HomeMy WebLinkAbout1511 Drake Avenue - Staff Report�7
Item No. a� '��:
Regular Action
PROJECT LOCATION
1511 Drake Avenue
City of Burlingame
Design Review and Variances
�i
Item No. �-
Regular Action
Address: 1511 Drake Avenue Meeting Date: November 22, 2010
Request: Design Review and Variances for floor area ratio and covered parking space width for conversion
of lower level crawl space to habitable space and other improvements to an existing single family
dwelling.
Applicant and Architect: John Matthews APN: 026-033-080
Property Owners: Jon and Kate Herstein Lot Area: 6,000 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 15301 (e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, which
states that additions to existing structures are exempt from environmental review, provided the addition
will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition.
Project History: On June 6, 2005 the previous property owner applied for a building permit for a 478 SF first
floor addition (over a crawl space with a maximum ceiling height of 5'-6") to the rear of the existing house. On
July 28, 2005, the Planning Department approved the single story addition with conditions, noting that
residential design review was not required because the crawl space below the addition had a proposed
ceiling height between 5'-1 '/2" and 5'-6", and that that this area would not be counted in the floor area
calculation. A building permit was issued for this project on August 5, 2005. In order to be clear on what was
approved, the following conditions of the approval were applied to the building permit:
1. "Crawl space under master bedroom can be no taller than 5'-6" to bottom of master bedroom".
2. "Crawl space shall not be developed as living space or any thing other than crawl space without
review by the Planning Department".
A code enforcement complaint was filed that the proposed addition was not being built according to the
approved plans and the Building Department sent out an inspector in January of 2006 to measure the plate
height of the as-built "crawl space" area. After confirmation from both the Building Inspector and the previous
property owner that the "crawl space" area was, in fact, built with a plate height of 8'-1 ", a red tag was issued
on the project. Because of the change to the below-floor area to "habitable space", this area would now be
considered a"story" for zoning code purposes, and the addition above would be considered a second story.
It was then determined by both the Planning and Building Departments that in order to move forward with the
project, the previous property owner would need to either:
1. Apply for design review for a first and second story addition; or
2. Fill, with concrete, the entire new lower level addition area off the rear of the house so that it has a
maximum ceiling height/plate height of 5'-11" and therefore will not be counted as habitable living
space.
The previous property owner then decided to fill, with concrete, the entire new lower level addition area to a
ceiling height of 5'-11 ". This decision was based on the fact that if all of the new lower level addition were
counted as living space, the addition would exceed the maximum allowable FAR and a variance would have
been required. A Building Permit was issued for the concrete fill in February, 2006.
On September 29, 2006, the Building Department sent a letter to the previous property owner indicating that a
code enforcement complaint was made regarding work in progress without permits. An inspector visited the
site, observed that work was being done without permits and another red tag was issued on the project.
On October 11, 2006, the Building Department sent a letter to the previous property owner stating that during
a site visit, it was observed that the approved concrete fill had been removed and replaced with a raised
plywood floor which was covered with linoleum. It was also noted that the work done had been performed
without the benefit of building permits or Planning Department review. The Building Department gave the
, De�;"gn Review and Variances 1510 Drake Avenue
previous property owner two options which needed to be resolved by October 23, 2006:
1. Submit a building permit application and three sets of plans that describe how you will remove the
raised wood floor and install reinforced concrete that will limit the ceiling height to 5'-11 "; or
2. Apply to the Planning Commission for review of the underfloor area as new conditioned floor space
(this would trigger the need for design review).
On October 16, 2006, the previous property owner submitted another application to fill the entire "crawl
space" area with both concrete and rebar to a point that the crawl space would have a maximum ceiling
height of 5'-11" and therefore would no longer count towards the floor area calculation or count as a"story".
The Planning Department included a condition of approval on this project stating that all concrete and rebar
fil� may not be removed from the crawl space area of the house without an approval for Design Review and a
Variance for floor area ratio. A Building Permit for this concrete and rebar fill was issued on November 21,
2006.
On October 30, 2006 the previous property owner submitted an application for Design Review to the Planning
Department to pursue the option to use that space as a"media room". With this application the property
owner proposed to fill in a portion of the "media room" with concrete to a ceiling height of 5'-11 ", so that it
would not count towards the floor area calculation, and a Floor Area Ratio Variance was not required.
On March 26, 2007, the Planning Commission reviewed the application for Design Review and had many
comments and questions about the project and voted to refer the project to a design review consultant (March
26, 2007 Planning Commission Minutes). After the Planning Commission made their vote, the previous
property owner declared he would withdraw his application for Design Review. On March 27, 2007 the
previous property owner submitted a formal withdrawal letter to the Planning Department.
After his withdrawal from the Design Review process, the previous property owner decided to proceed with
the concrete and rebar infill of the crawl space area. The infill was finaled by the Building Division on April 18,
2010.
In December, 2007, the Herstein family purchased the property at 1511 Drake Avenue and has been living
there since that time. Over the last three years they have worked with several designers and contractors to
create a proposal that would include conversion of the in-filled lower level crawl space area to habitable area.
Because the Planning Department included a condition of approval on the building permit for the infill of the
crawl space that stated that all concrete and rebar fill may not be removed from the crawl space area of the
house without an approval for Design Review and a Variance for floor area ratio, the Herstein family is now
applying to the Planning Commission to convert the crawl space to habitable area.
Summary: The existing split-level house with an attached garage contains 2,658 SF (0.44 FAR) of floor area
and has three (3) potential bedrooms. The applicant is proposing to convert 379.3 SF of the 496.2 SF
concrete in-filled crawl space area to living area (new study and new guest suite) and to make other
improvements to the property. With the proposed conversion of crawl space, the floor area will increase to
3,064.1 SF (0.51 FAR) where the zoning code allows a maximum of 3,020 SF (0.50 FAR). The proposed
project exceeds the maximum allowable floor area by 44.1 SF and therefore the applicant has applied for a
Floor Area Ratio Variance.
With the addition, the number of potential bedrooms will increase from three (3) to four (4). Two parking
spaces, one of which must be covered, are required on site. The existing attached, one-car garage is non-
conforming in width (9'-11" in width existing, where 10' is required), and therefore a Parking Variance is
required. One uncovered space (9' x 20') is provided in the driveway. All other Zoning Code requirements
have been met. The applicant is requesting the following:
■ Design Review for conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space (CS 25.57.010);
• Floor Area Ratio Variance for conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space (3,064.1 SF,
2
� De��,�gn Review and Variances 1510 Drake Avenue
0.51 FAR proposed; where 3,020 SF, 0.50 FAR is the maximum allowed) (CS 25.28.070, a); and
■ Parking Variance for covered parking space width (9'-11" in width existing and proposed, where 10'
in width is the minimum requirement) (CS 25.70.030).
1511 Drake Avenue
Lot Area: 6,000 SF Plans Date Stam ed: November 11, 2010
ORIGINAL REVISED
EXISTING PROPOSAL PROPOSAL ALLOWED/REQD
10/7/10 11/10/10
SETBACKS
_ . ... .. ..... ...... _ __.... .. , .................. ........ _ ,.. _ _.. ...... .._.
Front (1st flr): ; 23'-8" no change no change 15'-0"
(2nd flr): ' none no change no change 20'-0"
_. . _..
Side (left) ; 4'-3" no change no change 4'-0"
(right): ; 6'-0" no change no change 4'-0"
_ .... _._ ._ ...... ....... :... _.. _.
Rear (1st flr); ; 23'-10" 19'-7" (to stairs) no change 15'-0"
(2nd flr): ; 23'-10" 22'-0" (to balcony} ; no change 20'-0"
_.. _.� ..... _ . __._ _._..
Lot Coverage: 2,157 SF 2,185 SF no change 2,400 SF
36% 36.4% 40%
: ..........................................._......................................................_:......................... .. ... ...
� , ........................................._......_........._...................................................,...._.._...._.._............................. ......._........_......._........................................
FAR: ; 2,658 SF 3,154 SF 3,064.1 3,020 SF
0.44 FAR 0.53 FAR 0.51 FAR' 0.50 FAR 2
_ :....................................................................................................:......................................................................................................:.........
_.....,.............
# of bedrooms: ; 3 4 no change ---
..._ .................:................................................................................................:............................................................................... ..
, ................................................................................................................,......................................................................................................................
Parking: ; 1 covered 1 covered 1 covered
(9'-11" x 20') (9'-11" x 20') (10' x 20')
1 uncovered 1 uncovered no change 1 uncovered
(9' x 20') (9' x 20') (9' x 20')
: .................................................................................................:............................................................................................. ............ ........ .
; , , ....................................................................................................,..........................................................................................................................
Height: 24'-2" 13'-5" (to balcony) no change 30'-0"
� . _...... , _ ,....
DH Envelope: ; complies n/a no change CS 25.28.075
Area Ratio Variance for conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space (3,064.1 SF, 0.51 FAR proposed; where
3,020 SF, 0.50 FAR is the maximum allowed) (CS 25.28.070, a).
(0.32 x 6,000 SF) + 1,100 SF = 3,020 SF (0.50 FAR).
Parking Variance for covered parking space width (9'-11" in width existing and proposed, where 20' in width is the
minimum requirement) (CS 25.70.030).
Staff Comments: Staff would note that even before the prior owner "dug ouY' the rear yard and installed a
retaining wall; the lower level of this house would not have met the Zoning Code definition of a basement and
would not have received the basement exemption (please see attached section drawing of original project
proposal from 2005). Please refer to project history on pages 1 and 2 of the staff report for further
background on this property. See attached comments from the City Engineer, Chief Building Official, Parks
Supervisor, Fire Marshal and NPDES Coordinator.
Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission Design Review Study meeting on October 25,
2010, the Commission requested further justification for the FAR Variance and had some questions regarding
the history of the project and voted to place the item on the next available Regular Action Calendar when the
plans have been revised as directed (October 25, 2010, Planning Commission Minutes). The applicant
submitted revised plans, response letters and a revised Variance application for floor area ratio to the Planning
Division on November 10, 2010. The revised plans include keeping portions of the existing infilled concrete
and rebar and therefore the FAR Variance request was reduced from an overage of 134 SF to an overage of
3
, Des�ign Review and Variances
1510 Drake Avenue
44.1 SF. Please refer to the copy of the October 25, 2010, Planning Commission minutes included in the staff
report for the list of Planning Commission questions and concerns.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the
Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows:
Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood;
2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood;
3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure;
4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and
5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components.
Required Findings for Variance: In order to grant a Variance the Planning Commission must find that the
following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d):
(a) there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property
involved that do not apply generally to property in the same district;
(b) the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant, and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unnecessary
hardship;
(c) the granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in
the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience;
and
(d) that the use of the property will be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of
existing an potential uses of properties in the general vicinity.
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
November 10, 2010, sheets A-1.1 through A-3.3;
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);
3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which
would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit;
4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's October 12, 2010, September 30, 2010 and August
5, 2010 memos, the City Engineer's August 6, 2010 memo, the Parks Supervisor's August 9, 2010
memo, the Fire Marshal's August 9, 2010 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's August 4, 2010 memo
shall be met;
5. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the Floor Area Ratio
4
De�ign Review and Variances
1510 Drake Avenue
Variance and Parking Variance, as well as any other exceptions to the code granted here will become
void;
6. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall be
placed upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community Development
Director;
7. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall
not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with
all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;
8. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans
shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning
Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans
throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the
conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning
Commission, or City Council on appeal;
9. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination
and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall
be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued;
10. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which
requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction
plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior,
shall require a demolition permit;
11. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
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:
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;
13. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof
ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and
14. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built
according to the approved Planning and Building plans.
Erica Strohmeier
Associate Planner
c. John Matthews, 335 A East Fourth Street, San Mateo, CA, 94401, applicant and architect.
5
Design Review and Variances
Attachments:
1510 Drake Avenue
Architects Response to Commission's comments, date stamped November 10, 2010
Property Owners response to Commission's comments, date stamped November 10, 2010
Revised Variance application for floor area ratio, date stamped November 10, 2010
Section drawing from original project from 2005
Minutes from the October 25, 2010, Design Review Study Meeting
Application to the Planning Commission
Variance application for floor area ratio
Variance application for covered parking space width
Letter of explanation from the property owners
Photographs of streetscape, date stamped July 30, 2010
Copy of survey points from the original project, date stamped February 21, 2007
Staff Comments
Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed)
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed November 12, 2010
Aerial Photo
0
fif� ��{S
�
�1L r� .M
November 10, 2010
Community development Department
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Response to comments by Planning Commission at October 25, 2010 meeting:
1
2
3
4
5
6
The current owners were not apprised by the former owner of the
situation with respect to the crawl-space area not being able to be
developed or any prior history of difficulty with the City.
The applicants have reduced their request by 2/3 for floor area
exceeding the maximum floor area.
We understand that the Commission did not vote on a previous
application for a variance for floor area. The previous owner withdrew the
application.
We agree that the variance for the garage is very minor and as an
existing condition should qualify as a hardship to bring to full
conformance with the required width.
The previously existing grades would have still required the basement
area to be counted as floor area.
We agree that the proposed project adds no mass or bulk to the existing
structure.
�--� �� ., ��.wp �' 4',� �.. �
, , � :N �n, �
�� _
John Matthews Architecfs tele 650-340-7107
335 A East Fourth Avenue faz &50-34tl-7677
San Mateo. CA 94401 emai/ jackL�matthewsarchifecfs.com
November 10, 2010
Erica Strohmeyer, Associate Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Erica:
We are writing to you and the Planning Commission as a follow-up to our application and the
Commission Hearing on October 25tn
As indicated in our initial letter to you (attached below), our intent in requesting this Variance is
merely to make the best possible use of the space already contained within the existing
envelope of our house. We have focused on external improvements to the house, including
various elements to reduce the perceived mass and bulk. On the interior, we are working
towards our objective of allowing Katie to continue to work from home. We are not attempting to
maximize the square footage for its own sake, or for the sake of maximizing the resale value of
our home.
That being said, we heard the feedback from the Commission and have since worked hard to
come up with a design that minimizes our Variance request while getting useful space from the
area in question. We would like to reinforce that we have done so in a way that in no way
changes the footprint of the house or negatively impacts the neighborhood. In fact, we have
consulted with some of the same neighbors that objected to the prior project to ensure we had
agreement on our intent and plan.
With input from Planning Staff and Jack Matthews, AIA, we have developed a proposal that
meets all of the standard zoning requirements and reduces our Variance request to just 44 sq ft
(from our original request of 134 sq ft). While we understand the Commission's preference
would be to approve no Variance, we respectfully request that the Commission take under
consideration our good faith efforts to minimize the request while creating a logical flow and
useable space. We believe this enhances the use of our home for us, and transforms it from
something of concern for the neighborhood into a home that our neighbors and we will be proud
of.
Finally, we would also like to clarify one point of discussion from the Hearing. Commissioner
Terrones indicated his concern that it would be capricious for the Commission to agree to a
Variance now when it had been rejected previously. Our understanding of the history is that, in
fact, the previous owner had not actually completed the process of applying for the Variance, but
had actually withdrawn the application prior to it being voted upon. We hope that this
clarification will enable the Commission to consider our request.
Sincerely,
���
"` �` � -� �.":" �� �`. �....
.1on � K�zc:ic� I Ie�rstein
��, , . �iii�
. , z,i : _. ,�,,..
��I: I � -
, �v.� .w,..
November 10, 2010
Community Development Department
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: Findings for Variance Application for exceeding FAR
1511 Drake Street
�"' �� gy�' � ;
¢k �... . .. II.... i �a. �N t....
p,!
a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicab/e to your property which do not apply to other
properties in this area.
Due to issues with the previous owner, the house has almost 500 sq ft of
concrete, 34" in height, in a crawl space below the Master Bedroom/Bath.
This space includes two ventilation openings, resulting in an unheated
space immediately below living space. Additionally, due to construction
deficiencies (not disclosed to current homeowners), there is significant
water leakage into this finished crawl space.
b. Explain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right and what unreasonable
property loss or unnecessary hardship might result from the denial of
the application.
Converting the high crawl space to living space is a natural expansion of
the floor area. The proposed floor area exceeds the allowable by 44 sf or
1.46%. Strict conformance with the City's requirement for maximum floor
area is an artificial limit that does not match the existing physical
constraints or the orderly development of the house and will require
unnecessary framing and foundation work. The issues with the property
were not disclosed to the current homeowners by the Seller. As a result,
they had a reasonable expectation that they would be able to improve the
space already contained within the home's existing footprint. This
expectation was factored into their purchase decision, as they planned to
grow their family and one of the homeowners requires the additional space
to enable her to work from home. The current three-bedroom configuration
does not allow for this arrangement. The inability to use the currently
uninhabitable space may require the homeowner to find alternate
accommodation, and given the current housing climate, would likely result
in considerable loss.
c. Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be
detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or
to the public health, safefy, general welfare or convenience.
John Matthews Architects tete 650-340-1107
335 A East Fourth Avenue fax 650-340-1677
San Mateo, CA 94407 email %ack@matthewsarchifects.com
_�K.�, m_.;�
:-t...
, �� � ��` ,
�'"''�°" fl t �
� �„
,.
r� �
� . -',
The improvements are mostly in place already. There is no change to the ` �
exterior wall lines or massing.
d. How will the proposed project be compatible with the aesthetics,
mass bulk and character of the existing and potential uses on
adjoining properties in the general vicinity?
The proposed new work will compliment the existing house and improve its
overall appearance by adding fenestration, French doors and a trellis to the
lower level. These changes will reduce the apparent mass and bulk by
eliminating blank walls at the lower level.
John Mafthews Architects
335 A East Fourth Avenue
San Mateo, CA 94401
te% 650-340- i 107
fax 650-340-1677
emai! jack@mafthewsarchifecfs=com
�'�
� ~
/
"� �,., -ay��+.►a 1\S1
�
x
�
�
�
�
�
�
F
3
i � _ ^ .
/
i
i � Sa���v��as �� S4.-i+�-�1
, _ �/.
_ _
_ �
��, \ ��
_ �� �-��
a � �� _ _
-���, - _
�, ��_ ;��
� _ � :�.� .�
��_ o ; ` �
D �� .,
�i�.�-�
D ..,.
� 4'Rp /I/I�� \ . F
;,'F;�' , �;��4
i
---; �, �
,�I
�
; '
` ,'c
�
` VI�
-- -- �E
� � � O I
���� . i
_ � ` 0 �Y� Q
1 4`
� � �4 0 �'
��� o� ���� � II
� f�
I , �'` ---
�/'��/j\ �� i �
I' Y �
j `� ,� F d
\\ _ .
% �� �
� -
; � - �° ��- "
;p i> �
'� v^
' .i
i `i �
y
,,
�
�
i
i�.
�a°os
A�����. .. wA�
����a a N� �j�
�'�s� � . .. . :a€ m�z
4�1=0
�_��
€�
�
� ���
� � - � Ra
8��
� �� I .
� � o ;g�
I CX
, � �* � � � 8 � $� � R���� $ $R ME3 :�� Ca �_ _ _ .�:y 5 � n�
3q yp�q�' S R � C 9
�' � �6 �����s � 3�-�°-. C�� � �� � " Zq ¢�g �
1 y � � ��e�$ � _=£ 4�3 q �AL� �o� �qa �g 4 :ay___- -- 3.��
l � , � � 6 �� �<��� � � Z g"�' g°� ��
�y � � } e ;" ,�,� �� � � � � � � ; � rn �, � g„
�S ��II:.Lk� �p r��w y �#� � F, 'm,p ; �,�x� g� s�+ �'�x'"= ° _ ptlo:¢
Q����nt��,��. �� �.`��'� d �'� � g �r i �`°��> �, te%=�'��8-�e��� �.9[@
v ��. �t - Q ¢- M n�£�a� Gu adxB
� ��$�� �� ���� � � � �o i ��� ?� ��'���g���gg�� ���5s
x � m � 's9
c� � �� � � ln i � � :y y� r�z�s.�g,' ``Pa��
� � ��_ I S n R5 �- � _���=-gE" �:'
�} f, o g ���
e7 1! ? = Y�
�E � � @ s � � 6i�
a q��
i4 { >: 'i b �� �.
2 =� J �ER � �.
? � I ��
• ,; �. �2 j s x� R�,P�"� � iII�'2'
" �� � ��' �f •a��
>
. _
-� ��� �� "• g R$ i PRIVATE RESIDENCE :�,sP`�""'�_ _, •' ��� y CIdR15' PLUMBING, INC No REVI�I�ONnoNs '
; �_, o���P„�, o��
�'� I R a ='T : i ,��' Y 1025 WEST MACARTHUR BLVD
° � ; � � 1511 DRAKE AVE. _ � oaxtaNn, ca sasos �
N BURLINGAME, CA 94010 z��"��`, �;, „`,���'� cs:o� ssz-,zsZ r�c: cs�o� 852-40fi2 C18N�95046
_ ___. /.�
�— '
i
x- ;
.� _ . \
1
1
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes October 25, 2010
Commissioner Lindstrom indicated that he wou/d recuse himself from participating in the discussion
regarding Agenda Item 6(1511 Drake Avenue), as he may enter into a business relationship with the
applicanf for fhe project. He left the Council Chambers.
6. 1511 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND VARIANCES FOR
FLOOR AREA RATIO AND COVERED PARKING SPACE WIDTH FOR CONVERSION OF LOWER
LEVEL CRAWL SPACE TO HABITABLE SPACE AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO AN EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JOHN MATTHEWS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; JON AND KATE
HERSTEIN, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated October 25, 2010, with attachments. Community Development Director
Meeker briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Acting Chair Terrones opened the public comment period.
John Herstein, 1511 Drake Avenue and John Matthews, 335A East Fourth Avenue, San Mateo;
represented the applicant.
■ The applicanYs family has grown and they need more space.
■ With the conversion of the crawl space, the home becomes a two-story structure and is subject to
design review.
■ Are attempting to make the space more livable with access to the rear yard.
■ Whether using the space for storage or living space, doesn't change the appearance of the
structure, in fact improves the space.
■ Only a portion of the garage falls below the minimum size requirement.
■ Was concerned that the prior history of the property would be a factor in the request.
■ Have had other issues relative to the house that need to be addressed; want to now do everything
right.
■ Believed the prior owner had applied for a variance, but withdrew the application.
■ The vision is to make the exterior more appealing to the neighbors; feel they have support of the
neighbors.
Commission comments:
Appears that the applicant purchased the property and was not apprised of the situation with
respect to the crawl-space area; is having difficulty with the variance request, given the history.
Need to provide better justification for the variance request; why should it be approved in this
instance when others cannot receive the same approval. (Matthews — the applicant shouldn't be
held responsible for the actions of the prior owner. The prior owner was encouraged to apply for
Commission approval, but he chose to convert the area to crawl space. Are looking at a three-
percent difference between what is allowed by code versus the request; they are simply wishing to
use the space; it has already been improved, but would like to increase its livability by increasing
the ceiling height.)
Approval of the variance now would be capricious given the history of the case; the prior owner did
bring a variance application before the Commission, but it was denied; how could it be approved
now? What is the justification? (Hurin — previously appeared at design review study, but was
withdrawn prior to action.)
There is hardship for the garage variance, it is an existing condition.
Feels that the prior owner dug out the rear yard area and created a situation where the area must
now be considered as a story; but could have originally be considered as a basement area.
12
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes October 25, 2010
(Meeker— can do additional research to determine if this is true. Matthews — does have additional
records regarding the history of the property and the grade in the rear yard.)
Doesn't add any mass and bulk to the structure.
Public comments:
1► .C7iT�
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
CommissionerAuran made a motion to place the ifem on fhe RegularAction Calendar when complete.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi.
Discussion of motion:
None.
Acting Chair Terrones cal/ed for a vote on the motion to place this item on the Consent Calendar when
plans have been revised as direcfed. The motion passed on a voice vote 4-0-2-1 (Commissioners Yie and
Vistica absent, Commissioner Lindstrom recused). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not
appealable. This item concluded at 9:26 p.m.
Commissioner Lindstrom returned fo the dais.
13
�
�����
r�� �.I
cis.ttit�.t r y.nta E
��r-
''`�. _ ;� .
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROSE ROAD • BURLINGAME, CA 94010
p: 650.558.7250 • f: 650.696.3790 • www.burlingame.org
� APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Type of application: �
,�I, Design Review 181 Variance ❑ Parcel #: � 2�j — 0 3 3'— �� �
❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit ❑ Other:
PROJECT ADDRESS: I c� �� ��P�Y�rC n��NL�� ,��R, �- I�CrF���C G� � 40� o
❑O Please indicate the contact person for this project
APPLICANT project contact person�
OK to send electronic copies of documents �[
yt'' Name: Jbl�1� �.(�i } T ZE{ GW S
Address: ���'✓� ��C�T �R�'�} ��l�i�c
City/State/Zip: J�{� IIVL�'}1�0. C�� ��t-��
Phone: 6�a- 34o ti o7
FaX: 650 — 34d 1.��77
PROPERTY OWNER project contact person ❑
OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑
Name: JON K.�T� C.�ST� t N
Address: � �J 1 [ �i (�I�t lCC �1r�iU(,��
City/State/Zip: c��(� �.l NG(�Y1�1C,CA g�dt�
Phone: 6 c5� " �{�� 06 $ �
Fax:
E-mail: \CtL_��-Y1�l�cT��Sct�fGV1��eL�S.CcXr1E-mail: `\C��'i. ��ei/1 �' °l1M�tt'• LOvYi
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Pro�ect contact person�l
OK to send electronic copies of documents �I,
Name: J�'t'l� %�. I�'ll'PtT ( �i�W�
Address: 3 3� pc �+�cST �QU�P.T L-� AV ��1 U�
City/state�zip: SA t�(, MA�T� O, G,� 9 C}- C►.O 1
Phone: 6 S O— 3�t � i� ��
FaX: 6 So - 34 D l 6 77
E-mail
c� rc1�� -�- e��-s• c o
* Burlingame Business License #:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and belie�. A , _.-. ,J �
1
ApplicanYs signature: ;� ''_ `����� � - � , � -r�:^ -- -� Date: � � � � � `"�
I am aware of the proposed �ppliqation and here�y authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning
Commission. " r` i` �
1 � i;
Property owner's signature: � - ! / ` � � Date: �� � ' � �
_� / I
Date submitted: 1' �" l � �� �
* Verification that'the project architect/designer has a valid Burlingame business license will be required by the
Finance Department at the time application fees are paid.
❑ Please mark one box above with an X to indicate the contact person for this project. S:\Handouts\PC Application 2oo8-B.handout
�
July 30, 2010
Community Development Department
501 Primrose Road
Buriingame, CA 94010
Re: Findings for Variance Application for
1511 Drake Street
a. Describe the exceptional or eartraordinary circumstances or
conditions applfcab/e to your property which do not app/y to other
properties in this area.
The house has multiple floor levels and is built into a hiltside on an uphill
lot. The proposed floor level in the rear of the house would be about 4'-6"
beiow the ground level and currently exists as a 5'-11� high crawl space.
b, Explain why the variance request is necessary for the preservafion
and enjoyment of a substantia! property right and what unreasonab/e
property loss or unnecessary hardship might result from the deniat of
the application.
Converting the high crawl space to living space is a natural expansion of
the floor area. The proposed floor area exceeds the allowable by 135 sf or
4%. While it is possible to limit the floor area to 350 sf and therefore meet
the City's requirement for maximum floor area, it is an artificial limit that
does not match the physical constraints of the orderly development of the
house and wiA require unnecessary framing and foundation work.
c. Exptain why the proposeaf use at fhe proposed /ocation will not be
detrimental or injurfous to property or fmprovements in the vicinity or
to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience.
The improvements are mostly in place already. There is no change to the
exterior wall lines or massing.
d. How will the proposed project be compatib/e wfth xhe �esthetics,
mass bulk and character of the existing and potential uses on
adjoining properties in the genera/ vicinity?
The proposed new work will compliment the existing house and improve its
overall appearance by adding fenestration, French doors and a trellis to the
lower level. These changes will reduce the apparent mass and bulk by
eliminating blank watls at the lower level.
�'C;�i# �?affP]�i,So:S .APGf#�fE:C#S fafe FiSC�-.�*SQ-11Ca7
:i35 A East Fourth Avenue fax 65f1-340-i6i7
San Mateo, CA 94401 emait jackC�matthewsarchitects.com
��
September 23, 2010
Community Development Department
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: Findings for Variance Application for minimum garage width
1511 Drake Street
a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to your property which do not apply to other
properties in this area.
This variance request is for a one inch encroachment. It represents 0.8%
variance from the zoning requirement.
b. Explain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right and what unreasonable
property loss or unnecessary hardship might result from the denial of
the application.
The interior dimensions of the garage comply with the zoning ordinance
with the exception of a one inch encroachment for a distance of four feet
upon entering the garage due to an equipment enclosure. The garage is
about 21 "-6" wide beyond the encroachment. Rebuilding the equipment
enclosure for such a minor variance to the garage width requirement will
not make a significant difference and is an unreasonable hardship.
c. Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be
detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or
to the public health, safety, general we/fare or convenience.
The one inch encroachment by the equipment enclosure in the garage
does not impede the use of the garage as a covered parking space. The
width of the garage exceeds the requirements of the zoning ordinance at
the areas where the driver or passengers may want to exit the vehicle.
d. How will the proposed project be compatible with the aesthetics,
mass bulk and character of the existing and potential uses on
adjoining properties in the general vicinity?
This is an existing structure. There is no impact on the aesthetics, mass,
bulk or character of the existing structures since no change is proposed.
The garage is functional as a covered parking space.
Jahn Matthews Architects te/e 650-3a0-1ro7
335A East Fourth Avenue Fax S5Q-340-1677
San Mateo, CA 9440i email jack@matthewsarchitecfs.com
♦
.� ¢ "� t hh�.. �{ ♦: � i d� i F 4 C r' {� 1 � i
,. t)+.�� 4'., �� �#�; �..� t ��,�
��.,!a 1�.�=;�1liilt� � ._�1.:'ll
... .c �t;.:.'Ii.7� i� i 1�+..1 :,�:.i �}..�II:I� Y
� r;'. ��E �1�I' ilf�;.1F11�
���� ��:-:lfit�•+f k��.�n�
15tA:�i�,,.����� i �� , ;�.
lb,� }ru.�
�� �' :tti� �t4l�:t.tl�7Fii; :til :t`>��Itt,�C:�tsi !c, � ��s�+a ii t�i{� ;��,ui�;•�� ���;� � i.���s ��r.i� c �u ��,:i li� �u•c t�, li.tl,tt.sl�l�� .Er.0 i�. .��
'I.itl ��W I'I!♦ .t'ii��tl.11t��ll� t�� .li1' .I:��r ♦11��:;�'•111i�ti :1 tC�'Itl�.. 1�:1 ��� �.11':.tIN t�♦ l�r.tt�ci:l-�♦ f:ll� �.tc i II1.1[ �11I: Il��tt:llt'li
� „ii�i i.�� ��i ,���itli( � �. � � �l �!u :�li„n.ihl� � \�Z I��t ���� j�t„j�. �,t E�� I "�.�i .: 4:'ti,i .unl ���cic i, ,� �,�ii �iu 1:
t�:U I<�.tl �t(ttl'P;I :11 .) �:+•�4'i ttil+� I�tt" :1YIIi:It t' (31'•M�~ Ut�ii1S c�' t�14' :;-Il.'rL;i ,
�1 s:;;c 4��+,c�i 11�.tt ,�+u i:�>i�,c �t.�, .� r�i il-%cc�r���:t i.i3ul s�� ll-�1�.�:�� �3� l�i.s��ie tetli� ilu• l tCi. .1• ii��i�ici�i,4�i.
.n�uc � �I 11i.c� li��l�>>. ,�.e� cl:.� I, ��i �l :� � u. i. ,� �� .it:1. �,ti� �n �,s:;k�i .i I���;t�� i<< �<< i� .�ir��' t�..i����t�l �t� .i
;:l 1.;�¢�k�:�it��qi 1l� ;�ri�,��. �11��11��1'y iii.41 ;,rl�t1 Nl :l .;�<.tt� .141'.:♦ ���. �1I!tJt1- I3's:j11/11(li�l.lt;. � IN. �F71�t I�ti311; !ijA
�� E���; I�::t� I1� .11 liN. .,"I�It. 15.y� I�I.tI t\l� ���Ii�i 11� t�c� I�a .t�?le'1 !s� I�N� � 7[1 1�> :l'lll���l� (�Il' t ��11! !l'It' �Uit� ill.I�l' 17�s"
.Eti.�� i 1�:,�l,I.�. .A�a �I:.i� In�ic rl)r� �•sa.fx�i "1F����?. ;�c� I�.��E .� I-�r�.�� ���r! •�yti .,ii<1 �li�! t���t t:<<�1 .e�l�l�Ki�3rc�l ,}�.«.•.
���i� � ;Y:i�i. t�e li.i�e t:.iel .< <l.iee_li�a i .ui�l �,.li� f�:i, ti lu� �n �l '� � I��r «uti.l��t� c (r.�;t�Utt,e, h:�lu u�»i.� ,�� .n�
Ill�it���l U�:l-t:l t��lll:,:� :� �i. .UI<i �::I+ :t:l J:�i�li', (i � 4:� � lIIs:1 �1 ��� �1��� N..I; j� }!� �it4 �I�illll I.S1�;1 I!i..11l ;�+tlii;� 1111�� :111
��Ili� i 11i !�. i.u��Gi:;,� tls.i� ii', a�nj���ti.uit (�>i h.i�.t tr� fx .�f�l� I,:.F.� u�i 11��. Uin� ti�it1, �lu � ht:i�i� �i aliil� .i4.�,
� .���itii,�.�:� iii� �.�nir 1� �pn; �,;�I.:i�o �i� �t ��t ��j�l �ii,,ii�l� i�� Ix ui .� ii,�.�l 1��11•u�nt . �.itta �u � rl..� .� ��.�i:�t�
.�z.��r �,� IM ,if�l� I,r«�:ii, rllc<<nc�ti. 1�:t•.j�.i;. t� �I�.i�t:.�;r�l.i. "U�ti ( 111i,c�,��: tii� ,nl�tnt�t���! (�I,au.. �l'�
�e�tin�3 ��,:z.. II�e ��n�,,:u�iu ��I tlie •�i.t�. l,�c .i (.:;�.� lt,�.�tii \u 1'.,c� i���l�,���ni. 1 �ii.,il��n::��el� �i��.as�...n li
i:i1�1f /.��i �l.i�l- :74� �!<! ���5i1 fixe7;; .I111� \{l �1� ��i�� fl.11t: ,1 ti�41.i1' ��Ct11��1s111. li ;il-C1�C57.
�� l�N":lt'�1� ��1.1! 1�i4' t1 f�t71�♦It f� t�I.I::„;��• '�ll�t �1:11�' :1�+ If41Jr.i� l 1�t1 <�;�! !tl'tij!!�H>I� ��1 ?II.t- �1t�3'�'�I�H)I���Na(� ;t� .1
��i,,•lc .+stu i ti.c .��;t�:l�:.�tt! � I�.ui�c• ��, .i,� li,i��.i �t.11 Ix �::Ic>>,;il �1 ��I�� t.�:t i�i<<��.��c It� � ii.ur�;i tlu i�N�I�:�itEi
.i� I�II. l:i:ll�l 111 .1I11 11.t�. �Il a.l� 1. U�.t71\ t�i litl 'I;���I.��l�� i�;.i71:;i�♦ {�3.11 .tlt t'\Il'lll.l: \�l-�t .I(�l�l�:. Ili t��1i�U�1.12i�!ll
°�l��Al..'•1�l� ��.!�I�I�",�� .1�.,. j�111I1A11�\ i�� � I��IJiitt' (�it' l�\Il lll.l: �it��1♦ i�� (�11� �1!I;F�I.
\\ � In !n �i „� I„i.� ��nt n� �41ii,�,t'. ,,,��y,�.at i�i ��u; .���i�li�.�u��ii �1 � tluiii, s3�� �n��E>�>.t�.i � li.u��,�•. ciili.si:�.
„n� lit���y.r.i.ui;ciu. iit nn�l un�r.�,�r tli� ta��ii.. I„i tiii l��:c�li? ��I tlii• �tc�:ltl�.��li���ri. l u�.�ii4. �+� 1� 1,� �. ii�.��
��Iil �<t„Stllli7l:l'I:l l�� t��tll� ��{:��Il:;�t 9:ii� ��I�v,���♦'1:��(*i�1;1 'tt:�� l.��iJl��i ;i11 �_il\ :Ill�i �>iJt Itl'iti,`1����l� f�� III<�ll
ix�,����) titi��.�t Ii.����Kii.<! (�ii,�t �.� u�u ��x±:� �.In,���t t�u j�:���K:ts.
�� i� .tj��ili�� I.it�� 1��t�� � ���n!<�i�7.ill��f= ��� ��11r .t�>���Is.t1U�11.
11i�� c�11 i1 .
' .. •
...",.,...--,. . . ... �
���t. �.:!I� l�i'.�It tii
PLANNING APPLICATIDN:
1511 DRAKE AVENUE, BURLINGAME CA 9401 �
�..�. _,....M..
�t,:- "' � .'y;`�'...,.�.��..
1505
r —. "�
4j? �-
"y�e ��,� �1"� . �•, ,�,. "`�.�r� ".
� at�
��� qi� �i � .
�_ .qor
� -� �, �
� � {.�.� � � � ...s .. .
g , ��.T� �l� ��`_
�k #�_.�'�r..�_•,�Mij � ��.
� [`� C
'�
1509
� ,A :
..f.:. � F�.
�
PROJECT SITE
1511 DRAKE AVENUE
1517
,� s
:�
� �
..,�,"1�6's�,� _ _ �.:
�
�f .
as�+. —
� � � ,l�
,: ; 5` � '�� � :�� #
++�:;�� . � � ,:.
. � � �. ;�... _ .
�. � ...e.uxe�..�a... �. ...�. Y�.
�� � `�•� 'Y�edfWie,...
■�,; i. w.
1521
JOHN MATTHEWS ARCHITECTS
335 A EAST FOURTH AVENUE SAN MATE�, CA 94401-4008
T: 650-340-1107 F: 650-340-1677 www.matthewsarchitects.com
B & I-� SURVEYIl�TG, INC.
CALIFORNIA LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR #7701
901 WALTERMIRE ST • BELMONT, CALIFORNIA 94002 •(650) 637-1590 • FAX (650} 637-1059
February 9, 2007
City of Buriingame
Planning Department
501 Primrose Road
Burlingarne, CA 94010
Re: Curb & Floor Elevations
1511 Drake Ave.
Burlingame, CA 94010
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter is to certify that on Fehruary 9, 2007 our survey crew checked the curb and floor elevations at the above-
mentioned site based on the city bench mark `BM 184". The elevation of the curb is 59.44 at the left side of the
property an 59.11 at the right. The main floor elevation is 67.09.
W
Wayn aas, PLS
N:\bh�.5349-0'7�SURVEY�.5349-ElevCert.doc B&H
�� �-��vQ �s�.
��y���� �� ���
v<v � u� `.�.�
0
J �.S77Q� �
� �;- / z-3 f-og �
�N� �\/
�� ��' ",4! �F��
������ �°�
FE� � � 2��7
�e�° 6�� �t����T�.3;ai«:;4�
�'���?i'�� f:�'�.�2'",'.
Page 1 2/9/2007
Project Comments
Date:
August 3, 2010
To: � City Engineer
(650) 558- 7230
❑ Chief Building Official
(650) 558- 7260
❑ Parks Supervisor
(650) 558-7334
From: 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 Floor Area Ratio Variance for
conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space and other
improvements to an existing single family dwelling at 1511 Drake
Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-080
Staff Review: August 9, 2010
1. Replace all displaced/damaged sidewalk, driveway, curb and gutter.
Reviewed by: V V
Date: 8/06/2010
Date:
To:
From:
Revised plans submitted October 7, 2010
❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
X Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ Parks Supervisor
(650) 558-7334
❑ 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 Variances for floor area ratio and
parking for conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space
and other improvements to an existing single family dwelling at 1511
Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-080
Staff Review: N/A
In the "Study" the window that faces the courtyard must comply with the 2007 CBC
emergency escape and egress requirements for sleeping rooms.
This project must comply with all conditions of approval as stated in the review dated
August 5, 2010.
Reviewed by: � Date: �'� �e� /d �/o
_.-----.�.,;�--
�%'�` f..�-=- �
l/i'~�
`__�
Date:
To:
From:
Revised plans submitted September 24, 2010
❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
X Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ Parks Supervisor
(650) 558-7334
❑ 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 Variances for floor area ratio and
parking for conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space
and other improvements to an existing single family dwelling at 1511
Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-080
Staff Review: N/A
Recheck comment:
#9. The room labeled as a study is a room that can be used for sleeping purposes and
must have an emergency escape and egress window that complies with the minimum
code requirements. Please revise the plans to show a code compliant egress window in
this room.
Reviewed b • " � �
-
�_/ A ,
�
Date: 9-30-2010
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Staff Review:
August 3, 2010
❑ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
X Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
❑ Parks Supervisor
(650) 558-7334
❑ Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑ Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
❑ NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
Request for Design Review and Floor Area Ratio Variance for
conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space and other
improvements to an existing single family dwelling at 1511 Drake
Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-080
August 9, 2010
1) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2007 California Building
Codes (CBC).
2) Per the City of Burlingame's adopted Resolution, applications received after
January 1, 2009 must complete a"GreenPoint Rated Checklist". The GreenPoint
Rated Checklist, and other information regarding the City's Green Building
requirements, can be found on the City website at the following URL:
http://www.buriingame.orq/lndex.aspx?paqe=1219 or Contact Joe McCluskey at
650-558-7273.
3) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame
business license.
4) Provide fully dimensioned plans.
5) Provide existing and proposed elevations.
��? Place the following information on the first page of the plans:
"Construction Hours"
Weekdays: 7:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m.
Saturdays: 9:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m.
Sundays and Holidays: 10:00 a.m. — 6:00 p.m.
(See City of Burlingame Municipal Code, Section 13.04.100 for details.)
� Provide a complete demolition plan that indicates the existing walls, walls to be
demolished, new walls, and a legend. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not
be issued and, and no work can begin, until a Building Permit has been
issued for the project.
�Specify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2008 California Energy
Efficiency Standards. Note: All projects for which a building permit application is
received on or after January 1, 2010 must comply with the 2008 California
Energy Efficiency Standards. Go to
http:l/www.enerqy.ca.qov/title24/2008standards/ for publications and details.
�Q� 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 "-
Study" is a room that can be used for sleeping purposes and, as such, must
comply with this requirement.
�ndicate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the
Department of Public Works.
11)Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at
any point are considered in calculating the allowable lot coverage. Consult the
Planning Department for details if your project entails landings more than 30" in
height.
12)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers.
13)Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
NOTE: A written response to the items noted here and plans that specifically
address items 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 must be re-submitted before this project can
move forward for Planning Commi sion action.
�.�...�.._ ..
Reviewed b�r.�------`�"""Y '� Date: ,�� ��/ �
Date:
To:
From:
Project Comments
August 3, 2010
~ City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
~ Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
l� Parks Supervisor
(650) 558-7334
~ 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 Floor Area Ratio Variance for
conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space and other
improvements to an existing single family dwelling at 1511 Drake
Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-080
Staff Review: August 9, 2010
1. Landscape plan must show and list alt major trees and shrub on site.
2. Plans must include 3— 24" box size landscape trees.
Reviewed by: B Disco Date: 8/9/10
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
August 3, 2010
� City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
� Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
0 I'arks Supervisor
(650) 558-7334
� Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
❑x Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
0 NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review and Floor Area Ratio Variance for
conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space and other
improvements to an existing single family dwelling at 1511 Drake
/�►venue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-080
Staff Review: August 9, 2010
Fire sprinkler system shall be extended into area of remodel. Plans shall be
submitted and approved by the Fire Department for separate permit prior to
installation.
Reviewed by: � Daie: �� 1 d
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
August 3, 2010
0 City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
� Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
0 Parks Supervisor
(650) 558- 7334
Planning Staff
0 Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
� Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
X NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Subject: Request for Design Review and Floor Area Ratio Variance for
conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space and other
improvements to an existing single family dwelling at 1511 Drake
Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-080
Staff Review: August 9, 2010
Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City
NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution from construction
activities. Project proponent shall ensure all contractors implement Best
Management Practices (BMPs) during construction.
Please include a list of construction stormwater pollution prevention best
management practices (BMPs), as project notes, when submitting plans for a
building permit. Please see attached brochure for guidance. The brochure may also
be down loaded directly from "flowstobay.org." It is recommended that the
construction BMP's be placed on a separate full size plan sheet (2' x 3` or larger as
appropriate) for readability.
For additional assistance, please contact Kiley Kinnon, Stormwater Coordinator, at
(650) 342-2727.
Reviewed by: ��
��-��r-�...�.�.
� � � ;-
. �j� � � IJ
Date.
,,.
0/ �f
/' � SlmIDwaW
� PoDutiov Preumtiw Progem
� �
a�
i-
�:> `- --�
��' � V
GCIICZ81 �,,,rv�..
Construction
& Site Supervision
���d�
������ta�
�ro�.���o��
��a�.�������
��.� �
�a����m��a�
o ��.���.�.�.��
.��.�e��a��am
����.������
�m����m���
� ..awawawae.aQu.mm.m�R.mdewq
rmYrvC�hBttmK��YrMkdma[ Wms�vLae
�
J4w ywr a�lqes md v��ma4w.ton. Mam
me�e acv...nwcm�K.m�m.mm�
cmtavlm aJa i�C¢m� mtr�cm �Em�� ro� ee�i
ep�va�rtmqdmmet melrm LWtlu
Osi �C P+�b
�/Dnip�e m cmP��1 rmltlml V4 (s mb
�� »��dL. md iwtinc cqnymut
SLe Aviym�ed ae� �hrvld be vdl �war
f� Nem� m e1� �am m4h. md Lemd iPmn-
my.MekeOP�W�^�oRtl1�
iL^�➢ c�tamb v+t e( �he niv - pv.eut �mofl
mrtmNYim Y Ae non'� Cow e�mE pka of
,w e ao,mcam ��md.�. ww v�•mo wemoe �
a�pvh'mv4.
�/[sp Pdbmb oQ �p d vvLcn PYr ess3 �
� m�pia'lavom]tYo¢mmummc
��+Y �P P� �vlav W4 �tr�iu m eb.m N��s.
o�el , errLaeetl�. VYvmeN 9uYimH iu vo-aery.
�iltGmEs moAc�ecln5�v u e�p eWimrei mE
admroVrmoW
lQam � �ok4 d�b� ml dhu M�4'.....Mi.w1.
�Yd�vot�Wecilm P�M�awbrve �
.n�ms000..na.� u.mre�w�,..• .
wLmelc O�k. I[�ou �n uw vm. u.e Im
mai{hbksVQedvttdewc
JCmv � �h0m �mW^�a, merY BVP�m�Y fOr
luta. Pbee d�em� mEa mMa w toov vi0 mep
e q..*� •�.a,c .� .�me m o-saa� � m.
�p�.ApW4c 4mu rtwmmmhd b prtvmt
btageofiqyida Novc dwv oo� a�pm by
bin� tl do�u m me emm�wie� We.
JMW �m ➢��� m�leY m m�tuud in �od
wodtiN Ndm bY tl�c ha"v�y aomCOY mG mw vevm
aaoosea otwwah a.ct mu�u tr��wy (or
b4
A! fvitlaM'b lmma�
lI4�c1Ye wma tM�cWn - mmtmim wulc whu
y�ou ade[ wtmalt Ptic my �he vmowl Y� uvaa
fmi�6rhejo!_
ium.� �w,.nm,..e w.mi.. n�„o
r c:�.mor.«�.ek.wnw�na��e.
+R�4 �aW �l wlrmt4 dNd+a+. ckmdng-
<M1tioaG�a�ct. W vAicY m.mr�v�em.kavis
w L u vvd oi� wiBcea, b�m�t +vd Ae.
��y� or m...v ma a�mm xe�+. a�h.
raay�,m.w�n�m.m:wme..r�.�ea �a
mr8�Nn6 nFvA warL�a1 P�K ve8ir.k Omd�.
bxokm �q�AJt �od cmva¢, xvol ud ciovad vcpN
����.:�..�,��,��,
��ve��a�a�,�
�. a..� w�.�. � ....� �. a ,n..
R�m in �6a Nm� m mu � aat m mem bed.
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
Pollution Prevention - It's Part of the Plan
It is your responsibility to do the j ob right!
Runoff from stteets and other paved azeas is a major source ofpollurion in iocal creeks, San Francisco $ay arid the Pacific Ocean.
Construction activiries can direcdy affect the health of our waters unless con�actors and crews plan ahead to keep dirt, debris, and other
conshucrion waste away from storm drains and creeks. Following these guidelines will ensure your compliance with local stormwater
ordinance requirements. Remember, ongoing monitoring and maintenance of installed controls is crucial to proper implementation.
Heavy Earkh-Moving Roadwork & Paving F resh Conc�te Painting & Application
Equipment Activitie� A�, '
Operation
0
Slv➢meC mdPmmtlrt adtGr mal�s
lDmpukarompkp:lY����af u�mm�o
" ohwa0�++r6auvo.m�a.amd�inivka,
6a aJa avd M�4m^�� W�4 nfvelu4 aoE rtwx
HLVJc md ryuyaa� mwknmcc
! PMu_vm'ndnmelw mdhea.Y%�q.mmt,Mpw fio-
fi� W �4mle}i
J� �Ia����trtry�f�.�vA.+LickaoE
���v��...*�e �a.�
! I(Yd mi¢ train ad �N�xe moer wl, t+diun roe.lva.
m OziEtlNmiile.ieeQriVP�+armvPrbWa
o�eh G�p�vd411� Cnikn dl qm�EuiL. ome m
�Vw� �+�4 � �Y�le w4seve W�IS w
diq�s af WuN u L�dms rmte
JlbvuwcdaW a1bWFei�wm�l�anuG��m
v�
! a.�nt�.�u x tmai�..
('i� i 4'�7fr �dWl wLa 9�eJ LFTte
� �a... � a� -aon" w.�,, a �v�.n�
�+�� ���T W�Uxdrycl�mp�mcm
ae. f.e•o�a� �.�f.i., m ti�. aa�� �) wnm�
p�bk. IfYw �ut �ue vpb. urPet maW b kn9
tle deG Cv+�c
JSwwwoe����dmYmre'u�ommeCielery ek.av�
mopm�s,m�.w.r'•ne.ua.m smrm�
Ur r tiltic wsr s p�e fia M1w mvnoL
I Qm i9 T��e m JM w� E1' &lCmB W� PWmY
depwayotw�IW �oil.
/ �.+e+� w�+m � mo�om�+= w�+<v�
+g�.in i�eN��eH. Ya uv e yoimd by 1w m npret
ailtlyil' 9cm�nboeoPhoaNasm�luW�.i^c4NIn8
oJ.'ib�eyw�cq ,dl�helolbwmgag�v. 1)UW
9t1 mY�lmt mvgmcY��bc. 3)UII
rx c�.amrt oma e[�ymy s...acm wmms
Cma,(BOQr852"/550(2lhavp
�►s . . , '
� .��������.
.�..��
I Sah.AJc am.tioe mad'me.mhramy.aha
DmmpCmtrxEm JCbG�s11a0�qmw�( WkaWrzpw�mka¢WuO��
J%vealmvB��Yma�mhwhmWwlut,7'�vr �p�,�T�iHmm�e�v.nA�•�`"'�+^Lefeq�up
�++or t.o� im�.m�noo vm.
JSxGUP��N'R& �formum�nolrm lRTen�v4rlb+[mahlele�aNNM1��m�maz�rtEe
dopewvbma�su�.:davami�ad'u�dypl�e4 dooeavtite.daa¢mhacomp�amlYmuhmede�aevry
f em�mhamamduvYs.
/Paa�E^�+hpetr�8��e.�.aEmm llbm[�ucdiv�lo0bh�iohmclme3��mm[m
hia'uw6lvylshlmpmN'��m[�aWu.w1 JRrc�rJeu�eCoil.6nus5Acmve�q�drmuDb+k2
fmnam�m�mmNain6JetBrcu. ph���vro�.
Ilbedecktlmwdio-2robdireiiwod.mmdva.s lltiamAO'wmuuv8�xbuwua¢amm�KaeA�ea
tim� d � n�u
��:�.� � �.. ,;
���! �t► ��.t��',
.�'�,� ,� ,a ��
� , �-
Glaal Hvmau hanlu
!&1h x ym¢ y¢dam w� �+ouvtim ue, LLwp me
eue m>.m.we ��,�. �rom oo+aa�*� aom
��fNl m6 rvmH PMsI AY mtlaiYH fica wml
J S<ma beL oFeemmtaHm �j'.ve Wm Be wvs bMp
w�adbb..vummt0o icamPSmYe�.�m�m
mtins�naLll.mdnmo6
!%sy �R LM1dtl PW {�Cocl� aC wYmt vV 6vm
� �N��R �4 � �� Joi... I.yuW �eNuc� Gam
m�m,. m��...m.,.oa ¢Le. ma<k�e �e.m
e�aw.+..ea.m m.a ee a�.w� xu. m�m�.
maittco0r.cti�fidlty(metv.�ym bul mrmw�tv
wo��l
!� clm bmelm m�e p�ly mupims yum •
����. P�� �lo�m Amv. m �tla�m.
Landscaping,
Gardening,
and Pool Mainbeaance
�
� �«i uaWk�.m ��x mmw. cm �a.m
� H s�� m.m uodu mo. a�d ntioc .h�cm�.
! Smic oeNcids. taotimc ma aev rL�c.ic muoot� a
m e sheE m amge Ww
! SrLetWie g�a�g mCavv+tiouP���la3 hrC/YwvWv.
J Wah auewmasocm'vaa mIS mAmII�lautruavus Jllro imW�YCL«t tlams a Eiehrs n&.vt1woSawsy
mJ�Yd4.lneaewemIlOovabwubi�mt JPn��-bu.3Vm4Y�owGwbmm�beeam� wmmmA+�.
�rC�� vm�vamud'vtls�c�eehvdvoulduwmafu bluRivcmfhc�mmYvevoamwuE�xpm�d
JCmv JAvoNV+�[maeolmetaimmSvnAc.mw4miuu ��.WLmcvarWuiblc�ul�'��wn6miMP�Vm6 P��o�Bomtlwbdwswewebhrn�mta�npmLLy. JAdeeuo�m�elolWe¢wiAM'��a46eim4Aonmars
�bc�plra�muvWdYo�wYL wN�psm nfmaanbetme5Mv+��m��v:lthaw�o ayy4MrmA+W.h�uW�.arPo�m�� NaueC�P�dowv�Mm. acotiviolalW��Youm.awuei
W�����c . IC .mcta4Lbuwmaromhoia.hm+qilymg
JAepvymooimrmdwwmaa¢amoumlaeAmm� '��lYwYz4Wew4etr. yu�fmhrmm
id JUxclmkCmidi¢Ms.o�bammNuexwmRe�ama IOrm'�mix�WmmeBvhi.wve�emccmmtWaYWwJI
evra4em.
/RopvtynpwtSam�etavb¢mErAmu[xmois J� vuhowamabi.16omc.Co+���B4•p�cao- weaanaY.
@elmtvumw+re�Wmiry u�il¢m�m�einmawepmaamEnmCol- ISn�➢mJopmwm�Il�a�mPm6ary'putic
I�xtmd�ayGemNquebAnau EeopdmW.
JCmce �adabcmmrtrce�mataL�wbh
r�ra�..rs.ma. v�mrv�r�aaawm..mbu�evmw�a.im �w���wc�mn�,wr«m...noo�wmaa
is��a�,.,rim.oaQao�ym��M�ma ��'Yr�ooro:otreo.m�.a.memv . „�nr oemmnwa�m,��d:.�wnQmm
JGtrANipfivmPamwiOhTPma��oNmtmvaul iSceb'<lm>�amC�
JPafiml��m��nNi��'q'homtlwiobutn (`�°�4nY.acJWx'ed�aJamac4iv<wbmnu�w�uc. .
JLImW�IiryiW.m�eal3vova'4Mme�me(wiM lNeuat�BP�Ppsuhfivm��cvry/P+QoemWuetim
atrut�maia� ad�rvecwtlmL
lW6ar�JmZuvMa mtlr/W�mm�a�mpi.'�1 'il'`���`ar4i8W 6cmmc+iv8fb�m(truncFlo�ca�:�.'m�habd'v1
xa�wmr,w�mmm.mmpiarbt�a�.+wer �cm«�ma.«ru�moen�ow��<�r�wk�� •�wmaw�mae;.c
Eams4���.
.Iyaavegr.Woramd JPIace6ayEaluuoWzamuuemvn6hm'wkKm
Immuv.N vnlme�brraxacMe�Wqrmaimv+� lAvoidu.er.�Iirawnbl•vcvucMfam�¢�auvvl. �Q��waffrmymgmmmxam�bd adiur2m
16c9Nrmtl�.
AYrLfmcllurtDm�O��^r�[myleao> JA � � whevtr�nkwSaW6.LLmfvn-
umWraa J Whm bmk'v{t�R v��'b8. x ma mqek�eu tlrpieeo
IfmYot�bveimEiEwacd�neo�tatfarcwhmaetim a� mddvpo�eg�cly.
mdrmerxme4epmlWmQuJUYCmuolBmL �An'''b'��eWONP�•�mtbenueb�muV..ill
`�•'Od�1px'��"�`. JAn:yGeluyscWm�zotbaokevcawele4s1aoa611.
• iS�nWv]meNtiovt���.o�dw lMekeswab�akevWv��tdnxmltoNeuawelws6
• Adalorcdmdapumdla6 JAolatavAl*b�md��mkieCmaBu.r,cumvLSEovtl JOivpweo(�IlmoumefucuAY�v�.patl.
. ��a�worma. •••m�r�ww.mo.�o�.e�me •m�,,..m�mm
J Nma duy aolk m NVNa�s v�ne metwiat
JNTMhowdowvevemmc4mw YadCirtUshy
meWed.
lFmollvedpmypmvMbnWum�beaeapm� JRss�eM1tlw'vaan➢Wf Mvasimemtdtm
UcmdacmwiWtt�¢errolvm[mapo�vcmL'me- .
F�w ml ms Ih�m md wNaoY.11uWz afueeff
byuitlamdmiA�euWmtlauwaue. L�inapue'('i�Nmd4ieb�xm
I Use W M+a'+de+wE (alb.labei dfrsticoe Rme mo-
h'mt �movai �c`iml vw une�w�br R�� �Vme of�aw.d
lP�a[chiP��Mutfimm¢-hamdoo�dry�PP�n¢ �beo�m
aW aaE bl•••�, msy bea�vept �q a mila*e0 mpWUc
��m..maaoKaot,.a�,n. �u.�v�or�.mv�veR�.�awe...�
JGlemicdP�dmPP�mi3�emdctip.v4Av¢ JCdlmlawendP���PPmRP�Bwmc.mluac
8amm.mcP�4mY�����omlkadwmbuh'I vi�mB+CAPifmawuY.aodivmpasL
m mm1 be d'upo+cd o(m haa�tlw� wkx
�wnm.�e�m��eu�.�ave..�m.w,mmae- �wm�e�y�w.�..cW�x�� m� +me�a
prauuc.ear.nWticsnnmdom�.RS.tmicomo.mn .r.mkrW'bWey+pweehpm<ooteaev0�vte
wW4a�iebwJ.O{�LcckNWMclm]vaflexaRr bslaAGllf&[om�csbyvdvYb. .
nammimLeiH m 6ed aot Jlw mwOs� (moP w
.wnm)W�dioBclawmyw+eeaodd'upaem�hewibiY lDem[Dlevaa4lu�Rwlmmeaumt.
Wy¢rn�HS^mP��^e oftDcw+taml'tr+c�eredm cw� Wc
rtatmmt+umpLLYmmlmH9adetirim PooUPweatiu9ry MJatm�vice
J:lY�� dlm'vsax��c!ci<vetm.mxta
Re+F'b5cma IeXmvqm wbavF�L4
! Facyrle m Eigox af evue wa4nbuM P�t �t •
howe6oWL�a�danw�erollacmfieiliN.mweW. JWhmempp�vigapoWURWrLb�mediu�Ye�Sb
R'heoAryuem+�m6�YmJ'.�pYWm��.�vd >dry�"ILmayckwffihY��m¢tit6+�1�Y�b�
aomd.ow.mumw�em.�e.m.wmo�,.ee- ��.o�a��a�st.vam..r�
bgm.uoln�YLvdGIl 'dom.
lRcuwkCOovaoil-buad➢m�D'oWAetmfm�ti�ryQQ JCb1��4dvmmaYbomdivLcgaibme�itsy
�ama.�+...e.�.wu_ . c.c('a�a.mqro�ew+�..�wmwd�m�q)q
�. m.. m. w*�r.mt w.oa Pw a�ei�
JSmJ19^a��r&�+d+�a�moaHulackwiroWOSahL4o 9w.
CcmlyF�no'va�mhl9NW Dlvifbvm9�ertcY<Imt
Rb�md.im wark L'opwl � J Pa wt m mp�c-hd �I�b�� Crntloi �Ipu viA
�L6xmc u m6a .Imvatiw m mppc-ba�d pooi A�i-
Storm drain polluters may be liable for fines of up to $25,000 per da.y! 'e �;� ���%� �,� �' �'���.~
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW
AND VARIANCES
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for
Desiqn Review and Variances for floor area ratio and covered parking space width for
conversion of lower level crawl space to habitable space and other improvements to an existing
single family dwellinq at 1511 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, Jon and Kate Herstain, property
owners, APN: 026-033-080;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
November 22, 2010, 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 15301 (e)(1)
of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that additions to existing structures are exempt
from environmental review, provided the addition will not result in an increase of more
than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition.
2. Said Design Review and Variances are approved subject to the conditions set forth in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review and Variances are set
forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said meeting.
3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official
records of the County of San Mateo.
Chairman
I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of
Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a
regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22�d dav of November, 2010 by the
following vote:
Secretary
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption Design Review and Variances.
1511 Drake Avenue
Effective December 2, 2010
that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date
stamped November 10, 2010, sheets A-1.1 through A-3.3;
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);
3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage,
which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this
permit;
4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's October 12, 2010, September 30, 2010
and August 5, 2010 memos, the City Engineer's August 6, 2010 memo, the Parks
Supervisor's August 9, 2010 memo, the Fire Marshal's August 9, 2010 memo, and the
NPDES Coordinator's August 4, 2010 memo shall be met;
5. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the Floor Area
Ratio Variance and Parking Variance, as weli as any other exceptions to the code granted
here will become void;
6. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project
shall be placed upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the Community
Development Director;
7. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the
site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be
required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;
8. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project
construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of
approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall
remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process.
Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not
be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council
on appeal;
9. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single
termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that
these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a
Building permit is issued;
10. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling
Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to
submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full
demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit;
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption Design Review and Variances.
1511 Drake Avenue
Effective December 2, 2010
11. 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:
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;
13. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height
of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and
14. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the
architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been
built according to the approved Planning and Building plans.
J � �
, CITY OF BURLINGAME
° COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
���z! lNGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
i
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
� ��;` PH: (650) 558-7250 � FAX: (65(
��' ���� www.burlingame.org
Site: 1511 DRAKE AVENUE
� � ", � ^
�. »
� [� 9
�
��; �;>� 3•;,�,-��ry
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announ�es the ���L,� �������
following public hearing on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2010 ���'��
at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingame, fA:
Application for Design Review and Variances for floar areu
ratio and covered parking space width far conversion af lower
level crawl space to ha6itable space and other improvements
ta an existing single family dwelling at 1511 DRAKE
AVENUE zoned R-l. APN 026-033-080
Mailed: November 12, 2010
(Please refer to other side)
• �, . • .
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
• i
(P/ease refer to other side)