The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2753 Burlingview Drive - Staff ReportBURL—iNGAmE AGENDA NO: �� STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: September 21, 2015 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: September 21, 2015 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director —(650) 558-7255 Subject: City Council Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Approval of Applications for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes first and second story additions, on Property at 2753 Burlingview Drive, Located Within a Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zone RECOMMENDATION The City Council should conduct a public hearing, consider all oral and written testimony received during the hearing and, following closure of the hearing and deliberations, take one of the following actions: ■ Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's approval of the application; ■ Grant the appeal and deny the application; or ■ Remand the application to the Planning Commission for reconsideration. Following the City Council's action, staff will prepare a resolution memorializing the action for adoption on the next regular City Council agenda. BACKGROUND Project Description: The proposal is to demolish the existing second floor, as well as portions of the existing left side of the house that have non-conforming side setbacks. The existing attached garage will remain, and there will be first floor additions at the rear of the existing house, as well as a new second story. The proposed project will have a total floor area of 4,113 SF (0.41 FAR) where 4,300 SF (0.43 FAR) is the maximum allowed (including covered porch exemptions). The applicant is requesting a Hillside Area Construction Permit for this major renovation and first and second story additions. The existing highest ridge, at the left side of the house, is 24'-0" above average top of curb and the height of the highest section of the flat roof (at the center of the house) for the new second story addition is 30'-0" above average top of curb. 1 Appeal - 2753 Burlingview Dr. September 21, 2015 The exterior walls of the existing attached garage and the existing code-complaint uncovered parking space in the driveway leading to the garage will remain. The number of bedrooms on site will be increased from 4 to 5 and the on-site parking requirement will be increased from two spaces (1 covered, 1 uncovered) to three spaces (2 covered spaces, 1 uncovered parking space). The interior width of the garage will not be altered; it provides the minimum width for two covered parking spaces (18'-0" existing and proposed). Several interior structures (such as a furnace, water heater, and stairs) will be removed to increase the interior length in the garage. Because the parking space length is being altered, the required length must be 20'-0" to comply with code regulations and the design provides 20'-0". There is a protected size tree at the left, front side of the property that will be retained with construction. The applicant has submitted Certified Arborist Reports, date stamped March 11 and July 31, 2015, to detail protection measures. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant requests approval of the following applications: ■ Design review for a second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010,a,2); and ■ Hillside Area Construction Permit (C.S. 25.61.020). A copy of the August 10, 2015 report to the Planning Commission is attached to this report and contains a detailed analysis of the proposal. Planning Commission Action: At its meeting of August 10, 2015, the Planning Commission approved the applicant's requests with a vote of 3-2-1-1. The project was directed to come back as an FYI item to include the additional landscaping offered by the owner at the public hearing. At the hearing, some members of the Planning Commission expressed the opinion that substantial design changes had been made to the original proposal to take into account the concerns of the neighbors, and in particular the side setbacks on the first and second floors meet or exceed the required minimum, the massing is handled well, there is mature landscaping in place to help screen the addition, and there are no view concerns. Other members of the Commission expressed the opinion that more could be done to accommodate the concerns of the neighbors and that the design of the house is still too massive, in part because it sits at the top of the street. Appeal of Planning Commission's Action: Subsequent to the Planning Commission's action, the property owner to the right of the subject property, Terry McAloon, submitted a timely appeal of the Commission's action. Exhibits: ■ Appeal Letter ■ Appellant's letter, dated September 7, 2015 ■ Applicant's letter, dated August 31, 2015 ■ August 10, 2015 Planning Commission Minutes ■ August 10, 2015 Planning Commission Staff Report ■ Project Plans 2 _ ,, .., .,. ,, �� a� � ., k ., -� � � Lo �.'.•', City Clerk City of Burlingame, California Subject: Design Review of Residence At 2753 Burlingview Dr Dear Ms Hassel-Shearer, � ` ; i �.l 1. � C. . ; I '�� ' , %E- oURLIPIGAP✓l�� "?-PI_APJi�iING DI!/. August 14, 2015 On August 10, 2015 the Burlingame Planning Commission approved a design for a new residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr. I live at the adjacent residence at 2759 Burlingview Dr. I wish to appeal the Planning Commissioners' decision to the Burlingame City Council. I enclose my check for the required fee of $485.00. Sincerely, �� %�%� ,� �� , Terry McAloon H-ph- 344-4201 C-ph-773-4350 Email- jojtlmca@aol.com ` � J. T. MC ALOON {650) 344-4201 2759 BURLINGVIEW DR. BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Pay to the Ord�r of _ 12042 11-4288/1210 4000 0442068383 $'l � I� Date � I � yg�, oa tJ'L � �d Dollars � `° o� -� �<. � � i,, � � Wells Fargo Bank N.A �.�� ., ;,v^t^ �.a.m:� � � Califomia ,,.- +47�� °i,y� �' � " wellsfargo.com R For�P�°��L F'� �' � �; �T� �: L 2 104 288 2�: 044 2068 38 3��' 1 204 2 Honorable Mayor and Membe�s of the City Council City of Burlingame, California 5eptember 7, 2015 Subject: Review of Design Application For Residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr Dear Mayor and Council Members, I believe the proposed design for the residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr is out of scale for our neighborhood and should not be approved. Our neighborhood consists of forty-two homes whose architecture is almost entirely made up of single story, two thousand square foot houses (ref Exhibit 1, att,; photo of Burlingview Dr to get an idea of the look of the neighborhood). In reading the City of Burlingame Neighborhood Design Guidebook, I believe the intent of the City is to balance new construction with respecting the intent of the original neighborhood developers. As stated in the Introduction to the Guidebook: "...it is important that we respect the intentions of the original designers. We do this by looking at their work, supporting it and adding to it in ways that are harmonious." The Introduction to the Guidebook goes onto say that: "The neighborhood is a place with a character and boundary. "...a neighborhood's architectural identity is based more on common patterns shared by all houses. "The essential nature of the neighborhood is most often embodied by the patterns shared between the original houses that formed the neighborhood. "Where the original houses define the neighborhood, newer houses and additions should support that definition." In my opinion, the Guidelines quoted above apply to the current case since the houses in our neighborhood were built in the 1950's and are fairly described has having a common architectural character. The house at 2753 Burlingview is 4300 sq ft in area and two stories in height. So basically, it would be twice the size of contemporary neighborhood houses! I can appreciate that I do not have the background to understand the nuances that go into determining how a residence design gets approved. But based on the Guidebook's clear intent fio "conserve the valuable character of the original neighborhoods", I'm not sure that I follow the applicant's comments regarding the architecture of houses scattered throughout the Burlingame hills. In the architect's luly 30, 2015 letter to the Planning Commission (ref Ex 2), the first bullet states in part: "The massing is very similar to many of the 1950's, 60's and 70's homes in the hillside area that have a garage at either the left or right fa�ade, and a two story mass extending across the property (see attached photo examples.) "Therefore the only real difference between those homes and the applicant is the style or appearance." So I can only assume that the point of the above statement is to suggest that since there are houses somewhere in the Burlingame hillside area similar to the design under review, then such houses can be built anywhere in the hillside area. This seems to me to be overriding the intent of the Guidebook. The Guidebook states that neighborhoods have a character and a boundary. In light of this, It is hard to understand why photos of houses outside the boundary of our neighborhood (per Mapquest, some of the homes are two miles away!) have any relevance to the design of the house at 2753 eurling�iew. (I can't help but feel that the first bullet in the referenced letter should be restated as:" The only real difference between the houses on Burlingview and the applicant is that the applicant's house will be twice the area and twice the height of existing houses".) I believe that the Guidebook emphasizes the intent to preserve a locale's architectural character when it goes on to say: "...we have adopted an intention to define a neighborhood at a smaller scale by the immediate characteristics surrounding a given project." So isn't the Guidebook narrowing down the area to look at for architectural compatibility rather than expanding it as seems to be the case in the applicant's July 30 letter? There are sorne eight homes (not counting the applicant's) adjacent to or across from the site in question. All of them are single story and approximately 2000 sq ft in area. So how does the proposed design comply with the Guidebook where, in referring to older neighborhood houses, it states that: "They warrant respect and emulation." The intent of my objection is not to ask the applicant to design a house that uses plans from fifty years ago. The applicant is also currently building a house at 2747 Burlingview that is designed by the same architectural firm as the house in question. This house is also 4300 sq ft and I'd assume is considered as "modern architecture" (ref Ex 3; photo of this house). It is not a two story house; it is a single story place. In their submittal for this other house, the applicant made a point of stating that the building would be as low or lower than existing structures (ref Ex 4). As a result, the building has a hefght of 19'-11" as opposed to the 30' height of the building in question (ref Ex 5; Design Review permit}. So if there was this commitment to the neighborhood's architectural identity once, why can't there be a second time? Instead were looking at a house that towers some six to eight feet over my roof line jref Ex 6; photo of story poles shot from my roo�. When I raise my objections to the proposed design, I am not aione. While three members of the Planning Commission voted for the design; two voted against it. Four households in the immediate vicinity of the proposed house wrote letters to Planning Commission raising objections to the design; two other household members attended the Planning Commission August 10, 2015 meeting in support of our objectian to the design. So my `straw poll' of the voting on the design is as follaws: Planning Commission For A�ainst Neighbors 0 6 Total 3 8 I understand that the applicant can say that the design is within regulations and thus he has the right to have it approved. But we who have lived in the neighborhood for decades also have rights that, if they mean what they say, are protected by the Design Guidelines. We live in our neighborhood for a reason: it has a graceful symmetry to it that we find attractive. I appreciate that the City has to wrestle with applying the Design Guidelines while at the same time determining the suitability of "modern style" homes, I cannot compete with a skilled architect in discussing the various forms of "modern design". However, I did come across one discussion of such a design that indi�ates a form of "modern design" includes: "Low, horizontal massing, flat roofs, emphasis on horizontal planes and broad roof overhangs" (ref Ex 7). To my untrained eye, this definition matches what we have at the applicant's house at 2747 Burlingview. This residence, it seems to me, is a reasonable compromise in updating our neighborhood with "modern design" while at the same time "respects and emulates" the older neighborhood houses as is called for in the Design Guidebook. I don't see how the proposed house at 2753 Burlingview in any way attempts to respect the architectural legacy of our neighborhoad. So I'd again ask, why can't the applicant propose a design that follows the form of his first house rather than inserting a design into the neighborhood that I believe is clearly out of place, i.e. there is no other house like it in our neighborhood, i.e. 30' high; 4300 sq ft in area. If the design is approved, then we've missed the chance to preserve the character of a neighborhood that has had a graceful place in Burlingame for some six decades. I'd expect that with this approval other similar designs would follow in the years ahead. This would cause the neighborhood to have a chaotic look instead of the common pattern now shared by our neighborhood's houses. In my opinion, the objection to the proposed residence is in line with the purpose of the Design Guidelines: to support the positive characteristics of our existing neighborhoods. Sa, as stated above, I'd ask that the proposed design for 2753 Burlingview Dr not be approved. Sincerely, / ; . ��y � � �. Terry McAloon Address-2759 Burlingview Dr; H-ph 344-4201; C-ph 773-4350; email- jojtlmca@aol.corn _ ��; - ;• .-�; � � ��: � �. - ,j �� , ; �, .,, ,. � ''�' , � �..�., , � �, ; , ' .. ' � "�'� _ . r�.' • . - �, � � �� t " u� r . i �. ��a `� �;;��;�'�`�-y��,� ,�:.,�d`��y * ,� 7 , � � •�1� K . i. r ~' � � " ',�°a"o',�� '� ?', r,ti : • l ' "�1 � � ' � ��' f ' '' � s� �:-:L. 1?lr� . , , _� • , i.r� : •, '1 —,- ,,+ , , - ..; � / ' � � _ '��• '1,' ' '� •'� _ '� J �" l �� j i ' � � � '�✓�' �. , .�, .. ��-� � � R�.' +� \^ ' .} . . `� � ; •� •''y;-:; � � .,..r' � �K�, - s � � .;Y'�: 1 ',-.�^ /r? , � +, — '1t � -r—'�;L , •_ •� � ,i . '' � � `� . , 1 � J�� t� :!� ' � /, �; - ,✓ m � � ••_"if,� � ` ` �� ` �� ' k , � ti � ' � . � �+ � �`wy�` . Z,; � • s i '� �,�.�"Z 4 �� _^��Y1� !' r ' � '.'�� '•'+ � :y, :�' ' -i / •�. .. . . ''"it�h` e +� ` : �� . .` , • �, . `.,�. ,, .' S ' + � •' �� w: � ' � �'`�+' 7= ,4 , ., � � � a. s . F. ;.� �J+�'1�` ' .. �.. �- - � ,, � �'� . , •� • ' ' � +,' ' �'t� V '�, , . �' � � if ; �' -��f. •i v d, �: p"}. � � � , ' V, �v •� �� .�a�r . � ��k �;''t� � � fw'.�� '�� ' +9f�i1.��'" .`4�`. Fa' i,_ ► -a '', �� ..x t :i''.Y� •* �.y.l �'�£ - j, � � ` ir ,,r •: k'� _t . i' � •v?'f �� e� � M�' �l> s•� �"�. �� - •,�� f� �,{ r tt rA � • �\' • k,.� ', r^� ��.'�_y� 1 �L�,, � ' t � ^� �� t��. .t� � Y1�`�y �� `� A �' ��['-� � _ � � � # .. * 7 �v �~� t I �I�. S , ( " � r '� � ��'� . . i� , / �' .. . , \`'.�,� i�, 4� � � Y,�f� �•' ~` �' � 'a�. .� . �'�Y i. � � , . r �e� � .._ . t..E:?" . �3�.��.�7i�✓' �' � �!`�� !�t � ��': �� ,a � F• .?_ ��." G� '�.:' y'.: ~..� ._:L r. w � �f F �:. . �. A.. 3 ��1 i,� �'`: � k. , i I { , . � � � �i � � ' ' ' �'�� +� %/ 1' � �,7 i J •i, _�n.,�Gi•,�i . �,�eL d - :. . �� r i� �� ' I�, I � i � 1rC�� .�� . �L` i � }� � • P i , � 1 �' � , f� ' .� , �• ': a �• � . yl.�� i. �� . �� k `,. " �.f�1'` �r,. �r � ' �''�n � � �- , � $:� � 3 � .�•�. \! ^'�,C P ; 4 F�. r � ♦ . � , '�!r �' . , � �t v � ` Y� ' �y, +�,.�,. �� ;� . , � '-_^`�---.� -c��r�:.-:-:-.< ...:..:.::. :::::.:...� :•i=�-::r_:�:;_,____,.:_.=z,::,:� - � c. _� - -..:: -.:—.::==:_-:..:: :�...-r::>_,_;.:...�.:: :=:..... . :� :.i:-_-:.:-_�.•:_::�:.. -� ._ . - ,.. .... F�E'Iy/,�/7` � s..� i 1� Dreiling Terrones Arci'Tir�ciElr� InC. ArcAltecture i �n�tasirocture � Environmen�s 30 July 2015 To: Surlingame Planning Commission RE: 2753 Budingvisw Drnre — response to Design Revtew Study comments Dear Commissione►s and Staff, Thank you for your comments at the Design Review Study hearing on 7/13/15_ The folfowing Is our response to comments, and a descrip0on of a few minor revisio� to ihe exterior elevation drawings. Bullding Maes / 8tory Poles: As you have seen, the story poles were erected and certfFled. The outline of the story pole tiaggfng reflects the articulated massing in our revised design revievred on 7/13. In regards to the hause's mass and the concem for the context of tha neighborhood, we would note the following: o The massu�g is very simllar 6o many of the 1950's, 60's and 70's homes in tha tx'llstde area that have a ga�e at either ihe left or rigM i[orrt facade, and a two story mass extending across the property (See attacMad photo exar..r.;..::.) Many of these are 'Ywo story ranch houses" with pabled roots and are generally accepted as vemacular to the hills�da area. Though their plate heighis might be lower, they have the same impact due to the high gable roof. Th�efore the only real dHferer�e belw�een tlwse fiomes er►d this applicetion, is the sryle ar appear�� .:e. o The Clty Council and Commission have indicated that pend'eig furlher resolution on the appropriate nelghborhoods for "modem style" homes, the hitlside area is generally an acxeptable area for the modem style. o We have articulated the massing and detatls so that there is a variatlon in roof flnes with parapets, awnir�gsJoverhangs and materlals. o Previous projacts at the'crest" of a street, in which the Commission has asked for revislons to height, have generally had unitorm contlnual roof Iines or parapets that are noi articulated. o We have stepped badc both the rigM and left corners of the front faqade — particulady in regards to ihe only impacted neighbor on the �ight side. o There are no view lssues that are affected by the massing of the house. o We are not asidng for arry special conslderations for heipht w setbacks. Our haigM calculation Is near the maximum only because of the up-sloping lot o The house is setback on the sides more than the required minimum of T-0'. The setback an the left Is 11'-0", and on the right, the setback is 10'-2" on the Hrst floor and 11'-9' on the secflnd 800r. o We have minimized any view windows on the west elevatlon, facing McAloon at 2759 Burling�lew Drive. We Can iurther min�nize the impact if we obscure the bathroom window on the second floor west elevation. o Tha only poteMial neighborhood Impact is elong the front elevallon, wh[Ch is mssslve/y screened by two huge mature prolected size traes. The Commission has often asked applicants to cor►sider landscaping as a mesns io help screen a fagade... thfs elevation could hardly be more screened with landscaping. o The two dimensional elevatton �awings are deceiving. The front fa�ade In fact has several maJor steps in plane from the fr�nt af the property, includng: o Garege plane o Office / Laundry plane , o Second Floor Bedrooms 2/3 0 3econd Fioor oomers — Bath #3 and Master 8edraom Sit#ing area Square Fovtage: The total square faotage propo�ed ts eomewhat skewed by the existing attached garage which courits as square footaAe, and the iwo story volume which courds twlce towards our overall FAR — buc this two story valume is at the back of the house and has no real neighborhood imRact. :1COJ:N31"OAVP.l1ltiG�X`vltCyqlT9.CnIiP?IYl4$401(1 :..,y{;t..:-n:':� ...... .�. �.. .::.I�r....r-:'�i- 4I4L<'1tI�fSA'..>OFE-!Yi4..'yiidihUtq.COEiOmit�9S,1�s9 85Dh95:t+?0 ci7a.�nt.com .'u?d�l 9:iliS Nl(�nhfia.n __ _ _ M � 1: .� - � �.,, �.� �.�, ," _�',"+�.. "� t �: ��..�� . I' y4 � :,; .� .� r � �.,:� �� .� `�� ,.{ . � , `n -. r> % ; � � �. �t+.� a-.a,,,_ � :� � '�;� ;,� M �;4 .�: � F G:.! t 1 � � 9 � � � i�" i k��y � � �' .�� ,� � . - .� ,'� It�.. ��' ' � - � �� .,.. �k' ��q� .��" � �� . � i �' � `'o-''� j�l ,�,q��:; `x'; �. �� '`�\� R x �, i. { W�a!�',� . 1' rR�,i` ��"� �� . 3 � f '�'..,ftd , , _...: . . ... --- -- - - - - � , - .....::..:,:: � .- -- - ...... � - - - - - . .......... . . .......... ..... ...........:... .... . .... ..:.::... --=--. .. �. .... _ , ..� . ..... ._., ... ... , ----�__... ....:. .: .. _ ...:.. : ... . . ... ..:. ..... -- .............::- ,-..:.. _ _..:._-.:::,..;.-_--.::. .:......:.::.:...;:,...,.. .......... .....,... ... . . --.. ........ . . --.._ . ___ 4_. .:::.:...:::....:.:•�.::.:-..- ,:-.._::--:-_:-•-- ---_�•---- ---��:�--�._�..,,.,, - - --- - _z. ...,.. . __ ._...:_.,: .::_�•.-.�_, ��_.. :..-. .,;:_• - _ ::t�:- �:�-::,=:;_r- :;�.� j „ti . . •..:..: . . ..,�. .:.,_� � - - - - _S _'(.' � i..7. � 1..-"_c'a" _ .h . ':x . {�• :'� �.� __ _ i'�:%"�.S':: _-� _:�•: i�� ..t4 -.l�- . .:.�.v.+.,•.E•. - _ __ — '-.�}-:�i 5_ ' - ' I'`�'n� ':ec� . - ,.E'� S .:•'5::., - - - - `�'t'-r:� - ' - �•'•i: •• - - •.rT'.•: �i•5 �; ��1. - �•�� .:�;;-•, ' .r t ' " ' ' :: i � - , �.,- - i,'v4 ' _ >'T�i - - �, _.. _ . • �; . . ,::: -..,.:.:;;�,;r :. _ . - ... - _. �.z�-�`;,,.. ... .�.�_,�:«,.. t :...;..._:. •��-�` -- - � - � t . ,. ---- -,:.: �.�........ _- � - --:�'� - . . ,. , �. .. . .. . . . _. . . _ . -- _ _ _ .. . ... ... . :. i - �: .-:::_:-�. t� -;t1:•�:,. .., .;.>.• +, - ., . . .... ... . . ....... �::� ... ... . _ . �:,...:.„ ;�:.. ..._ . .--- - - . -- - . . . t XNia,T� � � L City of Burlingame Planning DepartineIIt �-t�r� iP� r'�1 �� T.� -_':'`:t��. 50 [ Primrose Roa� P(6S0) 558-7250 F(63i1) 6963790 .gr�w bwlinYame"or¢ �.� C.��,� �� . . � �CITY OF�BIIRLINGAME �� . : � � � - -. ` :: ` ; �:=.: �p�cr�; ��r.,,�r�c�zzor�. : :..� ,.� �� _.� � �� :: �_;$ .� � i ��i Ct'�'Y <�f•� ;3'.l�: Ir.ii��,ls�� 'I�.ie Planniag Cammission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's `�� c�e (��' e�� V' Section 25.50), Your auswers ta the follawing quesbions cam assist the Plarming Comrnission in making the decision as tfl whetb.ea the findings caa be made for youc request. Please tyQe or write neatly in iak. Refer to the back of ttus form for assisiance with tbese q�testitms. �. �sxplain why tPie blend of masa, scale asd doniinast structxral c/iaracteristics ofthe new cveair�tction or addihion are corasistent wltfe the existing structure's design ar�d with the exi�tin� street and nei�hbo�hood The proposed project indudes en ettach� garage in a"basemarr�' stary, The�etore a ceiGr� height grea�er than B-1/2 ieet is nsedetl tp acoommodate automoblles.'" �y geragg fior �,e proposed buifd{ng is being plac�d beldw grade in order to keep the building as bw as peasible (and iower tt�an adjacent builr��: �a;;). 7he adjflcerrt ei�rage room In the besem�t'Is necessary bo minimizs ihe mass and bulk of the house, �nd therefore needa to be usabte arM grater than B-1/2 teet in height. Attached garages in the froM part of the property are the norm an the side vf the street where the R�� s ��f� due ta the topogr�hy o#the area, and a oommon tlesign throughout the Bu�ingame Hills neighborhoad. 1. E,�plain how the variety of roof l�i�e, fecade, exterior f�inish inater iats and elevations of t7ee proposed new sd�ucrure or edditi'ore are consistem with the existing structure, street arul neighborltaod The proposed project is re�ledng an exisUng building, and the style and exteriar flrdsh materiaJs are conslstent wRh other modem style bulidings in tha nelghborhood, The character of the neighbnrhood wiil not be afFected by ihe proJect, as thare are similar buildings throughout the Burlingama Hllla that sit fn a m(x of dlfferent style� of buildings, mos�y deting form the mid 20th century pariod. Per�alty underground "Basement" can be faund irt the adjacent properties and throughout the neighborbood as a responae to the area's topography. 3. �,%w wiA dte proprued project be corrsistent with the resia�entia!' desi,gn griiaieti�es adonted hv the c�tv /GS 23. S�? 1. The ardrftectural style Ia compe[ible with that of the neighbofhood, as the neighborhpod pad�lblfs a Wgnd pF dif%rent etyles, including modem bliildinga like the proposed grajsct, wlth atteched genagea, 2. At�ched garages at the frnr�t of fhe pinp9rty are found ih mo� �ouses ort the e6de of fhe atreet where #he project Is (ot�ted. T}- � proposed basemeltt locaflon for �e garaBe a8ows tt�e proposed building to reme3n low to the �round thereiwe ham�oMzin9 wNh the ac�acent neighborhooc7. 3. The projed is consistent wfth the massing and bulk of the e�dating structtee to be replacet} and metches surrounding buildings in height and size. The exis�ng house, thaugh baing remo�►ed includes an atteched qe�ge. 4. The proposed structute does not affed surroanding structures_ 5. Pfonosed trees are seasonal, slender and IaraelY transoareirt � keep tham from abstrudlnp viewe. 4 �xplain how the rer�ovoal of �y trecs Iocated within tlie foot,print of any �ew structure or addition ts necessary and is cors�tent witii the city's reforestutian req�ireneents. What mitlg�tinn is proposed for tl� removal of arry �reesP Explain why th�s m�ig�on fs c�npropriat� One protected tree is being proposed for removal, and will ba replaced by (7) IVew trees. The tree rernoval a�licafion wlll be obtained after tt�e planning process la cpmpleted. , s��i,e.FxNt ...__..t... .._... � _ _ _ ' ...........:: r_'i..'.:.tr:::.: �..�..-.: ...!C::'t.'"'::'i..`.:_r:'.._":......,._ ...:......"'.' ..- . C...-.- . � " .'...-... . .' ..... . .__. : .-...[:._....__'.._.-.... ..... ....� .. ..:_ ._ . . .. . . � . � _ . . . .... ..... .: . .._ . ......._. .. . . . :"� " " ' . :.... . .. :...� -• �.. . ... , ....:-..... ............:..:..:�:.. . . .�...........�- _ . . .. � �=� H/ �B%7' s` �: �: Design Review Amendmenf 2747 Burlingview Drtv;; The applicant is requesting a Special Permit far a basement ceiling height that exceeds 6'-6". The praposed basemerrt storage area and hall at the right side of the house has a ceiling height of 9'-0". A total of 600 SF of basement area and 100 SF of utility areas are exempt from floar area calculations. No part af #he attached lower level garage is exempt from floor area calculations. ; The appiicant is requesting the following applications: ■ Design review for a new house (C.S. 25.57.Q10 {a) (2}}; and ■ Hillside Area Construction Permit (C.S. 25.61.020); and ■ Specia[ permit for an attached garage (C.S. 25.26.Q35 {a}); and ■ Specia( Permit for a basement height greater than fi'-6". {C.S. 25.26.035 (fl). 2747 Burlingview Drive �ot Area: 10 066 P{ans date stam ed; March i and March 2p, 2U74 APPROVED PU41VS � ALLOWED/REQUIRED SETBACKS Fronf (7st flrj: To attached garage: Side (le�): (right): Rear 9st flr ; Lof Coverage: FAR: # of bedrooms: 25'-6" 30'-2" 8'-7„ 7'-0" 24'-1" 3995 SF 39.7% 4242 SF 0.42 FAR 5 -� cpver� _ , ¢�i�' x 2fl'}, �t� 3 4':'`, :: `;: ; �, :,`: 23'-7" is the block average 25'-0„ 7'-0" 7�� 15'-0" Y 4026 SF 40% 4321 SF' 0.43 FAR � Special;Pe -� � --- 3p� „ ��.�J � „ _..__ __.__._.w_._. ��`-..."-L—_._.._.___._.._.._ 19 -11.__..______ _i.,__..�.�....�_, ' (0.32 x 10,065 SF) + 1100 SF = 4321 SF (0.43 FAR). 2 A special permit is required for a basement ceiling height that is greater than 6'-6" (C.S. 25.26.035 (fi�). ' A special permit is required for an attached garage (C.S. 25.2fi.03 (a)). StafF Comments: Se� aftached memos #ram the Chief Building Offiaal, Fire Division, Enginsering Division, Parks Division, and Stormwater Division. 2 • �uxr�c m a� +� t� .�^� �- ��t - � � �v ��ne•�4 �� t.�'=�'"i""xla�y yyds^ e�=�x � 3�'` �. ' � . - . :'� ? ,� � ��'.�, v� � „+`�e ��k�-��" '*�y; .�r'k'�� _�„ � i . . � . # � � � �� F,{� ✓ F f� fr �� rM1 c "�4•' . . . � . `' ) �� 4 '_ ��! t' N 4 .�� "� � F yH . . . . . . . . . . . . . � � . � � � � � {} •gq +�� .*1...{5 : �qL ' �'{ ..� ' 1 . �4 " ... . . ' , d . 7l S�` � .� �ti�!c �" :�-� ��;. , � ` , ,l -�� _ :�- ' _ � � t�- _ ��*."�. �`� - � , . ` � . .�� ' - � i� � _� �_ : �_ - - - _ -- - � i �� I _ �� _ ,�, _ . .___ � .� .. - , _�---- --� _ . _ _._ � . ! ► � : � - � _= �. �. . . ' L��• . 'r 1�� .+.'a.i'i � _ . � _ . .` . , x � . A �, � c t " , _ .. -a,- . � 'J . r r � �4 '� � . .~ ; "�. � � . �. �c� �i/ -.�}�- '�� : r S'. ;.na.s:f� � �fY y �.l 1?" � f � 't- -�. � 4s �"'f�' �' ♦ a�?" � �.�� .�• �r ": r � . � � 'A"'� �,• 4i'� r,i� : rr l a � r * T .� 'fa S � . : � • ' � - yy, e . . !, b ..7� � L' •. +r+"� ', a � � . � t-, f .. S._ s .rJ �' �, ='', � 'r _ '6 . L"S� t I r si . ti,.� . s t.., �ay, Y +: °R+ u� ' � ,y� 'S f , �` - , = y _'" .' t . �,. . � � p �`s+ ?.� � r� - ': �' � �l..�. +�.. } _ � j L _ • 5 � ,.. . . . y!�4 :. . � t - , -� Js . Ff�' � - �. � ' A � � � - � ?,'t'' , h < � �' .t�' t� � � i i;r : �s"'�i� _ _ . ,� . :.:�. .'r :�, a.. . ,�i F uy� ' ..+.,�i''� . '�� Yyt j ;+ .i'�-+'S� j� � �� '�/. . ^� i� r`1�w. F � . � ' - i . r" l�l �' Y�. F� - 7 �" f � ,�t 1 '.P - s .e -a - . . , __..,w,>r .. � `�.� ��""^l_. �.. }ie .'1X ^w�:'-3+' 3ir`L'. } i..' ari.7�'� r-�ysf{� .:t�� 9�K�e. w :�s'"' �`' �.- yt��.L'�� ♦ a�� - �.��o l�'F 2� "�wt "".�.,f<. ", �.''k�,� '� �,-.,� t_,,.s._.*R�Rf't y" �1� � •i�G; j .! h+'x "Z4� '�^'< �xt+''':3>..r,'G�.n �e'S �'r^ � ��F"-'`y�,. ':�I�.w_ -:J^Fe�� e.sm:.,"..ai. '7� � �,..' �9 :.i �; 1—.,{, 3"Tt.,fJ�+'..��i" �16.�i� r�,_ A 1�. . rc �'�S vnr �� .y-f�- -i.. �,y � �,r.�y . .'l�. v% Y�. .. . - 3. � t�' �:i-��4�i1�. T��"- i ..a.;.+:� :� � .�.� .s '1'�' ) ..'�f,'�,=a��-r ��.: -.7� �� .f -?��.tti:rJ..'��j`i�'s"'t`��$r. .,.,i! �I' _ �'fY .� �r ��'�t.� A.. ��A(e� � ; ,,�;� ;, '�-4 ��,., r .-.�� -1�'R �.�- __ � -� ,.1�-r�� .M �� s ... d�- iq:' _° - �'5. ,. :.al�, � i. Sar - .,_ �.� < �l : , e � �� . �,t+r!� _ � yR, �� t . ' a. a s �.'Y � w �,{ � y- . ' . ..y� . _,,� �".. � - :vr ,�, . . : � , '��'�- � '� " _ _ � + •;��. � � x .�, -fa-Y�� 3 ;;.+: �' •r ��t _ " .� , � _ - 'a!t .�- �2 - � � .,,t� ` ` � S ra�. '{� .�f�b..�;•� �.� „ �:1�,,,� ',t �,;�� '. �i ' � �Y ey:9.>.i;.�s . 1 s�4t,.�. ,,,r" =�.. '�-r� .�+'�'-j': � � ''!i;e 'r'F,,��'�.'=.:.ti:�hL-� -r...'.". ' ` , (i_v'�"�r �r-i,�1 y,�+s ,�,a= �, � .!�r. '�'� � ��r� �'�%'.{ +yrr Q�,��:,�y ,r:f t� :`; }' 'H. �:.r` �_ �� y, e "' , /.C-. �e+ R s,� 'y1 �# r'y�'' �}-fr_�y''� 5 �� r �n "�r'� '� '�: . ..' i�,;'' ;9fw- '?,`�a - �' �„r � �- �' �; ,� 'r '� r• : • •� r i � . , iy;, i" „r �'`" � "'c e , ,�,�.�M�M��t�'ti. ��'a�.s► ._+�'.f � a �� . r . �+� . .�*',-,� : �'��..s..:r.��'�` �'�" w�,.. .� � . -�n= �....• .r ro r. ,.�.'��. � al't'?i�.""'Y,..1:,�t. Jr�.�. .,,t-.:�'i': ��+ r.y.�.�' � ci�C'y,a . r�,�'a��y:r c ,.r�aiM ✓'�,r. � j �r ��, s�' y '4. .N' r>-'' -�'' �'�.�* �a:� :.-S' ,� p. �. ��`� .:�..;�� -�,}. .�- 'v��:c.:��:�`�r � � +. n �'�'*i.�:�c+.�l J-�+}! {--� --�s `_-�,�,.'tw �;� ' � • �' s � . ' _.a. f '+r: r'� �t- 'I�.��i � J!'^��r .� �, t �` ; *> .1 .. � '�-. .t,��..--..s�. :�'.:`,r""' .Y'e�-%S'�: �� 9:r�'..s... - �"�.; ..:ar,f.i'r�"`,�.' e :�-'�s.. �r �� "'.i�.'t� r� : W,{y. ,�'\c�` - gfr�3i`,�;:. -...«,+ t+r�,,, �,-`+,TJ , � . ti �� ¢ 7� � �" � a`'h`.: .�a- '�v . �, y - ' �'�... ' ��:.. �-�".i'4 i �`: %f �. a �i .t �.R` T ' r N . 'i' . �t-.: r . .,. ; .,�.'� - 4, . s � _ ,� '.M . r . it ' ,ii� . �� `�+� .3� � ?i'�{ . F ? ' r�,.: f y � . . r ; r�: ,, }� .fi, � r r. 'Y � F %;�'-•r` lV �- y�' '� �f+' =..�Y y . "1 '_� v.,� +-%..s i` f � f 7.�i-"'��"S `t' �'C �la ' y.c" . t� ' x '%t.��'"' < t^;e. _ v '��? s.� ��_ � .� i " �� ',� � . ,,� � �,y ..�J; � ^yr�f,`,�r"' �-o.r�', �P� ,� �: ri%`:�yc`z, ;t,�'�:�.y` _y}� •r4� n:,�, A,y ,+ 7, ♦ �+ :'4��y� ', v� !..'�•'- '�r..�.� �`c _,g, g� L\ � s1, �y � ,. +�, .tU r �`'� ,, _�.t �'t • v �. 1� " ,e �. � �p s, s '�" -"� rm.�' � i '-v r�' i,.,.. _� ., . . - . . � #-' .�� _ , . � i ._3+.�...+„yn'. «d.r ..s.,t--` � i'1, `r• �� .�y, � .�. e j � .,�� ,. _ � .j�,"� ;7i-^ .a 4i.. :�.i^ � Fr, � , .. Y�, y ��`� dye� T C,l� ��`""�'y'�t Xr' , .r.. -�?, r �... ... if'' t'� °w . �-. .7��" �'��w �cy, ;] :t'D'f:r ��." -?�;.y�.};� �h. � � - � 1.!'�.;�� t..• _t ��t%'�' i:� ; 'X`t i `�'_i � �F�; � _ f`+.f• � - . . . y� • �- « S .r T I N . 'Z t et `t'Ol'< �' ' e,�+, a r �,�• � 'a', • " >. ,,.rs , C�� r_ � t.�+ �, !''"' 3�j,� ,�{*: t.� ,�.: ' r. , �3 � �.i �t,a!� ,t,-ri p r aF",'�` -E'� _� ♦.f . �,�! . � .� £ r. � r . �+ w+ .:+sc ' S y _ . ` •.a'..� . i��tr`iK `j4 � 3'� ;` Vs i.� � � r � �tijt �y�Yr',�� y �..,i��.y, }.. •'� ' ^�..'y�'_R ��' •;.�r r`� �,�t{�, � �� :.�-�+ '� ��'+� � .'� ��,r�''•:r.-LG".�.�.�'��y. ..t� �.-.- .'a �.. �S+r � t�• -4.-� _� a....� �,,,� a�'r•,... � � ' �,:, . � � �,t. , ,: . .�5'�K��rs�. +".r-� "�� j : �Jt - �`�� h�.-�',;< ':4i� . �,.-a-7 y_.; �'�! :i.., . : ��,, S�.- . r = +' .� �• . ,,. . .. ' ,..'• •:�( " �''`.a�� ;�'"�^ . :... �..� �-1�4. �*�'.,yi '..� �` yc��" .-a�;. i ♦f..K`�! � �.�'�-� . r-,�.. j r` .�, ', ,iMy..� �+,4 ) �'�`�"�i '+"`�°�'.f�+�.. �"" `. .Y�� I�Y� r+ 3'. t}r '-rri f�- .' .-.► 1,.. .�..��Sr�X+� .4 \� ' ��,Ar� Y�, "rQi«"e�'- ;L'w3a� �� a t..,:. .: �a�.: d^F" 'd,,3 :�, �..►fi itp�� `Y�� if° fb- �� Yr�.� �1.f ....f �' �•� �- K � .1� ..-�r, ^y y,+ ...r,, _ �t ?t�11. -�.'1 - � , � . . �. i� �1 s u : , r� �.� � � '� � � .i `! � 1 � ' . :.� Y � .a � l � I'�' .i . ��. . t � YFC_ .yv,.� '� . i � l,y « y� �-;• #- �.. . r- '� -•wl� 1 ��- ''� � � T %^'y .++t F ` � �:.`.� { �� 7}S, .i��.�.�� d`y �� .1 r+ �..��''�� w'h�'�.':� } � ? ��` �� + '�S.'N -�v �'Ar'` .�,. �. '�r'r� �''e- � ��L �. � �.sb�� +�..'i jJ�" /"C - y � : � �.a ♦ '�{` i ' �.. Yr: "r:s ,Yti 'F� �i � ' ': 9:�v�� • � � "`"' � s �,� � �� . 1 '. 'x,�.. - .,�' a . .a;w �. • , . � r . j��j't� �+¢A� , �« .> .� �� .�..�,�� `�C} r`it i'�a.. .�:.�_li '� -� ;,-fi4K` ;,,�-� � y'�'r� .� tiy L21 �'�'�tsi-�_'- x+yk �.�� .�...dE.1� r , {L_a ! t. �� s'rM-'�.�+.t`s � ,�y .s.r`_.3..� ' � �34'� . . . ,: ,.�, .�,o� ,t,� � .. r .. � .. a. '� , ,.�;t , _.at , h „�t p . '_ y�� ..�. � �, � ..�.'•. ; r H' L-', ♦� �r'f . • ��., . �•,Y ,�y . ; '. '''(�;i" 3��-r. =r _,.� �!. ,y},� ��-Lr.'='°"1'�`.?=°t -��' �' :� � y�`f w.�t•- ^a'�. #:# �� Y 9d, •.?'ir ..�- - �Y. y�� K•'Y+-. _.}.i^� � J:,*qt.r] , rF "�w�`"4^' '+-'� e �-�? f `y��,. � r�ys i 'Y' �`C` ,, . , ..�! � . ..-: ) �, TC. 'r• J+ "i .� = i � F v�, `- � ~-�' 'M� '4 �'�r ar . _ �a` �1 ..� +� ,r .sT ,�r �� .�,'�'�JE!Z`� }� �:�• ; a��' a:: , .,_`,;at �� ,� �.� } �fi;.�. :�°'� r` ��. ...Y - �!'��, �� .Z� l.�� .f �r ..� t�` . '+A�y� �� -` j ��`'� �`' � v,d. -'�-"��":�2-�b: }�'"S�� ry ��y tr�,�` � - et'� '�` .' x� �, '��'' +� '° � � � �,►�.€ , ' : / ..� ii" :�'`�'+f' �' �l l � 7 . �.. �+"�s+y�' " � M45#' ` '�► f# � .� �,7 w.,� .,w�.fi` . 4"#'.r� �"'�i� ,'._�'d��''�k'a':.`: Y ..I : �1'1�. z'i �Y " f� w . �� ti.•..� � ej�'�•r �'f.r � ';'h�..^t� �'.i[ �. r��. ��' `'� i A f.,. 5'r. �� a^�� ? f r` +g�s..:_ �: . . � �` � ,�.�. ,�,,,• ' �. : � ! . .r� �S . - . i t.r � _,... '�: , . +t "'` J,: . : ! i+'.' t >. '- �)3'r'' • . ,! - .1� �- � '� : �", i�.� `Y x ,,j ,� ,.. , , � �-�r,-�. i p�`*_- � 'y�. , y .��.��'�� - '} �� '�y _ �� . � '�2- yi��/jn . t' �3Y �� ' �: + :'� �K..rt.i" �»y1�i..~� L+.yx�- �:n. ? � �h � '� .�.+ 24�- .. � .. �.� '� �r �. Y�` � � '$��' K� � � � � � 3k`:.i ?� ; i ' ',f . .s.' _ � �' y "� r� ty` n {M_,'� �„ r i�c : . i . .�, �"' ! f.i^f r :7< r` +" .� .y� +L� !c�,,.�•.•4 .tf ,r� �� '-W�,}�r 7� 'y�.V_�� -�E. i �I �1J��'T•� � ..v"'+r,<..^.:�h7.�,.�_ !C� t_Y,7 _. . .. _ �. . . . .l'd' -:�'-�'_:.f _1 J= .��l�""_- _ 7�' � �?... . . . . . R.-t['�l,. t. i:-- J?: � R� _'!._T_y,^4 ±laf"�a� ,�.'.Yj':'. .S".�..� e,m„�}�'�,��.� `#�.r . What is modern: characteristics of modern architecture — a2 modern � mode... Page 1 of 4 F�C/��s/ % � a2 MOD ERN �+ Search... _ � contact • resources • research � buildin�s • architects • events � home April9th, 2011 What is modern: charact�eristics of modern architecture research Comments Off What is different about modern architecture? a2 modern member, Greg Jones, A.I.A., summarizes some of the common characteristics of this period of architecture. Characteristics of Mid-Century Modern: Lack of ornament: Decorative moldings and elaborate trim are eliminated or greatly si_mplified, giving way to a clean aesthetic where materials meet in simple, well-executed j oints. Emphasis of rectangular forms and horizontal and vertical lines: Shapes of houses are based boxes, or linked boxes. Materials are often used in well-defined planes and vertical forms juxtaposed against horizontal elements for dramatic effect. http://a2modern.org/2U 11 /04/characteristics-of-modern-architecture/ 9/7/2015 What is modern: characteristics of modern architecture — a2 modem � mode... Page 2 of 4 • Low, horizontal massing, flat roofs, emphasis on horizontal plan;,� and broad roof overhangs: Modern homes tend to be on generous sites, and thus many, but not all, have to have meandering one-story plans. Many examples hug the ground and appear of the site, not in contrast to it. • Use of modern materials and systems: Steel columns axe used in exposed applications, concrete block is used as a finished material, concrete floors are stained and exposed, long-span steel trusses permit open coluxnn-free spaces, and radiant heating systems enhance human comfort. . • Use of traditional materials in new ways: Materials such as wood, brick and stone are used in simplified ways reflecting a modern aesthetic. Traditional clapboard siding are replaced with simple vertical board cladding used in large, smooth planes. Brick and stonework are simple, unornamented, and used in rectilinear masses and planes. • Emphasis on honesty of materials: Wood is often stained rather than painted to express its natural character. In many cases exterior wood is also stained so that the texture and character of the wood can be expressed. • Relationship between interior spaces and sites: Use of large expanses of glass in effect brings the building's site into the building, taking advantage of dramatic views and natural landscaping. • Emphasis on open, flowing interior spaces: Living spaces are no longer defined by walls, doors and hallways. Living, dining and kitchen spaces tend to flow together as part of one contiguous interior space, reflecting a more casual and relaxed way of life. • Generous use of glass and natural light: Windows are no longer portholes to the outside, but laxge expanses of floor to ceiling glass providing dramatic views and introducing natural light deep into the interior of homes. • Use of sun and shading to enhance human comfort: The best modern homes are e�cient. They are oriented to ta.ke advantage of nature's forces to provide passive solar heating in the winter, while long overhangs and recessed openings provide shading to keep homes cool in the summer. http://a2modern.org/2011/04/chara.cteristics-of-modern-architecture/ 9/7/2015 D�eiling Tr rrpnes InC. 31 August 2015 To: Burlingame City Council RE: 2753 Burlingview Drive — Appeal of Planning Commission Approval Dear Madam Mayor, Honorable Council and Staff, Thank you for this opportunity to present our position regarding the appeal of the Planning Commission's Project Approval for 2753 Burlingview Drive. First, let us state that the property Owners — the Chan Family — are very excited to reconnect with this neighborhood where Alvin grew up, be adjacent to his Parents who live around the corner on Bella Vista, and become members of the community. They have been very respectful of Mr. McAloon and the other neighbors, and have gladly met with them to discuss their project. �n regards to the issues of appeal, we submit the following "arguments": • It would appear that there is no basis for accepting the appeal and overturning the Planning Commission's approval of the project: o The applicant asked for NO special considerations for height, setbacks, FAR, lot coverage or declining height. The project in fact exceeds the required setbacks on all sides. o There are NO view blockage issues resulting from the project additions and massing o Mr. McAloon's only basis for objection at the Commission hearings appeared to merely relate to an interpretation of the Design Guidelines and issues of neighborhood context. • The rear, Hillsborough neighbor Mr. Feldman suggested at the Planning Commission Hearing that there were view issues from his property. The views from his one story structure appear to be entirely blocked by existing trees and fencing. • In regards to the Design Guidelines, the Planning Commission has already judged that the project fits the neighborhood conte� and approved the project based on their interpretation of the Design Guidelines • Mr. McAloon and A few neighbors have argued that the house is "too big" for the neighborhood. The proposed square footage of 4,113 sf (per Staff Report), includes 498 sf of attached garage (most of which would be exempt if detached) and 136 sf of high ceiling open area that is at the back of the house and not affecting any neighbor. Therefore the proposed living area is approximately 3,500 sf. • The Neighbors' suggestion that this is an area of only one story homes, is not accurate. • We are not aware of any statute or guideline that requires a house to be a certain square footage, or a given percentage below the allowable FAR, if neighbors object, or if there are a certain number of existing houses with less square footage... • The only potential interpretation would be if the massing of a house that is less than the allowable square footage, nonetheless has some negative impact on the neighborhood... • Massing: o We have articulated the massing and details so that there is a variation in roof lines with parapets, awnings/overhangs and materials. o Previous projects at the "cresY' of a street, in which the Commission has asked for revisions to height, have generally had uniform continual roof lines or parapets that are not articulated. o We have stepped back both the right and left corners of the front fa�ade — particularly in regards to the only impacted neighbor on the right side — Mr. McAloon o We are planning no large view windows that look out to Mr. McAloon's property o As noted to the Planning Commission, the front elevation is massive/y screened by two huge mature protected size trees. The Commission has often asked applicants to consider landscaping as a means to help screen a fa�ade... this elevation could hardly be more screened with landscaping. 2753 Burlingview Drive City Council Appeal Page 2 Planning Commissioners in fact commented that the story poles revealed that the massing was quite nice, and reflected a massing that was smaller than might be expected. The two dissenting Commissioners wondered if there were any other solutions that could have been pursued "be more compatible" or "reduce the massing": o Any alternative solutions would have to start with the two basics of where to locate the garage, and where to set the first floor elevation. o The Owners have no desire to throw away the existing garage and the first floor and put them in a landfill. The only area being removed is the previous unsightly addition. o Even if the site were scraped, the ONLY location and grade elevation for the garage is the EXISTING location and grade. Any other location would severely harm the two existing protected trees in the front yard. o Regarding the first floor, while the existing elevation is approx 6'-9" above the average top of curb at the front, it is only 1'-2" above grade at the rear. Therefore the ONLY elevation for the first floor is the EXISTING grade — unless the house were to be sunken into grade and have to step UP to get out to the back yard. o Options for relocating or sinking the garage or first floor are fairly unreasonable, when again, the proposed project is within the allowable height, FAR, Lot Coverage, Declining Height and Setbacks. Style / Additional Neighborhood Context: The City Council and Commission have indicated that pending further resolution on the issue of appropriate neighborhoods for "modern style" homes, the hillside area is generally an acceptable area for the modern style. There are in fact several homes in the immediate vicinity that have a somewhat modem or contemporary feel — including Mr. McAloon's home. In conclusion, we believe we have designed a well-styled home that fits into the Hillside and Neighborhood context, and serves the needs and desires of the Chan Family who will soon be contributing members of our Community. Thank you for your further consideration. Sincerely, � Wayne Lin, Project nager Dreiling Terrones Ar hitecture, Inc. cc Alvin Chan / Jacqueline Yuen — Owners attached: rendering �i�r,� � ,<•.. �i,c�,� , _ � ..,�� .. .:........ ..: .. ..� ,.,��-- ..�.ni:- .. ��..-., . ..;,�.: '0�,s I � �.. .. �,. � � � � . . . . . .r . . .....� 7 ic:lll.i'i .. k . ,�, ... .,� „ i � , , �; .- ..> ,� ; � � .r: : , . � ` ,�.. : t� . . � � . �4 ry, t m� Y . v � ' . �► / . . ��::;y'.. . _ .y . f �1 r_. �., - � . ��-�rk�M�M .. .. �" ..,.��`q - .. . � s ^� � �. � �'.��.�..��' . ..., : \�-y, . 4 ' .. � � J► ' l ' " ; `, , S V � . ._ Y . ' � ^ .� _ i , '�. �, ' � �� !, � . �y � . . �`. •� � � - - � ' � , . , . _, t � �:,��.�� . �.� ._ �� , f- , :. ,:;. � . , -.., � � , .�� . :' � � � � �y �� . .. ,,�� _ . : �, . . , _.., .. � _ �= , ..� ._ _ - > " .� ��- . � � ��,r _ � �, ` ' � • �-..,-�' �".�^ � ' i � , . -,. r, � �: -�'t-� �s,�"� , • : . _ -� _ _ ' � - �:. - ��`v�'►- • .F s . f"-[�- -�.' •;� . .._ : `:. ` ,�.,�,� �� . �. �, ciry �r,�i � F .�'�I!,�,j,Y` � II� �o� _ � qnawnr City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes Planning Commission BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Monday, August 10, 2015 7:00 PM Council Chambers a. 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor (Dreiling Terrones Architecture, Inc., applicant and architect; Alvin and Jacqueline Chan, property owner) (31 noticed) Staff Contact: Erika Lewit Attachments: 2753 Burlinqview Dr - Staff Report 2753 Burlinqview Dr - Attachments Commissioner Terrones was recused from this item as he has a business relationship with the applicant. All Commissioners had visited the project site. Commissioner Sargent met with three neighbors: the neighbor immediately adjacent uphill, and the two across the street. P/anning Manager Gardiner presented the staff report. There were no questions of staff. Wayne Lin, Dreilling Terrones Architects, represented the applicant.� > Story poles have been installed. > Owners have met with neighbors since story po/es were installed. > Have articulated massing and details so there are variations in rooflines with parapets, awnings, overhangs and materials. > Stepped back front and right corners of facade. > No view issues are effected by the mass of the house. > No specia/ considerations for either the height or sefbacks. Height is near the maximum on/y because of the upsloping lot. > Side setbacks are greater than required on both sides: 11' on the /eft side; 10'-2" on the first f/oor and 11'-9" on the second floor of the right side. > Has minimized view windows on the west e/evation. Front is screened by two large mature protected size trees. > Rendering shows different planes in the facade. > Existing 2-car garage counts towards floor area, and the two-story volume counts twice fowards FAR. > Rear e/evation windows revised, roof overhang extended. Additional windows on west e/evafion but will not be view windows. Alvin Chan spoke as the owner: > Met with neighbors Sunday evening. > Would like to make changes to plan as compromise to address neighbor concerns. > Proposes planting purp/e hopseed bushes for privacy between adjacent neighbor. > Proposes adding a third tree at front corner at corner of garage - Japanese maple. > Suggests adding an additional parking space on the curb to the right of the driveway. Questions to applicant: City of Burlingame Page 1 Prinied on 8H7/2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 10, 2015 > Have addressed the concerns of neighbors? (Chan: Can't speak for them. Have made suggested changes as a result of the meeting.) > Story poles show the house will impinge on the to Sequoia tree. (Lin: Arborist report mentions preserving tree so it remain in good health.)(Chan: 5-10 lower limbs will be removed according to the report.) > How to ensure the health of tree? (Chan: Arborist report is very specific with protection measures including fencing around the tree, and arborist involvement during construction.) Public comments: Terry McAloon, 2759 Burlingview Drive, spoke on this item: > Design guidelines are there to preserve good qualities of existing neighborhoods. > Guidelines say a neighborhood can be interpreted by its common characteristics, its general pattern exemplified by the original homes. > Guidelines say new houses coming into neighborhood should support existing homes, emulate the design and respect the homes. > Characteristics of neighborhood are sing/e-story 2,000 square foot homes. Does not see how a hvo-story 4, 300 sq ft home fits. > Homes on Atwater are similar to what is proposed, but that is a different neighborhood. Not sure why need to accept something from a different neighborhood. > Does not believe design complies with Neighborhood Design Guidelines. Gary Payne, 2754 Burlingview Drive, spoke on this item: > Submitted letter. Concerns mitigated by landscaping but sfill stand behind /etter. > Concern with mass and height of house. Will be taller than houses on each side so will be out of character with the neighborhood. > Impacts neighbor on pleasure and use of their home, loss of privacy. > Amenab/e to improvements and neighborhood upgraded, but wants to see if owners could meet their requirements for their home without as much impact on the neighbors. Merrill Feldman spoke on this item: > Lives behind the property. > Concerns stated by others > Nature of neighborhood would be changed by a house of this height and size. > /ssues taken into account in terms of front and side views, but nof considered from behind. Story po/es show impact to view from the rear. Applicant response: > Height point of departu�e (finished floor level of first floor) is 6'-9" based on hill topography. > House is set back beyond the required 7 feet. First floor is 10'-2", second floor 11'-9" to distance from the neighbor's side. Vice-Chair Loftis closed the public hearing. Commission discussion: > Difficult, as Burlingame is changing. Applicants want larger houses as property values increase. > Applicant has worked hard to take concerns of neighbors into account. Difference between this design and earlier is significant. > Massing is handled well, and held back significantly from the setbacks. > Does not impact distant views as specified in the Hillside Construction Permit ordinance. > Will be a larger house than the neighborhood at large. City of Burlingame Page 2 Piinted on 8/17/2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 10, 2075 > Well screened by existing mature trees. Additional tree will help further. > Story po/es seemed to show house would fit well. Flat roof allows height of the house to be brought down. > All neighborhoods are changing, so need to focus on quality of design. This is a high-quality design. > Has done a good job of mitigating neighbor concerns. However apparent massing seems large as it is viewed from the west, sitting out on the promontory. Other large houses fit in beiter when they sit back into the hill, not on top of a promontory. > 2751 Summit example a/so sits on a promontory and is two-stories. lt overshadows the houses around it. > Existing house mitigates the massing by pushing second story back into left corner. > Would like mass decreased. All houses around are single-story houses. This house is setting the sfandard. > Concern with trimming the limbs on the tree. > Story poles show house will nof be as massive as might be anticipafed. House is increasing overall height only 5.3 feet at the highest point of the ridge compared to existing house. > Building is sculpted nice/y. Facade steps away on upper floors. > Does not need to reproduce architecture from the 1950s. > Tree is /arge and will be able to endure trimming. It has already been trimmed previously. > Project can be supported with the proposed landscaping additions coming back as an FYI. Parking space may require an encroachment permit so should be pursued but not a requirement. Commissioner Sargent made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Gum, to approve the application with the following condition: > Applicant to return with an FYI prior to issuance of a building permit indicating landscaping proposed by the applicant, including the screening trees on the right side of the property and the Japanese maple at the front left of the property. Proposed parking space should be pursued with Public Works but is not a requirement. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 3- Loftis, Sargent, and Gaul Nay: 2- Gum, and Bandrapalli Absent: 1 - DeMartini Recused: 1 - Terrones Ciiy of Burlingame Page 3 Printed on 8H7/2015 Item No. 8a Regular Action Item PROJECT LOCATION 2753 Burlingview Drive Item No. 8a Regular Action Item City of Burlingame Design Review and Hillside Area Consfruction Permit Address: 2753 Burlingview Drive Meeting Date: August 10, 2015 Request: Application for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling that includes first and second floor additions. Applicant and Architect: Richard Terrones, Dreiling Terrones Architecture, Inc. Property Owner: Alvin Chan General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 027-261-030 Lot Area: 10,000 Zoning: R-1 Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section 15301 (e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that additions to existing structures are exempt from environmental review, provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition. Project Description: The existing house is two stories with an attached garage. The applicant is requesting Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for first and second story additions. The proposed floor area for the new house will be 4,113 SF (0.41 FAR) where 4,300 (0.43 FAR) is the maximum allowed on site (including covered porch exemptions). With the proposed project, the existing second floor will be demolished, as well as portions of the existing left side of the house that have non-conforming side setbacks. The existing attached garage will remain, and there will be first floor additions at the rear of the existing house, as well as a new second story. The applicant is requesting a Hillside Area Construction Permit for this major renovation and first and second story additions. The existing highest ridge, at the left side of the house, is 24'-0" above average top of curb and the height of the highest section of the flat roof (at the center of the house) for the new second story addition is 30'-0" above average top of curb. The exterior walls of the existing attached garage and the existing code-complaint uncovered parking space in the driveway leading to the garage will remain. The number of bedrooms on site will be increased from 4 to 5 and the on-site parking requirement will be increased from two spaces (1 covered, 1 uncovered) to three spaces (2 covered spaces, 1 uncovered parking space). The interior width of the garage will not be altered; it provides the minimum width for two covered parking spaces (18'-0" existing and proposed). Several interior structures (such as a furnace, water heater, and stairs) will be removed to increase the interior length in the garage. Because the parking space length is being altered, the required length must be 20'-0" to comply with code regulations and the revised design provides 20'-0", eliminating the previous request for a parking variance. There is a protected size tree at the left, front side of the property that will be retained with construction. The applicant has submitted a Certified Arborist Reports, date stamped March 11 and July 31, 2015, to detail protection measures. The applicant is requesting the following applications: ■ Design review for a second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010,a,2); and ■ Hillside Area Construction Permit (C.S. 25.61.020). Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit 2753 Burlingview Drive 2753 Burlingview Drive Lot Area: 10,000 Plans date stam ed: Jul 31, 2015 EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED SETBACKS : _ :..............................................................................._............................................:_....... ......._._..._..............................................................................._.._ ......................... . . . Front (1st flr): ; 34'-8" No change 23'-7" (2nd flr): ; 57'-3" 41'-3" 23'-7" To attached garage: 24'-11"' No change 35'-0" : .............................................................. . . _ ................................................................................................................................................................................ Side (left): ; 5'-0" 2 11'-0" 7'-0" (righf): ; 10'-0" No change 7'-0" ......................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................................................................ ........ . . Rear (1st flr) 31'-0" 41'-0" 15'-0" _Rear...(2nd flr):: : 37'.'0". . 41'-0" 20'-0„ : .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Lot Coverage: ; 2,860 SF 2,466 SF 4,000 SF 29% 25% 40% : ................... .......... . . .......... , ... ... ..................... . ......................... FAR: ; 3,356 SF 4,113 SF 4,300 SF 3 0.34 FAR 0.41 FAR 0.43 FAR # of bedrooms: 4 5 --- Parking: 1 covered 2 covered 2 covered (9' x 18') (18' x 20') (18' x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') (9' x 20') Height: 24'-0" 30'-0" 30'-0" ' Existing, non-conforming setback to the attached, single door garage. 2 Existing, non-conforming right side setback (5'-0" existing, where 7'-0" is required). 3 (0.32 x 10,000 SF) + 1,100 SF = 4,300 SF (0.43 FAR). Staff Comments: See attached memos from the Chief Building Official, Fire Division, Engineering Division, Parks Division, and Stormwater Division. Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting the Commission had several comments regarding this project and voted to place this item on the regular action calendar when all information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Division and story poles installed and surveyed. Please refer to the copy of the July 13, 2015 Planning Commission minutes included in the staff report for the Planning Commission comments on the design of the structure and the role of story poles of evaluating the project. The applicant submitted a response letter and revised plans date stamped July 31, 2015. The story poles were installed and certified on July 22, 2015. The installation of the story poles showed that the proposed second story would require trimming of the protected size Sequoia tree on the property. The applicant has submitted an updated Arborist Report, dated stamped July 31, 2015, to address this impact. The conditions of approval require that tree protection measures be installed and inspected by the City Arborist prior to any demolition on the site and that a Certified Arborist be present for any tree trimming of protected size trees. Staff would note the following items that in addition to the previously submitted letters, the Attachment section of this report contains four additional letters submitted by neighboring property owners and one additional letter -2- Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit 2753 Burlingview Drive submitted by the property owner. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows: 1. Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Required Findings for Hillside Area Construction Permit: Review of a Hillside Area Construction Permit by the Planning Commission shall be based upon obstruction by construction of the existing distant views of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be given to the obstruction of distant views from habitable areas within a dwelling unit (Code Sec. 25.61.060). Suggested Findings for Hillside Area Construction Permit: That the proposed single family dwelling is designed to decrease the impact of the proposed second story on the uphill property to the right, with a greater than existing side setback and flat roofs, and that this project does not obstruct distant views from habitable areas within nearby dwelling units and therefore the project may be found to be compatible with hillside area construction permit 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: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped July 31, 2015, sheets A0.01 through A5.1, AR1.04, L1.1 and L1.2.GP1.0, ER1.1, and Boundary and Topographic Survey; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staffl; 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Engineering Division's December 23, 2014 and March 18, 2015 memos, the Building Division's December 23, 2014 and March 13, 2015 memos, the Parks Division's January 8, 2015 memo, the Fire Division's December 23, 2014 memo, and the Stormwater Division's December 23, 2014 memo shall be met; 5. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be placed upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community Development Director; -3- Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit 2753 Burlingview Drive 6. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and tree protection measures are installed on site for any protected-size tree, and these measures are inspected and approved by the Parks Supervisor; any protected-size tree that is proposed to be removed, or that is damaged and must be removed as a result of demolition or construction, will require a Protected Tree Permit and may require further Planning Division or Planning Commission review; 7. that prior to issuance of a building permit for demolition or construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet and a landscape plan that list the Kielty Arborist reports dated March 11 and July 31, 2015, and recommendations, as well as the condition that certified arborist must be on site for trimming of any protected size tree; 8. 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; 9. 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; 10. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 11. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 12. 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: 13. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; '14. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and 15. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. Erika Lewit -4- Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit Senior Planner c. Richard Terrones, Dreiling Terrones Architecture, applicant Attachments: Applicant's response letter, dated July 30, 2015 July 13, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Applicant's response letter, dated May 28, 2015 April 13, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Application to the Planning Commission Staff Comments Arborist's Report, date stamped March 11, 2015 Arborist's Report, date stamped July 31, 2015 Communications submitted by neighbors for Design Review Study Hearings (4 items) Communications submitted by neighbors for Regular Action Hearing (4 items) Letters from the homeowner, date stamped April 13 and August 5, 2015 Photographs of Neighborhood, date stamped December 22, 2014 Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed July 31, 2015 Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed) Aerial Photo 2753 Burlingview Drive -5- Dreiling Terrones ' '�;-c � Inc. 4�,:,,.;1� � I�.;ir- I Inii,i;f��Jc'iUrr � Et�vironlnont; 30 July 2015 To: Burlingame Planning Commission RE: 2753 Burlingview Drive — response to Design Review Study comments Dear Commissioners and Staff, Thank you for your comments at the Design Review Study hearing on 7/13/15. The following is our response to comments, and a description of a few minor revisions to the exterior elevation drawings. Building Mass / Story Poles: As you have seen, the story poles were erected and certified. The outline of the story pole flagging reflects the articulated massing in our revised design reviewed on 7/13. In regards to the house's mass and the concern for the context of the neighborhood, we would note the following: o The massing is very similar to many of the 1950's, 60's and 70's homes in the hillside area that have a garage at either the left or right front facade, and a two story mass extending across the property (See attached photo examples.) Many of these are "two story ranch houses" with gabled roofs and are generally accepted as vernacular to the hillside area. Though their plate heights might be lower, they have the same impact due to the high gable roof. Therefore the only real difference between those homes and this application, is the style or appearance. o The City Council and Commission have indicated that pending further resolution on the appropriate neighborhoods for "modern style" homes, the hillside area is generally an acceptable area for the modern style. o We have articulated the massing and details so that there is a variation in roof lines with parapets, awnings/overhangs and materials. o Previous projects at the "cresY' of a street, in which the Commission has asked for revisions to height, have generally had uniform continual roof lines or parapets that are not articulated. o We have stepped back both the right and left corners of the front faCade — particularly in regards to the only impacted neighbor on the right side. o There are no view issues that are affected by the massing of the house. o We are not asking for any special considerations for height or setbacks. Our height calculation is near the maximum only because of the up-sloping lot. o The house is setback on the sides more than the required minimum of 7'-0". The setback on the left is 11'-0", and on the right, the setback is 10'-2" on the first floor and 11'-9" on the second floor. o We have minimized any view windows on the west elevation, facing McAloon at 2759 Burlingview Drive. We can further minimize the impact if we obscure the bathroom window on the second floor west elevation. o The only potential neighborhood impact is along the front elevation, which is massivelyscreened by two huge mature protected size trees. The Commission has often asked applicants to consider landscaping as a means to help screen a fa�ade... this elevation could hardly be more screened with landscaping. o The two dimensional elevation drawings are deceiving. The front fa�ade in fact has several major steps in plane from the front of the property, including: o Garage plane o Office / Laundry plane o Second Floor Bedrooms 2/3 o Second Floor corners — Bath #3 and Master Bedroom Sitting area Square Footage: The total square footage proposed is somewhat skewed by the existing attached garage which counts as square footage, and the two story volume which counts twice towards our overall FAR — but this two story volume is at the back of the house and has no real neighborhood impact. �, . � � � � ,�� , r U...v ,�i 11n:�im�.u�n '6 iYl '�.iG � I �ii; ��,n�. 2753 Burlingview Drive Response to Planning Commission Comments Page 2 Elevation Revisions: The minor revisions include: o Rear Elevation o Revised the window module for the windows into the two story Living Room volume o Bedroom #4, extended the roof overhang to the right on the roof above the deck o West Elevation — Bedroom #5, added small windows at the night stand area of the bed wall. These will not be view windows because the primary view is through the large window on the south wall, to the rear yard Thank you for your further consideration. Sincerely, v Wayne Lin, Proje Manager Dreiling Terrones Architecture, Inc. cc Alvin Chan / Jacqueline Yuen — Owners attached: sample hillside homes �,�.��.�. �,� ,,,�� ;,�,� , .,.,� _ ��__ , � „ , , , � �� , . . I S069f, I)00 ;11�iunLcOn�� -ii 11 Jii'.� rt� i r dJ.:(fm 8/1/2015 � („ppc�l� 3010 Alcazar Dr Burlingame, California Street View - Apr 2015 �o�� t.Q°�'v �•�a s,,t a�``' �co'�' s e��dsr��n Alv�rater �� 4r q� � ' \�n �i+. RIrA7a�� . �� 3010 Alcazar Dr - Google Maps Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5804fG,-122.395785,3a,37.8y,141.4h,90.35Vdat�!3m6!1e1 !3m4!1sm FWunQLzLZY167G1D90EYjQ!2e0!Ti 13312!8i6656!6m 1... 1/1 8/1/2015 � �_;(��c,�� 3066 Atwater Dr Burlingame, California Street View - Apr 2015 D\Q\ �f3V � �^a�� ` �a�Q �; ( 0'`S' Sy e/dsrJ�n p,� ter C;r pl o t � f� .�..aT�,� Ds . ��' 3066 Atwater Dr - Google Maps Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google https://www.google.com/maps/@37.580844; 122.398359,3a,40.2y,178.08h,87.06Udata=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4qoQmU1m0a-HvgTs3d)(iSA!2e0!713312!8i6656!6m1!... 1/1 8J1/2015 � Goo�le Burlingame, California Street View - Apr 2015 1527 Los Montes Dr - Google Maps 1527 Los Montes Dr h', r�� 6� �j i � - � G� ' �Q A� ^ r : p di q� 4 U /1 � p�, ,�r �.u,� e ��o ��Q . . . �� si t,. d �a Pf a � C] � Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google https:/hvww.google.com/maps/@37.574599,-171.395292,3a,40.9y,226.67h,90.21t/data=!3m6! 1e1 !3m4!1 s3VnnH m rdKlewbcWZV7beg!2e0!Ti 13312!8i6656!6m 1!1 e1 1/1 8/1/2015 3107 Margarita Ave - Google M aps .:; _ �;,;. � - �r,, . { , �.. J'„�, :ib'_ . �- « �'.1 . . � 'r • r i ..cr,:�. , v ... �� t`' �''`� �u+ � �,:, a.. � , ,��:�z, �,��, _. r ��z,;, -• - -_ .�t�� .� �,��i..�� ,� - ��.�J �3 0 .�'��c ;��a� ., � �►'--^` - � . �i+... •j ji , ^.' .,.. ,'.. . . _ .-. .. ... ... .....5 f..<S : Burlingame, California Street View - Apr 2015 � -'�,,C J f.- �� %�`� ; "� �. � '�� . �aA_ ., 1� � � ,,, {o� ,� , �v_ {a �� -. _. ..._.� ...._ �� , ..r . `.�. ..�..:.^..�... Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google https://www.google.com/maps/(d137.576458,-122.396677,3a,49.3y,325.45h,82.31Udata=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1 s_UAP07GCzEm3rf0ytSC m 5w!2e0!Ti 13312!8i6656!6m 1... 1/1 � �,00�(� 3107 Margarita Ave 8/1/2015 � Goo�le Burlingame, California Street View - Apr 2015 ��°' �a��t�''V c �� ,�. Z;ics�S`'�D\S' Pb�rt'�n ater �� O� O� `o �� .�,.a�ar n� . JL Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google 3074 Atwater Dr 3074 Atwater Dr - Google Maps https:/Nvww.google.com/maps/ cLD37.58W98,-122.398689,3a,50y,172.62h,84.7Udat�!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saQm7DqVcdzrg6yTLaHGDBA2e0!Ti 13312!8i6656!6m 1! 1e1 1/1 8/1/2015 2928 Trousdale Dr - Google Maps � (_,ppc�le 2928 Trousdale Dr Burlingame, California Street View - Apr 2015 : -�`Dn�gSB y- • �8S�1�v� -�� j.�OY t �\i1��S . 7`�a0 � �.A . vt ' ,a,rt<'. , �i 5�,�- Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google https://www.google.com/maps/@37.582012,-122.39677,3a,24.2y,148.33h,8922t/dat�!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY3Bf9Rk6jhNXRv-i IaM N nQ!2e0!Ti 13312!8i6656!6m 1! 1e1 1/1 8/1/2015 � (_,��c�� 3014 Atwater Dr Burlingame, California Street View - Apr 2015 O\�� Q�yv a� O � � ��t > ,�ti>>ti' S � b�st'�n P,ttvrater �► I' O,, o ti � .S. .i,.a��r �i! . �¢' 3014 Aiwater Dr - Google Maps Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google https://www.googie.com/maps/@37.580886,-122.396138,3a,58.2y,205.83h,83.72t/data=!3m6! 1e1 !3m4h sOG5gD KPgivXA7NU6sDk13g2e0!7i 13312!Si6656!6m 1!1e1 1/1 8/1/2015 3054 Atwater Dr - Google Maps Burlingame, California Street View - Apr 2015 �f�\ �C'V Q°' a<+ �A. S]t. ,,,\k: �. �� ' �'t!�`y� 55' �b�st/�� At+�� [�r pr 4 ti �� e� .�..a�at D� . JQ' ti'� � �;� � Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google https://www.google.com/maps/@37.580902,-122.397787,3a,75y,163.9h,83.71Udat�!3m6!1e1 !3m4!1s8QSZL9sWYvRwa4VeH F�ncw2e0!713312!8i6656!6m 1! 1e1 1/1 � �00�1� 3054 Atwater Dr 8/1/2015 � �,ppc�j� 3140 Hillside Dr Street View - Apr 2015 ,� �� k, �y'� fe .� ; � � ., , 9 { � 1 �� d/a o °" °',s+; a Ps � V,, O r � ��iJr .' �' c`�i � �'� ` � ` �7 p \ ��' { 3140 Hiliside Dr - Google Maps Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google https://www.google.com/maps/@37.573332; 122.395531,3a,85.3y,190.13h,81.97Udata=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_5Kz-EBMUIBHotOZ9CgELA!2e0!Ti13312!8i6656!6m1!... 1/1 � - .� _. � � . . _. , . ,. .. .. _'r�r' ,r.y��`%f i ..`� .f .,. . .��".";. , . . _ . . � �_ . . Burlingame, California 8/1/2015 1513 Los Montes Dr - Google Maps � �;Cj��l� 1513 Los Montes Dr F� ~; :_t � . ,.� � �,.,, t� ; � t +. \�4.:�:��,�� . � �.� n� aaa'a=� � ., � � ro r .� � . : _ . . . .,_ . �Y � a' . . � , � �� r � .. �e�., . ,. � Burlingame, California Street View - Apr 2015 �` �� S'�� n .� i ��' �'aPr �L.'"^ t'd �+t 1 �r -�i .. . �.,�Q uar -',�� ''� �� C��3 �'3� :' � ' , �- . �'i . ` ,; ��y�--�.� �,... � �� ' ° � � , � �k�:< t ° � � �� . L n ' . i , , � e �. .'. _.. ._ . . . .�., '; ' a y„ � . _ , - �: rt "�'' ��" s . • "' a � ' w....,:,:. . \4a,`�.�,L11,6� * .. . '. . ' . ,� �� . `111111N` ��y� � ' ... � �...,. -�� Image capture: Apr 2015 O 2015 Google https://www.google.com/maps/@37.573584,-122.394207,3a,75y,225.32h,85.3t/data=!3m6!1 e1!3m4!1 s4wj403BwbbgEOgcOscgzOw!2e0!Ti 13312!8i6656!6m 1! 1e1 1/1 F, ciry o �� , `��'``' '`� , o��`�`�,.9 y��. ,� � �,� 0 �� y 9p�pni City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes Planning Commission BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Monday, July 13, 2015 7:00 PM Council Chambers c. 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor (Dreiling Terrones Architecture, Inc., applicant and architect; Alvin and Jacqueline Chan, property owner) (31 noticed) Staff Contact: Erika Lewit Attachments: 2753 Burlinqview Drive staff reqort 2753 Burlinqview Drive attachments Commissioner Terrones was recused from this item, as he has a business relationship with the applicant. All Commissioners had visited the project site. Commissioners DeMartini and Bandrapalli each met with the neighbor at 2769 Burlingview. P/anning Manager Gardiner presented the staff report. There were no questions of staff. Wayne Lin, DTA, represented the applicant: > Has revisited the issues with the adjacent neighbor at 2759 Burlingview and will visif again once the story poles have been installed. > Garage stair relocated, allowing a conforming garage. Variance no longer requesfed. > Revision to west e/evation proposed to add two side windows to add light into the lower bedroom. Commission questions/comments: > Have the p/ans been shared with the neighbors? (Lin: Yes, have reviewed with neighbors at 2759 Burlingview.) > Pleased the parking variance has been eliminated. Public comments: None. Commission comments: > Moving the setbacks back on both sides will he/p with the impacts on the neighbors. However while massing has been improved will still be a huge building in relation to the neighboring houses. 10 foot plate height on first floor, 9 feet on second floor, whereas most of the neighboring houses are older ranch style with 8-foot ceilings. �ll make it hard to fit into the neighborhood. > Neighbors to right would not have views that would need to be protecfed. Not sure about other homes, but will determine once story poles go up. Story poles will a/so give a sense of the sca/e of the house. > Good job of sculpting the building, not just a rectangular box. Challenge is it sits on top of hill, over the house below it. Naturally sits on a promontory overlooking the house below. > Good job of mitigating the massing and allowing the neighbor to the right to have a sense of openness. City of Burlingame Page 1 Prinied on 8/4/2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes July 13, 2015 Commissioner DeMartini made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Sargent, to place the item on the Regular Action Calendar once the story poles have been installed. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 6- DeMartini, Loftis, Gum, Sargent, Gaul, and Bandrapalli Recused: 1 - Terrones City of Burlingame Page 2 Printed on 8/4/2015 _� � � Dreili��g Ter�ones � � ' Inc. 05-28-2015 To: Burlingame Planning Commission RE: 2753 Burlingview drive — Response to Comments, 4/13/2015 Study Meeting Dear Commissioners and Staff Thank you for your consideration of our project and your comments at the Study Meeting on 4/13/15. We have re- visited the project design with the Applicant (Alvin Chan) and we have made several changes in response to the Commission's comments. In working with Planning Staff, we have collectively determined that it is best to re-visit the Project with the Commission at a second Study Meeting rather than proceed to Action. This should allow us to get some feedback on the Architecture of the Project, prior to revising the story poles and proceeding to Action. We have re-visited the view issues with the adjacent neighbor, Mr. McAloon at 2759 Burlingview Drive, prior to revising the project. If the Architectural revisions are generally acceptable, we will again visit with Mr. McAloon once the story poles have been revised. Below are photographs from the view windows in Mr. McAloon's house. 2747 Burlingview Drive Response to Planning Commission Comments Page 2 The following is a list of the revisions we have made to the Architecture of the Project. Lower Floor Plan: • Main entry wall pushed out to receive new central vertical element also allowing more space in the foyer area • With the enlarged foyer, the garage stair has been relocated to allow for a conforming garage interior length of 21'-2" thus removing the need for any variance request Upper Floor Plan: • Bedroom 4 wall pushed in to provide more setback distance to the adjacent neighbor. Reflected in the South and West elevations • The bedrooms and bath along the North side of the upper floor have been adjusted to allow for the new window configurations and the central vertical element. This revision is also reflected in the North elevation • Master bedroom and Master bathroom have been flipped, thus allowing a master balcony in the front over the existing garage. This also reduces the potential of cutting excessive amounts of the adjacent sequoia tree limbs. This also allowed for a better opportunity to further sculpt the North and East elevations North Elevation: • A unifying central vertical element (with wood siding) has been incorporated into the design. This organizes the main front elevation into three (3) distinct elements: the vertical center piece, with horizontal elements at either side. • Upper right corner of the front fa�ade has been stepped back in response to potential view issues from the adjacent neighbor. The window layout remains the same. • The upper decorative band has been removed and the roof line has been lowered 1'-9" to a total height of 21'-11" above finished floor. • An awning has been added above the lower floor windows • The laundry room window has been revised to a vertical casement window to match the adjacent window layout • A separate awning has been added over the main front entry door. • Upper left corner has been stepped back in various locations with a balcony off the Master Bedroom to create a more sculpted elevation, particularly where the existing large sequoia tree is located. 2747 Burlingview Drive Response to Planning Commission Comments Page 2 • A new awning has been added above the upper level master bedroom balcony doors to give shelter from the weather. • NOTE: This second floor balcony faces the street, does not overlook any rear yards, and is sheltered from the front yard of 2747 Bu�lingview Drive (same owners) by the sequoia tree. East Elevation: • Upper floor elevaGon revised to reflect the new floar plan configuration • The upper right side is stepped back to create the master balcony which is reflected on the North elevation • New awning over the master bathroom that has been relocated to the left side of the elevation as reflected on the upper level floor plan • New window configurations to reflect the new Floor plan layout South Elevation: • Upper left band element removed and roof lowered to reflect the West and North elevations. • The left wall has been pushed in to give more setback distance to the adjacent neighbor • Upper right balcony and awning removed to reflect revised floor plan. A new comer window in the master bathroom with a small awning above, and turning over to the East elevation West Elevation: • Reduced the size of the upper bedroom window facing the adjacent neighbor. Changed to rivo (2) vertical casement windows that are on both sides of the new bed wall • Decorative band element has been removed and roof lowered to re8ect the North and South elevations • The upper level wall is stepped back to allow more setback distance to the adjacent neighbor • The upper left wall is also stepped back even further to reduce the amount of wall mass as viewed from the neighbors office window Thank you for your further consideration of our project. Sincerely, v Wayne Lin, Project M r Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 73, 2015 9. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY a. 833 Alpine Avenue, zoned R-1 Application for Design Review for a se nd story addition to an existing single family dwelling with detached gar (Waldemar Stachnuik, KWS United Technology, Inc., applicant and designer; an and Llndsay Morris, property owners) (47 noticed) Staff Contact: Catherine Barber All Commissioners had visited the project site. There were no ex-parte communi �ons to report. Senior P/anner provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff. Vice-Chair DeMartini opened the public hearing. Wa/demar Stachnuik and Brian Morris represented the pp/icant. Commission questions/comments: > The roof s/opes are significantly ifferent than what exists current/y. Needs to be much more delicafe in its approach to integratin the second-floor roofline into the house. The design detracts from the character of the house. > The front view of the house is eing a/tered in a negative way. > The mass of the side vations is increased by the second f/oor sheer-wall addifion. The dormers shou/d be made subordinat o the main roof. > Noticed the tall fen on one side of the driveway; was it done with permits? (Morris - wasn't aware of the code require nt at the time. Was installed because there is no back-yard; the side-yard serves as the yard area.) to correct this issue. > Agrees with omments about the shed roof. > Has any hought been given to making the windows consistent? (Stachnuik - is difficulf to make them cons' tent. Intends to use the windows with grids to match the windows on the front of the house . �ll inst aluminum-clad wood windows.) > e dormers are very prominent from A/pine. Important to do a correct design. comments: None. Commissioner Loftis made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Sargent, to refer the project to a design reviewer. Vice-Chair DeMartini asked for a voice vote, and the motion carried by the following vote: b. 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review, Parking Variance, and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor (Dreiling Terrones Architecture, Inc., applicant and architect; Alvin and Jacqueline Chan, property owner) (46 noticed) Staff Contact: Erika Lewit Commissioner Terrones indicated that he would recuse himse/f from participating in the discussion regarding this item as his fi�n has a business re/ationship with the applicant. He left the City Council Chambers. Community Development Director Meeker provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff. City of Burlingame Page 7 Printed on 7!1/2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2015 c. general.) > Appears to be possib/e to relocate the stairs into the interior of the house to improve parking. > The home approved on the adjacent property was massed better. > Need to engage with the neighbors regarding view impacts. > Question regarding landscape plan at the front,� will here be turf? Clarify on the landscape plan. > Believes the p/an could be "sculpted" a bit more to make it look less boxy. > Agrees with the comments regarding the garage. > A color rendering wou/d be he/pful in understanding the design. > The design is not tru/y Mid-Century Modern. Vice-Chair DeMartini opened the public hearing. Wayne Hu represented the applicant. Commission questions/comments: > Doesn't find the justification for the parking variance compelling. There is already major reconstruction going on with the project. > ls troubled by the massing of fhe house; take a look at this. (Hu - have looked at the massing in Public comments: Terry McAloon, 2969 Burlingview Drive: expressed concern about size, mass and bu/k of house. Twice the size of most homes in fhe area. The lot is similar in size to all other lots in the area. Concerned about losing the open view and partial Bay view from his house. Requested story poles. Vice-Chair DeMartini closed the public hearing. Commission discussion: > Suggested story po/es following refinements to the design. > Encouraged the applicant to meet with the neighbors when refining. > Require story po/es before coming back for action. > Cou/d warrant design reviewer, but fee/s that the firm has the ability to address the design concerns. > Doesn't feel that conditions warrant the parking variance in this instance, based upon the arguments presented in the application. Commissioner Sargent made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Loftis, to place the item on the regular action calendar when ready for action, with further direction to erect story poles for the project once revisions to the design are completed, prior to consideration by the Commission. Vice-Chair DeMartini asked for a voice vote on the motion, and the motion carried by the following vote: 1700 Devereux Drive, zoned R-1- Application for Design Review and Parking ' ce for a major renovation including a first and second story addition to a sting single family dwelling with an attached garage (Wehmeyer Design icant and architect; Stephen and Kimarie Matthews, property owner 43 noticed) Staff Contact: Catherine Barber Commissioner Terrones returned to the dais. All Commissioners had visit e project site. Vice-Chair DeMartini met with the neighbor at 105 Ray Drive. Commissione rrones met with the applicant. Commissioner Gum met with the neighbor on the /eft side of �te. P/anner Barber provided an overview of the staff report. City of BuAingame Page 8 Printed on 7/7/2015 � 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94D10 a.""•"•`""` p; 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 � www.burlingame.org i APPLICATiON TO THE PLANNING GOMMISSION Type of appiication: Gcl Design Review t7 Variance � Parcel #: oz�-zs�-oso C] Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit ❑ Other: PROJECT ADDRESS: z�53 6urlingview Drive APPUCANT project contact person l� OK to send electronic copies of documents � N��pe: (Same as Aic:hitecq Address: City/StatelZip- Phone: Fax: PROPERTY OWNER projectcontactperson❑ OK to send electronic copies of ducuments ❑ Namg: Aivin Chan Address: �' Q��'�^ •� �rive CitylSta#e/Zip: auriinc�ame � cA � sao�o Phone: sso-5oa-zs�s Fax: E-mail: V.I�vh� �-i�` W�� v��''��''n�� E-fl'lall: alvin@woridcocompany.com ARCHITECT/DESIGNER projectcoOtactperson� OK ro send etectronic copies ot documents ❑ Name: Richard Terrones /�CId�BSS: '1103 Juanita Ave City/State/Zip: Bur�inyame i ca i saoio Phone: 65a-343-9685 FaX: 650-558-1725 . �,,d � L..t' �-mal�: rt@dtaa�f.com \ �f��LC�� ' ` � -!r,�u,�.rdiE � �urlingame Business License #: ' ' ;''`'�- r�!'' PRU.IECT DESCRiPTION: AddR(on and alteration of existin residence AFFADAVIT/51GNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and b lief. App)icanYs signature: u Date: � Z�1 �{ I am aware of the proposed applicati and hereby nze the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property owner's signature: --"'— Date: `�' � � � � Date su6mitted: � 2- 22 + T-- ,t Verification that the project architect/designer has a valid Burlingame business license will he required by the Finance Depa�tment at the time application fees are paid. S:�HANDOUTS�PCRpplicatfan. doc ��k, Project Comments Date: To: From: March 13, 2015 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 X Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 0 Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor adition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: Revised plans dated March 11, 2015 No further comments. All conditions of approval as stated in the review dated 12-23-2014 will apply to this project. Reviewed by Date: 3-13-2015 R Project Comments Date: To: From: Subject: Staff Review: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 X Building Division (650) 558-7260 0 Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 0 City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing includes a first floor addition and a Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: December 22, 2014 single family dwelling which new second floor at 2753 027-261-030 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 D cember 31, 2013 then this project must comply with the 2013 California � uilding Codes. ;�., s of January 1, 2014, SB 407 (2009) requires non-compliant plumbing fixtures ��" to be replaced by water-conserving plumbing fixtures when a property is ' undergoing alterations or improvements. This law applies to all residential and commercial property built prior to January 1, 1994. Details can be found at htt�//www.leginfo.ca.gov/�ub/09-10/bill/sen/sb 0401- 0450�sb 407 bill 20091011 cha�tered.html. Revise the plans to show compliance with this requirement. 3) Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2013 California Energy Efficiency Standards. Go to http://www.enerqv.ca.gov/title24/2013standards/ for publications and details. 4) 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 an be found. lace 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.) . _ ... . _ . ....,. Co►�struction hours in fhe City Public right-of-way are limited to v�eekdays and non-City Holidays between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. � \.___.._._. _ -_ __..__._ _ .. _ . . ._._ .. __.. _ ._._ ... ... ......... .. ._ ._.._ . . . . _ _ _ ____.__.. _ __ Note: Construction hours for work in the public right of way must now be included on the plans. 6) On the first page of the plans specify the following: "Any hidden conditions that require work to be performed beyond the scope of the building permit issued for these plans may require further City approvals including review by the Planning Commission." The building owner, project designer, and/or contractor must submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically illustrated on the Job Copy of the plans prior to performing the work. 7) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business license. 8) Provide a fully dimensioned site plan which shows the true property boundaries, the location of all structures on the property, existing driveways, and on-site parking. 9) Provide existing and proposed elevations. 10)This project will be considered a New Building because, according to the City of Burlingame Municipal code, "when additions, alterations or repairs within any twelve-month period exceed fifty percent of the current replacement value of an existing building or structure, as determined by the building official, such building or structure shall be made in its entirety to conform with the requirements for new buildings or structures." This building must comply with the 2013 California Building Code for new structures. BMC 18.07.020 Note: Any revisions to the plans approved by the Building Division must be submitted to, and approved by, the Building Division prior to the implementation of any work not specifically shown on the plans. Significant delays can occur if changes made in the field, without City approval, necessitate further review by City departments or the Planning Commission. Inspections cannot be scheduled and will not be performed for work that is not shown on the Approved plans. 11)Due to the extensive nature of this construction project the Certificate of Occupancy will be rescinded once construction begins. A new Certificate of Occupancy will be issued after the project has been finaled. No occupancy of the building is to occur until a new Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. 12)Provide a complete demolition plan that includes a legend and indicates existing walls and features to remain, existing walls and features to be demolished, and new walls and features. NOTE: A condition of this project approval is that the Demolition Permit will not be issued and, and no work can begin (including the removal of � building components), until a Building Permit has been issued for the project. The property owner is responsible for assuring that no work is authorized or performed. 13)Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines 14) how the dimensions to adjacent structures. ooms that could be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. Specify the /ocation and the net clear opening height and width of all required egress windows on the elevation drawin_qs. 2013 California Residential Code (CRC) §R310. Note: The area labeled "Office" is a room that can be used for sleeping purposes d, as such, must comply with this requirement. icate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the Department of Public Works. 17)Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are considered in calculating the allowable lot coverage. Consult the Planning Department for details if your project entails landings more than 30" in height. 18)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 2013 CBC § 1009. 19)Provide lighting at all exterior landings. NOTE: A written response to the items noted here and plans that specifically address items 2, 5, 15, and 16 must be re-submitted before this project can move forward for Planning Commission action. The written response must include clear direction reqardinq where the requested information can be found on the plans. �, Reviewed b�--�� Joe C�C—�O i ' 650f,g58-7270 Date: 12-23-2014 2013 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING CODE RESIDENTIAL CHECKLIST �Ve�r residentic�l buitdin+�s rr�ust be d�signed fic► inc�trd� the Gre�n Eiuildi�7g mandc��ory measures speci�ied ir� chis checkltst. t h�se Gr-e�r� c�uilding rnanc�arr�ry measu��s ��rlsr� ap�aly tt� s�r�difiic�n.� ar ctlteratians of existi;�q resid�nti�rl buil�'incls �rher� th� aeldr�ior� a; alt?ratian rncreases t17e buildings concliiianecl ur�ea, volume, or size. These req�rirernents appl�� anly to ihe speeific area af addrt�on ar alteratian. Building Permit Number: I � Site Address: 7�-!"�'3 ��t-�1r��—�� - -- - -._ _ _ In the column labeled "P/an Reference" specify where each Measure can be found on the plans. Green Building Measure Plan Reference ` ` ' SITE'bEVELOPMENT (2013 CGC §4.106) ` Aplanhasbeendeveloped,andwillbeimplemented,tomanagestormwaterdrainageduring �� ` construction. CGC §4.106.2 & §4.106.3 ENERGY EFFICIENCY ` (2013 CGC §4.2 and the 2013 California Building Energy Efficiency Standards) ` 2013 Energy Code performance compliance documentation must be provided in 8-1/2" X 11" format and must be replicated on the plans. Walls with 2 X 6 and larger framing require R-19 insulation §150.0 (c) 2 Hot water piping insulation §150.0 (j) 2 A ii Lighting — new mandatory requirements for indoor rooms. §150.0 (k) Duct insulation (R-6) required §150.0 (m)1 Duct leakage testing — 6% with air handler and 4% without air handler §150.0 (m) 11 Return duct design/fan power, airflow testing, and grill sizing requirements §150.0(m)13 Water heating— 120 volt receptacle < 3 ft., Cat III or fV vent, and gas supply line capacity of at least 200,000 Btu / hour §150.0 (n) New third-party HERS verification for ventilation and indoor air quality §150.0 (o) New mandatory U-factor (0.58) for fenestration and skylights §150.0 (q) Luminaire efficiency levels 2013 California Energy Code Table 150.0 B Refrigerant charge verification for ducted package units, mini-splits, and other units §150.1 (c) 7 Radiant barrier now required in Climate Zone 3§150.1 (c) 2 Reduce U-factor (0.32) and SHGC (0.25) for high performance windows §150.1 (c) 3 A �. �,2, �� iv1AR 1 1 2015 CIT`( Gr BUf�LIi�GAME r�n�-, ni nninii+�ir_ n��i Green Building Measure Plan Reference WATER EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION (2013 CGC §4.3) Plumbing fixtures (water closets and urinals) will comply with the following: 1. The effective fiush volume of all water closets will not exceed 1.28 gai / flush. �2� � 2013 CGC §4.303.1.1 2. The effective flush volume of urinals will not exceed 0.5 gal / ffush. 2013 CGC §4.303.1.2 The fittings for faucets and showerheads will have all required standards listed on the plans; 1.5 GPM for faucets and 2.0 GPM for showers. 2013 CGC §4.303.1.3 and 2013 CGC §4.303.1.4 An automatic irrigation system controller for landscaping will be provided by the builder and installed at the time of final inspection. 2013 CGC §4.304.1 _ _ _ ENHANCED:'DURABILITYAND REDUCED MAINTENANCE (2013'CGC.§4.406) ` ' Annular spaces around pipes, electric cables, conduits or other openings in sole/bottom plates at exteriorwalls will be rodent-proofed by closing such openings with cement mortar, concrete ___ masonry, or similar method acceptable to the enforcing agency. 2013 CGC §4.406.1 , CONSTRUCTION WASTE RED.UCTION, DISFOSAL, AND RECYCLING (2Q13 CGC §4.408) ' A minimum of 60%ofthe non-hazardous construction and demolition wastegenerated atthe site will be diverted to an offsite recycle, diversion, or salvage facility per City of Burlingame Ordinance # 1704 and 2013 CGC §4.408 � BUILDING,MAINTENAN.C.E AND;OPE. RATION (2013 CGG§4.410) An operation and maintenance manual will be provided to the building occupant or owner. 2013 �. �. � CGC §4.410.1 FIREPLACES (2013 CGC §4;503) Any gas fireplaces will be direct-vent, sealed-combustible type. 2013 CGC §4.503.1 Any wood stove or pellet stove will comply with US EPA Phase II emission limits. 2013 CGC §4.503.1 `POLI:UTANT CONTROL (CGC §4.504) At the time of rough installation, during storage on the construction site, and until final startup of the heating, cooling and ventilating equipment, all duct and other related airdistribution componentsopeningswillbecovered with tape, plastic, sheet metals, or other methods acceptable to the enforcing agency to reduce the amount of water, dust, or debris that may enter the system. 2013 CGC §4.504.1 Adhesives, sealants, and caulks used on the project shall follow local and regional air pollution or air quality management district standards. 2013CGC §4.504.2.1 �� Paints and coatings will comply with VOC limits per CGC §4.504.2.2 � p. fl Aerosol paints and coatings will meetthe Product-weighted MIR limitsfor ROC and other requirements. 2013CGC §4.504.2.3 �`� �� Documentation provided verifies compliance with VOC finish materials. 2013 CGC §4.504.2.4 �� Carpet system installed in the building interior will meet the testing and product requirements found in the 2013 California Green Building Code. 2013 CGC §4.504.3 -�'t�- � Where resilient flooring is installed, at least 80% of the floor area receiving resilient flooring will comply with the California Green Building Code requirements.2013 CGC §4.504.4 �� Hardwood plywood, particleboard, and medium density fiberboard composite wood products used on the interior and exterior of the building will comply with the low formaldehyde emission �p � standards. 2013 CGC §4.504.5 Green Building Measure Plan Reference INTERIOR MOISTURE CONTROL (20.13 CGC §4.505) A capillary breakwill be installed if a slab on grade foundation system is used. The use of a 4" thick base of%:" or larger clean aggregate under a 6 mil vapor retarder with joint lapped not less than 6" will be provided unless an engineered design has been submitted and approved by the Building Division. 2013 CGC §4.505.2 and California Residential Code (CRC) §R506.2.3 Building materials with visible signs of water damage will not be installed. Wall and ffoor framing will not be enclosed when the framing members exceed 19% moisture content. �Q.� Moisture content will be verified prior to finish material being applied. 2013 CGC §4.505.3 INDOORAIR.QUALITY:AND:EXHAUST (2013 CGC§4.506) Exhaust fans that are ENERGY STAR-compliant, ducted and that terminate outside the building _will.be. provided in every. bathcoom. 2013 CGC §4.506.1 _ __ __._......__ _ __ ____ _ . ._ ... _ __ _ __ _ ._ _ Unless functioning as a component of a whole-house ventilation system, fans must be �' �-� controlled by a humidistat. 2013 CGC §4.506.1 ENVIRONMENTAL COMFORT (CGC §4.507) The heating and air-conditioning system will be sized, designed and have their equipment selected using the following methods: 1. Heat Loss/Heat Gain values in accordance with ANSI/ACCA 2 Manual J-2004 or equal; 2. Duct systems are sized according to ANSI/ACCA 1, Manual D-2009 or equivalent; ��'� 3. Select heating and cooling equipment in accordance with ANSI/ACCA 3, Manual S-2004 or equivalent. 2013 CGC §4.507 INSTALLER SPECIAL INSPECTOR QUALIFICATION (2013 CGC §702) ': ' HVAC system installerswill betrained and certified inthe proper installation of HVAC systems and equipment by a recognized training/certification program. 2013 CGC §702.1 �� -� VERIFICATION (2013 CGC §703) Upon request, verification, of compliance with this code may include construction documents, plans, specifications, builde r or insta ller certification, inspection reports, or other methods acceptable to the Building Division that will show substantial conformance with the 2013 Code requirements. �-� 2013 CGC §703.1 Responsible Designer's Declaration Statement . Contractor's Declaration Statement I hereby certify that this project has been designed to I hereby certify, as the builder or installer, under permit meet the requirements of the 2013 Green Building listed herein, that this project will be constructed to Code. meet the requirements of the 2013 Green Building Code. Name: �� -({�,ip�fj Name: Address: `�� p� � Address: City/State/Zip Code �D , ti, U�� G�� City/State/Zip Code TN=— Signature: Signature: Date: �3, �c� , l � Date: \ Project Comments Date: To: From: March 13, 2015 X Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 0 Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor adition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: Revised plans dated March 11, 2015 Responses to previous comments are acceptable. Reviewed by: V V Date: 3/18/2015 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 X Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 0 Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 1. The project site is 10,000 square feet which requires permanent stormwater treatment measures. You can find more information and guidelines at: http://www.flowstobay.orq/newdevelopment In addition, no additional storm runoff is allowed from the post-construction site. Please provide plans showing how this will be satisfied. 2. Please show all proposed utilities on the site plan. 3. On the construction schedule, please update and include the following statement: Construction hours in the City Public right-of-way are limited to weekdays and non-Ciiy Holidays between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Reviewed by: M. Quan Date: 12/23/14 � SAN M.�TEO COl1NTYWIDE Water Pollution Prevention Program C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) Stormwater Controls for Development Projects Chan/ Yuen Residence Project Information I.A Enter ProjeCt Data (For "C.3 Regulated Projects,"data will be reported in the municipality's stormwaterAnnual Report.) Project Name: Project Address & Cross St.: Project APN: Applicant Name: Applicant Phone CITY/COUNTY OF Dept. Address Phone website Case Number: 2753 Burlingview Drive, Burlingame 94010 and Summit Drive 027-261-030 Wayne Lin 650-696-1200 Project Watershed: Applicant Email Address: wl@dtaanf.com Development type: � Single Family Residential: A stand-alone home that is not part of a larger project. (check all that apply) � ❑ Single Family Residential: Two or more lot residential development. ❑ Multi-Family Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial, Manufacturing ❑ Mixed-Use ❑ Streets, Roads, etc. ❑`RedevelopmenY as defined by MRP: creating, adding and/or replacing exterior existing impervious surface on a site where past development has occurred.z ❑`Special land use categories' as defined by MRP: (1) auto service facilities3, (2) retail gasoline outlets, (3) restaurants, (4) uncovered parking area (stand-alone or part of a larger project) ❑ Institutions: schools, libraries, jails, etc. ;� � �""� � � r / � � �`'� ❑ Parks and trails, camp grounds, other recreational � �/ �"� ❑ Agricultural, wineries � �'�.�1!1�? � 1 2�� ❑ Kennels, Ranches ❑ Other, Please specify ,�I"j'r U; BURLWGAME Project Description°: Addition of second floor and interior alterations to existing house �.i-�i-,_pl._A.NNING D1ti/ (Also note any past or future phases of the project. ) I.A.1 Total Area of Site: .22 acres �•A•2 Total Area of land disturbed during construction (include clearing, grading, excavating and stockpile area):_.17 acres. Certification: I certify that the information provided on this form is correct and acknowledge that, should the project exceed the amount of new and/or replaced impervious surface provided in this form, the as-built project may be subject to additional improvements. � Attach Preliminary Calculations ❑ Attach Final Calculations ❑ Attach copy of site plan showing areas Name of person completing the form: Wayne Lin Title: Sign Date: 03-09-2015 Phone number: 650-696-1200 Email address: wlCc�dtaanf.com � Subdivisions or contiguous, commonly owned lots, for the construction of two or more homes developed within 1 year of each other are considered common plans of development and are subject to C.3 requirements. 2 Roadway projects that replace existing impervious surface are subject to C.3 requirements only if one or more lanes of travel are added. 3 See Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes here 4 Project description examples: 5-story office building, industrial warehouse, residential with five 4-story buildings for 200 condominiums, etc. 1 Final Draft October 31, 2014 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist I.B Is the project a"C.3 Regulated ProjecY' per MRP Provision C.3.b? 1.B.1 Enter the amount of impervious surfaces Retained, Replaced and/or Created by the project: Table 1.B.1 /mpervious and Pervious Surfaces I.B.7.a 1.6.1.b I.B.1.c I.B.1.d Existing Existing New Pre-Project Impervious Impervious Impervious Impervious Surface to be SurFace to be Surface to be Surface Retained6 Replaceds Createds Type of Impervious Surface (sq.ft.) s.ft. s.ft. s.ft. Roof area(s) 2505 0 2373 0 Imperviouss sidewalks, patios, paths, driveways, streets 1146 723 0 0 Imperviouss uncovered parking� 0 0 0 0 Totals of Impervious Surfaces: 3651 723 2373 0 I.B.1.f - Total Impervious Surface Replaced and Created (sum of totals for columns 1.6.1.c and 1.6.1.d): 2373 Pre-Project Pervious Surface Type of Pervious Surface (sq.ft.) Landscaping 6349 Pervious Paving 0 Green Roof 0 Totals of Pervious Surfaces: 6349 Total Site Area (Total Impervious+Total Pervious=l.A.1) 10000 I.B.2 Please review and attach additional worksheets as required below using the Total Impervious Surface Replaced and Created in cell I.B.1.f from Table I.B.1 above and other factors: I.B.1.e Post-Project Impervious Surface (sq.ft.) 2373 723 0 3101 Post-project Pervious Surface (sq.ft.) 6042 857 0 6899 10000 Check all that a I Check Attach pp y' If Yes Worksheet 1.B.2.a Does this project involve any earthwork? � q 1.B.2.b Is 1.6.1.f greater than or equal to 2,500 sq.ft? IfYES, the Projectis subject to Provision C.3.i. � g, C 1.B.2.c Is the total Existing Impervious Surface to be Replaced (column I.B.1.c) 50 percent or more of the total Pre-Project Impervious SurFace (column I.B.1.a)? � If YES, site design, source control and treatment requirements apply to the whole site; if NO, these requirements apply only to the impervious surface created and/or replaced. 1.6.2.d Is this project one of the Special Land Use Categories (box checked in section I.A. above) and � D, D-1, D-2 is 1.B.1.f reater than or equal to 5,000 Sq.ft? If YES, project is a C.3 Regulated Project. 1.B2.e Is I.B.1.f greater than or equal to 10,000 sq.ft? IfYEs, projectis a C.3 Regulated Project. ❑ D, D-1, D-2 1.B.2.f Is I.B.1.f greater than or equal to 43,560 sq.ft. (1 acre)? If YES, project may be subject to � E Hydromodification Management requirements. 1.B.2.9 Is I.A.2 (pg. 1) greater than or equal to 1 acre? If YES, obtain coverage under the state's Construction General Permit and submit to the municipality a copy of your Notice of Intent. ❑ See: www.swrcb.ca.qov/wafer rssues/proprams✓stormwater/construction.shtml. I.B.2.h Is this a Special Project or does it have the potential to be a Special Project? p F I.B.2.i Is this project a High Priority Site? (Determined by the Permitting Jurisdiction. High Priority Sites can include those located in or within 100 feet of a sensitive habitat, ASBS, or body of ❑ G water, or on sites with slo es, and are sub�ect to monthl ins ections from Oct 1 to A ril 30. 6.2.10 For Municipal Staff Use Only (Alternative Certification, O&M Submittals, Project Close Out) p G 5 Per the MRP, pavement that meets the following definition of pervious pavement is NOT an impervious surface. Pervious pavement is defined as pavement that stores and infiltrates rainfall at a rate equal to immediately surrounding unpaved, landscaped areas, or that stores and infiltrates the rainfall runoff volume described in Provision C.3. 6"Retained" means to leave existing impervious surfaces in place, unchanged; "Replaced" means to install new impervious surface where existing impervious surface is removed anywhere on the same property; and "Created" means the amount of new impervious surface being proposed which exceeds the total existing amount of impervious surface at the property. � Uncovered parking includes the top level of a parking structure. 2 Final Draft October 31, 2014 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Worksheet A C6 — Construction Stormwater BMPs Identify Plan sheet showing the appropriate construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) used on this project: (Applies to all projects with earthwork) Yes Plan Sheet Best Management Practice (BMP) � ER1.1 Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including pavement cutting wastes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemicals, wash water or sediments, rinse water from architectural copper, and non-stormwater discharges to storm drains and watercourses. � ER1.1 Store, handle, and dispose of construction materials/wastes properly to prevent contact with stormwater. � ERI.I Do not clean, fuel, or maintain vehicles on-site, except in a designated area where wash water is contained and treated. ►�1 ' ►1 ' Train and provide instruction to all employees/subcontractors re: construction BMPs. Protect all storm drain inlets in vicinity of site using sediment controls such as berms, fiber rolls. or filters. � ER1.1 Limit construction access routes and stabilize desiqnated access points. � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 Attach the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program's construction BMP plan sheet to project plans and require contractor to implement the applicable BMPs on the qlan sheet. Use temporary erosion controls to stabilize all denuded areas until permanent erosion controls are established. Delineate with field markers clearing limits, easements, setbacks, sensitive or critical areas, buffer zones, trees, and drainaqe courses. � ER1.1 Provide notes, specifications, or attachments describing the following: ■ Construction, operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment controls, include inspection frequency; • Methods and schedule for grading, excavation, filling, clearing of vegetation, and storage and disposal of excavated or cleared material; ■ Specifications for vegetative cover & mulch, include methods and schedules for planting and fertilization; ■ Provisions for temporary and/or permanent irrigation. � ER1.1 Perform clearing and earth moving activities only during dry weather. � ER1.1 Use sediment controls or filtration to remove sediment when dewatering and obtain all necessary permits. � ER1.1 Trap sediment on-site, using BMPs such as sediment basins or traps, earthen dikes or berms, silt fences, check dams, soil blankets or mats, covers for soil stock piles, etc. ►/ ' ►/ ' Divert on-site runoff around exposed areas; divert off-site runoff around the site (e.g., swales and dikes). Protect adjacent properties and undisturbed areas from construction impacts using vegetative buffer strips, sediment barriers or filters, dikes, mulchinq, or other measures as appropriate. 3 Final Draft October 31, 2014 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Worksheet B C3 - Source Controls Select appropriate source controls and identify the detail/plan sheet where these elements are shown. Detail/Plan Features that require Source Control Measures Yes Sheet No. source control measures Refer to Local Source Control List for detailed re uirements ❑ Storm Drain Mark on-site inlets with the words "No Dumping! Flows to Bay" or equivalent. ❑ Floor Drains Plumb interior floor drains to sanitary sewer$ [or prohibit]. ❑ Parking garage Plumb interior parking garage floor drains to sanitary sewer.a � L1.1 Landscaping ■ Retain existing vegetation as practicable. • Select diverse species appropriate to the site. Include plants that are pest- and/or disease-resistant, drought-tolerant, and/or attract beneficial insects. ■ Minimize use of pesticides and quick-release fertilizers. ■ Use efficient irri ation s stem; desi n to minimize runoff. ❑ Pool/Spa/Fountain Provide connection to the sanitary sewer to facilitate draining.e ❑ Food Service Equipment Provide sink or other area for equipment cleaning, which is: (non-residential) ■ Connected to a grease interceptor prior to sanitary sewer discharge.e ■ Large enough for the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned. ■ Indoors or in an outdoor roofed area designed to prevent stormwater run-on and run-off, and si ned to re uire e ui ment washin in this area. ❑ Refuse Areas ■ Provide a roofed and enclosed area for dumpsters, recycling containers, etc., designed to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff. ■ Connect any drains in or beneath dumpsters, compactors� and tallow bin areas serving food service facilities to the sanitary sewer. ❑ Outdoor Process Activities 9 Perform process activities either indoors or in roofed outdoor area, designed to revent stormwater run-on and runoff, and to drain to the sanita sewer.6 ❑ Outdoor EquipmenU ■ Cover the area or design to avoid pollutant contact with stormwater runoff. Materials Storage ■ Locate area only on paved and contained areas. ■ Roof storage areas that will contain non-hazardous liquids, drain to sanitary sewere, and contain b berms or similar. ❑ Vehicle/ Equipment ■ Roofed, pave and berm wash area to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff, Cleaning plumb to the sanitary sewere, and sign as a designated wash area. ■ Commercial car wash facilities shall dischar e to the sanita sewer.e ❑ Vehicle/ Equipment Repair ■ Designate repair/maintenance area indoors, or an outdoors area designed to and Maintenance prevent stormwater run-on and runoff and provide secondary containment. Do not install drains in the secondary containment areas. ■ No floor drains unless pretreated prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer.e ■ Connect containers or sinks used for arts cleanin to the sanita sewer.e ❑ Fuel Dispensing Areas ■ Fueling areas shall have impermeable surface that is a) minimally graded to prevent ponding and b) separated from the rest of the site by a grade break. ■ Canopy shall extend at least 10 ft. in each direction from each pump and drain awa from fuelin area. ❑ Loading Docks ■ Cover and/or grade to minimize run-on to and runoff from the loading area. ■ Position downspouts to direct stormwater away from the loading area. ■ Drain water from loading dock areas to the sanitary sewer.8 ■ Install door skirts between the trailers and the buildin . � L1.1 Fire Sprinklers Design for discharge of fire sprinkler test water to landscape or sanitary sewer.8 � L1.1 Miscellaneous Drain or • Drain condensate of air conditioning units to landscaping. Large air Wash Water conditioning units may connect to the sanitary sewer.e ■ Roof drains from equipment drain to landscaped area where practicable. ■ Drain boiler drain lines, roof to e ui ment, all wash water to sanita sewer.8 ❑ Architectural Copper Rinse ■ Drain rinse water to landscaping, discharge to sanitary sewere, or collect and Water dis ose ro erl offsite. See fl er "Re uirements for Architectural Co er." 8 Any connection to the sanitary sewer system is subject to sanitary district approval. 9 Businesses that may have outdoor process activities/equipment include machine shops, auto repair, industries with pretreatment facilities. 4 Final Draft October31, 2014 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Worksheet C Low Impact Development — Site Design Measures Select Appropriate Site Design Measures (Required for C.3 Regulated Projects; all other projects are encouraged to implement site design measures, which may be required at municipality discretion.) Projects that create and/or replace 2,500 — 10,000 sq.ft. of impervious su►face, and stand-alone single family homes that create/replace 2,500 sq.ft. ormore of impervious surface, must include one of Site Design Measures a through f(Provision C.3.i requirements).10 Larger projects must also include applicable Site Design Measures g through i. Consult with municipal staff about requirements for yourproject. Select appropriate site design measures and Identify the Plan Sheet where these elements are shown. Yes Plan Sheet Number � a. Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels and use rainwater for irrigation or other non-potable use. � Al.l b. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. ❑ c. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. ❑ d. Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. � L1.1 e. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with pervious or permeable surfaces. � f. Construct bike lanes, driveways and/or uncovered parking lots with pervious surfaces. g. Limit disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems; minimize � compaction of highly permeable soils; protect slopes and channels; and minimize impacts from stormwater and urban runoff on the biological integrity of natural drainage systems and water bodies; � A1.1 h. Conserve natural areas, including existing trees, other vegetation and soils. � L1.1 i. Minimize impervious surfaces. Regulated Projects can also consider the following site design measures to reduce treatment system sizing: Yes Plan Sheet Number ❑ j. Self-treating area (see Section 4.2 of the C.3 Technical Guidance) ❑ k. Self-retaining area (see Section 4.3 of the C.3 Technical Guidance) ❑ I. Plant or preserve interceptor trees (Section 4.1, C.3 Technical Guidance) 10 See MRP Provision C.3.a.i.(6) for non-C.3 Regulated Projects, C.3.C.i.(2)(a) for Regulated Projects, C.3.i for projects that create/replace 2,500 to 10,000 sq.ft. of impervious surface and stand-alone single family homes that create/replace 2,500 sq.ft. or more of impervious surface. 5 Final Draft October 31, 2014 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 0 Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 X Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the city's stormwater NPDES permit to prevent construction activity stormwater pollution. Project proponents shall ensure that all contractors implement appropriate and effective Best Management Practices (BMPs) during all phases of construction, including demolition. When submitting plans for a building permit, please include a list of construction BMPs as project notes, preferably, on a separate full size (2'x 3' or larger), plan sheet. A downloadable electronic file is available at: http://www.flowstobay.org/Construction Please contact Kiley Kinnon for assistance at: (650) 342-3727 Reviewed by: KJK Date: 12/23/14 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 0 Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 i� Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 0 City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly — Schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building Plans prior to approval indicating location of the device after the split between domestic and fire protection lines. 3. All sprinkler drainage shall be placed into landscaping areas. 4. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. Reviewed by: � Date: Z � �.cr./y Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 55�7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 X Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request fur Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which indudes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 1. No existing tree over 48 inches in circumference at 54 inches form base of tree may be removed without a Protected Tree Permit from the Parks Division. (558-7330) 2. Submit full size copy of arborist report for review. 3. Landscape plan is required to meet `Water Conservation in Landscape Regulations° (attached). Irrigation Plan required for Building permit. Audit due for Final. Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 1/8/15 ti OUTDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST e e' o o � o e � o 0 I ce ' that the subject project meets the specified requirements of the Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance. t�� • 0'°1 • 2,�� Signature Date �I�.i��n t� ��:I��"'ll �.i.il �.l .'' �� '� - - ` .. .. , . _. -' . .. . ._�.. . _. ... -. ... ._� _ . . ..... . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. .. _., - � Single Family ❑ Multi-Family ❑ Commercial ❑ Institutional ❑ Irrigation only ❑ Industrial ❑ Other: Applfcant Name (print): �JlC�1�RD ZC-'�-o►-�ES Contact Phone #: (p'��p - lo��p •�'Zcx� Project Site Address: Z�tj�j '��l,�N(,�,V�E1� �pj2J•� AgencyReview Project Area (sq.ft_ or acre): �a �� # of Units: � # of Meters: ` (Pass) ` (Fail) ;' � � � � :j �,,, � . ;� � : Total Landscape Area (sq.ft.)• I� , �,� �iii; , r: , �; . ❑ ❑ lei�,� � ';�hi } �..'(iUn�,,n f.l�li� - � `�� .,1�.1i � i � �i��. .? i.�.:�, ��t"j� c -+jjSY � } 'i'� �,� `i1��: Turf Irrigated Area (sq.ft.): ` ❑ ❑ ,�' ,� ��'�: .' , - Non-TurflrrigatedArea (sq.ft.: %j�� ❑ ❑ �� : �i o3lz = � �2 �ii � �,� �. k � � ;r � ; ` � �j Special Landscape Area (SLA) (sq.ft.): O O � 1-s. : �� nr;,a ,;�. ' Water Feature Surface Area (sq.ft.): lii:q� o�_�. _.�''� �.4r ila>>( a�r°� �;: ( s� I i isa�..�,L� ,�� I",�io'i, t� ;;i in� �J" .);I. Turf Less than 25% of the landscape area is � Yes '1 ❑' •❑ turf ❑ No, See Water Budget All turf areas are > 8 feet wide ❑ Yes ', O '❑ All turF is planted on slopes < 25% ❑ Yes ❑ ❑` Non-Turf At least 80% of non-turf area is native Yes ❑.' ❑ or low water use plants ❑ No, See Water Budget Hydrozones Plants are grouped by Hydrozones '§a Yes ❑ ❑. Mulch At least 2-inches of mulch on exposed 6� Yes ❑ ❑ soil surFaces lrrigation System Efficiency 70% ETo (100% ETo for SLAs) ❑ Yes 0-` ❑• No overspray or runoff �Yes `D : ❑ Irrigation System Design System efficiency > 70% 0 Yes ❑ 0 Automatic, self-adjusting irrigation ❑ Nq not required for Tier 1 ❑ ❑ control lers Yes Moisture sensor/rain sensor shutoffs � Yes ❑ ❑ No sprayheads in < 8-ft wide area. ,�Yes ❑ '❑' Irrigation Time System only operates between 8 PM �Yes ❑ ❑. and 10 AM Metering Separate irrigation meter ❑ No, not required because < 5,000 sq.ft. ❑ ❑ �ffi Yes Swimming Pools / Spas Cover highly recommended ❑ Yes =❑ 0 � No, not required Water Features Recirculating D Yes ❑ ❑ Less than 10% of landscape area ❑ Yes ❑: ❑ Documentation Checklist ❑ Yes ❑ : ❑ Landscape and Irrigation Design Plan ❑ Prepared by applicant ❑'' '❑ ($�Prepared by professional Water Budget (optional) ❑ Prepared by applicant ❑ 0, ❑ Prepared by professional Audit Post-installation audit completed ❑ Completed by applicant ❑ ❑ ,�Completed by professiona�k � �"� `�� .. �+/i.AR � 1 2015 CITY OF BURLiNGAME ,��r1 ni nnie��..ir� -.e„ OUTDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST o m- a a - a a �° • � Auditor: �-: �, � i ,.i,�� ,r s,��, ��,�` �, � ilt �'.1 t Materials Received and Reviewed: 0 Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance ❑ Outdoor Water Use Efficiency Checklist ❑ Outdoor Water Use Efficiency Checklist ❑ Water Budget ❑ Water Budget Calculation Worksheets ❑ Landscape Plan ❑ Plant List ❑ Post-Installation Audit ❑ Other: Date Reviewed: �:v,� i sk+ =:� � a;; �� c�:� � ,�a�;ij, � ,,- ❑ Follow up required (explain): ❑ Drip irrigation ❑ Self-adjusting Irrigation Controller Date Resubmitted: ❑ Plant palate Date Approved: ❑ Three (3) inches of mulch Dedicated Irrigation Meter Required: ❑ Soil amendment (e.g., compost) Meter sizing: ❑ Grading ❑ Pool and/or spa cover ❑ Dedicated irrigation meter ❑ Other: Comments: � Selected Definitions: Tier 1 New construction and rehabilitated landscapes with irrigated landscape areas between 1,000 and 2,500 square feet requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check or design review, or new or expanded water service. Tier 2 New construction and rehabilitated landscapes with irrigated landscape areas greater than 2,500 square feet requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check or design review. ETo Reference evapotranspiration means the quantity of water evaporated from a large field of four-to seven-inch tall, cool-season grass that is well watered. Reference evapotranspiration is used as the basis of estimating water budgets so that regional differences in climate can be accommodated. SLA Special Landscaped Area. Includes edible plants, areas irrigated with recycled water, surface water features using retycled water and areas dedicated to active play such as parks, sports fields, golf courses, and where turf provides a playing surface. Professional Professional is a"certified professional" or "authorized professional" that is a certified irrigation designer, a certified landscape irrigation auditor, a licensed landscape architect, a licensed landscape contractor, a ficensed professionat engineer, or any other person authorized by the state to design a landscape, an irrigation system, or authorized to complete a water budget, irrigation survey or irrigation audit. Water Feature A design element where open water performs an aesthetic or recreational function. Water features include ponds, lakes, waterfalls, fountains, artificial streams, spas, and swimming pools (where water is artificially supplied). ► Kielty Arborist Services Certified Arborist WI;#0476A P.O. Box 6187 San Mateo, CA 94403 650-515-9783 December 15, 2014 Drelling Tertones Architecture Inc. Atm: Mr. Carlos Rojas 1103 Juanita Avenue Burlingame, CA 940] 0 Site: 2753 Burlingview, Burlingame, CA Dear Mr. Rojas, As requested on Monday, November 17, 2014, I visited the above site for the purpose of inspecting and commenting on the trees. A new home is planned for this site and your concern as to the future health and safety of the trees has prompted this visit. An air spade was used to dig an exploratory trench along the existing house to help detect root damage and possible future root loss. Method: All inspections were made from the ground; the tree was not climbed for this inspection. The tree in question was located on a site plan provided by you. The trees were then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). Each tree was given a condition rating for form and vitality. The trees' condition rating is based on 50 percent vitality and 50 percent form, using the following scale. 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poor 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The height of the trees were measured using a Nikon Forestry 550 Hypsometer. The spread was paced off. Comments and recommendations for future maintenance are provided. An Exploratory trench was dug to help locate roots and help predict root loss. A Supersonic Air Knife was used for the trenching. The air knife uses compressed air to dig the trench. The use of the air knife reduces root damage when digging the trench. A sliding handled soil probe was also to attempt to locate roots below the depth of the trench. :��1�.I�`� !��r�� 1 20�� CITY OF BURLWGA!v1E CD�-P►. ANNING D1V. 2753 Burlingview/12/15/14 (2) Observations: The tree in question is a giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron gigantean) with an estimated diameter at breast height of 40 inches. The tree is located in the front of the property north of the existing garage and southwest of a new home being built. The estimated height of the sequoia is 50 feet with a total crown spread of 35 feet. The vigor of the tree is fair-good with normal shoot growth for the species. The form of the tree is fair with a straight trunk and a fair live crown ration. The tree has suffered moderate to heavy root loss from the excavation required to facilitate the building of the home. Several roots up to 3 inches in diameter. The roots were cut clean with a saw and impacts to the tree appear to be moderate. Exploratory trench being dug near the garage of the existing home. The exploratory trench exposed an abundance of small roots and no large roots along the edge of the garage. It appears roots were cut some time ago and the small roots are the results of that past root cutting. Large roots were unearthed neat the patio and at the entrance to the crawl space. The unearthed root appears to be the cause of the damage to the rat proofing in the crawl space. Small roots unearthed near garage of existing house at 2753 Burlingview. Roots appear to have been severed in years past. 2753 Burlingview/12/15/l4 (3) Summary: The construction at 2747 and the proposed construction at 2753 Burlingview will have moderate to heavy impacts of the giant sequoia tree located between the construction sites. The impacts to the tree will be mitigated by heavier than normal irrigation during the warm season months. The stability of the tree does not to appear to be compromised at this point. More will be known and mitigating measures will be adjusted as construction starts at 2753 Burlingview. The following tree protection plan will help to reduce impacts to the large tree. Tree Protection Plan: Tree protection zones should be established and maintained throughout the entire length of the project. Fencing for the protection zones should be 6 foot tall metal chain link type supported my 2 inch metal poles pounded into the ground by no less than 2 feet. The support poles should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center. The location for the protection fencing should be as close to the dripline as possible still allowing room for construction to safely continue. Signs should be placed on fencing signifying "Tree Protection Zone - Keep Out". No materials or equipment should be stored or cleaned inside the tree protection zones. Areas outside the fencing but still beneath the dripline of protected trees, where foot traffic is expected to be heavy, should be mulched with 4 to 6 inches of chipper chips. The wooden fencing will suffice for the neighbor's trees. Trenching for irrigation, electrical, drainage or any other reason should be hand dug when beneath the driplines of protected trees. Hand digging and carefully laying pipes below or beside protected roots will dramatically reduce root loss of desired trees thus reducing trauma to the entire tree. Trenches should be backfilled as soon as possible with native material and compacted to near its original level. Trenches that must be left exposed for a period of time should also be covered with layers of burlap or straw wattle and kept moist. Plywood over the top of the trench will also help protect exposed roots below. Normal irrigation should be maintained throughout the entire length of the project. The imported trees on this site will require irrigation during the warm season months. Some irrigation may be required during the winter months depending on the seasonal rainfall. During the summer months the trees on this site should receive heavy flood type irrigation 2 times a month. During the fall and winter 1 time a month should suffice. Mulching the root zone of protected trees will help the soil retain moisture, thus reducing water consumption. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty Certified Arborist WE#0476A Kielty Arborist Services LLC Certified Arborist WE#0476A P.O. Box 6187 San Mateo, CA 94403 650-515-9783 July 30, 2015 Drelling Tertones Architecture Inc. Attn: Mr. Wayne Lin 1103 Juanita Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 Site: 2753 Burlingview, Burlingame, CA Dear Mr. Lin, As requested on Thursday, July 30, 2015, I visited the above site for the purpose of inspecting and commenting on the large giant sequoia. A new home is planned for this site and the story pole have been installed, your concern as to the future health and safety of the trees has prompted this visit. Observations: The tree in question is a giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron gigantean) with an estimated diameter at breast height of 40 inches. The tree is located in the front of the property north of the existing garage and southwest of a new home being built. The estimated height of the sequoia is 50 feet with a total crown spread of 35 feet. The vigor of the tree is fair-good with normal shoot growth for the species. The form of the tree is fair with a straight trunk and a fair live crown ratio. The tree has suffered moderate to heavy root loss from the excavation required to facilitate the building of the home. Several roots up to 3 inches in diameter. The roots were cut clean with a saw and impacts to the tree appear to be moderate. Giant sequoia tree near proposed construction site. The tree has improved v'i�gpir si�c,�� December 2014 visit. � �;. d ?U�J �, i,� C'� hU�i�ING�1M�"- r.,�1rJ!i�!`� D!'�:�. 2753 Burlingview/7/30/15 (2) Despite lower than normal rainfall the vigor of the tree has improved since the digging of the exploratory trench in December 2014. The recently installed story poles has identified the limbs that will be removed to facilitate the proposed construction. Five to ten lower limbs will be remove raising the fringe of the tree. Summary: The de-compaction of the root zone (exploratory trench) and accelerated irrigation has dramatically improved the vigor of the sequoia. The removal of several limbs to facilitate the building of the house should have only minor effects on the tree. Continued irrigation and proper tree protection will continue to improve the overall health of the tree. Tree Protection Plan: Tree protection zones should be established and maintained throughout the entire length of the project. Fencing for the protection zones should be 6 foot tall metal chain link type supported my 2 inch metal poles pounded into the ground by no less than 2 feet. The support poles should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center. The location for the protection fencing should be as close to the dripline as possible still allowing room for construction to safely continue. Signs should be placed on fencing signifying "Tree Protection Zone - Keep Out". No materials or equipment should be stored or cleaned inside the tree protection zones. Areas outside the fencing but still beneath the dripline of protected trees, where foot traffic is expected to be heavy, should be mulched with 4 to 6 inches of chipper chips. The wooden fencing will suffice for the neighbor's trees. Trenching for irrigation, electrical, drainage or any other reason should be hand dug when beneath the driplines of protected trees. Hand digging and carefully laying pipes below or beside protected roots will dramatically reduce root loss of desired trees thus reducing trauma to the entire tree. Trenches should be backfilled as soon as possible with native material and compacted to near its original level. Trenches that must be left exposed for a period of time should also be covered with layers of burlap or straw wattle and kept moist. Normal irrigation should be maintained throughout the entire length of the project. The imported trees on this site will require irrigation during the warm season months. Some irrigation may be required during the winter months depending on the seasonal rainfall. During the summer months the trees on this site should receive heavy flood type irrigation 2 times a month. During the fall and winter 1 time a month should suffce. Mulching the root zone of protected trees will help the soil retain moisture, thus reducing water consumption. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty David Beckham Certified Arborist WE#0476A Certified Arborist #10724A 07.13.15 PC Meeting C'�MMUNI�:.�TION RECE1vED Item #9c AFTER PREPARATION 2753 Burlingview Drive (�FSTAFI�REPUR"l Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED JUL 10 2015 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD — PLANNING DIV. From: jojtlmca@aol.com [mailto:Litimca@aol.com] Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 2:34 PM To: CD/PLG-Lewit, Erika Cc: CD/PLGBarber, Catherine Subject: 2753 Burlingview Dr, Application for Design Review Dear Erica, My name is Terry McAloon and I live adjacent to the property at 2753 Burlingview Dr. My address is 2759 Burlingview Dr. You were good enough to go over the revised plans for the house under review when I was at City Hall on July 7. I also met with the property owner and a representative of the architect this morning regarding their new plans. I note that there have been changes made to the original drawings. So that I may better understand the impact of the changes, I would request that story poles be erected at the proposed building site. ( I believe that the commission will ask for story poles as a matter of course, but I wanted to go on record with such a request.) I'd also mention that I will be out of town from August 22, 2015 to September 3, 2015. I would appreciate it if you would allow me to make comments on the review process once I return in the event something should come up during my absence. Thank you Sincerely, Terry McAloon 2759 Burlingview Dr 04.13.15 PC Meeting Item #9b 2753 Burlingview Drive Page 1 of 3 Ms. Erika Lewit Senior Planner Planning Division Community Development Department City of Burlingame, California COMMUNICATION RECEIVED AFTER PREPARATION OF STAFF REPORT RECEIVED APR 13 2015 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD — PLANNING DIV. Subject: Public Hearing Notice for Design Review for a Single Family Residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr. April 12, 2015 Dear Ms. Lewit, My name is Terry McAloon. I live at 2759 Burlingview Dr. which is the house next store to the west of the residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr. I am writing you regarding concerns that I have over the design of the proposed residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr. They are as follows: A. Lack of Compliance with the Citv of Burlin�ame Nei�hborhood Guidebook- My house is a one story single family dwelling with approximately 1800 sq ft. There are three single story residences across the street from the proposed dwelling. Based on data from the Zillow website, two of these homes consist of some 1700 sq ft in area. I'm not able to determine the area of the third house. In looking at the other houses on Burlingview Dr. using Zillow, in my opinion, the average house is a single story residence with approximately 2000 sq ft of living space. The proposed new house will have two stories and an area of 4118 sq ft. or just about twice the size of the typical Burlingview Dr. home. I believe such a house is not compatible with our neighborhood and I reference the following statements from the Guidebook: i) "Component 5: Mass, Bulk and Scale a) Design Review Criteria: A compatible design will respect the scale of the existing neighborhood. It will use methods and include elements which support the scale of example houses in the neighborhood. The scale of the residence should be consistent with the example residences in the neighborhood. b) Mass and Building Plan When designing additions it is often tempting to fill in recesses in a building footprint, resulting in simpler rectangular forms. This will typically result in a more massive building that will not support neighborhood compatibility. 04.13.15 PC Meeting Item #9b 2753 Burlingview Drive Page 2 of 3 ii) Component 4- Location of Additions When placing a second story space, attempt toward the center of the property. Where sensible from an interior planning perspective, pull portions of the space away from the property line." Based on my reading of the above sections of the Design Guidebook, I have the following questions regarding the design of the residence under review: 1. Does a house designed to have twice the number of stories and twice the square footage of neighboring homes, meet the criteria of being consistent with the example residences in the neighborhood? 2. The footprint of the house seems to be a large rectangle that is recommended against in the Mass and Building Plan section of the Guidelines. 3. Was any attempt made to follow the Guidelines regarding locating the second story space towards the center of the property? This has a particular application on my comments below. 4. Will your review recommend the installation of story poles to depict the bulk and mass of the proposed structure? B. Direct Impact of Proposed House on Mv Residence- I currently have a view from a window on the eastside of my house that gives me a site-line of several hundred feet. (There is even a small sliver of a view of the bay from the window). What I understand from looking at the plans for the new house is that the outer wall on the west-side of the current house is 8.5 ft. The plan for the new building will raise this up to 24 ft. If this is correct, then it seems that my basic view would be reduced to looking at the wall of the new house. If my view is so restricted, I think it defeats the purpose of the statement in the Design Guidebook under Component 1: Building Location that says the following: "One of the defining characteristics of most Burlingame neighborhoods is the sense of space that occurs between houses. Historically this sense of space and distance was one of the original design criteria for most neighborhoods. Residents were seeking the space and feel of a less urban environment while having access to numerous urban and community amenities." So I'd ask that in your review if you would consider if any change in the height of the 24 ft wall can be made. I can't help but comment on the irony that seems to arise in the design/construction of the new house. As I understand the plan, it will include the demolition of the 'east wing' of the existing house. This structure has been the bane of our existence since it was built since it took a good 04.13.15 PC Meeting Item #9b 2753 Burlingview Drive Page 3 of 3 part of our view. (I have to wonder if it would even be allowed to be built now). But in tearing down this structure, I believe that a fairly decent view of the bay and even Mt Diablo would be visible from our window. The irony is that the new building would then come along and take the view away again. (It would be quite an achievement if somehow an arrangement could be worked out where the owner of the new house gets a place that's compatible with everyone and we get our view back!) I appreciate you and your colleagues giving consideration to my comments on the design of the new house at 2753 Burlingview Dr. Sincerely, Terry McAloon H ph 650 344-4201 C ph 650-773-4350 Email JOJTIMCA@AOL.COM 07.13.15 PC Meeting Agenda Item 9c 2753 Burlingview Dr. COMR7UNIC 4 TION RECEI VED AFTER PREPARATION or� sT� rr RE��nT page 1 of 1 RECEIVED JUL 13 2015 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD — PLANNING DIV. From: Sandra Feder [mailto:svfederCc�comcast.net] Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 2:10 PM To: CD/PLG-Barber, Catherine Subject: Property at 2753 Burlingview Drive Dear Planning Commission, We are writing to let you know our thoughts about the remodel planned across the street from our home at 2760 Burlingview Drive. We live directly across the street from the planned remodel at 2753 Burlingview Drive. We appreciate the new plans that have been drawn up, which make the front of the new house look less boxlike. Our major ongoing concern is simply that there are very few two-story homes on the top part of our street and none that look quite so different in scale as the proposed new home. The current house on the lot has a second story that is set back from the street, and we're wondering if such a design might be possible for the new home that will be there. It would make the home fit in better with the others that are on the street. Right now, our block has a certain look -- low-profile homes that blend into our hilly surroundings. This new home, while shaded from the street by large trees, just seems to be such a different style than what's already here and is much larger. The other new home being built on our street, has a profile that although modern, fits into the hillside well and does not block views at all. Thanks for listening to our thoughts on this matter. We do appreciate the new owners being open to hearing comments from neighbors and look forward to welcoming them to our community. Sincerely, Sandra and Dan Feder 04.13.15 PC Meeting COMMUNICATION RECEIVED Item #9b AFTER PREPARATION 2753 Burlingview Drive (�F STAFF R�PORT Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED APR 13 2015 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD — PLANNING DIV. Ms. Erika Lewit Senior Planner Planning Division Community Development Department Burlingame, California April 12, 20154 Regarding: Public Hearing Notice for Design Review for a Single Family at 2753 Burlingview Drive. Dear Ms. Lewit and members of the planning commission: My wife and I are owners and residents of the home across the street from the proposed project. In general, we are pleased to see upgrades and improvements in the area as they may improve the values of homes in the area and potentially keep the neighborhood well maintained. We do however have concerns about the size and scope of this project. It seems there is a trend evidenced by this and other projects in the Burlingame Hills area to maximize the size of homes that are built to the absolute legal limit. It seems we are evolving to an area of bigger and bigger homes on the same small lots. Our fear is we will lose the family neighborhood nature of the area and the open space between properties that we now enjoy. Is this in keeping with the long term plans for the area? In looking at the plans, we notice the increased height of the proposal. It appears the neighbor on the west side will be impacted by a 24 foot wall they will have to look at through their east viewing windows. We don't think it is fair to subject anyone to that circumstance. To us, it seems rude and disrespectful to these long-time Burlingame residents. We doubt any board member would like to have a 24' wall in their face, day in and day out. We hope the commission will consider these comments and acceptable accommodation can be made. Respectfully submitted, Gary E. Payne and Catherine A. Payne 2754 Burlingview Drive, Burlingame, CA 650-347-1994 City of Burlingame Planning Commissioners C/O Ms Erika Lewit Senior Planner Planning Division Community Development Department City of Burlingame, California August 1, 2015 Comments for August 10, 2015 Public Hearing Regarding 2753 Burlingview Dr Design Review Dear Commissioners, This is a follow-up to the concerns I expressed to the design of the proposed residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr in my April 12, 2015 letter. Since my first letter, I have met with the owner and architect of the proposed house as well as observed the story poles that were erected to outline the profile of the house. I believe that it might be appropriate to look at the application for the site at 2753 Burlingview Dr in conjunction with the approval that was given for the new residence at 2747 Burlingview Dr. As the Commission knows, both sites have the same owner and are using the services of the same architect. Regarding 2747 Burlingview, approval was given to build a residence with an area of 4242 sq ft. While this new house is at least twice the size of the typical house in the neighborhood, there seemed to be a recognition in the permit application that consideration needed to be given to the mass of the new building. At least as I read it, there were two statements in the paperwork that reflected this: In the Special Permit application regarding the basement ceiling height, under question 1, the applicant said: "The garage for the proposed building is being below grade in order to keep the building as low as possible (and lower than adjacent buildings)." In a similar application regarding the attached garage, under question 1, the applicant said: " The proposed building is being kept as low, or lower, than adjacent buildings by sinking the garage below the rest of the building." In looking at the application for 2753 Burlingview Dr, even though it's for the lot adjacent to the owner's other house, I don't see any comments that express the same concerns about the building being as low or lower than existing structures i.e, be consistent with the neighborhood's architecture. Instead, the house at 2753 Burlingview will be designed to be as tall as possible. In addition, it is on a lot adjacent to the crest of a 498 ft. hill. As such, its height will be further magnified with the result that its roof will be some six to eight feet higher than my place on top of the hill. There are at least two criteria on the Application for Design Review/Construction Permit that I believe are not met by the current design for the proposed house at 2753 Burlingview: ^'Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood- I believe that our neighborhood is correctly described as almost entirely consisting of single story, 2000 sq ft houses. The proposed house is two stories at maximum height and twice the area (4113 sq ft.) of typical existing houses. That is not a definition of compatibility. ^'Interface of the proposed structure with adjacent structures- In my earlier memo I mentioned that, if the proposed house is built, I would lose a view that I have out of the window in my den on the eastside of my house. I was told that this view could not be protected. So putting my earlier concerns aside, looking at the story poles that were erected for the proposed house, I have a new concern. In my opinion, the house will have walls so high I am not sure that I will be able to see the sky when I look out the window in my den. In addition I have a patio on the eastside of my house that is, at the moment, completely private. If the proposed design is approved, I will lose this privacy. The proposed house would loom over my patio. Based on the proposed height of the house under review, I don't believe the interfacing between the two houses shows "Respect for the neighbors existing conditions and utilization" as is suggested in the City's Neighborhood Design Guidebook. I invite all of the commission members to drop by my house and observe the interface between the two structures that I am describing. If the applicant receives approval for the proposed design, there will be two houses adjacent to each other that have a combined area of about 8300 sq ft. That is the equivalent of building four contemporary houses on two of our neighborhood lots. The addition of two houses of such large area into the neighborhood is in itself a cause for concern over how they will impact the consistency of the neighborhood's character. But even more important, the proposed height of the house under review, in my opinion, indicates a complete disregard for the feel of the neighborhood. This house, if it were built, would be like raising a thirty foot wall on the eastside of my residence with the consequences mentioned above. In light of the issues regarding the design that I've outlined, I request that the Commissioners ask the applicant to reconsider the current design for 2753 Burlingview Dr. Sincerely, Terry McAloon 2759 Burlingview Dr cell ph- 650-773-4350; home ph- 650-3444201; email- jojtlmca@aol.com CD/PLG-Lewit, Erika From: Sandra Feder <svfeder@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 12:31 PM To: CD/PLG-Lewit, Erika Subject: Comments re2753 Burlingview Drive Dear Burlingame Planning Commission Members: I live directly across the street from the proposed remodel at 2753 Burlingview Drive and am concerned about the scale of the structure that is being proposed. I would be happy to have you visit our home at 2760 Burlingview Drive to see for yourself how out-of-proportion the proposed property changes are in terms of the rest of the neighborhood. I believe that the Planning Commission is mandated to take into account the existing structures in the neighborhood before approving proposed changes. Our street is populated by one-story homes set back from the street. The existing homes very nicely follow the line of the hillside. They are unobtrusive looking - letting the natural beauty of the area and the view of the Bay be the focal points. What I love about living on Burlingview Drive is that when you turn from the upper part of Skyline onto Burlingview, you go up a little rise and then you're at the top of the street. You literally feel like you're on top of the world. We really feel that we are at the "summit" of Burlingame when we get home. While the proposed home does not block our view of the water, it does block a lot of sky. It's where we often see the moon rise and the stars shine. Another advantage of living where we do is the lack of light pollution, so that the night sky really comes alive up here. I would encourage members of the planning commission to come up to Burlingview to see for themselves just how large a structure is being proposed. I was quite surprised when the flags went up to mark the proposed height of the new house. I had been under the impression that the scate would be somewhat in keeping with the current second story that is on the property. This is as if they're building a three-story home. The other new house on our block, the one next door, is being built for the same extended family. It is modern and large but still fits in with the scale of the rest of the block. I understand that it was designed by the same architectural firm. Like the existing homes on Burlingview, there seems to have been some effort made to have it follow the natural line of the hillside, so it is less obstrusive than what's being proposed at 2753. We really have no large, boxlike houses on our street - the one large, two-story home on our street is set into the bend in the hill and therefore blends in better. It's also at the bottom of the hill, not on our upper, more open, part of the street. Please come take a look yourself. I would welcome planning commission members into my home to see the proposed project and to further discuss this matter. I am sure the owners and architects can come up with a different design. I've had a chance to chat with the new owner on two occasions and with one of the architects when they were visiting the site recently. At that time, they seemed open to trying to come up with a more fitting solution while still being able to maximize the site to accommodate the owner's growing family. We are looking forward to welcoming the new family to the neighborhood. Sincerely, Sandra Feder 650-773-1281 2760 Burlingview Drive, Burlingame CD/PLG-Lewit, Erika From: frog1325@comcast.net Sent: Saturday, August O1, 2015 3:55 PM To: CD/PLG-Lewit, Erika Cc: Terry & Joann McAloon; Sandra & Dan Feder Subject: Project at 2753 Burlingview Drive Dear Erika: Thank you for sending the plans for the project at 2753 Burlingview Drive. We have looked them over and they seem essentially the same as we saw at city hall prior to the first hearing. We continue to have concerns as expressed in our letter sent prior to the first hearing which do not seem to have been remedied. This week, the story poles were installed and we were shocked by the overall height and shear magnitude of the new dwelling. Aside from continuing concerns for the neighbor next to the project who's view and light space will be impinged, we feel the project is exceptionally massive for a"low density" residential area such as Burlingview terrace. The proposed dwelling will be much higher than the homes on either side and directly across the street from the project. It seems the primary objective is to maximize the allowable square footage that can be built on the lot. While this may be economically lucrative, we will remind the commission that this is a residential area where other objectives should be considered; it is not a high rises commercial area where pure economics prevail. We would ask the commission and the builders to reconsider the project with a view to modifications that reduce the impact on the remaining neighbors. Please invite the planning commissioners to come view the construction from inside our home at 2754 Burlingview and the Feder's home at 2760 Burlingview Drive (per their request). We were not able to connect to the email link for the commissioners on the city's web site. We can be reached at 650-347-1994 or 650-464-3559. Thanks for your help in contacting the planning commissioners. Sincerely Cathy and Gary Payne 2754 Burlingview Dr. � CD/PLG-Lewit, Erika From: David Klein <David.Klein@dtz.com> Sent: Saturday, August O1, 2015 6:58 PM To: �D/PLG-Lewit, Erika Cc: Melissa Germaine Subject: 2753 Burlingview Drive Erika: I am a homeowner at 2723 Burlingview Drive. I recently received a copy of the plans for the proposed improvements at 2753 Burlingview Drive and I have seen the story poles on the property. If the story poles represent the proposed mass of the remodeled structure, the remodeled structure lacks connection to the existing neighborhood homes because it is completely disproportionate to the scale of the neighborhood. This is an older neighborhood with a graciousness that comes from the existing homes having a scale that is proportionate to each other with breathing space between the homes. Burlingview is not a newer, McMansion-type street where homes bear no relationship to each other and are squeezed onto their lots with minimal setbacks or consideration of their neighbors. Please accept this email as a vote against the proposed added density and add it to the public record. Please also notify me of future meetings which I plan to attend. Regards, Dave Klein David Klein, Esq. SIOR LEED AP Managing Director � One Front Street, Suite 3025 � San Francisco, CA, 94111 � USA Direct: +1 415 352 2403 � Cell: +1 415 828 2188 Fax: +1 415 352 2401 david.klein(a�dtz.com � www.dtz.com California Broker # 00790730 California Attorney at Law # 92787 (Inactive Status) Twitter � Facebook � Linkedln � YouTube I do not practice law. Please seek independent legal advice. "We shape our too/s and thereafter our tools shape us. " Marshall McLuhan 1964 This email (including any attachments) is confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. It may be subject to legal or other professional privilege and contain copyright material. Any confidentiality or privilege is not waived or lost because this email has been sent to you by mistake. Access to this email or its attachments by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, 9: I 3. ��-� c, ��1 z�,�-i ►�� ,.�.,� � �1 � .� �.15'3 '�hur�i�l�•�Fvv 17�r- � COMNfUNICA7ION RECEIVED ,iIFT"ER PREPARAT�01V UF STAFF REPORT April 13, 2015 Ms. Erika Lewit Senior Planner Burlingame Community Development Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010-3997 Dear Ms. Lewit and members of the planning commission, 4�. .,.....,. � � � � ,z;�ry 5_'�s,s � ji'R � � ��i`i �, ;nr•,a, ir- -.-"� ='3l. �li_.� 1�a � i� �i!',��,,!r' After reading some of the concerns from my neighbors, I thought it would be helpful to write this letter and tell you a bit about my family and our plans to live at 2753 Burlingview. My family and I are really looking forward to moving back to Burlingame and the neighborhood where I grew up. My parents moved to the house adjacent to 2753 Burlingview (200 Bella Vista) in 1981, when I was a 1-year old. My three siblings and I went to St. Catherine from Kindergarten through 8th Grade. We all have fond memories of playing at Arthur's Toy Town and trading baseball cards at Video Magic and Bob's. My wife and I welcomed our 2"d child earlier this year, and we decided to move out of the city to Burlingame, where we knew we would be in a family friendly community. We needed more space than our 1,000 SF condo and wanted a yard where our children could play outside. We also wanted to be around other growing families and know that good schools were nearby. Additionally, my parents still live at 200 Bella Vista. As two working parents, being close to trusted and willing babysitters is essential. 2753 Burlingview is the house our children will grow up in. As such, it is important to us that we are good neighbors. I am happy to discuss any concerns my neighbors may have and make changes to our plans provided that they are reasonable and do not affect my family's enjoyment of our home. Having grown up in the neighborhood and now moving back to raise my children in the same neighborhood, I truly feel we are preserving the "family neighborhood nature" of the area. Sincerely, Alvin Chan 2753 Burlingview August 5, 2015 Ms. Erika Lewit Senior Planner Burlingame Community Development Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010-3997 Dear Ms. Lewit, members of the planning commission and my neighbors on Burlingview, My wife and I are looking forward to moving into the area and getting to know you all as neighbors. For those of you we've already met, thank you for being so welcoming. The last thing we want is to start off on the wrong foot with our neighbors because we plan on living here for a very long time. Given the concerns that a few of you have voiced, I would like to clarify some things. First off, we are not driven by what's "economically lucrative" or simply trying to "maximize the allowable square footage". This house is designed to be the future home of our family and incorporates how we envision raising our children. As I mentioned in my previous letter, my wife and I welcomed our second child earlier this year, and we hope to continue growing our family. The second story was designed so we could sleep on the same floor as all our children. Also, my wife's parents live in Hong Kong and are of the age where the long flight is becoming more and more difficult. When they visit, they normally stay for two to three months so they can spend time with their grandchildren. We wanted to make sure that our home had a guestroom that they would be comfortable living in for these long trips. I understand that the house looks big compared to the one-story homes next door and across the street. This is largely a result of the slope of our lot that requires the first floor to be almost seven feet higher than the curb. Please also consider that there are two very large trees in the front of our lot on both the west and east sides. These trees block the house from almost every view from the street except the area in front of the driveway that is portrayed by the rendering. Finally, I grew up next door to this house and know this neighborhood very well. Burlingview Drive is surrounded by Hillsborough, and you pass countless huge homes as you drive here from almost any direction. Our home is designed fully within the regulations of the R-1 district, the lowest density residential zone. We have met with our neighbor, Mr. McAloon a number of times and have already made modifications to provide additional setbacks that are even further within regulations. I definitely want to be respectful to the concerns of my neighbors, but please consider that this is our home and any additional modifications will have a much larger impact on my family than anyone else. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you would like to discuss further. I would love the opportunity to meet you and show you that we are a nice family and will make great neighbors! Sincerely, Alvin Chan (650)504-2679 i 1 I I DJ e N 'c �d � o a�J tU �E � s� � � q� A m � � n � � � Z � n U C �.�T� ' I �� . � y � �"' y .s Y1g �' N t � .tw.�„� .:' `o . �� +a �� Y + A�' � U �' •.r�, � : � ' �':,. � � �, � :;,.�;:. �,. � 1 .---, —.�� , , .,, i. � � � - — - — -- — � ,;�.. . a . , _� , I' . �. �i''� ; �� rrwi' ` � � ° > '�' "� _ . -.� �:r;tia � -- , ' � o z �� , . , _, ...._;- >. - � _ - � ; _. - . ; _' : . � � `� ,�;,�,� ,' �4f=,4 ��. � �,�� _-. _ .. __ . �� ,; y t r > _ - :. . _ __ � _ � -�- .. ::: _ . ..� ;, '�� . � , � _ � - -�- �`��:�� ` ,. �. :�� _ �A►. . _ �—..:.,"-_ _. __� _ . �� , _ ': � _.._ . � ` '=�, -� ,�,oti �.�:r,i jF �°� tr ��. ��Y' � f�' "�� r+ �, � r °� u . �n �',.' ;K' . ,, . ' c , � � �. ,, �,., �- , ., . . , .: ., ., , . ;. � � i:" —=��s �,� �--�_, ..__:. .. _ ._.._ _ ,... . -._. . . 2735 Burlingview Drive 2741 Burlingview Drive 2747 Burlingview ��rive 2753 Burlingview Drive 2759 Burlingview Drive (currentiy under con:,truction) (Subject Property) Properties on Applicant Side at �urlingview Drive � �-` 1 , '. � {_ _._YW� �_�. � � - �, ' ,...r �.— � _ ;�,�.�- w -- - � r�� , � �y�`'„��,�rt r . ,,_ �w. 2755 Summit Drive � 2760 Burlingview Drive 2754 Burlingview Urive Properties on Opposite Side oi Burlingview Drive 2748 Burlingview Drive � f '� �..R�: �` f""m�, d{S" �� - � � �� 2 Hiliview Court � �� :�. . �_� 2 2 2a� ,� �., �g��r�� N U � � � .N � � � o O � � ; P O � O O p O vi '��— O \ N � � � V ,O c y � o � E ri o �m' m o � aV �ma Planning vbmina6 19 December 2014 Neighborhood Photos PHI.I 1428 • CITY OF BURLINGAME � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 - �+ PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org - • . - � Site: 2753 BURLINGVIEW DRIVE - �- - - - - - The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the PUBLIC HEARING fallowing public hearing on MONDAY, AUGUST 10, 2015 afi 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose NOTICE Road, Burlingame, CA: Application for Design Review nnd Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renavation of an exis�ing single family tlwelling which includes a first floar oddition and a new second floor ot 2753 BURLINGVIEW DRIVE zoned R-i. APN 027-261-030 Mailed: July 31, 2015 (Please refer to other sideJ City of Burlingame 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 NATICE (Please refer to other side) RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW, AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a Categorical Exemption has been prepared and application has been made for Desiqn Review and a Hillside Area Construction Permit for first and second story additions to an existinq sinqle family dwellinq with an attached qarage at 2753 Burlingview Drive, Zoned R-1. Alvin and Jacqueline Chan, propertv owners, APN: 027-261-030; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on Auqust 10, 2015, 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 (e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that additions to existing structures are exempt from environmental review, provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition, is hereby approved. 2. Said Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit are approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit 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 10th dav of Auqust, 2015, by the following vote: Secretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption, Design Review, and Hillside Area Construction Permit 2753 Burlingview Drive Effective August 20, 2015 Page 1 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped July 31, 2015, sheets A0.01 through A5.1, AR1.04, L1.1 and L1.2.GP1.0, ER1.1, and Boundary and Topographic Survey; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staffl; 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Engineering Division's December 23, 2014 and March 18, 2015 memos, the Building Division's December 23, 2014 and March 13, 2015 memos, the Parks Division's January 8, 2015 memo, the Fire Division's December 23, 2014 memo, and the Stormwater Division's December 23, 2014 memo shall be met; 5. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be placed upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community Development Director; 6. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and tree protection measures are installed on site for any protected-size tree, and these measures are inspected and approved by the Parks Supervisor; any protected-size tree that is proposed to be removed, or that is damaged and must be removed as a result of demolition or construction, will require a Protected Tree Permit and may require further Planning Division or Planning Commission review; 7. that prior to issuance of a building permit for demolition or construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet and a landscape plan that list the Kielty Arborist reports dated March 11 and July 31, 2015, and recommendations, as well as the condition that certified arborist must be on site for trimming of any protected size tree; 8. 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; 9. 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. EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption, Design Review, and Hillside Area Construction Permit 2753 Burlingview Drive Effective August 20, 2015 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; 10. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 11. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 12. 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: 13. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 14. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and 15. 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. . . . _ . � . . Tan,�O'�� .. . _ �I. Y � � y :��R i v'u vJ �� "�� .` . .. .. . � . : . R �� ,�� * - ;� ��.� � �� ,, � �, Z X:Y' i w�n� .. Y� sS Y:��j � �5`. � . '4 :.F 44+�f ��^ � #S��#t�'j"��f .,� v � � `�' ��$ y`_ 1�� -x' � . , '; ,.-:, .,,_ � ' � � . r � . , , . . ,� �w�;: �� +/i ', 'i� � � . "' +. � ^ � r �f k . . �� ,. �S . S W I �+ , �� *. � � �' hfk � �+��; y � ., f � � y�, it .�k�� . - � ��,r.� y„ �� -. � * '�5, . , �` . ��. • - W �°��`" �� ^'� s w �r � .' � "'��.,,�.� �.�°" � '1 a,,-.? . .. y �� a . �� . k � ��- µt �� . !�' ^r,� •�'�� ,�-� � � .. �.�.,� ` ';.�. " �� 'f , " , � . . � a , i �: . � J : � , c Mf . . , . .i� ,;- �� ^.^ . . .. .� � .. �� ✓ .' v,, a f x. �' �� .�- ' �GJ � <• � � �, '�� , . � � �. �� . . ., ?.�' � . , . 2'/��. . . �� " �'' . � �..' � ,. '!« r � i �� y A�, �'' �' �'� �; 4 � i k a. �K m�� , q ' .. . � �� .. O _ � � ,. w � �: � ^ � "�'. �:. �.. .� � � ,. . '! � . �; ` '. • � � � � � AR a * p� ' �'" � _ �s' � G ,Z� � ' , - � �� ^� fi � � � 3 "` � 15 � ��- ` ` .- , � � V 2 i , „ �;: V , , . � . � �: . _ � _ $� , -. , � w° t it � � .k .b K .� . ... � . �. F R+�. � �: ' �, �� ` � �� k � � � � � �� ,, �� , �� _ . A � ;��„, ° � ' A _q'�/ ' �. ,�, . � � . ,. ,; � ' + ��`� ` � ., �� ., «. . • ,�.". ;. } R r �� ' , ' � �� , ...� . . � ;4'� �` ' � f�: � ,_ y , i�� . ' s( � V - . .. � �� i, Y �`W� � °� _ � � � ' � � � �,� . „- � , ..' �' . a ' . .� y�: �M ... �� .t� � � � .. �,�.... .. � � a.� � w �'� � - �� U, G w � � �� fi wy , N � n,�. � � � � 3 � � �va� � � � � �� .� , � ' �F .� � � O � �.... F .. a� rt'j7 � � , R : �,_..�_ ,. ,. „;. f. �- �.�� _ � � � � � �� w" ' } `�:.. � � c��op„�-�'�pPD o . oo'o� '"Co��.c�vs?�/�I�o ? ,..�'0v� -p�p �.:00 �'�o . :..� . k� �� :;,��+� � ° �n v�+=�u'oo v�:�ro �c � - e o o � a o ^ o 0 0 � �p ( N'o . . � , _ � . a�°.k.,.d� av''�'"� o 0 0 o OU� l�." �0� �� o U �� , . .. � � . Item No. 9c Design Review Study PROJECT LOCATION 2753 Burlingview Drive Item No. 9c Design Review Study City of Burlingame Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit Address: 2753 Burlingview Drive Meeting Date: July 13, 2015 Request: Application for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling that includes first and second floor additions. Applicant and Architect: Richard Terrones, Dreiling Terrones Architecture, Inc. Property Owner: Alvin Chan General Plan; Low Density Residential APN: 027-261-030 Lot Area: 10,000 Zoning: R-1 Project History: This project went before the Planning Commission as a Design Review Study item at the April 13, 2015 Planning Commission meeting (see the attached April 13, 2015 Planning Commission minutes). The Commission requested revisions to be made by the architect. The revised project is being brought back to Design Review Study for a second time so that the applicant can get any additional design input from the Commission prior to erecting and surveying story poles for the Hillside Area Construction Permit. The applicant has submitted a response letter, dated May 28, 2015, to detail the revisions made to the design and to review view concerns from the neighbor to the right side of the subject property. Project Description: The existing house is two stories with an attached garage. The applicant is requesting Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for first and second story additions. The proposed floor area for the new house will be 4,113 SF (0.41 FAR) where 4,300 (0.43 FAR) is the maximum allowed on site (including covered porch exemptions). With the proposed project, the existing second floor will be demolished, as well as portions of the existing left side of the house that have non-conforming side setbacks. The existing attached garage will remain, and there will be first floor additions at the rear of the existing house, as well as a new second story. The applicant is requesting a Hillside Area Construction Permit for this major renovation and first and second story additions. The existing highest ridge, at the left side of the house, is 24'-0" above average top of curb and the height of the highest section of the flat roof (at the center of the house) for the new second story addition is 30'-0" above average top of curb. The exterior walls of the existing attached garage and the existing code-complaint uncovered parking space in the driveway leading to the garage will remain. The number of bedrooms on site will be increased from 4 to 5 and the on-site parking requirement will be increased from two spaces (1 covered, 1 uncovered) to three spaces (2 covered spaces, 1 uncovered parking space). The interior width of the garage will not be altered; it provides the minimum width for two covered parking spaces (18'-0" existing and proposed). Several interior structures (such as a furnace, water heater, and stairs) will be removed to increase the interior length in the garage. Because the parking space length is being altered, the required length must be 20'-0" to comply with code regulations and the revised design provides 20'-0", eliminating the previous request for a parking variance. There is a protected size tree at the left, front side of the property that will be retained with construction. The applicant has submitted a Certified Arborist Report, date stamped March 11, 2015, to detail protection measures. The applicant is requesting the following applications: ■ Design review for a second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010,a,2); and ■ Hillside Area Construction Permit (C.S. 25.61.020). Design Review and HiIlside Area Construction Permit 2753 Burlingview Drive 1 wi A..��. AA AAA 2753 Bur/ingview Drive "" ^' �Q. '�,�� Pians date stamped: Ma 29, 2015 ' EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED SETBACKS ' _ .................._._._.............................._......................................._......................._................................................... Front (1st flr): ' 34'-8" No change 23�-7�� (2nd flr): ; 57'-3" 41'-3" 23'-7" To attached garage: i 24'-11"' No change 35'-0" __._._....._..._....._......_............_......._ ............1 ................._......................_...:......._...._......_............... _�...........1.' .................._.._.__......._................................... Side (left): ; 5'-0" 2 11 -0 7_p (right): ; 10'-0" No change � 7�-p�� ; ............................._._..__................._..._......................�...........' ............_......................................._................... Rear (1st flr) ' 31'-0" 41'-0" 15 -0 ................._............_Rear.....2nd f/r :: 37'-0" 41'-0�� 20'-0" ..... ....% _, ..__ _ _ : _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _. _ _. Lot Coverage: ; 2,860 SF 2,466 SF 4,000 SF 29% ; 25% 40% ; ..................................'.........................................3............................................................. FAR: ; 3,356 SF 4,113 SF 4 300 SF 0.34 FAR 0.41 FAR 0.43 FAR : ....................._.._._....................._.__................................................__......._....._._..._..........................._ # of bedrooms: ; 4 5 ___ _...._._........._ ................_............_._....................._._.._....................---........................... Parking: 1 covered 2 covered 2 covered (9' x 18') (18' x 20') (18' x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered 1 uncovered �s� x 20�� ; �9� x 20�� 9� x 20') . __... _ .... _ _. _ ._ ................. �... .... ...------........._........... _._.._. Height: 24'-0" j 30'-0" 30 -0 ' Existing, non-conforming setback to the attached, single door garage. Existing, non-conforming right side setback (5'-0" existing, where 7'-0" is required). (0.32 x 10,000 SF) + 1,100 SF = 4,000 SF (0.43 FAR). Staff Comments: See attached memos from the Chief Building Official, Fire Division, Engineering Division, Parks Division, and Stormwater Division. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows: Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Required Findings for Hillside Area Construction Permit: Review of a Hillside Area Construction Permit by the Planning Commission shall be based upon obstruction by construction of the existing distant views of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be given to the obstruction of distant views from habitable areas within a dwelling -2- Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit unit (Code Sec. 25.61.060). Erika Lewit Senior Planner c. Richard Terrones, Dreiling Terrones Architecture, applicant Attachments: April 13, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Applicant's response letter, dated May 28, 2015 Application to the Planning Commission Staff Comments Arborist's Report, date stamped March 11, 2015 Communications submitted by neighbors (2 items) Letter from the homeowner, date stamped April 13, 2015 Photographs of Neighborhood, date stamped December 22, 2014 Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed July 2, 2015 Aerial Photo 2753 Burlingview Drive -3- Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2015 9. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY a. 833 Alpine Avenue, zoned R-1 Application for Design Review for a se nd story addition to an existing single family dwelling with detached gar (Waldemar Stachnuik, KWS United Technology, Inc., applicant and designer; an and Llndsay Morris, property owners) (47 noticed) Staff Contact: Catherine Barber All Commissioners had visited the project site. There were no ex-parte communi �ons to report. Senior Planner provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff. Vice-Chair DeMartini opened fhe public hearing. Waldemar Stachnuik and Brian Mor�is represented the pplicanf. Commission questions/comments: b. > The roof slopes are significantly ifferent than what exists currently. Needs to be much more delicate in its approach to integratin the second-floor roofline into the house. The design detracts from the character of fhe house. > The front view of the house is eing altered in a negative way. > The mass of the side vations is increased by the second floor sheer-wall addition. The dormers should be made subordinat o the main roof. > Noticed the tall fen on one side of the driveway; was it done with permits? (Morris - wasn't aware of the code require nt at the time. Was installed because there is no back-yard; the side-yard serves as the yard area.) fo correct this issue. > Agrees with omments about the shed roof. > Has any hought been given fo making the windows consistent? (Stachnuik - is difficult to make them cons� tent. Intends to use the windows with grids to match the windows on the front of the house. �ll inst aluminum-clad wood windows.) > e dormers are very prominent from Alpine. Importanf to do a correct design. �ublic comments: None. Commissioner Loftis a design reviewer. following vote: made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Sargent, to refer the project to Vice-Chair DeMartini asked for a voice vote, and the motion carried by the 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1 - Application for Design Review, Parking Variance, and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor (Dreiling Terrones Architecture, Inc., applicant and architect; Alvin and Jacqueline Chan, property owner) (46 noticed) Staff Contact: Erika Lewit Commissioner Terrones indicated that he would recuse himself from participating in the discussion regarding fhis item as his firm has a business relafionship with the applicant. He left the City Council Chambers. Community Development Director Meeker provided an overview of the staff report. There were no questions of staff. City of Burlingame Page 7 Prinied on 7/7/2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2015 Vice-Chair DeMartini opened the public hearing. Wayne Hu represented the applicant. Commission questions/comments: > Doesn't find the justification for the parking variance compelling. There is already major reconstruction going on with the project. > Is troubled by the massing of the house; take a look at this. (Hu - have looked at the massing in general.) > Appears to be possible to relocate the stairs into the interior of the house to improve parking. > The home approved on the adjacent property was massed better. > Need fo engage with the neighbors regarding view impacts. > Question regarding landscape plan at the front,� will here be turf? Clarify on the landscape plan. > Be/ieves the plan could be "sculpted" a brt more to make it look less boxy. > Agrees with the comments regarding the garage. > A color rendering would be helpful in understanding the design. > The design is not truly Mid-Century Modern. Public comments: Terry McA/oon, 2969 Burlingview Drive: expressed concern about size, mass and bulk of house. Twice the size of most homes in the area. The lof is similar in size to all other lots in the area. Concerned about losing the open view and parfial Bay view from hrs house. Requested story poles. Vice-Chair DeMartini closed the public hearing. Commission discussion: > Suggested story poles following refinements to the design. > Encouraged the applicant to meet with the neighbors when refining. > Require story poles before coming back for action. > Could warrant design reviewer, but fee/s that the firm has the ability fo address the design concerns. > Doesn't feel that conditions warrant the parking variance in this instance, based upon the arguments presented in the application. Commissioner Sargent made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Loftis, to place the item on the regular action calendar when ready for action, with further direction to erect story poles for the project once revisions to the design are completed, prior to consideration by the Commission. Vice-Chair DeMartini asked for a voice vote on the motion, and the motion carried by the following vote: c. 1700 Devereux Drive, zoned R-1- Application for Design for a major renovation including a first and second story family dwelling with an attached garage (Wehmeyer D� Stephen and Kimarie Matthews, property owner Catherine Barber Commissioner Terrones returned to the dais. Review and Parking ��e addition to a sting single sign, icant and architect; 43 noticed) Staff Contact: All Commissioners had visit e project site. Vice-Chair DeMartini mef with the neighbor at 105 Ray Drive. Commissione rrones met with the applicant. Commissioner Gum met with the neighbor on the left side of �te. Planner Barber provided an overview of the staff report. Cify of Burlingame Page 8 Printed on 7!7/2015 '�� :'`"�� Dreilinq Terrones . „ _ Inc. .,�_ � , . �•��.�.��, ..�_ � � .. �� . �: 05-28-2015 To: Burlingarne Planning Commission RE: 2753 Burlingview drive — Response to Comments, 4/13/2015 Study Meeting Dear Commissioners and Staff Thank you for your consideration of our project and your comments at the Study Meeting on 4/13/15. We have re- visited the project design with the Applicant (Alvin Chan) and we have made several changes in response to the Commission's comments. In working with Planning Staff, we have collectively determined that it is best to re-visit the Project with the Commission at a second Study Meeting rather than proceed to Action. This should allow us to get some feedback on the Architecture of the Project, prior to revising the story poles and proceeding to Action. We have re-visited the view issues with the adjacent neighbor, Mr. McAloon at 2759 Burlingview Drive, prior to revising the project. If the Architectural revisions are generally acceptable, we will again visit with Mr. McAloon once the story poles have been revised. Below are photographs from the view windows in Mr. McAloon's house. 2747 Burlingview Drive Response to Planning Commission Comments Page 2 The following is a list of the revisions we have made to the Architecture of the Project. Lower Floor Plan: • Main entry wall pushed out to receive new central vertical element also allowing more space in the foyer area • With the enlarged foyer, the garage stair has been relocated to allow for a conforming garage interior length of 21'-2" thus removing the need for any variance request Upper Floor Plan: • Bedroom 4 wall pushed in to provide more setback distance to the adjacent neighbor. Reflected in the South and West elevations • The bedrooms and bath along the North side of the upper floor have been adjusted to allow for the new window configurations and the central vertical element. This revision is also reflected in the North elevation • Master bedroom and Master bathroom have been flipped, thus allowing a master balcony in the front over the existing garage. This also reduces the potential of cutting excessive amounts of the adjacent sequoia tree limbs. This also allowed for a better opportunity to further sculpt the North and East elevations North Elevation: • A unifying central vertical element (with wood siding) has been incorporated into the design. This organizes the main front elevation into three (3) distinct elements: the vertical center piece, with horizontal elements at either side. • Upper right corner of the front fagade has been stepped back in response to potential view issues from the adjacent neighbor. The window layout remains the same. • The upper decorative band has been removed and the roof line has been lowered 1'-9" to a total height of 21'-11" above finished floor. • An awning has been added above the lower floor windows • The laundry room window has been revised to a vertical casement window to match the adjacent window layout • A separate awning has been added over the main front entry door. • Upper left corner has been stepped back in various locations with a balcony off the Master Bedroom to create a more sculpted elevation, particularly where the existing large sequoia tree is located. 2747 Burlingview Drive Response to Planning Commission Comments Page 2 • A new awning has been added above the upper level master bedroom balcony doors to give shelter from the weather. • NOTE: This second floor balcony faces the street, does not overlook any rear yards, and is sheltered from the front yard of 2747 Burlingview Drive (same owners) by the sequoia tree. East Elevation: • Upper Floor elevation revised to reflect the new floor plan configuration • The upper right side is stepped back to create the master balcony which is reflected on the North elevation • New awning over the master bathroom that has been relocated to the left side of the elevation as reflected on the upper level floor plan • New window configurations to reflect the new floor plan layout South Elevation: • Upper left band element removed and roof lowered to reflect the West and North elevations. • The left wall has been pushed in to give more setback distance to the adjacent neighbor • Upper right balcony and awning removed to reflect revised floor plan, A new comer window in the master bathroom with a small awning above, and turning over to the East elevation West Elevation: • Reduced the size of the upper bedroom window facing the adjacent neighbor. Changed to two (2} vertical casement windows that are on both sides of the new bed wall • Decorative band element has been removed and roof lowered to reflect the North and South elevations • The upper level wall is stepped back to allow more setback distance to the adjacent neighbor • The upper left wall is also stepped back even further to reduce the amount of wall mass as viewed from the neighbors office window Thank you for your further consideration of our project. Sincerely, V Wayne Lin, Project M er �Y_��1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRfMROSE ROA� • BURUNGAME, CA 94D1d URLIMG!�MF_ p; 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • vuww.burlingame..org � APPLICATION T� THE PLANNiNG GOMMISSION Type of appiication: � Design Review ❑ Variance � Parcel #: oz�-zs�-oso i� Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit ❑ ��r� PROJECT AD�RESS: 275s �uhingview Drive APPLICANT project contact person I� OK to send eiectronic copies of documenls � ��pe: (Same as Arc:hitect) Address: City/StateTZip: Phone: PROPERTY fJWNER pro�ectcontactperson❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ Name: Aivin Chan AddfeSs: 2753 Buhinaviev�Drive City/State/Zip: aur�inaame � cA r sao�o E7hO�g; fi5D-504-2673 Fax: E-maii: �.i�vv�. Li� ��1�:� <i..'`�,=; �c��.c�,;,-. ARCHITEGTIDESIGNER pro�ectcontact Person � OK to send electronic copies oi documents � NBrne: Richard Terro�es Add�ess: 1903 ,luanita, Fax: E-R"tai�: atvin@worldcocompany.com CitylState/Zip: e�rur,yame i ca � sao�o Phone: ssasas-sse5 FaX: 650-558-�725 E-mal�: rt�r�dtaanf.com yt 6uriingame Business License #: ��'� � - _� -. �'` .T F�_€ , i L . � :., ! � �..� �M. } - ; << . � PROJECT DESCR{PTION: Addition and alteration of existin4 residence AFFADAVIT151GNATURE: I hereby certify under penslty of perjury that the infarmation given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and b lief. AppiicanYs signature: u Date: � Z�I � I am aware of the proposed applicati and here6y �atfi�rize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. �� /�f Propertyowner'ssignature: --""'-`� -"'�`��-�` Date: l��`� 1� Date su6mitted- � Z��'2"/i �^ ,1r Verificaiion that the project architect/designer has a valid Burlingame business license will l�e required by the Finance bepartment at the time appiication fees are paid. S:`NANDOUTS�PCApplication. doc .;�., . . , _.T,.... w _ _ ....... ... ..... ,_._ m , ...�r,. . . �. _ � .. _ ._......; �;� Project Comments �. Date: March 13, 2015 To: � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 i� Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 From: Planning Staff � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor adition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: Revised plans dated March 11, 2015 No further comments. All conditions of approval as stated in the review dated 12-23-2014 will apply to this project. Reviewed by�''� _�--�-�=--�( I\�(./ _� Date: 3-13-2015 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 X Building Division (650) 558-7260 0 Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 0 Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 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 D cember 31, 2013 then this project must comply with the 2013 California - � uilding Codes. ;(f �,,,�1s of January 1, 2014, SB 407 (2009) requires non-compliant plumbing fixtures �'� to be replaced by water-conserving plumbing fixtures when a property is undergoing alterations or improvements. This law applies to all residential and comrnercial property built prior to January 1, 1994. Details can be found at htt�://www.leginfo.ca.gov/�uUJ09-10/bill/sen/sb 0401- 0450 jsb 407 bill 20091011 chaptered.html. Revise the plans to show compliance with this requirement. 3) Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2013 California Energy Efficiency Standards. Go to http://www.enerqy.ca.qov/title24/2013standards/ for publications and details. 4) 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 an be found. �:5� lace 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.) . . ____,__ �.�._ Construction hours in'fhe City Public right-of-way are limited to v�eekdays and non-City Holidays between 8:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m. � \.... �' �._.._.._._------� ----._._..._.._._.._._.. ._ __....._....__...._......__...._...._..........__......_._... _............._....,.__...- - Note: Construction hours for work in the public right of way must now be included on the plans. 6) On the first page of the plans specify the following: "Any hidden conditions that require work to be performed beyond the scope of the building permit issued for these plans may require further City approvals including review by the Planning Commission." The building owner, project designer, and/or contractor must submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically illustrated on the Job Copy of the plans prior to performing the work. 7) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business license. 8) Provide a fully dimensioned site plan which shows the true property boundaries, the location of all structures on the property, existing driveways, and on-site parking. 9) Provide existing and proposed elevations. 10)This project will be considered a New Building because, according to the City of Burlingame Municipal code, "when additions, alterations or repairs within any twelve-month period exceed fifty percent of the current replacement value of an existing building or structure, as determined by the building official, such building or structure shall be made in its entirety to conform with the requirements for new buildings or structures." This building must comply with the 2013 California Building Code for new structures. BMC 18.07.020 Note: Any revisions to the plans approved by the Building Division must be submitted to, and approved by, the Building Division prior to the implementation of any work not specifically shown on the plans. Significant delays can occur if changes made in the field, without City approval, necessitate further review by City departments or the Planning Commission. Inspections cannot be scheduled and will not be performed for work that is not shown on the Approved plans. 11)Due to the extensive nature of this construction project the Certificate of Occupancy will be rescinded once construction begins. A new Certificate of Occupancy will be issued after the project has been finaled. No occupancy of the building is to occur until a new Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. 12)Provide a complete demolition plan that includes a leqend and indicates existing walls and features to remain, existing walls and features to be demolished, and new walls and features. NOTE: A condition of this project approval is that the Demolition Permit will not be issued and, and no work can begin (including the removal of � building components), until a Building Permit has been issued for the project. The property owner is responsible for assuring that no work is authorized or performed. 13)Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines 14)Show the dimensions to adjacent structures. �ooms that could be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window ,` or door that complies with the egress requirements. Specify the location and the net c/ear opening height and width of al/ required egress windows on the elevation drawin_qs. 2013 California Residential Code (CRC) §R310. Note: The area labeled "Office" is a room that can be used for sleeping purposes �--a d, as such, must comply with this requirement. icate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the Department of Public Works. 17)Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are considered in calculating the allowable lot coverage. Consult the Planning Department for details if your project entails landings more than 30" in height. 18)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 2013 CBC §1009. 19)Provide lighting at all exterior landings. NOTE: A written response to the items noted here and plans that specifically address items 2, 5, 15, and 16 must be re-submitted before this project can move forward for Planning Commission action. The written response must include clear direction reqardinq where the requested information can be found on the plans. �., Reviewed : 12-23-2014 ��;; t,�j 2013 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING CODE '�''��''``' �� ' RESIDENTIAL CHECKLIST FVe�tr resraer�trc�l vuiln'En.c�s rr-�ust be design�c! �c� inclt�de the �'rzen Buii�ir�rc� rnc�ndcrt�ry n�easures speci�ied in r}�is check��s'r. Th�se Gre�n 8�.�;lr�ing manc�arar�� mcasur-es ��Isa a�ply to �r'difiior;s ar alter�atror7s o� e,�ist:,�q residet�ii�rl buil�inqs �,�fhe�e ihe a�ditioP� ar� �Itera�ion ir7creuses t1�e �uildings canclitior3ec! �r� �, volumc.�, or size. Thes� requirerner�ts aJ��l�� c�nly� 'ro the s�ecific ar�a af ad�iti�n t�t� a�fer�tia�. Building Permit Number: , _ _ Site Address: �� -�.si'�:t _ _ L�� _ _ - _ . . _ _ In the column labeled "Plan Reference" specify where each Measure can be found on the plans. Green Building Measure Plan Reference SITE D.EVELOPMENT (2013 .CG.0 §4.106} A plan has been developed,and will be implemented, to manage storm waterdrainage during E�) , construction. CGC §4.106.2 & §4.106.3 ;> ' ` ENERGY EFFIClENCY , ,: (2013 CGC §4.2 and the 2013 California Building Ene,rgy Efficiency Standards) '`: 2013 Energy Code performance compliance documentation must be provided in 8-1/2" X 11" format and must be replicated on the plans. Walls with 2 X 6 and larger framing require R-19 insulation §150.0 (c) 2 Hot water piping insulation §150.0 (j) 2 A ii Lighting — new mandatory requirements for indoor rooms. §150.0 (k) Duct insulation (R-6) required §150.0 (m)1 Duct leakage testing — 6% with air handler and 4% without air handler §150.0 (m) 11 Return duct design/fan power, airflow testing, and grill sizing requirements §150.0(m)13 Water heating —120 volt receptacle < 3 ft., Cat III or IV vent, and gas supply line capacity of at least 200,000 Btu / hour §150.0 (n) New third-party HERS verification for ventilation and indoor air quality §150.0 (o) New mandatory U-factor (0.58) for fenestration and skylights §150.0 (q) Luminaire efficiency levels 2013 California Energy Code Table 150.0 B Refrigerant charge verification for ducted package units, mini-splits, and other units §150.1 (c) 7 Radiant barrier now required in Climate Zone 3§150.1(c) 2 Reduce U-factor (0.32) and SHGC (0.25) for high performance windows §150.1 (c) 3 A � �,2 �� ,.r= � I %015 ' �;I ; r O; F3URLINGAME Green Building Measure Plan _ Reference WATER EFFICIENCY QND CONSERV�4TION'(2013 CGC §4.3) Plumbing fixtures (water closets and urinals) will comply with the following: 1. The effective flush volume of all water closets will not exceed 1.28 gal / flush. �2� � 2013 CGC §4.303.1.1 2. The effective flush volume of urinals will not exceed 0.5 gal / flush. 2013 CGC §4.303.1.2 The fittings for faucets and showerheads will have all required standards listed on the plans; 1.5 GPM for faucets and 2.0 GPM for showers. 2013 CGC §4.303.1.3 and 2013 CGC §4.303.1.4 An automatic irrigation system controller for landscaping will be provided by the builder and installed at the time of final inspection. 2013 CGC §4.304.1 _ , < .. ENHANCED: DURABILITYAND:REDUCED MAINTENANCE (2013 CGC §4:406) ;' " Annular spaces around pipes, electric cables, conduits or other openings in sole/bottom plates at exterior walls_will be rodent-proofed by c.losing such, openings with_ cement_mortar,_concrete _ - ---- -- --- masonry, or similar method acceptable to the enforcing agency. 2013 CGC §4.4D6.1 __ _ CONSTRUCTION WASTE REpUCTiON, DISPOSAL,`:AND .RECYCLING (2p�.3 CGC §4:408) A minimum of 60%ofthe non-hazardous construction and demolition waste generated at the site will be diverted to an offsite recycle, diversion, or salvage facility per City of Burlingame Ordinance # 1704 and 2013 CGC §4.408 � "BUILDING.MAINTENANC.E ANR:,OPERATION (2013 CGC §4.410) '/ An operation and maintenance manual will be provided to the building occupant or owner. 2013 �� CGC §4.410.1 , , ` FIREPLACES (2.013 CGC §4.503) Any gas fireplaces will be direct-vent, sealed-combustible type. 2013 CGC §4.503.1 Any wood stove or pellet stove will comply with US EPA Phase II emission limits. 2013 CGC §4.503.1 ; POLLUTANT CONTROL (CGC §4;5Q4) At the time of rough instaliation, during storage on the construction site, and until final startup ofthe heating, coolingandventilatingequipment,allductandotherrelatedairdistribution components openings will be covered with tape, plastic, sheet metals, or other methods acceptable to the enforcing agency to reduce the amount of water, dust, or debris that may enterthe system. 2013 CGC §4.504.1 Adhesives, sealants, and caulks used on the project shall follow local and regional air pollution or air quality management district standards. 2013CGC §4.504.2.1 �� Paints and coatings will comply with VOC limits per CGC §4.504.2.2 � p, fj Aerosol paints and coatings will meetthe Product-weighted MiR limitsfor ROC and other requirements. 2013CGC §4.504.2.3 �`� -� Documentation provided verifies compliance with VOC finish materials. 2013 CGC §4.504.2.4 �� Carpet system installed in the building interior will meet the testing and product requirements found in the 2013 California Green Building Code.2013 CGC §4.504.3 ��- � Where resilient flooring is installed, at least 80% of the floor area receiving resilient flooring will comply with the California Green Building Code requirements.2013 CGC §4.504.4 �� Hardwood plywood, particleboard, and medium density fiberboard composite wood products used on the interior and exterior of the building will comply with the low formaldehyde emission �p � standards. 2013 CGC §4.504.5 Green Building Measure P�an Reference INTERIOR IVIO.tSTURE CONTROL (2013 CGC §4.505) .; A capillary break will be installed if a slab on grade foundation system is used. The use of a 4" thick base of%2" or larger clean aggregate under a 6 mil vapor retarder with joint lapped not less than 6" will be provided unless an engineered design has been submitted and approved by the Building Division. 2013 CGC §4.505.2 and California Residential Code (CRC) §R506.2.3 Building materials with visible signs of water damage will not be installed. Wall and floor framing will not be enclosed when the framing members exceed 19% moisture content. �p _� Moisture content will be verified prior to finish material being applied. 2013 CGC §4.505.3 INDOOR AIR QUALITY AN.D: EXHAU.ST (2013 CGC>§4.506) Exhaust fans that are ENERGY STAR-compliant, ducted and that terminate outside the building _will.be-provided_in..ev.er_y bathr_oom._2013 CGC §4.506.1___ .____— _______ _ — - -- -- -- _ Unless functioning as a component of a whole-house ventilation system, fans must be �'� controlled by a humidistat. 2013 CGC §4.506.1 , , , _ _ , ' ' ` 'ENVIRONMENTAL COMFORT (CGC.§4.507) ':: " The heating and air-conditioning system will be sized, designed and have their equipment selected using the following methods: 1. Heat Loss/Heat Gain values in accordance with ANSI/ACCA 2 Manual J-2004 or equal; 2. Duct systems are sized according to ANSI/ACCA 1, Manual D-2009 or equivalent; p10`� 3. Select heating and cooling equipment in accordance with ANSI/ACCA 3, Manual 5-2004 or equivalent. 2013 CGC §4.507 INSTALLER SPECIAL INSPECTOR QUALIFICATIO:N (2013 CGC §702)_`' : HVAC system installers will be trained and certified in the proper installation of HVAC systems and equipment by a recognized training/certification program. 2013 CGC §702.1 ��-� VERIFICATION (2013 CGC §703) Upon request, verification.ofcompliance with this code may include construction documents, plans, specifications, builder or installer certification, inspection reports, or other methods accepta ble to the Building Division that will show substantial conformance with the 2013 Code requirements. �Q� 2013 CGC §703.1 Responsible Designer's Declaration Statement ContractoF's Declaration Statement I hereby certify that this project has been designed to I hereby certify, as the builder or installer, under permit meet the requirements of the 2013 Green Building listed herein, that this project will be constructed to Code. meet the requirements of the 2013 Green Building Code. Name: �� ({��.� Name: Address: ' �� `�p � Address: City/State/Zip Code �D ,�, ��.� � G�� City/State/Zip Code ��v�_ Signature: Signature: Date: �3, �� _ l � Date: 3 Project Comments Date: To: From: March 13, 2015 X Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 0 Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor adition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: Revised plans dated March 11, 2015 Responses to previous comments are acceptable. Reviewed by: V V Date: 3/18/2015 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 X Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 0 Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 1. TMe project site is 10,000 square feet which requires permanent stormwater treatment measures. You can find more information and guidelines at: http://www.flowstobay.orq/newdevelopment In addition, no additional storm runoff is allowed from the post-construction site. Please provide plans showing how this will be satisfied. 2. Please show all proposed utilities on the site plan. 3. On the construction schedule, please update and include the following statement: Construction hours in the City Public righ%of-way are limited to weekdays and non-City Holidays beiween 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Reviewed by: M. Quan Date: 12/23/14 � 5AN M.':TEO COl1NTYWiDE Water Poliution Prevention Progrem C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) Stormwater Controls for Development Projects Chan/ Yuen Residence Project Information I.A Enter Project Data (For "C.3 Regulated Projects,"data will be reported in the municipality's stormwaterAnnual Report.) Project Name: Project Address & Cross St.: Project APN: Applicant Name: Applicant Phone: Development type: (check all that apply) CITY/COUNTY OF Dept. Address Phone website Case Number: 2753 Burlingview Drive, Burlingame 94010 and Summit Drive 027-261-030 Wayne Lin 650-696-1200 Project Watershed: Applicant Email Address: wl@dtaanf.com � Single Family Residential: A stand-alone home that is not part of a larger project. ❑ Single Family Residential: Two or more lot residential development.' ❑ Multi-Family Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial, Manufacturing ❑ Mixed-Use ❑ Streets, Roads, etc. ❑`RedevelopmenY as defined by MRP: creating, adding and/or replacing exterior existing impervious surface on a site where past development has occurred.2 ❑'Special land use categories' as defined by MRP: (1) auto service facilities3, (2) retail gasoline outlets, (3) restaurants, (4) uncovered parking area (stand-alone or part of a larger project) ❑ Institutions: schools, libraries, jails, etc. � � � � � \ � � � ❑ Parks and trails, camp grounds, other recreational �� ❑ Agricultural, wineries ❑ Kennels, Ranches ,� n,- � j 201� ❑ Other, Please specify �;,IT'r' O� BURLItVGAME Project Description4: Addition of second floor and interior alterations to existing house ,�,r�p-F�LANN!hJG DI`J. (Also note any past or future phases of the project.) I.A.1 Total Area of Site: .22 acres I.A.2 Total Area of land disturbed during construction (include clearing, grading, excavating and stockpile area):_.17 acres. Certification: I certify that the information provided on this form is correct and acknowledge that, should the project exceed the amount of new and/or replaced impervious surface provided in this form, the as-built project may be subject to additional improvements. � Attach Preliminary Calculations ❑ Attach Final Calculations ❑ Attach copy of site plan showing areas Name of person completing the form: Wayne Title: Signature: Date: 03-09-2015 Phone number: 650-696-1200 Email address: wl(c�dtaanf.com � Subdivisions or contiguous, commonly owned lots, for the construction of two or more homes developed within 1 year of each other are considered common plans of development and are subject to C.3 requirements. 2 Roadway projects that replace existing impervious surface are subject to C.3 requirements only if one or more lanes of travel are added. ' See Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes here 4 Project description examples: 5-story office building, industrial warehouse, residential with five 4-story buildings for 200 condominiums, etc. 1 Final Draft October 31, 2014 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist I.B Is the project a"C.3 Regulated ProjecY' per MRP Provision C.3.b? 1.B.1 Enter the amount of impervious surfaces Retained, Replaced and/or Created by the project: Table 1.B.1 /mpervious and Pervious Surfaces I.B.1.a I.B.1.b 1.B.1.c I.B.1.d Existing Existing New Pre-Project Impervious Impervious Impervious Impervious Surface to be Surface to be Surface to be SurFace Retained6 Replaced6 Createds Type of Impervious Surface (sq.ft.) (sq.ft. s.ft. (s .ft. Roof area(s) 2505 0 2373 0 Imperviouss sidewalks, patios, paths, driveways, streets 1146 723 0 0 Imperviouss uncovered parking' 0 0 0 0 Totals of Impervious Surfaces: 3651 723 2373 0 I.B.1.f - Total Impervious SurFace Replaced and Created (sum oftotals forcolumns I.B.1.c and 1.8.1.d): 2373 Pre-Project Pervious Surface Type of Pervious Surface (sq.ft.) Landscaping 6349 Pervious Paving 0 Green Roof 0 Totals of Pervious Surfaces: 6349 Total Site Area (Total Impervious+Total Pervious=l.A.1) 10000 I.B.2 Please review and attach additional worksheets as required below using the Total Impervious Surface Replaced and Created in cell 1.6.1.f from Table 1.6.1 above and other factors: I.B.1.e Post-Project Impervious Surface (sq.ft.) 2373 723 0 3101 Post-project Pervious SurFace (sq.ft.) 6042 857 0 6899 10000 Check all that a I Check Attach pp y' If Yes Worksheet 1.6.2.a Does this project involve any earthwork? � q I.B2.b Is I.B.1.f greater than or equal to 2,500 sq.ft? If YES, the Project is subject to Provision C.3.i. � g C 1.6.2.c Is the total Existing Impervious Surface to be Replaced (column I.B.1.c) 50 percent or more of the total Pre-Project Impervious SurFace (column 1.B.1.a)? � If YES, site design, source control and treatment requirements apply to the whole site; if NO, these requirements apply only to the impervious surface created and/or replaced. 1.6.2.d Is this project one of the Special Land Use Categories (box checked in section I.A. above) and � D, D-1, D-2 is 1.B.1.f reater than or equal to 5,000 sq.ft? If YES, project is a C.3 Regulated Project. 1.6.2.e Is I.B.1.f greater than or equal to 10,000 sq.ft? If YES, project is a C.3 Regulated Project. ❑ D, D-1, D-2 1.6.2.f Is I.B.1.f greater than or equal to 43,560 sq.ft. (1 acre)? If YES, project may be subject to � E Hydromodification Management requirements. � B.2.9 Is I.A.2 (pg. 1) greater than or equal to 1 acre? If YES, obtain coverage under the state's Construction Genera/ Permit and submit Yo the municipality a copy of your Notice of Intent ❑ See: www.swrc6.ca.qov/water issues/programs/stonnwater/construction.shtml. I.B2.h Is this a Special Project or does it have the potential to be a Special Project? p F I.B2.i Is this project a High Priority Site? (Determined by the Permitting Jurisdiction. High Priority Sites can include those located in or within 100 feet of a sensitive habitat, ASBS, or body of ❑ G water, or on sites with slo es, and are sub'ect to monthl ins ections from Oct 1 to A ril 30. 6.2.10 For Municipal Staff Use Only (Alternative Certification, O&M Submittals, Project Close Out) � G 5 Per the MRP, pavement that meets the following definition of pervious pavement is NOT an impervious surface. Pervious pavement is defined as pavement that stores and infiltrates rainfall at a rate equal to immediately surrounding unpaved, landscaped areas, or that stores and infiltrates the rainfall runoff volume described in Provision C.3. 6"Retained" means to leave existing impervious surfaces in place, unchanged; "Replaced" means to install new impervious surface where existing impervious surtace is removed anywhere on the same property; and "Created" means the amount of new impervious surface being proposed which exceeds the total existing amount of impervious surFace at the property. � Uncovered parking includes the top level of a parking structure. 2 Final Draft October 31, 2094 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Worksheet A C6 — Construction Stormwater BMPs Identify Plan sheet showing the appropriate construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) used on this project: (Applies to all projects with earthwork) Yes Plan Sheet � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 ►1 • Best Manaqement Practice Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including pavement cutting wastes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemicals, wash water or sediments, rinse water from architectural copper, and non-stormwater discharges to storm drains and Store, handle, and dispose of construction materials/wastes properly to prevent contact with stormwater. Do not clean, fuel, or maintain vehicles on-site, except in a designated area where wash water is contained and treated. Train and provide instruction to all employees/subcontractors re: construction BMPs. Protect all storm drain inlets in vicinity of site using sediment controls such as berms, fiber rolls, or filters. Limit construction access routes and stabilize designated access points. Attach the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program's construction BMP plan sheet to project plans and require contractor to implement the applicable BMPs on the olan sheet. Use temporary erosion controls to stabilize all denuded areas until permanent erosion controls are established. Delineate with field markers clearing limits, easements, setbacks, sensitive or critical areas, buffer zones, trees, and drainage courses. Provide notes, specifications, or attachments describing the following: ■ Construction, operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment controls, include inspection frequency; ■ Methods and schedule for grading, excavation, filling, clearing of vegetation, and storage and disposal of excavated or cleared material; ■ Specifications for vegetative cover & mulch, include methods and schedules for planting and fertilization; • Provisions for temporary and/or permanent irriqation. Perform clearing and earth moving activities only during dry weather. � ER1.1 Use sediment controls or filtration to remove sediment when dewatering and obtain all necessary permits. � ER1.1 Trap sediment on-site, using BMPs such as sediment basins or traps, earthen dikes or berms, silt fences, check dams, soil blankets or mats, covers for soil stock piles, etc. � ER1.1 Divert on-site runoff around exposed areas; divert off-site runoff around the site (e.g., swales and dikesl. � ER1.1 Protect adjacent properties and undisturbed areas from construction impacts using vegetative buffer strips, sediment barriers or filters, dikes, mulching, or other measures as appropriate. Final Draft October 31. 2014 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Worksheet B C3 - Source Controls Select appropriate source controls and identify the detail/plan sheet where these elements are shown. Detail/Plan Features that require Source Control Measures Yes Sheet No. source control measures Refer to Local Source Control List for detailed re uirements) ❑ Storm Drain Mark on-site inlets with the words "No Dumping! Flows to Bay" or equivalent. ❑ Floor Drains Plumb interior floor drains to sanitary sewere [or prohibit]. ❑ Parking garage Plumb interior parking garage floor drains to sanitary sewer.8 � L1.1 Landscaping • Retain existing vegetation as practicable. ■ Select diverse species appropriate to the site. Include plants that are pest- and/or disease-resistant, drought-tolerant, and/or attract beneficial insects. ■ Minimize use of pesticides and quick-release fertilizers. ■ Use efficient irri ation s stem; desi n to minimize runoff. ❑ Pool/Spa/Fountain Provide connection to the sanitary sewer to facilitate draining.8 ❑ Food Service Equipment Provide sink or other area for equipment cleaning, which is: (non-residential) ■ Connected to a grease interceptor prior to sanitary sewer discharge.e ■ Large enough for the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned. ■ Indoors or in an outdoor roofed area designed to prevent stormwater run-on and run-off, and si ned to re uire e ui ment washin in this area. ❑ Refuse Areas ■ Provide a roofed and enclosed area for dumpsters, recycling containers, etc., designed to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff. ■ Connect any drains in or beneath dumpsters, compactors, and tallow bin areas serving food service facilities to the sanitary sewer.e ❑ Outdoor Process Activities 9 Perform process activities either indoors or in roofed outdoor area, designed to revent stormwater run-on and runoff, and to drain to the sanita sewer.e ❑ Outdoor Equipment/ ■ Cover the area or design to avoid pollutant contact with stormwater runoff. Materials Storage ■ Locate area only on paved and contained areas. ■ Roof storage areas that will contain non-hazardous liquids, drain to sanitary sewere, and contain b berms or similar. ❑ Vehicle/ Equipment ■ Roofed, pave and berm wash area to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff, Cleaning plumb to the sanitary sewere, and sign as a designated wash area. ■ Commercial car wash facilities shall dischar e to the sanita sewer.e ❑ Vehicle/ Equipment Repair ■ Designate repair/maintenance area indoors, or an outdoors area designed to and Maintenance prevent stormwater run-on and runoff and provide secondary containment. Do not install drains in the secondary containment areas. ■ No floor drains unless pretreated prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer.e ■ Connect containers or sinks used for arts cleanin to the sanita sewer.e ❑ Fuel Dispensing Areas ■ Fueling areas shall have impermeable surface that is a) minimally graded to prevent ponding and b) separated from the rest of the site by a grade break. ■ Canopy shall extend at least 10 ft. in each direction from each pump and drain awa from fuelin area. ❑ Loading Docks ■ Cover and/or grade to minimize run-on to and runofF from the loading area. ■ Position downspouts to direct stormwater away from the loading area. ■ Drain water from loading dock areas to the sanitary sewer.8 ■ Install door skirts between the trailers and the buildin . � L1.1 Fire Sprinklers Design for discharge of fire sprinkler test water to landscape or sanitary sewer.8 � L1.1 Miscellaneous Drain or ■ Drain condensate of air conditioning units to landscaping. Large air Wash Water conditioning units may connect to the sanitary sewer.8 ■ Roof drains from equipment drain to landscaped area where practicable. • Drain boiler drain lines, roof to e ui ment, all wash water to sanita sewer.8 ❑ Architectural Copper Rinse • Drain rinse water to landscaping, discharge to sanitary sewer8, or collect and Water dis ose ro erl offsite. See fl er "Re uirements for Architectural Co er." 8 Any connection to the sanitary sewer system is subject to sanitary district approval. 9 Businesses that may have outdoor process activities/equipment include machine shops, auto repair, industries with pretreatment facilities. 4 Final Draft October 31, 2014 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Worksheet C Low Impact Development — Site Design Measures Select Appropriate Site Design Measures (Required for C.3 Regulated Projecfs; all other projects are encouraged to implement site design measures, which may be required at municipality discretion.) Projects that create and/or replace 2, 500 — 10,000 sq.ft. of impervious surface, and stand-alone single family homes that create/replace 2,500 sq.ft. or more of impervious surface, must include one of Site Design Measures a through f(Provision C.3.i requirements).10 Larger projects must also include applicable Site Design Measures g through i. Consult with municipal staff about requirements for your project. Select appropriate site design measures and Identify the Plan Sheet where these elements are shown. Yes Plan Sheet Number � a. Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels and use rainwater for irrigation or other non-potable use. � A1.1 b. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. ❑ c. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. ❑ d. Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. L1.1 e. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with pervious or permeable � surfaces. � f. Construct bike lanes, driveways, andlor uncovered parking lots with pervious surfaces. g. Limit disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems; minimize � compaction of highly permeable soils; protect slopes and channels; and minimize impacts from stormwater and urban runoff on the biological integrity of natural drainage systems and water bodies; � A1.1 h. Conserve natural areas, including existing trees, other vegetation and soils. � L1.1 i. Minimize impervious surFaces. Regulated Projects can also consider the following site design measures to reduce treatment system sizing: Yes Plan Sheet Number ❑ j. Self-treating area (see Section 4.2 of the C.3 Technical Guidance) ❑ k. Self-retaining area (see Section 4.3 of the C.3 Technical Guidance) ❑ I. Plant or preserve interceptor trees (Section 4.1, C.3 Technical Guidance) lo See MRP Provision C.3.a.i.(6) for non-C.3 Regulated Projects, C.3.c.i.(2)(a) for Regulated Projects, C.3.i for projects that create/replace 2,500 to 10,000 sq.ft. of impervious surface and stand-alone single family homes that create/replace 2,500 sq.ft. or more of impervious surface. 5 Final Draft October 31, 2014 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 X Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 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. o rg/Construction Please contact Kiley Kinnon for assistance at: (650) 342-3727 Reviewed by: KJK Date: 12/23/14 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 X Fire Division (650) 558-7600 0 Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly — Schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building Plans prior to approval indicating location of the device after the split between domestic and fire protection lines. 3. All sprinkler drainage shall be placed into landscaping areas. 4. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. Reviewed by: � Date: Z ��..�.�./y Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (s5o) ssa-72so X� Parks Division (s5o) sss-73� � Fire Division (650) 558-76Q0 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-72Q4 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 1. No existing tree over 48 inches in circumference at 54 inches form base of tree may be removed without a Protected Tree Permit from the Parks Division. (558-7330) 2. Submit full size copy of arborist report for review. 3. Landscape plan is required to meet `Water Conservation in Landscape Regulations" (attached). Irrigation Plan required for Building permit. Audit due for Final. Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 1/8t15 OUTDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST 0 e 0 0 6 �M � 0 ' 0 ~ �� : - � . -t �rr .t � � � - - , _�� - � 1 1i } I ce ' that the subject project meets the specified requirements of the Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance. � 03 � o�l 2�� Signature Date �I�i�O�� _��:�i�t.h�1�`I�l�fl,�� $i Single Family 0 Multi-Family ❑ Commeraal ❑ Institutional ❑ Irri ation onl ❑ Industrial ❑ Other: g Y Applicant Name (print): `�C�� "'ZC-'R�.a�ES Contact Phone #: (o�j - bq(� • �2� Project 5ite Address: Z��j�j $,�J�,aN(,�,��'� 'Qj2�� Agency Review `. Project Area (sq.ft. or acre): \a �� # of Units: t� # of Meters: ` jPass) '` (Fail) :", � t - i � � � 1 ��+� � �� '' Total Landscape Area (sq.ft.)• .` � � aF �i �i � r:; , , ; O ❑ ^/{-1�`(u_` � �hn i �-', �'r ;(^�io J n�i_iii� � \` \ i� I!; ' � ��i�l o � ,,:i , 't�' ` ;fiy ' , . `;{, "` "°� ' Turf Irrigated Area (sq.ft.}: ' ❑ ❑ , _� .; �� 7 = �; , < ' Non-Turf Irrigated Area (sq.ft. : 3�� ; ❑ ❑ �r ; �J ot�7 r � �[I ��i oii; . r , �1� , ;, � :i, ,,,;;, � � Special Landscape Area (SLA) (sq.ft.): ❑ ❑ a. : _ . : . _ � i;;;:,� ,� ;° Water Feature SurFace Area (sq.ft.): ,�i=.�l� °1 l. 1�;1 ' ..4,� 1 a tf:` �i`�.{��1 'I.^It , I� ` i flo.ii� � _I�::tln��{k ,i�_� _ . ... . :.. _...., ,. , ., . � . . _�:. � .� . . _.. . �. .. , .• .. . .. .. .,. _. r .. Turf Less than 25% of the landscape area is 1� Yes ❑ ❑ turf ❑ No, See Water Budget All turF areas are > 8 feet wide O Yes ',❑ ❑', All turf is planted on slopes < 25% ❑ Yes ;❑ .. ❑' Nan-Turf At least 80% of non-turf area is native Yes ❑; ❑•, or low water use plants ❑ No, See Water Budget . Hydrozones Plants are grouped by Nydrozones '§a Yes O ❑. At least 2-inches of mulch on exposed 6� Yes ❑ ❑, Mulch soil surfaces Irrigation System Efficiency 70% ETo (S00% ETo for SLAs) ❑ Yes <❑< ❑.: No overspray or runoff � Yes :❑ ,❑ Irrigation System Design System efficiency > 70% � Yes ; p ❑:': Automatic, self-adjusting irrigation ❑ No, not required for Tier 1 ❑ ❑' control lers Yes Moisture sensor/rain sensor shutoffs � Yes ❑ ❑ : fVo sprayheads in < 8-ftwide area. ,�Yes ❑ ❑ Irrigation Time System only operates between 8 PM �Yes ` 0 O. :: and 10 AM � Metering Separate irrigation meter ❑ No, not required because <5,000 sq.ft. :❑: ❑ � Yes Swimming Poois / Spas Cover highly recommended ❑ Yes ❑`.. p; � No, not required Water Features Recirculating ❑ Yes ❑ ❑ Less than 10% of landscape area ❑ Yes '. ❑ ❑, Documentation Checklist ❑ Yes ❑ ❑ ' ;,; Landscape and Irrigation Design Plan ❑ Prepared by applicant ❑ ❑'- !$.Prepared by professionai Water Budget (optional) ❑ Prepared by applicant ❑, 0 ` ❑ Prepared by professional Audit Post-installation audit completed ❑ Completed by applicant ❑ ': ❑' ,�.�ompleted by professiona' ""�' �'"� � _ _ _. ... . ._ _ _ _ . _. v...s �., `,��,�� C�G �IT� O= gURLI�lGArJ�` OUTDOOR WATER USE EFFICfENCY CHECKLIST e o � a • o o ' �, Auditor: ': �i � d_:� ,r , i�i�� ,�_;;' 1 I h1 ��.�� - _ .. - -- - ----_.._.� __ __ ----- ---- _ �--- Materials Received and Reviewed: ❑ Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance ❑ Outdoor Water Use Efficiency Checklist ❑ Outdoor Water Use Efficiency Checklist ❑ Water Budget ❑ Water Budget Calculation Worksheets ❑ Landscape Plan ❑ Plant List ❑ Post-Insta(lation Audit ❑ Other: Date Reviewed: 1��4 i, �,-;� i �?;. �� ..;� , � �ii �� ❑ Follow up required (explain): ❑ Drip irrigation L � Y ❑ Self-adjusting Irrigation Controller Date Resubmitted: ❑ Plant palate Date Approved: ❑ Three (3) inches of mulch Dedicated Irrigation Meter Required: ❑ 5oil amendment (e.g., compost) • Meter sizing: ❑ Grading ❑ Pool and/or spa cover ❑ Dedicated irrigation meter ❑ Other: t. Comments: � s Selected Definit3ons: Tier 1 New construction and rehabilitated landscapes with irrigated landscape areas between 1,000 and 2,500 square feet requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check or design review, or new or expanded water service. Tier 2 New construction and rehabilitated landscapes with irrigated landscape areas greaterthan 2,500 square feet requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check or design review. ETo Reference evapotranspiration means the quantity of water evaporated from a large field of four-to seven-inch tall, cool-season grass that is well watered. Reference evapotranspiration is used as the basis of estimating wate� budgets so that regional differences in climate can be accommodated. SLA Special Landscaped Area. Includes edible plants, areas irrigated with recycled water, surface water features using recycled water and areas dedicated to active play such as parks, sports fields, golf courses, and where turf provides a playing surface. Professional Professional is a"certified professional" or "authorized professional" that is a certified irrigation designer, a certified landscape irrigation auditor, a licensed landscape architect, a ficensed landscape contractor, a ficensed professional engineer, or any other person authorized by the state to design a landscape, an irrigation system, or authorized to complete a water budget, irrigation survey or irrigation audit. Water Feature A design element where open water performs an aesthetic or recreational function. Water features include ponds, lakes, waterfalls, fountains, artificial streams, spas, and swimming pools (where water is artificially supplied). Kielty Arborist Services Certified Arborist WEn0476A P.O. Box 6187 San 1Vlateo, CA 944Q3 650-515-9783 December 15, 2014 Drelling Tertones Architecture Inc. Attn: Mr. Carlos Rojas 1103 Juanita Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 Site: 2753 Burlingview, Burlingame, CA Dear Mr. Rojas, As requested on Monday, November 17, 2014, I visited the above site for the purpose of inspecting and commenting on the trees. A new home is planned for this site and your concern as to the future health and safety of the trees has prompted this visit. An air spade was used to dig an exploratory trench along the existing house to help detect root damage and possible future root loss. Method: All inspections were made from the ground; the tree was not climbed for this inspection. The tree in question was located on a site plan provided by you. The trees were then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). Each tree was given a condition rating for form and vitality. The trees' condition rating is based on 50 percent vitality and 50 percent form, using the following scale. 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poor 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The height of the trees were measured using a Nikon Forestry 550 Hypsometer. The spread was paced off. Comments and recommendations for future maintenance are provided. An Exploratory trench was dug to help locate roots and help predict root loss. A Supersonic Air Knife was used for the trenching. The air knife uses compressed air to dig the trench. The use of the air knife reduces root damage when digging the trench. A sliding handled soil probe was also to attempt to locate roots below the depth of the trench. ��I�'�� ,`�.�� 20,� C;;T'! OF BURLiNGAh�;E Cf)!; PI_ ANNING DIV. 2753 Burlingview/12/15/14 (2) Observations: The tree in question is a giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron gigantean) with an estimated diameter at breast height of 40 inches. The tree is located in the front of the property north of the existing garage and southwest of a new home being built. The estimated height of the sequoia is 50 feet with a total crown spread of 35 feet. The vigor of the tree is fair-good with normal shoot growth for the species. The form of the tree is fair with a straight trunk and a fair live crown ration. The tree has suffered moderate to heavy root loss from the excavation required to facilitate the building of the home. Several roots up to 3 inches in diameter. The roots were cut clean with a saw and impacts to the tree appear to be moderate. Exploratory trench being dug near the garage of the existing home. The exploratory trench exposed an abundance of small roots and no large roots along the edge of the garage. It appears roots were cut some time ago and the small roots are the results of that past root cutting. Large roots were unearthed neat the patio and at the entrance to the crawl space. The unearthed root appears to be the cause of the damage to the rat proofing in the crawl space. Small roots unearthed near garage of existing house at 2753 Burlingview. Roots appear to have been severed in years past. 2753 Burlingview/12/15/14 (3) Summary: The construction at 2747 and the proposed construction at 2753 Burlingview will have moderate to heavy impacts of the giant sequoia tree located between the construction sites. The impacts to the tree will be mitigated by heavier than normal irrigation during the warm season months. The stability of the tree does not to appear to be compromised at this point. More will be known and mitigating measures will be adjusted as construction starts at 2753 Burlingview. The following tree protection plan will help to reduce impacts to the large tree. Tree Protection Plan: Tree protection zones should be established and maintained throughout the entire length of the project. Fencing for the protection zones should be 6 foot tall metal chain link type supported my 2 inch metal poles pounded into the ground by no less than 2 feet. The support poles should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center. The location for the protection fencing should be as close to the dripline as possible still allowing room for construction to safely continue. Signs should be placed on fencing signifying "Tree Protection Zone - Keep Out". No materials or equipment should be stored or cleaned inside the tree protection zones. Areas outside the fencing but still beneath the dripline of protected trees, where foot traffic is expected to be heavy, should be mulched with 4 to 6 inches of chipper chips. The wooden fencing will suffice for the neighbor's trees. Trenching for irrigation, electrical, drainage or any other reason should be hand dug when beneath the driplines of protected trees. Hand digging and carefully laying pipes below or beside protected roots will dramatically reduce root loss of desired trees thus reducing trauma to the entire tree. Trenches should be backfilled as soon as possible with native material and compacted to near its original level. Trenches that must be left exposed for a period of time should also be covered with layers of burlap or straw wattle and kept moist. Plywood over the top of the trench will also help protect exposed roots below. Normal irrigation should be maintained throughout the entire length of the project. The imported trees on this site will require irrigation during the warm season months. Some irrigation may be required during the winter months depending on the seasonal rainfall. During the summer months the trees on this site should receive heavy flood type irrigation 2 times a month. During the fall and winter 1 time a month should suffice. Mulching the root zone of protected trees will help the soil retain moisture, thus reducing w�ter consumption. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty Certified Arborist WE#0476A 04.13.15 PC Meeting Item #9b 2753 Burlingview Drive Page 1 of 3 Ms. Erika Lewit Senior Planner Planning Division Community Development Department City of Burlingame, California COMMUNICA TION RECEI VED AFTER PREPARATION OF STAFF REPORT RECEIVED APR 13 2015 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD — PLANNING DIV. Subject: Public Hearing Notice for Design Review for a Single Family Residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr. April 12, 2015 Dear Ms. Lewit, My name is Terry McAloon. I live at 2759 Burlingview Dr. which is the house next store to the west of the residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr. I am writing you regarding concerns that I have over the design of the proposed residence at 2753 Burlingview Dr. They are as follows: A. Lack of Compliance with the Citv of Burlin�ame Nei�hborhood Guidebook- My house is a one story single family dwelling with approximately 1800 sq ft. There are three single story residences across the street from the proposed dwelling. Based on data from the Zillow website, two of these homes consist of some 1700 sq ft in area. I'm not able to determine the area of the third house. In looking at the other houses on Burlingview Dr. using Zillow, in my opinion, the average house is a single story residence with approximately 2000 sq ft of living space. The proposed new house will have two stories and an area of 4118 sq ft. orjust about twice the size of the typical Burlingview Dr. home. I believe such a house is not compatible with our neighborhood and I reference the following statements from the Guidebook: i) "Component 5: Mass, Bulk and Scale a) Design Review Criteria: A compatible design will respect the scale of the existing neighborhood. It will use methods and include elements which support the scale of example houses in the neighborhood. The scale of the residence should be consistent with the example residences in the neighborhood. b) Mass and Building Plan When designing additions it is often tempting to fill in recesses in a building footprint, resulting in simpler rectangular forms. This will typically result in a more massive building that will not support neighborhood compatibility. 04.13.15 PC Meeting Item #9b 2753 Burlingview Drive Page 2 of 3 ii) Component 4- Location of Additions When placing a second story space, attempt toward the center of the property. Where sensible from an interior planning perspective, pull portions of the space away from the property line." Based on my reading of the above sections of the Design Guidebook, I have the following questions regarding the design of the residence under review: Does a house designed to have twice the number of stories and twice the square footage of neighboring homes, meet the criteria of being consistent with the example residences in the neighborhood? 2. The footprint of the house seems to be a large rectangle that is recommended against in the Mass and Building Plan section of the Guidelines. 3. Was any attempt made to follow the Guidelines regarding locating the second story space towards the center of the property? This has a particular application on my comments below. 4. Will your review recommend the installation of story poles to depict the bulk and mass of the proposed structure? B. Direct Impact of Proqosed House on Mv Residence- I currently have a view from a window on the eastside of my house that gives me a site-line of several hundred feet. (There is even a small sliver of a view of the bay from the window). What I understand from looking at the plans for the new house is that the outer wall on the west-side of the current house is 8.5 ft. The plan for the new building will raise this up to 24 ft. If this is correct, then it seems that my basic view would be reduced to looking at the wall of the new house. If my view is so restricted, I think it defeats the purpose of the statement in the Design Guidebook under Component 1: Building Location that says the following: "One of the defining characteristics of most Burlingame neighborhoods is the sense of space that occurs between houses. Historically this sense of space and distance was one of the original design criteria for most neighborhoods. Residents were seeking the space and feel of a less urban environment while having access to numerous urban and community amenities." So I'd ask that in your review if you would consider if any change in the height of the 24 ft wall can be made. I can't help but comment on the irony that seems to arise in the design/construction of the new house. As I understand the plan, it will include the demolition of the `east wing' of the existing house. This structure has been the bane of our existence since it was built since it took a good 04.13.15 PC Meeting Item #9b 2753 Burlingview Drive Page 3 of 3 part of our view. (I have to wonder if it would even be allowed to be built now). But in tearing down this structure, I believe that a fairly decent view of the bay and even Mt Diablo would be visible from our window. The irony is that the new building would then come along and take the view away again. (It would be quite an achievement if somehow an arrangement could be worked out where the owner of the new house gets a place that's compatible with everyone and we get our view back!) I appreciate you and your colleagues giving consideration to my comments on the design of the new house at 2753 Burlingview Dr. Sincerely, Terry McAloon H ph 650 344-�201 C ph 650-773-4350 Emaii JOJTIMCA@AOL.COM 04.13.15 PC Meeting COMMUNICATION RF_CEIVED Item #9b AFTER PREPARATION 2753 Burlingview Drive OF STAFF REPORT Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED APR 13 2015 CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD — PLANNING DIV. Ms. Erika Lewit Senior Planner Planning Division Community Development Department Burlingame, California April 12, 20154 Regarding: Public Nearing Notice for Design Review for a Single Family at 2753 Burlingview Drive. Dear Ms. Lewit and members of the planning commission: My wife and I are owners and residents of the home across the street from the proposed project. In general, we are pleased to see upgrades and improvements in the area as they may improve the values of homes in the area and potentially keep the neighborhood well maintained. We do however have concerns about the size and scope of this project. It seems there is a trend evidenced by this and other projects in the Burlingame Hills area to maximize the size of homes that are built to the absolute legal limit. It seems we are evolving to an area of bigger and bigger homes on the same small lots. Our fear is we will lose the family neighborhood nature of the area and the open space between properties that we now enjoy. Is this in keeping with the long term plans for the area? In looking at the plans, we notice the increased height of the proposal. It appears the neighbor on the west side will be impacted by a 24 foot wall they will have to look at through their east viewing windows. We don't think it is fair to subject anyone to that circumstance. To us, it seems rude and disrespectful to these long-time Burlingame residents. We doubt any board member would like to have a 24' wall in their face, day in and day out. We hope the commission will consider these comments and acceptable accommodation can be made. Respectfully submitted, Gary E. Payne and Catherine A. Payne 2754 Burlingview Drive, Burlingame, CA 650-347-1994 �}. i3. �5 �'c. (`�t��-i ��q �-E-� �1� �j t� � �753 �5ur�iv��'�,/1�� 17�r- COMMUNICATION RECEIVED �FTER PREPARATI411� Q� STAFF REPORT' April 13, 2015 Ms. Erika Lewit Senior Planner Burlingame Community Development Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010-3997 Dear Ms. Lewit and members of the planning commission, _ �-� � � ��= � � ;. .�m � .... �._ a . . _,,. r_�� ;-, � � �i :�. � �� j!;� , �-.., �;- .�URL;�,<G;°.�-'� ,- ,_ ��- r�, r,; �,�: c� c�,�.� After reading some of the concerns from my neighbors, I thought it �vould be helpful to write this letter and tell you a bit about my family and our plans to live at 2753 Burlingview. My family and I are really looking forward to moving back to Burlingame and the neighborhood where I grew up. My parents moved to the house adjacent to 2753 Burlingview (200 Bella Vista) in 1981, when I was a 1-year old. My three siblings and I went to St. Catherine from Kindergarten through 8th Grade. We all have fond memories of playing at Arthur's Toy Town and trading baseball cards at Video Magic and Bob's. My wife and I welcomed our 2"d child earlier this year, and we decided to move out of the city to Burlingame, where we knew we would be in a family friendly community. We needed more space than our 1,000 SF condo and wanted a yard where our children could play outside. We also wanted to be around other growing families and know that good schools were nearby. Additionally, my parents still live at 200 Bella Vista. As two working parents, being close to trusted and willing babysitters is essential. 2753 Burlingview is the house our children will grow up in. As such, it is important to us that we are good neighbors. I am happy to discuss any concerns my neighbors may have and make changes to our plans provided that they are reasonable and do not affect my family's enjoyment of our home. Having grown up in the neighborhood and now moving back to rai� my children in the same neighborhood, I truly feel we are preserving the "family neighborhood nature" of the area. Sincerely, Alvin Chan 2753 Burlingview N V � � N C 3 3 � v < � N V O� O 00 C 1 ,n%^ W �T ,`V C v , < � � 0 a c� � � H � 3 � O � '8 � '8 'D' W N C fD � V! (Q L � � O � C � 3 � 7 lQ < N � v � < � N A OD W c ,�^ W � � v = <' � N � ri < t',' ..� g �� , � ' _�i t�� 0 �� ,�� ,(,� �' r.=:> ',�'^' � C C�? ` - � i 1-= .{` �,�.�.� 4 u � ,�� a I m � _ � �� z N (� 3 6 O 3 O 0 n � O O 3 � 3 i $, :'�, .�� i. I i'J �� .��'�T.. �� :: I - �n ond Alrerations an � Yuen Residence Wrlingview Drive ome, California 94070 27-267-030 i N V W � W C � 7 cc < � f v = <' c� N V � � W C ,�^ W L �C C v , < � � 0 -a m � � N � Q � � C n ro � 'p � V � W n C C � 7 3 � = 3 y � iC � 0 �C A 7 G � � � C � rt � 7 O � V fD � v � < m N ^ V N N C W a o0 �. � 1 rt � Q �T •V \ � v = .. � m �a� ,� � � i , �� i� , � , � ,, N �. ,, V i �O M1" � �ii u�� ; , � W I,�uGf�I i i> � i C hNil IN �il��,i;i;i�i � � . � r, � �� 6 �i�� p'�ro� ii , ,;� fD ^q �iY�� i" i Im�,�ld'�quII,�1� �^q, !i � . 0 Y��F4�I�a I�;I. � . � L M� ��C �r yy ; Ii�J�lti ir� � r�n�Y'!,.Inl .I;: �r�:. . 6 !._J k ./'a Dreiling Terrones ��.� ::; ''�.:..;.., :r; Inc. .4tchifectura Infrasiruciure Envirunmen Is I I p3 JuanBa Avanuo 6UfIIn47amB, CqG(C 11U PJU10 ssu e9a t xo 314 Centar Sheet i;YN HanldsUurg, Cnllloini� b5J48 7073d3 7305 �CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMUN�TY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIPv1ROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org Site: 2753 BURLINGVIEW DRIVE The City of Buriingame Planning Commission announces the ��LIC H�ARIIVG following pubiic hearing on MONDAY, JULY 13, 2015 at NQ��C� 7:00 P.M. in the City HaII�Council Cham6ers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA: Application for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a majar renavation of on existing single family dwelling which includes a first flaor addition and a new second floor at 2753 BURLINGVIEW DRIVE zoned R-l. APN 027-2b1-030 Mailed: July 2, 2015 (Please refer to other side) City vf Burlingame 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 ah�ut this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director , PUBLIC HEARING PIOTICE (Please refer to other sideJ ' � - n� �t =: - i J v e a :� � � � � �� .t c�„' ` - •w � : * � , �ss`�,�.i- - � � : �� "". ' �� ,��' $ ��j� � ,� . � _ s , � �.� .. _ :. . .. �?.� ��:. . _ ."� ' �e � ` � � . . � � . # �• ' * �. A t .., y . . ". F�:_ ��N� . ��.. . � •�� y;� t � � � _ � `� � , � � � r:, ,,��r F'�: � ��:• t� a ;' -� ;: � '� �r ��„��'a'�x .�. ' � i �S �-� ^�' 'r �,' ,£-`.�� : i �'CJ� . � @�¢� `� �f �..�F Q,� F f-. .��Y X, T . y� ; ,�' _� - �� - �+, r � . . _ f�r�� .��' � � � '. l �� t � . : �� - j'� S i _ �y. F � �. �.2�` . '* 4 ti � � l� i .. � +k � . �4 M _ ' �� ,� s �-§�,;. �$ � -,.�" '`�' ',� �� .�'� - s _. ... . . � . . .._ �i ..,,: .... v. ..,..f'�'.` �.iw.._ . � . , � ,yZ ' �� c � ��, r � �' �` �� - �. � �- �� t � � �,c �:7 ►. , �� s = �, y � � . c •� . �� ': , �r �. � � �'� � '�'=*`' �* � : � s�� . �� r � � � - gi . �� ': � �: • ' . ... .,:0 55... -� ,� ,�. �-�� 21�, ,� � _ �€r _ : � � - y�,� � � }� "_:. 3 • _.� �'.- . �-9 . _ � � i � ^ - �. r � . z � � "'�' l�� ' � rL'� � � �'' -� r 3 �.f � . . .: .- I�� . a `1i�� " � � ; `` QV . , Z,��j`3 '" �- ;_. . _ Q,V �.. ` . ,� V, �' � - _ - , �_ _ . � _ -_ - • , I ; . . ,. F : Y�. _��. - �, �{ �.. '. ,�,�'f .-�'�Ko � � {,� � .. �'"'Yd - _ = e: . ��',�g�� '-:& � �..-t p '�5��'* � � Y2� �� .�- € �-'�i • .. , �'� � ; � (', - ,�` `� . � � �v� ;� � � _ �. � � ��, � = �. � f �� .. e • � � � . � ��tz� �° `` �� "� �` � � � i. - +� , � ; :��„' , ,�; _•i x \ , � �"Cdn � Z Py�: .i�# " { ia- � �i � : { � �' �� ,. t �y.� _ �iY .� ... ,� E�'� � - . ' _ ' ' ? ! . , ' ' ..��a - � - .. v { `+ , . . . �"� _ � �� ';� ' .. � � a ��' � " . ', ' - 1.. �.� � , �� (1 ; ' �a� � < �- s _ _ \.7� . �` : � �� s _ � �, z� �� „s�� , _ �/� . ` � ,r�'.. �� = �T � - ' � 7 � . � - . � i�'c�h � � - 1. � � 'f'�',,;. �:. � / , .. . . � - - �� - a � � . . k t •�, i ��_ �� r�'..� � x�� r �:. � ��, :1 y� H � � Y± ' \� � O � � � , � , , ^� � .�:. E,a - - _ �� -s. � . � • ..-_ , r...� � . t f �' . : . - t attQ-:;+. ... . .,. , '. .. x , c n� �p�� . -� +:,y.'n ' ' ,. , y-_ ��p.D o oo'o s o �- o o�'op[� o0 0 �.`� ' 1 � . �A�� o �� r�.:�q%��D � . 0 0 0 p a o 0 0�o Q`�'o _ .. . _ � . .. .. }_. . � s�`=st . '� - ° �'� fl'.��, �_U II �:: �..�` � ..i, : �s '-- . � . -2 +�;.- ��'. ;a � _ • „ : . J�.L `• � ��RA • �. ,� �r��:: �.�� . N N �.,w... x h � ;� �.: te- __ '� f_r � � F,. �o.. . ... i .. ; t` � 4 ` � � �i� ,. r . ��• . . , . �A �.+. r ur. .. : �.. k;, . ' . ��. �•`. :� ^�^� �'"' ��'�� s'�� t ;� � +y+' � x"�• _ � , �.d�.d'i� "^a.;.�r . . K �'° � „�,f�i+{ . � ;� , _ � ��, . :, _ .. h ..: � � ^ .. � _ ' 'VR.r ._ fl �"� i �. �._ ., ,_ . � .� ;}. "`��. s. �...��,y A' �'t`�wx �_ �-�a-�...�_�, tk .. � .,: ��. . ;..—� '� ` . � r. �� :�" .�...a,� �� Item No. 9b � Design Review Stu�fy � City of Burlingame Design Review, Hillside Area Construcfion Permit, and Parking Variance Address: 2753 Burlingview Drive Meeting Date: April 13, 2015 Request: Application for Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and Parking Variance for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling that includes first floor additions and a new second floor. Applicant and Architect: Richard Terrones, Dreiling Terrones Architecture, Inc. Property Owner: Alvin Chan General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 027-261-030 Lot Area: 10,000 Zoning: R-1 Project Description: The existing house is two stories with an attached garage. The applicant is requesting Design Review for first and second story additions, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and a Parking Variance for the length of two covered parking spaces. The proposed floor area for the new house will be 4,118 SF (0.41 FAR) where 4,300 (0.43 FAR) is the maximum allowed on site (including covered porch exemptions). With the proposed project, the existing second floor will be demolished, as well as portions of the existing left side of the house that have non-conforming side setbacks. The existing attached garage will remain, and there will be first floor additions at the rear of the existing house as well as a new second story. The applicant is requesting a Hillside Area Construction Permit for this major renovation, first floor addition and new second story. The existing highest ridge, at the left side of the house, is 24'-0" above average top of curb and the height of the flat roof for the new second story addition is 30'-0" above average top of curb. The applicant is requesting a Parking Variance for the length of two covered parking spaces. The exteriorwalls of the existing attached garage and the existing code-complaint uncovered parking space in the driveway leading to the garage will remain. The number of bedrooms on site will be increased from 4 to 5 and the on-site parking requirement will be increased from two spaces (1 covered, 1 uncovered) to three spaces (2 covered spaces, 1 uncovered parking space). The interior width of the garage will not be altered; it provides the minimum width for two covered parking spaces (18'-0" existing and proposed). Several interior structures (such as a furnace, water heater, and stairs) will be removed or re-built to increase the interior length in the garage. Because the parking space length is being altered, the required length must be 20'-0" to comply with code regulations, where 18'-0" is proposed to the new stair configuration; therefore the applicant is requesting a parking variance for the length of the two covered spaces. There is a protected size tree at the left, front side of the property that will be retained with construction. The applicant has submitted a Certified Arborist Report, date stamped March 11, 2015, to det-�il protection measures. The applicant is requesting the following applications: ■ Design review for a second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010,a,2); and ■ Hillside Area Construction Permit (C.S. 25.61.020); and ■ Parking Variance for covered parking space length for two spaces (C.S. 25.27.020,b). This space intentionally left blank. Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permit, and Parking Variance 2753 Burlingview Drive 2753 Burlingview Drive Lot Area: 10,000 Plans date stamped: March 11, 2015 EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED SETBACKS � Front (1st flr): ' 34'-8" No change 23'-7" (2nd flr): ; 57'-3" 42'-1" 23'-7" To attached garage: 24'-11"' No change 35'-0" , _ ......................._.__...........__._......_._....._...._........_................__:.........................................................................._......................................................�.......................................................................................................................:.................................................................................... _............... Side (left): 5'-0" Z 11'-0" 7'-0" (righf): ; 10'-0" No change � 7'-0" _..... _............_.... _ .. ........_ ..................................._...__;._ _..............__.............. _ :................ . .............._....................... ....... _ .............................. ; _.. Rear (1st flr) ; 31'-0" 41'-0" 15'-0" i ; ; Rear 2nd flr :: ; 37'-0" � 41'-0" � 20'-0" _ r _)_ ; __ __ _______ __. ___ __ _ _. � Lot Coverage: ; 2860 SF 2616 SF 4000 SF 29% ; 26% 40% __........_........_...._ .............._......._._.._......_........................... ..... . . ..... ... ..... .......... . .............. .........................._..._... _. _ ... ........ _..............:.... .... .... ............................................. _ . ...... ............... FAR: ; 3356 SF 4118 SF 4300 SF 3 0.34 FAR 0.41 FAR 0.43 FAR _ ................................................._..........._......................................_.............:.................................................................................................................................._........................................................................................................__..........;._................................................_._...................__........_.. .. # of bedrooms: : 4 5 --- Parking: 1 covered 2 covered 2 covered (9' x 18'), attached 4 (18' x 18'), attached (18' x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') (9' x 20') Height: 24'-0" 30'-0" 30'-0" ' Existing, non-conforming setback to the attached, single door garage. 2 Existing, non-conforming right side setback (5'-0" existing, 7'-0" required). 3 (0.32 x 10,000 SF) + 1100 SF = 4000 SF (0.43 FAR). 4 A parking variance is requested for covered parking space length for two spaces (18'-0" length provided where 20'-0" is the minimum required) (C.S. 25.27.020,b). Staff Comments: See attached memos from the Chief Building Official, Fire Division, Engineering Division, Parks Division, and Stormwater Division. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows: 1. Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. 6►� . Design Review, Hillside Area Construction Permif and Parking Variance 2753 Burlingview Drive Required Findings for Variance: In order to grant a variance the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d): (a) there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that do not apply generally to property in the same district; (b) the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship; (c) the granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience; and (d) that the use of the property will be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of existing and potential uses of properties in the general vicinity. Required Findings for Hillside Area Construction Permit: Review of a Hillside Area Construction Permit by the Planning Commission shall be based upon obstruction by construction of the existing distant views of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be given to the obstruction of distant views from habitable areas within a dwelling unit (Code Sec. 25.61.060). Erika Lewit Senior Planner c. Richard Terrones, Dreiling Terrones Architecture, applicant Attachments: Application to the Planning Commission Variance Form Arborist's Report, date stamped March 11, 2015P Photographs of Neighborhood, date stamped December 22, 2014 Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed April 3, 2015 Aerial Photo -3- =a� �_�f��y COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 5(i1 PRfMROSE ROAQ • BtlRLiNGAA7E, CA 9401R BURIJNc�ME p; g5D.558.725� • f: 650.696.3790 � www.burlingame.org . j APPL�CATION TO THE PLANNING GOMMISSICIN Type of app{ication: � �esign Review D Variance � Parcel #: a2�-zs�-oso L7 Conditional Use Permit ❑ Speciai Permit ❑ Other. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2753 guriingview Drive APPLICANT project contact person � OK 2o send electronic copies of documents � NBrpg: {Same as Architect) Address: Cify/State7Zip: Phone: Fax: PROPERTY OWNER project cantact person ❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ (�Jame: AWin Chan Address: �� R„�.� ^� n��ve City/Sta#e2ip: au�li�aame � cA � sao�o Phone: s50-soa-2s7e Fax: E.�; ' �i.''• =- %: l;�;• , CC�:`' E-fT1a1I: alvin@woddcocompany.com E-maii: �rvv,� � �+"� • �- ARGHITECTIDESIGNER projeotcontactQerso�� OK to send etectronic copies of documents O f�a�pe:. Richard Terrones Address: �1o3,luanita� City(State/Zip: gur�in9ame i ca r saoio Phone_ sso-sa3-sss5 FgX: 55D-556-1725 E-mal�: rt@dtaanf.com �r Burlingame Business License #: �� _.,. �� ,,,� i.� � - �_. .� �-� . . . ��.;� PRD.iEGT DESCR1PTIdN: Addition and alteratio� of existin4 residence __ AFFADAViT/51G�JATURE: I hereby certify under pena#ty of per}ury ihat the information given herein is true and wrrect to the best of my knowledge and 6 lief. Applicant's signature: V Date: � Z�� I am aware of the proposed applicati and here6yt�th"�rize the above applicant to submit this'application to the Planning Commission. —f� `,,� Property ownec's signature: ----�`" -'�`��—� Date: � �' � � � � � bate su6mitted- � 2'� �' 2(� �--� �r Verification khat the pro}ect archiEectidesigner fias a valid Burlingame business license will he reqUired by the finance department at the time application fees are paid. S: jHANDOUTSI PC Application. doc CIT �� ' _�� CITY OF BURLINGAME VARIANCE APPLICATION Gua.�-c,C�-� = 2�-5-3 P�.�eu�.�G,�n�.w The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to your property which do not app/y to ofher properties in this area. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010 p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org This application is for the existing non-conforming length of the garage. The current interior length is 16'-4" with the intruding stair and an proposed 18'-0" interior length is part of this project with the rearranged stair. The garage currently is on a up slope therefore if they front wall were relocated, the driveway would need to be reconstructed and causing it to be steeper. The interior wall cannot be relocated with out major reconstruction of the kitchen area. b. Explain why the variance request is necessary for fhe preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right and what unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship might result from the denial of the application. c. We are proposing to re-adjust the existing garage stair to be able to adjust the current 16'-4" interior length to 18'-0" interior length. To be able to provide the required 20'-0" length, there would be significant modification to the kitchen by allowing the stair to be pushed back another 2'-0". By adjusting the front garage wall, the existing driveway and slope would have to be completely re-built and adjusted. the Variance consideration is necessary in order to provide a two car covered parking with out rebuilding the entire garage. Explain why the proposed use at the proposed /ocation will nof be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or to public health, safety, general welfare or convenience. The proposed use at the proposed location will not be detrimental or injurious because there will be (2) covered parking spots instead of the original (1) covered parking spot, thus removing a car from parking on the road. The modification to the stair is interior, with no change to the exterior of the garage. d. How will fhe proposed project be compatible wifh the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of the exisfing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity? The proposed project will not change in location it is currently in, thus it will be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of the general vicinity ��p��t' �� ; � ..� << �.6' -,�,�' � Handouts\Variance Application.2008 c;;��; o� �u�u;�G,�,rf�c GD'J-1=L1:NNIiJG Di`✓. ,E , ..,�.� W , . . ....,. N�,. ,..,_: ,� -..,,.� . u... . ... .., .�. . � . .. . Project Comments Date: March 13, 2015 To: � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 X Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 From: Planning Staff � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 0 City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor adition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: Revised plans dated March 11, 2015 No further comments. All conditions of approval as stated in the review dated 12-23-2014 will apply to this project. Reviewed by; ate: 3-13-2015 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 x Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 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 D cember 31, 2013 then this project must comply with the 2013 California -� uilding Codes. ;(� .,�s of January 1, 2014, SB 407 (2009) requires non-compliant plumbing fixtures '� to be replaced by water-conserving plumbing fixtures when a property is 1'' undergoing alterations or improvements. This law applies to all residential and commei�cial property built prior to January 1, 1994. Details can be found at http://www.leginfo.ca.govJ�ubJ09-10/bill�sen/sb 0401- 0450�b 407 bill 20091011 chaptered.html. Revise the plans to show compliance with this requirement. 3) Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2013 California Energy Efficiency Standards. Go to http://www.enerqv.ca.gov/title24/2013standards/ for publications and details. 4) 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 an be found. -.5� lace 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.) __._.. . .�_._� _...�._„ Co,n.s�truction hours in`the City Public right-of-way are limited to eekdays and non-City Holidays between 8:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m. � _... ______�_.._......_.._....__ ................___-_.._.___............_..�......_... _......................._......_.:._.......__.._.... Note: Construction hours for work in the public right of way must now be included on the plans. 6) On the first page of the plans specify the following: "Any hidden conditions that require work to be performed beyond the scope of the building permit issued for these plans may require further City approvals including review by the Planning Commission." The building owner, project designer, and/or contractor must submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically illustrated on the Job Copy of the plans prior to performing the work. 7) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business license. 8) Provide a fully dimensioned site plan which shows the true property boundaries, the location of all structures on the property, existing driveways, and on-site parking. 9) Provide existing and proposed elevations. 10)This project will be considered a New Building because, according to the City of Burlingame Municipal code, "when additions, alterations or repairs within any twelve-month period exceed fifty percent of the current replacement value of an existing building or structure, as determined by the building official, such building or structure shall be made in its entirety to conform with the requirements for new buildings or structures." This building must comply with the 2013 California Building Code for new structures. BMC 18.07.020 Note: Any revisions to the plans approved by the Building Division must be submitted to, and approved by, the Building Division prior to the implementation of any work not specifically shown on the plans. Significant delays can occur if changes made in the field, without City approval, necessitate further review by City departments or the Planning Commission. Inspections cannot be scheduled and will not be performed for work that is not shown on the Approved plans. 11)Due to the extensive nature of this construction project the Certificate of Occupancy will be rescinded once construction begins. A new Certificate of Occupancy will be issued after the project has been finaled. No occupancy of the building is to occur until a new Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. 12)Provide a complete demolition plan that includes a leqend and indicates existing walls and features to remain, existing walls and features to be demolished, and new walls and features. NOTE: A condition of this project approval is that the Demolition Permit will not be issued and, and no work can begin (including the removal of � building components), until a Building Permit has been issued for the project. The property owner is responsible for assuring that no work is authorized or perFormed. 13)Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines 14)Show the dimensions to adjacent structures. �ooms that could be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window ' or door that complies with the egress requirements. Specify the location and the net c/ear opening height and width of all required egress windows on the elevation drawin_qs. 2013 California Residential Code (CRC) §R310. Note: The area labeled "Office" is a room that can be used for sleeping purposes d, as such, must comply with this requirement. icate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the Department of Public Works. . 17)Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are considered in calculating the allowable lot coverage. Consult the Planning Department for details if your project entails landings more than 30" in height. 18)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 2013 CBC § 1009. 19)Provide lighting at all exterior landings. NOTE: A written response to the items noted here and plans that specifically address items 2, 5, 15, and 16 must be re-submitted before this project can move forward for Planning Commission action. The written response must include clear direction reqardinq where the requested information can be found on the plans. �, Reviewed Date: 12-23-2014 2013 CALtFORNIA GREEN BUILDING CODE RESIDENTIAL CHECKLIST (Ue�v resid�r�tial builc�inqs rr�ust be clOsigr��d �c� it�cfud� ih� Gr�ert t3ui��ir�c� �;�r�rrdafory mea�ures speci�ied irt it�is check�is'r. 1h�se Grn�n r��rldir�g manc�atrr� m�asures c�lsa crp�aly io �c`ditir�r�s vr c��teratr'o��rs o� existi;�a resid�ntial buil�'inqs �r✓here fhe c�c�di�ior� ar� �Izeratio�r increetses t1�e �auildin�s car�dit�nnEd �r-e�, volume, or srze. Thes� requir�rnet�ts aJ��lg� o�rly ra ihe speci�ic area af addrti�n ar al�er�tion. Building Permit Number: � , ; Site Address: 7��3_��n�� '�U� ----_ _ ___ ___ __ _ _ _ _ In the column labeled "Plan Reference" specify where each Measure can be found on the Green Building Measure s. Plan Reference -SITE:DEVELOPMENT (2013 CGC.§4.106). �: : A plan has been developed,and will be implemented, to manage storm waterdrainage during construction. CGC §4.106.2 & §4.106.3 ; , ENERGY EFFICIENCY ` ;; (2013 CGC §4 2 and.the 2013 California: Building Ene.Cgy Efficiency Standards) ' 2013 Energy Code performance compliance documentation must be provided in 8-1/2" X 11" format and must be replicated on the plans. Walls with 2 X 6 and larger framing require R-19 insulation §150.0 (c) 2 Hot water piping insulation §150.0 (j) 2 A ii Lighting — new mandatory requirements for indoor rooms. §150.0 (k) Duct insulation (R-6) required §150.0 (m)1 Duct leakage testing-6%with air handler and 4% without air handler §150.0 (m) 11 Return duct design/fan power, airflow testing, and grill sizing requirements §150.0(m)13 Water heating —1-?0 volt receptacle < 3 ft., Cat III or IV vent, and gas supply line capacity of at least 200,00� Btu / hour §150.0 (n) New third-party HERS verification for ventilation and indoor air quality §150.0 (o) New mandatory U-factor (0.58) for fenestration and skylights §150.0 (q) Luminaire efficiency levels 2013 California Energy Code Table 150.0 B Refrigerant charge verification for ducted package units, mini-splits, and other units §150.1 (c) 7 Radiant barrier now required in Climate Zone 3§150.1 (c) 2 Reduce U-factor (0.32) and SHGC (0.25) for high performance windows §150.1 (c) 3 A �� 1 -1 �I�Z ��.��.��.� �,;,�;�. ; � ��,� �:=;I � � c�� BURLI�GnME Green Building Measure Plan Reference WATER EFFICIENCY AND CQNSERVATION'(2013 CGC §4.3) Plumbing fixtures (water closets and urinals) will comply with the following: 1. The effective flush volume of all water closets will not exceed 1.28 gal / flush. �.L� � 2013 CGC §4.303.1.1 2. The effective flush volume of urinals will not exceed 0.5 gal / flush. 2013 CGC §4.303.1.2 The fittings for faucets and showerheads will have all required standards listed on the plans; 1.5 GPM for faucets and 2.0 GPM for showers. 2013 CGC §4.303.1.3 and 2013 CGC §4.303.1.4 An automatic irrigation system controller for landscaping will be provided by the builder and installed at the time of final inspection. 2013 CGC §4.304.1 , _ _ ,: ENHANCED: DURABILITY AND.REDUCED MAINTENANCE.(2013 CGC §4;406) ;': ' ` Annular spaces around pipes, electric cables, conduits or other openings in sole/bottom plates at e.xterior walls wi11 be rodent-p.roofed by. closing such openings with_ cement .mortar,_concrete _ _ -- - — — ------ masonry, or similar method acceptable to the enforcing agency. 2013 CGC §4.406.1 _: „ CQNSTRUCTION WASTE RED.UCTION, DISPOSAL; AND RECYClING.{2p�.3 CGC §4..408) ` ' A minimum of 60%ofthe non-hazardous construction and demolition waste generated atthe site wifl be diverted to an offsite recycle, diversion, or salvage facility per City of Burlingame Ordinance # 1704 and 2013 CGC §4.408 / _: _.. .. ,. _ _ '' BUILDING,MAINTENAN.CE ANR OPERATION (2013 CGC §4.410)� ' An operation and maintenance manual will be provided to the building occupant or owner. 2013 �� CGC §4.410.1 FIREPLAGES (2.013 CGC§4;503) Any gas fireplaces will be direct-vent, sealed-combustible type. 2013 CGC §4.503.1 Any wood stove or pellet stove will comply with US EPA Phase II emission limits. 2013 CGC §4.503.1 <::� POLLUTANT CONTROL (CGC §4:504) At the time of rough installation, during storage on the construction site, and until final startup ofthe heating, coolingandventilatingequipment,allductandotherrelatedairdistribution components openingswill be covered with tape, plastic, sheet metals, or other methods acceptable to the enforcing agency to reduce the amount of water, dust, or debris that may enter the system. 2013 CGC §4.504.1 Adhesives, sealants, and caulks used on the project shall follow local and regional air pollution or air quality management district standards. 2013CGC §4.5042.1 �� Paints and coatings will comply with VOC limits per CGC §4.504.2.2 � �. p Aerosol paints and coatingswill meetthe Product-weighted MIR limitsfor ROC and other requirements. 20]3CGC §4.504.2.3 �`� �� Documentation provided verifies compliance with VOC finish materials. 2013 CGC §4.504.2.4 �� Carpet system installed in the building interior will meet the testing and product requirements found in the 2013 California Green Building Code. 2013 CGC §4.504.3 -��- � Where resilient flooring is installed, at least 80% ofthe floor area receiving resilient flooring will comply with the California Green Building Code requirements.2013 CGC §4.504.4 �� Hardwood plywood, particleboard, and medium densityfiberboard compositewood products used on the interior and exterior of the building will comply with the low formaldehyde emission �p � standards. 2013 CGC §4.504.5 2 Green Building Measure INTERIOR MOISTURE CONTROL (2013 CGC §4.505) . A capillary break will be installed if a siab on grade foundation system is used. The use ofa 4" thick base of%z" or larger clean aggregate under a 6 mil vapor retarder with joint lapped not less than 6" will be provided unless an engineered design has been submitted and approved by the Building Division. 2013 CGC §4.505.2 and California Residential Code (CRC) §R506.2.3 Building materials with visible signs of water damage wili not be installed. Wall and floor framing will not be enclosed when the framing members exceed 19% moisture content. Moisture content will be verified priorto finish material being applied. 2013 CGC §4.505.3 INDOOR AIR QUALITY AN.D:EXHAUST (2013 CGC>§4.506) Exhaust fans that are ENERGY STAR-compliant, ducted and that terminate outside the building Plan Reference Ps O - l� _will.be. provided_m.ev.e _ry. bathr_oom._2�13 CGC §4.506.1_.._._______.___..__--_— .--.--.-___ -- .-.-- -- - -.. - - .- - Unless functioning as a component of a whole-house ventilation system, fans must be I ��`� I controlled by a humidistat. 2013 CGC §4.506.1 _ ' '` ;'ENVIRONMENTAL COMFORT (CGC §4..507) ` ' The heating and air-conditioning system will be sized, designed and have their equipment selected using the following methods: 1. Heat Loss/Heat Gain values in accordance with ANSI/ACCA 2 Manual J-2004 or equal; 2. Duct systems are sized according to ANSI/ACCA 1, Manual D-2009 or equivalent; 3. Select heating and cooling equipment in accordance with ANSI/ACCA 3, Manual 5-2004 or equivafent. 2013 CGC §4.507 ��-� _, , , _ INSTALLER SPECIAL INSPECTOR QUALIFICATION (2013 CGC §702); .' ` HVAC system installers will be trained and certified in the proper installation of HVAC systems and equipment by a recognized training/certification program. 2013 CGC §702.1 VERIFICATION (2013 CGC §7U3) ; _ . _. Upon request, verification.ofcompliancewith thiscode may include construction documents, plans, specifications, builder or installer certification, inspection reports, or ather methods acceptable to the Building Division that will show substantial conformance with the 2013 Code requirements. 2013 CGC §703.1 ► '� ►� Responsible Designer's Declaration'Statement : ` Contractor's Declaration Statement': _ I hereby certify that this project has been designed to I hereby certify, as the builder or installer, under permit meet the requirements of the 2013 Green Building listed herein, that this project will be constructed to Code. meet the requirements of the 2013 Green Building Code. Name: �� (��np�� Name: Address: t io3 >�\�p. � City/State/Zip Code �D , �, U�� n �D��' — Signature: Date: �3, �O°� _ l f-, Address: City/State/Zip Code Signature: Date: 3 Project Comments Date: To: From March 13, 2015 X Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 0 Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor adition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: Revised plans dated March 11, 2015 Responses to previous comments are acceptable. Reviewed by: V V Date: 3/18/2015 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 X Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 �---, 1. Tl�e project site is 10,000 square feet which requires permanent stormwater treatment measures. You can find more information and guidelines at: http://www.flowstobay.orq/newdevelopment In addition, no additional storm runoff is allowed from the post-construction site. Please provide plans showing how this will be satisfied. 2. Please show all proposed utilities on the site plan. 3. On the construction schedule, please update and include the following statement: Construction hours in the City Public right-of-way are limited to weekdays and non-City Holidays between 8:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m. Reviewed by: M. Quan Date: 12/23/14 � SAN M.'TEO CQUN7YWIDE Water Pollution Prevention Program C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) Stormwater Controls for Development Projects Chan/ Yuen Residence Project Information I.A Enter ProjeCt Data (For "C.3 Regulated Projects,"data will be reported in the municipality's stormwaterAnnual Report.) Project Name: Project Address & Cross St.: Project APN: Applicant Name: Applicant Phone: CITY/COUNTY OF Dept. Address Phone website Case Number: 2753 Burlingview Drive, Burlingame 94010 and Summit Drive 027-261-030 Wayne Lin 650-696-1200 Project Watershed: Applicant Email Address: wl@dtaanf.com Development type: � Single Family Residential: A stand-alone home that is not part of a larger project. (check all that apply) � Single Family Residential: Two or more lot residential development.' ❑ Multi-Family Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial, Manufacturing ❑ Mixed-Use ❑ Streets, Roads, etc. ❑'RedevelopmenY as defined by MRP: creating, adding and/or replacing exterior existing impervious surface on a site where past development has occurred.Z ❑'Special land use categories' as defined by MRP: (1) auto service facilities3, (2) retail gasoline outlets, (3) restaurants, (4) uncovered parking area (stand-alone or part of a larger project) ❑ Institutions: schools, libraries, jails, etc. � � � � j � / � (`� ❑ Parks and trails, camp grounds, other recreational t„ r", ❑ Agricultural, wineries ,. � 2�� ',,1; , , � 1 ❑ Kennels, Ranches ❑ Other, Please specify r�ITY UF BURLINGAME Project Description4: Addition of second floor and interior alterations to existing house ��,_��_ANN?PJG Dl'✓. (Also note any past or future phases of the project.) I.A.1 Total Area of Site: .22 acres �•A•2 Total Area of land disturbed during construction (include clearing, grad'+� g, excavating and stockpile area):_ 17 acres. Certification: I certify that the information provided on this form is correct and acknowledge that, should the project exceed the amount of new and/or replaced impervious surface provided in this form, the as-built project may be subject to additional improvements. � Attach Preliminary Calculations ❑ Attach Final Calculations ❑ Attach copy of site plan showing areas Name of person completing the form: Wayne Lin Title: Signature: Date: 03-09-2015 Phone number: 650-696-1200 Email address: wl(c�dtaanf.com � Subdivisions or contiguous, commonly owned lots, for the construction of two or more homes developed within 1 year of each other are considered common plans of development and are subject to C.3 requirements. 2 Roadway projects that replace existing impervious surface are subject to C.3 requirements only if one or more lanes of travel are added. 3 See Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes here 4 Project description examples: 5-story office building, industrial warehouse, residential with five 4-story buildings for 200 condominiums, etc. 1 Final Draft October 31, 2014 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist I.B Is the project a"C.3 Regulated Project" per MRP Provision C.3.b? ' 1.6.1 Enter the amount of impervious surfaces Retained, Replaced and/or Created by the project: Table 1.B.1 /mpervious and Pervious Surfaces I.B.1.a I.B.1.b I.B.1.c 1.B.1.d Existing Existing New Pre-Project Impervious Impervious Impervious Impervious Surface to be Surface to be SurFace to be Surface Retained6 Replaceds Createds Type of Impervious Surface (sq.ft.) (s .ft. (s .ft. (s .ft.) Roof area(s) 2505 0 2373 0 Imperviouss sidewalks, patios, paths, driveways, streets 1146 723 0 0 Impervious5 uncovered parking' 0 0 0 0 Totals of Impervious SurFaces: 3651 723 2373 0 1.B.1.f - Total Impervious Surface Replaced and Created (sum of totals for columns I.B.1.c and 1.6.1.d): 2373 Pre-Project Pervious SurFace Type of Pervious Surface (sq.ft.) Landscaping 6349 Pervious Paving 0 Green Roof 0 Totals of Pervious Surfaces: 6349 Total Site Area (Total Impervious+Total Pervious=l.A.1) 10000 1.6.2 Please review and attach additional worksheets as required below using the Total Impervious Surface Replaced and Created in cell I.B.1.f from Table I.B.1 above and other factors: I.B.1.e Post-Project Impervious Surface (sq.ft.) 2373 723 0 3101 Post-project Pervious Surface (sq.ft.) 6042 857 0 6899 10000 Check all that a I Check Attach pp y' If Yes Worksheet I.B.2.a Does this project involve any earthwork? � A 1.6.2.b Is I.B.1.f greater than or equal to 2,500 sq.ft? If YES, the Project is subject to Provision C.3.i. � g C I.B.2.c Is the total Existing Impervious Surface to be Replaced (column 1.B.1.c) 50 percent or more of the total Pre-Project Impervious Surface (column I.B.1.a)? � If YES, site design, source control and treatment requirements apply to the whole site; if NO, these re uirements a ly only to the impervious surface created and/or replaced. 1.6.2.d Is this project one of the Special Land Use Categories (box checked in section I.A. above) and is 1.B.1.f reater than or equal to 5,000 sq.ft? If YES, project is a C.3 Regulated Project. � D, D-1, D-2 I.B.2.e Is 1.6.1.f greater than or equal to 10,000 sq.ft? If YES, project is a C.3 Regulated Project. ❑ D, D-1, D-2 I.B.2.f Is I.B.1.f greater than or equal to 43,560 sq.ft. (1 acre)? If YES, project may be subject to � E Hydromodification Management requirements. 1.B.2.9 Is I.A.2 (pg. 1) greater than or equal to 1 acre? If YES, obtain coverage under the state's Construction General Permit and submit to the municipality a copy of your Notice of Intent. ❑ See: www.swrcb.ca.gov/water issues/proqramslstormwater/construction.shtrnl. 1.6.2.h Is this a Special Project or does it have the potential to be a Special Project? � F I.B2.i Is this project a High Priority Site? (Determined by the Permitting Jurisdiction. High Priority Sites can include those located in or within 100 feet of a sensitive habitat, ASBS, or body of ❑ G water, or on sites with slo es, and are sub'ect to monthl ins ections from Oct 1 to A ril 30. B.2.10 For Municipal Staff Use Only (Alternative Certification, O&M Submittals, Project Close Out) � G 5 Per the MRP, pavement that meets the following definition of pervious pavement is NOT an impervious surface. Pervious pavement is defined as pavement that stores and infiltrates rainfall at a rate equal to immediately surrounding unpaved, landscaped areas, or that stores and infiltrates the rainfall runoff volume described in Provision C.3. 6"Retained" means to leave existing impervious surfaces in place, unchanged; "Replaced" means to install new impervious surface where existing impervious surface is removed anywhere on the same property; and "Created" means the amount of new impervious surface being proposed which exceeds the total existing amount of impervious surFace at the property. � Uncovered parking includes the top level of a parking structure. 2 Final Draft October 31, 2014 C.3 and C.6 Developmenf Review Checklist I�J[•Tii'� iT��_1 C6 — Construction Stormwater BMPs Identify Plan sheet showing the appropriate construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) used on this project: (Applies to all projects with earthwork) Yes Plan Sheet � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ER1.1 � ERI.I � ER1.1 � ER1.1 Best Manaqement Practice (BM Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including pavement cutting wastes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemicals, wash water or sediments, rinse water from architectural copper, and non-stormwater discharges to storm drains and watercourses. Store, handle, and dispose of construction materials/wastes properly to prevent contact with stormwater. Do not clean, fuel, or maintain vehicles on-site, except in a designated area where wash water is contained and treated. Train and provide instruction to all employees/subcontractors re: construction BMPs. Protect all storm drain inlets in vicinity of site using sediment controls such as berms, fiber rolls. or filters. Limit construction access routes and stabilize desiQnated access points. Attach the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program's construction BMP plan sheet to project plans and require contractor to implement the applicable BMPs on the plan sheet. Use temporary erosion controls to stabilize all denuded areas until permanent erosion controls are established. � ER1.1 Delineate with field markers clearing limits, easements, setbacks, sensitive or critical areas, buffer zones, trees, and drainage courses. � ER1.1 Provide notes, specifications, or attachments describing the following: ■ Construction, operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment controls, include inspection frequency; ■ Methods and schedule for grading, excavation, filling, clearing of vegetation, and storage and disposal of excavated or cleared material; ■ Specifications for vegetative cover & mulch, include methods and schedules for planting and fertilization; ■ Provisions for temporary and/or permanent irrigation. � ER1.1 Perform clearing and earth moving activities only during dry weather. � ER1.1 Use sediment controls or filtration to remove sediment when dewatering and obtain all � ER1.1 Trap sediment on-site, using BMPs such as sediment basins or traps, earthen dikes or berms, silt fences, check dams, soil blankets or mats, covers for soil stock piles, etc. � ER1.1 Divert on-site runoff around exposed areas; divert off-site runoff around the site (e.g., swales and dikes). � ER1.1 Protect adjacent properties and undisturbed areas from construction impacts using vegetative buffer strips, sediment barriers or filters, dikes, mulching, or other measures as appropriate. 3 Final Draft Ocfober 31, 2094 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Worksheet B C3 - Source Controls Select appropriate source controls and identify the detail/plan sheet where these elements are shown. Detail/Plan Features that require Source Control Measures Yes Sheet No. source control measures (Refer to Local Source Control List for detailed re uirements ❑ Storm Drain Mark on-site inlets with the words "No Dumping! Flows to Bay" or equivalent. ❑ Floor Drains Plumb interior floor drains to sanitary sewera [or prohibit]. ❑ Parking garage Plumb interior parking garage floor drains to sanitary sewer.e � L1.1 Landscaping ■ Retain existing vegetation as practicable. ■ Select diverse species appropriate to the site. Include plants that are pest- and/or disease-resistant, drought-tolerant, and/or attract beneficial insects. ■ Minimize use of pesticides and quick-release fertilizers. • Use efficient irri ation s stem; desi n to minimize runoff. ❑ Pool/Spa/Fountain Provide connection to the sanitary sewer to facilitate draining.e ❑ Food Service Equipment Provide sink or other area for equipment cleaning, which is: (non-residential) ■ Connected to a grease interceptor prior to sanitary sewer discharge.e ■ Large enough for the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned. ■ Indoors or in an outdoor roofed area designed to prevent stormwater run-on and run-off, and si ned to re uire e ui ment washin in this area. ❑ Refuse Areas ■ Provide a roofed and enclosed area for dumpsters, recycling containers, etc., designed to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff. ■ Connect any drains in or beneath dumpsters, compactors, and tallow bin areas serving food service facilities to the sanitary sewer.e ❑ Outdoor Process Activities 9 Perform process activities either indoors or in roofed outdoor area, designed to revent stormwater run-on and runoff, and to drain to the sanita sewer.e ❑ Outdoor Equipment/ • Cover the area or design to avoid pollutant contact with stormwater runoff. Materials Storage ■ Locate area only on paved and contained areas. ■ Roof storage areas that will contain non-hazardous liquids, drain to sanitary sewer , and contain b berms or similar. ❑ Vehicle/ Equipment ■ Roofed, pave and berm wash area to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff, Cleaning plumb to the sanitary sewere, and sign as a designated wash area. • Commercial car wash facilities shall dischar e to the sanita sewer.e ❑ Vehicle/ Equipment Repair ■ Designate repair/maintenance area indoors, or an outdoors area designed to and Maintenance prevent stormwater run-on and runoff and provide secondary containment. Do not install drains in the secondary containment areas. ■ No floor drains unless pretreated prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer.8 ■ Connect containers or sinks used for parts cleanin to the sanita sewer.e ❑ Fuel Dispensing Areas ■ Fueling areas shall have impermeable surface that is a) minimally graded to prevent ponding and b) separated from the rest of the site by a grade break. • Canopy shall extend at least 10 ft. in each direction from each pump and drain awa from fuelin area. ❑ Loading Docks ■ Cover and/or grade to minimize run-on to and runoff from the loading area. ■ Position downspouts to direct stormwater away from the loading area. ■ Drain water from loading dock areas to the sanitary sewer.e ■ Install door skirts between the trailers and the buildin . � L1.1 Fire Sprinklers Design for discharge of fire sprinkler test water to landscape or sanitary sewer.e � L1.1 Miscellaneous Drain or • Drain condensate of air conditioning units to landscaping. Large air Wash Water conditioning units may connect to the sanitary sewer.e ■ Roof drains from equipment drain to landscaped area where practicable. ■ Drain boiler drain lines, roof to e ui ment, all wash water to sanita sewer.e ❑ Architectural Copper Rinse ■ Drain rinse water to landscaping, discharge to sanitary sewer8, or collect and Water dis ose ro erl offsite. See fl er "Re uirements for Architectural Co er." $ Any connection to the sanitary sewer system is subject to sanitary district approval. 9 Businesses that may have outdoor process activities/equipment include machine shops, auto repair, industries with pretreatment facilities. 4 Final Draft October 31, 2014 C.3 and C.6 Development Review Checklist Worksheet C Low Impact Development — Site Design Measures Select Appropriate Site Design Measures (Required for C.3 Regulated Projects; all other projects are encouraged to implement site design measures, which may be required at municipality discretion.) Projects that create and/or replace 2, 500 — 10,000 sq.ft. of impervious surface, and stand-alone single family homes that create/replace 2,500 sq.ft. or more of impervious surface, must include one of Site Design Measures a through f(Provision C.3.i requirements).10 Larger projects must also include applicable Site Design Measures g through i. Consult with municipal staff about requirements for your project. Select appropriate site design measures and Identify the Plan Sheet where these elements are shown. Yes Plan Sheet Number � a. Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels and use rainwater for irrigation or other non-potable use. � A1.1 b. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. ❑ c. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. ❑ d. Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. � L1.1 e. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with pervious or permeable surfaces. � f. Construct bike lanes, driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with pervious surfaces. g. Limit disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems; minimize � compaction of highly permeable soils; protect slopes and channels; and minimize impacts from stormwater and urban runoff on the biological integrity of natural drainage systems and water bodies; � A1.1 h. Conserve natural areas, including existing trees, other vegetation and soils. � L1.1 i. Minimize impervious surfaces. Regulated Projects can also consider the following site design measures to reduce treatment system sizing: Yes Plan Sheet Number ❑ j. Self-treating area (see Section 4.2 of the C.3 Technical Guidance) ❑ k. Self-retaining area (see Section 4.3 of the C.3 Technical Guidance) ❑ I. Plant or preserve interceptor trees (Section 4.1, C.3 Technical Guidance) 10 See MRP Provision C.3.a.i.(6) for non-C.3 Regulated Projects, C.3.c.i.(2)(a) for Regulated Projects, C.3.i for projects that create/replace 2,500 to 10,000 sq.ft. of impervious surface and stand-alone single family homes that create/replace 2,500 sq.ft. or more of impervious surface. 5 Final Draft October 31, 2014 Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 0 Fire Division (650) 558-7600 X Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 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 ful� size (2'x 3' or larger), plan sheet. A downloadable electronic file is available at: http://www.flowstobay.org/Construction Please contact Kiley Kinnon for assistance at: (650) 342-3727 Reviewed by: KJK Date: 12/23114 Project Comments Date: To: From December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 0 Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 X Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelling which includes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly — Schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building Plans prior to approval indicating location of the device after the split between domestic and fire protection lines. 3. All sprinkler drainage shall be placed into landscaping areas. 4. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. Reviewed by: � Date: Z ��./y Project Comments Date: To: From: December 22, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 X Parks Division (650} 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Hillside Area Construction Permit for a major renovation of an existing single family dwelting which indudes a first floor addition and a new second floor at 2753 Burlingview Drive, zoned R-1, APN: 027-261-030 Staff Review: December 22, 2014 1. No existing tree over 48 inches in circumference at 54 inches form base of tree may be r�emoved without a Protected Tree Permit from the Parics Division_ (558-7330) 2. Submit full size copy of arborist report for review. 3. Landscape plan is requireci to meet `Water Conservation in Landscape Regulations" (attached). Irrigation Plan required for Building permit_ Audit due for Final. Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 1/8/15 OUTDOOR WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST �, - 0 e 0 0 0 E` � 0 0 - ' � — ' � . � r -, - a,.'. I ce ' that the subject project meets the specified requirements of the Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance. t�3 • o�l • 2�S Signature Date ��ri.,f� `i_':I1I till 'ii ' .��-N I - _ .. . -: . . . .. �_� . :. . . . . .,..:_� � Single Family ❑ Mutti-Family ❑ Commercial ❑ Institutional 0 irrigation only ❑ Industria► ❑ Other: Applicant Name (print): `�C�� 'ZL-'��c►-�ES Contact Phone #: (��p - bqb • �2� ProjectSiteAddress: Z�tj�j 'Fy,�,�,�(,�,��') �jZ3�� Agency,Review; Project Area (sq.ft. or acre): �a �,E,� # of Units: � # of Meters: � (Pass}. "(Fati) '. � :; � r _ i � : � f ��„ � �o� ` Totai Landscape Area (sq.ft.). 1 � � � a� �ii�% � � i,� � � �, ; ❑ ❑ . :Inl�,.i i �'. } ri,_po o � i,i�tl� - P'� `� � .. ' . � ,Ic,l: ; �- ! �� i ..�!, , it�l� � ;;4Y � � !:n �,� .'; ��;�, iurf Irrigated Area (sq.ft.): ❑ ❑ o i . � i h..- t ��.' � i i '�,.) .' "✓� \ ;�� ❑ ❑ � Non-Turf irrigated Area (sq.ft. : ` � i ;�l ot�� - ar � it ii� 01��', n�, ' � Special Landscape Area (SLA) (sq.ft.): ❑ ❑ � =1"�-� �Cr �7 � �c ?3; fA 1 Ii1 r( �; . • -�i �, . .-s. �o�`;,;,� ,,� ', ;� Water Feature SurFace Area (sq.ft.): ��':�I� °I 14.:��,) � i��:lJ� f a � IP; li ., I I�� 19�i� �i,l.l ...' .,.;,. ..,'.��.._ I doyi_,1E1 �;410d ��.R.,,�i�.,.. . ... . , :�:. .. . . ,,., . �.—�. . . �.. �.� .. .r . . . Turf Less than 25% of the landscape area is 1�. Yes `.❑ '❑ turf ❑ No, 5ee Water Budget - All turf areas are > 8 feet wide ❑ Yes `,❑: ❑ All turf is planted on siopes < 25% ❑ Yes ;❑ ❑, Non-Turf At least 80% of non-turF area is native Yes ❑ ❑ or low water use plants ❑ No, See Water Budget Hydrozones Plants are grouped by Hydrozones � Yes ❑, ❑. At least 2-inches of mulch on exposed 5� Yes ❑ ❑, Mulch soil surfaces lrrigation System Efficiency 70% Efo (100% ETo for SLAs) ❑ Yes -❑ ❑, No overspray or runoff � Yes ❑ ❑ Irrigation System Design System efficiency> 70% � Yes p. ❑.,:; Automatic, self-adjusting irrigation ❑ No, not required forTier 1 0.::`: 0: ,; controllers Yes Moisture sensor/rain sensor shutoffs �I Yes 0 ❑ No sprayheads in < 8-ft wide area. ,�Yes ❑ ❑- Irrigation Time System only operates between 8 PM l�Yes ❑ ❑!. and 10 AM Metering Separate irrigation meter ❑ No, not required becan•a� <5,000 sq.ft. .❑ ❑ � Yes Swimming Pools / Spas Cover highly recommended ❑ Yes <❑ 0, i: $�, No, not required Water Features Recirculating ❑ Yes � ❑ ❑ Less than 10% of landscape area ❑ Yes ;❑• ❑,'.. Documentation Checklist ❑ Yes ❑ ❑ Landscape and Irrigation Design Plan ❑ Prepared by applicant ❑ ❑ '.. 1�.Prepared by professional Water Budget (optional) ❑ Prepared by applicant ❑ '0 .` ❑ Prepared by professional Audit Post-installation audit completed ❑ Completed by applicant 0` 0 ,�.Compieted by professiona�� ""` ="`z � ; � ; _ _ _ .. _ _ __ _- � .. �--- � r �r�.�: � I ?n�� ;IT'i �)= Ri IR� !��r6nn_ • �••' • - -�i� . il:� ��i'�a.�+.a �+:�:�kl.� +�h d? � T�.''"1. ''i {'a?74 '� y�S �. -5', �Y^r�F'� l�':a�+�'YcL'��W r s�, � F� i;u.� r.y �.oas�we- �yc�c�.�ae:�� '.�� v.�,, '�-"+.� ��. S-� t r� 2 � 1 Ya y �� 3s��y�`�,.�-P.�c��.i.5 r Y �, q'• � r N1L�' � '��- fY ��,.`7.i°�lY� �I��R"v��.s�^a?i'�+lyi• �o `Be} C � lete�l�b ��q n ��. �� -.� t�My :�� ,� ��;;�� yY M� .3:� < or�p. :ti. y � �`e �Y� �-��' ��.�� , � # �,�;.� �. ,�,� � .:,u�:��: �,.a.�� • -�:x�.��.��;�•�� " .=� ,.� ,� ..r -� �: '''` .�.n.tS%C'Y �.t-.?'�'y�'t x�;t'�.�^"�'-r ��.�.s re5:�, ��i.,�b�...rer �� . 5..�,M. � � � II 9 -. . •� ■ • • . .. • . ❑ Outdoor Water Use Efficiency Checklist ❑ Water Budget ❑ Landscape Plan ❑ Post-Insta(lation Audit Date Reviewed: ❑ Follow up required (explain}: Date Resubmitted: Date Approved: Dedicated Irrigation Meter Required: Meter sizing: Comments: Selected Definitions: ❑ Outdoor Water Use EfFiciency Checklist ❑ Water Budget Calculation Worksheets ❑ Plant List ❑ Other: �� !'t I s� � a'. i tr . L y ❑ Drip irrigation ❑ Self-adjusting Irrigation Controller ❑ Plant palate ❑ Three (3) inches of mulch ❑ Soil amendment {e.g., compost) ❑ Grading ❑ Pool and/or spa cover ❑ Dedicated irrigation meter ❑ Other: Tier 1 New construction and rehabilitated landscapes with irrigated landscape areas between 1,000 and 2,500 square feet requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check or design review, or new or expanded water service. Tier 2 New construction and rehabilitated landscapes with irrigated landscape areas greater than 2,500 square fieet requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check or design review. ETo Reference evapotranspiration means the quantity of water evaporated from a large field of tour- to seven-inch tall, cool-season grass that is well watered. Reference evapotranspiration is used as the basis of estimating water budgets so that regional differences in climate can be accommodated. SLA Professional � Water Feature Special Landscaped Area. Includes edible plants, areas irrigated witFi recycled water, surface water features using recycled water and areas dedicated to active play such as parks, sports fields, golf courses, and where turf provides a playing surface. Professional is a"certified professional" or "authorized professional" that is a certified irrigation designer, a certified landscape irrigation auditor, a licensed landscape architect, a licensed landscape contractor, a ficensed professional engineer, or any other person authorized by the state to design a landscape, an irrigation system, or authorized to complete a water budget, irrigation survey or irrigation audit. A design element where open water perForms an aesthetic or recreational function. Water features include ponds, lakes, waterfalls, fountains, artificial streams, spas, and swimming pools (where water is artificially supplied). Kielty Arborist Services CerTified Arborist WEn0476A P.O. Box 6187 San 1�lateo, CA 94403 650-515-9783 December 15, 2014 Drelling Tertones Architecture Inc. Attn: Mr. Carlos Rojas 1 103 Juanita Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 Site: 2753 Burlingview, Burlingame, CA Dear Mr. Rojas, As requested on Monday, November 17, 2014, I visited the above site for the purpose of inspecting and commenting on the trees. A new home is planned for this site and your concern as to the future health and safety of the trees has prompted this visit. An air spade was used to dig an exploratory trench along the existing house to help detect root damage and possible future root loss. Method: All inspections were made from the ground; the tree was not climbed for this inspection. The tree in question was located on a site plan provided by you. The trees were then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). Each tree was given a condition rating for form and vitality. The trees' condition rating is based on 50 percent vitality and 50 percent form, using the following scale. 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poor 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The height of the trees were measured using a Nikon Forestry 550 Hypsometer. The spread was paced of£ Comments and recommendations for future maintenance are provided. An Exploratory trench was dug to help locate roots and help predict root loss. A Supersonic Air Knife was used for the trenching. The air knife uses compressed air to dig the trench. The use of the air knife reduces root damage when digging the trench. A sliding handled soil probe was also to attempt to locate roots below the depth of the trench. ��'�� ,;�� .� � ;o,� t;ITY O� BURLiNGA�v'E Cr)!-�-G!_ ANNING DIV. 2753 Burlingview/12/15/14 (2) Observations: The tree in yuestion is a giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron gigantean) with an estimated diameter at breast height of 40 inches. The tree is located in the front of the property north of the existing garage and southwest of a new home being built. The estimated height of the sequoia is 50 feet with a total crown spread of 35 feet. The vigor of the tree is fair-good with normal shoot growth for the species. The form of the tree is fair with a straight trunk and a fair live crown ration. The tree has suffered moderate to heavy root loss from the excavation required to facilitate the building of the home. Several roots up to 3 inches in diameter. The roots were cut clean with a saw and impacts to the tree appear to be moderate. Exploratory trench being dug near the garage of the existing home. The exploratory trench exposed an abundance of small roots and no large roots along the edge of the garage. It appears roots were cut some time ago and the small roots are the results of that past root cutting. Large roots were unearthed neat the patio and at the entrance to the crawl space. The unearthed root appears to be the cause of the damage to the rat proofing in the crawl space. Small roots unearthed near garage of existing house at 2753 Burlingview. Roots appear to have been severed in years past. 2753 Burlingview/12/15/14 (3) Summary: The construction at 2747 and the proposed construction at 2753 Burlingview will have moderate to heavy impacts of the giant sequoia tree located between the construction sites. The impacts to the tree will be mitigated by heavier than normal irrigation during the warm season months. The stability of the tree does not to appear to be compromised at this point. More will be known and mitigating measures will be adjusted as construction starts at 2753 Burlingview. The following tree protection plan wil] help to reduce impacts to the large tree. Tree Protection Plan: Tree protection zones should be established and maintained throughout the entire length of the project. Fencing for the protection zones should be 6 foot tall metal chain link type supported my 2 inch metal poles pounded into the ground by no less than 2 feet. The support poles should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center. The location for the protection fencing should be as close to the dripline as possible still allowing room for construction to safely continue. Signs should be placed on fencing signifying "Tree Protection Zone - Keep Out". No materials or equipment should be stored or cleaned inside the tree protection zones. Areas outside the fencing but still beneath the dripline of protected trees, where foot traffic is expected to be heavy, should be mulched with 4 to 6 inches of chipper chips. The wooden fencing will suffice for the neighbor's trees. Trenching for irrigation, electrical, drainage or any other reason should be hand dug when beneath the driplines of protected trees. Hand digging and carefully laying pipes below or beside protected roots will dramatically reduce root loss of desired trees thus reducing trauma to the entire tree. Trenches should be backfilled as soon as possible with native material and compacted to near its original level. Trenches that must be left exposed for a period of time should also be covered with layers of burlap or straw wattle and kept moist. Plywood over the top of the trench will also help protect exposed roots below. Normal irrigation should be maintained throughout the entire length of the project. The imported trees on this site will require irrigation during the warm season months. Some irrigation may be required during the winter months depending on the seasonal rainfall. During the summer months the trees on this site should receive heavy flood type irrigation 2 times a month. During the fall and winter 1 time a month should suffice. Mulching the root zone of protected trees will help the soil retain moisture, thus reducing water consumption. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty Certified Arborist WE#0476A � � �'. 2735 Burlingview Drive 2755 Summit Drive 1 � � 2741 Burlingview Drive 2747 Burlingview Drive (currently under construction) Properties on Applicant Side af Burlingview Drive � � 2760 Burlingview Drive 2754 Burlingview Drive Properties on Opposite Side of Burlingview Drive I 1 � 2753 Burlingview Drive (Subject Property) 2748 Buriingview Drive � �� 2759 Burlingview Drive �€ �o o� � �" � - m� �o - m� ^ �� m�� U C .y � C Q t � :D � — _� � J � � � C U � � � � � — " J �.� U O� 1p a`.=S N V i � � .N � � � o 0 �^ � � P O � _ O O � — __ L � � p _ \ d __ � � � V ,O C y` c� o = E ^ O � m � � p� O �.- � �s � ` Z aV �m< 2 Hillview Court _ _ _ _ �` --:�_.. ,_,_. � �� '�-. _ . ;;;,; �; - ii_{i � Planning wbmina6 19 December 2014 Neighborhood Photos PHI.I 1428 . CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD � � BURLINGAME, CA 94010 '� PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org Site: 2753 BURLINGVIEW DRIVE The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the following puhlic hearing on MONDAY, APRIL 13, 2015 � at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, (A: Applicatian for Design Review, Parking Variance, and Hillside Area Construction Permit for o major renovation of nn existing single family dwelling which includes first and second story additions at 2753 BURLINGVIEW DRIVE zoned R-1. APN 021-261-030 Mailed: April 3, 2015 (Pfease refer to other side) PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Citv of Burlinqame 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 pubGc 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 ofher side) � , � }��, ��< � -� �� :� b,. " ;; h ;� � � �,.�,. � � .� . .z . r�� R ��-� : w 5 � � � � �� " ��.� � � � � . x � , � �� "�, '"� � '� - �� '� :. _ �' ' �; ti . � � ,v� +:��i';�;y • �'�� ;. � y� .. 74 } �� .. � :� ��i it 3. .. 9 �'� r � ��k � ; �,� f . ,� a �I ,�k s�. ,_ � � '�--"� � -. u, i , .� � . ; ` �` �" �� : �� ; � � ,. , � �,� .a, ��,� �. � - � • � ` �' `'"�,,��,�'" �� ; ,� '� :.:� �b �.. ,,� � �: � � � �'� ` � � �, �� w,��"ae � �. �� m ' �� `�' . ' , ' �� .�` `� _. «: , _ R �" �� y.. . . -i ��rH� � a �, �� 2� � �� <Y'� �; .: a- � � .) � �� o � � �� . < _. � � a �' „s ' �� *' � �t �R.,. ^_.. .. .. � .�.:: � � .: �,. � .. ± r� . �:.. �� "' ��► � �. , . � �, ��' ' � �� ''��_ � . � x 2�� _ , 2 ��1 ' � ; µ s �; , �, "� � . � � ^'�l �`� � �` � � ,.�'�••-' � .. �3 � � � � fi-?:� x a � �� w � 21 ; � � . _ � �; � S � V �' ' �` t3� . .� . ,�'.* , ` `�� 3 �� Q,V 2�� . �` . �=>.. V Q ;, � I " ; ,� � , � � �a, � , 4� Y ,�q gY �,$''� . . x � ...�''A ��yy�� . , t � � . ' A ��: f" �� . �� ) �}� 'a ', �' �� , x �`�, " s r. �: ` • _ ro� � _ - ��,;,r .v. � ,..� # ,» „� � � s�� ,'" _ i� ". � � . .'� �, �' �° � � N y�' � ��f i .. �' $ . �.. � bi ; >� � � � _^ � U� r G $. � � F �� - �� {.: �� O � 1 �� , �"; FbaA-.. : � �, arlingview Drive Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earths4ar Geographics, CNE}S/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AE�X, Get�mappin �, Aerogrid, IG-N, IGP, swiss•4opo, and the GIS User Communit,y