HomeMy WebLinkAbout2600 Summit Drive - Staff Report (3)Item No.
Design Review Study
PROJECT LOCATION
2600 Summit Drive
City of �ur9ingarrae
Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit
and Special Permits
Item No.
Design Review Study
Address: 2600 Summit Drive Meeting Date: September 28, 2009
Request: Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit and Special Permits for height and attached
garage for a first and second story addition to an existing single family dwelling.
Applicant and Designer: Jesse Geurse, Geurse Conceptual Design Inc.
Property Owners: John and Janice Gumas
General Plan: Low Density Residential
APN: 027-271-110
Lot Area: 82,342 SF
Zoning: R-1
Project Background: On April 13, 2009, fhe Planning Commission reviewed an application for Design Review,
Hillside Area Construction Permit and Special Permits at 2600 Summit Drive, Burlingame. The Commission had
concerns with view blockage issues caused by the addition that would affect the neighboring property at 2606
Summit Drive and voted to place the item on the Regular Action Calendar once story poles had been installed
and surveyed.
The project designer and property owners worked with the neighbors at 2606 Summit Drive to develop a revised
proposal for the project. Because the design has changed since the last study meeting, staff determined that the
project would return to Design Review Study by the Planning Commission for review of the revised proposal prior
to story poles being installed and scheduling the project on the Regular Action Calendar.
Project Description: This large and oddly-shaped lot is located at the corner of Summit Drive and Belvedere
Court in the Hillside Area. The narrow portion of the lot, along Summit Drive, is considered to be the lot front.
The applicant is proposing a first and second story addition to the existing two-story, 3,997 square foot single-
family dwelling. On the first floor, the applicant is proposing to reconfigure the interior and add a formal dining
room, entry hall and turret, and new garage to the front of the structure. On the second floor, the applicant is
proposing to add a hallway, master bath and closets, and an additional bedroom. With the proposed addition,
the floor area will increase to 6,642 SF (0.08 FAR) where the zoning code allows a maximum of 8,000 SF (0.10
FAR). The proposed project is 1,358 SF below the maximum allowable floor area. The proposed structure will
be 33'-4" above the average top of curb, which requires a Special Permit.
With this project, there is no increase to the number of potential bedrooms proposed (five existing). Three
parking spaces, two of which must be covered, are required on site. Two covered parking spaces (20' x 20') will
be provided in the new attached garage, and the required uncovered parking space (9' x 20') will be provided in
the driveway. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following
applications:
■ Design Review for a first and second story addition to a single family dwelling (CS 25.57.010, a, 5);
■ Hiliside Area Construction Permit for a first and second story addition (C.S. 25.61.020);
■ Special Permit for an attached garage (C.S. 25.28.035, a); and
■ Special Permit for bui!ding height between 3Q' and 36' (33'-4" proposed) (G.S. 25.28.060, a, 1).
= This space was intentiona!!y left blank �
Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit and Special Permits 2600 Summit Drive
2600 Summit Drive
Lot Size: 82,342 SF Plans date stam ed: Au ust 28, 2009
' EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED
SETBACKS '
Front (9st flr): ; 117'-0" (to BR1) 131'-0" {to formal DR) 15'-0"
(2nd flr): ' 141'-0" (to MB) 139'-0" (to turret) 20'-0"
Side (left): ; 16'-0" (to garage) 7'-0" (to garage) 7'-0"
(right): � 45'-2" (to BR1) 30'-0" (to BR2) 7'-6"
Rear (1st flr); ' 46'-8" (to BR3) � 56'-5" (to FR/dining) ; 15'-0"
(2nd flr): � 55'-5" (to MB) 53'-4" (to MB) 20'-0"
LotCoverage: � 3,191 SF 4,797.5SF ; 32,937 SF
3.9°/a 5.8% 40%
;
__.._---......._..----._...-----..._...------............_....._...;....._.._..._...-----------------•---- --------------- ----- -------------- ---'--------...--------------
FAR: ; 3,997 SF 6,642 SF 8,000 SF �
� 0.05 FAR 0.08 FAR 0.10 FAR
# of bedrooms: 5 � 5 ; ---
i
Parking: ; 2 covered 2 covered 2 covered
; �zo� x Zo°� ; �20� X 20�> �20� X 20�>
1 uncovered 1 uncovered 1 uncovered
(9' x 20') � (9' x 20') (9' x 20')
, ,
-----------..._�__ _ ' , � - - — -
-------.._...----------s.__..__v..v..--- --�------- •--
---- , -- ---_ �_ _
Height ; 28'-10" ; 33�;4�� z ;' 30'-0" --
DH Envelope: ; complies complies CS 25.28.075
' Per Municipal Code Section 25.28.070(e), the maximum single-family residential house size shall be 8,000 gross square feet,
including accessory structures.
Z Per CS 25.28.060(a)(1), a Special Permit is required for a structure between thirty and thirty-sixfeet as measured from average top
of curb (33'-4" proposed).
Staff Comments: See attached original memos from the City Engineer, Chief Building Official, Fire Marshal and
NPDES Coordinator.
Erica Strohmeier
Associate Planner
c. Jesse Geurse, applicant and designer, 405 Bayswater Avenue, Burlingame, CA 94010
John and Janice Gumas, property owners, 2600 Summit Drive, Burlingame, CA 94010
Attach ments:
Response lett�i irom ihe projeci designer daie siamped August 28, 2009
Minutes from the April 13, 2009, Planning Commission Design Review Study Meeting
Letter irom neighbors af 2606 Summit Drive, date stamped Aprii 13, 2009
Application to the Plannina CommissiQn
Special Permit Apniication Forms
Staff Comments
Notice of P�blic He�ring — Mailed September 18, 2009
Aerial Photo
-2-
Geurse Conceptual Desi�ns, Inco
405 Bayswater Avenue Burlingame, Califomia 94010
August 25, 2009
City of Burlingame
attn: Erika Strohmeier , Planner
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
re: Response to Planning Commission's recommendations per meeting minutes
on April 13, 2009 Planning Commission Meeting
Dear Members of the City of Burlingame Planning Commission,
We thank you for your concerns and suggestions made with regard to our application for design
review for the proposed addition to the residence located at 2600 Summit Drive.
We too, are architecturally sensitive and very eager to address your concerns. We had revised
the plans in accordance to your recommendations. We hope that you find the revised project
acceptable for approval. Please see below for response to changes.
In response to your particular recommendations:
1•"Impacts will be illustrated by story poles. "
a) Response: To be erected after approval process.
2• "Existing house has solar panels, hope the applicant will remain committed to re-installing
solar panels.
a) Response: Will work on implementing solar panels during the construction document
phase.
3•"Yi'ith respect to the left elevation; looks like it is on stilts; encourage installing stone on the
lower walls to make it Zook Zike a foundation supporting structure.
a) Response: Due to the re-design as well as the location GCD,Inc. and the client agreed that the
proposed re-design works well in context of the site. Currently there is no visual aesthetics at this
area of the house.
4• "Clarified the depth of the garage; could the garage be pushed in a bit to heZp reduce the
potential view impact; could consider moving storage to the laundry room to further minimize
impacts. . . "
a} Resp�nse: Garage currently meets City of Burlir.game clear garage area space. See
attached plans for revised design to minimize visual impact to neighbors.
� ,_ _ F. _,r . �_ `;.. _,
� �� G "�' �3
GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS
AUGUST 25, 2009
5• "Leave the best telephone numbers for the applicant and neighbor to ensure that
commissioners can visit the sites when the story poles are erected.
a) Response: Based on the concern of the neighbors. GCD, Inc. selected to re-design the
addition to accommodate the neighbors' concerns prior to any erection of story poles. My
clients had meet with the neighbors with new design in hand and according to the
conversation between the two neighbors it is our understanding that the neighbors at 2606
Summit Drive reviewed and approved the re-design of the addition. GCD, Inc. had
lowered various areas of the roof to lessen the overall bulk and mass to the rear neighbor.
6• "Should look at taking away mass of bedroom no.4 from over the garage, placing it over the
family room and shifting the master bedroom forward".
a) Response: In review of the potential re- location it was determined that the relocation of
the room above family room or living room would cause greater visual issue's. We had
re-designed the addition to more or less accommodate the relocation. See attached plans
for re-design.
7• "On the existingfront elevation; is there habitable space above the garage"
a) Response: Yes, Existing master bedroom closet and bathroom.
8• "What is the overall height of the structure from adjacent grade "
a) Response: Previous overall ridge was 28'-10". The new design has an overall ridge from
adjacent grade at 27'-1". GCD, Inc. had lowered the ridge an additional 1'-9" per plans.
Thank you for this opportunity to further consider our proposed addition. Should you have
additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us at 650-703-6197
Sincerely,
Jesse Geu
Principal
�`> �� .. _
;i j'i` i,. ,r„,;-
r'.au. ,, _ �.Uu:;
2 -. �
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minufes ,4pril 13, 2009
IX. DESIGN REVIEVl� STUDY ITEMS
7. 2600 SUMMIT DRIVE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS
FOR ATTACHED GARAGE AND HEIGHT FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORYADDITION TO A SINGLE
FAMILY DWELLING (JESSE GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN, INC., APPLICANT AND DESIGNER;
AND JOHN AND JANICE GUMAS PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: LISA WHITMAN
Reference staff report dated April 13, 2009, with attachments. Planning Manager Brooks briefly presented
the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Cauchi opened the public comment period.
Jesse Geurse, 405 Bayswater Avenue and John Gumas, 2600 Summit Drive, represented the applicant:
■ Addressed neighbor concerns raised in letter from owners of 2606 Summit Drive.
■ Addition is designed to minimize impacts.
■ Trying to create a nicer home design; have created hierarchy of forms that will not result in the
appearance of a large addition.
■ Willing to work with the adjacent neighbor to develop a compromise with respect to the design.
Commission comments:
■ Impacts will be illustrated by the story poles.
■ Exisiing house has solar panels, hope that the applicant will remain committed to reinstalling solar
panels.
■ With respect to left side elevation; looks like it is on stilts; encouraged to consider installing stone on
the lower walls to make it look like a foundation supporting the structure.
■ Clarified the depth of the garage; could the garage be pushed in a bit to help reduce potentiai view
impacts; could also consider moving storage to the laundry room to further minimize impacts.
(Geurse — the depth of the garage is about 2' shallower due to encroachment of storage into the
area. Could also change the roof pitch.)
■ Leave the best telephone numbers for the applicant and neighbor to ensure that Commissioners can
visit the sites when the story poles are erected.
■ Should look at taking away the mass of Bedroom #4 from over the garage, placing it over the family
room and shifting the master bedroom forward?
= On the existing front elevation; is there habitable space above the garage? (Geurse — the master
bedroom is at that location.)
■ What is the overall height of the structure from adjacent grade? (Geurse — 28' 10")
Public comments:
Chris Ngai and Yolanda Leung, 2606 Summit Drive; and Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; spoke:
■ Referenced photographs that they provided with their letter.
■ Only had 10-days to review the informati�n related to the project.
■ Addition will present a massive wall.
■ Vllif! hlock view of airpc�rt runways.
s Like the design; the story poles will show the impact.
� When was the street sign placed in front of the properfy; considering the sfiate of the postal service;
a lot of times the cards are received late. (�rooks — noted that notices are mailed out 10-days in
advance and the project site is posted at the same time.)
10
CIiY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISSIOIV — Approved Minutes April 13, 2009
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
CommissionerAuran made a motion to place the item on the RegularAction Calendar when complete.
Additional Commission comments:
■ Story po/es shall be erected.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Terrones.
Discussion of motion:
■ None
Chair Cauchi called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the RegularAction Calendar when plans
have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-0-2 (Commissioners Lindstrom and
Vistica absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at
8:26 p.m.
11
Chris Ngai and Yolanda Leung
2606 Stumnit Drive
Burlingame, Ca , 94010
�'�UI�IG�4TIC�1V ���IE��
,�„��'��t P�2EP� RfiTlC3�
��° ��'�4�`F �P�1R�'
�,� �. �� ,,,,,� , r � �
[ ����� �����
April 12, 2009 Received After
04.13.09 Planning Commission Mtg. �`G'� �� 2QQG
Agenda Item 6- 2600 Summit Drive �iTYGFuI��i!.i?VGRiUF
Design Review Board ��,c�;r�!r�c;, u��r.
City of Burlingame
Subject: Design review on a proposed new addition on Gumas's property on
2600 Summit Drive, Burlingame, Ca 94010
Dear Sirs:
We are the owner residents at 2606 Summit Drive and immediate neighbor to the left of
the subject Gumas property.
After reviewing the design of the Gumas' proposed addition, we have serious concerns
with regard to the newly proposed garage and additional bedroom at the west corner of
the Gumas property which is immediately adjacent to the boundary of our property.
The proposed addition calls for an exterior wa11 which is only 7 feet from our properiy
fence and measuring 24 feet x 35 feet in dimension. This massive wall, if allowed to be
built as proposed, will severely block and limit sunlight through our breakfast area bay
window as well as our dining room patio door and window. The e�sting two story
structure already limits our view of the sky and enjoyment of light to only 30% of the
window. With this newly proposed structure and its massive wall, we believe it will
prevent us from seeing the sky altogether, fiirther restricting our access to and enjoyment
of light in our breakfast area not to mention casting a very large shadow over our
property.
We believe this proposed two story structure is unreasonably and intrusively large,
resulting in excessive uifri.ngement into our property rights. The window(s) of the room
above the garage will have a close and direct view of our swinuning pool, further
iiifringing upon our rights to privacy as property owners. It goes without saying that
trese z*�?'?be�P�?tS� ?S�de from affecting o»r qu�lity of lif�5 causing unnecessary stress
upon our entire household, will also undoubtedly translate into a substantial decline in
our pro�eriy vaiue, aCtVGiSGi�% iu`T'ijraCiiu� on �ur re�uer��er�� Ylaiuilii�.
���E� � Of �
Keepir�g in mind our grave concerns as immediate neighbor to the subject property, we
suggest that any newly erected garage addition should stand no less than 15 feet from our
mutual property line. Moreover, the second story of the proposed structure should best
be recessed from the west side garage wall in order to allow more open space between the
Gumas praperty and our property.
As it stands now, our properiy's second storey has a view of the Say over the Gumas'
existing roofline which is at 28 feet. The height of the newly proposed project will result
in a 35 ft roof which will completely eliminate our north view of the bay. We are
vehemently opposed to the approval of any height variance and emphatically feel that any
variance over the 30ft limit is inappropriate and should not be granted. That said, any
new addition at the Gumas properiy should either stay with the existing 28 ft roofline or
otherwise be in conformance with existing building ordinances with no variances allowed.
Since Gumas' lot has over two acres of land, there are many different options to where
they can built their additions. Other suggestion is that they could build the additional
bedroom at the other end (near the street) of their existing structure as an e�tension to
their single storey home. We strongly believe the current proposed design needs to be
modified to meet the Burlingame city building height ordinance. The massiveness of the
proposed design needs to be reduced to match with the homes in this area. And most
importantly, the new design needs to minimi�e the negative impact to our home value
and the quality of life. The new design also needs to make good use of the size of the lot
and create a harmony in the neighborhood.
Sincerely,
C�°' l;S" � . �'��iE-/�iC,
le'�
Chris & Yolanda Ng ' �
;���� � �� 4
Existing view from our dinning room E�sting view from our breal�ast area
=��`'
� � ;
--�=— =��--s- _--�-
Existing view to the airport and the bay from 2nd floor bedroom
I�:::: � - - �- �
View after Gumas Property proposed new additions
�
- �-
£- _
3� .-�
�
�
.:�-�� —
��� � �
� ��_ ��
�-�����,�
� .�"� �
�-�-�,���
�.-
page 4 of 4
0
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT 501 PRIMROSE ROAD P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790
��� CIT7 a�
BURLNQAME APPI,ICA'�I011T 'I'O 'I'I�E ]PLAl�TNIlVG COIl�IYIISSION
�.,..
Type of application: Design Review Conditional Use Permit Variance
Special Permit Other Parcel Number:
Project address: 2G00 SUMMIT DRIVE BURLINGAME, CA. 94010 o Z�• �� I•���
APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER , 1— �
� Name: GEiJIZSE CONCEPNAL DESIGN, INC.
Address: 405 BAYSWATER AVENLTE
City/State/Zip: BURI.INGANIE, CA 94010
Phone (w): G50.703.6197
(h�: G50343.3093
� fl: G50558.9324
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
Name: GEiJRSE CONCEPNAL DESIGN, INC.
Address: 405 BAYSWATER AVFNUE
City/State/Zip: BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Phone (w): 650.703.6197
G50.34330J3
650558.9324
Applicant's si
PR03ECTDESCRIPTION: �STANDSECONDSTORYADDITION
AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE��,;�y certify�,nder penalty of perjury that the information
given herein is true and cor ct to the b st of r�iy k�owledge and belief.
I krdo-� abaut the
a�plicatian to t�e
Property owner's
app
Name: JOI-Il�I GUMAS
Address: 2G00 SUMMIT DRIVE
City/State/Zip: BLJRL.INGAME, CA 940I0
Phone (w): 415-G21-7575
ih):
�fl �
Please indicate with an asterisk *
the contact person for this project.
.
Date: 11/17/08
aathorize the above applicant to submit this
i 'r v �t — � �-� � a �
� � 11/IZ/08 `� �` E�`-"` � � � � �
; ° Date:
� i
`s , � PCAP��R`M x % ZOES
0
C!T" 0= BL'RLfiVGAME
?!�?f�l!v1hG D�FT,
�ii,, of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlinaame.or�
� � �ti
�"-�'-�'i � '� �� _. _, a .. � „ ._ , �
�,� IYY o
� �
BURUN6AME
�� �
RIDGE I-iEIGHT
CITY OF BURLINGAME
SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION
� �, �, r, r
.. u �.'t:i�i�
�..�'~:.I�':}t- � ��.'i;_f.'\f�'-`..,-,.i.]
;..,';t'v.;�i u1t.i�:,
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
exisiing sfreet and neighborhood.
The proposed yroject h�s ver� little visibilitL� from the street level. The overall reclesign o{ the the
residence and it's roof was thought out veri� care£u11L� as to not cre�te a l�rge looking arlclition but
yet to coll�orate the single story into a unifiecl seconcl story adclition i�y bringing down the roo{
eaves to a st�ggered elevation design. The exterior stL�le lends itself to roof design's and over�ll
{ac�cle.
2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior fznish materials and elevations of
the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, streei
and neighborhood.
As mentioned befare the majority of the resiclence's on the bloek arn winpletly clif{erent in
architectur�l aesthetics. The proposed project has vert� littlevisibility froin the street level.
Tlie style o{ the r�sidence allowed us to create � blending of m�sses to integrate the existing single
storL� addition into a second story residence with ininimal impact to ruass and bulk All exterior
materials were used to create a cohesive overall prance of the house with n�tural aesthetics.
3.
How will the proposed project be consistent with the residenfia[ design guidelines
arlopEed by the ciPy (C.S. 25.57)?
The entire project is consistent with aIl o{ Burling�me's regul�tions with the exception of the
height of tlie roof ridge �t the addition which was rec�iired to be talcen {roin the average top o{
curb. The average tope of curb was cletermined upon � steep incline whic� creates an � rJ�-1"
increase over the 30'�0" limitation. The actu�l riclge heiglit from existin$ paving is 2H'�2� wliiclz is
a tt�pic�l seconcl stori� construction. �e existing site is situatccl upon a level gr�cle� site with the
rear portion ciroyping of{ clr�nzatically.
1'le�se review t�is project on existing site con{i$ur�tion as well as existing contours.
4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within the foofprint of any new structure or
�rfditfon is neces�scary ana� i.� con�is�tent kvith the city's refoYes�tcrFio� Pe�rae�E�r�.E�ifs. Yi'itcsf
mitigation is proposed for the removal of arcy PYees? Ex�rlairt �vhy fnts r�i�iga£ioi� Fs
appropriate.
No tree�s to be removecl clue to the new loc�tion of the attachecl garage.
SPECPERIvf.FRM
CitJ of Burlingame Planning Department SOt Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlin�ame.org ,,,,
� ?- � t -
_�. . �., . �..r
PROPOSED ATTACI-IED
ry crrr o
� �
OURUNGAME
����
CITY OF SURLINGAME
SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION
h�: � U; � i � vi,�
;;;;�._,_, _�._.,,_
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 ihe back of this form for assistance with these questions.
1. Explain why fhe 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.
The proposed new relocation of the attached garage is locatc cl in a better vicinity due to the
reason tliat the gar�ge doors will not face the adjacent rear residence and actual worlcs better in
relationship to tlie eJcisting clriveway and proposecl aciclition to tlie residenee. The mass and bulk
of tlie garage in our opinion would not impecle upon neighbors due to the location on site.
2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations af
the proposetl new structure or addition are consistent wifh the exisfing structure, street
and neighborhood.
Tlie majority of the residence's on the block are completly clifferent in architectural aesthetics.
The proposed project has ven� little visibility from the street level. Tlie overall redesign of the the
residence and it's roof was thouglit out very carefully as to not create a large looking addition but
yet to collaborate the single story into a nni{ied second storL� adclition b�� bringing down the roof
eav�s to a to a staggered elevation design. The exterior stL�le lends itself to roof clesign s and
overall {acade design.
�
How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines
adopfed by tne ciiy (C.S 25.57)?
As mentionecl �efore the majority of tlie residence's on the block are completly clif{erent in
architectural aesthetics. Tlie proposed project has very little visibiliti� from the street level.
Tlie style of the rnsidence allowed us to create a blending of masses to integrate tlie existing single
ston� addition into a sc:conc� stori� resiclence with minimal impact to mass and bul�c. The loc�tion of
the garage lias a direct r�lation to the existing clriveway. The garage complies to all Citt�
regulations.
4. Explain how the removal of any trees [ocated within thefootprint oj any newstruciure or
��diPio:t is saecess��� �r�c� is c�r,�i�fE��at witd� f�2 ci�'� : efore�d�ticn ; 2u uire;r2nts. t3'hat
itilii��t�iti� iS�iO�7u.ieClt�Oi ir12F iE�iiVflP 63j �T:fy �'22�� �'X�l�ir rvFy ��iLS :�tIPIg'fkiSC:P F,3'
appropriate.
No tree's to be removed due to the new location of the attached g�rage.
SPECPERM.FRM
Project Comments
Date:
To:
November 17, 2008
� City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
CI Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
From
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit and
Special Permit for an attached garage for a first and second story
addition to an existing single family dwelling at 2600 Summit Drive,
zoned R-1, APN: 027-271-110
Staff Review: November 24, 2008
1. Storm drainage shall be designed to drain towards the street frontage or to the
City storm drain system.
2. The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public
improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway and other necessary
appurtenant work.
3. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works —
Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information.
Reviewed by: V V
Date: 12/15/2008
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From
November 17, 2008
� City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
X Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
� City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
0 Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
� Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
� NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review, Hiliside Area Construction Permit and
Special Permit for an attached garage for a first and second story
addition to an existing single family dwelling at 2600 Summit Drive,
zoned R-1, APN: 027-271-110
Staff Review: November 24, 2008
1) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2007 California Building Codes (CBC).
2) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business
license.
3) Provide fully dimensioned plans.
4) Provide existing and proposed elevations.
5) This project will be considered a New Building because, according to the City of Burlingame
Municipal code, "when additions, alterations or repairs within any twelve-month period exceed
fifty percent of the current replacement value of an existing building or structure, as determined
by the building ofFicial, such building or structure shall be made in its enti�ety to conform with the
requirements for new buildings or structures." This building must comply with the 2007 California
Building Code for new structures.
6) Due to the extensive nature of this construction project the Certificate of Occupancy will
be rescinded once construction begins. A new Certificate of Occupancy will be issued
after ihe project has been #inaled. No occupancy of the �uilding is to oc�ur until a new
Certificate of Occupancy has been issued.
7) Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines
8) Show the dimensions to adjacent structures.
9) Provide a complete demolition plan that indicates the existing walls, walls to be demolished, new
walls, and a legend. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not be issued until a Building Permit
is issued for the project.
10) Comply with ihe 2005 Califorr�ia Energy EfFiciency Standards for low-rise residential / non-
residential buildings. Go to http://www.enerqV.ca.qov/title24 for publications and details.
11) �ooms that can be used fcr sleepirg purposes must have at least one windo�r� or c�oor thaf
complies with the egress requirements. Specify the size and location of all required egress
windows on the elevation drawings
12) Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are
considered in calculating the allowable lot coverage. Consult the Planning Department for details
if your project entails landings more than 30" in height.
13) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers.
14) Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
15) The fireplace chimneys must terminate at least two feet higher han any portion of the building
within ten feet. Sec. 211�.
/
Reviewed by: � Date: � �
Project Comments
Date
1C•�1
From
November 17, 2008
❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
C� Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7279
�Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
Planning Staff
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Subject: Request for Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit and
Special Permit for an attached garage for a first and second story
addition to an existing single family dwelling at 2600 Summit Drive,
zoned R-1, APN: 027-271-110
Staff Review: PVovember 24, 2008
Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence.
1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter.
2. Provide backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly —
Schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building
Plans prior to approval indicating location of the device �ifter the split
between domestic and fire protection lines.
3. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall
clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings
shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation.
Reviewed by: ��� 2 Date: � ei �S—� �
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
November 17, 2008
� City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
� Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
� City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
� Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
� Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
✓ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit and
Special Permit for an attached garage for a first and second story
addition to an existing single family dwelling at 2600 Summit Drive,
zoned R-1, APN: 027-271-110
Staff Review: November 24, 2008
�
Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City
NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution from construction
activities. Project proponent shall ensure all contractors implement Best
Management Practices (BMPs) during construction.
Include a list of BMPs and erosion and sediment control measure plan as project
notes when submitting plans for a building permit. Please see attached brochures
for guidance.
For additional assistance, contact Eva J. at 65�/342-3727
_ �� � r �fi� �� �� � �t�`f��"�'�'��4
� � ifl � i.� � p a�
%%'% s,��
y :���'=�o���„o„r�<otia �,�m
� �
Pp
��j�.
��, .
�_
*`ti�L � -..�
Gen.eral^,'=ry "'�- -
CoIlSiNcC10A
3c 5ite Supervision
W�Ie�nrWov.od pW I �Wan(virie fin dry
'.m�ao��,. r �.,o� �.� o�m, ��>
�;��', maPb�..�.,,�d,�.e�.,w��, �a.
JCaew�l i6e�u�wei of mov'�A .Ine vour Ju
�.r o�,� y �.
�,.�K��.��>,,. n�
ia �,e ��� m�ro m�w„m u.a rm �
�e��iro��.
o�� �.i
.rx vvow�ooa�.m.�a.�c,a..rm�o���
�na.�.�.ev v�...i.�.r.R. �nw m. � w•w�� w
Yw.o .�.. u r,aww,�.�w
�u� w
�.m �r�.�.�un��i����o �ey�
w i�.�ul��
�� w
JCw« an
m ��
�p�o
J�u� ne,lma c..mn �tome y
Jl.late¢ame Oomble uJen vau'm.�n�'.i�uE
pmpen�.mCTwt w�.4.9wa IY �or �
�w. � am„wr wP ma�� s �,� �.e
u�� o.
rten4 wknu� aeqru m�� m.ewe.
�ak. wd rehi<le na Inuv��a m �e(I W
oili�w e 4 w pmVv1Y.
c�c��d
Nok �vphvltan�teoveie,�uwl,aoEU�a tiveRee�
rvmaM+ � �amrul e. �u.�.aa
.����o�,...�
W.�m w Ne ��c<� a. vv. � eh ar sUwm beE.
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
Pollution Prevention — It's 1'art of the Plan
It is your responsibility to do the job right!
RunoCf fi'om streets aud other paved azeas is a major source of pollution iu local creeks, Sau Fraucisco Bay and tUe Pacific Occan.
Construction activiHes cau d'vectly affect tlie healtU of our w¢ters uuless contractors and crews plan ahead to keep dirt, deUris, and other
construcfion waste away from stoim drains and creeks. Following these guidelines will ensure your compliance with ]ocal stonnwater
ordinance requirements. Remember, ongoing monitoring and inaintenance of i��stalled controls is crucill to proper implementation.
Heavq
Equipment
Operation
Earth-Moving
ActiviYi�s
'». x �t �� w�_weens4wu��Ilo:e�
'���� ��m^,�u��mMe'nleu� Jvlroeaw 6ve�nvminlaoaoo�I�ivmu4niiYUl�wL
vae�ur'pmeniryk�s��.4ec.+admi�oe apeJti�.s<«vne�ewu,a�a�io�
,<e,a., wwa ������.. r �M�m,.e�.��,a,s.�w.�s���,. �...a
mx� rrm Rr �. `° °��.` s` �u...n��av�o,mmM�roy.m�ort.N�t.u.h.
e.lw �.r+�iob..oa•<wao.m e,o.• v ...•:.
.vwvoKoi. a un �J�...nwMrna.,Mi�..�...�w�ouwht��.�anm�o,
e.va.m.�o,wa�. P `�n a
���wo.o�me�mm,�o �e,owirmom�o�mam��u�,�i�q�a�.m�w�<o�
a�wx rw�m�..mn�a��o:ui�., � mi..o. �e��
J��`�lue )mmNi�ky wdm Nq daypw
M1ouOonn.. �•p a[Imp�mal
abfebrm ��wm�V)w
��n . �•mclw�wWm�«0
eehen�niv m.
� inauemdp�.al>'
��,pym��rt<
a1�I��pon so�loi��e Yorviue.amne:l)o:�
••�m ' �aomc
cA�.°Vu�uoienIDssua em`:�rys i«,w
� nwup�rtw�r.�i��rt.or.b:m�.�u.em.oi�o-m.
�e .. n.,�o�,.�«,��i �y
�sm.e,n.�,.,..��m, v e. kb.M.,..m,..
lPefi.m�imlurmu�mne m��n Y mm .id.n�.
! Wnen�efiu4nkmwLm�LJ�Irl�quipmmlmewlwraevm�l
�,� -.. �0u• p myFv�mNvnmuay
Roadwork & Paving
����,�;�ss��,� P ,o,
°�Mv�;,� ;�°s N � ew o �,
!Vk w B 9 o-
�m��rn���.ianwmeam�<o ���rvrom �a y
a eu, e�i�.n.. =o�R�., s�or.e.mem�.k
in�`
�ca.� ee v� o n�a°,��em�mi,�.�i�.mi�rs�
w.r n a+ e. a� x�,� w m..�..,,��rt ww�
� v�,.';;,a �,��. m ��m,� e� awxe. , �,.e+�. �oe
�i,nrns��wwKw�ueu �.e�.cai
�m�vue
�om °�� ��„aw�m
f I�ou�a+w��.) ��t...d��w.•� u��up e�.nwmmID�
JOw�eoY�pW�.ail.vWmme dry mew�(x�m�
JGlleuicanar.eydeo..'ppoopNUY w�ofeea'.
hv�lregnvelmuud.
! AwIJ orcr-uppYUJoo by m�m wcp fer yyt tovn J.
Mtdf w�landyoodelmowa..��rWtmybvwv- �"P��ovnexmowl
� � Mgn�mEunnp�obm..tloyazpeJ�oe�oo
4xrvKi<��Nrcuo�min.tiw �
uEmnunm 0.epnvlNaerQwl yCoocolPova. ��¢ �����onmw.eu
�a�" '"'ww, �v�r.ua�oo"�..o���m�:�o�Wm.m.o��a..,
Ka� ��a
. I�wmh.nei�.tlebn�o.m.� ��x.�i�w.y0mmiuwim�nGommhe �
JNn ua�er.l...uuv��udu�veesy
- � .�
� �.. ��
�
.�'' ��h�'1
��'. ��'L;�gl�r�n.F,
,� r•
Painting & Application Landscaping,
of Solvents & Adhesives Gazdening,
and Pool Maintenance
, m in
..�, � +� 0�!
JK�ey�allAllyWeynln�pnAummlmne�awaytvm .
luoW a� .aemW via� �mn
o'A�' � �uiOeEimo�Nallaul�WVNmu� Y� �eihm.w�lervm�a+s� y � MF
raMavaoa�um¢hwm�h'may.uLGom..ioi ou4e�p.��munymuke.la�e�m...�e.
!Sm ofw�m vub�o).K JSmrt a�•..u.m.�i�m.be��.
,r �w�.,e�, ° ,m�+os�i w.�xea,� e ��n
,��+4•a�unortUw ombios lSN.EW.6�+�z'+��*�•a�iuoyrv�avla..4�wuwn.
�w��sa������,k..�owri,amwv�a„��,e.a„�.�, .M.c�.na�.�o�a�,.,.o�.rc..m m,�Mm�.e.,i m rz
rya.e�aw�w,�R„vin�mawow�m� o.e.w�m.e,. . � �•,"w� '
onAAi.pnneofa� w��Lle�Riwe��o�.rv�yenr+orc.fwW.�epJnN
Lee e�.a �m��m.i�,�a� deurvowui: �� m.�o '' n w� �u��„�„uLo. �.d.,�m„wee„n.
� aro�od�v��v.n.rm;,t,.-,r�.��e�,u<oNm����
ew�uG.aR�..w�m.m. "��w„aw.c,....rwem
,a�iv.Ra T+ uotlnu�a�.Ho!c�gprtPaie vLiro,Wn
J Plsse Wy eale� oroip�� <nilov wnno40ow�Wpe�o
�e,��oRwryioqmnmrmeem=mbsfinei��ndce
J RTrnFwhiuv. W� ��vdc 4e+uro m pkkup WI Jwn��•+
J Raycl� Wqe<b,u.\� oflmtm�oonnea�aimeLu.
JaNmowmN�m�h vafmvaJ�l'm r i.dmu4
Storm drain pmllnters may be liable for fines of up to $25,000 per day!
ru�, ae�.�w�.�e���'i.a�`uw� oi��.u.,P.
em:a.,m,ew�<,. i.,.,,awu..,.,..
o� mr.m
a�e�iom�e�uroo:ear.p�ea,wn�. i ,�
muVu<y�W lf o yain x'cmuWug I�nC o�aeiwryi
riv mun� M-d'uryr�.d o!u MuNm�� �ann.
Nopivpo��I�niuqbWl�w¢�a¢elonxiWNpL�
u�ym�fiotlw�J•w wllen1(mo
wn)bW
vvumierveawrnl�aulWrirymwkap W dai�ioa1 �
i� ..,,` w awm�± K.�m
wr����
Wy,elnauni�vyt nPo1�loWx Y��na�eEa yy
��� ¢nhAc�+.=.M1.xvnm��n.uk. Ymemumn4
�?�hFn�rimmmr�i�nlNoiihitt�.uu nGrF Brc�vMaiw
.�w„6��,�aRrt��,o �
6. 'W�Y.�
� m��e.�c,w. ro;.�eR
w a.ae�k.ma ranP. �.e.i a��e�d. nn�..o��.
���.,��.n�.n..o-,.n. vva��.��m,v�or��a
J u,�em�mw�.N vrn�•p=. ss ��aa., rvssm.
minminlnt� muv?ve.P�w�u�ww�e.maun
✓�ono��le�cyaNm � �.Ivromvwu
� `Y�wn ex1[un �I�cen U�k=
PooUFo�ur.iN30+ Al+iulydoce
, o, an � m�aw� ���a ..ia �o„�
rtA�m�� WemiAury
..(t�,�..eMin� �ry)M
11bPo aidaCam�o
WI3Y SFIOULD b� WORRY A�OLTi SOIL £R�SION?
- . • � �
Water and wind carry soil from our Bay Area Iand down into our
streams, Iakes and the Bay. This soil carries with it pollu-
tants such as oi1 and grease, chemicals, fertilizers, animal
wastes and bacteria, which thrzaten our water quality.
Such erosion also costs the home construction industry, Ioca1
government, and the homeowner untold millions of doIIars
a year.
Nature slowly wears away Iand, but human activities such as
construction increase the rate of erosion 200, even 2,000 times
that amount. When we remove vegetation or otfier objects that
hold soil in place, we expose it to the action of wind and water
and increase its chances of eroding.
The Ioss of soil from a construction site results in loss of topsoii,
minerals and nutrients, and it causes ugly cuts and gullies in the
Iandscape. Surface runoff and the materials it carries with it clog
our culverts, fIood channels and streams. Sometimes it destroys
wildHfe and damages recreational areas such as ]akes and re-
servoirs. , • . _
As an example, road and home building in tfie Oakland hi1ls
above Lake Temescal frlled the Iake to such an extent that it had
to be dredged in 1979 at a public cost of $750,000.
NBED MORE INFORMATION?
ABAG has produced a slide/tape show on soil erosion
called "Money Down the Drain. ° It is available for showing
to any interested group. Calt ABAG Public Affairs at (415)
841-9730.
ABAG has also published a"Manual of Standards for Sur-
face Runoff Control Measures" which deals extensively
with designs and practices for erosion prevention, sedi-
ment control, and control of urban runof£ The manual
addresses problems and solutions as they apply to
California and the Bay Area. It can be purchased from
ABAG and is available on reference at.many Ioca1 Iibraries
and in city and county public works and planning depart-
ments.
USDA Soil Conservation Service personnel are willing to
provide more information on specifrc erosion problems.
This brochure is a cooperative project of the Association of
Bay Area GoVernments and the East Bay Regional Park
District.
��/�f1 nss�ocia^*io�+
�'''(��� OF REF
l -1rlrlM GOVERNMENiS
Hotel Claremont
Be"rkeley, California 94705
(415)841-9730
1'1�OiEC�ING
EAST BAY REGIONAL
PARK DISTRICT
11500 Skyline Blvd.
Oakland, CA 94619
531-9300
Y���
���������
����
�RO�I�1�
�ROSIOnT COIiT?RO� CPiI� PROT�C`�
�IO�JR PROPERI'Y IiND PRE�NT
FiT`��TRE �i�1�ACIiES
� Vegetation-stabifized
�(�J 1 � Slope: Secarity
f � (i ( �' ; ��� • soIl in place
• minimum of
�(�� erosion
�� • fewer winter cIean-
'� � r � j up problems
• protection for
(� house foun-
� dations
/
�..-: ��(/
� � ���/ .
(�/! I
�� /1��_
Bare Slope: Headaches ''
and Liability
• mudslide danger
• Ioss of topsoil •'•` . ,
•. clogged storm ` •,'•t. , �
drains, fIooding '��� 7'�" '�
' :3' `\c
problems ,�r`�'
• expensive � � ' ' `
cleanup ,��'��1�
• eroded or �
buried house .,-���'� •
foundations ��J� " :' ' ' '
�.'. ��' i '`f'� �.4. t.,� i
.F� . L.�}
7 .f5�i'.�� r. .:( '�, �;�Yil. .
;:r:o ..r..,'�,,� '�-.»..'` _ � . •
� -.. . ...
TIPS FOR THE HOMEOWN��
� �� � 1
\\ :::,,:;=' .`/
"Winterize" your property by mid-September. Don't
wait until spring to put in Iandscaping. You need
winter protectioa. Final Iandscaping can be done
Iater.
Inexpensive measures installed by fall wi1l give you
protection quickly that wi1l Iast a1I during the wet
season.
Ia one afiernooa �ou can:
• Dig trenches to drain surface runoff water away
from problem areas such as steep, bare slopes.
a Prepare bare areas on slopes for seeding by raking
the surface to Ioosen and roughen soil so it wi11
hold seeds.
Seediag of bare slopes
• Hand broadcast or use a"breast seeder." A typical
yard can be done in Iess than an hour.
• Give seeds a boost with fertilizer.
• Mu1ch if you can, with grass clippings and Ieaves,
bark chips or straw.
• Use netting to hold soil and seeds on steep slopes.
• Check with your Iocal nursery for advice.
9y'f►,.
���
�int�* �I�x�#
� Check before storms to see that drains and ditches
are not clogged by Ieayss and rubble.
� Check after maJor storms to be sure drains are clear
and vegetation is holding on slopes. Repair as
necessary.
� Spot seed any bare areas.
:T� ; � � � • '•
�i�;�;•,,, • � � •
�resaa��.� 1 ' �
� 1'����'� � ' • �
'��r I' d.�, y , :
Soi1 erosion costs Bay Area homeowners millions of doI-
Iars a year. We lose vaIuable topsoil. We have to pay for
damage to roads and property. And our tax money has to
be spent on cleaning out sediment from storm drains,
channels , [akes and the Bay.
You can protect your prop-
erty and prevent future
headaches by following
these guidelines:
__::- � --- __
�EF� R� A1VD
DURING
CONSTRUCTION
• Plan construction activities during spring and summer,
so that erosion control measures can be in place when
the rain comes,
• Examine your site carefully before building. Be aware of
the slope, drainage patterns and soil types. Proper site
design will help you avoid expensive stabiIization work.
• Preserve existirig vegeta-
tion as much as possible.
Limit grading and plant
removal to the areas
under current construc-
tion. (Vegetation will
naturally curb erosion,
improve the appearance
and the value of your
property, and reduce the
cost of Iandscaping Iater.)
• Use fenctng to protect plants from f11 material and traffrc.
If you have to pave near trees, do so with permeable as-
phalt or porous paving blocks.
• Preserve the naturat contours of the Ianc1 and disturb the
earth as Iittle as possible. Limit the tirne in which graded
areas are exposed.
� Minimize the Iength and
steepness of slopes by
re benching, terracin6, or
���ky�� constructing diversion
;` �� structures. Landscape
' benched areas to stabilize
. the slope and improve its
appearance.
• As soon as possible after grading a site, plant vegetation
on aI1 areas that are not to be paved or otherwise
covered.
Control dust on graded areas by sprinkling with water,
restricting traffic to certain routes, and paving or gravel-
ing access roads and driveways.
TBMPORARY MEASURES ?O
S?ABILIZE ?HE SOIL
Grass provides the
cheapest and most ef-
fective short-term ero-
sion control. It grows
quickly and covers tfie
ground completely. To
fmd tfie best seed mix-
tures and plants for
your area, check witfi
your Iocal nursery, the
U.S. Department ofAg-
riculture Soil Conserva-
tion Service, or the
University of Ca&fornia
Cooperative Extension.
Malches hotd soil moisture and provide ground protection
from rain damage. They also provide a favorable envi-
ronment for starting and growing plants. Easy-to-obtain
mulches are grass clippings, Ieaves, sawdust, bark chips
and straw
Straw mulch is nearly 100 % effective when held in place by
spraying with an organic glue or wood fber (tackifiers), by
punching it into the soil with a shovel or roller, or by tack-
ing a netting over it.
Commercial applications of
wood itbers combined with
various seeds and fertilizers
(fiydraulic mulching) are effec-
tive in stabilizing sloped areas. �:, '. �.:'_`.
Hydraulic mulching with a - - -
tackifier should -
be done in tvso - _
separate appli- � - � %:,_ .. ' _ :_... ..:,;:,.: �
cations: the frrst
composed of seed fertilizer and ha1f the mu1ch, the second
composed of the remaining mulch and tackifier. Commer-
cial hydraulic mulch app&cators—who also provide other
erosion controI services — are Iisted under "Iandscaping" in
the phone book.
t..
'`�="
�� s`'=�-
;-::;
�:ti-::�
�:..... .................._...�... .
- _ " �,:�
Mats of excelsior, jute netting and plastic sheets can be ef-
fective temporary covers, but they must be in contact with
the soiI and fastened securely to work effectively.
Roof draiaage can be collected in barrels or storage con-
tainers or routed into tawns, planter boxes and gardens.
Be sure to cover stored water so you don't collect mos-
quitos, too. Excessive runoff should be directed away from
your house. Too much water can damage trees and make
foundations unstable.
STRUCTURAL RUNOFF CON?ROLS
Even with proper timing and planting, you may need to
protect disturbed areas from rainfall until the plants have
time to establish themselves. Or you may need permanent
ways to transport water across your property so that it
doesn't cause erosion.
To keep water from carrying soil from your site and dump-
ing it into nearby Iots, streets, streams and channels, you
need ways to reduce its volume and speed. Some exam-
ples of what you might use are:
plastic sheeting
perimeter dike
/
straw mulcfi
Riprap (rock Iining)—to
protect channel banks
from erosive wat fl w
er o
• Sedimeat trap—to
stop runoff carrying
sediment and trap the
sediment
�, :;: .:, .
—�
�v`
J. P
• Storm draia outlet
protectioa—to reduce
the speed of water fIow-
ing from a pipe onto
open ground or into a
' riatural channel
• Diversioa dike or perimeter dike—to divert excess
water to places where it can be disposed of properly
._A�.� }�' ,^1���4 � `Y��..� �._...�i
�.h.'?�;;Ca;�-;`'�;:�� ��.,:�.,-.: /SZ
tir":`::;:..���eY:ui'::::. �:.:: .£.:'.:�-::: .?i::...:�.::::::::,:::
*a.-.::::- '.".^�`�;:`:!� �� _�...:,.J+,.M...,^.��:...p:,`$/� s
-"�G�F:E:::'.':':::'::�C.:.:;:�t , % � _ --�
J �4, :� _.:_ : . ... .::
�'�:::-..::t;�.;::;���:1::'.i:`::�(�� �::.`'�::�"�",�1':i::'
��,.��.: : =: :.. - •::_::::;;;::: �,
_ .:�::�.=::�:�;�.�::� _ .._-
_
• Straw bale dike—to stop and detain sediment from
sma1l unprotected areas
(a short-term measure)
• PerimeEer swale — to divert
nznoff from a disturbed area
or to contain runoff within
a disturbed area
,:';`�"'.:;�
;t;{,:: =
,�,;::�::
:�:°�:;' .,.,,,....
• Grade stabifizatioa structare—to carry concentrated
runoff down a slope
jute netting
Iandscaping \
hydrauflc mulch
\ ;_:.;-;:'-:_:: �
�===�1 ==��11 ItlF\ =--
iii'!lrlii)ni.\ �nlr.�u�. ,.
�,
��� ' � �� � � �����
1� � -
��
� �
�
inm�
�"_'c�` I � �i
�_. �i�"¢-'� .
�!� � ' �
diversion ditch
bench
�/�!� _ � c�-.
-„ p...
._ � .. � �.. .
sediment trap
\\ outlet protectio�
� Conservairee
CITY OF BURLINGAME
{ COMfvIUNITY DEVELOPMENT DE
BURLfiJGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
a . �1� , BURLINGAME, CA94010
PH: (650) 558-7250 � FAX: (650)
www.burlingame.org
Site: 2600 SUMMIT DRIVE
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the
follawing public hearing on MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 28,
2009 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingome, CA:
Application far Design Review, Hillside Aren Canstruction
Permit, and Special Permits for attached gnrage ond
building height for a first and second story oddition to a
single family dwelling at 2600 SUMMIT DRIVE zoned
R-1. APN 027-271-I10
Mailed: 5eptem6er 1 &, 2004
(Please refer to other side)
G iori"E5�^.4325
� � �� ���
.;_ .r _
,�s �
c�
� .1ai:=_� r'ror ��:J1t1,
�� ���:���
�U��IC �EA�9N�
��`�'��
�l�' O� ��l`lll1�
� _.
A copy of the application and pfans for:this pro�ect may, t
the meeting at the Community Develo`pment pepartmenf
Road, Burlingame California
If you challenge the subject application(s) in caurt, you rr
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at
described in the `notice or in written eorrespondence.'deli�
prior to the pub(ic hearing.
Property owners :who`r.eceive this notice are responsible
tenants about this nofice>
For additional i�iormdiion, �lease call;;(650) 558 7250 Ti
Wilfiam ivieeKer '
Comrnunity Qevelopment Direc��r
reviewed prior io
t 501 Primrose
y be limited to
e piablic hearing,
red�`:io ihe ciiy at or
�r rnforming their
,:,. . -
������ ������� �� � ���
(Please refer fo other sideJ
C�MMUNICATION RECEIYED
�1FTER PREPARATION
Chris Ngai and Yolanda Leung OF STAFF REPORT
___
2606 Summit Drive �
Burlingame, Ca , 94010 � ' , _
^ - � 3c� �.,
�,.� bs�� 3�{z-rna�� c��S-7�3 ������.o ����
r�
A ril 12, 2009 �� - 'A
p �+� Rece.ived After ,..--:.�P� � � �009
_.
04.13.09 Planning CommissionYMtg
Agenda Item 6- 2600 Summit Drive �ITYCF�L?FLiiVGAtv?E
Design Review Board �.�,;,,�,ih�G ��G-�_
City of Burlingame
Subject: Design review on a proposed new addition on Gumas's property on
2600 Summit Drive, Burlingame, Ca 94010
Dear Sirs:
We are the owner residents at 2606 Summit Drive and immediate neighbor to the left of
the subject Gumas property.
After reviewing the design of the Gumas' proposed addition, we have serious concerns
with regard to the newly proposed garage and additional bedroom at the west corner of
the Gumas property which is unmediately adjacent to the boundary of our property.
The proposed addition calls for an exterior wall which is only 7 feet from our property
fence and measuring 24 feet x 35 feet in dimension. This massive wall, if allowed to be
built as proposed, will severely block and limit sunlight through our breakfast area bay
window as well as our dining room patio door and window. The e�sting two story
structure already limits our view of the sky and enjoyment of light to only 30% of the
window. With this newly proposed structure and its massive wall, we believe it will
prevent us from seeing tne sicy aitogeiner, furcner resiriciing our access io and enjoymen�
of light in our breakfast area not to mention casting a very large shadow over our
property.
We believe this proposed two story structuxe is unreasonably and intrusively large,
resulting in excessive infi-i.ngement into our property rights. The window(s) of the room
above the garage will ha�e a close and direct view of our swimining pool, further
infi-inging upon our rights to privacy as properiy owners. It goes without saying that
these infringements, aside from affecting our quality of life, causing unnecessary stress
upon our entire household, will also undoubtedly translate into a substantial decline in
our property value, adversely impacting on our retirement planiung.
page 1 of A�
Keeping in mind our grave concerns as immediate neighbor to the subject property, we
suggest that any newly erected garage addition should stand no less than 15 feet from our
mutual property line. Moreover, the second story of the proposed structure should best
be recessed from the west side garage wall in order to allow more open space between the
Gutnas praperty and our property.
As it stands now, our property's second storey has a view of the Bay over the Gumas'
existing roofline which is at 28 feet. The height of the newly proposed project will result
in a 35 ft roof which will completely eliminate our north view of the bay. We are
vehemently opposed to the approval of any height variance and emphatically feel that any
variance over the 30ft limit is inappropriate and should not be granted. That said, any
new addition at the Gumas property should either stay with the existing 28 ft roofline or
otherwise be in conformance with existing building ordinances with no variances allowed.
Since Guxnas' lot has over two acres of land, there are many different options to where
they can built their additions. Other suggestion is that they could build the additional
bedroom at the other end (near the street) of their existing structure as an extension to
their single storey home. We strongly believe the current proposed design needs to be
modified to meet the Burlingame city building height ordinance. The massiveness of the
proposed design needs to be reduced to match with the homes in this area. And most
importantly, the new design needs to minimize the negative impact to our home value
and tYae qualiiy of life. The new design also needs to make good use of the size of the lot
and create a harmony in the neighborhood.
Sincerely,
�i� ' 1 � ,. � G "��z��'�-�-�-
Chris & Yolanda Ng ' �
page 2 of 4
�
Existing view from our dinning room Existing view from our brea.l�ast area
�-
—����
E�sting view to the auport and the bay from 2nd floor bedroom
page 3 of 4
�
View after Gumas Property proposed new additions
�1
� _
page 4 of 4
�