The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1312 Alvarado Avenue - Staff ReportCity of Burlingame Desigi: Review arid Parking Variaitce Item # 3 }' Consent Calendar Address: 1312 Alvarado Avenue Meeting llate: 07/25/OS Request: Design review and parking variance for a first and second story addition. Applicant and Architect: Nancy Scheinholtz APN: 027-194-120 Property Owner: Suzanne Rogers Lot Area: 6,000 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1(e)(1) - additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before thc addition. Summary: The existing two-story house, with an attached one-car garage, contains 2,661 SF (0.44 FAR) of floor area and has three bedrooms. The applicant is proposing a 134 SF first floor addition and a 336 SF second floor addition at the rear of the house. With the proposed addition, the floor area will increase from 2,661 SF (0.44 FAR) to 3,017 SF (0.50 FAR) where 3,020 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed (includes exemptions for covered porch and chimneys). The proposed project is 3 SF below the maximum FAR allowed on this property. With this project, the number of potential bedrooms will increase from three to four. One covered (10' x 20') and one uncovered (9' x 20') parking spaces are required for increasing the number of bedrooins. The existing attached garage measures 15'-3" wide x 16'-6" deep. However, because there are two posts in the middle of the garage, 7'-6" x 16'-6" clear interior dimensions are provided for one covered parking space. The existing covered parking space is nonconforming in width and length. Therefore, a parking variance is required for substandard covered parking space width and length (7'-6" x 16'-6" existing where 10' x 20' is the minimum required). All other zoning code requirements have been met. Thc following applications are required: • Design review for a first and second story addition (CS 25.57.010, 5); and • Parking variance for existing substandard covered parking space width and length (7'-6" x 16'- 6" existing where 10' x 20' is the minimum required) (CS 25.70.020, 2). Table 1— 1312 Alvarado Avenue Lot Area: 6,000 SF SETBACKS _ _ ......... _.__ _ _ ._ Front (Ist flr): (2nd flr): __ _. Existing 18'-2" 34'-11" Proposed no change no change Allowed/Required 15'-0" or avg of block 20'-0" Side (left): I 3'-0" ' no change (rigl:t): 5'-3" 8'-9" . � . � Design Revietin anrl Parking Varinnce Table 1— 1312 Alvarado Avenue Lot Area: 6,000 SF Rear (1 st flr): (2�rd flr): Lot Coverage: FAR: # of bedrooms: Existing 47'-6" 51'-6" 1920 SF 32% _ _ __ 2661 SF 0.44 FAR _ _ _ _ 3 _ . . __ : _ .. Parking: __ Height: 1 covered (7'-6 x 16'-6")2 1 uncovered (9' x 20') _. 21'-8" Proposed 42'-2" 42'-2" 1842 SF 30.7% 3017 SF 0.50 FAR _..... 4 no change __ ....._ 24'-6" 1312 Alvarado Avenue Allowed/Required 15'-0" 20'-0" 2400 SF 40% __ 3020 SF' 0.50 FAR _ __ . _ _ 1 covered (10'x20') 1 uncovered (9' x 20') .. . ............. .... . . .. 30'-0" � DHEizvelope: encroaches along right '; complies see code I side ' (0.32 x 6000 SF) + 1100 SF = 3020 SF (0.50 FAR). 2 Parking variance for existing substandard covered parlcing space width and length (7'-6" x 1G-6" existing where 10' x 20' is the minimum required). Staff Comments: See attached. July i l, 2005, Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on July 11, 2005, the Commission noted that the proposed design is well done, blends in well with the existing house, and that the bay window as proposed is acceptable, and therefore placed this item on the consent calendar (July 11, 2005, Planning Commission Minutes). The Commission also noted that the parking variance is appropriate because the posts which limit the parking spaces in the garage are existing. No changes to the project were suggested. Planning staff would note that because there were no changes suggested, the project was placed on the subsequent consent calendar for your review. 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 Design Review and Parking Va�-iance 1312 Alvarado Avenue 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. Findings: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Commission's July 11, 2005, design review study meeting, that the first and second floor addition is well-designed, blends in well with the existing house and enhances the design of the community, the project is found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's five design review guidelines. Required Findings for Variance: In order to grant a parking variance for existing substandard covered parking space width and length (7'-6" x 16'-6" existing where 10' x 20' is the minimum required), 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 an potential uses of properties in the general vicinity. Findings for Parking Variance: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Cominission's July 11, 2005, public meeting, that the existing house was built with a shorter garage with two posts located in the center of the garage, that the posts represent a localized and minor encroachment into the required parking space width and that the existing attached garage can accommodate two vehicles, that the parking dimension variance is unique to this structure and its design and should not go with the property, the project is found to be compatible with the variance criteria listed above. 3 Desdgn Review and Parking variance 1312 Alva��arlo Avenue Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be by resolution and include findings made for design review and parking variance. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated 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 Department date stamped June 15, 2002, sheets A-1 through A-6, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that the variance for parking dimension (width and length) shall only apply to this residential building and shall become void if the building is ever expanded, demolished or destroyed by catastrophe or natural disaster or for replacement; 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), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 4. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 5. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 6. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 7. 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; 8. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's May 18, 2005, memo, the Fire Marshal's May 19, 2005, memo, the City Engineer's May 20, 2005, memo, and the Recycling Specialist's and NPDES Coordinator's May 23, 2005, memos shall be met; 9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; 4 Design Review and Parking Variance 1312 Alvararlo Avenue 10. 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; and 11. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. Ruben Hurin Planner c. Nancy Scheinholtz, applicant and architect 5 Ciry of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 11, 2005 commission. No,t�d that three nei hbors on Vista Lane are in support, submitted petitions, will work with all neighbors. T�ere were no furtl}�r comments from the flgor. The public hearing w,as closed. C. Vis ' a moved to reco mend the tentative and �fial parcel map to the Ci,t� Council for approval. The mot' n was seconded C. Keighran. � � Chair Auran calle for a voice vote on the otion to recommend th 'tentative and final parce�ap to the City Council f� approval. The motio passed on a 4-0-1-2 . Brownrigg abstaining, ers. Cauchi, Osterling a�nt). Appeal procedure were advised. This ite concluded at 10:35 p.m. C. Browhrigg returned to the cY�a�mbers and took his seat n the dias. � IX. D IGN REVIEW STU ITEMS 10. 818 NEWHALL R D, ZONED R-1 — LICATION FOR D STORY ADDITIO (MATT MEFFORD, G ARCHITECTS, APF GARRETT PR ERTY OWNER 52 OTICED PROJECT P REVIEW FOR A SECOND T AND ARCHITECT; MIKE Plr Hurin b�fly presented the proj�t description. There we� no questions of staff. Chair ran opened the public omment. Michael and resa Garrett, property owners nd Matt Mefford, TRG rchitects, architect, ere available to answer uestions. Architect noted th the project includes ad ng a master bedroo and bathroom above t existing attached garage at � e rear of the house, no ditional site coverag is proposed, in fact lot c verage will be reduced by 29��SF with the removal of the covered porch at the ear; and project has de 'gned to be sensitive to the ighbor's privacy regardin e placement of the a dition and windows. C ission asked if the appli nt spoke to the adjacent n'ghbor about the propo d project? Yes, revie ed the plans with the adjace neighbor to left which � closest to the addition, ey have no obj ection t the proj ect. There were no ther comments from th oor and the public hear' g was closed. C. Kei an noted that the arc tect has done a nice job wit he design and made a tion to place this ite�ii on t consent calendar as oposed with no further cha es. This motion was se nded by C. Brow gg. Chair Auran called for vote on the motion to plac this item on the consent alendar as propo d with no further changes. T e motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2 (Cers. Cauc i and Osterling a sent). The Planning Commis ion's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:40 p.m. 11. 1312 ALVARADO AVENUE, ZONED R-1— APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (NANCY SCHEINHOLTZ, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; SUZANNE ROGERS, PROPERTY OWNER) (53 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Plr Hurin briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Auran opened the public comment. Nancy Scheinholtz, architect, 1024 Black Mountain Road, Hillsborough, was available to answer questions. Commission noted that the proposed two-story bay window at the rear of the house could be made more interesting; there are a lot of windows proposed at the rear of the house, could additional landscaping be added at the rear of the lot to provide screening? Architect 15 Ciry of Burlingarne Planning Cornmission Unapprove�t Minutes 12. July I1, 2005 noted that there is an easement and existing mature landscaping at the rear of this property, cannot see the neighbor's house from this location. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. C. Deal noted that the proposed design is well done, blends in well with the existing house, the bay window as proposed is acceptable and the parking variance is appropriate since the posts which limit the spaces in the garage are existing, and made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar as proposed with no further changes. This motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Comment on the motion: would like to see a condition added that the parking variance applies only to this building envelope. Chair Auran called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar as proposed with no changes. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2 (Cers. Cauchi and Osterling absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:45 p.m. 21 BANC FT ROAD, ZON D R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT OR DECLINING GHT ENVELOPE FOR�ST AND SECOND S RY ADDITION (MIC EL AND RACHE YGAREWICZ, APPLIC TS AND PROPERTY ERS; DAVID G. PO ARD DESIGNE 68 NOTICED PROJECT LANNER: CATHE ARBER Monroe briefly�lresented the project descri�xfion. There were no quesf,i'ons of staff. Chair Auran ened the public comme . Michael Zygarewicz, roperty owner, and David Pollard, designer, 8 Rose Avenue #l, Pleas ton, were available to an er questions. Commissioners had t e followin comments regarding the oject: p vide depth; • trongly encourage applica t to consider keeping the and second floor window at the front of the house; it � • Verify that all window comply with egress requirem appear to be too sm ; • Concerned with t appearance of the extended imn required if usin a gas insert, verify with the ilding or other • Provide detai d information regarding t e window trim, window type, es and overall trim package; tr' package and window styl should be consistent throughout e house; suggest using tradition stucco mold around wind s to match existing; • New 'ndows should be true or si ulated true, three-dimensional ivided light wood windo to mat existing; windows need t have the mullions on the inte 'or and exterior of the wi ow to • Reduce height of the s cond floor plate to 8'-4" to atch existing plate height on • Facade on the No Elevation is flat, needs re articulation, could add a bay feature to break this fa�ade; cury d mullion element on t existing first vo d be a shame to lose th� unique element; ts and correct plans, so e window openings �y, may not be po ible, extension may not be department. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing v�as closed. 16 CITY OF BURLING/�IvIE PLANNING DEPAR"I'ME,NI' S01 PRIlvII20SE ROAD P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 ZITY � � B4l.RLIN(}AME APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION �.m .N.�. t�� Type of applicallon: Design Review ✓ Conditional Use Permit Variance � Special Permit Other Parcel Number: Project address: /3/z fFGl�ft�/fU0 �i!/� ,�(/iQl.lN6/1Nlf ,, Gf} �f'�D/O APPLICANT Name: /}Yl/G,Y �%iEf�l/V/;�L %z PROPERTY OWNER Name:__ c�UZi�N/V�' p /40��5' Address: l 3� � �oyG'$Q,d �v� _ Address: �� /9�-!�/�i�3'�O /�l�� City/State/Zip: �/i��INGA/LIL�, c�l j'�/� City/State/Zip: �v!%i�//1/lr./t/��' � � /�/D Phone (w): c�J S' D 7fX� Phone (w): (h): ��: �58��3 ARCHITECT/DESIGNER �-Name._ _N�/I�Gr S�`L�'!/I��LT'2 Address: �3% % �D�'I/1`lif'f� �Y/�. City/State/Zip:.�?'%�-//1�G�i��, G�{ %�/O Phone (w): �.5� D 7� (h): �� " 1�,5� �� Please indicate with an asterisk * the contact person for ��E D MAY 1 7 2005 (h): CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. (fl� �'SS'd?o.3 :CT nF.SCRiPTiON: N£N� �A� AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Applicant's signature: {'►� Date:�' � ' �5 � I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. _ _. , 1 Property owner's signature: � '�=; --��' �'� � -�r%�`.--. Date: � - �< "� �_� � PCAPP.FRM �� s�o�� ;� f� �'- q 5e c�i c� �f� � , � �z �-�P �Q , -�� Project Comments Date: To: From: Subject: Staff Review: 05/17/2005 ❑ City Engineer X Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist d City Attorney ❑ Recycling Specialist a Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Planning Staff Request for design review for a second story addition at 1312 Alvarado Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-194-120 05/23/2005 1) All construction must comply with the 2001 California Building Codes (CBC), the Burlingame Municipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal requirements. 2) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 3) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. 4) Provide a second means of egress from the basement area. 5) Provide guardrails at all landings. 6) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are more than two risers. 7) Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 8) The fireplace chimney must terminate at least two feet above any roof surface within ten feet. Reviewed Date: .5��'�o f Project Comments Date: 05/17/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Subject: Planning Staff ❑ Recycling Specialist � Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Request for design review for a second story addition at 1312 Alvarado Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-194-120 Staff Review: 05/23/2005 Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide double backflow prevention. Reviewed by: ��_ � L;�� Date: ,� �) %j�.��' Project Comments Date: 05/17/2005 To: d City Engineer ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Subject: Planning Staff O Recycling Specialist ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Request for design review for a second story addition at 1312 Alvarado Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-194-120 Staff Review: 05/23/2005 1. Storm drainage shall be designed to drain towards the street frontage. 2. Replace all displaced/damaged sidewalk, driveway, curb and gutter. 3. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works — Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information. Reviewed by: V V �72�,/ . Date: 5/20/2005 Project Comments Date: � From: Subject Staff Review: 05/17/2005 0 City Engineer � Chief Building Official � City Arborist X Recycling Specialist � Fire Marshal � NPDES Coordinator � City Attorney Planning Staff Request for design review for a second story addition at 1312 Alvarado Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-194-120 05/23/2005 Applicant shall submit a Waste Reduction Plan and recycling deposit for this and all covered projects prior to construction or permitting. Reviewed by: _ , ��`8.J , � Date: �/.23� � Project Comments Date: 05/17/2005 To: � City Engineer � Chief Building Official � City Arborist � City Attorney From: Subject: Staff Review: Planning Staff � Recycling Specialist � Fire Marshal ✓ NPDES Coordinator Request for design review for a second story addition at 1312 Alvarado Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 027-194-120 05/23/2005 Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution including but not limited to ensuring that all contractars implement construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) and erosion and sediment control measures during ALL phases of the construction project (including demolition). Ensure that sufficient amount of erosion and sediment control measures are available on site at all times. The public right of way/easement shall not be used as a construction staging and/or storage area and shall be free of construction debris at all times. Brochures and literatures on stormwater pollution prevention and BMPs are available for your review at the Planning and Building departments. Distribute to all project proponents. For additional assistance, contact Eva J. at 650/342-3727. Reviewed by: ��?� l� `_ ��`� Date: 05/23/05 v RE�f�IVED VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR 1312 ALVARADO AVENUE JUN 1 5 2005 A. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicabl��'� oF auRUNGa,ME to your property which do rcot apply to other properties in this area. P�NNiNG �EPT. The house was built in 1937 with two garage doors facing the street. There have been no changes to the street fa�ade of the home. In order to make the garage meet the current requirements, the existing garage would need to be made deeper by adding on to the front of the house and thus changing the original fa�ade. In order to meet the current width requirement, the posts and their footings inside of the garage would need to be relocated to create a wider space. Other properties in the neighborhood have similar garages or were built later than this house when cars were larger and spaces were designed to accommodate the larger cars. Some garages in the neighborhood are detached one car garages in the rear yard. B. Explain why the variance reguest is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a sub��turztial property right and what unreasonable properry loss or unrcecessary hardship rraight result from the denial of the application. This variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of an existing condition. The garage has always been a substandard size and it would truly be an unnecessary hardship to require the owner to enlarge it. The reason that we are seeking this variance is because we are adding a 4`h bedroom on an existing roof deck. The family has three children and they need more space. The denial of this variance will deny ttiem the right to add a fourth bedroom or add a great deal of unnecessary expense to a project. C. Explairc why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements irc the vicinity or to public health, safety, general welfare or convenience. There will not be any adverse affect on the neighborhood if this variance is granted. The house has always had this size garage. The house has also had the same family with three children living in it. The addition will barely be visible from the street. The proposal is to extend the kitchen nine feet into the rear yard, (no variance required) and build a bedroom and bath on top of the kitchen. The public health and safety of the neighborhood will not be affected if the garage is left as it is. D. How will the proposed project be corr�patible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of the existing and poteratial uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity. The proposed variance will not change the aesthetics, mass or bulk and character of the home because the variance is to leave the parking as it is. The addition of the bedroom is barely visible from the street. The proposal will improve the rear fa�ade of the home and the new kitchen will be more in scale with the size of the home. �� CITY o,� CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD " BURLINGAME, CA 94010 ' ,L ,• TEL: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org � Site: 1312 ALVARADO AVENUE Application for design review and parking variance for a first and second story addition at: 1312 ALVARADO AVENUE, zoned R-1. (APN: 027-194-120). The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Monday, July 25, 2005 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Mailed: July 15, 2005 (Please refer to other side) PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF B URLINGAME A copy of the application and plans for ttlis project ' ay be reviewed prior to the meeting at`�the��Planning �Depart�nent a�"`�5 �� Primrose Road, Burlingame, CahfQrrmia. ,�. �,. �.� , � �, � � If you challen�e the subject�application(s) in cow-t, ��µ ma� be limited to raising only those issues you or so�neone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice or in written correspondcnce delivered to the city at or prior to the public he�iring. Property owners �ho receive this notice are respon�ble � or informing t h e i r t e n a n t ss a b o u t:� h i s n o t ice. For a d di tiona l in for ah �, lease ca l l (650) 558-7250. Thank you �: � �� ,:,� �= p „ �:�t t'. ,, , � } Y � 1 ta � Margaret Monr�,� ��'i � City Planner � <-.-� '"� PUBLIC HEARING .iVOi'ICE (Please refer to other side) RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING VARIANCE RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for design review and parking variance for a first and second story addition at 1312 Alvarado Avenue, zoned R-1, Suzanne Ro�ers, property owner, APN: 027-194-120; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on Jul_y 25, 2005, 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: 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19, Section 15301 Class 1(e)(1) - additions to existing structures 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 parking variance are approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such design review and parking variance are as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San 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 25"' day of Julv, 2005 by the following vote: S ecretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review and parking variance. 1312 Alvarado Avenue Effective August 4, 2005 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped June 15, 2002, sheets A-1 through A-6, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that the variance for parking dimension (width and length) shall only apply to this residential building and shall become void if the building is ever expanded, demolished or destroyed by catastrophe or natural disaster or for replacement; 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), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 4. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 5. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 6. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 7. 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; 8. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's May 18, 2005, memo, the Fire Marshal's May 19, 2005, memo, the City Engineer's May 20, 2005, memo, and the Recycling Specialist's and NPDES Coordinator's May 23, 2005, memos shall be met; 9. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review and parking variance. 1312 Alvarado Avenue Effective August 4, 2005 Page 2 10. 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; and 11. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. . r� -_ � � q � �, T �4 �;� . ' , �..Y c .:� Tr4.f *� * • ',� q s t` 'a s �y v .. ,.� „�a . .. , , �, �... 5S'�fi.�,' � "� ��, . . "x, � � '�i�' , � � � -�ef a � 4"� t ' �ir ' '% � w y ...,'. ' '... r � . 5 ; ♦ V '��#. �"" �� . 1� � .. , � � .� • . � ,� '� I �♦ •�. � � �jv�t _ � � ,R a � x , tF'e �. � ` . , .�� y 4� ��:.` s'; :�•�� +y. ` �D . . ., , ' ',' .��' } , _ i %''� �� . , . . �, � � .. . � ., � �. i ,_ � - _- .�;'�',' `, � � . � ; h « ,�p�. � , , .°,. � 3K .. �r: • } � " t�"Ti v ' .+ i'� ' �`y,�;�� . � j „9�' � rt ,� . ! � � 1 '`',' � , �� ' , . . "y.t�'?' , � r `� �A �#�� ! t w. y+ F _ � . � � y " � � � I � �� i � i i �� r� � P 2� • �! �e. at� .., m��,'; , +�` i +"�.,�1�j y,� 1► k. Y� � f.: ' �� r .. .. . ' '� � '� J '� �. - +en � \•. • �• w . . �.� . ... .... -� "�� I• _ • . ,� , , ' � : '`, � ., , �� i . '�r . ♦ ,� , _. . � 4 .. ..; �.. , .. .: � Y � 4 .. , �d,�. ~ �# '��- �R�•. .`� / � . + , � ^' .}� �i 9� :°i '�� .� i� " � 4 . �� o-� � `p � +Yw a �'� ,��y ;� yr YY��' i �:� s l � M � '!.� . � • . � j '� . � ` . ., : �� - , 'x`.,r h � , :"�` � ��r �+t ; �,�+ , .. >�. � : , � � � k ;�` . t � .� . , , , � � , � . ' - , � , . ,� m,'� � -' / l�';e%;,,F` '� � ,� �;. a+ � �� ` j► ., ». ,��.� - ' r �� +�� : �.Y ` 's„ �. �� '- �� :<< .a � ��. k .i� � ''.Y._ y.a � � � �v'� �� ,i. � • • •� . �� ' �r. j•��` ��'�q ` 't'x�,�p. ,�,, . .s '� 1/' � �. ` �" ```r. � S•` ~ +� � ' d f • �,V`� *"+�' ,_,C;� - � � � �.� • + �r. � 1j � ,,. , � � 1� ti +1C,� . "° e C � ,,. . �, �V ' � � `�� k'. � .? � :� �► +S` ,'i'► ,, . j � ,' F'.~ ` f �i1L'S � �` �� . 'r x�! y ' �/ .� � � r � • ""Y � � � a 4 . �,`► / yt ,,,., ' y. � _ � � �'' ►� a � , �'� . � ,;�:.' , . ,�; , � .� � '� �'.��''+, � : � � 'S"''� . � ;> �, . :.' �. � . ' � ^#l�.. � � ' �,'"� . JT rti � � .� � �� • r _ � �' �. . '�Rl. �� I .3 ,��",�.. �. `�yj� f ,,'� � � . �" t �t •4� . � ;• s+ r'��► ��"�`''';. � s�� ..an } � �'' :� ' . �� •.. . w � r�� i . i � . � b r , `� _ � w �,� �,�.u+� .� .y �l �`.. I �� -�' � � • n, �w�` e� ��, � � : ��j � .i yC"�, Y ��y �'�/� ` �}.� � »' f � � r � 'Ts1- "` .+;''� � * s '� ..'��"". �. � � t �" � � �� K � , k � : . 14'7�'Y. ��r. ,nt. % � � �� ' I (.w '�- � 4At'�� ,�� :.i. " �Mw. ��R ��'+{' . . ,��'� � , } x. � � t.:,�� ,a; M �� , �, �' �z,,,� a , �"^ �' � � ;�" , � � ,:' ''� �. . � ; a `� , � � . �. �"' '�F " � �.x� ��, � 4 � �. • . +��-, � ' . • . � 'yt' ,?s ' ,' ��1.� � ►i� j"k�� t �+� , „� �� '� � i" ,� � .,�t�"� e!- � �,yr� -�3:'ti�� '�.1. ' ♦ . � . �r � � � � t � � � �,,..rr:. x -� j�` * .:7 �'y`� t- ; : ' , � � r , ,.�, , ° '. « � � � �� ...- 4� � .� �� A ''. � {.,r ��-+� _.; �`,�.`+�,, :�a�., .•, � ,�,, � �,� • �,, �� , „�# � �. � � �` �F` a� �� , � ry ' ,y •,f ¢ ,.. t�' �+ ' �� .,�i�� y � � r� �. b � � �.��r `�'� � . ��,rR1 ...., ;� � � �� w '�: � +r , 4 Y+ )a' ►' " � r � � � 's � ' �',� 4 n L S„ _ .. a�ry.. �� r iT�� ,� *r � r~. � �' � 4 � '�'*- �. f � .;'��,� ."! 4a. t.. . � ,v�� • , n „ � � �. ? , �• � .. . � � . �� ' . � '�}� , T 4, � a'� �,� ' "'~4 � � � �iSti .:,"' "'"� . /� � � �r ` '`�r-�} � r � " � e��^ � .. �Et � 1+ '= y � . � t. .. �,�,:�. iV � fi 3��1 , A/' ` �,. w�.�' � � '�w s� �'� `� �' . � , r «", " r �1 �� w� ,t ,� ."�r� ;1 � � �W ��; '•y < . .r� � r�' , '`'-' • ��` _ . > F. , `_�� ,. ; ,,�.. �.._, .'� -� {� �r �� . L�� , `k�i� � *.�f . +,. i `k '�°' ". _ ` � � �?..�`� � _ • ,�. . t..-: . � . � L,a - .1.i.i � n, I 1312 A ,R `jy .. � �R t -.:�: fi: r�� \� � 1-�e.: 7 a . 1r,` � �� , `��