HomeMy WebLinkAbout133 Crescent Avenue - Staff ReportItem No. 8b
Regular Action
PROJECT LOCATION
133 Crescent Avenue
City of Burlingame
Design Review
Item No. 8b
Regular Action
Address: 133 Crescent Avenue Meeting Date: September 10, 2018
Request: Application for Design Review for a new, tuvo-story single family dwelling with a detached garage.
Applicant and Designer): Tim Raduenz, Form + One Design
Property Owner: Mr. and Mrs. Greg Gambrioli
General Plan: Low Density Residential
APN: 028-293-060
Lot Area: 9,813 SF
Zoning: R-1
Environmental Review: The subject property is located within the Burlingame Park No. 2 subdivision. Based
upon documents that were submitted to the Planning Division by a Burlingame property owner in 2009, it was
indicated that the entire Burlingame Park No. 2, Burlingame Park No. 3, Burlingame Heights, and Glenwood
Park subdivisions may have historical characteristics that would indicate that properties within this area could be
potentially eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places. Therefore, for any
property located within these subdivisions, a Historic Resource Evaluation must be prepared prior to any
significant development project being proposed to assess whether the existing structure(s) could be potentially
eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places.
A Historic Resource Evaluation was prepared for this property by Page & Turnbull, Inc., dated June 23, 2017.
The results of the evaluation concluded that it is not eligible for individual listing on the California Register of
Historical Resources under any criteria. Therefore, the proposed project may be categorically exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act per 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.
Project Description: The subject property is an interior lot and the applicant proposes to demolish the existing
house and detached garage on the site. A new, two-story single family dwelling with a detached garage is
proposed on the property. The total proposed floor area is 4,635 SF (0.47 FAR), where 4,640 SF (0.47 FAR) is
the maximum allowed (including front covered porch exemption).
The existing site contains a total of two protected sized trees that are both Redwoods. The trees are located at
the front and rear of the property, along the left side property line. The applicant proposes to remove the
Redwood tree closest to the front property line and to retain the Redwood tree closest to the rear property line.
An arborist report was submitted on July 12, 2017 that details the tree removal and tree protection measures.
The Parks Division issued a Protected Size Tree Removal Permit on January 8, 2018, but it expired on July 8,
2018; therefore the applicant must renew the Removal Permit in order to have the Building Permit issued for the
project. 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 with a detached garage (C.S. 25.57.01 (a) (1)).
133 Crescent Avenue
Lot Area: 9,813 SF Plans date stamped: August 24, 2018
ORIGINAL j REVISED PLANS DATE
PROJECT ; STAMPED AUGUST 24, 2018
SETBACKS
Front (1st flr):
(2nd flr):
Side (left):
27'-6" No change
� ' '�
27'-6" No c�ange „ ,
f
._..��.......___ _ . ..............:...................................._...._�_ ��......... ........
7'-0" , No change ��v �L,�
ALLOWED/REQ'D
27'-5" (block average)
+ 27'-5"
Jc7s� . .2,�i� 7'-0��
Design Review 133 Crescent Avenue
ORIGINAL REVISED PLANS DATE ' ALLOWED/REQ'D
PROJECT � STAMPED AUGUST 24, 2018
(right): ; 12'-6" No change 7'-0"
........................................................_...........:..........................................................................................................:......... _...................................................... ....... ...................................................................... :
� ............................... ..............................................�..........� �..................................................................
Rear (1st flr): ; 66'-2" No change 15 -0
(2nd flr): 66'-2" No change 20'-0"
...................._................................................. ..._...................._..._..._.................;.........................---.................................._......... ..._...................................................._......._......._.:............................_.........................
2,677 SF No change 3,925 SF
Lot Coverage: ;
27% No change 40%
_ ..........................._.............................................................�..........................................................................................................:......................................................................................................................................................................:.................................... ..
: : , ..................................................................................
4,635 SF No change 4,640 SF'
FAR: ;
0.47 FAR No change 0.47 FAR
..........................................................................................�..........................................................................................................;......................................................................................................................................................................:....................................
# of bedrooms: ; 7 No change ---
.................. �..........................................................................................................:........................................................................................................................................... _.......................... ........................ _.. ... .
2 covered 2 covered
; (20' x 20') (20' x 20')
Parking: No change
1 uncovered 1 uncovered
(9' x 20') (9' x 20')
........................ _.....................................................,.......................................................................... _...............................;.......................................................................................................................................................................:........ . ..
. .......................................................................................................................................................
Height: ; 30'-11" 2 30'-0" 30'-0"
_ ..................................................................................:..........................._..............................................................................:......................................................................................................................................................................._.................. ....
DH Envelope: ; complies complies C.S. 25.26.075
' (0.32 x 9,813 SF) + 1100 SF + 400 SF = 4,640 SF (0.47 FAR)
2 Special Permit previously required for a height befinreen 30-36 feet. (C.S. 25.26.060(a)(1)).
Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on August 13, 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 (see
attached August 13, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes).
The applicant submitted revised plans date stamped August 24, 2018, and two response letters dated August 17
and 29, 2018, to address the Planning Commission's questions and comments. Listed below are the
Commission's comments and responses by the applicant.
1. The Commission can appreciate the proposed traditional form, however the design appears too
broad across the front and might benefit from some articulation between the first and second f/oors,
either wiih a change in materials or some type of compatible trim.
• Applicant revised the design to show a cedar wood trim band with flare between the first and second
floors on each elevation.
2. The proposed drawings are very detailed and busy; photos of the example houses and a rendering of
the proposed dwelling would help to understand
-2-
Design Review
133 Crescent Avenue
� A rendering was submitted in an 8 x 11.5 format on August 30, 2018 and has been included with the
revised plans sets. Photos of the inspiration houses at 2909 Hillside Drive, Burlingame and 160 Poplar
Avenue, San Mateo, have been submitted and are included in the staff report attachments.
3. The broadness of this design seems like it may be overwhelming and boxy on this lot in Burlingame.
• In addition to the flare added between the first and second floors, the Special Permit request for height
was eliminated by reducing the pitch of the roof from 9:12 to 7:12.
4. The curved detail at the rear seems ouf of character.
• The overhang at the master bedroom has been redesigned to eliminate the curved element.
5. Can the landscaping concerns raised by the neighbor to the rear be addressed on the plans?
• With the approval of the neighbor's immediately to the rear, the trees proposed to be planted at the rear
fence line have been changed from Crepe Myrtle to Carolina Cherry Laurels (24-inch box size). A note
has been added to the Landscape Plan that clarifies that the existing fence along the rear property line
will remain.
6. Is it possible to add more parity to bedrooms #3 and 4 in terms of windows; can a window be added
to each? More space might be required for the window above the pediment at the entry.
• A rear-facing window has been added to Bedroom #4 to eliminate the appearance of a blank wall. The
window above the entry has been reduced by 6 inches in length. The number of windows in Bedroom #3
has not been altered in order to retain the neighbor's privacy.
7. The plan sets appear to be missing a roof plan and the same side elevation is shown twice?
• A roof plan has been added to the plan set and the side elevation was corrected.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the
Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows:
Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood;
2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood;
3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure;
4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and
5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components.
5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components.
Suggested Findings for Design Review: That the architectural style, mass and bulk of the new single family
dwelling and detached garage (featuring hip roofs, asphalt diamond shingle roofing, proportional plate heights,
cedar shingle siding, flared trim between the first and second floors, and aluminum clad wood windows with
wood trim) is compatible with the character of the neighborhood; that the design is well-articulated and the
architectural elements reduce the appearance of mass and box appearance of the proposed project; that the
windows and architectural elements of the proposed structure are placed so that the structure respects the
interFace with the structures on adjacent pr.operties; that the detached garage proposed in the rear, right corner
Of the prOperty fits the existing pattern on the block; and that the proposed landscaping, including the existing
-3-
Design Review
133 Crescent Avenue
redwood tree that will remain on the left side and the proposed evergreen trees along the rear property line, will
help to screen the second floor from the neighboring properties. For these reasons the project may be found to
be compatible with the requirements of the City's five design review criteria.
Planning Commission Action:
The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the application, and consider public testimony and
the analysis contained within the staff report. Action should include specific findings supporting the Planning
Commission's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the Planning Commission. The reasons for any
action should be stated clearly for the record. At the public hearing the following conditions should be
considered:
2.
3.
n
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped
August 24, 2018, sheets T1.0 through LP1.0; including a row of new Carolina Cherry Laurels that will be
planted along the rear property line;
that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or
pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning
Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staf�;
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;
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
shall be i
Commis:
issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans
�dified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning
�, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans
the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the
of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning
�, or City Council on appeal;
conditions
Commissi�
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:
-4-
Design Review 133 Crescent Avenue
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 xoof 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.
Erika Lewit
Senior Planner
c. Tim Raduenz, applicant
Attachments:
• August 13, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes
• Applicant's Response Letters, dated August 17 and August 29, 2018
• Application to the Planning Commission
• Protected Tree Removal Permit effective January 8, 2018
• Letters from neighbor, date stamped August 8, 2018 and dated August 16, 2018
• Photo example of inspirational architecture (2209 Hillside Drive, Burlingame and 160 Poplar Ave.,
San Mateo)
• Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed)
• Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed August 13, 2018
• Address Map
• Historical Resource Analysis Report, date stamped June 5, 2018
-5-
/
� CITY
�� � ; �i
1►
�,,�b�3 � ;—�
� o< �� 90�
9voRn1
City of Burlingame
Meeting Minutes
Planning Commission
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Monday, August 13, 2018 7:00 PM Council Chambers
b. 133 Crescent Avenue, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review and a Special Permit
for building height for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. (Tim
Raduenz, Form+ One, applicant and designer; Greg Gambrioli, 133 Crescent LLC,
property owner) (113 noticed) Staff contact: Erika Lewit
Attachments: 133 Crescent Ave - Staff Reaort
133 Crescent Ave - Attachments
133 Crescent Ave- Historic Resource Analvsis Report
133 Crescent Ave - Plans - 08.13.18
Commissioner Comaroto was recused from this item since she lives within 500 feet of the property.
All Commissioners had visited the project site. There were no ex parte communications to report.
Senior P/anner Keylon provided an overview of the staff report.
There were no questions of staff.
Chair Gaul opened the public hearing.
Tim Raduenz, Form + One Design, represented the applicant.
Commission Questions/Comments:
> It is a traditiona/ style but has been broadened. Has there been considerafion of changing materia/s
between first and second floor? Or some kind of articulation such as a f/air line, or trim with dentils and
corbe/s. (Raduenz: Would be open to it. Tried to do something at the bottom with the clinker brick and
the band. Would be open to doing a flare with the trim detail at the second floor line.)
> Have the concems in the neighbors leiter been addressed? (Raduenz: Yes. Will make the change to
the landscaping and get a letter from the neighbor.)
> Sheet 3.1 the driveway elevation /ooks like it is the same as the /eft side e/evation. (Raduenz: �ll
correct it.)
> Was 9' first f/oor/8' second floor considered? (Raduenz: Looked at it, but the design has been
patterned off of a remode/ed house on Pop/ar in San Mateo Park with the same proportions.)
> There are a/ot of lines on the drawing, it is confusing to read. Would like to see a model, or photos of
the inspirationa/ house. (Raduenz: Had submitted a model to staff.)
> If there is precedent with a house in San Mateo Park it wou/d be he/pfu/ to see photos.
> Why is fhere a curved wall in the back from the first f/oor to second f/oor. (Raduenz: It is a detai/ to
create some f/ow. Cou/d make it more rigid and square off the cap, or put more detail on it.)
> Would suggest more parity to the windows in Bedrooms #3 and 4. Bedroom #2 has nice windows on
two sides of the bedroom. The e/evation on Sheet A3.0 shows a spot above the Living Room window to
put a bedroom window in that corner. On Bedroom #4 where the curve detail is, it accentuates a blank
spot,� perhaps a window facing the back yard. (Raduenz: Bedroom #4 can be done, Bedroom #3 might
City of Bur'lingame Page 1 Printed on 9/B/2018
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 13, 2018
have impacts on neighbors. �ll take a/ook at it.)
> Tension in the center window above the front porch pediment. Could the sill be raised in line with the
other two windows? The boitom of the casing is touching the top of the ridge. (Raduenz: Yes.)
> Needs to see a roof plan. (Raduenz: �ll inc/ude in the next round, as well as the 3-D rendering.)
Public Comments:
Joe Holmes: Adjacent on the south side. Spent some time with the applicant on the positions of the
windows. Matched the p/acement so they are not staring at each other, particularly on the second floor.
Large redwood in back is next to property line is uplifting the patio and fence, wou/d like to have it
removed.
Chair Gaul closed the public hearing.
Commission Discussion:
> Confused by the design. Seems broad at the front, a would be a big house for the neighborhood. A lot
of the houses in the area are broken up more. This seems like it would overpower the block compared to
the other homes. House seems to be more appropriate for a wider /ot with more room in front.
> Cou/d change materials between the first and second f/oor or adding a f/are would be helpful.
> Not as supportive of specia/ permit. Lowering the p/ates to a more standard height would reduce the
height. �th the /arge roof form there is room for the second f/oor to have vau/ted ceilings to make it more
spacious.
> Other houses in the neighborhood have second stories tucked more into the rooflines, inc/uding the
neighboring house to the right. The neighboring house cou/d be overpowered by this house, so would be
hard to grant the specia/ permit for height.
> Has approved a similar design previous/y, but it was broken down with two layers.
> Most of the front porches in the neighborhood have /arger siiting areas.
Commissioner Sargent made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Kelly, to place the item on
the Regular Action Calendar when plans have been revised as directed. The motion carried by
the following vote:
Aye: 6- Sargent, Loftis, Kelly, Gaul, Terrones, and Tse
Recused: 1 - Comaroto
Ciry of Budingame Page 2 Printed on 9/6/2018
Form + One
1499 Old Bayshore Highway
Unit # 140
Burlingame, CA 94010
p+ 415.819.0304
E + tim@formonedesign.com
TRANSMITTAL FORM
12098 Highway 42
Ellison Bay, Wisco. 54210
5470 Cross Country Way
Park City, UT 84098
To: Planning Committee From: Tim Raduenz
Subject: 133 Crescent - Burlingame Date Sent: 08.17.2018
Number of Pages: z P�us Pnotos
RESPONSE TO PLANNING COMMITTEE COMMENTS:
1. ADDING FLARE TO EXTERIOR
RESPONSE: We have added the band to building, we will be keeping the same material (cedar) in a ribbon
pattern, as we think this is a high end detail that is rarely done today, as it's an expensive detail to replicate. And it
gives the exterior texture which is required to keep the design cohesive, and the reason the more rectangle design
works as we are using higher end materials andpatterns. See attached, an approved similar design in Burlingame,
and our concept design, which is in San Mateo Park (poplar) and is an older home done in this period style.
2. WHY WE DESIGNED A RECTANGLE HOME.
RESPONSE: We are afforded a larger lot, and we already have a 7' side setback which we pushed out to 8' which
normally its 4', hence we think this design will workfor the neighborhood context/scale, also the other home to the
left is pretty substantial with a front facing garage, which helps with scale. The project is also a more historical
style home, which Greg + Gina wanted to build, and I as the designer, and with my 18 years of experience working
in the area, think it works in this neighborhood. We also finished the house a few doors down from this new project
and it works with all the various designs on this street... to me it works/fits nicely in the context of the
neighborhood.
3. FIXED THE DRAFTING ERRORS.
RESPONSE: We corrected the:
a. Elevations were corrected.
b. Added the roof plan into the planning set.
c. Included for your review, the 3d modeling.
Form + One • Design & Plazming • 1499 Old Bayshore Highway, # 140 • Burlingame • CA • 94010 � ais) 819.0304 • tim@formonedesign.com
4. WINDOWS ADDED TO THE 2ND FLOOR
RESPONSE: We have added the window to the rear bedroom as per board members comments, the front bedroom
has to stay as designed as drawn, a few meetings with the neighbors to the left and we want to keep the 2"d floor
windows to a minimum for privacy of both the neighbors and the new owners. I don't think this is a design issue. As
you will not get to see this side edevation much for the roadway.
5. UP-DATING DETAIL AT REAR FLAT ROOFED AREA.
RESPONSE: We have redesigned the overhang area next to the master bedroom area, the rrew detail is more
cohesive with the proposed project!
6. ON-GOING NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH
RESPONSE: We again reached out the rear neighbors and have done exactly what was asked for, which we would
have done anyways, but it is now emailed to the owners directly and updated on the plans, we will keep/protect
their existing fence, and have changed the rear lot ldne trees to evergreen.
Also, the neighbors to the left side have been on board with our plans since day one, they were the neighbors that
spoke at the meeting! We will continue the outreach and be proactive, as we normally are.
Lastly, Greg + Gina normally tries to install the good neighbor fence during construction so to help with the issues
that happen during construction, we have done this at our 729 Walnut street project and it has helped with the
neighbors being ok with construction and the day to day activities of construction.
If you have any questions please call or e-mail me.
Best,
Tim Raduenz — CGBP
Attachments: photos, etc.
�
Build It
GREEN �
MEMBER
Form + One' DeSigri & P18nniIIg • 1499 Old Bayshore Highway, #140 • Burling�nte • CA • 94010 � a�s) 819.0304 ■ tim@formonedesign.com
Form + One
1499 Old Bayshore Highway
Unit #140
Burlingame, CA 94010
P+ 415.819.0304
E + tim@formonedesign.com
TRANSMITTAL FORM
12098 Highway 42
Ellison Bay, Wisco. 54210
5470 Cross Country Way
Park City, UT 84098
To: Planning Committee
Subject: 133 Crescent - Burlingame
From: Tim Raduenz
Date Sent: 08.29.2018
Number of Pages: 2 plus photos
RESPONSE TO PLANNER COMMENTS:
1. San Mateo Reference Comment.
RESPONSE: 160 Poplar, see attached photo.
2. 2209 Hillside — Burlingame Comment
RESPONSE: It's on Hillside, and we are not doing the corbels as they are not the style but just showing the
committee that it has been done recently. I believe this house is a little busy and our style we will stick with shingles
on both levels.
3. 3d Model
RESPONSE: See attached.
4. Eliminating the Special Permit Request
RESPONSE: Yes we are eliminated the Nequest so we can get approval, as we need to get moving on building this
project this year. And it's not a deal breaker, even though we think it makes sense, architectuNally.
5. UP-DATING Landscape.
RESPONSE: We added your (Erika's) comments to the architectural sheet, so it was ada'ressed, but we added it to
the landscape plan as well, per your direction.
Form + One • Design & Planning • 1499 Old Bayshore Highway, #140 • Burlingame • CA • 94010 • ais) 819.0304 • tim@formonedesign.com
6. Roof Plan
RESPONSE: Its shown on the pdf set, see attached, printer might have not printed correctly, will be in on
Thursday to make sure the sets are correct, as Im not in the area 100% of the time to check the printer sets.
If you have any questions please call or e-mail me.
Best,
Tim Raduenz — CGBP
Attachments: photos, etc.
Build It�
�R���
MEMB�R
Form + One • Design & Planning • 1499 Old Bayshore Highway, #140 • Burlingame • CA • 94010 • ais) 819.0304 • tim@formonedesign.com
i ict�c�R;,
�11�''v\.
�
/ �.BURL�NGAME �
�• �
���
C(JMMUNITY DEYELUPIVAENT �EPARTMENT ��'sO9 '�Ri11AROSE ROAD �'BURLiTIGAM'E, CA 9401 �
p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org
A�PPLtCATION TO THE PLANNING COMMtSSION
T�pe of application:
� Design Review ❑ Variance
O Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit
❑ Parcel #: OZ �- y9-� — D�°
❑ Zoning / Other:
PROJECT ADDRESS: l ��% L�S�=��/'7` ��
APPLRCANT
Name: w� �DGG�/I%Z- °�N�t -��if�
Address: 3�5� �� � 5�- �9
City/State/Zip: s� � ���5�'-0 � %T���
,Phara�e: �lr�'. 8`1� D��
E-mai1: / /.0 4 D�-/''✓'��S/G'/✓, �/Y(
DESIGNER
PRE?P�R� t?1d1�MER /'
Name: /l�e. �' /�li2s. G 2�E6 C>��R/��
Address: �! �� su�"� �''� � � �R �✓E
City/state/zip: __�/�� ���bf� , G',� q��ld
�'hone: 10�0. 33 3. !n S �
E-mail: R�A�✓�it�f /�l�itfTS'�r�G� y�. 11Jjl.(
Name: S�� � H'/�l��
Add�ess:
City/State/Zip:
Phone:
E-mail:
Buriingame Busi�aess License #: 2 `�g� �
't�.4�.; � r`� i s ti i;`:.'sr ;�"'� �'t�
'�W',;in�jl"i�(1� �`J Ai.l�
8lGZ 0 � �df
p J .�
� ,-� ,� � 1 _, �� ��=
�� �i "n r: � = r''~'� -
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 P4anning approval process and waive any claims against the City
arising out of or related to such action. T� • (Initials of�etf�esigner)
PROJECT DESCRIPTlON: 1 I�l 1�' S� ��,D Inf � ���-l�� Z— S�
/%
AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby rtify der p alty of perjury that the information given herein is true nd correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief
Applicant's signature: Date: �l �� ��
1 �� ,auv�ne �o'f��:pno.�s�d �.P.Pii�2iKr; a�u�d ��ne'by �'t�riz�e'fit�ue �ve aPp�'ac�[:�tfio s�e�t�rmr��is app�ic�'t�oraa:to.�he �►�rr�g
Commission.
Property owner's signature: � 1�� �� $�-1 �-. t Date: �� . 3 D• ��
Date submitted:
S: �HANDOUTS�PCApplicatlon.doc
. . .. :...o. ... ! . :..�.a�� .._ �� .
� , � � /
i �
! - g
i � � �, �,
,�'rrr�s � ,(iecreati��a �?e�r�rtmen�
� SS4 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingutne, C�g y4 fl�Q
Date: ��-2�-� 7 . :f�S�►j Ss8-.733�
T�te undersigtted ow�er of the property at:
«� �� ��
.� ��� �i ,�,'�'�.:
s
! Address• 1 �� Crescent Ave,
' hereby apptres far a permit to remave or prune more than 113 afthe canopy of the foltow�n rotected
� 1� tree(s):
�e�s: Redwood Trees (2 ea) see site plan „
t��n�on Pro�aea-c�r R�ar c�f la�_�nd ieft fr�rri;side ���'�.�'�"�'n�'e` �p (#8P) + 4��� (#1 P)
W+�rk tn �a��'er,t'arm�ci: %Lemoval�
,.� �"rim �Vlf�nre "I'han U3 of the Crcrwn
Reason Wori� is Ne�essary: �g �il! be building a new 2- story home and de#ached garage, alsa foundation pro6lems with neighbors home
Is this Tree Removal Request Part of a Buildir�g Project? I�E� X
1`��4"1 �' : �'c.�F i'�
Note: A�hoto�raph oi ihe #ree{sj. ar�d a sche�atic drawing. of the Iocation of the tree{s) on the 'ra r �� ��' ��
�ubmitYaci alan� wii6 $'7"�t�0 tv: �`�ty� af ��riiu P l� �` mus# be J�g
Ata�ch an_V c��crctnent�t`imr.�a�r� r�u�z Ji�ve, . �m�, ��latie��r��+�acacr�etafut%� �rragg� fieq#�rer��a �u�t�t �srru�►��
letters of con�eria fram ��ei�%t ars, etc.}. ��tr���: Re��,fr°� apa Ind'e��rr�'�erzt �r�r�r�st pactur�s r��"�1'r�mcrg.ea� struc���rr�s,
owner {pr��r,� Greg Gambrioii 650-333-6844
I'hQzte
Address 241 � Surnmit Road Hilisborough CA 94010
(.'�-,�.�,;�,;,�:r�,�e� �ma�t r9�evelc�pmentinc a�yahoo.com
, x:
� '' � . ` �;
P�ryment Rec.� �',d � �, � ,r "� Payment tll'ethod � � "t,
This permit atiows the applicant to remove or prune the abave lisied tree(s) }n accordance with the provisians of t ``c �
Reforestakion and Tree Protection Ordinance (Municipal Code Cha ter I 1.U6 B si g p�p��
acknnwleclges r�ceipt of a copy oi Cha�ter i 1.06, and a ees to corn �e Ueban
a�ad tf�a.t afi ap�ea.is Tiave e`:red � P�i� with its provis ons�and il icorpictatio��n�s li ted bel�w�
b�eri resolved.
€���1�G� S�i�"ai�t��'U��
CfTY ARBOR�ST � _ � � � � -- r
CONDITiUNS: A.A �,. 24 -�n�h box s�� lundsecrpE tree(s) (nQ fruil ar nut tr�ees) wild be
re�uirerl aad m�ry be planted renyw�rere Qrt the prvperty. If eondiiin�es rrre �nt met witharr
fh� nldvttetX fitn� �� sp�c�ert irt Claa �er I.l. flG.0.90. (6j(S'), �ayment uf $70Q fvr eacit irec�
, ,���
� 1�t'Gi �ItC";JI.E'�' lt"�7.�ld��t'J�'.F�".d[l2!!{ li����,�e�c�r,e�l.
� �_ :Nd��r.�dac�r�t���°�} r.e�u�r�,� :��J��F'a��s:a�►.�' '
� (63t1} �3g=7330 when removrrf�'s} rrre cnmplete�f �
_�______ BUI.�.�iING FRD.TE'C7': P'err�eit tneffectave until after Planning Ce�»�rt%ssian review.
DATE AERMTT EFFECTIVE I m�. t�
PERMIT EXPTItLS �' 9 � , � �
t3AT�
. ������.�T�l�
This work sh�uZd be dorae hy quaCi aed tree prQf�ss�o�zuis arad a co ,� of this permiit must be av '
site ut a! times whe,� wvrk is beBrag per�ryy:ed. �2o�s �E� a��ble at the jc�b
BRENDA AND EDWARD LEVINE
132 COSTA RICA AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
415 269-6487
August 6, 2018
BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
RE: NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION AT 133 CRESCENT AVENUE,
BURLINGAME PARK, ON PLANNING AGENDA ON AUGUST 13, 2018
Dear Planning Commissioners,
We live directly behind the new residential home construction at 133 Crescent
Street, Burlingame, that is being proposed at the August 13 Commissioner's
meeting. We have the following requests, which we have already discussed with
the builder, Mr. Gambrioli, and believe we have agreement on. With your help,
we would like to confirm these items at the meeting:
1) Our back fence will remain as is.
2) Tall evergreen trees (approximately 15'-25' each) will be installed
along the full length of the back fence that abuts our property to
increase privacy.
Thank you for your assistance. Please contact us with any questions or input.
'7 .
'� �
� �'-�-----�" �- �---�..�
Edward and Brenda Levine
��������
At�[a Q 8 2Q18
C17Y U�� BURLlP;GAME
CUfJ-�'i.�h1NPJ6NG D!�/
CD/PLG-Erika Lewit
From: Brenda Levine <blevine132@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 5:14 PM
To: CD/PLGErika Lewit
Cc: Edward Levine
Subject: Re: FW: 133 Crescent - Landscape update for Rear Neighbors!!
Hi Erika,
The evergreen trees they are suggesting look very nice so we are pleased. Also, thanks for asking the designer
to make sure there is a comment in the final landscape plans that the rear fence remains as is. Ed and I will
attend the Commissioner's meeting when this project is on the agenda again.
Thank you for your help with this matter.
Best regards,
Brenda and Ed Levine
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 1:43 PM, CD/PLG-Erika Lewit <elewit(a�burlin ame.org> wrote:
Hello Brenda,
Attached is the landscape plan we discussed. The proposed trees/shrubs at the rear are Carolina Laurel Cherry.
The bottom note on the plan was cut off in the email, but I have asked the designer to make sure he adds a note
in the final plan set that specifically states: Existing Rear Fence To Remain
- � ' � : •. -
(650} 558-7254
� � �'.�rv- � •�Xrl \ "�F,�`°1 ���T
Y � . '
='i-+:. ~'� . .dw p�} � � ' y, ' _ •• �- +�. •� .r ssa . . . � . e} � - t
�.r � i; :!c r , �..��y,�.'. �iw�' : �c..> r � ., .`F��._ ,.� �
�"��r T T � • "A, �+ . �� . � it' J S t �- . . 'v� � Say; .: �v � �[R
� X ' S .i' .b -.S '�'f 4A�S . j T
.: 4 ��{ � � ' . , �r i�.� v,l'� �� _ '
� � "�'}• �- • • K, � - � � J . ,,M � � . ' �� � -';^R'+ . ,£• Y y v 'y,� �"' . +�� - .. .
w.. �e . . . t • �a-��`' � ��y �� '`'"5"t Y. � ����.. . a� �.. �r� � ���. �" � . t� � ' � i �..
,6 � ; � �} � �.�-1 �f. > `� � . :� � . . . _ �.1 � �.
� ;t�c ,� , � ��� � ;r `..s� ' .
f• ,
� , .�r-. � .� ,. �.�, • d .� ,_,�„ ��; .'. �.• �' .
. �, �� +�h,�. ,� �, :,��. ,�,� �-
. m_. _. � s�i���.�:� • :w. e-.�'st��.- �.s�i�w� �:4: -. "� :�''�� :�:� * :� .. � ,�.
�• 4'A
� � e - ' .��� . . ' m: «2--,W'o:F�? •
'! . . ____ �„�— iTL�lJs�.--� _
f7
. "+ . _ _ _ . .. ,. ,...'.x.:..
�. �� . -..._ -
�-E. ' ^ . � � . .
.. . .x. � ; ... . . . � ....-.
.: ' �ry�„y�w••-- - ". _. a �. - � � _ ..
..o_. . � -. . ��: `-c�'a��nF�" — y '!f ...... ' �.vc .,,v _ , . . .. , . ,
�. ' . . '. .. _ — '� ""._�. . ......-...
, �
;.t =.
'_�. _. .,... -� .. - .. . �. .. .... ... . _.. .. .�. .. &
-- __r_�—��I�. , � � ' '.. , � '�
� • f � 1
....
.. �.. .. .. .. . .. .
.. .. � . . . . ... . .. . . . . .
,:S
:``�; ���$ . _
. ■ � ■ ��� / ' —
■■���■,�
� , �■� ■� / � 1� ,
_� ■ �■■
__ ■� p.���,
�i��.��r■� �-�� �
� �� � � .. �z� �� . _ : s
� �■�e1� �� -.� � � .q
� ■ 1. ��: . .
� ■ .� , s� z �:�
� ' ,�,, L� ��,� . . _� . � �:
�. � • �� "�''��•�'� . .�, ; �
, , '.� fi �.� � '�. Y A �
� � -1.`- '', �. . � . . ' . .�.. .. �1a .i_` .:'� '.i T,.� F {
, 4 :
. � �
, ' r . �:. ' ' � '- , - ti,t,�._. d� ,�.
' � �,. , .�.... . � i. y; �
' � - , � ' 'y . ' E
� � �.f :.
, • ;_ ' tq � , /.il
�. - „_. . .. �
` _ � ' ' , j
� � g
.. � �' � ti�+ � 'i.� ' . —
e � _ { ��.. . �:,
, � �:
r ��..,. , � `'
, - , , . ;a
t " . _ ".. y,
�
,-�� '; � { �
, � _ i � � �{ �"'. � i ' � I' „q1" �� ,
�:� ��1J . . _,.. :.,�,�.' � _ � � r���
�_ �, �
,. ., . .. �-.: �
4: � w��i�;
i
e 5. r;.
. . +A �. ` .� ai
.'� fi� •. ,
b
,, . ��� . .. .:�.
�' i ,: .:
f .j � �,.,
,I�'•'�''��F: �. y
. �r. � � ' � `y� �,�i'!
.F�., ,.� 1�
� '*; �
t� ���' �:�-
', '� � i.-
� ) : ; , ..+
..
.,/,��� , . ��
p,•� � �; .
,,��{� :::�t,?� .�
�� �� �� • ,.
,� � .; '
{ ,,:.-},. J,,,
1, h.; , 'q •;F " . :
i ���� r8�
�: �o.►:
'; �'f
.i•-r�,��`�.:�
�r' �
A;' v+`r�, � �
��._���`! r. ' �'.• .
� v� .,,
"''�; , �l
,��. . � ���
� .., � ����.
>.5�� "��ti.� k �Q.
� '� � •� !�
�� '•' y� ; �..�t%'
��.. -. .r.. •.
.4.:'<' ``V`� .�;�
. '';'-:� �
:i' ; ��' ;� , �;.�.,�0
. >. . ��
:� .I;����,.
I �4:��' �Y x:Ic.� ,`��
`'�"? , , t,�.`�
•�;�, . ; .. ,'.:
� -.f� b.,, i�r
. • ' ��
{ .,�
� g Y;
: ��5� � .� �
, A .I� �,�� �N ) t
�f t;y� i��j
.7�, ( � l ',' M �
.� � ' '-��1,1 � f
I. �. ,�. I�
i
7 1 �Y :
'��J,h�7:, ', ,i,;y��;�' 'i
. ,fC '��1� f
� 1'1 � / 3k�+ iw�
. ���r =K`.J �
� �'��_�
. .��� �,:-.
_ �
�� �
�,
��� 'r�� � �
�
�
t
.�� .
'�,
�
��
,
;
!�
1i
�
. .
i � ` "
�vk"�. x f� � "
,� � Y
, _
� -_- -
�
L.�.....J
�
�
��
- -- _ . - - � _- -_ .
.,.�-� �-,- ��...�..�..�...-�--•
� "iA 7'���Y . �.
� _
---- --_ � - - . _, ,�_._ ,
� � �,
, . �� ._. ___ _...�... ___ ___. _.. _
160 Poplar Avenue, San Mateo
.� . s
- _
.�_ - � �=- -� -
�..
�_
f , [;
�� �t
�� ��
L�.� ��;,
■i �
��
C: �
�� �
i ��'
��� ��
.�- . _ �
.. �.- .: �
w
�� Ii
�� ��
�_, .
- - � ,
.��F�� � ��
� �+'�Y � t �
. _ �� �•�
� �;
_ - � ' - � �;-'•({ . .:
� � Yt '
� ,�{, °gt,�c. F l�'�
YE��V:i� 4r��,'''
°`�10
, � i . .
�1'.�
�. � . �`,i�� �'rf.% ..
� s: �
.:, .F� x ��;t a. „a,'" i .: � . � , _ ;- . : , . '
F.!'C;i!' �pu ' . "������
� ��(u fE �'k Y . - .1f/[+!F'Y
_. .. _.�. . ri . ...;.-'..]G. _ ....r .:G ..+,. . a.r,r.M-. _ e.r..^.- —
�
�
� . �;-�
, �;;:
� �� � �.:
;:,•.
k� -
� ,` I
... ::"`w�c.r �,.: �.:a
s - ���' . � .:i
K�wzt:a e ui�.: ���.:�.�-o ...._ ';'=��P;'....,�.�
'�• A �. y. _ .� �r , �. +��,` _
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND DESIGN REVIEW
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a Categorical Exemption has been prepared and application has been made for Desiqn
Review for a new two-story sinqle familv dwellinq with a detached qaraqe at 133 Crescent Avenue.
Zoned R-1. 133 Crescent Avenue LLC propertv owner APN� 028-293-060;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
September 10, 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 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
�, , 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 10th dav of September 10 2018 by the following vote:
Secretary
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption and Design Review
133 Crescent Avenue
Effective September 10, 2018
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date
stamped August 24, 2018, sheets T1.0 through LP1.0; including a row of new Carolina
Cherry Laurels that will be planted along the rear property line;
2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof
height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning
Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning
staf fl; .
3. that any changes to the size
which would include adding
permit;
or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage,
or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this
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:
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 fihe maximum approved floor
area ratio for the property;
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption and Design Review
133 Crescent Avenue
Effective September 10, 2018
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
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
= BURLINGAME, CA 94010
.• PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790
- - www.burlingame.org
Site: 133 CRESCENT AVENUE
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the
following public hearing on MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2018
at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingame, CA:
Application for Design Review for a new two-story single family
dwelling and detached garage at 133 CRESCENT AVENUE
zoned R-l. APN 028-293-060
Mailed: August 31, 2018
(Please refer to other sideJ
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE
Citv of Burlinpame
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
PUBL1� HEARING NOTICE
(Please refer to other side)
t �
- _ _
i !
,"a ' v�'i' ' � �3 � � C 'J ���}�} 0{�yuy �a4 `�n'
�, � � a� ' � � . b4�� aQ� ��� a
, tJ p
Q��6 .
�, £� �4+36 - � . ":�
a _ , � � A �a 6Qfl� _ A .
a a �' 4=
_ , �
>� � . � �
` -- � � ,��+ � �S . _ � r�q
,. �
_ a Q �4
d �m
6 .
` � ti �o , a �='3
� � � �.�� 4 �
pA � _ � .� �'�~a�t_- Q��, 4yd '.�:
. c�94 �d Q� �a
€ . � '� �4J6 �4�i q �O �f
n� �Q
_ _ _ �� �,�� �� � ��n� 4 �� � ��
-�. � a�, °�p c� an a � r" �,
�, � � � �� �b
�� a a p� q a
�4 Q .p• �� �r s � �cq � Q�� qQ4q
�
� �� � �� ��`�, �` �� �?a .
��4 �' a� ,; �
��� ��.. �:� �� �
{70�' � �`� v'. � � �
- � ,% �c? i�% . �'1Q L`� �l �>r� � Q� q� .
6q�� �cf.' �� �, ��,',- � �fi � �� �}a
r d{�3�t`' '` ' v ��� 4 � �'� � �,�C1
C�: �'c
}� _ �Qfl4 r� �,� � � �� ��
), � �a �� � � �`�� � �
.
° � ��� �,�. '� �',� �=�c�
s � � � r ` �
�
� ►. .����� � �� �
+� . L,�y��� � r'�� � ��:; . , � `� �
� � � ,� �w����� a � n
_ `.-- f,�,�.: �� a � � � q �
y �,:� ��`�'' � �� � q �
�� -'��� ����� �'� � �; � ��� �x, `� �
,� ,,. ' •�; � �:� ,.w � ,� , � � ,�., , �, -
� � � '' b l, . � - � cf
�4 •, � �C;;'�' 1 ;,� c�
; i., O m �, a q� q
�� :
a � � �.b � ,� � C`� c�Q q �
1� .
� / f � �' �jn W c> � �� `M q �p
. r-' ��� � �� a� � �,� �'� � �
t� c� �
�
~� ` � � o �' �� �, � � ����
' #M �•',,, . � a � � �
`* ..o- �a�,;`' D�4ty q� p c� SJa� �f�0
:�' . , • �. �y � 4 � �flQ � �lilQ �,
� �s`•' \�~� `� �+ �� Q 4� .�Q C� �a Q � �? �, qQ fl C►
;�
_"' � *tp ,.`v, , ,,\; � �� I� `� tO Q Q � 8, �d , d Q �t�` ,
� '\ >� � � � � , , � - - O C�i} Cy �, , c'S
'�i '' ' ' �ir � / � b C�7` a ,��. ;. _ 9Q{j
0 �i! , `Si / �%f .�' t ` D - _ _ a �4 Q � d � '
•
r ,` �* ���� ` �r�+l, '' \ � `���'j �� � q � �G��'J �q �� �
�� , ��.� / � �� �� , Q� Q �'1 �F'AF � . t3 4'S
` � � � Q Q �
� � Q
. �CS tiL• -� .
t. S
�:
r
F
�nb. � \ �r,�> `*` ,�` , � c�� � �R � p _ e -- _;
` - � : ' J � �, �� '� � � LrJ C1 _
�� � ��� � ' � �, � t�p � C'�f C?7� �ii �S ' ..
'"r - r � a a a n' 4
��M ,,; - " �1* ! , . �p q `� e+s O Cb �C'e! �d�
. q �
/J 1��� ! -' �j�d , i �,,�, d �j4'} �Q � � � d� f
r� `� �`:� C) ca 4+y es __ !% %J
�►l' �tl � ,.''��� ' ��y �� `� Q � � R � ' � �p� � p
��► ' '�'4 ".��� � �'' _ �', +. � �'b � '� �
,; ' � ,�� f,.,r. '+1r ,�,'� �� � , o 0
`� ytr -,� , , -
t� s ' F'�; '' !� � }? p
� __�'� �� ` C � �t �J : � � ♦ � d � d _ _ „ �,c�
aW�
�ow
Zow
n
o am
.�
w �' m
O �
<
m
Z
C
m
�
Item No. 9b
Design Review Study
PROJECT LOCATION
133 Crescent Avenue
City of Burlingame
Design Review and Special Permit
Address: 133 Crescent Avenue
Item No. 9b
Design Review Study
Meeting Date: August 13, 2018
Request: Application for Design Review and Special Permit for building height for a new, two-story single
family dwelling with a detached garage.
Applicant and Designer: Tim Raduenz, Form + One Design
Property Owners: Mr. and Mrs. Greg Gambrioli
General Plan: Low Density Residential
APN: 028-293-060
Lot Area: 9,813 SF
Zoning: R-1
Background: The subject property is located within the Burlingame Park No. 2 subdivision. Based upon
documents that were submitted to the Planning Division by a Burlingame property owner in 2009, it was
indicated that the entire Burlingame Park No. 2, Burlingame Park No. 3, Burlingame Heights, and Glenwood
Park subdivisions may have historical characteristics that would indicate that properties within this area could be
potentially eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places. Therefore, for any
property located within these subdivisions, a Historic Resource Evaluation must be prepared prior to any
significant development project being proposed to assess whether the existing structure(s) could be potentially
eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places.
A Historic Resource Evaluation was prepared for this property by Page & Turnbull, Inc., dated June 23, 2017.
The results of the evaluation concluded that it is not eligible for individual listing on the California Register of
Historical Resources under any criteria.
Project Description: The subject property is an interior lot and the applicant proposes to demolish the existing
house and detached garage on the site. A new, two-story house with a detached garage is proposed on the
property. The total proposed floor area is 4,635 SF (0.47 FAR), where 4,640 SF (0.47 FAR) is the maximum
allowed (including front covered porch exemptions).
The proposed house exceeds the maximum height limit of 30 feet at the two highest roof ridges. Both the front
and the rear ridges, running parallel to the front and rear property lines, are proposed to be 30'-11" in height,
where 30 feet is the maximum allowed without a Special Permit. The applicant is requesting approval of a
Special Permit for an overall height between 30 feet and 36 feet.
The existing site contains a total of two protected sized trees that are both Redwoods. The trees are located at
the front and rear of the property, along the left side property line. The applicant proposes to remove the
Redwood tree closest to the front property line and to retain the Redwood tree closest to the rear property line.
An arborist report, prepared by Kielty Arborist Services, was submitted July 12, 2017, that details the tree
removal and the tree protection measures (see attached). The Parks Division issued a Protected Size Tree
Removal Permit on January 8, 2018, but it expired on July 8, 2018; therefore the applicant must renew the Tree
Removal Permit in order to have a building permit issued for the project. 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 (C.S. 25.57.01 (a) (1));
and
■ Special Permit for an overall building height between 30 and 36 feet (30'-11" proposed) (C.S. 25.26.060
(a) (�))•
Design Review and Specia/ Permit
�133 Crescent Avenue
933 Crescent Avenue
�ot Area: 9,813 SF Plans date stam ed: Jul 5 and 12, 2018
PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D
SETBACKS
...........�...� ................_............_.. .._............._.......�..�.._.._...........,_.... .....�._..............__. �
...........................�_........._........,,.,___-___._.�...._....._....................�.....,.,,.............................
......... .......................__..........._._.._........_..........,,........_..........__................
Front (1st flr): 27'-6" �^27'-5" (is the block average)
(2nd flr): 27'-6" 27'-5"
..,......,,,,,_....__.._ .............�.. __�._�._........_..........._._......
,, ..
._.......�..._.._......._._..._._............�... _..�....._........._ ......................_.._...�_ ��__....................,., ..
....... ....................................
Side (left): ( 7'-0" 7 -0
I
.._.....�...._._...____.___.�...
(right): � 12'-6" 7�_p,�
_. _..._..� .._.._..._......... � ..,� ..............�..._.
........ _ ............. _................
Rear (1st flr): � 66�-2�� I 15 -0
(2nd flr): 1 66'-2" � 20'-0"
.._._.._._. i
�.�.
_...._....... .............._...................._.........._..�__�.�............_._. _._..�.....__.......�....
� ....................3,925 SF...............�......_.._................_�..........
2,677 SF
Lot Coverage: � �
27% ! ... 40%
.._�......_........�...�..........._..........�_...�........�........�._............�.,I.� ..............._..._.._........__�_�............__........_..,....� . ...�._., ._�....�_�_�......__ I .................... .._.
; _..�._..........�_ .................._.._.............
..... ................_...............
; 4,635 SF � 4,640 SF'
FAR: �
0.47 FAR ( 0.47 FAR
...�_�.._.__..�_ ................� _.......�...............__�.............................�__...........
# of bedrooms: 7 ___
.................................__.._._........._....�____._..._...____
�.__............._......_._..._._.........2 covered _—........_..__._.�......._.
� ........�...... .................___......�..._............�......................................................
� 2 covered
� (20' x 20') � (20' x 20')
Parking:
1 uncovered � 1 uncovered
� '
� (9' x 20') (9' x 20')
.._ ....................,,................._,.......�.................____......---._.
Building Height: � 30'-11" z ;
Special Permit required C.S.
� 25.26.060(a)(1)
.....� ..............,,........,,,.....................�.., ! �
,,........�......._.......�_...._........_�._.�..�..._..__...._._.......�..._..._...........�.�.._�. ... . .
..... ............. .�..._._.._...........______....................._�
..,_� ............._._.._ _.........�._..__._............_.
DH Enve%pe: j complies C.S. 25.26.075
.............................................._....._..........................._..............._........._...........J :
' (0.32 x 9,813 SF) + 1100 SF + 400 SF = 4,640 SF (0.47 FAR)
2 Special Permit required for a building height befinreen 30-36 feet (C.S. 25.26.060(a)(1)).
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the
Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows:
Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood;
2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood;
3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure;
4. Intertace of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and
-2-
Design Review and Specia/ Permrt
933 Crescent Avenue
. 5• � Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components.
Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit, the Planning Commission must find that the
following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.51.020 a-d):
(a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are
consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood;
(b) the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or
addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood;
(c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and
(d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is
consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is
appropriate.
Erika Lewit
Senior Planner
c. Tim Raduenz, applicant
Attachments:
• Application to the Planning Commission
• Special Permit Form
• Protected Tree Removal Permit effective January 8, 2018
• Letter from neighbor, date stamped August 8, 2018
� Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed August 3, 2018
• Address Map
• Historical Resource Analysis Report, date stamped June 5, 2018
-3-
3i"
- ��,��.��mME
�; .
�:'DAAM�FNJ�(��E'�/E•L�1R]IY}EIU�4D;E�P�ARTMENT •'�'I'��RiNfJ2�SiE �O�iD • �Rd:�N��1ME, CA 94'�90
' 'D
p: 65t3:558.7250 • f: 65fl.696.3790 • www.�urlingame.org
A�PPLt�AT10N TO THE P�.A�NNttVG COMMtSSiON
T�r�e of a#�lication:
�` Design Review ❑ Variance ❑ Parcel #: o� �� ��� �- ���
❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit � Zoning / Other:
PROJECT ADDRESS: ��� ..S�G��7" ��
APPL�CA��'
Name: �e * •�GG�j�%. ��g -���
Address: ��i� �� �" ��': ��
City/State/Zip: �`� � /�% �,I�
.P�ao,�e: �l� g��- �.��
.� �
o..p .
E-mail: ',�e ���� . �r��° �
F�t�@P��t� O��Wf�PLR
Name: /P�'?e' . � ��s. �i�'� ��F�oG-�
Address: �/ /� -��� � e �- �,r� e,,,��°�
City/State/Zip: _ � e�fi , �'s� ���i��
�a�e: ���. �. t� �
E-mail: �+����"` �; �i✓G'� ��. �"d/L�
�- DESIGNER
Name: ��il�
Ad�dress:
City/State/Zip:
Phone:
E-mail:
Bur�ingame Bus�+aess �icer�se �: � ��� �
, , i �,;.,'�
_;;rf=� � . . .
�i "�����,�,�,c ,, i '� i I � ���1
�h'�4� �' �., . �;,�' . . .
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 approva{ process and waive any c{aims against the City
arising out of or related to such action. • (Initials of aRr.c�#��!/Designer)
PROJ�CT [)ES�t�iIPTldN: ( � � �' � � `�� U,,(� ��; .� ��
AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby rtify F�der p r'�ialty of perjury that the information given herein is true nd correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief f-
Applicant's signature: -� Date: �� �� ��
1 a�� �a!u� :�!f,l�fi�,pnop�c���el �p�i�fii�� . ���d:'��neby ���r"ize �ae ,�'�cav�e �pp'i'uc�rnt'Go s+v��rr�k�ksis �pp'ii�c�t�� �,o ��a�e �I��r.r�ra�
�ommission.
Property owner's signature: � �-t � � �ate: �� • 3 � • 1 �
Date submitted:
5: �HANDOUTS�PCApplication.doc
City of Burlingame • Community Development Department • 501 Primrose Road • P(650) 558-7250 • F(650) 696-3790 • www.burlinaame.ora
4, cirY Q
�� ; �� �
J��1g_�
?}
o ���■
.��11Y i �i ����
8i10 Ci�' ��7RLIlVGAM�
The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ord nance NtN� �l�I.
(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 structura/ characteristics of the
new construcfion oraddifion are consistent with the existing structure's design and
with the existing street and neighborhood.
y... ;_�r/�° • ,
��F(�1�� /`�,f�`^J� C'� '%J� /��1��2� � ����� l�/� ��i�
� / e � �,� ��,f�'%��' -��,:°iZ-� �'�' �'vr'f� G�''�+✓ �""//J�`
� � . .. �, �.
.� ��' �
�i"� . ° .�.� . �;�� �
2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exteriorfinish materia/s and elevations
of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure,
� � hood.
„
g
s ree. an ne� bor �- � �+tl ���"i�'!'�° ,� ::�Ifi�-- � . � ��� , � ..� . �
� �� � � � �� � � �����
���� ��� ���— r � � �—�r�—��. ���, �,,� i � ��� �,��.�
�� - r��-- �1,/� �.� ��-. � �,�p��,�-�,
.
�
m . � �
or' ..�° • .���� � ��� � �.. � � ��
.� ��-- � `� .� �;�
/��►�1,����� - � � � f ��"��j, �� �- �� �� �� r����s
3. How w�ll the proposed project be consistent w�th the residentia/ design guidelines �;�� ��--,�.
adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)? � ���°�
�i�, ��� � ���� � 4--�-��.�-,a�. � - �
�� � �
�. _
' �
� ��.� � � � � �-�-� . ,�,,� ��� ��� „�� � ��..� � �"�, . .,�,�.���°
µ �
� ., ��. .��- � � .
�
., � „� " , � � -�-�— L�v
_ � .��. �� ..,,�.�
�`L�-- - `�l �� � �., _ �
��� �.-� t-� ��t�r� ,�i �4a �h �`�� i'��
4. Exp/ain how the remova/ of any trees /ocated within the foofprint of any new�mm� �.�N� �-�.,�
structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation
requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the remova/ of any trees� Exp/ain��'S� ����
why this mitigafion is appropriate, �,
. . �,.. ,
��-- �m � s . , � � °�,.�,�
_ .�� ��-" �.-��� � �
. � �m_ ,
�, . ,�... ��}%]a 1l /*y, �$
�o�I ' e �YP 4../� ���'
� �"�� �� 1 ���� � � � � �Q �-- ��'�- i��-�: �' �i � �'�
I� w�� �. � ��.�. ,,���:� l�c�� �:.����6. � 1`�� -���: �
�i See over for explanation of above questions. SPECIAL.PERMIT.APP.FORM
��-�.-- i �`T� ��As��i�� �� r
City of Burlingame • Community Development Department • 501 Primrose Road • P(650) 558-7250 • F(650) 696-3790 • www.buriinaame.ory
1. Explain why the b/end of mass, scale and dominant structural
characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the
existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood.
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 variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and
elevations of the proposed newstructure oraddition 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 it
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 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?
Fotlowing are the design criteria adopted by the City Council for residential design review. How does your project meet
these guidelines?
1. Compatibility of the architectural sryle 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 anynew
structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's
reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the removal of
any trees? Explain why this mitigation is appropriate.
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. 19.06), 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.
.� !
�'KUT'E�'��,� T.�E� T�tElVI.CIV��
PERMI'�" APP�,I�AT�O:i�T
�'ur�Cs � ,�'errecrtian ��,�rtr�rent
BSOBurling�rmeAve�tue, Burlingame, CA 94010
Date: 09-2�-'17 :(GSO� SSS-7330
The undersigned nwner of the property at:
' A�dress: -� �s �rescent Ave.
hereby applies for a permit to remove or prune more than 1/3 ofihe canopy ofthe fotlowin ro
�iPeci,�s:
Redwood Trees (2 ea) see siie pJan �� tected tree(s):
�atian��on Pr.ope,�t.y R�ar of !ot �nd left front:side C'��'°'���: 40�� (#8P) + 43" (#9 P)
��` �F��
-� �, w
, ��� �w �
��
Work ta'be Performecl• .X
• i��mnv� ---_______,_._"�''rim �1+tore "�'ha�n 1/3 nf the Crown
Reason Work is N�ecessary; W8 wiA be building a new 2_ story home and detached garage, aiso foundation prob�ems with nei hbors
Is this Tree Removal Requ�t p�rt of a Building Project? Y�S X g home
Note: A p6otograph of th.e iree(s) $nd a schete�atic drawiag of the tocation of the tr0 � ��. ���st �
sa�btnif#�d g9ang. wi"th $fiS:@0 to.. '`�� �+�...� av
Att�clr n��, r/errc�er�t#tiarr gu r�� ��v�'��rlin�arn+�. �rPdi�i�s+�t �lnrurnerrhrt% rritr ,�{ ) on the proFerty m ust be ��
-�' .� (Exanrp�e: Re�r�r�, fram an Inctc�xenc��nt Arbo� �e���e��a su�paxt rer�+el;
letters of concer�r, fr"am �Peig�t6ors. etc.}.
��1ure.s E,�'�`u��gea�str�ur�tures,
Owner (Printj Greg G�ttlbr1011
Phone 650-333-6844
Adaress2415 Summit Road Hills6orough CA 94Q10
(.a'�d},�'ene�,�:t�ar�,,,�,,,e� Email �9developmentinc@ya�oo.com
------------------------------------_..w.._.�____---
.�'�`.�`��''_..t�'�,�R -f.��.F�'+C�' ��.E �'i�'ZI'
Payment Rec.� �' ` � :� � � � Payment Medhpti' "i, �.�,� ��
I'his permit allows the ap�piicant to remove or prune the above listed tree(s} in aceordance with t
2eforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance (Municipa! Code Chapter 11.Ob). B si • g �� i c�
�cknowledges receip� of a copy of Cha�ter 11.Ob, a n d a g r e e s t o c o m t h� pravisions of the Urban
iiid that a! 1 a p p e a(� F i a v e e x ' re d Y��� n � i s p e r m i t, t h eapp li��t
b eeri resolved. P Y� t'i t h its provisions an d a11 conditions listed belflw;
>O�t�'F+�f �R; "'�ifitrtl�'GU�� �`�l .�f �1:�� _
'1'CY AR$OltIST -+
CONDITiONS: h.� �,. 2¢ _ ln�h bOx size [a�tds�upe tree(s) (no fruil ar nui trees) wil! be
�equired and ma y be pd a n t e� d � r n y w h e r e a n t h e pro�verty. If conditions �rre not met withirr
"''� +�� � t he a i lut'ted time as spe� fed dn Chap ter IX. �16,
�r ����� �i�rizr 11.te_,� r. e e r e p.� a� c c n�er�� t.funrl xti�! be.r,e 09 0. b 5
� C)( 1, P�Y men i uf $7QQ,�r'or each tree
yJtir.erl.
Ejs� ------,._._. :1VC��r��lac��etr�:{.$).r,��i,� ,�a�stJk�P,a��'rs:�%,�,i,�,�t,�t
� ����� �$�=�30 wiaen rerrravnl j"s� are complete�l
BUILDING pRO,�ECT: Permit ireeffective untiC after Pl�nntn Co
g mmrssion review, I
DATE
PERMIT EFpECTIVE I s S. t�
L�A�`E
P�RMIT EXPI]2L,S � , = t �r'
��vL�'�.�T�D�
This work should be done b �
Y quali aed tree professionals and a capy ofth� permit rrr�s�t �� ayailabl�► ut the 'vb
site at a! times wken work �s 6e�ng performed. 08/2p jSrc�vised
I
BRENDA AND EDWARD LEVINE
132 COSTA RICA AVENUE
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
415 269-6487
August 6, 2018
BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
RE: NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION AT 133 CRESCENT AVENUE,
BURLINGAME PARK, ON PLANNING AGENDA ON AUGUST 13, 2018
Dear Planning Commissioners,
We live directly behind the new residential home construction at 133 Crescent
Street, Burlingame, that is being proposed at the August 13 Commissioner's
meeting. We have the following requests, which we have already discussed with
the builder, Mr. Gambrioli, and believe we have agreement on. With your help,
we would like to confirm these items at the meeting:
1) Our back fence wilf remain as is.
2) Tall evergreen trees (approximately 15'-25' each) will be installed
along the full length of the back fence that abuts our property to
increase privacy.
Thank you for your assistance. Please contact us with any questions or input.
, � , .,y �r�,...-----...,
.._� ,, - ` t -.�. ---`..�
Edward and Brenda Levine
,�.�.� �„ W a�P,u����� �, �� � ��w� �d��'�
�� ��
'��� �'� ,� `+��' �' �. � � ��, � �
� �j ;�'ii��
t,:��..,�.;,�. ��I'„,'�;'�: �`��"8'�'�,8f�,!Gr�lV�_
��::.:�;���.,���-i�=''_,+tl"'��"'�1l�J� Ofi/.
. CITY OF BURLINGAME
r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
" - !� — ,. PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790
www.burlingame.org
Site: 133 CRESCENT AVENUE
The [ity of Buriingame Planning Commission onnounces the
foliowing public hearing on MONDAY, AUGUST 13, 2018 at
7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road,
Burlingame, Cp:
Application for Design Review and a Spetial Permit for height
for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached
garnge at 133 CBESCENT AVENUE zoned R-l.
APN 018-243-060
Nlailed: August 3, 2018
(Please refer to other side)
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE
Citv of Burlin�e
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.
!f 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
(Please refer to other side)
s ;
m'�` M�� �'�. � � � � �, ���� ��� J ��j � � o w
, � '� � � ,� ��,�j� ,��:�' ��'� � Z � C�
� � w
0
I� C �
� � ���a v�`�'�v � �: ..__ - , �
� �y � �' �� �C��� jV � f�
� � � � � �' �: ` wN m
� � � � �
� � � � ti� ' ��-� ��� � z
� � �� �
,� �� � � ����, .�... �, . _ .__,�� o a
c� cg :,`t� ti <
. �
'� e. � r�
= b .w m
�;�� =�
� �
. z
:�
� �i� ,i��`'' q`� C
�, � �' ��� � �� � �� m
� �c� ��t� �� � ���� ' �� '°� �� �� �y,�
C% � � �� �} � , 4+/
�,�} `_ � �y
� 1�' � - �.,i!'
� � �.
.L� �
(y� �.
� !�' 'J
�
� �-�'
�L+ Q ��� _ �� ��q
� .
�
4�'"�� �` - � � `
° ie%�f�C'� . ��� iq Il��lllli�lil� ,� II � I II�IIIIIIIIII�II�Iu�-- . . ^��. �� �
� ` �
I� �'tr'�r ^'':.���� .r�
. �
�J a�;
�+f�� ii/� , _ f� ��1
���� � ��
�„ ��a C;�' �4
�� � , ° � �
�, � .1 .,� . P ; N , iu�
�, �•
,a
�
i I
'`• '► Q_
6 ��, '�.1 = �
�. ���� �
" �� �4 „s
. p
y ^u � ' �, � � � c�3
. �
,.rv� � �` 'I ' y'��, I' � �4 � �I � � �
�Vmm,.� i� I I, �: �� I d �" � I ' � � � fi
�i i U �
� �t� ��� ,r�,�;: •. ��'� � �
�
t• r' r� 4 '
;� ri � , �
�i �, M� ��'�''� � ��'%�� � .
, ,, � � , Cf� � � ca
� � ,��� � t �r i �, � c�v �a
,
? , ,. , - .
,.. ,. , ,, y ..
t� �� :a
�k T+
_.
.
� ,,, �, � .��
C7 .�
s +.y� �y� �� �,� � , �
�
� �'
#��, +�,� � � = - = — = � =�, . �,���
�p �'y 5,�5r"' r �.•^� � `' � {� _ d � �47' � .
�I �',., T A ! /� ,+"�"� ��1 � ��V � � ��� ,.- ��V
�► , �3
f _ '.,. ,, � G �+ � '-� � �� �1 �
� M �'4 � 1� ♦ �,\ �
��� , lir' � � �� ���h 1� � � � ey� ��III It.-
;+f r;,�� ��,� �,., "a•'r� Cr7 �7 � �q C'� �,s � � � �� �'i� ?� �
'' °- '' �' �► `.,, ��" � .a � �'� � � � = £�``� �` Q �C'�`
irrj'� ' � r�� 4 a ,' l ��� � � ,; ~� � �%[� �� Ci - ��� �
, � ''�. �i� ;.� �ap, y � � ��
� , .,
i ��� � � � �^� � �, 4 �'t��� �° . �� � �'� �
,' . a a ��� �y,.
J ',ti, �� � , . � 'ti` /K�•r J��y, /�}.�,�V
. �, r f�, � 'V: �V '`V �S
, �k
�
`�!! �.
t � �
� " �� .. t `r'' � � �'�� ��k' . � �W C`i : _. � �1 �
t +r ` i ..-' +ti � Ci {+? - s �'S Ci
�`---` — .r' j '1 .• �'t . �3 '� � �l ` �
y y,� �• � � f1 y F` � � � �
r .- \ a �r"'T� �* '"` �'`t � r� rJ �Cit � � .
� - �,�� ,, �,.- • � � C'� �
� �1, .. � � ' ' �„ '► � -:� -�'� r.�� U,, `� �
i
.���� ';� W � �-" �, W ..,"�.0 `3 � �, � �� r�,� � .0
M.. .
-,,� ,, .K . �y -'' �- �q � ^'9 � �-t: tc �4�'s
`,O �,,���, L �, � . '� t C-`J.�" ,� C�7t C$ e's � � c�
� �' ,\.. ���_ "��� d �� � �J C5 x f
, - � m► . .�
�r .�''' ` �
i - � �
� � �r_. � Q � �3 �
' `, �`� `-- ��-'.•} ��.,,,r "i}� ��•�, t � n !?a� �s � `� ��' Ca
�+� ', k .�' �,� ,r s C7 c� `C� �7
, �
, ` .� �1 .,. � .-r �, �� '. � �i � .�
r� � � • �� -'� ��, � ,�. �,i � . � � ,:� „'
'�,, r �- � � r -� ,�� r� t:3 r;�
, �� i� . ;- ,
r�s�.{ �► - f,'",�� 4:,� � ``,. * �� �g
. 5 . l�t '�� t � �S �
.. �. � _ �.� � � � �? c3 _ ,. �r�