HomeMy WebLinkAbout1301 Burlingame Avenue - Staff ReportItem No. 8d
Regular Action Item
PROJECT LOCATION
1301 Burlingame Avenue
City of Burlingame
Commercial Design Review
Item No. 8d
Regular Action Item
Address: 1301 Burlingame Avenue Meeting Date: November 28, 2016
Request: Application for Commercial Design Review for fa�ade changes to an existing commercial
building.
Applicant: Apple Inc. APN: 029-202-080 & 029-202-090
Architect: Callison RTKL, Inc. Lot Area: 9,213 SF
Property Owner: Dalbir Gill Tr. and Avtar S. Johal Trust Zoning: BAC
General Plan: Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan: Burlingame Avenue Commercial District
Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per 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.
Current Use: Retail Store (Apple)
Proposed Use: No change
Allowable Use: Retail is a permitted use
Summary: The applicant is proposing fa�ade changes and a tenant improvement for an existing retail
store, Apple, located at 1301 Burlingame Avenue. The project site consists of two parcels under one
ownership. Both parcels have frontage on Burlingame Avenue and are through lots that back up to Fox
Plaza Lane and Parking Lot J. The Apple store is located at 1301 Burlingame Avenue on the corner parcel
(APN# 029-202-080), but has storage and office space behind Kara's Cupcakes (1309 Burlingame
Avenue). Kara's Cupcakes and Gymboree (1311 Burlingame Avenue) are both located in the same building
which is on the parcel adjacent to the Apple store (APN# 029-202-090).
The existing Apple store includes retail sales floor space, storage area, break room and supporting office
space as well as a mezzanine. The storage area, break room, office space and mezzanine are located
behind Kara's Cupcakes, on the adjacent parcel; however there is currently an internal connection between
the parcels that connects all of the floor area used by Apple. There is no direct connection between the
Apple tenant space and Kara's Cupcakes.
The project includes removing the mezzanine and expanding the rear portion of the store behind the
Gymboree space. The retail floor for the existing Apple store is surrounded by separate storage and office
space that is located around the perimeter (sheet AD-121), in a U-shape. The proposed plans include
widening the retail sales floor by removing these spaces and relocating them at the rear, which is the area
that would be expanding behind Gymboree. The overall square footage for Apple would increase by 1,122
SF from 6,100 SF to 7,222 SF. The majority of this increase would be in the retail sales floor area with an
increase of 965 SF from 2,248 SF to 3,213 SF. The remaining supporting areas would be shifted to other
locations within the building but would only increase by 157 SF.
The proposal includes exterior modifications and renovations in addition to the interior changes. The
massing of the building would be modified with the overall height lowered slightly from 24-6" to 22'-2". The
building facades along Burlingame Avenue, Park Road and Fox Plaza Lane are proposed for modification.
Along Burlingame Avenue the glass store frontage would be increased in height, with the majority of the
frontage being glass. The grey stone that currently clads the building is proposed to be removed on all
elevations and replaced with new mocha creme colored natural stone panels. The entrance to the store
would remain on Burlingame Avenue, the front doors would be recessed 2'-6" from the front fa�ade and a
glass canopy is proposed to be added over the entrance doors.
Commercial Design Review 1301 Burlingame Avenue
The horizontal display window along Park Road would be removed and the new Park Road fa�ade would
have new mocha creme colored stone panels that would be interrupted with a 25-foot wide by 16-foot tall
window about two-thirds of the way down this elevation. In addition, the Park Road elevation would have the
Apple logo embedded, flush mounted into the stone panels located toward the front third of this elevation
(closer to Burlingame Avenue). The logo would be approximately 4'-6" wide by 6-feet in height,
approximately 9-feet above the sidewalk and would be internally illuminated. A sample of the proposed
natural stone panel has been provided by the applicant and will be available to view at the Planning Division
and at the public hearing.
The rear elevation would also be modified with the existing grey stone panels replaced with the new mocha
creme colored natural stone panels. In addition two cutout windows will be added to the rear fa�ade of the
store along with an illuminated Apple logo. There rear of the two adjacent facades (which are used by Apple
for support space) will be modified with patching, painting and added windows. Any new signage that is
proposed would be reviewed be under a separate permit. This project is subject to Commercial Design
Review because it includes changes to fa�ades of a storefront located in the BAC zoning district. The
following application is required:
Commercial Design Review for changes to the front, side and rear fa�ades of an existing
commercial storefront in the BAC Zoning District (CS 25.32.045).
While the proposal includes a 1,122 SF expansion to the square footage used by this tenant, there is no
expansion to the building envelope. As noted above, the majority of this added square footage (965 SF) is
new retail sales floor area. Retail, personal service and food establishment uses located on the first floor
within the downtown parking sector are exempt from the off-street parking requirements (C.S. 25.70.090
(a)). The storage and office areas in the rear of the retail space support the retail store and are considered
ancillary to the permitted retail use. The existing supporting office space would be reduced by 189 SF as
part of this application.
Staff comments: See attached memos from the Building, Engineering, Fire and Stormwater Divisions.
October 11, 2016 Planning Commission Action Meeting: The Planning Commission reviewed this
project at their October 11, 2016 meeting and requested that the applicant make changes to the rear of the
building given the visibility of this fa�ade. The Commission noted the prominence of this location and while
the rear of the building faces an alley and parking lot, it interfaces with Downtown and needs more attention
(see October 11, 2016 Planning Commission Minutes attached).
The applicant submitted a written response and revised plans date stamped, November 16, 2016 in
response to the Planning Commission's comments and suggestions. The additional changes made to the
plans include:
• Adding cutout windows and illuminated Apple logo to rear fa�ade;
• Add windows to the adjacent rear fa�ades (rear of Kara's Cupcakes/current Gymboree);
• Patch and paint existing brickwork on westernmost farade; and
• Add stucco and new paint to the center fa�ade.
August 6, 2016 Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting
on August 8, 2016, the Planning Commission had the following comments and concerns with the proposed
fa�ade modifications:
Overriding concern is scale and compatibility with the neighborhood;
Understand there needs to be consideration for a unique tenant, but this can be achieved and still
have good pedestrian scale and street frontage;
Could do more with the "bring the outside in" concept, for example with the rear fa�ade;
�
Commercial Design Review 1301 Burlingame Avenue
• Hard to convey to the community that the intent is to bring the outside in with the glass on just one
side and the rest is all blank stone;
• Great-looking stone but there is so much of it. It will look too stark. The existing gray stone works
better;
• Park Road is the heart of Downtown. There is going to be development on the post office site down
Park Road that will be a big part of town. Great opportunity to do something spectacular, move
people down Park Road;
• The white stone is remnant of a mausoleum look. Concerned the building could end up taking on
that moniker; and
• Glad to have Apple in Downtown but it needs to step up and do more to be neighborly with the
architecture
The applicant submitted a response letter, revised plans and renderings date stamped September 29, 2016,
to address the Planning Commission's comments. The revised plans include the following changes:
• New stone proposed for the exterior material (sample provided);
• Entrance door height has been reduced;
• Entrance door has been recessed in to form a niche (vestibule);
• Canopy has been added over front doors;
• Side window has been significantly enlarged.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for Commercial Design Review as established in Ordinance No. 1652
adopted by the Council on April 16, 2001 are outlined as follows:
1. Support of the pattern of diverse architectural styles that characterize the city's commercial areas;
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;
3. On visually prominent and gateway sites, whether the design fits the site and is compatible with the
surrounding development;
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;
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 structure 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.
Suggested Findings for Design Review: That the upgraded fa�ades along Burlingame Avenue, Park
Road and the rear of the building add architectural style to a highly visible corner property. The subject
property is a prominent site that has high visibility in the Downtown area. The changes support a diversity of
architectural styles along Burlingame Avenue; while the proposed architectural style is not matching the
adjacent buildings it complements the streetscape by adding to the diversity of styles on the block. The new
entrance will provide a human scale with recessed entry doors and a glass canopy above. The new window
along Park Road will be 16 feet high by 25 feet wide and will provide visual interest as well as architectural
relief along this fa�ade. In addition, the rear fa�ade modifications with cutout windows will also add
3
Commercia/ Design Review
1301 Burlingame Avenue
articulation on this highly visible portion of the building. The mass and bulk of the building remain relatively
the same, with a small reduction to the overall height of the structure, but the overall height is well below the
35-foot height limit and the massing is consistent with the subject block. For these reasons the project may
be found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's five design review criteria.
Planning Commission Action:
The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the application, and consider public
testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action should include specific findings
supporting the Planning Commission's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the Planning
Commission. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. At the public hearing the
following conditions should be considered:
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped
November 16, 2016 sheets A-001 through A-811;
2. 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;
3. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height
or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning
Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staffl;
4. that the conditions of the Building Division's July 27, 2016 and June 21, 2016 memos, the
Engineering Division's July 29, 2016 and June 21, 2016 memos, the Fire Division's June 29, 2016
memo and the Stormwater Division's June 23, 2016 memos shall be met;
5. 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;
6. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction
plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the
Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved
plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required;
the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning
Commission, or City Council on appeal;
7. that 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;
8. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance;
9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
2013 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
4
Commercia/ Design Review
1301 Burlingame Avenue
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS
PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION:
10. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the 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; and
11. 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.
Catherine Keylon
Senior Planner
c. Apple Inc., Eric Malmquist, LLC, applicant
Callison RTKL Inc., architect
Avtar Johal, property owner
Attachments:
Planning Commission Action Meeting Minutes, October 11, 2016
Applicant's Response letter, dated November 16, 2016
Planning Commission Design Review Study Minutes, August 8, 2016
Applicant's Response letter, dated September 28, 2016 (with attachments)
■ Commercial Design Review findings
■ Downtown Specific Plan policy consistency findings
■ Downtown Streetscape Improvement — deposit of funds
Application to the Planning Commission
Letter of Explanation
Staff Comments
Letter from Gap Inc., dated November 21, 2016
Letter from Williams-Sonoma, Inc., dated November 21, 2016
Email from Jennifer Pfaff, dated November 18, 2016
Email from Jennifer Pfaff, dated October 3, 2016
Email from Jennifer Pfaff, dated July 31, 2016
Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed)
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed November 18, 2016
Aerial Photo
5
City of Burlingame B501LPRIMROSEROADL
�� BURLINGAME, CA 94010
B1JF�LIIVGAME
e`
�� Meeting Minutes
Planning Commission
Tuesday, October 11, 2016 7:00 PM Council Chambers
c. 1301 Burlingame Avenue, zoned BAC - Application for Commercial Design Review for
facade changes (Apple Inc., applicant; Callison RTKL Inc., architect; Avtar Johal,
property owner) (37 notices) Staff Contact: Catherine Keylon
Attachmenrs: 1301 Burlinqame Ave - Staff Report
1301 Burlingame Ave - Attachments
1301 Burlinqame Ave - Plans
All Commissioners had visited the property. Commissioner DeMartini was recused as he owns stock in
the applicant's company. Commissioners Gum, Bandrapalli, Terrones, and Sargent, met with the
applicant. Commissioners Sargent and Loftis were not present at the Design Review meeting but
watched the video.
Planning Manager Gardiner provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Loftis opened the public hearing.
Atilio Leveratto, CallisonRTKL Architects, and Matthew Green, Apple, represented the applicant.
Commission questions/comments:
> Is the Hillsdale Mall store representative of the new design? (Green: It is the previous prototype, and
is slightly narrower and deeper. The new ones are at Corte Madera, Infinite Loop, and Union Square.)
> Were the plans shared with neighboring properties and businesses? (Green: No. The property
owner from across the street spoke at the meeting last time.)
> Appreciates that the height has been dropped, and the canopy works well.
> Likes the inside-outside idea, and it is apparent from fhe front.
> Can anything be done to the srde and back to extend the inside-outside feel, and articulate
"dimensionality"? Coming down the street from the east, people will see the side of the building more
than fhe front. (Green: Is pulling the landscape from Burlingame Avenue down the side street for the
pedestrian experience, and to screen the building as seen from a vehicle. The window on the side lines
up with the "community space" inside.)
> Can anything be done to the back side to add interest? (Green: There is parallel parking along the
rear, so it woufd be hard to put an entry on the back. There is a grade change along the side. The back
is outside the scope of what had been wanted to take on. The focus has been on the customer
experience from the commercial area. The entire building is being reclad to take away some mass, and
the height is being lowered - that is the extent of what is being done on the back. A previous version had
shown some windows blocked up, but there is no reason to take them away so they are being retained.)
> Can there be any graphics or decoration on the back wall? Another logo? (Green: Difficult due to fhe
support infrastructure that has to feed the store along the wall. A graphic at pedestrian height would be
blocked by cars.)
> Is the desire to have a blank wall in the back? (Green: Yes, wants to keep it simple.)(Leveratto: Has
considered a mural over the windows as an option - would that be better?)
> Perhaps there are things that can be done in conjunction with the windows. What is behind the
windows? (Leveratto: They're from the old mezzanine, but the mezzanine is being removed.)(Green: The
windows are likely to be frosted over.)
City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 10/17/2016
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 11, 2016
> It is a prominent site with high visibility. Perhaps more landscaping? (Green: The parallel parking is
in the way, right up against the building, so there is not enough room for landscaping in the back.)
> Will the new stone be a rainscreen or grouted? (Green: It will be grouted. Since the new stone is
lighter than the existing stone, thought an open joint in the lighter stone would be distracting.) Had hoped
it would have been a rainscreen; there are a lot of interesting things fhat can be done to a rainscreen to
mitigate the sheer surface, such as moving the stone surface in and out.
> While the City likes having the Apple store downtown, this building is architecture as product design .
Buildings are not products, and have other responsibilities such as civic responsibilities.
> The front is fantastic. How far does the stone go in? (Green: All the way into fhe sto�e.)
> How far back rs the glass on the side? (Green: 2'-6" back. The wall is 5 feet. Is trying to meet the
commission halfway, and respect the desires of the Downtown Specific Plan.)
> Is there any patterning on the g/ass facade so people don't walk into the glass? (Green: There is a
series of dots in the interlayer of the glass.)
> The back is so pure but the adjacent building is left alone. Is it possible to bring the rest of the
building into the composition, create some texture? Given that the windows will probably be frosted,
there may be something more interesting to do.
Public comments:
Jennifer Pfaff spoke on this item:
> The back side is more important than what is being considered. It can be seen way down the street.
> There is no talk of doing anything with Parking Lot J in the near future. The wall will continue to be
visible and is huge.
> Submitted a historical photo from the 1960s as a suggestion.
> The building could be anywhere; does not have a Burlingame sense of place.
> The Downtown Specific Plan specifies every visible wall should be designed. Should not get a pass
because it is corporate architecture.
Eric Muhlebach spoke on this item:
> The rear seems to be a concern.
Safety implications if too much attention
entrance.
> Service alley is hard to keep clean.
> It is a far better rear facade than
Berkeley.
Chair Loftis closed the public hearing.
Commission discussion:
However the alleyway is so narrow that cars can be a hazard.
is drawn to the back of the building and people think there is an
anything else in Burlingame, or in San Francisco, Los Gatos or
> The cube at the edge of Park Road is the most visible part, not the back of the neighbo�ing building.
> Looking for something that would be an improvement at a distance, to just spruce up the back. Does
not need to look like an entrance.
> The front looks greaf. Jusi spend 1/10th of the energy on the back. Something that will blend in
better and attract attention to fhe back so it is not old 1940s windows with modern Apple next to it.
> Appreciates the evolution of the project. The 9'-6" height and glass awning is a big help and works
with the architecture.
> "Building as pavilion" - not a traditional 1930s Burlingame Avenue commercial building. It has a
lightness and warmth that speaks of the pedestrian activity.
> Rear facade is like an anchor to what is going on with the rest of the building. The stone is quite a
cleanup from what is typically found in an alley. Could have some interplay and contrast with the
adjacent building, which had otherwise been left unfouched. Leaving the windows to imply some scale
but have them be opaque does not make sense.
> Consensus on the front and side, but the rear facade needs more consideration.
City o/ Burlingame Paqe 2 Printed on 10H7/2016
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 11, 2016
> The fancy sheer stone on the back sets up the problem since it implies it is another front. Could
consider not putting the stone on the rear, buildings will often have stone on the front serving a civic
function, and brick on the back where it is utilitanan.
> This is not a good piece of urban design, but it is a good product. The fancy stone should not be
used on the back of the building unless something is going to be done that makes it more like the front of
the building.
> The alley is challenging since on one hand it is the back of the building with trash bins, but on the
other it is a prominent facade because of its visibility. Instead the back serves as the anchor for the
pavilion, serving as a screen for the alley as well as the view from the farmers' market and parking lof.
> Burlingame is a small town and this is a prominent location.
> While the back may technically be an alley, it is not a back alley in how it interacts on that street with
the rest of downtown.
Commissioner Sargent made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bandrapalli, to continue the
item. The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 5- Loftis, Gum, Terrones, Bandrapalli, and Sargent
Absent: 1 - Gaul
Recused: 1 - DeMartini
City of Burlingame Page 3 Printed on 10H7/2016
C/�LLISC)E'�ZTKL
CalliSonRTKI Archit��ct�, I'�_
148 Lafayetto Str��o�
11th Floor
New York, NY 10�,1 t
� +1 z12 354 9:'.�'
� +1 212 354 9;"• ��
November 16, 2016
Catherine Keylon
Community Development Department
Planning Division
City of Burlingame
Subject: 1301 Burlingame Ave - Commercial Design Review —Action meeting resubmission
Dear Honorable Members of the Planning Commission,
On behalf of the applicant, I am enclosing under cover of this letter a copy of the Planning
Commission Set in support of Apple's application for design review approval for revisions
to the Apple Store at 1301 Burlingame Avenue in anticipation of this matter being before
you for consideration and action at the Planning Commission's November 28, 2016
meeting.
I would like to take the opportunity to reiterate our appreciation of your comments and
feedback in order to ensure that the project is in harmony with the City's design standards
and expectations for this key downtown area, while still respecting Apple's strong brand
identity and distinctive architectural approach. To that end, as you know, Apple has
modified its design as originally proposed, including the following elements:
■ Addition of a glass canopy to the front fa�ade.
■ Recessing the door and lowering its height to provide an inviting vestibule.
■ Reducing the height of the building.
■ Expanding the window on the side of the building.
■ Adding trees to the frame the window on the side of the building.
We were gratified at the last public hearing on this matter that you were so receptive to
the project as modified. We are also sensitive to your concerns relating to the rear fa�ade
of the building and section 5.2.3.4 of the Downtown Specific Plan. With that in mind, we
propose to make the following additional changes to the building in order to further
ensure consistency with both the letter and the spirit of section 5.2.3.4. These changes
include:
■ Adding cutout windows and an illuminated Apple logo to the rear fa�ade,
providing articulation and visual interest.
■ Adding windows to the adjacent rear facades to provide articulation and detailing,
enlivening those portions of the building.
■ Patching and painting existing brickwork on the westernmost facade.
c•- � �. u: -- „_ -� � -
Adding stucco and new paint to the central fa�ade. �`2� ���' ����
NO V 1 7 2016
CITY OF Bt�RLE�NGAME
CD�•PL.E:NN�tV� DIV.
G/�LLIS�%�TKL
Taken together, these changes will reinvigorate the rear of not only the Apple Store, but
that of the two adjoining spaces as well. Each will be articulated and distinguished from
the other, providing visual appeal as well as an invitation for users of the parking area to
walk around to the storefronts.
We look forward to discussing these changes with you at the meeting on November 2gin
at which time we will respectfully request the Planning Commission's approval of the
project.
Documents attached:
11 copies
-Half size Planning commission set
1 Copy
-Full size Planning commission set
-Letter size Planning commission set
Sincerely,
Best regards,
Atilio Leveratto
Sr Associate Vice President
c: Apple Inc.: Eric Malmquist
� :�AI� i�.
: ..�.
�� �& 0 6
��a,.,,�Fo �
City of Burlingame
Meeting Minutes
Planning Commission
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Monday, August 8, 2016 7:00 PM Council Chambers
c. 1301 Burlingame Avenue, zoned BAC - Application for Commercial Design Review for
facade changes (Apple Inc., applicant; Callison RTKL Inc., architect; Avtar Johal,
property owner) (37 notices) Staff Contact: Catherine Keylon
All Commissioners had visited the property. Tliere were no ex-parte communications to report.
Senior Planner Keylon provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff.
Vice Chair Gum opened the public hearing.
Atilio Leverafto, CallisonRTKL Inc. represented fhe applicant with property owner Avtar Johal.
Commission comments/questions:
> Will the remaining portion of the Gymboree storefront be large enough for a retail tenant? Concern it
will not be leasable and will be leff vacant. (Johal. The landlord already has a tenant lined up.)
> Does the metal panel appear anywhere other than the side window on Park Road? (Leveratto: Soffit
on the front elevation as well.)
> Any response to the letter from Jennifer Pfaff? (Johal: The letter references the building prior.)
> Concern with the scale of the entry, with doors 10-12 feet tall. It is lacking human scale, similar to
fhe Pottery Barn and Banana Republic stores. Was there consideration of an awning or something along
the front facade to provide scale? (Johal: A canopy or awning is not part of an Apple standard. The
plane of the glass is recessed 2 feet into the space, so it creates a little canopy. There is also a 4-inch
metal frame around the door to give some scale.)
> While Apple has its concept, Burlingame Avenue has its design guidelines. In order to be approvable
it needs to considerer compatibility of the architecture with the mass, bulk, scale, and materials. There is
nothing human in the scale of the facade.
> The side elevation on Park Road will look stark, especially with the white stone. The new bump -outs
in the streetscape emphasize the corner. Needs something to gef people to come around the corner, like
the Peef's Coffee across the street does. Design turns its back on the side, only focuses on the front.
> The rear is also important. Also sees fhe alley from the back. By taking away the windows from the
structure next door it is even more blank. In many respects the stores have two fronts, and there has
been discussion of making the alleys and parking lots vibrant places. Something needs to be done to the
side and back to invite people down Park Road.
> Can a 3-D model be p�ovided to give a better understanding? (Johal: Yes. It can show it wrth people
too to give a sense of scale. The glass in proportion to the stone looks deceivingly tall. Matches datum of
jewelry store down the street.)
> Does nof see how a line at 8 feet will disrupt the cleanliness of the facade and entry. (Johal: Could
also project the door frame further out.) The door is 10 feet tall, which is not human scale. 7 or 8 feet is
human scale.
> Not sure how this fits in compatibly with any other building in downtown. All other buildings have
some sort of architecfural relief - corbel, projecting roofline, windows are examples of architectural
elements that add to an otherwise blank facade.
> The scale of the door is massive. A 10-foot door with al1 glass and stone is alienating.
> Blank facade is highly visible as one comes down the street. Maybe more glass and glazing on,
would further the concept of "bringing tlie oufside in." (Johal. Had considered another door but would
have to re-do the sidewalk."
City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 10/4/2018
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 8, 2016
Public comments:
Nick Delis spoke on this item:
> Owns the Gap building across the street.
> Lofs of work went into streetscape project. Kept the old world charm with lighting, flowers, etc.
> Apple store is an asset to downtown and deserves to be unique, but needs to be compatible.
> Safeway store as an example of working hard to find a way to fit into the community, and if has
turned out well.
> Can keep basic design buf needs human element of balance. Each building in town has that
character already.
> Apple wanfs to be unique, but does not deserve to receive overly special treatment when property
owners have spent special tax assessments on the streetscape fo maintain the beauty. Apple building is
too sfark.
Vice Chair Gum closed the public hearing.
Commission discussion:
> Overriding concern is scale and compatibility with the neighborhood.
> Needs to make conside�ations for a unique tenant, but can be achieved and still have good
pedestrian scale and street frontage.
> There are a number of storefronts along Burlingame Avenue fhat were designed and built before
design review so are not necessarily examples to reference. There are many that have gone through
design review that are handsome. neighborly a��d have good pedestrian frontages.
> Could do more with the "bring the outside in" concept, for example with the rear facade.
> Hard to convey to the cornmunity that the intent is to bring the outside in with the glass on just one
side and the rest is all blank stone.
> Great-looking stone but there is so much of it. It will look too stark. The existing gray stone works
better.
> Park Road is the heart of Downfown. There is going to be development on the post office site down
Park Road thaf wil! be a brg part of town. Great opportunity to do something spectacular, move people
down Park Road.
> The white stone is remnant of a mausoleum look. Concerned the building could end up taking on
that moniker. The communrty will crifique the building as it did before, and that was before there was
design review.
> Glad to have Apple in downtown but it needs to step up and do more to be neighborly with the
architecture.
Commissioner Gaul made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bandrapalli, to place the item
on the Regular Action Calendar when plans have bee� revised as directed. The motion carried by
the following vote:
Aye: 4- Gum, Terrones, Bandrapalli, and Gaul
Absent: 3- DeMartini, Loftis, and Sargent
City of Burlingame Page 2 Printed on 10/4/2016
�TKL
C.il.���:.snF�TFi �� �� � �
taa _ar.3y���t�. , �
11th Ftoor
New York, NY `
g +i ziz ss�+ �.
�+iziz;,.:
September 28, 2016
Attn: Planning Commissioners
Burlingame Planning Commission
Burlingame City Hall
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame
CA 94010
Subject: 1301 Burlingame Ave - Commercial Design Review — Design Review Study meeting
response Letter
Dear Commissioners:
Thank you for your time and comments provided during Design Review Study meeting held on
August 8, 2016.
We carefully studied the comments received and updated our design accordingly. By meeting with
some of you, we were able to get feedback and a better understanding of whether or not we are
going in the right direction. We also contacted Jennifer Pfaff and had productive discussion with
her as public representative.
Please see our responses below, regarding items left open from Design Review Study meeting:
- New stone sample is provided for warmer stone color
- Entrance door height is reduced and doors are recessed into the store to form niche
- Canopy was added above door to form human scale ambient at the entrance
- Side window is significantly enlarged to allow more transparency into the store and to
revive Park Rd. by attracting more people
- Apple logo was added, and together with enlarged window breaks continuous stone at
Park Rd.fa4ade.
- Options for back fa4ade are being researched, based on recommendation from Jennifer
Pfaff
- Full 3D renderings with building diagrams are provided as part of the document set to help
clarify design further
We hope comments are addressed to your satisfaction. We are open to further clarify any items
you might need more information on.
Thank you for your help and understanding.
Best regards,
�
Atilio Leveratto
Sr. Associate Vice President
c: Apple Inc.: Eric Malmquist
CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS:
APPLE STORE AT 1301 BURLINGAME AVENUE
A. With respect to the Commercial Desi�n Review ap�lication the followin findin s�can
be made pursuant to section 25.57.030(�) of the City of Burlingame Municipal Code and
the Citv of Burlin�ame, Commercial Desi�n Guidebook (updated 2012):
1. Support of the pattern of diverse architectural styles that characterize the city's
comrnercial, industria! and mixed use areas.
The Project supports the pattern of diverse architectural styles that characterize the City's
Downtown commercial area. The Project has been designed to be appropriate for use as a
retail store, while still maintaining compatibility with the neighborhood. Rather than seeking
to "match" the various adjacent architectural styles perfectly, the Project uses expansive clear
glass windows and stone cladding in a way that complements the surrounding buildings,
creating an overall diverse and welcoming streetscape environment. Further, the use of a
glass fa�ade storefront framed by stone cladding provides a contemporary riff on a classic
storefront, both modernizing and harmonizing the Burlingame Avenue frontage.
2. Respect and promotion of pedestrian activity by placement of buildings to maximize
commercia! use of the street frontage, off-street public spaces, and by locating parking
so that it does not dominate street frontages.
The Project is inviting to pedestrian shoppers and furthers the commercial aspects of the
Burlingame Avenue corridor both on Burlingame Avenue and Park Road.
The Project as proposed is human in scale and proportions, with a glass canopy and vestibule
that create an inviting entry to the space within, and an overall building height that falls in
line with adjacent storefronts. The clear glass fa�ade allows pedestrians to visually interact
with the Project's use and the customers and employees within the retail store, which attracts
foot traffic both to the Project and the area as a whole. Further, by increasing the surface
area of the glass fa�ade and decreasing the surface area of the stone cladding on the
storefront, the Project is also now lighter and airier in appearance, which makes the space
more inviting to passersby both visually and physically, and helps integrate the retail store
into the neighborhood.
The large (16 feet high by 25 feet wide) clear glass window along Park Road also provides a
visually appealing look to the public into the activity within the retail store, which promotes
pedestrian activity along Park Road and encourages pedestrian traffic onto Burlingame
Avenue.
3. On visually prominent and gateway sites, whether the design fits the site and is
compatible with the surrounding development.
The Project sits on the corner of the main Burlingame Avenue thoroughfare and Park Road,
and is thus a visually prominent gateway site. The three other buildings located at the corner
API,E\5107�\ 1011871.6
of Burlingame Avenue and Park Road — the buildings occupied by Peets, Lululemon and Gap
— are compatible with the proposed Project both in height and width. As a result, the Project
has a clear relationship with such buildings, with each building pairing with the other. None
of these four buildings match each other perfectly, but instead provide a harmonious and
mutually compatible gateway from Park Road onto Burlingame Avenue. The Project
enhances the character of the neighborhood and is prominent without appearing as a
'`billboard" for the site and proposed use.
4. Compatibility of the arehitecture with the mass, bulk, scale, and existing materials of
existing development and compatibility with transitions where changes in lund use
occur neurby.
The Project's architecture is compatible with the mass, bulk, scale and existing materials of
the adjacent storefronts a(ong Burlingame Avenue. The Project will reduce the current
building's height from 24 feet, 11 '/� inches to 22 feet, 3 3/4 inches (which falls well under the
35-foot maximum height permitted for this area) and will now be comparable in height to
other buildings in the immediate vicinity (including Kara's Cupcake and Gymboree).
Likewise, the Project's width, bulk, and scale are comparable to and compatible with nearby
buildings, thereby respecting the overall neighborhood architectural context. Also, by
increasing the surface area of the clear glass fa�ade and providing a glass canopy and
vestibule, the Project harmonizes with the variegated storefronts along Burlingame Avenue,
and helps create a more human scale for the building. The use of a variety of materials and
finishes in this corridor provides a diverse and attractive commercial neighborhood into
which the Project fits.
"I'he Project does not precisely match nearby architectural styles; while generally compatible
with the area, it also achieves a sufficiently different appearance so as to avoid making the
Burlingame Avenue area look like a"mall." At the same time, the Project is not so different
from surrounding styles so as to be jarring, out of place, or ostentatious. The Project's mass
and scale are similar to those of nearby buildings even though the architectural style is
different.
The Project's inclusion of a glass canopy and vestibule controls the pedestrian entrance width
and height, which both creates a human scale clearly intended for human interaction, and also
helps to manage the building's apparent mass. By including these features as well as a glass
storefront framed by stone cladding above, the Project provides articulation, avoids a full-
height storefront, and controls the overall massing and storefront height and width.
S. Architectural design consistency by using a single architectura/ style on the site that is
consistent among primary elements of the structure, restores or retains existing or
significant origina/ architectural features, and is compatible in mass and bulk with
other structures in the immecliate area.
The Project uses a single architectural style on the site that is consistent among all elements
of the structure, thus achieving architectural design consistency. The overall style and layout
of the Project is unitied and internally consistent and appears as a harmonious whole. In
2
addition, as found above, the Project is compatible in mass and bulk with other structures in
the immediate area.
The Project includes a primary building fa�ade, which uses a single architectural style. As
found above, the Project's fa�ade is consistent with the mass, bulk and scale of its adjacent
and nearby buildings.
6. Provision of site features such as fencing, landscaping, and pedestrian circulation that
enriches the existing opportunities of the commercial neighborhood.
Encouraging pedestrian trafflc along Park Road and providing direct access to the
Burlingame Avenue storefront creates a strong relationship between each street frontage and
the retail store and further supports pedestrian shoppers to explore the other commercial
businesses in the neighborhood.
The provision of expansive clear glass visibility into the retail store along with the tree
landscaping along both street frontages enhance pedestrian circulation and enrich the existing
opportunities of the commercial neighborhood. The landscaping serves to increase the
human life of Burlingame Avenue and provide human amenities for customers and the
general public. The Project landscaping will not be significantly changed and is thus
appropriate to the existing character of the neighborhood. Parking behind the Project
building is separated from the public street by landscaping and a sidewalk, thus minimizing
the impact of parking and vehicle circulation. The glass canopy and vestibule emphasize
pedestrian access and deemphasize vehicular access.
B. With respect to the Project's consistencv with the policies in the Burlingame Downtown
Specific Plan, the following findings can be made:
The Project's design is compatible and consistent with the relevant policies of the
Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan, which recognizes the presence and value of "a range
of architectural styles and periods" in the Downtown area as well as the existence of "fine
modern buildings, which overall are compatible in scale and detail with more historical
examples." The Project contributes to the lively mix of buildings with ditiferent heights and
styles and relates to the Downtown's traditional storefronts by using large display windows.
The Project exhibits fine-grained, pedestrian-friendly scale and details as discussed above.
The Project includes active storefronts, windows, and a door at ground level.
Specifically, the Project is consistent with relevant Specific Plan policies, as follows:
1. The Project is consistent with Downtown Specific Plun po[icy 5.2.1.1 in that the use of
the glass canopy and vestibule creates a small alcove for the entrance, which establishes a
definitive sense of entry. The door of the Project contains large glass panels with vertical
proportions that present a visual connection to the streetscape.
2. The Project is consistent with Downtown Specific Plan policy 5.2.1.2 in that the Project
is a high activity generating use along a side street intersection with Burlingame Avenue.
The fa�ade along Park Road continues that of the Burlingame Avenue frontage and includes
an expansive clear glass look into the activity within the retail store, helping entice
pedestrians down Park Road.
3. The Project is consistent with Downtown Spec�fic Plan policy 5.2.1.3 in that it upholds
the unique community character of the area by helping provide a mixture of building ages
and architectural styles. The Project's use of special materials (including the distinctive
mocha cream limestone suited to both exterior and interior applications), landscaping, and
storefront detailing reinforces the pedestrian nature of Burlingame Avenue and Park Road.
4. The Project is consistent with Downtown Specific Plan policy 5.2.2.1 in that it provides
a tloor to finish ceiling height in excess of 15 feet, which is consistent with the existing
character of Downtown Burlingame and adjacent buildings, provides a welcoming retail
environment, and accommodates a range of potential uses over the lifetime of the building.
As the Project is shorter than the existing building, is under the allowable height limit, and is
consistent with other building heights in its immediate vicinity, it does not overwhelm the
pedestrian experience and provides for human scale.
S. The Project is consistent with Downtown Specific Plan policy 5.2.3.1 in that it avoids
large uninterrupted expanses of horizontal and vertical wall surface. It provides variation in
building materials and planes. Inset windows, the glass canopy, and the vestibule articulate
the fa�ade and maintain a pedestrian scale. The design details are functional and purposeful
and are not merely applied or decorative. The fa�ade has a variation of positive space in the
windows and stone cladding, and negative space in the windows, entrance, glass canopy, and
vestibule. This level of architectural detailing and high quality materials complement the
existing buildings while contributing a fresh look to the streetscape. The Project's use of
expansive window displays also makes it appropriate for a corner site.
6. The Project is consistent with Downtown Speciftc Plan policy 5.2.3.2 in that it includes
large windows that enliven the streetscape, provide relief, detail, and variation, and are inset
to provide shade and shadow detail. The windows enliven the street and provide ample
views into the interior of the Project building, making it interact visually and functionally
with the surrounding area.
7. The Project is consistent with Downtown Specific Plan policy 5.2.3.3 in that the
materials to be used are high-quality, richly detailed, and visually interesting. The Project
does not entail the use of inetal siding or large expanses of stucco or wood siding, instead
using high-quality and attractive limestone in addition to the expansive glazing.
8. The Project is consistent with Downtown Specific Plan policy 5.2.3.4 in that its rear and
side facades are as sophisticated in design and materials as the primary fa�ade. The Project
building provides an expansive window display on its side fa�ade, and the rear of the
building is both pleasant and interesting.
9. The Project is consistent with Downtnwn Specific P[an policy 5.2.4.1 in that it does not
include a side yard, instead providing a contiguous building fa�ade along the street.
0
10. The Project is consistent with Downtown Specific Plan policy 5.2.4.2 in that it
includes an articulated storefront that is light and airy, and includes high-quality landscaping
near the primary entrance (which is adjacent to a well-traveled pedestrian route). These
amenities are functional and visually appealing, enhancing the streetscape and overall Project
area.
BURLINGAME
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Tel (650) 558-7230
Fax (650) 685-931D
'I�he City of Burlingarne
CITY HALL - SQ� PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLWGAME, CALIFORNIA 9401 �-3997
Website: �������.burlin�*ame.or�
CORPORATION YARD
Tel.(b50; 558-76'0
February 26, 2008
Apple Computer
Attention: Manag�r
1301 Burlingame fl� enue
Burlingame, CA 94010
Ref: DEPOSIT OF FL'NDS MADE BY APPLC CO:�IPCTER
FOR STREETSCAPE IMPROVE:�IENTS - PROJECT NO. 320-75110-220
llear Sir/Madam:
1?nclosed herewith are copies of the City of Burlingame's Resolution and Staff Report regarding the deposit
of funds made by Appl� Computer for Streetscape Improvements.
Our last contact for this project v�•as 1�r. Bob Laughrea of Apple Computer. Since these are very important
docurnents, we ask that 5-ou retain a copy for your records and forvvard a copy to your corporate offices or any
other person within ��our entit}� who requires them.
Thank you ��ery much.
Sincere�;,
a
�� , y. �. •, , _..
Jane Gomery
Project Manager
�„� - 1
-r, , , ,
Enclosures: Resolution
Staff Report
RESOLUTION NO. I2-2oo8
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCII.OF TAE CITY OF BURLINGAME iVIAIdNNG
FINDINGS PURSUANT TO GOVERl!VMENT C�DE SECTTON 66001 REGARDING
DEPOSIT OF FUNDS iVIADE BY APPLE CO�UTER FOR STREETSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS AT 1301 BURLINGAME AVENUE
(ENCROACHRTENT PER�VIIT 11810 — PROJECT NO. 320-75110-220)
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Burlingame:
WHEREAS, in 2003, Apple Computer deposiied $150,000 toward streetscape bulbout
improvements and $65,000 toward sidewalk improvements in the immediate vicinity of 1301
Burlingame Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the deposited amonnts directly relate to the 2Q03 cost estimate far ihe
improvements, and those costs have continued to escaIate; and
WHEREAS, the City is currently developing the Burlingame Avenue Specific Plan that will
establish the streetscape requirements for the azea; and �
WHEREAS, it is estimated that design and eonstruction of these specific improvements
could occur no later than 2013; and
WHEREAS, the public information required by Govemment Code Section 66006 has been
provided, and that information confirms that the monies are on deposit and no expenditures from the
funds have been made,
NOW, THEREF�RE, IT IS RE50LVED AND ORDERED;
1. The funds deposited in connection with Encroachment Permit 11810 in Project No. 320-
75110-220 shall remain on deposit pursuant to the findings stated above for use in the design and
construction of the streetscape iinpravements in the immediate vicinity of 1301 Burlingame
Avenue, Burlingame, and in particular, the buIbout area at the corner of Burlingame Avenue and
Park Road, and the sidewalk in front of 1301 Burlingame Avenue. This deposit shall be further
reviewed no later than March 2013 if the funds have not been expended or refunded by that time.
Y1? I�L�c.P
MAYOR
I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing
resolurion was i.ntroduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 4�i day of February ,
2008, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COLJNCILI�MBERS: BAYr.oc�, D�., r�cII., o'r�aoxy
�v'OES: COUI�'CILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: t���x
CITY CLERK
TO
DATE:
FROM:
STAFF REPORT
Agenda
Item #
Meeting
Date: February 4. 2008
SUBMITTED�� ��
A?PROVED BY
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CfTY COUNCIL
January 24, 2Q08
PUBLIC WORKS
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE DEPOSIT OF FUNDS FROM APPLE
COMPUTERS AT 13U1 BURLINGAME AVENUE FOR STREETSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO. 320-75910-220
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached
resolution extending the deposit of funds from Apple Computers for the purpose of
streetscape improvements.
BACKGRDUND: In 2003 the Apple Computer store was required by the Planning
Commission to constru�t streetscape improvements along the property frontage at
1301 Burlingame A�enue. Because the details of the streetscape plan were not
compfete, the Gity required the project develpper to deposit $215,000 for the future
design, engineering and construction of the improvements. The deposit includes
$150,000 for the streetscape bulb out and $65,000 for the sidewalk as well as
landscape improvements.
DISCUSSION: The funds were deposit�d in anticipation that the streetscape
improvements would be complete within five years. Since that time, Council has
directed staff to pursue a Specific Area Plan (SAP) for the downtown with a
streetscape plan to follaw. Because of this delay, the funds need to remain on
deposit until the design, engineering and construction of these improvements are
compfete.
Pu�suant to Government Code Section 66001, staff recommends that Council extend
the deposit of the funds until 2013. Upon the development of SAP and streetscape
plan, the deposited funds would be avaifable for streetscape improvements within the
next five years.
S:1R Public Worics Diredory`Staif Reports11301 Burlingame Ave 2-4-08 SR.doc
BUDGET IMPACT: None.
EXHIBITS: Resolution, Finance Departmen# memo regarding Apple Compu#er
Deposit
C
Jane Gomery
Program Manager
c: Ann VanZanten, Apple Computer
Jim Nantell, City Manager; Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works
Larry Anderson, City Attorney, Bill Meeker, Community Development Directar
Doris Mortensen, City Clerk
S:IA Pubqc Wwks DirectorylStaft RepoKs17301 Burtingame Ave 2-408 SR.dx
��� CITY o� MEMORANDUM
BURUNGAME
�L�!:� � - ,oe Finance Department
�A�TLD �RJ�1[ 6•
January 16, 2008
To: Syed Mur�uza
From: Mary Asturias
Re: Apple Computer Deposit
Apple computer deposited a sum of $215,000 with the City of Burlingame for off-
site streetscape public improvemenis on July 25, 2003. The City deposited the
funds in a deposit account. The fund has earned no interest. None of the funds
have been expended on the construction of streetscape improvements. This
construction is contingent on the compfe#ion of a downtown plan. No transfers,
foans or refunds have been made from the account. The current balance in the
account is $215,000.
PRI;VTEA O�ti RECYCLED P� PER
tu'�.
���'
euRUNcnenr
��
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010
p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.buriingame.org
APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Type of application:
C� Design Review ❑ Variance ❑ Parcel #:
❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit ❑ Zoning / Other:
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1301 Burlingame Ave. Burlingame, CA 94010
APPLICANT
Name: Apple Inc. Attn: Eric Malmquist
Address: 1 Infinite Loop MS 52RD
City/State/Zip: Cupertino, CA
Phone: (408) 892-2456
E-mail: emalmquist@apple.com
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
Name: Callison RTKL Inc.
Address: 148 Lafayette St, 11th Flr
City/State/Zip: New York / NY / 10013
Phone: 646-747-0871
E-mail: Yarden.harari@callisonRTKL.com
Burlingame Business License #:
PROPERTY OWNER
Name: _�JT� � %h/�-
Address: ,33 % P�� t M(ZC Si� le (�
City/State/Zip: � ;; � � 1 � c;,�}M� . C �} � y �' I �7
Phone: � �j U •- 3�I�Z - 057�
E-mail: i v�-ar' 61 ��� yu,l� v �.�-�:,j1-i
RECEIVED
JUN 1 4 'OiS
CITY OF BUH�iNGAME
CDD-PLANNING Df1/.
Authorization to Reproduce Proiect Plans:
I hereby grant the City of Burlingame the authority to reproduce upon request and/or post plans submitted with this
application on the City's website as part of the Planning approval process and waive any claims against the City
arising out of or related to such action. �_ (Initials of ArchitectlDesigner)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:�Apple Inc . Store at 1301 Burlinqame Ave . Burlinqame, CA
�94010
AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief.
Applicant's signature: ���7�% �� Date: Jun2 1, 2016
I am aware of the proposed application y a orize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning
Commission.
Property owner's signature: % Date:
Date submitted:
5: �HANDOUTS�PCApplicotion.doc
This Space for CDD
StafF Use Only
�
Project Description:
i
���� I C���'i �C.y'4-'i � L J ✓� ��.�y��
�--Q./'� 'j ��� -
. �
� � .�.��..Z. ��
�
i
�s�
�.�
zon� d � �}c, ,
- f
�----�-�-- - --- _.-,�.-------�-- -.;
Ke �
Abbreviation Term
CUP Conditional Use Permit
DHE Declinin Hei ht Envelc
DSR Desi n Review
E Existin
N New
SFD Sin le Famil Dwellin
SP Special Permit
�A
. , � � i,
� r �� T � �, � �l`, ,` :>��
� ��- -.�� �� *� �� �n���
.; . _: _.._: ZTKL
CallisonRTKL Architocts P.0
148 Lafayette Street
11th Floor
New Yark, NY 1001 ;
; +1 ztz 35n 9z:70
;:; +1 212 354 9253
PLANNING COMMISSION - LETTER OF EXPLANATION
Date:6/14/2016
Project Name: 1301 Burlingame Ave
Project Number: 003-160040.00
Dear Burlingame Planning Commission,
This letter of explanation is to accompany the Design Review submittal for a retail renovation of
Apple Inc., at 1301 Burlingame Ave.
The existing store main sales area occupies 1301 Burlingame, with back of house support areas also
extending behind 1309 Burlingame Ave. and including a mezzanine level, totaling approximately
6,100 sq. ft. The proposed design includes the removal of the existing mezzanine, and expanding
back of house spaces behind the current Gymboree space at 1311 Burlingame Ave.
The main sales area will increase to occupy the majority of 1301 Burlingame, with the overall
volume of the building remaining intact. The overall building height is to be slightly reduced, and
Burlingame glass storefront to increase in height, with a new window added along Park Rd. fa�ade.
Overall square footage will total 7,222 sq. ft.
We look forward to your consideration. Please don't hesitate to reach out if anything is unclear.
Thank you,
Yarden Harari
G��/���
Associate
**.**
c: Apple, Inc.: Eric Malmquist
CallisonRTKL: Atilio Leveratto
RECEIV�p
J�';J Y 4 � 01�
CITY pF gURLINGAME
CDD-PLqNNING DPV
Page 1 of 1
�� GITY 0�
�� ; � 1 �1
�`0,��+,�
� � �t
Project Comments - Planning Application
Project Address: 1301 Burlingame Avenue, zoned BAC, APN 029-202-080
Description: Request for Commercial Design Review for retail renovations including
fa�ade changes.
From
Martin Quan
Public Works Engineering
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised
plans with your resubmittal:
No further comments at this time.
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as they
will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
No further comments at this time.
Reviewed By: Martin Quan Date: 7/29/16
650-558-7245
� CITV O
�i .! �
P"�'`��
Project Comments - Planning Application
Project Address: 1301 Burlingame Avenue, zoned BAC, APN 029-202-080
Description: Request for Commercial Design Review for retail renovations including
fa�ade changes.
From
Martin Quan
Engineering
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised
plans with your resubmittal:
1. Is there a proposed door on Park Road side of the building?
2. Will the fa�ade renovations involve replacement of the structural members and/or foundation of the
building?
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as they
will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
2
3.
Per City of Burlingame Municipal Code 12.05, any work within the public right-of-way of the Downtown
Burlingame Avenue limits shall require approval from the Public Works Department and shall comply
with the following special conditions, specifications, details, and construction moratorium.
Sewer Backwater Protection Certification is required for the installation of any new sewer fixture per
Ordinance No. 1710. The Sewer Backwater Protection Certificate is required prior to the issuance of
Building Permit.
The sanitary sewer lateral (building sewer) shall be tested per ordinance code chapter 15.12. Testing
information is available at the Building department counter. A Sewer Lateral Test encroachment permit
is required.
Reviewed By: Martin Quan Date: 6/21/16
650-558-7245
� GITY
�� � �' �
_,�°��
1 ' � ' �
�r. � �� .
�9 �.
Project Comments - Planning Application
Project Address: 1301 Burlingame Avenue, zoned BAC, APN 029-202-080
Description: Request for Commercial Design Review for retail renovations including
fa�ade changes.
From:
Bob Disco
Parks Div.
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised
plans with your resubmittal:
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as
they will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
1. Existing City Street Tree may not be cut, trimmed or removed without permit from Parks Division
(558-7330)
Reviewed By: BD 6/22/16
558-7334
� GITY O
I�i ;J �
���`���
1 ���
�
_
Project Comments - Planning Application
Project Address: 1301 Burlingame Avenue, zoned BAC, APN 029-202-080
Description: Request for Commercial Design Review for retail renovations including
fa�ade changes.
From: Christine Reed
Fire Department
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised
plans with your resubmittal:
No comments at this time.
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as they
will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
Reviewed By: Christine Reed Date: 6-29-16
650-558-7600
ITY
�� ; �' �
,
c��K.� i+ r
` �. ,
+.�R..
Project Comments - P/anning Application
Project Address: 1301 Burlingame Avenue, zoned BAC, APN 029-202-080
Description: Request for Commercial Design Review for retail renovations including
fa�ade changes.
From: Rick Caro III
Building Division
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised
plans with your resubmittal:
No Comments
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as they
will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
No Comments
Reviewed By: Rick Caro III Date: July 27, 2016
650 558-7270
�� CITY ��
�� � �' �
_�
`,'�.�
`!§,
�y(� � �!� .,
Project Address
Description:
From:
Projecf Commenfs - Planning Application
1301 Burlingame Avenue, zoned BAC, APN 029-202-080
Request for Commercial Design Review for retail renovations including
fa�ade changes.
Rick Caro III
Building Division
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised
plans with your resubmittal:
1) 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, 2016 then this project must comply with the 2016 California
Building Codes.
2) Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2013 California Energy Efficiency
Standards. Go to http://www.energ� .�y ca•�ov/title24/2013standards/ for publications and details.
3) 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.
Sundays and Holidays: 10:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m.
(See City of Burlingame Municipal Code, Section 13.04.100 for details.)
Corestruction hours in the City Public right-of-way are limited to weekdays and non-City
Holidays between 8: 00 a. m. and S: 00 p. m.
Note: Construction hours for work in the public right of way must now be included on the
plans.
4) 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.
5) Provide fully dimensioned plans.
6) 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.
7) Indicate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the Department of
Public Works.
8) Provide a title block on the plans that includes the name of the owner(s) .
9) nn your plans provide a table that includes the following:
a. Occupancy group for each area of the building
b. Type of construction
c. Indicate sprinklered or non-sprinklered
10) Complete the occupant load table below, that accounts for all floor area in the tenant space, and provide
the table on the first page of the plans. See 2013 CBC § 1004.4 and Table 1004.1.2.
Occu anc Grou S uare Feet Occu ant Load Factor Total Occu ant Load
A-3 (Fixed Seatin ) See CBC 1004.4
B (Office) 30
Mercantile 30
Mercantile (Other) 60
S-2 (Storage) 300
* Not re uired to be counted in the Occu ant Load Calculation er CBC §202-"Floor Area Net"
C;orridors* 0 0
Stairwa s* 0 0
Toilet Rooms* 0 0
Mechanical Rooms* p
0
Closets* 0 0
Total Bld . Area
1 I) 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 city-required backwater
prevention devices.
] 2) Illustrate compliance with the minimum plumbing fixture requirements described in the 2013 California
Plumbing Code, Chapter 4, Table 422.1 Minimum Plumbing Facilities and Table A- Occupant Load
Factor.
13) Separatc toilet facilities are required for each sex, except:
a. Residential occupancies
b. Occupancies serving ten or fewer people may have a toilet facility for use by more than one
person at a time, shall be permitted for use by both sexes. 2013 CPC §422.2 #2.
c. Business and Mercantile occupancies with a total occupant load of 50 or less, including
customers and employees, one toilet facility, designed for use by no more than one person at
time, shall be permitted for use by both sexes. 2013 CPC §422.2 #3.
14) 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.
15) 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.
16) Specify the accessible path of travel from the public right of way, through the main entrance, to the area
of alteration.
17) Specify an accessible path of travel from all required exits to the public right of way.
18) Specify the path of travel from on-site parking, through the main entrance, to the area of alteration
19) Specify the total number of parking spaces on site.
20) Specify a level landing, slope, and cross slope on each side of the door at all required entrances and exits.
21) Provide an exit plan showing the paths of travel
22) Specify accessible countertops where service counters are provided
23) Provide complete dimensioned details for accessible bathrooms
24) Provide complete, dimensioned details for accessible parking
25) The second exit appears to terminate at the rear of the property. Provide an exit plan which shows
accessible path of travel from the exit to the public right of way per 2013 CBC 1007.2.
26) 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 CaliforniaAccess Compliance Manual —Interpretive Regulation
11 B-8.
27) In the tenant space indicate the location of the "Office" or area where bookkeeping and financial
reconciliation will take place. If the office is to be located on the mezzanine level then also
indicate an accessible office space on the ground floor. 2013 CBC 11 B-203.9
28) Doors and/or windows cannot project into the public right of way 2013 CBC §3202. Amend the plans to
show that doors and windows in their fully open position do not encroach into the public right of way.
29) The area labeled mezzanine does not appear to comply with the requirements for a mezzanine. "All
portions of a mezzanine shall be open and unobstructed to the room in which they are located, except for
columns and posts and protective walls or railings not more than 44 inches in height." Therefore this area
is considered a second floor and, as such, a second exit must be provided. In addition, the Building Code
requires two exits from the second floor when the occupant load is 10 or more.
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised
plans with your resubmittal:
Reviewed by: Rick Caro III Date: June 21, 2016
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as
they will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
1) 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.
2) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business
license.
3) 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 Building Permit is issued for the project.
4) Provide a complete furniture / movable fixture plan for the tenant space.
Reviewed By: Rick Caro III Date: June 21, 2016
650 558 -7270
� CITY �
�� � � I �
�`,� , -
h ..'�,� �i;1�i_�I�
e
00 � 9
'>ro
Project Comments - Planning Application
Project Address: 1301 Burlingame Avenue, zoned BAC, APN 029-202-080
Description: Request for Commercial Design Review for retail renovations including
fa�ade changes.
From
Carolyn Critz
Stormwater
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised
plans with your resubmittal:
No comments at this time.
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as
they will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
1. 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.orq/Construction
Reviewed By: Carolyn Critz �CC Date: June 23, 2016
(650) 342-3727
Gap Inc.
November 21, 2016
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Burlingame Planning Commission,
Two Folsom Street
San Prancisco, cn y4 � os
We have operated our store on Burlingame Avenue for several years. We share many of the
same customers with Apple. Since Apple's opening, the Apple store has been a significant
regional draw to Burlingame Avenue. Our store has had a tremendous benefit from Apple's
presence on Burlingame Avenue. Having heard about Apple's desire to reinvest in Downtown
Burlingame we are excited about Apple's re-commitment to Burlingame Avenue.
The plans that have been presented by Apple are a significant improvement to the current
design. The facades on Burlingame Avenue and Park are significant improvements over the
current design. Additionally the design, materials and articulation of the fa�ade of the
proposed Apple building, which fronts the service alley known as City Hall Lane, is well designed
and has our full support.
Accordingly, we support Apple's proposal.
Sincerely,
�/'/ � eU ��
/��//�� �.,
�
Raymond L. Miolla
Senior Vice President
Global Real Estate
`�1'VIT��IAM� -SOI�TC��1/.��, IN�.
Burlingame Planning Commission
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame, CA 94010
November 21, 2016
Dear Burlingame Planning Commission:
3260 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94109
415/ 616-8797
F� 4!5/ 439-8139
Bud Cope
Senior Vice President
Store Development
We have operated our store on Burlingame Avenue for several years. We share many of the
same customers with Apple. Since Apple's opening, the Apple store has been a significant
regional draw to Burlingame Avenue. Our store has had a tremendous benefit from Apple's
presence on Burlingame Avenue. Having heard about Apple's desire to reinvest in Downtown
Burlingame we are excited about Apple's re-commitment to Burfingame Avenue.
The plans that have been presented by Apple are a significant improvement to the current
design. The facades on Burlingame Avenue and Park are significant improvements over the
current design, As importantly the design, materials and articulation of the fa�ade of the
proposed Apple building which fronts the service alley known as City Hall Lane is well designed
and has our full support.
We request that you grant Apple the approval they are seeking so that Apple may re-invest in
the community known as Downtown Burlingame.
Sincerely,
�� ♦ f t
t �
Bud Cope
Executive Vice President
Williams-Sonoma, Inc Real Estate and Store Development
CD/PLG-Catherine Keylon
From: Jennifer Pfaff < -
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 5:46 PM
To: CD/PLG-Catherine Keylon
Cc: CD/PLG-Ruben Hurin; CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Subject: 1301 Burlingame Avenue
Honorable Chair Loftis and fellow Planning Commissioners,
It was with great pleasure that I recently reviewed the revised design for Apple at the corner of Park Rd. and Burlingame
Avenue. These plans appear to me to be a vast improvement over the versions they've previously submitted; I am especially
pleased to see Old City Hall Lane designed with the care and visual interest it deserves.
Please relay my thanks to the Apple designers for listening to the commission and the public. Most of all, I want to thank the
Planning Commissioners for keeping the bar high, and upholding the commercial design guidelines that were put into place to
reflect the values, character, and uniqueness of Burlingame.
Best,
Jennifer Pfaff
Bayswater Ave.
CD/PLG-Catherine Keylon
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jennifer Pfaff <
Monday, October 03, 2016 10:54 PM
CD/PLG-Bill Meel<er; CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner; GRP-Planning Commissioners
CD/PLGCatherine Keylon; Viadimir Miskovic; Atilio Leveratto; emalmquist@apple.com
1301 Burlingame Avenue - Review of Apple Store Design
Parlc Rd. with Old City Hali c. 1960s.pdf; ATTOOOOl.htm
Honorable Chair Loftis and Planiiing C�n�.nissioslers:
Several weeks ago, I sent in coanments reg�g•d:ng the redesi�n and configuration of the Apple Store
at 1301 Burlingame Avenue; inany of vou shared sin�ilar observations to my own. Additionally, at
least one commissioner commentecl o�� lack of visual interest on the large blank wall at the back of
the building, facing Old City Hall La�e, adjacent tc� Parking Lot J.
Recently, I met with the Apple representative and architect at their request to look at changes
they've made in an effort to bric�ge the forn�idable gap between Eurlingaine's design guidelines for
the downtown area, and Apple's desired co�potate "1c�ok". De#ii�i�ie improvements have been made
to the Burlingame Avenue- anc� Parlc Road elevations, and I contiigue to look to the commission to
consider the "huinan scale" aspect �o the degree that it is possible with this style of building.
However, the "back" of the bLiilding remains a large, sterile presence.
The downtown plan specifies tilat �lfl visi�le sir�es, including rear elevations of buildings and alleys,
be improved wit�� design features whenever ��c�ssihle. �'his structure has a highly visible rear
elevation that could bes;ome a vvonderf�l v�<y�.ial �-ac;�1 point; not only becoming an asset to the
project, but to the downtown as a whole.
In that spirit, I am attaching a linlc to one of several companies specializing in high quality,
photographic tile transfers that are UV tolerant: ���t�:I/tileart��a�s.com/historic-tile-
ri1UTalS� Though a mura� can take c�n many dff#ei•ent forms and sty�es, black and white vintage
images offer re�i��e�i vis�,aal restraiilt, a hallmarlc of�Ap�le, while the content could help "tell the
story" of the street, those who hav� lived hereq aald create a r�nuch needed "sense of place" to help
ground this building. The tiles caii be g�roc�zic�.cf i�s a variety of d.imensions, depending on the
desired "look".
As an example of a relevant vizzta�e photograph t}�ai could be enlarged to a mural size, please find
the attached 196�s phote� #rom the �ur�ingame Histc��•ical Society archives. It depicts the former
Bank of America building at 1�O1 Burlir�g��ne Avenue, as well as the ivy covered Old City Hall on
Park Road behind it, and other neigl�bor•ing s��t•�aciures-- a11 seen fi•om the vantage point of the
USPO staircase and parking Lot E. If you loolc �arefully in the �oreground at left, a magnolia
sapling can be seen that over tl�� s��cades has ��e��c���-�:v a huge tree!
Please be true to the guidelines set in �he D�wntown Specifzc Plan and ask Apple to consider all
sides of their project as equally contril�utory to the dc�wntown, atid to itnprove the back of this
building in some meani�gful way.
Sincerely yours,
Jennifer Pfaff
. . ps— t' '�"�M�ar+ .
� ;�:�;.�, �IG�++i� i �
� � � .!y �. . f
I '1L� ,. y
� � . .'� " r'. I ���� yill �: �
i
,I� �� � � �
. ���, �. . . � I t
!.4 : � � R i . � ..
�:y� . ,+ .��� ��� .. I � i. R ,f• . - — '.` e -
� �
� � S� �
n � '� -� x ��q' . _ - � ' ��. � _ . , ' •
�_.. �-'. , � � � -- . � e
_ • � - ;�4�� — � � - � _ _
f,' / � �� t • C ' ' ;: �:,'os vw.»e�' �����..- . � - - -. . _ t• + . v%, $�
� . ' � ' �id� . . . . �-- � , r1hy ^,. � r.�
�i � .I�� . ' )'�. . .
'�i r
+ � ` ` �`
. �� -
�r . " �I i
� : ,�r � ��l►� �
�-
� r
� � �
� , . . . �\�� _� � � ` �
.,• -������ k.�.,, � ��+ �
L% � -� i` f �i . `�S+ x `~ -
� �4 y_ _ . - . � � . .. . � . .. .i+;.�,. � ,y.i�`. . .
• � . ;�" � � ,' . ��.>, � . c� . . - x::
. . . � �.a �' �/ "4.. ���s
� .•.� iA..+ :»7.���~`,"�. � � � � �+ �� `4 � � .
tL �
Kyjr�{. r ' :! �
� i✓f �,y... "�'i� _ "'t ✓ • • ,
/. � _ .._ ,�' . +r�' — � s „I i �, '
CD/PLG-Ruben Hurin
From: Jennifer Pfaff
Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2016 10:57 PM
To: CD/PLG-Catherine Keylon; CD/PLG-Ruben Hurin
Subject: 1301 Burlingame Avenue
A decade or so ago, Apple approached Burlingame with plans for a new, bold building design for the corner of
Park and Burlingame Avenue— in what became a component of architectural branding for Apple Inc. At the
time, commercial design review guidelines were not completely in place. The demolition of the original
structure at Park Rd. and Burlingame Avenue was highly controversial, because for decades the structure had
been the home of an elaborately designed Bank of Italy building (evtl B of A), that appeared to have been
covered with stucco to "modernize" it in the 1970s. No one really knew what, if anything, remained underneath.
Having few tools at their disposal in the way of guidelines, the Planning Commission majority ultimately
approved the plans for the structure that exists there, today.
That was then; this is now. Brand architecture is clearly ephemeral; this is a one-use structure that only Apple
can inhabit. Nevertheless, I hope you will scrutinize this proposal the way you scrutinize all new applications
and not give Apple a pass. There needs to be some modicum of adherence by Apple Inc. to Burlingame's
aesthetics of mass and scale.
Two obvious design compatibility issues are the following:
1) the lack of relation of the height of the storefront glass, to anything around it. The Apple design du jour
appears to be the use of as much glass as possible., sometimes entirely out of glass, yet our guidelines direct the
designer to incorporate awnings or other means to arrive at more of a"human scale". Though similar in concept
to the current iteration, the latest version of the front facade glass has completely surpassed the height of any
neighboring entrance or window component around it, as if it was designed in a vacuum (which may, in fact, be
the case). Even with a somewhat lowered building height, there is no horizontal component to bring the big
glass facade down to earth; the new design has completely lost touch with the street and those on it. Similarly, it
breaks away from its neighbor to the west, because again, there is no horizontal element relating to anything on
the adjoining structure, nor the remainder of the block. Perhaps the use of a substantial metal awning that is
aligned horizontally to some component typical of entrance heights on Burlingame Avenue, could serve that
purpose.
2) With regard to the Park Rd. elevation: As was the unfortunate case with "Apple I", "Apple II" does not use
the highly visible corner location to Burlingame's or its own benefit. It remains an opaque, heavy and uninviting
mass, devoid of any life it has within. Though the addition of a transparent opening near the far edge of the
building is an improvement over the tiny faux horizontal window that Apple only begrudgingly incorporated
into the former model, it, alone, is not nearly bold enough to make a meaningful design contribution to the
structure. There should ideally be two, or even three such openings to make a sorely needed aesthetic and
active contribution to the Park Rd. side. In fact, such an addition would be giving a nod to the pattern of the
Park Road window openings on the original bank building, long ago.
Finally, the choice of light colored pumice-like material seems to be an invitation for dirt. On the positive side,
however, given some time, perhaps that material will add some life and warmth to an otherwise cold design,
eventually giving the structure an authentic patina that the current ediiice has never had.
I hope these suggestions will help create an Apple building that "belongs" and has a sense of
place, rather than being aloof presence.
As always, thank you and the applicant for your consideration.
,iennifer Pfaff
Bayswater Ave.
Burlingame
�
��,�
2
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 prepared and application has been made for
Commercial Desiqn Review for facade chanqes to an existina commercial buildinq at 1301 Burlinaame
Avenue. Zoned BAC, Dalbir Gill Tr. And Avtar S. Johal Tr., property owners, APN: 029-202-080 & 029-
202-090;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
November 28. 2016, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written
materials and testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that:
On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments
received and addressed by this Commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence
that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical
exemption, per CEQA Section 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, is hereby
approved.
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.
Chairman
I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame,
do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission held on the 28th dav of November, 2016, by the following vote:
Secretary
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption and Commercial Design Review
1301 Burlingame Avenue
Effective December 8, 2016
Page 1
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division
date stamped November 16, 2016 sheets A-001 through A-811;
2. 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;
3. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features,
roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to
Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined
by Planning staffl;
4. that the conditions of the Building Division's July 27, 2016 and June 21, 2016 memos,
the Engineering Division's July 29, 2016 and June 21, 2016 memos, the Fire Division's
June 29, 2016 memo and the Stormwater Division's June 23, 2016 memos shall be met;
5. 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;
6. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project
construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of
approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall
remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process.
Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall
not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City
Council on appeal;
7. that 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;
8. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance;
9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform
Fire Codes, 2013 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption and Commercial Design Review
1301 Burlingame Avenue
Effective December 8, 2016
Page 2
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION
PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION:
10. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the 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; and
11. 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
r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BURLIN,GAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
.� BURLINGAME, CA 94010
PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790
www.burlingame.org
Site: 1301 BURLINGAME AVENUE
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the
following public hearing on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 28,
2016 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA:
Applicatian for Commercial Design Review for fa4ode
changes at 1301 BURLINGAME AVENUE zoned BAC.
APNs 029-102-080 & -090.
Mailed: November 18, 2016
(Please refer to other side)
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE
City of Burlinc,�ame
A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to
the meeting at the Community Development Department at 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingame, California.
If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing,
described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or
prior to the public hearing.
Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their
tenants about this notice.
For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you.
William Meeker
Community Development Director
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
(Please refer to other side)
�,,,,_
\
r +-�
���
• �P •
-.1 #� � /+ t /q
�♦ '� ; �/ �
I
�,�,,. �
� ��*� � �
1 �. � `�
, �.
��
• - , �.�.
.� ';_'� �
•r �' .,
. =-,
� �
, , � _'
� �� •� ,
",�
,�1 � ����
.� r. .
� �� ��
.� ,
�
' t': '
\ `.• .'',.,��
1 1�
� •��� �~� r � 1 � • � � �cU,-`- l, ` If � � '• J , 'Fi
\ � �� , .�J '\ � �
f. � � , �
� � , .
� •�♦ _ � � � . �� a � . .�'— �.�
� • A , � '�. ��` i
� � ;�., �� � � - � � b�',�-. ��' - ��► � e � f ° :.;,
� w
.; {�
. � � �► ;�` ,
�► ,• . /� � � � � �'G►. �, ��'�,�s �. � r ,� : ~ ,
� ♦ ♦� � )�C=� '� � , � rr,��L
,1 / � � � , �' � • `\ ��/ �
, �4 *. �/1 � � � ' � • . .
:� ��� • � �'� ��� +���� t , � � ��.
� .�N"_ . a� � - � ,+iN • � � + d .� /
A`'" � �
, �
t�r, �� � � . � '� '' ` i
.� �',� r_ • '�, j'�I' � ^ .
A: ; ,�, � ^ , • .
� . `� � t � ��•' � f�� ` ' �
M " �
���± , �.r � � � ,, �:;�.�'� •
��. � �
� '-�, ' , �'., 1
� `'� „•. ^ .� �
. ^ , 4 � . �, , , .�
. � �. 1�• .I
��'� � , o�
� -'/ � � /,� r�� . �`✓ ' o .
�[` �• • , " � ' i
,
� ►.• l :, ' i! ��._' /
�� .
� �
�1
�•; i .� � i
V � ^ � � ` �^�
I � � • `'� ' ��: �
�,. ,�,�; � .�, ,� . �{
�,�f • �,. � � � -' �r, , ^
:... � . • � • __'` � • • , , �' . �:,
1301 Burlingame Avenue, BAC
Item No. 8c
Regular Action Item
PROJECT LOCATION
1301 Burlingame Avenue
City of Burlingame
Commercial Design Review
Address: 1301 Burlingame Avenue
Item No. 8c
Regular Action Item
Meeting Date: October 11, 2016
Request: Application for Commercial Design Review for fa�ade changes to an existing commercial
building.
Applicant: Apple Inc. APN: 029-202-080 & 029-202-090
Architect: Callison RTKL, Inc. Lot Area: 9,213 SF
Property Owner: Dalbir Gill Tr. and Avtar S. Johal Trust Zoning: BAC
General Plan: Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan: Burlingame Avenue Commercial District
Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per 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.
Current Use: Retail Store (Apple)
Proposed Use: No change
Allowable Use: Retail is a permitted use
Summary: The applicant is proposing fa�ade changes and a tenant improvement for an existing retail
store, Apple, located at 1301 Burlingame Avenue. The project site consists of two parcels under one
ownership. Both parcels have frontage on Burlingame Avenue and are through lots that back up to Fox
Plaza Lane and Parking Lot J. The Apple store is located at 1301 Burlingame Avenue on the corner parcel
(APN# 029-202-080), but has storage and office space behind Kara's Cupcakes (1309 Burlingame
Avenue). Kara's Cupcakes and Gymboree (1311 Burlingame Avenue) are both located in the same building
which is on the parcel adjacent to the Apple store (APN# 029-202-090).
The existing Apple store includes retail sales floor space, storage area, break room and supporting office
space as well as a mezzanine. The storage area, break room, office space and mezzanine are located
behind Kara's Cupcakes, on the adjacent parcel; however there is currently an internal connection between
the parcels that connects all of the floor area used by Apple. There is no direct connection between the
Apple tenant space and Kara's Cupcakes.
The project includes removing the mezzanine and expanding the rear portion of the store behind the
Gymboree space. The retail floor for the existing Apple store is surrounded by separate storage and office
space that is located around the perimeter (sheet AD-121), in a U-shape. The proposed plans include
widening the retail sales floor by removing these spaces and relocating them at the rear, which is the area
that would be expanding behind Gymboree. The overall square footage for Apple would increase by 1,122
SF from 6,100 SF to 7,222 SF. The majority of this increase would be in the retail sales floor area with an
increase of 965 SF from 2,248 SF to 3,213 SF. The remaining supporting areas would be shifted to other
locations within the building but would only increase by 157 SF.
The proposal includes exterior modifications and renovations in addition to the interior changes. The
massing of the building would be modified with the overall height lowered slightly from 24-6" to 22'-2". The
building facades along Burlingame Avenue, Park Road and Fox Plaza Lane are proposed for modification.
Along Burlingame Avenue the glass store frontage would be increased in height, with the majority of the
frontage being glass. The grey stone that currently clads the building is proposed to be removed on all
elevations and replaced with new mocha creme colored natural stone panels. The entrance to the store
would remain on Burlingame Avenue, the front doors would be recessed 2'-6" from the front fa�ade and a
glass canopy is proposed to be added over the entrance doors.
Commercial Design Review 1301 Burlingame Avenue
The horizontal display window along Park Road would be removed and the new Park Road fa�ade would
have new mocha creme colored stone panels that would be interrupted with a 25-foot wide by 16-foot tall
window about two-thirds of the way down this elevation. In addition, the Park Road elevation would have the
Apple logo embedded, flush mounted into the stone panels located toward the front third of this elevation
(closer to Burlingame Avenue). The logo would be approximately 4'-6" wide by 6-feet in height,
approximately 9-feet above the sidewalk and would be internally illuminated. A sample of the proposed
natural stone panel has been provided by the applicant and will be available to view at the Planning Division
and at the public hearing on October 11th
The rear elevation would also be modified with the existing grey stone panels replaced with the new mocha
creme colored natural stone panels. Any new signage that is proposed would be reviewed be under a
separate permit. This project is subject to Commercial Design Review because it includes changes to
farades of a storefront located in the BAC zoning district. The following application is required:
Commercial Design Review for changes to the front, side and rear fa�ades of an existing
commercial storefront in the BAC Zoning District (CS 25.32.045).
While the proposal includes a 1,122 SF expansion to the square footage used by this tenant, there is no
expansion to the building envelope. As noted above, the majority of this added square footage (965 SF) is
new retail sales floor area. Retail, personal service and food establishment uses located on the first floor
within the downtown parking sector are exempt from the off-street parking requirements (C.S. 25.70.090
(a)). The storage and office areas in the rear of the retail space support the retail store and are considered
ancillary to the permitted retail use. The existing supporting office space would be reduced by 189 SF as
part of this application.
Staff comments: See attached memos from the Building, Engineering, Fire and Stormwater Divisions.
Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on August 8, 2016, the Planning
Commission had the following comments and concerns with the proposed fa�ade modifications:
• Overriding concern is scale and compatibility with the neighborhood;
• Understand there needs to be consideration for a unique tenant, but this can be achieved and still
have good pedestrian scale and street frontage;
• Could do more with the "bring the outside in" concept, for example with the rear fa�ade;
• Hard to convey to the community that the intent is to bring the outside in with the glass on just one
side and the rest is all blank stone;
• Great-looking stone but there is so much of it. It will look too stark. The existing gray stone works
better;
• Park Road is the heart of Downtown. There is going to be development on the post office site down
Park Road that will be a big part of town. Great opportunity to do something spectacular, move
people down Park Road;
• The white stone is remnant of a mausoleum look. Concerned the building could end up taking on
that moniker; and
• Glad to have Apple in Downtown but it needs to step up and do more to be neighborly with the
architecture
The applicant submitted a response letter, revised plans and renderings date stamped September 29, 2016,
to address the Planning Commission's comments. The revised plans include the following changes:
• New stone proposed for the exterior material (sample provided);
• Entrance door height has been reduced;
• Entrance door has been recessed in to form a niche (vestibule);
• Canopy has been added over front doors;
2
Commercial Design Review
Side window has been significantly enlarged.
1301 Burlingame Avenue
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for Commercial Design Review as established in Ordinance No. 1652
adopted by the Council on April 16, 2001 are outlined as follows:
1. Support of the pattern of diverse architectural styles that characterize the city's commercial areas;
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;
3. On visually prominent and gateway sites, whether the design fits the site and is compatible with the
surrounding development;
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;
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 structure 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.
Suggested Findings for Design Review: That the upgraded fa�ades on Burlingame Avenue and Park
Road add architectural style to this corner property. The subject property is a prominent site that has high
visibility in the Downtown area. The changes support a diversity of architectural styles along Burlingame
Avenue; while the proposed architectural style is not matching the adjacent buildings it complements the
streetscape by adding to the diversity of styles on the block. The new entrance will provide a human scale
with recessed entry doors and a glass canopy above. The new window along Park Road will be 16 feet high
by 25 feet wide and will provide visual interest as well as architectural relief along this fa�ade. The mass
and bulk of the building remain relatively the same, with a small reduction to the overall height of the
structure, but the overall height is well below the 35-foot height limit and the massing is consistent with the
subject block. For these reasons the project may be found to be compatible with the requirements of the
City's five design review criteria.
Planning Commission Action:
The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the application, and consider public
testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action should include specific findings
supporting the Planning Commission's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the Planning
Commission. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. At the public hearing the
following conditions should be considered:
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped
September 29, 2016 sheets A-001 through A-811;
2. 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;
3
Commercial Design Review 1301 Burlingame Avenue
3. 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);
4. that the conditions of the Building Division's July 27, 2016 and June 21, 2016 memos, the
Engineering Division's July 29, 2016 and June 21, 2016 memos, the Fire Division's June 29, 2016
memo and the Stormwater Division's June 23, 2016 memos shall be met;
5. 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;
6. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction
plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the
Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved
plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required;
the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning
Commission, or City Council on appeal;
7. that 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;
8. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance;
9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
2013 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS
PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION:
10. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the 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; and
11. 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.
Catherine Keylon
Senior Planner
4
Commercial Design Review
c. Apple Inc., Eric Malmquist, LLC, applicant
Callison RTKL Inc., architect
Avtar Johal, property owner
Attachments:
Design Review Study Minutes, August 8, 2016 Planning Commission meeting
Applicant's Response letter, dated September 28, 2016 (with attachments)
o Commercial Design Review findings
o Downtown Specific Plan policy consistency findings
o Downtown Streetscape Improvement — deposit of funds
Application to the Planning Commission
Letter of Explanation
Staff Comments
Email from Jennifer Pfaff, dated October 3, 2016
Email from Jennifer Pfaff, dated July 31, 2016
Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed)
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed September 30, 2016
Aerial Photo
1301 Burlingame Avenue
�
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 prepared and application has been made for
Commercial Design Review for fa�ade changes to an existina commercial buildinq at 1301 Burlinaame
Avenue. Zoned BAC. Dalbir Gill Tr. And Avtar S. Johal Tr. , propertv owners APN: 029-202-080 & 029-
202-090;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on October
11, 2016, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and
testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that:
On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments
received and addressed by this Commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence
that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical
exemption, per CEQA Section 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, is hereby
approved.
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.
Chairman
I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame,
do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission held on the 11th day of October, 2016, by the following vote:
Secretary
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption and Commercial Design Review
1301 Burlingame Avenue
Effective October 21, 2016
Page 1
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the P/anning Division
date stamped September 29, 2016 sheets A-001 through A-811;
2. 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;
3. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features,
roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to
Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined
by Planning staf�;
4. that the conditions of the Building Division's July 27, 2016 and June 21, 2016 memos,
the Engineering Division's July 29, 2016 and June 21, 2016 memos, the Fire Division's
June 29, 2016 memo and the Stormwater Division's June 23, 2016 memos shall be met;
5. 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;
6. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project
construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of
approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall
remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process.
Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall
not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City
Council on appeal;
7. that 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;
8. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance;
9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform
Fire Codes, 2013 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption and Commercial Design Review
1301 Burlingame Avenue
Effective October 21, 2016
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION
PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION:
10. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the 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; and
11. 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.
G1TY OF BU.RLINGAME
COMMUNlTY DEVELQPMENT DEPARTMENT
501 PRiMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94Q10
PH: (65d} 55$-7250 �. FAX: (�50) 696-3790
www.burlingame.org
Site: 130i BURLINGAME AYENUE
The tity of 8url(ngame Planning tommission annaunces the
fallowing public hearing on UET SQAY,, OCTOBER 11,
2Q16 nt 7A0 P.M. in ttie tity Hnif Council Chambers, 5Q1
Primrose Road, Burlingame, �A:
Applicotion for tommercial Design Review for fa�ade
changes at 13Q1 8URLINGAME AVENUE zooed BAt.
APNs 029-2Q2-08Q & -4�0.
A�ailed: September 30, 201 b
(Please refer b other sJde j
PUBLIC HEARlNG
NOTICE
�
,
,'
C� of Burlin�ame
A copy of the applicatior� an�i pl�n� fior this praj�cfi may be reviewed prior to
the meeting at the Communit� [�evelo.�me.nt [�epartment at 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingame., �aiifor-nia.
if you challenge :fh� ��bject �ppli�aii+�n(s). in cc��rrt, you m�y b� limified to
raising only thos� isswe.s you or someQne el�e raised at the p�blic hearing,
described in the notic� or. in writte.n �arresporrdence de�ivered to the city at or
prior to the publi� hearing,
Property owners �rv��i� r:eceiv� this not'ree �i��responsibl� �C�r' irifiorming their
tenants about this :t�irtice.
For add'rtional in�"Qrt�i�:on, please caill;;.(650) 558-725.0`. �� you.
William Meeker ` �` - - - � - � -
� ..�,�- _-: _-- _ ��,,`
Community Developmer�:����` =- _ _ : �.�`,- ^ �� y=.__-' _
'��.Y� : . - _- .
- - " Y���'�i'� HEARING NOTI�E
(Ptease refer fo other side)
Item No. 9c
Design Review Study
PROJECT LOCATION
1301 Burlingame Avenue
City of Burlingame
Commercial Design Review
Address: 1301 Burlingame Avenue
Item No. 9c
Design Review Study
Meeting Date: August 8, 2016
Request: Application for Commercial Design Review for fa�ade changes to an existing commercial
building.
Applicant: Apple Inc. APN: 029-202-080 & 029-202-090
Architect: Callison RTKL, Inc. Lot Area: 9,213 SF
Property Owner: Dalbir Gill Tr. and Avtar S. Johal Trust Zoning: BAC
General Plan: Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan: Burlingame Avenue Commercial District
Current Use: Retail Store (Apple)
Proposed Use: No change
Allowable Use: Retail is a permitted use
Summary: The applicant is proposing fa�ade changes and a tenant improvement for an existing retail
store, Apple, located at 1301 Burlingame Avenue. The project site consists of two parcels under one
ownership. Both parcels have frontage on Burlingame Avenue and are through lots that back up to Fox
Plaza Lane and Parking Lot J. The Apple store is located at 1301 Burlingame Avenue on the corner parcel
(APN# 029-202-080), but has storage and office space behind Kara's Cupcakes (1309 Burlingame
Avenue). Kara's Cupcakes and Gymboree (1311 Burlingame Avenue) are both located in the same building
which is on the parcel adjacent to the Apple store (APN# 029-202-090).
The existing Apple includes retail sales floor space, storage area, break room and supporting office space
as well as a mezzanine. The storage area, break room, office space and mezzanine are located behind
Kara's Cupcakes, on the adjacent parcel; howeuer there is currently an internal connection between the
parcels that connects all of the floor area used by Apple. There is no direct connection between the Apple
tenant space and Kara's Cupcakes.
The project includes removing the mezzanine and expanding the rear portion of the store behind the
Gymboree space. The retail floor for the existing Apple store is surrounded by separate storage and office
space that is located around the perimeter (sheet AD-121), in a U-shape. The proposed plans include
widening the retail sales floor by removing these spaces and relocating them at the rear, which is the area
that would be expanding behind Gymboree. The overall square footage for Apple would increase by 1,122
SF from 6,100 SF to 7,222 SF. The majority of this increase would be in the retail sales floor area with an
increase of 965 SF from 2,248 SF to 3,213 SF. The remaining supporting areas would be shift locations but
would only increase by 157 SF.
The proposal includes exterior modifications and renovations in addition to the interior changes. The
massing of the building would be modified with the overall height lowered slightly from 24-6" to 22'-2". The
building facades along Burlingame Avenue, Park Road and Fox Plaza Lane are prosed for modification.
Along Burlingame Avenue the glass store frontage would be increased in height, with the majority of the
frontage being glass. The grey stone that currently clads the building is proposed to be removed on all
elevations and replaced with new castagna stone panels. The horizontal display window along Park Road
would be removed and the new Park Road fa�ade would have new stone panels that would be broken up
approximately three quarters of the way down (toward Fox Plaza Lane) with a 10' x 15' window and a 10' x
6' metal panel located above the glass. Samples of these materials have been provided by the applicant
and will be available to view at the Planning Division and at the public hearing on August 8t". The rear
elevation would also be modified with the existing grey stone panels replaced with the new castagna stone
panels. Any new signage that is proposed will be reviewed be under a separate permit.
Commercial Design Review
1301 Burlingame Avenue
This project is subject to Commercial Design Review because it includes changes to fa�ades of a storefront
located in the BAC zoning district. The following application is required:
■ Commercial Design Review for changes to the front, side and rear fa�ades of an existing
commercial storefront in the BAC Zoning District (CS 25.32.045).
While the proposal includes a 1,122 SF expansion to the square footage used by this tenant, there is no
expansion to the building envelope. As noted above, the majority of this added square footage (965 SF) is
new retail sales floor area. Retail, personal service and food establishment uses located on the first floor
within the downtown parking sector are exempt from the off-street parking requirements (CS 25.70.090 (a)).
The storage and office areas in the rear of the retail space support the retail store and are considered
ancillary to the permitted retail use. The existing supporting office space would be reduced by 189 SF as
part of this application.
Staff comments: See attached memos from the Building, Engineering, Fire and Stormwater Divisions.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for Commercial Design Review as established in Ordinance No. 1652
adopted by the Council on April 16, 2001 are outlined as follows:
1. Support of the pattern of diverse architectural styles that characterize the city's commercial areas;
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;
3. On visually prominent and gateway sites, whether the design fits the site and is compatible with the
surrounding development;
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;
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 structure 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.
Catherine Keylon
Senior Planner
c. Apple Inc., Eric Malmquist, LLC, applicant
Callison RTKL Inc., architect
Avtar Johal, property owner
2
Commercia/ Design Review
Attachments:
Email from Jennifer Pfaff, dated July 31, 2016
Application to the Planning Commission
Letter of Explanation
Site Photos
Materials
Staff Comments
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed July 29, 2016
Aerial Photo
1301 Burlingame Avenue
�3
:� -
Burlingame - R029
1301 Burlingame Ave., Burlingame, CA 94010
.:.
�- -
i'
r: •
A
�, � ".
� ' ��
' ' t
�
,: r
-- -- r.-:;..�--,.-�
s
. . ,. . � .
�, � �.
-- - . . ,
- _ _.,
-'^z7Tlr3i!??;tFtl�l+����,��j����� _ •.---- ._.- �
�r�� -'� �� '.. rrr�r« _`_- -- --...�.�+.��..._:� .
��:rrs�tr
��` - ' � �--'�"----�--'
' � (� � `� ��'�•�
� � � �� � � ���� .
;,�
: • �
�,, I{ �f �
. �. _ . �n—!' --�
��3
�,'" ,,
x ��Y�. ��_ - � - � ._ '� .�
� s ' r -'
!4R{"�5"F— � d
T ���
1309 Burlingame Ave.
c'�
.
_ �" �
r. ,
� � - �_� - �t_,_ _ _J
CallisonRTKL
June 3rd, 2016
�� �
-�
,�
�
�
��
�N It�
_y. .��_-
�i`��
_ - — '_. . -• E`.T,.�.�_�' ��� ���Si� ��i��Tar�
1311 Burlingame Ave.
RECEIVED
JUL 2 6 2016
CITY OF BURLINGAME
CDD-FLANNING DiV.
Planning Commission
1301 Burlingame Ave. (North Facade)
1301 Burlingame Ave. (South Facade)
1301 Burlingame Ave. (East Facade)
�.
Stone Panel
Burlingame - R029
CallisonRTKL
Metal Panel
Planning Commission
1301 Burlingame Ave., Burlingame, CA 94010 June 3rd, 2016 Materia l Boa rd
. CITY OF BURLINGAME
''� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
C��`''� PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790
www.burlingame.org
Site: 1301 BURLINGAME AVENUE
The City of Burlingame Planning (ommission announces the
following public hearing on MONDAY, AUGUST 8, 2016
at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council (hambers, SOl
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA:
Application for Commercial Design Review for fa4ade
changes at 1301 BURLINGAME AVENUE zoned BAC.
APNs 029-202-080 & -090.
Mailed: July 29, 2016
(Please refer to other side)
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE
City of Burlinpame
A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to
the meeting at the Community Development D�partment at 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingame, California.
If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing,
described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or
prior to the public hearing.
Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their
tenants about this notice.
For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you.
William Meeker
Community Development Director
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
(Please refer to other side)