The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1361 Bernal Avenue - Staff ReportItem No. C�y� Regular Action PROJECT LOCATION 1361 Bernal Avenue / Item No. Regular Action City of Burlingame Design Review and Special Permit Address: 1361 Bernal Avenue Meeting Date: April 22, 2013 Request: Design review and special permit for height for a first and second story addition to an existing two- story house. Applicant and Architect: Andrea Van Voorhis Property Owner: Charles Vestner and Mary Thibaut General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 026-058-060 Lot Area: 6000 SF 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 applicant is proposing to add a first and second story addition at the rear of the existing two-story house. The proposed house and detached garage will have a total floor area of 3,252 SF (0.54 FAR) where 3,361 SF (0.56 FAR) is the maximum allowed (including covered porch exemptions). The proposed project is 109 SF below the maximum allowed FAR and is therefore within 2% of the maximum allowed FAR. The slope on the property increases from the front property line to the rear property line, resulting in a difference of befinreen 12 -15 feet in elevation. The existing roof ridge is 33'-7" from the average top of curb. The proposed addition will have a roof ridge that is 2'-5" higher than existing, or 36'-0" feet from the average top of curb. The applicant is requesting a special permit for a proposed height of between 30 and 36 feet. The existing conditions on the property include a non-conforming carport that connects the existing detached garage to the house. With the proposed addition, the existing carport will be demolished. The existing detached garage (341 SF), which provides one code-compliant covered parking space for the proposed four- bedroom house, will remain. There is one uncovered parking space (9' x 20') provided in the driveway. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following applications: ■ Design review for a second story addition (C.S. 25.57.010, a, 5); and ■ Special Permit for Height (36'-0" proposed where 30'-0" is allowed) (CS 25.26.060, a, 1). This space intentionally left blank. Design Review and Special Permit for Height 1361 Bernal Avenue Lot Area: 6000 SF EXISTING SETBACKS Front (1st flr): (2nd flr): Side (left): (right): Rear (1st flr): (2nd flr): ; Lot Coverage: __.. FAR: # of bedrooms: Parking: Height: DH Envelope: 23'-0" 23'-0" 4'-3" 9'-11"' __ 41'-5" 53'-5" 1361 Berna/ Avenue Plans date stamped: April 11, 2013 PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED _ _ __ _ No change ' 15'-0"(or block average) No chanqe 20'-0" (or block average) 8'-5„ No change _ _._. No change 41'-5" 1983 SF 33% 2959 SF 0.49 FAR _.. _.. 3 1847 31% __ _ ....... 3252 SF 0.54 FAR _ _......... : 4 1 covered 3 ' (10' x 20') 1 uncovered (9' x 20') 33'-7" No change 36'-0" 4 complies 4'-0" 4'-0" _ 15'-0" 20'-0" 2400 SF 40% 3361 SF 2 0.56 FAR __ . _ _ _ . 1 covered (10' x 20') 1 uncovered (9' x 20') 30'-0" CS 25.28.075 ' The existing carport connects the detached garage to the house. This situation creates a non-conforming side setback of 0'-0" to the house/carport/garage structure. The existing carport will be demolished with the proposed project and the existing side setback measurement shown in the chart reflects the distance to the house along the driveway, which remains unchanged with the proposed addition. 2 (0.32 x 6000 SF) + 1100 SF + 341 SF = 3361 SF (0.56 FAR) 3 The parking area under the existing carport is in tandem with the covered parking space in the garage and is not counted as an existing covered parking space. 4 Special permit for proposed height of between 30 feet and 36 feet. Staff Comments: Staff Comments: See attached memos from the Chief Building Official, Fire Marshal, City Arborist, City Engineer and NPDES Coordinator. Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on April 8, 2013, the Commission suggested changes to the proposed windows, both for continuity with the existing windows and to break up the massing of the right side elevation (April 8, 2013, Planning Commission minutes). The Commission voted to place this item on the Regular Action calendar. In response to the Commission's concerns, the architect submitted revised plans, date stamped April 11, 2013, with revised windows for the proposed addition. -2- Design Review and Specia/ Permit for Height 1361 Bernal Avenue 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. Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit, the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.51.020 a-d): (a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood; (b) the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood; (c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and (d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is appropriate. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the application, and consider public testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action should include specific findings supporting the Planning Commission's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the Planning Commission. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped April 11, 2013, sheets 1 through 9; 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 staf�; 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 Chief Building Official's February, 26, 2013 memo, the Fire Marshal's and the Stormwater Coordinator's February 25, 2013 memos, the City Arborist's February 27, 2013 memo, and the City Engineer's March 5, 2013, 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 Special Permit for Height 1361 Berna/ Avenue 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 such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 7. 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; 8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9. that 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; 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2010 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: 11. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the applicant shall provide a certification by the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, that demonstrates that the project falls at or below the maximum approved floor area ratio for the property; 12. 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; 13. 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 14. 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 Senior Planner c. Andrea VanVoorhis, applicant and architect -4- Design Review and Specia/ Permit for Height Attachments: April 8, 2013 Planning Commission Minutes Application to the Planning Commission Special Permit Application Applicant's Letter of Explanation Letter from neighbor (in support), date stamped April 8, 2013 Staff Comments Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed) Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed April 12, 2013 Aerial Photo 1361 Berna/ Avenue -5- CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes April 8, 2013 Additional Commission comments: • Don't understand what the big deal is with the story poles, if they're not surveyed. With the story poles it's black and white. IYs not that big a deal to do. ■ Looking to save them some money and time and keep the project moving. �.�� ■ Wants to make sure the neighbor is able to see it clearly. f� �' ■ Either way this is going to be coming back to us. This is a design review ta'dy. ■ There will be another hearing, so if there is an issue then we can � or story poles. ■ We can do site visits ourselves. �� x�. ■ The neighbor came not saying that there would be a v�W�blockage, but saying that she did not know what the view impact would be. In that case it's�Gst a clarification, and then if there is an issue we can take it to the next step. Commissioner Gaul made a motion to This motion was seconded by item on the Regular Action Calendar when complete. Bandrapalli. Discussion of motion: ■ None. ,.. Chair Gau� called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the REGULAR ACTION CALENDAR when plans �e been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-1-0 (Commissioner Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:27 p. m. 9. 1361 BERNAL AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH A DETACHED GARAGE (ANDREA VAN HOORHIS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; CHARLES AND MARY THIBAULT, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERIKA LEWIT Reference staff report dated April 8, 2013, with attachments. Planning Manager Gardiner presented the project description. Questions of staff: None. Chair Gaul opened the public comment period. Andrea Van Voorhis, Burlingame represented the applicant: ■ The ambition is to leave it exactly as is from the street. ■ Challenge is the big single-paned windows in the front. To meet the City's GreenPoint requirements, needs sizable roof plane for solar. ■ Home has lots of beautiful windows, keeping all the original windows. The aluminum windows will be replaced with wood, except the bathroom window. ■ There is also a letter of support from a neighbor (Gary Diebel letter dated 4/7/2013, submitted after preparation of the staff report.) Commission comments: It is a really special house. Glad it is being preserved, and old windows are being maintained. 20 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes April 8, 2013 ■ Addition is a bit squared off, looks bulky. (Van Voorhis: Regarding massing knows City likes to see articulated fa�ade, but there are challenges, particularly meeting energy compliance. Needs to get 25 points with solar, so needs adequate roof area for solar. Would also like to have additional capacity in the future for an electric car. Also using back plane for sheer wall, otherwise would have to take out original plaster and stucco walls inside. The side is compliant with the declining envelope, but if it is pushed back the bathroom would have a ceiling less than 7 feet and the adjacent bedroom becomes too small for a comfortable space. ■ Have they talked to the neighbor at 1365 Bernal? Concern about light blockage. (Van Voorhis: Invited all adjacent neighbors to tour the house and come look at plans. None came. The owner of 1365 Bernal sounded amenable to changes, did not review plans but said it sounded favorable. Did make an effort to engage in dialog.) Glad you reached out to them. ■ Elevations Sheet 8 shows the carport roof is coming off, but what about trellis? Are the posts on the property line? (Van Voorhis: Just a tall fence to screen the cars Posts are an existing condition.) ■ Brise soleil, will there be plantings growing on it? (Van Voorhis: Intent is to have bougainvillea grow on it from planter. Can add planters on the side next to driveway on the corner so it can grow up from side of house. ■ Agrees with the comments about boxing it off. Not sure likes blank wall but looks better with trellis. ■ On the plans posted in front of the house there is a circular window over tub. How about a rectangular/oblong window? Like the stairway window but sideways, horizontal. (Van Voorhis: Amenable to changing window.) Public comments: none There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: Change the bathroom window, add planter. Should this be referred to a design consultant for massing? Would like to see it not as boxed off. Chair Gaul re-opened the public comment period. ■ Recessed but with roofline projecting? (Van Voorhis: It would be awkward, wants roof to follow the wall of the building.) ■ Cut out at covered porch helps. ■ Proportion of window panes in the front is different. Grid at front is different. (Van Voorhis: Windows are already big. Three over grids might work better, less square.) ■ Maybe make double-hung windows taller? (Van Voorhis: That big of a window would not work for the interior.) ■ Might be better with original windows than replacing in terms of sustainability. New double-hungs don't fit in with everything else. (Van Voorhis: Happy with balance, preserves the majority of house but is also efficient.) ■ Looking at the window patterns, can tell which are the new ones (6 over) and which are the originals, especially on East elevation. ■ Keep with undivided lights. ■ Bathroom also not a divided window? (Van Voorhis: Yes.) ■ Trying not to differentiate between old and new? (Van Voorhis: Yes, love the house.) 21 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes April 8, 2013 Commissioner Yie made a motion to place the item on the REGULAR ACTION CALENDAR when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Gaul. Discussion of motion: ■ Bring back on action with grids removed from the windows, and a different bathroom window. ■ Should massing go to design consulfant? ■ No, understands fhe applicants reasoning. It's not as broken up as we'd like to see it but I a/so think it's helpful fhat iYs not the front of the house. ■ Normally when we send things to design review it's because the architect does not understand the guidelines or what we're after. In this case they understand what we're after, but she's hamstrung by our requirements as a city to have the GreenPoint rating. Chair Gaul called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the REGULAR ACTION CALENDAR when plans have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-1-0 (Commissioner Terrones absenf). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:51 p. m. 10. 1616 EASTON DRIVE, ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES ON SITE FOR A FIRST FLOOR ADDITION AND NEW DETACHED GARAGE (FORM + ONE DESIGN, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER: MATTHEW WOLFE, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated April 8, 2013, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier briefly presented the project description. Questions of staff: None. Chair Gaul opened the public comment period. Matthew Wolfe, Burlingame, represented himself as the property owner: ■ First home for he and his wife, expecting their first child in September. ■ Excited about the home and neighborhood. Excited to get the project underway. Johnny Moss, San Francisco, represented the applicant: ■ Available to answer questions. ■ Seeking variance for parking reduction, plate height increase. Commission comments: Concern about side yard setback, just seems close to sidewalk. Having the Master Bedroom so close to the sidewalk seems awkward. Having a hard time with side setback variance — it's a foot and one half. Easier to approve without. Existing fence remains, which is tall? (Wolfe: Majority of addition is behind the fence. Intention was to keep the aesthetic and not just have one wall. The bump-out is meant to be consistent with the existing architecture.) 22 � CIT7 `r : i � 1l �� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010 p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Type of application: `I� Design Review ❑ Variance ❑ Parcel #: ❑ Conditional Use Permit � Special Permit ❑ Other: PROJECT ADDRESS: �'�a�� iL,IJt�-L. /�V� APPLICANT project contact person � Payor of DSR deposiUhandling fee ❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ Name: _bNh�A� v�-� ��2-u�S Address: 1�01 Gap.h'�� A�� City/State/Zip: �Ur.�l►JGt�j � G1� q4oi6 Phone: dlb.3`O•RO�i� Fax: C��o) 37L - 3�f 4�f E-mail: V�UvB�fLt-��S G S�,c�t�irt,t..l��i- ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Pro�ect contact person ❑ Payor of DSR deposiUhandling fee ❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ Name: S�e I� ,4.r�o�� Address: City/State/Zip: Phone: Fax: E-mail: PROPERTY OWNER project contact person ❑ Payor of DSR deposiUhandling fee ❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ Name: N1�N.L ��s�u �-i-Ni � � c��h'�-� Vrs3V�Y Address: 13�,1 Y3�2.uk�. �WE City/State/Zip: r,�'vY..tfr-�M'(� c,q �C4-�j6 Phone: `}�5 215 -19 b� Fax: E-mail: MC'1'1�� p�A� � Ct-tla-tL.c�'1 ��.� �� ."a, k,�, �� : � �� ...�, � FEB � `� 2013 CITY OF GUFii.INCAME �k Burlingame Business License #: 'L5 3�S' CDB-PLAPdidli�!�: �I�/. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: �bfla�l�.� �� dLl Cau�mou �p � 2og uUcau�'7tau�.p SGi Z7 AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: e y nder penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and b ief. Applicant's signature: Date: �� 1R, 2Q1� I am aware of the proposed applicatio� �ereby,�thorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. // Property owner's signature: Date:._�7 � � , � � � Date submitted: ?'r�� y�� k Verification that the project architect/designer has a valid Burlingame business license will be required by the Finance Department at the time application fees are paid. s:IHAN�ourslPcappir�orro�.doc This Space for CDD Staff Use Only � Project Description: � ��► !�� Gl, ih I `�-C' iivy�— �Z�/ �J� t!�(1 , . _ - �.. c1 ' I � �^��^'� ��f G� I sr t �r �-; ��'�.G� l� , -�-� G8 V' �i(,1�. ��5, �� Kev: Abbreviation� Term, .. CUP Conditional Use Permit DHE Declinin Height Envelope DSR Desi n Review E Existing N New SFD Single Famil Dwellin SP Special Permit Responses to the Special Permit Applicaton for 1361 Bemal Avenue. ---- L��^�� '�'��`� ��' �� Responses to the questions on the special permit application are below. Additionally, we are providing an supplemental paragraph as those responses don't explain the problem the existing historic home and site present. From the lowest point at grade to the highest roof point, the existing house is 24'-10", the proposed house is 26'-7". However, at the slope at the front of the site is substantial (30% for the first 15' from the front property line), so the height of the existing house as measured from the top of the curb at the middle of the front of the site is 34'-3". If the entire site was sloped 25%, this height would be acceptable under section 25.28.060, however, because the slope of the site decreases as you move to the back of the side, and the overall slope is less than 25%, we need to apply for a special permit. 1) The mass of the project is very consistent with the original building. The over all width and length of the house are not increased. The height is only increased 1'-9", to allow proper drainage from the roof. At present, several roof planes drain toward the center of the roof, which creates pooling and water penetration into the house in several locations. Altering the roof slightly, to make all of the water drain to the gutters will remedy this problem. Per the line of sight diagram on drawing 2/7, this height increase is not visible from the street. 2) All of the finishes are extensions of existing materials, completely consistent with the existing house. Additionally, all of the work is at the rear of the house. The front of this historic house is unchanged and completely consistent with the neighborhood. 3) All of the work is consistent with the City of Burlingame Design Review Section 25.57 guidelines 1) The aesthetic of the historic house (built in 1936) will remain unchanged. About 90% of the existing house will remain. The new construction is at the rear of the house, and consistent with the existing house. 2) The parking remains unchanged. One garage space and one driveway space are required by the configuration of the new home. One garage space and 4 driveway spaces are provided. 3) The style and view from the front of the house are unchanged. The overall width of the home is not increased, nor is the length. The roof is only raised by 1'-9" at the back of the house and this increase is not visible from the street. 4) The impact to the adjacent properties is minimal. The closest dimensions to the adjacent homes do not change, and the overall length of the house does not change. 5) The landscaping is largely unaffected by the project. The brick patio in back will be replaced with a covered porch. Trellises with Bougainvillea will be added and trellises to support existing roses will be added. One tree will be replaced, and one tree will be added in the back yard. 4) No trees will be removed as a result of the new footprint. One tree will be replaced in the front yard and a shade tree will be added in the back yard as part of the project. ��1 V t�� FEB 19 2013 CtTY OF BURLINGAME CDD-PLANNING DIV. February 18, 2013 Pianning Department City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 To All Concerned, We are writing about our proposed project at 1361 Bernal Avenue. We fell in love with the City of Burlingame and purchased our home in 2007. We have a 2-year old daughter (almost 3), Violette. Her grandparents, who do not live in California, are very fond of her and come to visit frequently. We are planning to give Violette a sibling, at which point we will no longer have a room f�r her grandparents to stay in our 3 bedroom house. To that end, we are proposing to add a bedroom and bathroom to our home, as well as study so that we will have a place to work. In order to end our work day at 5:30 and get home in time for a family dinner, we must sometimes do work after dinner and we would like a place to do this. This project will also turn our brick patio into as covered porch opening to the back yard. Because we are in a seismic zone, we have to provide shear support to the bedroom we are adding on the second floor, and those shear supports will create this covered porch. We are committed to living here in Burlingame — we love the town that we've made our home the last several years, and we want to create a house where we can comfortably live for the rest of our lives. We also want to live in a place where we can feel confident that our children will get some of the best public education available, and we see that happening here in our town. Rest assured, we love the character and feel of our historic home, and this project will do nothing to change that. The overall length and width of the house are not increased and all of the work will occur at the back of the house. Please feel free to contact us directly if you have questions about our project: Email: mqthibautCa�qmail.com, Or call: (415) 215-1955. Best, �arles Vestner ��V�� V ��.J FEB 1 9 20i3 cirr oF buHun►aAM� CDD-PLANNIIVfQ OIV, � diebel and company 04.08.13 PC Meeting Agenda Item 9 13fi1 Bernal Avenue C'O.tl.�ll( ' �7C :-17I(l �' RE(.'EI d "ED .�1 FTER PREP.-I R.-� TIO:ti� UF ST.� F'F REPOR T po box 1044 burlingame, california 94011-1044 t)650.558.8885 e� gdiebel@diebelstudio.com 7 April 2os3 Planning Commission City of Burlingame 5oi Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 9poio i36i Bernal Avenue Proposed Improvements Dear Planning Commissioners, My wife, Mary-Claire, and I are neighbors to the proposed project at 136i Bernal Avenue. We have reviewed the house addition plans and strongly support the proposal. We appreciate the care to the design and improvements, including the house addition, removal of the carport, and landscaping. The addition has no apparent impact on the streetscape, only a minor height increase, and minimal affect on neighboring properties. The project is very compatible with the existing architecture. We urge you to support the proposed improvements. Sincerely, t �� Gary Diebel, AIA, Architect :1 _ or,�,� �.�,{ � 3,�, N �'t Y.�. ✓ APR - S Zp;I c�T; o= s��ti�av�E CCD-Pl.1�NNiiVG �iV. � Project Comments � Date: February 22, 2013 To: � City Engineer � Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7271 X Chief Building Official � Fire Marshal (650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600 0 City Arborist � NPDES Coordinator (650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permit for building height for a 1 st and 2nd story addition to an existing single family dwelling at 1361 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-058-060 Staff Review: February 25, 2013 1) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business license. 2) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 3) 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. 4) Provide existing and proposed elevations. 5) 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. 6) Provide a complete demolition plan that indicates the existing walls, walls to be demolished, new walls, and a legend. 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 a� 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. 7) Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines 8) Show the dimensions to adjacent structures. 9) Rooms that can 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 clear opening height and width of all required egress windows on the elevation drawinps. 10) Indicate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the Department of Public Works. 11) 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. 12) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 13) Provide lighting at all exterior landings. J_ _'"'�..— � �� _�---� --�_ -= � ( NOTE: When plans are submitted for Building Code compliance plan check provide the following �J�formation on the first page of the plans: ; / �_ /,, �_. _,\ de�s� ner, and/or contractor must submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically �' �-flTu�trated on thg,le� Copy of the plar}s-prior to performing the work. 14) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2010 California Building Code, 2010 California Residential Code (where applicable), 2010 California Mechanical Code, 2010 California Electrical Code, and 2010 California Plumbing Code, including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1856-2010. Note: If the Planning Commission has approved the project prior to 5:00 p.m. on December 31, 2010 then the building permit application for that project may use the provisions found in the 2007 California Building Codes including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1813. 15) On the plans provide a copy of the GreenPoints checklist for this project at full scale. 16) Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2008 California Energy Efficiency Standards. Go to http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2008standards/ for publications and details. 17) Place the following information on the first page of the plans: "Construction Hours" Weekdays: 7:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m. Saturdays: 9:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. Sundays and Holidays: 10:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. (See City of Burlingame Municipal Code, Section 13.04.100 for details.) 18�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 Reviewed J D • -2-6�2D12�� Project Comments Date: To: From: February 22, 2013 0 City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 � City Arborist (650) 558- 7254 � Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 BFire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 0 City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permit for building height for a 1 st and 2nd story addition to an existing single family dwelling at 1361 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-058-060 Staff Review: February 25, 2013 While the project appears to not require sprinklers based upon proposed addition and remodel, the project is close. Be advised where more than one (1) addition and/or alteration for which building permits are required are made within a two (2) year period and said alterations are made to the premises of the same occupant. In such circumstances, the sum of these additions and/or alterations construction costs during this two (2) year period shall be aggregated for the purpose of calculating the replacement cost value formula. Final determination will be made and the plan review phase of the project. It is very important that you understand the threshold indicated by BMC §17.04.030. Designer, contractor, and owner should communicate specifically the extent of demolition and remodel. Keeping in mind any change orders and addendums which increase the total amount of square footage added or remodeled after plan review would be applied to the sprinkler ordinance. Reviewed by: �/� - Date: 2,s �QlZr � 3 Project Comments Date: To: From: February 22, 2013 � City Engineer (650) 558-7230 0 Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 X City Arborist (650) 558-7254 0 Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 0 Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 0 City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permit for building height for a 1st and 2nd story addition to an existing single family dwelling at 1361 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-058-060 Staff Review: February 25, 2013 1. Existing landscape to remain with the addition of one 24in box Magnolia grandiflora in rear of property as indicated on landscape plan.. 2. Adequate amount of new and existing trees. 3. No tree over 48" in circumference may be removed without permit from Parks Division. 4. No further comments Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 2/27/13 Project Comments Date: To: From: February 22, 2013 X City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 � City Arborist (650) 558-7254 0 Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 0 Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permit for building height for a 1 st and 2nd story addition to an existing single family dwelling at 1361 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-058-060 Staff Review: February 25, 2013 1. Storm drainage shall be designed to drain towards the street frontage or to the City storm drain system. 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 Date: 3/05/2013 Project Comments Date: To: From: February 22, 2013 � City Engineer (650) 558-7230 � Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 � City Arborist (650) 558- 7254 0 Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 � Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 X NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permit for building height for a 1 st and 2nd story addition to an existing single family dwelling at 1361 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-058-060 Staff Review: February 25, 2013 1) Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City's NPDES (stormwater) permit to prevent stormwater pollution from construction activities. Project proponent shall ensure all contractors implement appropriate and effective BMPs during all phases of construction, including demolition. When submitting plans for a building permit include a list of construction BMPs as project notes on a separate full size plan sheet, preferably 2' x 3' or larger. Project proponent may use the attached Construction BMPs plan sheet to comply with this requirement. Electronic file is available for download at: http://www.flowstobay.org/documents/business/construction/Countywide_Program_B MP_Plan_Sheet Jun2012.pdf 2) Best Management Practices (BMPs) requirements apply on any projects using architectural copper. To learn what these requirements are, see attached flyer "Requirements for Architectural Copper." Electronic file is available for download at: http://www.flowstobay.org/documents/municipalities/nd/Materials/2012%20Materials/ Architectural_copper_BMPs_FI NAL.pdf For assistance please contact Stephen D. at 650-342-3727 Reviewed by: SD �� j Date: 2/25/2013 � saN MtirEr�ioc Water Pollution Prevention Program Clean Watec -ie,d,hy Comrnunrty Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) Construction projects are required to i►nplement the stormwater best management practices (BMP) on this page, as they apply to your project, all year long. M1laterials & �i'aste �lanagement ��: � �. , .i _ v�� :..� ��.,"f�r'� ` �'i<' J � '~ .�s'� '#� rvo�-u:�,,�do�, n„�ir��:�i� a u�, ��a <o . s�a Gp�i<s �r v��. a�n �� om�«o�su�.;�a� ��3„-��i �� iih �ueps.�hcn �ain is fnrceast or il'noi uui�-ch being usxd ��ilhin 1 a Jays L7 l!u Ibin Jon'i �„n�sc) �cclaiincJ ��Icr lor �usl conirol N:¢arduus hlntrrials ❑ Lahl all liaiardoi ��icnols ond 6amrdous �.asms �v�cl� a, pcsi�ades. paims. Wmucrs. snh�tms. foel. oJ. a�M amtircae� m a cordnn�e ��i�h cin. couni�. sia�c and fedcral rcgWanons. ❑ Smre ha�rdoue maicvols and onsms w..�rer iight contmixa, srorc "' appmpnom scwnd�n� comainmcnt, and coccr tlr:m at �hc cnd of c�cn �orA da� or during ��a wcmhcr ur ��hcn ram is � re�as� � Follo�� manufoclurcr's applicatwn inslnicuons lor liaiardous matenols und 6e curctiil noI tn usc more [han nec<ssnn Do not appl� chcnucals owdcors �.licn rau� is forccas� nithin'_J hours L7 .>rr�n�e lor �pP��priaic d�sposil of�ll h.vardous ��astcs w;,,�� m:��„xemcn� U Co�cr.�us1<dispo:al c�iiiaincrs sccur�l�� ilh iarps a11hc cnd of c��en� .orA <la� �nd dunng �.c� ��-ea0ier ❑ CLceA'��ns�e dispusal wnuintrs (rcq��cn11� (ur Ieal� :u�d lo mnAe surc thc� are u .'crf Ilcd Nc�cr ho5c du��'n � duntps�er on UlC ronstn..iion si�� L7 Clean or rcplau ponablc iodais. �nd u¢�mrl Wcm licqucmh !or IcaAs and spJls. O Dispusc ofall ��os�cs ond dcMis propcA� Rccccic ma�cnals and �czsics iliai can b,: rcn c'�,cd (s�icli as asphah. co�rcic. aFgrceatc basc u�aecrials. ��ood E: p bwrd p�pe. eic ) ❑ Uis�sc of liquid n:sidiirs fioin pnints. Ihinners. sol�cnLs, gl�res. nnd dcamng IluiAs u har.ardous aavc. Cunsirur�iun E:n�r.uicc.v anJ Pcrimeler ❑ Esiablish an� n�e�nwm cRccl�rc �n;rimc�cr conuols and subili�c all nsmin�on �nvanc�s und e�n io suFlicicmlv coneml ewsion and scduneni di chamcs from siic and tra:k�,g o1F sne U S��ccp onnc wn �nr sUcct uaclang muncdmlcl�� mid sccu¢ udin�cnt �owcc iu prc��cm fur�icr v�cAing. Nc��cr hosc do��n svects ia dcm� up tracl.mg. Equipment M1lanagement d Spill Co�trol l �' 1 � . ,��`� �'�. �1:un�cnencc an� P. rl:ing � � O Des��ute an area. S�Ied �vid� appropria[e BMPs. for r_hicle yid equipment NarAing and siorege. ❑ PerFcirm m �or mammnance. repairjobs, and rehicle and cquipmcm �cashuig o�i sitc. U Ifrefuelingor.•chicicmamienm�wmusebedone nsnc. ��rork in a bcmicd arca away Gom storm druins anJ orcr a drip pan big rnough lo collcct fluids. Req�de or dispose ef fluids as iwardous waste. ❑ If vehide or cqwpinem cleaning musi be done ansim, dean �� i�� ..aier onlv m a bem�ed area that �vilf not allo�� rinse ��atcr ro ruu inlo guttcrs, svects. stom� drm �s, or urfacc �va�crs. O Do noi dcan cchldc or cquipment onsim using soaps. sokents, d.greascrs, steam cleaning equipmem. ete. Spill Prc�cnuon and Con�ml ❑ h.mp spill cicanup matcnals (rnes, absorben�s, ctc.) a.ailablc m�tic co�u�na-don si�c ai all nmu ❑ Insp: ci vchrdcs and cquipmcnt Gcqucntla (or and repau leaks pmmptic Use dnp pans m catch leaks until repairs am made. ❑ Clean up spiLLs or leal;s inunediaiek and dispou of cleann p ma�enaLs properly. ❑ Do no� hosc dovn surfa:es ��here flmds hace spilled. Usc dn dcanup mcdiods (abmrbcn� maicnals, ca� liucr, and.�or rags) ❑ S�.ccp up spillcd drc malcrials imnialia[cl�� Do fro� vy m��ash ehem a�vur �ci�h �va[cr. or bury d�em. ❑ C(ean up spilLs on din arcu M� digging up and prnperk dlsposiug of comaminated soil. ❑ Report sig�uficuu spols immedimely. You are ¢qniied b� Im. io rcport all sipuLcanl releaus offianrdous maicrials.includingoil Torcponaspill:l)Dia1911 or �ow local emergenc�� response number, 2) Csp th� Go��emor's OfSrz a(Emergenc}� Sen�ices Warning Ccnter. (8U07 Si�_?ii0 (.'a huurs). Earthwork & Paving/Asphait Work Contaminated Soils '`"`^�--�--�-_�3� �� —��3 / a' � i*s.. �4 7 E��`.�'�� Emsion Cumrol ❑ SchedNe e„Iadmg and e.�ca��auon ��orl: Cor dry �realher onlr. ❑ Smbiluz all denuded arzas, ins�all end main�in tcmporan� croslon wnvols (such as emsion connol fabnc or bonded fiber mams) unnl e�egetanai is esmblished. ❑ Sced or plant regctation tor elosion C0IIITOI O� iIO�fCS Of N'�CfG COIIS WC(10�� i5 nW immcdiatNy planncd $[IIIIpfnl CU�tNI O P�otect srorm drnin inlees, guuers, duches. and droinage courses with appropriate BMPs, such az gmvcl bags. fibcr rolls. bcrms. etc. ❑ P¢vene udimen[ Gom migrating oBsitc by innalling and maintoinirtg scdime�it coutrols, su;,h as fiber rolls, silt fences, or udiment baxins. ❑ Kccp cecavaicd soil on tl¢ silc.chcrc it �vill na collect uno tlie strtt�. O TransFzr cua�-a�ed matcrials to dump trucks an dx svc. �rot m Ihc srctcl. ❑ COniamineled Soils ❑ If am• of the follow•ing wndi�ions arc observW. �es1 for comaminatioa and ro�vaq the Regional Water Qualin Controt Board: ■ Umuunl soil <m�ditions, discolorauon. or odor. ■ A6andoncd nndcrgroundinnks ■ .46andoncd ��clls ■ B�vied barmis. debris, or �rash. J.A��cid paving a��d s:al coa�ing in ��e� �veadw�. or �rh:a� nin is iore :ui heforc fresh parcmcm �� ill M1avc �imc �o cwc. ❑ Corcr stomi drein inlcis anJ manholcs when appfying scal cou�. tacA coaC slum� swl, fog seal. ctc. ❑ Co11ec1 and rm cle or appropnaieh� disposz of e>cess abasive yacel or sv�d. Do NOT sweep or wnsh ii into gutters. � Do nor use �caicr to �vasli dmrn fmsh a:pltal� concmie pa.-cmcni Sawcutting & .4sphalUCuncmte Remoral ❑ Cauplaely corzr or 6arricade smm� dlain udea w hcn sa�r cmm�g Usc filicr fabnc, ca¢h basm mlcl Ghers or grn��cl ba7� to I.eep slmn out ol' ��e stonn drain sys�em. ❑ Shoce� abosorb. or vncuwn sa��•.cui s�um a�d disposc of aIl ��ucc as soon es you am fnishcd in onc loca�on or e� �he end of each wcxk da}� (n�hichc��cr is soonerl), ❑ If sa�.cro slum� en�ers a caich basin. Nzan u up immcdiatck. Concrcte, Grout R Nlortar apphcation - -�------ I � =�.. t �.� � c *. "S V 1�,.c � ��': � J S �..,�a� � ti �� i p:illcit;uid ao�.n Iron� drein:�g� �as� n,e� ma�ed�� N�si ��<«��i„ slomi dfain ❑ 1Vas6 ow eoncreic equipmcnvtrucAs uElsice or m a wntained arw, w �hne is no dix4argc inm Ihe underh�mg soil ur ouco surtounding arcas. Lei wncrete hardcn and disposc of as gar6agc. ❑ Collcn �hc �wsL �.�aicr from �.ashiny exposed aggregam concmte m�d rtmare i� (or appmpnat� disposal ofTvre Dewate�ing r.;,i� _ f :' / \ �3' � •;� �� _`..^.� ❑ EtTecliwxl�� mymge all runvrt all runoFl��cithm �hc siie. and all cunollUmi d�ulurgcs from d�c snc Drvcrt runbn ��a�cr fiom oll'suc aaar (rom all dismrbed areu or o�henrise enswc <ompl�.vx;c. ❑ Whcn dnca�enng. no�if and obia;n appro�al From tl�a local mwiiapalin� G:f discturcinF �ratv to a slmcl guucr ur stomi draiu. Fil�r��on ordiccrsion through a basin, mnk, or udimenl trap may bc required. ❑ hi areas o(known conraminatlon. icspng is 2quircd pnor Io rcusc ar discha�c of groundw-aicc Conmdl w�ilh U�c Engi�cr to dctennine whetlier testing is required and huw m imcrpret resW�s. Contami�uiM groundn�ain m�i bc vcatcYl cx houlcd o6-site for proper disposal. Storm drain polluters may be liable for fines of up to $10,000 per dav! Painting & Paint Removal w, M�� '+�t�i �? � r � :', � �� {'� _ ,�..� �.-�__—. � Painl�ng cicanup ❑ Never clean bmshes or nnse pauu wntn�ncrs into a cvce�, gnncr, aromi dra�n orsurfxc..•atcts. ❑ For �.eicr bazcd paincs, pami ou� 6nahcs �o U�c c�icnl puss�blc. Rinsc �o �hc �.�^Il�n' SC\�'iC OIILC � Oti Il�vc gpNCd pennission from the local.ras[e.�ater irca�mem authonn Na.�cr puur pemi down a drain. 7 For oil-bascd pamis, paint uin brushcs m �6e evenl possible and dean with tlwmu r mh�ene m a proper conminer Fil[cr and ac Ihinncrs and solvcros. Disposa of re:�a��e �„a �„� ,ni� a��„�«i�i��o�s �.5 Iwardous �vastc. Paint rtmocal ❑ Chemical pain� stripping Icsidue a� chips and di�s� from nurin< painL� or paims wNaining Icad or vibun�ltin mus� bc disposcd of �c harardous ��aztc ❑ Paim ch�ps and dnst Cmm noa-h�iardous dn� stripping and sand blasling ma� be s�rcpt up or collccted in plastic drop clochs und disposed of as vash. Landscape �laterials < �� ;%��, t, � , �.i ❑ Contain stockpiled landswpmg marcriats by� storing ILcm wdcr Urps mhen �hn� a¢ nd ac�ivelp bcing uscd. ❑ Smck crodible landscape matcriel on pallcts. Covcr w slore Ihcse matcrials u�hcn Wec arc na xli�•ek being usW or applied ❑ Disconnnue appLcaeon ofam� erodible ��,��aa ,,,�«�, ,,;�,o z �,.s � a a fomcast raiu c�tn� or dunng wcl wca�Lcr. �../ i�� SA}i NA.iF',�. CuL+1 i i J1t6E Water Pollution Prevention Program Clean Water �ie�nhe f..;•:r�.nr., Requirements for Architectural Copper Protect water quality during installation, cleaning, treating, and washing! Copper from Buildings May Harm Aquatic Life Copper can harm aquatic life in San Francisco Bay. Water that comes into contact with architectural copper may contribute to impacts, especially during installation, cleaning, treating, or washing. Patination solutions that are used to obtain the desired shade of green or brown typically contain acids. After treatment, when the copper is rinsed to remove these acids, the rinse water is a source of pollutants. Municipalities prohibit discharges to the storm drain of water used in the installation, cleaning, treating and washing of architectural copper. ��.�� Use Best Management Practices (BMPs) The following Best Management Practices (BMPs) must be implemented to prevent prohibited discharges to storm drains. During Installation • If possible, purchase copper materials that have been pre-patinated at the factory. • If patination is done on-site, implement one or more of the following BMPs: o Discharge the rinse water to landscaping. Ensure that the rinse water does not flow to the street or storm drain. Block off storm drain inlet if needed. o Collect rinse water in a tank and pump to the sanitary sewer. Contact your local sanitary sewer agency before discharging to the sanitary sewer. o Collect the rinse water in a tank and haul off-site for proper disposal. • Consider coating the copper materials with an impervious coating that prevents further corrosion and runoff. This will also maintain the desired color for a longer time, requiring less maintenance. During Maintenance Implement the following BMPs during routine maintenance activities, such as power washing the roof, re-patination or re-application of impervious coating: • Block storm drain inlets as needed to prevent runoff from entering storm drains. • Discharge the wash water to landscaping or to the sanitary sewer (with permission from the local sanitary sewer agency). If this is not an option, haul the wash water off-site for proper disposal. Protect the Bay/Ocean and yourself! If you are responsible for a discharge to the storm drain of non- �� stormwater enerated b installin cleanin treatin or washin `�- •=-- -=--�? 9 Y 9, 9, 9 9 ,�E :�--. : copper architectural features, you are in violation of the municipal �'� .� stormwater ordinance and may be subject to a fine. `�'A "'": �"��:;; Pho!o credd� Dor, Ed�,.ar�s Natcra! L^Jddlife Sanctuary Contact Information The San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program lists municipal stormwater contacts at www.flowstobay.orq (click on "Business", then "New Development", then "local permitting agency"). FINAL February 29, 2012 Building with copper flashing, gutter and drainpipe. Storm drain inlet is blocked to prevent prohibited discharge. The water must be pumped and disposed of properly. RESOLUTION APPROVING NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, AND SPECIAL PERMIT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and application has been made for Desiqn Review and a Special Permit for Heicaht for a first and second-story addition to an existinq two-story house at 1361 Bernal Avenue, Zoned R-1 Charles Vestner and Mary Thibaut propertv owners APN� 026-058-060; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on April 22, 2013, 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 negative declaration, per Negative Declaration No. ND-564-P is hereby approved. 2. Said Design Review and Special Permit are approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review and Special 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 22"d dav of Aqril, 2013, by the following vote: Secretary RESOLUTION APPROVING NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, AND SPECIAL PERMIT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and application has been made for Desiqn Review and a Sqecial Permit for Heiqht for a first and second-story addition to an existinq two-story house at 1361 Bernal Avenue. Zoned R-1. Charles Vestner and Mary Thibaut propertv owners APN� 026-058-060; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on April 22, 2013, 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 negative declaration, per Negative Declaration No. ND-564-P is hereby approved. 2. Said Design Review and Special Permit are approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review and Special 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 22"d dav of April, 2013, by the following vote: Secretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Special Permit. 1361 Bernal Avenue Effective May 2, 2013 Page 1 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped April 11, 2013, sheets 1 through 9; 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 garage, which would include amendment to this permit; or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an 4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February, 26, 2013 memo, the Fire Marshal's and the Stormwater Coordinator's February 25, 2013 memos, the City Arborist's February 27, 2013 memo, and the City Engineer's March 5, 2013, 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 such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 7. 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; 8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Special Permit. 1361 Bernal Avenue Effective May 2, 2013 Page 2 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2010 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: 11. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the applicant shall provide a certification by the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, that demonstrates that the project falls at or below the maximum approved floor area ratio for the property; 12. 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; 13. 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 14. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. ��.� CITY OF BURLINGAME �/ ,� `� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD �g�;;�: BURLINGAME, CA 94010 ��p'�' _'�c '_ PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org Site: 1361 BERNAL AVENUE The City of Burlingame Planning fommission announces the PUBLIC HEARING following public hearing on MONDAY, APRIL 22, 2013 NOTICE at 7:00 P.M. in the (ity Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, (A: Application for Design Review and Special Permit for height for a first and second story addition to on existing single family dwelling with a detached garnge at 1361 BERNAL AVENUE zoned R-l. APN 026-058-060 ' Mailed: April 12, 2013 (Please refer to ofher side) Citv 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 cour i 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 correspo�dence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE (Please refer to other side)