HomeMy WebLinkAbout1456 Cabrillo Avenue - Staff ReportItem # 3 a-
Consent Calendar
PROJECT LOCATION
1456 Cabrillo Avenue
City of Burlingame
Design Review
Address: 1456 Cabrillo Avenue
Item # 3a
Consent Calendar
Meeting Date: 1/27/03
Request: Design review for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage.
Applicant and Property Owner: Otto Miller APN: 026-041-170
Designer: James Chu, Chu Design and Engr., Inc. Lot Area: 6,000 SF
General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1
CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15303, Class 3—(a) construction of a limited
number of new, small facilities or structures including (a) one single family residence or a second dwelling unit
in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted
under this exemption.
Summary: The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing single-story house and detached garage to build a
new two-story single family dwelling and detached two-car garage. The proposed house and detached garage
will have a total floor area of 3,394 SF (0.57 FAR) (including 48 SF of attic areas on the second floor with a
ceiling greater than 5'-0" in height) where 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) is the maximum allowed. The project includes a
detached double-car garage (427 SF) which provides two covered parking spaces for the proposed five-bedroom
house. The site plan indicates two trees that are not protected size, 8 and 10 inches in diameter, will be removed
for the new driveway. The landscape plan notes that two, 24-inch box size trees (white birch and crapemyrtle)
will be planted in addition to several existing trees to remain on-site. All other zoning code requirements have
been met. The applicant is requesting the following:
• Design review for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached two-car garage (CS 25.57.010).
Tahle 1— 1456 C"ahrilln Avenue
PROPOSED EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D
SETBACKS
Front (Ist flr): 20'-0" 18'-7" 19'-8" (block average)
(2nd flr): 21'-6" none 20'-0"
Side (left): 4'-6" 3'-6" 4'-0"
(right): 8'-6" (at 2nd fl.) 2'-0" (to arch over 4'-0"
driveway)
Rear (lstflr): 48'-0" 24'-3" 15'-0"
(2nd flr): 46'-6" (to balcony) none 20'-0"
Lot Coverage: 2044 SF 1415 SF1 2400 SF
34% 23.5% 40%
FAR: 3394 SF 1584 SF 3420 SF
0.57 FAR 0.26 FAR 0.57 FAR
(3346 SF w/o attic areas)
' Information provided by San Mateo County Assessor's Appraisal Report (no appraisal date provided).
Existing FAR includes first floor, basement and detached garage.
Design Review
1456 Cabrillo Avenue
PROPOSED EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D
# of bedrooms: 5 not available ---
Parking: 2 covered 1 covered 2 covered
(20' x 20') 1 uncovered (20' x 20')
1 uncovered 1 uncovered
(9' x 20') (9' x 20')
Height: 29'-4" not available 30'-0"
DHEnvelope: CS 25.28.075 b, 2 not available CS 25.28.075
(window enclosure
exception)
Staff Comments: See attached.
Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on January 13, 2003,
the Commission made several suggestions for the project and placed this item on the consent calendar (January
13, 2003 P.C. Minutes). Planning staff provided all available information of the existing house as requested by
the Planning Commission. This data is shown on Table 1. The applicant addressed the Commission's concerns
in a written response dated January 21, 2003, which is included in your staff report for review. The following
are suggestions made by the Commission and a response to each question provided by the applicant:
Perhaps one of the "landscape pockets" shown on the landscape plan could be shifted so that the bedroom
looks out on an Italian Cypress.
► Applicant notes that he met with the next door neighbor at 1452 Cabrillo Avenue after the design
review study meeting to discuss the landscape pockets. The applicant will work with the neighbor to
determine the appropriate location of the landscape pockets prior to installation.
2. It appears that the French doors that are the main access to the backyard at the rear of the house can only
be accessed by cutting through the center of the breakfast nook, which will be difficult if there is
furniture in the room; is not a requirement, but applicant could consider eliminating the breakfast nook,
using the floor area to add the dormer at the right side, and re-locating the French doors to the center of
the house.
► The applicant points out that there are two sets of doors at the rear of the house; one in the family
room and one in the nook. The applicant considered relocating the doors to the center of the house,
but feels that the doors in their current locations provided the best access to the rear yard and
�
Design Review
1456 Cabrillo Avenue
detached garage without affecting the interior layout of the floor plan. The door in the breakfast nook
provides access to the detached garage and the door in the family room provides access to the rear
yard.
In regards to the suggestion of adding a dormer to the right side of the house, Planning staff would
note that adding another dormer would require a special permit for declining height envelope, since
the combined dormers extending beyond the declining height envelope would exceed 35 SF (window
enclosure exception allows up to 35 SF to extend beyond the declining height envelope).
3. Fence at right side is shown as remaining on the landscape plan, but is in poor repair; would like to see a
condition of approval requiring the fence to be replaced at this side.
► A condition of approval has been added requiring the existing fence along the right side property line
to be replaced with a new fence.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the
Council on Apri120, 1998 are outlined as follows:
Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood;
2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood;
Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure;
4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and
Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components.
Findings: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Commission's January 13, 2003,
design review study meeting; and that the design of the proposed new two-story single family dwelling and
detached garage, as modified by changes to landscaping, is compatible with the character of the neighborhood,
the project is found to comply with the requirements of the City's five design review guidelines.
Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Afiirmative action
should be by resolution and include findings made for design review, and the reasons for any action should be
clearly stated. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped
December 16, 2002, sheets A.1 - A.3, A.6 and L.1, and date stamped January 7, 2003, sheets A.4 and
A.S, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require and amendment to
this pertnit;
3
Design Review 1456 Cabrillo Avenue
2. that the existing fence along the right side property line shall be replaced with a new fence in compliance
with the fence regulations in Chapter 25.78 of the Burlingame Municipal Code;
3. that the applicant shall work with the neighbor at 1452 Cabrillo Avenue to determine the appropriate
location of the landscape pockets along the right side property line to screen the views from the new
second story prior to installation; the landscaping, including the landscape pockets as modified and
including a note from the neighbor regarding the agreed to location, shall be installed before the final
inspection is conducted by the Building Department;
4. that the two existing street trees (sycamore) shall be adequately protected during demolition of the
existing house and during construction of the new house;
that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or
enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof
height or pitch, shall be subject to design review;
6. 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 Department;
7. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department 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;
that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination
and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be
included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued;
9. 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 Department;
10. that the conditions of the City Engineer's December 23, 2002 memo, the Fire Marshal's December 20,
2002 memo, and the Recycling Specialist's December 17, 2002, memo shall be met;
11. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which
requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction Plan
and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall
require a demolition permit;
4
Design Review 1456 Cabrillo Avenue
12. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management
and Discharge Control Ordinance; and
13. that the proj ect shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code,
2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame.
Ruben G. Hurin
Planner
c: James Chu, Chu Design and Engr., Inc., designer
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes
January 13, 2003
Chair eighran called for a voi vote on the motion to u old the City Planners d rmination that e
pri ary frontage for signage 380 Lang Road was on t south side of the lot. T otion passed o a 7-0
te. Appeal procedures re advised. This item co cluded at 10:50 p.m.
IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS
12. 1456 CABRILLO AVENUE — ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW TWO-
STORY, SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH DETACHED GARAGE (OTTO MILLER, APPLICANT AND
PROPERTY OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN AND ENGINEERING INC.; DESIGNER) (67 NOTICED)
PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. Commission asked the staff to provide information
about the lot coverage, floor area and setbacks for the existing house in the staff report table.
Chair Keighran opened the public comment. James Chu, designer, was present to answer questions. He
noted that many dwellings in the neighborhood, and in particular the two adjacent houses, are two stories.
Some portions of the proposed house are attic areas that do not have live-able space but are counted in FAR
calculations done by the Planning Department so that the actual live-able space proposed for the dwelling is
less than the number calculated for total floor area. The Commission noted that they liked the design of the
right side of the house where the roof is brought down to a single story element, did the designer consider
adding a dormer at this side. The designer explained that originally a dormer was proposed at this location,
but it required a special permit to violate the declining height envelope, so it was eliminated.
Jeff Gressard, 1452 Cabrillo, spoke regarding the proj ect. He noted that his properly was immediately to the
right of the proposed dwelling and he had no concerns about the size, but it appeared that one of the
proposed bedroom windows directly faced one of his bedroom windows, would like to know if anything
could be done to improve privacy. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was
closed.
C. Bojues made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar for the next available meeting. This
motion was seconded by C. Vistica.
Comment on motion: the house is designed well, do not see that much could be done to increase privacy
between the two properties because the bedroom in question has only one window, window is needed for
egress purposes and cannot be eliminated; agree with the observation of the designer that the houses
surrounding the site are both two story and rather bulky. The following suggestions were made:
• perhaps one of the "landscape pockets" shown on the landscape plan could be shifted so that the
bedroom looks out on an Italian Cypress;
• it appears that the French doors that are the main access to the backyard at the rear of the house can
only be accessed by cutting through the center of the breakfast nook, which will be difficult if there
is furniture in the room; is not a requirement, but applicant could consider eliminating the breakfast
nook, using the floor area to add the dormer at the right side, and re-locating the French doors to the
center of the house; and
• fence at right side is shown as remaining on the landscape plan, but is in poor repair; would like to
see a condition of approval requiring the fence to be replaced at this side.
fC
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes
13.
January 13, 2003
Chair Keighran called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when plans had
been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is
advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 11:04 p.m.
344 PEPP AVENUE, ZONED R-1- PPLICATION FOR DESIGN�VIEW, FRONT AND SIDE ETBACK
VARIA CES, SPECIAL PERMIT F ATTACHED GARAGE CONDITIONAL USE PE IT FOR AN
ACC SORY STRUCTURE FO NEW TWO-STORY, SIN E FAMILY DWELLING. ARK BRAND
A HITECTURE, APPLICAN AND ARCHITECT KIERA ND MARIE WOODS, PRO RTY OWNERS)
6 NOTICED PROJECT P NNER: CATHERINE BA R
CP Monroe briefly pr ented the project d�
Chair Keighran ened the public comm�
present to ans er questions. The architect
willing to w rk with them to reach a pla�
iptio . There were no questions staff.
Mark Brand, architect, a Kieran Woods, owner, were
�d that the owner is awar of the neighbor's concerns and is
is agreeable to both p ies.
Scott d Alexis Danielson, 340 Pe per, spoke regarding the p ject. They noted that their residen 'is
i diately adjacent to the sub' ct property and the entra e to their property is situated nex o the
pr posed pool house. Their bi gest concern is that the pr osed development should preserve e creek
etting, submitted photograp to show even in normal st s the creek level rises to a point b ond the 100
year flood line, have a so' s report that indicates th soil adjacent to the creek bank a the proposed
swimming pool is very ndy and subject to liquef tion, the pool house is located on e creek bank and
that will make it impo ible to provide landscapi to screen the pool house from the eighboring property,
the pool equipment nclosure is proposed adja nt to the entrance to their prope and the noise will create
and unwanted nu' ance, could property own consider installing a lap pool that ill have a smaller footprint
and re-locatin e pool house and equip nt enclosure to an area that won't ' pact the neighbor's property
or view, suc as to the east end of the p 1 or adjacent to the main dwelli , would like to see rigorous tree
protectio easures for the magnific t trees on the site that benefit the hole neighborhood. There were no
other c ents from the floor an the public hearing was closed.
setback variances;
• would like to h e the applicant submit more stu ' s regarding the creek bank s ility, erosion, and
feasibility of uilding so close to the creek;
• the house ' well-designed and fits in with e traditional character of t neighborhood;
• the fro setback is justified by the path the creek as it flows acro this particular sit ,
look into options that
• th e is a large Redwood tree o e site that is not included in t survey;
• e tree report appears to hav quite a few inaccuracies notice uring a site visit the report sho d
revise some of the survey sizes and species types for th trees; also should include pro ction
measures, existing trees re a huge part of the charm of t is lot;
• can the width of the ool be reduced and garage pull to the interior to reduce the equired side
esigne , but this same character is not p sent on the
t th rear especially seems out of cha cter and more
a house more difficult, but fe that the requested
• a 13-15 oot front setback will make t house appear to jump out at the
incr se the front setback to some ere between 15 feet and 48 fee ,
fimission commented:
• front of the house ' very elegant and well d
sides and rear of e house; the flattish roof a
indicative of a addition to an existing house
• agree that eek location does make siti
variances re both too numerous and too arg�
17
January 21, 2003
Jan 21 03 08:35a
Chu Desi�n En�r.
(6501 345-9287 p.2
�U DESIGN & ENGINEERING INC.
39 West 43r Avenue, San Niateu, CA 94403
Tel: (650) 345-9286; Fax (650) 345-9287
City of Burlingame
Planning Dcpactment
�U 1 Prinu-ose A��e.,
Burlinganie, CA 94010
Re: 1�t56 Cabrillo Ave
Dear Planning Staff:
�
JAN 2 �. 2003
CITY OF LiU'riLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
The follo��-ing are the responds to Planning Commission's comments regarding 1456
Cabrillo Ave. project:
l. Wc ha��e met with the neighbor, Mr. Jeff Gressard of 1�52 Cabrillo Av�., after the
planning conunission meeting in regards to the landscape pockecs. We will
confirm�work with Mr. Gressard for the location prior to installation.
2. 7'hcre are actually l�vo sets of French doors at the rear of lhe proposed home. One
in Family room, and another one by thc Nook. Siiice the garage is closcst to the
Nook, therefore we would like to keep it at that location, �vhere the French door
off the Family room could be used for acccss to the rear yard.
3. We agreed with commission's suggestion, and will replace the existing fence.
lf you have any questions, please contact me at (650) 345-9286, cxt. 14.
Sincercly,
ne� Chu
roject I�esigner
Cr: Otto Ntiller, Owner
ROUTING FORM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
December 17, 2002
� City Engineer
_Chief Building Offiicial
Fire Marshal
Recycling Specialist
_Sr. Landscape Inspector
_City Attorney
Planning Staff
Request for design review for a new two-story single family dwelling with detached garage
at 1456 Cabrillo Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-041-170.
��
Reviewed By:
Y. v'
��`�/�'�t � .1ir;'
Date of Comments: 12�7�3La�
� � .
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS � �' S�'`�
Project Name: �r� ,�'�u�i IY�`�`�(
Project Address: � �-���,�
The following requirements apply to the project
1 _� A property boundary survey sha11 be preformed by a licensed land
surveyor. The survey sha11 show a11 property lines, property corners,
easements, topographical features and utilities. (Required prior to the
building permit issuance.)
2 � The site and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should be made to
drain towards the Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit
issuance.)
3. �L_ The applicant sha11 submit project grading and drainage plans for
approval prior to the issuance of a Building permit.
4 The project site is in a flood zone, the project shall comply with the City's
flood zone requirements.
5 "'� A sanitary sewer lateral i�b is required for the project in accordance with
the City's standards. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.)
6. The project plans shall show the required Bayfront BikelPedestrian trail
and necessary public access improvements as required by San Francisco
Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
7. Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the project. The sewer analysis
shall identify the project's impact to the City's sewer system and any
sewer pump stations and identify mitigat; ►n :�neasures.
8 Submit tr�c trip generation analysis for the project.
9. Submit a tr�c impact study for the project. The traffic study should
identify the project generated impacts and recommend mitigation
measures to be adopted by the project to be approved by the City
Engineer.
10. The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering
Division. T'he parcel map shall show all existing property lines, easements,
monuments, and new property and lot lines proposed by the map.
Page 1 of 3
U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.doc
� � , ,
.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
11. A latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel of land shall be
submitted to the Public Works Engineering Division with the parcel map
for reviews.
12 Map closure/lot closure calculations shall be submitted with the parcel
map.
13 The project shall submit a condominium map to the Engineering Divisions
in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
14 The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public
improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and other necessary
appurtenant work.
15 The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage streetscape
improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutters, parking meters and poles,
trees, and streetlights in accordance with streetscape master plan.
16 By the preliminary review of plans, it appeazs that the project may cause
adverse impacts during construction to vehicular traffic, pedestrian traffic
and public on street parking. The project shall identify these impacts and
provide mitigation measure acceptable to the City.
17 T'he project shall submit hydrologic calculations from a registered civil
engineer for the proposed creek enclosure. T'he hydraulic calculations
must show that the proposed creek enclosure doesn't cause any adverse
impact to both upstream and downstream properties. The hydrologic
calculations shall accompany a site map showing the area of the 100-year
flood and existing improvements with proposed improvements.
18 Any work within the drainage area, creek, or creek banks requires a State
�•-.� i � Department of Fish and Game Permit and Army Corps of Engineers
Permits.
19 No construction debris shall be allowed into the creek.
20 � The project sha11 comply with the City's NPDES pernut requirement to
prevent storm water pollution.
21 `l The project does not show the dimensions of existing driveways, re-
submit plans with driveway dimensions. Also clarify if the project is
proposing to widen the driveway. Any widening of the driveway is subject
to City Engineer's approval.
22 `� The plans do not indicate the slope of the driveway, re-submit plans
showing the driveway profile with elevations
Page 2 of 3
U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COIvIMENTS.doc
� . ,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
23 � The back of the driveway/sidewalk approach shall be at least 12" above
the flow line of the frontage curb in the street to prevent overflow of storm
water from the street into private property.
24. For the takeout service, a garbage receptacle shall be placed in front. The
sidewalk fronting the store shall be kept clean 20' from each side of the
property.
25. For commercial projects a designated garbage bin space and cleaning area
shall be located inside the building. A drain connecting the garbage area to
the Sanitary Sewer System is required.
Page 3 of 3
U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.doc
ROUTING FORM
DATE:
December 17, 2002
TO: _City Engineer
Chief Building Official
�Fire Marshal
Recycling Specialist
_Sr. Landscape Inspector
_City Attorney
FROM:
SUBJECT:
�'i�nr �„ � � Staff
Request for design review for a new two-story single family dwelling with detached garage
at 1456 Cabrillo Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-041-170.
�, �SCSJ �,�
�� ����
��s
�t� �t�, _ � � ,-��., ��-.��... �
li�i�5 C7� �s��i � `�.���T �
� � � � � 2� :� .�„ �, ��
a
�
Reviewed By: ��-� /� ��./:� Date of Comments: ���.n} I
ROUTING FORM
DATE:
December 17, 2002
TO: _City Engineer
_Chief Building Official
Fire Marshal
�Recycling Specialist
_Sr. Landscape Inspector
_City Attorney
FROM: Planning Staff
__ _�
SUBJECT: Request for design review for a new two-story single family dwelling with detached garage
at 1456 Cabrillo Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-041-170.
�,r�- c,���,Q 2� �+ ����-� .
��
� ��� �� �� � � �� � ��J ����� �
�
���_ „rf.i /�� �l1i,r�i���c%� �
� V
� ���,,-� �-c� ��-
— O�l�/��1� �'1 � �� l�(�(, �
�i ����,� d'�.9-� ��c-� w� Z- Wca� c���
�
�� � � ��� f �
�w►�- � �1 v�z /r � r �g'�`'�` �
G��- � w� �
� � � � ������}
.w�/l c"'� C1—`
�
Reviewed By: � Date of Comments: �T / o Z—
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT 501 PRIMROSE ROAD P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790
a� CITY ��
,BURLJNOAME APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
�.,�..,R•��ea
Type of application: Design Review � Conditional Use Permit Variance
Special Permit Other Parcel Number:
Project address: I'�� ���� ���d �u��
APPLICANT
PROPERTY OWNER
Name: � I�C/ � I I Name:
Addres�'.' I� I �_ �1.-t.� I I�����ss:
.. . i —
City/State/Zip���� �'l�"'�� ��
Phone (w):��'—I/�J�`° Y� I I`�
Phone (w): � �' T�
(h):
c�• �-�-��
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER �
(h):
��:
Nam�'I '��s'��c/I�I l ��I "�� j I� T� �
Address=�_I_�.- � ��� Please indicate with an asterisk *
- he contact person for this project.
City/State/Zip�
Phone (w):��' -�'�-�����
(h):
�fl�' ���"�'���
I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this
application to the Planning Commissi .
� �� ( � ��
Property owner's signature: � Date:
PCAPP.FRM
AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information
given herein is true and correct to the t of my knowledge and belief.
Applicant's signature: Date: � ��
�
���, CITY � CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
B4IRLJNC�AME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
��„��p �y�.°'� TEL: (650) 558-7250
Sife: 1456 Cabrillo Avenue
Application for design review for a new two-story, PV BLIC HEARING
single-family dwelling with detached garage at: 1456
Cabrillo Avenue, zoned R-1. (APN: 026-041-170). NOTICE
_ _.--- - _
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission
announces the following public hearing on Monday, �
January 27, 2003 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council !
Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, ,
California. ,
i Mailed: Janua 17, 2003
rY
I
(Please refer to other side)
i�
i _ �
CITY OF BURLINGAME
A copy of the applic -' �
n�'ec�nay be reviewed prior
to the meeting a la '� pa ent ��1 Primrose Road,
Burlingame, Cal' '
If you chal ge
raising onl hos
described i
at or prior t
Property o ers
tenants ab t th:
558-7250. ank
✓
Margaret �
City Planner
PU
(Please refer to other side)
�
be limited to
�blic hearing,
:d to the city
ming their
call (650)
�.
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND DESIGN REVIEW
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for desi
review for a new two-story single familv dwellin� and detached gara�e at 1456 Cabrillo Avenue, zoned R 1,
Otto Miller 911 N. Amphlett Boulevard, San Mateo, CA 94402, property owner, APN: 026-041-170;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
January 27, 2003, at which time it reviewed and considered the staffreport and all other written materials and
testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that:
1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments
received and addressed by this commission, it is her��y 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, 15303, Class 3—(a) construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures
including (a) one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas,
up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption, is hereby
approved.
2. Said design review is approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto. Findings for such design review are as set forth in the 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 Matea
CHAIRMAN
I, Ralph Osterlin�, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby
certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 27`� day of Janua , 2003 , by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
SECRETARY
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and design review.
1456 Cabrillo Avenue
effective February 3, 2003
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date
stamped December 16, 2002, sheets A.1- A.3, A.6 and L.1, and date stamped January 7, 2003, sheets
A.4 and A.S, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require and
amendment to this permit;
2. that the existing fence along the right side property line shall be replaced with a new fence in
compliance with the fence regulations in Chapter 25.78 of the Burlingame Municipal Code;
3. that the applicant shall work with the neighbor at 1452 Cabrillo Avenue to determine the appropriate
location of the landscape pockets along the right side property line to screen the views from the new
second story prior to installation; the landscaping, including the landscape pockets as modified and
including a note from the neighbor regarding the agreed to location, shall be installed before the final
inspecttbn is conducted by the Building Department;
4. that the two existing street trees (sycamore) shall be adequately protected during demolition of the
e�sting house and during construction of the new house;
5. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or
enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof
height or pitch, shall be subject to design review;
6. 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 Department;
7. that pric�r �o final inspection, Planning Departrnent 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;
8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination
and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall
be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued;
9. 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 Department;
10. that the conditions of the City Engineer's December 23, 2002 memo, the Fire Marshal's December 20,
2002 memo, and the Recycling Specialist's December 17, 2002, memo shall be met;
11. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance
which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste
Reduction Plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior
or exterior, shall require a demolition permit;
.
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and design review.
1456 Cabrillo Avenue
effective February 3, 2003
Page 2
12. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and
13. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire
Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame.
�
3
��
,
� �,� .� r ��
..
,.
�� <���. T' � �� � � � a �, . �,t�
..
�Y��� �' `°. , �`�' *��� ' <��,���
� � � �` � � �r � `�� : <: � '� � f��� , k ' .� } '� �'
4�\'4� � .r�M �' l"�tl � �r�' �' � k+aP.t� �"�� . �� ��v.
� �
rm r'` x
. '. ..
K�
`� % yy ' , �` � � �R -� a� '•,7 °,� �y���! �'
, .:���� -. . �_. �3'''p � � . ' ��° .:� �,1� �C' � �?�. /�
,
. ;. "�, �' / '�
. s `s� ,
�
- c � N �+. '�e �_, i�� . .��+ "✓ *^'�'. � ,.� fq ^'�� s � 'i: •,j�" -
.
� � ° �;,�t. � � �"'{� / ' i��a.d„'��,' �4 '� "+
�t;� �� ``.�a�,« � '� "�. �' _ s �; ' / �' `°� �, ^ /�. �" i • �7 "
� , , ,' � , � �,f � �� �. � ' � m�, ,,,;�.
��y: ',g �w� ,�•• � ,��4 �I �' �� �, 'e._. � 4
,i �Si � _E� � > A `�d��r,� � �.c� r+�9 � :�' ,� }a ����.,."'t
�f ' � ��:� �' ,�� � �. q �� ���✓i F � ,c�,�:� � �t;c�s�1$t' � �.$n .�1� ��
s �'y,`�rt . Y�F. � � ,. '�f � . '� /m.. ��: � �j �J �.. . .. � �,fi,�
` , .
A -��` . -. �. �� I� � �-� A' e�,R � $� '
¢ � ,� �, �, �,.. ,,� �, .,� � ,�.
`Jy�i�:'� �j. ^� ��� � i�,.�t' .y'},�,'`��€x��+�(,�y� . �t~, '��. � ,:;��, t � � ,+� a
r��:� � � r.� �i, "" � l p' i .� � a �r c "�p, '� �
i ��i� .
♦ ��� � �, �,,� � � � , �&' � ����.� �` . "�
,T . r M"'`�� t '�„ V'� �.�.� ��', �" �'� i..�ti� e + � .,� � .
�- .� 1_ / �t ` �� �� � � 1 A �3 ,��, r''y .,�
L ^
a .
� , . R � --
�s f ✓ �' �
� r y;; nj "� �.�,.. � �_ �a� � ��� �� � � � � •
, `
t � . � `�,.P��� � � � � �� �y�� 'e ? `
�ir -;r s' - .'�' �,y;�;" �� � . ;y. �° .
��� �� � �� ' � �' `�`` � J'. ,ti°
� � ° ,� �
; � , ,
. ��'; a r���� � `� �/ � � ��,.� E' -'�' p '`�
. -
A 4 >�'
y. - c � ; : � I` : J � i � � �' ! / ry� _ .ra� � ,-2
} •�� .. �` ' �''� � � �;�. , ,rl ^+%
, �
. x. ,� , . ... , �' ,. ,,r A. �',�. - �, � } p � ' � Y ,
• � ._ .� �� �.�
:_
�1� �� /�, � �� �� �. �.:� �� _ � _��;��� � ��
^# �lg.�`�. S� '<. q� '•y�y'� y�i_ ��� �` � P' �'�, �•� M1 v `T
�# .ij , •�t > � a'�q`v ' ��c� � � s� �i, `ti - •` �+� ,�, �r ,.,�
�, , � \� 3 ��, 4 �' 4 ,��� �
\� i �y � � � � 4 t �� ;� €, i" \ ` n �,�,' c �"^ �r �.�..5
�1 �°t '„e� � �V��'. � .�i k, ��'k � i��� 1' � �'�,,+�'� �T`a � „`��k. ,�vy �
.'� � ���s#"Ada �" `��'" � .� �� f� � i
4 �` }��D '� � / � r�, ati. ��p 4'ue� {�r7M ���'`,�� t ,��� �{"°
,
_�` �� � �" � �r�� ,ti ��� �,��� �� �e ��'A q�, �� � � M�:: ���.� �; ' �:'r �� � � .. , .
F. ,� �� "�. . ; ' ' a `+.n
..
� � $ a
,
k�� t �� � . � �7� �^'. �4 f :. �"
fi
,
y,i-�/ '� ., , S �., �yt:.r
�� x �
� �� �*p; , t�,, �'r's�ti. `t^� � ci�� " k �, ,� � _d�i�f � ' � `a. �� .' �� ��� � y �
:
� � ( ��`.� � �`�,.`� � �,� � �,. � ,,,, �� �� �,� .;�� f j% ,�; _ � �"'"� `
� �.
.� � �i .t*` ;� i�, � � /
�
. � �, ` � ��� i� " � - . �, I � .as�,.' .. ` y .
iR � �
. � �+. j�� �
' �,,,. ''�• ,� ""�;�^ �r: " �� 'r��,� ' `�,�
. .,.
� .: �
A,
a
«� y , g -
� s + , r
F� �r � ( _ q� �M ..��l,� . � � � e
� � . $" a_ v' 3� � ; �¢ �a°i 6 �� P� -� �� .��`
. � u, w �',r �' �'� , t, # ,I' A�°t�� ?:!��, , �,, �`�w. � �
� �: .,�; �iV^ i
� + , i c-;C
.�
� �,•,� ' � ����° � ' ' �` ; 3 .G` ���'p�. . '\,. ' .r � � � � �$ � �• � �� r ��
�
�
� � :
�. �.n _ .. � i �'�,. � �
€ v
� �
"s t � � �'9 ° ia' � �6�' .�" � dr� v�
e .
, � ti
� , . . ��. � . ' S.-A �" �� .t� � a �•,. �� � � �� . � �
,-_ - . ,� �T, . � , ,
.. '� � "��� �s. �� ...�l.+A�`i�� a, � �, '�� u .� �t�� � r
,
, .c � - � e � '.
re r ' u � �
1� • , � '- " � �� ia+``� " � � ��^%
. " " , ' .. ,,
,�� � ": ,,� , f j • �
. �
,
` d ?�.t ��� '� ���� � y'�' �x�t"j �' A , �, ;<
,
.t � ��`• � � ,, . � � •� �+:�`�. , : � A .a�"r �,, n. r;,
Y
` a . �" 6 i "" ' '� � - .�, s — , � �
, . ' �
W. . , a�
.� ,�;�r°f�: , >< �`� f_ �"�. � � �p� ;�a ��,. � �-.` .. ��,� ''� � v ..�� < .�
t � a
9 ^ s : >
"�T � . � • .� � �,� . $ ,� � ,, � a �� �' , �.'��� � �/ �' k'° � s
x � .,�
� " "�i.".,� � .K .. �.' � �:1%.�x�1`� `:� % . .7 � �� d ' , J �:s���y � I
� �
: �r
� ' r , ,. �;� /; . �,p
� �� $
� � ����� `��'� � . � � � A � Yg.M' J� / `4 !4
e �.
,. � . �., �` � ������
. .
� t; � � � :, +,• ,6 ^r �+P ; � � ' � �
r � � ,� �° �y �d =,*�= .r � � ' �� �, �.�:rf ' ret � � �
._ �
..
`�. ,� � � � � ,� ,�. t
� *
� ' ti °� � �;�� �/ , � i' ��� �`"� ,�`� '���
+�1 "s�
, ,
�F .� .
w ...- ; �
,'' �, i , " �' � � ,�, � �, , ,� r � � �� v �e ^�y •'�
�� �', � `<. :t� � ,� � ��, �`,r .�� �; �, � x ��-
. :����"�, '��'� '°. • , t�� � � �;; �. � ` �,
. � ,.
4 ,�� � �r �'x' �: •� • . ..+� ;,�+� '
_ t s '�' � r� � 3 �.e
yy''ppy���, � � �' . J�. Y'� �° �:• � � ��'� � � i�l'n " �f' ~ 9
�� �y,s . I� ,�,. {, ��/ V '}� )�� � ; �. -� �k `
� �-`� � . � �y ;,:�� ',}� � s� `�`, �'�' �� f �e 1
� x �� ,�,. . 1 ���,��_� S �p' :. 3 ,� y' _ �w �d�.,� � , � :.�
g � Y` .� '�j � �, � �. . � i .fy� � ! �y y
, , �. .
/ �� '� � +s��� P �� � ��'y �c � � '� � ,� `�
li " �` ,�� .` �"'� � � "� �.4�� �� � -" �. `' F
, w�y`� � � `"�'' I � 9¢ p �„'� {.. � .y Y"��
.. . .�. f.., ( h�'� f� ,��. t`���. ��
:
�• .,,, r. . 1 ,cu,� 3 _
�� ` � � �+ � � �� � � �� �� �� ,�� � P �� 'O�'��' � � �`�p�:��► �.< � ''� � ' i , ��"�
� .
�°'j � "`' ':� �,,� � + 1,� � � - �'. ":�, �,,r - � ���- ♦ �a'�� �O Itz.
�' � * �` ' 1♦ � f. � . : �+. � ; 'i�' • ° �''"• �. "'�! ,.,:
g±' J { `" ,�` �� v �# � � . .
� �,' ,,, � d. �, � �g �, t � r+t �.; ., ,,� +
� , ' � '+ �,; � �� � ? � }r�� og � �
�r � �� �'�� =-R � . S ,� � � '/f „ i�M �.' �„y'i�' '- � � .`0 ..
.J .��i �� . � �'Y.� 7 �" �� .
. , �
.
,
7 ' / �4�,
. �?
. � y�
. �"� F ". �,�r, ''� ��*°Y.y . ' � �.``� s'� ���� � �,r
' Y
� B i �'z.
- -," .r � � .. . '�' . � .
, _
; � -� �n' y,. Y ". �„�d
. � . . .. � . � .
.,
�, ��,�,� * e . .. 'r � d��., ,f �+ ,-�,
,,
:
�P�
s ,
4
�'+. �- + '.. • ,.N..' � .:. �y,� r,�
. �E^. , "�. � & �
�
, � ,
� ��` � ,� -�. ;. . � �, �. � �� .�K
, . _ .
� a . -�€, " a; � � f}� ��.
� . r's .. . �; $�r,' _ t Csxt"� _ � ,s�� ?�^�,�M �'y,�`�. �. ^. ° ti�,
_ +t < �
> � � '
, � . �.
� �v � 'f + �'� �
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes
January 27, 2003
• does the area where intenance is done on the go-carts have oil separators in the drains, NPDES
measures, and pr edures for oil spills need to be met plain how;
• unique use to
monitored Y
line;
urlingame, explain noise level - noise be confined to one area, can noise be
the protection of employees and stomers, what is the increase in noise at property
• appl' ation states that air will be 100% -circulated every hour, can this be verified; and
• there additional construction m sures that will be taken on the walls ad' ent to the track to
prevent the go-carts from going ough the walls should someone crash.
is item was set for the regular a ion calendar when all the information s been submitted and reviewed
by the Planning Department. is item concluded at 7:20 p.m.
835 AIRPORT BOUL ARD, ZONED C-4 - APPLICAT FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
AMENDMENT, CO ITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LOOR AREA EXCEEDING 1, AND
CONDITIONAL U PERMIT FOR VARIATION F THE BAYFRONT DESIGN G�ELINES
FOR LOT COV GE FOR A PROPOSAL TO EN OSE AN EXISTING INTERIO OURTYARD.
(BRUCE C TON, DOUBLETREE HOTEL, PLICANT; NOEMI AVRAM , ARCHITECT;
TODAY'S .1NC.. PROPERTY OWNERI P OJECT PLANNER: CATHE BARBER
Planne arber presented a summary of e staff report.
C issioners asked is a lar:dsca ng variance is required, table ows existing landscaping below the
quired amount. Staff respond that a landscaping variance s previously granted for this site, and that
this proposal does not affect dscaping and no additional l dscaping is required.
This item was set for the regular action calendar. This i
VII. ACTION ITEMS
concluded at 7:25 p.m.
Consent Calendar - Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on
simultaneously 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.
Acting Chair Bojues asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the
consent calendar. C. Brownrigg requested that item number 3b., 1540 Drake Avenue, be moved to the
regulax action calendar.
3a. 1456 CABRILLO AVENUE — ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW
TWO-STORY, SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH DETACHED GARAGE (OTTO MILLER,
APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN AND ENGINEERING INC.;
DESIGNER) (67 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
C. Auran moved approval of item 3a. on the consent calendar, 1456 Cabrillo Avenue, based on the facts in
the staff report, commissioners comments and the findings in the staff reports with recommended conditions
in the staff report and by resolution. The motion was seconded by C. Keele. Acting Chair Boj ues called for
a voice vote on the motion to approve and it passed 4-0-3 (C. Osterling, Keighran and Vistica absent).
Appeal procedures were advised.
�a