HomeMy WebLinkAbout623 Ansel Avenue - Staff Report;�
P.C. 12/9/85
Item #5
MENIO 'r0: PLANNING COMMISSIOLV
FROM; CITY PLANNER
SfJBJEC'I'; CONDOMINIfJM PERMI'I' FOR A 19 UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMIi�IUM
PROJECT AT 623 ANSEL AVENTJE, ZONED R-3
Tim Brosnan, representing Trico Pacific, is requesting a condominium
permit to build a 19 unit residential condominium with 29 parking
spaces (25 below grade and four at grade) at 623 Ansel Avenue, zoned
R-3. The four at-grade parking spaces will be designated for guest
use. A security gate will protect those parking spaces below grade.
The 19 units will range in size from 774-886 SF including the required
private open space of 75-89 SF per unit. The proposed project meets
all the requirements of the condominium permit and zoning regulations.
Staff Review
City staff have reviewed the project. The Chief Building Inspector
(November 5, 1985 memo) had no comment. The Fire Marshal (November 5,
1985 memo) notes the Fire Code requirements for sprinklering and a
problem relating to separation of exits on the first, second and third
floors. The City Engineer (November 18, 1985 memo) addresses 11 items
which must be included in the final plans. 1�'Iost of these are routine
requirements of final plans; and all can be addressed by the applicant
in the final plans. Planning staff would note that in a previous
project approved but never built on this site how the measurement of
fence heights was to be made was an issue. The reason the fences were
of concern had to do with a diagonal slope of plus 5' which occurs from
the rear corner downward to the Oak Grove/Ansel corner of the
property. The height of fences or walls placed on the rear and side
propzrty lines should be measured from grade on the adjacent property
and should not exceed 6'. By using the adjacent property grade no new
fences will exceed the height of existinq fences around this property.
The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed CC&Rs and had no comment.
The Park Director (October 16, 1984 and November 27, 1985 memos)
reviewed the landscape plans and noted items to be included in the
final landscape plans including that these final plans for lan3scaping
and irrigation conform to the Park Department's minimum design
standards and be approved by the Parks Department prior to issuance of
a building permit.
Study Questions
At study the Commission asked that the fire exiting concern be
elaborated. The City Engineer was asked at the meeting about the
requirements stated in his memo. He pointed out that most of these
requirements were standard and the three which were not he felt could
be addressed in the final plans without affecting the footprint of the
building or the site plan. 'Phe Fire Department (�Villiams memo,
November 26, 1985) has commented that the stair exiting problem can be
met with a minor adjustment in the final plans. This adjustment will
not affect the site plan or footprint of the building.
-2-
Planninq Commission Action
The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative
action should be taken by resolution. The reasons for any action
should be stated. At the public hearing the following conditions
should be considered:
l. that the conditions of the Fire Marshal's November 5, 1985 memo,
the City Engineer's November 18, 1985 memo and the Director of
Parks' October 16, 1984 and November 27, 1985 memos shall be met;
2. that the project as built shall conform to the plans submitted to
the Planning Department and date stamped October 30, 1985; and
3. that the hei_qhts of all the fences on the rear an3 side property
lines shall be measured from grade on the adjacent properties.
���� � ��
� �
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
MM/s
cc: Tim Brosnan, Trico Pacific
N. N. Gabbay, AIA
(N. N. Gabbay, AIA,
19 So. B Street, Ste.
San P�ateo, CA 94401)
+�
L
�
0
U
�
0
� ��
� a�
�a +�
T�
•r
�
� �
a� o
+� L o
'� � �
� •r
�
�� �
U N O
rti '� U
� �r � �
�i N �
-a o N
� L�o
-� � rts �-
•r �
>t��s
ON(n Q-
�
n. o o �
���
E n o� �
�
E � + •
•r '�
� • � a,
•r 'p S.
� � •r
i �
}) •r �
•r � �
� � �
� �
i p�
s.. c
� LL •r
� � �
�
Li- O U
c!') O N
rn �
� �
I� � rCf
r
c.�
Z
�
a
¢
U
N
0
z
Q
J
�
4J � o\�
U U O
� � �
fl.. n.
tn N
Y
� C U
N � r0
n. � .n
0 0 +�
a�
� r N
+� rts
� � +�
> a� �
•r i 0
� a� �
d � Li
�--i N M
PROJECT APPLICATION
�t CEQA ASSESSMENT
Application received (10/30/85
Staff review/acceptance (
��� ��n o.�
623 ANSEL AVENUE
BURLINGAME project address
�+b_����t'° project name - if any
)
)
i. APPLICANT Tri co Paci fi c 347-0703
name telephone no.
Post Office Box 1904, Burlingame, CA 94011
applicant s address: street, city, zip code
Tim Brosnan 347-0703
�, contact person, if different telephone no.
2. TYPE OF APPLICATION
Speci�.l Perr�it ( ) Variance* ( ) Conc�omihium Permit (X) Other
*Attach letter which addresses each of the 4 findings required by Code Chapter 25.54.
s. PROJECT DESCRIPTION CONDOMINIUM PERMIT to construct a 3 story, 19
unit condo building with subsurface parking for 25 cars and street
level parkinq for 4 cars (quest parking). The unit sizes are from
774 SF to 886 SF (including 75 SF to 89 SF of private open spaces).
1,780 SF of qeneral open space is provided in the rear yard area,
with an additional 850 SF in a 2nd floor courtyard which is open
to the third floor. The plans meet other zonin requirements for
lot coverage, height and setbacks.
(attach letter of explanation if additional space is needed)
Ref. code section(s): (PC Res.5-80) (Chap.26.30 )
4. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION
(029-100-140/150) �tn.14 ) ( 7 ) ( Burlingame Land Co. Map )
APN lot no. block no. subdivision name N 0. 2
� R-3 ) ( 13,065.50 �
zoning district land area, square feet
Trico Pacific Post Office Box 1904
land owner's name a dre s,
�ur�ingame, CA 94011
Reauired Date received city zip code
(yes) �j ( ) Proof of ownershi�
(3��) (no) ( — ) Owner's consent to a�plication
5. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
On the north side of r�operty (623 Ansel) a one story residence
existing; on the south side (619 Ansel) a one story building
existina.
Required Date received
(yes) (�8) (10/30/85 )
�YeS) f�8) � �� )
iYeS) ���) � �� )
iYeS) %8) � �� )
(other) ( )
Site plan showing: property lines; public sidewall:s and
curbs; all str�:ctures and improvements;
paved on-site parking; landscaping.
Floor plans of all buildings showing: gross floor area
by type of usc�`on each floor plan.
Building elevations, cross sections (if relevant).
Site cross section(s) (if relevant)
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
*Land use classifications are: residential (show q dwelling units); office use; retail
sales; restaurant/cafe; manufacturing/repair shop; warehousing; other (to be described).
6. PROJECT PP,�POSAL
Proposed consi;ruction, 3elow qrade ( 1 2 SF) Second floor ( ] SF)
gross floor area First floor (�j�2�s SF) Third floor ( h���� SE)
Pro,ject Cod�
Pro�osal Requirement
Front setback 15 15
Si de setback ] i_8? ] i $ i
_ 2
Side yard 7' 5' —6' — '
Rear yard 2p � 15-20'
Project Code
Proposal Requirement
Lot coveraae 56% 6�°o mdX
Puilriine height 35' SP over 5'
Lardscaoed area 23. 5% PC Res . 5 80*
on��site ok�.spaces 2g 2g,5
6. PROJECT PROPOSAL (continued) PROPOSED '
��IXS�f'�GX IN 2 YEARS IN 5 YEARS
after � after after
8-5 5 PM 8-5 5 PM 8-5 5 PM
Full time employees on site
Part time employees on site
Visitors/customers (weekday)
Visitors/customers (Sat.Sun.)
Residents on property
Trip ends to/from site*
Peak hour trip ends*
Trucks/service vehicles
*Show calculations on reverse side or attach senarate sheet.
� 7. ADJACENT BUSINESSES/LAND USES
Single and multiple family structures on all adjacent sites;
this use conforms to the general plan.
Required Date received
�yes) (no) ( — ) Location plan of adjacent properties.
(3Fe�) (no) ( — ) Other tenants/firms on property:
no. firms ( ) no. employees ( )
floor area occupied ( SF office space)
( SF other)
no. employee vehicles regularly on site ( )
no. comoany vehicles at this location ( )
8. FEES Special Permit, all districts $100 () Other application type, fee $ ()
Variance/R-1,R-2 districts $ 40 () Project Assessment $ 25 (X )
Variance/other districts $ 75 () Negative Declaration $ 25 (X )
Condominium Permit $ 50 ( X) EIR/City & consultant fees $ ()
TOTAL FEES $10�.00 RECEIPT N0. 2209 Received by M. Monroe
I hereby certify, arsder p�nalty of per y that the information given herein is
true and c.orr`e t to th b st of �y lyi�edge and belief.
/� ,/� I
Signature l,%'� %' "� 7 X f� Date October 30, 1985
Applica t
STAFF USE ONLY
NEGATIVE DECLARATION File No. ND-384P
The City of Burlingame by MARGARET MONROE on November 18
completed a review of the proposed project and determined that:
( ) It will not have a significant effect on the environment.
1y85,
( ) No Environmental Impact Report is required.
Reasons for a conc� us; o�: The devel opment of th i s s i te wi th ni neteen
one-bedroom units will not have an adverse impact on air, water
quality or other environmental concerns. The area is fully developed
already and all necessary utilities are available. Thi� project
will not result in a greater density than is allowed by the General
---- 1an.
I�I,II%\ CITY PLANNER �i• �g •�
Signat re of Processino fficial Title Date Signed
Unless appealed within 10 days hereof the date posted, the deterr�ination shall be final.
DECLARATION OF POSTIP�G Date Posted: _��%��(% ���, �� �J
I declare under penalty of perjury that I ar� City Clerk oF the City of urlingame and that
I posted a true copy of the above Neoati�ie Declaration at the City Hall of said City near
the doors to th�a Council Chambers.
Executed at Durl ingame, Cal i forni a on !' G/lg G���1'�'L�fi} %/ � > 19 �•✓`-
Apoealed: ( )Yes ( )P!o
� ���� �� .
JU . LF TT , CITY CLERK, CI �� 6URLINGAP1E
STAFF REVI EW
1. CIRCULATION OF APPLICATION
Project proposal/plans have been circulated for review hy:
City Engineer
Building Inspector
Fire Marshal
Park Department
City Attorney
date circulated
(11/4/85 )
i �� )
� �� )
� �� )
� - )
reply received
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
2. SUMMARY OF STAFF CONCERNS/POSSIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES
memo attached
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
(yes) (no)
Concerns Mitigation Measures
Does the proposa� meet Fire Request comments from the
and Building Code require- Fire Marshal and Chief Bldg.
ments? Inspector.
Do the plans meet the City Request comments from the
Engineer's requirements? City En�ineer.
3. CEQA REQUIREMEPlTS
If a Negative Declaration has not been posted for this oroject:
Is the project subject to CEQA review? Yes - see Negative Declaration
ND-384P
IF AN EIR IS REQUIRED:
Initial Study completed
Decision to prepare EIR
Notices of preparation mailed
RFP to consultants
Contract awarded
Admin. draft EIR received
Draft EIR accepted by staff
Circulation to other agencies
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Study by P.C.
Review period ends
Public hearing by P.C.
Final EIR received by P.C.
Certification by Council
Decision on project
Notice of Determination
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
4. APPLICATIOPJ STATUS Date first received (10/30/85 )
Accepted as complete: no( ) letter to aoplicant advising info. required ( )
Yes( ) date P.C. study (11/25/85 )
Is application ready for a�ublic hearing? ,�''(yes)�; (no) Recommended date ("'`�j'��5�)
Date staff report mailed� aoplicant (�-!/°cTt+,.��yr) Date Corrrnission hearing (� .?,.;��`� J.`:'.$)
Application approved (,O ) Denied ( ) Appeal to Council (yes) �(no)
Date Council hearing ( ) Apolication aporoved ( ) Denied ( )
_� / C�C �� �
signed date
DATE:
/'i .- �- �.�
MEMO T0: CITY ENGINEER
�.C�11EF BUILDING INSPECTOR
FIRE MARSHAL
DIRECTOR OF PARKS �,o/a,� a.,-� N,� ���,,H�� �� �
/
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT:
CGhat o py �,-;
%�� ��e' �Z ��! GG2r � if � �
/ -T
!� 2�'�i %ThJG/ �ZfGt �
An application has been received for the above project for review by the
Planning Commission. The application will be scheduled for :S7Z�.l� y
at their%1� �y meeting. We would appreciate having
your comments by // %� �S ��- �` ���
r
Thank you. �4. ,� o�-„ ,, �n- '' � , ,
r � /
�� . �/Ui �S�o ,�
/i Q v�' � '<� u � /
� �
Helen Towber
Planner
s/
att.
♦
/L�l�' �'� r� r� f�`� �
/ r
;
�' � :.,�
� � ��e�
6' �,
��=
l "
November 5, 1985
TO: Helen Williams, Planner
FROM: Bob Barry, Fire Marshal
S�JBTEGT: 623 Ansel
I have reviewed the plans submitted for this project and have the fol-
lowing coimnents:
l. The building must have a complete sprinkler and fire alarm system
inctalled throughout. This system must be monitored by an ap-
praved central station.
2. �its on the lst, 2nd, and 3n� floors are too close together.
1
:.. :.
.�
MEMO
T0:
FROM
November 18, 1985
Planning Department
Department of Public Works - Engr. Division
����iri��
f��OV 19 1985
Re: 19-Unit Condominium Project - 623 Ansel Avenue ���u����
Tentative and Final Parcel Maps to combine Lots
Tentative Condominium Map and Condominium Permit £�5-9
Many of comments in my September 7, 1984 memo have either been answered or least
partially addressed. The following are remaining concerns or conditions which
should be attached to approvals and addressed in final plans:
1. Revised permit plan to show additional adjacent site elevations on Sheet
A.1 based on tentative map information.
2. The proposed new sidewalk fronting the site shall be relocated next to
the curb in a circular alignment around existing trees with at least 2'
clearance. The proposed trees to be placed in back of the sidewalk at
2' minimum clear of back of walk depending on tree species. The Park
Department to approve clearances.
3. The revised driveway profile design need be modified of Building Permit
stage to show 4' sidewalk at 21 cross slope in drivewav area.
4. A detailed staking plan and a shoring plan complete with calculations
shall be submitted and approved prior to any grading on this site.
mg
5. All utility services to be installed underground and without additional
pole sets. If a transformer is required, it shall be installed either
underground or behind the setbacks on each street and landscaped from
view.
6. The roof and on-site drainage must go by gravity to the adjacent storm
drain system as approved by the City Engineer. Sump pump to go to storm
drain also. Detailed drain system calcs shall be submitted on both sys-
tems to confirm design.
7. All new curb, gutter and sidewalk, including a handicapped ramp and the
8' street gutter, shall be installed fronting this site. A design for
this shall be done by the applicant's Engineer and shall be submitted for
approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of the Building Permit.
8. The final lot combination parcel map shall be filed prior to issuance
of a Building Permit for this site. At least one of the existing structures
must be removed prior to filing.
9. Additional property line ties to confirm lot needed on the Final Parcel
Map and for the staking plan.
10. Site plan to show overflow drainage path for surface flow.
11. Show overflow drainage path from rear areas on Oak Grove to get out by
gravity. Modify steps at Oak Grove and lower so flows may go around to Ansel.
� �
,�
Frank C. Erbacher
City Engineer
OCTOBER 1 6, 1 984 /iJov • Z � �Q�$^
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
R. QUADRI - DIRECTOR OF PARKS
BERRYMAN CONDO - ANSEL & OAK GROVE
DATE:
T0:
FROM:
RE:
1) All new trees planted on City right of way to be located
minimum 3' from sidewalk.
2) New sidewalk around existing Oaks to be minimum 2' from
trunk of tree.
3 . , mum
��,� �y � i� .
4) Final landscape and irrigation plans to conform to Park
Dept. "Minimum Design Standards For Landscaping" and must
be approved before issuance of building permit.
Richard P. Quadri
Director of Parks
RPQ/kh
Co,�,� � �5 `, � , �`-- `� s f� � �
D v e �r�,, �� G� ti��� � v�es�•t.1-}--s
�.P p `� �
�l> v ,D vb � l� M •
�
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
Recess 8:40 P.M.; reconvene 8:48 P.M.
ITEMS FOR STUDY
Pag e 5
November 25, 1985
7. SPECIAL PERMIT - 38 SF DISH ANTENNA - 1723 TOLEDO AVENUE
Requests: elevation of the roof; visibility of the antenna to residents
in the area; what information could neighbors receive about this
installation; height of the house. Item set for hearing December 9,
1985.
8. SPECIAL PERMIT - SATELLITE DISH ANTENIJA - 808 EDGEHILL DRIVE
Item withdrawn.
9. TWO SPECIAL PERMITS - ACCESSORY STRUCTURE - 824 FAIRFIELD ROAD
Requests: parking requirement for this site; dimensions of the pool
house; required fencing; distance between building and side property
line; there are no roof gutt�rs, clarify drainaqe; confirm front
setback; clarify building inspector's comments r�garding kitchen
plumbing; are deck and slab the same �levation; when was carport put
in. Item set for hearing December 9, 1985.
�10. CO1vDOMINIUM PERMIT - 623 ANSEL AVENUE
�% 11. TEN'rATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP AND TEN�I'ATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP
�"- FOR THE ABOVE
Requests; address fire exiting; review CE's requirements. Items set
for hearing December 9, 1985.
CITY PLANNER REPORT
CP Monroe reviewed Council actions at its November 18, 1985 meeting.
Slqnaqe on Bayfront (Water) for Hotels
Reference staff report, 11/25/85, with attachments. CP reviewed her
staff inemo on water oriented signage for hotels: Council's request that
Commission study whether changes in the sign code might be necessary
and desirable to allow small amounts of signage for hotels on bay water
frontages; current sign code provisions; signage trends in the bayfront
area; staff's contacts with other communities with bay frontages and
hotels regarding their policies and regulations; bay oriented signage
concerns and issues. CP requested Commission consideration of whether
or not the city's policy on bay oriented signage should be clearly
stated in the sign code (regulation under C-4 and M-1 provisions);
suggestions for regulation were listed in the staff inemo.
Commission comment/discussion: the regulation prohibiting signage over
the fourth floor has been adhered to with office buildings but not with
hotels; do not see how we can allow signs on the bay; think a minimum
Page 6
Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes November 25, 1985
amount of signage should be allowed on the bayfront for the hotels, it
is desirable for their business interests; possibility of averaging
sign exceptions approved to date and formulating a regulation from that
figure; have difficulty finding there is a need for bayside signage or
that it is desirable, in general we have given a lot of freedom to
signage in that area, would prefer to examine each application on its
own merit rather than change the code. Staff expressed concern about
signage on the landward side of Airport Boulevard, consideration should
be given to the location of a hotel and where the signage is to be seen
from and what is too much signage. Further Commission comment:
possibility of allowing only a logo sign on a parapet at any location
with a modest amount of square footage; believe the present sign code
is sufficient, freeway oriented signage is prohibited; could amend the
code to prohibit bay frontage signage; have no interest in whether
someone can see a hotel sign from an airplane; travelers have their
hotel reservations before they arrive at the airport, bay oriented
signs are institutionalized advertising.
CP summarized Commission discussion. �ao Commissioners preferred to
leave the sign code as it is, two others recommended amending the code
to prohibit bay frontage signage and one Commissioner recommended
allowing some minimum amount of signage on the bay side which would
also be allowed to those hotels that are on the west side of Airport
Boulevard facing the bay. CP will forward Commission's comments and
recommendations to Council.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting ad journed at 9:50 P.i�i.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert J. Leahy
Secretary
CITY OF BURLINGAME
TO . CITY PLANNER
FROM . PLANNER
SUBJECT: 623 ANSEL AVENUE CONDO PERMIT
DATE : 11/26/85
I spoke with Nassay Gabbay today about the exiting problem noted by Bob
Barry. He said he talked to Keith Marshall about the memo on Monday but
the only problem they could see was that the stairway was 6" short of
maintaining one-half the diagonal distance of the floor which would be
a very simple thing to correct--they would just move the stair 6" to 1'-0".
They couldn't see any other problems. Since Bob Barry won't be back in
the office until December 10 they can't do more at this time. Mr. Gabbay
said that he would make sure that the plans met all codes at the building
permit stage.
H. Williams
��''�+ ;. �`" ��y}�'+ j ,� ' � �y'� � �'}�' : � �►. ,
M 1 � S° �"5'� �"��,
,�''� � � . . �P �"� � � � ��rj� 4, t '� � ��
� � :
� � � � d �� �.s°, �
' „��k '�, v , � � � " 'a� , `� �tw' � ,t� �`, � �
; ,
.
e �, '� � , .:� � � .� 3 � ' >
, " �. ^ / w `�' .� k
� ��� . i � SeY� �, � � � / �i ,t4 ��- � � � s r _
, � � ,, �; . : � ���, r+� '� � '.�t �";�
, � `��
,
, �,
� � �1�� � r— ���•� �+ �� �.'��,r, � .ri
, :� `:, ;' ii"
�a � • �.
i� , r w � � � .�y �,
. .
4 '+ ' '� � � �".�: ��-�.
�� , w ' `j �,�.Y� � �� � : ♦,�,/' � �w, .1�°
. ...
� � ,� � « . r
� . fi ,' � � ����` ' � ��,' �� �!� ;
�� ' � _ ° �
,.
� _ _
' �, ,��
. .
.f �,�
o � � ,i' •' � A.^!' ., ,.+�'�1 `�c.
� � '�y� � � �� � � � �° ' � i �; �'#�f^� � � � ��'..o � .
F .. �'� �i� �� ' � ���� � .• ��� <
.
� �
•� �: . � �v,.
r
. , ,
� � � � '',� `� R � t�0. ` E / � \ . , \ \\ .%-
M .✓.i 6 �'' �t . . ,
yY�.� ....��.� � �/��'����,� �+ ry ..� ,`y�( , � � �,
� � � � * � 1� +�1; � + �"$a.?� � / ,. r `� * �j
4r i�r ' � Z � �y� �� � . , ► < � � � `v,
�i�+"�` �' ` °t ` ; `.�
�� � �� � �. ;�� � � �' �� �
�, .�'' e� M�;' i a f' s� •� +�� � H
,
x
.
� � '� '�,y ' ��� �
q � " � L�� � . �
� '� ; {�1, O q � � y %
�
�S'�\ � j"� •�� °�\�����., r w � J � � � �� �
� ♦ �� � � � e ,�i'
� ; v ��� � � � �'���� � ��� � ' �'�
f ,�. ��� �` : �ZYy � � �� , �t' / , � � si
/. t , f
�; _� '�' ��, �� t."� � '�.g 6�3�2 � � ��� ' �
� y � �;� �, , . � s,�� �, � ,x
�, ' � �� .
t�r ..� I�`` , ; � DJ C �, s .
� ;. `"'� � a. � ' 6/ +'��� � f
'��" .�, . �_ �j' �"� j �� ia �D t f ="�� 9� 'Sr`� � �;} , � ` � ��
� ; , � :,� ,,�; � � .; , � ��, '� �« ��'
�►' ' � ' Q : �C . ¢ k... _,� �' . � `�.
, �.
� �"�..:, ,��- � �'`/ � , � � `_ . --tT
t' �' A �*v � .� � /`^. � ���� � / fi ,-,�
>� � .,t:a�, �♦ •.�..�/„ � :.�r, "�.', ,�a
t
.` � �, � ` �* � ° , .!�
_ ,' . _
.,� .. . .
� �
�7'/,. � , ���.�f , ���qt 'u� ,,
� � !
�� ,+„4�' .,� 1 ��� /� � y � � " �a. y� .
�.,•� � � a. .. �•,� `� � ' � �: � r�,, s/ / `A Y'! 2R� .
p , , . �
� � ..,, , /• � : � I• .� , � � � . � � � `
�� � � �� < �n � � 8
R � y � �i
� ..� �'�' � ��' � � �ar 4� � /���1�� ,. � `v m. �q ��������.. 5��.
_, ,
� I� /-�r° �d � � ` . `e� . 1
� f I� s'^�,. l `� i a��,y . 8 � ,��� {.y , • `;..�?n �
�:. /j ��"� f �- � . �' F �+��
�`� � �' ,' , "_# •� L w$i';�� ���
. � � � � � �� � � � �� .
�',`� g ���, ��. / . � r�'�'� , ��* ,� • r � �.� ,, t � �
t �
t' � -
.,s �' s� � w� �ti • . � ` �o"
�> * a � '�� , '� ' � � ,,� � ��j �
� � • � c � , ,.
> . � •�
.
� � � �.
, w��� a .. ,��� . ,
: �, ,
. �,. . � �
� .,
r � � ' ` " ' � '�� ��•����� °�
� �
� � • �
. � � �; ` A
f
i ;� � ,� ti +�<� � , � t.�> �
� , � � It �°v� � ,� \ . `" `1 ()�`�F'`� �; �
� i t.� �Z d t.� � �,� � � ,� �1 ry Y_� . ''�
� �� 1 �u1 � �� �
' . � . �' �, :,.-
�`` �` '• , � . ��� � ,�, , �
. .,
�-.� , ';� � � � ..
,,:
.
,, r ti � � .
,
.� � ,� . .
/
� � ' "�� .� ����
,,
� � ' r��
. ,
_ � �� � .\ �.e^' f � -.
_ .� ► , . , ii . �::a ... , , . , . �. �_ ''E i� �a �Y '�.,,m� a.c:.�:.
v� . n � �� � � � � f
��� � \ � >
� � '� ��=� �
� .� . �s �.
�� .
� � . � w �
> ,�. , �
�� .
�.- � � �a �, _.� �— �� .
�., �.
� �°''xk ��- �'� � . ���, '
• , �
a , ,. � �
� �' �' � �� ►
�'. � � ,
/ . .
� ,� . ��
+.' ' : : `
n �
�.. -� � �
s � - � � ��� ,�'
.."" . � � � � ��
� ,�` � �
� � , c� s '
�' . ��.� 4�, � r � �' � # � � iSP ,
��. ��` � ��
p., � � �� � � �� �
,
� �� � m �-, � � � ,
( � �' � „`�;",P
� '�
+ � ' �;�^:
. � �
`�'I' �..�
_ � a �. _ ,.
��t� C�i�� IIf �urii�t��m�
SAN MATEO COUNTY
CITY HALL- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD �
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 TEL: (415) 342-8931
NOTICE OF HEARING
CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, TENTATIVE AND FIPJAL
PARCEL MAP AND TENTATIVE COyDOMINIUP� MAP
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Monday, the 9th day of December, 1985 , at
the hour of 7:30 P.M., in the City Hall Council Chambers , 501 Primrose Road,
Burlingame, California the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame will conduct
a public hearing on the application to allow a 19 unit condominium project at
623 Ansel Avenue, zoned R-3.
At the time of the hearing all persons interested will be heard.
For further particulars reference is made to the Planning Department.
MARGARET MONROE
CITY PLANNER
November 27, 1985
. . �.
i �
RESOLUTIOid .d0.
li �
RESOLUTION APPROVIPdG CONDOMINIUM PERP4ITS
�i
t
RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City i
of Burlingame that; �
' i
WHEREAS, application has been made for a
i' Condominium Permit for d 19 Ulllt �ro.iect �
� I
!at 623 Ansel Avenue (APN 029-100-140/150 �!
' and ,
WHEREAS, this Commission held a public hearing on
said application on December 9 , 1985
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby RESOLVED and �
; DETERMINED by the Planninq Commission that said Condominium Permit
is approved, subject to the conditions set forth in E�hibit "A"
� attached hereto.
It is further directed that a certified copy of
this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County
of San Mateo.
A. M. Garcia
Chairman �
z/4/ss
I, ROBERT J. LEAHY, Secretary of the Planning '
Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certifv that the
foregoing Resolution was introduced and adonted at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9ti1 day of
December __,198 5, by the following vote:
AYES: COMP4ISSIONERS:
NO�S: COMMISSIONERS:
AIISEi�T: COMMISSIONERS:
Robert J. Lea y
Secretary