Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1456 Bernal Avenue - Staff Report4 PROJECT LOCATION 1456 Bernal Avenue Item # 56 Consent Calendar City of Burlingame Design Review Item # Consent Calendar Address: 1456 Bernal Avenue Meeting Date: 03/27/06 Request: Design review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. Applicant and Property Owner: Tony Leung APN: 026-043-170 Designer: James Chu Lot Area: 6,000 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15303, Class 3 — (a) construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including (a) one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. Summary: The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing single -story house and an existing non- conforming detached second unit to build a new two-story single family dwelling and detached two -car garage. The proposed house and detached garage will have a total floor area of 3,271 SF (0.55 FAR) where 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) is the maximum allowed. The proposed floor area is 149 SF below the maximum allowed FAR. The project includes a detached garage (427 SF, 20'-8" x 20'-8") which provides two covered parking spaces for the proposed four -bedroom house, one uncovered space (9' x 20') is provided in the driveway. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following: • Design review for anew two-story single family dwelling and detached two -car garage (CS 25.57.010). Table 1 — 1456 Bernal Avenue Lot Area: 6,000 SF ORIGINAL REVISED EXISTING' PROPOSAL PROPOSAL ALLOWED/REQ'D 12/27/O5 (03/07/06 SETBACKS ................................................................. ....................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Front (1st flr): j 15'-0" 20'-6" 21'-0", 19'-0" (to bay) 20'-6" (block average) (2nd flr): ( none 22'-6" 21 -0 ........................................................................................ i.............................................. 20'-6" (block average) ............................. .... Side (left): I 4'-10" 5'-0" no change 4'-0" (right): ............................................ 13'-0" ..................................................... ......... 10'-0" _......................................... ................................................................... no change ............................................ ................ ........................................................ ............................................................................................................................. 4'-0" Rear (lstflr): ( 58'-0" 39'-6" 41'-0" j 15'-0" (2nd flr): ................................................ none ................................ ..................... 35'-6" (to balcony) .............. ..............................................................................:... 37-0" (to balcony) I .... ............. ..... ..... ....................... ................................ ................................................................................................................................................................ 20'-0" ............. ........................................................................... Lot Coverage: 2,499 SF 1,974.6 SF I no change 2,400 SF 41.7% ............................................................................. 33% ................................................................................................ i .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40% .......................................................................................... FAR: 2,499 SF 3,271.1 SF 3,420 SF 0.42 FAR 0.55 FAR no change 0.57 FAR .................................................................................................................................................. # o bedrooms: ...................... n/a .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 no change --- Design Review 1456 Bernal Avenue Table 1 —1456 Bernal Avenue (Cont'd.) Lot Area: 6,000 SF 1 EXISTING' ORIGINAL PROPOSAL 12/27/O5 REVISED PROPOSAL 03/07/06 ALLOWED/REQ'D Parking: 1 covered 2 covered 1 covered (10' x 20') (20' x 20') no change (10' x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered 1 uncovered 9 x 20 9 x 20 ( ) 9 x 20 ( ) Heil:t: 12'-4" 29'-0"...................................... ........................................_29.'-.10''........................................._............................................._30'-0" ...... ........... DHEnvelope: I i complies complies complies (dormer exemption) CS 25.28.075 Information on existing house was obtained from the San Mateo County Assessor's appraisal report and from data shown on the boundary and topographic survey. (0.32 x 6,000 SF) + 1,100 SF + 400 SF = 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) Staff Comments: See attached. The finished floor of the house was raised an additional 6" above adjacent grade in the revised proposal in order to avoid problems with on -site drainage and to avoid making such a change post Planning Commission approval. Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on February 27, 2006, the Commission had several comments regarding drainage on the site, the size of the front porch, proposed landscaping, the bay window at the front, the balcony off the second story rear and the proposed detached garage (February 27, 2006 Planning Commission Minutes). The Commission moved to place this item on the consent calendar after the plans had been revised as directed. The applicant submitted a full set of revised plans and a letter addressing the Commission's comments date stamped March 7, 2006 to address the Commission's concerns. The following are comments made by the Commission at design review and the responses by the architect: Need to look at how drainage problem will be addressed on this lot; consider applying for a special permit for declining height envelope to raise the house, rather than shifting the house over and making the driveway narrower, encroachment into the declining height envelope would be minimal; do not want to see project come back for changes at time of construction. ■ The architect noted that the finished floor was raised six inches (elevation of 77') from the previous design to avoid drainage issues; no special permit was required for this change because the dormer exemption was used for the stairwell along the left hand side of the house (Revised Elevations, pages A.5 and A.6) 2. Consider moving the house forward on the lot to increase the rear yard space, bay window may project into the front setback up to] '-6"and not exceed 20 SF in footprint. The footprint of the house was moved 18" forward from the previous design (letter from architect dated March 7, 2006, Revised Site Plan, page A.2 and Revised Landscape Plan, page L1.0). 3. Concerned that the proposed porch is too small and not inviting, should increase size of porch, will help to reduce the mass of the building. 2 Design Review 1456 Bernal Avenue • No change was made to the porch (Revised Main Floor Plan, page A.3). 4. would like to see detached garage an additional 1 '-0 "from the side and rear property lines to provide more space for maintenance around garage structure. • The architect noted that there is now a two foot setback proposed for the detached garage (letter from architect dated March 7, 2006, Revised Site Plan, page A.2 and Revised Landscape Plan, page L1.0). S. Concerned with the Photinia species proposed along the left side property line at the rear of the lot, species is susceptible to blight, should choose a different species of the same size. The Photinia hedge along the left side property line was replaced with a Pittosporum privacy hedge (Revised Landscape Plan, page L1.0). 6. Clarify the roofing material above the bay window on the plans. ■ No note or detail was added to the plans (Revised Elevations, pages A.5 and A.6). 7. There are Tudor style houses across the street, porches are different with steep pitches, consider using a steeper pitch roof such as a 12:12 or 14:12 to create a distinction. ■ No change was proposed to the roof pitch (Revised Elevations, pages A.5 and A.6). 8. Suggest installing trees in the landscape pockets along the right side property line near the garage to provide privacy for the neighbors pool in the rearyard; could also install a large scale shrub such as a Pittosporum which has a fast growth pattern. • Three additional 15 gallon evergreen trees were added between the driveway and the neighbor on the right (letter from architect dated March 7, 2006 and Revised Landscape Plan, page L1.0). 9. Only need a one car garage for the proposed four bedroom house, consider reducing the size of the garage to increase the useable rear yard. ■ There was no reduction made to the size of the garage (Revised Garage Plan, page A.7). 10. Encourage property owner to talk to neighbor about type of fencing, could help to improve privacy. • The architect made no comment concerning the discussion of fencing with the neighbors; the original notes and diagram concerning the proposed fence were also included on the revised landscape plan (Revised Landscape Plan, page L1.0). 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 Design Review 1456 Bernal Avenue 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Findings: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Commission's February 27, 2006, design review study meeting, that the proposed house is consistent with the mass and bulk in the neighborhood and that the project has all of the attributes to comply with the design guidelines, the project is found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's five residential design review guidelines. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be by resolution and include findings made for design review, and the reasons for any action should be clearly stated. 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 Department date stamped March 7, 2006, sheets A.1 through A.7, L1 and Boundary and Topographic Survey; and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require and amendment to this permit; 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 4. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; all windows shall be simulated true divided light windows with three dimensional wood mullions and shall contain a stucco -mould trim; 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; 6. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 7. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 11 Design Review 1456 Bernal Avenue 9. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off -site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 10. that the project is subject to the state -mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; 11. 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. 12. that the conditions of the Recycling Specialist's December 28, 2005 memo, the City Engineer's and Chief Building Official's January 3, 2006 memos, the Fire Marshal's January 4, 2006 memo and the NPDES Coordinator's January 6, 2006 memo shall be met; 13. 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; 14. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 15. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Erica Strohmeier Zoning Technician c. James Chu, designer CHU DESIGN & ENGINEERING, INC. 39 West 43rd Avenue, San Mateo, CA 94403 Tel: (650) 345-9286; Fax (650) 345-9287 March 7, 2006 City of Burlingame Planning Commission 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: 1456 BERNAL AVE. Dear Planning Commissioners: RECEIVED MAR - 7 2006 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. Per your design review comments, we have made the following revision to the above reference project address. 1. The finish floor raised 6 inches higher than the previous design. 2. The footprint moved 18 inches forward than the previous design. 3. 2 feet setback now proposed for the detached garage. 4. Additional screening trees are added between the driveway and the neighbor on the right. (Please see Landscape Plan). Thank you all for your attention to these minor changes. Sincerely, 1 Tames Chu Project Designer City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 27, 2006 9. 1456 BERNAL AVENUE, ZONED R-1— APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW TWO- STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE. (TONY LEUNG, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND JAMES CHU, DESIGNER) (66 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER Plr Hurin briefly presented the project description and noted that an email was submitted after preparation of the staff report by John Walsh at 1460 Bernal Avenue expressing concerns with the rear of the proposed house overlooking his yard, need more clarification regarding the landscape screening proposed at the rear and would like to know if the proposed master bathroom windows will be opaque. Commissioner asked if bay windows are allowed to encroach into the setback, and if so, by how much. Plr Hurin noted that a bay window may encroach up to P-6" into the front setback with a maximum footprint of 20 SF. Commissioner asked if the applicant was made aware of the potential drainage issues; yes. There were no further questions of staff. Chair Auran opened the public comment. James Chu, designer, 39 W. 43rd Avenue, San Mateo, was available to answer questions, noted that this is a straight forward project and has been designed to comply with the zoning regulations, don't anticipate problems with drainage on this lot, the low spot on this lot is at the rear left corner, Department of Public Works requires that all drainage be directed to the street byway of a catch basin and sump pump. Commissioner noted that there have been recent drainage problems with new houses built on Occidental Avenue, Poppy Drive and Vancouver Avenue, do not want to see this project have to come back again for review because of drainage problems; finished floor is shown six inches above grade (finished floor proposed at 76.5' adj acent to grade at 75.9% don't see how the appropriate flashing can occur by the time the mudsill is added, will have to build a trough around the house to comply with building code requirements. Designer noted that the contractor will prepare the entire lot during grading to provide the appropriate drainage from the house, the existing contour will not remain, approximately three to four inches will be over -cut to place the mudsill six inches above grade. Commissioner noted that the appropriate drainage could only be provided by digging down and asked why couldn't the house be raised instead? Designer noted that the house could be raised an additional three to four inches and still be under the maximum height limit, currently there is 10'-0" proposed for the driveway width, could shift the house to the right a few inches and raise the height without encroaching into the declining height envelope. Commissioned noted that shifting the house over a few inches would help the neighbor, however it cannot be shifted over to far because the driveway will become to narrow to use because a landscaped area is proposed along the fence. Mary Francis Nappi, 1452 Bernal Avenue, noted that her house floods without a sump pump, during heavy rains the sump pump is constantly running, has had 6 to 7 feet of water in the basement when the sump pump failed; greatest concern is with the loss of privacy, has a pool in the backyard which is used by her children and grandchildren, asked if there is a code which addresses privacy, second floor balcony at the rear of the house will look into her yard, don't know how far back proposed house is from her house, now will have a driveway and detached garage next door where there currently is no driveway or garage, will impact her backyard, other houses in the neighborhood have attached garages; concerned with the decorative landscaping presently adjacent to her dining room, has worked on maintaining the landscaping for 12 years, would like to see it protected; concerned with the proposed height of the building and that it will cast a shadow; very concerned with the length of the house towards the rear, not too concerned with extending the house at the front; concerned with children congregating on the second floor balcony proposed at the rear of the house, it will be an attractive nuisance; Magnolia tree shown to be removed is actually a cumquat tree, the existing Pepper tree is nice, would like to see it relocated rather than removed; accessory structure at the 13 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 27, 2006 rear of the lot is the original house, was never used by the previous owners, cannot plant landscape screening on her property because the paving extends to the property line; how big is the proposed balcony? Designer noted that the balcony extends 3 feet from the house, property owner would like to have a balcony because it provides a view of the bay; the existing living unit at the rear of the lot which has not been used will be replaced with a garage, see this as an improvement regarding privacy concerns, property owner also want to protect his privacy. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. C. Deal made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar at a time when the following revisions have been made and plan checked. This motion was seconded by C. Osterling. ■ need to look closely at how the drainage problem will be addressed on this lot; ■ consider moving the house forward on the lot to increase the rear yard space, bay window may project into the front setback up to 1'-6" and not to exceed 20 SF in footprint; ■ concerned that the proposed porch is too small and not inviting, should increase size of porch, will help to reduce the mass of the building; ■ would like to see detached garage setback an additional F-0" from the side and rear property lines to provide more space for maintenance around the garage structure; ■ concerned with the Photinia species proposed along the left side property line at the rear of the lot, species is susceptible to blight, should choose a different species of the same size; ■ clarify the roofing material above the bay window on the plans; ■ there are Tudor style houses across the street, porches are different with steep pitches, consider using a steeper pitch roof such as 12:12 or 14:12 to create a distinction; ■ consider applying for a special permit for declining height envelope to raise the house, rather than shifting the house over and making the driveway narrower, encroachment into the declining height envelope would be minimal; ■ proposed balcony is an appropriate size, the balcony is small and adjacent to the master bedroom, is located on the opposite side of the house away from the neighbor's pool, will have a minimal affect on privacy, have to keep in mind that this is a suburban neighborhood; balcony helps to reduce the mass and bulk of the building, the balcony details are nice; the house is arranged in such a way that it steps away from the neighboring property towards the rear of the house, helps to improve privacy; ■ balcony will create a shadow on the first floor, could do a mock balcony instead; ■ suggest installing trees in the landscape pockets along the right side property line near the garage to provide privacy for the neighbor's pool in the rear yard; could also install a large scale shrub such as a Pittosporum which has a fast growth pattern; ■ only need a one -car garage for the proposed four bedroom house, consider reducing the size of the garage to increase the useable rear yard; and ■ encourage property owner to talk to the neighbor about type of fencing, could help to improve pnvacy. Comment on motion: there are a lot of little but important issues which need to be addressed on the plans, a lot of discussion about drainage, need to address drainage now, do not want to see this project come back for changes at time of construction; motion includes accepting the balcony as proposed because it is small and is not different than having a window in the same location, addressing the height of the building as it relates to the concerns with on -site drainage and addressing the landscape issues noted. 14 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 27, 2006 Chair Auran called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:35 p.m. 15 Page 1 of 1 COMMUNICATION RECEIVED ,AFTER PREPARATION OF STAFF REPORT 21z710 4 P-C, PLG-Strohmeier, Erica v-1u, ` C? From: Walsh Family [walshfamily@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 1:27 PM To: estrohmeier@burlingame.org Subject: 1456 Bernal Avenue Erica I reviewed the plans for the proposed new home at 1456 Bernal Avenue. Overall, I think that the plans call for an attractive design, a significant improvement over the home currently on the site. I am concerned about the rear section of the home that will overlook my yard at 1460 Bernal. I would like to see a tall hedge planted in order to screen the view of this two-story section from my deck and yard. I'm not sure if the Yew trees and Photinia indicated on the landscape plan will provide adequate screening. Also, the master bathroom windows look like they might directly face the window in my daughter's bedroom. Will these be opaque windows? Please forward my comments to the appropriate decision makers. Thank you. John Walsh 650 344 6950 (home) 415 505 6388 (mobile) 2/27/2006 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT 501 PRIMROSE ROAD P (650) 558-7250 F (650) 696-3790 CITY O� Bvimpi9AME APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Type of application: Design Review Yo Conditional Use Permit Variance Special Permit Other Parcel Number: A 16- .._._ . 1 . a k. Au. Project address: APPLICANT Name: Or©N `I' LEVUH.a*0 Address: IT . q" City/State/Zip&, f �1 72 Phone (w)A�n (0- !!c a. =1 PROPERTY OWNER Name: Address: F. ke, City/State/Zip: I� Phone (w): (h): (0: ARCHITEC11T/IIDESIGNER40 ll )I NameL HU rx� I co � 4 eReKoo J�C,* Address •+blw- City/State/Zipds Phone (w): • Please indicate with an asterisk * the contact person for this project. 0)(lO4 RECEIVEE) DEC 2 7 2005 (h): ,..1ii=^01'51CZ -410Al CITY OF BURLINGALI= PLANNING DEPT. AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Applicant's signature: �� Date: I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property owner's signature: O K Date: PCAPPYRM Project Comments Date: 12/27/2005 To: Y City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review for a new, two story single family dwelling with detached garage at 1456 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-043-170 Staff Review: 01/03/2006 1. See attached. 2. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works — Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information. 3. Sheet A.2 shows a portion of the driveway approach to extend over the property line extension to the street adjacent to Lot 34. The driveway approach shall be relocated such that the entire approach is located within property line extension. Reviewed by: V V j/ Date: 1/03/2005 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS p -P vl)-- mom`( Project Name: , i W ji 4!+ 4 44" - Project Address: IA-b The following requirements apply to the project 1 A property boundary survey shall be preformed by a licensed land surveyor. The survey shall show all property lines, property corners, easements, topographical features and utilities. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 5jkpq $y*,l 2 _� The site and roof drainage shall be shown o plansandshould made drain towards the Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 3. The applicant shall submit project 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 shall comply with the City's flood zone requirements. 5 A sanitary sewer lateral 40 is required for the project in accordance with the City's standards. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 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 traffic 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 project to be approved by the City Engineer. 10. The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering Division. The parcel map shall show all existing property lines, easements, monuments, and new property and lot lines proposed by the map. Pagel of 3 UAprivate development\PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 11. A latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel of land shall 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 shall submit a condominium map to the Engineering Divisions in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 14 _�_ The project shall, at its own cost, design 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 in accordance with streetscape master plan. 16 By the preliminary review of plans, it appears that the project may cause adverse impacts during construction to vehicular traffic, pedestrian traffic 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 Permit and Army Corps of Engineers Permits. 19 No construction debris shall be allowed into the creek. 20 The project shall comply with the City's NPDES permit 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 UAprivate development\PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.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 into 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 shall be located inside the building. A drain connecting the garbage area to the Sanitary Sewer System is required. Page 3 of 3 UAprivate development\PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.doc 11 Project Comments Date: 12/27/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer X Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Subject: Request for design review for a new, two story single family dwelling with detached garage at 1456 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-043-170 Staff Review: 01/03/2006 1) All construction must comply with the 2001 California Building Codes (CBC), the Burlingame Municipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal requirements. 2) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 3) Comply with the new, 2005 California Energy Efficiency Standards for low-rise residential buildings. Go to http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24 for publications and details. 4) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the property line. 5) Roof eaves must not project within two feet of the property line. 6) Exterior bearing walls less than three feet from the property line must be constructed of one -hour fire -rated construction and no openings are allowed. 7) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. 8) Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are considered in calculating the allowable floor area. Consult the Planning Department for details if your project entails landings more than 30" in height. 9) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are more than four risers. 10)Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 11)The fireplace chimney must terminate at least two feet above any roof surface within ten feet. Reviewed Date: l/_� /' Project Comments Date: 12/27/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff X Recycling Specialist ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Subject: Request for design review for a new, two story single family dwelling with detached garage at 1456 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-043-170 Staff Review: 01 /03/2006 Applicant shall submit a Recycling and Waste Reduction Plan for approval, and pay a recycling deposit for this and all covered projects prior to construction or permitting. Reviewed by: - Date: Project Comments Date: 12/27/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff ❑ Recycling Specialist d Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Subject: Request for design review for a new, two story single family dwelling with detached garage at 1456 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-043-170 Staff Review: 01/03/2006 No comment at this time. Reviewed by: <�;a Date:>� Project Comments Date: 12/27/2005 To: 000. City Engineer Chief Building Official City Arborist City Attorney From: Planning Staff 00, Recycling Specialist Fire Marshal NPDES Coordinator Subject: Request for design review for a new, two story single family dwelling with detached garage at 1456 Bernal Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-043-170 Staff Review: 01/03/2006 1) Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution including but not limited to ensuring that all contractors implement construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) and erosion and sediment control measures during ALL phases of the construction project (including demolition). Include appropriate stormwater BMPs as Project Notes. These BMPs include but are not limited to the following: • Store, handle, and dispose of construction materials and wastes properly to prevent contact and contamination of stormwater; • Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including pavement cutting wastes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemicals, wash water or sediments, and non-stormwater discharges to storm drains and watercourses, • Use sediment controls or filtration to remove sediment when dewatering site and obtain all necessary permits; • Avoid cleaning, fueling, or maintaining vehicles on -site except in a designated area where wash water is contained and treated, • Protect adjacent properties and undisturbed areas from construction impacts using vegetative buffer strips, sediment barriers or filters, dikes, mulching, or other measures as appropriate; • Perform clearing and earth moving activities only during dry weather; • Limit and time application of pesticides and fertilizers to prevent polluted runoff; • Limit construction access routes and stabilize designated access points; • Avoid tracking dirt or other materials off -site; clean off -site paved areas and sidewalks using dry sweeping method; • The Contractor shall train and provide instruction to all employees and subcontractors regarding the construction BMPs. 1 of 2 Project Comments — Con't-1456 Bernal Avenue- New 2-story SFD w/ detach gar. 2) The public right of way/easement shall not be used as a construction staging and/or storage area and shall be free of construction debris at all times. 3) Implement Erosion and Sedimentation Controls: a. Install and maintain all temporary erosion and sediment controls continuously until permanent erosion control have been established; b. Address method(s) for diverting on -site runoff around exposed areas and diverting off -site runoff arount the site; c. Address methods for preventing erosion and trapping sediment on -site. 4) Provide notes, specifications, or attachments describing the following: a. Construction, operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment control measures, including inspection frequency; b. Methods and schedule for grading, excavation, filling, clearing of vegetation, and storage and disposal of excavated or cleared material. Brochures and literatures on stormwater pollution prevention and BMPs are available for your review at the Planning and Building departments. Distribute to all project proponents. For additional assistance, contact Eva J. at 650/342-3727. Reviewed by: _F� Date: 01/06/06 RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND DESIGN REVIEW RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for design review for a new single family dwelling with a new detached garage at 1456 Bernal Avenue zoned R-1 Tony Leung, property owner, APN: 026-043-170; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on March 27, 2006, 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: I. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19. Section: 15303, Class 3 — (a) construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including (a) one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. 2. Said design review is approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for design review are as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. CHAIRMAN I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting the Planning Commission held on the 27th day of March, 2006, by the following vote: SECRETARY EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and design review 1456 Bernal Avenue Effective April 6, 2006 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 7, 2006, sheets A.1 through A. 7, L1 and Boundary and Topographic Survey; and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require and amendment to this permit; 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 4. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; all windows shall be simulated true divided light windows with three dimensional wood mullions and shall contain a stucco -mould trim; 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; 6. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 7. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; 8. that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 9. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off -site sedimentation of storm water runoff, 10. that the project is subject to the state -mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; -2- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and design review 1456 Bernal Avenue Effective April 6, 2006 11. 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. 12. that the conditions of the Recycling Specialist's December 28, 2005 memo, the City Engineer's and Chief Building Official's January 3, 2006 memos, the Fire Marshal's January 4, 2006 memo and the NPDES Coordinator's January 6, 2006 memo shall be met; 13. 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; 14. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 15. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. -3- CITY 0 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUWM9 ME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD •••titi 016H76504325 BURLINGAME, CA 94010 aE . TEL: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-3 $ OQ.24a www.burlingame.org Qd w Site: 1456 BERNAL AVENUE , g Mailed From 94010 Application for design review for a new, US POSTAGE story single family dwelling and detached PUBLIC HEARING garage at: 1456 BERNAL AVENUE, NOTICE zoned R-1. (APN: 026-043-170). The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Monday, March 27, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Mailed: March 17, 2006 III�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII _.__—_.—__ (Please refer to other side) A copy of the ap to the meeting Burlingame, Cal If you challenge raising only t" W' described in the at or prior to`thE CITY OF BURLINGAME SIP ilication and plans for tlt5 project may be reviewed prior �t the Planning Dp tm nt. a�f„541 ; Primrose Road, forma her ect a licatlon court, you may; be limited to . P , , issues your or soiheone_else `rased t the Public hearing, ,ntice.�r it" ritfett 66ruest3oti e delivered to the city f. a R H z ak Property owners who receivetSnc7fire responsiblf their tenants about :this ii6i ee. ' ctr A tional info rrhat (650) 558 7250 Thank. yo t j tt lk Margaret Monroe �' Q s a' City Planner _ ,w PUBL1 'HEARING NOTICE (Please refer to other side) for informing in, please call March 27 2006 y e /i 5b - 1q5& &1Kn4C-L RECEIVED City of Burlingame .,._. Planning Commissioners CO TIONRECEIVED MAR 2 4 Z006 'TER PREPARATION DFSWFREPORr CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. Dear Sirs, We are writing to you with our concerns regarding the tear down/remodeling project at 1456 Bernal Avenue. We live next door at 1452 Bernal Avenue and we are requesting that certain fixtures not be changed that would adversely effect the quality of life we have experienced over the past 20 years at our home and property. The following issues are of great concern to us (please see the enclosed pictures that relate to the items listed below): 1. The front hedge that divides our property from the sidewalk to the front of our home approx. 20 feet of hedge) ... we do not want our hedge touched or removed. 1 The ivy that divides our property line and provides a focal point thru our dining room windows (pictures enclosed of this view) .... we do not want this ivy touched or removed. The ivy continues the length of our property along the entire fence and provides a great deal of privacy and greenery for us. If a new fence is proposed next door we would like them to put it along side our fence so as not to disturb our 40 foot wall of ivy. We have maintained and manicured this wall of ivy over the past 15 years and have spent a great deal of money on this endeavor. 3. We would like to suggest placing about 4 tall privacy trellises on the other side of our fence with vines growing on them to provide additional privacy for our pool and our outdoor living space. 4. We want to be assured that we will not have any additional water run-off from the property/building site when it goes under construction and that proper drains will be provided for the runoff of water. 5. We request that a wrought iron (decorative) balcony be placed outside the master bedroom... instead of a 3 foot balcony that was proposed, in order to provide the privacy factor for our swimming pool and outdoor entertainment space. (We also ask you to consider that balcony as an attractive nuisance... since children will lean off of it to view our pool .... and there are credible statistics that these balconies are most unsafe with children in a home). We look forward to hearing from the planning commission on these matters and I feel assured that Mr. Chen and the Nappi family, with the thoughtful consideration of the planning commissioners, will reach an amicable agreement. You may reach us at: 650-343-4827 to discuss any and all issues that have been put forth in our letter to you. We thank you in advance for taking our issues under thoughtful consideration. We will look forward to speaking with you in the future. Respectfully submitted, w� Frank and Mary Frances Nappi 1452 Bernal Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 �r do- 4 44C jo`, s JA""� -44 g, ftk,Q-- &f- Fll-� v-w e T i aloff aaO qp c NO 3 p ,?Gir ­77777 r 777- City of Burlingame Design Review Item # 9 Design Review Study Address: 1456 Bernal Avenue Meeting Date: 02/27/06 Request: Design review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. Applicant and Property Owner: Tony Leung Designer: James Chu General Plan: Low Density Residential APN: 026-043-170 Lot Area: 6,000 SF Zoning: R-1 Summary: The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing single -story house and an existing non- conforming detached second unit to build a new two-story single family dwelling and detached two -car garage. The proposed house and detached garage will have a total floor area of 3,271.1 SF (0.55 FAR) where 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) is the maximum allowed. The proposed floor area is 148.9 SF below the maximum allowed FAR. The project includes a detached garage (427.1 SF, 20'-8" x 20'-8") which provides two covered parking spaces for the proposed four -bedroom house, one uncovered space (9' x 20') is provided in the driveway. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following: • Design review for anew two-story single family dwelling and detached two -car garage (CS 25.57.010). Table 1-1456 Bernal Avenue Lot Area: 6,000 SF EXISTING' I P(12/27/05) ALLOWED/REQ'D SETBACKS .................................................................................................... i _........................................................................... ..................................................... .............................................................................................................................................................. .................... .................................................... _............................................................... Front (1st flr): 15'-0" 20'-6" 20'-6" (block average) (2nd flr): none 22'-6" 20'-6" (block average) Side (left): 4'-10" 5'-0" 4'-0" (right): .......................................................... _.................... ..............................4.............................................................................................................................. 13'-0" .... 10'-0" _.._......................................................................................... .................................................................. ..................................................................................................................... 4'-01f _..................... Rear (1st flr): 58'-0" ! 39'-6" 15'-0" (2nd flr): I ............. ._.......................................................................... .................. none ................................................ _........................................ _........... ..._... 35'-6" (to balcony) ............. -...... _............ _................................................... ............... _............................. _..... _.._..... ........................ 20'-0" .... _.... _.........._...................................... __—._..— --- 1..._..._..... Lot Coverage: j 2,499 SF 1,974.6 SF 2,400 SF _.................................................................FAR........�._.....................................2,499...SF..........................................i... 41.7% 33% ......................__..............._.__........................................._ ...... ................ ...................... .......3,271.1 40% ..........................._................................................................_......................................... SF 3,420 SF 0.42 FAR 0.55 FAR 0.57 FARZ _....._._.._.._......_...._....__.._..........----...---- # o bedrooms: ...----..._..-----._......._._..---------._........-_..................._.:............._............--- n/a ---- .... _.......... -- .._..—_....... _............ 4 ---............. __... _._.............. _........................... ..... _... __...- - ---- - --- .—._.__................_._........................ _................---................._.._._..........._ ._....... _.._......................f................................_...__g_._,................_..._......................................_.............................___........................._..............._........------ Parkin 1 covered ----._.._....._.__.............._..._.._.....__ ... - 2 covered 1 covered (10' x 20') (20' x 20') (10' x 201) 1 uncovered 1 uncovered 1 uncovered j(9' x x ............................................................................... Hei ht: .................................................................................g....................................._.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................._ ....................2.0')................................. 12'-4" ........................._............9' .20..' ............_..._.............. ............_._......................................... 29'-0" ....__.._.._..__...................9x...2_. ............................................................................................ ..................0......'..) 30'-0" ..................................................................................................................................... DHEnvelo e: ' complies complies CS 25.28.075 ' Information on existing house was obtained from the San Mateo County Assessor's appraisal report and from data shown on the boundary and topographic survey. Design Review 1456 Bernal Avenue 2 (0.32 x 6,000 SF) + 1,100 SF + 400 SF = 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) Staff Comments: See attached. As proposed, the finished floor of proposed house is only. V above average top of curb elevation, which can result in flooding if on site drainage is not appropriately addressed. Because of the cost of drainage improvements and risk factors, has resulted in additional Planning Commission review as construction plans are developed. If finished floor is to be raised post Planning Commission approval, there is the possibility that a special permit for declining height envelope may be required, and if the increase in height is more than a foot, a special permit for height. Both of which would require a public hearing. Erica Strohmeier Zoning Technician c. James Chu, designer 2 "4 CITY G� CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLNGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 ti 016I �16504325 qqTEL: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-379 .1 . Ke www.burlingame.org rp Site: 1456 BERNAL AVENUE $ 00.24 0 Application for design review for a ne Mailed From 94010 story single family dwelling and detached US POSTAGE garage at: 1456 BERNAL AVENUE, PUBLIC HEARING zoned R-1. (APN: 026-043-170). N(1T1rP The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Monday, February 27, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Mailed: February 17, 2006 II. 1111 I tt 111 111111 1111 1111 I l l 11 11111 l lJ t l 1 l tt l 1 l 11 l t l 111 l 1111 (Please refer to other side) CITY OF BURLINGAME A copy of the apphca p and-QQj th projec y be reviewed prior to the meeting . Primrose Road, Burlingame, Clfp'. If you challe raising only described in at or prior t( Property ow rs N -� ". their tenants bou (650) 558-7 0� c Margaret Mon City Planner PU (Please refer to other- side) be limited to blic hearing, ;d to the city e respon able ;for informing P a ..'final inforfTatio?ii, please call a C: ICE