HomeMy WebLinkAbout1452 Drake Avenue - Staff ReportPROJECT LOCATION
1452 Drake Avenue
(existing house has been demolished)
Item No.
Action Item
City of Burlingame
Design Review and Special Permits
Item No.
Action Item
Address: 1452 Drake Avenue Meeting Date: February 23, 2009
Request: Design Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope, attached garage and
basement for a new, two story single family dwelling and attached garage.
Applicant and Architect: TRG Architects APN: 026-042-140
Property Owner: Ginkgo Burlingame LLC Lot Area: 6000 SF
General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1
Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Section 15303 (a), which states that construction of
a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including one single family residence or a second
dwelling unit in a residential zone is exempt from environmental review. In urbanized areas, up to
three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption.
History: On May 29, 2007, the Planning Commission approved an application for Design Review,
Special Permit for declining height envelope and Conditional Use Permit for garage height for a new,
two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at this site. A building permit was issued on
October 19, 2007 and the existing house was demolished shortly thereafter. During that time, the
property was sold. The current property owner does not wish to build the previously approved project
and is now proposing a new design.
The redesigned project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 10 (study meeting)
and November 24, 2008 (action meeting). At its meeting of November 24, 2008, the Planning
Commission approved the property owner's request for Design Review and Special Permits for
declining height envelope and attached garage for a new, two story single family dwelling at 1452
Drake Avenue, Zoned R-1 (see attached November 24, 2008 Planning Commission minutes). The
Commission approved the applications on a vote of 3-2-0-2. Dissenting Commissioners expressed
concern that the project, as designed, was incompatible with the character of the neighborhood within
which the project is to be situated.
On November 26, 2008, City Council Member Jerry Deal appealed the Planning Commission's action
(see attached e-mail dated November 16, 2008). At its meeting of December 15, 2008, the City
Council, on a vote of 4-1, voted to grant the appeal and reversed the Planning Commission's approval
of the project, denying the request without prejudice, finding that the project's architectural style and
design are not compatible with the neighborhood (see attached December 15, 2008 City Council
minutes).
Planning staff would note that for the December 15, 2008 City Council meeting, the architect prepared
an optional design, which was presented to the City Council at the appeal hearing (plans date
stamped December 12, 2008, included for reference). The revised design option included changes to
all four building facades, roof configuration and minor changes to the floor plans. The change on the
floor plans included eliminating the 60 SF trellis at the front of the house and adding 60 SF of floor
space to Bedroom 2 and adjacent hallway on the second floor. Therefore, was no increase in floor
area (3,014 SF (0.50 FAR) proposed where 3,020 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed). Planning
staff would point out that with the removal of the trellis at the front of the house, the proposed lot
coverage decreased from 32.1 °/o to 31.1 % where 40°/o is the maximum allowed.
The applicant is now proposing a redesigned project to address the comments of the City Council and
Planning Commission (plans date stamped January 20, 2009). The project now proposed includes
additional changes to the optional design reviewed by the City Council.
Design Review and Special Permits 1452 Drake Avenue
January 26, 2009 Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission Design Review study
meeting on January 26, 2009, the Commission voted to place this item on the consent calendar with
no suggested changes to the project (January 26, 2009 Planning Commission minutes). However,
since the January 26, 2009, design review study meeting, the applicant revised the project to include a
new basement. Therefore, because a basement was not previously proposed the application must be
reviewed as an action item. The public hearing notices, agenda and staff report include the request
for a Special Permit for the basement. The applicant submitted revised plans, date stamped January
30, 2009, which show the proposed basement (sheet A2.0).
Planning staff would note that the proposed basement contains an exercise room, sauna and shower.
Although shower stalls are specifically prohibited in basements (C.S. 025.28.035, a), Planning staff
determined that the proposed shower stall is a part of the sauna use (which is not limited in any way).
A condition of approval has been added which binds the sauna and shower, so that a shower stall is
only allowed in conjunction with a sauna when the project is built and at any time in the future. If the
Planning Commission does not agree with this determination, it can amend the conditions of approval
and take action on the project without a shower stall in the basement.
Summary: The applicant is proposing to build a new, two-story single family dwelling and attached
one-car garage. The proposed house and attached garage will have a total floor area of 3,014 SF
(0.50 FAR) where 3,020 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed (includes covered porch and
basement exemptions). The proposed project is 6 SF below the maximum allowed FAR.
The project includes an attached garage which provides one covered parking space (12' x 20' clear
interior dimensions) for the proposed four-bedroom house. 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:
■ Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and attached garage (CS 25.57.010);
■ Special Permit for declining height envelope (105 SF along the left side and 31 SF along the
right side extend beyond the declining height envelope) (CS 25.28.075);
■ Special Permit for attached garage (CS 25.28.035, a); and
■ Special Permit for a new basement with an interior ceiling height greater than 6'-6" (8'-10"
proposed) (CS 25.28.035, f).
1452 Drake Avenue
Lot Area: 6000 SF Plans Date Stam ed: Janua 30, 2009
PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D
Setbacks
Garage: 31'-0" 25'-0"
Front (1Sf flr): 22'-0" (bay window exempt) 22'-0" (block average)
(2"d flr): 22'-0" 20'-0"
_... _ _..._ _. _._ _ .... . _ .... . . .. _....
Side (right): 5'-4" 4'-0"
(left): 6'-9" 4'-0"
__. . _ . __....... _. _. .
Rear(1Sf flr): 38'-8" (to deck) 15'-0"
(2"d flr): 43'-8" (to deck) 20'-0"
2
Design Review and Special Permits
1452 Drake Avenue
1452 Drake Avenue
�ot �►rea: nwu sr rians uate siam ea: �anua su, �wy
PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D
Lot Coverage: 1869 SF 2400 SF
31.1 % 40%
_ _....... ____. . _ _
FAR: 3014 SF 3020 SF'
0.50 FAR 0.50 FAR
# of bedrooms: 4 ---
_. _. .. _. _ _ _. .. _
Garage: attached z special permit required for attached
garage
_ . .. _ . _. . . _ . _ .. ... _ _ _ _ : . _ .. ........ . ..... ..
Parking: 1 covered 1 covered
(12' x 20') (10' x 20')
1 uncovered 1 uncovered
(9' x 20') (9' x 20')
_...... _..__.._ _
Height: 24'-11 " 30'-0"
DH Envelope: extends beyond DH envelope 3 CS 25.28.075
_ _......__...._ ............................._.....___....._..._................................................................................................
_ .............................. _...................... ..... . ............. ..... ...... ...... ... .......... ........ .............................................. _.......... ...... ...................... _.. _............... ... .. .. . . ..... .... .... ..... . ... . . . . . .. .
Basement: basement with 8'-10" ceiling special permit required for
height 4 basement with ceiling height
greater than 6'-6"
' (0.32 x 6000 SF) + 1,100 SF = 3020SF (0.50 FAR)
Z Special Permit for attached garage (CS 25.28.035, a).
' Special Permit for declining height envelope (105 SF along the left side and 31 SF along the right
side extend beyond the declining height envelope) (CS 25.28.075).
4 Special Permit for a new basement with an interior ceiling height greater than 6'-6" (8'-10"
proposed) (CS 25.28.035, f).
Staff Comments: See attached comments from the Chief Building Official, City Engineer, Fire
Marshal and NPDES Coordinator (includes review of project after basement was added).
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.
3
Design Review and Special Permits
1452 Drake Avenue
Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit, the Planning Commission must find
that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.51.020 a-d):
(a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or
addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and
neighborhood;
(b) the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new
structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood;
(c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city;
and
(d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary
and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal
that is proposed is appropriate.
Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the
application, and consider public testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action
should include specific findings supporting the Planning Commission's decision, and should be
affirmed by resolution of the Planning Commission. The reasons for any action should be stated
clearly for the record. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered:
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date
stamped January 30, 2009, sheets A1.1, A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, A3.1, A3.2 and L-1;
2. that the shower stall in the basement shall only be allowed in conjunction with a sauna in the
basement and shall be built to the size, configuration and location as shown on the Basement
Plan, sheet A2.0; that any changes to the size, configuration or location of the shower stall
shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission review; that if the sauna is not built as
part of the project a shower stall shall not be allowed in the basement;
3. that if the sauna is ever removed or eliminated in the future, the shower stall shall also be
removed or eliminated along with the sauna;
4. 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 staff);
5. 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;
6. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 9, 2009 and September 26, 2008
memos, the City Engineer's October 16, 2008 memo, the Fire Marshal's February 9, 2009 and
September 29, 2008 memos, and NPDES Coordinator's September 29, 2008 memos shall be
met;
7. 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;
�
Design Review and Special Permits
1452 Drake Avenue
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 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;
12. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire
Codes, 2007 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:
13. 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;
14. that 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 Department; and
16. 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.
�
Design Review and Special Permits
Ruben Hurin
Senior Planner
c. Randy Grange, TRG Architects, applicant and architect
January 26, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes
December 15, 2008 City Council Minutes
Appeal e-mail from City Council Member Jerry Deal, dated November 26, 2008
November 10 and 24, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes
Application to the Planning Commission
Special Permit Forms
Staff Comments
Neighborhood Photos
Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed)
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed February 13, 2009
Aerial Photo
1452 Drake Avenue
�
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes January 26, 2009
9. 1452 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL
PERMITS FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW, TWO
STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND
GINKGO BURLINGAME LLC, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
jRESUBMITTAL OF A PROJECT WHICH WAS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE)
Reference staff report dated January 26, 2009, with attachments. Community Development Director
Meeker briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Cauchi opened the public comment period.
Randy Grange, 205 Park Road; represented the applicant.
Revised the design to be more traditional.
The design could include a detached garage, but it doesn't; is quite a bit smaller than a typical
project because of the presence of the oversized one car garage
Provided slides showing the property.
Commission comments:
■ Noted that the garage location obscures the entry way. (Grange — there is a porch at the location,
plus the garage door is decorative. If the garage is pushed further back it impacts the rear yard.)
■ Have done a nice job with the design.
■ Noted that the home is angled on the lot and asked why. (Grange — relates to feng shui, angle is
very subtle.)
■ Believes that the garage will look fine; it creates an alcove at the entry.
■ Asked what surface material is surrounding the fountain on the landscape plan? (Grange — lawn.)
■ There are a lot of hard surfaces within the yard, not much green; can any of these areas be made
permeable? (Grange — in the rear, there is an existing foundation from the formerdetached garage;
it will be used to build a terrace in the rear yard. Inherited a lot of foundations from the prior
structures on the lot. These areas are permeable.)
■ On right elevation, why is the window not treated the same as the other windows? (Grange — is an
attempt to be whimsical with the design.)
Public comments:
None.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
Good design; elegant design; not bothered by the location of the entry.
Commissioner Brownrigg made a motion to p/ace the item on the Consent Calendar when complete.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom.
Discussion of motion:
12
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes January 26, 2009
Opposed to the design; not supportive of attached garage so c/ose to street or small front porch,
and doesn't believe that an energy efficient house needs to look so different from others in the
neighborhood.
Chair Cauchi 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 5-1-1 (CommissionerAuran
dissenting, Commissioner Terrones absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not
appeala6le. This item concluded at 9:25 p.m.
13
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR
DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND
ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW, TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, ON
PROPERTY AT 1452 DRAKE AVENUE, LOCATED WITHIN A SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE
CDD Meeker reviewed the staff report and requested Council to hold a public hearing and make a decision
to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's action approving the application for Design
Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage for a new, two story single
family dwelling; or uphold the appeal, and modify the Planning Commission's decision by providing specific
direction to the project applicant regarding further changes to be made to the project; this action could
include referring the project back to the Planning Commission for review of the changes; or uphold the
appeal and deny the project.
Mayor Keighran opened the public hearing. Councilman Deal spoke and advised that he requested the
review due to the design of the project not being compatible with the neighborhood. Mary Martocci, 1448
Drake Avenue; Nancy Torres, 1429 Drake Avenue; Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; and Mary Lofton,
1460 Drake Avenue all spoke on the project. There were no further comments from the floor, and the hearing
was closed.
Councilman Deal made a motion to uphold the appeal and deny without prejudice the project approved on
November 24, 2008 finding that the proj ect's architectural style and design are not compatible with the
neighborhood; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved by roll call vote, 4-1
(Councilwoman Nagel dissented).
Decemba� 15
Burlingame City Council , 2008
Unapproved Minutes
Page 1 of 1
CLK-Morten�en, Doris
From: Jerry Deal jjerry@jdealassociates.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 12:17 PM
To: CLK-City Clerk
Subject: 1452 Drake
Doris:
I would like to call up 1452 Drake for review by the City Council.
Sincerely,
(J�i°�� ��R�
Jerry Deal
Honorable Mayor & City Council:
Please schedule a hearing for
1452 Drake to be heard at the
January 5, 2009 Council meeting.
City Clerk
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes November 24, 2008
VII1. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
2. 1452 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL
PERMITS FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW, TWO
STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND
GINKGO BURLINGAME LLC PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated November 24, 2008, with attachments. Community Development Director
Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fourteen (14) conditions were
suggested for consideration.
Chair Cauchi opened the public hearing.
Randy Grange and Yossi Zinger, 205 Park Road; represented the applicant:
Presented revised plans reflecting more traditional "Craftsman" details.
The enclosed "living area" of the proposed structure (excluding the garage and trellises) falls
more than 600-feet below the maximum lot coverage.
Commission comments:
• Liked the revised design a bit better than the original design.
■ Support the attached garage because more yard space is created in the rear.
■ Requested clarification regarding the thought behind having the front door receded into the
fa�ade (Grange: the massing concept is to have simple forms bridged by a glass porch/entry
connecting the two elements).
■ Concerned about what will happen at the rear of the property; particularly with respect to
drainage and maintenance (Grange: trees are on the top of the retaining wall. Zinger: are
planning to fill in the area and make it a landscape element; the channel will drain to the sump
pump).
■ Clarified that the wall at the rear of the property will be treated with a stone veneer.
■ Agreed that achieving a"Craftsman" style doesn't require total adherence to traditional details.
■ Building green and building sustainable doesn't require designing "Contemporar�i' architectural
style; concerned about creating a stigma for green design tying it to only "Contemporar�'
architecture.
■ Supportive of application.
• Asked if the "rain screen" siding is a real wood material (Grange: yes, real wood furred out from
the wall to permit rapid drainage behind it).
• Asked if the siding comes with more of a texture (Grange: any type of siding may be used as a
"rain screen").
■ What is intended for the wall edge at the top of the flat roof portion of the structure (Grange: a
small copper flashing is installed; will patina with age). There might be a better way to treat this
detail (Grange: looked at pitched roofs, plates and other designs; this seemed to provide the
most punch). Perhaps provide a cap on this feature (Grange: needed to have the membrane
for the green roof rofl up under the flashing).
■ Perhaps provide a bit more of an entry statement at the porch.
3
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes November 24, 2008
Public comments:
Mary Martocci, 1448 Drake Avenue and Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue spoke: changes that
have been made are an improvement; but the design still does not fit within the neighborhood.
Would prefer a more traditional style. Noted that the architect indicated that the home is not
being soid; is being built by a non-profit corporation. The property is owned by a limited liability
corporation, as are the two properties adjacent. The same owner owned property in the 1400
block of Balboa Avenue; this property generates $190 in property taxes on an annual basis due
to the ownership by a non-profit foundation. The home on Baiboa is used for school events
periodically and creates a disturbance. Will there be events held at the property? Is there a
home occupation permit that will be required for any business activities at the property. (Meeker:
noted that ownership of property is not the purview of the Commission, it must focus only upon
the design issues. If violations of the R1 zoning occur in the future, they will be addressed as a
code enforcement matter).
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
Commissioner Auran noted that he could not support the project, it is not appropriate for this
neighborhood.
Commissioner Auran moved to deny the application, with prejudice, noting that the design of the home
is out of character with the neighborhood.
The motion was seconded by Chair Cauchi.
Discussion of motion:
Don't think it will fit in to the neighborhood, it is a stark, industrial looking building.
This block of Drake Avenue is eclectic; includes a mixture of styles; this would be a handsome
addition to the block.
Project will read as an additional style on the block; there is a project on De Soto that is an
example of an instance where the style doesn't fit with the neighborhood.
Chair Cauchi called for a roll call vote on the motion to deny with prejudice. The motion failed 2-3-0-2
(Commissioners Brownrigg, Terrones and Vistica dissenting, Commissioners Lindstrom and Yie
absent).
Commissioner Brownrigg moved to approve the application, by resolufion, with the following conditions:
that the project shail be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date
stamped November 14, 2008, sheets A1.1, A2.1, A2.2, A3.1, A3.2, and date stamped October
29, 2008, sheet L-1;
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 staff);
�
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMIS3/ON — Unapproved Minutes November 24, 2008
3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would
include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit;
4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's September 26, 2008 memo, the City Engineer's
October 16, 2008 memo, and the Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's September 29, 2008
memos shall be met;
5. 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;
6. 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;
7. 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;
8. 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;
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 shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire
Codes, 2007 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS
. PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION
11. that prior to scheduling the 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;
12. that 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;
5
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes November 24, 2008
13. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the
roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; and
14. 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.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica.
Discussion of motion:
■ The home will be a good addition to the architectural styles in Burlingame; the massing handled
well.
■ The design is inconsistent with the neighborhood, including having a garage placed af the front
of the property, will not support.
■ Noted that the garage is at the front of the property due to grading that occurred on the properfy
previously.
■ Wishes the front door were more prominent, but can accept the design as presenfed.
Chair Cauchi called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 3-2-0-2
(Commissioners Auran and Cauchi dissenting, Commissioners Lindstrom and Yie absent). Appeal
procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:46 p.m.
0
City of Burlingame Planning Department SC 1 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org
�� CITY p
4 �
Bl1RLINGAME
�� : qm
$».
Type of application
Project address:
APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Design Review � Conditional Use Permit Variance
Special Permit Other Parcel Number:
�� .
Z � ��
APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER
Name: ..� �-�- � Name: Yvr�+ �--e,Z-�—C-
Address: �U'�"- �' � G_ - . �- � Address: �, � , ���� ,
City/State/Zip: � � �. �{p��:.�ity/State/Zip: r� 1 � � �
Phone (w): �.? � � , � (o Phone (w): (a • �0 Z�
(h):
��:��1,�. - �►� �'
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
Name: �C�- rte.�
Address: "5� V� t;i � C�tV��,�_'�
City/State/Zip:
Phone (w):
(h):
i� �-
(h):
(�: 65c�.3Q�. ��Da
Please indicate with an asterisk *
the contact person for this project.
� m �1_i�� ��,�s s
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: /��ill�% ��5177�ijvL�
AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information
given herein is true and corre 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 Cornmission. F� '
,�''�����-�- � ��� 0 �
Property owner's signature: " � �'� � ' ��� Date: � � �
�
—�---_.__.�;,:��—�—
Date submitted:
PCAPP.FRM
City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlin�ame.org
r' � g : �,
�
�i��,+�,�,_''�.. �
CITY OF BURLINGAME
SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION !
DeLI����� Ne� qti-�- En�zlo�
�l
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.
1. Explain why the blend of rriass, 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.
,SL� y-�-T�
r��^' � �-
2. Explain how 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
arttl neighborhood.
3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines
adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)? �
9. Explain how the renioval of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or
addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What
mitigation is proposed for the remova[ of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is
appropriate.
SPECPERM.FRM
Attachment A
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR
Declining Height
1452 Drake Avenue
The mass, scale, and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction
are consistent with the existing street and neighborhood. There is no existing
home on this site. There are a wide variety of houses on the street (in terms of
style, mass, scale etc...) and the proposed house will fit in. The site characteristics
(down sloping lot) create the need for a declining height permit for this project,
and this is consistent with the house next door (to the Northeast) which also
required the same special permit
2. The rooflines, fa�ade, materials, and elevations of the proposed house and garage
are different from, but not inconsistent with, the neighborhood and street. There is
no existing structure on the site. The proposed materials and detailing form a rich
combination, with natural wood siding, natural lime plaster, and consistent accent
features. The elevations all include a significant amount of articulation with wall
offsets and varied roof forms. The house is very low for a two story structure, and
has greater than required side setbacks, but due to the down sloping lot it still
encroaches into the declining height envelope.
3. 1. The architectural style is compatible with the character of the neighborhood.
2. The attached garage being proposed is appropriate for this site.
3. See items 1 and 2 above for comments about style, mass and bulk.
4. There ts a larger than typica� setback on both sides of this house.
5. A full landscaping plan is being provided, which will be a significant
improvement for the site.
Note: there are specifics about this site that make the declining height
encroachment appear much more severe than it actually is. The point of departure
for a declining height envelope line is taken from the average grade between the
front and rear property lines, ar as is the case here, the front and rear setback
lines. These points are based on what was once there prior to previous
construction that included the installation of the retaining walls that leveled out
this site. If one were to consider a point of departure based on the existing site
topography, it would yield a dramatically different result.
4. No trees are being proposed forrP�IDyu �•
City of Burlingame Planning Department S01 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlin ag me.org
r� CITY �
� �
BURLINGAME
�
��,�
CITY OF BURLINGAME
SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION �
a+4aCHcd C�a�a � �,,d
�as�e w►��.�
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 rec�uest. Please type or write neatly in ink.
Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions.
1. Explain why the blend of mass, scale and dorrainant structura[ characieristics of the new
construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the
existing street and neighborhood.
SL�� �-7~7-�-�1� G�-E��,v7- �
2. Exp[ain how 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.
3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential ctesign guidelines
adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)?
4. Explain how the rerraoval ofany trees located within thefootprint ofany new structure or
addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What
mitigat�on is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is
appropriate.
SPECPERM.PRM
Attachment B
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR
Attached Garage
1452 Drake Ave.
This is a proposal to have a one car attached garage. Attaching the garage provides more
usable interior parking, creates a larger rear yard, and minimizes on-site pavement which
also minimizes storm water run-of£ The severe down sloping lot creates a very difficult
situation for a detached garage, and the house that was previously approved for this site
had the garage sitting way up above natural grade on a series of retaining walls; this
solution eliminates that issue.
The mass, scale, and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction
are consistent with the existing street and neighborhood. There is no existing
home on this site. There are a wide variety of houses on the street (in terms of
style, mass, scale etc...) and the proposed house will fit in. The site characteristics
(down sloping lot) create a situation where the attached garage is the more logical
parking solution.
2. The rooflines, fa�ade, materials, and elevations of the proposed house and garage
are different from, but not inconsistent with, the neighborhood and street. There is
no existing structure on the site. The proposed materials and detailing form a rich
combination, with natural wood siding, natural lime plaster, and consistent accent
features. The elevations all include a significant amount of articulation with wall
offsets and varied roof forms. The attached garage is consistent with the
neighborhood. There are a variety of garage configurations in the neighborhood,
and, due to the down sloping lots, some houses have garages underneath in the
rear.
3. 1. The architectural style is compatible with that of the existing house and
character of the neighborhood.
2. The attached garage being proposed is consistent with the neighborhood.
3. See items 1 and 2 above for comments about style, mass and bulk.
4. There will be minimal impact on neighbaring properties as the garage is set
well back.
5. A full landscaping plan is being provided, which will be a significant
improvement for the site.
2. No trees are being proposed for removal.
1452 Drake Ave. Attachment B
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR BASEMENT WITH CEILING HEIGHT GREATER THAN
6'-6"
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 mass and
scale of the proposal have been manipulated with offsets and 1 1/2-story
features to minimize impact and maximize interest. The proposed
basement has no impact on the mass or scale of the structure.
2. The rooflines, farade, materials, and elevations of the proposal are similar
to that of other houses in the neighborhood. Stucco, wood, etc.... The
roofline is varied and the fa�ade includes numerous offsets and 1 1/2-
story elements to break up the mass. 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 attached garage being proposed is similar to existing patterns and
consistent with the neighborhood.
3. See items 1 and 2 above for comments about style, mass and bulk.
4. The proposed house provides much greater than required side
setbacks.
5. A full landscaping plan is being provided, which will be a significant
improvement for the site.
4. No trees are being removed for this project
� Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
February 4, 2009
❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
X Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
Planning Staff
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for declining height
envelope, attached garage and basement for a new, two-story single
family dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-042-
140
Staff Review:
Basement Comments:
Provide one emergency escape and egress from each sleeping room in the
basement area. Sec. 1026.1. On the plans provide details for the window well as
required by Sec. 1025 and for the required ladder access from this area as
described in Sec. 1026.5 Provide complete details for a guardrail around this
opening at grade level.
All other comments as noted on the review dated 9-26-08 apply.
Reviewed by:
;
�---
�� �
� ��=�� ._- �
-�
Date:
���/��
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
September 25, 2008
❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
X Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for attached garage
and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family
dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-042-140
Staff Review: September 29, 2008
1) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2007 California Building Codes (CBC).
2) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business
license.
3) Provide fully dimensioned plans.
4) Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines.
5) 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.
6) Comply with the 2005 California Energy Efficiency Standards for low-rise residential / non-
residential buildings. Go to http://www.enerqy.ca.qov/title24 for publications and details.
7) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the property line.
8) On the p�ans specify that the roof eaves will not project within two feet of the property line.
9) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that
complies with the egress requirements. Specify the size and location of all required egress
windows on the elevation drawings. Note: The area labeled "Dem/Office" is a room that can be
used for sleeping purposes and, as such, must comply with this requirement.
10) 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.
11) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers.
12) Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
13) The fireplace chimney must terminate at least two feet higher than any portion of the building
within ten feet. Sec. 2113.9
Reviewed �� �`' Date: �e.2 /B /�� �
Project Comments
Date:
�
From:
September 25, 2008
�( City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
.
Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for attached garage
and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family
dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-042-140
Staff Review: September 29, 2008
1. See attached.
2. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works —
Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information.
3. This project is subject to the City policy to maximize the planter strip. The new
sidewalk is required to be constructed to the property line and transition to the
existing sidewalks on both adjacent properties. Both the site and landscape
plans need to be revised to meet this requirement.
Reviewed by: V V
Date: 10/16/2008
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS � � ��
Project Name• �� �'�"�j� nw'�'u-iw'
Project Address: '��� 1���. ��
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.) --�,,�,� �� ,�,�,��5 -�:a �� �< ��-p r�,�•,r�
yt-��� �y �-r�1�- ut�..�sL� �u� ����iv� c-�a:c�2.
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. 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 �� sa�nitary sewer lateral td�i 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 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.
Page 1 of 3
U:\private 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
U:\private development\PLANNING REVIEW CONIMENTS.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
U:\private development�PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.doc
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
February 4, 2009
Cl City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
� Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
a City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
d Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for declining height
envelope, attached garage and basement for a new, two-story single
family dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-042-
140
Staff Review:
Comments remain the same...
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 protectian lines.
3. 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: ���0? Date: g
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
September 25, 2008
O City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
d Fire Marshal
(650) 558- 7600
O City Arbarist
(650) 558-7254
Planning Staff
� NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for attached garage
and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family
dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-042-140
Staff Review: September 29, 2008
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. 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: Y��..__ � _-
Date: �4 a�'
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
September 25, 2008
� City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
� Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
� City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
� Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
� Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
✓ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for attached garage
and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family
dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-042-140
Staff Review: September 29, 2008
Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City's
NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution from construction
activities. Project proponent shall ensure all contractors implement Best
Management Practices (BMPs) during construction.
Include a list of BMPs and erosion and sediment control measure plan as project
notes when submitting plans for a building permit. Please see attached brochures
for guidance.
�_ �,
Reviewed by: �� � Date: 09/29/2008
�� ��
, ;T
,, � s«��,�,.,
- zro��„«o�,r��a,�,o,,,�N�
�
,����
�� ' d `' �-a
;�_
:, :
� ��: �
,:,Y *
General �'"��
Construction
8c Site Supervision
JSch�W � anon md aaNe .a�,;nn r. e�y
. �h P�nmrt. o � ¢.vpo
'n�� po p e reeosoacaotlolsCe(m<
!n A . . _ry ����
0. Q nb' � PrnWz.
JC I�! [ N
� w
�n kW�:e e�wll'veloe
� ry. , eek0amaoeW.�mswnrn �
J �mo yfwr cmploY<cs md wMovtracbn. .N
. <i � �.k�n .
�teLJv wl- n��W..aew
Pcrmuarn'tt�NlrHrcu6uAW r29+n¢ a.
�ooe m�t�r+na wx�
JDesiSonr we compktety M a far
] �b,�ei6i� fi�ci' d
- .�a,:�e �v� �,
�msMa�a�o.s.�aam� ��a�en�;
vyMs3auw�orrepwv �
JA�cep�a�eHalio L f h p
L C �ve�vit� o
w - o ww �U Pln',a�.wwti�b��r f
rnry fs.
J�'c o uvumn oa cxw� �en_ rlara inxA causs
'J -a�c '.wouu��'�e
JDry eweey Pa•N surf thnt �4wn ro��w ��:un.
. k. . f�e' f �. 1
I: �W� Ln� .. .. - a��
lluuuw
JClau uP IeaYn, dnp o�La apilix �mmedix2lY.�
aaidW; o a.M �wfms Uec dry ilum ocOw�N
<.Ifyou wc�er ry
R K� h i4�J�>hwsstuu �u�s.
�co a� a�,u cc�e�.n � r
i.,r i� a.� .. r. .: m i„p.
�N
] AluO.Iwe�s�+ca�nukaWWercvm
i�g f qn .?Ic.c. clu� wt v Aimpnv by
s� M Pn We wvsmetian u.<.
IFiu< zive pmable � d- ood
.+ohi�ardnM��o � -
� uy�a�.tt�.�rpr.yer <Te<km ea .w� . Wr
Wc
wr�ls'w-ane Wudting
l�Pncnm swr.e. mAuct '�mi.e wxcrt wnen
yU Ncr matmak. Y n Y ��M
�ob.
iu...m�a.e���u,; �nrv,mr.am.�
bco� �w o['ee�rJabk wm�.0 wcb � covnne �
��I.ur.pmcmlm en�dcpea.an�.<Icvr�vcg
per r.st aud �eti.la ouwieavrce �uatenals
asusW a� �wC5�.z..bonc.r
lDtqrox ot a0 wuicn mE Eemoll!too 0 �eln pmperly.
41mvc avd.. -r,Mrxvv.� ,
4inp ml eoR �a�e�bav� Pwtfi��e„i�e N����r 1e
br' keu � P5ei�:w�l wu�.�ren. woul. a�W clweu v�:e�v-
,
,�-„ imaeu � .. a t
u.,�w� � �. am t a. o. i�.�
�Lrn N We s�mc� or nwr e creek or wream bed.
Stormwater Pollution Frevention Program
Pollution Prevention — It's Part of the Plar�
It is your responsibility to do the job right!
Ruuoff from streets and othec pavad azcas is a major source of pollution ui 1oca1 creeks, San Francisco 13ay and tha Pacific Oceau.
Consrtuction aeeivities can directly affect the health ofour waters unless contractors and crews ptan ahead to keep dirt, debns, and other
constniction waste away from storm drains anci creeks. F'ol lowing these guidelines will ensure your compliance with local stonnwater
ordinanee requirements. Remcmber, ongoin� monitoring ac�dmaintenance of installed controls is erucial to proper implementation.
Heavy Earth-Moving Roadwork & Paving F resh Conerete Painting & Application
Equip�ent Activiti�s 8c :Vlortar Apglication of Solvents & Adhesives
Operation �� �.��� -
�s
��
h'G.3 �y�"i0
' �� f � I
O �I r+a� �, �� `„` ,
T� �' �''�'`�' ! t%�el
. . W�Q�wpewea�ros�w'ztl�. �ewrrolF�aazlec
- roadwas���s¢.
J SchM�J<auvmor� ane srv.fin'twohlwM' u.e�0er. . .
tMmg Co¢munlon ! tl�x vii imn�.mi.v� fori�asr u��:rM�r IcakmS WwPmem I KCN stl �W+d Daio�'Pmdwys mG wss�ea amaY from
J uuv e.wwLL4 reb�L �u� uWY w'wu ilariwclY uwce Oru n�t'r. Gkeeeal Bivinea Rauo-eu t6e E+nni rtm.e4 aM nmm E.. .�- ndues fion.
JP�r(�ammymm� �estinpufcawr tl3dhatyrvey . u 1'n ..yLmuNvimu�f.uivarz
�bwJw� lwJ�LryaiJx � �k � 1�( � b.sardoux tessA be �sW�ot abavuMuc
SlaPlam<v�an0ymvmOreveNciamamfnmce IS . !'Le ��Wi�� 'eqwt " b ��Lwl�uwL , a�.�v..6��.:w�.. e�� "ryic.on<i lswmi..aer
iixNaa�.. ��oP �oroo„ �ioro,wnuz�� w.00.����� i<yn �wi wm �a�� ���„iv��,.a.�.,n �. m'� p,.t„o�'�
u a��ia� y�o �� �z� n-s a>a a., k.� �
d � fu Ing vnd�vunn� JY . 4.Ime.1 .. .. . JDpnauu�Lvul �. F- wor.�rmaPUPaento� :�p. cun . �h �y4�n��ucn.ew�m Pimnqg�lcanuy
<tiGava�u�pmemmanernevcs. y� 'dbybal. 'd' walea.eil� nGl4eudnnofl. JNa�e�cleaubcuWcaormrepuwiwwainmwwa
e��R,ez�.msw,��mnr�i.�. �rt oo��.�e,moxeaa.sa��m� .�n.c�me�.ro�aa,o,or.�+m
� n�w.�,��i �<m�io�,wh,v, �wc�ha�. �yta s�:-
Sirn�lYtnr�vulrcp .
J ' � � J b and.eluclomd
N B
�u a a
l A � P �
i� i�-t.cn �i. n n:.
n � �c.cicwM1c�cwrPov31. o
1 ri� � oC �.t4 s aa Iwrartlou� wasie.
��o� ��e��i,,,i�„M.�,,,o.wmw�a .o-
J Aac�a c, fim.on �owt�an<z
+� ro � ,mm.d�.dr .aw my a�vF�
♦n�.K�n.Ycoav-m.; va,<�m�.�am��
_.lwkh i. t' Ny I avw aG
b b s a
��o�_ urv��,��� a i < � ��tKp
h< <.�si d�w�.
J ' �4 �elyh u
, m m LN...wN e., W�LIe f. � AW �ow�olry �
! . � � e�T . Yk
ch�Wvti:u�wm.minaud mil.
t ,�s�. � � - - �.
- ��� � <�,.�,ww ..
el] 'gui(iearenNxisn dws � W14
al." eepceta.qp�LLu, e..pow:cgey .e xi
') �II
�c I LveeFexrSeniwNvneg
����.(xtn�852-� sat'_ano�vc)
h �I�"+��h1. JN'aybou � d �
JOse uuktlarwo d�'M1e.mEi.Mmnofta�wM<rsa.x JTaue.up blMYba� p �c..,. ��y�iv �I
�an=�udS�adMmea. '���q�e� �i .h� I . f�.
�
I Co I. I: ni v�iu�m�eA xnil wiM.ttcurc� Nmr m��d . .°� . ""� be k m�vm f Nqw f M1
� ��h 6 JClrvuendunlcatcLbasmsmdmm6olaa�hooepplyivg �4ea 15um' Anm�,d�vied� �eeoraMmn_
J14opeyymariwrmdvuurwuWl.rzuanenAsWuueo� ��_e s,���tuu�M+rt.wi�tee.n�.otr��unil ��C���� a
wv - ' �W' � halrwuctt o�cn�uw[tLauyw�w�ll
�no�w•�rRmnmi � .� asa���ouw. � �*`v �,�n. �>
��Ar .. m.n.i..rai.��ry � � � : t � � .C" JSe��Ovuin�wTn�.ma mxen�mum+��nc�a.veuan
I j o�Cm v.. Nap clotls
�c ���a�ia� oa,�..�.xi�c,��i�w�m
OmaNLNmeu!'reco'rns 1��..P� �G ��ufll a.�uii�.wCwiC lATc 0� d-- ur.'J I.�
I9cLa4kcn.a.Wo,andgr��wor4[m(Lywwwa_ lCnichM 6ompa� � d�� "t d"� d°uu ,� mio
pa - � pvworabsm!<mmaenia �v'vindu�auewu�v��.�.
lTuYurmmrj.un�n�nc r xuav mmrhe�rl�iie «� 'K""� � ��k `�°
��»n - JClcai�oo�WW avika4 wR`d�' mnh . usv. JN 1-RF ' L' .ii�z. :
�wcmar tiocm �.w�•w�w�m���,wa�u �n�*..o��,.,�� � �s�). .meo�,�a�o�wo� n,�e. a, : .,m m, m�
�
xao�zo�rrewma�,���,�mry.o �.,,. r �ci_ .�e-wr=�a+�v�omaivm.�uaraa,s °„�.•'�'"�myn���oan
wu.n.rw�ll.w.. A. J Ea-bn�s .1a �.
Jp�xuw.�za.lv .�bi�.ii.�.k�m4�+�0 a�� J. ulo.r.eVL- )a.�r�nx.k�nrfuuiauna . � .���.« r 4nm�..�cw
, � . ., i � w., u a.'t � . . � .
AMrh to tlf eedWahtl R�dvatu tbet m9 M cam A��'l('a^ncrc Rawvl
�� J. o�en e«asauaun.imc.tin% F� or.ou J ..�y-�e . ... � � e�.
mdwocv�heReri.i:�alNSu.�R�..y ovc Wwd. .•.: l:VI�.Lr�W.�F+�. 1 p .w4A��;w:rorv�o.a�aP awcrsWxP•w..-�..
IMak brvtr n-�e ea a.um.i�emern¢naitl JRar�icluAe tuN: Rb�k u..w..<ea.aLWvll.
w'eLLs�NrtnuWlazils nt�VwuaN� JPnvana�� em x.5ho ,�.a�wyemsh uo cx.vav�Y.wer.e .b^wt_
. awm e,no s, aa��;,�. w ��n. �� sa� �w �wry awos m.m��rnb� �o�n me
JN.�c�W.�w- ��..w.,wv��u+mw
! ` ... vkrxu: cvtv . .4, p �m.Yd �..Ux �l:y
n vm��cWOM.
Storm drain polluters may be liable for fines of up to $25,000 per day±
Landscaping,
Gazdening,
and Pool Maintenance
�
JI4�aa«I�JRauAtaMw� �ufvid
r e.swN�e�e�wx�.�o�,«.,av�w�w..u�e.
�s��_vud� �� � .��,�,�aW�.,,.
,�.�em �.��,��.
�¢.ww�y.ar�a,�c<.w���� m,r
JTv.lun�wrr smA etndrrnnnnF1'rvw�y
!k Lae - �p' b�Le� iLe ��.�i� '�.
bl . Rwc ro �. � h� d
. ry l d ' M1 � . . . �u
. o � d � . u��iwi � .
J M�AP .N .F. Me ou
� . �
r�i � n � � n awiv .n- . ;r.:u ��
� � . , .W ..�� ����ir.
I�n� chi� Eusl t. nm �on bi�nNous Ly skiOPtaB
aM aand b aeimfi maY kr�vcp! vp m w�cuea.o FAasc�c
dmp �bWs mG NSWxa o[aa tras�
J fAmicm a�� pai 'pp' aue.mn chips avC d�,u�
➢� p� nwng q0 m mb:ql
nn m..� h� ivT�.ud ef u IuraMm�s e-aa�<s.
J Il mpp �Owtdwg � �ILtiaA
. . . kaiv� M�sG
w.�a:rclsl`aG �n w..�r.�ix�! �
:wNu - �tl �'f ovaucoJc<fma�ac
. Sl. LI Wk- ' h e+V
s�aa�r .etoww..�lMn�riocaLvg�a��iv�on.
J Na�me e�n ��� ���
1
��WeY. � .Y �w . . ussa1P
ecA Emp. aNs cma bc Ci.¢�osed of ss ear
c,s�� as,am�uomm.
JReveg ch �oo �x av ucelirn� Parm uf emeion cu� vol tor
t,a nma�c ,�aan n✓.
� � �aw ar � v� a
�.(m..ne.rtn,M1�.mcA °6�rr� t. WqcalMu�J
J spose�- pe � _ . .
�Nu- % �� � w �e�u
m . l �p ���a.�.vry.au�wwfua�.
✓no ��, i � - . t -o
.w .. ... ^ -,. r ,o,,
� p � � g � �-� . , �
la a �vo.Ll. da cu rarJ w.�a1c.�
J W not Dloa or rek� ura, ttc �om M� avaet.
P U£m6w$p M'
✓rurualraui •'•..rs , . . f.....<..� e
J vJFc rmpp�� y. pnol x ryx I Fl ' �. �e fow> n�
'/Jey:.ib�v�cwic.rtabYy� 0. R P
�� �.,,� m� m� eewa�ue we.r� m..m�
Aain
JNusse �-pa�Wytnt:flispose teecez tiq�ud Jenimmn azcmav�e ceuredw
�o�lu�LnB � .� �a�du�sw . eece m[f�m:dMN.IK m�v]M
sl��d�ey � ' .un.ninynWctuo�ebrysinl-�x�.wv.�:iw �.vn�uiunc
J>mn nsbm�lUCGec Ne>xnMavo nu��.
n�.ryl'mo��..�mm�talrtoi�n�rnso�rc�snf�ng�¢cYcling
f
nbar�nmv.iresv.Alaproa�. . llbootuwmppa-bvaod�ipcMaCoio-�l-lyyxi0
- Pu�DawOPo�et'nil�
� � a.� - n. d, ne �� cocce���, e�nu m.w+h� ��r ma w�a ee
oa �-cnw� w;m is.�.om ,,,�s� w-� ro�y- �mm�iemq,emo.w cr �n. vw.s� na.m��� u�,o�.
���a aa;oy.
WHY SHOULD WB WORRY ABOUT SOIL EROSION?
— . � � �
Water and wind carry soil from our Bay Area Iand down into our
streams, Iakes and the Bay. This soil carries with it pollu-
tants such as oi1 and grease, chemicals, fertilizers, animal
wastes and bacteria, which threaten our water quality.
Such erosion also costs the home construction industry, local
government, and the homeowner untold mi�ions of dollars
a year.
Nature slowly wears away Iand, but human activities such ,
construction increase the rate of erosion 200, even 2,000 tim�
that amount. When we remove vegetation or other objects th
hold soil in place, we expose it to the action of wind and wat
and inaease its chances of eroding.
The loss of soil from a construction site results in Ioss of topsc
minerals and nutrients, and it causes ugly cuts and gullies in tI
Iandscape. Surface runoff and the materials it carries w'rth it cIc
our culverts, fIood channels and streams. Sometimes it destro�
wildlife and damages recreational areas such as Iakes and r
servoirs.
As an example, road and home building in the Oakland hill
above Lake Temescal f1led the Iake to such an extent that it ha�
to be dredged in 1979 at a public cost of $750,000.
NEED MORE INFORMATION?
ABAG has produced a slide/tape show on soil erosion
called "Money Down the Drain." It is available for showing
to any interested group. Ca1I ABAG Public Affairs at (415)
841-9730.
ABAG has also published a"Manual of Standards for Sur-
face Runoff Control Measures" which deals extensively
with designs and practices for erosion prevention, sedi-
ment control, and control of urban runoff. The manual
addresses problems and solutions as they apply tc
California and the Bay Area. It can be purchased from
ABAG and is available on reference at many Iocal Iibraries
and in city and county public works and planning depart-
ments.
USDA Soi1 Conservation Service personnel are willing to
provide more information on specifc erosion problems.
This brochure is a cooperative proJect of the Association of
Bay Area Governments and the East Bay Regional Park
District.
ASSOC���i�ON
OF BAr REn
GOVERNMEN?S
Hotel Claremont
Berkeley, Caiifornia 94705
(415) 841-9730
PRO�EC�ING
EAST BAY REGIONAL
PARK DISTRICT
11500 Skyline Blvd.
Oakland, CA 94619
531-9300
YovR
PRO PER�Y
�ROM
ER�SION
EROSION CONTROL CAN PROTECT
YOUR PROPER?Y AND PREVENT
FUTURE HEADACHES
_ _ ,i
V¢getation-stabiliz¢d Bare Slope: Headaches
)(�) r� Slop¢: Security and Liability
J� i� ((;��� • soil in place • mudsIide danger
• minimum of • loss of topsoil
��� erosion • clogged storm `•'•
�� ��� • fewer winter clean- drains, flooding ,�,�k�
�/ � up problems problems .
� • protection for • expensive � �'•�•,•'
i� house foun- cleanup �r�'���'
� �dations • eroded or •
��, buried house '��•�
1 % i�/ foundations �
�`
I �j/�,(�,� '::��,ti� �.�,t'f f c:Y; .
�/�//�� `} �,� ='•� �`� �r
�1 ( t ` sn� . �,��' 't .�` `+3=a-
��� .i;. ��. .
/ ,t,y ���; ,
,o, , f.• '•� _ - . , •
,� .. . ...
TIPS FOR THE HOMEOWNE�
%���
��
� ;�
"Wiaterize" your property by mid-September. Don't
wait until spring to put in Iandscaping. You need
winter protection. Fina1 Iandscaping can be done
Iater.
Inexpensive measures installed by fall will give you
protection quickly that will Iast aI1 during the wet
season.
In one afternoon you can:
• Dig trenches to drain surface runoff water away
from problem areas such as steep, bare slopes.
• Prepare bare areas on slopes for seeding by raking
the surface to Ioosen and roughen soil so it will
hold seeds.
% �.
t .i
�
Seediag of bare slopes
• Hand broadcast or use a"breast seeder." A typical
yard can be done in Iess than an hour.
• Give seeds a boost with fertilizer.
• Mulch if you can, with grass clippings and Ieaves,
bark chips or straw.
• Use netting to hold soil and seeds on steep slopes.
• Check with your Ioca1 nursery for advice.
► �
Winter alert
� Check before storms to see that drains and ditches
are not clogged by Ieaves and rubble.
� Check after major storms to be sure drains are clear
and vegetation is holding on slopes. Repair as
necessary.
� Spot seed any bare areas.
WHAT YOU CAN DO TO
CONTROL BROSION
AND PRO?ECT
YOUR PROPERTY
Soil erosion costs Bay Area homeowners millions of do1-
Iars a year. We Iose valuable topsoil. We have to pay for
damage to roads and property. And our tax money has to
be spent on cleaning out sediment from storm drains,
channels, Iakes and the Bay.
You can protect your prop-
erty and prevent future
headaches by following
these guidelines:
BEFORE AND -
DURIN�
CONSTRUCTION
• PIan construction activities during spring and summer,
so that erosion control measures can be in place when
the rain comes.
• Examine your site carefully before building. Be aware of
the slope, drainage patterns and soil types. Proper site
design will help you avoid expensive stabilization work.
Preserve existing vegeta-
tion as much as possible.
Limit grading and plant
removaI to the areas
under current construc-
tion. (Vegetation wi11
naturally curb erosion,
improve the appearance
and the value of your
property, and reduce the
cost of landscaping Iater. )
• Use fencing to protect plants from fill material and traffic.
If you have to pave near trees, do so with permeable as-
phalt or porous paving blocks.
• Preserve the natural contours of the Iand and disturb the
earth as Iittle as possible. Limit the time in which graded
areas are exposed.
• Minimize the Iength and
steepness of slopes by
benching, terracing, or
- constructing diversion
-�`=� structures. Landscape
' benched areas to stabilize
. the slope and improve its
appearance.
• As soon as possible after grading a site, plant vegetation
on all areas that are not to be paved or otherwise
covered.
• Control dust on graded areas by sprinkling with water,
restricting traffc to certain routes, and paving or gravel-
ing access roads and driveways.
?EMPORARY MEASURES TO
STABILIZB THE SOIL
Grass provides the
cheapest and most ef-
fective short-term ero-
sion control. It grows
quickly and covers the
ground cosnpletely. To
fnd the best seed mix-
tures and plants for
your area, check with
your Iocal nursery, the
U.S. Department ofAg-
riculture Soil Conserva-
tion Service, or the
University of California
Cooperative Extension.
Mulches hold soil rnoisture and provide ground protection
from rain damage. They also provide a favorable envi-
ronment for starting and growing plants. Easy-to-obtain
mulches are grass clippings, leaves, sawdust, bark chips
and straw
Straw mulch is nearly 100% effective when held in place by
spraying with an organic glue or wood fiber (tackifiers), by
punching it into the soil with a shovel or roller, or by tack-
ing a netting over it.
Commercial applications of
wood fbers combined with ,. ...
various seeds and fertilizers
(hydraulic mulching) are effec-
: . ... .
:. :5�;. .:. _° ",i . ! :;
tive in stabilizing sloped areas. ;::; .
.;.., .. . . . ; . -.
Hydraulic mulching with a �� ' ''
tackifer should
be done in two
- . _...-.. :
,,
separate appli- ' • ' "
cations: the first y � �
composed of seed fertilizer and half the mulch, tfie second
composed of the remaining mulch and tackifier. Commer-
cial hydraulic mulch applicators—who also provide other
erosion control services — are Iisted under "Iandscaping" in
the phone book.
_._-.__-�---
t
'�� � � �- F ,:
_ -. .-� ..
_ _ ' ' �:�'"'�r}
Mats of excelsior, jute netting and plastic sheets can be ef-
fective temporary covers, but they must be in contact with
the soil and fastened securely to work effectively.
Roof dsaiaage can be collected in barrels or storage con-
tainers or routed into lawns, planter boxes and gardens.
Be sure to cover stored water so you don't collect rnos-
quitos, too. Excessive runoff should be directed away from
your house. Too much water can damage trees and make
foundations unstable.
STRUCTURAL RUNOFF CON?ROLS
Even with proper timing and planting, you may need to
protect disturbed areas from rainfall until the plants have
time to establish themselves. Or you may need permanent
ways to transport water across your property so that it
doesn't cause erosion.
To keep water from carrying soil from your site and dump-
ing it into nearby lots, streets, streams and channels, you
need ways to reduce its volume and speed. Some exam-
ples of what you might use are:
perimeter dike
jute netting
� �
diversion di�
bench
/
straw mulch
• Riprap (rock Iining) — to
protect channel banks
from erosive water fIow
• Sediment trap—to
stop runoff carrying
sediment and trap the
sediment
�:.: :: .
�
�"�
� P
• Storm draia outle
protectioa—to reduc�
the speed of water fIow
ing from a pipe onto
open ground or into a
natural channel
• Diversion dike or perimet¢r dike — to divert excess
water to places where it can be disposed of properly
- �-.
�.',:,, ,`� �- � ... �� � ,�.,.,�
ti.-,, ^-. ""
�t � �
��` �.} � ` y� � _
� ' �
� .r,��-,. ` �� ' - -
_ — z � � �: ,...�.
_ �,a,�
• Straw bale dike—to stop and detain sediment from
sma11 unprotected areas
(a short-term measure)
• Perim¢t¢r swale — to divert
runoff from a disturbed area ;:., f,.`::.�,-t-,.:>j ,-:,�-
or to contain runoff w'rthin
<;:;"t;;;.>.
'`-;:;:;:::;;<::;::.,: ::
;;�;:,;�'.�:-��:;;:>:.`<::,::�r:� `�
a disturbed area _ ..... ., . , .. . ... .
• Grade stabilization structure — to carry concentrated
runoff down a slope
sediment trap
_ `— o
� o� �.
� � <-� _
outlet protectio�
,����E�i�����i1 ,�Ir,r
�
�' Conservahee
�
� Nf►GHBORHOOD FRONT ELEVAl/DNS
J SCALE: AI�S
_��>
a
��' '� � ; ., ,.,
a- , a . 'q�r'�.� n�
� y� ^ � �
u.
� lt� �
P,.<&_ 4 �*. ' � ::'yi1
.. wiJ�°w.... . .
� . � � '� t '� � �r
I �� ��"' �y ��
� g "`
�� + � � � � '�'-.
. ;'�.� �� � 'I� � et �:
View away from L�ft Side rard
. � ��s
�O' C`� y:'C �'�s/n
M�I�s Qenirsula 82 F k�
Hospitas �' �'a
�Pt a� '�a,r� '�'dl�ga ra a c
�, v +� ��,f
�'a.� ���' �n ���,
c� d pr.
�'a�. �. �
g� �di� � �'�,� a��r
u,�oA �t ,���Q .,p� b}�Q.
� p�a �°' ���, 82 Q�'
��L`�r �'�rs h'd�l�� fii�, ,�Az
h''a � �,
py� <,��� y �O 8,���� ay � �a�c sz
9� ��,o �$y � �ay ��di �� �
��� �}� � �
� ' Y` �`pl Y'B'9* � ��V`
�Ona �°` R�y .�„rp �
0�, "d���c� kY �"ay `�e
e o
02
�'�bLdy ,,�n
Q �l
i
e Q.� s+
3 `L dr
{{`b� �l{ �G �fi19
Q �P�� 9VC
c
N �4yP
a
c�,�^�
� �r
� �yr
k
� �
��
�q� �
��lt5s_
y'�n„
0
GLe
��U
o�
���
c4` 9YN
�
Ytr �ory
Pd
��P
c �d�,rrb ��
.� �.
d`G
�SUBJECT
PROPERTY
�_pfi�!'¢ ye �a��iYlJ�.
O T+{�' . 9`�
e,� ...
Arcbit�ot,r
205 Paik Road, Stite 203
Bwiingeme, Califomia 94010
FAX 650.579.01 I S
650.574.5762
E-M�1: admindfrgazrh.com
Architect
�
r.�iooux
m�v+�
• UII.772 t
F7� 1 ,�$'
�F G�1�
�„'�'A:G�C^�N'..; �. M°..'�°�.'�Cw^,:^
..,..,. . ... �. .., �:.' Y'� :.,... .. .
Coneultant(s):
Project Tide:
G/NGKO
RESIDENCE
New Residence
APN: 026-042-f40
1452 Drake Avenue
Burlingame, CA
Owner(s):
6ingko, LLC
sheat conteats:
PNOTOS
S��te ASNO'fID
Drwm by
C6«kedBy�. TRG
]ob
Due�. 19�SbF'f-0A
Strtu� DD
REVISIONS
� SIDE YARDS AS SEEN FROM STREEl �,� VICIN/TY M/1 P �,K
L 8CALE: MiB �
SCALE: NTS
1460 Drake �9ve- Left Xeighbor
1456 Drake Ave- Left Neighbor
Subject Property - 1�952 Drake Avenue
1448 Drake Ave- RigM Neighbor
1444 Drake Ave- Right Neighbor
View towards Aight Side 1'ard
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW
AND SPECIAL PERMITS
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 and Special Permits for declining height envelope, attached qaraqe and
basement for a new, two-story sinqle family dwelling with an attached garage and basement at
1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, Ginkgo Burlinaame LLC, property owner, APN: 026-042-140;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
February 23, 2009, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written
materials and testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that:
On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and
comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is
no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on
the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19, Section: 15303 (a),
which states that construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures
including one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone is
exempt from environmental review. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family
residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption, is exempt from
environmental review.
2. Said Design Review and Special Permits are approved subject to the conditions set forth
in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review and Special Permits are
set forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said meeting.
3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official
records of the County of San Mateo.
Chairman
I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby
certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission held on the 23rd day of February, 2009 by the following vote:
Secretary
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption, Design Review and Special Permits.
1452 Drake Avenue
Effective March 5, 2009
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division
date stamped January 30, 2009, sheets A1.1, A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, A3.1, A3.2 and L-1;
2. that the shower stall in the basement shall only be allowed in conjunction with a sauna in
the basement and shall be built to the size, configuration and location as shown on the
Basement Plan, sheet A2.0; that any changes to the size, configuration or location of the
shower stall shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission review; that if the
sauna is not built as part of the project a shower stall shall not be allowed in the
basement;
3. that if the sauna is ever removed or eliminated in the future, the shower stall shall also
be removed or eliminated along with the sauna;
4. 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 staff);
5. 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;
6. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 9, 2009 and September 26,
2008 memos, the City Engineer's October 16, 2008 memo, the Fire Marshal's February
9, 2009 and September 29, 2008 memos, and NPDES Coordinator's September 29,
2008 memos shall be met;
7. 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;
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 Categorical Exemption, Design Review and Special Permits.
1452 Drake Avenue
Effective March 5, 2009
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 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;
12. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform
Fire Codes, 2007 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:
13. 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;
14. that 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
Department; and
16. 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.
. GTY OF BURLINGAME
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD -
�' � BURLINGAME, CA 94010 r' �,�,��.� � .
��' �' ' PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 6���790!- ~� ' �
s � � `�
- www.burlingame.org = '°°'�"` �
�= ��
__ �x �� ��
�_�. �$ � �.� �w
u
S�te: 1 ��� DRAKE AVENUE
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the
following publie hearing an NIONDAY, FEBRUARY 23,
2009 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501
Primrose Rond, Burlingame, CA;
Application far Design Review and Special Permits for
basement, declining height envelope and attached garage
for a new, two-story single family dwelling at 1452
DRAKE AYENUE zoned R�lo APN 026-042-140
Mailed: February 13, �009
(Please refer to other side)
� � ��
���L1�.��`§�
;� ��,��.���
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE
Citv of �urlir►,aame
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
PUBLIG FIEARII1IG NOTICE
(Please refer to other side)
x�r
�� '' ` �� �` e �.
� � � � ��
� d �
. � � �� � � ��..
�
�� ���� � �� �` �� "� �%�
� � � x, ,�7
�' ��: �� , �`
�� ,� ���� � ����
�
�.� ����'� ; h�� �r`� ���
�� � t�;� �� � ��
�z a.;`��;'. ����.�> �;. � r �� ���
4�y ikre
�� .
�a�
;� .
WS: ,
� �
� :
t >' _
..��'�.1�.�
m
�� � � �
� �� {,
�: �,
� ���
�
�
� ��
�� � � � � �,
a� � � �,p�
� � � � �"���
� ��� �
, i, `
� �" � � ��
� 4 .�
�� ��' v�"a,
�V �
�
� J�
�� �,� �
....a.m w , .
--�---�--�- -
�' � � �
` �+, -�?
`� �� �
� �;
�� � � � ,
!.. '�
� � ��a
� .: f �., � ��� .�.
�fj � . �"�p �
� � ��
,,,�; � �: _ �a
. �� .� � � �� °� � . `�`
�� ` � n
� �� , � �� �
,� ``,' �,� , , �� �� ��` � ��_
�,,� � w•'� �.,� ����' ��
'`�� � �.
,'«c `• ' +� � . a ., . . .,, x.. • .; . . .... e . .
� ��
� ��-
i' � '�`�m�„�
,�„ ,.
i
��
r
��,
.�',�.�� .�.
� a:
� �
T
�"
�;,