The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1529 Howard Avenue - Staff Report` .�� _ — �_.Z� � f� yy�v�� _ _ +.: .. . � � .. _.— __—__ ' ��.�. .. � . . . � . . . -- — __ _=_—�-- _—= = � . . .. - — t-_=� ` _ . .,. � _--= _ � . .� � ,.,. 2 . --�- . . , .... �� - - ��_-_—�._-�-� �. . _ .. � , , , �-.�'. �1i . . . .. 6� : I I_,,. ` � � ' � ! 4 Ij— ! � i � � ' . . 7 � 3,�,�; �� r� � i x , ` � . - �- _ ae�. i`'rrci1� - .. 1 . . � � . . . . . = § � � k' _ . . _. . �. _ . _ ; �... _ .. . - .. _ .. .. .. . .... .. . ..�,I .. : ' - '�� . �"'_� �; ��.��.'�: . . ' . ' ' ' .� , . ... . . '.. : ; , =�.-. ��~ - . . . - . . . . . . _ ' . . . . . _ .. .... . , .. .. . .. � 1j � � ! , n�S.W.� V. Y! _ _ - . '.I: . ,�''-.. - . •t, �, 1':_ . . _� ,�- . -. -.- ..� .:.. . ..::.. ...: ' �, , �'. _ - . __i::.�-.. ... . . . . �.... . .. o..,..�- '_ .—. "" "_'_ _ _�_w,,. aa...s.mra�r . ..,+a..�r�+a-_-e'-�+- -�� ,�r_'+�.' , _ - ... _"'*';.^-.�v�;;='..�: - ,..,..�.�-. - - � , . -- _ ... ..._ . _ :.. _ ' .. . _ _ �� ; � ,_ � _. ��,.. � ,��,, ; � � 4�. �_,..w.�.a�� .. 7 ' � :::,� � ,. .. � � � ��:� ` ' i-cw ��e�. �4. ��„;�},.• .. ..._ - , . �. _ ��', ,�� . � �. x. . '". , 5 .__ +.-�..n- _ � . . ,_ ;.:-w�. � .ss8,. .r�.'✓^+ .,�. .»� :. . ;�� . - � x. :; r � _, . .�..� . .... _ � .. .. � . �'�LSJ`^�i5�� . '... a�s�'a:.'e:.. .....L . _ " �:'>. .. ':�L'.'�...: -... . . .... 1 1 ,� � S � � 7 T = .N. i :� � �� . i,�,9� � � � �. Item No. 5 City of Burlingame RegularAction Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Special Permit Address: 1529 Howard Avenue Meeting Date: April 28, 2014 Request: Application for Negative Declaration, Special Permit for Basement Ceiling Height, and Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. Applicant and Architect: Randy Grange, TRG Architects Property Owners: John and Cherie McGee General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 028-292-210 Lot Area: 8,904 SF Zoning: R-1 Environmental Review: The subject property is located within the Burlingame Park No. 2 subdivision. Based upon documents that were submitted to the Planning Division by a Burlingame property owner in 2009, it was indicated that the entire Burlingame Park No. 2, Burlingame Park No. 3, Burlingame Heights, and Glenwood Park subdivisions may have historical characteristics that would indicate that properties within this area could be potentially eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places. Therefore, for any property located within these subdivisions, a Historic Resource Evaluation must be prepared prior to any significant development project being proposed to assess whether the existing structure(s) could be potentially eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places. A Historic Resource Evaluation was prepared for this property by Page & Turnbull, Inc., dated September 5, 2013. The results of the evaluation concluded that 1529 Howard Avenue does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the National or California Registers under any criteria. Because there was a potential impact on historic resources, an Initial Study was prepared for the project. Based on the analysis by Page and Turnbull, it was determined that there would be no adverse environmental impacts, and a Negative Declaration has been prepared (see attached ND-572-P). The purpose of the present review is to hold a public hearing and evaluate that this conclusion, based on the initial study, facts in the Negative Declaration, public comments and testimony received at the hearing, and Planning Commission observation and experience, are consistent with the finding of no significant environmental impact. Project Description: The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing two-story house and garage to build a new, two-story single family dwelling with a detached garage. The proposed house and detached garage will have a total floor area of 4,308 SF (0.48 FAR) where 4,349 SF (0.49 FAR) is the maximum allowed (including covered porch and basement exemptions). The proposed project is 41 SF below the maximum allowed FAR and is therefore within 1% of the maximum allowed FAR. The applicant is proposing to remove a protected-size Magnolia tree on the property in order to accommodate the project. The tree is located immediately behind the existing garage, at the rear of the property. The applicant has submitted an arborist report for the Magnolia, dated February 18, 2014. The Parks Supervisor has indicated in his March 5, 2014 memo that the applicant must submit a separate Protected Tree Removal Permit to the Parks Division. This Permit must be approved prior to any demolition work on the site. The proposed two-story house will have a 621 SF basement. The applicant is requesting a special permit for a basement ceiling height of greater than 6'-6", to allow a proposed basement ceiling height of 9'-0". The top of the finished floor above the basement is less than finro (2) feet above existing grade and therefore, the basement floor area exemption applies to this space. A total of 600 SF (the maximum allowable exemption) has been deducted from the FAR calculation. The proposed detached garage provides two code-compliant covered parking spaces for the proposed six- bedroom house (three off-street parking spaces are required for a six-bedroom house, two of which must be covered). 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: Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Special Permit 1529 Howard Avenue ■ Negative Declaration, a determination that there are no significant environmental effects as a result of this project; ■ Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage (CS 25.57.010 (a) (1)); and ■ Special Permit for a basement ceiling height that is greater than 6'-6" (CS 25.26.035 (fl). 1529 Howard Avenue �oi Area: �s,yu4 sr Plans date stam ed: A ril 9, 2014 PREVIOUS PLANS � CURRENT PLANS (DATE ` � STAMPED APRIL 9, 2014) ; ALLOWED/REQUIRED ; , SETBACKS � ; , -------....__...-- ---._._._...__ . ---.._ ................._.._....._..................._.._.._......-;----....... ._............__..................... ._.._......--�---.....---- ---._.._.......__...._.......-----....._............_.......__..._...._._.__....----....... ................._.................. Front (1st flr): 24'-11" ' 23'-11" � 23'-11" is the block average (2nd flr): ; � �� 23'-11 " 2311 I No chan e � --.._._ ..................._................_.._..----.�..._....----...._.........._................... _.._._._...---.._.._.__.._......__.�_._.................._._..................----- g -._._........._...._......_....;._......_.....__..._.. _._..__._._...._..._..._....__...__..............._.._.............. Side (left): ; 5'-6" ; No change � 4'-0" (right): � 9'-6" � No change � 4'-0" ----._._._..........._ ...............__......----- �—...----...._._._.....---...._......._.._..............— _..._;._.__...._...._._................----..._ ---------....._...._.......__._._..............._....,.... _.......----._...._.......---__.........._...._.._......_............_..__._.........-- Rear (1st flr): i 80'-6" � No change i 15'-0" (2nd flr): ; gg�_p�� : No change � 20'-0" ---- ................._...—...__._...---.... _--..._......_..._............_.................................------......_._..__........._ . � _......._ ._ ...................-- -----.._.......-- ----._...._,._.......----...------..__.........._..........__.._.._...._......._...---- Lot Coverage: ; 2470 SF � 2786 SF 3562 SF � ' 30% 31% 40% ; , , _._.__._......_._.._...__......__. _.—......—.. i......._...._ ...............---._..—.....-- -----.........._......_.................---; -----.._....._........_._....._....._...._........._........._.._.—.__._..._.,._._..._....._..._...._._._.........__.............._._..._...—......_._....----._.._..... FAR: i 4249 SF 4308 SF ` 4349 SF' I 0.47 FAR 0.48 FAR � 0.49 FAR _...—_._...----._..�.._.._.........._...._;_.._......._....------------............_._......_...._........._._.._._ .............._._._.__._._..__..._..............._..................._.......-------------..._..�__.............._....._....._..........-------..._.__._..._......__........._......................._.... # of bedrooms: i 6 � No change ! --- , � Basemeni: i 621 SF basement with a No change ; Special Permit required per ' ceiling height greater than ` C.S. 25.26.035,f 2 6'-6" _ .........................._.._....-- -----......_._.._...._._.._ _ .........._........._._.._...._.....-----..—..._..__....__..............................._.; ............. _._.__......_...._.__.._..._._......_...................__................................----�----....__........................... _._...................._....._..__...__...---...._ . . .--- Parking: 2 covered, detached No change ; 2 covered, detached (20' x 20') ; ' (20' x 20') 1 uncovered i � 1 uncovered (9' x 20') ` � ; (9' x 20') _._...__.._........----..__._...------.._ .__ ......................-- -- ---...----- --..._...._.._............;.._............._........--- ... , _._........- -- -- —�--- --- --.....------....._...----......._.........._....---.._......_.......... Height: 26'-3 1/8" No change ; 30'-0" _._..__._........_._......_.....---.— _. _.........._.._...._._....._...---------..._...._.._.__.....:.._.........._._........._.._..--------..........._........__.._._ ; --..__._..._..---........_ ..............._....._-----.._._....._.._.................. DH Envelope: --- ; --- � complies ; ' (0.32 x 8904 SF) + 1100 SF + 400 SF = 4349 SF (0.49 FAR) 2 Special Permit requested for a basement ceiling height that is greater than 6'-6". Staff Comments: See attached memos from the Chief Building Official, Fire Division, Engineering Division, Parks Division, and Stormwater Division. Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission Environmental Scoping and Design Review Study meeting on March 24, 2014, the Commission had several comments and suggestions regarding the proposed project (see the attached March 24, 2014 Planning Commission minutes). The Commission voted to place this item on the regular action calendar when the plans had been revised as directed. -2- Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Special Permit 1529 Howard Avenue Please referto the attached meeting minutes and the applicant's response letter and revised plans, date stamped April 9, 2014, for responses to the Commission's comments. Negative Declaration: Because there was a potential impact on historic resources, the proposed project is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission held an environmental scoping session for this project on March 24, 2014. An Initial Study was prepared by the Planning Division staff. It has been determined that the proposed project can be covered by a Negative Declaration since the initial study did not identify any significant impacts from the proposed construction of the new single family dwelling and detached garage (please refer to the attached Negative Declaration No. 572-P). The Negative Declaration was circulated for 20 days for public review. The 20-day review period ends on April 28, 2014; as of the printing date of this staff report (April 24, 2014), no comments have been submitted on the Negative Declaration. Required Findings for a Negative Declaration: For CEQA requirements the Planning Commission must review and approve the Negative Declaration, finding that on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received in writing or at the public hearing that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant (negative) effect on the environment. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows: 1. Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Required Findings for 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 and within the Negative Declaration. Affirmative action on the following items should be taken separately by resolution including conditions from the staff report and/or that the commissioners may add. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated. 1. Negative Declaration. 2. Design Review. -3- Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Special Permit 3. Special Permit. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: 9529 Howard Avenue that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped April 9, 2014, sheets A1.1 through A4.1, L1.0 and L2.0, PW.1, and Boundary and Topographic Survey; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning 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 Building Division's March 10, 2014 and January 15, 2014 memos, the Parks Division's March 5, 2014 and January 21, 2014 memos, the Engineering Division's February 4, 2014 memo, the Fire Division's January 21, 2014 memo, and the Stormwater Division's March 7 and January 16, 2014 memos 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 prior to a issuance of building permit for demolition on the site, the applicant shall obtain approval of a Protected Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department for the protected-size Magnolia Tree on site; the construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet showing the approved Tree Removal Permit; 7. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 8. 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; 9. 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; 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; 11. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2013 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; -4- Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Special Permit 1529 Howard Avenue THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: 12. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 13. 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; 14. 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; 15. 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 16. 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. Randy Grange, TRG Architects, applicant Attachments: Applicant's response letter, date stamped April 9, 2014 March 24, 2014 Planning Commission Minutes Application to the Planning Commission Special Permit Form Arborist's Report, date stamped February 18, 2014 Staff Comments Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed) Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed April 18, 2014 Aerial Photo Separate Attachments: Negative Declaration and Initial Study (ND-572-P), dated April 8, 2014 Historical Resource Evaluation conducted by Page & Turnbull, Inc., date stamped September 5, 2013 -5- A rchitectJ Wednesday, April9t", 2014 Planning Commission City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: 1529 Howard Ave. Deax Commissioner, You first reviewed this proposal as a study item on Monday, March 24th� We have made some revisions based on Planning Commission comments from that meeting. The front porch has been increased in depth, while the space accessing the front door was widened. The two story element on the front has been modified to include a stone first floor rather than just a wainscot, and the cantilever with brackets has been removed. Shingles will flare out over a belly band. On the right elevation, windows have been added tom either side of the chimney at the lower level, and the chimney is now stone. At the rear elevation, the window and door pattern under the porch has been revised. We hope you like the revisions and look forward to the meeting to discuss the project. Thank You, Randy Grange AIA LEED AP ��' � A6 g: Er h a ":; � u . � �� e � �, A P,k -- ;: � '., . /i a��r�iea L:) vy� FSG ................._. ' i:ITY 0- r;�i;-��_;NG,AP�.�= ��(J�,'-.=_=',^!i�i;i'�( ^ ,.��.. Y a iJ: 205 Park Road, Sui�e 203, Burlingame, CA 94010 650.579.5762 Fax 650.579.0115 www.trgarch.com CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes March 24, 2094 ■ Looking at the front elevation, the upper and lower windows on the left side are about the same size, would it make more sense to have different sizes, a hierarchy of window sizes, have the upper ones a little bit smaller? (Geurse - Agree that it feels like the top one is heavier than bottom one.) ■ Trying to understanding the roof plan, is the big section between two gables,'/z:12 slope, then does it get steeper? (Geurse — Dashed line in middle is a step down, so both are in'/2:12 slope.) ■ There are a lot of houses with same design in this area. Neighbors are going to be copying design, want to make sure you build it exactly as it is drawn, don't to lose details and have it diluted. ■ Like the rear elevation, the roof line is a nice design feature. ■ Design looks great — could look at the chimney extending higher, doesn't have to meet two feet above ridge. ■ On north elevation, are the doors substantially taller? (Geurse — Yes, the doors are eight foot tall, has nine foot high plates and normal header.) ■ Are there hand rails on the front elevation? (Geurse — yes.) There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commission comment: Generally in support, with a couple changes as noted in the comments. Commissioner Terrones made a motion to p/ace the item on the Consent Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Davis. Chair Sargent called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the Consent Calendar when plans have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-0-0. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealab/e. This item concluded at 10:12 p.m. 9. 1529 HOWARD AVENUE, ZONED R-1 -APPLICATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH A DETACHED GARAGE (TRG ARCHITECTS, ARCHITECT AND APPLICANT; JOHN AND CHERIE MCGEE, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERIKA LEWIT Reference staff report dated March 24, 2014, with attachments. There were no ex-parte communications. Project Manager Brooks briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Sargent opened the public comment period. Randy Grange, TRG Architects, represented the applicant. Picked a style that thinks will fit into neighborhood, shingles soften building. Historic review took a while so haven't review the plans until recently, would like to add windows in family room on driveway side. As far as the tree in the rear, the arborist is here to answer questions. Propose to plant eight new trees on site. Commission comments: Like design, think it will fit in well with neighborhood. Wondering about the two-story element on right side of front fa�ade, is there a different way to treat that? This layout is something we see a lot of, would like to see something different. 19 . CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes March 24, 2094 ■ Can you make the front porch bigger? That part of town is close to downtown, would be a nice hang out spot. ■ Know that parking is constricted in this area, is the driveway gate manual or automatic? Could you push it back further it so that multiple cars could be parked in the driveway? ■ In looking at the front porch, if you make it bigger by extending it towards the front, would it interFere with window? (Grange — Actually took that window out, so can pull the front porch forward and get more seating area.) ■ On the right elevation, next to chimney, could you add windows on first floor on either side? ■ Consider taking stone up to shoulder as a bottom base to the chimney. ■ This neighborhood is about porches and craftsman, this design will fit in. ■ Could the roof line somehow include the entry to emphasize the entry a little more? ■ Neighborhood has a lot of original craftsman, see more horizontal siding as base ratherthan stone, might work on this design to fit into neighborhood. ■ Have any of the neighbors seen the plans? Have seen other projects with big stairwell windows that have caused concerns with privacy. ■ Seems to be consensus on ideas, porch could come out a bit. ■ Would there be an issue with maintenance of horizontal siding? Would be okay with stone as long as it is a type of stone that we might see in this area. ■ Prefer the stone, looks more solid or substantial. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Terrones made a motion to place the item on the RegularAction Calendar when complete. This motion was seconded by Chair Sargent. Chair Sargent called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the RegularAction Calendar when plans have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealab/e. This item concluded at 10:27 p.m. X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS Appointment of two Planning Commissioners to serve on a joint City Council/Planning Commission committee to review and propose amendments to the City of Burlingame Neighborhood Design Guidebook: Chair Sargent noted that the Commission had a good discussion in the study session and that he had watched Mayor's appointments at Council meeting. Wants to act on appointments, echo what the Mayor said regarding issues with a wide range of opinion; appointees should reflect that range; think that it is very important that appointees work well with members of subcommittee. He then appointed Commissioners Terrones and Chair Sargent to the Design Guidelines subcommittee. XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT There were no Commissioner's Reports. XII. ADJOURNMENT Chair Sargent adjourned the meeting at 10:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nirmala Bandrapalli, Secretary 20 . r4..5'_ PK' _' Z i� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010 p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.buriingame.org APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Type of application: � Design Review. ❑ Variance ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit PROJECT ADDRESS: /� Z � 8 Please indicate the contact person for this project / APPLICANT � project contact person l�' OK to send electronic copies of documents p� Name: / l� �l(�/ ��CT,S Address: � � %�a�k �.�, ��3 City/State/Zip: �U�llnq/'h�-e � C� 9Yol� Phone: � �Jd ' .� � �j' " � �(� 2 Fax: � �� ` � �� ' �%�� E-mail: ,S � r--U�1 � ��_ ARCHITECT/DESIGNE Pro�ectcontactperson❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ Name ❑ Parcel #: ❑ Other: � PROPERTY OWNER project contact person ❑ OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑ i / Name: O�in �' �f? ��1 �P � C � � Address: / �� / �lla rai Y�- CitylState/Zip: c� r' � !� �`�1��0 Phone: ��Jr " � / �' J�`f Fax: E-mail: �Z� @ �� C'. ��yL(. Address: � � �� Y Ic �� : � L�� City/State/Zip: �LJ �/ n � -e �/ % ` ��C � Phone: b �v � � � % ' � �� Z Fax: � l�0 ' � � �/ ' �� ,� E-mail: �� s �� q � ✓�� '7f1�1/� * Burlingame Busin ss License # � � ��p �- PROJECT DESCRIPTION:�N Z�S //S-� LJ� ,L��L�G� �/�'r�� Ci �Gc � l x�1 /.� � �D�,. _ - _ � AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I h reb ertify u na y o erjury that the information given herein, is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and beli . Applicant's signature: 'Date: � / 3 � I am aware of the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit his application to the Planning Commission. . G Property owner's signature: Date: � � I G �j �, ,� � � � � ��"'� � e.._ � �� ,-.� :,.� Date submitted: l � i��;9 * Verification that the project architect/designer has a valid Burlingame business license will be r'��i d' by`the Finance Department at the time application fees are paid. ❑ Please mark one box above with an X to indicate the contact person for this project. S:�Handou'is��pTic,�ri�Qp$;��andout CD�-oLn,NNING DiV. City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) �58-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlingame•ore r� CITY � � � BURLINGAME � ' ! '�.. CITY OF BURLINGAlVIE SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. l. Explain why tlie blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with tlze existing structure's design and witlz tlze existing street and neiglzborhood. 2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior�nish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with tlze existing structure, street and neighborhood. 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)? 4. Explain how tlie removal of any trees located witlzin the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with tlze city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for tlze removal of any lrees? Explain wlzy t/zis mitigation is appropriate. SPECPERM.FRM City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlin�ame.orQ 1. Explain wlzy tlze blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent witlz tlze existing structure's design and with t1Ze existing street and neighborlZood. How will the proposed structure or addition affect neighboring properties or structures on those properties? If neighboring properties will not be affected, state why. Compare the proposed addition to the mass, scale and characteristics of neighboring properties. Think about mass and bulk, landscaping, sunlighUshade, views from neighboring properties. Neighboring properties and structures include those to the right, left, rear and across the street. How does the proposed structure compare to neighboring structures in terms of mass or bulk? If there is no change to the structure, say so. If a new structure is proposed, compare its size, appearance, orientation etc. with other structures in the neighborhood or area. 2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish mateYials and elevations of the pYoposed new structure or addition are consistent with tlze existing structure, street and neighborhood. How does the proposed structure or use compare aesthetically with structures or uses in the existing neighborhood? If it does not affect aesthetics, state why. Was the addition designed to match existing architecture and/or pattern of development on adjacent properties in the neighborhood? Explain why your proposal fits in the neighborhood. How will the structure or addition change the character of the neighborhood? Think of character as the image or tone established by size, density of development and general pattern of land use. Ifyou don't feel the character ofthe neighborhood wil] change, state why. 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city? Following are the design criteria adopted by the City Counci] for residentia] design review. How does your project meet these guidelines? 1. Compatibility of the architecturai 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. 4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent witlz the city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for tlze removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is appropriate. Will any trees be removed as a result ofthis proposal? If so, explain what type of trees will be removed and if any are protected under city ordinance (C.S. 11.06), why it is necessary to remove the trees, and what is being proposed to replace any trees being removed. If no trees are to be removed, say so. SPECPERM.FRM Attachment A SPECIAL PERMIT BASEMENT WITH CEILING HEIGHT GREATER THAN 6'-6" 1529 Howard Avenue The mass, scale, and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction are consistent with the existing street and neighborhood. There are a wide variety of houses on the street (in terms of style, mass, scale etc...) and the proposed Craftsman style fits in nicely. The proposed basement has no impact on the mass or scale of the structure. 2. The rooflines, fa�ade, materials, and elevations of the proposal are similar to that of other houses in the neighborhood. Wood shingles, painted wood trim, stone veneer etc.... The roofline is varied and the fa�ade includes many architectural details to enrich its character. The basement is not visible from the street, and does not contribute to the rooflines, materials etc... 3. 1. The architectural style is compatible with the character of the neighborhood. 2. The detached garage is the same as the existing pattern, and consistent with the neighborhood. 3. See items 1 and 2 above for comments about style, mass and bulk. 4. A full landscaping plan is being provided, which will be a significant improvement for the site. 4. No trees within the footprint of the structure will be removed for this project. One tree behind the house will be removed, and one street tree will be removed and replaced. Please see the landscaping plan for additional details and new trees. Kielty Arborist Services Certified Arborist WE#0476A P.O. Box 6187 San Mateo, CA 94403 650- 525-1464 February 18, 2014 Mr. Michael Callan 1233 Oak Street San Mateo, CA 94402 Site: 1529 Howard, Burlingame, CA Dear Mr. Callan, .,, . ,�.. ;� ��"�R �P ��,$ � �,�� .� ; L �w�. �1 �. ... � -a ,;_,_,` � � :L.O �4 : f �,� � �^� F ,�.i-�.. �� i.!i'�i_ii �l--.ri.��it ,_ .L)�-�-'� � ,.'�i',li'.vC L i�'�. As requested on Friday, February 14, 2014, I visited the above site for the purpose of inspecting and commenting on the large magnolia tree in the center of the lot. The tree is very close to the existing garage and your concern as to the damage the tree is causing has prompted this visit. Method: All inspections were made from the ground; the tree was not climbed for this inspection. The tree in question was located on a"Not- to-Scale" map provided by me. The tree was then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). The tree was given a condition rating for form and vitality. The trees' condition rating is based on 50 percent vitality and 50 percent form, using the following scale. 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poor 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The height of the tree was measured using a Nikon Forestry 550 Hypsometer. The spread was paced off. Comments and recommendations for future maintenance are provided. Observations: , The tree in question is a southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora) with a diameter at breast height of 26.1 inches. The tree is located in the rear center of the lot 18 inches from the corner of the existing garage. The estimated height of the magnolia is 35 feet with a total crown spread of 40 feet. The tree has poor to fair vigor with less than normal shoot growth for the species and some tip dieback. The form of the magnolia is fair however the location is very poor. The tree has a large root flare and an abundance of surface roots which are damaging the existing garage and a recently installed paver style patio. The trunk of the tree is currently touching the roof of the structure. 1529 Howard/2/18/14 (2) Summary: The large magnolia is causing significant damage to a structure on the property and surrounding hardscape. The garage is planned for replacement and the magnolia most likely will not survive the demolition and rebuilding of the existing garage. Remove and replace the magnolia with a more suited species of tree in a location where the tree can thrive for years to come. Magnolia trunk 18 inches from existing garage. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty Certified Arborist WE#0476A Project Comments Date: To: From: March 3, 2014 0 Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 X Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 � Fire division (650) 558-7600 � S#ormwater Division (650) 342-3727 Erika Lewit, Planning Subject: revised plans for 1529 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028- 292-210 - original comments, response to comments, and revised plans are in your In- Box Staff Review: 1. Complete infiormation on "Tree Work Plann form and submit to Parks Division (850 Burlingame, Ave.) for approval . 2. Fill out aProtected Tree Removal Permif (attached) and submit to Park Division for approval. Include Arborist report and pictures. 3. Water Conservation requiremen#s fulfilled, irrigation plan, ok. Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 3/5/14 Project Comments Date: To: From: January 13, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 X Parks Division (650) 558-7334 0 Fire Division (650) 558-7600 0 Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Environmental Review and Design Review for a new, two-story house with a detached garage at 1529 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-292-210 Staff Review: January 21, 2014 1. Replace City street trees with 2- 24" box Gingko biloba. 2. Japanese Maples must be larger, upright varieties. 3. Arborist report needed for removal of Magnolia to determine if tree is diseased or structurally unsound. Landscape may need to protect magnolia and incorporate existing tree into landscape plans if tree is healthy. 4. If Public Works requires sidewalk replacement, Policy for Expanding Width of Planter Strip needs to be implemented. 5. No existing tree over 48 inches in circumference at 54 inches from base of tree may be removed without a Protected Tree Permit from the Parks Division (558-7330). 6. Tree Work Plan (attached) required for removal and replacement of City Street trees. 7. Landscape plan is required to meet `Water Conservation in Landscape Regulations" (attached). Irrigation Plan required for Building permit. Audit due for Final. Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 1 /21 /14 M�Co�-152� �� UTDOOR WATER USE EFFtCIENCY CNECKLIST 4 " • r � C • ' ' � � 1 0 • ' t _ . f . I certify th jec[�tb�e me e specified requirements of tf�e Watcr onserva 'on in Landscaping Ocdinance. �,.r:: ' `/� � � � gnatur Date , ��L��jt .yt�_��,� ?J}}r:i .E�O�`� - 1 �, in le Famii U Multi-F i❑ Commercial ❑ instituti naI '� Irri ation oni ❑ Industrial U Othe � g Y G Y r: Applicant Name (print): Con[act Phone tt: O' 3 2• 22� Project Site Acidress Agency Review' Project Area (sq.ft. or acre): � i1 of llnits: N of NFeters: I '(PassJ .' (Fail}'` ct ' I t�di� L E{ 1 i,i �, �;�; Total Landscape Are {SC�. .�j n , i. I �' f<< .� �� c _: � ❑ �i=! �/� ' /i 'i .� �,�� ¢ l�-) � i #� �=; � V r. .j- , -. i _ . i 1" 11 '1 1 �,�� .I t�'f191.?� �� Y.=i; ' , Turf Irrigated Area (sq.ft.): ` ,L�' L] '� i _, � � � 1_ � � r�� '' Non=furf Irrlgated Area (sq.ft.j: '$ p ;. �� ,, -� p 1 7 i ur a-,� � ,�_, � , �:;E. } ,. � _- Spectal Landscape Area {SLA} (sq.ft.): — :p u ` _ �:-�. . , 1t:, , Water Feature Surface Area (sq.ft.): � 1.�r:�� ..1 .� i it�+..i-� _ l:� Ic�''�{��_-1 _ l_ t � (.'� °�� l J� 7� tL - Turf Less than 25% of the landscape area is Yes - .Cl.,,;'�< turf ❑ No, See Water f3udget All turf areas are> 8 feet wide � Yes�� -`:0"'�`� l] .` All turf is planted on slopes < 25°S �1'es � p� Non-Turf At least 8o°0 of non-turf area is native la.Yes � p. or low water use plants U No, See Water Budget Hydrozones Plants are grouped by Nydrozones s �•;: .,p; ,.; Mutch At least 7-inches of mulch an exposed es �..•0 .. ,. soil surfaces � -. Irrigation System Efficiency 70% CTo (100% ETo for SLAs) Yes $. ' �; . --- �_.._ _ __. _..._ . No overspray or runoff Yes 'O" �. V: frrlgation System Oesign System efficiency> 70% es :;.F�`` . Q: `�; . Automatic, self-adjusting irri�ation o, not required for iier 1 . ��i� ..- C7, •� controllers C] Yes Moisture sensor/rain sensor shutoifs �I.Yes � �� 'f7' p� No sprayheads in < 8-ft �vide area. �.Yes .O' `0, : Irrigation Tfine System only operates t�eCween 8 PNi l�Yes � `' U. and 10 AM Metering Separate irrigation meter o, not required because < 5,000 sq.ft. `.�7-`.� '; Cl �. ❑ Yes Swlmmfng Pools ( 5pas Cover highly recommended � ❑ Yes ;.."'.a'-` O_- Na, not required Water Features Recfrculating ❑ Yes : `;B- :;.,. :.�.: ;` ; - ------_-• - _. __�_ _._.__��_.�._ .---• -- -_ _ _.. .� Less than i0% of landscape are Yes <;,O : ❑ Documentatbn Checklist �Yes � - � D � Landscape and Irriga[ion Design Plan 0 Prepared by applic.ant '0 .__ �L]: Prepared by professional Water E3udget (optianalj ^ ❑ Prepared by applicant '. •�.:� � . U', :� - N U prepared by pro(essional Audlt Post-installation audit compl�te U Completed by applicant x„ ��;$"��.� 'G2 t` �- � � ❑ Completed by professional }' �" ` - ;_'- }� � ;1,. f� ;, � Project Comments Date: January 13, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 Q Fire Division (650) 558-7600 i� Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 0 City Attorney (650) 558-7204 To: From: Subject: Staff Review: Planning Staff Request for Environmental Review and Design Review for a new, two-story house with a detached garage at 1529 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-292-210 January 21, 2014 1) Stormwater requirements are required to be implemented at stand-alone single �amily home projects that create and/or replace 2,500 sq.ft. or more of impervious surface. These requirements are in addition to any City requirements. To determine if this project is subject to those requirements complete and return the attached "Stormwater Checklist for Small Projects." For additional information about these requirements please refer to the attached flyer "New Stormwater Control Requirements Effective 12/1/12" and by visiting the San Mateo County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP) website at: http://flowstobay.org/files/privatend/MRPsourcebk/Section4/C3iNewRegsSmProjSep 2012.doc To obtain a checklist electronically, the document is available at: http://flowstobay.org/files/privatend/MRPsourcebk/Section4/StormChecklistSmallProj Dec2012.doc 2) 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://flowstobay.org/files/privatend/MRPsourcebk/Section5/ConstBMPPIanJun2012. pdf 3) 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://flowstobay.org/files/privatend/MRPsourcebk/Section8/ArchitecturalcopperBMPs . pdf For assistance please contact Stephen D. at 650-342-3727 Reviewed by: SD Date: 1/16/14 Project Comments Date: To: From: March 3, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558- 7230 0 Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 � Fire division (650) 558-7600 X Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 Erika Lewit, Planning Subject: revised plans for 1529 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028- 292-210 - original comments, response to comments, and revised plans are in your In- Box Staff Review: 1) The Stormwater Requirements Checklist has been filled out and returned. It indicates that the project does trigger the new stormwater requirements. The applicant has indicated that sight design measures B.2.b,c,d will be implemented in the project. 2) Comments included in earlier review should be incorporated during building permit issuance. Reviewed by: SD �� Date: 3/7/14 /� i � . ' sa� MA'�e couNrYwi�� 1'�aterPcjfution ��'�'e��onFiogram City of 8urlingame - Office of 'Stormwater Checklist for Small Pro' ts JeC Environmental Comptiance Municlpal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP} 1�103 Airporf Blvd arder No. R2-2009-0074 ; Order No, R2-20i 1-0083 NPDES No. CAS612008 Office: (650) 342�3727 Fax: (650) 342�3792 Complete fhis form forindividual single family home projects of any size, other projects that creafe and/or replace less fhan 10,000 square feet of impe�vious surface, and projects in the following categories fhat create and/or replace less fhan 5, D00 square feet of imperv)ous surfaca: resfauranfs, retal! gasoline out/ets, auto servrce facilities', and paricing lofs {stand-alone or part of another use). ,��.� ;,.�, �� ` � �� , A. Project Information � c �. �i .� e_;g, A.1 Project Name: /'/' 1 � �-�/ e� ��.5/ �-C/%�.Q� _ -, — r; € {�� ) il i �1 A.2 Project Address _ � 5 � 9 �/�I�J� r� - � - _ � y B. 5elect Appropriate Si#e Design Measures r. B.1 Does the project create and/or replace 2,5Q0 square feet or more of impervious surface2? Yes ❑ No ➢ If yes, and the project will receive final discr�tionary approva! on or after DecembeY 1, 2012, fhe projecf must include one of Site Design MeasurEs a thrnugh f.3 Fact sheets regarding site design measur�s a through f may be dawnloaded st http://www.flowstobay.org/bs new development.php#flyers.. ➢!f no, or fhe project will receive ftna! discretfonary approval before December i, 2012, fhe projecf rs encouraged to implement srte design measures4, which may be required at municipality discrefion. Consult with municipa! sfaff about requirements for your project. B.2 {s the site design measure included in fhe project plans? a. Diract roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels and use rainwafer for irrigation or other non-potable use. b. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. c. D(rec` runoff from sidewalks, wafkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. d. Direct runoff from driveways andlor uncovered parking lots ont�,vegetated areas. e. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces. f. Construct blke fanes, driveways, andlor uncovered parking (ots with per-meable surfaces. g. Minimize lar�d disfurbance and impervious surface. (especially parking lots), h. Maximize permeability by clustering developmenf and preserving open space, Yes No ❑ ❑ � "RQ i--� � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ a i. Use micro-detention, including distributed landscape-bassd detention. J. Protect sensitive areas, including wefland and riparian areas, and minimize changes fo the natura! topography. k. Se1f-treating area (see Section 4.2 of the C,3 Technical Guidance) I. 5eff-retainina area (see Saction 4.3 of the C,3 Techn�cal Guidance) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ m. Pfant or preserve interceptorfrees (Section 4,1, C.3 Technical Guidance) 1 See 5tandard Indusfrial Classi�cation (SlC) codes here. 2 Complete fhe C.3/C.6 Development Review Checklist if the project is not an individual single family home, and if creates and/or replaces 10,000 square feet or more of fmpervlous surface; �r i? it is a restauranf, retail gasoline outlet, auto service facility, or parking lot project that creafes and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface. 3 See MRP Provision C.3.i, 4 See MRP Provlslon C.3.a.i.(6), 1 Approved December 4, 2012 � Z�- Z-�'i z- Zlb ��-`�_�` o`='=�� 1�i-i�,�-,a��,�.= ,,, , . .._T � �T.. Stormwater Checklist for Smal1 Projects , C, Select appropriate source controls (Encouraged for all projects; may be required af municipa/ discretion. Consultmunicipa! Sf��,S� Arethese Features that features fr� require source project? control measures Yes No o_ ❑ �.; ❑ ❑ / -, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � ❑ � ❑ ❑ Storm brain � Floor Drains Parking garage Landscaping ooVSpa/Fountain ❑ Faod Service �� Equipment /� (non- residential) Refuse Areas dutdoor Prc Activitles Z Outdoor Equipmenf/ Materials Vehicle/ Equipment Vehicie/ Equipment Repair and Maintenance Fuel Dispensing Areas Loading Docks ❑ � Fire Sprinklers Source controf ineasures (Refer to Local Source Controi List for detailed requirements) • Mark on-site inlets with the words "No Dumping! Flows to Bay" or equivalent. ■ Plumb interior floor drains to sanitary sewer (or prohibit]. ■ Plumb interior parking garage floor drains to sanitary sewer.s � i2etain existing vegetation as practicable. ■ 5elect diverse species appropriate to the site, Include plants that are pest- and/or disease-resistant, drought-tolerant, and/or attract beneficial insects. ■ Minimize use of pesticides and quick-release fertilizers. ■ Use efficient irriqation system• desiqn to minimize runoff. ■ Provide connection to the sanitary sewer to facilitate draining.6 Provide sink or other area for equipment cleaning, which is: ■ Connected to a grease interceptor prior to sanitary sewer discharge.s ■ Large enough for the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned. • Indoors or in an oufdoor roofed area designed to prevent stormwater run-on and run-ofF, and signed to require equipment washing in fhis area, ■ Provide a roofed and enclosed area for dumpsters, recycling containers, efc., designed to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff. ■ Connect any drains in or beneath dumpsters, compactors and tallow bin areas serving food service facilities to the sanitary sewer.� ■ Perform process activities either indoors or in roofed oufdoor area, designed to prevenf stormwater run-on and runoff and to drain to fhe sanitary sewer.s ■ Cover the area or design to avoid pollufant confact with stormwaker runafF. • Locate area only on paved and contained areas. ■ Roof storage areas tha# will cQntain non-hazardous liquids, drain io sanitary sewers, and contain bv berms or similar. ■ Roo#ed, pave and berm wash area fo prevent stormwater run-on and runoff, plumb to the sanitary sewer6, and s?gn as a designated wash area. ■ Commercial car wash facilities shal( discharge to fhe sanitary sewer.6 ■ Designate repair/maintenance area indoors, or an oufdoors area deslgned to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff and provide secondary containmeni. Do not install drains in the secondary containment areas. ■ No €loor drains uniess pretreated prior fa discharge to the saniiary sewer. 6 � Connect conialners or sinks used for parts cleaning to the sanitary sewer, s ■ Fueling areas sha(I have lmpermeable surface that is a) minimally graded ta . prevent ponding and b} separated from the rest of the site by a grade break. � Canopy shall extend ai least 10 ft in each direction from each pump and drain away from fueling area, ■ Cover and/or grade to minimlze run-on to and runoff from the �oading area. ■ Posifion downspouts to direct stormwater away from the Ioading area. ■ braln water from loading dock areas to the sanitary sewer,6 ■ Install door skirts between the trailers and fhe buifding. ■ Design for discharge of fire sprinkler fest water to landscape or sanitary sewers Miscellaneous ■ Drain condensate of air conditioning units to landscaping. Large air Drain or Wash conditioning units may connect to fhe sanitary sewer.s Wafer • Roof drains shail drain to unpaved area where practicable. ■ Draln boiler drain lines, roof top equlpment, ail washwater to sanitary sewers. Architectural ■ Drain rinse water to landscaping, discharge to sanitary sewers, or collect and Copper dispose properly offsite. See flyer "Requlrements for Architectural Copper.° S See MRP Provision C.3.a.1{7). 2 fs source controi measure included in project plans? Plan Yss No Sheat No. ❑ ❑ I ❑ ❑ L�, p L z. o ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ C�' ❑ ❑ � ❑ ❑ G� � C'. Approved December 4, 2092 _ Stormwafer Checklisf for Smal! Projects , b�• ��lement construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) (Required for al1 pro;'ects.} � D.1 Is the site a"High Priority Site"7 (Munrcrpa! staff will make this determination; if the answerls yes, Yes ❑ [�o p� fhe projeci wi1! be referred to consirucfron site rnspection staff for monthly sformwater inspections durrn9 the wef season, October 9 through Apri! 30.) •"�-ligh Prlority Sites" are sftes that require a grading permii, are adjacent to a creek, or are , othenvise high priority for stormwater protecfion during construcfion per MRP Provision C.6,e,ii(2), D,2 q�� projects require appropriate stormwater BMPs during construction, indicate which BMPs are included in the projeci, befow. Yes No Best Mana emenE Practice BNiP ❑ Attach the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Preven#ion Progrem's construction BMP plan sheet to �prolect plans and require contracfor to impfement the applicable BMPs on the plan sheet. ❑ Temporary erosion controls to stabilize all denuded areas untii permanent erosion controls are established. _ ❑ Delineate with field markers clearing limits, easements, setbacks, sensitive or critical areas, buffer zones, trees, and draina e courses. ❑ Provide notes, specifications, or attachments describing the following: ■ Construction, operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment controls, include inspection frequency; � Methods and schedule for grading, excavation, fiiling, clearing of vegetation, and storage and disposal of excavated or cleared materfal; • Specifications for vegetafive cover & mulch, include methods and schedules for p(anting and fertilization; • Provisians for tem ora and/or ermanent irrf ation. ❑, Perform clearinq and earth moving activities only. during dry weather, � ❑ G� Use sediment controls or filtration to remove sediment when dewaiering and obtairi all Protect afl storm drain inlets in vicinfty of si#e using sediment controls such as berrr�s, fiber rolls, or filters. Trap sediment on-site, using BMPs such as sedlment basins or traps, earthen dikes or berms, silt fences, check dams, soil blankets or mats, covers for soil stock iles, etc. �] Divert on-site runoff around exposed areas; divert ofF-site runoff around the site (e,g„ swales and dikes). ❑ Protect adjacent properfies and Gndisturbed areas from construcfion impacfs using vegetafive buffer strips, sedimeni barriers or filters dikes, mulchin , or other measures as a ro ria#e. ❑ Limit consiruction access routes and stabilize designated access points �No cleaning, fueiing, or maintaining vehicles on-site, except in a designafed area where washwater is contained and treated. ❑ Sfore, hand[e, and dispose of construction materials/wastes properly Eo prevent contact wlth stormwater. ❑ Contractor shall train and�rovide instruction to all re: construction BMPs,� � Control and prevent the discharge of all potentlal pollutants, incfudi�g pavement cutfing wastes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemicals, washwater or sediments, rinse water {rom archifectural copper, and non-stormwater discharges to storm drains and watercourses. Name of appficant completing the Sig E. Commenfs {for munlcipaf staff use only): F. NQTES (€or muntc�pal staff use only): Section A Notes: Section B Notes: r� o�v . �lran Date: 2" � 2 � 6 Any connection fo fhe sanitary sewer system is subject to sanitary dfstrict approvaf. 7 Businesses that may have outdoor process activitieslequipment include machine shops, aufo repair, indusiries with pretreatment facilities. 3 Approved December 4, 2012 Project Comments Date: To: From: March 3, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 X Building Division (650) 558-7260 0 Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 � Fire division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 Erika Lewit, Planning Subject: revised plans for 1529 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028- 292-210 - original comments, response to comments, and revised plans are in your In- Box Staff Review: No further comments. All conditions of approval as stated in the review dated 1-15-2014 will apply to this project. Reviewed by• �' � -�- �/�" Date: 3-10-2014 �r �. �. .r � � . � , x�.e. ��,�,��,n.,� �. , ,.� � �.�,:� n ,� �.rc..�..�..,,, �� roject Comments Date: To: From: January 13, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 X Building Division (650) 558-7260 � Parks Division (650) 558-7334 0 Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Environmental Review and Design Review for a new, two-story house with a detached garage at 1529 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-292-210 Staff Review: January 21, 2014 �� On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2013 California Building Code, 2013 California Residential Code (where applicable), 2013 California Mechanical Code, 2013 California Electrical Code, and 2013 California Plumbing Code, including all amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1889. Note: If the Planning Commission has not approved the project prior to 5:00 p.m. on December 31, 2013 then this project must comply with the 2013 California ,� Building Codes. � Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2013 California Energy � Efficiency Standards. Go to http�/Iwww.enerqV.ca.clov/title24/2013standards/ for publications and details. Note: The California Building Standards Commission has delayed implementation of the 2013 Energy Codes. If an application is submitted for this project prior to July 1, 2013 then the project will be required to comply with the .-. 008 California Energy Efficiency Standards. � 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. � ee City of Burlingame Municipal Code, Section 13.04.100 for details.) �,. On the first page of the plans specify the following: "Any hidden conditions that require work to be performed beyond the scope of the building permit issued for these plans may require further City approvals including review by the Planning Commission." The building owner, project designer, and/or contractor must submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically illustrated on the Job Copy of the plans prior to performing the work. 5) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business license. 6) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 7) 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. 8) Provide existing and proposed elevations. 9) 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. 10)When you submit your plans to the Building Division for plan review provide a completed Supplemental Demolition Permit Application. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not be issued until a Building Permit is issued for the project. 11)Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines 12)Show the dimensions to adjacent structures. 1 Obtain a survey of the property lines. �`I RESIDENTIAL: Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. Specify the locafion and the net c/ear opening height and width of all required egress windows on the elevation drawin_qs. 2013 California Residential Code (CRC) §R310. Note: The areas labeled "Den" and Theater" are rooms that can be used for � eeping purposes and, as such, must comply with this requirement. ndicate on the plans that, at the time of Building Permit application, plans and engineering will be submitted for shoring as required by 2013 CBC, Chapter 31 regarding the protection of adjacent property and as required by OSHA. On the plans, indicate that the following will be addressed: a. The walls of the proposed basement shall be properly shored, prior to construction activity. This excavation may need temporary shoring. A competent contractor shall be consulted for recommendations and design of shoring scheme for the excavation. The recommended design type of shoring shall be approved by the engineer of record or soils engineer prior to usage. b. All appropriate guidelines of OSHA shall be incorporated into the shoring design by the contractor. Where space pertnits, temporary construction slopes may be utilized in lieu of shoring. Maximum allowable vertical cut for the subject project will be five (5) feet. Beyond that horizontal benches of 5 feet wide will be required. Temporary shores shall not exceed 1 to 1(horizontal to vertical). In some areas due to high moisture content / water table, flatter slopes will be required which will be recommended by the soils engineer in the field. c. If shoring is required, specify on the plans who's sole responsibility it is to design and provide adequate shoring, bracing, formwork, etc. as required for the protection of life and property during construction of the building. d. Shoring and bracing shall remain in place until floors, roof, and wall sheathing have been entirely conshucted. e. Shoring plans shall be wet-stamped and signed by the engineer-of-record and submitted to the city for review prior to construction. If applicable, include surcharge loads from adjacent structures that are within the zone of influence (45 degree wedge up the slope from the base of the retaining wall) and / or driveway surcharge loads. 1� ndicate on the plans that an OSHA permit will be obtained for the shoring* at the r excavation in the basement per CAL / OSHA requirements. See the Cal / OSHA handbook at: htt�//www.ca-osha.com/pdfpubs/osha userguide.pdf * Construction Safety Orders : Chapter 4, Subchapter 4, Article 6, Section 1 41.1. 1'' ndicate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the . v partment of Public Works. ✓� rovide one emergency escape and egress from each sleepinq room in the .- basement area. On the plans provide details for the window well as required by 2013 CBC §1029.5.1 and for the required ladder access from this area as described in 2013 CBC §1029.5.2. Provide complete details for a guardrail around this opening at grade level. See also 2013 CRC §R310. 19)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. 20)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 2013 CBC 1009. Provide lighting at all exterior landings. ��Specify on the plans whether the fireplace is a gas or solid wood-burning device. If the fireplace is a solid wood-burning device clearly state on the plans that the fireplace will meet all requirements as a U.S.EPA Phase II certified wood-burning device. NOTE: A written response to the items noted here and plans that specifically address items 1, 2, 3, 4, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 22 must be re-submitted before this project can move forward for fanning Commission action. _- ��-�____,�--�---_— �� Reviewed by�=-�""�� :-��-��'��""' `� Date: 1-15-201 Joe C�`yx!�BO� 6� -5� -7270 t, Project Comments Date: To: From: January 13, 2014 � Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 0 Building Division (650) 558-7260 0 Parks Division (650) 558-7334 OFire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Environmental Review and Design Review for a new, two-story house with a detached garage at 1529 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-292-210 Staff Review: January 21, 2014 Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly — Schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building Plans prior to approval indicating location of the device after the split between domestic and fire protection lines. 3. All sprinkler drainage shall be placed into landscaping areas. 4. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. Reviewed by: � Date: y 1 i��"�y Project Comments Date: To: From: January 13, 2014 X Engineering Division (650) 558-7230 � Building Division (650) 558-7260 0 Parks Division (650) 558-7334 � Fire Division (650) 558-7600 � Stormwater Division (650) 342-3727 � City Attorney (650) 558-7204 Planning Staff Subject: Request for Environmental Review and Design Review for a new, two-story house with a detached garage at 1529 Howard Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-292-210 Staff Review: January 21, 2014 1. See attached review comments #1, 2, 5, 14 and 20. 2. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works — Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information. 3. Applicant is advised to call City Arborist regarding potential relocation of sidewalk area for new street trees in the planter strip. 4. A geotechnical report is required for the proposed basement. The report must identify all adverse impacts including but not limited to structural design, shoring, groundwater fluctuations and impacts to adjacent properties and provide mitigation measures. 5. Basement perimeter drainage design is required with proposed potential groundwater pumping requirements with backup power as necessary. 6. All basement construction must be completed within one rain season. Reviewed by: V V Date: 2/0412014 PUSLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION PLANNING REVIEW COMl��NTS +`� �"'� �-��'`� Project Name: �� (��i�o �` Project Address: �� .��D ' _.. The following req_uirements apply to the project 1 � A property boundary survey shall be preformed by a licensed land . surveyor. The survey sha11 show all property lines, property corners, e�sements, topographical features and utilities. (Required prior to the building perLnit issuance.) �ji{�.�'' y,��g �v ��'��c(�=-p �f� ��9 � d� td.r=ficn-E� �it�,��t��l 5��--, 2 �, The site and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should be made to drain towards the Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 3. Ti�e applicant sha11 submit proj ect grading and drainage plans for approval prior to the issuance of a Building permit. 4 The project site is in a flood zone, the project sha11 comply with the City's flood zone requirements. 5 � A,�'�`aru'taty sewer lateral � is required for the project in accordance with . the City's standards. ) 6. The project plans shall show the required Bayfront Bike/Pedestrian trail and necessary public access improvements as required by San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. 7. Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the project. The sewer analysis shall identify the project's impact to the City's sewer system and any sewer pump stations and identify mitigation measures. 8 Submit tr�c trip generation analysis for the project. 9. Submit a traffic impact study for the project. The traffic study should identify the project generated impacts and recommend mitigation measures to be adopted by the proj ect to be approved by the City Engineer. 10. The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering Division. The pazcel map shall show a11 existing property lines, easements, monuments, and new property and lot lines proposed by the map. Page 1 of 3 U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COMI��NTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 11. A latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel of land sha11 be submitted to the Public Works Engineering Division with the parcel map for reviews. 12 Map closure/lot closure calculations shall be submitted with the parcel map. 13 The project sha11 submit a condominium map to the Engineering Divisions in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 14 �_ The project sha11, at its own cost, desib�m and construct frontage public improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and other necessary appurtenant work. 15 The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage streetscape improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutters, parking meters and poles, trees, and streetlights i.n accordance with streetscape master plan. 16 By the preliminary review of plans, it appears that the project rnay cause adverse impacts during construction to vehicular tr�c, pedestrian tra�c and public on street parking. The project shall identify these impacts and provide mitigation measure acceptable to the City. 17 The project shall submit hydrologic calculations from a registered civil engineer for the proposed creek enclosure. The hydraulic calculations must show that the proposed creek enclosure doesn't cause any adverse impact to both upstream and downstream properties. The hydrologic calculations shall accompany a site map showing the area of the 100-year flood and existing improvements with proposed improvements. 18 Any work within the drainage area, creek, or creek banks requires a State Department of Fish and Game Pernut and Army Corps of Engineers Pernuts. 19 No construction debris shall be allowed into the creek. 20 � The project shall comply with the City's NPDES pernut requirement to prevent storm water pollution. 21 The project does not show the dimensions of existing driveways, re- submit plans with driveway dimensions. Also clarify if the project is proposing to widen the driveway. Any widening of the driveway is subject to City Engineer's approval. 22 The plans do not indicate the slope of the driveway, re-submit plans showing the driveway profile with elevations Page 2 of 3 U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COMI��NTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 23 The back of the driveway/sidewalk approach shall be at least 12" above the flow line of the frontage curb in the street to prevent overflow of storm water from the street urto private property. 24. For the takeout service, a garbage receptacle shall be placed in front. The sidewalk fronting the store shall be kept clean 20' from each side of the property. 25. For commercial projects a designated garbage bin space and cleaning area s3�all be located inside the building. A drain connecting the garbaae area to the Sanitary Sewer System is required. Page 3 of 3 U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COMI��NTS.doc RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A NEW S�NGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH A BASEMENT AND A DETACHED GARAGE AT 1529 HOWARD AVENUE, ON PROPERTY SITUATED WITHIN THE R-1 ZONE RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, an application has been made for Desiqn Review and a Special Permit for a new, two stoN sinqle-familv dwellinq with a detached aaraqe and a basement ceilinq heiqht qreater than 6'-6" at 1529 Howard Avenue. Zoned R-1, John and Cherie McGee, propertv owners APN: 028-292-210; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on April 28, 2014, 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. 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. 2. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. Chairman I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 28th dav of April, 2014, by the following vote: Secretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Design Review and Special Permit 1529 Howard Avenue Effective May 8, 2014 Page 1 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped April 9, 2014, sheets A1.1 through A4.1, L1.0 and L2.0, PW.1, and Boundary and Topographic Survey; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staf�; 3. that any changes to the size garage, which would includ amendment to this permit; or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or e adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an 4. that the conditions of the Building Division's March 10, 2014 and January 15, 2014 memos, the Parks Division's March 5, 2014 and January 21, 2014 memos, the Engineering Division's February 4, 2014 memo, the Fire Division's January 21, 2014 memo, and the Stormwater Division's March 7 and January 16, 2014 memos 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 prior to a issuance of building permit for demolition on the site, the applicant shall obtain approval of a Protected Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department for the protected-size Magnolia Tree on site; the construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet showing the approved Tree Removal Permit; 7. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 8. 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; 9. 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; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Design Review and Special Permit 1529 Howard Avenue Effective May 8, 2014 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; 11. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2013 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: 12. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 13. 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; 14. 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; 15. 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 16. 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. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME FINDING THAT THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH A BASEMENT AND A DETACHED GARAGE AT 1529 HOWARD AVENUE WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME hereby finds as follows: Section 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 a Negative Declaration, per Negative Declaration ND-572-P, is hereby approved. Section 2. 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, the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify adopted at a regular meeting of the Plannin the following vote: Secretary of the Planning Commission of that the foregoing resolution was introduced and g Commission held on the 28th dav of April, 2014 by Secretary . CITI' OF 6URLINGA�JE , COtv"�fvlUl�li1' DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. BURLINGANIE 501 PRIMROSE ROAD � BURLIIJGAtv1E, CA 94010 - y�Y� ;a M1 PH: (650) 558-7250 d FAX: (650} 696=3790 - 4+nvv✓.burlingame.org - Site: 1529 HAWARD AVENUE The CiFy of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the following pubiic hearing on MONDAY, APRI! 28, 2014 at 7:00 P.M. in the fifiy Hall (ouncil (hambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, LA: Application for Negative Declnration, Special Permit for Basement Ceiling Height, and Design Review for a new, two- story single family dwelling with a detached garage at 1529 HOWARD AVENUE zoned R-l. APN 028-292-210 Mailed: April 18, 2014 (Please refer to other side) 0 . � � . . - • s-_ -' :: ._ ��8�� 0�� IVOTICE 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 court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director (Please refer to other side) PtJ�LIC HEARII�fC NOTICE , �' . ,�, -�.�°� = v n!�' � . .. °.`� �� rf W R� .� v . �;.r _ t` �. ��ti" ; x�,, ,�;��, , -�'�' �-' � �� -- �` �, , �.9� � . _. . �� `�, � R "' •�� ;�� ,. � � '' � y�.. y� • � .• .� �r' y � ' /a'+k. Sl � f, � .' ,' . � . . .. 4 �,� ' .:i;. ..�e; �,° #►� .�� .�c^ . : �t " � �' ..,e Y .�e '�� /"i • �"k .. "' � ~ a � O� # . -A . • .. � ��;. E n,e;r.,. � i�' � `'"�� i _.. ^ . � �s's'�,� , �. �. �W. .. ,. :.. . • ' , �"f �� '��.�`� .. r�.y� *�., u �� g{5 �. K ,Y �� - . , � . ��,.. "'� s� � : �_^ c, r ; a = � <�.; �,>.;. �. _ , . ��; '�T.� .� ,,. � M '�� , t � � . �i� �- � .. � �� :� � x� .,r.. � ,'� , '� � �i %�'"� � �..� � j { i� .. 4. ' ��„ � .,. ,M �y'�.rb �. '�'+..� . Y '� ' � i'. � �� _ . . : , , �. � �r s `:y": �, { � ,�� . - '�` � " �+'�, �+�- � � � � pj��,�iy O ,� �� .�.., i � � � �.�> .��Y � , d �'� t � k � 3 ' k>, � . � a� �� + , � � �. .,... � ' '�' � � ♦ � � '. . y .. �� , �, _ , ` ' �'�.:� s. `.... ys ; ; � L- � a ��i�� .,,�� , �' ;�w d � ' X \/ . . .;; e ' U � ijr,+ .�,�. .. ` � a,. Y � .. ., .. .� „ .�. � : � . a + rL . . . _, �, .:. ♦ . _ .:. .. � : .. -#d _ r M.w. �> ". -�' :�^w� 'r. � ��. � .� ;��,�. ' � � �.. . ,� � �,�� r ��:* » . j . �� •��^�� ,.\^ � �R' ��~ � f � . _ � + �r, � "y�.� ?„ q�°' "yV 12 J� . � . iT p, `" ~ ' �"F�` � • .a,� y � "� .. +�� *°�.:�.y�p : � . � � � � ` � 4 :� � 'r % pr � .Ty�S. . �. �,q� :� �, �'�' _ �'� - #� �' . ,. • ,J , d � �+� � � i.r�+ , � � � . ` '. � �; M �. y � � ��_ � _ � � � �_ �� _..,. . ��,,� � � � t s � E �;�� ;� ' � � . � :� � w . � . ,� r �� . � . � ,;' _ � ;: , . . .�y� ....: 4., q ;�. . . � C� . y � �� , r $� � (d�Ai ��" � . �� Z} .r+'s;.�-�'�[�y.� �� .,Y � ��r�� t �� , c�.. ��Y : ' , e.. �� . � � � '� �. � Cs� . , � ,�. .. .. , . .�� , . . 9 . m � � � t- . .:.: , . � �� ; k" ry„ . u,_ ; _._ ,..r, __ _ a+�, � ` . f, � , .�-. r� �� -. `4 ar�� c� r .`+; '�:. ,�� :. - � .- �� `' "'° 'y , ,,,,: , ��'' �' � �... S °�+d �7c�``� � � W � II �' � k� }� �''��.' � - '��,�`6g xa �.,,.. � � � . �., M - 4 "r�" ��';_ . �: 4,r� r.a G . .rv.�7� � � �,`:r � �"*� • � ��'�+�> . ^� :: � Y..�.- ' i�f�� _ �:. �, �, ... �. . .., �� .„ . p��. �n" ' .a . � . .� �b � N '� ;... _ �a •:, �" �, , , _ .. � • . �-''�. �,''� � -• �;�' � "� , , ., � � iV � , ^� � �rj ,�" � P � ' � ,�' �• , � : �� _: . . w ��" �s� �, � ��'�� '� � r_ � .i � - .s � � =.�r$ V� � .�� ,V.�p 1'"`,� �� ta��/ a^ � �,, �„ r�, ��`. ;� �� '�` ;� �r^�-�_ �� '_� ` . �, � � � � ��""l� .�(� x� ,; � �„„. � s _F�r atF z � ` � -_ � Gt i � � � \�( ^�� k� `� �� k� � � � u� �:. �,... . , `� . � k �� i _ � }..� � :� MF ~ � �i .. � `. � . .. ��`. `ti. ��._ S lE "^\i... k "�'� f i��' .�� , 4°��` t' ' J ai'�Sr �I� k� a��. . �.. � ix� ' I`1 '1^ 4 s=r� b,`f '� d` � � � ia# ��.' � � �� b.�. �. � ' � ` i � '- �:. •� '� ,� ' � �« ;� � r�, .�ta.�^'�, '� x, �„ ��.f i �° •p�,, � �"Sr 4 t, i �� ;1 ' S ,� :�, _ .a',� a� R�'.w�"�°� •^.. �' � aa�.� x � _x :. ._ � �" `�" . �i � � � I \ �' � - � a � � �*�, � +� "�� "� /� ��tt � ,� �'' � r < 4 tv � �'¢ � �, � ; � �' � f . , ti ..- , - �� ` ' ,. R �. "�S' ,:��;., ry�r � ' ' '"r' �'��Y xn N .. � , . , 7 ' ' � � , � -}9" _ � 5 _ x'�� .;� � � �� -rr� ... � �-y*. � . ' � Yr,.. ��. . � ,.¢ �� , ''a. +'„�, r.s � ,� .:. s.g � n * " r ,,r<� ,� � em , � � ` .. �� . ; � r�3.. c � ' s� �; �: tu� � s� �: � s'. s ��i `�" � � � .M � {� .. M-{�� . . _ ��~ �, t' t � � „� � + �3 �`' . <,: I,t �`'� a . _'•-•u � ,� ,..:'"R�. '' . .n . . �,�6yf. ,�.. ` � 1`,r .; 9�' d '* `'-� "' -�•,��«e,'�°..": I : »r , : :. � �..,;_�:. a '•� "� � �fr'� '� .�}�+. � �" . . �,.,,� � . 0 � � %, `f `�1 � ,c)�� k��,��`� � � . ��A.�`�� im, I t L'' ; m g re,.� �, f. -n, e`�i "� ,�'s?' 8" ,��,y� � �'i ... �' \ t/ � ,'��,:� `' � � _ �.s �:". r _. ' . • _, a � . `a �..� ��-„� � � �� ta 1� ^�i . � r. . t' � �Q��`� �f : � ' , , � ".�T� ;=�,:� �- ,. � ... qf � r� �� ` i . , *�' - � .� � �, + -.,��,,, �'_::,. , ,' � � .�ii �� :;= - t "� �� ' "�"��. "�� ' 't'� � �a.:. .rtie �. i.�, t� ,.'+. - ',�'"�'} �::�� . . '. � Y'.� t � v „r'�'.. '�� • '��. �_`T .�� .. �. �.��,� � `9V.�� ,,�.�: _ s . -. � �. . Y7' - �,�i ��..� ' g� .. p� t y�� .: .. �. � +i• �, • T • � . • it�`�r. �.1Yi�. � .a � � . � y` � ^ a� ',.� h►�','�� . �'*� �'�' .p . . � �" r ' , . ,�. ., '� ,�„ � v U,i, ' ., r ,�, r �� •..� .,.. � �: . r3 ,. "<°� f � , , V _ �+ �. . �� i ::� � • p -. ��_ ♦, � �. � 4'- Ye x1t S4 . a r . � ' � - ��Y _' ... `h , �., ;¢ ..t �4 � - . • � � � T � ; � • � "`�o* ��., i�r�- .�S e . �. � �„ x :, ;� �. , � i t .�.. � v r';,� �� , ''�� ' ' '� �� . _. �_�.