The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About85 California Drive - ResolutionRECORDING REQUESTED BY: Planning Department City of Burlingame WHEN RECORDED MAIL T0: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 2009-092421 09:46am 07l13109 R1 Fee: NO FEE Count of pages 8 Recorded in Official Records County of San Mateo Warren Slocum Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder I��!� ii�� ,�� i I��'� �� i� �� I �� * 2 0 0 9 Q Q 9 Z 4 2 1 A R* Resolution No. 037 -2009 85 CALIFORNIA DRIVE - APNs: 029-242-050 & 029-242-250 TITLE OF DOCUMENT I hereby certify this to be a full, true and correct copy of the document it purports to be, the original of which is on file in my office. � � Date: May 22, 2009 � Wi liam Meeker, Comm y Deve op ent Director RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for Commercial Desiqn Review for faGade chanqes to an existinq commercial buildinq at 85 California Drive zoned C-2 Sub Area D Putnam Trust 3 California Drive, Burlinqame, CA, 94010 property owner, APN: 029-242-050 and 029-242-250; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on May 11, 2009, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: On the basis of the initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19, Section 15301 - Existing facilities, Class 1(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that interior or exterior alterations involving such things as interior partitions, plumbing, and electrical conveyances are exempt from environmental review. 2. Said Commercial Design Review is approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Commercial Design Review are set forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. ✓�� airman I, � L r.,e,Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby cert�fy that the! oreg�ir.� r?sol�!ti�n was �r.tro�uced and ado�ted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11`h day of May, 2009 by the following vote: 85 CALIFORNIA DRIVE - RESO 37-2009 AYES: Auran, Brownrigg, Lindstrom, Vistica, Yie NOES: NONE ABSENT: Cauchi ABSTAIN: Terrones � ecretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption and Commercial Design Review. 85 California Drive Effective May 21, 2009 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped April 2, 2009, sheets A.101, D.201, D.301, A,201, A.203 and A.301; any changes to the exterior materials shall require review by the Planning Commission; 2. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's March 19, 2009 memo, the City Engineer's March 17, 2009 memo and the NPDES Coordinator's March 10, 2009 memo shall be met; 3. that prior to approval of the final inspection, the applicant shall record a cross-access easement with the San Mateo County Clerk-Recorder for the drive aisle located on the adjacent property (APN: 029-242-040) which provides access to the disabled-accessible parking spaces at 85 California Drive; 4. that any changes to the size or envelope of building, which would include changing or adding exterior walls or parapet walls, shall require an amendment to this permit; 5. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 6. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 7. that prior to issuance of construction plans shall approval adopted by the remain a part of all se Compliance with all con not be modified or chan �uUi iCii vil aNNcai; a building permit for construction of the project, the project be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall ts of approved plans throughout the construction process. ditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall ged without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City 8. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteraiion projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 0 10 that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2007 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption and Commercial Design Review. 85 California Drive Effective May 21, 2009 11. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Division; 12. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and 13. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Approved Minutes May 11, 2009 VII. ACTION ITEMS Consent Calendar - ltems on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted upon simu/taneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant, a member of the public or a Commissioner prior to the time the Commission votes on the motion to adopt. Chair Terrones asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. There were no requests. He noted that he would abstain from voting on the item since he was not present at the meeting when the matter was reviewed as a study item. 2. 85 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUBAREA D OF THE BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA — APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR FA�ADE CHANGES TO AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (KENT PUTNAM, APPLICANT; PUTNAM TRUST, PROPERTY OWNER; AND HUGH HYNES, PROTO INC., DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Commissioner Yie moved approval of the Consent Calendar based on the facts in the staff report, Commissioner's comments and the findings in the staff report, with recommended conditions in the staff report and by resolution. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica. Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner Cauchi absent, Commissioner Terrones abstaining). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:11 p.m. 3