HomeMy WebLinkAbout128 Lorton Avenue - Staff Report (2)PROJECT LOCATION
128 Lorton Avenue
Item No. 9c
Environmental Scoping &
Design Review Study
City of Burlingame
New 19-Unit Residential Condominium
Address: 128 Lorton Avenue
Item No. 9c
Design Review Study
Meeting Date: October 15, 2019
Request: Application for Environmental Scoping, Design Review, Condominium Permit and Density Bonus
Concession and Waivers/Modifications for construction of a new five-story, 19-unit residential
condominium with at-grade parking.
Applicant: Chris Grant, The Pacific Companies APN: 029-231-210
Property Owner: Lorton Management Corp. Lot Area: 7,500 SF
Architect: Architects Orange
General Plan Designation: Downtown Specific Plan Zoning: R-4 (R-4 Incentive District Subarea)
Adjacent Development: Five-level public parking garage (under construction), multifamily residential and
commercial uses
Current Use: Multifamily residential (4 units)
Proposed Use: 19-unit condominium building with at-grade parking.
Allowable Use: Multifamily, duplex, and single family residential uses.
Environmental Review: Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines is
intended to promote in-fill development within urbanized areas. This class consists of in-fill projects which are
consistent with local general plan and zoning requirements. This class is not intended to be applied to projects
which would result in significant impacts on endangered, rare, or threatened species, traffic, noise, air quality,
water quality, utilities, and public services. Application of this exemption, as all categorical exemptions, is
limited by the exceptions described in Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15332 states:
(a)
(b)
The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan
policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres
substantially surrounded by urban uses.
(c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or
water quality.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The City has entered into a contract with ICF to prepare and document the analysis, findings, and
determination that the proposed project will have been reviewed and in compliance with the CEQA, pursuant to
Section 15332 of the 2019 CEQA Statute and Guidelines. The scope of work includes analysis of potential
transportation/traffic, noise, and air quality impacts. If it is determined, through the analysis process, that
additional CEQA review is required (such as an Initial Study), the scope of work will be revised accordingly.
Project Summary: The applicant is proposing construction of a new five-story, 19-unit residential
condominium building with an enclosed at-grade parking garage at 128 Lorton Avenue, zoned R-4, within the
R-4 Incentive District Subarea. The R-4 Incentive District Subarea is located within the Burlingame Downtown
Specific Plan Area and located south of Howard Avenue between Highland Avenue and Park Road. In order
to provide an incentive to encourage high density residential uses, buildings or structures up to fifty-five (55)
feet in height are allowed by right within this Subarea. Multifamily residential uses are permitted, but are
limited to a maximum average unit size of 1,250 SF.
The project site is located immediately adjacent and to the south of the approved five-level public parking
garage (construction is underway) which will provide 368 parking stalls when completed. The parking garage
will be set back 10'-0" from the shared side property line, 14'-0" from the shared rear property line, and will be
48 feet tall.
Environmental Scoping, Design Review, Condominium Permit 128 Lorton Avenue
and Density Bonus Concession and Waivers/Modifications
The project site currently contains four residential units in two separate buildings. These buildings would be
demolished to build the proposed 19-unit residential condominium building. The existing buildings were not
identified on the Draft Inventory of Historic Resources of the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan. The site is
bordered by three-story apartment buildings to the south and across Lorton Avenue to the east, and a
privately-owned vehicle storage lot to the west. A five-level public parking garage will be built on the lot
immediately to the north (construction is underway).
The proposed building would contain 19 residential units in four floors above an enclosed at-grade parking
garage. Each of the units will contain a kitchen/great room, bedrooms, bathrooms and a space for a
washer/dryer. The proposed project includes 11 one-bedroom units, 7 two-bedroom units and 1 three-
bedroom unit. Unit sizes range from 630 SF to 1,500 SF; the average unit size proposed is 785 SF (1,250 SF
average maximum unit size permitted). An enclosed trash room is provided within the garage.
A total of 17 parking spaces are provided on-site in an enclosed at-grade parking garage (14 parking spaces in
a puzzle stacker system and 3 independent spaces). All vehicles would enter and exit the project through a
driveway entrance on Lorton Avenue.
During preliminary review Planning staff identified the following applications required for this project:
■ Design Review for the proposed construction of a new five-story, 19-unit residential condominium
building (C.S. 25.29.020 and 25.57.010, and Chapter 5 of the Downtown Specific Plan);
■ Condominium Permit for construction of new residential condominium building (C.S. 26.30.020); and
■ Density Bonus Concession for off-street parking and Waivers/Modifications of development standards
including building setbacks (front, left/right sides and rear), lot coverage, building height, common open
space, and private open space requirements (C.S. 25.63.050).
Design Review: The purpose of this design review study meeting is to provide initial comments on design
elements as they relate to the proposed project.
The proposed project is subject to Chapter 5 of the Downtown Specific Plan (Design & Character). Section 5.3
(pages 5-17 through 5-21) provides design guidelines specifically for residential projects within the Downtown
Specific Plan area. Section 5.4 (pages 5-22 through 5-27) provides more general design guidelines that apply
to all areas of the downtown, including residential and mixed use areas. These applicable sections of the
Design and Character chapters of the Downtown Specific Plan have been attached for reference.
The materials proposed for the exterior of the building include cement plaster walls with decorative reveals,
manufactured stone veneer, decorative cornice/trip along the top edge of the building, precast decorative
panels, and glass guardrails at balconies. Aluminum framed doors and windows are proposed on the ground
floor, while the windows on the upper floors will be vinyl. A painted metal screen is proposed to conceal
rooftop mechanical equipment. A green screen landscape wall is proposed at the ground level along the left
side of the building, facing the public parking garage.
Please refer to the building elevations on sheets A4.0 and A4.1 and perspective renderings on sheets G1.0,
A1.0 and A1.1 for additional information. The building elevations and renderings also include the approved
five-level public parking garage for reference.
Off-Street Parking: Parking requirements are based on the number of bedrooms proposed per unit. Zoning
Code Section 25.70.032 provides reduced residential parking standards specific to properties located within
the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan. In the R-4 Incentive District Subarea, the minimum parking
requirement is 1 space for each studio unit or one-bedroom unit, 1.5 spaces for each two-bedroom unit, and 2
2
Environmental Scoping, Design Review, Condominium Permit 128 Lorton Avenue
and Density Bonus Goncession and Waivers/Modifications
spaces for each three-bedroom unit. The proposed project includes 11 one-bedroom units, 7 two-bedroom
units and 1 three-bedroom unit. Therefore, the zoning code requires a total of 24 off-street parking spaces
where 17 parking spaces are proposed. The applicant is applying for a density bonus concession for off-street
parking requirements (see "Density Bonus Concession and Waivers/Modifications" section further in the staff
report). There is no guest parking required on-site for properties located within the Downtown Specific Plan.
The code requires that the condominium development provide an area for deliveries. The code does not
specify that it be a dedicated parking space, only that it be "an area for on-site deliveries." The project
proposes that spac� #17 double as a short-term delivery or service vehicle parking; the space would be posted
to allow for such use.
The project include:; an at-grade parking garage providing a total of 17 parking spaces. Within the garage, the
applicant is proposing to install a puzzle stacker parking system manufactured by CityLift, which would provide
14 of the 17 parking spaces. The remaining three spaces, including a disabled-accessible space, would be
provided as standar�� parking spaces.
The proposed puzzle stacker system accommodates two vehicles stacked vertically and provides independent
access to all cars parked on the system (one empty slot required for each automated unit). All vehicles would
enter and exit the pr�ject through a driveway entrance on Lorton Avenue.
The Municipal Code does not include specifications for automated parking systems, so the City currently does
not have a standard mechanism for review and approval. However, as a policy the Downtown Specific Plan
encourages "creative approaches" to providing on-site parking including automated parking systems. The
parking system and :>haring space #17 to provide an area for delivery vehicles could each be considered within
the scope of "creativ�e approaches" to providing the required on-site parking. To date, the City has approved
several commercial and residential projects with parking lifts/automated parking systems.
The Downtown Specific Plan notes that "new development should provide safe, secure facilities for bicycles.
This can be accom�►lished in a number of ways, depending on the type of development. Where possible,
secured, indoor parkung space (i.e. lockable, caged space) for bikes should be provided in all new residential
and commercial buildings. New projects should include bike stalls to allow users the opportunity to securely
store their bicycles. These can include racks or hooks on walls in front of parking spaces in residential
buildings, and designated and secure bicycle storage areas in commercial buildings." The applicant proposes
to provide bicycle storage in each unit with racks or hooks on walls.
Common and Private Open Space: A total of 500 SF (26.3 SF/unit) of common open space is proposed for
the condominium project where 1,900 SF (100 SF/unit) is required. The common open space is provided at
the rear of the lot and would contain paving and landscaping. The applicant is applying for a
waiver/modification of the common open space requirements (see "Affordable Units/Density Bonus Incentives"
section further in the staff report).
The applicant is proposing to provide private open spaces (balconies) in five of the 19 units; the balconies
range in size from 7g SF to 280 SF (75 SF/unit is the minimum required). The applicant is applying for a
waiver/modification of the private open space requirements (see "Affordable Units/Density Bonus Incentives"
section further in the staff report).
Landscaping: Existing landscaping consists of turf and shrubs at the front and rear of the site. There is one
small street tree in front of the site. The applicant is proposing to replace all of the existing landscaping with
new landscaping.
Proposed landscaping is shown on the Landscape Plan (sheet L1), which includes three, 24-inch box trees
and a variety of shrub� and small decorative plants throughout the site. The applicant is proposing 50% (127
3
Environmental Scoping, Design Review, Condominium Permit 128 Lorton Avenue
and Density Bonus Concession and Waivers/Modifications
SF) landscaping �rvithin the required front setback where 50% (125 SF) is the minimum required. The project
meets all other zoning code and condominium permit requirements.
In accordance with the City's requirements, each lot developed with a multifamily residential use is required to
provide a minimun� of one 24-inch box-size minimum non-fruit trees for every 2000 SF of lot coverage. Based
on the proposed project, a total of three landscape trees are required on site. In addition, the City Arborist is
requiring that the �existing street tree be replaced with two new street trees within the planter strip on Lorton
Avenue.
128 Lorton Avenu�e
Lot Area: 7,500 S1= Plans date stamped: Se tember 30, 2019
PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED
SETBACKS
Frorrt Setback: 5'-0" (all floors) ' 18'-6" (all floors) (block average)
Left Side Setback: 0'-0" (all floors) ' 5'-0" on first floor + additional
1'-0" for each floor above the first
fioor
-- - - - - - - .._...._.......... - - ---- ----- -- - -- - ...._.....__.....__ - - - - --� ----- -....... .._.. - -- - ............ - ---...
Right Side Setback: 5'-0" (all floors) ' 5'-0" on first floor + additional
1'-0" for each floor above the first
floor
Rear Setback: 10'-0" (all floors) ' 20'-0" (all floors)
Lot Coverage: 5,901 SF 3,750 SF
78.6% 2 50%
___"""_".._."_.._....._' ..............................""......... "...""""..""""."_"."_'......_........""_".'."_"""...."................................."..._._...._.._".___..._._"""""".""..........4............."...".'....................'..""'..__.'""_".....".."".."._........... ...__...
Buildirrg Height: 65'-0" to top of elevator enclosure 3 75'-0" maximum
56'-0" to top of main building 55'-0" by right
CUP required to exceed 35'-0"
Density bonus waiver/modification requested for front, right and left side, and rear setback requirements.
Density bonus waiver/modification requested for lot coverage requirements.
Density bonus waiver/modification requested for building height requirements. Building height measured
to elevator and stairway enclosures because they take up more than 5% of roof area (8.2% proposed).
Table continued on next page.
4
Environmental Scoping, Design Review, Condominium Permit
and Density Bonus C;oncession and Waivers/Modifications
128 Lorton Aven4ie
128 Lorton Avenue
Lot Area: 7,500 S1= Plans date stamped: September 30, 2015
PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQUIRED
Fro�nt Setback 50% 50%
Laridscaping: 127 SF 125 SF
.
Private Open Space: 78 SF — 280 SF/unit in 5 of 19 units 4 75 SF per unit
-- -..___... - � - - - - - -- -- ...__._... -- - .._._._..... ---- - �-- - - --..._........ - .....- - - � ._...___ --
Common O�en Space: 500 SF 5 1,900 SF
Off-Street Parking: 17 spaces 28 bedrooms x 0.5 = 14
(14 spaces provided in automatic 14 spaces by California State
puzzle stacker + 3 standard spaces) ; Government Code
11, 1-bdrm units x 1= 11 spaces
; 7, 2-bdrm units x 1.5 = 10.5 spaces
1, 3-bdrm units x 2= 2 spaces
24 spaces by Zoning Code
Area for deliveries in space #17 Area for on-site deliveries required
100% covered 80% must be covered
Density bonus waiver/modification requested for private open space requirements.
Density bonus waiver/modification requested for common open space requirements.
Density Bonus Concession and Waivers/Modifications - Affordable (Below-Market Rate) Units: The
Density Bonus Ordinance is discretionary, and while projects are required to submit residential impact fees,
they are not obligat:ed to provide affordable units unless they seek to utilize development concessions and
waivers/modificatior�s of development standards offered by the ordinance, and/or provide affordable units in
lieu of submitting residential impact fees. Code Section 25.63.40 allows development concessions and
incentives where af�ordable units are offered, with more incentives offered when lower income and a higher
percentage of BMR units are provided.
Code Section 25.63.050 allows waivers or modifications where affordable units are offered. An applicant may
apply for a waiver or modification of development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding
the construction of a development at the densities. The developer must demonstrate that development
standards that are requested to be waived or modified will have the effect of physically precluding the
construction of a deiisity bonus project permitted under the law. Please refer to the applicant's density bonus
application, dated October 10, 2019, for additional information.
The application includes a request to utilize the density bonus ordinance, consistent with the provisions set
forth in Government Code Sections 65915 through 65919, which is the state density bonus law. The project
includes 10% of the total units (2) as moderate-income units. In San Mateo County the "Moderate Income"
category is defined as households earning between 81%-120% of the San Mateo County Area Median Income
(AMI), which in 2019 corresponds to up to $119,400 for a single-person household or $164,750 for a family of
four.
�i
Environmental Scoping, Design Review, Condominium Permit
and Density Bonus Concession and Waivers/Modifications
The applicant is requesting the following density bonus concession:
128 Lorton Avenue
■ Off-Street Parking Requirements: Consistent with state density bonus law, C.S. 25.63.040 (b) allows
one concession for projects with 10% of the units offered as BMR units for moderate income levels. The
applicant i:s requesting relief of the off-street parking requirements by providing 17 parking spaces
where 24 spaces are required for the proposed project.
The applicant is requesting the following waivers of the following development standards:
Front, Left and Right Side, and Rear Setback Requirements: The project application includes
requests for waivers from front, left and right side, and rear setback requirements.
Front Setback: The proposed front setback is 5'-0" to all floors of the building, where 18'-6" is required
based on the average of the block. Staff would note that the five-level public parking garage
immediately to the north of the site was approved with a 5'-6" setback along Lorton Avenue.
Left Side Setback: The proposed left side setback is 0'-0" on all floors of the building, where 5'-0" and
an additional 1'-0" for each floor above the first floor is the minimum required for condominium
developments. The parking garage adjacent to the site will be set back 10'-0" from the shared property
line.
Right Side :3etback: The proposed right side setback is 5'-0" on all floors of the building, where 5'-0"
and an additional 1'-0" for each floor above the first floor is the minimum required for condominium
developments. The adjacent three-story multifamily residential building to the south (124 Lorton
Avenue) is located 11'-0" from the side property line.
Rear Setback: The proposed rear setback is 10'-0" on all floors of the building, where 20'-0" is the
minimum required. The lots directly behind the project site will contain a portion of the public parking
garage (14'-i�" from the rear property line) and an existing a privately-owned vehicle storage lot (there
are no existing buildings on this lot).
Lot Coverage: The proposed lot coverage is 78.6% (5,901 SF) where 50% (3,750 SF} is the maximum
allowed.
Building Height: As previously noted, in order to provide an incentive to encourage high density
residential uses, buildings or structures up to 55'-0" in height are allowed by right within the R-4
Incentive District Subarea; the maximum building height allowed is 75'-0". The proposed project
consists of the following building heights:
56'-0 to the top of the building parapet
61'-0" to the top of the rooftop mechanical equipment screening
65'-0" to the top of the elevator enclosure (the stair and elevator enclosures are not exempt from
the builcNing height requirement since they cover more than 5% of the roof area (8.2% proposed).
Private Open Space: The applicant is proposing to provide private open spaces, consisting of
balconies, in f�ve of the 19 units where a minimum of 75 SF is required in each unit. Balconies provided
in the five units range in size from 78 SF to 280 SF.
Common Open Space: The proposed common open space is 500 SF where 1,900 SF is the minimum
required based on the 19-unit building (100 SF/unit). The common open space is provided at the rear of
the lot and contains paving and soft landscaping.
0
Environmental Scoping, Design Review, Condominium Permit 128 Lorton Avenue
and Density Bonus Concession and Waivers/Modifications
The Downtown Specific Plan and corresponding zoning do not provide for specific density limits (dwelling units
per acre); therefore, a number of bonus units is not applicable. However, because the proposed project
includes 10% of the units to be offered to moderate income households, under Chapter 25.63 the project is
eligible for concessions and wai��ers/modifications received in building form of which, in practice, would allow
the project to reach a higher d�nsity than what would have been able to under the regular development
standards.
General Plan/Specific Plan: The General Plan designates the site as Downtown Specific Plan. In 2010 the
City Council adopted the Burlincrame Downtown Specific Plan (with amendments in 2014, 2015, 2016, and
2017), which serves as an eleme�nt of the General Plan. The subject property is located within the boundaries
of the planning area for the Dowr�town Specific Plan; the site is in the R-4 Incentive District. The Plan describes
the R-4 Incentive District as follows:
The R-4 Incentive District consists of lands in the southern portion of Downtown, on either side of
Bayswater Avenue between Highland Avenue and Park Road. The land uses for this area are
predominantly higher density multifamily residential. The development standards for this district provide
incentives to encourage high density residential uses. In addition to residential uses, small corner
retails stores serving local residents would be allowed.
Public Facilities Impact Fee: l-he purpose of public facilities impact fees is to provide funding for necessary
maintenance and improvements created by development projects. Public facilities impact fees are based on
the uses, the number of dwellinc� units, and the amount of square footage to be located on the property after
completion of the development project. New development that, through demolition or conversion, will eliminate
existing development is entitled t.o a fee credit offset if the existing development is a lawful use under this title,
including a nonconforming use.
Based on the proposed 19-unit multifamily dwelling apartment development, the required public facilities
impact fee for this development K>roject is $83,055.00.
Residential Impact Fee: The purpose of residential impact fees is to support and build new homes for lower-
income residents. The fees can be charged to developers of new residential projects and used for land
purchase, construction costs, or site rehabilitation related to providing workforce housing. The fees are waived
if at least 10% of the units in �� development are provided at rents or sales prices affordable to Moderate
Income households for a perio�d of 55 years. Because the project includes 10% of the total units (2) as
moderate-income units, the residlential impact fee is waived.
Staff Comments: None.
Planning Commission Action:
1. Design Review Study: The Planning Commission should comment on the design of the project as
required by Chapter 25.57 of the Zoning Ordinance, Design Review, and to the following design criteria
for multifamily projects (C:ode Section 25.57.030 f, 1-4):
(1) Compatibility with th�e existing character of the neighborhood;
(2) Respect the mass a�nd fine scale of adjacent buildings even when using differing architectural
styles;
(3) Maintain the tradition of architectural diversity, but with human scale regardless of the architectural
style used; and
(4) Incorporate quality materials and thoughtful design which will last into the future.
Environmental Scoping, Design Review, Condominium Permit
and Density Bonus Concession and I✓Vaivers/Modifications
Ruben Hurin
Planning Manager
c. Chris Grant, The Pacific Companies
Attachments:
Application to the Planning Commission
Density Bonus Application, dated September 30, 2019
Downtown Specific Plan Applicab�le Design Guidelines (reference only)
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed October 4, 2019
Aerial Photo
128 Lorton Avenue
E:3
eukunctnME
C�RflMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 501 PRIMROS6 R;OAD • Bt�RLINGAME, CA 94Q10 I
p: 650.55�'.7250 • f; 654.696.3790 • www.burlingame,org
APPLICA 1C}N TO T(�E PLANP�[NG CCJMMISSI
Type of apptication:
[.�- Design Review ❑ Variance � Parcel #: c`,7 a� % - �-3l ���$
❑ Conditianal Use Permit ❑ Spec'ral Permit >❑ �oning / Other:
PROJECT ADDRESS: I� ��+ �����
APPL(CANT '
Name: �-���^,`� ��'��.�,r�
Address: �
CityiState/Zip:
Phone:
E-rnaii:
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
Name; ��v� 1� `�
Address: �'`� �.� ��e v��n f�v`2.
PRUPERTY OWNER
Name: ,"`�`_�r+��. � � _ ��9 f/�" '
Address: � °�..�' ��s,�.�'�,� .—_
CitylSta�.
Phone:
E-mail:
City/state/Zip: _ �/� �,�� q,���
Ph one: 7l �' � '!� " � ���
E-mail: �v: tt' �r! � ; t� , �/'�. , ct��-:
Burlingame Business License �:
�������� �
�
i'��°'� � � ����
.'; �`'F` � �� b�—��.!�i..€�i"� g%����
�t.� �'' ���;,�, �� �
Authorizatior[ to Repraduce Proiect Plans:
I hereby grani the Ci#y of Burlin��me the �u�t�ority ta repraduce upon request andlc�r post plans submitted with this
application an the City's websit� as part of the Planning approva! process and wa�ve any claims against the Ci#y
arising out of or related to such action. (lrtitials of Architect/Qesignerj
PRC?JECT DESCRIPTtON: (
P:�.
tx � (�'j�•. ,
A�FlDAVITI9lGNATU
best of my knowledge
Applicant°s signaturf
I am aware of the prop
C€�rnmission.
Property owner's sig
that the information given herein is true and correct to the
Date: !t`�-JI �/�
icant to subm"st this applicaiion io fhe Planning
�ate: 1 f 1f�7�:�z, �t �
Date suk�m'itted: � � � � � � �
5: �HANDQUTS�PCAppllcation. doc
THE
�����1�
COMPANIES
Revised — October 10, 2019
Revised — September 30, 2019
Revised - July 15, 2019
November 21, 2018
Mr. Ruben Hurin
Planning Manager
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
RE: Density Bonus Application
Lortoni Heights - 128 Lorton Avenue
Applicants: Stephanie Gildred and Pacific West Communities, Inc.
Architects: David Ho (Architects Orange)
Dear Ruben:
We are pleased to pravide for review 128 Lorton, an affordable housing condominium project
located at 128 Lorton Avenue (APN 029-231-210). The project will be a joint venture between
the owner of the property, Stephanie Gildred, and Pacific West Communities, Inc., an
affordable housing developer. Plans provided with this application demonstrate our ambition to
redevelop the property for higher density residential dwelling units.
Pursuant to Government Code Section § 65915 and Burlingame Municipal Code 25.63 we
hereby submit this Df;nsity Bonus application. This document is prepared with the intent of
providing the written explanation of our requests and clarifying use of California Gov. Code §
65915, known as Dernsity Bonus Law, and California Gov. Code § 65589.5, known as the
Housing Accountability Act.
To accomplish this density the project will rely on California Gov. Code, § 65915 (hereafter
Density Bonus Law). This statue provides qualifying affordable housing developments specific
rights as defined in Density Bonus Law subdivision (b).
For purposes of density bonus eligibility, the project elects to be classified as having an
affordable housing camponent under Government Code § 65915 (b)(1)(D). This project will
contain at least 10% of units for moderate income households in a common interest
development. Compliance with this section provides for application of State Density Bonus
Law to the project and bestows all of the rights, privileges and benefits of the statute.
Ph: 2C38.461.OQ22 JJ Fax: 2G�8.�L61.0C333 J/ 430 E. State Street} Ste. 1Q0 J/ ��gle, ND 83618 /J .�r��s.�;�c:hszusif�c�.s�aaa�
Prolect Description
The property is located in Zoning District R4. Lot size is 0.172 acres. The project is designed
with 19 dwelling units. The building will consist of 4 levels of residential over an on-grade
parking podium. 17 parking spaces will be provided for the project via a two level stacking
system. The housing unit mix includes 11 one-bedroom, 7 two-bedroom, and 1 three-bedroom
apartments. Unit size;s range from 630 square feet to 1,500 square feet.
California Gov. Code�� § 659] 5 offers four categories of benefits to affordable housing
developments, such as this project. They include density bonuses, as described in subdivision
(b), incentives or concessions, as described in subdivision (d), waivers or reduction of
development standards, as described in subdivision (e), and parking ratios, as described in
subdivision (p). Each category is discussed in appropriate detail in this letter.
Density Bonus — suk»division (b)
It is important to understand how density bonus law is intended to work in tandem with the
local jurisdiction's development procedures. In keeping with Government Code § 65915(b) the
granting of the density bonus and concessions are given as a matter of right, simply for
providing the affordable housing. The statute is mandatory. The developer is entitled to receive
a specific percentage increase in the number of units and between one to three incentives or
concessions based ora the level of affordability of the project. [See § 65915(d)(2) and (�]. The
amount of the density bonus that the developer is entitled to receive is determined by a simple
mathematical formul�a as set forth in subdivision (�.
Lorton Heights qualifies for the density bonus by complying with Government Code §
65915(b)(1)(D) by providing for 10% of the units for moderate income households. The zoning
for this 0.172 acre site is R-4. With 19 units the density will be 111 dwelling units per acre�.
We find no restriction on density per acre for R-4 in Burlingame Municipal Code. As such no
increase in density is required for the project. Should density limitations be identified by staff
during the project design review process this section will be further developed.
Concessions/Incentuves — subdivision (d)
The developer also has the right to request any particular incentive or concession that will
positively impact the; project's ability or capacity to provide units at affordable housing costs or
rents for the targeted units. The local agency must approve the requested incentives or
concessions unless it makes a statutorily prescribed written finding, based upon substantial
' Fraction is rounded up per § fi5915(q)
evidence. [See § 65915(d)(1)]. If such a finding can be made to deny a particular concession,
the developer would have the right to utilize another concession.
Under § 65915(d)(1), the City must grant the concession requested by the applicant unless it
makes one of three v��ritten finding as specified in the statute, based upon substantial evidence.
These findings, as set forth in subdivision (d)(1)(A)-(C), are limited to the following:
A. The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions,
consistent �vith subdivision (k), to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in
Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be
set as specified in subdivision (c).
B. The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in
paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or
the physical environment or on any real property that is listed in the California
Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to
satisfactori�ry mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the
development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households.
C. The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law.
Density bonus projects are entitled by right to receive between one and three incentives or
concessions, depending on the level of affordability. In this case, since the developer proposes
to restrict at least 10'% of the units for occupancy by moderate income households, as shown in
the first page of this document, the project qualifies for one concession [Govt. Code §
65915(d)(2)(A); BMC 25.63.040]. As you will see below, the project's requested concessions
results in identifiablf, and actual cost reductions for this project, consistent with the definition of
a concession under state density bonus law2. The requested concession is as follows:
1) Reduction in Required Parking:
BMC § 26.30.070 requires multi-family residential condominiums to provide one parking
spaces per unit. There are 19 units for in this project. The development is able to provide
17 spaces via a stacking system. To provide the additional 2 parking spaces we would have
to either eliminate all ground level open space or provide for a very complex subterranean
parking system. The extra two parking spaces would cost at a minimam $50,000 each, and
� Under Subdivision (k)(1), a aoncession or incentive means:
"A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or arohitectural design requirements that
exceed the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5
(commencing with Section 18901) of Division 73 of the Health and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback
and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in
identifiable and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5. of the Health and
Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
likely much more depending on drainage and other structural requirements. This request
provides for a savings of $100,000. As such, we request that the number of required
parking spaces be reduced from 19 to 17.
Waivers or Reductions of Development Standards — subdivision (e)
Density Bonus projects have the right to relief from development standards via waivers and/ar
reduction of developtnent standards. The local agency must grant a waiver or modifcation of
any development standard that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction
of the density bonus project at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted
under the law. [See § 65915(e)(1)]. Our requests for waivers are identified below.
Hei�ht - Code Section 25.29.060
BMC § 25.29.095 sets height limitations for this property. R-4 Incentive District limits the
height to fifty-five (55) feet and requires a conditional use permit for projects exceeding 55 feet.
However, BMC § 25.29.095 includes this site within the R-4 Incentive District Subarea and
accordingly is entitled to by right high density residential uses up to 55 feet in height. If
limitation of 55 feet in height standard were applied to this project it would result in the loss of
either 1) an entire floor of dwelling units or 2) all upper stacked parking spaces in the parking
system. This would deprive the project of the benefit of the density requested for the project.
We request that the development standard for maximum height be waived so that all 19 units
can be constructed and no parking count reduction below proposed is required. Note that the
current submittal provides for the building height to be 56 feet. We are studying options to
reduce the height o within the 55' standard. Should this be feasible this waiver will be adjusted
accordingly.
Lot Coverage — Code; Section 25.29.070
BMC § 25.29.070 identifies the maximum lot coverage for all buildings and structures as 50%
for interior lots. If the project were required to meet the standard of no greater than 50%
coverage it would re��uce unit count by greater than 1 unit for each floor. This would deprive
the project of the requested density and concessions. We request that the development standard
for lot coverage be waived for this project.
Setback Lines— Code Section 25.29.075
BMC § 25.29.075 id�ntifies minimum side setback lines of 4 feet for lots less than 51 feet wide
and an increase setba�ck of one foot for every floor above the first floor. If this development
standard were required on this project it would result in reduction of parking on grade and
consequently loss of units corresponding to ihose parking spaces. We estimate the unit loss to
range between 3 and 10 units due to parking space loss. Elimination of the units as a result of
adhering to the 4 fee�t setback development standard would deprive the project of the proposed
density.
Code Section 25.29.075 also requires that buildings step back one additional foot for each level
above the ground floor setback. This results in the top floor residential space losing a total of
16 feet of usable site width. The impact to the project would result in the loss of at least one of
the three units on the top floor and one or more of the units on the 4t" floor. Rear setbacks
impact the density of the project in the same way, reducing unit counts on the top two floors.
We request that the dE�velopment standard for setbacks be waived for this project.
Private Open Space — Code Section 26.30.070(e)3
The project provides �private opens space for 5 of the 19 units. The site constraints for this
project are such that additional private open space would reduce the unit count. With the future
Lorton Park coming online in the very near future and the close walking distance to downtown
the future residents of these units wil( have adequate locations to recreate outdoors. As such the
cost of providing open space at the expense of losing much needed units seems a poor
exchange. We request that the private open space requirement be waived for this project.
Common Open Space — Code Section 26.30.070(e)4
The project provides 500 SF of common open space at the back of the property. The site
constraints for this pr�flject are such that additional common open space would require reduction
of unit count or loss of parking spaces. A common question for common open space is that of
providing it on the roof of the building. We have attempted on other projects to provide this
amenity on other projects without success. The cost to waterproofng, enhanced structural
loads, consolidation c�f inechanical equipment, safety railing measures, meeting accessibility
standards and various other costs preclude the option of common open space on the roof of the
building. We request that the common open space requirement be waived for this project.
There are 28 bedrooms amongst the 19 dwelling units. This results in an allowable parking
count of 14 spaces, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking. While as few as 14 spaces are
allowed under Density Bonus Law calculations this project is proposing to exceed the minimum
allowed. Added parking spaces are provided via a stacking system for a total of 17 parking
spaces inclusive of handicapped for use by building residents. Guest parking is anticipated to
utilize the proposed �arking garage directly adjacent to the project.
Housing Accountability Act — Review Standards
Additionally, I am sure that the City appreciates that as a low-income housing development, this
project also falls witriin the protected class under the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) [Govt.
Code §65589.5]. In keeping with the legislative intent of the HAA, a local government may not
reject or make infeasflble a housing development that contributes to meeting the jurisdiction's
need far low income housing as determined pursuant to the housing element process "without a
thorough analysis of �the economic, social, and environmental effects of the action and without
complying with subdivision (d)" [Govt. Code § 65589.5(b)].
Subdivision (d) provides that a jurisdiction shall not disapprove a low-income housing
development project or condition approval in a manner that renders the project infeasible for
development of low income households, "including through the use of design review standards,
unless it makes written findings, based upon substantial evidence in the record." Subdivision (d)
delineates five very specific reasons that would authorize a jurisdiction to deny an affordable
housing project. In this case, none of the statutorily prescribed reasons that would authorize
such a finding are present. Additionally, if any local jurisdiction denies a low income housing
development or conditionally approves the project, including design changes that have a
substantial adverse effect on the viability or affordability of the housing development, the
jurisdiction would bear the burden to show that its decision is consistent with the findings
required under § 655�89.5(d) and that such findings are supported by substantial evidence in the
record [Govt. Code § 65589.5(i)].
We appreciate the gracious support from the City of Burlingame for affordable housing
developments. Thank you for your attention and time commitments associated with your
review and approval of this project. With construction costs escalating daily we request this
project be processed �through the approval process expeditiously to limit financial impacts to the
viability of this affordable housing project.
Re rards,
Chris Grant
The Pacific Companies
http://t�����s�r��,, c�r�;
S.0 Design & Character
5.3 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Residential buildings in Downtown Burlingame offer higher densiry
development than elsewhere in the City, providing a lifestyle for those who �vant
to live within walking distance of the Downtown commercial axeas and transit
opportunities. New buildings will mediate this density with thoughtful design
and details that create attractive, livable residcntial environments. Buildings
should contribute to an appealing neighborhood character and should employ
recognizable residential design details such as �risible residential entries, porches,
bay� windows and roof overhangs, and balconies and small outdoor areas.
Below are recommendations for the architectural treatment and organization
of buildings and open space, and the suggested cxiteria for reviewing projects
during the design review process.
5.3.1 ARCHITECTURAL DIVERSITY
Residenual projects should respect the diversity of building types and
styles in the residential areas Downtown and seek to support it by�
applying the following principles:
• Design buildings to maintain genexal compatibiliry with the
neighborhood.
• Respect the mass and fine scale of adjacent buildings even when
using differing architectural styles.
• Maintains the txadition of archirectuxal divexsiry, but with human
scale regardless of the architectuxal style used.
• Create Uuildings with quality materials and thoughtful desi�i to
last into the future.
5.3.2 PEDESTRIAN USE AND CHARACTER
5.3.2.1 Entrances
Primary pedestrian access to all ground-level uses should be from
the sidewalk along the public street. Fntries should be clearly defined
features of front facades. Common entrances for multiple units are
FIGURE 5-27: Buildings should contribute to an appealing
neighborhood character and should employ recognizable residential
design details such as visible residential entries, porches, bay
windou�s and roof overhan�Os, and balconies and small outdoor areas.
FIGURE 5-28: Entries should be clearlv defined features of fro�rt
fa�ades, and are encouraged to have appropriately-scaled, usable
gathering spaces that invite informal social interaction with neighbors.
5.0 Design & Character
encouraged to havc appropriately-scaled, usable gathering spaces at
or adjacent to entrances that invite informal social interacrion with
neighbors.
5.3.2.2 Ground Level Treatment
Residential development may have a finished floor elevation up to 5
feet above sidewalk level to provide more interior privacy for residents.
Entry porches ox stoops along the street are encouraged to bridge this
change in elevation and connect these uruts to the sidewalk to minimizc
any physical separation from the srseet level. The street-level fxontage
should be visually interesting with frequent unit entrances and clear
orientation to the stxeet.
5.3.2.3 Site Access
Cuxb cuts should be minimized to promote traffic and pedestrian safery
and cxeate cohesive landscaping and building fa�ades. A ma�mum of
two curb cuts should be provided for projects requiring 30 parking
spaces ox moze; Eor projects with less than 30 spaces, only one curb cut
should be pxovidecl. One-way driveways should have curb cuts with a
full5 depressed width no greatex than 12 feet two-way curb cuts should
be no gxeater than 22 feet. On-site bicycle parking for xesidents is
encouraged.
5.3.3 ARCHITECTURAL COMPATIBILITY
5.3.3.1 Development Massing
'The resider.tial areas �within Dowr.t�wn Burlinga���e have a�at�ge
oE building heights, and so parucular atzention must be paid to
the massing of new buildings to ensure an appxopriate transition
with surrounding development. Massing and street fa�ades shall
be designed to cxeate a residential scale in keeping with Buxlingame
neighborhoods.
5-13
FIGURE 5-29: The street-level frontage should be visually interesting
with frequent unit entrances and strong orientation to the street.
FIGURE 5-30: Articulation, setbacks, and materials should
minimize massing, break down the scale of buildings, and
provide visual interest.
Articulation, setbacks, and matexials should minirnize massing, break
down the scale of buildings, and provide visual interest.
5.3.3.2 On-Site Structured Parking
Given the densit�- and premium land values Downtown, new projects
will likely provide on-site parking in enclosed garage structures,
underground, or in "semi-depressed" garages that are partially
underground and partially above ground.
Paxking should not be allowed to dominate the character of the project.
Where enclosed parking is at ground level, it should be fronted or
wrapped with habitable uses when possible. If it is not possible to
fully wrap the parking, it should be incorpoYated into the design of
the facade. Semi-depressed parking (paxtly below ground and paxtly
e�osed above gYound) should be screened with architectuxal elements
that enllance the stseetscape such as stoops, porches, or balcony
overhangs.
5.3.3.3 Roof Treatment
Interesting and varied roof forms are encouraged. Rooflines should
emphasize and accentuate significant elements of the building such
as entries, bays, and balconies. Rooftop equipment shall be concealed
fxom view and�ox integrated witliin the axchitectuxe of the building.
5.3.4 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONSISTENCY
5.3.4.1 Facade Design
Facades should include projecting eaves and overhangs, porches, and
other architectural elements that provide human scale and help break
up building mass. r1ll exposed sides of a building should be designed
with the same level of care and integrity. Facades should have a
variation of both positive space (massing) and negaCive space (plazas,
inset doorways and windows).
Occupied space
scrcrns packing
from sidcwalk.
�. .
r,
. ���... A, . ... ..
',,.. ?�Y..':,.
� rt
z �
.� ¢"�r�
y � ��;:
_ `, ,_ -. .�
FIGURE 5-31: Where enclosed parlang is at ground level,
it should be fronted or wrapped with uses that can be
occupied such as lobbies and living space when possible.
FIGURE 5-32: Semi-depressed
parking should be screened
with architectural elements that
enhance the streetscape such
as stoops, porches, or balcony
overhangs.
5.0 Design 3c Character
Elements such as entrances, stairs, poxches, bays and balconies should
be visible to people on the street. Corner paxcels are encoutaged to
incoxporate features such as corner entrances, bay windows, and corner
roof features, but should avoid monumentally-scaled elements such as
towexs.
5.3.4.2 Windows
projecting eaves and overhangs, porches, and other
architectural elements that provide human scale and help
break up buildin� mass.
Building walls should be accented by well-proportioned openings that
provide relief, detail and variation on the fa�ade. W'indows should be
inset generously from the building wall to create shade and shadow
detail. The use of high-quality window products that contribute to the
xichness, detail, and depth of the fa�ade is encouxaged. Windows with
mullions should have individual window lights, rather than applied
"snap-in" mullions that lack depth and are not integral to the window
structure. Reflective glass is undesirable because of its tendency to
cxeate uncomfoxtable g1aYe conditions and a visual basrier. Where
residential uses are adjacent to each other, windows should be placed
with regard to any open spaces or windows on neighboring buildings
so as to protect the pxivacy of residents.
5.3.4.3 Materials
Building materials should be richly detailed to provide visual intexest.
The use of materials that are reflected in the historic aYchitecture
present in the neighboxhood is encouraged. Metal siding and large
expanses of stucco or wood siding are also to be avoided. Roofing
mateYials and accenting features such as canopies, cornices, tile accents,
etc. should also offex color variation. Residential building materials
�hou1�1 include quality detai!s such as w:ought iron, wc��-.ramzd
windows, wood brackets and tile roofs.
5.3.5 SITE AMENITIES
5.3.5.1 Setbacks
Table 3-2 in Chaptex 3 specifies basic building standards such
as setbacks and height Building setbacks are intended to create
5-20
FIGURE 5-33: Residential facades should include
FIGURE 5-34: Windows should be inset generously from the
building wall to create shade and shadow detail.
a transition between the hardscape, urban environment of the
commexcial areas and the suburban setting in the surxounding
neighborhoods. Setbacks have multiple purposes, including providing
sunlight, places for landscaping, and areas for activity and recreation.
Building setbacks should be appropriately landscaped to provide
screening and introduce txees and plantings in this area. Landscaped
setUack areas should be integrated with buildings by provicling
openings in the building walls that connect the perimeter landscapin�
with interior courtyards and landscape pathways. Landscaping should
be planned in xelation to surrounding vegetative types with special
considexation being given to native species where possible. Pathways
and courryards should be made of pervious materials to allow
groundwater absorption.
5.3.5.2 Open Space
Private on-site open space within the Downtown area is not intended
to provide recxeational space or laxge landscaped areas, since this is
a more urban environment. However, open space is an important
element fox residential buildings and should be used to effectively
articulate building forms, promote access to light and fresh air, and
maintain pxivacy for powntown residents. In Yesidential development,
most open space should be used to pxovide attractive ameniues fox
residents, including interior courtyards, outdoor seating options and
perixnetex landscaping. Balconies and rooftop texraces are encouxaged.
Where open space is situated over a structural slab, podium or rooftop
it should have a combination of landscaping and high quality paving
materials, including elements such as planters, medium-sized trees,
and use of textuxed and�ox coloxed paved suYfaces. Plantexs may be
designed to not only accommodate coloxful oxnamental landscaping,
but could also accommodate gaxden plots fox "urban agriculture."
Trees should be selected from the Ciry's tree list.
FIGURE 5-35: Where open space is situated over a structural slab,
podium or rooftop it should have a combination of landscaping and
high quality paving materials, including elements such as planters,
mature trees, and urban agriculture.
5.0 Design & Chacactec
5.4 ADDITIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL AREAS OF
DOWNTOWN
5.4.1 LAND USE TRANSITIONS
Where appropriate, when new projects are built adjacent to existing
lower-scale residential development, care shall be taken to respect
the scale and privacy of adjacent pxoperties.
5.4.1.1 Massing and Scale Transitions
Transitions of development intensity from higher densiry
development building rypes to lower can be done through diffexent
building sizes or massing treatments that aYe compatible with the
lower intensity surrounduig uses. Massing and orientation of new
buildings should respect the massing of neighboring structures by
varying the massing within a project, stepping back upper stories,
reducing mass by composition of solids and voids, and varying sizes
of elements to transition to smaller scale buildings.
Tran.rition Element.r
3
8 2 Story 3-Story 4-Stor�
�
�
Low Density `' °
1-2 Story ;� � F ' �e � �
�_�;: _ " €, �rs�;, ; � f
>
�,�; r
��,� � � �
�. .
5.4.1.2 Privacy
Privacy of neighboring structures should be maintained with
windows and upper floor balconies positioned so they minirriize
views into neighboring properties, minimizing sight lines into and
from neighboruig properties, and limiting sun and shade impacts on
abutung propertics.
FIGURE 5-37: Transitions can also be made by stepping massing down within a
project, with lower building elements providing a buffer between taller elements
and adjacerii lower-density deveiopment.
5.4.1.3 Boundaries
��here appropriate, when difEerent land uses or building scales are
adjacent, buui�daries snould be established by pxoviciing pedestsian
paseos and mews to create separation, rather than walls or fences.
5-22
FIGURE 5-36: Transitions of development intensity from higher density
development building types to lower can be done though building types or
treatments that are compatible with the lower intensity surrounding uses.
Boundaries can be established by providing pedestrian paseos and mews to
create separation, rather than walls or fences.
� ,�
����'
� � .�` `� �.' _ �'�" �
.
����� - � .
� � �
, � _
,
, �� ___ ..
�� �,, `��� _
i>>. � a"��,��;:,.'��%�
, .,.. ���
— llI�,l�l?NSIV� ��
Cence scparatcs projects
FIGURE 5-38: Following a cooperative, rather than defensive design approach for the spaces between buildings results in a
more coherent downtown feel, as opposed to a collection of unrelated projects.
FIGURE 5-39: Example of two different land use intensities joined with a
common paseo pathway.
5.0 Design & Character
March 21st
June 21 st
t
= 5�
�
' � �
�� Fia�e t �.
Y`£ � .,
September 21 st �
June 21 st
September 21st
3pm
March 21 st
June 21 st
September 21 st
December 21st December 21st December 21st
FIGURE 5-40: Sample shadow analysis shows the range of shading conditions
through the year.
5.4.2 SHADOW IMPACTS
Every building invariably casts some shadows on adjoining parcels,
public streets, and/or open spaces. However, as the design of a
project is developed, considerarion should be given to the potential
shading impacts on surroundings. Site plans, inassing, and building
design should respond to potendal shading issues, minimi7ing
shading unpacts where they would be undesirable, or conversel5�
maximizing shading where it is desired.
As part of the design review process, development in the Specific
Plan Area that is proposed to be tallex than existing surrounding
stxuctures should be evaluated fox potential to create new shadows/
shade on public and/or quasi-public open spaces and major
pedestrian routes. 11t a minitnum, shadow diagrams should be
prepaxed for 9 AM, 12 noon, and 3 PM on March 21 st, June 21 st,
September 21 st, and December 21 st (approximately corresponding
to the solstices and equinoxes) to identify extreme conditions and
trends. If warxanted, diagtams could also be prepared for key dates
ox times of da�� — fox example, whether a sidewalk or public space
would be shaded at lunchtime during warmer months.
5-24
9 am 12 noon
5.4.3 SUSTAINABILITY AND GREEN BUILDING DESIGN
Project design and materials to achieve sustainability and green builcling
design should be incoxpoYated into projects. Green builcling design
considers the environment during design and constxuction and aims
fox compatibility with the local enviYonment: to pxotect, respect and
benefit from it. In general, sustainable buildings are energy efficient,
water conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high-quality spaces and
high recycled content materials. The following considerations should be
included in site and building design:
• Resilient, durable, sustainable materials and finishes.
• Flexibility over time, to allow for re-use and adaptation.
• Optimize building orientation fox heat gain, shading, daylighting,
and natural ventilation.
• Design landscaping to create comfortable micro-climates and
reduce heat island effects.
• Design for easy pedestsian, bicycle, and transit access, and pzovide
on-site bicycle paxking.
• Maximize on-site stormwater management through landscaping
and permeable pavement.
• On flat roofs, utilize cool/white roofs to minimize heat gain.
• Design lighting, pltunbing, and equipment for efficient energy use.
• Create healthy indoor env�onments.
• Pursue adaptive re-use of an existing building ox portion of a
building as an alternative to demolition and rebuilding.
• Use crcativity and innovation to build more sustainable
environments. One example is establishing gaYdens with edible
fruits, vegetables or oYhex plants as part oE pxoject open space, or
providing gaxden plots to resiclents for urban agriculture.
To reduce caxbon footprint, new projects are encouraged to follow
the standards and guidelines of the Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (I,F.ED) Green Building Rating System,
developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), and pursue
LEED certification if appropxiate.
South facing windows with shading
Summer
dcvices to contro] ovcnc�ating in
Sun
Summcr
� i
Wintcr Sur
Direc[ sunlight through
south facing windows would
improve passivc heating in
Winter
FIGURE 5-41: Use of shading devices to control solar loads in
summer and gain passive heat in winter.
FIGURE 5-42: Minimize stormwater runoff to
impermeable areas with landscaping, green roofs, and
rain gardens when possible.
S.0 Design & Character
5.4.4 LANDSCAPE TREES
The City of Burlingame has a long history of proactive tree planting
and proper tree care. Fxom the late 1800's when trees were planted
along El Camino Real and Easton Drive to the current day, Burlingame
has enjoyed the many benefits trees provide to an urban area.
Burlingame's longtime commitment to trees is evidenced by recogni-
tion as a"Tree City USA" for 30 consecutive years. This is the longest
streak in the County, 5th longest in the State and one of the longest in
the Country fox receiving this award.
In Downtown Burlingame, trees include street trees lining sidewalks
and roadways (typically within the public right-of-way), as well as trees
on private property in settings such as landscaped setback areas, court-
yards, and roof gardens.
open space plans.
Chaptex 4: Streetscapes & Open Space) provides guidance fox street
trees within the public right-of-way. Landscape txees on pxivate pxop-
exry have equal importance as part of the "urban forest," in contrib-
uting env�onmental and aesthetic benefits to downtown. Txees are
important for their beaury, shade and coolness, economic benefits, and
role in reducing energy use, pollution, and noise.
The City of Burlingame has an Uxban Foxest Management Plan that
includes policies and management practices for both city and private
trees. Maintaining existing trees is a priority; and large trees on private
property are protected by City Ordinance. Any tree with a circumfer-
ence of 48 inches ar more when measured 54 inches above the ground
1S 1��PYOiCCt�c� lYeC.�� t� peYYT11t 1.c YP��.11Ye� tn YPrppV2 nr hr �Vlly Yr"nv
a protected tree.
Consistent with Burlingame's status as "Txee City USA," new projects
are xequired to incorporate trees into landscape and private open space
plans. Property owners should consult the Buxlingame Urban Forest
Management Plan fox design considexations, planting techniques, and
maintenance guidance.
S-Z6
FIGURE 5-43: Consistent with Burlingame's status as "Tree City USA,"
new projects are required to incorporate trees into landscape and private
Downtown Burlingame is the symbolic and historic centex of the Ciry.
The vision far Downtown is to presexve the mi�c of buildings, the
pedestrian-scaled environment and the carefully designed public spaces
that contribute to its special community charactex. Downtown's flex-
ible and timeless late 19th and early 20th Century buildings contribute
historic character and distinctiveness to this desirable pattern and rrus
of buildings. New buildings should be sensitive to the historic scale
and architecture of Downtown.
Historic preservation and adaptive re-use is encouraged both to main-
tain the unique ambience of Downtown Buxlingame but also fot eco-
logical benefits. Preservation maximizes the use of e�sting materials
and infrastructure, reduces waste, and preserves historic character.
Historic buildings were often traditionally designed with many sustain-
able features that responded to climate and site, and when effectively
restored and reused, these features can bring about substantial energy
savings.
The guidelines in this chapter, together with the Commerczal De.rign
Guiclebook for eommercial and miYed use developments and the
Inverttory of Hi.rtoric IZe.rourie� are intended to ensure that both new
development and impxovements to existing pxopexties are compatible
with the historical character of Downtown and will be the Uasis of
design review
Where a builcling is described in the Inventory of � Hi��toric Re��ouree�, the
inventory should be consulted as part of the design review Bulding
chaYacteristics described in the inventory should be a considerarion in
project design and review, together with other design considexations
desexibed in this chaptex and in the Commercial De.rign Guidebook.
F1iiURE 5-44: Downtown's late 1)th and earl} 2t7th Cenritry buildings
contribute historic character and distinctiveness to this desirable pattern and
mix of buildings.
5.4.5 PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS
CITY
_�C�'�}� `T �'n *
a�.�,���d�a A �� i` �.
= � .. * *:�
c. 1{„,� �
� • ' i �
'r . ! �1 « 1 .�w •�{
���
IiHAT� �.�� � • �
Site: 128 LORTON AVENUE
The City of Burlingame Planning {ommission anaounces the
fotlowing public hearing on TUE AY OCTOBER 15, 2019 at
7:00 P.M. in the City Nail Council Chambers, SOl Primrose Rond,
Burlingame, CA:
Application for Environmeotal Scoping, Design Review,
Condominium Psrmit and Density Bonus for a new 5-story,
19-unit resideatial condominium huilding with at-grade parking
at 128 LORTBN AVENIlE zoned R-4 lncentive District.
APN 029-231•2)0
Mafed: October 4, 20t9
(Please refer to other side)
� � t
�" � r
. - .. .
�
�
' � r • _ � ���� . � � �: r t� � � � _ � rt .r ♦
• s �: � M-�, t" '� �
'�.• : •. •
•' - �` •- .�s � s • �., -� �
s • • • � • -f -� � • t
•- •-r - • • � • r � M '�• •
• • • - • � �
Property owners whaa receive ihis notice are responsible for informing their
tenants about thi� notice.
For additional information, please catl (650) 558-7250. Thank you.
Kevin Gardiner, AICP
Community Development Director
C !�E t IV�lT1�
(Please refer to other side)
128 Lorton Avenue
300' noticing
APN #: 029.231.210
� f e��ag .�w � � ,
�� - � r�� ; .� �s� ��� � �;��, �°�E
:,
�ya ..3 . , ar,flr �' t",�' _ ;'` � � �
,
_ `�? � '� � ,r;C�` � �{.7 � �"�
r ;�
�, ' � ��t y u' �
.
�' �` � �� �
c,� ,, �-, a,,.� �� �f� �.. '� , ��� �
,k �� � :., . C � ; �
e
,- .
n3' ' `` ��
�, , ..; �,���� .
,
� ,, , �
. �.
,: , :. �� . `"� �
��a�' . � , �+z'�L� . .: �
��� ` &� . ,, ' ;'; - �"�. �„�,r,# - -
� ' ��..� -�''.�- � ��
� _ �
,, v ^
� �' �
�. ,.� '.: ,,
� �
�'e,� L%
„
k� ; w
CM"S`F % . _�..�, 1
d
yit.� k � :,.' _
�r ✓
5`i' ' -
r �
< i
-�S[� .i'� �� � _ �
�.p ° �
k✓ � m , � d � z �
� }
a ry
p � :> � :' � , � '�., • 5 � ,c ''. .., .. ' � " a� .
.� � a w _
' ' ` ��
�� � �'
n, _ _ ; -�`�_�
' � � �' ��
. �� . �� �� s' - � � �'
� - ��ar � �� Ci . �� ,q; _
�� � ��
�a`�. � �'�'
��, � � �
�� �;� . ��` '; :�'�� ��?
, �.
,, � � ��
� � .���„ E;, � . �
�,
,
r � �s � _ .;
��,
,
e, � . � 'P��%
��� ��� ��� � � � - � ��
�, "��� ��
�
�, �� �. ,�. „� �' `�
� �� ��
�
�. , f=
_
� `���� `�' � s�� � " � �� ���
�.
, � - t- � ,� �
� �
,„ , t
�;t �, � ��
,r.�� ,, �� � � a= _ _' �� ��;, ,�;�:,
�.��5 ;, � �
� � �� � � d
� €� � � � �� �� 3 � �
� �`' �' � _
�_. �� � �,
� � �;
r � r� �,� ,.,.�' �r�, � � � ,�� � ��
., � .
,,
„ �, , � � �
� � «��� ��� r� _ �y�� �
�-
� �.:�. �`�` � ��� *� ,�� �� �
, , ..,
� � ` ��� — � �
� - ��
�� � _ � r� �;; .a�-� � ���'�
� , � � � � ,�'�s `� �� `s' �C�,
,� �
�� � �
� � ���. , � � � � �
� � �
� ,. . �
�,� � � � �� ., � �� �� �, �
� � � � A= � �� �� ; � ��'
� � � �y �� ��
� r..< E��,
�w,
��4,.
� � � ��5 �� �
�t''`� � ,E t ��' � � ' r.� �
� � � r�.7�, � ` �:, �r. �,�� � `� c���7, ; C�"
City of Burlingame
Planning Division
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
128 Lorton Avenue
Project Address: 128 Lortun Avenue
Description: New 19-Unit Residential Condominium Project
Date of Plans: April 2, 2020
Lot Area: 7,500 SF (50' x 150') Zoning: R-4 (R-4 Incentive District Subarea)
AlI comments marked with a"► " symbol must be addressed.
■ The proposed project is subject to the R-4 District Regulations (Chapter 25.29), Condominium Subdivision
Regulations (Chapter 26.30), Off-Street Parking Regulations (Chapter 25.70) and Design Standards for
Residential Areas of the Downtown Specific Plan.
A. Compliance with R-4 District Repulations
1. Permitted Uses (Code Section 25.29.020)
■ The proposed 19-unit multifamily residential use (condominium building) is permitted based on Code
Section 25.29.020 (b).
■ The average maximum unit size proposed for this project is 864 SF (1,250 SF average maximum unit size
permitted).
2. Design Review (Code Section 25.29.045)
Application for Design Review is required for the proposed 19-unit multifamily residential project. The proposed
project will be evaluated according to the Design Standards for Residential Areas as provided in the Downtown
Specific Plan.
► Provide materials board showing samples of all proposed materials.
3. Lot Dimensions and Lot Requirements (Code Section 25.29.050)
• The subject lot measures 7,500 SF (50' wide x 150' deep) and is therefore in compliance. This is an
existing lot; there are no lot line adjustments or lot mergers proposed with this application.
1
City of Burlingame
Planning Division
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
128 Lorton Avenue
4. Height Limitations (Code Section 25.29.060)
- Subject property is located in the R-4 Incentive District
- 75'-0" maximum height is permitted.
- Conditional Use Permit required if building exceeds 55'-0" in height.
- Up to five (5) percent of roof area may project not more than ten (10) feet above top of parapet and may
only be used for enclosing elevators, mechanical penthouses, solar structures, antennas or other
equipment.
Average top of curb: (37.01' + 37.12')/2 = 37.06' (based on top of curb survey points on Lorton Avenue)
Proposed: 56'-6" to top of parapet; 59'-6" to top of other screening
Allowed: 75'-0" above average top of curb; CUP required if building exceeds 55'-0 in height
Rooftop stairway/elevator enclosures total 8.2% of roof area. Therefore, because the enclosures exceed
5°/o of the roof area, the overall building height is measured to the top of the elevator/mechanical rooftop
enclosure (65'-0" above average top of curb).
■ It appears that the proposed building height will exceed 55'-0". Request for waiver/modification of the
building height requirement has been submitted.
5. Lot Coverage (Code Section 25.29.070)
50°/o of 7,500 SF lot = 3,750 SF inaximum allowed
Proposed Maximum Allowed
Lot Coverage: 5,977 SF 3,750 SF
79.6% 50%
■ The proposed project does not comply with lot coverage regulations (79.6% proposed). Request for
waiver/modification of the lot coverage requirement has been submitted.
This space intentionally left blank.
2
City of Burlingame
Planning Division
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
128 Lorton Avenue
6. Setbacks Lines (Code Section 25.29.075)
Proposed Minimum Required
Front (1St flr): 5'-0" 18'-6" (block average)
�2�d fl�'): 5�_0„
�3rd fl/): cJ�_p»
�4rn flr): 0'-0" and 15'-2"
(5�'' flr): 0'-0" and 15'-2"
_...... _ _. .. . _
Left Side (15t f/r): 0'-0" and 5'-0" 5'-0"
(2"d flr): 0'-0" and 5'-0" 6'-0"
(3�°' flr): 0'-0" and 5'-0" 7'-0"
(4t'' flr): 0'-0" and 5'-0" 8'-0"
(5t�' flr); 0'-0" and 5'-0" 9'-0"
_ .. _ ___ _ _.
Right Side (1St flr): 5'-0" 5'-0"
�2na flI): 5'-0" 6'-0"
�3�a flr): 5'-0" 7�_�„
�4rn flr): 5'_0„ $�_�„
(5:n flr): 5'-0" 9,_�„
_ _ _ _
Rear (15r f/r): 10'-0" 20'-0"
(2nd flr): 10'-0" 20'-0"
(3�d flr): 10'-0" 20'-0"
(4t" flr): 10'-0" 20'-0"
(5th flr): 10'-0" 20'-0„
* Minimum side setb7ck requirement for condominium developments is 5'-0" (Code Section 25.29.075 (e).
■ The proposed project does not comply with front, right side, left side, and rear setback requirements.
Request for waiver/modification of front, right side, left side, and rear setback requirements has been
submitted.
7. General Plan Consist�ncy (Land Use Element)
The General Plan land use designation is R-4 Incentive District. The Downtown Specific Plan and
corresponding zoning d� not provide for density limits.
■ The density of the proposed project is 111 dwelling units/acre.
3
City of Burlingame
Planning Division
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
128 Lorton Avenue
8. Public Facilities Impac� Fees (Chapter 25.80)
Public Impact Fees are based on the number of dwelling units on the property after completion of the
development project. New development that, through demolition or conversion, will eliminate existing
development is entitled to a fee credit offset if the existing development is a lawful use under this title,
including a nonconforming use.
■ Based on a 19-unit residential apartment project and providing a credit for the existing four residential units,
the required Public Impact Fee for this development project is: $83,055.00 (see table below). The Public
Impact Fees payment will be required at time of building permit issuance.
Service Area Proposed Multifamily Project Existing Multifamily Units
19 Units 4 Units
(fee based on per dwelling unit) ;(fee based on per dwelling unit)
General Facilities & F_quipment $1636 x 19 =$31,084 $1636 x 4=$6,544
_ _ __ _... __ ....
Libraries $1415 x 19 =$26,885 $1415 x 4=$5,660
_....
Police $259 x 19 = $4,921 ; $259 x 4 = $1,036
_ __ .. _
Parks and Recreation $350 x 19 =$6,650 '; $350 x 4=$1,400
Streets and Traffic $1105 x 19 =$20,995 ;$1105 x 4=$4,420
_.... _ ......... ..... . ..........
Fire $381 x 19 = $7,239 ; $381 x 4 = $1,524
_ _ __ ....._.. _ _... . _. .._ ..
Storm Drainage $391 x 19 =$7,429 $391 x 4=$1,564
_
Subtotal $105,203.00 ; $22,148.00
_._... _ _. _..., .. _....._..
Total $105,203.00
- $22,148.00 (credit for existinq 4-unit residential)
$83,055.00
Planning staff would note that the City of Burlingame's Public Impact Fee Ordinance allows the applicant
to request a waiver of public impact fees in those instances where an applicant can demonstrate the lack
of a reasonable relationship (nexus) between development's impacts and the fee that is to be collected.
The application sh�all be made in writing and filed with the director of community development not later
than twenty (20) days prior to the public hearing before the planning commission on the development
project application.
Payment of Public Impact Fees will be added as a conditional of approval for the project.
This space intentionally left blank.
4
City of Burlingame
Planning Division
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
128 Lorton Avenue
9. Bicycle Storage
The Downtown Specific Plan notes the following:
"New development should provide safe, secure facilities for bicycles. This can be accomplished in a number
of ways, depending on the type of development. Where possible, secured, indoor parking space (i.e.
lockable, caged space) for bikes should be provided in all new residential and commercial buildings. New
projects should include bike stalls to allow users the opportunity to securely store their bicycles. These can
include racks or hooks on walls in front of parking spaces in residential buildings, and designated and
secure bicycle storage areas in commercial buildings."
In their review of the proposed project on October 15, 2019, the Planning Commission had the following
comments/suggestions regarding bicycle storage. These comments have not been adequately addressed,
since the applicant indicates that bicycle storage will be provided in each individual residential unit.
■ Since there is a reduction in parking, needs to accommodate other uses such as bicycles.
■ Would encourage space for bike storage. Outdoor area at the rear may be in shade much of the time.
Not sure it will be utilized.
Bicycle rack system (Doubleup — Single Sided Vertical Bike Rack (Model 543-4010) has been added in the rear
yard.
10. Affordable Units
■ Applicant indicates �hat the project will contain 10% of the units for moderate income households. Floor
plans note that Unit A1 on Podium Level and Unit A1 on Second Level Plan will be designated as the
affordable units.
B. P/annin_q Commission Review (October 15, 2019 Meetinq)
► At the October 15, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting, the Commission noted several concerns and
suggestions (see attached meeting minutes). Please provide a response letter to address these
concerns/suggestions.
City of Burlingame
Planning Division
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
128 Lorton Avenue
C. Compliance with Parkinp Re_qu/ations
1. Off-Street Parking (Chapter 25.70)
Subject property is located within the Downtown Specific Plan and is subject to the following off-street parking
requirements:
- 1 parking space required for each studio or 1-bedroom unit.
- 1.5 parking spaces required for each 2-bedroom unit.
- 2 parking spaces required for each 3-bedroom unit.
- No guest parking spaces required.
Proposed Required
Number of Parking Spaces: 17 spaces 11, 1-bdr units x 1.0 = 11
(2 compact) 7, 2-bdr units x 1.5 = 10.5
(14 in vehicle lifts) 1, 3-bdr unit x 2= 2
(1 disabled-accessible) Total = 24 spaces
; (14 spaces based on Density
Bonus)
__.. .... . _.
Clear Back-up Space: 23-0" and 25'-2" 24'-0" or all spaces can be
exited in three maneuvers or
_......_ _ _ _ :.
less
Parking Space Dimensions: Vehicle lifts, compact (2) and Standard spaces = 9' x 20'
disabled-accessible spaces Compact spaces - 8' x 17'
; (2 compact spaces allowed)
,
Covered Spaces: 17 spaces (all) 12 spaces
(80% of 14 must be covered)
_ _.._
Driveinray Width: 12'-4" 12'-0"
► Vehicles in parking spaces #1 and #2/3 cannot turn around an exit the garage with the proposed
layout/configuration. Staff will need to discuss with the applicant how the proposed CityLift Two Level
Puzzle System (Model 2LP) will allow these vehicles to enter/exit these spaces.
■ The applicant has applied the Density Bonus requirements for affordable housing, which allows a parking
ratio of 0.5 spaces per bedroom. Based on this ratio, a total of 14 parking spaces would be required for the
28 bedrooms proposed in the condominium building.
■ Based on Code Section 26.30.070 (a)(1), a maximum of two compact parking spaces are allowed based on
the proposed total number of units. The minimum required dimension for compact spaces (spaces #16 and
#17) is 8' wide x 17' deep. Parking spaces #16 and #17 comply with the minimum requirements (8'-6" x
18'-0" proposed).
■ Based on Code Section 26.30.070 (3), residential condominium developments shall provide an area for on-
site deliveries. The project proposes that space #17 double as a short-term delivery or service vehicle
parking; the space would be posted to allow for such use.
City of Burlingame
Planning Division
(650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 (fax)
Plan Review Comments
128 Lorton Avenue
D. Compliance with Condominium Requlations
Front Setback Landscaping (Code Section 26.30.070 (e) (1))
50% of the front setback of the building shall be soft landscaping.
Front Setback Area: 25C SF (5' x 50')
50% of Front Setback Area: 125 SF (0.50 x 250 SF)
Based on the Landscape Plan (sheet L1), the landscaping area provided within the front setback area
measures 155 SF (62% of front setback area).
2. Private Open Space (�ode Section 26.30.070 (e) (3))
75 SF per unit minimum required.
Above ground floor units must have minimum dimension of 3'-6".
■ The project will not be in compliance with private open space requirements since only 5 of 19 units will
have a balcony/deck (99 SF — 308 SF per unit provided in five units). Request for waiver/modification of
the private open space requirement has been submitted.
3. Common Open Space (Code Section 26.30.070 (e) (4))
100 SF/unit minimum required: 1,900 SF total (50% or 950 SF must be soft landscaping)
Must have minimum dimension of 15'-0" to qualify for common open space.
Common open space rriay be provided on appropriately designed, rooftop areas.
� The proposed project provides 500 SF (10' x 50') of common open space at the rear of the site. However,
it does not comply with the minimum requirement of 950 SF and a minimum dimension of 15'-0". Request
for waive/modificati�n for common open space has been submitted.
End of Comments
7
� CITY O
�� i �I �
�`„ ,
e�, � �-�
•� �� � n
Vnoanr
Project Address
Description
From
Project Comments — Planning Application
128 Lorton Avenue, zoned MMU, APN: 029-231-210
Request for Environmental Review, Design Review, and Condominium Permit
for a ruew 19 unit residential condominium.
Christine Reed
Fire D�partment
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised plans
with your resubmittal:
Provide fire apparatus access to the rear of the building which is within 150 feet maximum from
fire apparatus access.
8-18-19 Not ��ddressed. The rear stairway is not mitigation for lack of fire apparatus access.
Provide apparatus access or you may submit an Alternate Means of Protection Application that
proposes mitigation for lack of fire apparatus access. Acceptable mitigation includes both 1)
increase to construction Type IIIA and 2) roof access hatches from both stairways with
standpipe outlets at each roof hatch location.
1-13-20 Still not addressed. The rear stairway is not mitigation for lack of fire
apparatus access. Provide apparatus access or you may submit an Alternate Means of
Protection Application that proposes mitigation for lack of fire apparatus access.
Acceptable mitigation includes both 1) increase to construction Type IIIA and 2) roof
access hatches from both stairways with standpipe outlets at each roof hatch location.
4-20-20 An Alternate Means of (Materials and) Protection application has not been
submitted to CCFD as stated in the previous review, detailing proposed mitigation for lack
of fire apparatus a�ccess. However, in total, the mitigations listed on the response letter
are not adequate alternates for lack of access around the building and no emergency
escape windows. Application is attached or you can download from the CCFD website.
Provide a complete exit discharge and exit discharge lighting all the way to a public way from both stairwells. 8-18-19
Addressed.
Exit discharge path from rear stairs must stay within property lines, it is not allowed to cross over onto an adjacent
property. 8-18-19 Addressed.
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as they will need to be
addressed at time of building permit submittal.
1. Provide a fire sprinkler <�nd standpipe system throughout the building. Plans shall be approved by the Central County
Fire Department prior to installation. Standpipe outlets shall be located at intermediate stair landings.
2. Provide a fire alarm system throughout the building. Plans shall be approved by the Central County Fire Department
prior to installation.
3. Provide an Emergency Responder Radio Coverage system. Plans shall be approved by the Central County Fire
Department prior to installation.
4. Provide a separate fire protection underground to be submitted through the Burlingame Building Department prior to
submission for the Fire Sprinkler System.
5. See Burlingame Municipal Code for the requirements for elevators. Elevators shall not be installed with shunt trips.
Reviewed By: Christine Reed Date: 4-20-20
650-558-7617
I�°
r ..._�
��r�►��o�.�
�,�
Request for Alternate Means of Protection or Methods of
Construction
Date Submitted:
In accordance with section §2.02, Title 19 California Code of Regulations, the undersigned requests
approval of alternate means of protection for:
Project Name:
Project Address:
Subject of Alternative (separate forms must be completed for each different item):
Code Requirement Requesting Mitigation (specify code edition and section):
�entral �ounty �'ir� I�e�a.�trnent
Servtng the carr�munities af'But-tingame, Hilisb�►r�gh and Miltbrae
Building Permit:
)ustification (attach copies of pertinent information):
Alternate Requested By:
Print Name
Signature
Requestor Address:
Requestor Phone:
For Staff Use Only
Date Reviewed:
Findings:
Approved [ ]
Denied [ ]
Fire Marshal:
�� c�ry o�
�� o �� �
.�� �`�
°�qP�»A
Project Address
Description
From:
Project Comments - P/anning Application
128 Lorton Avenue, zoned MMU, APN: 029-231-210
Request for Environmental Review, Design Review, and Condominium Permit
for a new 19 unit residential condominium.
Jennifer Lee
Stormwater
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised plans
with your resubmittal:
None at this time.
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as they
will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
If the project creates and/or replaces >2,500 square feet to <10,000 square feet of impervious
surface then it must comply with Provision C.3.i. of the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional
Stormwater NPDES Permit which requires that one or more site design measures listed on the
Stormwater Chec{clist for Small Projects must be installed. If applicable, please complete, sign
and return the "Small Projects Checklist" accessible here:
www.burlinqame.orq/stormwaterdevelopment.
Required Best Management Practices (BMPs) apply to all construction projects utilizing
architectural copper. If applicable, please read "Requirements for architectural Copper." A
downloadable ele�tronic file is available at: http://flowstobay.org/newdevelopment#flvers under
Flyers and Fact Sheets.
Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the city's stormwater
NPDES permit to prevent stormwater pollution from construction-related activities. Project
proponents shall �nsure that all contractors implement appropriate and effective Best
Management Practices (BMPs) during all phases of construction, including demolition. When
submitting plans for a building permit, please include the Construction BMP plan sheet.
An electronic file is available at: www.burlinqame.orq/stormwaterdevelopment.
Reviewed By: Jennifer Lee Date: '''�'�; o
650-558-7381 4/4/2019
� CITY
� `
�� r � F �
� � f�
�+'Poun!
Project Address
Description
From:
Project Comments - P/anning Application
128 Lorton Avenue, zoned MMU, APN: 029-231-210
Request for Environmental Review, Design Review, and Condominium Permit
for a new 19 unit residential condominium.
Bob Disco
Parks Division
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised plans
with your resubmittal:
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as they
will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
1. WELO and irrigation plan required with building permit submittal
Reviewed By: BD Date: 4.21.2020
bdisco@burlingame.org
r'
� CITY O
�� :� t �
���'��
,
���e
,ry o _ N
Q„
Project Address:
Description
From:
Project Comments - Planning Application
128 Lorton Avenue, zoned MMU, APN: 029-231-210
Request for Environmental Review, Design Review, and Condominium
Permit for a new 19 unit residential condominium.
Rick Caro III
Building Division
Please address the following comments at this time; provide a written response and revised
plans with your resubmittal:
No comment at this time.
The following comments do not need to be addressed now, but you should be aware of them as
they will need to be addressed at time of building permit submittal.
3) Provide two completed copies of the Mandatory Measures with the submittal of your plans for
Building Code compliance plan check. In addition, replicate this completed document on the
plans. Note: On the Checklist you must provide a reference that indicates the page of the plans
on which each Measure can be found. BMC 18.30.040, 18.30.045 & 18.30.050
5) On the first page of the plans specify the following: "Any hidden conditions that require work to
be performed beyond the scope of the building permit issued for these plans may require further
City approvals including review by the Planning Commission." The building owner, project
designer, and/or contractor must submit a Revision to the City for any work not graphically
illustrated on the Tob Copy of the plans prior to performing the work.
14) Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 2016 CRC §303.8 or 2016 CBC § 1008.2 and 2016 CBC
§ 1205.4
17) On the first page of the plans state the Access Regulations that you are using to gain full access
compliance. There are five access regulations that may apply to a multi-family residential project in
California:
a. The Architectural Barriers Act of 1969 (ABA)
b. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
c. The Fair Housing Act (FHA)
d. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
e. The California Building Code (CBC), Chapters ll A and 11 B.
m
] 8) On the first page of the plans clearly state whether ANY public money, of any kind, will or will not be
used to construct this project.
19) On the first page of the plans clearly state if an application for ANY tax credits have or will be submitted
for tax rebates. NOTE: See the 2015 California Code of Regulations, Title IV, § 10325 (�7 (K). In part:
"All tax credit recipi�ent projects shall adhere to the provisions of California Building Code 11(B)
regarding accessibility to privately owned housing made available for public use."
21) Specify an accessible path of travel from all required exits to the public right of way.
22) On the first page of t:he plans clearly state that all paths of travel and common use spaces will be
accessible and all living units will be adaptable.
23) Provide details whic�h show that the maneuvering clearances for the bathrooms in each unit are accessible
2016 CBC § 1127A2.2 #1. (The space under the lavatory can be used but the maneuvering clearance and
are allowed to encroach into the knee and toe clearances.)
24) Provide details which show that the water closet in each unit complies with 2016 CBC § 1134A.7 #1;
26) Specify that there will be a clear maneuvering space adjacent to each tub that is at least 30" X 48"
measured from the drain end of the tub. 2016 CBC § 1134A.5
27) Specify on the plans that all dwelling unit interior doors will comply with CBC l 132A5.2. Note: Many
doors within the unit appear to have only 12" of strike side clearance.
30) Please Note: Architeats are advised to specify construction dimensions for accessible features that are
below the maximum and above the minimum dimension required as construction tolerances generally do
not apply to accessible features. See the California Access Compliance Manual — Interpretive Regulation
11 B-8.
32) Indicate on the plans that, at the time of Building Permit application, plans and engineering will
be submitted for shoring as required by 2016 CBC, Chapter 31 regarding the protection of
adjacent property and as required by OSHA. On the plans, indicate that the following will be
addressed:
a. The walls of the proposed basement shall be properly shored, prior to construction activity.
This excavation may need temporary shoring. A competent contractor shall be consulted for
recommendations and design of shoring scheme for the excavation. The recommended
design type of shoring shall be approved by the engineer of record or soils engineer priar to
usage.
b. All appropriate guidelines of OSHA shall be incorporated into the shoring design by the
contractor. Where space permits, temporary construction slopes may be utilized in lieu of
sharing. Maximum allowable vertical cut far the subject project will be five (5) feet.
Beyond �hat horizontal benches of 5 feet wide will be required. Temporary shores shall not
exceed 1 to 1(harizontal to vertical). In some areas due to high moisture content / water
table, flatter slopes will be required which will be recommended by the soils engineer in the
field.
c. If shoring is required, specify on the plans the licensed design professional that has sole
responsibility to design and provide adequate shoring, bracing, formwork, etc. as required
for the pro�ection of life and property during construction of the building.
d. Shoring and bracing shall remain in place until floors, roof, and wall sheathing have been
entirely constructed.
e. Shoring plans shall be wet-stamped and signed by the engineer-of-record and submitted to
the city for review prior to construction. If applicable, include surcharge loads from adjacent
structures that are within the zone of influence (45 degree wedge up the slope from the base
of the retaiming wall) and / or driveway surcharge loads.
33) Indicate on the plans that an OSHA permit will be obtained per CAL / OSHA requirements. See
the Cal / OSHA handbook at: http://www.ca-osha.com/pdfpubs/osha user uide.pdf
* Construction Safetv Orders : Chapter 4, Subchapter 4, Article 6, Section 1541.1.
34) Indicate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the Department of
Public Works.
35) Include with your Building Division plan check submittal a complete underground fire sprinkler plan.
Contact the Burlingame Water Division at 650-558-7660 for details regarding the water system or Central
County Fire for sprinkler details.
36) ) Sewer connection fees must be paid prior to issuing the building permit.
37) A pre-construction rr�eeting must be conducted prior to issuing the permit. After you are notified by the
Building Division that your plans have been approved call 650-558-7270 to schedule the pre-construction
meeting.
Reviewed By: Rick Cara III Date: April 17, 2020
650 558-i'270