The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1435 Bellevue Avenue - Staff Report_ ! �.,.�� .".� � � �� (riew building) (conversion or extension) Ispplicati.on to the Planning Commission and :�ity Council of the C�ty of Burlingame la PROJECT NAME ceR��s�IOG� C�ES`I"r �� \' % �.�.v...�` Date Filed �� '7 Study by P eC e�'• b�7� P e C. Hear ing 9-�'� "�� I�ction C,Co Consideration Action 2 0 ?1PPLICANT �-�:�5 ��-�-�i,VtT� ASt5f3CIA�'ES a�a k�S�C�A�'1�S Name �y: �',�,�• i�ICQI�.�iIDiS �.� SC�I�?g TT�7C. % Telephone 343-�11W-d Adclress �p09 Cali:f ornia Drive g I3urZ�.�.�ame � Gal� i orn.ia 3a PROPERTY OWNER � � Name_ 1435 BEL�'y�U�` zS:SdCI�?3'ES Telephone �1?-3-32�3L1- Address 100� Cali�orni� Drive, Burlin��ame, Cali�ornia 4 e LOCATION 1429, Z43�� and lti-35 Bellevue �.zr�nue, Bu?^Zi�.��a�n�, Ca1 iio��.ia, Zot 153 .P-�n. Z,o-� 16; Block 10 �3urlin�;a�e I,anc� Co. P�Iap T�1o. 2, Burliil�a�e. 5o DESCRIPTION CF THE CONDOMINIUM �uilc�inE; to be zhree y� �o;�� o� livin�; area abo�re �artially "belotia �radeT' ��.�a�e. 2'� Condominium Iivin�; ��-rxits com- �risin�: 6 One-Bedroo�/t�ne Bath i?nits • 15 Tz•ro�-�edroo�n/Teao �3ath uni-�s; _ -�'1�=�0- e-room l�o a llen un.zcs.�� Sc�. �'u. to 0�� Sq. �'t. in size., 6o DOCUMENTS TO BE SUBMITTED: " Project Plans Proof of Ownership Landscaping Plan CEQA Requirements EIR Lightina Plan CC&R and Agreements Public Improvement Plans Tentative Subdivision Map 7o FEE: $50ed0 Receipt No. `i-Z� Received �y 8 e CER'I'Ir ICATION BY APPLICANT I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the inf�rmaticn giver, herein is true and correct to the �est of my Jcnawledge and belief. signature ,��-�� . Date . °o HAS AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM BEEN COMPLETED? YES ,� NO If�NO, submit this additional form, toge�her with $25v00, to the , Planning Department. lOe,ATTACH A STATEMENT DESCRIBING THE PROJECT`S OVERALL IMPACT ON SCHOOLS, PARKS, UTILITIES, 1VEIGFiBOP.HOODS, STREETS, ^1RAFFIC, PARKING AND OTHER COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND RESOURCESB ' llo PLANS REQUIRED Ao .A detailed development plan of the projecz including the location, treatment and sizes of structures, parking layout, access areas and exterior elevations. B. A detailed landscaping plan indicatinq types and sizes of landscaping materials. C. A detailed lighting plan indicating location and nature of lighting and lighting fixtures in common arease 12. ATTACH A COPY OF CONDITIONS, COVENANTS AND F2ESTRICTIONS, AND ANY CONDOMINIUP-4 AGREEMENTS FOR THE PROJECT SETTING FOP.TH THE OCCUPANCY AND MANAGEMENT POLICIES. 13. VdILI� THE PROJECT REQUIRE THE DEDICATION OF LAND OR EASEMENTS FOR STREET WIDr.NIiQG, PUBLIC ACCESS OR OTHER PUBLIC PURPOSE? YES NO y If YES, attacn plans and other evidence of intenta 14. IS APPLICANT THE LEGAL OWNER OF THE PROPERTY? YES NO � If NO o 'rT� & St' Car�panp Ao Owner's name (�'Ir, Robe_r� G�-c�s} i-;:es, I�atherin� Y. r��vers Be Owner's address 1426 �urliz�rattte_��ve. 14:--7�,,'7 Bellevue� jf�yanne ��'�.IiiZ�c'� i a �a �".LZ �c`l.. � �d1 fi ► Ce Attach signed statement from the property owner ndec�la�ing �cnowledge of and agreement to this condominium permit application. 15e EIR REQUIREMENTS � (A) (A,B & C) or (D) 1�. Environmental Assessment form received �-s $25 fee, Receipt No . ��Z�' B. Draft EIR reeeived C. Planning Commission EIR study D. Council reslution to certiLy, date Eo EIR negative declara-tion posted $175/$200 fee,Receipt No. Hearing Res. No. $25 fee, Receipt No. - �"`urlingame Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 September 28, 1977 � 6. FINAL PARCEL MAP, BEING A RESUBDIVISION TO COMBINE LOT 15 (APN 029-121-060/070) AND A PORTION OF LOT 16 (APN 029-121-080), BtOCK 10, BURLINGAME LAND COMPANY; PROPERTY AT 1429/1433/1435 BELLEVUE AVENUE, ZONED R-4, BY WILLIAM A. BARTLETT FOR D. A. NICOLAIDES ET AL'. C. E. Kirkup indicated that all staff conditions have been met and recommended apprbval of this item. C. Jacobs moved for approval of the above item; the motion was seconded by C. Cistulli and carried unanimously (7-0). 7. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR REDWOOD CREST, A 27-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1435 BELLEVUE AVENUE � (APN 029-121-060/070/080}, ZONED R-4, BY DAUID A. NICOLAIDES FOR 1435 BELLEVUE � ASSOCIATES (APPLICAN7S) WITH FIR-FED SERVICE CORP. (PROPERTY OWNER) (ND-125P POSTEG 9/16/77) Chm. Taylor read the item. C. P. Swan reviewed the application, referring to the staff report in the Commission's packet, and a repor� from the Director of Public Works dated September 23, 1977 regarding the procedures for condominium permits. He noted that a condominium application needs to satisfy municinal codes, specifically Title 25 Zoning and Title 26 Subdivisions, and that the application meets the Zoning Code. He made reference to a memorandum from Asst. C. E. Rebarchik which contains sugyested conditions. He noted that ail conditions should be satisfied�when the tenta.tive subdivision map is prepared. He briFf}y summarized the conditions of approval: (1) that Condominium Project Guidelines (Item #9) for single-line diagrams showing ihe location of all utilities be provided before a building permit is issued; (.2) that off-street parking areas be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; (3) that landscape plans be ap�roved by the Park Director; {4) that site improvements compTy with regulations of Title 26, specifically, (a) flood proiection design be approved by the City Engineer, (b) furnish plars and obtain the City Engineer's approval of separate utility service to each unit, (c) show identity and location of climate control for each unit to the City Cngineer's satisfaction,.(d) obtain City Engineer's approval of driveway profile and structural design, (e) comply with plans and maps submitted or as otherwise agreed by the City Engineer and other City departments. Arihur Dudley, 1009 California Drive, Burlingame, stated that all the conditions were acceptable; he note� that the creek running through the property had been i.raced back to Occide�tal Avenue where a 4' pipe limits the flow of water. He felt, if there were to be any problems, they would not occur at the proposed condominium site. He also noted that the property owners listed on the agenda item should be corrected to show Fir-Fed Service Corp. as property owner. Chm. Taylor asked for comments from the public. There being no one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. C. Jacobs asked about the w�dth of the walls. C. E. Kirkup stated that the wall widths must meet both the Fire Code and the Building Code; insulation would be required and basically there would be a double wall. There being no further discussion, C. Sine moved that the application be approved, noting the property owner as Fir-Fed Service Corp., approval to be subject to all conditions outlined by the City Pianner and the approval of final specifications and plans by the City Engineer and City Park Director. C. Francard seconded the motion; a roll call vote was taken and the motion carri.ed unanimously (7-0). ` Burlingame Planning Cammission Minutes Page 10 September 28, 1977 �8. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR 27 CONDOMINIUM UP;ITS AT 1435 BELLEVUE AVENUE ' (APN 029-121-060/070/080), ZONED R-4, BY �rJILLIAM A. BARTLETT FOR W. 0. NICOLAIDES & SON, INC. � Chm. Taylor read the item. C. E. Kirkup noted that all conditions are on the.map itself and recommended its approval. C. Mink moved that the above-noted Tentative Subdivision Map be approved; the motion was seconded by C. Cistulli and upon a roll call vote carried unanimously (7-0). 9. �ONDOMINIUM CONVERSION PERMIT FOR ADELINE ARMS, APd 8-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1469 EL CAMINO REAL (APN 026-013-030�, ZOPdED R-3, BY JOHN YOHANAN FOR SARKIS h1. FARD (APPLICANTS) IdITH GORDON KULLBERG ,�ND TERRANCE IP.I�lIN (PROPERTY OWNERS) (ND-126P POSTED 9/16/77) Chm. Taylor read the item. C. P. Swan briefly reviewed the application noting tha.t he felt staff did not have full details to recommend approval at this time. It was also pointed out that this is the first condominium conversion since the adoption af a condominium conversion ordinance. A City inspection and report will be required, as-built plans to show by single line diagrams the location of utilities and Title 26 Subdivisions requirements must.be satisfied and approved by the City Engineer. Noting that ihe application was not complete, C. Mink moved this item be removed from the agenda until such time that complete information is provided staff so that. recommendations can be made for the Commission's consideration. The motion was Seconded by C. Cistulli and carried unanimously (7-0). • 10. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR 8 CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 1469 EL CAMINO REAL (APN 026- 013-030), ZONED R.-3; BY KCA ENGINEERS, INC. FOR SARKIS FARD (APPLICANT) WITH - GORDON KULLBERG AND TERRAhCE IRWIN (PROPERTY 04�NERS) As this item was related to Item 9, the same ruling applied. 11. VARIANCE FROM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS TO CONVERT T6J0 BRSEMENT PARKING SPACES INTQ A WORKSHOP; PROPERTY AT 500 PENINSULA AVENUE (APN 029-294-29G), ZONED R-3, BY ROBERT AhlD SYLVIA PISANI (ND-127P POSTED 9/16/77) Chm. Taylor read the item. Asst. C. P. reviewed the application, noting that the applicant feels he has more off-street parking than he needs and could use more storage area. He also noted that removal of two parking spaces u�ould bring the parking ll% below code. He reviewed the guidelines for granting variances and stated that staff could noi recommend approval of the application. Robert Pisani stated that he chose this area for storage because the equipment he plans to store would get rusty if stored in a metal shed outside. He also stated he would bring the shop up to code. The Commission discussed the application and several Corr�nissioners expressed concern aboui the loss of parking. It was noted that though not all the parking spaces might be in use at this time, with tenant turnover this could change and then parking would be inadequate. Chm. Taylor opened the public hearing. There'being no one wishing io speak, the public hearing was closed. Secy. Sine read two letters. One from Mrs. Ross Smith, 15 Dwight Road, dated September 22, 1977, who wrote in opposition to the application, noted that loss of off-street parking would crowd the street. She also felt the need for storage could have been anticipated when the building was constructed. A second letter in opposition to the application was received from Mr. and Mrs. Phil. Knight, 23 Dwight Road; this September 17, 1977 letter is incorporated in these minutes by reference. �� C�t�� f ��z �i�t��te SAN MATEO COUNTY CITY HALL- SOI PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 1435 Bellevue Associates c/c David A. Nicolaides 1009 California Drive Burlingame, CA. 94010 Gentlemen: October 14, 1977 TEL:(415) 342-893i Since there was no appeal or suspension by the City Council of Planning Commission action at their September 28, 1977 meetings �he condominium permit for Redwood Crest, a 27-un.it condominium project at 1435 Bellevue Avenue in an R-4 District became effective October 4, 1977. The condominium permit was unanimously appr•oved by the Planning Commission with the following conditions: (1) that Condominium Project Guidelines for single-lir�e diagrams showing the location of all utilities be provided be�=ore a building permit is issued; (2} that off-street parl:ing areas be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; (3) that landscape plans be approved by tihe Park Director; (4) that site improvemeni,s comply with regulations of Title 26, specifically, (a) flood protection design be approved by the City Engineer, (b) furnish plans and obtain the City Engineer's approval of separate utility service to each units (c) show identity and location of climate contro1 for each unit to the Cii.y Engineer's satisfaction, (d) obtain City Engineer's approval of driveway profile and structural design, (e) comply with plans and maps submitted or as otherwise agreed by the City Engineer and other City departments. Any site improvements or construction work will require separate application to the Building Department. Yours very truly, LJMS/s� cc: �i i;y C1 erk Building Inspector License Collector Property Owner: Fir-Fed Service Corp., Coast Federal Savings 444 So. E1 Camino Real San Mateo, CA. 94402 c/o West & Loan Assoc. G�� 7 _ ��-�� Wayne M. Swan City Planner Assessor's Office, Redwood City (Lot 15 and portion Lot 1G, 61ock 10, Burlingame Land Co. Map No. 2; APN 029-121-060/070/0�0) a .� - °LIIVIPOi1A��IQTAL IT7PACT REPORT" Dated: July 15, 1977 TO TII� CIT�' OF EURLII7GAA'IL; Subject: "TE�E REDGd00D CREST COIdDOMIIIIUMS" P PROPOSED 27 UIdIT CONDOn2IIdIU��4 PFOJZCT 1435 ��LL�VUL; �VEPdUE BliRLINGJIP�E, CALTFORNIA Developer: "1435 BELLEVUE �SSOCIATES" 1005 California Drive Burlingame; California General Contractor: Y�. 0. . TdICOLAIDPS & SO?:d, INC . 1009�California Drive �urlingame, California Pre�ared By: �rthur G. Dudley Condominium Consultant 1009 California Drive Burlingame, Caliiornia • r CONT�IJT S Section Page I. D�SCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT 1- 3` II. DESCRIPTION -0F ENVIROI•dMENTAL SETTING 4- 6 III. EPdVIR(�Pv'r4ENTAL IMPACT IE�' PROJECT WERE CONSTRUCTED 7 -- 12 A. Short Term Impact During Construction 7- 8 l. Site �xcavation 7 2. Street Excavation . 7 3. Building Construction 7- 8 4. Distinctive Trees 8 B. Longer Range Impacts of the Project 8- 12 1. Traffic 8 - 9 2. Parking 9 3. Population and Schools 10 4. [ti�ater 10 - 11 5. Sewers and Sewage Treatment 11 6. Storm Se�aers 11 7. Natural Environment 11- 12 8. Visual Impact 12 IV. n7ITIGI�TI0P1 I�EIISURES TO MINIMIZE 'I'HE PROJECT' S IA2PAGT !. 13 - 15 _ � L. Density and Population 13 2. Parking and Traffic 13 3. Lot Coverage 13 - 14 COI�ITEtdTS Section P�ge � 4. Building Setbacks 1,4 � 5. Fire Safety Measures 14 - 15 I V. ALTER.II�TIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT_ . 16 - 18 � 1. iQo iVew Construction 16 - 17 2. A PZaximum Density Project 17 - 18 VI. CUMULAT�VE LONG TERM EFFECT$ OF PP.OROSED _ PROJ�CT � 19 VII: IP.REVERSIBLE EIQVIRONMENTAL CI�AldGE5 IIIVOLVED � 20 , VIII. GRObVTH IDIDUCING IPQPACT OF THE PRC1PnSED PROJECT � '� 21 - 22 IX. COiiDOP�'IINIUM PROJL;CT CONSIDEP�TIONS 23 - 27 l. Choice of Type of Project for_ Site 24 - 25 � 2. Choice of Building Configuration 26 3. Economic Effect of Proposed Condo- minium Project 27 u I. DLSCRIPTIOid OF PROFO�L'D PROJECT Tiie pro.posed "Redu�ood Crest" project is a 27 unit conclominium building of three stories at 1435 �.ellevue F�venue, Burlingame, Califo.rnia. TlZe building �>>ill be designed so that '. - the one level of parlLing �aill be under the buil�ing and will be 50�� below grade and 50-o above grac�e. Tlie par]>ing area �vill have .a concrete floor, concrete-block walls, and a concrete �nd steel (post tensioned) :.eiling. Lhis latter becomes the floor o:E the first level of living units. The balance of the buildin.g will be const-ructed of wood irame, stucco and sheet- rock. The building will consist of 6 one-bedroom/one l��th units, 15 tu�o }�edroorl/two baths units, and 6-t�ao bedroom/two bath and den.units. T1�2 City of.Burlingame requires 54 parl;ing spaces of which 80o will be covered. Tlie garage below tile buslding will provide 44 parkiizg_spaces and there will }�e 10 parking spaces outside the building. The building is intended as a luxury development clesigned to appeal to affluent, mature persons wisliinq to move froi� large private homes in the Burlingame/San T�ateo/ IIillsborough area into smaller but spacious quarters. These will be condo- minium apartment homes ranging in size frorn 968 to 2002 square feet and pricea from $70,000.00 to $150,000.00. The c�evelopers -- 1 -- market research, among prospects and from the experience of having developed four very similar condominium projects during the �ast five years iaithin �ne block of thi� site, indicates typical purchasers wi11 range between 45 and 75 years in age with no elementar,y or hic�h school age children. PJo children under 18 ��ears of age will be permitted as permanent residents. The land for which the project is proposecl �_s Zoned.R-� and has a-total of 34,050 square f�et cahich �aould permit the construction of 36 units.. The developer has limited the project to 27 units in order to achieve the larger residen.tial units souc�ht by the m�rket segment for which the project is designed. Site,coverage by the building will be 48.50 of the total square feet o.f the land involved wherEas 50% is permit,te.d for R-4 lots. The below ground level 44 parkinc� spaces, 27 sL-orage lockers and equipment rooms extend under al1 of �he builGing. Seven open-air parking spaces project from the below-ground- lev�l garage area into the rear set-bacic. T.�ao open-air parlcirig spaces are �rovided at the southeasterly corner of the westerly - basement area. All parlcing areas are secured by the building or by fences and entrance thereto is througn elcctronically controlled garage doors or gates. A swimming pool at tlle westerly court.of the property, besides providing recreation, could also be used as an emergency water sunply as pa.rt of the building's fire safety features. - 2 - e Because of the building's total floor area, the Burlingame Fire:Department will require. an automatic.sprinlcler system insta.11ed throughout the building. The sprinkl�r system wil.l have automatic, direct cornmunication to the Fire Station. The building will contain two elevators.servicing the gar_age level with all three floors of living units. There will be three spacious lobbies, one on each floor. There will be three recreational roor.ls. The one on the first floor will be an exercising room with many pieces of equipment plus a Sauna Bath; the one on the second floor will be a billiard room; and the one on the third floor will be a general social room appropriately furnished. The construction of the building provides for nine foot ceilings in all areas. NTost common area ha11s are to be seven anc�' one-half f�et wide. '. There will be a total of 54 storage lockers p-rovided - two for each unit. One locker for each apartment wilT be located on the same floor as the apartment. One locker Eor each apartment will be located in the basement area. - 3 - lI. D�SCRIPTIOP•I OF �i�dVIROi�IA1ENTAL S�TTIIQG The gEneral environmen�al setting for the proposed project, ' the city of Eurlinganle, is in transition. [�ith most oi its. existing residential land develo1�ed by the late 1950's,�new residential construction in �urlinc�ame nouz must come from filli.ng in -the rare, occasional vacant lot in residential neighborhoods, converting lancl zoned ind.ustrial or commercial, or by redevelo.ping or replacing deteriorating residential struc- tures: This transitional stage, moving from existing zoning into implementation of the city's General Plan, �aill be a slow, on-going �rocess lasting at least into the 1980's. The pro- posed project coulc� be a part of this transition fror.i the existing status quo into the fu�ure envisionec3 in the General Plan. The immediate neighborhoo�' of the pronosed project is an area describecl in the Land Use Elenent oi the General Plan o.f the City of Burlingame as "designated for high c�ensity resideri- Lia1 uses in recognition of its special locational advantages. It has access to all forms of transportation and proximity to tl.ie major downto�an area in Burlingame. The dominant building type envisaged for this area_is multi-story apartment build- (1) ' ings." (1) Page 13.; General Plan for Burlingame of Burlingame Council October 20, 1969. - 4 - . Adopted by the City Published October, 1969. It is a r�sidential area of curving streets lying north- west of the Burlingame Avenue main business district of the city of Burlingame. Bounded on the west by El Camino Real, on the north by Oak Grove Avenue, on the east by California Drive and on the south by Sellevue �venue, tlie area.is presently zoned as R-3 with a limited amount of R-4 along Bellevue Avenue,and C-2 along Califarnia Drive. The Burlingame Public Library, the �urlingame City Hall, and two medical-dental oifice buildings are the only conseauential exce��tions to the totally residential character of the neigh'oorhood. I�partments and condomzniums are the prevalent structures, with single-family residences rare exceptions in this area. The riomes are the oldest, dating bacY to the 1910-1920 er�. r7ost.of tne�ti have been converted into several apartments, and typically two or tlZree additional reiatal units have been constructed in a separate building a� the rear of many of the lots. t�lost are t�ao .story buildings. The apartment buildings in this area date from the 1920's to the 1970's though most of the newest structures built in the last two or three years have been condominiums. Virtually all buildings built in the last 20 years are two stories ��ith grade level parking, or 3 stories with parking under the building partially belo�a grade and partia.11y above grade. - 5 - This is an attractive residential neighborhood of well mairitained buildings and landscaping and mature street trees. Residents appear to be single younger persons, young couples ,aithout chil�ren, or older persons.. There seem to be very few school age children in the neighborhood, �nd the condo- minium residents are primarily older working persons, retired people or widows. IL is a quiet neighborhood with comparatively light traffic so that there are "Yield" signs rather than "Stop" signs at several intersections. FThereas 24-hour, two-way traffic counts on Ll Camino Real are currently approximately 26,000 , vehicles, traffic within the neighbor_hood, in a 24-hour period in July, 1977 amounted to 1,575 cars on Bellevue ancl 1360 on Almer Road. Parkirig along the streei:s is the lea'st desirable aspect of the neighborhood environment. The high proportion of residents livinc� in single far�ily homes, converted to multi-resic�ential, quasi apartments which lack adequate off-street parking for their tenants, makes for a great m�ny cars parked, clay and night, on the streets. Ne�aly constructed apartments and condominiums complying with the higher parlcing requirements tend to correct this situation at least for occupants of such new buildi.ngs. - 6 -- i I?I. EP��VIJ:20I�I^iEPdTAL IP�PACTS IE�' PROJECT ,. i ti�lERE CC�STR.ifCTED. F. 5hort Term 2mpa.^,ts During C��n.=_:truction. l.. Site ��'xcavation. Annc_yinc� lavels of noise and dust �aould liltely be present dixring the approximately � weeks period of demolitic�� of exist-W ing structures and excavati�n. �Vorlc would be lir,lit�c: to day- tin:e hours, and wetting aown curing dertolition will help control dust. Vehicles iiaulin? a�aay del�ris and excavat�d material. should be maintained so that dump ga�es seal tightl�,- anc do not allo�a material to fall to the roadways. Sprayir.g their loads with �aater wi_ll help minimize flying dust. 2. Street Excavation. Rela'tively . narro�v stl eets withiii L-he _ieighbcrhood mean that traffic flow rcay be impedec� somewhat from time to time as streets are dug ap for the insLallaticn of conn2ctinc� lines to se�,�age, water and cx�.s mai�:>. �IoJ_es and ditciz�s dug for the��e �urposes should be temporarily covered wh�n-not bezr�g directl�� worked in so that traffic ca�n rno�;�� b�� tne sit� in as normal a nlanner as pos:,inle. '�. �,�ailding Construction. �ize approximately 14 months reruired to coizstruct the project wi1]. mear� c��ntinued r_oise and disturba�ce te nearby ._ � _ residents, though the worst of this will be over once the basic structure and shell have_been erected. Liniting worlt to daytime hours and providing baffle structures for noisy equipment su_ch as air.compressors �aill help minimize any disturbanc.e. 4. Distinctive Trees. Under the City's Ordinance �1019 r_egulating Distinctive and Heritage Trees, special precautions will be required during construction work to protect certain existing trees on the site. Three street trees should be temporarily fenced to protect them from damage by construction vehicles. Two.other trees on the , site need protection against damage to their roots and trunks during excavation. Care should be exercised so that t.ne mature trees, paTm and redwood., at the front o.f the property are protected during construction. B. Lonaer P.ange Impacts of the Project. l. Trafiic. Vehieular traffic within. the neighborhood will be in- creased slightly because of the automo�iles of additional residents of the project, o� their guests, and by service vehicles. The.actual number of living units on the-over-all proper�y is being increased from 14 to 27 so the total ef.f_ect on vehicle numbers wilT be relatively small. It is estimated currently between 50 and 60 trips are made daily by vehicles in and out of the area of the proposed project. It is estim- ated that v�ith the proposed project on the site appro��imately �� 120 to 130 trips will be m�de by vehicles in and out of the property daily. All of which is a relatively small increment to the 24-hour tr.affic count of July 1977 of 1,575 cars on Bellevue Avenue and 1,360.cars on Almer Road between Floribunda �venue and Sellevue Avenue. 2_ Parking. i'he impact of the project upon street parking will be minor. The project's frontage along Bellevue �venue is 184 feet. Tiie 3 existing drive�-aay openings at curbline are 2 of 15 feet each, one_of 12 �eet in width for a total of 42 feet. The•pro- posed project's 4 ope,�ings in the curb line will be two at 18 feet, two at l5 f_eet f.or a total of 66 feet of curbline opening or 24 feet more than currently in existance. The extensive gar�ge parking and off-street parking provided.by the proposed project far eYceeds the per living unit parki.ng accomodations currently provicied by the existing buildings with the result that few, if any, vehicles related to the project will be par}ced at the curb. 3. Population and Schools. The population impact upon the communit_y from:a luxury condominium building of 27 units will.be minimal a.s the project will be replacing.l4 units which currently house as many persons per unit as will the condominium; the total increase will be the persons living in the additionzl 13 units. The average occupancy - 9 - nurnber in the four condominium projects �eve.lo�ed by the aPpl'icants �aithin one �lock of the proposed project is 1.6 persons per apartment home unit. Thus, the additional I3 units on this site will add approximately 2Q to 21 more people. The number of people housed in this pro�osed condominium will be considerably less than the number who would occup_y,rental apartment units on the same site which might be constructed for younger families with small children.. This condominium will have a provision.in its Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions which grovides that all perm�nent residerits must be 18 years of age or older. Pd.o elementary school or high school age �hildren will be living in this �evelopment. Thus the project eliminates potential enrollment in the Burlingame schools. 4 . 6+7ater . Udater service within the neighborhood is provided by a 12" line along Bellevue Avenue delivering �aater at 80 to 90 pounds pressure. There is ample capacity to accomodate the requirements of the project. 5. Sewers and Sewaqe Treatment. Sewage treatment canacity is adequate to accomodaie the needs of this project. 6. Storm Sewer. The rear of this property is a natural high point in - 10 - relation to surrounding land and drainage water from this pro�erty will flow through drain pipes under the sidewalks to the street gutters and existing storm drain inlets on Bellevue Avenue. This dr�inage will not be cl�anged by the new ccnstruction, nor zaill the existing concret culvert (creek). 7. Natural Fnvironment. The impact of the propose� project on the natural envir- onmental assets of the site such as existing trees ancl open landscaped space will be favorable. Existing trees �aill be re- tained along the westerly boundary of the property as well as a.t the norths�esterly and southe.asterly corners of the pro�erty. GVith the front set�ack of the building being as great or greater than the existing buildings and with one, well-planned building r�placing 5 miscellaneously designed buildings now on the pro- perty, the proposed project will provide as muciz open space as is noca provide�, but with much more uni.formity. The open space will provide large areas in the .front and in.the rear yards for extensive landscaping making the visible impact on the nei,hbors z very favorable one. The height of the building will compare favorably with the buildin�s next to and nearby the �roposed project. 8. Visual Impact. The visual impact of the overall project is a matter of subjective j:udgement. It i.s the intent of the cleveloper - 11 - ' �I i . . . , � . . . - . . �i .. . . : . . . - - � . . - . . � . .I . - . , . , . . . . - . j that the building be attractive and unobtrusive. It wi11 be light in color to blend with the other buildings in the neigh- I borhood. It will be similar in design and appearanee to the other. four condominium buildings this developer has built within one bTock of the p.roposed project during the pa.st five.and one-Yialf years. The mature trees that now exist plus the landscaping ' the developer will be installing on the property �aill make for a very pleasing visual i-mpact. b - IZ - IV. h4ITIGATIOIJ MEASURES TO- MINIA•1IZE THE PROJECT'S IMPACT. l. Density and Population. By building 27 condominium units instead of the 36 rental units permissible for this site and in view of the fact that there are presently l4 living units on the pro_perty, whi�h wi11 be elirninated; the proposed project minimizes the im�act upon the local neighborhood population density to a very c�reat extent. Similarly, building expensive larger units and restricting res- idents to persons 18 years of age or older eliminates potential enrollment in the local schools. 2. Traffic and Parki The slight additional traffic generated within the neigh- borhood by 27 condominium units will be lessened by the increased and superior of_f-street parking the projeet will provide. Because of the very ample turn-around space provicled in the aarage areas, the hazard of cars-backing out of a driveway into traffic will be eliminated. The greatly increased number of off-street parl:ing spa_-ces provided will t�ake many parked cars off the streets both during day-time hours as well as night=time hours. The new driveways.will add 24 additional feet of open curb space so that the impact on street parlcing space is minimally,reduced. 3. Lot Coverage. The buil.dings currently on the site of the proposed project - 13 - cover approximately 43% of the land area, whereas, the proposed building will cover just under 500 (48.5%) of the land area. Currently there are 3 existing driveway openings at curb line and driveways over .the land area, whereas, the driveways of the proposed building will be t�ao short ones from street curb over the front set-back to the building, plus a short carriage-entry drive also in the front set-back, n large portion of the land surface is left open without hard surf_ace. 4. Buildina Setbacks. All building setbacks comply with the Gi.ty of Burlingame requirements, thus, ampl� space is provided for light and air betweeri the proposed project and all neighboring buildings. Also, ample space is provided for ingress`and egress of fire fighting personnel around the entire building. 5. Fire Saf.ety Measures. The Burlingame Pire Department will require compliance with the provisions of the 1970 Uniform Standard Building Code and 1dFP� �13, both of which impose much more severe requirements than have existed in the past. It is anticipated that these pxovisions will greatly mitigate any difficulties tl�e burlingame Fire Depart- ment might have in quickly locating and puttin� out a fire in a building of this type. - 14 - The principal measures required are: a. Personnel access to all sides of the building. b. An emergency water supply in addition to the re�ular water mains will be. furnished by the swimming pool. c. A totally automatic sprinkler system throughout the entire building wi�h an automatic communica- tion signal to the Fire Station w3�ich is activ- ated wizen any sprinkler in the building is released or.when any of the manually operated fire alarm boxes are used in the building. d. Manually operated fire alarm boxes .to be located convenient to all apartment homes in the hallways on each floor of_ the building. e. Smoke detectors to be located in entranceways to sleeping rooms. f. �ldequate.exiting via three sets of fire stairs with doors locked from the outside for security reasons. g, Adequate pedestrian exiting from underg�ou.nd. garnges. h. Means of smoke removal from every floor.and garage avea via openable windows and doors. - 15 - V. ALTERrdATIVE� TO THE PROPOS�D PROJECT An environmental impact statement is required to consider the possible effects of alternatives to a proposed project, including not building it. The given factors in developing alternatives to the proposed project are the Zoning Ordinance provisions as they apply to this lot and the Emergeney Ordinance #1013 limiting building hei:ght to 35 feet. The non-variables are: A maximum of 36 units; building coverage of 500 of the lot; parking on the basis of 1 Z spaces for a studio or one-bedroom apartment, 2 spaces for a two-bedroom apartment, and 2 lZ spaces for a three-bedroom apartment; 80% of the required parking must be covered; and uncovered parking may not be in front or side - yard setbacks. The following alternatives take these factors into account: 1. No New Construction. This is not a viable alternative except on a very short term basis, whereas this environmental impact statement attempts. ' to encompass at least a ten-year perioc�. The older buildings on this site have all been converted to apartments, including-the secondary buildings to the re.ar and all , except one, are in a serious state of deterioration. At the same time it is uneconomic to repair or upgrade thein, when one compares the potential of the site for 27 modern condominium dwelling units. To leave the present buildings as they are for the next ten years is not a realistic alternative. - 16 - 2. A Maximum Density Apartment Project. With 36 dwelling units permissible for this site, the type of units which these can be is determined by the parking that can be provided.. In this instance it is possible to achieve 44 covered parking spaces under a building covering50% of the site and 10 uncovered spaces outside the building. A permissable apartment mix with these 54 spaces.will then be 36 one-bedroom or studio units only._ If the developer seeks the lowest possible construction costs in order to hold down rents, there will be grade level parking with two floors of apartments above. The average size of the apartments will be approximately 400 to 42D square feet for the studios and 700 to 720 square feet for the one-bedroom units. If the developer seeks to build larger units he will construct a partially aunken parlcing area below the build- ing structure and have four floors of apartments; the average size for these apartments would be approximately 500 to 520 square feet for the studio units and 800 to 840 square feet for the one-bed- room units. Either alternative produces small units very close to one another and with virtually no useable outdoor area, private or sha�ed, for the occupants. The inpact upon the neighborhood environmental quality iaould be more adverse than the proposed project. The.y would add to population density, parking, traffic and sewer problems, and possibiy detract from natural environ- niental features. - 17 - A high-rise apartment building of eight to twelve storie.s could conceivably be built on this site. With one floor of parking under ground and one at ground level sufficient parking woul� be available to accomodate 3II to 40 apartment units. Such uriits would have to be high-cost rental or condominium:apartments. It is questionable.if either a rental or a condominium deuel- opment of thiS type would be economically feasible. However, should it prove feasible and should it`be successful, the unit - numuers and the resultant peaple numbers as well as the traffic volume would all tend to create a much greater adverse impact on the neighborhood than would the proposed project. - 18 - VI. CUMULATIVE LONG TERM EFFECTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT. Cumulative long term ef.fects of_ a project.which might adversely affect the state of the environment are.a required component.of an environmental impact statement. F�ith the present proposed project no such effects are forseen. The only cumulative effect kno�an at the present time is th.at the project will possibly someday nece.ssitate increasing the size of the six inch sanitary sewer line to an eight inch line, which will be beneficial to the entire local environment. - 19 - VII, IRREVERSIBLE ENVIP.ONMENTAL CHANGES IIdVOLVED . There.are no ]cnown irreversible environmental changes irivolved with,the proposed project. It wi11 have no direct or secondary effect upon any nonrenewable resources initially nor in the future. - 20 - a VIII. GROG4TH IIQDUCIT.dG IP4PACT OF TIIE PPOPOSED PROJECT. Since the proposed prb.ject is a luYury conclominium apartment building, its direct impact upon population growth in the community.will be less than other alter_natives such as rental apartments or less expensive, smal'l�r condominium units. Fio�aever, as a relatively low-density xesidential building the proposed project would represent a continuing step to�aards im�lementing the Burlingame General Plan's designation of this neighborhood for medium density residential use. The proposed pr_oject is very similar to the four condo- minium projects built by the applicant in the immediate neigh- borhood, all of which have had a proven minimal gro�•:th impact on the region in general. From the growth vie�apoint the proposed project is increasing the.number of living units from the present l4 to a total of 27 new condominium apartment homes. Other possible development plans for this property could mater_- ially enlarge this number and result in a more positive gro�eth impact with other attending factors than will the proposed project. To develop a rough estimate of the size of the growth potential in the downtown area, all buildings within the,area designated for higher density residential use in the General Plan was recently visually surveyed and evaluated.,Z� count - 21 - was made of those lots still occupied by older homes or by older homes converted into one or two dwelling uriits since these would be the most lilcely candidates for replacement with higher- clensity buildings within the riext decade. � total of 60 sucl� lots were found within the area. Since at least three adjacent lots wQuld be required for a project comparable to the proposed condominium, only those locations �ahere there were three or more adjacent lots were.consi.dered to have.sueh �otential. On this basis, there are approximately 12 sites which could con- ceivalily be developed for residential projects similar to the propose�d project: It does not necess�rily follow that the requirec� adjacent lots at each site can be acquired by a single owner, nor that some of the prospective sites are particularly suited for a condominium development, thereFore, a figure of something less than 12 such buildings �vould be a more realistic estifnate of this future growth potenti�l. - 22 - IX. CQN�Or�iIAIIUM PROJECT COPISIDERATIO_NS . Ordinance �#1015 providing for permits and regulation of Condominium Subdivisions within tlie City of_ Burlingame was enacted by the City Council August 5, 1974; and its provisions will apply'to the proposed development. Recognizing that condominiums differ from rental apartments in numerous respects, and for the benefit of public health, safety and welfare and to protect purchasers of condominiums and community apartments, it requires a Condominium Permit and approval by the Planning Corrnmission, or City Council upon appeal.or review.. Such approval is to be granted,upon the basis of satisfying six major concerns: a. Overall impact upon local community facilities and resources. .b. A detailed development plan of the project. c. A detailed landscaping plan. d. A detailed exterior lighting plan. e. A co.py of Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions and any Conc?ominium Agreements for the project. f.. Provisions f_or the dedication of land or easements �ahere requir_ed. This environmental impact statement is intended to address itself to com1�lying with the requirements of item "A" of the list. The other required documents are submitted in conjunction herewith. - 23 - l. Clioice af �rype oi Project for Site._ Given the eYisting zoning and building rPcxuirements in Burlingame, the site is a.desirable location ior a high-quality, luxury rental apartment or condominium project. As noted in the General Plan, the neighborhood is conveniently located in reTationship to the downtown area, .civic facilities and trans- portation. Most of the area is already utilized for attractive well-maintained multi-family buildings either rentai apartments or conclominiums. The site is very valuable property because of its R-4 zoning and location, and this af_fects the equations determining the economic feasibility of any pro��osed development. As tlie alternatives di.scussed ea.rlier in this report pointed out, any project utilizing the site's full potential of 36 units results in smaller individual units with minimum outdoor area and minimum amenities. These would be inferior to a number of the rental apartments or condominiums in the area. Reducing the number of units to gair. space in the.apart- ments,more outdoor area, and r.lore ameriities, increases the costs and, consdquently, the rents and/or selling prices that must be generated by the project. A clecision must be made evaluating the quality and size of residential unit that can be.built against what it will cost and what rental or sales income it will be likely to bring in. Given the high per unit land cost o.� this - 24 - site and present day construction costs, a pro�ect with reas- onably spacious units wi11 be extremely eYpensive. A developer. must then concern himself with who can af.ford the rental units or condominium units in his project, and their probable personal financial arrangements. I3e also has the problem of lzaving a well thought out project that can be fin�nced. . Out' of this come the facts that relatively few people liave the means to rent luxury apartments at the high rents their high costs should command, and that those who are finan- cially a;�le also want and need th.e tax advantages of ownership. P�ost of these people already own �airly eYpens'ive homes �ahich have materially appreciated over their purchase p.rices, and thus the owners will wish to utilize the provisions of Federal Income Tax l.a�as permitting deferral of capital gains on the sale of a personal residence when a replacement residence is purchased within a snecific time. Z�dd to this the fact that by the act of purchas.ers buying the Condominiums they are ,actually providing the developers long range �inancing f_or the project, and thus solves that probler.l for the developer. Un�'er these economics,.a developer has almost no choice b.ut to build a condominium project rather than a rental apartment building. - 25 - 2. Choice of �uilding Configuration. Having determined a luxury condominium project as the most logical use of the site, a developer then attempts.to evaluate what other condominium projects offer and what "buyer" prospects are seeking. He then determines his best market and tlie s.ize units that will be most saleable. In this instance, the developer has-determined his target should be condominiums ranginc; from 980 square feet to 2002 square feet iri size. Z�11 the factors for parking variables based upon the number of b.edrooms per apartment are then factored in. At this point construction economics are then evaluated and comparisons made of the various means of achieving a 2J unit . condomiriiuin building. A high-rise building �aith more than 3 stories of living area with the same features and amenities as the proposed pro�ect will cost 35% to 45o more per square foot to build than the proposed project building. Obviously, this means a selling price 35% to 45o hiqher and a project oi questionable merit. F�aving built �our condomiriium buildings in tnis area durinq tlie past several years al1 of which were similar to the �roposed �roject in design, c�uality of construction and alT other features, the developer strongly feels that the proposed developrnent is the only realistic way to.proceed wi�h the land in question. - 26 - i 3. Economic Effect oF Proposed Condominium Project. iIt is esttmated that the finished value of the pro.posed project will be $2,500,000.00. Rea1 estate property taxes. city and county., will, at the current tax rate, approximate ' $51,500.00 annually. Considering the high per ca�ita addition to the assessment tax roles by the project, its economic effect upon Burlingame should be very favorable. The various mitigating measures planned and required �aill minimize any extra demands upon civic services anr�. �esources. - 27 -