The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About628 Trenton Way - Staff Report? ' �� :� ,,. a � , ` � � p �� . � ; Item No. 8f Regular Action Item �� . � i t � `.�:" .. . _.."'-'� ��, , ,��... , .,_� . __ . . . _ �`^.._ . . . . .xs " �; m �. .. " G ` � , e. . �> .... . F �, � �. ,„._ . Hd��. ""� � ' - ws., a . _._ .,. � '� �m` "r� ,, � � � ,„ ,� :9'�-� . ,.. - .^'w . t �a�� ; , �.d � .�... 4 "�.�x . . . � . . � � .. . � . .� � .. . ' . �` � .... �. .. . . ' ' . .. �"t PROJECT LOCATION 628 Trenton Way City of Burlingame Design Review and Special Permifs Address: 628 Trenton Way Item No. 8f Regular Action Item Meeting Date: December 14, 2015 Request: Application for Design Review and Special Permits for an attached garage and basement ceiling height for a new two-story single family dwelling and attached garage. Applicant and Architect: Toby Long, Toby Long Design Property Owners: Charlotte Payton and Greg Smelzer General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 029-165-140 Lot Area: 5,000 SF Zoning: R-1 Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section 15303 (a), which states that construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone is exempt from environmental review. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. Project Description: The proposal includes demolishing an existing one-story house and attached garage to build a new, two-story single family dwelling with a basement and attached garage. The proposed house and attached garage will have a total floor area of 2,699 SF (0.54 FAR) where 2,700 SF (0.54 FAR) is the maximum allowed (including covered porch and basement exemptions). The proposed project is 1 SF below the maximum allowed FAR and is therefore within 1% of the maximum allowed FAR. The proposed two-story house will have a 600 SF basement. The applicant is requesting a Special Permit for a basement ceiling height of greater than 6'-6", where the proposed basement ceiling height is 8'-0". The top of the finished floor above the basement is less than 2'-0" above existing grade and therefore the basement floor area exemption applies to this space. A total of 600 SF has been deducted from the FAR calculation (the maximum allowable exemption is 700 SF). The proposed attached garage provides two code-compliant covered parking spaces for the proposed four- bedroom house (two off-street parking spaces are required for a four-bedroom house, one of which must be covered). There is one uncovered parking space (9' x 20') provided in the driveway. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following applications: ■ Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and attached garage (CS 25.57.010 (a) (1)); ■ Special Permit for an attached two-car garage (CS 25.26.035 (a)); and ■ Special Permit for a basement ceiling height that is greater than 6'-6" (8'-0" ceiling height proposed) (CS 25.26.035 (fl). Intentionally left blank. Design Review and Special Permits 628 Trenton Way 628 Trenton Way �ot Area: 5,�0o SF Plans date stam ed: December 4, 2015 PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED SETBACKS ,. ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Front (1st flr): 15'-2" 15'-2" (block average) (2nd flr): 26'-1" 20'-0" (attached garage): 29'-2" 25'-0" for two single-wide garage doors Side (left): 4'-0" 4'-0" (right): 7'-5" 4'-0" Rear (1st flr): 22'-4" to house (20'-0" to chimney) ; 15'-0" (2nd flr): 31'-9" 20'-0" , ............... ........... . ................... .. Lot Coverage: 1732 SF 2000 SF 34.6% 40% FAR: 2699 SF 2700 SF' 0.54 FAR 0.54 FAR # of bedrooms: 4 --- Basement: basement with a ceiling height Special Permit required per C.S. greater than 6'-6" (8'-0" ceiling 25.26.035 (fl height proposed) 2 Off-Street Parking: 2 covered, attached 3 2 covered (20' x 20' clear interior dimensions) ; (20' x 20' clear interior dimensions) 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') : Building Height: 26'-10" (22'-8" previously proposed) ; 30'-0" DH Envelope: complies C.S. 25.26.075 ' (0.32 x 5000 SF) + 1100 SF = 2700 SF (0.54 FAR) Z Special Permit requested for a basement ceiling height that is greater than 6'-6" (8'-0" ceiling height proposed). 3 Special Permit required for an attached garage. Staff Comments: See attached memos from the Building, Parks, Engineering, Fire and Stormwater Divisions. Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on August 24, 2015, 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 24, 2015, Planning Commission Minutes). Please refer to the attached applicant's response letter dated November 24, 2015 and revised plans, date stamped December 4, 2015, for responses to the Commission's comments and a detailed list of changes made to the project since the design review study meeting. 2 Design Review and Special Permits 628 Trenton Way Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows: Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Required Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit, the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.51.020 a-d): (a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood; (b) the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood; (c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and (d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is appropriate. Suggested Findings for Special Permit (Attached Garage): That the proposed attached two-car garage complies with the off-street parking requirement for the project, that the attached two-car garage is located 29'-2" back from the front property line, contains two single-wide door and is integrated into the architecture of the house by way of a flat roof and siding to match the house and the neighborhood, and that no protected sized trees are to be removed within the footprint of the new house and attached garage, the project may be found to be compatible with the special permit criteria listed above. Suggested Findings for Special Permit Findings (Basement): That the majority of the basement height is located below grade and therefore does not add to the mass and bulk of the structure, and that the plate height of the basement (8'-0") is consistent with the plate height of the proposed first floor, the project may be found to be compatible with the special permit criteria listed above. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the application, and consider public testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action should include specific findings supporting the Planning Commission's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the Planning Commission. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped December 4, 2015 sheets A0.0 through A8.0 and L-1; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staf�; 3 Design Review and Special Permits 628 Trenton Way 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Building Division's August 5, 2015 and May 22, 2015 memos, the Parks Division's June 1, 2015 memo, the Engineering Division's May 27, 2015 memo, the Fire Division's June 1, 2015 memo and the Stormwater Division's May 27, 2015 and August 8, 2014 memos shall be met; 5. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be placed upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community Development Director; 6. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 7. 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; 8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial orfull demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2013 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: 11. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the applicant shall provide a certification by the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, that demonstrates that the project falls at or below the maximum approved floor area ratio for the property; 12. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 13. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 14. 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; and 4 Design Review and Special Permits 628 Trenton Way 15. 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. Ruben Hurin Senior Planner c. Toby Long, Toby Long Design, applicant and designer Attachments: August 24, 2015 Planning Commission Minutes Applicant's Response to Commission's Comments, dated November 24, 2015 Email submitted by Toby Long, dated August 22, 2015 Application to the Planning Commission Applicant's Letter of Explanation, dated May 20, 2015 Special Permit Applications Information Sheet — Windows Staff Comments Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed) Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed December 4, 2015 Aerial Photo 5 � CITY �. ,, - �, ,� , '`�- : / ! 1 w �:,.., ryco�l.:::��7 �� 0 �� m 4wow<r- City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes Planning Commission BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Monday, August 24, 2015 7:00 PM Council Chambers c. 628 Trenton Way, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review and Special Permits for a basement and attached garage for a new, two-story single family dwelling and attached garage (Toby Long, Toby Long Design, applicant and designer; Charlotte Payton and Greg Smelzer, property owners) (57 noticed) Staff Contact: Ruben Hurin All Commissioners had visited the property. Gum spoke fo neighbors on right and left and direct/y across the street. Senior Planner Hurin provided an overview of the project. Questions of staff.� > Have factory-built homes been built in the City previous/y? (Meeker: As long as they comply with alI applicab/e building codes they are permitted.) Chair DeMartini opened the public hearing. Greg Sme/zer, Charlotte Payton and Toby Long represented the applicant. Commission questions/comments: > Have they looked at providing a detached garage? (Long: that type of design wou/d have compromised too much of the rear-yard.) > Was a lower plate height considered for the second floor? (Long: have only considered the nine-foot plate height.) > Is there an attempt to match fhe finishes of the home next door? (Long: the materia/s on the home next door are materials that are a preference of the designer,� attempting to complement, not emulate.) > Why remove both street trees and replace with one? (Long: are open to looking at this matter.) > Haven't seen simulated turf in the front-yard before; what is the thought process? (Long: are biased to doing this for the aesthetic. But are open to discussion.) > Provide a sample of the Andersen 100 Series window that is proposed. > What is the pu�pose of the shed? (Long: sforage.) > Provide a sample of the synthetic turf, but would prefer drought tolerant landscaping. > For the screens, provide some deviation in the screen design so that it doesn't completely match the neighboring house. > Is the landscaping intended to be Modern and a bit rigid in its design; there are no other ornamental provided? (Long: are open to more of a conversation regarding the landscaping.) Make the landscaping a bit more lush to soften the appearance. Most concerned with the large tree species. Public Comments: Mary Ann Notz, 619 Trenton Way: Fee/s that the design of the new home and the neighboring home are too similar in appearance and provide fhe appearance of a very large home. This is very out of character with the other homes on the street. Has lived in Burlingame since 1969 and is not aware of any homes with basements among her acquaintances. City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 12/5/2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 24, 2075 Frank Henley, home to the right: Unfortunate that the design is so similar to his home. Doesn't want to get off on the wrong foot with the neighbor, but it is so similar. Hopes that the design can be altered in some manner to differentiate the iwo homes. Chair DeMartini c/osed the public hearing. Commission discussion: > /s a handsome design. The massing and sca/e are well done. Understands the challenges of designing fo� a 5, 000 square foot lot. The landscaping needs some work. > Wants to support the design like that proposed. Is concerned with placing two homes of such similar design next to one another. Not sure how the neighborhood context is affected. Needs to be revised to not be so identical. > The two homes read as so similar given that the other homes in the neighborhood are similar in sca/e and design. > Should attempt to make the designs more dissimilar. > Doesn't have a problem with the attached garage given the existing pattern in the neighborhood and the desire to have a more useable rear-yard. > Hard to say that this design doesn't fit in the neighborhood when the neighboring design was approved under the same design review criteria by a prior Planning Commission. > A key component will be the landscaping, but still not sold on artificial turf. Consider drought-resistant landscaping. > Appreciates the effort to minimize the overall height. Supports the contemporary design with the attached garage. Chair DeMartini made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Sargent, to place the application on the regular action calendar when ready. Chair DeMartini asked for a voice vote, and the motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 6- DeMartini, Loftis, Gum, Sargent, Terrones, and Gaul Absent: 1 - Bandrapalli City of Burlingame Page 2 Printed on 12/5/2015 ARCHITECTURE tobylon�design ' MEMORAN DUM/TRANSMITTAL DATE: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 TO: Ruben Hurin - City of Burlingame Ptanning FROM: Abby Wittman REGARDING: 628 Trenton Way - Planning Commission Comment Response/Summary of changes Ruben, We are submitting revised drawings for the project at 628 Trenton Way to address the comments from t e August 24th Planning Commission meeting. The comments can be summarized in two categories, responses betow: 1) Proposed proiect is too similar to adiacent hou_se at 624 Trenton In order to make the proposed project distinctly different from the adjacent residence, we have changed the roof geometry from a flat roof to a butterfly roof. This gives the buitding a new three-dimensional shape without changing the footprint. This form has further influenced the design of the larger windows to indude the slope of the roof in their confi�uration. All wood screens have been removed from the front of the house so as not to resemble those on the adjacent property. As far as materials, the stone veneer, which is also present on the neighboring building, has been reptaced with metat siding. The wood siding has been lightened in color. The trim and stucco are now both in the gray palette. 2) Landscape plan needs more development We've worked with a landscape designer to provide more detail and variety of P�a�us a ve tlowaa ea op act a�n The artificial turf has been replaced with native and or drought tolerant plants, p rY turf. The screening around the fence line has more variety throughout the property. The front yard is more open with the two of the required tree on the fence line next to the driveway. Overall, we believe this to be a more thorough and variegated plan which adds interest to the property and softens the tines at the base of the building. Please contact me if you have any questions or need more detail regarding these revisions. i can be reached by phone at 415.420.6908 or via email abbyCtobylongdeign.com. Sincerely, ; j Y Abby ittriman 6114 LA SALLE AVENUE #552, OAKLAND, CA 94611 P:415.905.9030 WWW.TOBYLONGDESIGN.COM 08.24.15 PC Meeting Item #9c 628 Trenton Way Page 1 of 2 From: Toby Long, AIA [mailto:toby@tobylongdesign.com] Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2015 4:32 PM To: CD/PLG-Hurin, Ruben Subject: Fwd: house plans Re: neighbor letter. It's not the adjacent neighbor. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Charlotte Payton <pavtoncharlotte(�a,yahoo.com> Date: August 22, 2015 at 3:56:41 PM PDT To: "Toby Long, AIA" <toby(a�tob�gdesi�n.com> Subject: Re: house plans COMMUNICATION RECEIVED AFTER PREPARATION OF STAFF REPORT RECEIVED AUG 24 2015 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD — PLANNING DIV. They live around the corner on Dwight. I think the address is 424 Dwight, but not sure of the house number. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 21, 2015, at 9:28 AM, Toby Long, AIA <tobvna,tobvlong;desi n.com> wrote: excellent.....which neighbor? i'll send to ruben and let him know which address. ��f�y��A�a��-��-� I presenting Clever Homes 6114 la salle avenue #552 oakland ca 94611 415.905.90301 415.344.0808 prefab evolved. www.deverhomes.net <image003.png>like us on facebook � �. 08.24.15 PC Meeting Item #9c 628 Trenton Way Page 2 of 2 From: Charlotte Payton [mailto:qavtoncharlotte@vahoo.com] Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 7:47 AM To: Toby Long <tobv@tobvlon�desi�n.com> Subject: Fwd: house plans Hi Toby, Here's a note from a future neighbor for the design review board. Thanks, Charlotte Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Ariel <arielfrank(a�gmail.com> Date: August 20, 2015 at 7:56:19 PM PDT To: Charlotte Payton <paytoncharlotte(u�yahoo.com> Subject: Re: house plans RECEIVED AUG 24 2015 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD — PLANNING DIV. Wow, the plans look amazing! ! I can't wait to see your home when it's done! And I'm so excited we're going to be neighbors soon! Keep me posted on how everything progresses :) Hope to see you soon! Ariel On Aug 19, 2015 7:50 PM, "Charlotte Payton" <pavtoncharlotte(a�vahoo.com> wrote: Hi Ariel, Here are our house plans. Let me know what you think. I can't wait to be neighbors! Thanks so much! Charlotte � MEMORANDUM/TRANSMITTAL DATE: T0: FROM: REGARDING: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 City of ��N�Pla�nning Abby Wittman 628 Trenton Way - Design Review Submittal ARCHITECTURE .` � tobylon�design � ;:�,�-�z��y�'� �� 2�5� �;�L1�1GAN1E �,�NING DaV. Ptease see attached proposal for a new two story residence at 628 Trenton Way. This proposal includes the demolition of the existing 1150 sf house with attached 395 sf garage. The new construction indudes 2349 sf at the first and second story, and a 598 sf basement for a total of 2947sf of habitable space. The 451 sf attached garage brings the total square new footage to 2947 sf. This project also includes 155 sf of covered porch at the first ftoor. Total F.A.R is 2699 sf of the permitted 2700 sf. Total Lot coverage is 1857 of the permitted 2000 sf. This new two story residence emphasizes compatibitity with the neighborhood in that the mass and scale is simitar to the two adjacent properties at 632, and 624 Trenton Way. These are both two story single family residences. The proposed building is in compliance with the dectining height envetope and the daylight plane, which acknowledges the necessity for natural light between buildings of similar heights. Dense landscape screening at the property line and wood screens are proposed on the windows to preserve privacy. At the south property line, adjacent to the 1-story portion of 632 Trenton Way, the exterior wall of the proposed second story is actually 5'-10" further from the restriction of the daylight plane in order to preserve the natural light and views consistent with the existing residence at 628 Trenton. The proposed residence includes an attached garage that is consistent with the existing house on the property as well as the properties on both sides of the street. This garage is a two car garage which is also replacing a two car �garage on the property. The proposed residence has two doors shown at the garage to break up this facade. The existing residence has one garage door, similar to properties at 632 and 624 Trenton Way, on the same side of the street. The new construction acknowledges the adjacent properties in setting back from the one story portion of 632 Trenton and providing dense landscaping and window screens to provide privacy for 624 Trenton. At the rear of the building, the mass is reduced further to one story in order to be consistent with the existing building in that portion of the property. Open space at the rear deck is established facing 632, much tike the courtyard form that is present in the existing building. The proposed building is set back from the north property line an additional 3'-6 from the 4'-0" side setback, adjacent to 624 Trenton. This is 3'-6" more than the existing building, which promotes more light between the two story forms and additional area for landscape screening. The one-story garage etement with the second story offset facing the street atso mimics the pattern shown at 624 Trenton. The project also features a single story front porch that is consistent with the features of alt residences on this street and neighborhood. The neighborhood material palette is comprised of siding, stucco and stone. The proposed project includes atl of these exterior materials in its language, including wood privacy screens which are found on 624 Trenton. 6114 LA SALLE AVENUE #552, OAKLAND, CA 94611 P:415.905.9030 WWW.TOBYLONGDESIGN.COM � 4RCHITECTLRE tob lon desi n ='��,� Y � g The building will be constructed using off-site construction techniques and advanced prefabrication systems. The structure will be a wood-framed modular construction, regulated by the State of California as Factory-Built Housing. By utilizing the facilities of a factory, the majority of this home will be constructed off-site inctuding the rough construction and the finishes, both interior and exterior. The house will be built at the same time the site work is being constructed, affording both a significant decrease in the time required to build the house, and numerous environmental advantages from the recycting of materials to the quality-control of the structure itself. The project is currently designed to include up to 6 modules, which will be set by a targe crane following the completion of the foundation. This process �enerally takes one day, and wilt be followed by the finishing of parts of the building at the joints of the modules, and the construction of the decks, and eaves. The entire process for construction is anticipated to take between 4 to 6 months, and will greatly reduce the daity impact of construction to the site and the neighborhood. 6114 LA SAL�E AVENUE #552, OAKLAND, CA 94611 P:415.905.9030 WWW.TOBYLONGDESIGN.COM City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlin�ame.orQ �� CITY � � � BIJRLINGAME ��,,., � °� CITY OF BURLINGAME SPECIAL I� PERMIT APPLICATION 628 TRENTON WAY - ATTACHED GARAGE The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. 1. Explain why the blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhooc� The proposed residence includes an attached garage that is consistent with the existing house on the property as well as the properties on both sides of the street. This garage is a two car garage which is atso reptacing a two car garage on the property. The proposed residence has two doors shown at the garage to break up this facade. The existing residence has one garage door, similar to properties at 632 and 624 Trenton Way, on the same side of the street. 2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish �naterials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood. The proposed residence combines one story and two story elements to reflect the language estabtished on this side of Trenton Way. it proposes a one-story garage element, with the second story offset which mimics the pattern shown at 624 Trenton. it also features a singte story front porch that is consistent with the a{_,� features of atl residences on this street and neighborhood. The neighborhood - �� material palette is comprised of siding, stucco and stone. The proposed project inctudes all of these exterior materials in its language ,. ',,; ,;; 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)? 1.Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood �_;;_`f � (_f �'C',�.�,s� ,., �;-_ :�.,��, , The styte of the neighborhood inctudes very simple buildings with clean lines, large windows and very little ornamentation. The proposed project follows this pattern. By incorpora�ing two doors on the garage, this reflects the door proportion of the nei�hboring homes with a single �ar garage and increases compatibility compared to the existing two gar garage with one door. 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; All residences on this street incorporate attached garages with additional uncovered parking at the front of the tot. The proposed project follows this pattern, improving the look of a two car gara�e present in the existing and adjacent properties, by proposing two doors instead of one. This garage is also set back from the property line 4'-3" beyond the required 25' and 14' further than the existing garage. 3.Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; ' On this side of Trenton, three out of the six properties are currently two story buildings. the proposed project will follow this pattern. Incorporating one story elements at the garage, porch and rear living area reduces the mass of the building. The proposed project follows a very traditional pattern language both in materiats and scale consistent with the neighborhood and adjacent properties, see above. 4 Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties. The attached garage is located with the same 4'-0" side set back as the existing garage. Toward the rear of the property, the massing is reduced as it opens up to a deck, similar to the courtyard shape of the existing residence. S.Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Bamboo is proposed at the perimeter of the property in order to soften and screen any massing visible to adjacent neighbors. 4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is appropriate. Only hydrangea and camelia tree/ shrubs are to be removed witli in the footprint of the garage and deck areas. these will be replaced by bamboo to continue a function of screening. SPECPERM.FRM � City of Burlingame Planning Deparhnent SOl Primrose Road P(650) SS8-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.or� �� CITY O� Bl�1RLI�Q�AME I «�� a CITY OF BURLINGAME SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION 628 TRENTON WAY - BASEMENT with interior ceiling height g�eater than 6.5' The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. 1. Explain why the blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the e.xisting sfreet and neighborhood The proposed basement is located below existing grade and will not be visible to adjacent properties or from the street 2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood The basement does not have any exterior walls that are visible from the neighborhood. 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)? � I.Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood No walls with exterior style etements visible. 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; The proposed basement does not affect parking 3.Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; Style, mass, and bulk not visibte . y.`-•-'' '{ q p.<.: �� J� ��'� f'' � i ` �' � �J �v, ,r or- a�.�r�.��can,�� .}!:�..�.��i�!v�.E �-;_�,� ;,,,,�,�,a� ;,;,; � 4 Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties. The adjacent properties will not be able to see this basement area because it is below grade and not visible beyond the fence S.Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Mass and bulk not visibie above grade, no landscape screening necessary. 4. E�lain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is appropriate. No trees removed within footprint SPECPERM.FRM