The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2508 Easton Dr - Staff ReportCity of Burlingame Design Review Address: 2508 Easton Drive Item No. 5 Action Item Meeting Date: December 12, 2011 Request: Application for Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. Applicant and Designer: Stotler Design Group Property Owner: Lonestar Holdings LLC General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 027-192-100 Lot Area: 6,000 SF Zoning: R-1 Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section 15303 (a), which states that construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone is exempt from environmental review. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on October 11, 2011, the Commission had several comments and concerns with the project and referred the application to a design review consultant (October 11, 2011 Planning Commission Minutes attached). Please refer to the attached meeting minutes for a complete list of concerns expressed by the Planning Commission. Planning staff would note that the Special Permit for declining height envelope previously requested along the right side of the house has been eliminated by altering the design of the second floor. The applicant submitted a written response dated December 7, 2011 and revised plans date stamped December 5, 2011. These plans were reviewed by the design review consultant and serves as the basis for the analysis prepared by the design review consultant. Analysis and Recommendation by Design Reviewer: In a written analysis dated December 5, 2011, the design reviewer summarizes how this project complies with the residential design guidelines (included in staff report for reference). However, the design reviewer also notes suggestions to improve the project further. Please refer to the design reviewer's analysis for a summary of changes made to the project as well as additional suggestions. In summary, the reviewer notes the following: "The applicant has provided an improved project as compared to the original submittal. The project could be further improved in a few ways. The proportions feel a little top heavy, especially on the front. I note that the proposed plate height for the second floor is 9' where Burlingame typically uses an 8' plate; bringing that down will help the proportions. On paper, the front end of the house reads a bit like a two story box with a one story skirt wrapped around it (might not read that way in the field). Because the second floor front fa�ade is so symmetrical, the lower level feels attached and less integrated (than before), but bringing the upper plate down should help to alleviate that. I had suggested some brackets or other detail below the rear balcony which were included on an interim submittal but not this one. I thought the family room doors should move over to align with the balcony above, but it is the back of the house. Some materials are not called out and therefore unknown (belly band, columns, eaves, gutters etc...). With the inclusion of some of these further improvements, I can support this project." Project Description: The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing single-story house with a detached garage to build a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. The proposed house and detached garage will have a total floor area of 3,413 SF (0.56 FAR) where 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) is the maximum allowed (including covered porch and chimneyexemptions). The proposed project is 7 SF belowthe maximum allowed FAR and is within 1% of the maximum allowed FAR. Design Review 2508 Easton Drive The project includes a detached garage (427 SF) which provides finro code-compliant covered parking spaces for the proposed five-bedroom house. There is one uncovered parking space (9' x 20') provided in the driveway. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following application: ■ Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage (CS 25.57.010). 2508 Easfon Drive Lot Area: 6,000 SF Plans date stam ed: December 5, 2011 PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED SETBACKS _.._ ......................................................................._.._._..- -------------._..__................_............................................_._..............._.............................._........___._..__.;........_..._..........------....._....._......._....__........_......._.............._..................................._.......__..._...__......._.._.._....__. Front (9st flr): 17'-2" 17'-2" (block average) (2nd flr): 24-2" 20'-0" __. ................._........_........._.......------.._......----......_............._......._....-- — - ---.._........._._..__......._............._......._......._........................................................................................_.._..._..__.._..._,----......._...._..__..._..---._._.....---..__...._..._..__....._.._...._....._.............................................................................. Side (left): 11'-0" 4'-0" (right): 4'-0" 4'-0" _.._..........__..__.._.__.._...._.....---.._ ...........................................__......._._------.._ ..._........ _......._._...._..._........_.....,..........._..._.._..._....-----.._...___.................._...................__.._........................................................................................... Rear (1st flr): 45'-9" 15'-0" (2nd flr): 41'-9" to deck 20'-0" Lot Coverage: 2206 SF 2400 SF 36.7% 40% FAR: 3413 SF 3420 SF 0.56 FAR 0.57 FAR --......--------....__. ................................. ...._....._.................._......_.......--------......------------._....__..................,..............._.....................................,..................__......._.._..._...._.............__.............---......._......---.......---..........._........................................................_........... # of bedrooms: 5 --- -------..._._...._._.._..-------------....._...._ .......................................................................................__..........._.._...........----..__...........----.......__..,.......__......---...................................__...................._.........__........................ Parking: 2 covered 2 covered (20' x 20') (20' x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') Height: 30'-0" 30'-0" _...__....._._..------....-----......_..........._..__........._.._........... _...---....--- -----...----- ---..._.........._.....--- -- ---......._..._ ........................_...............---.........................._.i................................._.............__................................................................................_................_...................._......__..__... DH Envelope: compiies ' CS 25.28.075 ' (0.32 x 6,000 SF) + 1,100 SF + 400 SF = 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) Staff Comments: See attached memos from the City Engineer, Chief Building Official, Parks Supervisor, Fire Marshal and NPDES Coordinator. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows: 1. Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. 2 Design Review 2508 Easton Drive Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the appiication, and consider public testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action should include specific findings supporting the Planning Commission's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the Planning Commission. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped December 5, 2011, sheets T1, C.O, A1 through A4, L-1, L-2 and GPC; 2. that the property owner shall be responsible for implementing and maintaining all tree protection measures in the Tree Protection Plan as defined in the arborist report prepared by Kielty Arborist Services, dated August 30, 2011; all tree protection zones shall be established and inspected by the City Arborist prior to issuance of a building permit; 3. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 5. that the conditions of the Park Supervisor's September 20 and July 26, 2011 memos, the Chief Building Official's September 15 and July 26, 2011 memos, the City Engineer's August 17, 2011 memo, the Fire Marshal's July 25, 2011 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's July 25, 2011 memo shall be met; 6. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be placed upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community Development Director; 7. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 8. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; 9. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 10, that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 11. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 12. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2010 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; 3 Design Review 2508 Easfon Drive THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: 13. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the applicant shall provide a certification by the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, that demonstrates that the project falls at or below the maximum approved floor area ratio for the property; 14. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 15. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 16. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and 17. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. Ruben Hurin Senior Planner c. Stotler Design Group, applicant and designer Attachments: ApplicanYs Response Letter, dated December 7, 2011 Design Reviewer Analysis, dated December 5, 2011 October 11, 2011 Planning Commission Minutes Application to the Planning Commission Arborist Report prepared by Kielty Arborist Services, dated August 30, 2011 Staff Comments Photographs of Neighborhood Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed) Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed December 2, 2011 Aerial Photo 0 Attention: City of Burlingame Planning Dapartment Re: 2508 Easton �� Date; 12/7/zo 11 D E C- 7 2 Q' 1 Ruben, Ci� OF SURLl�1GAAhE CD�-PIAt�NING DIV. Please f nd in this application proposal the following revisions based on comments from the planning commission and one of the town's a��chitectural consultants, Randy Cn•ange. In review of the design comments on this home we went through a few alteinative design concepts in order to address the concerns. After oar redesign chorces we have made our choicas that we believe a�•e vest. The owner has chosen to maintain the French style exterior which is we believe is compaiible with this diverse neighborhood, ihus keeping the stucco exterior finish and cast stone window sills. A sample will t�e provided at the hearing to review. We have made fhe revisions through a negotiation of modifications with the consultant. These modificatians are Iisted in his letter io ihe commission and his recommendation io support the pro�ect. In conclusion, this process has Ueen very helpful in cIarification and improvement on what we Uelieve was a nice design bui became Uetter as a result of these comments and modifications. We would �•eally like to move this forward and get your approval at the hearing next Monday. Ifyou have any questions, please call. Regards, Scott Stotler Stotler Design Cn•oup, Inc. 349 First St. suite A Los Altos, CA 94022 Design Review Memo City of Burlingame Date: December 5, 2011 Planning Commission p �� City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010 DEC -� 20 �1 Re: 2508 Easton Ave. Cl;� CF BUt��G4�A� Architect: Stotler Design Group C�iS-Pl�\t�11I�G i�1V. Planner: Ruben Hurin I have received and reviewed the revised plans for 2508 Easton Ave. I have visited the site and surrounding area. I reviewed the original submission to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's comments as presented in the meeting minutes. I also met with the Planner, owner, and architect about the project. I also reviewed two interim designs and commented on them as well. The Planning Commission comments from the original meeting are as follows: ■ Asked if the area affected by the declining height envelope is the master bath? (Stotler — yes, were attempting to respect the declining height envelope as much as possible.) ■ Has a problem with granting exceptions to the declining height envelope for new homes on standard lots. No compelling argument for approving the declining height envelope request. • Disappointed in the loss of the front porch — encourage large front porches since the neighborhood is a very walking-oriented area. ■ Feels the design is too similar to the proposed project across the street. (Stotler — specifically tried to design two different styles — pointed out the changes. Feels that there is a distinctive design for each project. With respect to the declining height envelope — by following the regulation in all instances, the projects on the same lot configuration start to appear similar. With respect to the porch, attempted to respect the average setback and removed the porch.) ■ Noted the deck above the entry with no access — is this intentional? (Stotler — yes, was meant as an architectural detail.) ■ Why aren't the architectural details carried through on all sides of the project. (Stotler — could arch some of the windows — will be using wood frame windows. Noted that some applicants prefer gridless windows on the rear to preserve clear views.) ■ The front is handsome, but the design character doesn't carry through. ■ Could revise the master bathroom to eliminate the declining height envelope. ■ Why not provide a door to the balcony? (Stotler — if a door is provided would want it to be centered at the front of the house — there are limitations imposed by the shape and geometry of the interior.) ■ Noted that there is room to work with the design to comply with the declining height envelope requirement. ■ The entry is not inviting — could use more design work. (Stotler — feels that the design is compatible with the neighborhood.) 2508 Easton Drive December 5, 2011 ■ Doesn't have a problem with the declining height envelope portion of the request — agrees with the argument that the exception results in design variation. ■ Asked for clarification regarding the permeability of the pavers on the driveway. ■ On the front elevation, second-story windows — what is the material? (Stotler — is the sash of the French doors.) • Identify trim around all windows on the house. Prefer wood sills. (Stotier — are providing pre-cast concrete window sills. Referenced maintenance issues with wood sills.) ■ Wants to see this home as a different design from the home across the street. Similar materials are provided. ■ Need to provide divided lights, wood trim. (Stotler — the windows are recessed to provide a shadow-box effect.) ■ Not certain the architectural style is consistent with the neighborhood — the materials selected are not used frequently in the neighborhood. Wood details are typically provided in the neighborhood. (Stotler — noted that the details in the plans are found in the neighborhood. The majority of his clients do not want to use wood products for maintenance reasons.) ■ Feels that the design is a bit too fancy for the neighborhood. (Stotler — the style is present in the area.) ■ Consider providing a more expansive porch and incorporate other suggestions from the Commission — rethink the design on this project to make it different from the project across the street. (Stotler — is the direction to move away from the stucco exterior? If so, will move away from the French-style.) Doesn't want the impression that the two homes are built at the same time. • Alarming that there is a balcony provided with no access. (Stotler — could end up being only a roof over the front porch, and not a deck.) ■ The design guidelines encourage wood finishes; the roof materials are the same — too much similarity. Encouraged a design that emulates the homes of the 20s and 30s. (Stotler — feels that the materials proposed will stand the test of time.) Revisions to original design: General: Per the comments made at the Planning Commission hearing, we believed that the architect should: eliminate the special permit request; carry detail all the way around the house; make the house less "heavy" feeling; make the house less formal to better fit into the existing streetscape. An interim design was presented that included a rustic stone water table at the front of the house, timber headers and beams, and a more craftsman style porch. I commented that there were multiple styles going on and that they should probably pick one direction. Following is a summary of changes from the original submittal to the current submittal • General: The floor plan has been modified and the special permit for declining height has been eliminated. The floor plan has been modified and a front porch has been added in front of the dining room. • Front elevation: The iron railings have been removed from the second floor; the quoins have been removed; A single larger window has replaced the two little ones above the front door; The entry porch has been changed; a front porch has been added; the proposed window trim now wraps all the way around the windows. �a 2508 Easton Drive December 5, 2011 • Left elevation: The massing has been modified; the window details have been carried through. The front and rear porches have been revised. • Rear elevation: Additional detail has been added to the rear porch feature (none before); the window details have been carried through. • Right elevation: The massing has been modified to eliminate the special permit request; the stone has been removed from the chimney; the window details have been carried through • Misc: The garage has been re-designed; It appears that the proposed plate height does not meet the City requirements for a detached structure within the setback but no dimension was given. DESIGN GUIDELINES: Compatibility of the Architectural Style with that of the Existing Neighborhood: • There are a variety of house styles in the neighborhood, and the proposed architectural style will fit in with the neighborhood reasonably well. 2. Respect for Parking and Garage Patterns in the Neighborhood • The detached garage is typical and will be compatible with the parking patterns in the neighborhood. 3. Architectural Style, Mass 8� Bulk of the Structure: • The mass and bulk of the structure is similar to the previous submittal. The design and the level of detail proposed for the structure is improved over the original submittal. 4. Interface of the Proposed Structure with the Adjacent Structures to Each Side: • The proposed house will interface reasonably well with its neighbors. 5. Landscaping and its proportion to the Mass and Bulk of Structural Components: • A landscape plan has been included. Additional landscaping and tree planting is always encouraged. The plans don't indicate new fencing along the side and rear property lines. Including some planting along the driveway fence instead of the paving band would soften the edge. SU M MARY: The applicant has provided an improved project as compared to the original submittal. The project could be further improved in a few ways. The proportions feel a little top heavy, especially on the front. I note that the proposed plate height for the second floor is 9' where Burlingame typically uses an 8' plate; bringing that down will help the 3 2508 Easton Drive December 5, 2011 proportions. On paper, the front end of the house reads a bit like a two story box with a one story skirt wrapped around it (might not read that way in the field). Because the second floor front fa�ade is so symmetrical, the lower level feels attached and less integrated (than before), but bringing the upper plate down should help to alleviate that. I had suggested some brackets or other detail below the rear balcony which were included on an interim submittal but not this one. I thought the family room doors should move over to align with the balcony above, but it is the back of the house. Some materials are not called out and therefore unknown (belly band, columns, eaves, gutters etc...). With the inclusion of some of these further improvements, I can support this project. Randy Grange, AIA � CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISSION — Approved Minutes October 11, 2011 7. 2508 EASTON DRIVE, ZONED R-1-APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (STOTLER DESIGN GROUP, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; LONESTAR HOLDINGS LLC. PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated October 11, 2011, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker briefly presented the project description. Questions of staff: None. Chair Yie opened the pubiic comment period. Scott Stotler, 349 First Street, Los Altos; represented the applicant. Commission comments: ■ Asked if the area affected by the declining height envelope is the master bath? (Stotler— yes, were attempting to respect the declining height envelope as much as possible.) • Has a problem with granting exceptions to the declining height envelope for new homes on standard lots. No compelling argument for approving the declining height envelope request. ■ Disappointed in the loss of the front porch — encourage large front porches since the neighborhood is a very walking-oriented area. ■ Feels the design is too similar to the proposed project across the street. (Stotler— specifically tried to design iwo different styles — pointed out the changes. Feels that there is a distinctive design for each project. With respect to the declining height envelope — by following the regulation in all instances, the projects on the same lot configuration start to appear similar. With respect to the porch, attempted to respect the average setback and removed the porch.) ■ Noted the deck above the entrywith no access — is this intentional? (Stotler—yes, was meant as an architectural detail.) ■ Why aren't the architectural details carried through on all sides of the project. (Stotler— could arch some of the windows — will be using wood frame windows. Noted that some applicants prefer gridless windows on the rear to preserve clear views.) ■ The front is handsome, but the design character doesn't carry through. ■ Could revise the master bathroom to eliminate the declining height envelope. ■ W hy not provide a door to the balcony? (Stotler— if a door is provided would want it to be centered at the front of the house — there are limitations imposed by the shape and geometry of the interior.) ■ Noted that there is room to work with the design to comply with the declining height envelope requirement. ■ The entry is not inviting — could use more design work. (Stotler—feels that the design is compatible with the neighborhood.) ■ Doesn't have a problem with the declining height envelope portion of the request — agrees with the argument that the exception results in design variation. ■ Asked for clarification regarding the permeability of the pavers on the driveway. ■ On the front elevation, second-story windows — what is the material? (Stotler — is the sash of the French doors.) ■ Identify trim around all windows on the house. Prefer wood sills. (Stotler— are providing pre-cast concrete window sills. Referenced maintenance issues with wood sills.) ■ Wants to see this home as a different design from the home across the street. Similar materials are provided. 9 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISSION — Approved Minutes October 19, 2011 ■ Need to provide divided lights, wood trim. (Stotler— the windows are recessed to provide a shadow- box effect.) ■ Not certain the architectural style is consistent with the neighborhood — the materials selected are not used frequently in the neighborhood. Wood details are typically provided in the neighborhood. (Stotler — noted that the details in the plans are found in the neighborhood. The majority of his clients do not want to use wood products for maintenance reasons.) ■ Feels that the design is a bit too fancy for the neighborhood. (Stotler — the style is present in the area.) ■ Consider providing a more expansive porch and incorporate othersuggestions from the Commission — rethink the design on this project to make it different from the project across the street. (Stotler— is the direction to move awayfrom the stucco exterior? If so, will move awayfrom the French-style.) Doesn't want the impression that the two homes are built at the same time. ■ Alarming that there is a balcony provided with no access. (Stotler— could end up being only a roof over the front porch, and not a deck.) • The design guidelines encourage wood finishes; the roof materials are the same — too much similarity. Encouraged a design that emulates the homes of the 20s and 30s. (Stotler—feels that the materials proposed will stand the test of time.) Public comments: None. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Yie made a motion fo p/ace the item on the Regular Action Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica. Discussion of motion: None. Chair Yie 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 6-0-9-0 (Commissioner Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:06 p.m. 10 �� 6URLINGAME � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMEN`i • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD ° BURLINGAME, CA 94010 p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org APPLICAl"ION 1'O THE PLAIVNIiVG COIViIVIISSION Type of application: � Design Review ❑ Variance ❑ Parcel #: � Z � � �!� � -- � � � ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit ❑ Other: PROJECT ADDRESS: �� ' ,�� 2\ � � �j �� l 1�� ,� � 0 Please indicate the contact person for this project APPLICANT `� project contact person �, OK to send electronic copies of documents�O` ,� � Name: ��r�— ��ES� �� ''"� Address: ��- � �''� ��5� s�T1� �� City/State/Zip: �-� S .��-�� Sr �� - � ( � Z Z Phone: �7 �� L �i ~�2l � 3 Fax: �� '� 5 � � �� vi s� of--t L s-1 �-�-� ��-�:t�s��.�� r c�,,1a , ti E-mai : �`cEuf�,--�1 CG sf�--I-I e--,rd�s,�� , `-� �� I- ARCHITECT/DESIGNER pro]ect coota�t Person ❑ OK ta send electronic copies of documents ❑ PROPERTY OWNER project contact person ❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ Name: ��.�ha r f'�D ��1��, � � �C._C' Address: �pZ l30PJe�' C� City/State/Zip: S' ��, 1�0.� +-e� �' � YYQ Z Phone: _ �S'D �7�`� �`�� Fax: E-mail: r� � v � cv�t�1 �( • a �� I�� Name: �T�=`c t.._��"= ��5t�-� �12<`v�`� , Address: 4�� t ��ST S"`j, s��: :-� City/State/Zip: � � t��v 5 j �„�} �J� ��L Phone: � � L�� — Fax: �� 5e� f�f m JUL 2 2 2011 CITY OF BURLWGAME CDD-PLANNING DIV. �� V� � �� E-mail: .��i"��=- >-C�7"P �'1 �>i E''S � �l � ��-� r�\ �; � �i �,;,- �: � s �a �r Burlingame Business License #: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: C��v'vL � ", ��j ��sYi,�-� i.� � ti^ ��.� f Cx�.=� „� a�•.,�_��,,h 2� I O I 7 s—I�'��,� !ti� v1 j2�� i" �ii �c:� AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify�u der penalty of perjury tha the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ,�! j� �' � �, / Applicant's signature: �--( �� Date: � � �I I am aware of the propos d applicatio �d hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this ppli ation to the Planning Commission. '-7 /�� Property owner's signa re: G Date: �`7 I � /,� -, e� l t submitted: 7•22 �� t � Verification that the pro ect rch ct/designer has a valid Burlingam �ness license will be required by the Finance Department at the time application fees are paid. ❑ Please mark one box above wifh an X to indicate the contact person for this project. 5:1HAN�ouTs�PCapplication 2oos.handoutdoc This Space for CDD StafF Use Only � Project Description: � 5 i �c' � o - -�-a ;�n � � - f'�S t ��C.�. 5 DSR deposit/handling fee paid by: KeV: CUP DHE DSR E N SFD SP \ I Cc�� r O� �� v � cs�lrl �" �GN i �r� p Ot,� YL� � Conditional Use Permit Declining Height Envelope Desian Review New Single Family Dwellin Special Permit � Y• Kielty Arborist Services Certified Arborist WE#0476A P.O. Box6187 San Mateo, CA 94403 650 — 525 — 1464 August 30, 2011 Stotler Design Group Attn: Mr. Scott Stotler 349 First Street Suite A Los Altos, CA 94022 Site: 2508 Easton, Burlingame, CA Dear Mr. Stotler, DBH CON Ht/Sp Comments As requested on Monday, August 28, 201 l, I visited the above site to inspect and coimnent on the trees. New construction is planned far this site and as required a survey of the trees on site and a tree protection plan will be included. Method: All inspections were made from the ground; the trees were not climbed for this inspection. The trees in question were located on a map provided by you. The trees were then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). The trees were given a condition rating for form and vitality. The trees' condition rating is based on 50 percent vitality and 50 percent form, using the #�ollowing scale. 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poar 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The heights of the trees were measured using a Nikon Forestry 550 Hypsometer. The spread was paced off. Comments and recommendations for future maintenance are provided. Survey: Tree# Species 1 Pittosporum (Pittosporum undulatium) 1.7 60 �CP ��.2c�� ;-t�' - - ,-. -- �i;�,_ .._ `,i:i3' �.�,,��'.E� 10/5 Street tree, good vigor, fair form poorly staked. 2 Pittosporum 12-l0est 65 (Pittosporum undulatium) 3 Coral tree (neighbors) 30/20 Fair-good vigor, fair form, codominant at base. 20est 60 25/35 Good vigor, fair form, heavily pruned in past. i m 2508 Easton/8/30/11 0 5 Pittosporum (Pittosporum undulatiu�n) Privet (LigustYum japonicum) 6* Redwood tree (Sequoia sempervirens) *denotes neighbor's tree �2) 20est 60 11.5 60 26est 70 35/25 good form, fair vigor, heavily pruned in past. 25/25 Fair vigor and form, in concrete patio. 50/35 Good vigor, topped in past. Summary: The property has been well maintained in the past. The trees on this site are a mix of imported trees and one native redwood. The trees are on the perimeter of the properties, ideal for construction. With normal tree protection the neighbors trees will not be affected by the proposed construction. Tree Protection Plan: Tree protection zones: ♦ Should be established and maintained throughout the entire length of the project. ♦ Fencing for the protection zones should be 4 foot tall orange plastic type supported by metal stakes pounded into the ground. The support stakes should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center. ♦ The location for the protection fencing should be as close to the dripline as possible still allowing room for construction to safely continue. ♦ Signs should be placed on fencing signifying "Tree Protection Zone - Keep Out". ♦ No materials or equipment should be stored or cleaned inside the tree protection zones. ♦ Areas outside the fencing but still beneath the dripline of protected trees, where foot traffic is expected to be heavy, should be mulched with 4 to 6 inches of chipper chips. The spreading of chips will help to relieve compaction and improve the soil structure. Root Cutting: ♦ Any roots to be cut should be monitored and documented. ♦ Large roots or large masses of roots to be cut should be inspected by the site arborist. ♦ The site arborist may recommend fertilizing or irrigation if root cutting is significant. ♦ Cut all roots clean with a saw or loppers. ♦ Roots to be left exposed for a period of time should be covered with layers of burlap and kept moist. Trenching: ♦ Trenching for irrigation, electrical, drainage or any other reason should be hand dug when beneath the driplines of protected trees. Hand digging and carefully laying pipes below or beside protected roots will dramatically reduce root loss of desired trees thus reducing trauma to the entire tree. 2508 Easton/8/30/11 (3) ♦ Trenches should be backfilled as soon as possible with native material and compacted to near its original level. ♦ Trenches that must be left exposed for a period of time should also be covered with layers of burlap and kept moist. Plywood over the top of the trench will also help protect exposed roots below. Irrigation: ♦ Normal irrigation should be maintained throughout the entire length of the project. ♦ The imported trees on this site will require irrigation during the warm season months. ♦ During the summer months the trees on this site should receive heavy flood type irrigation 2 times a month. ♦ Irrigation during the winter months may also be necessary, depending on the seasonal rainfall. Flood type irrigation 1 time per month during the fall and winter months may be advised by the site arborist. ♦ Mulching the root zone of protected trees will help the soil retain moisture, thus reducing water consumption. Demolition, Parking and Staging: ♦ During the demolition process all tree protection must be in place. ♦ An inspection prior to the start of the demolition may be required. ♦ All vehicles must remain on paved surfaces if possible. If vehicles are to stray from paved surfaces, 4 to 6 inches of chips shall be spread and plywood laid over the mulch layer when inside root zones. This type of landscape buffer will help reduce compaction of desired trees. ♦ Parking will not be allowed off the paved surfaces near protected trees. ♦ The removal of foundation materials (including curbs, asphalt and retaining walls), when inside the driplines of protected trees, should be carried out with care. Hand excavation may be required in areas of heavy rooting. ♦ Exposed or damaged roots should be repaired and covered with native soil. ♦ Tree protection fencing may need to be moved after the demolition. The site arborist should be notified and the relocated fence should be inspected. This information should be kept on site at all times. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty Certified Arborist WE#0476A Project Comments Date: To: From: September 14, 2010 � City Engineer (650) 558-7230 0 Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 X Parks Supervisor (650) 558-7254 � Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 � Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 0 City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 Staff Review: �andscape plan is required to meet `Water Conservation in Landscape Regulations'. Complete attached Water Conservation in Landscape checklist. � 3. Protected Tree Permit required before construction begins. Application may be obtained from Parks Division (558-7254). Include Tree Protection diagram (attached) on plans and note as determined by Arborist Report. ` t� �,; � , i . � r I !� ,/ / / . // / r � � = / , r Reviewed bv: B. Disco Date: 9/20/11 - - _ OUTDOOR 1tVATER USE EFFICIEiVCY CHECKLIST' o - . e -. . �.. I certify that the s ject project meets the specified requirements of the Water Conservatinn in Landsqping Ordinance. ��, �j � �-/ / Signaiure Date � Single Family O Multi-Family O Commercial �(nstitutional 0 Irtigation only 0 industrial O Other: � Applicant Name (print): � yt � f� Contact Phone #: L�Q�—�(�� Ze ProjectSite Address: Z �p(.� �as f�ry � �vr��'n �� /+ (i Project Area (sq,ft or acre): �� j 1 Fj Sq ,%¢-. # of Units: # of Meters• � ��e � � :e; � '� - e . Total tandscape Area (sq.ft.r): p �- �. : -� � e ' � p & 4a• ��ea �' -e Gjb�v �•!f•$�.�' ��.'� 5G to ° -- . � °` �s � Turf Irrigeted Area {s9-ft-): SOCi Sy. �'l • � �. _' :r�.�� •�%�-S�5 x e.v� - .. �'�" �'• Non-Turf Irrigated Area (sq.ft.): t 5rJ D y�• e a ' fa s �e e ' Special Landscape Area (SLA) (sq.ft_): � .A • _ t�_ < e-. Water Feature Surface Area (sq.ft_): j�• G} • _ . e - ' e - • 5 � e �•-c+� c_a a 'c�_, . Turf Less than 25°� of the landscape area is � Yes turF ❑ No, See Water Budget All turfareas are> 8 feet wide g Yes All turF is planted on slopes < 25/ � Yes 'Nan-Turf At least 80%of nan-turf area is native F$ Yes II or low water use plants ❑ No, See Water Budget ',Hydrozones Plants are grouped by Hydrozones � Yes ' Muich 'At least 2-inches of mulch on exposed � Yes ;soil surfaces Irrigation System Efficiency 30% ETo (100% Efo for SLAs) � Yes No overspray or runoff ❑ Yes Irrigation System Des➢gn System e�ciency>70% � Yes Automatic, self-adjusting irrigation ❑ No, not required #or Tier 1 controliers � Yes Moisture sensor/rain sensor shutoffs � Yes fVo sprayheads in � 8-ftwide area. � Yes Nrrigatfon Time System only operates between 8 PM � Yes and 10 AM 61Aetering Separate irrigation meter � No, not required because < 5,000 sq.ft. ❑ Yes Swimming Poois / Spas Cover highly recommended ❑ Yes ��, �. ❑ No, not required lNater Features Recirculating ❑ Yes Less than 10/ of landscape area ❑ Yes DocumenYation Checklist ❑ y� Landscape and Irrigation Design Plan ❑ Prepared by applicant � Prepared by professional 1Nater Budget (optional) ❑ prepared by applicant �`, • ❑ Prepared by professional Audit Post-installation audit completed ❑ Completed by applicant 'V • URBAN FORESTMANAGEN:_. ✓T PLAN � (... .. E(15TtHG TR:EE TO 'ftEM7UM. PFit)TECT11'E FENG3a�� }�3. :5: 1. PR6TEGi3+lE FF}iC.,7x1� S`}3+lLL HE �GH7 O�titi�E PC)!LYPR4P'fLEl+fE FEIiGtNG. P. M�OTM7MG IN�SJE 7isE DR�Pk!?�E �:�Ei4 �i�-1- aC Ftitf(EA. CUT, 3T�ftI3. OR 07HEK'�PISE �]�3ieE€), 3. C�F1�K►iG't(tiR �E'�:� L� EKTkf4if �i�ii 7�NLk F'ftOTECT i111 �KiSTI%�G 7R€� T�7 Rf�li�19[. A5 HE4ti�FtED 6tY !7ti?lD5C�:1�E FE�I�. �. TftEE F'�i1iT�LiKLN �i{.�L BE 3FlSTiILi€d ZN h�C9R�t9G€ �!(i7l-1 PE2D�C.�";T i4fi'3�F3857 $'�'PDfi'F �ii'�il 5it,1�1 8� f�SF�:€C7�b ,,__ T�� PC��T��Tf�i� E�� '� - 717 TF�E iFk�EPT1{SFt DF ,tt3T t�t��' T�3 S+GA�,E wfl��. Updated July 20, 2009 - 32 - Project Comments Date: To: From: Subject: Staff Review: July 25, 2011 � City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 i� City Arborist (650) 558-7254 � Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 � Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney Planning Staff Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 J u ly 25, 2011 1. Sit� plan needs to include existing trees and shrubs. �� 2. /As per requirements, three (3) 24"box size trees must be included in �4�ndscape ' 3.�Landscape plan is required to meet `Water Conservation in Landscape �gul�tions" (attached). Irrigation Plan required for Building permit. Audit due for Finai. 4. No protected size tree (48" in circumference or more) may be removed without permit from Parks Division (558-7330). Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 7/26/11 Date: �C•� From September 14, 2010 ❑ City Engineer (650) 558-7230 X Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ Parks Supervisor (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 for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 Staff Review: Sheet GPC found in this submittal. When plans are submitted for building Code plan check provide a copy of the GreenPoints checklist on the plans at full scale. All conditions of approval as stated in the review dated 7-26-2011 will apply to this project. Reviewed � Date: 9-15-2011 � , � Date: To: From Subject: Staff Review: July 25, 2011 ❑ City Engineer (650) 558-7230 X 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 Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 July 25, 2011 1) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2010 California Building Code, 2010 California Residential Code (where applicable), 2010 California Mechanical Code, 2010 California Electrical Code, and 2010 California Plumbing Code, including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1856-2010. Note: If the Planning Commission has approved the project prior to 5:00 p.m. on December 31, 2010 then the building permit application for that project may use the provisions found in the 2007 California Building Codes including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1813. � On the plans provide a copy of the GreenPoints checklist for this project at full scale. � Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2008 California Energy Efficiency Standards. Go to http://www.enerq .y ca,gov/title24/2008standards/ for publications and details. �� Specify the roofing material to be used. If the roofing material weighs more that 51bs/ft. then Indicate on the plans that the roof will comply with Cool Roof requirements of the 2008 California Energy Code. 2008 CEC �151 (f) 12. The 2008 Residential and Non-Residential Compliance Manuals are available on line at http://www.energv.ca.qov/#itle24/2008standardsl �,5-� Place the following information on the first page of the plans: "Construction Hours" Weekdays: 7:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m. Saturdays: 9:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. Sundays and Holidays: 10:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. (See City of Burlingame Municipal Code, Section 13.04.100 for details.) : � � On the first page of the plans specify the following: "Any hidden conditions that require work to be performed beyond the scope of the building permit issued for these plans may require further City approvals including review by the Planning Commission." The building owner, project designer, and/or contractor must submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically illustrated in these plans prior to performing this work. 7) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business license. 8) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 9) When you submit your plans to the Building Division for plan review provide a completed Supplemental Demolition Permit Application. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not be issued until a Building Permit is issued for the project. 10)Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines 11 Obtain a survey of the property lines. �� n the plans specify that the roof eaves will not project within two feet of the property line. Revise the plans to show that there will be no eaves on the left and rear sides the garage. �)Indicate on the plans that exterior bearing walls less than five feet from the property line will be built of one-hour fire-rated construction. (2010 CBC, Table 602) /'�Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or v door that complies with the egress requirements. Specify the size and location of all required egress windows on the elevation drawings. Note: The areas labeled "Guest Room" and "Guest Suite" are rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes and, as such, must comply with this requirement. �)Indicate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the Department of Public Works. � Guardrails, as shown, appear to be 36" in height. Revise the plans to show that all exterior guards will be 42" in height per 2010 CBC §1013.2 17)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. 18)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 19)Provide lighting at all exterior landings. C2O�The fireplace chimney must terminate at least two feet higher than any portion of � the building within ten feet. 2010 CBC §2113.9 NOTE: A written response to the items noted here and plans that specifically address items 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 20 must be re-submitted before this project can move forward for Planning Commission action. Reviewed b�- ��--- � Date: 7-26-2011 �/ Project Comments Date: To: From: Subject: Staff Review: July 25, 2011 � 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 Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 July 25, 2011 1. See attached. 2. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works — Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information. �Applicant is advised to call City Arborist regarding potential relocation of sidewalk area around trees in the planter strip. Reviewed by: V V Date: 8/17/2011 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION PLANNING REVIEW COMIVVI�NTS i�6�1 i'^�%' sT�` Project Name: �� +ti`( �+�'�r� - Project Address: � ��C�"�� The following requirements apply to the project 1 ,�_ A property boundary survey sha11 be preformed by a licensed land surveyor. The survey shall show all property lines, property corners, easements, topographical features and utilities. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 2 �_ The site and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should be made to drain towards the Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 3. The applicant shall submit project grading and drainage plans for approval prior to the issuance of a Building permit. 4 The project site is in a flood zone, the project shall comply with the City's flood zone requirements. -�, -� Lti�`l ��i 5 �_ A sanitary sewer lateral�� is requ�red for the project in accordance with the City's standards. ) 6. The project plans shall show the required Bayfront Bike/Pedestrian trail and necessary public access improvements as required by San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Coxnn�ission. 7. Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the project. The sewer analysis shall identify the project's impact to the City's sewer system and any sewer pump stations and identify mitigation measures. 8 Submit traffic trip generation analysis for the project. 9. Submit a trafFic impact study for the project. The traffic study should identify the project generated impacts and recommend mitigation measures to be adopted by the project to be approved by the City Engineer. 10. The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering Division. The parcel map shall show all e�sting property lines, easements, monuments, and new property and lot lines proposed by the map. Page 1 of 3 U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW CONIlvIENTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 11. A latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel of land shall be submitted to the Public Warks Engineering Division with the parcel map for reviews. 12 Map closure/lot closure calculations sha11 be submitted with the parcel map. 13 The project shall submit a condominium map to the Engineering Divisions in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 14 � The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and other necessary appurtenant work. 15 The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage streetscape improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutters, parking meters and poles, trees, and streetlights in accordance with streetscape master plan. 16 By the preliminary review of plans, it appears that the project may cause adverse impacts during construction to vehicular trafFic, pedestrian traffic and public on street parking. The project shall identify these impacts and provide mitigation measure acceptable to the City. 17 The project sha11 subxnit hydrologic calculations from a registered civil engineer for the proposed creek enclosure. The hydraulic calculations must show that the proposed creek enclosure doesn't cause any adverse impact to both upstream and downstream properties. The hydrologic calculations shall accompany a site map showing the area of the 100-year flood and existing improvements with proposed improvements. 18 Any work within the drainage area, creek, or creek banks requires a State Department of Fish and Game Permit and Army Corps of Engineers Permits. 19 No construction debris shall be allowed into the creek. 20 �_ The project shall comply with the City's NPDES pernut requirement to prevent storm water pollution. 21 The project does not show the dimensions of e�sting driveways, re- submit plans with driveway dimensions. Also clarify if the project is proposing to widen the dxiveway. Any widening of the driveway is subject to City Engineer's approval. 22 The plans do not indicate the slope of the driveway, re-submit plans showing the driveway profile with elevations Page 2 of 3 U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COMIv1ENTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 23 The back of the driveway/sidewalk approach shall be at least 12" above the flow line of the frontage curb in the street to prevent overflow of storm water from the street into private property. 24. For the takeout service, a garbage receptacle shall be placed in front. The sidewalk fronting the store shall be kept clean 20' from each side of the property. 25. For commercial projects a designated garbage bin space and cleaning area sha11 be located inside the building. A drain connecting the garbage area to the Sanitary Sewer System is required. Page 3 of 3 U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COD�IMENTS.doc Project Comments Date: To: From: Subject: Staff Revievw: July 25, 2011 0 City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � 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 Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 July 25, 2011 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 after 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 �hall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. Reviewed by: ��— /� `�� Date: z s��i�� Project Comments Date: � From Subject: Staff Review: July 25, 2011 0 City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 0 City Arborist (650) 558-7254 � Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7279 0 Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 X NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney Planning Staff Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 July 25, 2011 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. Please include a list of construction stormwater pollution prevention best management practices (BMPs), as project notes, when submitting plans for a building permit. Please see attached brochure for guidance. The brochure may also be down loaded directly from "flowstobay.org." It is recommended that the construction BMP's be placed on a separate full size plan sheet (2' x 3` or larger as appropriate) for readability. For additional assistance, please contact Kiley Kinnon, Stormwater Coordinator, at (650) 342-2727. JUL � �; Reviewed by: �� J� �� _ .� { E ; � = Date: � J 7� �� j � o � Simmw-n�c � PvOutiooPrnmuaoPmgeem � ro� P� y:; ..: -- �;� ;�� ~ �-.+<"�.. Cl'CriCiAl ��'w'". �• Constrnctian & Site Supervision �.'°�"":y� .�,,. �. r, � ,� .�.e., ��°`� �. �wwu..�s.mmm�.�,yxm, '�� ..�.e,.��.�.��: � ��mm.,�. - �� , �� ,�.��.�, ��u� ��m -��oa, �.,� , .�.m �,�.��a.�,,.n� � �w�ea.��m�m.� '�AT �^AD T�d.clav W� b�W m�uem Miq o'=h a rLedl�. ilw�mm n.�s� 4^eee^�Y. � W�d.ma.hv�yuauWu,�mm�ml ^�w�. j�,e��n�,�u w� „a�wnm�e +ea�.=�"�.wr`a�ne � . . . mvWmi�wpa.odmm.a �� mwue'e.mVm�GKta�amh(m @N�k.�x�aun�m.e+we �� prb. A p}utic Ilnr4 �v.�mm61 b µnm Idaso e! Gq�:li N..v 2e.o om � Jv.,�us y�. bir� it Mn m be �mmunim Yu. lA4b .m. wb�. b0en v� mdcl.b.1 m ma1 +em,.s mta M m�H.,da�y.ay ma w�-.� � "�M�,W�h.�km�va=qompk. ��/TnWe. mm� �� o..amr�.�m�� eo..�.��a�w-mia...a,.� ' W�S+ew �l wl�mn, hsrmca c1��d v.z � �.�m..n�.m.�.�... �mv� � m. .�ma e��'�`iw� �m�i.� v �/oy�.s��a'm�:.�..w..w.m '°o'Ir. mwW ��.qm..m,mwrm�..�.u.x� e�wm4w6t�mdad.�.4mu��beiw.�re1 ��mu�i � -�....�..� a��e .�m�,�..�� ,.� It's Part of the Plan It is your responsibility to d� tlie j ob right! Runofffrom streets and otherpaved azeas is amajor sovrce ofpollution in local creeks, San Franciseo Bay and the Pacific Ocean, Construction activities can direcdy a$'ect the health of ouxwaters unless wntractors and crews plan ahead to keep dirt, debris, and other const�uction�vasteawayfromstomidrainsandcreeks_Followingtheseguidelineswillensuieyotscompliancewithlocalstormwater � ordinance requizements. Remember, ongoing monitoring and maintenance of installed controls is crucial to proper implementation. Heavy Equipment Operation 0 Earth-Moving Activities �� ,�,. � m�,.� �- ��,��..��.� ,��;m�,�m �� w��en��p� ��.�� .�.�� .�� s��P�� .-. w1��4.'�mwraS�a&vawl�t miRULimo � i�` �6��'4 amrt lu �� M myn�wbxw�m115 w �pw S�iLwcmic v.a . mmdm..me�.�,;�e � u�ebu�NR6"�l� bmaie. �u W 4�Il��Ned xM thqlgfm N�.bnw davCM'�vanmd w�AL �Wa m:mhaKqme6UssdY�l.ampm-A P'�k �� r�IFw.mVmuD)ahmerc �}b.�jwmmyLbYaay la�do.c m��dmY�vn4�e.d'aelY. ile�a�L J�P �'ba6W�mmY'viW�nw.mNYdm aoffiv�kledmmmvl ��.w�. m ae..,v. h d�v w� wwdr ax.�m.ed.� � � m�v�dh� �� aan��.w�.�vu.., ""mw`�„d�: w.:..�<ncv siim@.��r.om�otrm... �s�,va�mv �. n o m an.,sw a,,,,.,,y ��.�� t� a�� .� ��a�m��a�mw �� Roadwor�C & Paving � �� o�� ;.�r�,��;� � �� o�� ,� ffi. �, .� Ary ,m,�,�,�,me�m�.�e ��o� � ��z�� m�e�e�� ,�.��,�.��.��,�.a .��.,�e�� a.�a=�s J � avdmlatrdmM�sd�mmLobawlmw�Y�aH �/� mw✓ar.edm�oema¢eoaouWndwem Ju�Nekd�mSNeMgx�b�.mNra�mreevmm3 � �Ga7��6Nvmbnm]�emuml� Jaue mmmvam��eiil6nmaWW�aCO<8+�me. .de�,y. a � ��u�mw.m�.a.m,mm.�wi- ��a�mm�wcn�. +a§+b ma am �,ae'� m„aw�.m �s�a,a„e�m.wmm� �.,xmwr,�..��u.m�m�¢..w cwcvmr.mme p � anWtie.mh.neh.nu. .mm�em J�tddriWfirmPnctiPo�➢ ¢N�u6m[m+�t lP�mmi>a�o��.�sw+vwmwoiabvm >(�wm�xlv�umcm.a�.wbmmlews Rui.miY.rioms"M"c+dq1(�riW �L�v�5�rY/��I�mmmm�amrcmu ��^P),mNyWmJ�mouxwemi. l �J�. ^'��m��1��Y�olumrwq JCoYcclmdrtvXl�m�PWOWadYduW�catvm� v6viwgnymuaL lOovdussdl.sslydlmNdiozmctavayui�m�mP� JAvadmewp➢tiutiouMmvwrhf detmmvL AurdfordloQN^�do�dn+mrPortm�m�- �°�mRaoo�+l smluavd JAwNvwucBrsca�¢Muntrol'wei.M+��ve. �nu'�tNxmd'W'm�adura{Iot(o� �� m+ �mltVmQweyCmwlsmn�� b�a�w�w•�cbervmw�w�u �� . Um.�wma�m�.e�„�,;�.o�aao� ^�,motmn.��m..so��mmaou.�,:m •��v�� P�� W.vN�avo.�vties5ma . ewdwv.4dadsmwt uw*m�'nRw:umanmo..�ma. e�, �m.o.� m a� w a..}.,a ew va e,� •,p.n �.wm'. � �� - � � �� •� �� a�,N�� .I _ _` �I�L '�i�`,'� :! F I• ' 0� . 11 � 1 -� � - :�ur. . � �I� - �, � i'��-;.. � 1 '� ; � ..� �q�� .... �� . �� ,�� ° �� ,,.��a�� ,�,�,��v.� � �,�� ,��.� ��;��w�ne�e� � x �.��.�.��.,�,..� , � � . ,�..�„ ��,,..mm. L3lla3C�lllg� � C]r8.I1dCIIlIlg� SII(i j�ppj Maintwnanr.� ��,v�e�� e�p�� r.�.��,� m..� �� .m,� ��,��,o��«�.� ,�,,��.m� �.�,.� �� .�,�.m�.��a.�, m,��..�.�.�� ,� .,�m. m�.��,.�m�,�, � �.�o��,�.��e,�� Pp �.�.��,��_� �.��w,�,t.�.,�� e�.�.��.�. �,��.��.m�� .'�fmmcNmvA.ponadin+hmdiob NmaG�P��dow.Mah . aoWv�elewu'atimma..iw.. m�W. ddd¢e d'ou34 x t�� `b"�^^ vld�ml.]mw1�m �mMu�m�b�wvm JEn+eaa��LmuvOmt�mmWavaimeeehalfm �evuhvmm�pepucmeme � ..w 5�.h.me.�or.ma� pewiu Fwcmem�xu�msanNmiPuw.eofmxa bw �� mua.�mia��. a��- '�xm.e..n "o�m�.w.vmeo[.mm J DLPmc o(wna �v ss s�.m.n wma. rtcatwdm�u�y�. cxm,mJUMrmpotmW ! Prtvat�ev�A�wu6fivmGmewMA�<ovmwPm ��Affimdrtivcfbwv��.mwW osntlR ryammbGn ✓ Platt ha�mlc a o0a wziw �m�v� dnrmdopu b � r� mg�mYmg srvo[ z u�lc6R Y�.�. J WhmTi�P W P��d.lcameb➢� W e0 Weplv � d w==a�a�r. � �wa � �mw. wm� �. i. u. :.,.G" � me �m��m u� m�o� oro�m nn.�o-. e�u. .r ea„��y.osems.a�m.a..d,�,�,� Storm drain. polluters may be liable for fines of up to $25,000 per dayl ��t�a%PP�+�ds�vml�tipi+mduWv ffiumlmvavdm�oWqmv.r+mmem+ns�ta�e " A+�hmP.a6�n��lvdwmbwil vi�av�mVil:umvv.+atm�si fm mm be d'uporo] at m bmNmi� wuku JWLm.¢p�pmyorn��Wwm6�ion " rmbtid�Nb+rndmwuw��esU�mml� M& P��+kibbcktlmmtlomcNWwnv�m+d'u� wefor' ��CIm.CRPme� 4m�[R��iobvoLO55ehw10t6almiwutw�tr[ b�Aml4Ltl& �+9Pa��dNpwm�cvUSYb ^��R'mbadoai[Ywomwuos(mwoc f°�"0�syodvmb. . �a+am)WIIG'uatlo�gw+er�ddi.pw•mWem�ea fWmtbMrmNs�u�v.emhmb�ws[ ��6�4e ofUcwuv�Ytr�.q�e1a mlude dmmtu�OaiqRmlvn9exd.u'�irm s�ar�. r.�..� v�rrr�se. ✓➢+�*)u m E�Mu o( vm� ram�4 � P+�e�u. �W L.a�tlmom�w@cem4dib.mw�vp. A�uL�S m. �Wr�.� v+�ioyum �m.��m. �or,.�. �/��cw.cua-a..mm�u.ncpw,M�uw�y �.�.�� ./ sm.uc�edsm•m�..mmrta�sw;w uosmnnm «Y %'suo� m W 8dW DMdrmnB+�M1be �fxlVv¢ ._ �� :. 1��a«��kp��m� .��.,��..�..�� . e��. PaaUP�bwyp� M,m�«' - tla�a�ot.+ma��.+�� v.. . Q J R'6m my^0`ma. p� u�vc bi'S1mm. dmpm fm 5 m _�� dduuvb4�lmm Wvi�yoe�lym„� �a�.�.nwwmru.ea:as.emmm.� . �,..eeN aa..aqm�....+s�wmmi.�v]M ^'�'��*.�aw�arti+� ��Wais��+We� mdmmu�. W� NR�wi�b ��m� ��- �,��,�,k.,a��. Stormwater Po1luti�an Prev�ention Program Pollution Preventlor� �� .u�.m��.mad..m n�,�,.y ./�� .vaaw�w.�-mm,eo.avm�wmv ��uaw�arinw.r...wa.erc w'°�°cm.rua.wmia�ammaamy.m woNvnba �PUcw+v6NwoWofva-ut RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND DESIGN REVIEW RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for Desiqn Review for a new, two-story sinqle familv dwelling and detachedyaraqe at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, Lonestar Holdings LLC 2508 Easton Drive Burlinqame CA 94010 property owner. APN: 027-192-100; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on December 12. 2011, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19, Section 15303 (a), which states that construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone is exempt from environmental review. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption, is hereby approved. 2. Said Design Review is approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review are set forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. Chairman I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th dav of December, 2011 by the foilowing vote: Secretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption and Design Review. 2508 Easton Drive Effective December 22, 2011 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped December 5, 2011, sheets T1, C.O, A1 through A4, L-1, L-2 and GPC; 2. that the property owner shall be responsible for implementing and maintaining all tree protection measures in the Tree Protection Plan as defined in the arborist report prepared by Kielty Arborist Services, dated August 30, 2011; all tree protection zones shall be established and inspected by the City Arborist prior to issuance of a building permit; 3. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 5. that the conditions of the Park Supervisor's September 20 and July 26, 2011 memos, the Chief Building Official's September 15 and July 26, 2011 memos, the City Engineer's August 17, 2011 memo, the Fire Marshal's July 25, 2011 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's July 25, 2011 memo shall be met; 6. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be placed upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community Development Director; 7. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 8. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; 9. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption and Design Review. 2508 Easton Drive Effective December 22, 2011 10. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 11. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 12. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2010 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: 13. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the applicant shall provide a certification by the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, that demonstrates that the project falls at or below the maximum approved floor area ratio for the property; 14. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 15. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 16. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and 17. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Buiiding plans. �CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT D BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD - � , BURLINGAME, CA 94010 . PH: (650) 558-7250 r FAX: (650) www.burlingame.org Site: 2508 EA�TON 9R11/E The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on MONDAY, DECEMBER 12a 20� 1 at 7a00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Cham6ers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA: Application for Design Review for a new, two-story single fomily dwelling and detached garage at 2508 EASTON DRIVE zoned R-1. APN 027-192-100 Mniled: December 2, 2011 (Please refer to other side) - t �z f„ � -- I_i ,� i= �' � S E%. G= PU�LIC IiEARIWG IVO"�IC� Cit of Burlinaam_e lication and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to A copy of the app � artment at 501 Primrose the meeting at the Community Development Dep Road, Burlingame, California. ou may be limited to If you challenge the subject app�ication(s) in court, y ublic hearing, raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the p described in the notice or in written correspondence del'svered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. ert owners who receive this notice are r2sponsible for informing their Prop y tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director P�l�L�C H�A�1�� 1�0`i'IC� (Please refer to other side) City of Burlingame Design Review and Special Permit Address: 2508 Easton Drive item No. Design Review S udy Meeting Date: October 11, 2011 Request: Application for Design Review and Special Permit for declining height envelope for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. Applicant and Designer: Stotler Design Group Property Owner: Lonestar Holdings LLC General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 027-192-100 Lot Area: 6,000 SF Zoning: R-1 Project Description: The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing single-story house with a detached garage to build a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. The proposed house and detached garage will have a total fioor area of 3,336 SF (0.55 FAR) where 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) is the maximum allowed (including covered porch and chimney exemptions). The proposed project is 84 SF below the maximum aliowed FAR and is within 2% of the maximum allowed FAR. A Special Permit is required for declining height envelope along the right side property line (34 SF, 3'-5" x 10'-0" extends beyond the declining height envelope). The area outside the declining height envelope does not qualify for the window enciosure exemption because the window is not more than 25% of the face of the enciosure. The project includes a detached garage (427 SF) which provides two code-compliant covered parking spaces for the proposed five-bedroom house. There is one uncovered parking space (9' x 20') provided in the driveway. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following applications: ■ Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage (CS 25.57.010); and ■ Special Permit for construction exceeding the limits of the declining height envelope along the right side property line (34 SF, 3'-5" x 10'-0" extends beyond the declining height envelope) (CS 25.28.035 (c)). 2508 Easton Drive Lot Area: 6,000 SF Plans date stam ed: Se tember 13, 2011 PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED SETBACKS i Front (1st flr); 17'-2" � 17'-2" (block average) (2nd flr): 24-2" 20'-0" Side (left): --- 11'-0" - i---- 4� �,� _ (right): 4'-0" ' 4'-0" Rear (9st flr); 45'-9" I 15'-0" (2nd flr): 41'-9" to deck � 20'-0" Lot Coverage: 2295 SF 2400 SF 38.2% 40% FAR: 3336 SF 3420 SF 0.56 FAR i 0.57 FAR ---------------------- -- ---- --------------------------- —' — # of bedrooms: 5 j --- Parking: 2 covered 2 covered (20' x 20') ' (20' x 20') 1 uncovered � 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') ' (0.32 x 6,000 SF) + 1,100 SF + 400 SF = 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) Design Review and Special Permit 2508 Easton Drive Lot Area: 6.000 SF Heighf: PROPOSED 30'-0" DH Envelope: Special Permit Required (34 SF extends beyond declining heipht envelope) Z Plans date 2508 Easton Drive d: September 13. 2011 ALLOWED/REQUIRED 30'-0" CS 25.28.075 2 Special Permit for construction exceeding the limits of the declining height envelope along the right side property line (34 SF, 3'-5" x 10'-0" extends beyond the declining height envelope) (CS 25.28.035 (c)). Staff Comments: See attached memos from the City Engineer, Chief Building Official, Parks Supervisor, Fire Marshal and NPDES Coordinator. Ruben Hurin Senior Planner c. Stotler Design Group, applicant and designer Attachments: Application to the Planning Commission Special Permit Application Arborist Report prepared by Kielty Arborist Services, dated August 30, 2011 Staff Comments Photographs of Neighborhood Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed September 30, 2011 Aerial Photo � ;��I � ,�'+"., , ,,�„ • � Type of application: '� Design Review ❑ Variance ❑ Parcel #: � Z � ' i l Z � � � � �0 Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit ❑ Other: PROJECT ADDRESS: ^�� 0 � �S { � �� J��-'t �� `'� � O Please indicate the contact person for this project APPLICANT � project confact person L� OK to send electronic copies of documents� Name: -�� E � �- G��S�, �� `�` `��'� J � Address: ��C `E� � ��-5"�C S�TI-'��) � ef� City/State/Zip: L�S r�L-'�C�Sr C,;�- _ � ��Z-Z. Phone: t `i �� 7 `"2� (o � Fax: �� 1 J �`fs� ��Sc o f`i'C- 5� �-�� "�:[�5��.� r c� ��a .��f.,,.� E-mai: clr�ci:-E��S-f-�-i��c�Es;��aaru�:4��i J T ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Pro�ect contact Person ❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ Name: � �� L`�=— C7�'St t��1 �(�-��,�� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010 p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSIOtV PROPERTY OWNER project contact person ❑ OK fo send electronic copies of documenis ❑ Name: --��.C'�ar i'�ot��rS ��.-C, Address: /oZ �Dt7P� C� City/State/Zip: SG,�, 1/1�� -e� � gYY�z Phone: �v S,(� -7 �`� �S�v 7� Fax: E-mail: r�� ra �' c�i � �� G.�a Address: �.�� t ��ST S { , s v � .� � � City/State/Zip: (�� S ��%'��` S 1 �'.�� `�� Phone: i `/'C3 �� r �3 l5c�t-l-� �..� ��i� �_�� Fax: � E-mail: �� '�� ;1`'c! �s � �, �s ; �^ c; �� P (�c,� c��c�-a�e,1� 5--��,-�l�S;`��t �.�.-�, e.�.t � Burlingame Business License #: PROJECTDESCRIPTION: C�C"-'r1�t� CyCi 5-S�`�, R'��5� �;1,.� y � �� l�C.s�i.—�� .. C,� • -c-v�ti, JUL 2 2 2011 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD-PLANNING DIV. �\ C� U. Mt �.�f' � 1 i ��rn-j,�-� p2�}�� i � AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify�u der penalty of perjury tha the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. �'� / � � �� Applicant's signature: ;- Z. % Date: ' / " " G I am aware of the proposed applicatio� d hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this ppli ation to the Planning Commission. ,-, ., Property owner's sign Date: �/ / � � 1 / � Y .�, ��V/ t submitted: 7'22' �� / °--�' ``'t G * Verification that the pro ect chrt�ct/designer has a valid Burlingam �ness license will be required by fhe Finance Department at the time application fees are paid. ❑ Please mark one box above with an X to indicate the contact person for this project. s:�HarvoourS�PcaPpGcorion zoos.handour.doc City of Burlingame Community Development Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlinaame.orq ;; �, CITY OF BURLINGAME SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION ''�� - ��''" 2508 EASTON DRIVE _ _ , � 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 strucfural 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 2 story residence with a detached 2 car garage will replace the existing 1 story residence and detached 2 car garage. The proposed residence is consistent with the surrounding properties in terms of mass/scale and the architectural style. Due to the setback on the southwest side to accommodate the detached garage a special permit is required for the "Declining Height Envelope" (see exterior elevations). 2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new strucfure or addition are consistent with the existing sfructure, street and neighborhood. The proposed residence roof lines, exterior finishes and elevations are consistent with similar style homes. The architectural style and elements will blend well with the character of the neighborhood. 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with fhe residential design guidelines adopted hy fhe city (C.S. 25.57)? The proposed single-family residence with detached garage is consistent with the residential design guidelines and complies with zoning requirements except for the "Declining Height Envelope" that requires this special permit. 4, Explain how the removal of any frees located wifhin the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestafion requirements. Whaf mitigation is proposed for fhe removal of any frees? Explain why fhis mitigation is appropriate. The only trees being removed are small shrub like trees that are right up against the existing house. The entire site will be provided with complete new landscaping and irrigation including the addition of several trees. Kielty Arborist Services Certified Arborist WE#0476A P.O. Box6187 San Mateo, CA 94403 650 — 525 — 1464 August 30, 2011 Stotler Design Group Attn: Mr. Scott Stotler 349 First Street Suite A Los Altos, CA 94022 Site: 2508 Easton, Burlingame, CA Dear Mr. Stotler, .�_� � :� �.�";i �_�:J ,Y. .._.�i/� As requested on Monday, August 28, 201 l, I visited the above site to inspect and comment on the trees. New construction is planned for this site and as required a survey of the trees on site and a tree protection plan will be included. Method: All inspections were made from the ground; the trees were not climbed for this inspection. The trees in question were located on a map provided by you. The trees were then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). The trees were given a condition rating for form and vitality. The trees' condition rating is based on 50 percent vitality and 50 percent form, using the �ollowing scale. 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poor 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The heights of the trees were measured using a Nikon Forestry 550 Hypsometer. The spread was paced off. Comments and recommendations for future maintenance are provided. Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON Ht/Sp Comments 1 Pittosporum 1.7 60 (Pittosporum undulatium) 2 Pittosponun 12-l0est 65 (Pittosporum undulatium) 10/5 Street tree, good vigor, fair form poorly staked. 30/20 Fair-good vigor, fair form, codominant at base. 3 Coral tree 20est 60 25/35 Good vigor, fair form, heavily (neighbors) pruned in past. 2508 Easton/8/30/11 � 5 Pittosporuxn (Pittosporum undulatium) Privet (Ligustrum japonicum) 6* Redwood tree (Sequoia sempervirens) *denotes neighbor's tree (2) 20est 60 11.5 60 26est 70 35/25 good form, fair vigor, heavily pruned in past. 25/25 Fair vigor and form, in concrete patio. 50/35 Good vigor, topped in past. Summary: The property has been well maintained in the past. The trees on this site are a mix of imported trees and one native redwood. The trees are on the perimeter of the properties, ideal for construction. With normal tree protection the neighbors trees will not be affected by the proposed construction. Tree Protection Plan: Tree protection zones: C ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Should be established and maintained throughout the entire length of the project. Fencing for the protection zones should be 4 foot tall orange plastic type supported by metal stakes pounded into the ground. The support stakes should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center. The location for the protection fencing should be as close to the dripline as possible still allowing room for construction to safely continue. Signs should be placed on fencing signifying "Tree Protection Zone - Keep Out". No materials or equipment should be stored or cleaned inside the tree protection zones. Areas outside the fencing but still beneath the dripline of protected trees, where foot trafFic is expected to be heavy, should be mulched with 4 to 6 inches of chipper chips. The spreading of chips will help to relieve compaction and improve the soil structure. Root Cutting: ♦ Any roots to be cut should be monitored and documented. ♦ Large roots or large masses of roots to be cut should be inspected by the site arborist. ♦ The site arborist may recommend fertilizing or imgation if root cutting is significant. ♦ Cut all roots clean with a saw or loppers. ♦ Roots to be left exposed for a period of time should be covered with layers of burlap and kept moist. Trenching: ♦ Trenching for irrigation, electrical, drainage or any other reason should be hand dug when beneath the driplines of protected trees. Hand digging and carefully laying pipes below or beside protected roots will dramatically reduce root loss of desired trees thus reducing trauma to the entire tree. 2508 Easton/8/30/11 (3) ♦ Trenches should be backfilled as soon as possible with native material and compacted to near its original level. ♦ Trenches that must be left exposed for a period of time should also be covered with layers of burlap and kept moist. Plywood over the top of the trench will also help protect exposed roots below. Irrigation: ♦ Normal irrigation should be maintained throughout the entire length of the project. ♦ The imported trees on this site will require irrigation during the warm season months. ♦ During the summer months the trees on this site should receive heavy flood type irrigation 2 times a month. ♦ Irrigation during the winter months may also be necessary, depending on the seasonal rainfall. Flood type irrigation 1 time per month during the fall and winter months may be advised by the site arborist. ♦ Mulching the root zone of protected trees will help the soil retain moisture, thus reducing water consumption. Demolition, Parking and Staging: ♦ During the demolition process all tree protection must be in place. ♦ An inspection prior to the start of the demolition may be required. ♦ All vehicles must remain on paved surfaces if possible. If vehicles are to stray from paved surfaces, 4 to 6 inches of chips shall be spread and plywood laid over the mulch layer when inside root zones. This type of landscape buffer will help reduce compaction of desired trees. ♦ Parking will not be allowed off the paved surfaces near protected trees. ♦ The removal of foundation materials (including curbs, asphalt and retaining walls), when inside the driplines of protected trees, should be carried out with care. Hand excavation may be required in areas of hea�y rooting. ♦ Exposed or damaged roots should be repaired and covered with native soil. ♦ Tree protection fencing may need to be moved after the demolition. The site arborist should be notified and the relocated fence should be inspected. Tlus information should be kept on site at all times. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty Certified Arborist WE#0476A Project Comments Date: To: �7Ci :Ti i7 September 14, 2010 � City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 X Parks Supervisor (650) 558-7254 0 Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 � Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 0 NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney Planning StafF Subject: Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 Staff Review: �andscape plan is required to meet `Water Conservation in Landscape Regulations'. Complete attached Water Conservation in Landscape checklist. 2. 3. Protected Tree Permit required before construction begins. Application may be obtained from Parks Division (558-7254). Include Tree Protection diagram (attached) on plans and note as determined by Arborist Report. � �� - ��- -�-�..v � ��P � � �� ..� .� . Reviewed bv: B. Disco Date: 9/20/11 _ _ -___ OUTDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIS7 1 certify that the s ject project meets the specified requirements of the Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance. �� ti �j_ 2P-ll Signature Date a Single Famify O Multi-Family O Commercial ❑(nstitutional 0 Irrigation only Q lndustrial O Other: Applicant Name rint : iA ) Gj `t • / f� [ontact Phone #: L�Q��g�Z �ZG/. Project5ite Address_ Z�j p�j �a,$/7�y� � R �,(� n�� /+ (i Project Area (sq.ft or acre): �� j 1Fj Sq , F�'-• # of iJnits: # of Meters: � e e 'e - � . Total Landscape Area (sq_ft.): / (� r"' • _ �e a e � g , _� - Z e• e e !.,! ��i% L'!T' �<� -� §5 tio ° ° - .� $ Turf irrigated Area {s4-ft); -r, pU ,5'y� .F/-• — - a-r � c, � Non-Turf irrigated Area (sq.ft.j: � cj Fj p y�f-. 6 - ; QQ SpeciallandscapeArea (SI.A)(sq.ft_): �,A . �< e Water Feature Surfiace Area (sq.ft.): �• F} • a • 2 �=. ' ° na ' cs � o fihEpi l�a`- Turf Less than 25°� ofthe landscape area is � Yes �� ❑ No, See Water 6udget ' All turf areas are > 8 feet wide � Yes All turf is planted on slapes < ZS°� ■ Yes Nan-Turf At ieast 80% of non-turf area is native � Yes or low water use planfis ❑ No, See Water Budget Hydrozones Plants are gro�ped by Hydrozanes � Yes Mulch At least Z-inches of mulcti on exposed � Yes soil surEaces trrigation System Efficiency 70% ECo (100°6 ETo for SLAs) � ye� M110 overspray or runofF ❑ Yes irrigation System �esign System efficiency > 70% ■ Yes Automatic, self-adjusting irrigation ❑(Vo, not required forTier 1 cantrollers � Yes Moisture sensarJrain sensorshutoffs � Yes tJo sprayheads in c 8-ftwide area. ■ Yes Irrigatior� 7ime System oniy operates betrveen 8 PM ■ Yes and 10 AM Metering Separate irrigation meter � No, not required 6ecause < 5,0�0 sq.ft. ❑ Yes Swimming Poots / Spas Cover �ighly recommended O Yes �-�, �. ❑ Na, not required Water Features Retirculating 0 Yes Less than 1Q% of landscape area ❑ Yes Documentatian Checklist ❑ y� Landscape and Irrigatian �esign Plan � Prepared by applicant � Prepared by professional Water Budget (optianal} ❑ Prepared by appiicant �t, - ❑ Prepared by professional Audit Post-installation audit completed � Completed by applicant 'Y • ❑ Completed by professional URBAN FOREST MANAGE11a_. JT PLAN � � � i \ � — �� , , �. ---�,�_, � -.�� . � � ' �.�. , .' � _.-'' _ � �. '�„s;: =cr�: -'..... ... ....r1"'4.;i... {t�i2�3iE�7�D i�oKiT �i3#3Ej E.�1.:rliF;G ifiEE TO REFIIUN. �f�C37EG7t37E F�E�3�� Y1�3 f�5: i. R320IELu�+IE FE}iGf�G 5}��t:tl BE �i�iT t�L�±#�E POLYPRtYP'iLEl�E FENCIti� �. H+�Tk�9NG 13�t�QE Tt�SE DRiP�l�E ot�F�l �ti:�1- B� R1.5iEp. GUT. SfC3f3itii3. OR 076�ER5Y�E [51SFITfi9E[l. s. c��'�tu;traR sw�.�t r� �€�€ �� a �a��cr �i� �� i7tE�5 TtJ REi�J419�, �S RE�j1i9F�D 6tY S�S?f355�1�'PE PL�i. 1. Tft€� P.�Q'f��TRt�t'i ��li. aE �r+sru� � hGG9RDRt7.C€ $!'i�3�3 Pi�o,�[CT ;�49�:s:T �€P43�t'F ; _ T��. P'��T��f�� " -- - 7� FFlE kF'��E€'T1t5H i1F ,ttFT .. F�� r�3 SC?:L.E wt��c Updated Jv.ly 20, Z009 - 32 - Date: To: From: September 14, 2010 ❑ City Engineer (650) 558-7230 X Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ Parks Supervisor (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 for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, AP N : 027-192-100 Staff Revi'ew: Sheet GPC found in this submittal. When plans are submitted for building Code plan check provide a copy of the GreenPoints checklist on the plans at full scale. Ail conditions of approval as stated in the review dated 7-26-2011 will apply to this project. Revie�tved Date: 9-15-2011 U Date: To: From: Subject Staff Review July 25, 2011 ❑ City Engineer (650) 558-7230 X Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ City Arborist (650) 558-7254 ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-727� ❑ Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 ❑ City Attorney Planning Staff Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 July 25, 2011 1) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2010 California Building Code, 2010 California Residential Code (where applicable), 2010 California Mechanical Code, 2010 California Electrical Code, and 2010 California Plumbing Code, including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1856-2010. Note: If the Planning Commission has approved the project prior to 5:00 p.m. on December 31, 2010 then the building permit application for that project may use the provisions found in the 2007 California Building Codes including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1813. � On the plans provide a copy of the GreenPoints checklist for this project at full scale. � Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2008 California Energy Efficiency Standards. Go to http://www.enerqy.ca.gov/title24/2008standards/ for publications and details. -� Specify the roofing material to be used. If the roofing material weighs more that 51bs/ft. then Indicate on the plans that the roof will comply with Cool Roof requirements of the 2008 California Energy Code. 2008 CEC §151 (f) 12. The 2008 Residential and Non-Residential Compliance Manuals are available on line at http:/lwww.enerqv.ca.qov/title24/2008standards/ � Place the following information on the first page of the plans: "Construction Hours" Weekdays: 7:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m. Saturdays: 9:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. Sundays and Holidays: 10:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. (See City of Burlingame Municipal Code, Section 13.04.100 for details.) '� On the first page of the plans specify the following: "Any hidden conditions that require work to be performed beyond the scope of the building permit issued for these plans may require further City approvals including review by the Planning Commission." The building owner, project designer, and/or contractor must submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically illustrated in these plans prior to performing this work. 7) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business license. 8) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 9) When you submit your plans to the Building Division for plan review provide a completed Supplemental Demolition Permit Application. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not be issued until a Building Permit is issued for the project. 10)Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines 11 Obtain a survey of the property lines. � n the plans specify that the roof eaves will not project within two feet of the property line. Revise the plans to show that there will be no eaves on the left and rear sides the garage. �Indicate on the plans that exterior bearing walls less than five feet from the property line will be built of one-hour fire-rated construction. (2010 CBC, Table 602) �Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. Specify the size and location of all required egress windows on the elevation drawings. Note: The areas labeled "Guest Room" and "Guest Suite" are rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes and, as such, must comply with this requirement. �Indicate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the Department of Public Works. �Guardrails, as shown, appear to be 36" in height. Revise the plans to show that all exterior guards will be 42" in height per 2010 CBC §1013.2 17)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. 18)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 19)Provide lighting at all exterior landings. �6�The fireplace chimney must terminate at least two feet higher than any portion of L� the building within ten feet. 2010 CBC §2113.9 NOTE: A written response to the items noted here and plans that specifically address items 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 20 must be re-submitted before this project can move forward for Planning Commission action. Reviewed b .� '�� ` Date: 7-26-2011 ' �� Project Comments Date: To: From Sub}ect: Staff Review: July 25, 2011 0 City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 X City Arborist (650) 558-7254 � Recycling Specialist (650) 55&7271 0 Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney Planning Staff Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zaned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 July 25, 2011 1. Site plan needs to include existing trees and shrubs. �'� 2. s per requirements, three (3) 24"box size trees must be included in ndscape `� 3. ndscape plan is required to meet `Water Conservation in Landscape egulations" (attached). Irrigation Plan required for Building permit. Audit due for Final. 4. No protected size tree (48" in circumference or more) may be removed without permit from Parks Division (558-7330). Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 7/26/11 Project Comments Date: To: From Subject: Staff Revievv: July 25, 2011 6( 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 Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 July 25, 2011 1. Se� attached. 2. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works - Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information. �3. Ap�licant is advised to call City Arborist regarding potential relocation of sidewalk area around trees in the planter strip. Reviewed by: V V Date: 8/17/2011 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION PLr1NNING REVIEW CONIlV�NTS N�-� �� 'Y Project Name: �/� �4i �6 - Project Address: '�=�' ��1�`�� The following requirements apply to the project 1 _� A property boundary survey shall be preformed by a licensed land surveyor. The survey sha11 show all property lines, property corners, easements, topographical features and utilities. (Required prior to the building pernzit issuance.) 2 �_ The site and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should be made to drain towards the Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 3. The applicant shall submit project grading and drainage plans for approval prior to the issuance of a Building permit. 4 The project site is in a flood zone, the project shall comply with the City's flood zone requirements. � `� �.c�f �.�-w.,( 5 � A sanitary sewer lateral�� is required for the project in accordance with the City's standards. ) 6. The project plans shall show the required Bayfront Bike/Pedestrian trail and necessary public access improvements as required by San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. 7. Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the project. The sewer analysis shall identify the project's impact to the City's sewer system and any sewer pump stations and identify mitigation measures. 8 Submit traffic trip generation analysis for the proj ect. 9. Submit a traffic impact study for the project. The traffic study should identify the project generated impacts and recommend mitigation measures to be adopted by the project to be approved by the City Engineer. 10. The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering Division. The parcel map shall show a11 existing property lines, easements, monuments, and new property and lot lines proposed by the map. Page 1 of 3 U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEVJ COMIvIENTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 11. A latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel of land shall be submitted to the Public Works Engineering Division with the parcel map for reviews. 12 Map closure/lot closure calculations shall be submitted with the parcel map. 13 The project shall submit a condominium map to the Engineering Divisions in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 14 � The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and other necessary appurtenant work. 15 The project shall, at its own cost, design and consiruct frontage streetscape improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutters, parking meters and poles, trees, and streetlights in accordance with streetscape master plan. 16 By the prelisninary review of plans, it appears that the project may cause adverse impacts during construction to vehicular traffic, pedestrian traffic and public on street parking. The project shall identify these impacts and provide mitigation measure acceptable to the City. 17 The project sha11 subxnit hydrologic calculations from a registered civil engineer for the proposed creek enclosure. The hydraulic calculations must show that the proposed creek enclosure doesn't cause any adverse impact to both upstream and downstream properties. The hydrologic calculations shall accompany a site map showing the area of the 100-year flood and existing improvements with proposed improvements. 18 Any work within the drainage area, creek, or creek banks requires a State Department of Fish and Game Permit and Army Corps of Engineers Permits. 19 No construction debris shall be allowed into the creek. 20 _� The project sha11 comply with the City's NPDES permit requirement to prevent storm water pollution. 21 The project does not show the dimensions of e�sting driveways, re- submit plans with driveway dimensions. Also clarify if the project is proposing to widen the driveway. Any widening of the driveway is subject to City Engineer's approval. 22 The plans do not indicate the slope of the driveway, re-submit plans showing the driveway profile with elevations Page 2 of 3 U:\private development�PLl�NNING REVLEW COMI��NTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 23 The back of the driveway/sidewalk approach sha11 be at least 12" above the flow line of the frontage curb in the street to prevent overflow of storm water from the street into private property. 24. For the takeout service, a garbage receptacle sha11 be placed in front. The sidewalk fronting the store shall be kept clean 20' from each side of the property. 25. For commercial projects a designated garbage bin space and cleaning area shall be located inside the building. A drain connecting the garbage area to the Sanitary Sewer System is required. Page 3 of 3 U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COMI��NTS.doc Project Comments Date: To: From: Subject: Staff Revie�v: July 25, 2011 0 City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 � City Arborist (650) 558-7254 0 Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 0 Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney Planning Staff Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 July 25, 2011 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 after the split between domestic and fire protection lines. 3. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall �learly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. Reviewedi by: �� / `��%=� Date: z S��%i�� Project Comments Date: To: From Subject: Staff Review: July 25, 2011 0 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 X NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney Planning Staff Request for Design Review for a new, two-story single-family residence at 2508 Easton Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-192-100 . July 25, 2011 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. Please include a list of construction stormwater pollution prevention best management practices (BMPs), as project notes, when submitting plans for a building permit. Please see attached brochure for guidance. The brochure may also be down loaded directly from "flowstobay.org." It is recommended that the construction BMP's be placed on a separate full size plan sheet (2' x 3` or larger as appropriate) for readability. For additional assistance, please contact Kiley Kinnon, Stormwater Coordinator, at (650) 342-2727. k `, _ � _ II ! J�,�� u Reviewed by: �� J� ��,��1 � �^, .., ;��". Date '� �� o• � 5�mmwn�a � PoOWovPmmoov�ryvg`em .%� ro� ati � .._.� "v:;:.. i ;� riCt1CIAI Yy,��'''�''=.! Constraction & 5itc 5upervision �� ..� �.,�.,�� , m, .a�o.�.,, ��.A.b.9�� r wm�eee.w� .�:m�.,�e.m.m��nx e.�....�.,mw.�` Jt�v�'�i�-e'wM�,'�..� Q�,a. m1^�v��mwd4eamnmmi �mm� nmw� nc.m.� v nmu..bae,a M ru.ei.ae.a�p�.°y.�sse.m.ve�.wm. + �v�s� m.o�w..m... nr.� mm•�u�d�md�.mmWrtqm�TpW¢ � amJ hvdryAe P+��m ,o �c��wi4.m r�y�c " � n...mden...d�....y 6�.u�� me�.dV�. �c��w.L.w� �b.�.� �.mnR _— � vlum5�aam[ue! �Ea 0^�voeY e¢v�uE nC�cd M�m vssh �a � ��w�lnvawlm�J¢eN�.'a J1+�1 ��+D P�w w(av Wu b�ln m mu en'v. aw'k w dva W�.lf w�m 1F W'v 4 ea�+M'. em¢� womciw�hmae.vWlmm�ml b4 �}+ma omv 9n� �,e�11m rerymeo��nm�ae.�uw o�+mw� rciW�w �MLm1lnmYd�amcA�i �Wx�m ��a,.�a ��'�� mhn4Awpm�dszo.wmYrk. •�Pe�m�umeuw rn.v �Mmpi �b�v4reApl..tleliov4 rsmvimdsl w pmm b4ro of 59+d� Nmr dm om � d�V^s h b� 11 dwn m ma m�6��atiu� du. J4fab.m c�b�. b0�h an m+4ie�ird m mod .nti.�i mJerbY tl�la�W mmP.7md �W .��u � °�n°P>h.�kma.vmw�rl« u.�u. m..ama� Yw�mdc � ddxoM'��amlYwuN �sYd�� m.t.l.l� rmm�vw�ml> nmw= � r'+R+m =l.�wne m.af.�� p.a a.mm�. Ka�4.�+m m.ui..d�.m..+m�v�.t em.�.,�. w.tim.�� d �m�me.v.• ..nwar �m,�..�.°m`.a �mm a�' P��r. r�eyma•��e �n.;.�.�a.r.� se �4d biokm�i.p W �i �e�dw.vL..a v� W t�d4h uwh. �onALUYLaC�A.aomotbemciebd mu�1 �'�n O�yP^C��yl•edu11x5qyNWo .� �.e..�:-�~ �e �- �tormwaier Pollution Preventio� P�rogra�n Pollution Preventio� — It's Part of the Plan It is your responsibility to do tlie j ob right! Runo$'from stree4 and otherpaved azeas is amajor source ofpollution in local creeks, 5an Francisco Bay andthe Pacific Ocean, Conshvetion activities can d'uecHy affect the health of ouc waters unless contractors and crows plan aheadto keep dix� debris, and othei � construclionwasteawayfromstomzdrainsandereeks.Followingtheseguidelineswilleasiueyourcompliancewithlocalstoimwater � ordinancerPz,;*ements.Remembe,ongoingmonitoringandmaintenanceofinstalledconirolsiscrucialtoproperimplementation_ , Heavy Barth-Moving Roadwork 8c Paving Fresh Concrete painting &Application Bquipmant Activities & Mortar Application af Soh�nis & Adhestc�es Operation — . j \ ��i3 n�<ap.med.�momm�".au� ivi.o.w J.uLrnrmtra�aa�a . I�� wcnn�dvamtrt+4mvwmkraAYxemz v^.hhrAWe+tr �walmuom J90�kJla.'iw�Ivin6ui�m�IwLIDew'ilL�� rtWdaP�v�P�6�tl�vE�rvw..V'8� ' .mmHm.uhvemJ.olw�ry�- JP.��m �m:v'�o..� .m raml9�mhxetv N�amatma,e�a_`' uNJVLNv�iP Bdsat vo-.Ymyaa� P�4�4��4N�i��'�i41vi4x� SfmNmHCmdT^�tl....e�mw� 9dvP��Vo+v+•s�5vwim�uelrm �?�ewemeWw�4�mamm..m�tt. f��mtmmdaamlcmvv.pvrm�Gmn idaunuiumdmwbeG'pudo(u�n•,�a.., /W�wn.� n��mtie.e �dw —,, �Y°Nww..�w..aovaex�a6i.tyy�m1 .sm��'.ffiw�b.'•�Irm�nm.ew.ow �vmaAamCvmm�nr�mmoi � mon9�eN�n(mu.urazm�m�...r +^�^>ti��P��e�w.W�wrme Ra.nm..m9•�u«a•�Vmea� Lbe«wedpnoObNb,�1'<mdmnlMA��e wml8bmevat ��i.wN�meemvtb,m W�} . ,wmamd=x4mmn.mmm.. 6�.m mYb.�e.mw�'miv.s�+x.�..v1 •a . fm.e.,oxt�u.md�wo�¢�r•�iww•m� .JN..mam�mwsamm.. Jbe.+.�.>.mrmeanminmss �rt.�w�eatmmm..om.isb�dmwb4.z amaor.�e<.a.�n�m.mm. ��rv�^>�-�ce vLm...vGmutl� ^�S p�as.�a�e a+mY �web4 11Hea�kEw�«AtrMbtlirulwnV�mmlmw'�'Iekm4h'mhudueLL,vebrrtmnsvwmiP+��n JnheW�meu'vee�M'mdda+�Lwo4wf�mt � hvhsW�w.kr.rIl6awmmeov6l�� JP>w+meb...dO�+tW^�ow6WemWeemoi amm.lae.m�rn*m�P4.m.a:�Ivam �m.�amde+ma ' �d.�oro�wcaLimmwlrA.ew %�L '�mutie a•F�o(u WeFWe m5..m'w'unvmaXamwP�d Landscaping, Ganiening� SIIcl Pool Mainhmnncr. ..�p�Ne.ed�ma..ab[m.w.4 r�mw:d me u: � wm,�mnm.Q.ewm,w�.e..�a. JS �ticdqlvotiffi,doihueLem4J�mtlom�or m. m.ma�ouw. ' om .i samue v�a ma mw� nAiw ror m�w""•— u6wWmdom.. mm�nGeLamN�mwRxry a�v��Wkeeudec ��a'�•=wu014�.Fkw+3naMV�rm[ I*��mNmWelml.•�h'�wnemwt��.m,en dnlnle4xvim lrora"�ma�..�nwaaxn.�...u.anm+n �Awuwvn[c¢wtroueem.,a.wma.@w�m�e mLw�rx�emeNo.v Jrvomowm mr�u.�mymxwv p..:..tsu'w. 6frcaaaLW�LWw��an�rv�Y6..samne.e Po.`y�t�mm m+NbNwn6oWlmo NowV�P�dom.A.6i. xoWviduPa�ocm.uea �e.�um�.amm��maw.0.�.suwwlm. ' JU.caodmlaeAm.Wadumml..w6m+n��rm¢ d^�^5�4=die5ax.tam. m�X¢uetlritl�mmWanWm JP�elYmo+�armdmimm+¢ovdouwlviGmu� '^��tu�y'w'.Gaid.c� ��yvwr.n'm �.ibWml mwbhtl�wu� �Pvp¢�e.'�mx J�I.umsYalfmmo(w.lmmlmllix uWd�+zdn�m�iJIR��Smxb JUurbakdwSmtrDc�ab��bArm�+ M'vawl � .nmammmT.�.aYcl�vhacvammbltm ' SWva�.�a.mat Fiic�sd � d.pwelAv.4 u E�6w ��¢ 1p:y..�o.d.e6'deL.u..4r. S•iti�bnY�h� �a�1�P� JNYGbsdmm'6M�wn�lu�vE1� �6mmie�Me�pNetUudry�lemp_ -• aa.ne.��.n.a� �.�u�.w)mn� �t IfW+m�CucwiK�hwmwphmkery dmrn JSww W Md�mYm�v'v4 hvm�tiv�ly.lkrcn �qm� ��bm+r.+T�vMw+nx�mEml'ihm yuo3k6rdv�mwL rv�a�+.�.Mdrenm�amab e��elwa�.edwu / �u��miWm�.vubm�� .��sNlyavu.ldb �cma.�g�� a�W �s�Y�wa��M1K 1JGY m �r.ommerrm.,sayse.mw�ma �aP�lenaSwpnm,.� JAvwH��+wmnbume.almw.am�l. JNe.c�n.h�nww�il6mm�wef..cc�m�rw. �•OO•b. r�.w mme�oa.m.�.,�c�^^omr. >�o�o-ommuWw.mvsor.m�mm.m.�e�. sn maww=m,w�.ms�Qamvp.,m �^�Yd4v�6T�ab&rtay. �Lmela6.. fs�cpoJryt* maoiL�rmimvcJ�wm44 mi6 /"� . .m.W=.� J➢�uEemM1PMrthmNVNlmdVm'mlrvm6eNh '�w..u�eeu�etn� m��dmm�� .,e.�w.a.m„aws �u�vwu�.m�..mx�,. m:.a.a�� JGtrTE�vEmP�vawiPo�P ivbotm+t�l tle .�Lvn lP��1>w�.amwT.naomw.louv�, Iaat.naer7N+�W��awsmmimw. •e•e� JOmW�ui➢N��mElutiode["�/'s�rout�(Nh lPvwaeoR�wu4GwvAivcnry/pW�.mmuvao 1 ��.�um.dJeldw�hmm�rn�emu ��'�.'hWhmMCWmd�mow�eml. .�bmAileelln�e��Pewu6mmd'v� �n�wak�whwi��mmplRh't�vd�^+�l cvaml✓P�lebtlut m,�,. �auwm�w�wm�m•ir�w� .6�iwe�+Kmuvd JP4ce �La4juo@vuwuovuhv4doxvalyeb JWodm�dbdoOmNdiowudauaW4mm�aw� lAmWmenyPV.ubnM�wwchf �amowL ��m� maror¢�mb�nci[nrLc� AildfmdledT^�0��+�+'mwmybeao- A�l��➢amnl �,.,.e. J�o.,e�roa�.�.am,m.vtr�e�+ra��m�. �we�y,�MuwP.�a.e„m,myt�x�mu.p� �mr�We.v�dlti��weoua..Alaunwnh�.ecn �� iWdaNe�G�wab�owdl ��"°° i`^V�b. • �d��t5sm�yp�wleml he�amY�u2 . VmuN �P� &mb+ua�.xob �m.n¢v��0�m[Lwm�mme6mnmti4 '�R`�v�°6a�IDmtra[Fnkmmm�i.u�lioEGR Je�e�a�omq.w�m.mldeuL.�xmx�wtles5uova �my��'� �m� o(eemAy��mµ . �•4�.4arma uwcmahup'eepwumde�orae�� Jr��.em.vEo.m.e.wmdm.�muuFdA'n.OaNY !x=.mbmYmWmnand+�e.+mm.�v:+�. �� Sborm drain polluters may be liable. for fines of up to $25,000 per da�l m�a J�uv mtl uFmt piqoa of �u ]yo:LmdmWuauh�mJma�.vC •. ��14'mm�cv r � �..�y JUn�qp..utiEum�oW.4heldL.euov�R'vm P:m[�nM.mau�6o.�6.�a.an'��iw'me w�.im.Wncm.n uP.mm.n%rvuvoF�w d�mp�Y�uGdiW m` � mva.4d6pl.tie , u . n�rm=a�.m wema.. nmwe..,� �/��l�p �hmpp'v�[rtdi4umi�LR.mldm lCullmlmnvWP��arry9ap.P�¢w+a.�na ��[l�arm bl ul�wo-adeusxv.oY.ssdm�i �m mvd ke tl�yvKA of n bmNw� �rukr, wem.�ea�sn�ausoneva.wawvs aa�rw�*ws.mk��K �mi�.�m ,��..esu�tmm�.w,m.�,�..�,..u� ��p�w,mcao•.eu.n � ��.oc� WW��eY.mlOr.ehckvlWlbelmlw.+tx�ta b�ImU(JIWmm�hyvdm�b. bcnm��eh^tltY b bd wt i[you rm cAxt (mop tt •.e^�)6WNloedoemgwutmidl.yw•dlhvmiWY J➢amL6NvaNtlu�4sm.hmd��em1. ��C ofihemwmeYb�r.q�malm �viudu V�mm[u�a�Ymm.4mg$0.d.u¢ jaalT�hluyy.� A41elm�we � N�vuLo%a<8�eftml � a��enm.a.nv �JNmwrv�w<,a.rp�L4 � v.�=xei�mme[�..,m•a�mv+�uu. �� ' . hw.hoWL.wJauvv¢w14�tim5villry,,arweW. JWbm�Pb�•I�sxbt�h6.d'v�w+�br5m n'benw.rwin+mPbbmY.�[bv�iequ.ei M•itm��+ersJm.tim�liyNvtyme. bmEecvp..ud�c�bWim9md4mmto(ssw- �rn��ea.v.uudewedablu6.edm�rm.r�m 6T,°m•evY.al�u. 'h.m. .rww.um...aua..�aam..na��umw. �a�m.�.n..a.drs.ma��a.cwen.�ms . eades.sdw...�d��.mia . M.m..aMmw.� �eam.e•�uwui)M Sm.Yamd%tlmv.mv.bwWmsswiWuw5mM.4a fiw�. •b.mawiuY�k Ww�wab� ✓C )nav3�me18dwnhLmny.amq�eqsVee . e4�domwWnLN�� JmmiunmA.x�bud�lDm�am.troldwN�h lUmw��.a[G��mn4wbnbcm�dc�M w�� 61�nnc�ynW�lis�md��b � n.m.�.a..t.lma..<eMr�.myoe+n�T^r- ..�e4�m».dyu......aeoi�Nm.. .n^rou�y. � 1300 Montero Ave. 2512 Easton Dr. 2508 Easton Dr. 2504 Eastoa� Dx. 2500 Easton Dr. -- View from Easton Dr. Subject Property View from Easton Dr. r- - - z _. -.�,. � r�" �=,. ;,� _ � �, ;� ,r r� r' f ,✓ ,� � `-�, , ; ---�,. - s` - r' � - �-� f , � jf 1l � �~ - - ��, �} C�S _ ' -�. . �Ijfo � : �` -_..,_ <q Ge � _ �':_ � �$ �� . ; -,� , �8t �. �-�, � o �,.� -:4 _ ��$ � �etr.0¢ - �_� .s , <� f� r.r' 2' -ra y 1 . 4 �j f � �� '�� 1 �'�'''ti ti` - af � �:. _ r p� �r o� ,;, ... —r� ,,k Y�,q�jt `3� - - `a'�'� � � _'l�h� �o ,�1� � ~� �� `e �e � �, • 1'� � G �� . t,�' ` Y�_ C; _ y s' , ��`�� - �'�`�.,. - ? �+ . "`} . _ �� J Key Map Owner: Emporio Group Inc. Project Address: 2508 Easton Dr. B Lirling ame, CA � �CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD - _ "=�.�'- -';�' ` �_'� �\, � BURLINGAME, CA 94010 ';_ ` - _ � PH: (650) 558-7250 � FAX. (650) 696 3790 ' _ www.burlingame.org -;: �: _ - � �° - - - $ifi0: 250� ��Y��! �R@�/� �__._�..�.�_'�� The City af �urBing��c� Pl�nni�ig Commission announces the following public h�ari�g �� TUESDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2011 a� 7a�0 PaM. in the City Hall Council tha�n6ers, 501 Primr�ge Road, �urlingame, CA: Application �or De�ign �evie�v and Sp�cial Permit for decfining height envelope for a new, two-story single fomily dwelling and detached garage at 2508 EASTON 9RBVE �oned R-1. APN 027-192-100 Mniled: S�p��a6�� 6, �011 (Please refer fo ofher side) � ._ _ ��.� � ��,�-�,�;�:� PlIf3LIC HEARING tVAi10E Citv of Burllnqame A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Community Development Department at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. If you challenge fihe subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director PllBLIC HEAi�IP1G AIOTICE (Please refer to ofher side)