HomeMy WebLinkAbout149 Pepper Avenue - Staff ReportItem No. 8d
Regular Action
PROJECT LOCATION
149 PepperAvenue
Item No. 8d
City of Burlingame RegularAction
Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Conditional Use Permit
Address: 149 Pepper Avenue
Meeting Date: July 27, 2015
Request: Application for Negative Declaration and Design Review for first and second story additions to an
existing single family dwelling and a Conditional Use Permit for an existing accessory structure.
Applicant and Architect: Jeff Alan Guard, JAG Architecture
Property Owners: Jill and Derek Johnson
General Plan: Low Density Residential
APN: 028-263-060
Lot Area: 10,230 SF
Zoning: R-1
Environmental Review: The subject property is located within the Burlingame Park No. 3 subdivision. Based
upon documents that were submitted to the Planning Division by a Burlingame property owner in 2009, it was
indicated that the entire Burlingame Park No. 2, Burlingame Park No. 3, Burlingame Heights, and Glenwood Park
subdivisions may have historical characteristics that would indicate that properties within this area could be
potentially eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places. Therefore, for any property
located within these subdivisions, a Historic Resource Evaluation must be prepared prior to any significant
development project being proposed to assess whether the existing structure(s) could be potentially eligible for
listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places.
A Historic Resource Evaluation was prepared for this property by Page & Turnbull, Inc., dated August 28, 2013.
The results of the evaluation conctuded that 149 Pepper Avenue does not appear to be individually eligible for
listing in the National or California Registers under any criteria.
Because there was a potential impact on historic resources, an Initial Study was prepared forthe project. Based on
the analysis by Page and Turnbull, it was determined that there would be no adverse environmental impacts, and a
Negative Declaration has been prepared (see attached ND-584-P).
The purpose of the present review is to hold a public hearing and evaluate that this conclusion, based on the initial
study, facts in the Negative Declaration, public comments and testimony received at the hearing, and Planning
Commission observation and experience, are consistent with the finding of no significant environmental impact.
Project Description: The grade on the site slopes up from the curb to the rear property line by approximately 17-
feet. The existing house is set back 63 feet from the front property line and is two stories at the front and single
story at the rear. There is an existing detached garage at the rear, left side of the property.
The applicant is proposing to add to the first and second stories at the front of the existing house and to re-
landscape the front and rear yards. With the proposed additions, the proposed house and accessory structures on
site will have a total floor area of 4,396 SF (0.43 FAR) where 4,714 SF (0.46 FAR) is the maximum allowed
(including covered porch exemptions).
There are four bedrooms in the existing house and the proposed additions will not increase the number of
bedrooms. The parking requirement for a four-bedroom house is 2 spaces, 1 of which must be covered. The
existing conditions meet the code parking requirements, with one covered space in the existing detached garage
and a second uncovered parking space in the driveway leading to the garage.
The property was granted a Side Setback Variance for a first floor addition at the rear of the house in 1999. Plans
submitted for that application show evidence of the existing detached single-car garage in its current location and
footprint. However, there is no evidence of permits for the windows and skylights that appear to have been
installed in this structure after 1999. No new work is proposed to the existing accessory structure, but as part of the
current application the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the glazed openings that are within 10
feet of a property line and over 10 feet from adjacent grade in the existing detached garage.
There is an existing porte cochere at the left side of the house. City records show evidence of this porte cochere
from an Appraisal Report in the 1930's. The porte cochere is non-conforming in its side setback. There is no
Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Conditiona/ Use Permit
149 Pepper Avenue
evidence of permits for the corrugated roof that extends from the porte cochere down the driveway toward the
detached garage. The applicant is proposing to remove this corrugated roof with the current application.
With the proposed application, the applicant is proposing to landscape the front and rear yards. A fence and
automatic gate, not to exceed 5- feet in height to meet fence requirements, will be installed at the front of the
property. Two trellises, both under 100 SF, will be erected in the rear yard. No trees are proposed to be removed
with the project. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following
applications:
■ Negative Declaration, a determination that there are no significant environmental effects as a result of this
project;
■ Design Review for a second story addition (CS 25.57.010 (a) (2)); and
■ Conditional Use Permit for an accessory structure with glazed openings within 10 feet of a property line and
over 10 feet from adjacent grade (existing structure and glazed openings) (CS 25.60.0.10(i)).
149 PepperAvenue
�ot Area: 10,230 SF Plans date stam ed: June 3, 201!
EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D
SETBACKS
_
Front (1st flr): ;
63'-1" 59'-8" 57'-5" (the block average)
(2nd flr): ; 65'-7" 63'-5" 57'-5"
, _........ __ , __ _ _
Side (left): :
0'-0"' No change 4'-0"
(right): ; 3'-0" 2 4'-0" 4'-0"
Rear (1st flr): j 43'-8" No change 15'-0"
___ _ (2nd flr)� _--- , _ _ --- ; 20, ���
_. _._.__.._
Lot Coverage: ' 3,509 SF 3,565 SF 4,092 SF
34% 35% 40%
_ __ _ , _ _.
FAR: 3,917 SF 4,396 SF 4,714SF 3
0.38 FAR 0.43 FAR 0.46 FAR
_ ;....._... , __ _
# of bedrooms: ; 4 No change ---
, 1 covered ; 1 covered
(9' x 18') 9' x 18'
Parking: 1 uncovered No change 1 uncovered
(9' x 20') (9' x 20')
_ .. __ __ _....
' CUP request for the glazed
openings within 10 feet of
Accessory ; Original detached ; property line and more than 10 CUP required per C.S.
Structure; ': garage ', feet above adjacent grade 25.60.010(i)
(previously installed in the
existing structure) 4
d�
Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Conditional Use Permit 149 Pepper Avenue
EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D
Height: 31'-1" 5 No change 30'-0"
DH Envelope: complies No change C.S. 25.26.035
' Existing, non-conforming left side setback to the porte cochere.
Z Existing, non-conforming original right side setback (3'-0" existing where 4'-0" required). Side Setback Variance granted in
1999 for the setback to the first floor addition at the rear of the house (3'-0" existing where 4'-0" required).
3 (0.32 x 10,230 SF) + 1100 SF + 340 SF = 4,714 SF (0.46 FAR).
4 Conditional Use Permit requested for glazed openings in an accessory structure (existing) that are within 10 feet of a
property line and over 10 feet from adjacent grade.
5 Existing house is non-conforming in height (31'-1" existing where a Special Permit is required fora height between 31'-36')
Staff Comments: See attached memos from the Chief Building Official, Fire Division, Engineering Division, Parks
Division, and Stormwater Division.
Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission Environmental Scoping and Design Review Study
meeting on March 9, 2015, the Commission had comments and suggestions regarding the proposed project (see
the attached March 9, 2015 Planning Commission meeting minutes). The Commission voted to refer the project to
a design review consultant. A discussion of the analysis of the revised project and recommendation by the design
review consultant is provided in the next section.
Analysis and Recommendation by Design Reviewer: The design review consultant visited the site and surrounding
area, met with the project architect and property owners to discuss the Planning Commission's concerns with the
project and reviewed revised plans. Please refer to the attached design reviewer's analysis and recommendation,
dated stamped June 30, 2015, for a detailed review of the project.
The revised plans and a color rendering are date stamped June 3, 2015, and the architect has submitted a
response letter date stamped June 3, 2015. Listed below are some of the Commission's comments, followed by
the responses and revisions made by the applicant (Please refer to the attached meeting minutes, the design
consultanYs recommendation, and the architect's response letter for a detailed list of the Commission comments
and the architects plan revisions).
1. The Commission requested clarification from staff about the proposed shower in the basement.
Planning Staff would note that although the plans label the lower level floor area as "basement," this space
does not meet the Burlingame Municipal Code definition of a basement: "Basement"means the portion of
a building between floor and ceiling that is wholly or partially underground. Where more than two (2) feet of
any portion of the basement's height is above the existing grade next to the basement, a basement shall be
counted as a story. The lower level is counted as a story and there is no code restriction that would prevent
the location of a shower in this living space.
2. The proposed entry is not consistent with, nor does it tie into the rest of the house.
The design review consultant notes the following items in his analysis:
1. The existing house has no particular style or a jumble of styles and could be termed "non-descript".
The addition at the rear of the house is a distinctly contemporary style; and
2. The inside of the house is completely contemporary and excellently designed, with unique curved and
trellis ceilings, wonderful lighting and fixtures. The interior is a complete surprise from the impression
the house gives from the exterior (front).
-3-
Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Conditional Use Permit
149 Pepper Avenue
In an effort to preserve the unique interior of the house and to bring cohesiveness to the design of the
entire house, the design review consultant has recommended that the applicant make changes to bring a
more contemporary feel to the entire house. The plans have been revised to include the following changes:
1. The existing windows will be replaced using casement and picture windows with clean lines and no
divided lites. The original round top window at the left side of the living room that was shown to remain
in the previously proposed plans, has been replaced with a tall narrow slit window;
2. The half hipped gables on the existing roof have been changed to triangular gables and the roofing
material will be replaced throughout with a standing seam metal roof; and
3. In an email dated June 30, 2015, the applicant and owners invite the Commissioners to do a walk-
through of the interior of the house (please see the attached email for specific times and dates).
3. The artificia/ turf proposed for the /arge expanse of the front lawn is a concern;
• The applicant has substantially revised the proposed hardscape and landscape for the front of the house.
The previously proposed artificial turF has been replaced with native grasses. There are 5 new Ginko
Biloba trees to be planted along the right side property line for screening. The stepped retaining walls
previously proposed at the front entry have been revised to include planting beds.
Negative Declaration: Because there was a potential impact on historic resources, the proposed project is subject
to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission held an environmental
scoping session for this project on March 9, 2015. An Initial Study was prepared by the Planning Division staff. It
has been determined that the proposed project can be covered by a Negative Declaration since the initial study did
not identify any significant impacts from the proposed construction of the additions to the single family dwelling
(please refer to the attached Negative Declaration No. 584-P). The Negative Declaration was circulated for 20
days for public review. The 20-day review period ends on July 22, 2015; as of the printing date of this staff report
(July 10), no comments have been submitted on the Negative Declaration.
Required Findings for a Negative Declaration: For CEQA requirements the Planning Commission must review
and approve the Negative Declaration, finding that on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received in
writing or at the public hearing that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant (negative)
effect on the environment.
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.
Findings for a Conditional Use Permit: In order to grant a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission
must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.52.020, a-c):
(a) The proposed use, at the proposed location, 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;
(b) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Burlingame general plan
and the purposes of this title;
-4-
Negative Declarafion, Design Review, and Conditional Use Permit
149 PepperAvenue
(c) The planning commission may impose such reasonable conditions or restrictions as it deems necessary to
secure the purposes of this title and to assure operation of the use in a manner compatible with the
aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of existing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general
vicinity.
Suggested Conditional Use Permit Findings: Based on the fact that the windows and skylights to be permitted
in the detached garage have been in place for some time and no complaints related to the glazed openings have
been reported to the City, and that the existing fence and vegetation at the left side and rear of the property reduce
any impacts to neighboring properties of light or glare through the glazed openings, the project may be found to be
compatible with the conditional use permit criteria.
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 and within the Negative Declaration.
Affirmative action on the following items should be taken separately by resolution including conditions from the staff
report and/or that the commissioners may add. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated.
1. Negative Declaration.
2. Design Review.
3. Conditional Use Permit.
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 June
3, 201, sheets A0.0 through A3.1, BMP, and Boundary and Topographic Survey;
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 Pfanning staffl;
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 Building Division's October 24, 2014 and January 1, 2015 memos, the Parks
Division's November 5, 2014 and January 15, 2015 memos, the Engineering Division's October 28, 2014
memo, the Fire Division's October 27, 2014 memo, and the Stormwater Division's October 29, 2014 and
January 14, 2015, memos shall be met;
5. 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;
6. 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;
7. 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 Counci� 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;
8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and
-5-
Negative Declaration, Design Review, and Conditional Use Permit
149 Pepper Avenue
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;
9. 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;
10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2013
Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO
THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION:
11. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the applicant shall provide a certification by the project
architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, that demonstrates
that the project falls at or below the maximum approved floor area ratio for the property;
12. 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; and
13. 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.
Erika Lewit
Senior Planner
c. Jeff Alan Gard, applicant
Attachments:
Design Review Study March 9, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
Design Review Consultant's Analysis, dated June 30, 2015
Response letter from the applicant, date stamped June 3, 2015
Email from the applicant and owner about house tourd, dated June 30, 2015
Application to the Planning Commission
Conditional Use Permit Form
Staff Comments
Letters of Support from Neighbors (4 letters)
Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed)
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed July 17, 2015
Aerial Photo
Separate Attachments:
Negative Declaration and Initial Study (ND-584-P), dated July 2, 2015
Historical Resource Evaluation conducted by Page & Turnbull, Inc., date stamped August 28, 2013
�
Revisions
TO: City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame CA 94010
1317 GRANT AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94133
T 415.495.6254
JAG@JAGARCHITECTUR E.COM
ca.license#c-399B6
RE
Johnson Residence
149 Pepper Ave
Burlingame, CA 94010
June 2, 2015
Dear Planning Commissioners,
Planning Commissioners:
Nirmala Bandrapalli,
Jeff DeMartini,
Michael Gaul,
Peter Gum,
William Loftis,
Richard Sargent,
Richard Terrones
ewK.jegarchitecture.com Thank you for your canstructive feedback during our March 9, 2015 Planning Commission
hearing. Since then, the Johnson family and I have been working closely with Planner Erika
Lewit and City of Burlingame architectural design review consultant Jerry Winges to address
these comments.
We have made a number of changes to the proposed front facade and entry garden design
in response to the points raised by the commission:
05
02
15
_
Front Garden- We replaced the proposed artificial turf area with a drought
tolerant grass lawn bordered by decorative gravel.
Pedestrian path and drive- We interspersed the pedestrian path paving squares
with a pattern of drought resistant dymondia flowering green beds to break up the
paving areas and distinguish the path from the drive.
Additional Vertical Landscape features-
a) Originally presented as a seating area, the stepping retaining walls facing the
front garden have been broken up with an intermediate planting bed. This bed
includes 2 trees which adds a vertical garden feature to navigate the transition
between the massing of the home and garden elements.
b) Tatl deciduous Ginkgo Biloba "Goldspire" trees have been spaced along the living
wall at the property line to visually screen the neighbors.
c) Large potted plants have been added to the formal front garden and play area
green space to provide flexible garden features that the owners can arrange for
events and seasonal themes.
Building Features- To unify the architecture of the front facade the town
architectural consultant suggested a more modem ridge line profile and a standing
seam metal roaf. We have added these revisions to the proposed scope of work.
Unify the Windaws- The consultant suggested replacing all of the side yard true
divided light windows with more modern casement and picture window units more in
keeping with the style of the interior architecture. We have added replacing all of
these units to the proposed scope of work.
Compatible fenestration- As suggested by the design review consultant the side
yard facing arched window has been eliminated. We replaced it with a slot
window in concert with the vertical features of the proposed facade alteration.
Additionally, the slot helps to articulate the axis of the vaulted space within.
The in-fill window units at the bay and the front door are a stain grade mahogany
for a less industrial appearance and profile at the front facade.
Please feel free to contact my office if you have any questions.
Thank you
0
Jeff Alan Gard
,;�,
CD/PLG-Lewit, Erika
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hello Erika.
jeff gard <jeffgardesign@earthlink.net>
Tuesday, June 30, 2015 12:12 PM
CD/PLG-Lewit, Erika
Fwd: RE: Date for walk through with the commissioners
My clients prefer to the Sat & Sunday mornings 10-1 lAM for pre arranged walk through times.
Please let me know if this email works as something you can add to your report for the commissioners.
I'll have the half size sets ready by the end of the day and will deliver Wed. Morning.
Thank you for all of your help.
Jeff
Jeff— let's plan on having them walk through on Saturday and/or Sunday morning. Maybe around 10am?
Derek JohnG�n
F,crr o
i��: �� �
�Z�J�
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:
L� Design Review ❑ Variance
❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Special Permit
❑ Parcel #: C72.-� Z�J - D�O
❑ Zoning / Other:
PROJECT ADDRESS: ��� 1 �-lpi'���, YC=
APPLICANT project contact person ❑
Payor of DSR deposiUhandling fee ❑
OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑
Name: �� �� �L� �7.�.t7
Address: I3�� .�`��1�1T �Y�
City/State/Zip: ��P..'N ��SGo���'�
Phone: �i I�• �.%� �Z�`�"
Fax: 1J /,�.
E-mai�: ,�A�.Ca �J�:C���c.C�l�j"�" t�.��•r_oM
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER project contact person Ff
Payor of DSR deposit/handling fee ❑
OK to send electronic copies of documents �
PROPERTY OWNER project contact person ❑
Payor of DSR deposit/handling fee ❑
OK to send electronic copies of documents ❑
Name: �I�L �1D n�1�iG. �0�1��1
Address: ��f 9 ��°��'�.. a,Y �=
City/State/zip: _�U ��--1 N��� M� � G�, 9�{-0��
Phone: 415.�° � 9��
Fax: '�/�
—T
E-mail: I oN 1JSaN I I Ll,� �b� Ld��l� • N��
Name: _� a��
Address: (% �' �t� �VL
City/State/Zip: �a1� ��'�.1.$Gc� � � � ���
Phone: �� � �J . `�� �. ��
Fax: }.I/.�..
E-mail: �� � I�C��.pC-i-II��-�UP--��.C�oh
* Burlingame Business License #: 298J�
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: �}2nt,C1"_^: �.�A�;�. ��"?�L�.C, �I�b�T'. G'�,1Vls l� � C--�
-� � ta11� ool� �'o t2+�•� c-� � � �� To {-i � IT.ItiP� I � �'�c -� , 'j�,) E �i-
��rT-�z.,- sr�,i�� ._-rk.cL� �5 . � �p„�T���c� �C--,-�-r� .
AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief. _
Applicant's signature: Date: 0 2 �
I am aware of the proposed appl' he y the above applicant to submit this a plication to the Planning
Commission. �
' '/�/r'�
Property owner's signature: : Date:
Date submitted: �o �2- � I �4^
* 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. s:�HalloourslPc,aPp�r�arro.,.ao�
This Space for CDD
Staff Use Only
�
Project Description:
���� C� I l O r� TL� � 'J� � I� n
Sin
o,;� e�
��^� I�►
1�ev►� e� -�r c�d ' �
�l �' �`�(�h
U r
A,. d ) ow-e � � e,.� e 1 �-t� �� e� , s-���
_I �
Ok� � � � h
Ke •
.
Abbreviation Term
CUP Conditional Use Permit
DHE Declining Height Envelope
DSR Design Review
E Existin
N New
SFD Single Famil Dwelling
SP Special Permit
�� �;��
'��� �:
i �r'"-���
� �n _..�.. µ CITY 4F ��TRLI�'�GAi�1E ..µ. �. ��
�CUI'�DI'I'lU:�"�L �`�E PE�''4'iI'i A.pFLiC,�Z"iC11�i �
TYtE P13f8I1�I1�? C OR1CTl@SS4Qfl 1� P£QUBR'{� �?4� law to i�aake iindin�s as defincd b}� the C.it��'s Urd�nancc (Code
Sectian 25.��.tl`tJ)_ Ymeer ax�sw��ers to th� tc�t@u�w��n� q�sestion.� can assist ch� Plartr�En� C'ar�i�s�on �n
makin� the deci�ian a.� to whechcr the tindi��s can bc made %r your requcst. Please typ+e or write �teatty
in enk. Rcfer ta the back ot'thi� tiorn� for asststance with th�e �questions.
1. Explain ►rhy� th� prc+pvsed us� ai th� propnsed lacation w�ill rtnt be detriment�l ar anjuriows ro
Qmp�rn� crr irnpr�rv,���r�ts in the vdrinet�' ar tn public he�tth. suJ�t}�, �+rr��rrr! ►��elfarP ar
cr�n►��r�r'enc�
The proposed request is for the approval of existing conditions that pre-date the current property
owner. Transom windows over the garage door do not face the adjacent property line and
therefo�e do not pose a threat to the safety or privacy of the adjacent properties. Similarly the
skyiight is greater than 5' from the property line and is not a threat to the safety of the adjacent
property. The window and skylight on the d�tached garage structure provide natural light to a
space that is generally used for parking and garden related activities and is not a significant
source for privacy or light pollution issues.
I. Hr�w ►vill tl�e prcr�c�sc*�i res� lr� torat�d a�d c�nducted in accor�d�rnce w�tth the Bur�in�rr�e
Gen�rat Picer� an� lvnir� llydinanee?1
The detached one story garage is within the rear thirty percent of the length of the lot and is
consistent with the side yard setback exception for R-1 25.26.073
3. No�� �►�itf the� propv4ed pra,��rt b� cornpatiblc rv�th the cr�sthetics, nrass, balk and ch�racrer e�f
tl�� existin� and p�atential uses ca,� �djoirein� propertits in th�,��n�ral ��icin�tyr
The detached garage will not be altered under this permit. The current location is consistent with
the adjacent property land use pattern, which also includes a back of the lot detached structure
and pool houses. The architectural features of skylights and transom windows of the detached
garage are set approximately 188' from the street, and help ta emphasize the front porch of the
homes over the garage door.
i -. � : fr st
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
October 24, 2014
� Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
� Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
X Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review for an addition to the main level and
lower level of an existing single family dwelling at 149 Pepper
Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-263-060
Staff Review: October 27, 2014
1
2
Provide a residential fire sprinkler system throughout the residence, required
per Burlingame Municipal Code 17.04.108:
a. Provide a minimum 1-inch water meter.
b. Provide a backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly — A
schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building
Plans prior to approval indi�ating location of the device after the split
between domestic and fire protection lines.
c. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval
shall clearly indicate fire sprinklers shall be installed under a separate
deferred fire permit, approved by the Fire Department prior to
installation.
Electronic gate shall be equipped with a Knox key switch for emergency
access by the Fire Dept.
� �� f
�'� � G �
Reviewed by: Christine Reed
Date: 10-27-14
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From
October 24, 2014
X Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
� Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review for an addition to the main level and
lower level of an existing single family dwelling at 149 Pepper
Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-263-060
Staff Review: October 27, 2014
1. On the site plan, please show where all the existing downspouts are located
and where the runoff is directed.
2. Sewer backwater protection certification is required for the installation of any
new sewer fixture per Ordinance No. 1710
3. On the site plan, please show where all the existing utilities are located
(PG&E, telecom, water, sewer, etc). Show if there are any overhead wires as
well.
Reviewed by: M. Quan
Date: 10/28/14
Project Comments
Date:
January 13, 2015
To: � Engineering Divisior�
(650) 558-7230
� Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
From: Planning Staff
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
X Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Subject: Request for Design Review for an addition to the main level and
lower level of an existing single family dwelling at 149 Pepper
Avenue, zoned R-1, AI'N: 028-263-060
Staff Review: Revised plans dated January 12, 2015
1. Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) noted on plan sheet BMP.
2. Pervious paving identification noted on plan sheet A0.0.
Please contact Kiley Kinnon, Stormwater Coordinator, for assistance at:
(650) 342-3727
Reviewed by: KJK
Date: 01/14/15
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
October 24, 2014
� Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
� Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
X Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review for an addition to the main level and
lower level of an existing single family dwelling at 149 Pepper
Avenue, zoned R-1, AIPN: 028-263-060
Staff Review: October 27, 2014
� Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the
city's stormwater NPDES permit to prevent construction activity stormwater pollution.
Project proponents shall ensure 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 a
list of construction BMPs as project notes, preferably, on a separate full size (2'x 3' or
larger), plan sheet. A downloadable electronic file is available at:
http://www.flowstobay.org/Construction
2. All exterior surface paving materials, including, but not limited to those used
on driveways, sidewalks, walkways and patios, must be identified as pervious or
impervious.
Reviewed by: KJK
Date: 10/29/14
,;�,
Sr r" � ! �Y�;�i:tE
Water Pollution
Prevention Program
Clean Water ��._ R.� r;-<�i- ;if
Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Construction proje�cts are required to implemen2 the stormwater best management practices (BMP) on this pa�e; as
they apply to your project, all year long.
�laten ils K �Vaste ��lanagement
Vun Hazardow �latcnalv
❑6armadc��:r�tockpl ��fzon�dlrioroihcraensaucuonm�t.00l
«�ihta�n�.hGir,�n'_f 'castorifnol'uc���ch�bc�ipu.c:d��iihin
l a dn� s
❑ �m i bw do i i u� emn<) m iafincd �� ai cc tor Uust mmml.
Hvardn �Mul J�
LI t ob�l all 1�� tl< � t' I. d I�� d st � � wcli a,
pe<i�<�d p� [. ih� . I �nis f 1 �I. d �nt�fr�eie7 �n
.,orUa ce ��iih �,.1� �- i� i ic d ��d<<at r�culmio rs
� Siore haia�doi s maie ��I, n d��ast�s in ��atzr G�hi caniafnen aio�e
�n appropriate scw�idan� unininmenc and co��r �hem a� the e»d of
a�cn��� kl� c A' t,:U� 1 ��f� �.:t
❑!-ollo�� f c1 c. F � I� - t o t t' to t erd s
ii:it�ri.l-a d b a- f � � i sc o tl c ssa -. D noi
applc chc �. I. . t li . I. �. .s lo i'it � J 1 our�.
❑ lrran�c t�.r �ppropr�at� disposol ot alI hai.o�do� s��astes.
wa n rt.�n � � �
❑C� cr � i d� �� snlc. � c ti� h���lhtarysaithc�nAof
� n � k da i d d � c� � atl �r.
❑ Chack �.�,r dlsp�sal o �.�ii en frcqucn�h for Ical.. <uid to mak�.:
sum �h., �� o� rfill.,d- �e�er ho.c do�� i a dump�ccr on th�„
c stn�C st
U U��an i. � la.� p�nable �oilctc and iasp:ct ihc�n Ireqientl� Po�
I uA: � I p'tt�.
❑ Dispos Call �� azics an�i dcbris pro� rl _ Rw���lc i aicnnls a�d
�astes ihai can be rccceled (sueh as a=phali.:onerete_ ae,regni. baec
matccials. �cood. g� p board, pipc. etc_)
❑ Ui�pose of liquid r3idu« li�om paiuts, thiiu�ers. sol��ents. gliiei and
cicaning tluids as 6arncdous �� aztc.
Cnac�ructiun Entr:mces and Pcrinictcr
❑ F.slabli�h a�d ni�intaiii cffc,:ti�c pcnmetcr controls,ind eiab I�i.�� aft
co�ttructfon envm-,ces and ecit< io s�0icieml� concml erosian �nd
sedi�ncm discha�gcs Itom slu: nnd tmckln� o�i sitc_
❑ Sneep or �aeuum ane street vewkin; inunedla�elc and secnre
seAlmcni souroo io prc�_m fnrthcr iracking_ hcccr hosc do�vi �ircats
tocicni upirackinE
EquipmenC M19anagement &
Spill Contral
� e�
R �:
� � ��.
4� ' #•
�-� �+�<�
A1�intennncc and Parl.in�
❑ Dcsi�iiatcanarca fn�d tl pp �p �at B14Ps,for
srhicle and equip t pnrkin, and smmge.
❑ Perform major moint�n�nce, repairjoFs and �ehicle
and cqiiipineni �� ,7 p 1T �t .
Ll If relu.lin� or �eh�d� ma�n[. iance musi be done
oiisic k� �:ri���darc,�:� C .to d-�n�
ei�d o� cr <� drip pan o� drop rloil - bi� �nouyh io �ul Icci
Ild I. R I o d.,�.. 1 It d� m hni�rdrn s�-i<.
❑ If � I cl,or�qiip i�nt,lcan�utkmistbcdon�onsii�.
dca�i v.„ate� o i� in a Ircrnr.tl area that �vill not
p110t� !.\ 3IC[ 10 n��t If110 �����ClS 9t[OCtS 9(0[Ilt
d afns, cr �urfacc.�aters.
❑ Di I Ic �1�_Icerequ'p�i� i .�,�ps
sof c t�.d�cr�u.scn or.l�am„1 _�quipmenl.
S�ill P �c [ u� anA C m[ �I
❑ 6� � � l! t n i I ab �hc t. �md
., i 1 uc ) a�e lo! ! t il :�i t . i II i �s.
�] I i �k t I� I i I q p �nt 1 � itt I' ut
�zp I A-P� ptl� �.,.dnp�nns�o,,.�4hl�aAs
untl cp - _� d
U CI p G. lls o I ol.s � �,1� fcI � a d I'F sz ��I'
<I�� p c'als � o�K I.
C! D� -tl� � d Cu oh� fl�L I- �-Pilled.
Us I I� p ih d(absortw t ut.nols. cai
liit I:orraEe)
O S� �Fl P'pJlcd 1�� iamnulsimmcd�atek Uono�
in �o oash ihem a��a� ��;�h ��a�cr. or bun t6em_
❑ Clenn up spills on din arcas 67 chogin_ up and
pcopzrl�-disposinn of coniaminatM soil.
� Repon slEnificam spills iinnmdimcl��. You nrc requimd
b� la�� to r.por[ alt signif c�nt rel�aa;s oC hai��dous
inaicnuls. incliiding oil. Tu repnrt a spill_ I) Dial 91 I
or ��our local enwrgcn<} responsc numbcr. >_) C�II thc
Go�crnor s ORc� ol ti ncr�;n�� Smlicas Waming
Cante�-CrioO) Hi?-7�5�1 (2i Iroua?.
Earthmoving
_ � . _ ...<:: � , -
.,�'"'°"""'"`':-�a��,-A-«.____�,.
t�� � �.
,��yt' �
— --�.-T �' + �
� { `�" " ." �tC J.�1 i .:
� ,�k;,�, �� --�—_
�w.... .._an� ��.� �stz��
O S:hedulc ,rn4ing � id c�cawt on �wrk
Uur ig dr� ncaihcr.
O Siab�I�i.c nll �icnuded.vuas. i�isiall and
mninla�ntempo. . o i I I i c.h
� erosion �ontrol lab�i., or bo idad fib,r
matn�) un��l �uFotafion �c ostablish��d.
U R �' t �� e ial o onh �� I�c i
b ol i I � d-� cd or olmu
���Intion lor . o irol o i slopes
r�chen consi a on s ni t immcdiamlr
plaimcd
❑ Prc ;nt sediuicni f�om n���rati��� olLsitc
�nAprolecistorn dra � �ilcte. guiicr,s.
d�i 1 d 1 ' a�, o� b si 11 �
2 � 3� t- p� op-�<< Il�tPs. !
t 1 0ll s It 1 .. d�cni h�s-n..
�Ib�...b . t
❑ti �,. i� i �<< ei , i
to d� mp tni�6s o i.1�. iot in Oi� str<zts.
Cnnt�min,itcA So�lr
C:llf ftt f�ll is� d�us�a�
<b liul � m � ( �xt
�. i� .t tl:, R„ion:il N;�t�r Q� alit��
Co vol 6nard.
ti �sunl �oil cond tions. d s clocaiia�.
xior.
- A6andonod undcrymund tanAs.
- Abai�doncd��clls
� Bu�ied 6. vcls. debns_ or irnsh.
Paving/Asphalt�l'ork
O��-oid p� � I s I t� g in �� ct
�rcath �. �hcn n�n - ( c .st.to
pre� am materlals that I�a� e noi airsd
o-oin contaeGn� sion»vzic� runon�.
':! Co�crsmnn drnm ldeiaandm,mlioles
��hcnapphingccal�. �t i�icl;c,ot�l.slum'
sznl.logsonl ctc
❑ Colleaandmc�ilcorappropriatc.l�
dispo4, f. . abm. �- � 1 eand.
Do h'Ot�s��_,.p or ��a_I it inio �ullcr:
❑ Do nct usc "a��r �o �ti �� 7� Cr�sL
cphali con�rcie pa.���ncni.
Snw-cut[in� x>s�ihalt; Cuni rcic Remo��al
❑ Prom�i I � ��orm drnin udeis ��hen
aa��nnC . U� fli i b _c tchbns�n
� le� fih � cl b� to kccr lum
o�oPth � d � s�i
❑S�,ce� no�.no , .a m
sl d d po f II �i as saio
cr ��ct i � i o�
Il .I`[I I�A�h4�nlF.da (�hCh.,���[�is
❑ 11'sn��c, t sl � i s a ca�ch b;is�n clea�
i1 up in �n�d-a��l�.
Concrete, Crout & %1ortar
<lpplication
� i
� ��
�' � �
� ,
�..��.� �
❑ St o�-i . t� 1 i.rsa�
Ir _t nn Arau _ c� ,n�mecs and on
p:ill�t> undc� �o� �r to prolecl them Irrnn
ra� f7. d - d.
U N�a I �uiu.ncr�i�,qupm.,�t�trucA,
ofTs�l� cr �n a dc: � at.d ��a,hom
ar.�a ��I��rc Ilic � t- II Il. �nlo a
tcmpomni�astcptaud�n „i
that ��ill p�c��: u Ica,lung imo �he'�
u J I��..ol �� �.� c ,d c r, .
i. � u crac hard., i and d�spou ol as c�
ga b ti
❑ WI � .I � � .-poud s�s�ale
pr � nl��asl���at [onic�tcrin�s�ornt
Amms. BIocA am� inlc�s and �a:uum
si tt s. l s � I� t to d n ar;a� o
dn� onto a b,.c cd nrlocr, u b� pi mpcd
and disposb ofpropcdp.
Landticaping
x
� dt:e
yPo+�,.L �"w � � _ ' f Y�
t�`�� £ .
❑ Pr c�,,.� tto.kpCl„d Innd�car�ne mnierial�
from «�ind.md ro�in b�� stnrin, Ihcni undcr
lar�s nII ��car-round
O SiacA ba£;;cd m�iorial on prillcts and
unAcrro�er.
❑ Diswntiuucapplicnoonofau. crodiblc
IandsaaEx motcrial �� 1�Lin 2 da� s befc,rc a
C<�c� -t��ur«emordurn<<ech�eat6cr.
Storm drain polluters may be lia�le for� fii���°v�'up ta $10,Q04 per dayi
Painting & Paint Removal
�� �p
� k {a� � .
4 j ��
? - .�! �µ-�'� a i
�{ i � � ,
i
Pxm[ing Clcanup nnd Rcmo� xI
J Vc�:r di� b shcs or nnar pdn�
ta� ' te a t� t gnuar. smrm
d . a
J F :�t� b cd��� � p to il slcs
� d�.�i Ip �bl d .� i.
I tl I E I th �. la �
'1 ��i p i lo a i 1- i.
�7fo �Ib; dp� � p�toib sl sto
tl .-t t� �bl d t a il �� �-r
or:ot��nl naproper�,o t n,.cFiltzrand
�c tl in ' d- I� t D'spo' 1
....liq �,l ��ha. duu��asic.
7 Paim �hips and dust Iram non-hanrdous
dr� svipp' E id sand bl�stuip ma� bc
��epi up or �ollcct�d in pl�stic drop
cbtlu and (�_poi� ofa.� trash.
JCI wlp t..t�IP k d ad.liips�
and dusi i o n., pi� t-. p' i
�o itaining lead n .r tribu« I�i i
� zi Ix d �x d f�. 1 amrdrnis «aste_
L' �d ba�� 1 p� t r��uo�el requires u �I.it.-
�<rCfi�d comm:�or.
De»aCering
.� i'. ��`.,��r,'�' ���I
�a� .i � �
��
��1 � . �
J D. I s,�s ul Eroi nd�� ntc� or caplur<d
oo(llcomdc«a�erngop l �iis�
b p perl� manoucd �nd d p s<L N'Iicn
pos-bl dd� at ed IaK�t
1 Isc.ipcd � � m�t. � cr_ If
d sclmryu : t tl anfian �ucall�oi�c
locbl i�asia��atec ircalmeni plant.
❑ Di��cn rwion ��arcr liom offsirc o��a�
Cm�n all disn�rbcd a�cas_
U ��'hcn dc�caicring. nouli and obtain
appm�el Crom ihc Iowl munfcipalfi�
bcl'om dac6urging oamr �o a strmi eurtcr
or s�orm drain. Piltration or diccrsion
�hr�ugh a b. fa �ank ur sedimcnt trap
s� bcrcquirc;l
❑ tn arcas of kno�� n or suspcc�cd
ommnindiion. coll �our locni ngencg to
dc�znnfne �� he�her tlic groand �vamr must
bc �eved. Pumpcd ernw�d�catanna� n:ed
io bc collccmd �nd Iinulcd fl sic for
vc.�cmen[;�nd propcc disposal
� Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
January 13, 2015
� Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
X Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review for an addition to the main level and
lower level of an existing single family dwelling at 149 Pepper
Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-263-060
Staff Review: Revised plans dated January 12, 2015
No further comments.
All conditions of approval as stated in the review dated 10-24-2014 will apply to this
project.
_ _ ,.
.. :...._-
_n _..�� �__ .�
Reviewed by � .,-�`�'; '�� Date: 1-13-2015
. , �/ ,....-
� Pro�ect Comments
Date:
To:
From:
Subject
Staff Review:
October 24, 2014
� Engineering Division
(650) 558-7230
X Building Division
(650) 558-7260
� Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
� Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Request for Design Review for an addition to the main level and
lower level of an existing single family dwelling at 149 Pepper
Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-263-060
October 27, 2014
1) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2013 California Building Code,
2013 California Residential Code (where applicable), 2013 California Mechanical Code,
2013 California Electrical Code, and 2013 California Plumbing Code, including all
amendments as adopted in Ordinance 1889. Note: If the Planning Commission has not
approved the project prior to 5:00 p.m. on December 31, 2013 then this project must
�omply with the 2013 California Building Codes.
As of January 1, 2014, SB 407 (2009) requires non-compliant plumbing fixtures to be
replaced by water-conserving plumbing fixtures when a property is undergoing
alterations or improvements. This law applies tc� a1l re5idential and comn�el-cial ��roperty
briilt pric�r ta January l, 19�)��. Details c��c� l�E: ft�«nc� at htt�://www.le�info.ca.gc�v/��ub/09-
10/billJsen�sb 0401-0450�sb 407 bili 20091011 ch_aptered.html. Revise ihe plans to
s w co�l7pliance cvith this t•eq�iiretnent.
) pecify on the plans that this project will comply with the 2013 California Energy
- Effiaency Standards.
Go to httq:i/www.enerqy.ca.gov/title24/2013standards/ for publications and details.
4) Provide two completed copies of the attached Mandatory Measures with the
submittal of your plans for Building C;ode compliance plan check. In addition,
replicate this completed document on the plans. Note: On the Checklist you must
provide a reference that indicates thP page of the plans on which each Measure
� be found.
5 P ce 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.)
@
�� 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 Job Copy of the plans prior to performing the
work.
7) Anyone who is doing business in thE City must have a current City of Burlingame
business license.
8) Provide a fully dimensioned site plan which shows the true property boundaries, the
location of all structures on the property, existing driveways, and on-site parking.
9) Provide existing and proposed elevations.
10}Provide a complete demolition plan that includes a legend and indicates existing
walls and features to remain, existing walls and features to be demolished, and
new walls and features.
NOTE: A condition of this project approval is that the Demolition Permit will
not be issued and, and no work can begin (including the removal of a�
building components), until a Building Permit has been issued for the
project. The property owner is o-esponsible for assuring that no work is
-,authorized or performed.
��ooms that could be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door
that complies with the egress requirements. Specify the location and the net clear
opening height and width of all required egress windows on the elevation
drawinqs. 2013 California Residential Code (CRC) §R310.
Note: The area labeled "Game RoomlMedia Room" is a room that can be used for
sleeping purposes and, as such, must comply with this requirement.
,�ndicate on the plans that, at the time of Building Permit application, plans and
�--�engineering will be submitted for shoring as required by 2013 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 recard or soils engineer prior 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
shoring. Maximum allowable vertical cut for the subject project will be five (5) feet. Beyond
that horizontal benches of 5 feet wide will be required. Temporary shores shall not exceed 1 to 1
(horizontal 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, formwark, etc. as required far the
protection 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 retaining wall) and / or driveway surcharge loads.
dicate on the plans that an OSHA permit will be obtained for the shoring* at the
excavation in the basement per CAL_ / OSHA requirements. See the Cal / OSHA
handbook at: http:!/www.ca-osha.comlpdfpubs/osha userguide.pdf
�-� * Construction Safety Orders : Chapter 4, Subchapter 4, Article 6, Section 1541.1.
14 dicate on the plans that a Grading Permit, if required, will be obtained from the
partment of Public Works.
rovide section details that show the finished headroom height for each room in the
basement. Per the 2013 CRC the minimum ceiling height in a basement is 7'0". Portions
of the basement that do not include habitable space, hallways, bathrooms, toilet rooms
and laundry rooms shall have a ceilirig height of not less than 6"8". NOTE: Areas with a
headroom height greater than 5'11" are considered to be floor area by the Planning
Division.
16) 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.
17) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 2013 CBC §1009.
18) Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
NOTE: A written response to the items noted here and plans that specifically address
items
2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 must be re-submitted before this project can move
forward for Planning Commission acti�n.
Reviewed by: Date: 10-24-2014
Joe Cyr, CBO 650-558-7270
Prvject Comments
Date:
January 13� 2015
To: Q Engine�rir�g Division
(fi50) 558-723U
� Building Division
(sso) sss-72so
X Parks Divi.sion
(s5o) ssa-�33¢
From: Planning Stafif
� Fire Division
(65Q) 55&7600
{� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(65Q) 558-7204
Subject: Request for Design f�eview for an addition to the main level and
lawer level of an e�sting single family dwelting at 749 Pepper
Avenue, zoned R-1, �#P�1: 028-263-060
Staff Review: Revised plans dated January 12, 2015
� . No further comments
Landscape to remain
Two additionai trees added to landscape
Reviewed by: BD
Date: 1/15/15
Project Comments
Date:
�
From:
October 24, 2014
� Engineering Divisiori
(650) 558-7230
� Building Division
(650) 558-7260
X Parks Division
(650) 558-7334
0 Fire Division
(650) 558-7600
� Stormwater Division
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
(650) 558-7204
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review for an addition to the main level and
lower level of an existing single family dwelling at 149 Pepper
Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-263-060
Staff Review: October 27, 2014
1. No existing tree over 48 inches in circumference at 54 inches form base of
tree may be removed without a Protected Tree Permit from the Parks Division.
(558-7330)
'b2. ` Note on plans if landscape will remain or be rehabilitated.
3. Two new landscape trees added to site plan as per requirement. Please
Indicate tree species for review.
Reviewed by: B Disco
Date: 11 /5/14
2/13/2015
:�;
Erika Lewitt
Senior Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Ms. Lewitt:
We are writing this letter in support of our neighbors, Derek and Jill Johnson. The Johnsori s are
submitting architectural drawings to the City of Burlingame design review committee for
improvements to their property at 149 Pepper Avenue in Burlingame. Along with other
neighbors, we met the Johnson's architect and reviewed a set of drawings and 3-D model of the
proposed improvements, and we are in favor of their remodel plans. Please let us know if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
, ` ���
Tom and Maureen Byrne
148 Pepper Avenue
Burlingame, CA 94010
2/11/2015
Erika Lewitt
Senior Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Ms. Lewitt:
We are writing this letter in support of our neighbors, Derek and Jill Johnson. The Johnsori s are
submitting arch:tectural dra �vir.gs to the City� of Burlir.game design rPvipw commi±t�e for
improvements to their property at 149 Pepper Avenue in Burlingame. Along with other
neighbors, we met the Johnson's architect and reviewed a set of drawings and 3-D model of the
proposed improvements, and we are in favor of their remodel plans. Please let us know if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
— � /%� �--`" .
��
evin & Mandy Marconi
151 Pepper Ave.
Burlingame, CA 94010
2/11/2015
�ZiA
Erika Lewitt
Senior Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Ms. Lewitt:
We are writing this letter in support of our neighbors, Derek and Jill Johnson. The Johnson's are
submitting architectural drawings to the City of Burlingame design review committee for
improvements to their property at 149 Pepper Avenue in Burlingame. Along with other
neighbors, we met the Johnson's architect and reviewed a set of drawings and 3-D model of the
proposed improvements, and we are in favor of their remodel plans. Please let us know if you
have any questions.
�
Sincerel�,
� �
� t=1�,
�,
[Your Name]
KE 1`� �t �_ 1 q� c._9�
[Address} iy-1 PEPI�C� �1/LG-1.(LtE LNEXT .�JOQ /Y �l�+h+C�-�
Burlingame, CA 94010
February 11, 2015
MS. Erika Lewitt
Senior Planner
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Ms. Lewitt:
This is a letter supporting the proposed addi�ion to our neighbor's home at 149 Pepper
Avenue. Our property is on the corner of Pepper Avenue and Chapin Lane and our
garage entrance faces the front of the Johnson's home.
I understand that Derek and Jill Johnson will be submitting their architectural drawings,
reflecting improvements to their home, to the City of Burlingame design review
committee for evaluation. We have had an opportunity to review these plans, and a 3-D
model of the proposed improvements with them and their designer. We feel that this
proposal will enhance the existing structure by adding curb appeal and practical space.
We support the Johnson's project and appreciate this opportunity to comment to the
city's review committee.
Sincerely,
��.�Q
P. Perez
�
211 Chapin Lane (corner of Pepper Ave
Burlingame, CA 94010
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMIMISSION OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME FINDING
THAT THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE APPROVAL OF A REQUEST
FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR FIRST �4ND SECOND STORY ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE
FAMILY DWELLING AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DETACHED ACCESSORY
STRUCTURE AT 149 PEPPER AVENUE WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME hereby finds as
fol lows:
Section 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and
reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that
there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on
the environment, and a Negative Declaratian, per Negative Declaration ND-584-P, is hereby
approved.
Section 2. 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,
the City of Burlingame, do
adopted at a regular meeting
the following vote:
Secretary of the Planning Commission of
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and
of the Planning Commission held on the 27th dav of Jufv, 2015 by
Secretary
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, APPROVING A
REQUEST FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR FIR.ST AND SECOND STORY ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DETACHED ACCESSORY
STRUCTURE AT 149 PEPPER AVENUE, ON PROPERTY SITUATED WITHIN THE R-1 ZONE
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, an application has been made for Desiqn Review and Conditional Use Permit for first and
second story additions to an existinq single familv dwellinq and an existinq detached accessory structure
at 149 Pepper Avenue, Zoned R-1, Jill and De�-ek Johnson, propertv owners, APN: 028-263-060;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on Julv 27,
2015, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and ali other written materials and
testimony presented at said hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that:
1. Said Design Review and Conditional Use Permit are approved subject to the conditions set forth in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review and Conditional Use Permit are set
forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said meeting.
2. 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, ,�ecretary 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 27th dav of Juiy, 2015, by the following vote:
Secretary
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of Approval for Design Review
149 PepperAvenue
Effective August 6, 2015
Page 1
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division
date stamped June 3, 201, sheets A0.0 through A3.1, BMP, and Boundary and
Topographic Survey;
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 staffl;
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 Building Division's October 24, 2014 and January 1, 2015
memos, the Parks Division's November 5, 2014 and January 15, 2015 memos, the
Engineering Division's October 28, 2014 memo, the Fire Division's October 27, 2014
memo, and the Stormwater Division's October 29, 2014 and January 14, 2015, memos
shall be met;
5. that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project
shall be placed upon the private praperty, if feasible, as determined by the Community
Development Director;
6. 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;
7. 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;
8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, arrd 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;
9. that the project shal� 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 Design Review
149 Pepper Avenue
Effective August 6, 2015
Page 2
10. that the project shalt meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform
Fire Codes, 2013 Edition, as amenr�ed by the City of Burlingame;
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION
PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION:
11. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the applicant shall provide a certification
by the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design
professional, that demonstrates that the project falls at or below the maximum approved
floor area ratio for the property;
12. 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; and
13. 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.
. CITY OF BURLINGAME
' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
- BURLINGAME, CA 94010
PH: (650) 558-7250 s FAX: (650) 696-3790
www.burlingame.org
Site: 149 PEPPER AVENUE
The City of Burlingame Planning (ommission announces the
following puhlic hearing on MOIVDAY, JULY 27, 2015
at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hnll Council (hambers, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA:
Application for Negative Declaration and Design Review
for first and second story additions to �n existing single-
family dwelling and a Canditional Use Permit for an
existing accessory structure at 149 PEPPER AVENUE
zoned R-l. APN 028-263-060
Mailed: July 17, 2015
(Please refer to other side)
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE
Citv of Burlinaame
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) 5�8-7250. Thank you.
William Meeker
Community Development Directo�
Pll�LIC H�ARIiVG NOTICE
(Please refer to ofher side)
� � � � �. � �..� . - � — - . , � t � _
� �� � .�� ,�. a a . *� � � ��� .
rt w e
r , . � s ,� _ �-'��
�, - ie� . .:. , � • ' ."�.•� - F
.. ;4. _ � "� ' ��. if �+ f � 3 � � . ... � `� �� y�
�. - - ; - - ��.
,�'k� �'� � � � * �
- � 1'I � - ` ° ,� - �".r;� - �. "` � .�
_
.
� �
',�' ► �
4 � .
,� �� � '� _��� � � � r � #
� •�1 � � _ �,� � �
� ,
� � �- = i�' � . t �
�
�'' � : _
. � �
� _
�. � .
n . .
�-.
� �� . ,
,
.
, �
'� * #►
�.��" �:, � �` � � i
�� e� r.���,. � � ' - ,
' .,�1��'�,,e� � �" �Z� �_ � ' �'�1, � 1"
� � � . � �.
�� �:: � �
�� ,� ,� ��-� . . .
� . .
.e , . .
..
V`� r�� � .�" , � r.E h l� T�..�} t�.
. n� ' r ,.. '�
4 r;
, r . , .�.
F; -
� `' �. ,,� � � . _
: �� � , _ � � �� � _ �
�
� � � , : � �:�� � ;�x,. �� e� , ��
��
���� ..
Ipx ;�: '' . w ,. �' � .`�.
< - T
:
,- >
, *
,� ��=--*- � r ��w � � , , �
- �
� r � Y =. � � - ���
� ; v.
{ x,� �_' , .�� ' _. � i
p � a
� �
: �
, ,�
,
- � � �,
� '
, „ ; �Q
� ,�;� � � y._. �
,�M ��: �,�;
� ��: �� #, y � '� � _ �` `+�l� "'� '�� ' ;:� ��� �
�` � ��$ � �5 � + � k � . � ��� � � � .
. ; :� � : • � � �f , � ,,.
� .. � . '1� .. ..; 76, "` - � `r ; � "�''°� - a a : �,. & M •
, w� f
'� ' a:_ �`� . - . �_a
'� - �' . , J _ �',�,.��":i..f� � a_ � e.
`� _ _ ' a -� � 3'`a '' -` � � * .
. . �' . ���` �.. ; � � � , i�� � ` - !'�� � � �'
x.. r
t
�.�:.' �' .. �. � _, , � 1� _, �"�` #��`'�� *�`�
" . . . ,�p' . 'Gs ' ; �'� . _ "
` � a. • t
� . + �� . . . ��. . . . � .�� �, � s � .
y.
� y
:. -. , '�� x ' ' t� " � _
� .
� a r � � �' '
.
�
, , �
.� , .= t �: �� ..�..�� r �
�_<<., - "
, � .� �
� ...�_ , ._
6
, _._ , �� : �
. ` �
� � � � �
� ��x' • 7S7 I `��i ^. .� �� � �Y � �� � .
� � �'¢'�� ,�� :� - _ �a ''4 �w �}:�a�
i�` � �� E ����' ,�9 �� � + � � ,.
, , �
F. ,�
.� �: �
. , - �:
� � �
, .� � - � �I ' ` � m �
a , �. . �
� , ' � �-� �_ �� � ��� " ���- � ` ' �"�+"
- * �-• �, ; '+� ; � �-
> *, �_- . ��, � . � � � s �� ��
� � �,.
, . � �
f t � _�
. �� _ ���
� _ � �- . � � � a
�� *� � *
�T'i � �� ;�` �� �•� �* � , � � �'._��
� �
- = .� , . �
� � �
- , ,. a. :: �. � •�� � +'� . _ �� � _ � r 9
� — '� _
�# �s: ��� �
n � �'� � " `_ ' ; � " s, ° �
� � �r i� T�� ' �' :� ��` �i �`
. - �� E.
>_ �� � k
,� � _;
., , , .
_ �" �, t ._. �
�� �
; , �� �
"��"'� � ,�A � '' . �, `�M; ,I
'� � �. '�` �` � �. � � . .
., �-
�
q�. .. ��'' � � �r k i �"�' ' "'...� � ., "� 1 �� � � � !
i � �_
a,���"" ' "s . y � � � �� � 37
- �A � �. . . N
,� , � � , �`
�
h ;.. �
� r � { �
+rr
� � � °� >. '� � i � �
� � � � �'-
�: : . �� 3
c y . .. �4 � � � �
. �y •
; =r � .
F S
�,'' � � � � � � � ��� J
.,_;�. �
:� � -.
� �` �
y . �
� � � Y .: ..
� �. , � k
�
`� � �
r {
���p°��� �r " • ',e�o D o oo-o 'o ' •-s . . 'oe .o �
� � . � � �
� �,� �� j 0 - . . . �- o0 0`°�, ,
x �, �, 6 - : � �
., ,.: � :_r