The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2208 Summit Drive - Staff ReportA use permit is required to provide the parking area on the Rhinette lot because it is zoned R-3. The donation receiving activity and donations trailer will also be located the rea of.the Rhinett lot adjacent to the wall. Th�e"� wall is�10 feet'cin from�e �ear roperty �ine and encloses a g�eportion-of the sit lease�to the � adjacent property fronting or�i�.�roadw�y. Th , enclosed area� is used for anfoutdoor �eating area f�r the�restaurant on Broadway. Thete will be 1 employee manni�q tY�e donation trailer during the hours the store is open.E He/she will sort the goods donated and move some directly into the stockroom for immediate resale from the store. The `'remainder will be stored in the trailer to be taken for repair, cieani g etc•.�at�,anothe� sit,�. : ' { f � � There will bL� employees in tk�e store, in�e�uding�-. managers and .=employee at th� donation trailer; for a total of 9 on site at any one time. The�store hou� will be 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. daily. Sunday hours may be sHorter. Employees will work�on-site and also be trained in service business skills in the training room by the on-site managers. Training courses will occur only during the hours that the store is open, 10 a.m. to 8 p.m., weekdays. There will be no week end training sessions. The two lots at 1215 California and 1109 Rhinette cannot be merged to eliminate the variance and conditional use permit because they have different zoning and general plan designations. A merger would require a General Plan Amendment and a rezoning. Since� properties had been used in conjunction �--" �'�� the auto body shop was at this location (1215 California�the site of the auto repair; 1109 Rhinette, outdoor storage), since they continue to be in the same ownership, and since the R-3 zone allows parking areas as a conditional useQ requesting a parking variance and conditional use permit appear to be a viable procedural alternative to a general plan amendment and rezoning. It is important to note, however, that the two properties must be legally connected so that the 11 parking spaces remain on the 1109 Rhinette lot so long as 1215 California is used for retail sales, support office, on site employee training facilities and storage uses. Should the division of retail sales, office, Item No. 8b Regular Action PROJECT LOCATION 2208 Summit Drive (vacant lot) City of Burlingame Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and Specia/ Permits for Building Height, Attached Garage, Address: 2208 Summit Drive Item No. 8b Regular Action and Basement Meeting Date: April 9, 2018 Request: Application for Design Review, Hillside Area Construction, Permit, and Special Permits for building height, an attached garage, and a basement for construction of a new single family dwelling on an existing vacant lot. Architect: Kevin O'Brien Applicant and Properly Owner: Warren Donald General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 026-022-040 LotArea: 5,972 SF Zoning: R-1, Hillside Area Construction Permit Zone Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section 15303 (a) of the CEQA Guidelines, which- states that construction of a Iimited 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, this exemption may be applied to the construction or conversion of up to three (3) single-family residences as part of a project. Site History: This parcel was created with a lot split and several lot line adjustments that were approved by the Planning Commission in 2014. The approval for this action required that a footprint for a new residence be shown to indicate that the property could potentially be developed, but no plans for development were approved at that time. The owner is now submitting an application to build a new, two-and a half story single family dwelling on the vacant lot. Site Description: The subject property is an interior lot located along Summit Drive where Canyon Road and Easton Drive meet Summit Drive. The lot slopes up gradually by 18.4% from the front of the property to the rear of the property, except at the rear left corner of the property where there is sharp incline. There is a partially culverted creek located uphill from the subject property and at its closest point, the creek is approximately 239 feet from the subject property's right side property line (measurement made to the culvert that traverses 2849 Canyon Drive, located west of the subject property). The subject property has a street address of 2208 Summit Drive. There are three parcels that are adjacent to 2208 Summit Drive. The property immediately to the left (east of the subject property) is 2220 Summit Drive and is the site of Hoover Elementary School. The property behind (south and west o� the subject property is 2202 Summit Drive and is a flag-shaped lot, with an arm leading to the parcel frontage on Summit Drive that runs along the right side of the subject property. There is a third property adjacent to the subject property with the address of 2841 Canyon Drive, and it is located just beyond the driveway for 2202 Summit Drive and to the right (west) of the subject property. The subject property at 2208 Summit Drive, 2220 Summit Drive (Hoover School), and 2202 Summit Drive (flag lot) are all located in the City of Burlingame. The property at 2841 Canyon Drive is located in unincorporated San Mateo County. The properties to the east and south of the Hoover School site are located in the Town of Hilisborough. Refer to the attached aerial for a visual representation of the properties and of City and County boundaries. There are four easements existing on the subject property (please refer to survey in the plan set, date stamped December 31, 2017): 1. The first easement is a PG & E easement for overhead wires (denoted as OH and with a green line on the survey in the plans). This existing easement starts at the pole located in the right-of-way directly in front of the flag portion of the lot at 2202 Summit Drive. The overhead wires extend across the subject property at a point approximately 41 feetdown the right property line from the front right corner of the lot, and then extend across the property to a pole approximately 90 feet from the left side property line. The Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and Special Permits 2208 Summit Drive easement exits the property approximately 138 feet down the left side property line and extends across the property at 2220 Summit Drive to a pole located behind the rear, right corner of the Hoover School main building. No permanent structures can be built over the ground or in the airspace above this easement. 2. The second easement is a 10-foot wide City of Burlingame sanitary sewer easement (denoted as SS and with red lines on the survey in the plans) that runs diagonally across the subject property from the front, left corner towards the rear, right side of the lot. This sewer easement primarily services the City of Burlingame properties located behind the subject property. No permanent structures can be built over the ground or in the airspace above this easement. 3. The third easement is a private ingress and egress easement for the flag-shaped property at 2202 Summit Drive (denoted as I& E Easement for Lot 1, Lands of Fanning & Gillis, in blue, on the survey in the plans). This easement runs most of the length of the right side of the subject property. The easement is part of the existing asphalt driveway leading from Summit Drive to the residence with address 2202 Summit Drive and this driveway provides the only access to that residence. No permanent structures or landscaping can be built over this easement. 4. This fourth easement is a private pedestrian and vehicle easement for the property at 2841 Canyon Drive (denoted as I& E Easement Line for Lands of Iverson, in yellow, on the survey in the plans), located to on the right side of the subject property and overlays the access easement for 2202 Summit Drive. No permanent structures or landscaping can be built over this easement. Project Description: The applicant proposes construction of a new, finro-and a half story single family dwelling with an attached garage and a basement on this vacant lot. The total proposed floor area is 2,990 SF (0.501 FAR), where 3,011 SF (0.504 FAR) is the maximum allowed (including ceiling heights greater than 12 feet and front covered porch exemptions). The existing private and utility easements on the property are not proposed to be altered with the development of the lot, with the exception of the PG&E overhead wires easement which is located directly in the footprint of the proposed development. The applicant has submitted a letter, dated October 12, 2017, to indicate that they will enter into an agreement with PG&E along with the approval of the Burlingame School District (owner of Hoover Elementary School property), to relocate the pole on the subject property to the front of the property at 2220 Summit Drive (Hoover Elementary School). The overhead lines would run across the front of the subject property to this pole (see October 12, 2017 letter from Assistant Superintendent Hellier and Sheet 0.1 of the plans). The property is located in the Hillside Area Construction Permit Zone and the Planning Commission shall review the proposed structure based upon the obstruction by the construction of the existing distant views of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be given to the obstruction of distant views from habitable areas within a dwelling unit. The Planning Commission may request that story poles be installed for the purposes of evaluation and clarification by the Planning Commission and the surrounding neighbors. The proposed house will be situated at the rear, left side of the vacant property. A series of terraced retaining walls (between 6 and 16 feet in height) are proposed at the left side and at the rear of the property to create a buildable area and rear yard for the residence. The lowest level of the new residence will be a basement wine cellar and half bath at the rear of the house. Because of the slope on the lot, the front portion of the lowest level does not meet the definition of a basement and is tHerefore considered a lower level half story and accommodates two, staggered single car attached garage spaces. The split levels ofthefirst and second floors of the residence accommodate the main living space for the house as well as three bedrooms. The applicant is requesting a Special Permit for a structure between 30' — 36' in height, where the highest ridge of the proposed residence is 34'-8" measured from the average top of curb at Summit Drive. -2- Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and Special Permits 2208 Summit Drive There are two covered parking spaces (10' x 20' each) proposed in the attached garage and a single uncovered parking space is provided in the driveway leading to the garage. The proposed house has 3 bedrooms and the proposed parking exceeds the code requirements for a 3-bedroom house. The applicant requests a Special Permit for the proposed attached garage. The proposed house will have a 473 SF basement. The applicant is requesting a Special Permit for a basement ceiling height of greaterthan 6'-6", where the proposed basement ceiling height is 8'-2". The top of the finished floor above the basement is less than 2'-0" above existing grade and therefore the basement floor area exemption applies to this space. A total of 473 SF has been deducted from the FAR calculation (the maximum allowable exemption is 700 SF). The existing site does not contain any protected sized trees. There are two 24-inch box landscape trees proposed at the front of the property, in addition to three existing trees that are currently located in the pedestrian and vehicle easement for Lands of Iverson. No new landscaping is proposed in the either of the private easements. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following applications: • Design Review for a new, two-and a half story single family dwelling and attached garage (C.S. 25.57.01 (a) (1)); • Hillside Area Construction Permit (C.S. 25.61); • Special Permit for a structure between 30'-36' in height (C.S. 2526.060(a) (1); ■ Special Permit for an attached garage (C.S. 25.26.035(a)); and ■ Special Permit for a basement with a ceiling height greater than 6'-6" (C.S. 25.26.035(�). 2208 Summit Drive Lot Area: 5,972 SF Plans date stam ed: March 6, 2078 PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D SETBACKS Front (1st f/r): 42'-1" 15'-0" (2nd flr): 49'-1" 20'-0" Two atfached, 42"-10" 20'-0" staggered sing/e car garages: 59'-0" 25'-0�� Side (left): 4'-0" 4�_0�� (right): 4�_�� 4�_0�� Rear (1st flr): 15'-0" 15'-0" (2nd flr): 22'-5" 20'-0" LotCoverage: 1,631 SF 2,389SF -3- Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and Special Permits 2208 Summit Drive PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D 27% 40% 2,990 SF 3,011 SF' FAR: 0.501 FAR 0.504 FAR Special Permit required for Basement: basement with 8'-2" ceiling height z basement ceiling height greater than 6'-6" # of bedrooms: 3 --- 2 covered 1 covered (10' x 20' each), attached 3 (10' x 20') Parking: 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') Special Permit required for a Height: 34'-8" height beiween 30'-36'' DH Enve/ope: complies CS 25.26.075 ' (0.32 x 5,972 SF) + � 100 SF = 3,011 SF (0.504 FAR) ' Special Permit required for a basement ceiling height greater than 6'-6" (C.S. 25.26.035(�). ' Special Permit required for an attached garage (C.S. 25.26.035(a)). ° Special Permit required for a proposed height beriveen 30'-36' (C.S. 25.26.060 (a) (1)). Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on March 12, 2018, the Commission had several comments and suggestions regarding this project and voted to place this item on the regular action calendar when all information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Division. The applicant has submitted revised plans date stamped March 27, 2018, to address the Planning Commission's comments. Please refer to the copy of the March 12, 2018, Planning Commission minutes included in the staff report. Listed below are the Commission's comments and responses by the applicant. 1. What type of window is proposedT • The plans have been revised (Sheet A.6 Exterior Materials Box) to clarify that the windows wili be aluminum clad wood windows. 2. With the upward s/ope on fhe /oi there is jusfifcation for the Specia/ Permit for height, but can the plate heighfs be lowered to reduce the overall height7 The entry fower e/ement has an especially ve►tical fee/ to it. • The plate height at the second floor tower element has been reduced from 10'-6" to 9'-6", which results in a 1 foot lower overall ridge height at the entry tower; the previously proposed height was 35'-8" and the -4- Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit and Special Permits 2208 Summit Drive revised height is 34'-8". The plate height on the upper floor level has also been reduced by 1 foot from 9'-0" to 8'-0". 3. This is a di�cu/E p/an io visualize on a vacant/ot. Sforypo/es don't seem necessarybecause of the upward s/ope on the sunounding lots. However, can the applicant have markers set atsome of the house comers in order fo clarify where the house will sit on the /ot1 • The applicant hired B&H Surveyors to set a total of 6 markers on the property to indicate the footprint of the house. The markers that were set are circled on the site plan labeled House Markers, date stamped March 27, 2018. 4. The restrictions of the vehic/e and pedeslrian easement for Lands of /verson af 2841 Canyon Drive stafe that ihere sha// be no /andscaping in the easement. But the site and /andscape p/ans show 3 existing trees at the soufheasf side of this easement Can this be exp/ained? • Planning Staff would note that the existing lot is vacant and the trees in the easement are an existing condition. The proposed project does not show any new structures or new landscaping in this easement and this meets submittal requirements for development of the lot. The presence or removal of the existing trees in the easement is a private property matter that can be resolved by the owners if necessary. The easement is used for vehicle and pedestrian access but is not required for emergency vehicle ingress and egress. 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. Suggested Findings for Design Review: At the March 12, 2018 Design Review Study meeting the Planning Commission noted that the proposed house has an elegant design given the restrictions of the easements and the slope of the lot. The prominence of the attached garage has been minimized by staggered bays and the open space pattern in the neighborhood is preserved because the garage is closest to a school facility use and not a residential use. The roof lines of the residence are varied and gain height as they step towards the rear of the lot, which minimizes the height of the building as viewed from the street. The proposed materials for the residence, such as the wood garage and entry doors, stucco faqade, and the aluminum clad recessed windows, are consistent with the overall Mediterranean style and are compatible with the neighborhood. For these reasons the project may be found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's five design review criteria. Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit, the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.51.020 a-d): (a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics ofthe new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood; (b) the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood; -5- Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit and Special Permifs 2208 Summit Drive (c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and (d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mftigation forthe removal that is proposed is appropriate. Suggested Special Permit Findings (Height): That because of the irregular shape of the lot and the easements at the front of the lot, the footprint of the proposed house is restricted to the most sloped section of the property and this necessitates several higher roof ridges. The proposed massing of the house is varied within this restricted buildable area and the roof ridge heights between 30'-36' are limited to finro ridges focused at the right side of the lot, which is not immediately adjacent to any neighboring houses. The proposed 4:12 roof pitch for the new house is consistent with the Mediterranean style and also minimizes the overall height. For these reasons the project may be found to be compatible with the special permit criteria. Special Permit Findings (Attached Garage): That the two proposed single car garages are staggered in their setbacks to reduce the impact of the garage door interface with the street. The existing easements on the lot create a large amount of open space adjacent to the street and the garage placement at the far side of this open space, combined with the turret shape and high ridge of the entry, create a pedestrian oriented entry for the residence: The attached garage design is consistent with the garage pattern in the neighborhood and is necessary because of the restricted buildable area on the lot. For these reasons the project may be found to be compatible with the special permit criteria listed above. Special Permit Findings (Basement Ceiling Height): That the proposed basement ceiling height exceeds 6- 6", but that the entire rear basement area is below grade and therefore does not impact the visible mass of the structure. The existing slope and the easements on the lot restrict the buildable area and require that portions of the house be built below grade. For these reasons the project may be found to be compatible with the special permit criteria listed above. Findings for Hillside Area Construction Permit: Review of a Hillside Area Construction Permit by the Planning Commission shall be based upon obstruction by construction of the existing distant views of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be given to the obstruction of distant views from habitable areas within a dwelling unit (Code Sec. 25.61.060). Suggested Findings for Hillside Area Construction Permit: That the proposed single family dwelling structure is designed in such a way that it steps downward with the existing slope on the lot. That the proposed highest ridges are located adjacent to an access driveway and below the neighboring uphill residences. For these reasons the project will not not obstruct distant views from habitable areas with nearby dwelling units and therefore the project may be found to be compatible with hillside area construction permit criteria. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the application and consider publictestimony 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: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped March 27, 2018, sheets A.1 through A.8, L1.0, T.1 and Boundary and Topographic Survey dated November 2017; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staffl; � Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and Special Permits 2208 Summit Drive 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that 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; 5. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading orearth 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; 6. 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; 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; 8. 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; 9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2016 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: 10. 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; 11. 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; 12. 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; 13. 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 14. that priorto 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. -7- Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and Special Permits 2208 Summit Drive Erika Lewit Senior Planner c. Warren Donald, applicant Attachments: • Minutes from March 12, 2018 Design Review Study Meeting • House Markers site plan, date stamped March 27, 2018 . Application to the Planning Commission • Special Permit Forms (3) • October 12, 2017 letter regarding PG&E easement • Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed) • Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed March 30, 2018 • Aerial Photo � � CITY O �� ` � �� _ City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes - Draft Planning Commission BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Monday, March 72, 2018 7:00 PM Council Chambers b. 2208 Summit Drive, zoned R-1 - Application for Hillside Area Construction Permit and Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and Special Permits for height, an attached garage, and basement. (Warren Donald, property owner and applicant; Kevin O'Brien, architect) (24 noticed) Staff Contact: Erika Lewit aetecnmenes: 2208 Summit Dr - Staff Reoort 2206 Summit Dr - Attachments 2208 Summit Dr - Plans - 03.12.18 All Commissioners had visited the project site. There were no ex-parte communications to report. Commissioner Terrones noted that he would recuse himself from participaNng in the discussion due to a business relationship with the Burlingame School District (owner of the property next door) and has been involved in property negotiations involving the school site and the project site. He left the Council Chambers. Comm�nity Development Director Meeker provided an overview of the staff report. Questions of Staff.• > Wfth respect to Easement No. 4; there is a note that no permanent structure or landscaping shall be placed within fhe easement. It appears that trees exist wifhin the easement (Meeker. allow the applicant to respond.) Chair Gum opened the public hearing. Wa�ren Donald represented the applicant. He noted that trees within the easement are existing. Commission Questions/Comments: > It is a bit ditficult to determine where the home will be placed on ihe property;� would be helpful to have stakes installed that at /east show where the home is to 6e placed. (Donald: willing to install stakes.) > Is there a speci�c window style that is proposed? (Donald: not yet.) Note that sryle and construction of the windows on the plans. > No problem with fhe special pemtit for height. However, feels like the design pushes to the maximum due to the plate heights. (Donald: at a disadvantege due to the location of the cur6. Trying to make the best house possible. Pushed to the rear of the lot due to the easements.) Most houses around the site donY have ten-foot plate heights on the g�ound floor. (Donald: is using the school as the reference for the proposed building height.) Pu61ic Comments: There were no public comments. Cfty of Burlingame Pege t pnnred on aa�ota Planning Commission � Meeting Minutes - Draft March 72, 2078 Chair Gum closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion: > Doesn't the attached garage require a special permit7 (Meeker.• yes, and it has been requested.) > Perhaps the most complicated design ever presented,� fee/s shoehomed onto the fot. DoesnY feel that using the school as a reference to support the taller home is appropriate. Need to respond to the other home across the access easement. Is too tall, stretched out. Would 6e better with a nine foot first floor plate height with an eight foot second floor plate height. > Agrees that the design is nice and does a good job of fitting into the lot 6ut the overall height needs to be reviewed. The special permit for height is supportable. Suggested bnng it back on regular action. Commissioner Sargent made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Comaroto, to place the item on the regular action calendar when ready for action. Discussion of MoUon: > Place stakes at the front two comers of the garage, the right comer of the front porch, the rear right corner of the kitchen, and the rear comers of the loggia. Chair Gum asked for a voica vote, and the motion cartied by the following vote: Aye: 6- Gum, Gaul, Sargent, Loftis, Keily, and Comaroto Recused: 1 - Terrones City otBudingeme Page z PAntad on MS/2018 t�o ��- % - 46 "-o'a'� -I- 163.28 SE7HMM �A�a Q n� ...�.c OR�VE � <: I :..,W ••: � �' � A � 4�49� • . .. �nr+n �� • — �-iouse. � a ✓1�-C✓5 . �n �� 4�,► �iD MAR � ? 2�i8 CITY GF 6Ur�LiI�aAME CDD-F��INING ClV. I w. .�pJ� ��T� 6uRL�nGnM' � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010 p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Type of application: ❑ Design Review ❑ Variance O Parcel #: 0 z 7� 2 7� - yy� ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit O Zoning ! Other: PROJECT ADDRESS: Z 2O8 S V �j r. APPLICANT `� PROPERTY OWNER � Name: � 4�✓� �`� LJ ti'v�D`-• � Name: (n.� au- ✓' u� `J e�` a`-' L4� Address: 11 �0 �j�,�eWbreak �-�-.�` Address: LI SO r✓-�orJ�jroe% iec,v�L City/State/Zip: �� C�ctJ'oU(0 t'l ��'s� GJ¢ 'P1762Eity/State/Zip: L � .�cv'za�d �%��J, C'i� Phone: �oSb � 30 � " �l'� `l � E-mail: Wa'�o�on 36 �v�M�•�aM Phone: 6� '.3 U 7— Y9 9 9 E-mail: L✓ ��v�I 3 6��,L• CeH� ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Name: k�V��'1 ��%�l"!C✓L � Address LIS �11Iwt pl L -�� City/State/Zip: �rcu�i ��- �,. P ►�- `tS7Y6 Phone: 1�� ` ZO y— 20 J� E-mail: K�D0.�'L�li�lG . CD►^�. Burlingame Business License �� V �� DEC 11 2017 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD-PLAN�iC��G DIN. Authorization to Reproduce Proiect Plans: I hereby grant the City of Burlingame the authority to reproduce upon request and/or post plans submitted with this application on the City's website as part of the Planning approval process and waive any claims against the City arising out of or related to such action. (Initials of ArchitecUDesigner) DESCRIPTION: i�e� ��ncj (2.. }e� Wt,1 \y {r�pirj � 0«GtG,G On / n��rl � AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge an�d el�ief.I /� � � ApplicanYs signature: W / `� �� Date: �Z /� / 7 I am aware of the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit t is application to the Planning Commission. �, I f Property owner's signature:_�/V Date: � L l� / Date submitted: � 2' �1 � 5: �NANOOUTS�PC Applicatlon.do[ This Space for CDD Staff Use Only � Project Description: Abbreviation Term CUP Conditional Use Permit DHE Declining Hei ht Envelc DSR Design Review E Existin N New SFD Single Family Dwelling SP Special Permit ��a�c� C�.-�-� City of BuAlnpame • Community Development Departrnent • 501 Primroae Road • P(650) 558-7250 •(650) 696-3790 • www.burlinaame.om F, e�Tr ��' : e i � _��1�� I CITY OF BURLINGAME � SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION 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. Exp/ain why the blend of mass, sca/e and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and nel�ghborhood. I , „ %%e /' lG�=Se' � I'ZS r GfE" L�'I � C` 1 S �d/C ci?�� i2 - / � �' �rzP� �fa�er� ��h� d �� TD U I� �i fi/ Ctho� �i/J� CyAse/v+� %.�l� SC��/�'/ aS �� Psii �, ��,( away �'�°� �!i IrO'/' S/ r�P� �/IBGtI/H� �C� �r► S S p �x; 5�•,5 Sl��e ��,�� ,-a�� ' �� prs/��-r�"/' 2. Exp/ain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materia/s and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consi$tent with the existi►�g structure/ streetandneigh6orhood. �G p�,pp S�� r�SiG��J/�� i5 5�� S7vr� a-f- �'�/2 �ra��" a�1� �rJCI��S`k� �l✓�d n�`fe s�d �i� 7`'wo s7l��./ e /' pT �2 -� a t �ri!'��: -�L' yv1�5S��9 -Ivwct�'ds �� e�+�vi01� evle�ays b��loi�h ye� �,-�-,1 �� t�d v 3 � �a..� � ��s�� .�� S 9 � h �� '�s � �� -�� 5 3. How will the proposed proJect be consistent wlth the resident� I design idelines adoptedbythecity(C.S.25.5(7)T jb�� ro`o05c�o(��g�j��C'�,��ti��S '�'�/IE ✓z4ui✓eWl(�vi"�5 Set TUr� �h -�'%rL 4�es�0.evifi'� �'v;o�e�i�PS. —rl.ig pr��aS2� ��r�o� 5'i"�+ Z i� �� .Spc��hr5�l Co a�licL� W��C�j (.ur�l c� ', �1� o�e� � o� es i v� �i-h2 Gc.�^a� •�-t�a�G�� ga��9es b(ev�� , 1`-r�� h�; �bo��JdcY.�, 7Lr� �a��s aY� 5�f�tqy"reo� �v r�(✓ce `�r� �ypt�e ap��✓�ce o� ��Z �oa�s �o� � S�i-�� 4. Exp/ain how t e removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the cify's reforestation requirements. What mitigation Is proposed for the removal of any trees7 Explain why this mJtlgation Is approprlate. Rev. 07.2008 � See over for explanation of above questions. SPECIAL.PERMIT.APP.FORM Clry of Budingame • Canmunily Development Depertment • 607 Pdmroee Roed • P(860) 558-7260 • F(860) 896-3790 • www.budinaame.om 1. Explain why fhe blend of mass, sca/e and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addifion are consisfent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood. How will the proposed structure or addition affect neighboring properties or structures on those properties? If neighboring properties will not be affected, state why. Compare the proposed addition to the mass, scale and characteristics of neighboring properties. Think about mass and bulk, landscaping, sunlight/shade, views from neighboring properties. Neighboring properties and structures include those to the right, left, rear and across the street. How does the proposed structure compare to neighboring structures in terms of mass or bulk? If there is no change to the structure, say so. If a new structure is proposed, compare its size, appearance, orientation etc. with other structures in the neighborhood or area. 2. Explain how the variefy of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new strucfure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood. How does the proposed structure or use compare aesthetically with structures or uses in the existing neighborhood? If R does not affect aesthetics, state why. Was the addition designed to match existing architecture and/or pattem of development on adjacent properties in the neighborhood? Explain why your proposal fts in the neighborhood. How will the structure or addition change the character of the neighborhood? Think of character as the image or tone established by size, density of development and general pattern of land use. If you don't feel the character of the neighborhood will change, state why. 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city? Following are the design criteria adopted by the City Council for residential design review. How does your project meet these guidelines7 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. 4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint ofany new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent wifh fhe city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for fhe removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is appropriate. Will any trees be removed as a result of this proposal7 If so, explain what type of trees will be removed and if any are protected under city ordinance (C.S.11.06), why it is necessary to remove the trees, and what is being proposed to replace any trees being removed. If no trees are to be removed, say so. �-� <<��-�- Clty of Budinpeme � Communily Development Departrnent • 501 � rose Road • P(850) 55&7250 • F(660) 696-3790 • wunv.burllnaame.ora � CITY ~� : � 1 � �� '� CITY OF BURLINGAME SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the Citys 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. Exp/ain why the b/end of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent wlth the existing sbucture's design and with the existing street and neighborhood. '( 1tix pvb� �lv�c.hJ.� �S 'l �Z 5-1Dr;25 2�roi- S�MI �c7 ✓� n 1 -ao -��.c 5u�rio.;nditi hoMs�s, �(�^-� .�pc?�^•�h rnay�c� I st-yi�� ca,� s��Po.k -�in-� �'�`-� /s�air �ler•�r� �,�Jln{c�� 1 S re y�-�^� f�� -b c�CceSS -(-f�- v-�u✓� O t.�S �z vE., �S �..rl'�� Y�d-1 1'12,.1C�,%`� -�-1'�-� -Foc�-4Prlrl'� CX`��cl�l) � `-}� �� I 2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior �nish materials and elevatlons of the proposed new structure oradditlon are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood. jk.� v��d �oa-� l�r�s- v'`d- lo.�.� r'i�+'�o1 r�o-� 'is �a�rtSiS{`-�'1-� c�si�l�l -}-�- c'�y�'h�-�c�-u✓a� S�7i� . ��.� Pra,Qoee—� p �'/�� °''� crt� S c�a'� �e �S o n� b L2 -�� -%� f��1 boV l�tdo �1 � � `O �` �O D <� 2 ✓�d � � � "> 3. How will fhe proposed proJect be conslstent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)7 �i'�x ,P✓oQr�`a—d �'�� -�rt S o ✓i '� {�ts � Ui wi "t �� V�'� � ✓� ve�'1 -EG� S �a�'� � re s�e�l v2�av�c�s e,�e a r�d � a�� ✓Q s-t,-; ��I';Grs _��1�� yh� °'''t r� s�- l�-1 �e.�.r� 30,_3(� <� 5�a� n� d�� c?n, s-1 �.�� s�� o 4. Expl in how the remova/ of any trees located within the footprint of any new ,1 ��aE _ structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What miflgation !s proposed for the removal of any treesl Explaln why this mitigation is approprlate. j�l/,� _ �o -�✓�-S -�c' lx ,r¢;n`o..�c1 Rev. 07.2008 � See over for explanation of above questions. SPECIAL.PERMIT.APP.FORM City of Burlingame • Communlly Development Department • 601 Primrose Road • P(860) 568-7260 • F(860) 698-3790 • www.burlinaame.om 1. Explain why the blend of mass, sca/e and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent wifh fhe existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood. How will the proposed structure or addition affect neighboring properties or structures on those propertles? If neighboring properties will not be affected, state why. Compare the proposed addition to the mass, scale and characteristics of neighboring properties. Think about mass and buik, landscaping, suniighUshade, views from neighboring properties. Neighboring properties and structures include those to the right, left, rear and across the street. How does the proposed structure compare to neighboring structures in terms of mass or bulk? If there is no change to the structure, say so. If a new structure is proposed, compare its size, appearance, orientatlon etc. with other structures in the neighborhood or area. 2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood. How does the proposed structure or use compare aesthetically with structures or uses in the existing neighborhood? If ft does not affect aesthetics, state why. Was the addition designed to match existing architecture and/or pattern of development on adjacent properties in the neighborhood? Explain why your proposal fits in the neighborhood. How will the structure or addition change the character of the neighborhood? Think of character as the image or tone established by size, density of development and general pattem of land use. If you don't feel the character of the neighborhood will change, state why. 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city? Following are the design criteria adopted by the City Council for residential design revlew. How does your project meet these guidelines? 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. 4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addifion is necessary and is consistenf with the city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is appropriate. Will any trees be removed as a result of this proposal? If so, explain what type of trees wiil be removed and if any are protected under city ordinance (C.S. 11.06), why it is necessaryto remove the trees, and what is being proposed to replace any trees being removed. If no trees are to be removed, say so. �,�,�� C�� ,�. �� }��v� Clly of Burlingame • Community Development Department � 501 Primrose Road • P(650) 5 7250 • F ) 696-3790 • unvw.burlinaame.om F, c��r �r ; � � � ��;� CITY OF BURLINGAME SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION The Planning Commission is required by lawto makefindings as defined bythe 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 dominanf structural characferistics of fhe new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood. , � `�,� baS�r�e.�'!f GYr�'� °S b�r�'�oi � ✓!,� �� sf��'y S 1 n pe o-F -f'h� f o f an� w � Il N�f be visi ble -F'va �-f-�� S¢Y'�f ar s v� r� v v�� „�� fes iolevtcc� So �h�+�e �e� l, �y h� �y � aln� na � r�'►pa�f �fhe o�ve�/l h�iyh�� iere is �o d��QG7� e��f��ap�S�.� 2, Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the ex'sting structure, street and neighborhood. �� r �cpos�� '�� l'�eS/�er�C� J 4Sc� �'�i/� G��es �1� f�a�a� ��ie l��ss�'�y �f- fh� 57��c�ur�� 3. How will the proposed proJect be consistent wlth the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (C.S. 2.57)T �e �o�ePaSeoi res� �liJ� �/la ws �� I�/vi''"Pm� �7` �'r%y1 ir/ �'ye res i�� a�es%y��l �'vi� ��res. � 4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistenf with the cify's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the removal of any treesl Explaln why this mitigation is appropriate. �� Rev. 07.2008 � See over for explanation of above quest(ons. SPECIAL.PERMIT.APP.FORM City of Budinpame • Communfty Devebpment Depar6nent • 607 Prtmrose Road • P(860) 558-7260 • F(850) 696-3790 • a�vw.budinaame.om 1. Explain why the blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing strucfure's design and wifh the existing sfreet and neighborhood. How will the proposed structure or addition affect neighboring properties or structures on those properties? If neighboring properties will not be affected, state why. Cornpare the proposed addition to the mass, scale and characteristics of neighboring properties. Think about mass and bulk, landscaping, sunlight/shade, views from neighboring properties. Neighboring properties and structures include those to the right, left, rear and across the street. How does the proposed structure compare to neighboring structures in terms of mass or bulk7 If there is no change to the structure, say so. If a new structure is proposed, compare its size, appearance, orientation etc. with other structures in the neighborhood or area. 2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exferior finish materials and e/evations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistenf with the existing structure, sfreet a�nd neighborhood. How does the proposed structure or use compare aesthetically with structures or uses in the existing neighborhood9 If it does not affect aesthetics, state why. Was the addition designed to match existing architecture and/or pattem of development on adjacent properties in the neighl�orhood? Explain why your proposal fits in the neighborhood. How will the structure or addition change the character of the neighborhood? Think of character as the image or tone established by size, density of development and general pattern of land use. If you don't feel the character of the neighborhood will change, state why. 3. How will the proposed prc ject be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the cityl Following are the design criteria adopted by the City Councll for residentfal design review. How does your project meet these guidelinesl 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 structurai components. 4. Explain how the removal of ��ny trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is r►ecessary and is consistenf with the city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why thi:� mitigation is appropriate. Will any trees be removed as a result of this proposal? If so, explain what type of trees will be removed and if any are protected under city ordinance (C.S. 11.06), why it is necessary to remove the trees, and what is being proposed to replace any trees being removed. If no trees are to be removed, say so. .� • : '�� •i!i � Burlingame School District :e,fApn. TU�ifkNf Lu��T�`."• October 12, 2017 Carl Mune, Electrical Engineering Estimator Pacific Gas and Electric CHM3@PGE.com (650) 413-4643 Subject: 2220 Summit Drive, Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Power pole moving for Warren Donald (650) 307-4999 Dear Mr. Mune: We have met with Mr. Donald, and understand he is working with your office on the relocation of a power pole so he can bufld his home on the adjacent property to ours. Our understandtng is that Mr. Donald wouid incur all associated costs, and that the schedule would be at a time when no staff and students are present at Hoover Elementary School located at 2220 Summit Drfve, Buriingame, CA 94030. Is this pole shared with any other utility7 If so Mr. Donald would have to incur those costs for moving the pole as well. With those provisions, and if located within the area shown in the diagram to the left, the Burlingame School District is writing in support of hfs request to move the power pole onto our property. Our upcoming schedule for this installation could be during the following time frames November 20 — 24, 2017 December 22 — 31, 2017 January 1— 5, 2018 February 19 — 23, 2oi8 April 2 — 6, 2018 Please let us k ow if you need any additional lnformation. � GSby Hel er Assistant Superintendent, Business Services / CBO 1825 Trousdele Drive Budingame, CA 940'10 650-258-3800 www.budinpamescfaols.org BOARD OF TRUSTEES Kay Coskey Oavina Orabkin Merk Intrieri Doug Luftman Florence Wong DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION Maggle Meclsaac, Ed.D. SuperiMendent Marcia Russell, Ed.D. Assistent SuperiMendent, Educattonal Services Gaby Hellfer Assistent Superintenden6 Busfness Sarvices/C80 RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW, SPECIAL PERMITS, AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a Categorical Exemption has been prepared and application has been made for Desipn Review. Saecial Permits. and an Hillside Area Construction Permit for a new two and half story sinale family dwellinq with a basement and attached paraae at 2208 Summit Drive. Zoned R-1. Warren WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on April 9• 2018, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: 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 Section 15303 (a) of the CEQA Guidelines, 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, is hereby approved. 2. Said Design Review, Special Permits, and Hillside Area Construction Permit are approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review, Special Permits, and Hillside Area Construction Permit 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 9th dav of Aoril. 2018 by the following vote: Secretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption, Design Review, Special Permits, and Hillside Area Construction Permit 2208 Summit Drive Effective April 19, 2018 Page 1 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped March 27, 2018, sheets A.1 through A.8, L1.0, T.1 and Boundary and Topographic Survey dated November 2017; 2. that any changes to height or pitch, anc Division or Planninc staf�; � building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that 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; 5. 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; 6. 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; 7. 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; 8. 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; 9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2016 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: EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Area Construction Permit 2208 Summit Drive Effective April 19, 2018 Page 2 Categorical Exemption, Design Review, Special Permits, and Hillside 10. 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; 11. 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; 12. 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; 13. 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 14. 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. . CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT eurt��N�AntE 501 PRIMROSE ROAD �BURIINGAME, CA 94010 PH: (650) 558-7250 � FAX: (650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org Site: 2208 SUMMIT DRIVE The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on MONDAY, APRIL 9, 2018 af 7:00 P.M. in the (ify Hall founcil (hambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA: Application for Hillside Area Consfruction Permit and Design Review for a new, iwo•story single family dwelling and Special Permits for height, an attached garage, and hasemenT ot 2208 SUMMIT DRIVE zoned R-1. APN 027-271-440 Mailed: March 30, 2018 (Please referto otherside) City of Burlingame PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE 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 the 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 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE (P/ease refer to other side) 2208 Summit Drive, R-1 �4�oq . � � B-$ 2Zo8 'April 8, 2018 Judith Iverson 2841 Canyon Road Burlingame, CA 94010 PG'„�'g ' �uw►m� f '�r. COhLtlLf:\'IGITlO�\' RLCi:II'Gli AFTTR PRF.!'9R.17'!ON orsr�rrr,r�oar � i�'�E�:.:1�i�� t;n'2 - 9 '1018 CIl-Y OF BURLINGAM� CDD-i l;�J�:PdfNr, Di�J. City of Burlingame Community Development DepartmeM Planning Division 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Subject: 2208 Summit Drive Board Members, Please consider the significant concerns one neighborhood regarding the Development of the lot designated as 2208 Summit Drive. The fear relates To the mass and height of this proposed design on such aa narrow lot. As most residents have not had an opportunity to view the recently placed boundary markers due to the Easter holiday and Spring Break, I am requesting the placement of story poles. This will allow us to judge the impact of this structure on the site. The community has great pride in their beautiful new Hoover school and Is concerned that this project may detract from that. Sincerely, �C��l ;�� . ��