HomeMy WebLinkAbout998 Howard Avenue - Staff Report (4)�
City of Burlingame
Environmental Scoping and Design Review Study for a
New Three-Story Commercial Building
Item No. 9d
Environmental Scoping &
Design Review Study
Address: 988 Howard Avenue Meeting Date: June 8, 2015
Request: Environmental scoping and Design Review for an application for Environmental Review,
Commercial Design Review, Conditional Use Permit for building height, and Setback and Parking
Variances for a new 3-story commercial building.
Applicant: Dimitrios Sogas APN: 029-214-220
Architect: Toby Levy, Levy Design Partners
Property Owners: Robert Lugliani
General Plan: Shopping and Service- Downtown Specific Plan (Myrtle Road Mixed Use Area)
Lot Area: 15,352 (0.35 Acres) Zoning: MMU (Myrtle Road Mixed Use Area)
Adjacent Development: Auto sales, service and storage; retail and personal service, multiple-family
residential and single family residential, railroad right-of-way
Current Use: Gas Station/Automobile Repair
Proposed Use: 3- Story Commercial Building (retail/office)
Allowable Use: Retail, Personal Services, Business Services, Service Commercial, OfFice, Travel Agencies,
Government Agencies.
Environmental Review: Environmental review is required because the proposed project includes a new
commercial building that exceeds 10,000 SF in floor area and therefore does not qualify for an exemption from
CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act). As a part of preparing the Initial Study for the environmental
document for this project, staff is requesting that the Planning Commission comment on any potential
environmental effects which it feels should be investigated. The standard list of items investigated in an Initial
Study is attached for reference. These potential environmental effects which will be considered in the CEQA
document include:
• Aesthetics
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
� Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use
• Noise
• Transportation
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Energy
• Cumulative Impacts
The issues identified by the Commission will be incorporated into the environmental documents for the project.
At this time, staff notes that based on preliminary analysis, it appears that the type of CEQA document required
will be a(Mitigated) Negative Declaration. However, the type of CEQA document will be finalized during the
environmental review process. The City has entered into a contract with Circlepoint environmental planning
consultants to prepare the CEQA document for this project.
� �
Environmental Scoping and Design Review Study
988 Howard Avenue �
During preliminary review Planning staff identified that the following applications will be required for this project:
■ Commercial Design Review (Code Section 25.57.010(c));
■ Conditional Use Permit for building height (45'-0" proposed where 35'-0" is the maximum allowed
without a CUP) (C.S. 25.34.055);
■ Parking Variance for number on-site parking spaces (60 on-site parking spaces provided where 73
parking spaces are required for the proposed uses; 13 space deficiency) (Code Section 25.70.010 (a));
and
■ Rear Setback Variance (10'-0" rear setback proposed where 20'-0" is the minimum required) (C.S.
25.34.060(c)).
Design Review: Design Review is required for new commercial buildings pursuant to C.S. 25.57.010(c)(1).
Design Review was instituted for commercial projects in 2001 with the adoption of the Commercial Design
Guidebook. The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Downtown Special Plan therefore in
addition to the guidelines provided in the Commercial Design Guidebook, there are design recommendations
provided in the Chapter 5.0 of the Downtown Specific Plan that apply to the proposed project. The site is
located in the Myrtle Road Mixed Use Area, which has specific design provisions that apply as noted in Section
5.2.4 (Page 5-7) of the Downtown Specific Plan.
The following design review criteria for commercial development projects are outlined in the zoning code:
(1) Support of the pattern of diverse architectural styles that characterize the city's commercial, industrial and
mixed use areas; and
(2) Respect and promotion of pedestrian activity by placement of buildings to maximize commercial use of
the street frontage, off-street public spaces, and by locating parking so that it does not dominate street
frontages; and
(3) On visually prominent and gateway sites, whether the design fits the site and is compatible with the
surrounding development; and
(4) Compatibility of the architecture with the mass, bulk, scale, and existing materials of existing
development and compatibility with transitions where changes in land use occur nearby; and
(5) Architectural design consistency by using a single architectural style on the site that is consistent among
primary elements of the structure, restores or retains existing or significant original architectural features,
and is compatible in mass and bulk with other structures in the immediate area; and
(6) Provision of site features such as fencing, landscaping, and pedestrian circulation that enriches the
existing opportunities of the commercial neighborhood.
Project Summary: The subject property is located at 988 Howard Avenue. The site is bound by three streets,
East Lane, Howard Avenue and Myrtle Road. The narrowest portion of a parcel is considered the frontage for
zoning purposes; in this case Myrtle Road is considered the front of the property. The site is currently occupied
by a gas station and automobile repair shop. Abutting the property to the north is an automotive service
garage, across the street to the south is an automobile storage lot, across the street to the east is a two-story
mixed use building with retail and personal services on the ground floor and residential above, and across the
street to the west are the railroad tracks with automobile sales and service beyond (along California Drive).
The applicant is proposing to construct a new three-story commercia► building. The proposed building will
contain approximately 1,300 SF of retail space on the ground floor with approximately 21,000 SF of office
Page 2 of 6
r °
� �
, Environmental Scoping and Design Review Study
988 Howard Avenue
space on the two floors above. The proposal also includes a 4,300 SF roof deck. The building height proposed
is 45-feet.
There will be at-grade parking located behind the lobby and retail space on the ground floor, with access off of
East Lane. In addition there will be below-grade parking provided as well with access off of Howard Avenue
with a total of 60 on-site parking spaces provided.
The retail space will be accessible from both Howard Avenue and Myrtle Road. The lobby to access the
second and third floor office spaces will be along East Lane. At this time the office space is being designed to
accommodate either a single tenant or multiple tenants. In addition to the roof deck that is proposed, both
floors of office will provide multiple deck areas along the three street facing sides of the building.
Lot Area: 15,352 SF 0.35 Acres Plans date stam ed: June 13, 2014
PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED
Use Office and Retail Uses Office Use — Permitted C.S. 25.34.020(e)
Retail Use — Permitted C.S. 25.34.020(a)
SETBACKS
Front: 20'-0" 10'-0"
(Myrtle Road)
Side (inierior): 0 None Required
(exterior): 5'-0" None Required
Rear: 10'-0" 2 20'-0"
(East Lane)
BUILDING ENVELOPE:
Lot Coverage: 11,160 SF 11,514 SF
72.6% 75%
Height:: 45'-0"' Heights over 35'-0" require conditional use
- ermit u to a maximum of 45-0"
OFF-STREET PARK/NG
Number of Parking 60 spaces3 Office - 1 space per 300 SF
Spaces: Retail -1 space per 400 SF
Office: Second floor 10,650 SF
Standard — 47 spaces Third floor 10,230 SF
Puzzle stacker- 5 spaces 20,880 SF/300 = 69.6 spaces
Tandem — 8 spaces Retail: 1,325 SF/400 SF = 3.31 spaces
Grand Total= 60 s aces Grand Total = 73 spaces
Drive Aislel 24'-0" 24'-0" aisle required for 90-degree parking
Clear Back-up Space: or all spaces can be exited in 3 maneuvers
or less
' Rear setback variance requested for a 10'-0" rear setback where a minimum of a 20'-0' rear setback is required.
Z Conditional Use PeRnit requested for 45 =0" height where 35'-0" is the maximum allowed without a CUP.
3 Pa►icing variance requested for 60 on-site paricing spaces where 73 on-site parking spaces are required.
Page3of6
v
�
.r
Environmenta! Scoping and Design Review Study
988 Howard Avenue �
PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED
Parking Space Standard spaces = 8'-6" x 18' Standard spaces = 8'-6" x 18'
Dimensions:
- Driveway Width: 12'-0" driveway width- Parking areas with not more than 30 vehicle
East Lane entrance spaces shall have a minimum driveway width
(21 vehicles) of 12'-0"
18'-0" driveway width- Parking areas with more than 30 vehicle
spaces shall have a minimum driveway width
Howard Avenue entrance of 18'-0"
(39 vehicles)
LANDSCAPING
Landscaping: 78% 10% of front setback
820 SF 1,050 x 10%= 105 SF
General Plan and Zoning: The Burlingame General Plan designates this site for Shopping and Service Uses.
In 2010 the City Council adopted the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan, which serves as an element of the
General Plan. The subject property is located within the boundaries of the planning area for the Downtown
Specific Plan, specifically in the Myrtle Road Mixed Use Area. The Plan describes the Myrtle Road Mixed Use
Area as follows:
The Myrtle Road Mixed Use area is centered on Myrtle Road and East Lane, east of the
CalTrain railroad tracks. Development will be consistent with the existing neighborhood scale of
small streets and mix of varied commercial and residential buildings. Existing residential and
commercial properties could be improved and expanded at a scale consistent with the adjacent
residential areas. The area is meant to serve as a buffer between the downtown commercial
district and the residential neighborhoods to the east.
Off-Street Parking/Parking Variance Request: The code requires one parking space for each 300 SF of
office space and one parking space per 400 SF of retail space, for a total of 73 on-site parking spaces required
given the proposed square footage. The project includes 60 on-site spaces. There will be 21 spaces provided
at-grade, tucked behind the retail space with an entrance along Howard Avenue. The at-grade parking includes
a 5-car puzzle stacker. A puzzle stacker is a mechanical parking option that provides independent access to all
cars parked on the system. The two high puzzle lift does not require a pit; however it does require one empty
slot. There will be 39 below-grade parking spaces provided as well with access from a driveway along East
Lane. Eight of the 39 spaces will be provided as tandem spaces.
The Municipal Code does not include specifications for parking lifts, so the City currently does not have a
standard mechanism for review and approval. However, as a policy the Downtown Specific Plan encourages
"creative approaches" to providing on-site parking including parking lifts. The parking lifts and tandem spaces
could each be considered "creative approaches" to providing the required on-site parking. Other Bay Area
communities including neighboring San Mateo have approved similar projects with parking lifts.
The applicant has prepared a trip generation and parking demand analysis for the proposed project. This
analysis, prepared by Nelson Nygaard is attached for reference. In summary the trip generation analysis
indicates that due to the project location near transit and services that the number of trips generated will be
reduced by 16.2% when compared to standard ITE trip generation rates. The parking demand analysis used
ITE's Parking Generation Manual, 4�' Edition, and when compared to the City' parking requirements the study
indicates that the project would generate a demand for 59 spaces where the City's Zoning Code requires 73
spaces.
Page 4 of 6
Y
, .
Environmental Scoping and Design Review Study
.
988 Howard Avenue
Rear Setback Variance Request: Code Section 25.34.060 (c) requires properties in the MMU (Myrtle Road
Mixed Use) zone to have a rear setback of at least 20-feet. The subject property is bordered by three streets,
with Myrtle Road considered the front and East Lane considered the rear of the property. The properties along
Myrtle Road are a mix of residential and retail /personal service uses, where East Lane acts as a frontage road
along the railroad tracks. In order to have more of an interFace with the existing neighborhdood the applicant
wishes to provide a larger front setback along Myrtle Road and essentially swap the front and rear setback
requirement. The project will provide a 20-foot front setback along Myrtle Road, where only 10-feet is required
and a 10-foot rear setback along East Lane where 20-feet is required, which will require approval of a rear
setback variance.
In accordance with C.S. 25.54 the Planning Commission would need to make the following findings in order to
grant a variance:
(a) There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved
that do not apply generally to property in the same district;
(b) The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant, and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship;
(c) The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience;
(d) That the use of the property will be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of existing
and potential uses of properties in the general vicinity.
Conditional Use Permit Request for Height: The Myrtle Road Mixed Use District states that no building shall
exceed a height of 45-feet. A conditional use permit is required for any building which exceeds thirty-five (35)
feet in height. The proposed height, measured to the top of the parapet, will be 45 feet (from average top of
curb). In order to grant approval of a Conditional Use Permit the following findings must be made by the
Planning Commission:
(a) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or
convenience;
(b) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Burlingame general
plan and the purposes of this title;
(c) The planning commission may impose such reasonable conditions or restrictions as it deems
necessary to secure the purposes of this title and to assure operation of the use in a manner
compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of existing and potential uses on adjoining
properties in the general vicinity.
Staff Comments: See attached comments from the Chief Building Division, Parks Division, Engineering
Division, Stormwater Division and Fire Division.
Planning Commission Action:
1. Environmental Scoping: As the first discussion item, the Planning Commission should review and
take public comment on the proposed project and the areas of potential environmental effects as listed
in the staff report. The Commission should add any additional effects of the project that it believes
should be addressed in the CEQA document. The areas of investigation for environmental evaluation
as defined by CEQA are listed in the attached Initial Study Checklist for your reference.
2. Design Review Study: As the second discussion item, the Commission should comment on the design
of the project as required by Chapter 25.57 of the Zoning Ordinance, Design Review, and to the
following design criteria for commercial projects:
a. Support of the pattern of diverse architectural styles that characterize the city's commercial,
industrial and mixed use areas; and
Page 5 of 6
�
�
Environmental Scoping and Design Review Study
988 Howard Avenue
I
b. Respect and promotion of pedestrian activity by placement of buildings to maximize commercial
use of the street frontage, off-street public spaces, and by locating parking so that it does not
dominate street frontages; and
c. On visually prominent and gateway sites, whether the design fits the site and is compatible with
the surrounding development; and
d. Compatibility of the architecture with the mass, bulk, scale, and existing materials of existing
development and compatibility with transitions where changes in land use occur nearby; and
e. Architectural design consistency by using a single architectural style on the site that is
consistent among primary elements of the structure, restores or retains existing or significant
original architectural features, and is compatible in mass and bulk with other structures in the
immediate area; and
f. Provision of site features such as fencing, landscaping, and pedestrian circulation that enriches
the existing opportunities of the commercial neighborhood.
Because a CEQA document is being prepared for this project, it is important that any changes to the building
envelope be made early enough in the process so that any changes are reflected in the environmental review.
Catherine Barber
Senior Planner
c. Dimitrios Sogas, applicant
Toby Levy of Levy Design Partners, project architect
Robert Lugliani, property owner
Attachments:
Application to the Planning Commission
Project Description, submitted by the applicant
Environmental Information Form, submitted by the applicant
Conditional Use Permit Application
Variance Application
Nelson/Nygaard Vehicle Trip Generation and Parking Demand Analysis Memo, March 4, 2015
Neighborhood Photos
Staff Comments
Letter of Concern- Email from J. Wald, Anita Road
Initial Study Checklist — blank
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed May 29, 2015
Aerial Photo
Page 6 of 6
� (r,�'��' �r1
BURU. GAME
♦ �
I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010
p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org
� APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COnJif1�ISSION
Type of application:
❑ Design Review ❑ Variance 0 Parcel #: O 2--G1 ' Z-1 �- -.2..2Z�
❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit ❑ Other:
PROJECT ADDRESS: � � S � ��w�p
APPLICANT projectcontactperson�l �
Payor of DSR deposit/handling fee �l, �
OK to send electronic copies of documents i�
/
Name: �,,..,� ,, R..� � So�a,� s
Address: ( 2�cn 9� L��•� �, �3Z3
City/State/Zip: �� a r�� �, a ti� C'�����L
Phone: (� ,�C� � D"� l D�-( Z-
Fax:
I�
E-mail: �z C G C� q .�►1
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Pro�ect contact Person
Payor of DSR deposiUhandling fee
OK to send electronic copies of documents
Name: �c�� .� �Q.r� ��� �p ,,
�/ F ,
PROPERTY OWNER project contact person ❑
Payor of DSR deposit/handling fee ❑
OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑
Name: ��h ,--�i�- �_i a G � G h�
Address: �� �D�v�r�
City/State/Zip: _ � �,, ��� �q Q � ��..- � �()-t n
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail:
,
6Ju ��,..� rs � � �� �= ! \l � �
c � � �
Address: �D S�, c.,��4.1� G r�_
City/state/zip: S . -�=. �� �'�((D �
Phone: Lf l��- ��� —�S(� �
Fax: ��S'— � �"� — �! l �-
'Y1af? -- �? 2015
;�i�! �r 0� :?+ �RLINGAPv1E
;,!,o-��_ar��N�r�G Div.
i110 �NINN`{1d-0C.r'�
�VVt1�JNl i�.if?i; ;�� ; .�.1;:;
�!OZ G ",
E-maiL � �. _� e C O w� '�� v ��
�Y (1+�,(C� �c.' r �;.i i•tµ s . . �'%, , � ����t�
* Burlingame Business License �#. �` 0�-8'3 l `�
� +..� ,�,�; `�
�,.-_
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:_ �-� e c,��.�.�
AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby
best of my knawledge and_belie#�,
Applicant's signature:,��
I am aware of the propose lic�fi.c
Commission. �� � �
Property owner's signature: �
� �
ertify�Gnder penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the
/�:
;�
� � Ii' _— Date: � / � ��
/
and he� authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning
Date: ��" �`�
Date submitted: 3 � �� � S
*- Verification that the project architectldesigner has a valid Burlingame business license will be required by the
Finance Department at the time application fees are paid. s:�Halloours�ac,aPPr,cono�.doc
*
- �.
uuAunrcw'M�c
�-�YSR
_ �--
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE RQAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94090
p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org
APPLICATtON TO TNE PLAfVNING COMMISSIOIV
Type of appiicaiion:
❑ Design Review ❑ Variance ❑ Parcel #:
❑ Conditional Use Permit O Special Permit ❑ Zoning / Other.
PROJECT ADDRESS:_ t �� � �JC��-�i�
APPLICANT
Name:
Address:
CitylState/Zip:
Phone:
E-mail:
ARCHITECTlDESIGNER
Name:
PR�PERTY OWNER
Name:
Address:
City/State/Zip:
Phone:
E-mail:
Address:
City/State/Zip:
Phone:
E-mail:
Burlingame Business License #:
Authorization to R roduce Pro'ect Plans:
1 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 pa e lanning approval process and waive any claims against the City
arising out of or retated to such action. (Initials of Architect/Designer)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:,�,��,�p,�� � �, �� � �'�U �i
t
AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATURE: 4 er�by rtify �ihder penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and ��elief. � � � �8 �� �
ApplicanYs signature: � . r Date:
, �
I am aware of the proposed applicat` n and eby authorize e above applicant to submit this application to the Planning
Commission.
Property owner's signature: Qate:
Date submitfed:
5: �NANDOUTSj PC Applirotian.daC
f
3/4/2015
...
Dimitrios Sogas
Emporio Group Inc
1290 Howard Ave, Suite 323
Burlingame CA 94010
To whom it may concern
����� V G�
P�IAR - 9 2015
CITY OF BURLfNGAME
CDD-PLANNING DIV.
Sirs
My company is in the process of acquiring the parcel at 988 Howard Avenue in Burlingame,
currently the Olde English Garage, owned by Robert, Lugliani, for the purpose of developing a
commercial building. We are currently in escrow with a ratified contract, and are scheduled to
close on or about Sept 30, 2015. Therefore Mr Lugliani will be signing documents as the owner
until the property changes ownership, with the understanding that Emporio Group (or a
subsidiary) will be paying the fees and will be responsible for the execution of the project.
If you have any question about this, please feel free to contact me at dsogas@yahoo.com or 650-
703-1042.
� R 1
� ^ S��S�
Robert Lugliani
Current Owner
988 Howard Ave, Burlingame CA
Emporio Group Inc
r
" �.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING AT 988 HOWARD STREET;
BURLINGAME
The site for the proposed 3 story, 22,225SF office building is bounded by 3 streets, East
Lane, Howard and Myrtle Avenues. The site is a connections between Downtown
Burlingame, Caltrain and the Lyon Hoag residential neighborhood.
East Lane is a essentially a service road alongside Caltrain, with surtace parking along on
one side and a low scale industrial structures, some of which have been converted to
commercial uses. Myrtle Avenue has the other side of the commercial/industrial buildings
that face East Lane and some low scale residential, with the other side 2 to 4 story
residential structures. Our site on Howard Street, the connector to the other side of the
tracks faces auto storage and sales yard.
The design proposes a first floor with a setback along all three streets, with the entry lobby
on the corner of Howard and East and a small retail space at the corner of Howard and
Myrtle Streets. Great care has been taken to create pedestrian friendly experience and
response to the surrounding neighborhood. There is a public plaza adjacent to the retail
space and another smaller one next to the entry. The massing of the structure also reflects
the surrounding development uses. The parking is tucked behind the lobby and retail, with
2 smaller garage entries one off of East and the other off of Howard.
The two stories of office space above, will provide flexible layout accommodating either one
or multiple tenants. The space will have multiple exterior spaces as well as a roof top open
space.
We are asking for two variances. One to reduce the amount of required parking, given our
proximity to Caltrain and the other to flip the official rear and yards.
A parking study by Nygard is being submitted along with our application. Based on their
traffic study, we have provided 61 spaces instead of the required 82 spaces.
The other variance is for the relocation of the designation of the rear yard. Per code, the
shortest side would be the front, locating it on Myrtle. However, the front set back is 10'
and the rear is 20'. Our variance requests that we designate the front as East Lane, since
that will permit us to have the greater set ba�:k along Myrtle Street, as a better transition to
the Lyon Hoag residential neighborhood. Additionally the commercial entrance will be at the
corner of East and Howard.
�- Y��, �=n:� �- I V E C�
hv1AR -- 9 2015
•' �F 3URLINGAME
�I�.i�f)-P(ANNIP�G DIV.
#
�
City of Burlingame Planning Department 50! Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(6S0) 69b-;i790 ��vv�v.burlinQame.ore
4, CI'fY .
Aa � �
st11RLJNC�AME ���R41�MENTAL INFORIV�ATION FURM
�� ;
'�� q� �% •(to be coinpleted by applicant when Negative Declai�ation or E�tvironmenCal lmpact
Report is rec�uired) .
GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Address: 988 Howard Avenue
Applicant Name: Dimitrios Sogas
Address: 1290 Howard Avenue, Suite 323
City/State/Zip: Burlin�ame, CA 94010 ___
Phone:� � 1-650-703-1042
Assessor's P�trcet Nurnber: 024 214-220 �:
Property Ov���ier�ame: Em�orio Group Inc.
Address: , 1290 Howard Avenue. Suite 323
City/State/Zip: Burlin�ame, Ct� 94010
Pho�ie: . i-654-703-1042
Permit apptications required for this project {special permit, variance, �subdivision map, parcel map,
condominium permit, buitding pennit, etc.): Conditionat Use Permit far B�ildin� Hei�ht & Setback &
Parkin Variances
.�elated permits, apptications anc! approvals required f�r this project t�y City, Regional, State and Federa3
Agencies: Environmental Review and Commercial Desi�i Review
SiTE INFORMATION
Site size: .352 Acres and 15.352 Square Feet Ex'isting Zaning: MMLJ
Esisting use(s} of property: Auto Gara e �
Total Number of Existing Parki»g Spaces : NA Nuinber of Compact Spaces�: NA
Number ai E�isting Structures and Total Square Foataae oi Each: �. 1 structure = 4.800 SF +/-
�Tilill any stcuctutes be demolished for this project? � 3� Yes No :
Size ancl use of structures to be c3emolished:,4 800 SF Structure existine automobile �ara�e
Nu�nber and size of existin� trees on site':i3) 4" trees (2) S" trees Ll b" trees (1)12=' tree
Will any ofthe existing tress be removed? 7C Yes No
If Yes, list nwnber, size and type of trees to be removed:S314" t�ees (2) 5�' trees (2} 6" trees :(deciduous
and species unkown) (1112" tree (Geiiera Parviflora-Australian W illow)
Are there a,ny natural or rnan-made water channels which run tllrough or adjacent to the site?
Yes X No IiYes, where?
1 Ciiy of Buriingame miniii�uni standard parking space size is 9'x?0'. "fhe minimum size for compact parking spaces is $'x17'.
Etefer to City of Burlingame Zoning Ordinance C.S. 25.70 for parking requicements for, particular uses.
Z Refer to the City of Surlingame's Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Urdinance {C.S. 1 l.U6) for uee removal perniit
and tree planting requirements.
ENVREY.CRM
_ f
City ofBurlingame Planning Department SOi Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 w�ww.burlin�ame.org
Describe in general the existi��g surrour►ding land �ses to tlle:
North Auto Repair Shop �
South Auto Dealership Parkin� Lot
East Retail Market / Convenience Store �
V4'est Caltrain & Rail Station
PROPOSED PROJECT
Project Description: Removal of existing stntcture and paverr►ent: new construction of a 3-story buildin�
over basement: 2 staries of office/commercial abave ground level of lobby. retail/cafe, parkin��
Residential Projects: . .
Number of Dwelling Units: 0 �
Size of Unit(s): NA � � �
Househoid size {nuinber of persons per unit} expected: NA �
CommerciaV[ndustrial Projects:
Type and square footage of each use: Office Use = 22,225sf cafe/retail= l,4?Ssf
Estimated number of employees per shift: no specific user cietermined
Will the pro{ect involve tlte use, disposat or emission of potentiatly hazardous materials (including
petroieum products}? Yes X No .
If Yes, ptease describe: NA
Institutional Projects {public facilities, hospitals, schools): .
Major function af facility: NA
Estimated number of err►ployees per shift: NA
Estimated Occupancy: NA
For all Projects: � � � � � �
Flood Hazard: Is this site within a special flood hazard area? Yes X I�3o
Land Use: If the project involves a canditionat use permit, variance or rezosiing application, please
explain why the applications are required': Conditional Use Perrnii Form Filed for Buildin� Hei� &
Variance A�plication for Setback & Parfciiig Fornls {Attached).
' Please fill out and submit the apprapriate epplication form 9variance special permii, etc.)
ENVREV.PRM
City of Burlioaame Pianning �epartment SOl Primrose Road P(650) 558-7254 F{6S0) 696-37y0 �vww.barlineame.ore
Building gross square footage: Existing: 4,800 sf �
Proposed: �Floors 1-3) 3� 375sf -� basement (14 575) _�6 950sf
Number of floors of construction: Existing: 1 story _ Proposed: 3+ basement
Traffic/Circulation: Standard and compact off-street parking spaces provided:
Existing: Standard NA
Compact
Total
Proposed: Standard 60 commercial
Compact
. Total b0 commercial
Grading: Amount of dirtl�ll materiai being moved (chec[c one):
0-500 cabic �rards 5,U00-20,400 cuUic yards
X 500-5,000 cubic yards � O�er 20,Q00 cubic yarcfs(indicate arnount}
Note: lf f 11 is being placed over existing bay fill, pravide engineeriitg reports which shotiv the effect af
the new fill on the underlying bay mud.
Storm water runoff: Tndicate area of site to be covered with imper��ious surfaces {parking lot paving,
etc.): NA Surfaces will be Permeabfe /And/ or �lantin�s / Landscape Roof run-aff treated with bio-
reiention lanters.
�s the axea with impervious surfaces less than 200 fect away from a wetland, stream, lagoon or bay?
Yes X No �
Noise: Describe noise sources and timing of activity generated by your project during eonstruction: _
General construction durin�tvaical construction hours. _
Noise sources generated during operation of facility: 1�one by use.
Vibration: Will the praposat cause vibration that rnay af�ect adjacent properties? DescriUe any potential
sources of vibxation: NA:
Exterior Lighting: Please describe any proposed exterior lighting of the facitity�: Street level/ sidewalk
�r�v li�ht�'s � fc��r ht�ildin en rance� --
Watei: Expecte�=amount of water usa�e:
Domestic �aUday Peak Eise � � �allmin
Commercial gal(day Peak use aal�tnin
Expected fire flow demand gal/min '
As per the C.3 regulations set foxth by the Califoinia Regional Water Qua[ity Controf Board, please
respond to the follorving questions: � �
1. � Would the proposed project result in an increase in pollutant dischar�es to receivi�ig waters? �
. No. � . . . .
' Refer to City of Burlin;nme Exterior [Iluinination Ordinance (No. 1477) regardina rcquiremenis which limit eiterior
illumination in bot5 residential and commercial zones.
ENVREV.FRM
�
_ �
City of Borlingame Planning Departmcnt 54l Primrose Road P(G�0) 558-7250 F(650} 596-.i7�0 www.burlingame.ore
2. Would the proposed project result ial significant alteration of receiving �vater quality durittg or
foilowing construction? No. ,
3. Would the proposed project result in increased impervious sarfaces and associated increased
runoff? There will be a decrease in impervious area on the proposed�roject thus reducin�#he runoff from
the site. � � �
4. Vllould the proposed project create a significant aiiverse er►vironmental impact to drainage patterns
due to changes in runoff flow rates volumes? No signifcant adverse environrnental impact to drainage.
There will be a decreased in runoff flow rates volumes.
5. Would the proposed praject result in inereased erosion in its watershed? The project will �iot result �
an increased in erosion in its watershed. �
6. Is the project tributary to an already impAired water body, as listed on the Clean VVater Act'son
Se�tion 303(d) list? lf so wil! it result in an increase in a��y pollutant for which the water body is already
impaired? No.
7. Wou1d the proposed project have a potential signifcant environmental impact on surface water
quality, to marine, fresh, or wetland . �
waters? No.
�. Would the proposed project have a potentialiy significa�tt adverse impact on snound water quality?
NO. � '
9. Will tfie proposed project cause or contribute ta an e�ceedance of applicable surface or
groundwater receiving water quality objectives ar degradation of beneficial uses? No.
!4. Will the proje�t impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habifa.t?
No
Sewer: Expected daily sewer discharge
Source of waste��vater discharge on site (i.e. restrooms, restaurants, iaboratory, macerial processin�, etc.)
ENVRL'V.i�RbT
� -. .
�
City of 8nrlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(b50) 558-725U F(650) C96-3790 www.burlin�an�e.org
Geueral:
Are the following items applicable ta the project or its effects? Provide attachment to explain nature of all
items checked `yes'. � .
Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, or hiI(s, or
substantia) alteration of ground contours. �
Change in scenic views or vistas fi•om existing residential areas or pubiic lands
or roads. �
Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. �
Si�ificartt amounts of solid waste or litter.
Change in dusi, ash, smoke fumes or odors in vicinity.
Change in bay, lagoon, stream, channel or groundwater quality or quantity, or
alteration of existinD drainage paiterns.
Substantial change in existing noise or vibration ie��els in the vicinity (durin�
construction andlor during operation}.
Site on itlled land or on slope of 10 % or more. "
Use or dispasal of potentiafly hazardous materials, such as toxic substances,
flamrnable materials or explosives.
Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fre water, sewage)
Sabstantial increase in fossil fuel cansuinption (oil, natural gas, etc.).
Relationship ta a larger project or series of prajects.
CERTIFICATION
I herzby certify that the statements fur�iished ahove and in the attached exhibits
preseat the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of
my abifity, and that the facts, statements, and information present d are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
..�- / '��� '
Date S d'� ( Sign 'ure` .f � %-�� _
�__.__. H_,��� .
Yes No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
�nvt�v.r• 2ns
City of Burlingame Planning Department �O1 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790
�i� � r'
r�� a
f�sril�
r` ���
CITY OF BURLINGAME
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICAT�O�
www.burlin�ame.orQ
���C�
- 9 2015
CIT`( OF BURLINGAME
' CDD-PIANNING DIV.
The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code
Section 25.52.020). 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 proposed «se crt dze proposed location will not be detrimentn! or injurious tn
property or in:proventents in the vicinity or to pub/ic /�ealt/�, safety, geizern/ we/fare or
co�rvenience.
The proposed project will replace the current auto repair shop/ former gas station, with a new 22,OOOgsf
commercial structure, with a small retail space facing Howard and Myrtle Aves. The project will remove 4 large
curb cuts that interrupt the pedestrian flow, with 2 smaller curb cuts. It will remove the many cars that are often
parked on the site, with a 3 story modern commercial building, which opens directly onto the street and is well
planted. The office major entrance faces the exit of the CalTrain Station, while the smaller retail space has a plaza
that addresses the smaller scale residential and commercial neighbors on Myrtle.
2. How wi/! tlte proposed crse be located and conducted in accordance with t/�e Burliizgame
The proposed building complies with the MMU zoning, Myrtle Rad Mixed Use District, which saw this area as
a buffer from the railroad to the smaller scale residential district beyond. The active ground floor uses, will
create a safe pedestrian street as well as continue the small scale commercial on Myrtle, which already
exists. The new exterior planting and plaza spaces, makes the most of the required setbacks, in enhancing
the neighborhood experience.
3. How will_+% e proposed project be conzpatible with the aesthetics, nurss, bcrlk and character of
tJre exi.sti►zg and pote�ttial uses on adjoiniitg properties i�r t/�e ge�teral vicinity?
The proposed building is compatible with the many scales and varied characters around the site. The
mass is broken down to pedestrian scale, with the expressed entry off the corner of Howard and East
avenues. The solid verticat mass along East Avenue is in keeping the industrial buildings that face the
railroad tracks (many of which have been converted to offices). The building becomes more horizontal as it
faces Howard, with a deeper recess to provide a landscaped pedestrian buffer. The predominant feature
along Myrtle is the plaza for the small retail, with the deep planted setback.
CUP. FRM
��
� CITY
'�r : � �
��. � ,:�
•�� _
V � l.J
CITY OF BURLINGAME
VARIANCE APPLICATION MAft - 2fl�5
,� , t LWGAME
CDD-PlANNIf�G DiV.
The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance
(Code Section 25.54.020 a-d). 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.
a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to
your properfy which do not apply to other properties in this area.
The site is bordered by 3 streets; Myrtle, Howard and East. By strict reading of the code, the narrowest dimension
determines the front yard, so technically that would designate Myrtle as our front yard, with the 10' set back and having
a 20' set back along East Street.
b. Explain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substanfial property righf and what unreasonable property loss or unnecessary
hardship might result from ihe denial of the applicafion.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010
p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org
The variance would permit us to locate the greater open space along Myrtle, which is a mixed use residential and
commercial block with greater set backs. The uses along East Street which face the Railroad tracks are commercial
and industrial. Additionally if the high speed plan with elevated tracks goes ahead, our larger open space would
open onto an industrial street, with an elevated train. We are still proposing a 10' set back along East street, with the
building entry off of Howard and East. The Myrtle street side with the larger open space would provide a plaza for
the retail use which would be more beneficial to the business and the neighborhood.
c. Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location
injurious to properfy or improvements in the vicinity o
general welfare or convenience.
�
will not be detrimenta! or
r to.public health, safety,
The proposed relocation of the rear and front yard would yield more neighborhood and pedestrian compatible uses
along the mixed use street of Myrtle that has the larger setbacks.
How wil! the proposed projecf be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and
character of fhe existing and pofenfial uses on adjoining properties in the general
vicinify?
The switch in location of the rear and front yard would create a well scaled transition from Howard Street into the
mixed use neighborhood. The plaza and setback along Myrtle would greatly benefit the surrounding neighbors, while
the diminished set back along East, would not be missed, since it primarily used by cars and parking.
Handouts\Variance Application.2008
_�_
-=�::
NELSON
NYGAARD
MEMORANDUM
To: Dimitrios Sogas
From: Brian Canepa & Francesca Napolitan
__
.
��C�IVE(�
MAR - 9 2015;
CITY O� BURLINGAME' .
CDD-PLANNiNG DIV.
Date: March 4, 2015
Subject: 988 Howard Vehicle Trip Generation and Parking Demand Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The Emporio Group Inc is proposing a mixed-use project at 988 Howard Avenue in Burlingame,
CA. Currendy, the project is envisioned as three-story building with z2,225 square feet of office
space on the second and third floors with a small retail component of i,42o gross square feet and
a 48o square foot lobby on the ground floor. A total of 6i parking spaces will be provided. Of the
6i spaces, 48 will be standard parking spaces, 8 will be tandem spaces, and 5 spaces will be
provided in parking stackers. '
Under the current Ciry of Burlingame zoning code for the Downtown district, 75 parking spaces
would be required for the office component of the project and 4 spaces would be required for the
retail component, for a total of 79 required parking spaces.l The Emporio Group is proposing to
reduce the amount of parking provided on-site by 23 % to 6i parking spaces.
TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS OF THE PROGRAM
The proposed location is appropriate spot for office and retail, with easy access to the Burlingame
Caltrain station. The project is located in Downtown Burlingame and is within walldng distance to
a number of restaurants and other amenities for office and retail workers. The location, density
and mixed-use factors will have the largest impact on trip generation.
Nelson\Nygaard has used URBEMIS to calculate the trin r2duction effects of the project's
location. The URBEI�ZIS mitigation component is a simple yet powerful tool; it employs standard
traffic engineering methodologies, but provides the opporiunity to adjust ITE average rates to
quantify the impact of a development's location, physical characteristics and any demand
management programs. In this way, it provides an opportunity to fairly evaluate developments
that minimize their transportation impact, for example, through locating close to transit or
providing high densities and a mix of uses.
� Per City of Burlingame Zoning Code for the Downtown Specific Plan area one space per 300 sq.
ft. of office is required and one space per 400 sq. ft. of retail is required.
1 16 NEW MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 500 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 415-284-1544 FAX
415-284-1554
www.nelsonnygaard.com
_ , .. . -- --- . ------- .._ -... - ---.. _ . .. _
_ _ . _ _
.- -� -- __ -
�,
_ 988 Howard Ave. Parking Study ( Trip Generation & Parking Demand Analysis
Emporio Group Inc
Figure 1 shows the inputs that have been used to complete the URBEMIS mitigation component,
along with data sources. The number of trips generated by a development depends not only on the
characteristics of the project itself, but also on the surrounding area. A project in an urban area,
for example, will generate fewer trips than the same project located close to a freeway interchange
and surrounded by low-density subdivisions or office parks. For this reason, URBEMIS requires
data for the area within approximately a half-mile radius from the center of the project, or for the
entire project area, whichever is larger. In effect, the smaller the development, the more
important the development's context.
Figure 1 URBEMIS Data Input
� , .
Office space 22,225 sq. ft. Project plan
Retail space 1,420 sq. ft. Project plan
Number of housing units within'h mile 4,562 American Communiry
radius Survey 2006 - 2010
Number of jobs located within �/z mile 3,573 American Community
radius Survey 2006 - 2010
Local serving retail within'/2 mile Yes Site observation
radius
Transit service 38 daily buses stop within �/a mile (existing) Caltrain/Samtrans
58 daily trains stop within �/z mile (existing) maps/schedules
Intersection density (1) within'h mile 328 valences Street plan
radius
Sidewalk completeness within'/z mile 100% have sidewalk on both sides Site observation
radius
Bike lane completeness within'h mile 25% direct parallel routes exist Site obseroation
radius
Notes: (1) Calculated from existing street network, based on the number line segment terminations, or eacn vaience .
Intersections have a valence of 3 or higher - a valence of 3 is a"T" intersection, 4 is a four-way intersection, and so on.
Taking all of the factors identified above into consideration, the URBEMIS model results in a trip
reduction of up to i6.2% when compared to standard ITE trip generation (Figure 2). There is
currently a good mix of uses around the development and the site is close to retail services
resulting in a �.2% trip reduction compared to standard ITE trip generation rates. The
Burlingame Caltrain station and Samtrans Route 292 yield another 2.2% trip reduction and
pedestrian and bicycle friendliness will further reduce trip generation by 6.8%. As result of all of
these inputs the total daily vehicle trips generated by the site will be 256 as compared to standard
ITE trip generation rates, which result in 306 daily vehicle trips.
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. � 2
�
`r
988 Howard Ave. Parking Study � Trip Generation & Parking Demand Analysis
Emporio Group Inc
PARKING DEMAND GENERATION ANALYSIS OF THE
' : �Z�1:7_\ul
A parking demand analysis was undertaken in order to determine the potential parking impacts
generated by the proposed project utilizing parking demand data from the Institute of
Transportation Engineers Parldng Generation Manual, 4� Edition.
Baseline Parking Demand Ratios
Appropriate baseline parldng demand ratios were established for the project as a first step of the
parking analysis. These ratios were informed by parking demand and occupancy information
from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parldng Generation Manual, 4� Edition,
which is considered an industry standard. Figure g shows the downtown parking requirements as
compared to ITE weekday and Saturday peak parldng ratios used in the parking analysis. It
should be noted that ITE does not currently have a land use code for small scale retail that is
locally serving thus; the parking generation rates for retail are likely to be very conservative for
this project.
Peak Parking Demand
The peak demand is calculated by applying the peak parking ratio for each land use to the total
square footage for office and retail. The weekday peak parking demand is 59 parking spaces or
z ITE Land Use Code 701 Office (Urban)
3 ITE Land Use Code 820 Shopping Center
NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Inc. � 3
Figure 2 Mitigated Trip Generation with URBEMIS
Figure 3 Peak Period Parking Ratios
.
988 Howard Ave. Parking Study � Trip Generation & Parking Demand Analysis
Emporio Group Inc
22% lower than the number of parldng spaces required under the City of Burlingame's zoning
code. On Saturday the peak parking demand is 10 parking spaces (Figure 4).
CONCLUSION
A trip generation analysis was conducted to show how the location of the site, its proximity to
transit services and locally serving retail, and adjacent pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure
reduces the number of vehicle trips generated by the site by i6.2% when compared to standard
ITE trip generation rates. While trip generation is not a direct proxy to parldng demand it does
suggest that this project is likely to produce less parking demand in this specific conte�ct.
In addirion, a parking demand analysis was conducted using ITE's Parking Generation Manual,
4� Edition to compare projected parking demand to parking requirements under the City of
Burlingame's zoning code. While the data ITE's parking generation manual does not reflect the
more urban nature of the project site, it still shows that the project is likely to generate demand
for 59 parking spaces or 25% fewer spaces than is required under zoning code. Thus, the 6i
parking spaces proposed under the current project plan should be sufficient to meet parldng
demand.
NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Inc. � 4
Figure 4 Peak Parking Demand
.
c
SITE BOUNDARY,
SITE
TYP.
�-�-�- :
C'I T C
`��..�.��� 9! ��
�ti�AR — � 201�
SITE - CORNER OF MYRTLE RD & HOWARD AVE
C'I T C
ADJACENT BUILDING ON HOWARD AVE.
SITE - CORNER OF EAST LN. & HOWARD AVE.
C ITC
ADJACENT BUILDING 0�1 MYRTLE RD.
:;i � Y u� BURLINGAME
,��'f;-F-! �,Ni�ING DIV.
C�ITC
ADJACENT BUILDING ON EAST LN.
EXISTING SITE & CONDITIONS
��
A "..� _ : '
R � M '--�- € 4
LEVY DES�GN_ . �_
F;
0o sa,n� r� ; � T
Son Frand�w. CA' . - .
�.,o�
988 HOWARD AVENUE BURLINGAME, CALIFORN/A
L E V Y D E S I G N P A R T N E R S I N C
90 SOUTH PARK / SAN FRANCISCO / CA 94107 / T/ 415.777.0561 F/ 415.777.5117
,
.
�
Project Comments
Date:
April 13, 2015
To: � Engineering Division
�sso� sss-�2so
� Building Division
(650) 558-726U
X Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
From: Planning Staff
� Fire Division
{s5o) sss-7soo
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Subject: Request for Environmental Review, Commercial Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit for building height, and Setbadc and Parking
Variances for construction of a new 3-story commercial building with
a roof dedc at 988 Howard Avenue, zoned MMU,
APN: 029-214220
Staff Review: April '13, 2015 — 2"d Submittal
1. No Further Comments- Water Conservation checklist and Irrigation Pfan will
be submitted for Building permit
Reviewed by: BD
Date: 5/19/15
r
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
March 16, 2015
� Engineering Division
(sso) ��2so
� Building Division
(sso) 5ss-�2so
X Parks Division
(s5o) ssa-73�
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
0 City Attomey
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Subject: Request �For Environmenfal Review, Commercial Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit for bui{ding height, and Setback and Parking
Variances for construction of a new 3-story commercial building with
a roof deck at 988 Howard Avenue, zoned MMU,
APN: 029-2'14-220
Staff Review: March 16, 2015
1. No e�asting tree over 48 inches in circumference at 54 inches form base of
tree may be removed without a Protected Tree Permit from the Parks Division.
(558-7330)
. Landscape plan is required to meet `Water Conservation in Landscape
Regulations° (aitached). Irrigation Plan required for Building permit. Audit due
for Final.
3. Provide separate irrigafion (drip or bubbler) to new landscape Street Trees.
Reviewed by: BD
Date: 3/24/15
,
.
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
April 13, 2015
� Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
� Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
X Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Environmental Review, Commercial Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit for building height, and Setback and Parking
Variances for construction of a new 3-story commercial building with
a roof deck at 988 Howard Avenue, zoned MMU,
APN: 029-214-220
Staff Review: April 13, 2015 — 2"d Submittal
"Project proponent previously submitted a completed stormwater compliance "C.3
and C.6 Development Review Checklist." Proponent submitted and proposed several
site design measures to comply with the C.3. and C.6 requirements." No additional
comments:
Reviewed by: KJK
Date: 05/12/15.
1 _ . . I
Project Comments
1. This project may be required to comply with the C.3 and C.6 provisions of the San
' Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP). If the project
will create and/or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface and; the
project will replace 50 percent or more of site impervious surface, then stormwater
source control and treatment requirements shall apply to the entire project site. A
summary of applicable requirements is attached. The project proponent must
complete, sign and submit, to the City, the appropriate form for each applicable
requirement. �
� Please complete, sign and return the following attached forms:
A. C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist.
B Special Projects Worksheet.
C. Rainwater Harvesting and Use Feasibility Worksheet.
Date:
To:
From:
March 16, 2015
0 Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
� Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
X Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Environmental Review, Commercial Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit for building height, and Setback and Parking
Variances for construction of a new 3-story commercial building with
a roof deck at 988 Howard Avenue, zoned MMU,
APN: 029-214-220
Staff Review:� March 16, 2015
Page 1-2
For additional information, including downloadable electronic files, please see the C.3
Stormwater Technical Guidance at www.flowstobay.org
3. Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the city's
stormwater NPDES permit to prevent construction activity stormwater pollution.
Project proponents shall ensure that all contractors implement appropriate and
effective Best Management Practices (BMPs) during all phases of construction,
including demolition. When submitting plans for a building permit, please include a list
of construction BMPs as project notes, preferably, on a separate full size (2'x 3' or
larger), plan sheet. A downloadable electronic file is available at:
http://www.flowstobay.org/Construction
.
� •�� -
4. Required Best Management Practices (BMPs) appiy to all construction projects
utilizing architectural copper. Please read attachment "Requirements for architectural
Copper." A downloadable electronic file is available at:
http://www.flowstobay.orq/files/newdevelopment/flyersfactsheets/Architecturalcopper
Please contact Kiley Kinnon, NPDES Stormwater Coordinator, for assistance at (650)
342-3727.
Reviewed by: KJK
Date: 03/17/15
Page 2 of 2
Page 2 of 2
.`
�
SAN MkTEO COUNTYWIDE
Water Pollution
Preve_y�'pnProgram
C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist
Municipai Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP)
Stormwater Controis for Development Projects
City of Burlingame
NPDES Coordinator
1103 Airport Bivd
Burlingame, Ca 94011
Office: (650) 342-3727
Fax: (650) 342-3712
Project InformaEion
l.A Enter Project Data (For'C.3 RegulafedProjects,"data willbe reported in the municipa�tys sformwaterAnnualReport.)
Project Name: Case Number:
988 /�d u�� ��r� ,�v�NuF �c; ���� �,�-s,- c�r�=1
ProjectAddressB�CrossSt: ?a� ���r�o,�i/EN[/E, gt,//Z�1�G'/}-1�r� aL� .tci� �vty?.'�'GF 2�n ,)
Project APN: D� L��- "�2� Project Watershed: SQ �3 MA�- T�a'
Applicant Name: tplN!/ /Z /O SOGPrS
Applicant Phone: �6So, %03 -!d �y APP���nt Email Address: dS�Q,r. (� yq �fl a, Coyy
Developmeni type: ❑ Single Family Residential: A stand-aione home that is not part of a larger project.
(check all that apply) � Single Family Residentiai: Two or more lot residentiai development �
❑ Mul�-Family Residential
� Commercial
❑ Industrial, Manufacturing
❑ Mixed-Use
❑ SUeets, Roads, etc.
IA1 Total Area of Site: � O. 3:SV acres
I.A.2 Total Acea of land disturbed during construction (indude clearing, grading, excavating and stockpie area): D. 3� acres.
Cetiifica6on:
I cert'�fy that the infQrmaGon provided on this form is correct and acknowledge that, should the project exceed the amount of
new and/or replacEd impenrious surface provided in this form, the as-built project may be subject to addifional improvam�a.
❑ Attach Pretiminary CalculaUons ❑ Attach Final Calculations �Attach c�py of site ptan showing areas
Name o4 person _ ,�
Signature: vJ�'1��// F�[�'""'+� Date: OS— dS—/S
� �2e Q S$ octsA LS -k[�
Phone number �6 Sa �� 9 3� 8�� o Email address: Vqq�urw,[F� r+�+e � i�
Project Description4:
(Also note any past
or future phases of the
projec.t.)
❑`RedevelopmenY as defined by MRP: creating, adding andlor replaci�g exterior exis6ng
impervious surface on a site where past devefopment has occurred?
❑`Special land use categories' as defined by MRP: (1) auto service facitities', (2) retaH gasoline
outiats, (3) restaurants, (4) uncovered paridng area (stand-alone or part of a larger project)
❑ �institu6ons: schoois, Ibraries, jails, efc.
❑ Parks and ttails, camp grounds, other recrea6onal
❑ Agricuftural, wineries
❑ Kennels, Ranches
� Other, Please specify
1=-o P�� 3—S ToKY CoivlM�iK Clh'L 0�7�C � �6 u/t sb l� G
k11 TGF �R-sr'rr��i P�E-iLK �� � ��2�4GE
sOLcSIG� �EI�G/�E'�(L,
1 5ubdivisions or contiguous, common{y owned lots, io� the construction of two or more homes d�veioped within 1 year of each other are
considered common plans af development and are subject to C.3 requirements.
2 Roadway projects that replace ewsting impervious surface are subjed to C.3 requirements on ly it one or more lanes of travel are added.
3 See Standard industrial Class�rztion (SIC) codes here
4 Project description exampies: 5-story office building, industriat warehouse, residential with five4-story buildings for 200 condominiums, etc.
� Final Draff Ocfober3l, 2014
: �
C.3 a �d C.6 Devel�pme^t Reviev✓ Checkiis! �
I.E� Is the project a"C.3 Regulated Project" per MRP Provision C.3.b?
I,g,1 Enter the amounf of impervious surfaces Retained, Replaced andtor Created by fhe proj�ct
Table 1 B 1 Impervious and Pervious Surfaces
I.B.1.a I.B.1.6 I.B.1.c 1.6.1.d I.B.i.e
Existing Existing New Post-Project
Pre-Pro;ect �mpervious Impervious Impervious Impervious
Impervious Surface to be Surface to be Surface to be Surface
Surface Retained� Replaced6 Createdb (sq.ft.)
Type of Impervious Surface {sq.ft.) (S .{�, s.ft. s.ft. =b+c+d
Roof area(s)
. g89 0 �g s� Sa �o s7�
Imperviouss sidewalks, patios, paths, driveways, streets Q�j � d
Cj • p O
imperviouss uncovered parking�
Totals of lmpervious Surfaces: �S'Y3(p a g9
1.8.1.f - Total Impervious SurFace Replaced and Created (sum of tota/s forcoiumns 1.B.i.candl.B.1.�:
Pre-Project
Pervious
Surface
Type of Pervious Surface (sq.ft.) • •
Landscaping , ��
Pervious Paving d .
Green Roof � � �
Totals of Pervious Surfaces: //(o
Total Site Area (Total Imperv'sous+Total Pervious=l.A.1) /$ 3SV�
�8� j lo�57t
/O �7
Post-project
Pervious
Surface
(54�ft-)
Z83
/
d
78
/S 3 Sv
s Per the MRP, pavement that meets the foilowing definiticn of pervious pavement is NOT an inpervious surface. Pervious pavement is
defined as pavernent that stores and infiltrafes rainfall at a rate equal to immediately surrounding unpaved, landscaped areas, or that stores
and infiltrates the rainfall runoH voiume descnbed in Provision C.3.
6`Retained' means to leave existing impervious surfaces in place, unchanged; "Reptaced' means to instai! new impervious surfa� where
existing impervious surface is removed anywhere on the same property, and 'Created" means ihe amount of new impervious surface being
proposed which exceeds the tofal ewsting amount of imperv+ous surface at the property.
7 Uncovered parking includes the fop fevei of a parking structure. 2 Final Draft Octo6er 31, 2094
/
��8�2 a!Q..1�ePAVand Cr a d n cel11.61.f from Table I.B 1rabove and1otherfa tors;Tofa1 Impervious Surface �
i_
� .
C.3 and C.8 Development P,eviev✓ Checklisf
Worksheet A
C6 — Construction Stormwater BMPs
Identify Plan sheet showing the appropriate construction Best Management Practices {BMPs) used on this project:
(Applies to aI! projects wifh earfhworft)
Yes Plan Sheet Best Mana ement Practice BMP
� Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including pavement cutting
G.p t'LhNS �stes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemico�s, wash water or sediments, rinse
water from architectural copper, and non-stormwaterdischarges to storm drains and
watercourses.
t' Ishvasfes p� operiy to prevent contact with
►'�
Store, handle, and dispose of construction ma ena
�' stormwater.
� �, Do not cfean, fue1, or maintain vehicles on-site, except in a designated area where wash
water is contained and treated.
� �( Train and provide instruction to all employees/subcontractors re: construction BMPs.
� �� Protect ail storm drain inlets in vicinity of site using sediment controts such as berms, fiber
rolis or filters.
� � t Limit construction access routes and stabilize desi nated access oints.
� � � Attach the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program's consfruction BMP
plan sheet to project plans and require contractor to implement the applicable BMPs on the
lan sheet.
� �� Use temporary erosion cantrols to stabilize all denuded areas until permanent erosion
contrats are established.
� Delineafe with field markers clearing limits, easeme�s, sefbacks, seosifive or cri6cal areas,
buffer zones, trees, and draina e courses.
�- � Provide notes, specificafions, or attachments describing the following:
■ Construction, operation and maintenance of erosion and sed'�rnent controls, include
inspection frequency;
• Methods and schedule for greding, excavation, filGng, dearing of vegetation, and storage
and disposa! of excavated or deared material;
■ Specifications for vegetative cover & mulch, include methods and schedutes for planting
and fertilization;
■ Provisions for tem ora and/or ermanent im ation. -
� Perform clearing and earth moving activities only dunng dry weather.
� - Use sediment controis or filtrafion to remove sediment when dewatering and obtain all
necessa ermits.
� Trap sediment on-site, using BMPs such as sediment basins or tcaps, earthen dikes or berms,
silt fences check dams, soil blankets or mats, covers for soil stock iles, etc.
� Qivert on-site runoff around exposed areas; divert off-site runoff around the site (e.g., swales
and dikes .
� G� PL��s buffe stra�s,Csed mr nt barriers or fittersr d kesr mulchin ors therlmeasuaes as a� 0 9riateNe
Final Drat� October 31, 2014
C.3 and C.6 �eve�vpmenf Reviev✓ Ch�cklist
Worksheet B
C3 - Source Controls
Select appropriate source controls and identify the detail/pfan sheei where these e[ements are shown.
Detail/Plan
Yes SheetNo.
(� c� PcRn�S
� �(
(� N
� �/
❑
❑
❑
❑
.0
❑
❑
❑
❑
Features that require
source controi measures
Sform Drain
Floor Drairts
Parking garage
Landscaping
Food Service Equipment
(non-residentia�
Refuse Areas
�Outdoor Process Activities'
Outdoor EquipmenU
Materials Storage
Vehicie/ Equipment
�leaning
Vehicle/ Equipment Repair
and Maintenan�e
Fuel Dispensing Areas
Loading Docks
� e D p�A'�S Fire Sprinklers
� Miscellaneous Drain or
Wash Water
� I I Archftectural Copper Rinse
Source Control Measures
(Refer ;o Local Source Control �ist for detailed requirements)
Mark on-site inlets with the words'No Dumping! Flows to 8ay' or equivalent.
Plumb tnterior floor drains to sanitar,r sewere [or prohibit].
Plumb interior parking garage floa drains to sanitary sewer.H
■ Retain existing vegetation as practicable.
■ Seled diverse species appropriate to the site. Include plants that are pest-
and/or disease-resistant, drought-tolerant, andlor attract beneficial insects.
■ Minimize use of pesticides and quick-release fertil'¢ers.
■ Use effiaent irriqafion system� desiQn fo minimize runoff. _
Provide wnnection to the sanitarysewer to facilitate draining e
Provide sink or other area for equipment cteaning, which is:
■ Connecfed fo a grease interceptor prior to sanitary sewer discharge.e
■ Large enough for the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned.
� Indoors or in an outdoor roofed area designed to prevent stormwater run-on
and run off and signed to require equipment washinq in this area.
■ Provide a roofed and enclosedareafordumpsters, recycling containers, efc.,
designed to prevent stoTnwater run-on and runoff. .
■ Connect any drains in or beneath dumpsters, compactors� and fallow bin
areas serving food service faciGiies to the sanitary sewer. �
Petform process acfivities eiiher indoors or in roofed outdoor area, desigBed io
prevent stormwater run-ori and nmoff and to drain to the sanitary sewer.
= Cover the area or design to awid poAutant contact with stormwater runoff.
■ L�cate area only on paved and contained-areas.
a
■ Roof storaqe areas that wiil contain non-hazardous liquids, drain to sanitary
• Roofed, pave and berm wash area t� prevent stormwater run-on and runoif,
pfumb to the sanitary sewer°, and sign as a designated wash area. e
• Commerciai car wash facilities shall discharqe to the sanifary sewer.
■ Designate repair/maintenance area indoors, or an outdoors area designed to
prevent stormwater run-on and runoff and provide secondary containment.
Do not install drains in the secondary cantainment areas.
■ No floor drains unless pretreaied prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer e
■ Connecf containers or sinks used for parts cleaninq to the sanitary sewer.e
■ Fuefing areas shail have impermeable surface that is a) minimalfy graded to
prevent ponding and b) separated f�om the rest of the site by a grade break.
■ Canopy sha(I extend at Isast 10 ft. in each direction from each pump and
drain away from fueting area. ___
■ Cover and/or grade to min'unue rvn-on to and runoff from the loading area.
■ Position downspouts to directst�rrnwater away from the loading area.
• Drain water from loading dodc areas to the sanitary sew�: a
■ Install door skirts between the irailers and the buildinq.
Design for discharge of fire sprinkler test water to landscape or sanitary sewer.e
• Drain condensate of air condifi�ning units to landscaping. Large air
conditioning unfts may conned to the sanitary sewer.B
■ Roof drains from equipment drain to landscaped area where practicable.
• Drain boiler drain lines roof top equipment all wash water to sanitary sewer.e
• Drain rinse water to landscaping, discharge to sanitary sewere, or collect and
.������a mm�erlv offsfte. See ftver "Reouirements for Architectural Copper."
f ,
r
e Any connection to the sznifary sewer system is subject to sanitary district approval. .
9 Businesses that may have outdoor process activtieslequipment include machine shops, auto repair, industri Fina! Draft Ocfobe� 31,' 2014
4
�
.
.)
C.3 and C.6 Development Re�✓iew Check/rst
Worksheet C
Low Impact Development — Site Design Measures
Select Appropriafe Site Design Measures (Required for C.3 Regulafed Projects; all offier projecfs are encouraged fo
implement sife design measures, wh,ich may be r�quired at municipalify discrefion.) Projecfs thaf create and/or reptace 2,500—
10,000 sq.ti. of impervious surface, and sfand-alone single family homes fhat create/replace 2500 sq.ft. or more of impervious
surface, must include one of Site Design Measures a through f(Provision C.3.i requ�remenfs).10 Largerprojects must also
include applicable Sife Design Measures g through i. Consulf wifh municipal staff about requirements for your project.
e
Regulated Projects can also consider the following site design measures to reduce treatment system sizing:
Yes Plan Sheet Number
� G -/ � 42.�
❑
n
j. Self-trea6ng area (see Section 4.2 of the C.3 Technical Guidance)
k. Sslf-retaining area (see Seciion 4.3 of the C.3 Technicai Guidance)
i. Plant or preserve interceptor trees (Section4.1, C.3 Techniql Guidance)
m
�
i
�
I
i
i
j
i
i
lo See MRP Provision C.3.a.i.(6) for non-C.3 Regulated Projects, C.3.c.i.(2)(a) for Regulated Projecfs, C.3.S ior projecls thatcreafelreplace
2,500 to 10,000 sq.ft. of impervious sur(ace and stand-alone single fa5ily homes that crea;e/replace 2,500 sq. Finel Dr2ft OCto6ef 31,u2014
�_�__� ...,...,.,,�.�*o ��tp.�asian measures and ldentify the Plan Sheetwhere theseelemenis are shown.
C.3 and C.6 Developmeni Revie�v Check!isf
� Worksheet D
C3 Regulated Project - Stormwater Treatrnent Measures
Check all applicable boxes and indicate the treafinent measure(s) inciuded in the project.
Yes
Attach W� sheet F
and Calculations
Attach Worksheet D-1
and Calculations
Is the project a Special Project?"
If yes, consuit �ith municipal staff about the need to ev2luate the feasibility and infeasibilit� of 140% LID
treatment. Indicafe fhe type of non-LID treatment to be used, the hydraulic sizing method , and
percentage of the amount of runoif specified in Provision C.3.d that is treated:
(For the % not treated by non-L(D measures, continue with Nlorksheet D-1)
% of C.3.d amount
Non-LID Treatment Measures: Hvdraulic sizinq method�Z of runoff treated
❑ Media filter ❑2.a �2.b ❑2.c —%
❑ Tree well filter ❑2•a . �2•b 02.° —%
It is feasible to treat the C.3.d amount of runoff using infilVation?
lndicate the infiffration measures to be used, and hydraufic s¢ing method:
Infiltration Measures: Hvdraulic sizin4 methodt2
❑ Bioinfiltration13 ' ❑1.a ❑1.b ❑2.c�3
❑ Infi(trafion trench ❑1.a ❑1.b
�i other (speciiy)• /NF/GT/�T/61-� T{f�2o�/�{ {'G}4l�T,�2 �C3 o x�
Is the project installing and using a recycled water plumbing system for non-pofable water use and the
installation of a second non-potable water system for harves:ed rainwater is impracfical, and considered
infeasible due to cost considerations? If yes, check the box below and skip ahead to worksheet D-3
(fhere is no need for further evafuaiion of Rainwater harvesting/use.)
Re�vded Water Measure:
❑ Recycled Water System for non-potable water use will be installed and used.
❑
Attach Plans showing
' system, connection to
' Recycfed Water Line
' and/or Connection
� Approval Letterfrom
Sanitary District
Attach �sheet D-2
and Calculations
it is feasible to treat the C.3.d amount of nmoff using rainwater harvesting/use?
Rainwater Harvestinq/Use Measures: Hvdraulic sizinq mefhod1z
❑ Rairnrater Harvesting for indoor non-potable wate� use ❑1.a ❑1.b
❑ Rairnvater Harvesting for landscape irrigation use ❑�,a ❑1.b
It is infeasible to treat the C.3.d amount of runoff using either infiltration or rainwater harvesfingluse?
Indicate the biotreatment measures to be used, and the hydraulic sizing method:
❑ -
Attach
Worksheets D-1 and
D-2 and Ca[culations
Biotreatment Measures:
, ❑ Bioretention area
❑ Flow-fhrough planter
❑ Other (specify):
�draufic sizinc�method�Z
02.c ❑3
�2.c ❑3
q copy of the long term Operations and Maintenance (OS�M) Agreement and Plan for this project wifl be required. Piease
contact the NPDES Representative of the appiicable municipality for an agreement template and consult the C.3 Technical
Guidance at www.Flowsfobay.orq for maintenance plan templates for specific facility types.
�� Special Projects are smart growth, high densiky, or transit-oriented developmenfs w�th the criteria defined in Provision C.3.e.fi.(2), (3) or (4)
(see Worksheet F�.
�Z Indicate which of the follow9ng Provision C.3.d.i hydrautic sizing methods were used. Volurne based approaches; 1(a) Urban Runoff
Quafity Management approach, or 1(b) 80% capEure approach (recommended volume-based approach). Flow-based aoproaches: 2(a)10%
of 50-year peak Flow approach, 2(b) 2 times the 85'" percentile rainfail intensity approach, or 2(c) 0.2-inch-per-hour intensity approach
(recommended flow-based approach). Combination flow and wlume-based aaaroach: 3.
�3 See Section 6.1 of the C.3 Techn'�cal Guidance fo� conditions in whis bioretention areas provide bioinfiltrati Fina! D1aff OCfober 31, 2014
i
� .
.
, �.
,�
.
C.3 and C.6 Developmenf Revier� Checklist
Worksheet D-1
�easibility of Infiltration
D-1.0 Infiltration Potential. Based on site-specific soil reportt4, do site soils eiJ:er:
a. Have a saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksai) less than 1.6 inchesfiour), OR, if the Ksat
rate is not available:
b. Consist of Type C or D soils?
➢!f Yes, infiltrafion rs nof feasib/e — skip to D-1.9 below.
➢!f No, complete the Infrltratron Feasibilify checklisf 6elow:
Evatuate infiltration feasibility:
D-1.1 Would infiltration facifi6es15 at this sife conflict with the location of existing or ProPosed
underground utifities or easements, or wouid the siting of infiltration facilities at this site resuli
in ttieir placement on top of underground utifities, or othenvise oriented to underground
utilities, such that they would discharge to the utility trench, restrict acce.ss, �r cause stability
concems7 (If yes, attach evidence documenting this condition.)
D-1.2
D-1.3
D-t.4
D-1.5
p-1.6
Q-1.7
ts there a documented concem that there is a potential, on the site for soii or groundwater
poltutants to be mobil'¢ed? {If yes, attach documentation of mobilization concerns.)
Are geotechnical hazards present, such as steep sfo�es, areas with tandstide potential, scils
subject to Gquefaction, or would an infittration facility ° need to be built less than 10 feet from
a building foundation ar other improvements subject to undermining by saiurated soils? (If
yes, attach documentation of geotechnical hazard.)
Do tocaf vrater district or other agency's policies or guide[ines regarding the locations where
infilEration �may occur, the separation from seasonal high �roundwater, or setbacks from
potential sources of pollution, prevent infiltration devices� from being implernented atthis
site? (If yes, attach evidence documenting this condiiion.)
Would constn�ction of an infiltration device10 require that it be located less than 100 feet
away from a ssptic tank, underground storage tank with hazardous mateoals, or other
potentiai underground source of pollution? (If yes, attach evidence documenting this claim.)
ls there a seasonal high groundwater table or mounded groundwater that would be within 10
feet of the base of an infiltrafion device10 constructed on the site? (If yes, attach
documentation of high groundwater.) •
Are there tand uses that pose a high threat io water quality — including but not {imited to
industrial and light industrial activi6es, high vehicular traffic (i.e., 25,000 or greater average
daily traffic on a main roadway or 15,000 or more average daily traffic �n any intersecting
roadway), automotive repair shops, car washes, fleet storage areas, or nu rseries? (If yes,
attach evidence documenting this claim.)
D-1.8 1s there a groundwater production well within 1�0 feet �f the location where an infiltration
device10 would be constructed? Qf yes, aitach map showing the well.)
Results of Feasibi[ity Determination
lnfiltration is Infeasible?
D-1.9 �If any answer to questions D-1.1 thru D-1.8 is °Yes° then Infiltration is Infeasible.)
Continue to Worksheet D-2.
Infiltration is Feasibfe?
Do not fill out worksheet D-2.
Con6nue to Worksheef D-3.
Yes No
� �
� ❑ I
�
�
❑ a
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ �
❑ ❑
❑ �
❑ O
� �
❑ ❑
la If no site-spe�ific soil report is available, refer to soil hydrauiic conductivity maps in C.3 Teehn'ical Guidance P,ppendix I.
15 For more inforrnation on infiltration faaiities and devices, see Appe � ix E of the SMCWPPP C3TG HandbooFinal Dfaft OCtober3l, 2014
C.3 and C.5 Gevelopment Revrew Checklisf
Worksheef D-2
Feasibility of Rainwater Harvesting and Use
D-2.1 Potential Rainwater Capfure Area
a. Enter the total squate footage of impervious surface for this site from Table I.B.t
(Total Created and Replaced impervious Surface from 1.6.1.fl
b
c.
If the existing impervious surface to be reptaced (totai from Column 1.6.1.c in Table 1.8.1)
is 50% or more of the pre-project impervious surface (tofal from Column I.B•1.a in Table
�,g,1), then enter the post-project impenrious surface (total from Column 1.8.1.e in Table
I,g,1) in D-2.1.b. If not, enter zero in D-2.1.b.
Convert the larger of the amounts in Items D-2.1.a and D-2.1.b from square feet to acres
(divide by 43,560).
This is the projed's Potential Rainwater Capture Area, in acres.
� O S 'Sq. ft.
� .,q. ft
D _ 2 Acres
p_2,2 Feasibility of Landscape Irrigation:
a. Enter area of posf-project onsife landscaping (see Column 1.6.1.e in Table 1.6.1)
b. Multiply the Potentiai Rainwater Capture Area above (D-2.i.c) by times 3.2.
D - d% Acres
o - 7 7 Acres
� Yes ❑ No
c. Is the amount in D-2.2.a (onsite landscaping) LESS than the amount in D-22.b (the producf
of 3.2 times the size of the Poten6al Rainwater Capture Area)�6?
➢ If Yes, con6nue fo D-2.3.
➢ ff No, fhere are iwo op6ons:
' 1. !t may be possible to meet the ireafinenf requirements by direcfing rvnoff
from impervious areas fo self-refaining areas (see Secfion 4.3 offhe C.3
Technicaf Guidance).
2. It may be possi6le uss fhe C.3.d amouni of runoff forirrrga6on. Refer fo Table
11 and fhe curves in Appendnc F of the LfD Feasibilify Report to evaluafe
feasibiTity of harves6ng and usrng the C.3.d amount of runoff for irri9aGon.
Comptefe tfre calcufations and affach fo fhis worksheef. !f feasible fhat
completes Worksheet D-Z and you may move on fo Worksheet D-3.
D-2.3 Feasibility Indoor Non-Potable Uses: (check fhe box forthe applica6le pr�jectfype, fhen frlf in the requested
informa6on and answerthe quesSon).'T
❑ a. Residential Project
Units
Number of dwelting units (total post-project):
Divide the amount in () by Potenfial Rainwater Capture Area (D-2.1.c):
fs the amount in () LESS than 124?
❑ b. Commercial Project
F{oor area (total interior past-project square footage):
Divide-��e amount in n by Potential Rainwater Capture Area (D-2.1.c):
Is the amount in (i) L.ESS than 84,000?
❑ c. School Praject
i. Floor area (total interior post-project square footage):
ii. Divide the amount in (i) by Potential Rainwater Capture Area (D-2.1.c):
iii, Is the amount in {ii) LESS than 27,000?
Dulac
❑ Yes ❑ No
v3, S6 o sq.tt
�c� 8,� Sq.ftJac
❑ Yes � No
Sq.ft.
Sq.ftJac
❑ Yes ❑ No
►
�
r
;
�
�6 �andscape areas must be contiguous and within the same Drainage Management Area to iRigate with harvesfed rainwater via gravity flow.
�� Rainwater harvested for indoor use is typically used for toilef/urinal8ushing, industrial processes, oc other n Final Drdit OctobeT 39, 2014
•
�.>
.
❑ d. fndus!rial Projecl
i. Estimated demand %r nor-potable water (gallons/day):
ii. Is ihe amount in (ij LESS than 2,900?
1:
A
❑ e. Mixed-Use ResidentialiCommercial Projectlg
i. Number of residankial dtivel(ing units and commerciai floor
area;
ii. Percentage of total interior pest-project floor area serving
each activity:
iii. Prorated Potential Rainwafer Capture Area per activity
(mul6ply amount in D-2.1.c by the percentages in [i]):
iv. Prorated project demand per impervious area (divide the
amounts in [] by the amounts in [ii]): �
C.3 and C.6 Develcpmen� Re:ie;v Checklist
Gal.lday
❑ Yes ❑ No
Residen6a! Ccmmercia!
Units Sp•ft-
o�a
%
Acres Acres
D Wac Sq.ft/ac
v. Is the amount in (iv) in the residential column fess than 124, AND is [he amount Yes ❑ No
in the commercial column less than 84,000? �
If you checked "Yes" forthe a6ove quesGon forthe applicab/e praject fype, rainwaterharvesfing forindooruse is
considered infeasible forthaf buiJdinq. lf there is only one building on fhe sife you are done with this worksheet !f there
is mor� than one building on fhe sife, for each fhaf has an individua! roof area of 10,000 sq. ff, ormore, complete
Sec6ons D-2.2 and D-2.3 of this form for each building, Con6nue fo D-2.4 � a 7Vo' is checked for any 6uilding.
!f you checked "No' for fhe quesfion applicable to fhe type of project, rainwater harvesfing for indoor use may be
feas�b(e. Confinue to D-2,4:
D-2.4 Project Information •
*- See definitions in Glossary (Attachment 1)
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
D-2.5
5.1
Project Type: G��M����' If residential or mixed use, enfer # of dwelfing units:
Enter square fooiage of non-residential interior floor area:
Total area being evaluated (entire project or indvidual roof with an area > 10,000 sq_ft.):
rv3, $roo
T--
�5 3Sv_sq.ft.
If it is a Special ProJect', indicate the percentage of LID t�eatment* reduCfion: percent
(Ifem 4.4 appfies only fo enbre pr�jecf evalua6ons, not indrvidual roof area evaluafions.)
Tatal area being evaluated, adjusted for Speaal Project LID treatment reductioncredi�: ��t S?� sq.ft.
(This is fhe fota/ area being evaluafed that requiras L1D treatmenf.)
Calcutat� Area of Self-Tceating Areas, Self-Retaining Areas, and Areas Contributing Eo Self-Retaining Areas.
Enter square footage of any selt-treatioy areas• in the area that is being evaluated: %��� sq.ft.
5,2 Enter square footage of any selt retaining areas• in the area that is being evaluated: sq•�.
5.3
5.4
D-2.6
6.1
62
Enter the square footage of areas contributing runoff to se�r--etaining area`: sq.�
TOTAL of Items 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3: '� sq.ft.
Subtract credit for self-trea6nglself-retaining areas from area requiring treatrnenL
Subtraot the TOTAL in ltem 5.4 from the area being evaluated (ltem 4.5). Thisis the potential ! 3� O� SQ.ft.
ra[nwater capture area•.
Convert the potential rainwater capture area (Item 6.1) from square feei to acres. O• �
acres
D-2.7 Determine feasibility of use for toifet flushing based on demand
18 For a mixed-use project involving activities othar than residentiat and commercial adivities, follow the steps for residentiallcommerclat
mixed-use projects. Prorate the Potential Rainwater Capture Area for each activity based onthe percentage ot the project serving ea�h
a`�"�'�y� Frnal Drff Octo6er31, 2014
9
r
C.3 and C.c" Development Review Checklrst
7.1
7.2
7.3
ProjecYs dwelling �rits per ac. e of po!ential r2inwater cap;ure zrea (Divide the nur�ber in 4.1 by
the number in 6.2).
Non-residential interior floor area per acre of potertial rain capt��re area (Divide ihe numbzr in 4.2
by the number in 6.2).
Note: formulas in ltems 7,1 and 7.2 are set up, respective!y, for a residential or a non-nsidentizl project Do
not use fhese p;e-set formufas /ormixed use projects. For mixed use projects ; evaluafe the residentla!
toilet tlushing demand based on the dwelling unifs per acre ;or the residential portion of fhe pro�ect (use a
prorated acrezge, 6ased on �e peroenfage of the project dedicated to residential use). Then evaluafe fhe
commercial toilet flushing demand per acra for the commercia! portion of the project (use a prorated acreaqe,
based on the percenfage of the pr�ject dedicsted fo commercial use).
Refer to the appiicable countywide table in Attachment 2. Identify the number of dvveiling units
per impervious acre needed in your Rain Gauge Area to provide the toilet ftushing demand
required for rairnvater harvest feasibility.
Refer to the applicable countywide table in Attachment 2. Identify fhe square feef of non-
� 4 residential interior floor area per impervious acre needed in your Rain Gauge Area to provide the
toilet flushing demand required for rairnrater harvest feasibility.
d�velling
uni:slacre
1nt. non-
res. fioor
6 O D a area/acre
dwelling
% 3 D D � units/acre
int. non-
res. floor
area/acre
Check "Yes° or `No" to indicafe whefherthe followrng con�tions appJy. If'Yes'is checked forany question, then rainwaferharves6ng and
use is infeasible. As soon as you answer "Yes ; you can skip to lfem D-2.9. !f IVo" is checked for af! items, fhen rainwaterharves6nq and
use is feasible and you must harvest and use fhe C.3.d amount of sformwafer, unless you infiltrafe the C.3.d amount of sformwater'.
7.5
r�
Is the projecYs number of dwelling units per acre of potential rainwater capture area (iisted in Itern
7.1) LESS than the number idsntified in Item 7.3?
Is the projecf's square foofage of non-residential interior floor area per acre of pot�ntial rainwater
capture area (Gsted in ttem 7.2) LESS than the number ideniified in Item 7.4?
D-2.8 Detertnine feasibility of rainwater harvesting and use based on factors other than demand.
$'1 Does fhe requirement for rainwater harvesfing and use af the project conflict with local, state, or
federal ordnances or buil�ng codes?
❑ �
❑ Yes
❑ �
�Y�
❑ �
❑ Yrs
Would the technical requirements cause the harvesting system to exceed 2% of ihe Total Project
CosY, or has the applicant documented economic hardship in relation to maintenance costs? (If so,
8.2 attach an explanation.)
❑ res
8.3 Do constraints, such as a s(ope above 10% or lack of availahle space at the site, make it infeasible ❑ Yg
to locate on the site a cistem of adequate size to harvest and use the C.3.d amount of wateY� (If so,
attach an expfanation.)
❑ Yes
8_4 Are there geotechnicaUstability concems related to the surface (roof or groun� where a cistern
would be lopted that make the use of rainwater harves< < infeasible? (If so, aflach an
• explanation.)
8.5 Does the I�cation of utilities, a septic system and/or Heritage Trees* 6mit the placement of a cistem
on the site to the extent that rainwater harvesting is infeasible? (If so, attach an explanation.)
❑ �
o�
❑ �
❑ �
❑ �
lVofe: /f is assumed tftaf projecfs wifh signifrcanf amounts of landscaping wrll eifher treat runoff wifh landscape dispersal (se/f-freafing and
seff-refaining areas) orwi!! evaluafe the feasibilify of harvesfing and using rainwafer for irrigation using the curves in Appendix F �f fhe UD
Feasibility Reporf.
•- See definitions in Glossary (Attachment 1)
1p FinalDraff Ocfober3l, 20l4
�
•
. .
' C. 3 and C.6 Gevefopment Revie�i Checkfist •
• ' �
D-2.9 Results of Feasibility Determination Infeasible Feasible �
a Based on the results of the feasibifity analysis in Items 7.5, 7.6 and Section D-2•8, rainwzter � �
harvesting/use is (check one):
--> If "FEASIBLE"is indicated forltem D-2.9.a the amount ofstormwaferrequiring treatment must 6e freated with harvesfing/use, unless
it is infilfrated inio the soil.
-� tf "1NFEASlBLE" is checked forltem D-2.9.a, then fhe applicant may use appropriately designed bioretenfion' facitifies (`see
definifions in Gsu6s �ace condr6ons� then fhe biorefenfion acrlies ar� p dicfed fo In�traKe 80% 06 more average 1ann alrrunoff. If
unimpeded 6y
Ksat < 1.6, maa�facr7if nu'ndetrrdrainst�lfsife conditons pre' dude nfilfration, e!i ed bioreten�6on area orfiow hroughlplan�erma�be �
sform drains v� fY
used.
� q Final Draft Ocfo6er 31, 2014
�
�
Worksheet E
C, 3 ar.•d C.o �7evelcpmeri RevieN� Checklist
Hydromadification Management
�
Are ihe app�icable items provided with the Plans?
v.. Nln NA �
-- �
�
. ,
i
�� ❑ ❑ 5ite plans with pre- and post-projed impervious suriace areas, surrace ��vw ���C������ ��
- enfire site, focafions of flow duration controls and siie design measures per HM siie �
design requirement � �
i
❑ � � Soils report or other site-speafic document showing soil type(s) on site
C
� � lf oroiect uses the 8ay Area Hydrology Modet (BAHM), a list of model inputs and outputs.
� � ❑ If project uses cxlstom modefing, a summary of the modeling calcutations v�ntn
corresponding graph showing curve matching (exisfing, post-project, and post-project
with HM controls curves), goodness of fif, and (allowable)1ow flow rate.
� ❑ ❑ If project uses fhe lmpradicability Provision, a fisting of an appucaoie costs ana a �� �C�
descrip6ort of the altemative HM project (name, location, date of start up, entity
rP�nonsible for maintenance).
E-1 Is the project a Hydromodification Management19 {HM) Project?
E_�,1 Is the total impervious area increased over the pre-projzct conditicn?
❑ Yes. Continue to E-1.2
❑ No. The proiect is NOT required to incoraorate HM Measur2s.
Go to Item E-1.4 and check'No'
E-1.2 Is the site located in an HM Cont�ol Area per the HM Control Areas map (Appendix H of the C.3 Technical Guidance}?
❑ Yes. Continue to E-1.3
❑ No. Aftach map, indicating project focation: The proiect is NOT required to incoroorate H_M Measures.
Skip to Item E-1.4 and check "No'
E-1.3 Has an engineet or qua(ified environmental professional determined that runoff from the project f�ows only through a
hardened channel or enctosed pipe along its entire Iength before emptying into a watervray in the exempt area?
❑ Yes. Attach map of facility. Go to Item E-1.4 and check "Yes." •
❑ No. Atfach map, indicating project location. 7he ro'ect is NOT re uired to inco orate HM Measures.
Skip to Item E-1.4 and check "No'
E-1.4 !s the projecf a Ffydromodification Management Project?
,❑ Yes. The project is subject fo HM requi�ements in Provision C.3.g of the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit.
❑ No. The project is IXEMPT from HM requirements.
D If the project is subject to the HM requirements, incotporate in the projectflow duration contro! measures designed
.' such that post-project discharge rates and durations match pre-projecf discharge rates and durations.
➢ The Bay P,rea Hydrology Model (BAHN� has been developed to help s'¢eflow duration controls. See
www bavareahvdroloqvmodel.orq. Guidance is provided in Chapter 7 of the C.3 Technical Guidance.
E-2 Incorporate HM Gontrols (if required)
�
❑ ❑ lf the project uses altematives t� the default BAHM approach or settings, a wntten
description and rationale.
i
19 Hydromodification is the change in a site's rvnotf hydrograph, induding increases in flows and durations that results when land is deveioped
(made mote impervious). The effects of hydromodification include, but are not limited to, increased bed and bank erosion of receiving sUeams,
loss of habitat, increased sed'rtnent transport andJor deposition, and increased flooding. Hydromodification control measures are designed to
reducs these effeds. 12 Finaf Draff Ocfober3l, 2014
•
.;
. � -
C.3 and C.6 Developmenf ,4eview Check!isf
Worksheet F
Specia! Projects
Complefe this workshesf for projects that appear to meet the definition of `Specia/ Project'; per Provision C.3.e.ii ef fhe Municipal
Regiona! Sformwater Permit (MRP). The form assists in determining whefher a projecf ineefs Special Project criteria, and fhe
percenfage of !ow impact developmenf (Lf0) treatment reduction credit. Speciaf Projects that implemenf less fhan 100% LID
treafinenf must provide a narrafive discussion of the feasibility or infeasibrlity of f OC% L1D treaiment See Appendix J of fhe C.3
Technical Guidance Handbook (download at www.flowstobay.orq) for more information.
F.1 "Special ProjecY' Determination (Check fhe 6oxes to defermine if fhe project meefs any of the followrng cafegories.)
Soecia! Proiect CateqorY "A"
• Does the project have ALL of the following characterisfics?
❑ Locafed in a muniapality's designated central business district, downfown core area or downtown core zoning district,
neighborhood business disfrict or comparable pedestrian-oriented commercial district, or historic preservation site
and/or district20;
❑ Creates andlor replaces 0.5 acres or less of impervious surface;
❑ lncludes no surface parking, except for inadentai parlcing for emergency vehicle access, ADA access, and passenger
or freight loading zones;
❑ Has at least 85°/a coverage of the entire site by permanent structures. The remainirig 15% portion of the site may be
used for safety access, parking structure entrances, trash and recyding service, utifity access, pedestrian connedions,
pubiic uses, landscaping and stormwater treatment.
❑ No (confinue) .
❑ Yes — Compiete Sectlon F2 below
S�eciaf ProiectCateqorv'B' •
Does the projed have ALL of the following characteristics?
❑ Located in a muniapality's designated central business district, dowc�own core area or downtown core zoning districf,
_ neighborhood o usiness district or comparable pedestrian-oriented comrnerciai district, or historic preservation site
and(or district2 ;
❑ Creates and/or replaces an area of impervious surface that is greate� than 0.5 acres, and no more than 2.0 acres;
❑ Includes no surface parking, except for incidental parking for emergency access, ADA access, and passenger or
freight loading zones;
❑ Nas at least 85% coverage of the entire site by permanent sfructures. The remaining i5% portion of the site may be
used for safety access, pa�icing structure entrances, trash and recyding s ervice, utility access, pedestrian connections,
public uses, landscaping and stormwater treatmen�
❑ Minimnm density of either 50 dwelling units per acre (for residential projects) or a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 21 (for
commeccial or maed use projects)
❑ No (continue)
❑ Yes — Complete Secfion F-2 below
Speaal Proiect Cateaory °C'
Does the project have ALL of the following characteris6cs?
❑ At least 5Q% of the project area is within 4/2 mile of an ezisting or planned transit hub21 or 140% within a planned
Priority Devel�pmentAreau;
❑ The pro;set is characterized as a non-auto-refated useZ3; and
❑ Minimum density of either 25 dwel[ing units per acre (for residenfial projects) or a Ffoor Area Ratio (FAR) of 2:1(for
commercial or mixed use projects) �
❑ No (continue)
❑ Yes — Comptete Section F-2 below
2D And buitt as pa�t of a munidpality's stated objective to preserve/enhance a pedesVian-oriented type of urban design.
Z� "Transit hub' is defined as a rail, light rail, or commuter rail station, ferry terminal, or bus transfer station served by three or more bus roufes. (A
bus stop wifh no supporting services does not quafrfy.)
� A"planned Priority Development Area" is an infill development area fortnally designated by the Association of Bay Area Governmenf's 1
Metropolitan Transportation Commission's FOCUS regional pfanning program.
� Category C speci5ca{Iy excludes stand-alone suriace parking lots; car dealerships; auto and truck rental facili6es with onsite surface storaga; fast-
food restaurants, banks or pharmacies with drive-through lanes; gas stations; car washes; auto repair and servlce faciEities; or other auto-related
project unrelated to the concept af transit �riented development
, �3 Final Draff Ocfober 31, 2014
C.3 and C.fi Developmeni Review Checklrsf
F2 LID Treatment Reduction Credit Calcufation
(1(more fhan one cafegory applies, choose oniy one of ihe appficab!e cafegories ard fil! o�t the fable for thaf category.)
Category Imperviaus Area Site Project DensitylCriteria Aliowabte Applied
Created/Replaced Coverage Density or Credit Credit
(gq, f},) (%) FAR (%) (%)
A NA. N.A. 100°/a
B Res t 50 DU/ac or FAR Z 2:1 ��%
� Res Z 75 DU/ac a FAR Z 3:1 75%
Res z 1 �0 DU/ac or FAR >_ 4:1 .100%.
C Locafion credit {select one)2°:
Wrthin Y4 mite of transit hub 50%
•• Within'h mile of hansit hub 25% ; �
.. Within a planned PDA 25% '"
Density credit(selecione): •
Res z 30 DU/ac or FAR Z 2:t • 10%
Res Z 60 DU/ac a FAR t 4:1 ' 20%
� Res Z 100 DU/acor FAR >_ 6:1 30%
Parking credit (select one): '
510°Io at-grade surface parkingZ$ 10%
. . No surfa�e parki� 20%
. TOTAL TOD CREDf7 =
F.3 Narrative Discussion of the Feasibi(ity/lnfeasibitity of 100% LID Treatment:
if project will implement less than 1d0% LID, prepare a discussion of the feasibilityor infeasibility of 100% LlD treatment, as
described in Appendix K of the C.3 Technical Guidance.
F.4 Setect Certified Non-L1D Treatment Measures:
If the project wi11 include non-LID treatment measures, select a treatment measure certifted for "Basic' 6eneral Use Level
Designa6on (GULD) 6y the Washington State Department of Ecolog�s Technical Assessment Protocol — Ecology (fAP�.
Guidance is provided in Appendix K of the C.3 Technical Guidance (download at www.flowstobay.orq) 26
24 7o qualify for the location credit, at least 50% of the projecYs site must be located within Ihe % mile or'/: miie radius of an existing or planned
transit hub, as defined on page 1, footnote 2 A planned transit hub is a station on the MTC's Regional Transit Expansion Program list, per MTC's
Resolution 3434 (revised Apr12006), which is a regional priority funding plan for future transit stations in the San Franc+sco BayArea. To qualify for
the PDA locafron credit,100% o[ the project site must be located within a PDA, as defined on page 1, footnote 3.
ZS The at-grade surface parking must be treated with LID treatment measures.
26 TAPE certification is used in order to sztisfy 5pecial Projed's repo14g requirements in the MRP. F1na1 D7�ff OCfobef 31, 2014
,.
.�? ♦
�
C.3 ar,d C.& Gevelopment Raview Checkfst
Worksheet G
(For municipal staff use only)
G-1 Alternative Certification: Were the treatment and/or HM control sizing and dzsign revievred by a quafified third-pa�y °
professional that is not a r�ember of the project team or agency staff'?
❑ Yes ❑ No Name of Reviewer
G-2 High Priority Site: High Prioriry Sites can include these iocated in or within 100 feet of a sensitive habitat, Area of Special �
Biological Significance (ASBS), body of water, or on sites with slopes (subject to rnontiily inspeciions from Oct 1 to April
30.)
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, then add site io Staffs Monthly Rainy Season Construction Site Inspection List
Opetations and Maintenance (O&M) Submittals
G� Stormwater Treatment Measure and/HM Control Owner or Operators Information:
Name: �
Address: � �
'
Phone: Email: ;
➢ Applicant musf call far rnspec6on and receive inspection vrrthin 45 days of insta/laSon of freatment measures and/or '
hydromodification management contro/s. � i
f
The following ques6ons apply to C.3 Regulated Prajecfs and Hydmmodifica6on Management Projecfs. l
� • � Yes No N/A �
- G-3.1 Was maintenance p{an submitted? ❑ ❑ ❑
_ . G-32 Was maintenance plan approved? ❑ ❑ ❑ �
. G-3.3 Was maintenance agreemenf submifted? (Date executed: 1 ❑ ❑ ❑ �
... _ i
;.. D Affach fl�e executed mainfenance agreement as an appendix fo fhis checMisf. •
G� Annual Operations and Maintenance (0&M) Submittals (for municipai staif use oniy): �
For C.3 Regulated Projecfs and Hydromodifica6on Managemenf Projecfs, indcate the dates on which the App/icanf �
submitted annual reporfs forprojecf O&M:
GS Comments (for municipal staff use only):
G-6 NOTES (for municipal staff use only):
Seciion I Notes: �
Wortcsheet A N otes: �
Worksheet B Notes:
WorksheetC Notes:
Worksheet D-1 Notes:
Wo�icsheet D-2 tlotes:
15 Fnal Draff Ocfober3l, 2014
C.3 and C.6 Gevelopmer,t Revie:v Checklist
�
Worksheet E Notes:
Worksheet F Nofes:
G-7 ProjecE Close-Out (for municipal staff use only): Yes No NA
7.1 Were final Conditions of Approval met? � �
7.2 Was initial inspection of ths completed trealmenUHM measure(s) conducted? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Date of inspection: 1
7.3 Was rnaintenance plan submitted? � �� �
(Date executed: 1 �
7.4 Was project informafion provided to staff responsible for 08�M verification inspections? � ❑' ❑
•(Date provided to inspection staff: �
G-8 Project Close-Out (Continued — for municipal staff use on(y):
Name of staff confirming project is closed out: �
Signafure: Date: '
Name of 0&M staff receiving information: +
Signature: Date:
96
Finat DraR October 31, 2094
_ �. . _ .
�
.�
i
•
,
.�
�i]a��COO D a�� La��OO C�� °.���9 D�1C�o
CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING
May 7, 2015
City of Burlingame
Building Departtnent
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA. 94010
Re: 988 Howard Avenue, Burlingame, CA
APN: 029-214-220
To Whom It May Concem:
Per review comments prepazed by various departments of the City of Burlingame, I respond as
follows:
ENGINEERING DIVISION (comments bv Martin Quan, dated 03-16-2015):
1. See enclosed Pre-Development Hydrology Map. It shows where the stormwater runoff is
currently directed. It is all sheet flow from the site and ultirnately collected at the
northerly comer of the property on Myrtle. The connection of the existing catch basin is
unknown.
2. Per our discussion you would like us to submit a total fixture units calculations for the
proposed project to deternune if a sewer analysis report will be requued. Please see
enclosed calculations.
3. I understand that there is no public parldng on Howard Avenue. The proposed design will
have less driveway openings that will provide more public parking on Myrtle Road and
East Lane.
4. The 5-car stacker will be assigned for the commercial tenants.
5, This comment will be addressed by the architect.
6. The ramp profile is now shown on sheet C-1. The line of sight when exiting &om the
ramp onto the sidewalk is now shown on sheet Gl. The proposed planters on both sides
of the drivecvay are only 2 foot high and will not cause any obstruction to the line of
sight.
7. Sidewalk dimensions and planting area dimensions surrounding the property are now
shown on plan (sheet C-1).
8. See enclosed stormwater ta.ble calculations with the attached roof and treatment planters
plan.
9. This item will be addressed by the architect.
STORMWATER DIVISION (comments bv KJK, dated 03-16-20151:
1. Enclosed is the completed C.3 and C.fi Development Review Checklist.
If you have any questions please don't hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
� � � ✓
Vergei P. Gal �
965 CENTER STREET • SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 •(650) 593-8580 • FAX (650) 593-8675
go 5outh Park
San Francisco CA9yio7
Ap
`C
Qi5 777 o56i te1 L E V Y D E� I�G�N PA RT N E RS
415 777 5117 fax � T
URE
DATE: 05/05/2015
T0: CITY OF BURLINGAME CC:
FROM: TOBY LEVY,FAIA
PROJECT: 988 Howard Avenue SUBJECT: PLAN CHECK COMMENTS
APN # 029-214-220
COMMENTS:
The following are the responses to the City of Burlingame Stormwater Division Plan Check
Comments:
Itemized Response to Stormwater Division Plan Review Comments:
Please see the attached letter from MacLeod and Associates.
Sincerely,
Toby Levy, FAIA #C-10527
President
Levy Design Partners Inc.
� _
c,
Page 1 of 1
._
� NV. 9236
�
r =
9,� N �
�_
LEGEND
BASIN OVERFLOW•
EXIT POINT
� DRAINAGE DIRECTION
PRE-DEVELOPMENT
HYDROLOGY MAP
SCALE: NONE
�.^ \V' �
�
4 ��
�^�
� F�
O \ -a^�p^ �,
_ ,
�
�� �
1� �
0
S �
\
�
\
,
—SD SD SD 'Z SD
t--G G Z�G G
�r �
AC PAVE �
�
i.�
�
o� �
�
'�• � � Qy� �
f �
V`' �
� �
V N
ol � •�
I
�
�
tie
;�.
� AC PAVE �
JU JU �Z. wv. oi.s�(x�
WV. 90.84(NEkNN�
S� �4' .
G G G G G-
R-O0� �s��� �{
r �� 5 S �` "T.
.. 7 I3S
M.
. � MECNAN�CAI EOINPYElrt —; —ROOFIOP wALc PADS
766�-3'
_ — 27-70��6-5' 60—�U� _ _� — — 20—D� 5_B-CK
� � . . � _ � .. .. .:, .� ._ _.. ... �
, � - K � � F��� x��� -
� ��� �� � ,�z
O. . .
,����( ��y�.
` _�c,clB�", i , � ! ♦ : .ari�ai'aM��.F � __'_.� __.... ._. ...
�r ,
` �.. �. � '�'�� �r
� I
l
• � •
GENERALNOTES .
1. ROOF 70 COt�IY M7M 'COOL ROOf' REWrtiE1�EM5 OF THE
701D fALfORN4 EIdRCY CODE SCC1i0N t57F.t2.
Y. Al( ROOf MEAS TO BE MSS �' /-PlY PER C8C TIBE �
1505. ROOF i0 SLOPE TO DRNN Ai 1//' PE11 FOOT 4IN. Z.+ �
J. FOOF ANp prEpfLO�f DRNNS O R00� AND UEtK ARC�S SNLI � `g � a
CONNECi/fLOW 10 PVNfCRS 10 CrtY 4WER, S.C.D. .,.= &�3
�, BURT-UP WRH A�GD ROOf INSUUTWN OVER STRUCTURPL ��
SM[ATWNC. 1'�P. '
J
Nonce
nw. ernMP we pMllOea.
.n n. pnpny w mq+ye a
l�owP rrer� tic �e r,w
' - r ' � Y .� {"vv � i5s � �"C i �ipieMr�.u� 4' f Derpn PrNen
� _i a . '
` � .__� . ._c��rrtm:..riw[i�� � �� Y.�..
\ �.:, ' T o,� . A>p`..� �w�.. 1 � 7
{; Y: )� � � �.���'�µi i•y1�u '�`�`m�� J�' TYl Pu`.+FET �,.
\ �F!`� �'p �/� �/��'4� � .��i�i I
�i ��i<:.. _ -���. /��`..i �.%%i� ..
� �c • %" iii�
` - �� � ¢ ;;.: �
\ _ _ . '; t � t�o�� a I �` �L
- �. . , ;,,� ,,-,,.� _ = 50 ,� O
. '� �• �, w �. I `� 5
� A��,���1�•�,. ;v1���� ���, 'e,�4:�%'\;�
` "`¢1�� � r 'MP.� �r1�\�� ,Gr�.'�`i� �qN.�'u� r ;�i����� �, r�_�Y� i�' ' 1
�� � 4,r�, � t ,+�.,a% ti ,�. ;�•; ;,,-; �5 �
�I � _- � � �i � ' �?'!� � 'I� y� ' � I, � \
, - � '
� 1I E'�f=klJk "Y.MERCUIC'A00�'l7ECK � �
� f •.}YCF �v:_"{. . . 1
\ +F 6'-8' o w1
o �t /'�.'�'�',,�,_ i.:_' `,ff/�, c Ir�;��. I
` �
`� � ru P.� �
•7 , },�i(�'��°l�., : ��Q-�^����i.�. $��� � � t� �
3� �� '�S�'p. . i�'�i`�)\\. ,rE`3,`F.�S +y a�\\1\\� i!a � I
�'�� rt �-. r;� r � �— ar'w ,. � .�-
� �%�,�,_ � ��%,f^` �` �,'"� , '
� �:-,�, �,,i;.� � .� fi�. - �: � � ; i
'; ; .: 9e ? t_ �. ,z %,' �A . �� i
� ___ � k ;;�•�5'1 f 'w 1 "__�t'�`� I
--- � i
` ' . , .>� •� ,� �
� r-r !
'�� ; � �
. . . i � ,!�� . . ' �_' ,�Q.. � �
'; . k� �;������ s�;�";�2�',' s� '� p� c rc. �.Ea
�� ,:. �
,�,� �,� �. ' . � „"nr
;�- 5e 1�'`� '�" .<� �"'�;•ri ,
; ; � � :,� ,�� �,� ;4 .;� , � � - �j2 (a , �L
� :� , .
7 �` es_a li i � � �ow-r�c�r ? ' t I
� _ J . . � rra�r� - I
�--. . . . . .i . . . � � '
3 cza F A.rt.�p, ;� ��,.,,r�� R_, ;;, �,.�.-- ,,,,;-, � �
(�' S � �.���� �+c t x ' i�� �'!{ tz: Tu.� CUS � �� � 1
� 3 J� 5 '�%• � i�1io ��` ,`�`��� ?'� # � �'�''�Y,��unc �:1�� � \� 1
f �t ,.0 w � i;- ti . °�3'r�1r I
,r:�i ���. r.;.. �, '. ,>�'6� .- ,�n�`bi �
� �� �4 Y 'k� 1 1 1
c 1`/ �e�'-�yy,�� � ' -- - ' 1
' { •' � � � � � � L� � � � _ __ __ _ _ _ _�� � ' o •' � � �
s'-o'
n'-s�• ar-s' i�•-e• n•-�r m•-o• srre�nc �
b'-1' 126•_7•
b�� K �a� 2
,� _ $o S. �:
�PLAN: ROOF PUW
iro =r�
�
�i
!
\
�
���
W
�
Z /�
W \�
� U
� , 1 '
�■■
� S
� L
Q �
� �Z
O —
2 -�
00 �
�
� m
y�gtEl(,4H�r
m �c� �.
* � e-,os2� {
� �'� p=
TF�F CA��F�
888 HOWARD AVENUE
AP'N; OZ6414 220
BURLINGMIE, G
PR6,�CT NR 2014-21
dlR llT6lt"
@�L�271S RNIMOCONW011
CONTACF. TOBY LEVY
N�s�mase� r
N�s�m-s+n F
uu� AS NOTED
FLOOR PLAN:
ROOF PLAN
A2.4
, �
♦
l' L� h� I�'�tz. �4- t�--f"� �
� i 5� �'-F
} t A7T
166'-1� .-
se-z' _ _ _ _ �—zo' srra.rx
— � — — -- -- -- -- ----- -- ----- ;;k�' , �
, -�
� cow eoW ta�r ce�r� CaYI cn1Y coW coW eo1W m�1 [a�f� ca�1r �. �/ �
�� . � [TAMCAIC iTAIOMD iG�DARD t7A fTAMWMO JTAlOARC iT [TAMOMO LTAl4M0 R�� :�Mw :1Y�0 .. . '--I
� �o�o� . f. .: � , , - r
� S�v , ' � .. o • � � �u n o m o ^ � � � � • `� ,
Z(� � ` `,��T- �� � � � � � � � � � � � � - ` ' p
..�i�' ' s z � S 1 `` s M �.� -..,'' '�`.
:<_, ..J, , � � � � � � � � � � � � _ l- i � ` -
�, " �.�. e'-a-
-. I
J�—,� �k ,._,�� � ��:
� - L _ J ..�3�r�
j� / sx�cou� w sru�o�m ,;�� �� ;► �
` : . � `wra s'-Y vcrmcK fwc. 7 �w+nr.�p sPoccS� �wK �2'-0• vcmicv. '- �.• .
VEHCUIM OPiYCYAY �� �i •� ACCESAB0.M TO CIFMuiCE fOR •� . � ; I
CAN SUCIff.RS �'�'
\ � � /�LCES49LE Pu+wNG 7 = . .
� ; �,�6 7 ;��:�: � —
� ,
� w ceuor, s cua w:n[ �,� �
7Wty1 A/�p(ER
: d '�...: PECEPGp.ES � T�'0 2 �. �
�, . ` ,' ��,_o. �5,_D,�9,_p,�8,_p,� �._0.� � �.-0. � — . ..
� '� � �'O�' fTTTTTI '�' �/ �
,��`,_ � � � L11.111J � � �� �'� � �_ 'J.
M. ,A= � � ��) ��� '� _`�� ' 1 ' .�
\ � . j E � � I �II �II �I ` `r '4
�:�• �� � � � � _ ` i
o,i � 2 � � � � � � (
' r e�: � trow� p 8 S � ��� ��� �� � � -�..
�4Y'�N �f/1` i�lti� � ���-d �. °°n' I `°"' II `w" II `°"' I +��+� �., �� ' ";♦
4 . RAIYYO i�MG�O iWWW i7NG11O ��1,,.
S. � � � ..Jr � �l �� \!
� I �� + ' � Y � A :� :E: PD.C. - - .. - _ � . i
�j !
_ . . . . . . I : � I st�W�GE o i 1.
Y_!7 l _ L - _ , . .
�� :� � �
. ii � � W i
' ii i .. cou�+cv� �oeer � \ / a, •' K /
R \ ,. II i �� ��j �� � .' , . .1
��:� . . �
:�' ' Y ' 1
! � . _"-_'—' RE7A4 SPACE - - ' . ,
\:. _�____ __ �. S1AIR 1 f3t5Y 6[�I . . � ' ' I dv
.. .�. . 1
t1� ��� 16'-0'
#.---i¢"-�' ' w�DE p+ME � � . .. . 1
� .�\-� . � ' _ __. A6LE � . � -
i . �t.. . . . .
�, , . . � . . : _
_ � . ��_.:. �— -
W � . :..
------ - --- i ' � :��
� N
� K
. . . � �� i.5i aoPE � . � � � � 1
,� ��et�� � �4 . L e �''r - - ' b � :- -
� ' � - . ' �~ ���
�_��_ _� � � ..�� _� �� �
. - �_ ;� .- : = . . �.:. _ .. -
. . . . � -�, : . . . . . : . � . �. . � . .: . . . . '. '
�. . .. . 18'- '. 6'-6� , . 20'-p� . � .. . . .. � tf'-0' ... . . .. .. . Zp;_ �� � . „
w�-�- , �_z-
��
o�mcKAr ---
�PLAN:GROUNDfL00R
ue�ra
' ,µ, OWA AVENUE
.� 4\`
.._....-^..""'�.�.:
�. a� �-�, ��. � 3
— 38 S•�:
GENERAL NOTES
1. CONTRACTOR i0 PROVIDE SQLID COflfINU0U5 BACNWG FOR ALL
WFLL MD. fir11FE5, /�CCESSORiES. M41M'ORK, EOIYPNEM
RMKS. S�KlVING. F7C. KL BIOCKwG 70 BE SWE OWENAON
AS ASSOCIATCD (RN1N0. SEE A0.5 C
2. AT µl 1pI�ET f00MS PRPADE TN[ fOLIOW�G: Zy L
7.1. 4W. JOk�6� CLK SPACE N FRONT Of SRK = �i S
7.2. 41N. 30kt6' CLR SP�CE Ai S�OE UF iU8 '�
71 41N. J6�tt6' CLR. SPACE N fROM OF TOtCT �V_ g,�3
3. SCE A0.5 fOR ttP�CV. YOUN�MG HEWFRS IN 6�THROOMS ?'
>
1. fLL BA7Wt00Y5 NUST COYPLY N77H CBC SEC710N I IA u'
J
- wonce
nw. m..��P r�e wm�mea.
veMV�YM�y�H
lvryOWpi PMb�r\ bc ni! Nd
�clMuN�raqMwbM
'����4�./f�r �C�� O Wavne�Nn4+YDerPiPW�n
I
_ %� 5.�..
W
�
Z Q
W
��A� �r��L a�.� � > V
�
—' 2� ( s• � � W
�/ �
\ �
� �7
O `
2 �
� �
�M
� W
AR �
`, ,Sj � 1
.. 0 �i" .�
* � o-,w:� �
N� �urwu oA7[ �
9 � �r
Tf �F C���E�
9B8 HOWARD AVENUE
kPN: 0�8 21� 420
. BURLINGMIE, G
pR6JECT NQ 2D14-21
access�sa�rY ruo�s
y a�e �msi
j� —1 r _ 7R�D-XM6 KNMM6C�
L 1 J f�--pU�1C DOORS: 80'
ic
R OOOPS 18'
IDR PU�IC DOOR£ 21'
N07E: SEE /�0.5 (OR
�OOmOrui DOOR ACCE55181Lm
CLWWCC GEiNLi �Q:iT/�('.% TOSYLEVY
�4�s�masa+ P
g+s�m•s�tt F
� AS NOTED
FLOOR PLAN:
GROUND FLOOR
PR[A[CE NORfM iRUE NOif1N
� � A2.1
-, - -- - -
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Staff Review:
March 16, 2015
� Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
� Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
X Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Request for Environmental Review, Commercial Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit for building height, and Setback and Parking
Variances for construction of a new 3-story commercial building with
a roof deck at 988 Howard Avenue, zoned MMU,
APN: 029-214-220
March '16, 2015
1. The building shall be equipped with an approved NFPA 13 Sprinkler System
throughout. Sprinkler drawings shall be submitted and approved by the Central
County Fire Department prior to installation. The system shall be electronically
monitored by an approved central receiving station.
2. The applicant shall ensure proper drainage in accordance with the City of
Burlingame Engineering Standards is available for the fire sprinkler main drain and
inspector test on the building plumbing drawings. These items may drain directly to
landscape or in the sewer with an air gap.
3. The fire protection underground water line shall be submitted and approved by
the Burlingame Building Department prior to installation.
4. Minimum fire flow shall meet requirements of Cafifornia Fire Code Appendix B,
no less than 1,500 gallons per minute. Contact Burlingame Engineering Dept.
5. The building shall be equipped with an approved Class I NFPA 14 Standpipe
System. The standpipe system shall be submitted and approved by the Central
County Fire Department prior to installation.
6. � he fire sprinkler system and fire standpipe system will not be approved by
the Central County Fire Department until the fire protection underground has been
submitted and approved by the Burlingame Building Department.
7. A manual and automatic fire alarm system shall be installed throughout the
building.
8. Provide elevator recall for use by emergency responders.
9. Elevator machine room(s) shall be constructed with the minimum fire rating as
the�elevator hoistway, including all openings. Fire sprinkler coverage shall not be
provided in room. Do not install elevator shunt trip.
10. Evacuation signs required throughout the building per California Code of
Regulations, Title 19, §3.09.
11. Ground floor of Stair #1 shall be extended to the exterior of the building with
an exit passageway.
Reviewed by: Christine Reed
}� �
��'�-�` � Date: 3-26-15
�.
Project Comments
Date:
April 13, 2015
To: 0 Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
X Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
From: Planning Staff
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
0 City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Subject: Request for Environmental Review, Commercial Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit for building height, and Setback and Parking
Variances for construction of a new 3-story commercial building with
a roof deck at 988 Howard Avenue, zoned MMU,
APN: 029-214-220
Staff Review: April 13, 2015 — 2"d Submittal
No further comments.
All conditions of approval as stated in all previous reviews of the project will apply to this
project.
Reviewed by: r'�.---''ii�� �'4U ;�'`� Date: 5-14-2015
.
�
e• —
� Project Comments
�
Date:
To:
From:
March 16, 2015
� Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
X Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
0 City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Environmental Review, Commercial Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit for building height, and Setback and Parking
Variances for construction of a new 3-story commercial building with
a roof deck at 988 Howard Avenue, zoned MMU,
APN: 029-214-220
Staff Review: March 16, 2015
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Plans submitted for any commercial project must be designed, wet-stamped, and
signed by a licensed architect. 1997 Uniform Administrative Code §302.2 and
§302.3.
On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2013 California Building
Code, 2013 California Residential Code (where applicable), 2013 California
Mechanical Code, 2013 California Electrical Code, and 2013 California Plumbing
Code, including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1889. Note: If the
Planning Commission has not approved the project prior to 5:00 p.m. on
December 31, 2013 then this project must comply with the 2013 California
Building Codes.
Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2013 California Energy
Efficiency Standards.
Go to http•//www.enerqy.ca.qov/title24/2013standards/ for publications and
details.
Provide two completed copies of the attached Mandatory Measures with the
submittal of your plans for Building Code compliance plan check. In addition,
replicate this completed document on the plans. Note: On the Checklist you must
provide a reference that indicates the page of the plans on which each Measure
can be found.
Place the following information on the first page of the plans:
"Construction Hours"
Weekdays: 7:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m.
Saturdays: 9:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m.
J
, f
Sundays and Holidays: 10:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m.
(See City of Burlingame Municipal Code,. Section 13.04.100 for details.)
Construcfion hours in the City Public right-of-way are limited to
weekdays and non-Ciiy Holidays between 8:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m.
Note: Construction hours for work in the public right of way must now be
included on the plans.
6) On the first page of the plans specify the following: "Any hidden conditions that
require work to be performed beyond the scope of the building permit issued for
these plans may require further City approvals including review by the Planning
Commission." The building owner, project designer, and/or contractor must
submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically illustrated on the Job
Copy of the plans prior to performing the work.
7) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame
business license.
8) Provide a fully dimensioned site plan which shows the true property boundaries,
the location of all structures on the property, existing driveways, and on-site
parking.
9) Note: Any revisions to the plans approved by the Building Division must be
submitted to, and approved by, the Building Division prior fo the implementation
of any work not specifically shown on fhe plans. Significant delays can occur if
changes made in the field, without City approval, necessitate further review by
City departments or the Planning Commission. Inspections cannot be scheduled
and will not be performed for work that is not shown on the Approved plans.
10)A new Certificate of Occupancy will be issued after the project has been
finaled. No occupancy of the building is to occur until a new Certificate of
Occupancy has been issued.
11)Provide a complete demolition plan that includes a leqend and indicates existing
walls and features to remain, existing walls and features to be demolished, and
new walls and features.
NOTE: A condition of this project approval is that the Demolition Permit will
not be issued and, and no work can begin (including the removal of �
building components), until a Building Permit has been issued for the
project. The property owner is responsible for assuring that no work is
authorized or performed.
12)When you submit your plans to the Building Division for plan review provide a
completed Supplemental Demolition Permit Application. NOTE: The Demolition
Permit will not be issued until a B�"�ding Permit is issued for the project.
13)Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed
property lines
14)Show the dimensions to adjacent structures.
15)Obtain a survey of the property lines.
16)The plans show that the side of this structure is less than three feet
from the property line. Revise the plans to show that there are no openings on
this side of the building and that gable end venting and attic ventilation will be
achieved through other means. 2013 CBC §705.8.1 and Table 705.8
.
_r
;: _ _
17)The plans show that the structure is three feet from the property line. To comply
with the opening protection required in 2013 CBC, Table 705.8 the building face
must be more than three feet from the property line or the gable end venting
must be eliminated and attic ventilation must be achieved through other means.
18)On the plans specify that the roof eaves will not project within two feet of the
property line.
19)Provide details on the plans which show that all roof projections which project
beyond the point where fire-resistive construction would be required will be
constructed of one-hour fire-resistance-rated construction per 2013 CBC §705.2.
20)Indicate on the plans that exterior bearing walls less than five feet from the
property line will be built of one-hour fire-rated construction. (2013 CBC, Table
602)
21)On the plans show that all openings in exterior walls, both protected and
unprotected, will comply with 2013 CBC, Table 705.8. Provide a table or chart
that specifies 1) the openings allowed and; 2) the size and percentage of the
openings proposed.
22)Indicate on the plans that, at the time of Building Permit application, plans and
engineering will be submitted for shoring as required by 2013 CBC, Chapter 31
regarding the protection of adjacent property and as required by OSHA. On the
plans, indicate that the following will be addressed:
a. The walls of the proposed basement shall be properly shored, prior to construction
activity. This excavation may need temporary shoring. A competent contractor shall be
consulted for recommendations and design of shoring scheme for the excavation. The
recommended design type of shoring shall be approved by the engineer of record or
soils engineer prior to usage.
b. All appropriate guidelines of OSHA shall be incorporated into the shoring design by
the contractor. Where space pernlits, temporary construction slopes may be utilized in
lieu of shoring. Maximum allowable vertical cut for the subject project will be five (5)
feet. Beyond that horizontal benches of 5 feet wide will be required. Temporary shores
shall not exceed 1 to 1(horizontal to vertical). In some areas due to high moisture
content / water table, flatter slopes will be required which will be recommended by the
soils engineer in the field.
c. If shoring is required, specify on the plans the licensed design professional that has
sole responsibility to design and provide adequate shoring, bracing, formwork, etc. as
required for the protection of life and property during conshuction of the building.
d. Shoring and bracing shall remain in place until floors, roof, and wall sheathing have
been entirely constructed.
e. Shoring plans shall be wet-stamped and signed by the engineer-of-record and
submitted to the city for review prior to constxuction. If applicable, include surcharge
loads from adjacent structures that are within the zone of influence (45 degree wedge up
the slope from the base of the retaining wall) and / or driveway surcharge loads.
23)Indicate on the plans that an OSHA permit will be obtained for the shoring* at the
excavation in the basement per CAL / OSHA requirements. See the Cal / OSHA
handbook at: http•//www.ca-osha.com/pdfpubs/osha userquide.pdf
* Construction Safety Orders : Chapter 4, Subchapter 4, Article 6, Section
1541.1.
. . . _ . .. . . �.Y
� .
►
24)Indicate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the
Department of Public Works.
25)Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at
any point are considered in calculating the allowable lot coverage. Consult the
Planning Department for details if your project entails landings more than 30" in
height.
26)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 2013 CBC
§ 1009.
27)Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
28)On your plans provide a table that includes the following:
a. Occupancy group for each area of the building
b. Type of construction � �
c. Allowable area
d. Proposed area
e. Allowable height
f. Proposed height
g. Proposed fire separation distances
h. Exterior wall and opening protection
i. Allowable
ii. Proposed
i. Indicate sprinklered or non-sprinklered
29)Acknowledge that, when plans are submitted for building code plan check, they
will include a complete underground plumbing plan including complete details for
the location of all required grease traps and city-required backwater prevention
devices.
30)Illustrate compliance with the minimum plumbing frxture requirements described
in the 2013 California Plumbing Code, Chapter 4, Table 422.1 Minimum
Plumbing Facilities and Table A- Occupant Load Factor.
�In the commercial space shown on sheet A2.1 provide details that show a
minimum of one accessible Uni-sex restroom in the tenant space.
32)Provide details on the plans which show that the entire site complies with all
accessibility standards. NOTE: If full accessible compliance cannot be achieved
complete the attached Request for Unreasonable Hardship.
33)Specify on the plans the location of all required accessible signage. Include
references to separate sheets on the plans which provide details and graphically
illustrates the accessible signage requirements.
34)S�cify the accessible path of travel from the public right of way, through the
main entrance, to the area of alteration. .
35)Specify an accessible path of travel from all required exits to the public right of
way.
36)Specify the path of travel from on-site parking, through the main entrance, to the
area of alteration
37)Specify a level landing, slope, and cross slope on each side of the door at all
required entrances and exits.
38)Specify accessible countertops where service counters are provid�d
39)Provide complete dimensioned details for accessible bathrooms
c
_a
. .
40)Provide complete, dimensioned details for accessible parking
41)Provide details on the plans which show that the building elevator complies with
all accessible standards. 2013 CBC §11 B-407.
42)On the first page of the plans clearly state that all paths of travel and common
use spaces will be accessible and all living units will be adaptable.
43)Please Note: Architects are advised to specify construction dimensions for
accessible features that are below the maximum and above the minimum
dimension required as construction tolerances generally do not apply to
accessible features. See the California Access Compliance Manual —
Interpretive Regulation 91 B-8.
�emove all references to the ADA (see the accessible parking on sheet A2.1) as
this project must comply with the 2015 CBC, Chapter 11 B not the ADA.
45)Provide an exit plan showing the paths of travel
46)Specify the total number of parking spaces on site.
47)Sewer connection fees must be paid prior to issuing the building permit.
NOTE: A written response to the items noted here and plans that specifically
address items 31 and 44 must be re-submitted before this project can move
forward for Planning Commission action. The written response must include
clear direction reqardinq where the requested information can be found on the
Ip ans•
Reviewed by. Date: 3-20-2015
�
t.
CD/PLG-Barber, Catherine
From: James Wald • � � .com>
Sent: Monday, June Ol, 2015 6:39 PM
To: CD/PLG-Barber, Catherine
Subject: 988 Howard Ave
Hello Catherine,
I received a post card from the Community Development Department regarding 988 Howard Ave construction. If this
isn't your realm of expertise, then please pardon my error and forward this email to the correct department.
I live at Anita Rd where I own a duplex (formerly a house built in 1922) which I absolutely adore. My main concern
is that the potential 3 story building will block the setting sun and invade my privacy with its roof top deck. I live in a one
story home so I'm a little uneasy with the height of this building. Overall, I support the revitalization of Howard Ave and
believe there is an opportunity there to offer restaurants and shops. It's a much wider street than Burlingame Ave so it
can definitely support the overflow from it's more popular sister street.
Another issue, will anything that close to the railroad tracks be in danger of being taken over through imminent domain
by the high speed rail cabal?
Thank you for reading my email and like I stated earlier, just forward to those that should be aware of my concerns. I'm
not much of a political person but this possible building has me worried.
With sincerity,
Jim Wald
Anita Rd
i
- ,�
r
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FROM APPENDIX G OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
AESTHETICS. Would the project:
❑ Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
❑ Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
❑ Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
❑ Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
❑ Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
❑ Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
❑ Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management
or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
❑ Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
❑ Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation?
❑ Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
❑ Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
❑ Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
❑ Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Senrice?
❑ Have a substantial or adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified
in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish
and Wildlife Service?
❑ Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
❑ Interfere substantially with the movement of any native or resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
❑ Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
❑ Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
❑ Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource as defined in'15064.5?
❑ Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
' 15064.5?
❑ Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?
❑ Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
1
�� -
♦
Environmental Checklist from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines
GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
❑ Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
a) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
b) Strong seismic ground shaking?
c) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
d) Landslides?
❑ Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil?
❑ Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse?
❑ Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (2001), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
❑ Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
v Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
❑ Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
o Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials?
❑ Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
❑ Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
❑ Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
❑ For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing
or working in the project area?
❑ For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
❑ Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
❑ Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
❑ Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
❑ Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that
there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses
or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
❑ Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
-2-
�
.�
f
Environmental Checklisi from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines
❑ Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surFace runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site?
❑ Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
❑ Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
❑ Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
❑ Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
❑ Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding
as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
❑ Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
❑ Physically divide an established community?
❑ Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
❑ Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
❑ Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
❑ 2b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a
local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
NOISE. Would the project result in:
❑ Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
❑ Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
❑ A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
❑ A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
❑ For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing orworking in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
❑ For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Woul�+ f�e project:
❑ Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
❑ Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
❑ Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
-3-
�
�i .
3
Environmental Checklist from Appendix G of fhe CEQA Guidelines
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
❑ Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other public facilities?
RECREATION.
❑ Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
❑ Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
❑ Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
❑ Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
❑ Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location
that results in substantial safety risks?
❑ Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
❑ Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑ Result in inadequate parking capacity?
❑ Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
❑ Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
❑ Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
❑ Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
❑ Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
❑ Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
❑ Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
needs?
❑ Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
❑ Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
-4-
�1 `
`t
Environmental Checklist from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines
❑ Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
❑ Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
-5-
. CITY OF BURLINGAME
< ' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
- BURLINGAME, CA 94010
�' PH: (650) 558-7250 o FAX: (650) 696-3790
www.burlingame.org
Site: 988 HOWARD AVENUE
ihe City of Burlingame Plnnning Commission announces the following
public hearing MONDAY, JUNE 8, 2015 at 7:00 P.M. in the City
Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, [A:
Application for Environmental Scoping for an applitation for
Environmental Review, Commercial Design Review, Conditional Use
Permit for building height and Setback�and Parking Variances for
construction of a new 3-story commercial (retail�office) 6uilding with
a roof deck and below-grade parking at 988 HOWARD AVENUE
zoned MMU. APN 029-214-220
Mailed: May 15, 2015
(Please refer to other side)
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE
Citv of Burlin_qame
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 challera�� 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 HEIa►RING NOTICE
�I
�� .
r
(Please refer to other side)
�
r
.� �