HomeMy WebLinkAbout1532 Bernal Avenue - Staff Report (2)�r
Item # 5
Regular Action
PROJECT LOCATION
1532 Bernal Avenue
City of Burlingame
Design Review
Address: 1532 Bernal Avenue
Item # ,-rj
Regular Action
Meeting Date: OS/09/OS
Request: Design review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached two-car garage.
Applicant and Designer: Dale Meyer Associates APN: 026-033-200
Property Owners: Larry and Mary Jo Nejasmich 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 one-story house and detached one-car garage
(1662 SF, 0.28 FAR) to build a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached two-car garage. The
proposed house and detached two-car garage will have a total floor area of 3,420 SF (0.57 FAR) where 3,420 SF
(0.57 FAR) is the maximum allowed. The proposed FAR is at the maximum FAR allowed on this 6,000 SF lot.
The proposed new house will contain four potential bedrooms, requiring one covered (10' x 20') and one
uncovered (9' x 20') parking spaces on site. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing detached 376 SF
one-car garage (11'-4" X 29'-4", clear interior measurements) and replace it with a new detached garage (20' x 22',
clear interior dimensions), which will provide two covered spaces. One uncovered 9' x 20' space is provided in
the driveway. All other zoning code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following:
• Design review for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached two-car garage (CS 25.57.010).
Table 1 —1532 Bernal Avenue
Lot Area: 6,000 SF
EXISTING � ORIGINAL ' �VISED ' ALLOWED/REQ'D
! PROPOSAL PROPOSAL ;
O1/26/05 (03/22/OS)
SETBACKS ' �
; ;
. ................... ... ......................... :............................................................................ _ _........... . ........._....
Front(IS` flr): 20'-0" � 20'-6" � 20'-6" I 20'-6"(block average)
2 r none � 24'-0" � 26 -6 ' 20'-6"
� nd�r�, � � n
J� • '
� ......g ........� _ ........ ....................................................................................... �.....................................................................................................,.
,...........
Side ri ht : 5'-2" � 4'-0" ; 4'-0" i 4'-0"
(left): 8'-10" i 13'-0" � 13'-0" ; 4'-0"
r...................................................................................... .
Rear (ls` flr): 57'-0" j 44'-6" ; 41'-0" � 15'-0"
�2,�d r): none ' ...................................48�..-��� 47'-0" � 20'-0��
,� .................. .................................................................................... :............................................................................................,...........................................................................................................................................
f !
Lot Coverage: 1,777 SF ' 2,358 SF 2,263 SF � 2,400 SF
�
� o
0 0
0
40 /o
9 3 8 /o
30 � 3 /o
�0 ...................................................................................................................................._i..........................................................................................I..................................................................................
FAR: 1,662 SF � 3,311 SF j 3,420 SF j 3,420 SFl
0.28 FAR � 0.55 FAR � 0.57 FAR � 0.57 FAR
(0.32 x 6,000 SF) + 1,100 SF + 400 SF = 3420 SF (0.57 FAR)
Design Review
Table 1 —1532 Bernal Avenue (cont'd)
1532 Bernal Avenue
Lot Area: 6,000 SF
EXISTING i ORIGINAL ; REVISED � ALLOWED/REQ'D
PROPOSAL ' PROPOSAL '
' (Ol/26/OS) ' (03/22/OS �
# of bedrooms: unknown 4 ' 4 � ---
:...............................................................................................................:...........................................................................................:............................................................................................................................
................................... ,
i
Parking: 1 covered 2 covered ' 2 covered ! 1 covered
(11'-4" x 29'-4") ' (20' x 22') ; (20' x 22') ; (10' x 20')
1 uncovered 1 uncovered 1 uncovered ; 1 uncovered
�9� X Zo�) (9� X 20�� ; (9� X Zo�) � (9� X Zo�)
_ . .. . .........;.... ............................................_......................................... ... ,.............................. . __...
g ........... . ...................... .. ................ ,
Hei ht: 14'-2" ; 25'-0" � 26'-6" ! 30'-0"
i� ......................................................................................... .�....
DHEnvelope: complies complies � complies � CS 2528.075
Staff Comments: See attached.
March 14, 2005 Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on
March 14, 2005, the Commission referred the project to a design reviewer with direction (March 14, 2004 P.C.
Minutes). The following changes were made to the project:
■ Footprint: The living room and the guest room switched sides due to the moving the entryway from the
left side of the house to the front of the house and because of the inclusion of a front porch. The size and
shape of the rear deck was also changed to reflect the craftsman style.
■ Roof Configuration: The roof configuration was completely changed and the pitch was changed from a
4:12 to a 5:12 (see roof plan, sheet P3).
■ Front Elevation: A covered porch was added that faces the street, the stucco exterior was replaced with
wood shake siding, windows with craftsman style mullions replaced all the original windows and exposed
beams were placed in the peaks of the roof.
■ Rear Elevation: Wood shake siding and stone siding replaced the stucco siding, a trellis that is supported
by wood columns was placed over the rear deck area, the second story uncovered deck was removed and
exposed beams were placed in the peaks of the roof.
■ Right Side Elevation: The gas fireplace flue box was replaced with a stone chimney towards the rear of
the house, the stairwell was brought down to grade and incorporated a larger window area, wood shake
siding replaced the stucco siding and exposed rafter ends were incorporated into the roof eaves.
■ Left Side Elevation: The entryway was switched to the front elevation, a stone chimney was added
towards the front of the house, more windows were added towards the rear of the house, wood shake
siding replaced the stucco siding and exposed rafter ends were incorporated into the roof eaves.
2
Design Review
1532 Bernal Avenue
The following is a list of the Commission's direction and responses by the applicant. The applicant submitted
revised plans date stamped Apri122, 2005. A summary of the design reviewer's analysis, dated Apri122, 2005, is
provided in the following section.
1. Need to announce from the front property line, the location of the front door on the side, use landscaping
and something structural; structure lacks as sense of entry.
The applicant revised both the entry to the house and the exterior materials to give the front elevation
more of a sense of entry. A front porch was added that brings the entryway from the side of the house to
face the front property line, the building material was changed from stucco to wood shake siding, the
second story was pushed back for better articulation, chimneys were added, all of the windows were
changed to include craftsman style mullions and exposed beams were placed at the roof peaks to bring in
a more defined architectural style (see revised plans date stamped April 22, 2005, southwest elevation
page P3). The design reviewer notes that the new style is a complete departure from the previously
submitted plans, that it is a major improvement over the former design and that the front porch is a
welcome addition to the streetscape. Please refer to the design reviewer's analysis, date stamped April
22, 2005, and the summary in the next section.
2. Needs something to make the house more appealing; southeast elevation has two blank walls at the
location of the kitchen and the master bath above; lacks windows and proposed windows are too s`nall;
windows should say there are people inside; no character.
The southeast elevation (revised plans date stamped Apri122, 2005, page P4) has been revised to include
more windows with mullion patterns of the craftsman style, the entryway has been moved to the front
elevation, the back deck is now covered by a trellis, a stone chimney has replaced the gas fireplace flue
box and exposed rafter ends were incorporated into the roof eaves. The design reviewer notes that the
side elevations are broken up with articulations and variety and that the windows seem compatible and
harmonious and are consistent on all four elevations. Please refer to the design reviewer's analysis, date
stamped April 22, 2005, and the summary in the next section.
3. Northwest elevation fireplaces are gas so no chimney is required, but they need to be integrated into the
structure, they appear as storage boxes on the outside of the building.
Both gas fireplace flue boxes on the northwest elevation were replaced with stone chimneys and the front
most fireplace was moved to the southeast elevation (revised plans date stamped April 22, 2005, page
P4).
4. The windows on front elevation do not line up to support the building above and the massing is out of
balance, project needs better massing.
The applicant revised the plans so that all windows on the front elevation were replaced with windows
that incorporate craftsman style mullions, the second story was pushed back from the front of the house
for better articulation, stone chimneys were added to both sides of the house for more balance and
exposed beams were added at the roof peaks for more balance between the two stories (revised plans date
stamped Apri122, 2005, page P3). The design reviewer stated that because of the articulation of the side
walls and the direction of the gable roof, the massing is an appropriate interface with the neighbors and
that the overall bulk is mitigated by the deign features.
Design Review 1532 Bernal Avenue
5. The roof over the staircase looks like a"hat'; the wall needs more articulation.
• The northwest elevation was revised to include more articulation of the staircase; the exterior wall was
carried down to grade, the roof placement and pitch were changed and a larger window area was added to
the stairwell area (revised plans date stamped Apri122, 2005, northwest elevation page P4). Please refer
to the design reviewer's analysis, date stamped April 22, 2005, and the summary in the next section.
6. Front porch is not appropriate on the side, the California Building Code will not allow a port cochere any
more.
The applicant moved the entryway from the left side elevation to the front elevation and incorporated a
front porch area that faces the front property line (revised plans date stamped Apri122, 2005, southwest
elevation page P4).
7. The orname�ztal stucco band is too massive and not seen anywhere in the area.
� The ornamental stucco band was removed because the exterior building material was changed to wood
shake siding (revised plans date stamped Apri122, 2005, pages P3 thru P4).
8. Need to revise the flat roof at front, may not see clearly on elevation, going to look odd when built, know it
exists with tlie current house but does iaot need to be repeated on the new house.
� The entire roof was changed to a 5:12 pitch and the flat roof area at the front was removed (revised plans
date stamped April 22, 2005, pages P3 thru P4). Please refer to the design reviewer's analysis, date
stamped April 22, 2005, and the summary in the next section.
Analysis and Recommendation by Design Reviewer (dated Apri122, 2005): The design reviewer met with
the applicant to discuss the Planning Commission's concerns with the project. In a letter dated Apri122, 2005,
the reviewer notes that the design has been completely revised to respond to the Planning Commission concerns.
The reviewer comments that the shingle/craftsman bungalow style proposed is compatible with the scale and
feeling of the neighborhood and with Burlingame in general. He states that the new style proposed is a complete
departure from the previously submitted plans and a major improvement over the former design.
In regards to interfacing with adjacent structures, the reviewer notes that because ofthe articulation on the side
walls and the direction of the roof gable slope, he feels that the massing is an appropriate interface with the
neighbors. In regards to the landscaping, the reviewer notes that the planting of six Mayten trees may be too
much because these trees will grow into two major clusters, the potential canopies of which are not shown on the
plans. He also notes that planting of a row of pines along the right side fence may not be appropriate. Staff
would note that the landscape plan was not altered from the original as suggested by the design reviewer.
In summary, the design reviewer notes that this is a complete re-design of the previously submitted scheme and it
should be judged on its own merits. He applauds the owner and architect for the flexibility to come up with a
new design concept that is much more compatible with the City of Burlingame and he recommends approval,
except for the noted minor tweaking of the landscaping plant selections.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the
Council on Apri120, 1998 are outlined as follows:
C�
Design Review
1532 Bernal Avenue
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.
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:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped
April 22, 2005, sheets P 1 through P5, and Boundary and Topographic Survey date stamped January 26,
2005; and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require and amendment to
this permit;
2. that all planting shall follow the landscape plan on page PS of the revised plans (date stamped April 22,
2005);
3. 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;
4. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed
professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window
locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved
in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury;
certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department;
5. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the proj ect has been built according
to the approved Planning and Building plans;
6. 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;
7. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof
ridge and provide certiiication of that height to the Building Department;
8. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners
and set the building footprint;
9. that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new
Design Review 1532 Bernal Avenue
structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer;
10. 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;
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 Chief Building Official's January 27, 2005 memo, the City Engineer's and
Recycling Specialist's January 28, 2005 memos and the Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's January
31, 2005 memos 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. Dale Meyer, applicant and designer
C�
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
desi�n review for a new two-story single family dwellin� and detached two-car gara�e at 1532
Bernal Avenue zoned R-1 Larr�and Mary Jo N�asmich propertv owners APN: 026-033-200;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
Mav 9, 2005, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written
materials and testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that:
1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and
comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no
substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the
environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19. 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.
2. Said design review is approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto. Findings for such 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
of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of May, 2005 by the following vote:
Secretary
�
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and design review.
1532 Bernal Avenue
Effective May 19, 2005
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department
date stamped April 22, 2005, sheets P1 through P5, and Boundary and Topographic
Survey date stamped January 26, 2005; and that any changes to the footprint or floor area
of the building shall require and amendment to this permit;
2. that all planting shall follow the landscape plan on page PS of the revised plans (date
stamped Apri122, 2005);
3. 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;
4. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other
licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details
such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is
no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall
provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the
Building Department;
5. that prior to 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;
6. 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;
7. 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;
8. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the
property corners and set the building footprint;
9. 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;
10. 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;
L �
9
Exhibit "A" Cont.
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and design review.
1532 Bernal Avenue
Effective May 19, 2005
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 Chief Building Official's January 27, 2005 memo, the City
Engineer's and Recycling Specialist's January 28, 2005 memos and the Fire Marshal's
and NPDES Coordinator's January 31, 2005 memos 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.
.
�
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TEL. (650) 558-7250
FAX. (650) 696-3790
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET
TO: FROM:
Dale Meyer Erica Strohmeier, Zoning Technician
COMPANY: DATE:
Dale Meyer Associates February 16, 2005
FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO. OF PAGES:
(650) 348-7119 12, including the cover sheet
RE:
1532 Bernal Avenue, Burlingame
❑ URGENT Q FOR REVIEW ❑ PLEASE COMMENT ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE
Dale,
Attached please find my plan check comments for the project at 1532 Bernal Avenue, Burlingame.
After review of the plans and the boundary and topographic survey that were submitted on January 26,
2005, the Planning Department has noted that all of the plan check comments have been met and that
your project is ready to be scheduled for a Planning Commission Public Hearing. Please submit 5 full
size sets of the plans and one reduced set to the Planning Department at your nearest convenience.
Also attached are comments from the City Engineer, Chief Building Official, Recycling Specialist, Fire
Marshal and NPDES Coordinator. Please call them directly if you have any questions regarding their
comments.
If you should have any questions regarding the plan check comments or the design review process,
please feel free to call me at (650) 558-7252.
Sincerely,
Erica Strohmeier
Zoning Technician
501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME CA • 94010
�
�
City of Burlingame
Planning Department
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
Job Address: 1532 Bernal Avenue
Date of Plans: January 26, 2005
Job Description: Design Review for a new 2-story house and new detached 2-car garage Page: �
of 1 -. ' ,.
, : . ;.� i�.-,�� i,� ���
� . S�� �'CxtC'�-��. ��Ci <.�'.'� r c� '�� �� <_�-�, fl'��I�W�'� � � 'Gi
�
,'
�Wv�-i ��S �`�� Z-O�-%�� 7A'_6�� �'r'��cc'C c,v��r�o'�_
�Y� r � � � Z�I ' D' C
�i`�y 5� Z„ �� �,• �� O,�
i��i �- �� �c" �3� n'� �i'- v"
, ,.
,,,, ; ,, L�y_� ��� l
`. � ����� yd'-a�� ,�,_ �;�
� �a� r,,� .r.' , : . , c, ; . , . , _
n L� - � �
� , oV�F �o, r
� i� I S'F i '✓lLi.
� �� `
��� � I �L��l l'• ���-�I�� - (L ^�a�-e_
; � � , - ��JO� Z" � U 0�� .
��s ���-6��K �1
}8 �3' � � 6'` ,
� �
LI3 � (I2�y: � Ll�.�.� /
�� (�0� IG�J v � � -�
. - ����r��,r �.�,
?�6 =� '- i=�o`lo ,
�o � ,
• 1_,��r�� , � _ �,��_,� �rr,
�� ; G ,
t ���as�E� �i
�{ �J� �Z� �Z�'� - L��va<�,
d�s ' A
�S ri-�f
� ( ��,,��
Z � � ly' x � �-6'��
2� ,�Z-' �
Ib S � -
;� ` ��"6��'
`lD� �5 � SS�nI��-6''
g ( ,� � �,��'�� XZ
`1 °� �6'� I� -. `\
56•� ���'�, � �� —��
Z�35��� `�, �_'`������
�'�Dv�_� [ I�� Pn.n, � �
F�oP� o✓r:�l�
�� r:��
City of Burlingame
Planning Department
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Job Address: � 53Z B2 r�na� �ilK.�1c1�2 Page: �
� � �?. oor ��: r����. " �;, �- �� � � � , � .: _ - � , � � � oo = % �;,z o � , , � � F� Q �� , � � �� '
�� �. � . �
� �� � `' �
�� �rD J�O � 2 (�
I�II,� � � �I�� - ���� rjor�L��
— yq.�z (�.a' �: 6.-���� - ����,-��� F�,<��. , ; ,��� , 6�s ( ��' � ���� \
I�6i �� �28F��� �
, r
LI i�'xi������� s
\ I ����
�8 `� �°�,y� F;
�C� � �ib�.�" x�e'�
� �bV�,i��i C„ �)i�, `�}'Q_ ���• �� � � „' � � 'x ��
v
1�� �1�-b� nl' �
_ Z�(?� _ i � , � \
I 2 � : , � � F I �./
1,.' � �4-IO�1v�;ij�1
� . _ Lt - C < C•
�2�0. ( _
— 20 _ t�,ti..:�� c+ ��;=. � ' '
�,, r'
- - ^.? ,� ( � ' . S� �%��
� , �v��� ��`l. .N' ��''/` �T .
�
A,�i�r���� 7�� ^�`(���� �%�il I<{ �,;.j�' ���CZ
�
� �' �
�{�✓v,rc:c� �O� DZ } � S = U� � ��
�,_���. ��. ,, � � - � _ - _
� ��+ni�,�pl��Ec � ,_������, ��,�','^� �, � ; � � ,� , , ,�
� � � _.. . �„ � , '
_,
��,�� �,= c����,r� �,,�c� _��� — ���.��_� - �Z : �u,�'
�� ����„�'� �b�f.�r:, � 63.ty' � _ (�c ,-{'
i`
•�J ���� l� ' ,
l ,��'Nl G'' - �, �. � , I . ( i ' � n �. °_ �i �,�' ; " i� _'./'�;f? i)�"
r,
City of Burlingame
Planning Department
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Job Address: �53Z- �ha� ��n�
�
� /4 ��� �i i`- . � � � � ��; ; �, v �, ., .
,��
���
,
��`'
���� ���+-�i�`� Zo �- � Z�'- r " � ��-6"� ';o�A�e h�a �\, �
�� iv�`��` � °''". �6� �" �,- b'' �
� � � � �j+� i- 5 '- z'' � '- o " �I '- o "
v
l,e ��} �a '- �. �: i� �_ o, y'- a•'
\ ,
�� iS� ; fi �-�? �I�`b �� I��_��i
� -�
/J �
. i�. r.r� '�� Y� C v'� � "I � ` a � �� ` b �
, j
1
1 (/Vl �
lJ �r�i Y- , r l� . L+ f, � �� � �' ,^ ,. , r , `.
_ �
�i'DPO���� % ('��.1�:. ��` �20'. � �� ;, �. , < �� ��
�4uinC'(�� � ���Jr��^� �� �c. i � ,�, ; ���. ,_.��
� � `
� � 1��� ��1,�- �� �,�.� '.
�
• �'L�Sc� oV� ('G� C11���:"� � r j% ,� �'.l�'.� , �� , � �� � �i ��,:���
, � . , . �. +;_.-
,
, , , .
�,C�i�`.iGt�J�I�1� '�`.���r"�.-'l° C'I/� �t - l.'� � � -e G✓!`�. . � . _
/
\ l 1J �
C✓ ylvi i�c-./,`�i- c A �� '�":�;' �✓'�-� (1 ��
` , �
I. Se-t bP �� s'. � x�� s�
� �
�_,�' ' '' I�` �j�' ' v . <( C !�- �/`p � �..� "K l%"\/`n r T� .
Page: �
fF l l ou�'f
/
e �.r�,., {, - , , ,
�
. �
Job Address: ( Jf �Z � i�� � •
Page: ,�
a . L�f" ��-a-�1e� �. ( �! o % X (, C�C;c �� � � ,
_ = �4oC � tIV a � a t�w-�=r
�
- � x � �� i ✓�t � �D�D`�� �
�e e �p �� � — -- ��� �� � �A _ �iarc�c« �
_ ,- --:;--.�--�--� �' .
;bv l�� b" x'.' �
Z 6' � y'� /
;
� 6,��Z, '�
� �� � i � � � , � �n�.t
i
�1-
� � � ��
���5 � �'- 6"� �'. ,t���� ;� ar� ��
LI62 i iti' x��3''
- -
� 1 � %� �� � '`
2 ( 6' '�''' t� ��
.
�bi ���xZ��
� ,
� �S � - �S� _ �C��C� (�.LG�-
/ � �
i' IZ�j ' � x�'D`- ,/� � . v. � (_c c`.�--
1--- - =-(e� c.
�
�
� �f�5-f � f�.<^� � �� �'�'F-rCC�
�
_`�e `Oa� �_ Z � `��� - �1°`��"�-
�..�,��.� �. ,-�__
��', �O , a S - a-'y } � oc �� �< o � �; c c r cv-c. �--
�5 � Z' 6" x I�t' j
• � �vv. C'� ,��� �.
�� �� ` � �� f� `- � �.A � C (1
i�
�
� E� � � � �" ���6��
. �
�j?O.r �I`l��lo"x�lb�-11",�
;
2 3.3 c� y� L�� � 8�
� -�� � � ._
- �6p
- � b�
City of Burlingame
Planning Department
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
�� �'�Cb�� �,(?�c� �L�=.,c,.(•�Z� 6GOD�t�1f>C tL,40= ,r%�ZO
P��' .�'�,' �
Z 6�.zs �� �� 38°fl
53 ��� vv�ax. n�,�C'c�-�.c�.
— �a�o�F� Qer�,. Qr� �.�.��-,:c�.�
- j � . r; � 9 n / �" . �. �,. �'_ � �; f
- � - ����,�� �(er�li� �-r�, �tk�1v��,:�:�
3�11q, s� � � s���k � j
, ,.
f
City of Burlingame
Planning Department
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Job Address: I S3Z i.7� 1'�Il I��
- -� ,
�' 4-� V I I � I�Gj 1 �- � � � � .
n �1
,�,�.�I,��p�'_ �_.U�'�;� ��-� ,����vii 4�,��7���, �'r/; Y ;���;,,
2 <�'
�'��� �- � 6� 02' �- z�, s� _ �( � . � �_
�` F�11o��k'. ��.�Za ' _ `?"
M � 3c �.C�'
/ •
� �-�('<' /' . �
Pb ��` t-
.,
r���,f, , 6�.�
: 6 � ,�'
,•
�,�i�"� i CJ>'i �j � � L � �J��
i
�
Page: J
��p o� C�b: ��(;,;�� � �= �,� �Z- 6��0�
�
�i � h T �. v� u� C�'.� '. I- r;
a �s �:.0 ��Gl . , _,' . � L� :
C ���
rn�l c�� �nl � "✓r L%t1� "
�C . �m�lj��iV�� : � �Pt�� �e�� = �' �� ��%�<,� rr
%
l`
��'�U`%C(�� � ��`�l`C� �7L� 1"i.2� '.P��'!'n��i� /^� q ��,
�:
� i�'����r^�' Z Crv������1 �j�,' -;�'� � �r� ,; ,,,! ,� � ,-; r���
/;
• /aC,'f ,'. �' � .� ., �� , , � , .
,� �.
, �
� , , �� :' � E ,,, �_
`.
i
� �G� V1,��C � 5 �j ✓�� �� (��/`.Lt � �'�IC- (:('� e`( � �C���'\✓!. IL)�' 1 A.`.' i ! !rtl` ��.�, j'sr �.C.�.
� �, . 1
� � 7 S� ' C" ✓�,�tic ,r' � •
.