15064.5[a][3] or as
unique archaeological resources per Section 21083.2 of the California Public Resources Code),
representatives of the City and a qualified archaeologist shall meet to determine the appropriate
course of action. In considering any suggested mitigation proposed by the consulting archaeologist in
order to mitigate impacts to historical resources or unique archaeological resources, the lead agency
shall determine whether avoidance is necessary and feasible in light of factors such as the nature of the
find, project design, costs, and other considerations. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate
measures (e.g., data recovery) shall be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site
while mitigation for historical resources or unique archaeological resources is carried out.
50. If paleontological resources, such as fossilized bone, teeth, shell, tracks, trails, casts, molds, or
impressions are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, work will stop in that area and within
100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess the significance of the find and, if
necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the City of Burlingame.
51. If human remains are discovered at any project construction sites during any phase of construction, all
ground-disturbing activity 100 feet of the resources shall be halted and the City of Burlingame and the
County coroner shall be notified immediately, according to Section 5097.98 of the State Public
Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of California’s Health and Safety Code. If the remains are
determined by the County coroner to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission
(NAHC) shall be notified within 24 hours, and the guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the
treatment and disposition of the remains. The project applicant shall also retain a professional
archaeologist with Native American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of the specific site
and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any, identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the
archaeologist may provide professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant, including the
excavation and removal of the human remains. The City of Burlingame shall be responsible for
approval of recommended mitigation as it deems appropriate, taking account of the provisions of State
law, as set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(e) and Public Resources Code section 5097.98.
The project applicant shall implement approved mitigation, to be verified by the City of Burlingame,
before the resumption of ground-disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were
discovered.
Geology and Soils
52. The project sponsor shall submit a detailed design level geotechnical investigation to the City of
Burlingame Building Division for review and approval. The investigation shall include recommendations
to develop foundation and design criteria in accordance with the most recent California Building Code
requirements. All foundations and other improvements shall be designed by a licensed professional
engineer based on site-specific soil investigations performed by a California Certified Engineering
Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer. All recommendations from the engineering report shall be
incorporated into the residential development design. The design shall ensure the suitability of the
subsurface materials for adequately supporting the proposed structures and include appropriate
mitigations to minimize the potential damage due to liquefaction.
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
14
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
53. That the applicant shall install fire sprinklers and a fire alarm system monitored by an approved central
station as required by the Fire Marshal prior to the final inspection for building permit.
54. That prior to demolition of the existing structures on the site, a survey shall be performed to determine if
there is any presence of asbestos. The person who performs the survey must be Cal-OSHA certified. If
asbestos is found, the BAAQMD (Bay Area Air Quality Management District) shall be immediately
notified and the applicant shall comply with asbestos removal requirements.
Hydrology and Water Quality
55. The project applicant shall prepare and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) for
all construction activities at the project site. At a minimum, the SWPPP shall include the following:
a. A construction schedule that restricts use of heavy equipment for excavation and grading activities
to periods where no rain is forecasted during the wet season (October 1 thru April 30) to reduce
erosion associated intense rainfall and surface runoff. The construction schedule shall indicate a
timeline for earthmoving activities and stabilization of disturbed soils;
b. Soil stabilization techniques such as covering stockpiles, hydroseeding, or short-term
biodegradable erosion control blankets;
c. Silt fences, compost berms, wattles or some kind of sediment control measures at downstream
storm drain inlets;
d. Good site management practices to address proper management of construction materials and
activities such as but not limited to cement, petroleum products, hazardous materials, litter/rubbish,
and soil stockpile; and
e. The post-construction inspection of all drainage facilities and clearing of drainage structures of
debris and sediment.
56. The project shall comply with Ordinance 1503, City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and
Discharge Control Ordinance.
57. The project shall comply with Ordinance 1845, City of Burlingame Water Conservation in Landscape
Ordinance.
58. That all surface storm water runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site shall
be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards as adopted
by the City of Burlingame.
59. That all construction shall be done during the hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame
Municipal Code; these hours are between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and
6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. There shall be no construction on Sundays or holidays.
60. To reduce daytime noise impacts due to construction, the project sponsor shall require construction
contractors to implement the following measures:
a. Equipment and trucks used for project construction shall use the best available noise control
techniques (e.g., improved mufflers, equipment redesign, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine
enclosures, and acoustically-attenuating shields or shrouds, wherever feasible).
Design Review, Condominium Permit, Conditional Use Permit 1433 Floribunda Avenue
and Tentative Condominium Map
15
b. Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from adjacent receptors as possible, and they shall
be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, incorporate insulation barriers, or other measures
to the extent feasible.
61. That the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise
level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping area.
Transportation/Traffic
62. CityLift Model No. 2LP3W6 (or comparable) parking lifts shall be installed in the garage, with the
following conditions:
a. The parking lifts shall be properly illuminated to provide safety for easy loading and unloading, while
not causing excessive glare.
b. Sound absorption materials will be used to minimize any excessive noise from the operation of the
parking lifts.
c. Signage shall be installed in each garage explaining the proper use of the lifts and emergency
contact information for lift maintenance or problems.
d. The applicant shall be required to work with the manufacturer during construction to review issues
related to installation of the parking lifts and to receive operational and safety training of the parking
lifts.
e. The final design of the parking lifts shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community
Development Director.
63. A minimum of thirteen (13) parking spaces shall be permanently maintained on the same lot with the
building, including the spaces provided by the lifts.
Ruben Hurin
Planning Manager
Attachments:
August 13, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
Applicant’s Response Letter, dated August 27, 2018
May 11, 2015 and February 24, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
Application to the Planning Commission
Applicant’s Letter of Explanation, date stamped October 19, 2017
Conditional Use Permit Application
CityLift Product Data Sheets
Downtown Specific Plan Applicable Design Guidelines
Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed)
Notice of Public Hearing – Mailed September 14, 2018
Area Map
Separate Attachments:
Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study (ND-569-P), dated February 6, 2014
! !"#$ %&"!& ' "&# ( ( )) *$+ " , &- ." &% &/ "# 0 " !0
& 0 + $"# "# + "$ -& & 0 + , ! # ". 1& .1+ , $ "&/ (-+ 2 3(!" + &- #&"+ $
* "# 0 " !0 ! # ". 4 & "#$ 5$ $)) *$"+6 &%2 &- ." $ +"& - $ *1 +&*+6
**& & $+& # ".- ) )& +2 /"& 7 438 " + * +$,, "+$*+9 ! &" ! "
!
"
#
$ % # & '
' $ $%'
'
'
"
(' #
) * +
, -
. /$ +
## '
0#
#
11
0 2
, 3 45' 6 6 '
' 7
/$ + # 8 0
0
2
, # 9'
# :;' 0 9' 4 9
/$ +
'
2
, 8 ## . /$ + #
#
<
## #
'# ## = ##
0 ## *
# < > ?
# # #2
, @
# . /$ + A
0 = 2
,
B
&
#
%0 0
'
6
# # # /$ + 8 #
2
, 8 #
. 8 # #
. /$ + -
0
# <
C # # '
## 2
, 8 #
. /$ + #
# '
##
# 2
&
+
"
#
+
, &#
, B #
, -
0#
, &0#
# '
0#
, B !
B #' #
$ 0
0 #
, %0
' #
#=
, B # #'
#
0 @
#
, 6
#
'
# # # #
, D
8
0 '
#
, 6
0#'
"
#
$ %
&
' '
! #
&
'
$ .&"+ ,+ - 5& 2 0$ +
& "&- $"#
-&: (
% $! (
5.0 Design & Character 5-175.3 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AREASResidential buildings in Downtown Burlingame offer higher density development than elsewhere in the City, providing a lifestyle for those who want to live within walking distance of the Downtown commercial areas and transit opportunities. New buildings will mediate this density with thoughtful design and details that create attractive, livable residential environments. Buildings should contribute to an appealing neighborhood character and should employ recognizable residential design details such as visible residential entries, porches, bay windows and roof overhangs, and balconies and small outdoor areas. Below are recommendations for the architectural treatment and organization of buildings and open space, and the suggested criteria for reviewing projects during the design review process.5.3.1 ARCHITECTURAL DIVERSITYResidential projects should respect the diversity of building types and styles in the residential areas Downtown and seek to support it by applying the following principles: • Design buildings to maintain general compatibility with the neighborhood. • Respect the mass and fine scale of adjacent buildings even when using differing architectural styles. • Maintains the tradition of architectural diversity, but with human scale regardless of the architectural style used.• Create buildings with quality materials and thoughtful design to last into the future.5.3.2 PEDESTRIAN USE AND CHARACTER5.3.2.1 Entrances Primary pedestrian access to all ground-level uses should be from the sidewalk along the public street. Entries should be clearly defined features of front façades. Common entrances for multiple units are FIGURE 5-27: Buildings should contribute to an appealing neighborhood character and should employ recognizable residential design details such as visible residential entries, porches, bay windows and roof overhangs, and balconies and small outdoor areas. FIGURE 5-28: Entries should be clearly defined features of front façades, and are encouraged to have appropriately-scaled, usable gathering spaces that invite informal social interaction with neighbors.
5.0 Design & Character5-18encouraged to have appropriately-scaled, usable gathering spaces at or adjacent to entrances that invite informal social interaction with neighbors. 5.3.2.2 Ground Level TreatmentResidential development may have a finished floor elevation up to 5 feet above sidewalk level to provide more interior privacy for residents. Entry porches or stoops along the street are encouraged to bridge this change in elevation and connect these units to the sidewalk to minimize any physical separation from the street level. The street-level frontage should be visually interesting with frequent unit entrances and clear orientation to the street.5.3.2.3 Site AccessCurb cuts should be minimized to promote traffic and pedestrian safety and create cohesive landscaping and building façades. A maximum of two curb cuts should be provided for projects requiring 30 parking spaces or more; for projects with less than 30 spaces, only one curb cut should be provided. One-way driveways should have curb cuts with a fully depressed width no greater than 12 feet; two-way curb cuts should be no greater than 22 feet. On-site bicycle parking for residents is encouraged.5.3.3 ARCHITECTURAL COMPATIBILITY5.3.3.1 Development MassingThe residential areas within Downtown Burlingame have a range of building heights, and so particular attention must be paid to the massing of new buildings to ensure an appropriate transition with surrounding development. Massing and street façades shall be designed to create a residential scale in keeping with Burlingame neighborhoods. FIGURE 5-29: The street-level frontage should be visually interesting with frequent unit entrances and strong orientation to the street.FIGURE 5-30: Articulation, setbacks, and materials should minimize massing, break down the scale of buildings, and provide visual interest. Orient doorways and windows to create a strong relationship with the street.Clearly defined entries that are proportional to size of building and use.Stoops provide transition to street, gathering place, define private space.
5.0 Design & Character 5-19Articulation, setbacks, and materials should minimize massing, break down the scale of buildings, and provide visual interest.5.3.3.2 On-Site Structured ParkingGiven the density and premium land values Downtown, new projects will likely provide on-site parking in enclosed garage structures, underground, or in “semi-depressed” garages that are partially underground and partially above ground. Parking should not be allowed to dominate the character of the project. Where enclosed parking is at ground level, it should be fronted or wrapped with habitable uses when possible. If it is not possible to fully wrap the parking, it should be incorporated into the design of the facade. Semi-depressed parking (partly below ground and partly exposed above ground) should be screened with architectural elements that enhance the streetscape such as stoops, porches, or balcony overhangs.5.3.3.3 Roof TreatmentInteresting and varied roof forms are encouraged. Rooflines should emphasize and accentuate significant elements of the building such as entries, bays, and balconies. Rooftop equipment shall be concealed from view and/or integrated within the architecture of the building.5.3.4 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONSISTENCY5.3.4.1 Facade Design Facades should include projecting eaves and overhangs, porches, and other architectural elements that provide human scale and help break up building mass. All exposed sides of a building should be designed with the same level of care and integrity. Facades should have a variation of both positive space (massing) and negative space (plazas, inset doorways and windows).FIGURE 5-31: Where enclosed parking is at ground level, it should be fronted or wrapped with uses that can be occupied such as lobbies and living space when possible. Occupied space such as a lobby screens parking from sidewalk.Occupied space screens parking from sidewalk.FIGURE 5-32: Semi-depressed parking should be screened with architectural elements that enhance the streetscape such as stoops, porches, or balcony overhangs. StoopVentilation with decorative grillwork
5.0 Design & Character5-20Elements such as entrances, stairs, porches, bays and balconies should be visible to people on the street. Corner parcels are encouraged to incorporate features such as corner entrances, bay windows, and corner roof features, but should avoid monumentally-scaled elements such as towers. 5.3.4.2 WindowsBuilding walls should be accented by well-proportioned openings that provide relief, detail and variation on the façade. Windows should be inset generously from the building wall to create shade and shadow detail. The use of high-quality window products that contribute to the richness, detail, and depth of the façade is encouraged. Windows with mullions should have individual window lights, rather than applied "snap-in" mullions that lack depth and are not integral to the window structure. Reflective glass is undesirable because of its tendency to create uncomfortable glare conditions and a visual barrier. Where residential uses are adjacent to each other, windows should be placed with regard to any open spaces or windows on neighboring buildings so as to protect the privacy of residents.5.3.4.3 MaterialsBuilding materials should be richly detailed to provide visual interest. The use of materials that are reflected in the historic architecture present in the neighborhood is encouraged. Metal siding and large expanses of stucco or wood siding are also to be avoided. Roofing materials and accenting features such as canopies, cornices, tile accents, etc. should also offer color variation. Residential building materials should include quality details such as wrought iron, wood-framed windows, wood brackets and tile roofs.5.3.5 SITE AMENITIES5.3.5.1 SetbacksTable 3-2 in Chapter 3 specifies basic building standards such as setbacks and height. Building setbacks are intended to create FIGURE 5-34: Windows should be inset generously from the building wall to create shade and shadow detail. FIGURE 5-33: Residential facades should include projecting eaves and overhangs, porches, and other architectural elements that provide human scale and help break up building mass.
5.0 Design & Character 5-21a transition between the hardscape, urban environment of the commercial areas and the suburban setting in the surrounding neighborhoods. Setbacks have multiple purposes, including providing sunlight, places for landscaping, and areas for activity and recreation. Building setbacks should be appropriately landscaped to provide screening and introduce trees and plantings in this area. Landscaped setback areas should be integrated with buildings by providing openings in the building walls that connect the perimeter landscaping with interior courtyards and landscape pathways. Landscaping should be planned in relation to surrounding vegetative types with special consideration being given to native species where possible. Pathways and courtyards should be made of pervious materials to allow groundwater absorption.5.3.5.2 Open SpacePrivate on-site open space within the Downtown area is not intended to provide recreational space or large landscaped areas, since this is a more urban environment. However, open space is an important element for residential buildings and should be used to effectively articulate building forms, promote access to light and fresh air, and maintain privacy for Downtown residents. In residential development, most open space should be used to provide attractive amenities for residents, including interior courtyards, outdoor seating options and perimeter landscaping. Balconies and rooftop terraces are encouraged.Where open space is situated over a structural slab, podium or rooftop it should have a combination of landscaping and high quality paving materials, including elements such as planters, medium-sized trees, and use of textured and/or colored paved surfaces. Planters may be designed to not only accommodate colorful ornamental landscaping, but could also accommodate garden plots for "urban agriculture." Trees should be selected from the City's tree list. FIGURE 5-35: Where open space is situated over a structural slab, podium or rooftop it should have a combination of landscaping and high quality paving materials, including elements such as planters, mature trees, and urban agriculture.
5.0 Design & Character5-225.4 ADDITIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL AREAS OF DOWNTOWN5.4.1 LAND USE TRANSITIONSWhere appropriate, when new projects are built adjacent to existing lower-scale residential development, care shall be taken to respect the scale and privacy of adjacent properties.5.4.1.1 Massing and Scale TransitionsTransitions of development intensity from higher density development building types to lower can be done through different building sizes or massing treatments that are compatible with the lower intensity surrounding uses. Massing and orientation of new buildings should respect the massing of neighboring structures by varying the massing within a project, stepping back upper stories, reducing mass by composition of solids and voids, and varying sizes of elements to transition to smaller scale buildings.5.4.1.2 PrivacyPrivacy of neighboring structures should be maintained with windows and upper floor balconies positioned so they minimize views into neighboring properties, minimizing sight lines into and from neighboring properties, and limiting sun and shade impacts on abutting properties.5.4.1.3 BoundariesWhere appropriate, when different land uses or building scales are adjacent, boundaries should be established by providing pedestrian paseos and mews to create separation, rather than walls or fences.FIGURE 5-36: Transitions of development intensity from higher density development building types to lower can be done though building types or treatments that are compatible with the lower intensity surrounding uses. Boundaries can be established by providing pedestrian paseos and mews to create separation, rather than walls or fences.Transition AreaMedium DensityLow DensityHigh Densitybuffer / paseobuffer / mewsTransition Elements2-Story 3-StoryLow Density1-2 Storystreet / mews4-StoryFIGURE 5-37: Transitions can also be made by stepping massing down within a project, with lower building elements providing a buffer between taller elements and adjacent lower-density development.
5.0 Design & Character 5-23FIGURE 5-39: Example of two different land use intensities joined with a common paseo pathway.FIGURE 5-38: Following a cooperative, rather than defensive design approach for the spaces between buildings results in a more coherent downtown feel, as opposed to a collection of unrelated projects.PLPLDEFENSIVEFence separates projectsCOOPERATIVEPlaza/pathway visually unites buildings
5.0 Design & Character5-245.4.2 SHADOW IMPACTSEvery building invariably casts some shadows on adjoining parcels, public streets, and/or open spaces. However, as the design of a project is developed, consideration should be given to the potential shading impacts on surroundings. Site plans, massing, and building design should respond to potential shading issues, minimizing shading impacts where they would be undesirable, or conversely maximizing shading where it is desired. As part of the design review process, development in the Specific Plan Area that is proposed to be taller than existing surrounding structures should be evaluated for potential to create new shadows/shade on public and/or quasi-public open spaces and major pedestrian routes. At a minimum, shadow diagrams should be prepared for 9 AM, 12 noon, and 3 PM on March 21st, June 21st, September 21st, and December 21st (approximately corresponding to the solstices and equinoxes) to identify extreme conditions and trends. If warranted, diagrams could also be prepared for key dates or times of day — for example, whether a sidewalk or public space would be shaded at lunchtime during warmer months. FIGURE 5-40: Sample shadow analysis shows the range of shading conditions through the year.ProposedProjectProposedProjectProposedProject9 am 12 noon 3 pmMarch 21st March 21st March 21stProposedProjectProposedProjectProposedProjectJune 21st June 21st June 21stProposedProjectProposedProjectProposedProjectSeptember 21st September 21st September 21stProposedProjectProposedProjectProposedProjectDecember 21st December 21st December 21st
5.0 Design & Character 5-255.4.3 SUSTAINABILITY AND GREEN BUILDING DESIGN Project design and materials to achieve sustainability and green building design should be incorporated into projects. Green building design considers the environment during design and construction and aims for compatibility with the local environment: to protect, respect and benefit from it. In general, sustainable buildings are energy efficient, water conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high-quality spaces and high recycled content materials. The following considerations should be included in site and building design:• Resilient, durable, sustainable materials and finishes.• Flexibility over time, to allow for re-use and adaptation.• Optimize building orientation for heat gain, shading, daylighting, and natural ventilation.• Design landscaping to create comfortable micro-climates and reduce heat island effects.• Design for easy pedestrian, bicycle, and transit access, and provide on-site bicycle parking.• Maximize on-site stormwater management through landscaping and permeable pavement.• On flat roofs, utilize cool/white roofs to minimize heat gain. • Design lighting, plumbing, and equipment for efficient energy use.• Create healthy indoor environments.• Pursue adaptive re-use of an existing building or portion of a building as an alternative to demolition and rebuilding.• Use creativity and innovation to build more sustainable environments. One example is establishing gardens with edible fruits, vegetables or other plants as part of project open space, or providing garden plots to residents for urban agriculture. To reduce carbon footprint, new projects are encouraged to follow the standards and guidelines of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), and pursue LEED certification if appropriate.FIGURE 5-41: Use of shading devices to control solar loads in summer and gain passive heat in winter.FIGURE 5-42: Minimize stormwater runoff to impermeable areas with landscaping, green roofs, and rain gardens when possible.Winter SunSummer SunSouth facing windows with shading devices to control overheating in SummerDirect sunlight through south facing windows would improve passive heating in Winter
5.0 Design & Character5-265.4.4 LANDSCAPE TREESThe City of Burlingame has a long history of proactive tree planting and proper tree care. From the late 1800’s when trees were planted along El Camino Real and Easton Drive to the current day, Burlingame has enjoyed the many benefits trees provide to an urban area. Burlingame's longtime commitment to trees is evidenced by recogni-tion as a "Tree City USA" for 30 consecutive years. This is the longest streak in the County, 5th longest in the State and one of the longest in the Country for receiving this award.In Downtown Burlingame, trees include street trees lining sidewalks and roadways (typically within the public right-of-way), as well as trees on private property in settings such as landscaped setback areas, court-yards, and roof gardens.Chapter 4: Streetscapes & Open Space) provides guidance for street trees within the public right-of-way. Landscape trees on private prop-erty have equal importance as part of the "urban forest," in contrib-uting environmental and aesthetic benefits to downtown. Trees are important for their beauty, shade and coolness, economic benefits, and role in reducing energy use, pollution, and noise. The City of Burlingame has an Urban Forest Management Plan that includes policies and management practices for both city and private trees. Maintaining existing trees is a priority, and large trees on private property are protected by City Ordinance. Any tree with a circumfer-ence of 48 inches or more when measured 54 inches above the ground is a "Protected Tree." A permit is required to remove or heavily prune a protected tree. Consistent with Burlingame's status as "Tree City USA," new projects are required to incorporate trees into landscape and private open space plans. Property owners should consult the Burlingame Urban Forest Management Plan for design considerations, planting techniques, and maintenance guidance. FIGURE 5-43: Consistent with Burlingame's status as "Tree City USA," new projects are required to incorporate trees into landscape and private open space plans.
5.0 Design & Character 5-27FIGURE 5-44: Downtown’s late 19th and early 20th Century buildings contribute historic character and distinctiveness to this desirable pattern and mix of buildings.5.4.5 PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGSDowntown Burlingame is the symbolic and historic center of the City. The vision for Downtown is to preserve the mix of buildings, the pedestrian-scaled environment and the carefully designed public spaces that contribute to its special community character. Downtown’s flex-ible and timeless late 19th and early 20th Century buildings contribute historic character and distinctiveness to this desirable pattern and mix of buildings. New buildings should be sensitive to the historic scale and architecture of Downtown. Historic preservation and adaptive re-use is encouraged both to main-tain the unique ambience of Downtown Burlingame but also for eco-logical benefits. Preservation maximizes the use of existing materials and infrastructure, reduces waste, and preserves historic character. Historic buildings were often traditionally designed with many sustain-able features that responded to climate and site, and when effectively restored and reused, these features can bring about substantial energy savings. The guidelines in this chapter, together with the Commercial Design Guidebook for commercial and mixed use developments and the Inventory of Historic Resources are intended to ensure that both new development and improvements to existing properties are compatible with the historical character of Downtown and will be the basis of design review. Where a building is described in the Inventory of Historic Resources, the inventory should be consulted as part of the design review. Building characteristics described in the inventory should be a consideration in project design and review, together with other design considerations described in this chapter and in the Commercial Design Guidebook.
1
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
APPROVING A REQUEST FOR DESIGN REVIEW, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEW EIGHT-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM
DEVELOPMENT AT 1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
(ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 029-112-050)
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2017, Melinda Kao filed an application with the City of Burlingame
Community Development Department – Planning Division requesting approval of the following requests:
Design Review for the proposed design of the new residential condominium (C.S. 25.28.045 and
25.57.010, and Chapter 5 of the Downtown Specific Plan);
Condominium Permit for a new, four-story, eight-unit residential condominium building (C.S.
26.30.020); and
Conditional Use Permit for building height (46’-0” proposed where a Conditional Use Permit is
required for any building exceed 35’-0”; 55’-0” maximum building height allowed) (C.S.
25.28.060).
WHEREAS, on August 13, 2018 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing (design review study) to review an eight-unit residential condominium project. At that time
direction was provided to the applicant for revisions to the architectural design elements of the project;
and
Following consideration of all information contained in the September 10, 2018 staff report to the
Planning Commission regarding the project, all written correspondence, and all public comments
received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission grants approval of the eight-unit multi-family
residential condominium development based on the following findings regarding the project entitlements:
Design Review Findings:
That the proposed condominium building will be compatible with the existing character of the
neighborhood with the use of a variety of quality materials including stucco, composite wood and
cement panel siding, solid and perforated metal panels, aluminum projections and aluminum clad
wood windows and doors. The new four-story building respects the mass and scale of this portion
of Floribunda Avenue which has a mix of two, three and four-story multifamily residential buildings
with a variety of architectural styles. The building includes articulated front, side and rear façades
that provide visual interest. For these reasons the project may be found to be compatible with the
requirements of the City’s four design review criteria.
Condominium Permit Findings:
Sound community planning; the economic, ecological, social and aesthetic qualities of the
community; and on public health, safety and general welfare in that the eight-unit residential
condominium project is scaled to be compatible with existing multifamily buildings along Floribunda
Avenue and features ample landscaping with usable common open space;
2
The overall impact on schools, parks, utilities, neighborhoods, streets, traffic, parking and other
community facilities and resources in that the project site is located in an urban area and is
surrounded by residential development which is served by utility and public services; that the two
buildings which previously existed on the lot and contains five residential units will be replaced with
a four-story building containing eight residential units on the same lot and therefore can be
adequately served by required utility and public services since the proposed project is only
contributing three net new units on the site; and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for
the previously approved 10-unit multifamily residential building analyzed potential impacts of new
infill development and included standard conditions of approval to mitigate potential environmental
impacts, and with incorporation of these standard conditions of approval, the project would not result
in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and
Conformity with the general plan and density permitted by zoning regulations, in that the project
provides three additional residential units (8 total) consistent with the applicable general plan and
zoning designations.
Conditional Use Permit Findings:
That because the multifamily residential condominium building is a permitted use and the stepped
back third and fourth floors and well-articulated building facades of the 46-foot tall building respects
the mass and scale of this portion of Floribunda Avenue, which has a mix of two, three and four-
story multifamily residential buildings with a variety of architectural styles, the proposed use and
building will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not
be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience; and that because the
proposed eight-unit building is 38 units per acre and is consistent with the General Plan land use
designation, the proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the
Burlingame general plan. For these reasons the project may be found to be compatible with the
requirements for a Conditional Use Permit.
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
September 24, 2018, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written
materials and testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND DETERMINED BY THIS PLANNING COMMISSION THAT:
Section 1. On the basis of the Initial Study, Addendum and the documents submitted and
reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no
substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and
the modified project falls within the scope of the previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
ND-569-P prepared for the original project.
Section 1. Said Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit are
approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto. Findings for such Design
Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit are set forth in the staff report, minutes, and
recording of said meeting.
3
Section 2. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official
records of the County of San Mateo.
Chairman
I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of September, 2018, by the following vote:
Secretary
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions of Approval for Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Effective October 4, 2018
Page 1
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division
date stamped September 4, 2018, sheets A0.0 through A0.7, Topographic Survey, C0.1
through C3.0, L1.1 through L4.1 and A1.1 through A5.3;
2. that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall pay the first
half of the Public Facilities Impact fee in the amount of $8,305.50, made payable to the
City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Division;
3. that prior to scheduling the final framing inspection for the condominium building, the
applicant shall pay the second half of the Public Facilities Impact fee in the amount of
$8,305.50, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Division;
4. that during construction, the applicant shall provide fencing (with a fabric screen or mesh)
around the project site to ensure that all construction equipment, materials and debris is
kept on site;
5. that a Protected Tree Removal Permit shall be required from the Parks Division for
removal of any tree on the property with a circumference of 48 inches or larger when
measured fifty-four (54) inches above natural grade;
6. that this proposal shall comply with all the requirements of the Tree Protection and
Reforestation Ordinance adopted by the City of Burlingame in 1993 and enforced by the
Parks Department; complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted at the time
of building permit application;
7. that the maximum elevation at the top of the roof ridge shall not exceed elevation 71.55'
as measured from the average elevation at the top of the curb along Floribunda Avenue
(25.55') for a maximum height of 46’-0", and that the top of each floor and final roof ridge
shall be surveyed and approved by the City Engineer as the framing proceeds and prior
to final framing and roofing inspections. The first floor finished floor shall be elevation
25.55’; second floor finished floor shall be elevation 41.55'; third floor finished floor shall
be elevation 51.22’; fourth floor finished floor shall be elevation 61.89’. Should any framing
exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that the final
height of the structure with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the
approved plans;
8. that any changes to the size or envelope of the building, which would include expanding
the footprint or floor area of the structure, replacing or relocating windows or changing the
roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review
(FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff);
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions of Approval for Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Effective October 4, 2018
Page 2
9. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project
construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of
approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall
remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction
process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval
shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City
Council on appeal;
10. that storage of construction materials and equipment on the street or in the public right-of-
way shall be prohibited;
11. that the ‘service vehicle stall’ shall be marked on the service parking space and designated
on the final map and plans, this stall shall not be assigned to any unit, but shall be owned
and maintained by the condominium association, and the service vehicle stall shall always
be accessible for parking and not be separately enclosed or used for resident storage;
12. that the Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the condominium project
shall require that the service vehicle stall shall be reserved for service vehicles only and
shall not be used by condominium residents;
13. that the final inspection shall be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued before
the close of escrow on the sale of each unit;
14. that the developer shall provide to the initial purchaser of each unit and to the board of
directors of the condominium association, an owner purchaser manual which shall contain
the name and address of all contractors who performed work on the project, copies of all
warranties or guarantees of appliances and fixtures and the estimated life expectancy of
all depreciable component parts of the property, including but not limited to the roof,
painting, common area carpets, drapes and furniture;
15. that the trash receptacles, furnaces, and water heaters shall be shown in a legal
compartment outside the required parking and landscaping and in conformance with
zoning and California Building and Fire Code requirements before a building permit is
issued;
16. that any security gate system across the driveway shall be installed a minimum 20'-0' back
from the front property line;
17. that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation
of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer;
18. that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site shall be
required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards;
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions of Approval for Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Effective October 4, 2018
Page 3
19. that the applicant shall submit an erosion and sedimentation control plan describing BMPs
(Best Management Practices) to be used to prevent soil, dirt and debris from entering the
storm drain system; the plan shall include a site plan showing the property lines, existing
and proposed topography and slope; areas to be disturbed, locations of cut/fill and soil
storage/disposal areas; areas with existing vegetation to be protected; existing and
proposed drainage patterns and structures; watercourse or sensitive areas on-site or
immediately downstream of a project; and designated construction access routes, staging
areas and washout areas;
20. that methods and procedures such as sediment basins or traps, silt fences, straw bale
dikes, storm drain inlet protection such as soil blanket or mats, and covers for soil stock
piles to stabilize denuded areas shall be installed to maintain temporary erosion controls
and sediment control continuously until permanent erosion controls have been
established;
21. that construction access routes shall be limited in order to prevent the tracking of dirt onto
the public right-of-way, clean off-site paved areas and sidewalks using dry sweeping
methods;
22. that if construction is done during the wet season (October 15 through April 15), that prior
to October 15 the developer shall implement a winterization program to minimize the
potential for erosion and polluted runoff by inspecting, maintaining and cleaning all soil
erosion and sediment control prior to, during, and immediately after each storm even;
stabilizing disturbed soils throughout temporary or permanent seeding, mulching matting,
or tarping; rocking unpaved vehicle access to limit dispersion of mud onto public right-of-
way; covering/tarping stored construction materials, fuels and other chemicals;
23. that common landscape areas shall be designed to reduce excess irrigation run-off,
promote surface filtration and minimize the use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides;
24. that trash enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and
surface drainage and that if water cannot be diverted from these areas, a self-contained
drainage system shall be provided that discharges to an interceptor;
25. that this project shall comply with Ordinance 1845, the City of Burlingame Water
Conservation in Landscaping Regulations, and complete landscape and irrigation plans
shall be provided at the time of building permit application;
26. that all site catch basins and drainage inlets flowing to the bay shall be stenciled. All catch
basins shall be protected during construction to prevent debris from entering;
27. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the
development, shall be installed to meet current code standards and local capacities of the
collection and distribution systems shall be increased at the developer’s expense if
necessary;
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions of Approval for Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Effective October 4, 2018
Page 4
28. that all utilities to this site shall be installed underground. Any transformers needed for
this site shall be installed underground or behind the front setback on this site;
29. that sewer laterals from the site to the public sewer main shall be checked and shall be
replaced to city standards as required by the development;
30. that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed;
31. that all drainage (including water from the parking garage) on site shall be required to be
collected and pumped to the street as determined by the Public Works Department;
32. that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall
be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District;
33. that the applicant shall install fire sprinklers and a fire alarm system monitored by an
approved central station prior to the final inspection for building permit;
34. that all construction shall abide by the construction hours established in the Municipal
Code;
35. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1645, the City of Burlingame Recycling and
Waste Reduction Ordinance, and shall submit a waste reduction plan and recycling
deposit for demolition and new construction, before receiving a demolition permit;
36. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance;
and
37. that the project shall be required to comply with all the standards of the California Building
and Fire Codes, in effect at time of building permit issuance, as amended by the City of
Burlingame.
The following four (4) conditions shall be met during the Building Inspection process prior
to the inspections noted in each condition:
38. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the
property corners, set the building envelope;
39. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other
licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details
such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is
no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall
provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the
Building Department;
40. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height
of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division;
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions of Approval for Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Effective October 4, 2018
Page 5
41. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been
built according to the approved Planning and Building plans;
Mitigation Measures from Initial Study
Aesthetics
42. The project sponsor shall be subject to the design review process to evaluate the
aesthetics of the construction of a residential condominium in the Downtown Specific Plan
R-3 District.
Air Quality
43. During construction, the project sponsor shall ensure implementation of the following
mitigation measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard
mitigation requirements:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
c. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet
power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry sweeping is
prohibited.
d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
e. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding
or soil binders are used.
f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting off equipment when not in use or
reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne
toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of the California Code of Regulations
[CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.
g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic
and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the
Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible
to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions of Approval for Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Effective October 4, 2018
Page 6
44. The project sponsor shall implement the following GHG reduction measures during
construction activities:
a. Alternative-Fueled (e.g., biodiesel, electric) construction vehicles/equipment shall
make up at least 15 percent of the fleet;
b. Use at least 10 percent local building materials; and
c. Recycle at least 50 percent of construction waste or demolition materials.
45. The project shall include a common facility for trash disposal, recycling, and composting
as shown on the project plans date stamped September 4, 2018.
46. The project sponsor shall participate in all residential recycling and composting programs
offered by the solid waste provider to multifamily residential customers. This shall include
the composting program, currently offered as an optional service.
Biological Resources
47. The applicant shall comply with the City's on-site reforestation requirements as approved
by the City Arborist.
48. Construction under the Downtown Specific Plan shall avoid the March 15 through August
31 avian nesting period to the extent feasible. If it is not feasible to avoid the nesting
period, a survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no
earlier than 7 days prior to construction. The area surveyed shall include all
clearing/construction areas, as well as areas within 250 ft. of the boundaries of these
areas, or as otherwise determined by the biologist. In the event that an active nest is
discovered, clearing/construction shall be postponed within 250 ft. of the nest, until the
young have fledged (left the nest), the nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second
nesting attempts.
Cultural Resources
49. In the event that any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources are discovered
during ground disturbing activities, all work within 100 feet of the resources shall be halted
and after notification, the City shall consult with a qualified archaeologist and Native
American representative to assess the significance of the find. If any find is determined to
be significant (CEQA Guidelines 15064.5[a][3] or as unique archaeological resources per
Section 21083.2 of the California Public Resources Code), representatives of the City and
a qualified archaeologist shall meet to determine the appropriate course of action. In
considering any suggested mitigation proposed by the consulting archaeologist in order
to mitigate impacts to historical resources or unique archaeological resources, the lead
agency shall determine whether avoidance is necessary and feasible in light of factors
such as the nature of the find, project design, costs, and other considerations. If avoidance
is infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) shall be instituted. Work
may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for historical resources or
unique archaeological resources is carried out.
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions of Approval for Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Effective October 4, 2018
Page 7
50. If paleontological resources, such as fossilized bone, teeth, shell, tracks, trails, casts,
molds, or impressions are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, work will stop in
that area and within 100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess the
significance of the find and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in
consultation with the City of Burlingame.
51. If human remains are discovered at any project construction sites during any phase of
construction, all ground-disturbing activity 100 feet of the resources shall be halted and
the City of Burlingame and the County coroner shall be notified immediately, according to
Section 5097.98 of the State Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of California’s
Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined by the County coroner to be Native
American, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be notified within 24
hours, and the guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition
of the remains. The project applicant shall also retain a professional archaeologist with
Native American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of the specific site and
consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any, identified by the NAHC. As necessary,
the archaeologist may provide professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant,
including the excavation and removal of the human remains. The City of Burlingame shall
be responsible for approval of recommended mitigation as it deems appropriate, taking
account of the provisions of State law, as set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(e)
and Public Resources Code section 5097.98. The project applicant shall implement
approved mitigation, to be verified by the City of Burlingame, before the resumption of
ground-disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were discovered.
Geology and Soils
52. The project sponsor shall submit a detailed design level geotechnical investigation to the
City of Burlingame Building Division for review and approval. The investigation shall
include recommendations to develop foundation and design criteria in accordance with
the most recent California Building Code requirements. All foundations and other
improvements shall be designed by a licensed professional engineer based on site-
specific soil investigations performed by a California Certified Engineering Geologist or
Geotechnical Engineer. All recommendations from the engineering report shall be
incorporated into the residential development design. The design shall ensure the
suitability of the subsurface materials for adequately supporting the proposed structures
and include appropriate mitigations to minimize the potential damage due to liquefaction.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
53. That the applicant shall install fire sprinklers and a fire alarm system monitored by an
approved central station as required by the Fire Marshal prior to the final inspection for
building permit.
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions of Approval for Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Effective October 4, 2018
Page 8
54. That prior to demolition of the existing structures on the site, a survey shall be performed
to determine if there is any presence of asbestos. The person who performs the survey
must be Cal-OSHA certified. If asbestos is found, the BAAQMD (Bay Area Air Quality
Management District) shall be immediately notified and the applicant shall comply with
asbestos removal requirements.
Hydrology and Water Quality
55. The project applicant shall prepare and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan
(SWPPP) for all construction activities at the project site. At a minimum, the SWPPP shall
include the following:
a. A construction schedule that restricts use of heavy equipment for excavation and
grading activities to periods where no rain is forecasted during the wet season
(October 1 thru April 30) to reduce erosion associated intense rainfall and surface
runoff. The construction schedule shall indicate a timeline for earthmoving activities
and stabilization of disturbed soils;
b. Soil stabilization techniques such as covering stockpiles, hydroseeding, or short-term
biodegradable erosion control blankets;
c. Silt fences, compost berms, wattles or some kind of sediment control measures at
downstream storm drain inlets;
d. Good site management practices to address proper management of construction
materials and activities such as but not limited to cement, petroleum products,
hazardous materials, litter/rubbish, and soil stockpile; and
e. The post-construction inspection of all drainage facilities and clearing of drainage
structures of debris and sediment.
56. The project shall comply with Ordinance 1503, City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance.
57. The project shall comply with Ordinance 1845, City of Burlingame Water Conservation in
Landscape Ordinance.
58. That all surface storm water runoff created during construction and future discharge from
the site shall be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) standards as adopted by the City of Burlingame.
59. That all construction shall be done during the hours of construction imposed by the City of
Burlingame Municipal Code; these hours are between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on
weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. There shall be no construction on
Sundays or holidays.
EXHIBIT “A”
Conditions of Approval for Design Review, Condominium Permit and Conditional Use Permit.
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Effective October 4, 2018
Page 9
60. To reduce daytime noise impacts due to construction, the project sponsor shall require
construction contractors to implement the following measures:
a. Equipment and trucks used for project construction shall use the best available noise
control techniques (e.g., improved mufflers, equipment redesign, use of intake
silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and acoustically-attenuating shields or shrouds,
wherever feasible).
b. Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from adjacent receptors as possible,
and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, incorporate insulation
barriers, or other measures to the extent feasible.
61. That the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the
interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any
sleeping area.
Transportation/Traffic
62. CityLift Model No. 2LP3W6 (or comparable) parking lifts shall be installed in the garage,
with the following conditions:
a. The parking lifts shall be properly illuminated to provide safety for easy loading and
unloading, while not causing excessive glare.
b. Sound absorption materials will be used to minimize any excessive noise from the
operation of the parking lifts.
c. Signage shall be installed in each garage explaining the proper use of the lifts and
emergency contact information for lift maintenance or problems.
d. The applicant shall be required to work with the manufacturer during construction to
review issues related to installation of the parking lifts and to receive operational and
safety training of the parking lifts.
e. The final design of the parking lifts shall be subject to the review and approval of the
Community Development Director.
63. A minimum of thirteen (13) parking spaces shall be permanently maintained on the same
lot with the building, including the spaces provided by the lifts.
ADDENDUM FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND-569-P)
FOR 1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
PROPOSED CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 10-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM
PROJECT.
A. INTRODUCTION
This Mitigated Negative Declaration Addendum has been prepared in compliance with Section 15164 of the
implementing guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines), which permits a lead
agency (the City of Burlingame) to prepare an addendum to the previously prepared mitigated negative
declaration if some changes or additions to that mitigated negative declaration are necessary, but none of the
changes are sufficiently substantial to warrant preparation of a new (or subsequent) mitigated negative
declaration pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines.
As approved by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, this addendum may be included in, or attached to the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, but it need not be circulated for public review.
B. SUMMARY
On February 24, 2014, the Planning Commission approved an application for a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Condominium Permit, Design Review, Parking Variance and Tentative Condominium Map for
construction of a new four-story, 10-unit residential condominium at 1433 Floribunda Avenue. On May 11,
2015, the Planning Commission approved an application for Design Review Amendment for approval of a
variety of exterior changes to the building, as well as changes to the landscaping along the right side property
line.
A building permit was issued in May 2016. Shortly after the existing buildings and vegetation were removed,
the property was sold to a new owner. The new owner would like to build a project which includes a different
design, contains two fewer units (reducing from 10 to 8) and a parking garage that is located at grade rather
than below grade.
The proposed revised project falls within the scope of the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared for the project (ND-569-P). Therefore, this addendum to the previously approved Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been prepared to reflect the changes to the project. The applicant submitted
revised plans, date stamped September 4, 2018. Below is a summary of the revisions with regard to
aesthetics.
C. IMPACTS TO AESTHETICS
The following is a summary of changes proposed with the current project as it relates to aesthetics.
Design: As shown on the proposed plans, date stamped September 4, 2018, although the building
retains the previously approved contemporary/modern design, there are changes to all four building
facades. Materials proposed for the exterior of the building include stucco, composite wood and cement
panel siding, solid and perforated metal panels, and aluminum projections. Aluminum clad wood
windows and doors would be used throughout the building. The overall height of the building, at 46'-0"
above average top of curb level, matches the previously approved building height.
Setbacks: In the previously approved project, the building was set back 16’-4” from the front property line
on all four floors. In the current proposal, the building is set back further with the first two floors at 19’-0”,
the third floor at 24’-6” and the fourth floor at 26’-6½”. The rear setback has also been increase from 20’-
11” on the first floor and 20’-6” on the upper three floors to 24’-6½” on the first and fourth floors and 23’-
3½” on the second and third floors. Lastly, there have been slight decreases in the left and right side
setbacks, but they are considered to be minor as the differences vary from 0’-9” to 2’-3”.
ADDENDUM FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
Page 2
Lot Coverage: The previously approved project included a lot coverage of 4,731 SF. With the current
project there is a change to the configuration of the footprint of the building, however the proposed lot
coverage is slightly lower than previous approval at 4,620 SF.
The previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study concluded that “In summary, the
proposed four-story condominium building would be consistent with the massing, scale and setbacks in
comparison to the existing two, three and four story buildings on adjacent sites and in the general vicinity” and
that “While the proposed structure would alter the visual character of the site, the project would not degrade
the existing visual character or quality of the site or its surroundings because it was designed to be
compatible in character, mass, orientation and architectural style with structures on the adjacent site and in
the surrounding area.”
Since the revised project includes modifications to the previously approved contemporary/modern
architectural style, increased front and rear setbacks and reduced lot coverage, impacts from the revised
project would be less than significant.
D. IMPACTS TO HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The following is a summary of changes proposed with the current project as it relates to hydrology and water
quality.
In the previously approved project, the required parking for the residential condominium was provided in a
below grade parking garage. With the revised project, all of the required parking is provided in an at-grade
garage, eliminating the need to disturb a significant amount of soil to accommodate a garage.
The previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study noted that “The Downtown Specific
Plan has a Standard Condition of Approval for projects with subgrade structures that requires the project
sponsor to prepare a Geotechnical Study and implement mitigation measures to ensure no permanent
groundwater dewatering and reduce potential impacts on the local groundwater table and aquifer volume”.
Since the revised project no longer includes a below-grade parking garage, impacts from the revised project
would be less than significant.
E. IMPACTS TO LAND USE AND PLANNING
The following is a summary of changes proposed with the current project as it relates to land use and
planning.
As noted above, the revised project contains two fewer units than the originally approved project (reducing
from 10 to 8 units). The previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study concluded that
“The Downtown Specific Plan is an element of the City’s General Plan. The Land Use Element of the General
Plan designates this site for high density residential uses, which allows for the construction of 51+ units per
acre. The ten-unit apartment building will be located on a 0.218 acre site, which results in a density of 46
units per acre, which is just below the range established by the high density residential General Plan
designation. Therefore, the project would not physically divide an established community, and would result in
a less than significant impact.”
Since the proposed project includes a reduction in the number of units, which will continue to be below the
range established by the General Plan designation, there would be no additional impacts related to land use
and planning.
ADDENDUM FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
Page 3
F. IMPACTS TO TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION
The following is a summary of changes proposed with the current project as it relates to traffic/transportation.
As noted above, the revised project contains two fewer units than the originally approved project (reducing
from 10 to 8 units). The previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study concluded that
“The proposed project will not create a substantial increase in the traffic generation in the area. All arterial,
collector, and local roadway systems in the City have the capacity to accommodate the incremental traffic or
trip generation produced by the proposed increase of five dwelling units for this project.”
Since the proposed project includes a reduction in the number of units and the project complies with the off-
street parking regulations by providing all required parking spaces on-site, there would be no additional
impacts related to traffic/transportation.
1
1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
INITIAL STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
1. Project Title: 1433 Floribunda Avenue – Construction of a New
Four-story, 10-Unit Residential Condominium
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Ruben Hurin, Senior Planner
Telephone: (650) 558-7250
E-Mail: rhurin@burlingame.org
4. Project Location: 1433 Floribunda Avenue
Burlingame, CA
5. Assessor’s Parcel Number: 029-112-050
6. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Samir Sharma
1281 Lawrence Station Road #340
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
7. General Plan Designation: High Density Residential
Downtown Specific Plan:
R-3 Base District
8. Zoning: R-3
9. Description of Project: The applicant is proposing a new, four-story, 10-unit residential condominium
project with below-grade parking at 1433 Floribunda Avenue, zoned R-3. The project site currently
contains 5 residential units in two buildings, which would be demolished to build the proposed 10-unit
residential condominium building. The site is bordered by a two-story multifamily building to the west,
and three-story multifamily buildings to the north, south and east (see Figure 1).
The proposed building would contain ten residential units in four floors and a below-grade parking garage.
Each of the ten condominium units will contain an entry, living and dining areas, kitchen, two bedrooms,
bathrooms and a space for a washer/dryer. The average unit size proposed is 1,125 SF (1,250 SF average
maximum unit size permitted). Bicycle parking and an area for trash receptacles is provided in the below-
grade garage.
The zoning code requires 15 parking spaces for the residents of the units (1.5 spaces for each two-
bedroom unit) and an area for on-site deliveries, for a total of 16 on-site parking spaces. There are no
guest parking spaces required for properties located within the Downtown Specific Plan area. Four of the
required parking spaces would be provided by way of parking lifts located at the rear of the garage
(parking lifts would provide four parking spaces above four ground spaces). Access to the proposed below-
grade garage would be from Floribunda Avenue by way of a driveway at the east end of the property. A
gate is proposed to enclose the driveway and parking area (see Figure 2).
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
2
The property is an existing lot with a public street frontage of 49.63’ where 55’ is required, and the
property narrows to 44.83’ at the rear of the lot. Given the narrow width of the lot, accommodating all of
the required parking spaces, service vehicle space and backup areas is challenging, even with the reduced
parking requirements of the Downtown Specific Plan. The proposed project includes parking lifts to
provide four of the required parking spaces. By relocating spaces that would have been on the ground, the
parking lifts also provide room to accommodate a service vehicle space on the site.
The applicant is proposing to use Klaus parking lifts (see attached specifications). The proposed parking
lifts can accommodate vehicles up to 8’-2” wide x 17’-0” long. Building Section 1 on sheet A4.1 shows that
the proposed floor-to-ceiling garage height in the area where the parking lifts are located is 12’-0”. This
height would be sufficient to accommodate Klaus lift #26061-190, which requires a clearance of 137.79
inches (11’-6”). This lift would be able to accommodate a medium size SUV on the lower level of the lift
(vehicle up to 5’-10” tall) and a standard vehicle on the upper level (vehicle up to 4’-11” tall). The
applicant provided specifications for a 2014 Ford Explorer which shows that it is 5’-10” tall, 7’-6” wide and
16’-5” long.
Materials proposed for the exterior of the building include stucco, simulated limestone veneer, metal
panels, cement panels and cement board siding, composite wood at the balconies and an aluminum fascia
along the roof edge. Aluminum clad wood windows and doors would be used throughout the building.
Steel structural posts are proposed at the front of the building. The overall height of the building is
proposed at 46'-0" above average top of curb level where 46’-0” is the maximum allowed (using the
Inclusionary Zoning incentive). On sheet A3.3, two visual simulations are provided looking north-east and
south-west along Floribunda Avenue.
There is a total of 1,117 SF (111.7 SF/unit) of common open space proposed for the condominium project
where 1,000 SF (100 SF/unit) is required. Of the required common open space, a minimum of 50% must
be in soft landscaping (500 SF); 581 SF of the provided common open space is proposed to be landscaped
and therefore is in compliance. There is 79 SF to 358 SF in private open space per unit (75 SF/unit is the
minimum required) provided in balconies and at grade. The applicant is proposing 52% (423 SF)
landscaping in the front yard where 50% (403 SF) is the minimum required. The project meets all other
zoning code and condominium permit requirements.
Currently, there are four existing oak trees (9-inch and 11-inch diameter along the left side property line;
32-inch and 34-inch diameter along the right side property line) and one existing 29-inch diameter palm
tree on the subject property. The applicant is proposing to remove the four existing oak trees and
transplant the existing palm tree closer to the front of the lot if feasible. An arborist report prepared by
Ralph Osterling Consultants, Inc., dated May 16, 2013, notes that the two larger oak trees are in fair
condition and that “past pruning for existing building clearances on the subject property and on the
adjacent property have resulted in off-balance crowns and have restricted rooting areas.” The arborist
report recommends that with the proposed development these oak trees should be removed.
The existing 32-inch and 34-inch diameter oak trees meet the definition of a protected-size tree in the
Burlingame Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance. In his memo dated March 11, 2013, the
City Arborist notes that a Tree Removal Permit will be required from the City of Burlingame to remove
these trees. The existing 9-inch and 11-inch oak trees are not protected size and may be removed without
a permit.
In accordance with the City's requirements, each lot developed with a multifamily residential use is
required to provide a minimum of one 24-inch box-size minimum non-fruit trees for every 2,000 SF of lot
coverage. Based on the proposed project, a total of four landscape trees are required on site. The
proposed landscape plan for the project complies with the on-site reforestation requirements. There will
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
3
be a total of seventeen trees on site, including an existing palm tree at the front of the lot, four new 24-
inch box Japanese maple trees (Acer palmatum “fireglow”) at the rear of the lot and twelve new 24-inch
box Fern Pine trees (Podocarpus gracilior) along the right side property line (sixteen new trees on site
proposed, where a minimum of four landscape trees are required). Two new street trees, Acer Rubrum
“October Glory”, will be planted as part of the project.
This project is subject to Inclusionary Zoning regulations which require that an affordable unit be included
with any residential projects with four or more units. The 10-unit proposal requires one affordable unit.
The applicant is proposing that Unit B1, a 1,065 SF two-bedroom unit will be the affordable unit.
The inclusionary zoning ordinance allows the applicant to apply up to two of three incentives offered
including increasing the building height (up to 46'-0" without a conditional use permit), reducing the
common open space by up to 50% or 200 SF (whichever is greater), or increasing the number of compact
parking stalls to 50% of the required parking. The applicant is using the incentive to increase the building
height without a conditional use permit (46’-0” building height proposed). Based on this proposal, the
affordable unit must be maintained at that market rate for 10 years.
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site currently contains five residential units in two
buildings. The existing buildings were not identified on the Draft Inventory of Historic Resources of the
Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan.
The site is bordered by a two-story multifamily building to the west and three-story multifamily buildings
to the north, south and east. The surrounding area to the sides and rear is planned for high density
residential uses (51+ units per acre) and is zoned R-3 (multi-family residential). The properties across
Floribunda from the site are planned for medium-high density residential uses (20-50 units per acre) and
are zoned R-3 (multi-family residential). The density of the proposed project is 45.9 dwelling units per acre
and is within the densities allowed in the General Plan.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement): The proposed project would require Planning Commission approval for a condominium
permit, design review, and a parking variance for providing required off-street parking spaces in parking
lifts. A building permit will be required from the City of Burlingame Community Development Department,
Building Division, for construction of the condominiums. Demolition of existing structures will require a
permit from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. An encroachment permit from the Burlingame
Public Works Department will be required for any storm water improvements or other work within the
public right-of-way.
12. Downtown Specific Plan: The proposed project is within the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan.
The Downtown Specific Plan includes Standard Conditions of Approval that apply to all projects within the
Downtown Specific Plan Area. The conditions incorporate development standards and policies from
several adopted plans and policies (such as the Burlingame Municipal Code, General Plan, and other
requirements of jurisdictional agencies) and would substantially mitigate potential environmental impacts
from future projects. These conditions are required to be included in the discussions and analysis of
subsequent environmental review for all projects within the Downtown Specific Plan Area.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
4
Figure 1
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
5
Figure 2
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
7
Summary of Mitigation Measures
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Environmental Factor Mitigation Measure
Aesthetics Mitigation Measure 1a: The project sponsor shall be subject to the design
review process to evaluate the aesthetics of the construction of a
residential condominium in the Downtown Specific Plan R-3 District.
Air Quality Mitigation Measure 3a: During construction, the project sponsor shall ensure
implementation of the following mitigation measures during project construction,
in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements:
a) All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded
areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
b) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be
covered.
c) All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed
using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of
dry sweeping is prohibited.
d) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
e) All roadways, driveways, sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon
as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading
unless seeding or soil binders are used.
f) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting off equipment when not in
use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the
California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of the
California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for
construction workers at all access points.
g) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in
accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be
checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper
condition prior to operation.
h) Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact
at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and
take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall
also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
Mitigation Measure 3b: The project sponsor shall implement the following GHG
reduction measures during construction activities:
a) Alternative-Fueled (e.g., biodiesel, electric) construction vehicles/equipment
shall make up at least 15 percent of the fleet;
b) Use at least 10 percent local building materials; and
c) Recycle at least 50 percent of construction waste or demolition materials.
Mitigation Measure 3c: The project shall include a common facility for trash
disposal, recycling, and composting as shown on the project plans date stamped
December 30, 2013.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
8
Summary of Mitigation Measures
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Mitigation Measure 3d: The project sponsor shall participate in all residential
recycling and composting programs offered by the solid waste provider to
multifamily residential customers. This shall include the composting program,
currently offered as an optional service.
Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 4a: The applicant shall comply with the City's on-site
reforestation requirements as approved by the City Arborist.
Mitigation Measure 4b: That a certified arborist's report showing how the
existing trees to remain will be protected during construction, to be
approved by the Parks Department, shall be prepared prior to issuance of a
building permit; the approved tree protection plan shall be implemented
prior to any construction on the site.
Mitigation Measure 4c: Construction under the Downtown Specific Plan
shall avoid the March 15 through August 31 avian nesting period to the
extent feasible. If it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, a survey for
nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier
than 7 days prior to construction. The area surveyed shall include all
clearing/construction areas, as well as areas within 250 ft. of the
boundaries of these areas, or as otherwise determined by the biologist. In
the event that an active nest is discovered, clearing/construction shall be
postponed within 250 ft. of the nest, until the young have fledged (left the
nest), the nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second nesting
attempts.
Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 5a: In the event that any prehistoric or historic
subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground disturbing
activities, all work within 100 feet of the resources shall be halted and after
notification, the City shall consult with a qualified archaeologist and Native
American representative to assess the significance of the find. If any find is
determined to be significant (CEQA Guidelines 15064.5[a][3] or as unique
archaeological resources per Section 21083.2 of the California Public
Resources Code), representatives of the City and a qualified archaeologist
shall meet to determine the appropriate course of action. In considering
any suggested mitigation proposed by the consulting archaeologist in order
to mitigate impacts to historical resources or unique archaeological
resources, the lead agency shall determine whether avoidance is necessary
and feasible in light of factors such as the nature of the find, project design,
costs, and other considerations. If avoidance is infeasible, other
appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) shall be instituted. Work may
proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for historical
resources or unique archaeological resources is carried out.
Mitigation Measure 5b: If paleontological resources, such as fossilized
bone, teeth, shell, tracks, trails, casts, molds, or impressions are discovered
during ground-disturbing activities, work will stop in that area and within
100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess the
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
9
Summary of Mitigation Measures
1433 Floribunda Avenue
significance of the find and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment
measures in consultation with the City of Burlingame.
Mitigation Measure 5c. If human remains are discovered at any project
construction sites during any phase of construction, all ground-disturbing
activity 100 feet of the resources shall be halted and the City of Burlingame
and the County coroner shall be notified immediately, according to Section
5097.98 of the State Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of
California’s Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined by the
County coroner to be Native American, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) shall be notified within 24 hours, and the guidelines of
the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the
remains. The project applicant shall also retain a professional archaeologist
with Native American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of
the specific site and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any,
identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the archaeologist may provide
professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant, including the
excavation and removal of the human remains. The City of Burlingame shall
be responsible for approval of recommended mitigation as it deems
appropriate, taking account of the provisions of State law, as set forth in
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(e) and Public Resources Code section
5097.98. The project applicant shall implement approved mitigation, to be
verified by the City of Burlingame, before the resumption of ground-
disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were discovered.
Geology and Soils Mitigation Measure 6a: The project sponsor shall submit a detailed design
level geotechnical investigation to the City of Burlingame Building Division
for review and approval. The investigation shall include recommendations
to develop foundation and design criteria in accordance with the most
recent California Building Code requirements. All foundations and other
improvements shall be designed by a licensed professional engineer based
on site-specific soil investigations performed by a California Certified
Engineering Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer. All recommendations from
the engineering report shall be incorporated into the residential
development design. The design shall ensure the suitability of the
subsurface materials for adequately supporting the proposed structures
and include appropriate mitigations to minimize the potential damage due
to liquefaction.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
10
Summary of Mitigation Measures
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Mitigation Measure 8a: That the applicant shall install fire sprinklers and a
fire alarm system monitored by an approved central station as required by
the Fire Marshal prior to the final inspection for building permit.
Mitigation Measure 8b: That prior to demolition of the existing structures
on the site, a survey shall be performed to determine if there is any
presence of asbestos. The person who performs the survey must be Cal-
OSHA certified. If asbestos is found, the BAAQMD (Bay Area Air Quality
Management District) shall be immediately notified and the applicant shall
comply with asbestos removal requirements.
Hydrology and Water
Quality
Mitigation Measure 9a: The project applicant shall prepare and implement
a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) for all construction
activities at the project site. At a minimum, the SWPPP shall include the
following:
a) A construction schedule that restricts use of heavy equipment for
excavation and grading activities to periods where no rain is forecasted
during the wet season (October 1 thru April 30) to reduce erosion
associated intense rainfall and surface runoff. The construction
schedule shall indicate a timeline for earthmoving activities and
stabilization of disturbed soils;
b) Soil stabilization techniques such as covering stockpiles, hydroseeding,
or short-term biodegradable erosion control blankets;
c) Silt fences, compost berms, wattles or some kind of sediment control
measures at downstream storm drain inlets;
d) Good site management practices to address proper management of
construction materials and activities such as but not limited to cement,
petroleum products, hazardous materials, litter/rubbish, and soil
stockpile; and
e) The post-construction inspection of all drainage facilities and clearing of
drainage structures of debris and sediment.
Mitigation Measure 9b: The project shall comply with Ordinance 1503, City
of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance.
Mitigation Measure 9c: The project shall comply with Ordinance 1845, City
of Burlingame Water Conservation in Landscape Ordinance.
Mitigation Measure 9d: That all surface storm water runoff created during
construction and future discharge from the site shall be required to meet
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards as
adopted by the City of Burlingame.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
11
Summary of Mitigation Measures
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Noise Mitigation Measure 12a: That all construction shall be done during the
hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code;
these hours are between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays, 9:00 a.m.
and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays. There
shall be no construction on holidays.
Mitigation Measure 12b: To reduce daytime noise impacts due to
construction, the project sponsor shall require construction contractors to
implement the following measures:
a) Equipment and trucks used for project construction shall use the best
available noise control techniques (e.g., improved mufflers, equipment
redesign, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and
acoustically-attenuating shields or shrouds, wherever feasible).
b) Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from adjacent receptors
as possible, and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary
sheds, incorporate insulation barriers, or other measures to the extent
feasible.
Mitigation Measure 12c: That the method of construction and materials
used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the
building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping area.
Transportation/Traffic Mitigation Measure 16a: The project sponsor shall obtain approval for a
Parking Variance for satisfying off-street parking requirements with parking
lifts.
Mitigation Measure 16b: Klaus #26061-170 (or comparable) parking lifts
shall be installed in the garage of each residential unit, with the following
conditions:
a) The parking lifts shall be properly illuminated to provide safety for easy
loading and unloading, while not causing excessive glare.
b) Sound absorption materials will be used to minimize any excessive
noise from the operation of the parking lifts.
c) Signage shall be installed in each garage explaining the proper use of
the lifts and emergency contact information for lift maintenance or
problems.
d) The applicant shall be required to work with the manufacturer to
provide operational and safety training of the parking lifts to the
original purchases of the units.
e) The final design of the parking lifts shall be subject to the review and
approval of the Community Development Director.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
12
Summary of Mitigation Measures
1433 Floribunda Avenue
Mitigation Measure 16c: A minimum of sixteen (16) parking spaces
shall be permanently maintained on the same lot with the building,
including the spaces provided by the lifts accommodating four vehicles
and the delivery vehicle space.
Mitigation Measure 16d: Project sponsors shall provide adequate
secure bicycle parking in the Plan Area at a minimum ratio of one
bicycle spot for every 20 vehicle spots.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
13
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
1. AESTHETICS
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Discussion
The proposed ten-unit condominium would replace five units in two single and two-story buildings. In this
particular location, the land is essentially flat and the area is fully developed; no distant views or vistas are
present.
The subject property is surrounded by two and three-story multifamily residential buildings. The building to
the east is three stories, with a driveway along the adjacent property line. The building to the west is two
stories, and is set back approximately 5 feet from the side property line of the subject property. A three-story
multifamily residential building is located across the street from the site.
The proposed four-story condominium interjects a variation in the skyline by being placed between a three-
story building to the left and a two-story building to the right of the subject property. The proposed four-story
structure creates diversity in the surrounding area with the existing two and three-story buildings located in
the immediate area. While there are no four-story buildings immediately adjacent to the site, there are taller
buildings along this block and in the adjoining area.
The building design incorporates stucco, simulated limestone veneer, metal panels, cement panels and cement
board siding, composite wood at the balconies and an aluminum fascia along the roof edge. Aluminum clad
wood windows and doors would be used throughout the building. Steel structural posts are proposed at the
front of the building. The neighboring buildings are architecturally nondescript, with minimal design details,
and the proposed building has a higher level of detail than those neighboring. This proposed building has been
designed in a manner that is consistent with the existing size and mass of the area and complies with the
regulations for mass and bulk contained in the R-3 zoning regulations.
The zoning code regulations allow construction of a building up to 46 feet high as an incentive for providing an
affordable unit. This project proposes to include one affordable unit and has chosen to use the height
incentive contained in the zoning regulations to have a four-story building.
City of Burlingame General Plan: The City of Burlingame General Plan contains a Policy Plan that lists goals and
objectives for the future development of the City. These goals focus on maintaining the small town identity
and supporting the local economy. The following goal and objective apply to the project site:
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
14
Goal IV: To maintain and improve the quality of the environment to preserve the public health and
enhance the prospects of enjoyment by residents and visitors.
Objective: Maintain the pleasant appearance prevailing in most of the City’s residential areas and
improve the visual quality in areas of less satisfactory appearance.
Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan: The project site is located within the planning area of the Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. The Specific Plan provides goals and policies that would encourage housing
opportunities in Downtown Burlingame:
Goal LU-6: Promote diversity in housing type and affordability within the Downtown area.
Goal D-3: Preserve and enhance small-town scale with walkable, pedestrian-scaled streets.
The Specific Plan also contains Design Guidelines for the different uses within the planning area. The project
site is located in a residential area, for which there are guidelines in the Specific Plan. The related guidelines
are summarized below:
1. Architectural Diversity. Residential projects should respect the diversity of building types and styles in
the residential areas Downtown and seek to support it by applying the following principles:
• Design buildings to maintain general compatibility with the neighborhood.
• Respect the mass and fine scale of adjacent buildings even when using differing architectural
styles.
• Maintain the tradition of architectural diversity, but with human scale regardless of the
architectural style used.
• Create buildings with quality materials and thoughtful design to last into the future.
2. Pedestrian Use and Character.
• Primary pedestrian access to all ground-level uses should be from the sidewalk along the public
street. Entries should be clearly defined features of front façades. Common entrances for multiple
units are encouraged to have appropriately-scaled, usable gathering spaces at or adjacent to
entrances that invite informal social interaction with neighbors.
• Residential development may have a finished floor elevation up to 5 feet above sidewalk level to
provide more interior privacy for residents. Entry porches or stoops along the street are
encouraged to bridge this change in elevation and connect these units to the sidewalk to minimize
any physical separation from the street level. The street-level frontage should be visually
interesting with frequent unit entrances and clear orientation to the street.
• Curb cuts should be minimized to promote traffic and pedestrian safety and create cohesive
landscaping and building façades. A maximum of two curb cuts should be provided for projects
requiring 30 parking spaces or more; for projects with less than 30 spaces, only one curb cut
should be provided. One-way driveways should have curb cuts with a fully depressed width no
greater than 12 feet; two-way curb cuts should be no greater than 22 feet. On-site bicycle parking
for residents is encouraged.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
15
3. Architectural Compatibility
• Massing and street façades shall be designed to create a residential scale in keeping with
Burlingame neighborhoods. Articulation, setbacks, and materials should minimize massing, break
down the scale of buildings, and provide visual interest.
• Parking should not be allowed to dominate the character of the project. Where enclosed parking
is at ground level, it should be fronted or wrapped with habitable uses when possible. If it is not
possible to fully wrap the parking, it should be incorporated into the design of the facade. Semi-
depressed parking (partly below ground and partly exposed above ground) should be screened
with architectural elements that enhance the streetscape such as stoops, porches, or balcony
overhangs.
• Interesting and varied roof forms are encouraged. Rooflines should emphasize and accentuate
significant elements of the building such as entries, bays, and balconies. Rooftop equipment shall
be concealed from view and/or integrated within the architecture of the building.
4. Architectural Design Consistency
• Facades should include projecting eaves and overhangs, porches, and other architectural elements
that provide human scale and help break up building mass. All exposed sides of a building should
be designed with the same level of care and integrity. Facades should have a variation of both
positive space (massing) and negative space (plazas, inset doorways and windows).
• Elements such as entrances, stairs, porches, bays and balconies should be visible to people on the
street.
• Building walls should be accented by well-proportioned openings that provide relief, detail and
variation on the façade. Windows should be inset generously from the building wall to create
shade and shadow detail. The use of high-quality window products that contribute to the richness,
detail, and depth of the façade is encouraged. Windows with mullions should have individual
window lights, rather than applied "snap-in" mullions that lack depth and are not integral to the
window structure. Reflective glass is undesirable because of its tendency to create uncomfortable
glare conditions and a visual barrier. Where residential uses are adjacent to each other, windows
should be placed with regard to any open spaces or windows on neighboring buildings so as to
protect the privacy of residents.
• Building materials should be richly detailed to provide visual interest. The use of materials that are
reflected in the historic architecture present in the neighborhood is encouraged. Metal siding and
large expanses of stucco or wood siding are also to be avoided. Roofing materials and accenting
features such as canopies, cornices, tile accents, etc. should also offer color variation. Residential
building materials should include quality details such as wrought iron, wood-framed windows,
wood brackets and tile roofs.
5. Site Amenities
• Building setbacks should be appropriately landscaped to provide screening and introduce trees
and plantings in this area. Landscaped setback areas should be integrated with buildings by
providing openings in the building walls that connect the perimeter landscaping with interior
courtyards and landscape pathways. Landscaping should be planned in relation to surrounding
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
16
vegetative types with special consideration being given to native species where possible. Pathways
and courtyards should be made of pervious materials to allow groundwater absorption.
• In residential development, most open space should be used to provide attractive amenities for
residents, including interior courtyards, outdoor seating options and perimeter landscaping.
Balconies and rooftop terraces are encouraged.
Overall the design is consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan design guidelines. The project was reviewed
by the Planning Commission in a design review study session and refinements were made to the design.
Light and Shadows: Burlingame has not established a community standard for shadow impacts, and most
jurisdictions do not have criteria for significance. The Downtown Specific Plan provides guidance for assessing
potential shadow impacts for projects in Downtown Burlingame, specifying that as part of the design review
process, development in the Specific Plan Area that is proposed to be taller than existing surrounding
structures (such as the proposed project) should be evaluated for potential to create new shadows/shade on
public and/or quasi-public open spaces and major pedestrian routes. The plan suggests at a minimum shadow
diagrams should be prepared for 9 AM, 12 noon, and 3 PM on March 21st, June 21st, September 21st, and
December 21st (approximately corresponding to the solstices and equinoxes) to identify extreme conditions
and trends.
Figure 3 shows the existing shadow conditions for 9 AM, 12 noon, and 3 PM on March 21st, September 21st,
and December 21st. Figure 4 indicates shadow impacts for the same dates and times for the proposed project
as modeled from the dimensions provided on the submitted plans. Because the existing buildings on the site
are set back further than the other buildings along the block, currently there is a break in the shadows along
the sidewalk for this property. However, the shadows from the proposed project are similar to the shadows
currently cast by the surrounding buildings. Based on these established criteria, the proposed four-story
building would not create significant new shadows/shade on public and/or quasi-public open spaces and major
pedestrian routes. There are no public or quasi-public open spaces adjacent, and the adjacent pedestrian
route (Floribunda Avenue sidewalk) would only experience shading for some of the morning hours. Overall the
shading is comparable to surrounding buildings. Therefore the project would not be considered to have
significant shadow impacts.
Exterior lighting provided for the project will be required to comply with exterior lighting regulations of
Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 18.16.030, which regulates exterior illumination for residential and
commercial zones of the City. It requires that exterior lighting on all residential and commercial properties
shall be designed and located so that the cone of light and/or glare from the lighting element is kept entirely
on the property or below the top of any fence, edge or wall. It also requires that on all residential properties
exterior lighting outlets and fixtures shall not be located more than nine (9) feet above adjacent grade or
required landing; walls or portions of walls shall not be floodlit; only shielded light fixtures which focus light
downward shall be allowed, except for illuminated street numbers required by the fire department.
In summary, the proposed four-story condominium building would be consistent with the massing, scale and
setbacks in comparison to the existing two, three and four story buildings on adjacent sites and in the general
vicinity. Landscaping would be added with the addition of four trees in the rear yard, two new street trees
along the Floribunda street frontage and various plantings throughout the site. The landscaping will cover 52%
of the minimum required front setback, where the zoning code requires that 50% of the front setback shall be
landscaped. The project will provide 1,117 square feet of common open space, where the zoning code
requires 1,000 square feet.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
17
While the proposed structure would alter the visual character of the site, the project would not degrade the
existing visual character or quality of the site or its surroundings because it was designed to be compatible in
character, mass, orientation and architectural style with structures on the adjacent site and in the surrounding
area.
Mitigation Measures
The design is largely consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan design guidelines. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure 1a would reduce any impact to the visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 1a: The project sponsor shall be subject to the design review process to
evaluate the aesthetics of the construction of a residential condominium in the Downtown Specific
Plan R-3 District.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010
City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 25 - Zoning, Burlingame, California, 2013 edition.
City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 18, Chapter 18.16 – Electrical Code, Burlingame, California, 2010
edition.
Project plans date stamped December 30, 2013.
Site Visit, December, 2013.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
18
Figure 3 – Existing Shadows
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
19
Figure 4 – Shadows with Proposed Project
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
20
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may
refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Discussion
No impact. The project site is located in an urbanized area in the City of Burlingame. The project site does not
include active agricultural uses, nor is the site zoned for agricultural uses. Therefore, the proposed project
would not convert farmland to non-agricultural use and would have no effect on farmland or any property
subject to a Williamson Act contract.
Mitigation Measures: None Required
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
21
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
3. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution
control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Frequently create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
Discussion
The proposed application is for a 10-unit multifamily condominium project to replace the existing five
dwellings on site. While this project will accommodate more people than the previous use, the change in
emissions generated by five additional dwelling units at this location over emissions from all development in
Burlingame is insignificant. The site is within walking distance of countywide bus and rail services. The site is
zoned for multifamily residential development and with proper adherence to regional air quality requirements
during construction, the proposed project will not create any deterioration in the air quality or climate, locally
or regionally.
The Downtown Specific Plan includes a Standard Condition of Approval that requires incorporation of
residential and commercial energy efficiency measures such that energy efficiency is increased to 15% beyond
2008 Title 24 Standards for Electricity and Natural Gas (E-8)1. This is a standard that applies to all projects in
Burlingame through the City’s Green Building Ordinance, not just those in the Downtown Specific Plan Area.
Since 2011 the City has required that applicants who apply for a building permit for residential construction
projects with a valuation of $50,000 or more are required to comply with the City of Burlingame Green
Building Ordinance. Compliance measures are achieved by Build It Green “GreenPoints”, LEED®, Energy
Efficiency Standards, other recognized point systems, or equivalent approved methods. The City’s Building
Division evaluates each project for compliance.
1 The California Energy Commission has delayed the implementation of the new, 2013 California Energy Efficiency
Standards until July 1, 2014. The City of Burlingame will continue to enforce the 2008 California Energy Efficiency
Standards and the Mandatory GreenPoints checklist requirements until July 1, 2014.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
22
The Downtown Specific Plan also includes a Standard Condition of Approval that requires incorporation of
recycling measures and incentives such that a solid waste diversion rate of 75% is achieved upon occupation.
This is based on a “policy goal” established by AB 341 for the state to achieve a 75% diversion rate by the year
2020. However, this is a regional-scale effort rather than project-level, and is implemented through the solid
waste service provider Recology San Mateo County. To work towards the 75% diversion goal, for multifamily
residential customers Recology San Mateo County offers single-stream recycling at no additional charge and an
optional compost program. The proposed project includes a common trash and recycling area, which would
allow residents to participate in all recycling programs offered by Recology, including composting.
Mitigation Measures
The proposed project would be subject to the measures recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) (listed below in Mitigation Measure 3a), which would reduce construction-
related PM10 and PM2.5 emissions to a less than significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3b
would reduce the project construction dust emissions to less than significant. All of these mitigation measures
are Standard Conditions of Approval in the Downtown Specific Plan (E-2, E-3 and E-4).
Mitigation Measure 3a: During construction, the project sponsor shall ensure implementation of the
following mitigation measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard
mitigation requirements:
a) All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
b) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
c) All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet
power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry sweeping is
prohibited.
d) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
e) All roadways, driveways, sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.
Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders
are used.
f) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting off equipment when not in use or
reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne
toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]).
Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.
g) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and
determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
h) Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead
Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action
within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance
with applicable regulations.
Mitigation Measure 3b: The project sponsor shall implement the following GHG reduction measures
during construction activities:
a) Alternative-Fueled (e.g., biodiesel, electric) construction vehicles/equipment shall make up
at least 15 percent of the fleet;
b) Use at least 10 percent local building materials; and
c) Recycle at least 50 percent of construction waste or demolition materials.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
23
While the solid waste diversion goal is managed by Recology, rather than individual projects or the City of
Burlingame, Mitigation Measures 3c and 3d maximizes the potential for solid waste diversion.
Mitigation Measure 3c: The project shall include a common facility for trash disposal, recycling, and
composting as shown on the project plans date stamped December 30, 2013.
Mitigation Measure 3d: The project sponsor shall participate in all residential recycling and composting
programs offered by the solid waste provider to multifamily residential customers. This shall include the
composting program, currently offered as an optional service.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Updated May, 2012.
Recology San Mateo website: http://www.recologysanmateocounty.com accessed December, 2013.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
24
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-
status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) or state-protected
wetlands, through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Fundamentally conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Discussion
The site has been fully developed and used for residential uses since at least 1907. The proposed project site is
currently covered by several buildings and paved areas, with several small areas of landscaping. There are a
number of large, non-native trees on or adjacent to the property, including two oak trees (9-inch and 11-inch
diameter) along the left side property line, and two oak trees (32-inch and 34-inch in diameter) along the right
side property line. The trunks of the two trees along the right side extend across the property line onto the
adjacent property at 1437 Floribunda Avenue 2. Other than these trees, vegetation is limited to small
landscaped areas and weedy plants. The four oak trees are proposed to be removed as a part of the project. A
tree removal permit is required for removal of two of the four oak trees that are protected sized trees (32-inch
2 California Civil Code Section 834 states: “Trees whose trunks stand partly on the land of two or more conterminous
owners, belong to them in common.” Therefore, the property owners of 1433 and 1437 Floribunda Avenue will need to
provide consent to remove the trees along the right side property line.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
25
and 34-inch in diameter). The two smaller oak trees are not protected size and may be removed without a
permit.
The applicant explored the option of keeping the oak trees and submitted a site plan which shows the impact
of the drip line of the oak trees on the building footprint. The depth of buildable area for the 45 foot wide lot
would be reduced to between twenty feet and 33 feet for more than half of the length of the lot. In addition,
the location of the trees would limit the ability to provide the required on-site parking. Therefore, the
applicant determined that it was necessary to remove the oak trees in order to meet the project objectives.
An existing Canary Island Date Palm will be transplanted within the front yard of the site if feasible. The
project also includes four new 24-inch box Japanese Maple trees within the common open space at the rear of
the property and twelve new 24-inch box Fern Pine trees along the right side property line. Two new street
trees (24-inch box Acer Rubrum) are proposed along Floribunda Avenue.
This heavily urbanized area supports no riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities. The nearest creek
segment is a segment of Ralston Creek about 260 feet to the northeast of the site running in a box culvert
underground, and in an open culvert between 1209 and 1217 Oak Grove Avenue before continuing
underground toward the San Francisco Bay. This drainage way is within a culvert and is separated from the
site by urban development. Therefore, no impacts on sensitive natural communities, including riparian habitat
would result from project implementation.
The project site is fully developed, with buildings, paved areas, and small landscaped areas. There are no
creeks or wetlands present on the proposed project site. Therefore, the proposed project would have no
substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands.
The Downtown Specific Plan has as a Standard Condition of Approval to protect nesting birds. In urbanized
(developed) areas such as the project area, the lack of natural communities results in resident and migratory
birds nesting in ornamental and/or street trees. As such, the proposed project could result in disturbances to
nesting birds, which may be located in or adjacent to the subject property, should construction occur during
the avian nesting period (March 15 through August 31). Nesting birds, their nests, and eggs are fully protected
by the Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503 and 3503.5) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA). The
MBTA protects over 800 avian species, including geese, ducks, shorebirds, raptors, songbirds, and many
relatively common species. Destruction or disturbance of a nest would be a violation of these regulations and
is considered a potentially significant impact. Implementation of the Standard Condition of Approval included
in the Downtown Specific Plan (G-1) would require preconstruction surveys for nesting birds, should
construction occur during the avian nesting period.
In accordance with the City's requirements, each lot developed with a multifamily residential use is required to
provide a minimum of one 24-inch box-size minimum non-fruit trees for every 2,000 SF of lot coverage. The
proposed landscape plan for the project complies with the on-site reforestation requirements with the
provision of four 24-inch box Acer Palmatum “Fireglow” (Fireglow Japanese Maple) trees in the rear yard and
twelve 24-inch box Podocarpus gracilior (Fern Pine) trees along the right side property line (sixteen new trees
on site proposed, where a minimum of four landscape trees are required).
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures 4a and 4b will reduce potential conflict with the tree preservation ordinance, and will
ensure compliance with the City’s reforestation requirements. Mitigation Measure 4c would reduce impacts
to nesting birds to a less-than-significant level:
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
26
Mitigation Measure 4a: The applicant shall comply with the City's on-site reforestation
requirements as approved by the City Arborist.
Mitigation Measure 4b: That a certified arborist's report showing how the existing trees to
remain will be protected during construction, to be approved by the Parks Department, shall be
prepared prior to issuance of a building permit; the approved tree protection plan shall be
implemented prior to any construction on the site.
Mitigation Measure 4c: Construction under the Downtown Specific Plan shall avoid the March
15 through August 31 avian nesting period to the extent feasible. If it is not feasible to avoid the
nesting period, a survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no
earlier than 7 days prior to construction. The area surveyed shall include all clearing/construction
areas, as well as areas within 250 ft. of the boundaries of these areas, or as otherwise
determined by the biologist. In the event that an active nest is discovered, clearing/construction
shall be postponed within 250 ft. of the nest, until the young have fledged (left the nest), the
nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010
City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 25 – Zoning, Burlingame, California
Map of Areas of Special Biological Importance, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties, California, State
Department of Fish and Game.
City of Burlingame, Parks Division Memoranda, dated October 31, 2013, August 14, 2013, June 17, 2013 and
March 11, 2013.
Project plans date stamped December 30, 2013.
San Mateo County Assessor, Assessor Information Page for the subject property
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
27
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a unique archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Discussion
The site involved in this project has been developed as a residential use for many years prior to this proposal.
No local information was found which would suggest that the existing buildings have any local significance.
The Downtown Specific Plan included an Inventory of Historic Resources that identified which properties
appear to be eligible as historic resources, based on State and federal criteria. The subject property was not
listed on the inventory. As a result, these structures do not appear to be eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historic Resources or the National Register of Historic Places. As such, the structures are not
considered to be an historic resource as defined in Section 21084.1 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Based on relevant archaeological reports for the immediate area, there are no known cultural resources
associated with the site and the proposed project will not create any cultural impacts to the affected area.
Project related construction activities involving ground-disturbance during construction could result in
significant impacts, if any unknown culturally significant sites are discovered. If remains were unearthed during
project construction, damage to or destruction of significant archaeological remains would be a potentially
significant impact.
Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains and/or traces of prehistoric plant and animal life exclusive
of human remains or artifacts. Fossil remains, such as bones, teeth, shells, and wood, are found in geologic
deposits (rock formations). The project vicinity has been developed and no known paleontological resources
have been recorded. Because the proposed project would result in minimal excavation in bedrock conditions,
significant paleontologic discovery would be unlikely. However, significant fossil discoveries can be made even
in areas of supposed low sensitivity.
The site has no known human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. However, it is
impossible to be sure about the presence or absence of human remains on a site until site excavation and
grading occurs. The proposed project requires additional excavation for the building’s slab foundation,
therefore there is a low likelihood that human remains will be encountered.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
28
Mitigation Measures
Potential impacts to archeological resources would be reduced to less than significant with the
implementation of Mitigation Measure 5a. In the event a paleontological resource is encountered during
project activities, implementation of Mitigation Measure 5b would reduce potential impacts to less than
significant. In the event human remains are encountered during project activities, implementation of
Mitigation Measure 5c would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 5a: In the event that any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural
resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities, all work within 100 feet of the
resources shall be halted and after notification, the City shall consult with a qualified
archaeologist and Native American representative to assess the significance of the find. If any
find is determined to be significant (CEQA Guidelines 15064.5[a][3] or as unique archaeological
resources per Section 21083.2 of the California Public Resources Code), representatives of the
City and a qualified archaeologist shall meet to determine the appropriate course of action. In
considering any suggested mitigation proposed by the consulting archaeologist in order to
mitigate impacts to historical resources or unique archaeological resources, the lead agency shall
determine whether avoidance is necessary and feasible in light of factors such as the nature of
the find, project design, costs, and other considerations. If avoidance is infeasible, other
appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) shall be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts
of the project site while mitigation for historical resources or unique archaeological resources is
carried out.
Mitigation Measure 5b: If paleontological resources, such as fossilized bone, teeth, shell, tracks,
trails, casts, molds, or impressions are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, work will
stop in that area and within 100 feet of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess the
significance of the find and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in
consultation with the City of Burlingame.
Mitigation Measure 5c: If human remains are discovered at any project construction sites during
any phase of construction, all ground-disturbing activity 100 feet of the resources shall be halted
and the City of Burlingame and the County coroner shall be notified immediately, according to
Section 5097.98 of the State Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of California’s Health and
Safety Code. If the remains are determined by the County coroner to be Native American, the
Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be notified within 24 hours, and the
guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. The
project applicant shall also retain a professional archaeologist with Native American burial
experience to conduct a field investigation of the specific site and consult with the Most Likely
Descendant, if any, identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the archaeologist may provide
professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant, including the excavation and removal of
the human remains. The City of Burlingame shall be responsible for approval of recommended
mitigation as it deems appropriate, taking account of the provisions of State law, as set forth in
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(e) and Public Resources Code section 5097.98. The project
applicant shall implement approved mitigation, to be verified by the City of Burlingame, before
the resumption of ground-disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were
discovered.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
29
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010
This space intentionally left blank.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
30
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as
it may be revised), creating substantial risks to life
or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of wastewater?
Discussion
The existing site is essentially level, with less than a foot of slope upwards from the front of the property to the
rear. It is located in an urban setting, initially developed with single family dwellings in the early decades of
the last century. From mid-century onwards many of the original single family dwellings were incrementally
redeveloped or supplemented with multifamily residential buildings, including all of the parcels immediately
adjacent to the project site.
The site is approximately 1.5 miles from the San Andreas Fault, but is not within the Alquist-Priola zone. The
site is within 1.5 miles of the Serra Fault, a minor thrust fault considered to have common roots with the San
Andreas Fault. There are no known faults on the site. The seismic exposure will be reduced over the present
development, since the new residences will incorporate the seismic construction requirements of the
California Building and Fire Codes, 2010 Edition.
The site is relatively level and does not have a history of landslides. Four broad soil groups exist in Burlingame.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
31
At the location of this site the soil is designated as an alluvium plain that consists primarily of gravel, sand, silt,
and clay deposits. Under seismic conditions most Burlingame soils are reasonably stable. This site is in an area
of moderate to low (0.1- 1% probability) liquefaction susceptibility. The project will be required to be designed
to meet all the requirements, including seismic standards, of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2010
Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame, for structural stability.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 6a would ensure that the potential effects of groundshaking and
liquefaction would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 6a: The project sponsor shall submit a detailed design level geotechnical
investigation to the City of Burlingame Building Division for review and approval. The
investigation shall include recommendations to develop foundation and design criteria in
accordance with the most recent California Building Code requirements. All foundations and
other improvements shall be designed by a licensed professional engineer based on site-specific
soil investigations performed by a California Certified Engineering Geologist or Geotechnical
Engineer. All recommendations from the engineering report shall be incorporated into the
residential development design. The design shall ensure the suitability of the subsurface
materials for adequately supporting the proposed structures and include appropriate mitigations
to minimize the potential damage due to liquefaction.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), Liquefaction Susceptibility Maps,
http://gis.abag.ca.gov/website/liquefactionsusceptibility/, accessed December, 2013.
Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, San Francisco Bay Region, Sheet 3, 1:125,000, 1981.
E. Brabb, E. Pampeyan, and M. Bonilla, Landslide Susceptibility in San Mateo County, San Mateo County,
California, 1972.
Perkins, Jeanne, Maps Showing Cumulative Damage Potential from Earthquake Ground Shaking, U.S.G.S. Map
MF, San Mateo County: California, 1987.
City of Burlingame, Building Division Memoranda, dated October 25, 2013; August 16, 2013; June 12, 2013;
and February 26, 2013.
City of Burlingame, Engineering Division Memoranda, dated November 12, 2013; August 29, 2013; July 11,
2013; March 19, 2013.
Project Plans date stamped December 30, 2013, the Planning Division.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
32
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
Discussion
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) is currently designated as a
nonattainment area for state and national ozone standards and national particulate matter ambient air quality
standards. SFBAAB’s nonattainment status is attributed to the region’s development history. Past, present and
future development projects contribute to the region’s adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By its
very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result
in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to
existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s contribution to the cumulative
impact is considerable, then the project’s impact on air quality would be considered significant.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) approach to developing a Threshold of Significance
for Green House Gas (GHG) emissions is to identify the emissions level for which a project would not be
expected to substantially conflict with existing California legislation adopted to reduce statewide GHG
emissions needed to move us towards climate stabilization. If a project would generate GHG emissions above
the threshold level, it would be considered to contribute substantially to a cumulative impact, and would be
considered significant.
The Thresholds of Significance for operational-related GHG emissions are:
• For land use development projects, the threshold is compliance with a qualified GHG reduction Strategy;
or annual emissions less than 1,100 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of CO2e; or 4.6 MT CO2e/SP/yr (residents
+ employees). Land use development projects include residential, commercial, industrial, and public land
uses and facilities.
• For stationary-source projects, the threshold is 10,000 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of CO2e. Stationary-
source projects include land uses that would accommodate processes and equipment that emit GHG
emissions and would require an Air District permit to operate. If annual emissions of operational-related
GHGs exceed these levels, the proposed project would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution
of GHG emissions and a cumulatively significant impact to global climate change.
The BAAQMD has established project level screening criteria to assist in the evaluation of impacts. If a project
meets the screening criteria and is consistent with the methodology used to develop the screening criteria,
then the project’s air quality impacts may be considered less than significant. For condominiums and
townhouses, the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 06/2010 (Table 3-1, Operational-Related Criteria Air
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
33
Pollutant and Precursor Screening Level Sizes) set a screening threshold of 78 dwelling units for any individual
project. The proposed project would have ten units on a 9,515 square foot (0.218 acre) site, which
corresponds to a density of 46 dwelling units per acre.
On March 5, 2012 the Alameda County Superior Court issued a judgment finding that the BAAQMD had failed
to comply with CEQA when it adopted the thresholds contained in the BAAQMD’s 2010 CEQA Guidelines
(BAAQMD Homepage, accessed May 2012). As such, lead agencies need to determine appropriate air quality
thresholds of significance based on substantial evidence in the record. Lead agencies may rely on the
BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines (updated May 2011) for assistance in calculating air pollution emissions, obtaining
information regarding the health impacts of air pollutants, and identifying potential mitigation measures.
However, the BAAQMD has been ordered to set aside the thresholds and is no longer recommending that
these thresholds be used as a general measure of a project’s significant air quality impacts. Lead agencies may
continue to rely on the Air District’s 1999 Thresholds of Significance and to make determinations regarding the
significance of an individual project’s air quality impacts based on substantial evidence in the record for that
project. For this analysis, the City of Burlingame has determined that the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds in
the updated May 2011 CEQA Guidelines for project operations within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin are
the most appropriate thresholds for use to determine air quality impacts of the proposed Project.
First, Burlingame has used the May 2011 BAAQMD thresholds in previous environmental analyses under CEQA
and found them to be reasonable thresholds for assessing air quality impacts. In addition, these thresholds are
lower than the 1999 BAAQMD thresholds, and thus use of the thresholds in the May 2011 CEQA Guidelines is
more conservative. Therefore, the city concludes these thresholds are considered reasonable for use in this
analysis.
In this case, the proposed project would situate ten units on a 9,515 square foot (0.218 acre) site, which
corresponds to a density of 46 dwelling units per acre. Given that the proposed project would fall well below
the 78 dwelling units threshold specified in BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, it is not anticipated that
the project will create significant operational GHG emissions.
Climate Action Plan. Burlingame’s Climate Action Plan is designed to focus on near- and medium-term
solutions to reduce its emissions. These program and policy recommendations were developed after careful
consideration of the unique characteristics and demographics of the Burlingame community and the major
sources of emissions from Burlingame’s Community Greenhouse Inventory. The five major focus areas include:
energy use/green building, transportation/land use, solid waste, education/outreach and municipal programs.
Energy efficiency and green building programs provide the fastest and most economical means to reduce
emissions. The proposed project will be required to comply with the City of Burlingame’s Green Building
Ordinance. Verification of compliance with Section A5.203.1.1 Tier 1 (15% above Title 24) of the Green Building
Ordinance or LEED Silver shall be accepted as the methods of meeting compliance with this ordinance. By
complying with the Green Building Ordinance, the project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment nor would it conflict with
an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
34
Sources
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 2011 (Table 3-1, Operational-Related
Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Screening Level Sizes).
City of Burlingame, Climate Action Plan, Burlingame, California, June, 2009.
City of Burlingame, Building Division Memoranda, dated October 25, 2013; August 16, 2013; June 12, 2013;
February 26, 2013.
This space intentionally left blank.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
35
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Discussion
The proposed multifamily residential development would not involve the transport, use, storage or disposal of
reportable quantities of hazardous materials. Future residents would likely use and store small quantities of
household hazardous wastes (i.e., ammonia, paints, oils) which would not be considered significant. By its
residential nature, this project will not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans the City of
Burlingame may need to implement.
Prior to demolition of the existing structures on the site, a survey shall be performed to determine if there is
any presence of asbestos. The person who performs the survey must be Cal-OSHA certified. In the case of
residential buildings having four or fewer dwelling units, the owner/operator can sample and test suspected
asbestos containing materials rather than hiring a certified consultant. If asbestos is found, the BAAQMD (Bay
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
36
Area Air Quality Management District) shall be notified and the applicant shall comply with asbestos removal
requirements.
Compliance with the California Building and Fire Code requirements as amended by the City of Burlingame will
ensure that people in the new structure are not exposed to health hazards or potential health hazards. An
NPDES permit is required to ensure that runoff from the site does not contribute to pollution of adjacent
waterways.
The Fire Marshal has required that the building be equipped with a minimum NFPA 13R designed system with
electronic monitoring system and be protected by a fire alarm system, which is required to be monitored by an
approved central station. This requirement will reduce potential fire hazards for the project. Burlingame also
participates in a county-wide mutual aid program for large-scale fires and related emergencies. The City of
Burlingame's water system that serves this site is rated as a Class 3 system by the Insurance Services Offices,
and is adequate for fighting fires at this location.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 8a and 8b would ensure that fire hazards are reduced, and that
asbestos is not released during demolition of the existing structures.
Mitigation Measure 8a: That the applicant shall install fire sprinklers and a fire alarm system
monitored by an approved central station as required by the Fire Marshal prior to the final
inspection for building permit.
Mitigation Measure 8b: That prior to demolition of the existing structures on the site, a survey
shall be performed to determine if there is any presence of asbestos. The person who performs
the survey must be Cal-OSHA certified. If asbestos is found, the BAAQMD (Bay Area Air Quality
Management District) shall be immediately notified and the applicant shall comply with asbestos
removal requirements.
Sources:
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010.
City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 25 - Zoning, Burlingame, California, 2013 edition.
State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List, February 16, 2012.
City of Burlingame, Fire Division Memoranda, dated October 23, 2013; February 25, 2013.
San Mateo County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Program, San Francisco International Airport, February, 2012.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, San Mateo County Natural Hazard Disclosure (Fire), Map NHD-41, January 06, 2000.
Project plans date stamped December 30, 2013.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
37
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or Potentially Significant Impact
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation
Less Than Significant Impact No Impact
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion of siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation of seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Discussion
This project is a residential infill development project and it is not located adjacent to a waterway. The project
site is shown on the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
Community Panel No. 06081C0153E. The site is located in Flood Zone X, which is outside the 100-year flood
zone, and is not a Special Flood Hazard Area. Zone X is described as an area of moderate risk to flooding
(outside of the 100-year flood but inside the 500-year flood limits). The ground floor of the project is proposed
to be constructed about 1'-0” above average top of curb (elevation 26.38’). The subject property is relatively
flat, and all of the surface water will be required to drain to the street frontage. There is a storm drain at the
intersection of Floribunda Avenue and Ansel Avenue that connects to a 90-inch pipe that flows under Oak
Grove Avenue and ultimately to San Francisco Bay.
The project site is currently developed and largely covered in impervious surfaces. Project development would
result in a negligible change of impervious surfaces. This added impervious surface could cause an increase in
storm water runoff, but would be considered insignificant given the size of the lot and the remaining pervious
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
38
areas. However, with compliance with City Engineering standards regarding site drainage, impacts will be less
than significant.
The project will need to have an erosion and sedimentation control plan that describes BMPs, (best
management practices) that will be implemented for storm water management and erosion control. This plan
will need to be shown and describe what type of erosion control measures will be administered to prevent soil,
dirt and debris from entering storm drain systems and how these measures will be maintained. These
measures may include, but not be limited to, the following: sediment basins or traps, berms, silt fences, straw
bale, storm drain inlet protection soil blankets, and covers for soil stock piles. These measures need to be
installed to stabilize denuded areas and to maintain temporary erosion controls and sediment control
continuously until permanent erosion controls have been established. Implementation of the mitigation
measure below would reduce potential construction-related impacts to less-than-significant.
Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City NPDES (National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System) permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution from construction
activities. The project proponent will be required to ensure that all contractors implement BMP’s during
construction.
This project is subject to the state mandated Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance; compliance will be
determined by approval of a complete Outdoor Water Use Efficiency Checklist, and landscape and irrigation
design plans at time of the building permit application.
The Downtown Specific Plan has a Standard Condition of Approval for projects with subgrade structures that
requires the project sponsor to prepare a Geotechnical Study and implement mitigation measures to ensure
no permanent groundwater dewatering and reduce potential impacts on the local groundwater table and
aquifer volume (D-1). Because the proposed project does not include significant subgrade structures, this
condition would not be applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 9a would reduce potential construction-related impacts to less-than-significant.
Mitigation Measures 9b-9d would reduce stormwater and water use impacts to less-than-significant.
Mitigation Measure 9a: The project applicant shall prepare and implement a storm water
pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) for all construction activities at the project site. At a
minimum, the SWPPP shall include the following:
a) A construction schedule that restricts use of heavy equipment for excavation and grading
activities to periods where no rain is forecasted during the wet season (October 1 thru
April 30) to reduce erosion associated intense rainfall and surface runoff. The construction
schedule shall indicate a timeline for earthmoving activities and stabilization of disturbed
soils;
b) Soil stabilization techniques such as covering stockpiles, hydroseeding, or short-term
biodegradable erosion control blankets;
c) Silt fences, compost berms, wattles or some kind of sediment control measures at
downstream storm drain inlets;
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
39
d) Good site management practices to address proper management of construction materials
and activities such as but not limited to cement, petroleum products, hazardous materials,
litter/rubbish, and soil stockpile; and
e) The post-construction inspection of all drainage facilities and clearing of drainage
structures of debris and sediment.
Mitigation Measure 9b: The project shall comply with Ordinance 1503, City of Burlingame Storm
Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance.
Mitigation Measure 9c: The project shall comply with Ordinance 1845, City of Burlingame Water
Conservation in Landscape Ordinance.
Mitigation Measure 9d: That all surface storm water runoff created during construction and
future discharge from the site shall be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) standards as adopted by the City of Burlingame.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010.
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Assessing the Air Quality Impacts of Projects and Plans, May, 2011.
City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 26, Chapter 26.16 – Physical Design of Improvements, Burlingame,
California.
E. Brabb, E. Pampeyan, and M. Bonilla, Landslide Susceptibility in San Mateo County, San Mateo County,
California, 1972.
City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 18, Chapter 18.20 – Grading, Excavation, Fills , Burlingame, California.
Map of Approximate Locations of 100-year Flood Areas, from the National Flood Insurance Program Flood
Insurance Maps, October 16, 2012.
City of Burlingame, Stormwater Division Memoranda dated November 1, 2013; June 11, 2013; February 21,
2013.
City of Burlingame, Engineering Division Memorandum dated November 12, 2013; August 29, 2013; July 11,
2013; March 19, 2013.
Project plans date stamped December 30, 2013.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
40
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
Discussion
The Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan designates the project site and surrounding area as Medium-High
Residential “R-3 Base District” and the site is zoned R-3. According to the Downtown Specific Plan, the R-3 Base
District is characterized by multifamily residential including some lower intensity residential uses such as single
family homes, duplexes, apartment homes, multifamily homes, and accessory buildings. The R-3 Base District
provides a transition between higher intensity uses to the south towards the core of Downtown, and lower
intensity residential uses to the north across Oak Grove Avenue.
The proposed multifamily building is a permitted use in the R-3 Base District. The project would not result in a
fundamental conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Thus, the project would
result in a less than significant land use impact.
The Downtown Specific Plan is an element of the City’s General Plan. The Land Use Element of the General
Plan designates this site for high density residential uses, which allows for the construction of 51+ units per
acre. The ten-unit apartment building will be located on a 0.218 acre site, which results in a density of 46 units
per acre, which is just below the range established by the high density residential General Plan designation.
Therefore, the project would not physically divide an established community, and would result in a less than
significant impact. The project site is not located within a habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 25 - Zoning, Burlingame, California, 2013 edition.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
41
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
11. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
Discussion
According to the San Mateo County General Plan, Mineral Resources Map, the project site does not contain
any known mineral resources. Furthermore, according to the State of California Department of Mines and
Geology, Mineral Resources Zones and Resources Sectors Map, the project site is located in an area designated
as MRZ-1. This designation refers to an area “where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral
deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence.” Therefore,
implementation of the project would not impact mineral resources.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010.
San Mateo County, General Plan, October 18, 2010.
E. Brabb, F. Taylor, and G. Miller, Geologic, Scenic and Historic Points of Interest in San Mateo County,
Department of Interior, 1982.
State of California Department of Mines and Geology. 2005. State of California Department of Mines and
Geology, Mineral Resources Zones and Resource Sectors Map.
http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/minerals/index.htm
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
42
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
12. NOISE
Would the project result in:
a) Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne vibration
levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Discussion
The project site has been developed with a residential use for more than 100 years. Since there is a net of five
residential units being added, the proposed project will not significantly increase the existing ambient noise
levels. The proposed project will be required to comply with current construction standards, including
increased insulation, which also provides for noise attenuation.
Because the proposed project is a multifamily residential land use, Title 24 of the California Code of
Regulations will require a qualified acoustical engineer to prepare a design level acoustical study as a
prerequisite to building permit issuance for any future multifamily residential development applications where
noise levels could exceed 65 decibels. The study shall include post-construction monitoring to ensure that
interior ambient noise levels for multifamily housing are at or below 45 dBA.
Construction of the proposed condominium will not require pile driving or other significant vibration causing
construction activity. The project does not include any permanent operational activity that would result in
excessive or perceptible vibration, and the operational impact of the project on increased vibration levels
would be less than significant.
In addition, the site is located outside the designated noise-impacted area from San Francisco International
Airport.
The proposed project includes a parking lift in each garage to allow two vehicles to be parked in one space.
There is further discussion of the parking lifts in Section 16 – Transportation/Traffic including mitigation
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
43
measures. The noise associated with a parking lift is similar to that of an automatic garage door opener.
Section 16 includes a mitigation measure requiring sound absorption materials to be used to minimize any
excessive noise from the operation of the parking lifts to ensure that noise impacts are less-than-significant
(Mitigation Measure 16b).
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 12a and 12b would reduce temporary construction noise impacts to
less-than-significant levels. Mitigation Measure 12c would ensure that interior noise levels would be reduced
to less-than-significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 12a: That all construction shall be done during the hours of construction
imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; these hours are between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
p.m. on weekdays, 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on
Sundays. There shall be no construction on holidays.
Mitigation Measure 12b: To reduce daytime noise impacts due to construction, the project
sponsor shall require construction contractors to implement the following measures:
a) Equipment and trucks used for project construction shall use the best available noise
control techniques (e.g., improved mufflers, equipment redesign, use of intake silencers,
ducts, engine enclosures, and acoustically-attenuating shields or shrouds, wherever
feasible).
b) Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from adjacent receptors as possible, and
they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, incorporate insulation
barriers, or other measures to the extent feasible.
c) Loaded trucks and other vibration-generating equipment shall avoid areas of the project
site that are located near existing residential uses to the maximum extent compatible
with project construction goals.
Mitigation Measure 12c: That the method of construction and materials used in construction
shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed
45 dBA in any sleeping area.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010.
City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 25 - Zoning, Burlingame, California.
San Mateo County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan, San Francisco International Airport, February, 2012.
Chief Building Official Memos dated October 25, 2013; August 16, 2013; June 12, 2013; February 26, 2013.
Project plans date stamped December 30, 2013, the Planning Division.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
44
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
13. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Discussion
This site and the surrounding area are planned for medium-high and high density residential uses. The
proposed infill residential development conforms to the City of Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan, General
Plan and Zoning Code regulations and does not represent any alteration to the planned land use in the area.
The project is consistent with the City's Housing Element because it is providing an increase in housing in an
area designated for multiple family residential uses. The proposed project will remove five housing units and
replace them with ten condominium units, which will create more housing by adding a net of five units on the
site.
One affordable unit is required to be included in the project per the City’s Inclusionary Zoning regulations. The
affordable unit must be maintained at that market rate for ten years. Although the project would require the
relocation of residents of the existing dwellings onsite, this is not considered to be a substantial amount of
housing. The project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people that would
necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere; therefore, the impact is considered less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
Sources
Project plans date stamped December 30, 2013.
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame City Council, Housing Element, City of Burlingame, Burlingame, California, 2010.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
45
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
14. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
Discussion
Because the project is infill, represents an insignificant increase in the total population of the City, and is
located on an already developed site, the existing public and governmental services in the area have capacities
that can accommodate proposed net increase of five dwelling units.
Fire protection services in the City of Burlingame are provided by the Central County Fire Department, which
also serves the Town of Hillsborough. Three stations are located in Burlingame: Station 34 at 799 California
Drive, Station 35 at 2832 Hillside Drive, and Station 36 at 1399 Rollins Road. As part of the permitting process,
the Central County Fire Department would review project plans before permits are issued to ensure
compliance with all applicable fire and building code standards and to ensure that adequate fire and life safety
measures are incorporated into the project in compliance with all applicable state and city fire safety
regulations. Because the proposed project is not anticipated to generate additional demand for fire protection
services, and would not result in the need for new or expanded facilities, the project’s potential impact on fire
protection services would be less than significant.
Police protection services are provided in the City of Burlingame by the Burlingame Police Department, located
at 1111 Trousdale Drive. The proposed project would slightly increase the number of occupied units onsite
from five to ten. Therefore, the project would not result in an increased demand for police services or require
the expansion or construction of police facilities. The project’s potential impact on police services would be
less than significant.
Students in the City of Burlingame are served by two school districts: Burlingame School District (BSD) for
grades K-8 and San Mateo Union High School District (SMUHSD) for grades 9-12. The proposed project would
only slightly increase the number of occupied housing units onsite from five to ten; it is anticipated that the
potential number of school-age children would only increase slightly. Therefore, any students generated by the
project would be accommodated by the existing capacity of the two districts, resulting in a less than significant
impact.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
46
The City of Burlingame is served by several parks and recreation facilities, including 13 parks and playgrounds,
an aquatic center, and a golf and soccer center. Since the proposed project would only cause a slight increase
in the number of occupied units onsite, the project would not generate additional demand for parks or other
public facilities and therefore the impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame, Fire Division Memorandum, dated October 23, 2013 and February 25, 2013.
City of Burlingame Website, www.burlingame.org
This space intentionally left blank.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
47
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
15. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Discussion
The proposed project does not replace or destroy any existing recreational facilities, nor does it displace any
proposed or planned recreational opportunities for the City of Burlingame. The sites involved in this project
are not presently zoned or used for recreational purposes. Since the proposed project would only cause a
slight increase in the number of occupied units onsite, the project would not generate additional demand for
parks or other recreation facilities. Therefore, impacts to recreation would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
48
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
16. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume-to-
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Discussion
The site is an interior lot on Floribunda Avenue, between El Camino Real and California Drive. California Drive
is a four-lane arterial with on-street parking and traffic signals at key intersections (including Oak Grove
Avenue, one block north of Floribunda Avenue). The intersection of Floribunda Avenue and California Drive is
controlled with a stop sign for Floribunda Avenue traffic (no stop for California Drive traffic), with left and right
turns permitted from Floribunda Avenue onto California Drive.
El Camino Real is a regional arterial situated approximately 0.2 miles west of the project site. It has four-lanes
through most of Burlingame, and is typically six lanes in neighboring jurisdictions. There are traffic signals at
key intersections including Floribunda Avenue and Oak Grove Avenue. On-street parking is prohibited on El
Camino Real.
The Burlingame Caltrain station is located approximately 0.5 miles from the project site. Caltrain provides
service with 20- to 30- minute headways during the weekday AM and PM commute hours.
SamTrans bus lines operate on both California Drive and El Camino Real, with bus stops within walking distance
of the project site. SamTrans bus lines provide access to the Millbrae Intermodal Station, which in turn
provides access to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) service to San Francisco, Daly City and the East Bay.
SamTrans provides service with 15- minute headways on El Camino Real during the weekday AM and PM
commute hours.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
49
Trip Generation: The trip generation rates for multiple family development in the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, ninth edition, 2012, was used to analyze the proposed project. The
peak hour traffic expected from the existing five units was compared to the peak hour traffic from the
proposed ten residential condominium units. The trip generation estimates show that the project would result
in a net increase of two AM peak-hour trip and two PM peak hour trip. Based on this analysis, the traffic
impacts on the major arterial roadway from this project are minimal.
TABLE 1 – NET CHANGE IN VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION DUE TO PROPOSED PROJECT
Land Use Size Daily AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Apartments
(ITE Code 220)
5 units 34 3 3
Residential Condo/Townhouse
(ITE Code 230)
10 units 58 5 5
Net Change +24 +2 +2
SOURCE: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 9th edition, 2012
The proposed project will not create a substantial increase in the traffic generation in the area. All arterial,
collector, and local roadway systems in the City have the capacity to accommodate the incremental traffic or
trip generation produced by the proposed increase of five dwelling units for this project.
Site Access: The site is currently served by an existing driveway along the westerly property line, serving the
garage at the rear of the property. The applicant proposes to replace the existing driveway and curb cut with a
new curb cut and driveway accessing the below grade parking at the east side of the site.
The driveway leading to the below-grade parking area is proposed to be 12'-0" wide. The ITE Guidelines for
Driveway Location and Design recommends a width for multiple family residential uses of 10 feet for one-way
driveways and 20 feet for two-way driveways. The Burlingame Municipal Code limits the amount of frontage
to be used for driveways to 25% of the property length at the street (in this case 12'-5" for the 49.63’property
frontage). In addition, the Burlingame Municipal Code requires a minimum driveway width 12’-0” for parking
areas with not more than thirty (30) vehicles (13 spaces proposed with this project). The City's traffic engineer
has reviewed this proposal and determined that the 12’-0” driveway width is adequate, given that Floribunda
Avenue is a local street with low traffic volumes.
On-site Circulation and Parking Supply: Within the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan, the parking
requirement for two-bedroom units is 1.5 spaces per unit. Therefore fifteen parking spaces are required for
the residents of the units plus one service vehicle parking space, for a total of 16 on-site parking spaces.
The property is an existing lot with a public street frontage of 49.63’ where 55’ is required. Given the narrow
width of the lot, accommodating all of the required parking spaces and backup areas is challenging. The
application includes a request for Variance from parking dimension standards to allow parking lifts to satisfy
parking requirements for the residential units.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
50
The proposed project includes parking lifts to provide four of the required parking spaces. By relocating spaces
that would have been on the ground, the parking lifts also provide room to accommodate a service vehicle
space on the site. The remaining spaces are provided in the below-grade parking garage. As proposed, the
project provides the required 16 parking spaces, including the four spaces provided using parking lifts.
The Burlingame Municipal Code does not include specifications for parking lifts, so the City currently does not
have a standard mechanism for review and approval. However, as a policy the Downtown Specific Plan
encourages “creative approaches” to providing on-site parking including parking lifts. The parking lifts are
proposed as a mitigation measure for the requested parking variance. Other Bay Area communities including
neighboring San Mateo have approved similar residential projects with parking lift; the mitigations (below) are
based on the Conditions of Approval imposed by other jurisdictions on similar projects and would reduce
potential parking impacts to less-than-significant.
Vertical Clearance/Ceiling Height. The applicant has provided specifications for Klaus parking lifts (date
stamped November 11, 2013). Klaus lifts have been common in local installations, including projects in San
Mateo. There is a range of lift models, able to accommodate a range of passenger cars as well as station
wagons, vans, and sport utility vehicles (SUVs). Table 2 (below) shows the range of Klaus lifts, including the
required ceiling clearances.
TABLE 2 – KLAUS PARKING LIFTS DIMENSION REQUIREMENTS
Vehicle Height (inches)
Type/Model
Number
Required Height / Ceiling
Clearance (inches) Upper Lower
Klaus 2061-160 125.98 59.06 59.06
Klaus 2061-170 129.92 59.06 62.99
Klaus 2061-180 133.86 59.06 66.93
Klaus 2061-190 137.80 59.06 70.87
Klaus 2061-200 141.73 59.06 74.80
Klaus 2061-210 145.67 59.06 78.74
SOURCE: Klaus Multiparking Product Data Sheet, “Single Vario 2061”, date stamped November 11, 2013.
The proposed project has a floor-to-ceiling garage height of 144 inches (12’-0”) in the area where the parking
lifts will be located. This height would be sufficient to accommodate Klaus lift #26061-190, which requires a
clearance of 137.80 inches (11’- 5”). This lift would be able to accommodate a medium size SUV on the lower
level of the lift (vehicle up to 70.87 inches tall) and a standard vehicle on the upper level (vehicle up to 59.06
inches tall). For reference, a 2014 Ford Explorer has a height of 70.4 inches and a 2013 Honda Accord has a
height of 57.7 inches and, so both vehicles would fit. Table 3 on the follow page provides vehicle height
dimensions for a range of vehicle sizes.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
51
TABLE 3 – TYPICAL VEHICLE HEIGHTS AND WEIGHTS
Vehicle Type Vehicle Height
(inches) Curb Weight (lbs)
Mid-Sized Sedan (Honda Accord) 57.7 3,192
Large Sedan (Lincoln Town Car) 59.0 4,345
Tall Passenger Vehicle/Crossover (Ford C-Max) 63.8 3,859
Minivan (Chrysler Town & Country) 67.9 4,652
Small SUV (Honda CRV) 65.1 3,305
Mid-Sized SUV (Ford Explorer) 70.4 4,534
Full-Sized SUV (Full-Sized Range Rover) 72.3 4,918
Large SUV Chevrolet Tahoe
Chevrolet Suburban
76.9
76.8
5,467
5,680
SOURCE: Manufacturers’ websites technical specifications.
Based on the dimensions of the range of vehicles that residents could reasonably expect to be accommodated
in their garages, there may be instances where lifts are not utilized in order to accommodate a larger vehicle.
For example, a resident may choose to park a single SUV or minivan in their parking space rather than use the
lift to park two standard passenger cars. The garages as proposed have sufficient width and depth for the
range of vehicles described, so a large vehicle could be parked if the lift is not utilized. Implementation of the
mitigation measure below would reduce potential parking impacts to less-than-significant.
Weight Capability. For all of the lift models, the bottom space of the lift can accommodate a vehicle weight up
to 2500 kg (5512 lbs), and the upper/lift space can accommodate up to 2000 kg (4409 lbs). As shown in Table
3 (above) cars as large as a Lincoln Town Car could be accommodated on the upper spaces of the racks.
Bicycle Parking: The Downtown Specific Plan includes a Standard Condition of Approval to provide bicycle
parking as one of several measures to reduce potentially significant greenhouse gas emissions to a less-than-
significant level (E-5). The plan requires adequate secure bicycle parking at a minimum ratio of one bicycle
spot for every 20 vehicle spots. The proposed project includes a secured bicycle parking area to accommodate
10 bicycles in the below-grade parking garage, which significantly exceeds the requirements of the condition.
Mitigation Measures
Based on the conclusions of the analysis, the impact on parking supply is considered to be less-than-significant.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 16a-16e would reduce any parking impacts to less-than-significant
levels.
Mitigation Measure 16a: The project sponsor shall obtain approval for a Parking Variance for
satisfying off-street parking requirements with parking lifts.
Mitigation Measure 16b: Klaus #26061-190 (or comparable) parking lifts shall be installed in the
garage of each residential unit, with the following conditions:
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
52
a) The parking lifts shall be properly illuminated to provide safety for easy loading and
unloading, while not causing excessive glare.
b) Sound absorption materials will be used to minimize any excessive noise from the
operation of the parking lifts.
c) Signage shall be installed in each garage explaining the proper use of the lifts and
emergency contact information for lift maintenance or problems.
d) The applicant shall be required to work with the manufacturer during construction to
review issues related to installation of the parking lifts and to receive operational and
safety training of the parking lifts.
e) The final design of the parking lifts shall be subject to the review and approval of the
Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure 16c: A minimum of sixteen (16) parking spaces shall be permanently
maintained on the same lot with the building, including the spaces provided by the lifts
accommodating four vehicles and the delivery vehicle space.
Mitigation Measure 16d: Project sponsors shall provide adequate secure bicycle parking in the
Plan Area at a minimum ratio of one bicycle spot for every 20 vehicle spots.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010.
City of Burlingame. 2010. City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, File No. ND-555-P, Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan. May, 2010.
City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 25 - Zoning, Burlingame, California, 2013 edition.
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 9th edition, 2012.
San Mateo County Congestion Management Program, 1997.
San Mateo County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan, San Francisco International Airport, December, 1996.
Klaus Multiparking Product Data Sheet, “Single Vario 2061”, date stamped November 11, 2013.
Project plans date stamped December 30, 2013.
53
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Discussion
The proposed project will be served by existing utilities in place in the area, or will be required to connect to
these systems. All new utility connections to serve the site and that are affected by the development will be
installed to meet current code standards; sewer laterals from the main on the site to serve the new structure
will be checked and replaced if necessary. Abandoned utilities and hookups will be removed.
The estimate for wastewater generated by the proposed project is approximately 4,000 gallons per day (GPD)
or 400 GPD per dwelling unit. There is an 8-inch sanitary sewer line in Floribunda Drive that runs to the
wastewater treatment plant.
The City of Burlingame purchases all of its water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).
Water is supplied to the City by several SFPUC pipelines that are connected to six metered connections at
various locations throughout the City. The applicant estimates the project demand for water as approximately
1400 gallons per day (GPD) or 140 GPD per dwelling unit. The site is tied into an existing 6-inch water line
along Floribunda Avenue, which extends from 12-inch water lines at Primrose Road and Ansel Road, and a 10-
inch water line at California Drive. There is adequate capacity in the system to accommodate the proposed
increase of five units on this lot.
There is a storm drain at the intersection of Ansel and Floribunda Avenues that connects to a 90-inch pipe that
flows under Oak Grove Avenue and ultimately to San Francisco Bay.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
54
The City Engineer has indicated that there is adequate capacity in the sanitary sewer, water and storm
drainage systems to accommodate the incremental increase of five dwelling units. Therefore, the project’s
impact to wastewater treatment requirements and facilities would be less than significant.
The current solid waste service provider is Recology, which hauls waste collected in Burlingame to the San
Carlos Transfer Station and the Recyclery of San Mateo County for sorting then disposal at Ox Mountain
Landfill. Demand for solid waste disposal services generated by the project could be adequately served by
existing capacity at the transfer station and landfill and the project would comply with all applicable
regulations related to solid waste; therefore, the impact is considered less than significant.
Construction activities would generate waste during the construction phase. The general contractor would be
required to recycle and to reduce the waste stream and transport and recycle the construction waste
separately. After reclamation and recycling from demolition, solid waste generated during operation of the
project would be typical for residential use, and would not be considered substantial.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
Sources
The City of Burlingame General Plan, Burlingame, California, 2010, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments.
City of Burlingame, Engineering Division Memorandum dated December 18, 2012.
City of Burlingame, Stormwater Division Memoranda dated November 1, 2013; June 11, 2013; February 21,
2013.
Project Plans date stamped December 30, 2013.
Recology San Mateo County, www.recologysanmateocounty.com , site accessed December, 2013.
Initial Study 1433 Floribunda Avenue
55
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Significant or Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than Significant
Impact No Impact
18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten
to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulative considerable? (“Cumulative
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Discussion
The project does not have the potential to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Any potential short-term increases
in potential effects to the environment during construction are mitigated to a less than significant level, as
described throughout the Initial Study.
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the environmental analysis in this Initial Study was
conducted to determine if there were any project-specific effects that are peculiar to the project or its site. No
project-specific significant effects peculiar to the project or its site were identified that could not be mitigated
to a less than significant level. The proposed project would contribute to environmental effects in the areas of
aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, temporary increases in construction-generated
dust and noise, a temporary increase in sedimentation and water quality effects during construction, potential
geology/seismic considerations with new development, and short-term traffic impacts during construction.
Mitigation measures incorporated herein mitigate any potential contribution to cumulative impacts associated
with these environmental issues. Therefore, the proposed project does not have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable.
The project may have significant adverse effects on human beings in the areas of air quality, noise and with
geologic/seismic considerations with new development. Mitigation measures identified in this Initial Study
would reduce the effects to a less than significant level.
TOBY LEVYAS NOTEDEXTERIORRENDERINGS A3.3RENDERING: LOOKING NORTH-EAST DOWN FLORIBUNDA AVENUE1RENDERING: LOOKING SOUTH-WEST DOWN FLORIBUNDA AVENUE2CONTACT:SCALE:(415) 777-0561 P(415) 777-5117 F1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUEAPN: 029 112 050BURLINGAME, CAPROJECT NO. 2017-01DATESET ISSUEPLANNING COMMISSION10-16-20171433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA NOTICE:These drawings and specificationsare the property and copyright ofLevy Design Partners Inc. and shallnot be used except by writtenagreement with Levy Design PartnersPLANNING COMMISSION REV 0103-02-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0205-04-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0308-27-2018
1433FLORIBUNDA43"=1'-0"WINDOW DETAIL: RECESSED WINDOW SILLCEMENT PLASTER33"=1'-0"WINDOW DETAIL: RECESSED WINDOW HEADTOBY LEVYAS NOTEDELEVATIONS:EXTERIOR A3.1ELEVATION: PROJECT EAST21/8"=1'-0"ELEVATION: FLORIBUNDA AVENUE ELEVATION (PROJECT NORTH) 11/8"=1'-0"CONTACT:SCALE:(415) 777-0561 P(415) 777-5117 F1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUEAPN: 029 112 050BURLINGAME, CAPROJECT NO. 2017-01DATESET ISSUEPLANNING COMMISSION10-16-20171433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA NOTICE:These drawings and specificationsare the property and copyright ofLevy Design Partners Inc. and shallnot be used except by writtenagreement with Levy Design PartnersPLANNING COMMISSION REV 0103-02-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0205-04-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0308-27-2018
TOBY LEVYAS NOTEDELEVATIONS:EXTERIOR A3.2ELEVATION: PROJECT SOUTH11/8"=1'-0"ELEVATION: PROJECT WEST 21/8"=1'-0"CONTACT:SCALE:(415) 777-0561 P(415) 777-5117 F1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUEAPN: 029 112 050BURLINGAME, CAPROJECT NO. 2017-01DATESET ISSUEPLANNING COMMISSION10-16-20171433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA NOTICE:These drawings and specificationsare the property and copyright ofLevy Design Partners Inc. and shallnot be used except by writtenagreement with Levy Design PartnersPLANNING COMMISSION REV 0103-02-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0205-04-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0308-27-2018
TOBY LEVYAS NOTEDSECTIONS:BUILDING A4.1BUILDING SECTION11/8"=1'-0"BUILDING SECTION21/8"=1'-0"CONTACT:SCALE:(415) 777-0561 P(415) 777-5117 F1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUEAPN: 029 112 050BURLINGAME, CAPROJECT NO. 2017-01DATESET ISSUEPLANNING COMMISSION10-16-20171433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA NOTICE:These drawings and specificationsare the property and copyright ofLevy Design Partners Inc. and shallnot be used except by writtenagreement with Levy Design PartnersPLANNING COMMISSION REV 0103-02-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0205-04-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0308-27-2018
⅊FLORIBUNDA AVENUE⅊TOBY LEVYAS NOTEDSITE PLAN:NEW A1.1SITE PLAN: NEW11/8"=1'-0"CONTACT:SCALE:(415) 777-0561 P(415) 777-5117 F1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUEAPN: 029 112 050BURLINGAME, CAPROJECT NO. 2017-01DATESET ISSUEPLANNING COMMISSION10-16-20171433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA NOTICE:These drawings and specificationsare the property and copyright ofLevy Design Partners Inc. and shallnot be used except by writtenagreement with Levy Design PartnersPLANNING COMMISSION REV 0103-02-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0205-04-2018PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0308-27-2018
FLORIBUNDA AVENUE(2) ACE RUB AS PER
CITY PLANTING &
IRRIGATION DETAILS.
(10) CAR CAL
(4) DOD VIS
(19) CAR DIV
(18) TRA JAS
(24) CAR TES(32) SEN MAN
(29) CAR TES
(20) SEN AMN
(1) FRA MOU
(3) AGA MAT
(3) AGA BLU
(16) CAR CAL
(54) CAR TES
(3) LAG NAT
(9) OLE LIT
(15) STI TEN
(11) OLE LIT
(20) CAR CAL
(19) STI TEN
(14) STI TEN
(13) CAR CAL
(11) TRA JAS(27) STI TEN
(11) CAR TES
(2) POD GRAADASTANDARDLOBBY
⅊
UNIT 1
(25) CAR TES
(29) CAR TES
(32) FES ELI
PLANT LIST
TREES
SYMBOL BOTANICAL COMMON SIZE QUANTITY FORM
ACE RUB ACER RUBRUM RED MAPLE 24" BOX 2 TREE FORM
DOD VIS DODONAEA VISCOSA HOP BUSH 24" BOX 4 TREE FORM
LAG NAT LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA 'NATCHEZ'WHITE-FLOWERING CRAPE MYRTLE 24" BOX 3 MULTI-TRUNK
POD GRA PODOCARPUS GRACILIOR FERN PINE (TREE FORM)24" BOX 2 TREE FORM
SHRUBS / PERENNIALS
SYMBOL BOTANICAL COMMON SIZE QUANTITY
AGA BLU AGAVE 'BLUE FLAME'BLUE FLAME CENTURY PLANT 5 GAL 3
AGA MAT AGAVE 'MATEO'MATTHEW'S AGAVE 5 GAL 3
CAR CAL CARPENTERIA CALIFORNICA BUSH ANEMONE 5 GAL 59
FRA MOU FRAGULA CALIFORNICA 'MOUND SAN BRUNO'MOUND SAN BRUNO COFFEEBERRY 5 GAL 1
OLE LIT OLEA 'LITTLE OLLIE'LITTLE OLIVE OLIVE 5 GAL 20
GRASSES & GRASS-LIKE PLANTS
SYMBOL BOTANICAL COMMON SIZE QUANTITY
CAR DIV CAREX DIVULSA (TUMULICOLA)BERKELEY SEDGE 1 GAL 19
CAR TES CAREX TESTA CEA ORANGE SEDGE 1 GAL 147
FES ELI FESTUCA GLAUCA 'ELIJAH BLUE'ELIJAH BLUE FESCUE 1 GAL 32
STI TEN STIPA TENUISSIMA MEXICAN FEATHER GRASS 1 GAL 75
GROUND COVERS
SYMBOL BOTANICAL COMMON SIZE QUANTITY
SEN MAN SENECIO MANDRALISCAE BLUE CHALK STICKS 1 GAL 30
VINES
SYMBOL BOTANICAL COMMON SIZE QUANTITY
TRA JAS TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES STAR JASMINE 1 GAL 29
1 INCORPORATE COMPOST AT A RATE OF AT LEAST FOUR (4) CUBIC YARDS PER 1,000 SQ. FT. TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES INTO PLANTING AREA.
COMPOST SHALL BE "CLODBREAKER", AS AVAILABLE AT AMERICAN SOIL & STONE, RICHMOND, CA.
2 PROVIDE AND INSTALL A 3-INCH LAYER OF MULCH ON ALL EXPOSED SOIL SURFACES OF PLANTING AREAS. MULCH SHALL BE "FOREST FLOOR", AS
AVAILABLE AT AMERICAN SOIL & STONE, RICHMOND, CA.
PLANT NOTES
CONTACT:
SCALE:
1433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUE
APN: 029 112 050
BURLINGAME, CA
PROJECT NO. 2017-01
DATE SET ISSUE
PLANNING COMMISSION10-16-20171433 FLORIBUNDA AVENUEBURLINGAME, CAR
57C
5INR
A
EP
D L NA
HCNSET
ASCLIE Signature
Date
12.31.2019
Renewal Date
C
T
E
OF ILA F O
ER
RIT OS HP
3R
OF
D
SD AC
AETTCHI
CHRIS FORD
CFLA
CRLA # 3557
NORTHNORTH
PROJECTTRUE
Email: Chris@CFLA.biz
Telephone: (510) 601.8022
PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0103-02-2018
74 Dudley Avenue
Piedmont, CA 94611
PLANNING COMMISSION REV 0205-04-2018
08-27-2018 PLANNING COMMISSION REV 03
2
1
3
PLANTING
L2.1
PLAN
1/8"=1'-0"
0 4'8'16'
3
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 1/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 2/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 3/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 4/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 5/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 6/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 7/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 8/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 9/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 10/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 11/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 12/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 13/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 14/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 15/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 16/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 17/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
8/28/2019 18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html 18/18
18-687 - 133 Crescent Ave - Attachments /181
(N) LANDSCAPING(N) LANDSCAPINGE.V.(N) TERRACE(N) GARAGE(N) SINGLE FAMILY2 STORY HOME(REMOVE)(PROTECT)(REMOVE)(REMOVE)(REMOVAL BY)SEPARATE PERMITPROTECT (E)NEIGHBORS FENCECONTRACTOR TOWORK W/ NEIGHBORDURING CONSTRUCTIONProposed Site Plan
A1.0GENERAL NOTES & SCOPE1. PROTECT ALL EXISTING LANDSCAPING AND TREES DURING CONSTRUCTION,CONSULT ARBORIST AS REQUIRED.2. NO EXISTING TREES OVER 48" IN CIRCUMFERENCE AT 54" FROM BASE OF TREEMAY BE REMOVED WITHOUT A PROTECTED TREE PERMIT FROM THE PARKSDIVISION (558-7330) NO TREES ARE TO BE REMOVED FOR THIS PROJECT.3. WATER CONSERVATION IN LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE NOT REQUIRED SINCELANDSCAPE WILL NOT BE REHABILITATED AS NOTED ON PLANS.4. A PLAN HAS BEEN DEVELOPED, AND WILL BE IMPLEMENTED, TO MANAGE STORMWATER DRAINAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION. CGC 4.106.2 & CGC 4.106.35. ALL SPRINKLER DRAINAGE SHALL BE PLACED INTO LANDSCAPING AREASARBORIST NOTES ON TREES1. PROTECT ALL STREET TREES DURING CONSTRUCTION2. ONLY FRONT REDWOOD TREE IS APPROVED FOR REMOVAL. THE REAR REDWOOD TREE SHOULDBE TRIMMED AND MAINTAINED BY A QUALIFIED TREE SERVICE COMPANY, AND IRRIGATION SHOULDBE PROVIDED AS RECOMMENDED IN THE ARBORIST REPORT.1PUBLIC WORKS NOTES1. A REMOVE/REPLACE UTILITIES ENCROACHMENT PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO (1) REPLACE ALLCURB, GUTTER, DRIVEWAY AND SIDEWALK FRONTING SITE, (2) PLUG ALL EXISTING SANITARYSEWER LATERAL CONNECTIONS AND INSTALL A NEW 4" LATERAL, (3) ALL WATER LINECONNECTIONS TO CITY WATER MAINS FOR SERVICES OF FIRE LINE ARE TO BE INSTALLED PERCITY STANDARD PROCEDURES AND SPECIFICATION. (4) AND OTHER UNDERGROUND UTILITYWORKS WITHIN CITY'S RIGHT-OF WAY.2. ALL WATER LINES CONNECTIONS TO CITY WATER MAINS FOR SERVICES OR FIRE LINEPROTECTION ARE TO BE INSTALLED PER CITY STANDARD PROCEDURES AND MATERIALSPECIFICATIONS. CONTACT THE CITY WATER DEPARTMENT FOR CONNECTION FEES. IFREQUIRED, ALL FIRE SERVICES AND SERVICES 2" AND OVER WILL BE INSTALLED BY BUILDER.ALL UNDERGROUND FIRE SERVICE CONNECTIONS SHALL BE SUBMITTED AS SEPARATEUNDERGROUND FIRE SERVICE PERMIT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.STORMWATER CHECKLIST NOTES1. DIRECT ROOF RUNOFF INTO CISTERNS OR RAIN BARRELS AND USE RAINWATER FORIRRIGATION OR OTHER NON-POTABLE USE.2. DIRECT RUNOFF FROM SIDEWALKS, WALKWAYS, AND/OR PATIOS ONTO VEGETATED AREAS.3. DIRECT RUNOFF FROM DRIVEWAYS AND/OR UNCOVERED PARKING LOTS ONTO VEGETATEDAREAS.4. CONSTRUCT SIDEWALKS, WALKWAYS AND/OR PATIOS WITH PERMEABLE SURFACES.5. USE MICOR-DETENTION, INCLUDING DISTRIBUTED LANDSCAPE-BASED DETENTION.6. PROTECT SENSITIVE AREAS, INCLUDING WETLAND AND RIPARIAN AREAS, AND MINIMIZECHANGES TO THE NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY.7. MARK ON SITE INLETS WITH THE WORDS "NO DUMPING! FLOWS TO BAY" OR EQUIVALENT.8. (A.) RETAIN EXISTING VEGETATION AS PRACTICABLE (B) SELECT DIVERSE SPECIESAPPROPRIATE TO THE SITE. INCLUDE PLANTS THAT ARE PEST- AND/OR DISEASE-RESISTANT,DROUGHT-TOLERANT, AND/OR ATTRACT BENEFICIAL INSECTS. (C) MINIMIZE USE OF PESTICIDESAND QUICK -RELEASE FERTILIZERS.9. DESIGN FOR DISCHARGE OF FIRE SPRINKLERS TEST WATER TO LANDSCAPE OR SANITARYSEWER.10. TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROLS TO STABILIZE ALL DENUDED AREAS UNTIL PERMANENTEROSION CONTROLS ARE ESTABLISHED.11. DELINEATE WITH FIELD MARKERS THE FOLLOWING AREAS: CLEARING LIMITS, EASEMENTS,SETBACKS, SENSITIVE OR CRITICAL AREAS,BUFFER ZONES, TREES TO BE PROTECTED ANDRETAINED, DRAINAGE COURSES.12. PROVIDE NOTES, SPECIFICATIONS OR ATTACHEMENTS DESCRIBING THE FOLLOWING: (A)CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS,INCLUDE INSPECTION FREQUENCY; (B) METHODS AND SCHEDULE FOR GRADING, EXCAVATION,FILLING, CLEARING OF VEGETATION , AND STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED ORCLEARED MATERIAL, (C) SPECIFICATIONS FOR VEGETATIVE COVER & MULCH, INCLUDEMETHODS AND SCHEDULES FOR PLANTING AND FERTILIZATION (D) PROVISIONS FORTEMPORARY AND OR PERMANENT IRRIGATION13. PERFORM CLEARING AND EARTH MOVING ACTIVITIES ONLY DURING DRY WEATHER14. USE SEDIMENT CONTROLS OF FILTRATION TO REMOVE SEDIMENT WHEN DEWATERING ANDOBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS.15. PROTECT ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS IN VICINITY OF SITE USING SEDIMENT CONTROLS (E.G.BERMS, SOCKS, FIBER ROLLS OR FILTERS)16. TRAP SEDIMENT ON-SITE, USING BMP'S SUCH AS SEDIMENT BASINS OR TRAPS, EARTHENDIKES OR BERMS, SILT FENCES, CHECK DAMS, COMPOST BLANKETS OR JUTE MATS, COVERSFOR SOIL STOCK PILES, ETC.17. DIVERT ON-SITE RUNOFF AROUND EXPOSED AREAS; DIVERT OFF-STE RUNOFF AROUND THESITE (E.G SWALES AND DIKES)18. PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND UNDISTURBED AREAS FROM CONSTRUCTIONIMPACTS USING VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, SEDIMENT BARRIERS OR FILTERS,DIKES,MULCHING OR OTHER MEASURES AS APPROPRIATE.19. LIMIT CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUTES AND STABILIZE DESIGNATED ACCESS POINTS.20. NO CLEANING, FUELING OR MAINTAINING VEHICLES ON-SITE, EXCEPT IN A DESIGNATED AREAWHERE WASHWATER IS CONTAINED AND TREATED.21. STORE, HANDLE AND DISPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS/WASTES PROPERLY TOPREVENT CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.22. CONTRACTOR SHALL TRAIN AND PROVIDE INSTRUCTION TO ALLEMPLOYEES/SUBCONTRACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION BMP'S.23. CONTROL AND PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF ALL POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS, INCLUDINGPAVEMENT CUTTINGWASTES,PAINTS,CONCRETE, PETROLEUMPRODUCTS,CHEMICALS,WASHWATEROR SEDIMENTS, RINSE WATER FROM ARCHITECTURALCOPPER, AND NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES TO STORM DRAINS AND WATERCOURSES. Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:
001002003004005006
Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM Ph: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114MR.+ MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :06-15-2017Drawn :C.HARRISON17_023Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 028-293-060
Contractor :
PLANNING SET
Zoning: R1
MR. + MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Gambrioli Developments Contact: Greg Gambrioli 2415 Summit Drive Hillsborough, CA 94010 P: 650-333-6844
Lot Size: -
PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENTS 06-04-18PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENTS 08-16-182
9'-6"TOP PLATE (63.50)2ND FLR(SUB. FLR)2ND FLR T.O.P. 8'-6"HEADER 8'-0" (62.00')8'-0"
(E) LOT LINEMAIN FLR F.F. (54.00')HEADER 6'-10"6'-10"(N) DRIVEWAY12'-0"45°D.H.E. (53.99')30'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT (82.12')40 YR ARCH.ASPHALT DIAMONDSHINGLESG.S.M. GUTTERS(PAINTED)VERTICAL WOODCORNER TRIM "windsorONE"WOOD CEDAR SHINGLE(PAINTED) CUSTOM LAYOUTSTAGGERED SEE PHOTOGRADE (53.00')SIERRA PACIFIC WOOD+ALUM. CLADWINDOWS W/ S.D.L. (PUTTY STYLE)CASEMENT WINDOWSTO BE LEADED ANDPRODUCED BY LOCAL ARTISAN"FRANK"(E) LOT LINE(N) 12" DEEP PLANTINGPOCKETS FOR PRIVACYLANDSCAPE(N) 6' REDWOOD FENCE(7' SETBACK)7'-0"3"1'-0"8'-0"46'-0"67'-5"(N) 6' REDWOOD FENCE1'-2"2'-0"4'-6"2'-0"2'-6"2'-0"4'-6"2'-6"3'-0"3'-6"CLINKER BRICK FOUNDATIONCLADDING DETAIL W/ BRICKBANDING(N) 10" SQ. CHADSWORTHCLASSIC COLUMNSREDWOOD/CEDARCUSTOM WATERTABLE W/ VENEERCLINKER BRICK BELOW+ REGGIO METAL GRILLESTYP.A.T.O.C. (52.12')30'-0"2ND FLR.7'-6"D.H.E. (53.75')12'-0"12 745°2ND FLR.7'-6"EGRESSEGRESS12 4REDWOOD/CEDARCUSTOM WATER TRIMW/ FLARE, AT MID SECTIONANTIQUE CLINKERBRICKS (VENEER)G.S.M. GUTTERS(PAINTED)WOOD CEDAR SHINGLE(PAINTED)32'-0"18'-0"4'-0"2'-0"3'-6"2'-0"3'-6"
4'-6"2'-0"4'-6"FIXEDFIXEDWOOD CEDAR SHINGLE(PAINTED) CUSTOM LAYOUTSTAGGERED SEE PHOTOREDWOOD/CEDARCUSTOM WATERTABLE W/ VENEERCLINKER BRICK BELOW+ REGGIO METAL GRILLESTYP.12 712 7EGRESSEGRESS 9'-6" 8'-6"
6'-10"TOP PLATE (63.50)2ND FLR(SUB. FLR)2ND FLR T.O.P.MAIN FLR F.F. (54.00')HEADER 6'-10"GRADE (53.00')A.T.O.C. (52.12')30'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT (82.12')30'-0"12 4Proposed Elevations
See DetailsA3.0 Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:
001002003004005006
Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM Ph: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114MR.+ MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :06-15-2017Drawn :C.HARRISON17_023Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 028-293-060
Contractor :
PLANNING SET
Zoning: R1
MR. + MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Gambrioli Developments Contact: Greg Gambrioli 2415 Summit Drive Hillsborough, CA 94010 P: 650-333-6844
Lot Size: -
PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENTS 06-04-18PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENTS 08-16-18A3.0Scale: 1/4 = 1'-0"1PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATIONA3.0Scale: 1/4 = 1'-0"2PROPOSED LEFT ELEVATIONA3.0Scale: NA3SIDING TRIM CUTSHEETA3.0Scale: NA4CEDAR PATTERN STYLE2" EXPOSURE + 6" EXPOSURE (COMMONLY CALLED: RIBBON COURSERELATED CODE REQUIREMENTS: (EGRESS)1. EGRESS WINDOWS SHALL HAVE A MIN. NET CLEAR OPERABLE AREA OF 5.7 SQUAREFEET.2. THE MINIMUM NET CLEAR WIDTH DIMENSION SHALL BE 20"3. THE MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENING HEIGHT DIMENSION SHALL BE 24"4. PER 2016 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE 2016 CRC R310 OR CBC 10302222
(E) LOT LINE(N)DRIVEWAY(N) 6' REDWOOD FENCE
(E) LOT LINE(N) 6' REDWOOD FENCESEE LANDSCAPE PLANSCASEMENT WINDOWSBY S.P. PUSH OUT CASEMENTSW/ SDL (PUTTY)40 YR ARCH.ASPHALT DIAMONDSHINGLESG.S.M. GUTTERS(PAINTED)VERTICAL WOODCORNER TRIM "windsorONE"12'-0"6'-0"8'-5"38'-0"67'-5"46'-0"1'-0"(N) 12" DEEP PLANTINGPOCKETS FOR PRIVACYLANDSCAPE2'-0"(7' SETBACK)
4'-6"2'-0"4'-6"3'-6"2'-0"2'-0"4'-6"3'-6"TEMP.TEMP.CUSTOM WOODSHUTTERS BY "TIMBERLANE"EAST COAST MANUFACTURERWOOD CEDAR SHINGLE(PAINTED) CUSTOM LAYOUTSTAGGERED SEE PHOTO2'-6"3'-6"6X6 PAINTED CORBELSREDWOOD OR CEDARREDWOOD/CEDARCUSTOM WATERTABLE W/ VENEERCLINKER BRICK BELOW+ REGGIO METAL GRILLESTYP.12 7EGRESS 9'-6" 8'-6"
6'-10"TOP PLATE (63.50)2ND FLR(SUB. FLR)2ND FLR T.O.P.MAIN FLR F.F. (54.00')HEADER 6'-10"GRADE (53.00')A.T.O.C. (52.12')30'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT (82.12')30'-0"
12'-0"47°D.H.E. (53.99')2ND FLR.7'-6"D.H.E. (53.75')12'-0"40 YR ARCH.ASPHALT DIAMONDSHINGLESG.S.M. GUTTERS(PAINTED)VERTICAL WOODCORNER TRIM "windsorONE" 9'-6" 8'-6"
6'-10"2'-0"4'-6"2'-0"4'-6"2'-6"3'-6"2'-6"3'-6"2'-0"3'-6"2'-6"3'-6"2'-6"3'-6"2'-0"4'-6"3'-6"CASEMENT WINDOWSBY S.P. PUSH OUT CASEMENTSW/ SDL (PUTTY)CASEMENT WINDOWSBY S.P. PUSH OUT CASEMENTSW/ SDL (PUTTY)WOOD CEDAR SHINGLE(PAINTED) CUSTOM LAYOUTSTAGGERED SEE PHOTOCLINKER BRICK FOUNDATIONCLADDING DETAIL W/ BRICKBANDING6X6 PAINTED CORBELSREDWOOD OR CEDARREDWOOD/CEDARCUSTOM WATERTABLE W/ VENEERCLINKER BRICK BELOW+ REGGIO METAL GRILLESTYP.12 7TOP PLATE (63.50)2ND FLR(SUB. FLR)2ND FLR T.O.P.HEADER 8'-0" (62.00')MAIN FLR F.F. (54.00')HEADER 6'-10"GRADE (53.00')A.T.O.C. (52.12')30'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT (82.12')30'-0"12 4WOOD CEDAR SHINGLEHATCH REMOVED TOMAKE ELEVATION MOREREADABLEProposed Elevations
See DetailsA3.1 Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:
001002003004005006
Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COMPh: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114MR.+ MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :06-15-2017Drawn :C.HARRISON17_023Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 028-293-060
Contractor :
PLANNING SET
Zoning: R1
MR. + MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Gambrioli Developments Contact: Greg Gambrioli 2415 Summit Drive Hillsborough, CA 94010 P: 650-333-6844
Lot Size: -
PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENTS 06-04-18PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENTS 08-16-18A3.1Scale: 1/4 = 1'-0"1PROPOSED REAR ELEVATIONA3.1Scale: 1/4 = 1'-0"2PROPOSED RIGHT ELEVATION (DRIVEWAY)OPENINGWINDOWSIZE (H X W)EXT. WALLREMARKS:12342'-6" X 2'-0" X 2 EA.TOTALCASEMENTS/FIXEDMASTER CLT.96 SQ.FT.WINDOWSQ.FT.10 SQ.FT.4'-6" X 4'-0" X 2 EA.36 SQ.FT.4'-6" X 2'-0" X 4 EA.36 SQ.FT.8'-0" FEET FROM LOT LINEWALL SIZE = 1,012 SQ.FT.OPENING % ALLOWABLE= WALL SIZE X 25% = MAX ALLOWED1,012 SQ.FT. X .25 = 253 SQ.FT.3-6" X 2'-0" X 2 EA.14 SQ.FT.BATHROOM CASE.BEDRM. CASE.222
8'-4"TOP PLATEHEADER 7'-0"7'-0"MAIN FLR F.F.2'-0"20'-10"TEMP.(E) LOT LINE2'-10"MIN. 24"40 YR ARCH.ASPHALT DIAMONDSHINGLESG.S.M. GUTTERS(PAINTED)WOOD CEDAR SHINGLE(PAINTED) CUSTOM LAYOUTSTAGGERED SEE PHOTO15' BUILDING HEIGHT15'-0"CUSTOM WOOD CARRIAGEDOOR (PAINTED)4X6 BRACKETS (PAINT)(DESIGNED EDGE DTL.)BEVOLO (LIGHT FIXTURES)LED, MADE IN USA (COPPER)127.25124.25G1.03GARAGE CONTROLPADE.V.E.V. CHARGER3/0TEMP.00112/0002O.H. DOOR20'-10"20'-10"G2.02G2.05G2.032'-3 1/2"16'-3"2'-3 1/2"4"20'-2"4"9'-0"1 HR FIRE RATEDBOTH SIDES(SEE DETAIL)G2.06ATTIC LADDER / WERNER OR EQ.STANDARD SIDE WALLS2X4 @ 16" O.C. INSULATEDW/ R-13 MIN. R-15 PREFERREDFRONT WALL2X4GARAGE ELECT. PANELDOOR TO BE NOT WITHIN 10'OF PROPERTY LINES, CONFIRMON SITE.20'-2"20'-2"2'-0"20'-10"TEMP.(E) LOT LINE
2'-10"MIN. 24"15' BUILDING HEIGHT15'-0"127.25124.25PROTECT (E)NEIGHBORS FENCECONTRACTOR TOWORK W/ NEIGHBORDURING CONSTRUCTION 8'-4"TOP PLATEHEADER 7'-0"7'-0"MAIN FLR F.F.20'-10"(E) LOT LINE
2'-10"MIN. 24"15' BUILDING HEIGHT15'-0"127.25124.252'-0"20'-10"(E) LOT LINE2'-10"MIN. 24"15' BUILDING HEIGHT15'-0"127.25124.25PROTECT (E)NEIGHBORS FENCECONTRACTOR TOWORK W/ NEIGHBORDURING CONSTRUCTION5/8"5/8"1/2"3 1/2"6"2 x 4R-13 FIBERGLASS BATT INSULATION @ 2x4APA RATED SHEATHING EXPOSURE 112" PLYWOOD OR OSBMIN. 2X4 STUDS @ 16" O.C.58" DENSGLASS "FIREGUARD" SHEATHING58" DENSARMOR PLUS FIREGUARD, ORTOUGHROCK FIREGUARD GYPSUM BD.APPLIED VERTICALLY OR HORIZONTALLYTO STUDS W/ 1-7/8" 6D COATED NAILS 7"O.C. STAGGER JOINTS EACH SIDENOTES:SEE WWW.GP.COM FORTECHNICAL SPEC'S, SEE: UL U305,GA WP 3605CEDAR SHINGLES (BLUE LABEL) S.S.FASTNERS TYP.Garage Floor Plan + Elevations
See Details G2.0 Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:
001002003004005006
Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM Ph: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114MR.+ MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :06-15-2017Drawn :C.HARRISON17_023Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 028-293-060
Contractor :
PLANNING SET
Zoning: R1
MR. + MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Gambrioli Developments Contact: Greg Gambrioli 2415 Summit Drive Hillsborough, CA 94010 P: 650-333-6844
Lot Size: -
PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENTS 06-04-18PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENTS 08-16-18G2.0Scale: 1/4 = 1'-0"2FRONT ELEVATION(GARAGE)G2.0Scale: 1/4 = 1'-0"1GARAGE FLOOR PLANG2.0Scale: 1/4 = 1'-0"3LEFT SIDE ELEVATIONG2.0Scale: 1/4 = 1'-0"4REAR ELEVATIONG2.0Scale: 1/4 = 1'-0"5RIGHT SIDE ELEVATIONG2.0Scale: 3" = 1'-0"6EXT. WALL DETAILS(EXTERIOR & INTERIOR)(1 HR RATED)22
N.T.S.ARArborist Report Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:
001002003004005006
Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COMPh: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114MR.+ MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :06-15-2017Drawn :C.HARRISON17_023Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 028-293-060
Contractor :
PLANNING SET
Zoning: R1
MR. + MRS. GREG GAMBRIOLI
133 CRESCENT AVE.
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Gambrioli Developments Contact: Greg Gambrioli 2415 Summit Drive Hillsborough, CA 94010 P: 650-333-6844
Lot Size: -
PLANT LIST133 CRESCENT AVENUE - BURLINGAME, CASYMSCIENTIFIC NAMEREV 11/2017Arbutus unedoSIZEStrawberry TreeCOMMON NAMECamellia japonica 'Lily Pons''Lily Pons' CamelliaMyrtus communis 'Compacta''Compacta' Dwarf MyrtleQUANTITYGROWTHWUCOLSTREES871124" Box15 GAL5 GALSLOWMOD.MOD.LMLAUCJMCSHRUBSPERENNIALSDietes vegetaFortnight Lily5 GALMOD.LDI(T)(S)(P)15 GALSLOWLPROJECT'S TOTAL SOD AREA = 929 sfPROJECT'S TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA = 4026 sf*929 sf / 4026 sf = 23.1%(PERCENT OF FINAL LANDSCAPE AREATO BE HIGH WATER USE SOD LAWN AREA)LL'Breeze' Dwarf Mat RushLomandra longifolia 'Breeze'5 GALMOD. LLaurus nobilis 'Saratoga''Saratoga' Bay Laurel (Shrub Form)LNPittosporum 'Golf Ball''Golf Ball' Kohuhu5 GALMOD.PIM121 GALFASTLLantana montevidensis 'White'Trailing LantanaLMNepeta faasseniCatmint361 GALFASTLNF140TOTAL122L & VL TOTAL87.1%122 / 140 =ORNAMENTAL GRASSES(Og)VINES(V)65 GALMOD.MTrachelospermum jasminoidesStar JasmineTJSQUARE FEETTURF IRRIGATED AREANON-TURF IRRIGATED AREA*SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREA% OF LANDSCAPE AREA% ALLOWED25% MAX.23.1%76.5%0%92930970WATER EFFICIENCY IN LANDSCAPING CALCULATION SUMMARYWATER FEATURE(S) AREATOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA10% MAX.--0%100.0%04026*NON-TURF IRRIGATED AREAS TO BE IRRIGATEDUSING NETAFIM-BRAND IN-LINE DRIP HOSESPrunus caroliniana (Standard)Carolina Laurel Cherry (Tree-form)424" BoxMOD.LPCPenstemon gloxinoides 'Firebird''Firebird' Garden Penstemon1 GALFASTMPG95 GALMOD.LRosa 'Cecile Brunner''Cecil Brunner' Vine RoseRC166987PLANTING NOTES:1. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY PLANT AND SODQUANTITIES PRIOR TO SUBMITTING BID FOR WORK.2. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATESTSTANDARDS OF NURSERY STOCK, PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICANNURSERY AND LANDSCAPE ASSOCIATION.3. PLANT MATERIAL CANNOT BE GUARANTEED AS DEER RESISTANTDUE TO THE CHANGING HABITS OF DEER.4. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE COVERED WITH A LAYER OF BARKMULCH TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF (3) INCHES, WITH A CHIP SIZE OF NOLESS THAN (1) INCH. A 2-INCH LAYER OF GREENWASTE MULCHUNDER THE BARK MULCH IS RECOMMENDED.5. 4 YARDS OF COMPOST MUST BE INCORPORATED PER 1000 SF OFPERMEABLE AREA.6. SADDITIONAL OIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE USED AS NECESSARY.SOIL AMENDMENT SHALL BE FREE OF DEBRIS. ROCKS LARGER THAN1-INCH DIAMETER SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED. SOIL AMENDMENTSARE NOT PERMITTED IN TYPICAL NATIVE PLANT LANDSCAPE AREAS.7. PLANTING HOLES SHALL GENERALLY BE 2x - 3x THE SIZE OF THEROOT BALL. THE WALLS AND THE BASES OF THE PLANT HOLES SHALLBE SCARIFIED. HOLES SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITH 5% ORGANICCOMPOST AND 95% EXISTING SOIL. PLANTING HOLES OF NATIVEPLANT MATERIAL SHOULD BE INOCULATED WITH MYCORRHIZAEFUNGI, PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECS.8. TREES SHALL BE STAKED WITH (2) PRESSURE-TREATED 2-INCHDIAMETER POLES. TREE TRUNK SHALL BE SECURED WITH TWORUBBER TIES OR STRAPS FORMING A FIGURE-EIGHT BETWEENTRUNK AND STAKE.9. RESIDUAL WEED PRE-EMERGENT SHALL BE APPLIED BY THECONTRACTOR AS NECESSARY. APPLICATION SHALL BE ACCORDINGTO MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS.10. LAWN SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED ON SLOPES GREATER THAN 25%.ALL TURF AREAS SHALL BE FERTILIZED AT TIME OF INSTALLATION.GENERAL NOTES:1. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL PERMITS NECESSARY TOCOMPLETE PROPOSED WORK PER CITY OF BURLINGAMEREQUIREMENTS.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ON SITE ALL GRADES, PROPERTYLINES, EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, UTILITIES, SITE IMPROVEMENTS,WATERPROOFING AND UNDERGROUND PIPING BEFORECONSTRUCTION BEGINS. THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE DESIGNERASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE PLANSAND ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS. ALL DISCREPANCIES ORPROBLEMATIC SITE CONDITIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THEATTENTION OF THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE DESIGNER.3. WORK WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY IS SUBJECT TO INSPECTIONAND APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF BURLINGAME. CONTRACTOR SHALLOBTAIN AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FROM THE CITY OFBURLINGAME PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO WORK WITHINTHE RIGHT OF WAY. THIS WORK MAY INCLUDE LANDSCAPING IN THERIGHT OF WAY, NEW CURB DRAINS AND PARKING STRIP.4. FINISHED GRADES SHALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAYFROM STRUCTURES AND SHALL BE PROPERLY INSTALLED TOPREVENT ANY STANDING WATER. ALL HARDSCAPE SHALL HAVE AMINIMUM GRADE OF 2% UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. JUTE MESHEROSION CONTROL NETTING SHALL BE USED ON ALL 3:1 ORGREATER SLOPES AND STAKED APPROPRIATELY.5. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PROTECTION FOR EXISTING TREESBY INSTALLING TEMPORARY FENCING AROUND THE TREES ASCLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE DRIPLINE. IN THE EVENT THAT TREEROOTS OVER 6" ARE DISCOVERED, THE LANDSCAPE DESIGNERSHOULD BE CONTACTED.6. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL, CIVIL ANDOTHER ENGINEERING DRAWINGS / DOCUMENTS IN RELEVANTAREAS.7. THE LANDSCAPE DESIGNER MAY MAKE SITE OBSERVATIONSDURING CONTRUCTION BUT SHALL NTO BE UTILIZED TO SUPERVISECONSTRUCTION ON SITE.8.THIS PLAN IS NOT A SURVEY OR CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT. ITIS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND SHOULD BE USED FOR PLANNINGPURPOSES ONLY.Existing Sequoia sempervirensExisting Coast Redwood1On-SiteMOD.HSS0 5 10 201SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"NorthMC11PG8CJ7AU2LL7LN16LM12PC4DI4NF20AU6RC3RC6NF16DI5TJ2PI6TJ4SAVE 40" DIAMETER(E) REDWOOD TREEPER CURRENTARBORIST REPORTREMOVE 10" DIAMETER (E) PINE TREEPER CURRENT ARBORIST REPORTREMOVE 9" DIAMETER (E) HOLLY TREEPER CURRENT ARBORIST REPORT9'-6 1/4"10'-1"10'-3 3/4"10'-8 1/8"REMOVE 45" DIAMETER (E) REDWOODTREE PER CURRENT ARBORIST REPORTEXISTING REAR NEIGHBOR'SREAR PROPERTY LINE FENCETO REMAIN AS-IS(N) REAR PROPERTYLINE SECTION OFFENCE TO BE BUILTIN FRONT OF (E)REAR PROPERTYLINE FENCE1
2
3OFSHEET NUMBER:SHEETSRevisions
Revision Number:
133 Crescent AvenueSCALE:Burlingame, CA 94010SHEET NAME:PROJECT NAME:PROJECT DATE:DRAWN BY:JPB / BMDescription:Date:
APN : 028-293-060
PLANNING SET
1060 El Camino Real, Suite D
Redwood City, CA 94063
tel. 415.425.7700
www.bergezandassociates.com
ZONING : R1
LOT : 10,150 SF
OWNER : 1/8" = 1'-0"LP1.0(PROPOSED)PLANTINGPLAN6Mr. & Mrs. Greg Gambrioli Residence
06/2018Telephone AccessPool EquipmentFBFuse BoxFire HydrantGas MeterFHGMExistingExisting ValvesExisting StoopExisting PipeElectric OutletElectric MeterDown SpoutDoor OpenerDownEMEPEOEVESDODN(E)DSTAUPWM Water MeterUtility PolePCPEPLSASLMBPAPBLTPlant Cut-outService LineSewer AccessProperty LinePower BoxPlanting AreaMail BoxLightA/C Power BoxCrawl SpaceAir ConditioningLEGENDCSAPACGSHBIBGas Shut-offIntercom BoxHose BibbPlan Check Comments 06/05/18
Plan Check Comments 08/14/18
PROJECT LOCATION
2 Kenmar Way
Item No. 9a
Design Review Study
City of Burlingame
Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit
Address: 2 Kenmar Way Meeting Date: September 10, 2018
Request: Application for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a first and second story
addition to an existing single family dwelling.
Applicant and Designer: Tim Raduenz, Form One APN: 027-130-110
Property Owners: Eric and Serena Fong Lot Area: 14,114 SF
General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1
Project Description: The site is located on a sloping lot, which slopes downward from front to rear by thirteen
feet along the left side property line and twenty-six feet along the right side property line, and upward from left to
right by nine feet. The existing one-story house with an attached two-car garage contains 2,871 SF (0.20 FAR)
of floor area and has four bedrooms. The applicant is proposing an addition on the main floor and a new lower
floor along the right side and rear of the house, which would increase the total floor area to 5,163 SF (0.37 FAR),
where 5,617 SF (0.40 FAR) is the maximum allowed. The project is 454 SF below the maximum allowable floor
area.
The proposed project is subject to Design Review because although the proposed additions are on the main and
lower floors, due to the downward sloping lot the addition at the rear is two stories in height (see proposed Right
Side, Left Side and Rear Elevations) (Code Section 25.57.010 (a) (2)).
The subject property is located in the Hillside Area and Code Section 25.61.020 of the Burlingame Municipal
Code states that no new structure or any addition to all or a portion of an existing structure shall be constructed
within the affected area without a Hillside Area Construction Permit.
With this application, the number of bedrooms will increase from four to six (family room on lower floor qualifies
as a bedroom; wine room and storage rooms on lower floor do not qualify as bedroom since these rooms do not
contain windows). Three off-street parking spaces, two of which must be covered, are required for this project.
The existing attached garage provides two covered parking spaces (22’-3” wide x 20’-7” deep clear interior
dimensions provided where 18’-0” x 18’-0” is the minimum required for an existing garage) and one uncovered
parking space (9’ x 18’) is provided in the driveway. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met.
The applicant requests the following applications:
Design Review for a first and second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010 (a) (2)); and
Hillside Area Construction Permit (C.S. 25.61.020).
This space intentionally left blank.
Item No. 9a
Design Review Study
Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit 2 Kenmar Way
2
2 Kenmar Way
Lot Area: 14,114 SF Plans date stamped: August 20, 2018
EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D
SETBACKS
Front (1st flr):
(2nd flr):
15'-0”
n/a
no change
n/a
15'-0" or block average
20'-0"
Side (left):
(right):
7'-0"
7’-0”
no change
7’-0”
7'-0"
7'-0"
Rear (1st flr):
(2nd flr):
68’-0”
n/a
29’-5”
29’-5”
15'-0"
20'-0"
Lot Coverage: 3327 SF
23.5%
4591 SF
32.5%
5645 SF
40%
FAR: 2871 SF
0.20 FAR
5163 SF
0.37 FAR
5617 SF ¹
0.40 FAR
# of bedrooms: 4 6 ---
Off-Street Parking: 2 covered
(22-3”W x 20'-7”D)
1 uncovered
(9’ x 18’)
no change
2 covered
(18' x 18' for existing)
1 uncovered
(9' x 18')
Building Height: 19'-6” 20’-4” 30'-0"
DH Envelope: --- complies CS 25.26.075
1 (0.32 x 14,114 SF) + 1100 SF = 5,617 SF (0.40 FAR)
Staff Comments: None.
Ruben Hurin
Planning Manager
c. Tim Raduenz, Form One, applicant and designer
Eric and Serena Fong, property owners
Attachments:
Application to the Planning Commission
Notice of Public Hearing – Mailed August 31, 2018
Area Map
2 Kenmar Way
300’ Radius
APN 027.130.110
(E) HOUSE TOP PLATEHIGHEST RIDGE LINE(E) HOUSE F.F.8'-0"14'-10"ASPHALT (ARCH.)SHINGLES (CLASS A)(G.S.M.) OGEE GUTTERSYSTEM, (N) PAINTSTUCCO, W/ NEW SKIM COATTO RE-FINISHCRAWLSPACE VENTINGFINISH GRADE12 412 4MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWS/DOORSWOOD GABLE DETAIL(E) STEPS & W.I.RAILING(E) AVG. CURB4'-6"19'-5"(E) LWR FLR F.F.10'-2"10"1'-8"EL. 99.75'EL. 105.47'EL. 110.00'EL. 118.00'EL. 124.98'ADDITION T.P.(N) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE(E) HOUSE F.F.9'-6"26'-6"(N) ASPHALT (ARCH.)SHINGLES (CLASS A)(E) (G.S.M.) OGEE GUTTERSYSTEM, (N) PAINT(E) STUCCO(E) CRAWLSPACE VENTING(E) CRAWLSPACE ACCESS(E) FINISH GRADE12 4(E) MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWS/DOORS(E)(E)(E)(E)(N) STEPS & W.I.RAILING12 4LWR FLR T.P.LWR FLR F.F.9'-0"(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(N) TEMP.(E) V.I.F. LOCATION(E)(E)(N) ASPHALT (ARCH.)SHINGLES (CLASS A)(N) STUCCO TOMATCH (E)(N) MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWSTO MATCH (E)27'-5" (ADDITION)15'-2" (N) TERRACE(E)(E)(N)1'-3"(E) MAIN HOME T.P.8'-0"(N)GRADE(N) STONE/TILE TERRACE(N) (G.S.M.) OGEEGUTTER SYSTEM,(N) PAINT TO MATCH (E)70'-9" (EXISTING)(N) WOOD GABLEDETAIL TOMATCH (E)(N) TEMP.(N) TEMP.(N) TEMP.(E) AVG. CURB3'-3"(N) 42" GUARDRAIL(N) MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWS/DOORSTO MATCH (E)4'-2"1'-4"10"D.H.E.6"MARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD DOORS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD DOORS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARS(E) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE25'-7"19'-5"EL. 99.75'EL. 105.47'EL. 109.47'EL. 110.00'EL. 108.72'EL. 118.00'EL. 119.50'EL. 124.98'EL.125.72'EL. 99.33'30' HEIGHT LIMITSIDE PROPERTY LINE45°14'-0"12'-0" Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM Ph: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114Fong Residence
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :08-19-17Drawn :Tim Raduenz17_035Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 027-130-110
CONTRACTOR:
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
BUILDING SET
ZONING: R1
LOT SQ.FT.: 0.32 Acres
Mr. + Mrs. Eric Fong
See DetailsA3.1Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED REAR ELEVATIONA3.1As-Built + Proposed Elevations Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1AS-BUILT REAR ELEVATIONA3.1
(E) HOUSE TOP PLATEHIGHEST RIDGE LINE(E) HOUSE F.F.8'-0"14'-10"ASPHALT (ARCH.)SHINGLES (CLASS A)(G.S.M.) OGEE GUTTERSYSTEM, (N) PAINTSTUCCO, W/ NEW SKIM COATTO RE-FINISHSKYLIGHT (V.I.F.)REPLACEMENT W/ VELUX(E) AVERAGE CURB4'-6"19'-5"(E) LWR FLR F.F.10'-2"MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWS/DOORSEL. 99.75'EL. 105.47'EL. 110.00'EL. 118.00'EL. 124.98'(E) HOUSE TOP PLATE(N) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE(E) HOUSE F.F.8'-0"15'-10"(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(N) EGRESS9'-6"
26'-6"
9'-0"(N) ASPHALT (ARCH.)SHINGLES (CLASS A)(N) STUCCO TOMATCH (E)(N) MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWS/DOORSTO MATCH (E)1'-3"
8'-0"(N) (G.S.M.) OGEEGUTTER SYSTEM,(N) PAINT TO MATCH (E)ADDITION T.P.(N) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE(E) HOUSE F.F.LWR FLR T.P.LWR FLR F.F.(E) MAIN HOME T.P.GRADE(E) HOME OUTLINE (E) SKYLIGHT V.I.F. LOCATIONREPAIR/REPLACE/ RELOCATEAS NECCESARY49'-0" (EXISTING)51'-2" (ADDITION)(N) TEMP.(N) TEMP.(N) EGRESS(N)20'-4"(E) AVERAGE CURB4'-6"MARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADDOORS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARS(E) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE25'-7"(E) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE19'-5"EL. 105.47'EL. 110.00'EL. 118.00'EL. 124.98'EL. 125.72'EL. 99.75'EL. 110.00'EL. 108.72'EL. 118.00'EL. 119.50'EL. 124.98'EL. 125.72'EL. 99.33' Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM Ph: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114Fong Residence
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :08-19-17Drawn :Tim Raduenz17_035Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 027-130-110
CONTRACTOR:
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
BUILDING SET
ZONING: R1
LOT SQ.FT.: 0.32 Acres
Mr. + Mrs. Eric Fong
See DetailsA3.2Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED RIGHT ELEVATIONA3.2As-Built + Proposed Elevations Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1AS-BUILT RIGHT ELEVATIONA3.2
(E) HOUSE TOP PLATEHIGHEST RIDGE LINE(E) HOUSE F.F.8'-0"14'-10"12 412 4ASPHALT (ARCH.)SHINGLES (CLASS A)(G.S.M.) OGEE GUTTERSYSTEM, (N) PAINTCRAWLSPACE ACCESSCRAWLSPACE VENTINGCEDAR SHINGLES (5" EXP.) V.I.F.BRICK WAINSCOTINGW/ (N) STUCCO OVER(E) AVERAGE CURB4'-6"19'-5"(E) LWR FLR F.F.10'-2"MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWS/DOORSEL. 99.75'EL. 105.47'EL. 110.00'EL. 118.00'EL. 124.98'(N) ASPHALT (ARCH.)SHINGLES (CLASS A)(E) (G.S.M.) OGEE GUTTERSYSTEM, (N) PAINT(E) CRAWLSPACE ACCESS(E) CRAWLSPACE VENTING(E) CEDAR SHINGLES(5" EXP.) V.I.F.(E) BRICK WAINSCOTINGW/ (N) STUCCO OVER(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)12 412 4(E)(E)(E) PATIO
(N) PATIO(N) STONE TREADS(N) STUCCO TO MATCH (E)ADDITION T.P.(N) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE(E) HOUSE F.F.9'-6"26'-6"LWR FLR T.P.LWR FLR F.F.9'-0"1'-3"(E) MAIN HOME T.P.8'-0"GRADE(N) TEMP.12 4(N)FIXED(N) TEMP.(N) TEMP.(N) TEMP.(N) TEMP.(N)10'-3"(E) AVERAGE CURB4'-6"(N) 42" GUARDRAIL(N) MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWS/DOORSTO MATCH (E)(N) WOOD GABLEDETAIL TOMATCH (E)3'-3"1'-4"10"MARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD DOORS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD WINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARS(E) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE25'-7"EL. 99.75'EL. 105.47'EL. 110.00'EL. 108.72'EL. 118.00'EL. 119.50'EL. 124.98'EL. 125.72'EL. 99.33'20'-4" Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM Ph: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114Fong Residence
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :08-19-17Drawn :Tim Raduenz17_035Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 027-130-110
CONTRACTOR:
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
BUILDING SET
ZONING: R1
LOT SQ.FT.: 0.32 Acres
Mr. + Mrs. Eric Fong
See DetailsA3.3Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED LEFT ELEVATIONA3.3As-Built + Proposed Elevations Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1AS-BUILT LEFT ELEVATIONA3.3
(E) HOUSE TOP PLATEHIGHEST RIDGE LINE(E) HOUSE F.F.8'-0"14'-10"12 4ASPHALT (ARCH.)SHINGLES (CLASS A)ALUMINUM GARAGEDOOR BY WAYNE DALTONOR EQUALCEDAR SHINGLES (BLUELABELBRICK WAINSCOTING W/VENEER OF STONEBRICK WAINSCOTINGW/ (E) STUCCO OVERCEDAR SHINGLES (5" EXP.) V.I.F.MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWS/DOORSLIGHTS ON MOTIONDETECTORWOOD BRACKETS &VENTING, (RE-PAINT)BRICK WAINSCOTINGW/ VENEER STONE& LIGHT (MOTIONDETECTOR)BRICK WAINSCOTINGW/ STUCCO OVER(G.S.M.) OGEE GUTTERSYSTEM, (N) PAINTSTUCCO, W/ NEW SKIM COATTO RE-FINISHWOODEN COLUMNS, PAINTED(E) AVERAGE CURB4'-6"19'-5"(E) LWR FLR F.F.10'-2"
1'-8"
10"EL. 99.75'EL. 105.47'EL. 110.00'EL. 118.00'EL. 124.98'(E) HOUSE TOP PLATE(N) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE(E) HOUSE F.F.8'-0"15'-10"(E) WOOD BRACKETS &VENTING (RE-PAINT)(E) BRICK WAINSCOTINGW/ (E) VENEER STONE& (E) LIGHT (MOTIONDETECTOR)(E) BRICK WAINSCOTINGW/ (E) STUCCO OVER(E)(E) (G.S.M.) OGEE GUTTERSYSTEM(E) STUCCO(E) BRICK WAINSCOTINGW/ (E) STUCCO OVER(E) CEDAR SHINGLES (5" EXP.) V.I.F.(E) MARVIN (INTEGRITY)WOOD CLAD WINDOWS/ DOORS(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)ALUMINUM GARAGEDOOR(E) CEDAR SHINGLES(E) BRICK WAINSCOTING W/VENEER OF STONE(N) ASPHALT (ARCH.)SHINGLES (CLASS A)(E)(E)(E) WOODEN COLUMNS, PAINTED26'-1"LWR FLR F.F.10'-3"(E) AVERAGE CURB4'-6"D.H.E.6"1'-4"1'-8"
10"MARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARSMARVIN WOOD ALUMINUMCLAD DOORS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARS(E) HIGHEST RIDGE LINE25'-2"MARVIN WOODALUMINUM CLADWINDOWS WITH SDLMUNTIN BARS19'-5"20'-4"EL. 99.75'EL. 105.47'EL. 109.47'EL. 110.00'EL. 118.00'EL. 124.98'EL. 125.72'30' HEIGHT LIMIT45°SIDE PROPERTY LINE12'-0" Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM Ph: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114Fong Residence
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :08-19-17Drawn :Tim Raduenz17_035Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 027-130-110
CONTRACTOR:
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
BUILDING SET
ZONING: R1
LOT SQ.FT.: 0.32 Acres
Mr. + Mrs. Eric Fong
See DetailsA3.0Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATIONA3.0As-Built + Proposed Elevations Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1AS-BUILT FRONT ELEVATIONA3.0(NO CHANGE TO FRONT OF HOME)
(E) SLOPE
(N) SLOPE
(E) SLOPE(E) SLOPE(E) SLOPE(E) SLOPE(E) RIDGE(E) RIDGE(E) RIDGE
(E) VALLEY(
E
)
V
A
L
L
E
Y
(
E
)
V
A
L
L
E
Y
(E) VALLEY(E) ARCH. COMP. ROOF
(CLASS A - FIRE RATING)
(NO WORK) (PATCHING AS REQUIRED)
(E) SKYLIGHT
(REPAIR/REPLACE/RELOCATE AS NEEDED)(E) D.S.
(E) D.S.
(E) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(E) D.S.
(E) D.S.
(E) D.S.
(E) D.S.
(E) G.S.M. OGEE
GUTTERS (NOT CURRENTLY)
PAINTED
(E) G.S.M. OGEE
GUTTERS (NOT CURRENTLY)
PAINTED(E) SLOPE(E) SLOPE
(N) SLOPE (N) RIDGE(N) D.S.
(
N
)
H
I
P
(N) ARCH. COMP. ROOF
(CLASS A - FIRE RATING)
TO MATCH (E)
(E) 4
12
(E) 4
12
(E) 4
12
(E) 4
12
(E) 4
12
(E) 4
12
(E) 4
12
4
12
4
12
(E) RIDGE(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.
(N
)
V
A
L
L
E
Y
(N) SLOPE(N) SLOPE
4
12
4
12
(N) SLOPE(N) SLOPE
4
12
4
12
(N) HIP(N) RIDGE
(N) D.S.
(N) D.S.(E) RIDGEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEDOWNSPOUTS TO
DRAIN TO
LANDSCAPING
Sheet
Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.Rev.:Description :Date :Revisions one
DESIGN PLANNING
form
3841 24th Street, #A
E-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM
Ph: 415.819.0304
San Francisco, CA 94114
Fong Residence2 Kenmar WayBurlingame, CA 94010Title :Project :Date :08-19-17Drawn :Tim Raduenz17_035Job No. :Owner :APN#: 027-130-110CONTRACTOR:2 Kenmar WayBurlingame, CA 94010BUILDING SETZONING: R1LOT SQ.FT.: 0.32 Acres Mr. + Mrs. Eric FongSee Details
A2.2
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
1PROPOSED ROOF PLAN
A2.1 Existing/Proposed Roof PlanPLUMBING & HVAC NOTE:
1. GROUP ALL EXHAUST FLUES TOGETHER
WHEN POSSIBLE & LOCATE ON ROOFS
SLOPING TO THE REAR OF HOUSE TYP. VERIFY
LOCATION W/ DESIGNER.
NOTES:
1. (MATCH EXISTING) G.S.M. GUTTERS, & (3" GSM) DOWNSPOUTS:
LINE ALL VALLEYS WITH GSM, AT LEAST 20" WIDE WITH WITH 1/4" EDGE
TURNED OVER AND FASTENED WITH CLEATS. LAP JOINTS AT LEAST 4", BUT
DO NOT SOLDER.
2. ROOFING MATERIAL TO BE 40 YR ARCHITECTURAL
ASPHALT SHINGLES, SEE CUT SHEET ABOVE, COLOR TO BE DETERMINED,
ANTIQUE BLACK OR PEWTER GREY
3. WHEN INSULATION IS INSTALLED IN ENCLOSED RAFTER SPACES WHERE
CEILINGS ARE APPLIED DIRECT TO THE UNDERSIDE OF ROOF RAFTERS, A
MINIMUM AIR SPACE OF 1 INCH MUST BE PROVIDED, INSULATION BAFFLE
NEEDED.
4. FLASHINGS AND COUNTER FLASHINGS SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN
0.016-INCH (28-GAGE) CORROSION RESISTANT METAL, AND VALLEY FLASHING
5. AT THE JUNCTURE OF THE ROOF & VERTICAL SURFACES, FLASHING &
COUNTERFLASHINGS SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 0.019-INCH (26 GAUGE)
6. RADIANT BARRIER NOW REQUIRED IN CLIMATE ZONE 3 §150.1 (c) 2. (CAL
GREEN)
7. TERMINATION OF ALL ENVIRONMENTAL AIR DUCTS SHALL BE A MIN. OF
3'-0" FROM PROPERTY LINES OR ANY OPENING INTO THE BUILDING (I.E.
DRYERS, BATH& UTILITY FANS, ETC., MUST BE 3'-0" AWAY FROM DOORS,
WINDOWS, OPENING SKYLIGHTS OR ATTIC VENTS, PER CODE
8. (AS REQUIRED) THE TRUSS PLAN AND THE TRUSS CALC. SHALL BE
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD BEFORE
SUBMITTING TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO
FABRICATION. TRUSS PLANS SHALL BE WET SIGNED & WET STAMPED BY
TRUSS DESIGN ENGINEER.
9. FURNACE LOCATED IN ATTIC SPACE SHALL BE LISTED FOR ATTIC
LOCATION AND PROVIDED WITH 24" WIDE SOLID FLOORING ACCESS WAY
AND 30" WORKING SPACE AT CONTROLS.
10. ATTIC VENTILATION AT CALIFORNIA FRAMING TO RECEIVE LOW PROFILE
VENTS OR OPENING IN THE ROOF SHEATHING BELOW
11. (AS REQUIRED) ALL TRUSS/RAFTER BLOCKING TO RECEIVE 2" DIA HOLES
IN EVERY BLOCK TYPICAL FOR EVEN DISTRIBUTION OF AIR FLOW.
ATTIC FURNACE NOTES (IF REQUIRED):
1. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING FOR ATTIC FURNACES (CMC SECTION 904.04)
A. PASSAGEWAY TO EQUIPMENT LESS THAN 6'-0" IN HEIGHT SHALL BE NOT MORE
THAN 20'-0" IN LENGTH WHEN MEASURED ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF
PASSAGEWAY FROM THE ACCESS OPENING TO THE EQUIPMENT. SECTION
904.10.1.
B. UN-OBSTRUCTED PASSAGEWAY W/ A SOLID FLOORING AT LEAST 24" WIDE
THROUGH-OUT ITS LENGTH. SECTION 904.10.2
C. A 30"x30" LEVEL WORKING PLATFORM IN FRONT OF THE SERVICE SIDE OF THE
APPLIANCE. SECTION 904.10.3
D. A PERMANENT 120V RECEPTACLE OUTLET AND LIGHTING FIXTURE NEAR THE
APPLIANCE. SECTION 904.10.4.
E. UPRIGHT FURNACES MAYBE INSTALLED IN ATTIC OR CRAWLSPACE MORE THAN
5'-0" IN HEIGHT, PROVIDED THAT REQUIRED LISTINGS, DUCT AND FURNACE
CLEARANCES ARE OBSERVED. SECTION 904.10.5
F. CLARIFY THE LOCATION OF THE FURNACE ON PLANS BY DASHED LINE OR
OTHER SYMBOL..
SKYLIGHT NOTES:
1. SKYLIGHT UNITS SHALL BE TESTED &
LABELED IN COMPLIANCE WITH
AAMA/WDMA/CSA 101/I.S.2/A440 PER CRC
SECTION R308.6.9.
SOLAR CONDUIT:
PROVIDE A PIPE FOR SOLAR CONDUIT FOR FUTURE
USE.
WATER METER152.14
CURB(N) FIRE(N) IRRIGATION(N) DOMESTIC(E) GARAGE(E) SINGLE FAMILY (E) TERRACE(N) TERR.(N) ADDITIONSINGLE STORY HOMEFRONT SETBACK 15'-0"REAR SETBACK 15'-0"SIDE SETBA
C
K
7
'
-
0
"
SIDE SETBACK 7'-0"7'-0"7'-0"48'-2"7'-0"7'-0"7'-0"7'-015'-0"
35'-9"31'-10 3/8"DIM. LOT TOSETBACK 7'-0"DIM. LOT TO(E) HOME 7'-0"DIM. LOT TOADD. 48'-2"DIM. LOT TOSETBACK 15'-0"DIM. LOT TOADD. 35'-9"DIM. LOT TOADD. 25'-5"(N) REPLACE DAMAGEDAND DISPLACED CURB, UTTER,AND/OR SIDEWALK FRONTINGSITE WHERE NEEDED(E) NEIGHBOR GARAGE(E) NEIGHBOR HOUSE(E) D.S.(E) D.S.(E) D.S.(E) D.S.(N) D.S.(E) D.S.(E) D.S.(E) D.S.(E) D.S.(E) D.S.(E) G.S.M. OGEEGUTTERS (NOT CURRENTLY)PAINTED(N) D.S.(N) D.S.(N) D.S.(N) D.S.(N) D.S.DOWNSPOUTS TO DRAINTO LANDSCAPING(E) G.S.M. OGEEGUTTERS (NOTCURRENTLY)PAINTED Sheet Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.
Rev.:Description :Date :
Revisions
oneDESIGN PLANNING form3841 24th Street, #AE-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM Ph: 415.819.0304San Francisco, CA 94114Fong Residence
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
Title :
Project :
Date :08-19-17Drawn :Tim Raduenz17_035Job No. :
Owner :
APN#: 027-130-110
CONTRACTOR:
2 Kenmar Way
Burlingame, CA 94010
BUILDING SET
ZONING: R1
LOT SQ.FT.: 0.32 Acres
Mr. + Mrs. Eric Fong
See DetailsA1.1Scale: 3/32" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED SITE PLANA1.1PROPOSED SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES & SCOPE1. PROTECT ALL EXISTING TREES DURING CONSTRUCTION, CONSULT ARBORIST ASREQUIRED.2. NO EXISTING TREES OVER 48" IN CIRCUMFERENCE AT 54" FROM BASE OF TREEMAY BE REMOVED WITHOUT A PROTECTED TREE PERMIT FROM THE PARKSDIVISION (558-7330) NO TREES ARE TO BE REMOVED FOR THIS PROJECT.3. WATER CONSERVATION IN LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE NOT REQUIRED SINCELANDSCAPE WILL NOT BE REHABILITATED AS NOTED ON PLANS.4. A PLAN HAS BEEN DEVELOPED, AND WILL BE IMPLEMENTED, TO MANAGE STORMWATER DRAINAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION. CGC 4.106.2 & CGC 4.106.35. ALL SPRINKLER DRAINAGE SHALL BE PLACED INTO LANDSCAPING AREASSTREET TREES1. PROTECT ALL STREET TREES DURING CONSTRUCTIONPUBLIC WORKS NOTES1. A REMOVE/REPLACE UTILITES ENCHROACHMENT PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO (1)REPLACE ALL CURB, GUTTER, DRIVEWAY AND SIDEWALK FRONTING SITE, (2) PLUG ALLEXISTING SANITARY SEWER LATERAL CONNECTIONS AND INSTALL A NEW 4" LATERAL, (3)ALL WATER LINE CONNECTIONS TO CITY WATER MAINS FOR SERVICES OF FIRE LINE ARETO BE INSTALLED PER =CITY STANDARD PROCEDURES AND SPECIFICATION. (4) ANDOTHER UNDERGROUND UTILITY WORKS WITHIN CITY'S RIGHT-OF WAY.STORMWATER CHECKLIST NOTES1. DIRECT ROOF RUNOFF INTO CISTERNS OR RAIN BARRELS AND USE RAINWATER FORIRRIGATION OR OTHER NON-POTABLE USE.2. DIRECT RUNOFF FROM SIDEWALKS, WALKWAYS, AND/OR PATIOS ONTO VEGETATED AREAS.3. DIRECT RUNOFF FROM DRIVEWAYS AND/OR UNCOVERED PARKING LOTS ONTO VEGETATEDAREAS.4. CONSTRUCT SIDEWALKS, WALKWAYS AND/OR PATIOS WITH PERMEABLE SURFACES.5. USE MICOR-DETENTION, INCLUDING DISTRIBUTED LANDSCAPE-BASED DETENTION.6. PROTECT SENSITIVE AREAS, INCLUDING WETLAND AND RIPARIAN AREAS, AND MINIMIZECHANGES TO THE NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY.7. MARK ON SITE INLETS WITH THE WORDS "NO DUMPING! FLOWS TO BAY" OR EQUIVALENT.8. (A.) RETAIN EXISTING VEGETATION AS PRACTICABLE (B) SELECT DIVERSE SPECIESAPPROPRIATE TO THE SITE. INCLUDE PLANTS THAT ARE PEST- AND/OR DISEASE-RESISTANT,DROUGHT-TOLERANT, AND/OR ATTRACT BENEFICIAL INSECTS. (C) MINIMIZE USE OF PESTICIDESAND QUICK -RELEASE FERTILIZERS.9. DESIGN FOR DISCHARGE OF FIRE SPRINKLERS TEST WATER TO LANDSCAPE OR SANITARYSEWER.10. TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROLS TO STABILIZE ALL DENUDED AREAS UNTIL PERMANENTEROSION CONTROLS ARE ESTABLISHED.11. DELINEATE WITH FIELD MARKERS THE FOLLOWING AREAS: CLEARING LIMITS, EASEMENTS,SETBACKS, SENSITIVE OR CRITICAL AREAS,BUFFER ZONES, TREES TO BE PROTECTED ANDRETAINED, DRAINAGE COURSES.12. PROVIDE NOTES, SPECIFICATIONS OR ATTACHEMENTS DESCRIBING THE FOLLOWING: (A)CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS,INCLUDE INSPECTION FREQUENCY; (B) METHODS AND SCHEDULE FOR GRADING, EXCAVATION,FILLING, CLEARING OF VEGETATION , AND STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED ORCLEARED MATERIAL, (C) SPECIFICATIONS FOR VEGETATIVE COVER & MULCH, INCLUDEMETHODS AND SCHEDULES FOR PLANTING AND FERTILIZATION (D) PROVISIONS FORTEMPORARY AND OR PERMANENT IRRIGATION13. PERFORM CLEARING AND EARTH MOVING ACTIVITIES ONLY DURING DRY WEATHER14. USE SEDIMENT CONTROLS OF FILTRATION TO REMOVE SEDIMENT WHEN DEWATERING ANDOBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS.15. PROTECT ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS IN VICINITY OF SITE USING SEDIMENT CONTROLS (E.G.BERMS, SOCKS, FIBER ROLLS OR FILTERS)16. TRAP SEDIMENT ON-SITE, USING BMP'S SUCH AS SEDIMENT BASINS OR TRAPS, EARTHENDIKES OR BERMS, SILT FENCES, CHECK DAMS, COMPOST BLANKETS OR JUTE MATS, COVERSFOR SOIL STOCK PILES, ETC.17. DIVERT ON-SITE RUNOFF AROUND EXPOSED AREAS; DIVERT OFF-STE RUNOFF AROUND THESITE (E.G SWALES AND DIKES)18. PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND UNDISTURBED AREAS FROM CONSTRUCTIONIMPACTS USING VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, SEDIMENT BARRIERS OR FILTERS,DIKES,MULCHING OR OTHER MEASURES AS APPROPRIATE.19. LIMIT CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUTES AND STABILIZE DESIGNATED ACCESS POINTS.20. NO CLEANING, FUELING OR MAINTAINING VEHICLES ON-SITE, EXCEPT IN A DESIGNATED AREAWHERE WASHWATER IS CONTAINED AND TREATED.21. STORE, HANDLE AND DISPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS/WASTES PROPERLY TOPREVENT CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.22. CONTRACTOR SHALL TRAIN AND PROVIDE INSTRUCTION TO ALLEMPLOYEES/SUBCONTRACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION BMP'S.23. CONTROL AND PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF ALL POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS, INCLUDINGPAVEMENT CUTTINGWASTES,PAINTS,CONCRETE, PETROLEUMPRODUCTS,CHEMICALS,WASHWATEROR SEDIMENTS, RINSE WATER FROM ARCHITECTURALCOPPER, AND NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES TO STORM DRAINS AND WATERCOURSES.
(E) GARAGE
(E) SINGLE FAMILY
SINGLE STORY HOME
(E) NEIGHBOR GARAGE
(E) NEIGHBOR HOUSE
(E) TERRACE
(N) TERR.
(N) ADDITION
Sheet
Scale:All drawings & Specifications provided as instruments of service are the property of the Designer whether the project is executed or not.It is unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the Designer. To duplicate or make copies of these documents,partly or in whole, for use for other projects & buildings.Rev.:Description :Date :Revisions one
DESIGN PLANNING
form
3841 24th Street, #A
E-mail: TIM@FORMONEDESIGN.COM
Ph: 415.819.0304
San Francisco, CA 94114
Fong Residence2 Kenmar WayBurlingame, CA 94010Title :Project :Date :08-19-17Drawn :Tim Raduenz17_035Job No. :Owner :APN#: 027-130-110CONTRACTOR:2 Kenmar WayBurlingame, CA 94010BUILDING SETZONING: R1LOT SQ.FT.: 0.32 Acres Mr. + Mrs. Eric FongSee Details
A1.2
Scale: 3/32" = 1'-0"
1PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN
A1.2 PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLANGENERAL NOTES & SCOPE
1. PROTECT ALL EXISTING TREES DURING CONSTRUCTION, CONSULT ARBORIST AS
REQUIRED.
2. NO EXISTING TREES TO BE REMOVED
3. WATER CONSERVATION IN LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE NOT REQUIRED SINCE
LANDSCAPE WILL NOT BE REHABILITATED AS NOTED ON PLANS.
4. A PLAN HAS BEEN DEVELOPED, AND WILL BE IMPLEMENTED, TO MANAGE STORM
WATER DRAINAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION. CGC 4.106.2 & CGC 4.106.3
5. ALL SPRINKLER DRAINAGE SHALL BE PLACED INTO LANDSCAPING AREAS
PROJECT SITE1A0.1ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.201842SHEET INDEXPARCEL MAPA0.1A0.3A0.3.1A0.4A0.5A1.1A2.1A2.3A3.0A3.1A3.2A3.3A3.4A4.1A5.1A8.0A8.1A8.2COVER SHEET, VICINITY MAP, AREA CALCS,SHEET INDEX,AREA PLANNEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT ANALYSISEXISTING AND PROPOSED SITE PLANSAREA CALC SHEETEXISTING MAIN FLOOR & LOWER LEVEL DEMOPLAN WITH DEMOLITION NOTESPROPOSED LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN AND MAINFLOOR PLANPROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN & PROPOSEDROOF PLANEXISTING WALL CALCULATION SHEETPROPOSED & EXISTING FRONT ELEVATIONSPROPOSED & EXISTING RIGHT SIDE ELEVATIONSEXISTING REAR ELEVATION & BUILDING SECTIONPROPOSED & EXISTING LEFT SIDE ELEVATIONSPROPOSED SECTIONEXISTING GARAGE FLOOR PLAN AND ELEVATIONARCHITECTURAL DETAILSARCHITECTURAL DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONSHORIZONTAL SIDING SPECIFICATIONSSHEET# DESCRIPTIONR A F F E R T Y R E S I D E N C EB U R L I N G A M E , C A L I F O R N I AAPN#:PROJECT ADDRESS:PROPERTY OWNER:ZONING:OCCUPANCY:CONSTRUCTION:FOR CODE COMPLIANCE:PARKING:026-053-1201408 BERNAL AVENUEBURLINGAME, CA 94010HOLLI & JOHN RAFFERTY1408 BERNAL AVENUEBURLINGAME, CA 94010R1-CR-3, U-1TYPE V-B2016 CALIFORNIA CODES (CBC, CEC, CMC, CPC, CRC )2016 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE2016 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODEONE COVERED AND ONE UNCOVERED OFF STREET PARKING SPACELOT SIZE:6,000 sf15' 1ST STORY AND 20' 2ND STORY4'30' AVERAGE HEIGHTFRONT & REAR SETBACK:SIDE SETBACK:HEIGHT LIMIT: 405.6 sf (100 SF COVERED PORCH CREDIT)1,571.1 sf1,038.7 sf3,015.4 sf < 3,020 SF MAXPROPOSED LOWER LEVEL:PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR:PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR:TOTAL PROPOSED RESIDENCE: 500sf1,510 sf 342 sf (NOT INCLUDED IN FAR)2,010 sf(E) LOWER LEVEL:(E) FIRST FLOOR:(E) DETACHED GARAGE:TOTAL EXISTING W/O GARAGE:ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA RATIO (32%+1,100):3,020sfPROJECT SUMMARYALLOWABLE COVERAGE (40%):EXISTING LOT COVERAGE:PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE:2,400 sf1,858 sf (MAIN HOUSE + (E) GARAGE)1,868 sf (MAIN HOUSE + (E) GARAGE )3VICINITY MAP5N.T.S.LANDSCAPE CONSULTANTL-1L-2L-3CIVIL AND SURVEY CONSULTANTSSU-1C-1C-2P-1LANDSCAPE PLANSLANDSCAPE PLANSLANDSCAPE PLANSLAND SURVEYGRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANEROSION CONTROL PLANPOLLUTION PREVENTION SHEETPROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION FOR ARCHITECTURAL PRESENTATION
45°45°45°PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION1A3.1+/- 1/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING FRONT ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0"2ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.2018
PROPOSED RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION1A3.21/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"2ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.2018
1A3.31/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING REAR ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0"2ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.2018PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION
PROPOSED LEFT SIDE ELEVATION 1A3.41/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING LEFT SIDE ELEVATION AND SITE SECTION1/4" = 1'-0"2ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.2018
A5.1ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.2018(E) GARAGE FLOOR PLAN 11/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION (E) TO REMAINEXISTING REAR ELEVATION (E) TO REMAIN41/4" = 1'-0"31/4" = 1'-0"51/4" = 1'-0"61/4" = 1'-0"EXISTING FRONT ELEVATION (E) TO REMAINEXISTING LEFT SIDE ELEVATION (E) TO REMAINEXISTING GARAGE PHOTOS 2
LOT 23
BLOCK 46
EASTON ADDITION
6,000 SQ.FT.
0.14 ACRES
LOT 24
LOT 2245°1A0.3STREET SCAPE ELEVATION - BERNAL AVENUE4N.T.SPROPOSED AREA PLAN W/ CONTEXTUAL AERIAL VIEWN.T.S.ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.201831/16"=1'-0"51412140814041/16"=1'-0"NEIGHBORS FRONT VIEWSNEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET1412140814042N.T.S.EXISTING VIEWS OF PROPERTY140914016NEIGHBORHOOD AVE. FRONT SETBACK
LOT 23
BLOCK 46
EASTON ADDITION
6,000 SQ.FT.
0.14 ACRES
LOT 24
LOT 22EXISTING SITE PLAN W/ FIRST FLOOR PLAN1A0.41/8" = 1'-0"PROPOSED SITE PLAN W/ ROOF PLAN21/8" = 1'-0"ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.2018
PROPOSED CROSS SECTION1A4.11/4" = 1'-0"1/4" = 1'-0"2ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.2018
LANDSCAPE PLAN1L-11/8= 1'-0"OF SHEETSJOB NO.SHEETCHECKEDDATESCALEDRAWNMYMY5/18/16AS NOTEDxxxRAFFERTY RESIDENCE
1408 BERNAL AVENUE LANDSCAPE PLAN
BURLINGAME, CA 94010 650-327-2644EXP.11/30/17SIGNATUREDATEMara Young1/18/17
HYDROZONE DIAGRAM1L-33/16" = 1'-0"OF SHEETSJOB NO.SHEETCHECKEDDATESCALEDRAWNMYMY5/17/16AS NOTEDxxxRAFFERTY RESIDENCE
1408 BERNAL AVENUE HYDROZONE DIAGRAM
BURLINGAME, CA 94010 650-327-2644 TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA- 1,537 S.F.SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREA- 0 S.F.MAWA- 28,550 gallons/yrETWA- 27,571 gallons/yrEXP.11/30/17SIGNATUREDATEMara Young1/18/17
1A0.1-1ISSUE LOGDATEFEBRUARY 2016DRAWNY&BCHECKEDAEYJOB #RAFFERTYA.P.N. 026-053-120Y O U N G A N D B O R L I K
A R C H I T E C T S ,I N C O R P O R A T E D
4962 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE #218 LOS ALTOS, CA 94022
TEL: (650) 688-1950 FAX: (650) 323-1112 w w w . y b a r c h i t e c t s . c o mLICENSED ARCHI
T
ECTANDREW E R NLE Y
O
UNGSTAT
E OF CA L IFORNIAREN. 4 -3 0 -1 9C-21679
1408 BERNAL AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR:
RAFFERTY RESIDENCE
Copyright 2018 YOUNG AND BORLIK ARCHITECTS INC. All designs, drawings, and written materials appearing herein, are protected and constitute original and unpublished work of the Architect and may not be revised, re-used, copied, or disclosed without the written consent of the Architect. Equipment manufactured by others is excluded. Drawings and specifications are instruments of architectural service, and shall remain the the property of the Architect. Use is restricted to the site for which they are prepared.PLANNING SUBMITTAL JUN. 09. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 19. 2017GREEN POINTS ADDEDOCT. 02. 20142PLAN CHECK REVS.AUGUST 19. 20141PLAN CHECK REVNOV. 23. 2016PLAN CHECK REVS.JAN 30. 2017PLANNING SUBMITTAL JULY.17.2018FRONT ELEVATION RENDERING
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Community Development Department
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: September 6, 2018 Director's Report
TO: Planning Commission Meeting Date: September 10, 2018
FROM: Ruben Hurin, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: FYI – REVIEW OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
DESIGN REVIEW PROJECT AT 1337 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED R-1.
Summary: An application for Design Review and Special Permit for declining height envelope
for a first and second story addition to an existing single family dwelling and new detached
garage at 1337 California Drive, zoned R-1, was approved by the Planning Commission on
October 11, 2016 (see attached October 11, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes). A
building permit was issued in December 2017 and construction is underway.
With this application, the applicant is requesting approval of the proposed changes listed below.
Please see the attached letter from the property owner, date stamped September 6, 2018, for
an explanation of the changes made to the project.
Change the exterior siding on the second floor of the house and on the detached garage
from stucco to 8-inch fiber cement horizontal lap siding with 1 x 4 corner trim board.
Eliminate the corbels under the second floor bay window cantilevers along the left side
of the house.
Relocate the existing window in the den (first floor window at the front of the house) to
the second floor at the rear of the house (in master bedroom). Replace the relocated
window with a new fiberglass clad wood window to match other new windows.
Relocate the existing window in the living room (first floor window at the front porch of
the house) to the second floor along the right side of the house (in bedroom #2).
Replace the relocated window with a new fiberglass clad wood window to match other
new windows.
The applicant submitted the originally approved and proposed floor plans and building
elevations, date stamped September 6, 2018, to show the changes to the previously approved
design review project.
Other than the changes detailed in the applicant’s letter and revised plans, there are no other
changes proposed to the design of the house. If the Commission feels there is a need for more
study, this item may be placed on an action calendar for a second review and/or public hearing
with direction to the applicant.
Ruben Hurin
Senior Planner
Community Development Department Memorandum
October 18, 2011
Page 2
Attachments:
Explanation letter submitted by the property owners, date stamped September 6, 2018
October 11, 2016 Planning Commission Minutes
Originally approved and proposed floor plans and building elevations, date stamped September 6,
2018