The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAmendment - document type/separator unknown/missingCITY OF BURLINGAME City Hall — 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 94010-3997 � �c�r �� p' � i 1 .� �1 Y li Oe ��'N . P"��' � a �a arvwnr• COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division PH: (650) 558-7250 FAX: (650) 696-3790 July 31, 2007 Otto Miller P.O. Box 121 Burlingame, CA 94011 Dear Mr. Miller, Since there was no appeal to or suspension by the City Council, the July 9, 2007, Planning Commission approval of your application for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit for emerging lots and Special Permits for building height and declining height envelope became effective July 19, 2007. This application was to allow for construction of a new, two-story single family dwelling with a detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 10, zoned R-1. The July 9, 2007 minutes of the Planning Commission state your application was approved with the following conditions: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2007, sheets A.1, A.4, A.5, U.1, L1.1, S.1 and D.1 through D.4, and date stamped June 7, 2007, sheets A.2, A.3, A.4A, A.4B, A.5A, A.SB, A.6 and L1.0; 2, that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 3. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 4. 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 buitt according to the approved Planning and Building plans and the City Arborist shall verify that all required tree protection measures were adhered to during construction including maintenance of the redwood grove, an appropriate tree maintenance program is in place, all required landscaping and irrigation was installed appropriately, and any redwood grove tree protection measures have been met; A: Register online to receive City of Burlingame e-mail updates at www.burlingame.org :o .�� ' July 31, 2007 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 2 5. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 6. that the conditions of the City Engineers' May 31, June 4, August 30, and October 15, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 18, 2007, memos, the Fire Marshal's September 3, 2002, June 22, 2005, and June 18, 2007 memos, the Chief Building Official's August 5, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 15, 2007 memos, the Recycling Specialist's August 27, 2002, and June 27, 2005 memos, the NPDES Coordinator's June 27, 2005, memo, and the City Arborist's September 3, 2002, and April 3 and May 21, 2003, and April 13, 2007 memos shall be met; 7. that any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to have a City grading permit, be overseen by the project arborist, inspected by the City Arborist, and be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and with all the requirements of the permit issued by BAAQMD; 8. that there shall be no heavy equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or holidays during the development of Lot 10; use of all hand tools shall comply with the requirements of the City's noise ordinance; 9. that as much employee parking as possible shall be accommodated on the site during each of the phases of development; construction activity and parking shall not occur within the redwood tree grove protective fencing on Lot 10; 10. that construction materials shall not be staged on Lot 9; all heavy equipment and materials shall be staged along the right side of the property on Lot 10; 11. that at no time shall any equipment exceeding 18,000 LBS be allowed to be within 30 feet of the currently fenced off Redwood Tree Grove protection zone; 12. that prior to the placement or use of any motorized equipment within 30 feet of the currently fenced Redwood Tree Grove protection zone, a protective layer of mulch one foot deep with 3/< inch plywood on top, shall be installed and inspected by the project arborist to avoid further soil compaction of the area; post construction the protective plywood and mulch may be removed as approved by the project arborist; 13. all construction shall be done in accordance with the California Building Code requirements in effect at the time of construction as amended by the City of Burlingame, and limits to hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; 14. that the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping areas; :: Register online to receive City of Burlingame e-mail updates at www.burlingame.org G: July 31, 2007 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 3 15. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall be installed along the right side property line to meet current code standards and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems shall be increased at the property owner's expense if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department and the location of all trenches for utility lines shall be approved by the City Arborist during the building permit review and no trenching for any utility shall occur on site without continual supervision of the project arborist and inspection by the City Arborist; 16. that the new sewer connection to the public sewer main shall be installed along the right side property line to City standards as required by the development; 17. that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed unless their removal is determined by the City Arborist to have a detrimental effect on any existing protected trees on or adjacent to the site; 18. that prior to being issued a demolition permit on the site, the property owner shall submit an erosion control plan for approval by the City Engineer; 19. that prior to installation of any sewer laterals, water or gas connections on the site, the property owner shall submit a plan for approval by the City Engineer and the City Arborist; 20 21 that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site will be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards; that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 22. that the project property revisions to the proposed the tree protection prog construction; owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any house and/or accessory structure or necessary changes to ram or to address new issues which may arise during 23. that should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the Community Development Director and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City; 24. that the driveway shall be designed to be pervious material as approved by the City Arborist, and installed according to approved plans with the supervision of the project arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist; :: Register online to receive City of Burlingame e-mail updates at www.burlingame.org :: July 31, 2007 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 4 25. that the established root protection fencing shall be inspected regularly by the City Arborist and shall not be adjusted or moved at any time during demolition or construction unless approved by the City Arborist; that the root protection fencing shall not be removed until construction is complete on Lots 9 and 10, except if the portion of the protective fence on Lot 9 in the area of the driveway may be removed to install the driveway with the approval of the City Arborist; the removal of a section of the fence should not disturb the maintenance irrigation system installed within the tree protective fencing; 26. that the driveway on Lot 10 shall be constructed of pavers set in sand, with a maximum cut below grade of 10 inches and a base compaction determined by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist; that if any roots greater than � 2 inches in diameter are encountered during grading for the driveway on Lot 10 and must be cut to install the driveway, the situation shall be documented by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to cutting any roots; and that if at any time the project arborist on site or the City Arborist feels the number of roots to be cut to install the driveway on Lot 10 is significant, a stop work order shall be issued for the site until the City Arborist determines whether it is necessary to relocate the driveway; 27. that special inspections by the City Arborist, to be funded by the property owner, shall include being on site during any demolition and grading or digging activities that take place within the designated tree protection zones, including the digging of the pier holes for the pier and grade beam foundation, and during digging for removal or installation of any utilities; that the special inspections by the City Arborist shall occur once a week or more frequently as required by the conditions of approval and shall include written documentation by the project arborist that all tree protection measures are in place and requirements of the conditions of approval are being met; that no materials or equipment shall be stockpiled or stored in any area not previously approved by the City Arborist; and that the City Arborist may also stop work for any violation of the conditions related to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site; 28. that under the observation of the City Arborist, all pier holes for the foundation shall be hand dug to a depth of no more than 18 inches and the surface area around the hole shall be protected as required by the Ciry Arborist; that if any roots greater than 2 inches in diameter are encountered during the digging for the pier holes, the property owner's on-site arborist shall call the City Arborist and determine how the pier shall be relocated and the Building Department shall be informed of the change and approve that the requirements of the building code are still met; and that if at any time during the installation of the pier and grade beam foundations roots greater than 2 inches in diameter must be cut, the situation must be documented by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to the time the roots are cut; :: Register online to receive City of Burlingame e-mail updates at www.burlingame.org 6C July 31, 2007 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 5 29. that, based on root locations that will be determined by hand digging on the site, the property owner shall submit a detailed foundation report and design for approval by the Building Department and City Arborist to establish the bounds of the pier and grade beam foundation and have it approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site; and that if at any time during the construction the pier locations must be altered to accommodate a Redwood tree root, the structural changes must be approved by the Building Department prior to the time any such root is cut or damaged; 30. that the property owner shall submit a complete landscape plan for approval by the City Arborist prior to a Building permit being issued to address the landscaping and fence installation on the site, including plantings, irrigation, electricity, fences, retaining walls and soil deposits on the site; installation of all landscape features shall be overseen by the property owner's arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist, including fence post holes; and work shall be stopped and plans revised if any roots of 2 inches in diameter or greater are found in post holes or any new landscape materials added endanger the redwood trees; 31. that no fencing of any kind shall be allowed for the first 65'-0" along the side property line befinreen Lots 9 and 10; 32. that for tree maintenance the property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the protected Redwood grove during demolition and construction work on the project and for a 5-year post construction maintenance program for the Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection. This maintenance program shall be founded upon the recommendations of the April 28, 2003 Mayne Tree Company report as well as such additional recommendations as the property owner shall receive from a certified arborist; and that the property owner of record shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discussed the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction (issuance of an occupancy permit) on the project and every two years thereafter for a period of 5 years; 33. that the property owner shall deposit with the City $118,780 based on the appraisal of the value of the four Redwood trees accepted by the City Arborist and City Attorney on Lots 9 and 10, as security to the City against one or more of the Redwood trees dying as the result of construction or within 5 years of the completion of construction due to problems attributable to construction; these funds shall be available to the City Arborist to cover any necessary removal costs, cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the grove of Redwood trees; nothing in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or loss of trees; 34. that for purposes of these conditions the project arborist is a certified arborist hire by the property owner/developer; a certified arborist means a person certified by the International Society of Arboriculture as an arborist; :: Register online to receive City of Burlingame e-mail updates at www.burlingame.org C: July 31, 2007 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 6 35. that before issuance of any demolition or building permit, the property owner shall record a deed restriction on the lot identifying the four (4) key Redwood trees and providing notice to the heirs, successors, and assigns that these trees were key elements of the development of the lot and: a. The trees may cause damage or inconvenience to or interfere with the driveways, foundations, roofs, yards, and other improvements on the property; however, those damages and inconveniences will not be considered grounds for removal of the trees under the Burlingame Municipal Code; b. Any and all improvement work, including landscaping and utility service, on the property must be performed in recognition of the irreplaceable value of the trees, must be done in consultation with a certified arborist, and if any damage to the trees occurs, will result in penalties and possible criminal prosecution; 36. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition or the edition approved by the City and as amended by the City of Burlingame at the time a building permit is issued; 37. that before any grading or construction occurs on the site, these conditions and a set of approved plans shall be posted on a weather-proofed story board at the front of the site to the satisfaction of the Building Department so that they are readily visible and available to all persons working or visiting the site; 38. that if work is done in violation of any requirement in these conditions prior to obtaining the required approval of the City Arborist, and/or the Building Division, work on the site shall be immediately halted, and the project shall be placed on a Planning Commission agenda to determine what corrective steps should be taken regarding the violation; 39. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall be maintained during construction on Lot 10, and this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall not be temporarily altered, moved or removed during construction; no materials, equipment or tools of any kind are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, within this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing, the protective fencing and protection measures within the fencing shall remain in place until the building permit for each development on Lots 9 and 10 has received an occupancy permit and the City Arborist has approved removal of the protective fencing; 40. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall install a locked gate in the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing for inspection access to the protected area in order to determine on going adequacy of mulch, soil moisture and the status of other field conditions as necessary throughout the construction period; this area shall be accessed only by the project arborist, City Arborist, or workers under the supervision of these professionals; :: Register online to receive City of Burlingame e-mail updates at www.burlingame.org :: July 31, 2007 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 7 41. that the property owner shall maintain throughout construction a three-inch thick layer of well aged, course wood chip mulch (not bark) and a two-inch thick layer of organic compost spread over the entire soil surFace within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the project arborist and City Arborist; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be supervised by the project arborist and the City Arborist; the project arborist shall inform the City Arborist of the timing of installation of the course wood chip mulch and organic compost so that observation and inspection can occur; 42. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall ensure maintenance of the supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an active hose bib, snaked throughout the entire area on Lots 9 and 10 within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; irrigation must be performed at least once every two weeks throughout the entire construction period for all three lots unless determined not to be necessary by the project arborist and City Arborist; this area shall be soaked overnight, at least once every two weeks, until the upper 24-inches of soil is thoroughly saturated; the Ciry Arborist shall periodically test the soil moisture to ensure proper irrigation; 43. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall ensure maintenance of at least four (4), 8-inch by 11-inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a "Tree Protection Fence", "Do Not Alter or Remove" and in the event of movement or problem call a posted emergency number; 44. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lot 10 shall be regularly inspected by the project arborist and City Arborist during construction on Lot 10; violation of the fenced areas and/or removal or relocation of the fences shall cause all construction work to be stopped until possible damage has been determined by the City Arborist and the property owner has implemented all corrective measures and they have been approved by the City Arborist; and 45. that before issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall deposit $7,500 with the Planning Department to fund, on an hourly basis, the City Arborist inspections as required in the conditions of approval of all construction and grading on Lot 10 to insure that the mitigation measures included in the negative declaration and the conditions of approval attached to the project by the Planning Commission action are met; and a. that the property owner shall replenish by additional deposit by the 15th of each month to maintain a$7,500 balance in this inspection account to insure that adequate funding is available to cover this on-going inspection function; and b. that failure to maintain the amount of money in this account by the 15th of each month shall result in a stop work order on the project which shall remain in place until the appropriate funds have been deposited with the City; and :9 Register online to receive City of Burlingame e-mail updates at www.burlingame.org :G July 31, 2007 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 8 c. that should the monthly billing during any single period exceed $7,500 a stop work order shall be issued until additional funds to replenish the account have been deposited with the city so inspection can continue; and d. that should the city be caused to issue three stop work orders for failure to maintain the funding in this arborist inspection account, the property owner shall be required to deposit two times the amount determined by the City Arborist to cover the remainder of the inspection work before the third stop work order shall be removed; and e. that the unexpended portion of the inspection deposit shall be returned to the property owner upon inspection of the installation of the landscaping and fences, irrigation system and approval of the five year maintenance plan/ program for the portion of the Redwood tree grove on the lot; and that this same account may be used for the City Arborist's selected licensed arborist inspector on lot 10 selected by the City Arborist and approved by the Community Development Director. All site improvements and construction work will require separate application to the Building Department. This approval is valid for one year during which time a building permit must be issued. One extension of up to one year may be considered by the Planning Commission if application is made before the end of the first year. The decision of the Council is a final administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. If you wish to challenge the decision in a court of competent jurisdiction, you must do so within 90 days of the date of the decision unless a shorter time is required pursuant to state or federal law. Sincerely yours, � ��°� ,- ��'� '� William Meeker Community Development Director Chief Deputy Valuation, Assessor's Office (LOT 10 BLK 55 EASTON ADDITION NO 5 RSM 7/46; APN: 026-033-270) File :: Register online to receive City of Burlingame e-mail updates at www.burlingame.org �: ROUTIl�TG FORM DATE: Monday March 31, 2003 TO: _City Engineer Chief Building Of�icial Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist �City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for mitigated negative declaration, design review, conditional use permit for re- emerging lots, and special permit for two atta.ched garages for three new two-story houses at 1537 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, A.PN:026-033-030 . ST�1FF REV�W: Monday, March.31, 2003 /�?� �'G �•,`�� 1�n�2�s �—n �-v�' iti*F'�vS a�. � ��f s�-,;� �.�5, C�y,�� -�-�-�� d. �/,�/oz ,�� /�l �Lr�c� /d.�-�� .�oz� d-c5 �� 4'-�pz<<a-� y Q`Jr �r�2.�� , R'ewed B: `� Date of Comments: y 3�� evi y ROUTING FORM DATE: August 26, 2002 TO: _City Engineer Chief Building Official �ire Marshal �Recycling Specialist �City Arborist � _City Attarney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for design review and special permit for attached garage for a new, two-story single family dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue (A), zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-030 �rti d �81 STAFF R.EVIEW: Monday, August 26, 2002 ��"�� G��`p�a� S � S ��Z�..�� 6.1 5.--- .. . � Comments: � S ° � Reviewed By: Date of MEMORANDUM CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY ARBORIST DA'TE: 5/21/03 TO: Planning Dept./Erika FROM: Steven Porter RE: 1537 Drake Ave. Erika, since receiving the latest Arborist Report from Mayne Tree Co. (4/28/03), I have inspectecl the site, evaluated the Arborist Report and have reviewed chauges in. the building plans. I have determined the following: I am satisfied that the conditions we prepared for Mr.Miller, (Planning Dept. Memo 4/23/03), have been met with in the latest Arborist Report from 1Vtayne Tree Co.. The findings i.n this report are accurate and I am personally confident that if all of the tree protections listed in the report aze followed by Mr. Miller, and his contractors, that this proj ect can go forwazd as planned without significant short or long term harm to the trees in question. With regazd to the Arborist Report, submitted by Mrs. Garcia, (Barrie Coate, 4/9/03). This report appears to cite standard, general tree protection guidelines. I believe tlus report was done without any actual prior site specific field analysis. Although accurate, the report does not address remedial efforts available when the general guidelines are sometimes violated: The Mayne Tree Co. report, on the other hand, is based on actual "hands on" field inspection of the specific site and situation. In this report, it appears that there will be no violation of general tree protection guidelines and that the construction methods to be used will cause minimal tree root damage and will be well under the cririca150% root mass loss farmula. However, the Mayne Tree Co. Report has cited an additional important issue: "Af�er : construction, installation of landscaping, irrigation, electricity, retaining walls, etc. can.have more impact to trees than the construction itself. I recommend having the lan.dscape.plans d.iscussed with the architect and the arborist. This may be a further help to keeping these hees healthy." I agree with this recommendation.....,sp Mar 13 07 12:57p MILLER DEVELOPEMENT 'vc��vor�r �n� l�:zu r�n,x �15U583444a '♦ . �i ` ~i � - �l *t ' �• , yr� � �� MAYNE TREE E�CPERTS CO 6503408435 p.3 f�0U2 I'Vlayne Tree Exper� Company�, In�c. . i'sS fAF3UStitD 1931 ' STi1'1� CUfV'l�2AC`[i3R"S L[C:t�VSE N0. 27674i GR,4DUATE FORESTER - (.'[:fGflF1�0 AItHOKl5l:1 • PF_ST CQNTROL - ADV350RS J4TtD O!'[[i�iTORS IL t[:hlAttil �.1ai 1t�L1NCTliN 535 CiRAGATO ROAD. �i'E. A ��-�� SAIVCAR[AS. CA 94070•62Z8 KF.VtNx.xir�:'Y TGLL•PI�IONE: (654)592-M1400 - (�I+iilul'nONSNfANAfiGR ��ary$fz�7 FA(;$1MlI.F: {�i50}593-4443 L•MAFL' in rrmaynetrecwm i�F. ot�o Ml�ie�' i�a. aax �zi E3t,tr7ingame, CQ 94011 �a3r Mr. M1ier, � 1537 DRAI� AVE. (L(3�F5 9&!0}, BURLINGAME �rhis fet�r is m relt�eraxe past site plan reviews and soif [�ing for morts. �n Mard� i, .t004, w� testecf for rool� at s�veral P�Aos�ed pier hole locatinns. Resu3ts and �:a�ndusians are �n my misdated re�ort of February 4, 2D{?�. (Tt shoutd have beerti daat��ed �r�ch 4r 20l74.) A pi�r hple diagram was induded in VYa1t l.,evis4n's report ' f h�ad r�viewed tl�e lanc�Cape plans #��epareti by Mr. Michael Calkin and reporbeti my •apinivns in rny Septernber i8, 20�6, repott There is essentially r�o thange in Mr. �Elan's �bruary 5, 20�7, fat l0 (ands�ape plan. [r ther+efore, c� nat fi�d problems, at�er than aEready sta�ed En past re�arts, witi� �ruposed devoelopment and impacts i� #� �dwaod grove. I thi� k a!! potential areas af mpacts have been adciressed, �,e. io�mda�, driveways, arid I�mdscaPing. ��rtaerely, ��-�-�� -�-�- . �,�� z- /;�,�-�� . Rit#�arc1 L HUnting6on :�rtiffad Arborlst WE #Ui19A �rti�'ied Ft��ester-#�-9�5... - --------- ..__._. �Ui:pmd RECEIVED MAR 1 3 2007 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLAiVNING DEPT. � Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc. ESTABLISHED 193.1 STATE CONTRACTOR"S LICENSE NO. 276793 GRADUATE FORESTER • CEP.TIFIED ARBORISTS • PEST CONTROL • ADVISORS AND OPERATORS RICHARD L. HUNTINGTON PRESIDENT KEVIN R KIELTY OPERATIONS MANAGER Mr. Otto Miller Miller Development P.�. Box 121 Burlingame, CA 94011 Dear Mr. Miller, SITE: 1537 DRAI� AVE., BURLINGAME (LOTS 9& 10) NOV 0 � 2006 cir�r oF auRUNc,�ne PLANNING DEPT. On October 16, 2006, we met at the above site along with the Burlingame arborist, Mr. Steve Porter, and the project foreman, Mr. Cliff Raines. The reason for this meeting was to discuss potential impacts to the e�dsting redwoods from proposed construction. Each lot will have its own set of potentiat impacts from excavation for driveways, utilities, and stump removal. Each lot wil! be addressed separately with recommendations to help mitigate patentiat impacts. LOT 10: This is the north lot and north of the redwoods. Lot utifities are proposed to go along the north side well outside the driplines of the redwoods, about 30 feet away. This will have little or no impacts to any of the redwoods. Lot 10 has an old tree stump in the middle, north of the redwoods. A tractor can pull out this stump if it is pulled northward, away from the redwoods, with the tractor north of the stump. This will significantly reduce potential impacts to any redwood roots. Lor 9: This lot is south and west of the redwoods. Potential impacts at this time are from the proposed driveway and utility trenching. The utility trench is to go along the south property line, about 30 feet from the redwoods. There will be little or no impacts. 535 BRAGATO ROAD, STE. A SAN CARL,OS, CA 94070-6228 TELEPHONE: (650) 593-4400 October 19� 2��6 FACSIMILE: (650) 593-4443 EMAIL: info@mayneVee.com RECEIVED The more critical area will be excavation for the driveway. A standard driveway profile requires 10 inches of materials, i.e. rock, sand, pavers. To determine how deep driveway excavation can safely go before hitting roots, a trench, 18 to 20 inches deep, was dug along the north edge of the proposed driveway. 1537 Drake Ave. (lots 9& 10), Burlingame - 2- October 19, 2006 A trench was dug from the sidewalk westward to the northeast front corner of the proposed garage. The nearest redwood is about 15 feet away. Roots 2�nches in diameter and larger were not cut and their diameters and locations were noted. Diameters were taken at the north edge of the trench and their depths were taken at the south side of the trench. The distance to the nearest redwood is at least 20 feet except for root #5, which is about 15 feet. Five roats were found in the upper 12 inches of the trench. Root numbers are from east ta west and diameters were estimated using a tape measure. Root # Diameter (inches) Depth (inches) 1 2.75 10 2 3 4 5 9 11 9 12 2.00 2.50 3.0 7.00 The large woody growth (see photograph) from a redwood root has been exposed. It is somewhat loosely attached and will break or cut ofF easily without damage to the tree. During exposure of the woody growth, a 7-inch root was found, root #5, which is 12 inches below the existing grade. To conclude, the depth of driveway excavation depends on the shallowest root(s). These are #2 and #4, which are 9 inches deep. I think a 7-inch cut could be done without encountering large raots. A littfe deeper could be done near the existing sidewalk where the driveway is to start. This appears to then allow for a gradual raise up to the garage. Please call with any questions. I think this report is accurate and is based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, `, r ��i�--� � . .�--t��,� �� Richard L. Huntington Certified Arborist WE #0119A Certified Forester # 1925 RLH: pmd oF J �' � � NO. WE.p119A � z * �� Fh'TIFIED AR��/ i �1 - , J � � � �' t' �. __ + � q �, , �, � . �'. ,F � � � y.� r i�,?�i,�xu "�, g, u� a �`�3- L?� x�,y,, z� ��' , 94�� 4� �� fi s �+ r,. .. � �ti.,. t � -�,�r�s . 3 ' � �_t�a r-&� ':$`r�'� d y;r�`" + �. ...' C F.. ., _ . :_ .e3� �;,� , , "'}*a, y� .�—_ �-:» � "v�. �-��. . "s3 '• . � � . r,.- �!1 � ' � "_ . / � �'�t'%4 �:'�nt�. _ ��Ri �r .. ry� �°`� �(s af ��F Y ��,�+�� y, 'w: � S� � q,�, � -rf � S+ r . �.,�s, �� .'f��` �.' 1 h -. d�t'�- �e�+ .� . j� " t ,( ih � � � J j �. . , ' 9i .`{ t'.. �`�j ^,i 3 � [j.� P �. `1'st' v �''isR.� �.. � ;� 1 Y- + �j . � -.' � '� .,g:.�. � J ��. -u �r � .d�r �� ,�, �' � '',P"��,""s, � . �-M ,f�� i� z�:.Yt`' ��,� . `3� _ � � -d^iy� A,� - r�F�' ' T' � )n � 1'`� �� t t� F � . . $ - �:i ... *si g [ ' .:� �, �� f�... _ � � r � ~ a .. '�'`': µ � Zyy,� , k , i` r'' � x. , � d�"v� i,, ,F. �. ''�S ,��6� 'f' ,��5n � � , � j� . �:fN � . 14�^` . . - � }-... � .. � .�.r�Yd`,'n.`ar�� p �: dyd a'�['-r�j�i� ��-- �� `rF x� s � �� .1.. - �� ,��'f� t i "�'_°" � ' r 't � ' � � ��"�-� � � �. . _ � . - <, .' . . �r s ,. i�' �� „"C '�,n _. G �. T'- � , � '..,, � � - -' ' ;... �. - > : � _- � , r� hi • � _ . Y, ,�,,�,�,;;._.__- -_. � --� . ;, � � i�t � . . :k� - . ' - ` , �- �-cw � � S,� ` � � � '„ �` r '1 � � ~ � �1y � � �, �t = •i �, .� ✓ ri � �� .. . - - � � � ♦' r��'�� l� �w� �s � � �+ �^'�L%'�� 1 � 'i': �}31 � � � ,_ a��_"� � .dl� ' '� ,..J �'��WW.L t � � }:. �� ,� � s y � ,�,[�'l�r.�'S �`� �^ro.� -��'�.�� `� �' �%��r.�',�j� �w "f . � � `. �,- �k-, �s�,�� :,c�, � _�� ^ -- .. ' � ' Z �� k ai`�.'x� p'.'. '` . i � ' � �� a�.s .. .. F�, �� F � .'� � �. � '� f � Jy�. 4' _�' d � . 's - . . b �� „ � .-, ' - ' � � � .-. • ! � �� . _ . • ". „ z."'�?� ..y,• � . � �. .._ .. .�_t � - Project Comments Date: r� From: June 15, 2007 Qf City Engineer (650) 558-7230 ❑ Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ City Arborist (650) 558-7254 ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 ❑ Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 ❑ City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for application for amendment to mitigated negative declaration, design review, conditional use permit for emerging lots, and special permits for building height and declining height envelope to construct a new, finro-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Lot 10, zoned R-1. Staff Review: 1. A property boundary survey shall be perFormed by a licensed land surveyor/engineer. The survey shall show all property lines, property corners, easements, topographical features and utilities. 2. Storm drainage shall be designed to drain towards the street frontage. 3. The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway and other necessary appurtenant work. 4. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works — Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information. Reviewed by: V V Date: 06/18/2007 �� nProject Comments Date: June 17, 2005 Ta: � City Engineer d Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 Staff Review: All previous comments still apply. In addition, backwater protection certification is also required. < Reviewed by: V V Date: 6/27/2005 Pf e v i b J s G� w� wi c r►��'S MEMO UM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Apri18, 2002 To: Planning Department From: Vic or Voong, Enginee ' . Subject: � Drake Avenue �� - The Engineering Division has received several letters regaz�ing the sewer mains on Drake Avenue. We aze aware of the problem that occurred in this azea last year. To solve ihis problem, the City recon.structed four laterals that had problems and removed tree roots from the sewer main. The e�cisti.ng sewer does not have any capacity problems, however it had tree roots which ca.used obstruction of flows in the�sewer main. Due to the shallow depth of #he sewer main in the street, properties with plumbing fixtures below the street level have to install a bacl�low valve in their private properly to prevent any possible back up of sewage. The City has removed the lree roots from the sewer main, however these tree roots will eventually grow back causing problems. Therefore this sewer main is on the City list of frequent maintenan.ce areas to keep free from tree roots. U_1ViCTORIProjedslPrivate11537Drake.wpd � ��r � � .�!c!� � �r?� � PL��1NIl�� DEPART�NT 1VIEM0 TO: Engineering- Syed Murtu�at and Donald Chang FROM: Erika Lewit, Planning RE: .1537 Drake I�ATE: 5.31.02 Please�review the following information and submit youT written� comments to me by S:OOp.m. on Monday, June 3, �002. � � Thank You, Erika - � n __ � ' ��Q/j! �( f a�— .-i�-Q !.. � �. /'' LI � � O Zl�-Q �i�l �� _ GJ U-o�-c.t - � i � lu-s�-�°� - � ��'�' � � S'w�wii� `� . ' � �, 1VIEMOR:AND�TIVI PUBLLC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1'O: PLt�NNIl�G D� FROM: CITY ENGINE] DATE: JUNE 4, 2002 SUBJECT: 1537 Drake A,veuue Residential devetopment project � Staff bas reviewed the in€ormation submitLed by I�uriaga Taylor Iac. pertainin� ta. potential enviromnental impacts and mitigations for the project. Following comments shall� i�e� addressed � by the project �developer prior to the planning com�nission approval: a: � Provide .Location Map of the proposed sewex bacl�low preventc�r installati+on with addresses. (prior-to planning commission meeting) . b: Insta}lation of sewer backflow preventor device is the respon:sibility of a private properly own,er. A plumbing permit is required from the City's Building Division prior to the � installation af backflow preventor device(s). � . c: Submit sewer flow monitoring results with gra�hs of peak and average flows with dates � � � and times of monitoring as a supporting documeat to the sewer flow calculations:(prior f,o � - planning commission meeting) d: Provide a clear conceptual drawing of water line installatioa showing the limits of pipe replacement, le4gth, valves, and size. (prior to planning commissioa �e��?� e: A detail design drawing and specifications shall be submitted for City Engineer's approval �prior to the �issuance �of Building Permit. An encroachment permit is required for the . .constructiont �f water line.. f: Revise the `COI1Sti11C[lOII OPCC3ti0II_PIaII' to pravide a note saying that `No construction equipment.parking and or coastruction workers parking be allowed on the street'. (priar to pianning commission meeting) g: Provide a note.oa the `Constiuction Operation Flan for perimeter construction fence to be eiected to prevenCconstruction debris escaping �nto adjacent properties. (prior to planning commission meeting) � � �h: Projecx consaucaon shail comply wi�h rhe City's constructioa hours and noise ordi�ance. � s:U � wo� n��o�ytaw�. BY NamclSyod Murnm Leausl1537 Ihate Are memo.apd M�MORANDUM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DONALD CHANG, SE1vIOR CIVII. ENGINEER DATE: AUGUST 15, 2002 SUBJECT: Sewer Backup Problem at 1500 Block of Drake Avenue This is to respond to the concerns raised by the public during a June 24`� Planning Commission meeting regazding the existing sewer system at 1500 block of il7ra�e Avenue. The applicant has conducted a sewer study recently and the sewer flow monitoring results showed that the existing pipe size is not a problem. The sewer backup problem was the result of the tree-root intivsion, sags in the pipe, and the age of the pipe. The City has taken the following immediate measures to remedy the problem: � Placed this Iine on the Monthly Frequent Maintenance Program. The Sewer Department will clean this line monthly beginning September to clean fihe grease and debris. Treat this iine with chemical foam for tree-root control. �n August, 2002, a Ciry contractor will inject chemical foam into the sewer main to kill the tree roots within the pipeli.nes. This trea.tment will prevent root intrusioa for the next 2 years. The City will conduct a study of the line to analyze the problems and come up with a long term solution. Once a feasible solution is developed a cost estimate v��'�:' be prepared and this project will be inciuiied into fhe next year capital imQrovemeat program subject to City Council's approval. . C: George Bagdon, Syed Murtuza, Phil Scott, Phil Monaghan, V'mce Falzon, Victor Voong S:1A Pubfic Worlcs Diacbory�Planoiug Correspond\1500 blocic D�ake DATE: TO: � ROU'TING FORM August 5, 2�02 �City Engineer . Cluef Building Offiicial - Fire �Marshal ,�Re�yc,ling Specialist City Arborist �_City Attorney - � FROM:, Planniag Sta� �. SUBJECT: ..Request for design review and special permit for attached garage for a new fwo-story single _ � family.dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue (A), zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-030 . STAFF REVIEV4: Monday, August 5, 2002 � � r� •: : � ',� � Re�riewed B• l�� = Date of Comments: �� . Y• 0 DATE: TO: ROU'TIl�TG FORM August .S, 20U2 �Citjt Engineer . Chief Building Official � Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist City Arborist City Attorney FROM• � Planning Staff STJ�JECT: Request for design review for a newfiwa-story single family dweiling and detached garage at 1537 Dra1�e.Avenue (B), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 5., 2002 ,� !.�iZ1�:�� .4� !. �,� _- '� Rer�iewed B;r: v- U Date of Comments: �( "� `r� � �- �� PUB�.IC WORKS �EPARI7.IRENT ENGINEER�NG DIV��ION � �� . . rLAxivnv�.�v�w �o�rrrs � ,� s�r�� . . � _ . . -ProjectName�fT D�_� - � - . . - - . . i • = Project Address:_ � 'W'�� The%l�o ' r.equirements apply to the project _ -�� 1 � A properly. boundar3r suiyey shall be }�reformed by a licensad land . surveyor. The survey shall show all propefiy lin:es, property corners, .. " � easements, topograplucal feai�ues and utilities. (Required .prior to .the . . building permit issuan.ce.) _ 2 � X The �ite and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should .be made to drain towar�s � ti� Frontage Strcet. (Required prior to the buildi.ng permit - - issuance.) . . �� 3..- = The applicant shall submi# project grading and drainage plans for . approval pri�r to: the issaanc� of •a Building permit � 4 - � The project site�is �n a flood �one, the project shall comply with the Ciiy's � � flood zone requtrements. 5� -_�. A sanitary sewer Iateral�t is required for the project �n accordance with the �ity's stan�ards: (gequired.prior to ihe #�uil�ing permit issuance.) 6. . The �project plans shali show the required Bayfront Bike/Pedestrian irail �� and necessary public acccss improvements as required by San Francisco � Bay Conservation and I�velopment Commission. � 7. � Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the projec�. The sewer analysis � - shaIl identi£y the project's impact to the City's sev�rer system and any ; sewer pump stations and identify mitigation measures. � 8� � � Submit traffic trip generation analysis for the pcojec� �; 9. � Submit a tra�ic impact study for the project. The tra�ic sludy shouid . _ �- � identify the project generated impacts and recommend mitigation : measur.es to be adopted by the project to be approved by the Cify ' . Enigiueer• . � 10. � The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering .� . Division. The garcet map shall show.aIl existing property lines, easements, � � monuments, and new properiy and lot lines proposed by.the map. . : . " . _ . � Page 1 of 3 . II:lprivate dev�elopmentlPL.�AIINING REVIEW GONII�IENTS_doc �. , . P�UBi��C WORKS DEPARTMENT �NGINEERING DIVISIOI�T 11_ _. ,A �latest pr.eliminary tifle report of the subjed parcel of land shall be submitted to the Public Works �ngineering Divisioa with the parc�l �map for reviev�s. � 12 � . Map closureJ.iot closure calculations shall be submitted wvith the parcel . maP, . . �i 3� ._?l�e project. shall submit a condominium map to the �ngineering Divisions in accot+danoe with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act �14 - The_ pro�ect shal}, at its own cost, design and const�v�ct frontage public �� .impro�e.r�nents including c�irli; gutter, sidewalk and other uer,e�sary � � aPPurtenant worl� _ � 15 � The proj�ct shall,at�its owti�c�st, design and const�uct frontage streetscape � impro�rements including sidewalk, car6, gutters, parking meters: �d �goles; � .� irees, �and.streedights in accor"dance with �st�tscape. master plan. �� 16 . By the preliminary .review of plans, -it appears that the project ma3� .cause. � adver.se impacts during construction to vehicular�iraffc, pedestrian traffc - � and public on strcet parking. The projec� shall identi.fy tliese impacts and _ � provide mitigation measure acceptable to the City. . 17 � Tl�e project shall s�ulimit hydrolo�ic calculations from a registered civil � eng'ineer -for the proposed creek � enclosure. The hydraulic .calculations . must show that the progosed creek enclosure doesn't cause any adverse � � �impact �o both upstrcau� arid downstream properties. The �hydrologic � calculations sha11 accompany a site map showing the area of the 100-year flood and existing� �nprovements with proposed improvements. � 18 _- Any work withi� the drainage �area; creek, or creek banks requires a State � DepaRment of � Fish and �ame Permit �nd �rmy Corps of F�xa,p,ineers Permits. - 1� No construction debns shall he �llovyed into �he crcek. .20 � 1he project shall compiy with the � City's IVPDES permit reqaiiement to �. � prevenf storut water pollwtion, � . 2�1 _.,�� 'Fhe pr�oject does not show the dimensions of existing driveways, re- . submit plans witli drivevv�ay._ ,dimen.sions. Also cl�rify if the �projeet is � proposing to widen the driveway. Any wideining of the drivewa.y is sabject � � ta City Engineer's approval. �� 22 _:�+C The. plans do not indicate the slope of the dri�veway, re-subm.it plans . � s}iowiag ti�e,drivevsray pro�Ie. wi� �elevations . . - " � Page 2 of 3 U.�privake.developmenflPLANNING REYiEQfiCOhIIvIEN't'S_doc .� . . �� _: ' PUBLIC WORKS DEPA�2TMENT ENGiNEERIN� DIVI�I�N . � � i ewaik roach. shall be at least 12" . above . 23 The ba�ck of.�he dnvev�ay/s d app � die flow line� of the fronta�ge carrb in the �street to prevent overflow of storm � � � water .f�om the sh�t into private P�P�Y- � � 24. . For the takeout service, a.garbage reeeptacle shall �be placed in front The - - - sidewa�lc f�onting the store shall be k�ept cleaa 20' from each side of the . . P�P�Y• � - �. : 25.� For comme�ial.prujeCts a designated garbage bin space and c�eaning anea - --�. sha]1 lie locat�ed inside the building. A drain connecting the gatbage area to -- -- the �anitary Sewer System is required � . � . � . � _ �rt.-, . - . . � ; .... . , _ - - � . Page.3 of3 � U�private developmeu�t�LANNING REVIE�V COM1VIQiTS.doc � �MO U lrl PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT August 30, 2Q02 To: Plaiuiing Deparh�ient � From: Victor Voong, n g Division Subject: 1537 Drake Aven e . Staff has reviewed the submittals received on August 21, 2002 and the following are snpplemental comments in addition to tl�e previousty made comments dated June 4, 2002; 1. Plans for the waterline installation sha11 indicate the type of pipe to be used and method of construction. . � 2. Sewer flow results did not show �ny capacity problems. Comment c dated June 4, 2002 is acceptable to the City. 3. Comments f, g and h dated June 4, 2002 aze acceptable to the City. 4. Plans currently show that straw ro1Ls to be installed on the two sides of the property. Straw rolls shall also be installed along the east side of the properly which is common with Lot 9 to prevent erosion onto adjacent properties. 5. All other previoi�sly made comments still apply to this project. U:tVICTOR1ProjectslPrivate11537DrakelLots9and10.wpd MEMO UM PUBLIC VVORKS DEPARTMENT October 15, 2002 To: e . From: V ng, Engineering Division Subject: 153T e Avenue _ Staff has reviewed the submittals dated on September 23, 2002 and the following aze supplemental comments in addition to all previously made comments; ' 1. Project plans sha11 show details for how the new water line is to be connected to the existng water lines, i.e., 45-degree bends. 2. Utility notes shall be revised to indicate that new valves shall be�made of brass with bronze handles. 3. Utility notes shall also include pressure testing of new water pipes at 225 psi for two hours and five minute flush, and information regardi.ng disinfection or chlorination of new pipes. 4. Although project plans currenfly show a 90�degree fittin.g at the intersection of the new pipes in the easement area, the text indicates a tee fitting. Plans shall indicate the proper fitting to be installed. Plans shall also s}iow water service connections for adjacent properties on Bernal Avenue and Drake Avenue. 5. Project plans shatl include two one-inch blowoi�s behi.nd the proposed valves at intersection of new pipes in the easement azea. 6. All other previously made comments still apply to this projec� U:IVICTORWrojects�Private11537DrakelLots9and10.wpd Project �omments Date: To: From: June 15, 2007 ❑ City Engineer (650) 558-7230 ❑ Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 d Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 ❑ City Arborist (650) 558-7254 Planning Staff ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 a City Attorney Subject: Request for application for amendment to mitigated negative declaration, design review, conditional use permit for emerging lots, and special permits for building height and declining height envelope to construct a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Lot 10, zoned R-1. Staff Review: Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly — Schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building Plans prior to approval indicating location of the device after the split between domestic and fire protection lines. 3. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. �� UN I �' 2007 CITY CF ��nL°�'�!Gkf�E 1'LA{VNING D�PT, Reviewed by: �� 2L�� Date: / �� a � Project Comments Date: To: From: June 17, 2005 ❑ City Engineer ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney ❑ Recycling Specialist m Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dweiling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 Staff Review: Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide double backflow prevention. 3. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. Reviewed by: Date: � � Y�-� �� i.�-�-- � � � � � ROU'TIl�T� FORM � �ATE: � August �5, 20U2 TO: _City �ngifleer � Chief Building Official . . - - �F'ire Marshal � - Recycling. Specialist City Arboris.t . � City Attorney � FRONi: - � Planning Staff 0 SLTBJECT: _ Request for design review and special pemut for attaclieti gaiage for a new two-story single � fam�ly dwelling� at 153� Drake Avenue �A), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . . � � a.r'►� �8� . - .� STAI'F REVIEW: Ivionda�+, August 5, 2002 � : ��/ Z �C.P�� S 4 r'�-.� �'`Zr as�� `�� . � y � t .; :1 .1 � Reviewed.Bg: Date of Comments: :� .��—s� �-. Project Comments Date: To: From: June 15, 2007 ❑ City Engineer (650) 558-7230 X Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ City Arborist (650) 558-7254 ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 ❑ Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 ❑ City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for application for amendment to mitigated negative declaration, design review, conditional use permit for emerging lots, and special permits for, building height and declining height envelope to construct a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Lot 10, zoned R-1. Staff Review: 1) All construction must comply with the 2001 California Building Codes (CBC), the Burlingame Municipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal requirements. 2) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 3) When you submit your plans to the Building Division for plan review provide a completed Supplemental Demolition Permit Application. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not be issued until a Building Permit is issued for the project. 4) Prior to applying for a Building Permit the applicant must either confirm that the address is 1537 Drake or obtain a change of address from the Engineering Department. Note: The correct address must be referenced on all pages of the plans. 5) Comply with the new, 2005 California Energy Efficiency Standards for low-rise residential buildings. Go to http�//www.enerqv.ca.qov/title24 for publications and details. 6) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the property line. 7) Roof eaves must not project within two feet of the property line. 8) Exterior bearing walls less than three feet from the property line must be constructed of one- hour fire-rated construction and no openings are allowed. 9) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. 10) Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are considered in calculating the allowable floor area. Consult the Planning Department for details if your project entails landings more than 30" in height. 11) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 12) Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 13) The fireplace chimneys must terminate at least two feet above any roof surface within ten feet. � Reviewed b f,' Qate: � (5 � � � , . � • Project Comments Date: To: From: June 17, 2005 d City Engineer X Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist d City Attorney ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 .--- Staff Review: 1) All construction must comply with the 2001 California Building Codes (CBC), the Burlingame Municipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal requirements. 2) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 3) Provide a title block on the plans that includes the name of the owner(s) and the name, address, and phone number of the project designer. 4) Prior to applying for a Building Permit the applicant must obtain a change of address from the Engineering Department. Note: The correct address must be referenced on all pages of the plans. 5) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the property line. 6) Roof eaves must not project within two feet of the property line. 7) Exterior bearing walls less than three feet from the property line must be constructed of one-hour fire-rated construction and no openings are allowed. 8) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. 9) Provide guardrails at all landings. 10)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are more than four risers. 11)Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 12)The fireplace chimneys must terminate at least two feet above any roof surface within ten feet. Note: The previous building permit application for this project has expired. A new building permit application must be submitted and a new plan check fee will be collected. Reviewed bv: �� / � �" � / Date: / /z.�/�,� � � ROU'TIl�1G �QRM. DATE: August 5, 2002 TO: - City Engineer ��luef Bnilding Official � � Fire" Maisfial � — .- Recycling Specialist � �City Arborist . City Attorney. --� �� FROiVI: � Planning Sfaff � . �---. • SU$JECT: Request for design.review for a uew twb=story single familydwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue .(B), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . � �STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 5; 2002 . - . , t ,, . 0 Project Comments Date: June 17, 2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Chief Building O�cial ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff X Recycling Specialist ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 Staff Review: Applicant shall submit for approval a Waste Reduction Plan and recycling deposit for this and all covered projects prior to construction or permitting. Reviewed by: �� Date: � _ � ; -� �� ' '� ` � ROUTING FORM DATE: TO: � City Engineer Cluef Building Official ire Marshal V Recyclin� Specialist � _City Arborist � _City Attorney FROM: � Planning Staff SU$JECT: Request for design review for a new !wo-sto .ry single family dwelli.ng and detacned garage at 1537 Drake Avenue (B), �oned R-1, APN: 026=033-030 . Q►�. Ca� STAFF REV�W: Monday, August 5, 2002 ��- - ' QCu.,�" � c� � � �� ,�t9-�-�� Y w ` . � �� V ��_tf • � .,c.�- . c��— � ��`�'`'� �� ^ � �-��^'"� . � /�� .� -�'�— • . `� . ` . � � August S, 2002 _� �_ �� , ��-�- �— � . �� u,� l� � . Reviewed By: � Date of Comments: ��Z �/� Z , � r Project Comments � City Engineer � Chief Building Official � City Arborist � City Attorney � Recycling Specialist � Fire Marshal ✓ NPDES Coordinator Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 �� Staff Review: 06l27/05 Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution including but not limited to ensuring that all contractors implement construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) and erosion and sediment control measures during ALL phases of the construction project (including demolition). Ensure that sufficient amount of erosion and sediment control measures are available on site at all times. The public right of way/easement shall not be used as a construction staging and/or storage area and shall be free of construction debris at all times. Brochures and literatures on stormwater pollution prevention and BMPs are available for your review at the Planning and Building departments. Distribute to all project proponents. For additional assistance, contact Eva J. at 650/342-3727. Reviewed by: � � Date: To: From: June 17, 2005 Date: 06/27/05 CITY OF BURLINGAME City Hall — 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, Califomia 94010-3997 � GITY O �� I � _ `�..`,(; j� ,� �-L' _. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PH: (650) 558-7250 FAX: (650) 686-3790 January 5, 2009 Otto J. Miller P. O. Box 121 Burlingame, California 94010 RE: TREE PROTECTION DEPOSIT 1637 AND 1543 Drake Avenue Dear Mr. Miller: VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S.P.S. I have had the opportunity to review your December 19, 2008 letter requesting release of the tree protection deposit for the above-referenced properties. Unfortunately, I cannot authorize release of the deposit as an administrative matter, since the Planning Commission's action approving the development of the finro sites does not peRnit release of the deposit until 5-years have lapsed following completion of construction on the sites_ Spec�cally, Condition 33 of the Planning Commission's July 9, 2007 approvals of entitlements for both properties states, in part: "that the prope►fy owner shall deposit with the City $118, 780 based on the appraisal of the value of the four Redwood trees accepted by the City Arborist and City Attomey on Lots 9 and 10, as security to the City against one or more of the Redwood trees dying as a result of construction or within 5 vears of the completion of construction due to problems attributable to cnnstruction..." (emphasis added) It is clear from the language of the condition that the interrt was to retain the deposit until 5-years following completion of construction upon botf� sites; therefore, I cannot at this time authorize release of the deposit. However, you do have the option to file a request for an amendment to the conditions of approval for both projects. By doing so, you would be provided the opportunity to approach the Planning Commission with information supporting your request in an effort to seek modification to the language contained within Condition 33 of the project approvals. If you wish to utilize this avenue, please contact your project Planner (Senior Planner Ruben Hurin — 650.558.7256) for assistance in filing an amendment request. Sincerely, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ��%� �Iliam Meeker Community Development Director c: Ruben Hurin, Senior Planner Maureen Brooks, Planning Manager Steve Porter, Arborist �o Register online for the City of Burlingame list serve at www.burlinAame.orp 0� y Otto J. Miller P.O. Box 121 Burlingame, CA 94010 (650) 340-8112 ph (650) 340-8435 fax December 19, 2008 William Meeker Community Development'Director City of Burlingame � 50.1 Prirnrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Deposit for tree protection on Drake Avenue Dear Bill: I own the lots at 1537 and 1543 Drake Boulevazd. ��[ev��SmHd DEC 1 � 2008 CITY OF Bl!RlINGAME PIANNING DEPT. More than five years ago some grading was done on these lots, and during the grading some tree roots were cut. At that time, the City required that I institute a remediation program that ancluded mitigation measures for the trees and special requirements for the foundations of the houses to be built. In addition, I was' supposed to post a bond for the value of each tree ($118,700 in total) to ensure that ihe remediation program would be carried out. There was no surety company willing to write such an unusual bond, so I ended up having to post the entire $118,700 in cash. The deposit was supposed to be in place for five years after �the houses were built. At the time, I expected to proceed with the new homes right away. However, I did not begin construction until #he fall of this year. So, the trees were untouched during the entire five years before consiruction began. During that tixne, my arborist performed all the mitigation, including mulching, watering, fertilizing, and regular�pruiiing, that was agreed to, with Steve Porter, City Arborist. Through the passage of time and the mitigation measures, the trees are doing beautifully. My azborist has written a letter to the City Arborist, Steve Poiter, certifying the health of the trees. I believe that Mr. Porter�agrees with this assessment. The grading on the lots is complete. We completed the installation of. the special pier foundation for both houses, and above-ground construction is well under way. The balance of construction from now until completion will have no irnpact ott the trees. The trees are fully protected with fencing and signage, which will stay in place, until the City Arborist recommends removal. Steve Porter, City Arborist, has been involved in this project since its inceptibn, and has continually monitored the condition and mai.ntenance of the trees. Steve Porter has visited the site before, during and after grading and installation the foundations and was very pleased At this point, I feel that the purposes of the remediation program have been fulfilled. The trees should be treated in the same way as trees at any other site. Burlingame has allowed consixuction of homes and garages much closer to redwood trees than the houses on these two lots, but no one else has been required to put up a deposit. There is no need for the City to continue to hold my funds any longer. The bondJdeposit was part of the conditions of approval for these two homes. I would like to initiate the process of having these conditions amended due to the (positive) changes that � have occurred since the date of approval. Please let me know what I need to do to� get this process started. , Sincerel , ��JlX1� Otto Miller CITY OF BURLINGAME Communiiy Development Department 501 Primrose Road Bu►iingame, Califomia 94010-3997 Phone: (650) 558-7250/FAX.• (650) 696-3790 Web: www. burlingame. org ; _.._. _ . �., . � __ .. �. . ._ .:_� TO: Otto Miller FROM: Bill Meeker FAX NO: 650.340.8435 PAGES (including cover): 2 PHONE NO: 650.340.8112 DATE: January 5, 2009 RE: Tree Deposit — Drake Avenue Props. CC: COMMENTS: Oito: P/ease see my aftached response fo your December 19, 2008 leiter. Bill CITY OF BURLINGAME Community Development Department 509 Primrose Road Bu�ingame, Califomia 94010-3997 Phone: (650) 558-7250/FAX: (650) 696-3790 Web: www. burlinqame. or_q ; TO: Otto Miller FROM: Bill Meeker FAX N4: 650.340.8435 PAGES (including cover): 1 PH4NE NO: 650.34.0.8112 DATE: December 2�, 2008 RE: December 19, 2008 Letter CC: COMMENTS: Otto: This is to confirm receipt of your December 19, 20081etter requesting re/ease of the deposit for tree protection purposes for your properties at 1537 and 1543 Drake Avenue. 1 will review the leiter and the project file(s) in the upcoming week and will prepare a response to you at that time. Have a happy holidayl Bill Meeker � . ,� . � . PLANNING DEPARTMENT May 11, 2004 Otto Miller 911 N. Amphlett Boulevard San Mateo, CA 94401 Dear Mr. Miller, �� cirY o � � BURLJNGAME �F o� 0 4 ��wtco .Nwc �'. The City of Burlingame CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 Re: Lot 10, 1537 Drake Avenue TEL: (650) 558-7250 FAX: (650) 696-3790 At their meeting on May 3, 2004, the City Council held a public appeal hearing on your application to amend the conditional use permit for emerging lots to separate and amend the conditions of approval and for additional tree protection requirements at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1. Compliance with the conditions which relate to the protection and maintenance of the Redwood grove of trees on Lots 9 and 10 and the staging area fencing on Lot 10 is necessary before any construction activities shall be allowed on Lot 11 and any portion of Lot 10. This City Council action on Lot 10 gives the property owner authority to use 20 feet of Lot 10 for a staging area during construction on Lot 11, providing all tree protection and maintenance measures on Lots 9 and 10 included in the conditions of approval are installed first. However, the stop work order remains on Lots 9 and 10 until the Planning Commission has reviewed and approved the proposed development for these lots and the Building Division has issued building permits for construction on each lot. The stop work order on Lots 9 and 10 addresses all site preparation including digging and grading and any construction. The condition of approval (#50) requires that the property owner place on deposit with the City and maintain a monthly balance of $7,500 to fund arborist inspection by the city. These inspections are identified and required in the conditions of approval and are in addition to the arborist oversight which the property owner is required to provide during certain construction activities. The deposit will also be used to cover the arborist inspection of the required tree maintenance and protection improvements on Lots 9 and 10. The property owner had deposited $7,500 for arborist inspection during required root exploration and identification after the stop work order was placed on the project for illegal grading. There is some money left in this account which will be carried forward. However, based on condition #50 of this approval, this inspection account must be brought to $7,500 and maintained at that level of funding throughout the construction period of all three lots. The unspent residual will be returned to the property owner at the end of construction on all three lots. Before the stop work order is removed or any maintenance activity can occur on Lots 9 and 10 the property owner shall deposit $6,375 with the Planning Department to bring the inspection account up to $7,500. Subsequently, on the first of each month the Planning Department will submit an accounting of the inspection hours expended, and the property owner will deposit by the 15�' of the month funds to reimburse the account. Failure to maintain the required funds in this account shall result in a stop work order on the project. , � ! � May 11, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 2 City Council's approval of the amendment to the conditional use permit for Lot 10 included the following conditions of approval: l. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2003, sheets A.1 and A.6, date stamped Apri12, 2003, sheets A.2, A.3 and A.S, and date stamped Apri125, 2003, sheets A.4 and L1 for Lot 10; and all changes shall be consistent with the plans which were approved for this lot on May 27, 2003, because those plans were determined to be consistent in scale and mass with the overall development approved at or near the same time on adjacent lots 9 and 11 shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 2. 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), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; and all changes shall be consistent with the plans which were approved for this lot on May 27, 2003, because those plans were determined to be consistent in scale and mass with the overall development approved at or near the same time on adjacent lots 9 and 11; that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; 4. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans and the City Arborist shall verify that all required tree protection measures were adhered to during construction including maintenance of the redwood grove, an appropriate tree maintenance program is in place, all required landscaping and irrigation was installed appropriately, and any redwood grove tree protection measures have been met; 5. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 6. that the conditions of the City Engineers' May 31, June 4, August 30, and October 15, 2002, memos, the Fire Marshal's September 3, 2002 memo, the Chief Building Inspector's August 5, 2002 memo, the Recycling Specialist's August 27, 2002 memo, and the City Arborist's Apri13 and May 21, 2003 memos shall be met; 7. that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to have a City grading permit, be overseen by a licensed arborist, inspected by the City Arborist, and be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and with all the requirements of the permit issued by BAAQMD; , . � May 1 l, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 3 8. that there shall be no heavy equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or holidays during the development of Lot 10; use of hand tools shall comply with the requirements of the City's noise ordinance; 9. that no construction equipment, construction material storage or construction worker parking shall be allowed on the street in the public right-of-way during construction on the site; as much employee parking as possible shall be accommodated on the site during each of the phases of development; construction activity and parking shall not occur within the redwood tree grove protective fencing on Lot 10; 10. all construction shall be done in accordance with the California Building Code requirements in effect at the time of construction as amended by the City of Burlingame, and limits to hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; there shall be no construction on Sundays or holidays; 11. that the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping areas; 12. that the new 2 inch water line to serve lots 9, 10 and 11 shall be installed before an inspection for the foundation will be scheduled by the City; and all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall be installed to meet current code standards and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems shall be increased at the property owner's expense if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department and the location of all trenches for utility lines shall be approved by the City Arborist during the building permit review and no trenching for any utility shall occur on site without continual supervision of a licensed arborist and inspection by the City Arborist; 13. that the new sewer to the public sewer main shall be installed to City standards as required by the development; 14. that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed unless their removal is determined by the City Arborist to have a detrimental effect on any existing protected trees on or adjacent to the site; 15. that prior to being issued a demolition permit on the site, the property owner shall submit an erosion control plan for approval by the City Engineer; 16. that prior to installation of any sewer laterals, water or gas connections on the site, the property owner shall submit a plan for approval by the City Engineer and the City Arborist; 17. that prior to installing the new water line to serve Lots 9,10 and 11 and supplying the maintenance imgation system to the redwood grove in the easement at the rear of Lots 9, 10 and 11 and prior to receiving a building permit, the property owner shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works department to replace the 2-inch water pipe in the City right-of-way; � May 11, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 4 18. that the property owner shall arrange for a licensed professional to install backflow valves on the sewer laterals to 1553 Drake Avenue, 1557 Drake Avenue, 1561 Drake Avenue, and 1566 Drake Avenue at the property owner's expense and with the permission of the affected property owners; the Planning Department will advise the eligible property owners of this condition of approval, noting that it is their choice to take advantage of this opportunity; 19. that the contractor shall submit the "Recycling and Waste Reduction" form to the building department to be approved by the Chief Building Official that demonstrates how 60 per cent of construction demolition material will be diverted from the waste stream and the property owner shall be responsible for the implementation of this plan; (completed) 20. that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site will be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards; 21. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 22. that the proj ect property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions to the proposed house and/or accessory structure or necessary changes to the tree protection program or to address new issues which may arise during construction; 23. that the property owner shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 24. that should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the City Planner and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City; 25. that the driveway and the detached garage it serves for the proposed house on Lot 10 shall be shifted to the north side of the lot within 5 feet of the north side property line and the driveway shall be designed to be pervious material as approved by the City Arborist, and installed according to approved plans with the supervision of a licensed arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist; 26. A. that the root protection fencing for the Redwood trees on Lot 9 and 10 shall be installed on site and inspected by a Certified arborist; and a written report prepared by a certified arborist documenting the dimensions of the root protection fencing for the Redwood trees shall be submitted to the City Arborist within 24 hours of the inspection, and that the written report shall be approved by the City Arborist prior to the issuance of any demolition or construction permit; B. that the established root protection fencing shall be inspected regularly by the City Arborist and shall not be adjusted or moved at any time during demolition or construction unless approved by the City Arborist; � � May 11, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 5 C. that the root protection fencing shall not be removed until construction is complete on Lots 9 and 10, except if the portion of the protective fence on Lot 9 in the area of the driveway may be removed to install the driveway with the approval of the City Arborist; the removal of a section of the fence should not disturb the maintenance imgation system installed within the tree protective fencing; 27 A. that driveway on Lot 10 shall be constructed of pavers set in sand, with a maximum cut below grade of 10 inches and a base compaction determined by a certified arborist and approved by the City Arborist; B. that if any roots greater than 3 inches in diameter are encountered during grading for the driveway on Lot 10 and must be cut to install the driveway, the situation shall be documented by the certified arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to cutting any roots; C. that if at any time the certified arborist on site or the City Arborist feels the number of roots to be cut to install the driveway on Lot 10 is significant, a stop work order shall be issued for the site until the City Arborist determines whether it is necessary to relocate the driveway; : A. that a licensed arborist shall be on site during any demolition and grading or digging activities that take place within the designated tree protection zones, including the digging of the pier holes for the pier and grade beam foundation, during the digging of the fence post holes for the first 60 feet of fence between Lots 9 and 10, and during digging for removal or installation of any utilities; B. that a licensed arborist, selected by the City and funded by the property owner, shall inspect the construction site once a week or more frequently as required by the conditions of approval and certify in writing to the City Arborist and Planning Department that all tree protection measures are in place and requirements of the conditions of approval are being met; C. that no materials or equipment shall be stockpiled or stored in any area not previously approved by the City Arborist; D. that a Certified arborist shall be given written authority by the property owner and be obligated to stop all work on the site should any activity violate any and all conditions of approval relating to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site, and E. the City Arborist may also stop work for any violation of the conditions related to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site; • ' May 1 l, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 6 29 A. that under the observation of a certified arborist, all pier holes for the foundation shall be hand dug to a depth of no more than 18 inches and the surface area around the hole shall be protected as required by the City Arborist; excavation activity for the foundation shall be limited to the months of May to October; B. that if any roots greater than 3 inches in diameter are encountered during the digging for the pier holes, the property owner's on-site arborist shall call the City Arborist and determine how the pier shall be relocated and the Building Department shall be informed of the change and approve that the requirements of the building code are still met; C. if at any time during the installation of the pier and grade beam foundations roots greater than 3 inches in diameter must be cut, the situation must be documented by the certified arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to the time the roots are cut; 30 A. that, based on root locations that will be determined by hand digging on the site, the property owner shall submit a detailed foundation report and design for approval by the Building Department and City Arborist to establish the bounds of the pier and grade beam foundation and have it approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site; B. if at any time during the construction the pier locations must be altered to accommodate a Redwood tree root, the structural changes must be approved by the Building Department prior to the time any such root is cut or damaged; 31. that the property owner shall submit a complete landscape plan for approval by the City Arborist prior to a Building permit being issued to address the landscaping and fence installation on the site, including plantings, irrigation, electricity, fences, retaining walls and soil deposits on the site; installation of all landscape features shall be overseen by the property owner's arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist, including fence post holes; and work shall be stopped and plans revised if any roots of 3 inches in diameter or greater are found in post holes or any new landscape materials added endanger the redwood trees; 32. A. that the fence post holes shall be hand-dug under the supervision of a certified arborist for the fence installed along the first 60-feet of the property line between Lots 9 and 10; B. that if at any time during the hand digging a root greater than 3 inches in diameter is encountered, the post hole shall be relocated as directed by the Certified arborist and as approved by the City Arborist; May 1 l, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 7 33. Tree Maintenance: A. The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance during demolition and construction work on the proj ect and for a 5-year maintenance program for the Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection. This maintenance program shall be founded upon the recommendations of the Apri128, 2003 Mayne Tree Company report as well as such additional recommendations as the property owner shall receive from a certified arborist; B. The property owner shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discussed the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction on the project and every two years thereafter for a period of 5 years; C. Prior to a demolition permit being issued for the project, the property owner shall submit an appraisal for each of the four (4) Redwood trees on Lots 9 and 10 from a certified arborist; upon submittal of the appraisal, a penalty amount shall be set by the City Arborist and the City Attorney based on the appraisal. Before issuance of any demolition or building permit for the project, the property owner shall then submit security to the City in a form approved by the City Attorney equal to the penalty amount should one or more of the Redwood trees die during demolition or construction or the 5-year period after completion of construction that is attributed to construction on the site by the City Arborist, to cover any necessary removal costs, and to cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the trees; nothing contained in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or loss of the trees. 34. that for purposes of these conditions a certified arborist means a person certified by the International Society of Arboriculture as an arborist; 35 A. that the fence post holes shall be hand-dug under the supervision of a certified arborist for the fence installed along the first 60-feet of the property line between Lots 9 and 10; B. that if at any time during the hand digging a root greater than 3 inches in diameter is encountered, the post hole shall be relocated as directed by the property owner's Certified arborist and as approved by the City Arborist; 36. Tree Maintenance: A. The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance during demolition and construction work on the project and for a 5-year maintenance program for the Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection; this maintenance program shall be as recommended by the City Arborist based on site studies and experience during construction; May 11, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 8 B. The property owner shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discusses the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction on the project and every two years thereafter for a period of 5 years; C. Prior to a demolition permit being issued for the project, the property owner shall submit an appraisal for each of the four (4) Redwood trees on Lots 9 and 10 from a certified arborist; upon submittal of the appraisal, a penalty amount shall be set by the City Arborist and the City Attorney based on the appraisal. Before issuance of any demolition or building permit for the project, the property owner shall then submit security to the City in a form approved by the City Attorney equal to the penalty amount should one or more of the Redwood trees die during demolition or construction or the 5-year period after completion of construction that is attributed to construction on the site by the City Arborist, to cover any necessary removal costs, and to cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the trees; nothing contained in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or loss of the trees. 37. that before issuance of any demolition or construction permit, the property owner shall record a deed restriction on the lot identifying the four (4) key Redwood trees and providing notice to the heirs, successors, and assigns that these trees were key elements of the development of the lot and: A. The trees may cause damage or inconvenience to or interfere with the driveways, foundations, roofs, yards, and other improvements on the property; however, those damages and inconveniences will not be considered grounds for removal of the trees under the Burlingame Municipal Code; B. Any and all improvement work, including landscaping and utility service, on the property must be performed in recognition of the irreplaceable value of the trees, must be done in consultation with a certified arborist, and if any damage to the trees occurs, will result in penalties and possible criminal prosecution; and 38. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition or the edition approved by the City and as amended by the City of Burlingame at the time a building permit is issued; 39. that a soils compaction analysis shall be performed by a soils engineer on the area that was excavated and refilled during the week of November 24, 2003, to determine what the existing compaction is. The soils engineer and a certified arborist shall then determine what corrective steps if any must be taken to restore the area to the compaction existing in the surrounding soil and shall submit this determination to the City Arborist and City Engineer for approval. The corrective steps will then be completed before issuance of any construction permits for the site; (completed); 40. that before any grading or construction occurs on the site, these conditions and a set of approved plans shall be posted on a weather-proofed story board at the front of the site to the satisfaction of the Building Deparhnent so that they are readily visible and available to all persons working or visiting the site; May 11, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 9 41. that if work is done in violation of any requirement in these conditions prior to obtaining the required approval of the City Arborist, and/or the Building Division, work on the site shall be immediately halted, and the proj ect shall be placed on a Planning Commission agenda to determine what corrective steps should be taken regarding the violation; 42. that the property owner shall replace the existing 2-inch water pipe with a 2-inch copper pipe from its connection to the 2-inch line on Bernal Avenue in the city easement at the rear of lots 9, 10 and 11 as directed and approved by the City Engineer; this line shall be installed to connect to the existing line past lot 9 and a connection provided to Lot 10 shall be provided at a location approved by the City Arborist; 43. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall be maintained during construction on Lots 9, 10 and 11, and this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall not be temporarily altered, moved or removed during construction; no materials, equipment or tools of any kind are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, within this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing, the protective fencing and protection measures within the fencing shall remain in place until the building permit for each development on lots 9 and 10 has received an occupancy permit and the City Arborist has approved removal of the protective fencing; 44. that prior to issuance of the building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall reinforce the existing Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing by installing 36-inch long layout stakes 24-inches into the ground with the supervision of the project arborist and as inspected by the City Arborist; there shall be one stake approximately every 6 linear feet as determined by the location of any substantial tree roots, with steel wire affixed to the fence base though a hole in the layout takes to prevent movement or alteration of the protective fencing once installed; 45. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the properly owner shall install a locked gate in the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing for inspection access to the protected area in order to determine on going adequacy of mulch, soil moisture and the status of other field conditions as necessary throughout the construction period; this area shall be accessed only by the proj ect arborist, City Arborist, or workers under the supervision of these professionals; 46. that prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall cause to have a three-inch thick layer of well aged, course wood chip mulch (not bazk) and a two- inch thick layer of organic compost spread over the entire soil surface within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the project arborist and City Arborist; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be supervised by the project arborist and the City Arborist; the project arborist shall inform the City Arborist of the timing of installation of the course wood chip mulch and organic compost so that observation and inspection can occur; 47. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10 and starting in the late Spring/Early Summer 2004, the property owner shall install a supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an active hose bib from the temporary water line on Lot 9, snaked throughout the entire area on Lots 9 and 10 within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; irrigation must be performed at least once every two weeks throughout the May 11, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 10 entire construction period for all three lots unless determined not to be necessary by the project arborist and City Arborist; this area shall be soaked overnight, at least once every two weeks, until the upper 24-inches of soil is thoroughly saturated; the City Arborist shall periodically test the soil moisture to ensure proper irrigation; 48. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall affix at least four(4), 8-inch by 11-inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a"Tree Protection Fence", "Do Not Alter or Remove" and in the event of movement or problem call a posted emergency number; 49. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lots 9 and 10, shall be regularly inspected by the project arborist and City Arborist during construction on Lot 10; violation of the fenced areas and/or removal or relocation of the fences shall cause all construction work to be stopped until possible damage has been determined by the City Arborist and the property owner has implemented all corrective measures and they have been approved by the City Arborist; 50. that before issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall deposit $7,500 with the Planniug Department to fund, on an hourly basis, a licensed arborist inspector selected by the City Arborist to assist the City Arborist in inspecting all construction and grading on Lot 10 to insure that the mitigation measures included in the negative declaration and the conditions of approval attached to the project by the Planning Commission action are met; and a. that the property owner shall replenish by additional deposit by the 15�' of each month to maintain a$7,500 balance in this inspection account to insure that adequate funding is available to cover this on-going inspection function; and b. that failure to maintain the amount of money in this account by the 15�' of each month shall result in a stop work order on the project which shall remain in place until the appropriate funds have been deposited with the City; and c. that should the monthly billing during any single period exceed $7,500 a stop work order shall be issued until additional funds to replenish the account have been deposited with the city so inspection can continue; and d. that should the city be caused to issue three stop work orders for failure to maintain the funding in this arborist inspection account, the property owner shall be required to deposit two times the amount determined by the City Arborist to cover the remainder of the inspection work before the third stop work order shall be removed; and that the unexpended portion of the inspection deposit shall be returned to the property owner upon inspection of the installation of the landscaping and fences, irrigation system and approval of the five year maintenance plan/ program for the portion of the Redwood tree grove on the lot; and f. that this same account may be used for the City Arborist's selected licensed arborist inspector on lots 9 and 10. May 11, 2004 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Page 11 The decision of the Council is a final administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. If you wish to challenge the decision in a court of competent jurisdiction, you must do so within 90 days of the date of the decision unless a shorter time is required pursuant to state or federal law. Sincerely yours, � �— Margaret Monroe City Planner James Chu, designer Chu Design & Engr., Inc. 39 W. 43rd Avenue San Mateo, CA 94403 Chief Building Inspector Chief Deputy Valuation, Assessor's Office (LOT 10 BLOCK 55 EASTON ADD BURLINGAME NO 5 RSM 7/46; APN: 026-165-230) ' S ,� - c�rx � ..�r!r�lr►!� �e' ?• , ��. TO: FROM: RE: DATE: � PLAN1VI�vG DEPAR MEM(� Engineering- Syed Murtuza and Dona.�d Chang Erika I,ewit, Planning 1537 Drake � 5.31.02 � Please review the follawing infocmation and submit youc written comments to me by S:OOp.m. _ on Monday, June 3, 2002. " � Thank You, Erika . � � � � � �� . �N � �� --�iti� �i�� G�.w �-v�- �! �.Q � j ; ,,� 1 us��—��-v , �'u' ,.,�.fz � �..�w►�-� -� • � 1VIEMOR:AND�J�VI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT �'O: PLANNING FROM: CITY ENGIr DATE: JLTNE 4, 200 SUBJF.CT: 1537 Drake Avewe Residential development projed � Staff has reviewed the in€orimation submitt,ed by I�zuriaga Taylor Inc. pertainin� rta potential emvironm;enEal impacts and mitigatioas for the project. Follo�ving comments sh�ll- i� addressed �� by the project �developer prior to the planning commission approval: a: Provide Location Map of the proposed sewer bacIdiow preventor installation with addresses. (prior�to planning commission meeting) . b: Installation of sewer bad�low preventor device is the respon:sibiGty of a private property owner. A plumbing permit is required from the City's Building Division prior to the � installation of backflow preventor device(s). . C: d: S�bmit sewer flow monitoring results with graphs of peak and average flows with dates and times of monitoring as a supporting doaument to the sewer flow calculations:(prior to planning commission meeting) Provide a clear concepdial drawi,t�g of water line installation showing the lunits of pipe replacement, length, valves, and size. (prior to planning commission �al��;� e: A detail design drawing and specifications shall be submitted for City Engineer's approval prioc to the issuance of Building Permit. An encroachment permit is required for the . construction of water line.. f: Revise the `Constiuction Operation.Plan' to provide a note saying that `No constiuction �quipment.parking and or conshuction workers parking be allowed on the street'. (prior to Ptanning commission meeting) S= Provide a note.on the `Construction Operation Plan for perimeter constii�ction fence to be ei�ected to prevenCconstruction debris escaping �nio adjacent properties. (prior to planning commission meeting) h: Project construction shall comply with the City's construction hours a�d noise ordinance. � s:� r� w� n��. BY NameLSyod Mu�vi I.e�eas\l537 Dnloe Are memo.�vpd ' �. • ' � � � � � PUBI.IC WORKS ��ARTNIENT ENGINEERING DIVISION _ - - : rLarnvn�tc xE�w camav�rrrs ,� ��,�: . - _ - Project Name�u f . Din��6T - ---r-,-r--r--- =- - � - Project Address:_ ��. '�� : _ The follo ' r.equirements apply to the project � � .1 ' •� ProP�Y- boundary sucvey shall be preformed by a licensed land . � surveyor. The survey shall show all proPertY i�, P�Pe�Y �m� . - � � easements, topographical f� and utilities. (Required .prior to 1he � - building permit iss�iance.) _ 2 " X The �ite and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should .be made to drain tow�rds ti� Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit � - iss�ance.) ��: �.—� The applic,ant s�ali submit project grading and drainage plans €or _ approval prior to: the issuance of �a Building permik � -. 4 -� � The p"roject site is in a flaod zone, the project sl�all comply with the City's : � flood zone requirements. 5 �_� �A sanitary sewer lateral�t is required for the pmject in accordance with the �ty's stan�3ards: (Required.prior to the building�permit issuance.) 6. . The project plans shall show the required Bayfront Bike/Pedestrian trail -� and .necessary public access improvements as required by �San Francisc.� - � Bay Conservation and Uevelopment Commission. 7: � Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the project The sewer analysis - shall identify the project's impact to the City's sewer system and any � sewer pump stations and identif�► mitigation meas�urs. . 8: � Submit traffi� trip generation analysis for the pioject. ': 9. - Submit a traffic impact stu�dy for the project. The trat�c study should . . - ide,ntify the project generated imp�cts and recommend mitigation '. meas�u�es to be adopted `by tfie pmject to be approved by the City � _ E�- 10. The project shall file a parcel map with die Public Works Engineering Divisioa The paroel map shall show all existing property lines, easements, � � � monuments, and new properly and lot lines proposed by the m�p. - _ - � � � _ _ Page 1 of 3 - U:lpriva�e developmentlPLANNING REVIEW COhIIv�N1'S doc � . ' �UBi.�C WORKS DEPARTMENT �1�TGINEERING DIVISION i 1_ �,..� .� .la�st Pt�eliminarY title repod of the subjed parcel of laad shall be submitted to the Public Works F.,agineering Division with the gara�t map �or reviews. i2 . Map closureJlot closure calculations shall be submitte� with the parcel . maP- . :13 _�_ .�'he project shall submit a condominium map to the Enginaering Divisions in acco�daace with the requineme�ts of tlie �ubdivision Map A�ct 14 " The. project shaU, at its own cost, design and cons�nsct frontage public iimprovemeuts including c�.ufi, gutter, sidewalk and other necessary i aPP�Y work. _ . 15 � The proj�ct sha11, at �its own c�st, design and cons�truct frontage streetscape � improvement� iucluding sidewatl� ciu�b, gutters, parkiug meters �d Qoles; . tree.s, and.streetlights in accordance with streetscape. master plan. . ��6 . By the preliminary .review of plans, it aPPe� �� ProJect may _cause- adverse impacts during constiuction to vehiculaz traffic, pedestrian tra�"ic - � and public on street parking. The project shall identify tliese impacts and provide mitigation measure acceptable to tbe City. . i7 � The project shall submit hydrologic calculatioas from a registered civil _ engineer -for the proposed creek � enclosu�e. Th� hydraulic calczilations must shaw that the proposed creek enctosure doesn't cause any adverse � `impact �o bofh ups�ain and downstream properties. The � hydrologic �.calculations sha11 accompany a site m�p showing the area of the 100-year -flood and existing improvem�nts with proposed improvements. . 18 � Any work withim the drainage �area; creek, or creek banks requires a State �� D►epathrient of Fish and Game Penmit �nd �1rmy Cocps of F�p,ineers Permits. � :19 . No coastruc�ion debris shall be allowed into �e creek. .20 � The project shall compiy with the - City's NPDES permit requirement to - - � prevent storrn ��water pollution. � . -�� 21 �; The project does not show the dimensioas of exis-ting driveways, re- . submit .plans with drivevvay dimensians. Also c[�rify if the pmjed is - -. � proposing to widen the driveway. Any widening of the driveway is subject - • : to City Engineer's approval. - �� 22 .� The _ plans do not indicate the slo of the drivewa , re-submit lans � Pe Y P � sliowing the:driveway profile with elevations _ . - - Page Z of 3 U�tiya�t developmeatlPLANNING REViEW OOI�II�'IVTS_doc _, . _ _ ��. �'� t. �' PUBLIC WORKS DEPA�tT1ViENT ENGINEERING DIVISION . � . � - » 23 The back of.the driveway/sidewalk approach. shalll�e at least 12 . above � � � tl�e flow line of the frontage c�rb in the sh�eet io prevent overflow of storm water fmm the sh�eet into private property. - - � 24. . For dte taikeout service, a.gari�age receptacle shall be placed in front The - -: _� sidev�ralk fi+onting the store shall be kept cleaq 20' from each �ide of the P�P�Y• �_� : - 25. For commenci�l .pmlects a designated g�age bin space and cleaning area - -_�. shall �e located inside the building. � drain connecting the gacbage area to -. .- the Sanitary Sewer Sy�tem is required. FYSo . ' l • _ . - , .. . Page 3 of 3 � U�priva�e developmentiPLANNING REYIEW COb�II�Kt�.doc DATE: TO:. ROUTING FORM August 5, 2002 �City Engineec _Cluef Build'mg Official � F'ire�Marshal `Re�ycL•ng Specialist City Arborist �_City Attorney F7tOM:_ . Planniag Stall SUBJECT: ..Request for design r�view and special permit for atiached garage %r a new two-story single __ � family dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue (A), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002 � � �: : � t,� � Reviewed By: V..v . Date of Comments: �� ROUTING FORM DATE: August 5, 2002 TO: � ��it�r Engineer . _Chief Building Official � F'ire Ib(arshal Recycling Specialist _City Arborist !City Attorney FROM: � Planning Staff SUBJEG"T: Request for design review for a new�wo-story single family dweiling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue (B), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . �� `� ` ' ±� Reviewed Bp: V- V' Date of Comments: gt "� `�� STAF�' REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002 MEMO UM PUBLIC VVORKS DEPAR'TIv�NT October i 5, 2002 To: e From: V ng, Engineering Division Sub}ect: 153 e Avenue Staffhas reviewed the submittals dated on September 23, 2002 and the following are supplemental comments in addition to all preyiously made comments; � 1. Project plar�s shall show details for how the new water line is to be connected to the existng water lines, i.e., 45-degree bends. 2. Utility notes shall be revised to indicate that new valves shall be made of brass with bronze handles. � 3. Utility notes shall also include pressure testing of new water pipes at 225 psi for two hours and five minute flush, and information regarding disinfection or chlorination of new pipes. 4. Although project plans currenfly show a 90-degree fitting at the intersection of the new pipes in the easement area, the text indicates a tee fitting. Plans shall indicate the proper fitting to be installed. Plans shall also show water service connections for adjacent properties on Bernal Avenue and Drake Avenue. 5. Project plans shall include two one-inch blowoffs behind the proposed valves at intersection of new pipes in the easement azea. iS. All other previously made comments still apply to this project. ulv�croRwroJedswm►ateN 537nrakerl.oessana'i o.wpd ��o � PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT August 30, 2002 To: Planning Department � From: Victor Voong, n g Division Subject: 1537 Drake Aven e Staff has reviewed the submittals received on August 21, 2002 and the following are sapplemental comments in addition to tHe previously made comments dated June 4, 2002; 1. Plans for the waterline installation shall indicate the type of pipe to be used and method of construction. 2. Sewer flow results did not show any capacity problems. Comment c dated June 4, 2002 is acceptable to the City. 3. Comments f, g and h dated June 4, 2002 aze acceptable to the. City. 4. Plans currently show that straw rolls to be installed on the two sides of the property. Straw rolls shall also be installed along the east side of the property which is common with Lot 9 to prevent erosion onto adjacent pmperties. 5. All other previously made comments still apply to this project� UiViCTORWrojedslPrivate\1537Drake\lots9and10.wpd ROUTING FORM DATE: August 5, 2002 TO: _City Engineer Chief Building ()tficial , � - �F'ue Marshal Recycling Specialist � _City Arborist �_City Attorney FROIVI: Plann'tng Sta�' SIJBJECT: . Request for design review and special permit for attacbetl garage for a new two-story single family dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue (A), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . ar1� (8� . STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002 � Y c�. cC��S � 4- f�..� � 'Z�r �.-.a � �,.,� ��- � y � !' Reviewed By: Date of Comments: �_� �--�i Z-- , ,� _1 L . � � 1' ROUTIl�TG FORM DATE; Z`U: FROM: August S, 2002 � City Engineer �C6ief Building Official Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist City Arborist _City Attorney. Planning Staff u i"-. • SUBJEGT: Request for design review for a uew twb=story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue (B), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002 G2.-�s � w��is P,, o�O p�-�/ /, ti � C� s(,-�c�z�--�_ l� sS `{'�� n �r � e e-,��e/ �•- a-w, p,l vs-� .,�fj� � o-v�c _`j o v v (!�r''�' - r^�s � S� 0 � Reviewed By<. DatE of Comments:. ��5� D�z - , , � � � ROITTING FORM ` �' DATE: Au�st 5, 2002 TO: City Engineet �Chief Building Official. Fire Marshal Recyciing $pecialist City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staii � SUBJECT: Request for design ieview and special permit for attached garage for a new two-story single � � family dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue (A), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 STAFT+ REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002 I� �-� v�h f r c o� p,L'j ��ol��e ca � DH �yi �i �e:. ��i �.s c�ip%ia CCGt�Kc he� t��>,./ �t a-�es � d C! OS � 7�0 �j o vsr �clal� �-o lo g N.� � 7� U S e as a S h c c� �-� v�c�( �Ajo✓ia�r c� , � c uJ� �LS Ic�SS �2ti " r�� P rD� a,- � v r,Z p � k e�� 1 u v� �� re - O��S/..S _ ,� �•-� L G�"� , . �:.. Reviewed By:�!% �� Date of Comments: ��S �� Z, . , ti• � � ROUTIl�TG FORM DATEi TO: FROM: August S, 2002 City Engineer _C6ief Building Official F'ire Marshal �Recycling Specialist Cily Arborist _City Attocney Plaaning Stafi' SUBJECT: Request for design review for a new two-stocy single family dwelliIIg and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue (B), qoned R-1, APN: 026-033-030 . a.�. C A) � . STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002 O ►.� � ��- . � QCu� ��.,� �,(n.vr �� C� (��,4,t�- ✓ �n � � �� S -� - c�� h,�-� �� - � � �-��"`� . . �� .� '�- - . - �� , �., ��..�-� �- ��-- `�C u,� ! � r� v��-�- � ' _ � - Reviewed By: Date of Comments: __�_ /_Z ��c'� �— , `•. ROUTING FORM DATE: Monday March 31, 2003 T�: _City Engineer _Chief Building Official Fire Marshal . Recycling Specialist �City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Plxnning Staff : SUBJECT: Request for mitigated negative declaration, design review, conditional use permit for re- emerging lots, and special permit for two attached garages for three new two-story houses at 1537 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN:026-033-030 . ST�FF REVIEW: Monda.y, Mazch.31, 2003 � /�?r�i'G,�ct.�� r�ns-�2�5 �-n �-�' i�.F'�c-�s a�-t . �Sc� sV-%.�E ��5� ��c,k� -�� co, G//7/o� .8/1� /i! �L�7GE /a�� '2� `�b �f'� 4'��.rc.d-L y Q`IJ�fE2E.i7 .�� / /O. . Reviewed B: ��'� Date of Comme . y 3� y nts• � �. t' MEMOR ANDUM CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY ARBORIST DATE: 5/21/03 TO: Planning Dep�/Erika FROM: Steven Porter ItE: 1537 Drake Ave. - Eiika, since receiving the latest Arborist Report from Mayne Tree Co. (4/28/03), I have inspected the site, evalua.ted the Arborist Report and have reviewed changes in the building plans. I have determined the following: I am satisfied that the conditions we prepared for Mr.Miller, (Planning Dept. Memo 4/23/03), have been met with in the latest Arborist Report from Mayne Tree Co.. The findings in this report are accurate and I am personally confident that if all of the tree pmtections listed in the report are followed by Mr. Miller, and his contractors; that this project can go forward as planned without significant short or long term hazm to the trees in question. With r�gazd to the Arborist Report, submitted by Mrs. Gazcia, (Barrie Coate, 4/9/03). This report appears to cite standard, general tree protection guidelines. I believe this report was done without any actual prior site specific field analysis. Although accurate, the report does not . address remedial efforts available when the general guidelines aze sometimes violated: The Mayne Tree Co. report, on the other hand, is based on actual "hands on" field inspection of the specific site and situation. In this report, it appears that there will be no violation of gerieral.tree protection guidelines and that the construction methods to be used will cause minimal tree root damage and will be well under the critica150% root mass loss formula. . However, the Mayne Tree Co. Report has cited an additional important issue: "After constntction, installation of landscaping, irrigation, electricity, retaining walls, etc. can h�ve more impact to trees than the construction itself. I recommend having the landscape plans discussed with the architect and the arborist. This may be a further help to keeping these trees healthy." I agree with this reeommendatioa......sp K. _ + RECEIVED MAY 9 2005 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (650)558-7230 The City of Burlingame CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 CORPORATION YARD (850)558-7670 May 9, 2005 Otto Miller P.O. Box 121 Burlingame, CA 94011 Re: New & Existing Addresses at 1537, 1543, & 1547 Drake Avenue Dear Mr. Miller: This letter will confirm that the City has assigned new and existing addresses to your three new singles family homes as follows: 1537 Drake Avenue - Existing Address, Vacant Lot, Lot 9, Block 55, Easton Addition #5 Subdivision APN 026-033-280 1543 Drake Avenue - New Address, Vacant Lot, Lot 10, Block 55, Easton Addition #5 Subdivision, APN 026-033-270 1547 Drake Avenue - New Address, New House Under Construction, Lot 11, Block 55, Easton Addition #5 Subdivision - APN026-033-260 Please post the new address number so it can be visible from the street. Also, the numbers must be illuminated. We have given notice to the parties listed below. Please advise other interested parties of this change. Sincerely, CITY OF BURLIAiGAME Syed Murtuza, P.E. Asst. Director of Public Works � By Edwin Chung Engineering Technician c: Paciiic Gas & Electric, Pacific Bell, Burlingame Post Office, Planning Department, Building Department, Fire Department, Street & Sewer Department, Police Department, Water Office, Water Department, Park Department, Assessor's Office [] CHANGE ADDRESS ON FLOODPLAIN DATABASE ON LOCAL AREA NET [] REPRINT FLOODPLAIN DATABASE & GIVE BUILDING DEPT. CHANGED DATABASE [] CHANGE ADDRESS ON WATER, SEWER & STORM MAPS IN MAP ROOM (RED) [] GIS DATA BASE (JIM KELLY) r4 � � � � � � �° �,0• �►.'��,.. `� .. , .: �� . � � r� , � . , . �'r z - : ti� 2 . � �. . �° . . G � 2 :�s�: ::: :., � . `.� �v �� . 'a' .:�� t�� :� :�. � 33 - : : � � � �� % z � . : , . .. : � .� �, �, .. . , . . � �o ti ,��i : i �s`� ,r -...,� : o �� . , � � ..: .'� •� •,�� ./.�. Q + � /' . ' .. .. _.. f %.'�':Qi% �0,77 : .�. - . -_. — � ,�,� _ . ,�y ��: ---___ _ . � � �:� �. q �. ' � % �r . -- � Q�Y g `�... � � . i . . . �� ,�,. � . � ��, tt► � . i . f%� . , . . � / : . � � � � �... . � ` .. . �lt. � � r � � . . /' �? : : . � a . : , � a%c� :...:� 5� � . � � � �:�4:` . �o ?: �.. :: . � . :9 �� . ;c :. � . _. �b � �' �. � � �`. .: � � � � . .: 1 .. . �. � � � rof� �� , _. � : . ..: . � : � . : .:; : � 3�- : ti 3� . � �.4. . : . , o� �Q:� : ._ ��,1 : 1 : � .�. -ti5 � : .15 �. � . . .�' � �� :: � �:` �Q= Q . ._. ��. 2 _ � : So •.:. : sa.:'. . .. . :�.. 50' � > . . o �- . �� .. � ` � � � 2 � � .� ��:��1,� . . 7. � ct� . b < d� ,� '� �; �� ,,;..: � _ . s. �� . �, ._ .��. � ' • ':: � �.7��'� '-.�. l,/�f�., , ;r. a , `Q�I . .�: � JQ �:�. � . ��a�•.. . � 5a�' �.` . , r�. .J f./ T �r �. . . . � 4 � ' �n� � �: ��0�:� . � \ � �� : . � �;: � �1' _ �� .�' � L � �: 1 : � �.. ��3 , � � � �h l�' ��: �3�:� x ..:h � . � . , � � , . : � ,3� .� � . �. : . .: : , : h � � h. 2 0�_� �:1 I0 .J �i �` : - N p : `: , . �• . " : , .�� . : .. := 1�4y � 1�43�` ,1�.�7 : 4° $� i. � � � . : .. . .. � � � , / �. ; ° . . ,.; .. . .:. , - �. ca � � ;5'c+ S'c� SQ �..�dl:,.�...��r . ` ` �.. . ..' . _ � : _ _ 5-q - 05 ��ca� �RATED JVNC OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY �% �� c� . CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 TEL: (650) 558-7204 FAX: (650) 342-8386 Web: www.burlingame.org July 10, 2009 Mr. Mark Hudak, Esq. Carr McClellan Professional Law Corporation 216 Park Road Burlingame, California 94010 RE: Aqreement Between Citv and Otto Miller Reqardinq Redwood Trees at 1537 Drake Mark: Thank you for the signed agreements regarding the preservation and m��tenance ef +he retlwood trees at 1537 Drake. As Bill Meeker is away on vacation, I have had Planning Manager Maureen Brooks execute the agreement on the City's behalf. Mr, Miller's fully executed copy is enclosed. Regarding the issue of interest, I have checked with retiretl City Attorney Larry Andersen and he has verified that no interest was to be paid on this deposit. This fact was statetl in the original agreement. Specifically, Larry saitl that there was no provision in the agreement for interest because any interest eamed constituted an adjustment for ordinary inflation to the original tleposit amount. Larry further stated that you, Otto and he may have talked about re-writing the agreement because the project dragged for such a prolongetl period, but that never happened. However, he was clear that no interest was to be�paid on the tleposit. Please have Mr. Miller direct Borel Bank to issue the irrevocable letter of credit and have it forwarded to my attention. Once I have received the letter of credit, I will authorize the Finance Director to release the deposit to Mr. Miller. I wiil notify you when that authorization has been made. Thank you very much for your kind cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, �� For Clark Guinan City Attorney cc: Bill Meeker, Community Development Director Jesus Nava, Finance Director Maureen Brooks, Planning Manager v'� � . AMENDED AGREEMENT BETWEEN OTTO MILLER AND CITY OF BURLINGAME FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION OF FOUR REDWOOD TREES AT 1537-1543 DRAKE AVENUE BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA Otto Miller ("Owner") on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors, and assigns and as owner of the real property at 1537-1543 Drake Avenue, Burlingame, California ("Property"), this _ day of July, 2009, and the City of Burlingame ("City") amend that agreement between them dated November 7, 2003 and agree as follows: 1. Factual Background: In November of 2003, Owner deposited the sum of $118,780.00 with the City of Burlingame ("City") as a guarantee the Owner's compliance with the City's Conditions of Approval for construction of residences on lots 9, 10 and 11 of the Property. Specifically, the City imposed Condition No. 35(C) regarding four coastal redwood trees on the Property. Ini�ia► unpermitted grading activities had caused root damage to one of the trees. The condition approved by the Planning Commission, and the agreement which is amended herein, were both intended to ensure the maintenance and preservation of the four coastal redwood trees during the period of construction of the residences and for a period of fis�� years at�c.�r completion of construction. The Condition was modified in March of 2004, and again in July of 2007, at which time it was re-labeled condition tio. 33. Cor:�truction on lot 11 proceeded and was completed. Construction of the residences �:�n lots 9 and 10, however, did not commence until the late summer, early fall of 2008. In December of 2008, Owner applied to the City for return of his money deposit citing that, for almost five years, the trees had been maintained and preserved. The Owner's arborist indicated that the trees �vere healthy and the City's arborist confirmed this report. The City arborist recommended return of the full money deposit at the conclusion of construction of the residences on lots 9 and 10. On January 26, 2009, the Planning Commission heard Owner's request for return of his money deposit, additional evidence related to the request and directed staff to meet with the applicant to negotiate a reasonable compromise that would protect the City's interest and the trees while providing the return of a portion of Owner's deposit. On February 9, 2009, the Commission approved the condition modification and directed the City Attorney to finalize the documents. 2. Termination of Prior Agreement: The parties intend this Agreement to be their whole and entire agreement regarding the four redwood trees and to replace that prior Agreement between 13600.00001 \BGLIB 1 \1408423.1 � ' them dated November 7, 2003. Accordingly, the prior agreement is terminated. 3. Term of A�reement: The term of this Agreement shall commence upon_the date of completion of construction, issuance of Certificates of Occupancy and final inspections of the residences on lots 9 and 10 and shall terminate five (5) years after that date. 4. Owner's Provision of Irrevocable Letter of Credit as Security For the performance of his obligations a) under condition No. 33 of the development entitlement for the properties located at 1537-1543 Drake Avenue and b) under the terms of this Agreement for the maintenance andlor replacement of the redwood trees, Owner shall cause the issuance of an irrevocable letter of credit, drawn in favor of the City. The letter of credit shall meet all of the following terms: a. The letter of credit shall be an irrevocable letter of credit. b. The irrevocable letter of credit shall be in the total amount of $20,615.00, but comprising two portions: $5,615.00 for maintenance and $15,000.00 for tree death. c. The irrevocable letter of credit shall be drawn on a financial institution with offices located in Burlingame or otherwise acceptable to City. d. The financial institution issuing the irrevocable letter of credit shall be a reputable and verifiably stable financial institution and shall be approved by City. e. The City may draw on the letter immediately and unconditionally by presenting the issuer a draft accompanied by a written statement declaring any one of the following: 1) that the amount of $ from the $5,615.00 portion of the letter of credit is currently due and payable for the annual maintenance of the redwood trees at 1537-1543 Drake Avenue not performed during the prior year. or 2) that the amount of $ from the $15,000.00 portion of the irrevocable letter of credit is currently due and payable because one of the four redwood trees has died as a consequence of construction activities. or 3) that the remaining balance of the tree maintenance portion of the irrevocable letter of credit and the full $15,000.00 balance of the tree removal, disposal and replacement portion of the irrevocable letter of 13600.00001 \BGLIB 1 \I408423.1 � credit is currently due and payable because the issuing financial institution has elected not to renew the irrevocable letter of credit before the end of five years from the date of execution of the irrevocable letter of credit and Applicant has not provided a replacement letter of credit satisfactory to City. £ The irrevocable letter of credit shall be in the form attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. 5. Owner's Obli at� ions: a. Maintenance: Owner shall provide for the annual maintenance of the redwood trees by a licensed tree firm/arborist, for a period of five (5) years from the date of completion of construction, issuance of Certificates of Occupancy and final inspections of the residences on lots 9 and 10. Owner shall have arborist submit to City copies of his invoices for maintenance work on trees. Annually, Owner shall have arborist submit to City a report on the maintenance activities performed on the trees and an assessment of the health of the trees. Owner will include $5,615.00 in the irrevocable letter of credit for the expenses of this maintenance and reporting obligation. Upon authorization by City, the amount of the letter of credit reserved for maintenance puiposes shalI decline annually by an amount equal to Owner's cost of pro�•iding the required maintenance b. Tree Death: Owner shall be responsible for the removal, disposal and replacement of each and all of the four trces during the five (5) year term of this Agreement. In the event that one of the trees dies within five (5) years from the date of completion of construction, issuance of Certificates of Occupancy and final inspections of the residence on lots 9 and 10, and that the cause of death is due to the Ow�ner's construction related activities, adverse conduct or activities, omissions in maintenance and upkeep by Owner or Owner's agents employees, contractors or subcontractors, City may immediately and unconditionally draw funds from the $15,000.00 portion of the irrevocable letter of credit, to cover all direct and indirect costs for the removal and disposal of the tree and for the replacement of the tree; provided, that if the death of a redwood tree is due to natural causes, acts of God, or acts of third parties (other than Owner or his agents, employees, contractors or subcontractors), Owner shall not be responsible for removal or replacement nor shall City. Determination of the cause of death of any tree shall be made by the City Arborist and that decision shall be final. c. Replenishment: In the event that a tree dies and City draws an amount from the $15,000.00 portion of the irrevocable letter of credit, Owner shall within three (3) business days, replenish the irrevocable letter of credit by depositing an amount sufficient to restore the full principal amount of this 13600.00001 �E3GLIB I \1408423.1 � , portion of the letter of credit, to $15,000.00. In the event that another tree dies during the five (5) year term, City may immediately and unconditionally again draw funds from the $15,000.00 portion of the irrevocable letter of credit to cover all direct and indirect costs for the removal and disposal of the tree and for the replacement of the tree and Owner shall again, within three (3) business days, replenish the irrevocable letter of credit by depositing an amount sufficient to restore the full principal amount of this portion of the irrevocable letter of credit, to $15,000.00. Owner shall have the obligation to replenish the letter of credit in this manner and under these circumstances, as often as necessary to maintain this portion of the irrevocable letter of credit at $15,000.00 for the full five (5) year term of this agreement. d. Owner's obligations under this Agreement shall survive Owner's sale, lease or other transfer of either or both of the properties to other persons. At the time of such transfer, Owner shall inform purchaser, lessee or other transferee of Owners obligations hereunder and shall provide a copy of this Agreement. Owner shall retain for himself and City a right-of-entry to property in order to continue to perform his obligations under this Agreement. Owner shall grant City same right-of-entry to property in �rder that City is able to perform its obligations under this Agreement. e. In the event that the financial institution issuing the irrevocable letter of credit elects during the five year term of this agreement, not to renew the irrevocable letter of credit, City shall have the unconditional right to draw upon the full balance of the irreyocable letter of credit and hold said funds for the purposes stated in this agreement. However, Owner shall have the right to provide City with a new, replacement irrevocable letter of credit, if it contains the same terms and conditions of the ILOC not renewed, issued by another local financial institution acceptable to the City. If Owner provides City with a new, replacement ILOC containing the same terms and conditions as the original, City shall then return funds drawn on the original, non-renewed ILOC to Owner. 6. City's Obli atg ions: a. Upon completion of construction of both residences on lots 9 and 10 and after certificates of occupancy have been issued and/or after. final inspections have been completed, and upon Owner having caused the issuance of an irrevocable letter of credit as described herein to satisfaction of City, City shall return to Owner the cash deposit of $118,780.00, without any interest (per section H of the original agreement). b. Upon submission to City by Owner of copy of paid invoice for maintenance of trees, City shall draw from irrevocable letter of credit an 13600.00001 �BGLIB 1 \1408423.1 amount equal to the amount of said invoice and shall pay said funds to Owner. If the $5,615.00 maintenance portion of the irrevocable letter of credit is exhausted prior to the term of this agreement, Owner shall be entirely responsible to continue to pay for the maintenance of the trees under the terms of this Agreement. c. City shall provide Owner with 10 days' written notice before drawing on the letter of credit to allow Owner an opportunity to cure any defects in performance or to provide information regarding the cause of death of a tree. 7. Return of Balance of Funds: If not terminated earlier pursuant to section Se above, at the end of five (5) year term of this agreement, the irrevocable letter of credit or any replacement thereof, shall permanently expire and the then-remaining balance of this irrevocable letter of credit, if any, shall be refunded to the Owner. 8. Notices. All notices and other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement, including any notice of change of address, shall be in writing and given by personal delivery, or deposited with the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, addressed to the parties intended te be nc�tified. Notice shall be deemed given as of the date of personal delivery, or if maiied, upon the date of deposit with the United States Postal Service. Notice shall be given as follows: To City Mr. William Meeker Community Development Director City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 To Owner: Otto Miller P. O. Box 121 Burlingame, CA 94011 9. Compliance With All Laws. Owner shall observe and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, codes and regulations, in the performance of its duties and obligations under this Agreement. Owner shall perform all services under this Agreement in accordance with these laws, ordinances, codes and regulations. Owner shall release, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its officers, agents and employees from 13600.0000 ] �BGLIB 1 \I 408423.1 any and all damages, liabilities, penalties, fines and all other consequences from any noncompliance or violation of any laws, ordinances, codes or regulations. 10. Assignability. The parties agree that they shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of their respective obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent of the other party, and any attempt to so assign this Agreement or any rights, duties or obligations arising hereunder shall be void and of no effect. 11. Entire A�reement -- Amendments The terms and conditions of this Agreement, all exhibits attached, and all documents expressly incorporated by reference, represent the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. This written Ageement shall supersede any and all prior agreements, oral or written, regaxding the subject inatter between the Owner and the City. No other agreement, promise or statement, written or oral, relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, shall be valid or binding, except by way of a written amendment to this Agreement. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not be altered or modified except by a written amendment to this Agreement signed by the Owner and the City. 12. Costs and .�rtorney's Fees. T'he preva�i:li�g party in any action brought to enforce the terms and conditions of this Agreement. or arising out of the performance of this Agreement, may recover its reasonable costs (including claims administration) and attorney's fees expended in connection with such action. 13. Independent Contractor. For the purposes, and for the duration, of this Agreement, Owner, its officers, agents and employees shall act in the capacity of an Independent Contractor, and not as employees of the City. Owner and City expressly intend and agree that the status of Owner, its officers, agents and employees be that of an Independent Contractor and not that of an employee of City. 14. Applicable Law. The laws of the State of Califomia shall govern this Agreement. 13600.00001 �BGLIB 1\1408423. I CITY OF BURLINGAME Wil iam Meeke , � Community Development Director 13600.00001 \BGL[B 1 \1408423.1 OWNER �1�� Vl� �� . "`' Otto Miller Date: �-"�-' �� APPROVED AS TO FORM: i '''�% ' /� � ,r'�� /, i. �. � /J -�r-^-----`... �� % Mark Hudak, Esq. � , Date: _7, l�7 Date: �� 2(�G% IRREVOCABLE STANDSY LETTER OF CREDIT Date: June 15, 2009 Beneficiary: City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Attn: Mr. William Meeker Community Development Director Burlingame Community Development Department For the Account of: Mr. Otto Miller P.O. Box 121 Burlingame, CA 94011 The Borel Private Bank atxi Trust Company ("Issuer") hereby establishes an Irrevocable Letter of Credit number , in the arncnsnt of Twenty Thousand, Six Hundred, Fifteen dollars ($20,615.00) in favor of the City of Burlingame ("IIrneficiary"), a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of California and existing in San Mateo County (hereinafter referred to as "City"). This amount shall be in two distinct portions: l)$5,615 00 for maintenance activities, and 2) $15,000.00 for removal, disposal and replacement of dead trees, as deternuned necessary by City. This letter of credit is issued in connection with the amended condition #33 of City's approval of the development project of applicant, Mr. Otto Miller ("Applicant"}, located at 1537-1543 Drake Avenue in Burlingame. In addressing the protection, maintenance and replacement of four redwood trees located in the front of the said properties, the amended condition requires applicant to secure this irrevocable letter of credit in favor of the City. This Irrevocable Letter of Credit is immediately and unconditionally available to City against City's draft(s) drawn at sight on Bore1 Private Bank & Trust Company, 160 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402 and when accompanied by any of the following: 1. City's written statement (signed by the Public Works Director, City Manager of City Attorney of City) stating that the amount of $ from the $5,615.00 portion of the letter of credit is currently due and payable for the annual maintenance of the redwood trees at 1537- 1543 Drake Avenue. This portion of the letter of credit shall be reduced by an amount corresponding to each invoice for annual maintenance approved by City. Or 2. City's written statement (signed by die Public Works Director, City Manager, or City Attorney of City) stating that the amount of $ from the $15,000.00 portion of the Amount: $20,615.00 Letter of Credit # Borel Bank and Trust Company 160 Bovet Road San Mateo CA 94404 (650) 378-3700 � irrevocable letter of credit is currently due and payable because one or more of the four redwood trees has died as a consequence of construction activiries. If and when City draws said amount fiom the $15,000.00 portion of the irrevocable letter of credit, applicant shall, within three (3) business days, deposit an amount sufficient to restore this portion of the irrevocable letter of credit to the full amount of $15,000.00 Or 3. City's written statement (signed by the Public Works Director, City Manager, or City Attorney of City) stating that the remaining balance of the tree-maintenance portion of the irrevocable letter of credit and the complete $15,000.00 balance of the tree-removal, disposal and replacement portion of the irrevocable letter of credit is currently due and payable because the Issuer of the irrevocable letter of credit has elected not to renew the irrevocable letter of credit. Partial drawings are perniitted. All drafts under this Irrevocable Letter of Credit shall be marked "Drawn under Irrevocable Letter of Credit Number , issued by Borel Private Bank & Trust Company, 160 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402. The term of this irrevocable letter of credit is one (1) year from the date of its execurion �vith renewal one year trems as provided herein. It is a condition of this Letter of Credit that this letter shall be deemed automatically extended without amendment for additional periods of one year each from present or any future anniversary of the expiration date hereof, unless forty-five (45) days prior to any such date Issuer shall notify City in writing by certified mail at the above listed address that Issuer elects not �o consider this Letter of Credit renewed for any such additional period. Borel Private Bank & Trust Company expressly agrees with City that all drafts draw� �der and in compliance with the terms of this Irrevocable Letter of Credit will be duly honored b� ,s as specified if presented at this office on or before 4:00 Pacific Time, _/ / (One year from ,ssue date) or as renewed. Except so far as otherwise expressly stated herein, this Letter of Credit is subject to the Intemational Standby Practices 11998 (ISP98) Borel Private and Trust Company I� Stan Rubin, Senior Vice President 160 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402 P 650-378-3745 F 650-378-3774 stanr@borel.com Borel Bank and Trust Company 160 Bovet Road San Mateo CA 94404 (650) 378-3700 � , Date: June 15, 2009 Beneficiary: City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Attn: Mr. William Meeker Community Development Director Burlingame Community Development Department For the Account of: Mr. Otto Miller P.O. Box 121 Burlingame, CA 94011 The Borel Private Bank and Trust Company ("Issuer") hereby establishes an Irrevocable Letter of Credit number , in the amourtr af Twenty Thousand, Six Hundred, Fifteen dollars ($20,615.00) in favor of the City of Burlingame ("Beneficiary"), a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of California and existing in San iiateo County (hereinafter referred to as "City"). This amount shall be in two distinct portions: 1) $5,615.00 for maintenance activities, and 2) $15,000.00 for removal, disposal and replacement of dead trees, as determined necessary by City. This letter of credit is issued in connection with the amended condition #33 of City's approval of the development project of applicant, Mr. Otto Miller ("Applicant"), located at 1537-1 �43 Drake Avenue in Burlingame. In addressing the protection, maintenance and replacement of four redwood trees located in the front of the said properties, the arnended condition requires applicant to secure this irrevocable letter of credit in favor of the City. This Irrevocable Letter of Credit is immediately and unconditionally available to City against City's draft(s) drawn at sight on Borel Private Bank & Trust Company, 160 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402 and when accompanied by a»y of the follow7ng: 1. City's written statement (signed by the Public Works Director, City Manager of City Attorney of City) stating that the amount of $ from the $5,615.00 portion of the letter of credit is currently due and payable for the annual maintenance of the redwood trees at 1537- 1543 Drake Avenue. This portion of the letter of credit shall be reduced by an amount corresponding to each invoice for annual maintenance approved by City. Or 2. City's written statement (signed by the Public Works Director, City Manager, or City Attorney of City) stating that the amount of $ from the $15,000.00 portion of the IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT Amount: $20,615.00 Letter of Credit # Borei Bank and Trust Company 160 Bovet Road San Mateo CA 94404 (650) 378-3700 inevocable letter of credit is currently due and payable because one or more of the four redwood trees has died as a consequence of construcrion activities. If and when City draws said amount from the $15,000.00 portion of the irrevocable letter of credit, applicant shall, within three (3) business days, deposit an amount sufficient to restore this portion of the irrevocable letter of credit to the full amount of $15,000.00 Or 3. City's written statement (signed by the Public Works Director, City Manager, or City Attorney of City) stating that the remaining balance of the tree-maintenance portion of the irrevocable letter of credit and the complete $15,000.00 balance of the tree-removal, disposal and replacement portion of the irrevocable letter of credit is currently due and payable because the Issuer of the irrevocable letter of credit has elected not to renew the irrevocable letter of credit. Partial drawings are permitted. All drafts under this Irrevocable Letter of Credit shall be marked "Drawn under Inevocabie Letter of Credit Number , issued by Borel Private Bank & Trust Company, 160 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402. The term of this irrevocable letter of credit is one (1) year from the date of its execution with renewal one year trems as provided herein. It is a condition of this Letter of Credit that this letter shall be deemed automatically extended without amendment for additional periods of one year each from present or any future anniversary of the expiration date hereof, unless forty-five (45) days prior to any such date Issuer shall notify City in writing by certified mail at the above listed address that Issuer eiec�s not to ccrosider this Letter of Credit renewed for any such addirional period. Borel Private Bank & Trust Company expressly agrees with City that all drafts drawn undez and in compliance with the terms of this Irrevocable Letter of Credit will be duly honored by us a: s�+ecified if presented at this office on or before 4:00 Pacific Time, _/_/ (One year from issur date) or as renewed. Except so far as otherwise expressly stated herein, this Letter of Credit is subject to the International Standby Practices 11998 (ISP98) Borel Private and Trust Company : Stan Rubin, Senior Vice President 160 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402 P 650-378-3745 F 650-378-3774 stanr@borel.com Borel Bank and Trust Company 160 Bovet Road San Mateo CA 94404 (650) 378-3700 Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc. ESTABL[SHED 1931 STATE CONTRACTOR'S LICCNSE NO. 27G793 CERTIFIED FORESTER • CERTIFIED ARBORISTS • PEST CONTROL • ADVISORS AND OPERATORS RICHARD L.. HUNTINGTON 535 BRAGATO ROAD. STE. A PRESIDENT SAN CARLOS. CA 94070-6228 JEROMEY ]NGALLS TELEPHONE: (650) 593-4400 CONSULTANT/ESTIMATOR FACSIMILG: (650) 593-4443 .�UI�/ 28, ZOO9 EMAIL: inti�L mayncu�cccum Mr. Ruben Hurin Senior Planner City of Burlingame Parks & Recreation Department 850 Burlingame Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 0 Dear Mr. Hurin, RE: 1543 DRAKEAvE., BURLINGAME On July 27, 2009, I inspected the above site as the house and landscape are now completed. All looks as planned and the trees look healthy. I think that there have been no impacts to the redwoods and the irrigation will actually help the trees. Clearance pruning was minimal, to get clearance, and will not result in impacts to tree health. I, therefore, sign off on this lot, but deep root fertilization is still recommended. This, of course, will be up to the new owners. Please call with any questions. Sincerely, -, i� !� ��.�` � � �/ > ) t;,/ � � ��. � � Richard L. Huntington Certified Arborist WE #0119A Certified Forester #1925 SpCIETY �z� �r- ..' w � z NO. WE-011�A �F�F�e � OF PMER1Cq� a �'�, �,Q�� L. N�N�.�� 09 'c' � ��' 4�� cn G,r,,� O Q O —� ��' � � �� Z � . � * � � �9TiF�F� FORE/ RLH:pmd cc: Otto Miller � �; i;��. ,. City of Burlingame Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits Address: 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 10 Item #3 Action Item Meeting Date: 7/09/07 Request: Application for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit for emerging lots and Special Permits for building height and declining height envelope to construct a new two-story single family dwelling with a detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 10, zoned R-1. Applicant and Property Owner: Otto Miller Designer: James Chu, Chu Design & Engr., Inc. General Plan: Low Density Residential CEQA Status: Negative Declaration ND-523-P and Addendum APN: 026-033-270 Lot Area: 6006 SF Zoning: R-1 Background: The most recent action on this site occurred on May 3, 2004, when the City Council approved an Amendment to the original Conditional Use Permit for three emerging lots (Lots 9, 10 and 11) in order to separate Lot 11 and amend conditions of approval for Lots 9 and 10. Since that action three years have passed. Planning staff has provided a history of the project below. History of the Original Project: On May 27, 2003, the Planning Commission approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration with a mitigation monitoring plan included as a part of the conditions of approval for the re-emergence and development of three lots at 1537 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1 (May 27, 2003 P.C. Minutes). The planning application was for a Conditional Use Permit for three re-emerging lots, Design Review for three new houses (one on each lot) and Special Permits for an attached garage for Lots 9 and 11 at 1537 Drake Avenue. Of major concern on this site was a grove of Redwood trees determined to be significant. The Negative Declaration prepared for this project was based on the premise that the tree protection measures required in the environmental document and implemented through the conditions of approval would be adhered to throughout the project from demolition of the main structures on the site to five years of tree maintenance following occupancy of the site, thus reducing the impacts of development on the significant groves of trees to a level acceptable to the community. A demolition permit for the existing house and accessory structures was issued on November 12, 2003. Demolition of all existing structures on the site was completed by the end of November, 2003. On November 25, 2003, the contractor began grading on Lot 9 at the location of the significant grove of Redwood trees. The grading was based on a set of foundation plans which had not been reviewed or approved by the Building or Planning Departments. Based on the Planning Commission approval, no grading should have occurred in the area being excavated since the conditions of approval required that a root location exploration be completed and a pier and grade-beam foundation be designed to avoid the major roots identified, and then a pier and grade-beam foundation be hand dug under the continuous on-site supervision of a licensed arborist. There was no root location identification, no notification to any arborist and no arborist on site during the grading excavation. At that time, a stop work order which applied to the entire site (Lots 9, 10 and 11) was issued by the City. The project was placed on the December 8, 2003, Planning Commission calendar for review of the project. At the December 8, 2003, meeting the Commission continued the item until the root damage had been properly investigated and the foundation type for the houses on the lots (9 and 10) which could affect the redwood grove had been developed and the conditions of approval revised accordingly (December 8, 2003 P.C. Minutes). At that meeting the Commission also requested several other items to be completed by the property owner including: investigation of the root damage in the excavated area and mapping of the determination of the approximate location of tree roots, foundation type and location of protective fencing. An independent arborist, chosen by the City and paid for by the property owner, began working with the City Arborist to assist him in overseeing the root investigation as well as evaluating the properly owner's arborist's reports and compliance with them during construction. Amendment to Mitigated Negafive Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits All three houses were originally approved within one set of conditions which assumed, as proposed by the developer, that all three houses would be built simultaneously. The property owner wished to begin construction of the house on Lot 11 while the foundation design based on the root investigation continued for the houses on Lots 9 and 10. In order to go ahead on Lot 11, the Conditional Use Permit, which contained single set of intertwined conditions for all three lots, had to be amended so that the conditions of approval were separated, one set of conditions for each lot. An application for an Amendment to the original Conditional Use Permit for emerging lots in order to separate and amend conditions of approval for Lots 9 and 10 was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on March 29, 2004 (March 29, 2004 P.C. Minutes). The Planning Commission's decision was appealed to the City Council. At their meeting of May 3, 2004, the City Council upheld the Planning Commission's decision regarding the conditions of approval for Lots 9, 10 and 11 (May 3, 2004 C.C. Minutes). Construction of the house on Lot 11 was completed in June of 2005. The protective tree fencing, mulching and irrigation have been adequately maintained from June, 2004 to July, 2007, and the trees have been periodically checked by the City Arborist for their health. The applicant now is requesting review of the new single family dwelling proposed on Lot 9. Present Request (based on plans date stamped March 13 and June 7, 2007): The applicant is requesting an Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit for Emerging Lots and Special Permits for building height and declining height envelope to construct a new finro-story single family dwelling with a detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R- 1. Currently, Lot 10 is vacant and contains no structures, with the exception of tree protection fencing around the existing Redwood tree grove. Based on the root investigations, changes have been made to the design of the house since the original approval in 2003. The following pages include a summary of the proposed project on Lot 10, changes made since the last action meeting, applications requested, a development table and information on the root investigation, utility/drainage lines and material staging. In a memo dated April 13, 2007, the City Arborist notes that based on the proposed plans, "the building design and construction methods have been adequately incorporated into the most current plans that will ensure the preservation of the Redwood Tree Grove." He also notes "that as long as the project contractors follow the current plans, the Arborist recommendations, as well as the conditions of approval, this project can go forward and be completed with the Redwood Tree Grove intact and preserved." Given the conclusions from the root investigation, the methods proposed for constructing the foundation and driveway for Lot 10, the proposed trench locations for underground utility lines and on-site irrigation and additional conditions to be added to the project, the City Arborist did not require any additional arborist's reports. Summa►v of Proposa/ on Lot 10 The proposed house on Lot 10, with a detached finro-car garage, measures 3,422 SF (0.57 FAR), where 3,422 SF (0.57 FAR) is the maximum allowed. The proposed house is at the maximum allowed FAR. The proposed house has five bedrooms; three parking spaces are required on-site, two of which must be covered. The two-car detached garage (20' x 20' clear interior dimensions) and one uncovered parking space in the driveway (9' x 20') meet the parking requirement for a five-bedroom house. 2 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits The applicant submitted a Landscape Plan and Irrigation Plan, sheets L1.0 and L1.1, respectively. Sheet L1.0 shows that 11 new trees will be added on the lot to screen the finro-story house and garage. The following species are proposed on Sheet L1.0 for Lot 10: Crecian Laurel (2 —15 gallon), Swampmyrtle (1 -24" box), Yew (4 —15 gallon), Pittosporum (1 —24" box size) and Italian Cypress (2 — 15 gallon). The site will be in compliance with the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance (two, 24" box and eight, 15-gallon trees proposed where a minimum of three 24" box landscape trees are required). Changes to Lof 10 Projecf Since May 3, 2004 City Council Meeting: Since the City Council meeting on May 3, 2004, the applicant has made several changes to the project proposed on Lot 10 to mitigate any impacts to the existing Redwood tree grove. To minimize any impacts to the tree roots, the applicant is proposing to use a pier and grade beam foundation for the entire house (see sheets S.1 and D.2). The pier locations for the pier and grade beam foundation will be based on root locations determined by hand digging on the site. The property owner will be required to submit a detailed foundation report and design for approval by the Building Department and City Arborist to establish the bounds of the pier and grade beam foundation and have it approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site. As a result, this foundation system raised the house by 2'-9" from what was previously proposed. The roof pitch for the main roof of the house was decreased from 10:12 to 9:12 to mitigate the increase in height. However, the house now exceeds the maximum height limit by 1'-0" and requires a special permit (31'-0" proposed where 30'-0" is allowed). Furthermore, a special permit is also required for declining height along the left side of the house (54 SF, 2'-3" x 24'-0" along the left side of the house extends beyond the declining height envelope). The applicant is requesting the following: • Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review and Conditional Use Permit for Emerging Lots to construct a new two-story single family dwelling with a detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10; • Special Permit for building height (31'-0" proposed where 30'-0" is allowed) (CS 25.28.060); and Special Permit for declining height envelope (54 SF, 2'-3" x 24'-0" along the left side of the house extends beyond the declining height envelope) (CS 25.28.075). This space intentionally left blank. �3 Amendment to Mifigafed Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Lot Area: 6,006 SF Plans date stam ed: March 13 and June 7, 2007 Proposed Allowed/Required � SETBACKS _� ............................................................................................................................................... ............................. ..................................._......................................................................................... ......................... . ......... ...................................................................................................................... .... . . , Front (1st flr): 30'-8" i 21'-1" (2nd flr): 36'-8" i 21'-1" � ............................. . ................................................................. ................................................... .... _ .......................................................................................................................................................................... , Side (left): 9'-6" ' 4'-0" (right): 4'-6" � 4'-0" _ ............................................:................................._....................................................._............_......._............................................................... � Rear (1st flr): 36'-5" � 15'-0" (2nd flr): 36'-5" 20'-0" ....................... .......... ..... ... ........ _ .....................:..................................................................................................................................................................................... Lot Coverage: 2,125 SF � 2402 SF 35% ; 40% ...................................................................... ................._...................................................... _ ... ................_................................._... .. _......__.........._..................._........._................................._........._........ _ ......................_........ i FAR: 3,422 SF I 3422 SF' 0.57 FAR ' 0.57 FAR ................................................................... ........_.............. .... ............................................................................................................................_�..........................................................................................._...................._................................................................. Parking: 2 covered � 2 covered (20' x 20') � (20' x 20') 1 uncovered/(9' x 20') ; 1 uncovered/(9' x 20') _ ................................................................................................................. ....... ................................................................................................................................................................................... : ......................................... . . ................._......................................................._........................................... # of bedrooms: 5 ; --- ........................................................... .............................................................................._........................................................._..............._....................................._'........................................................................................................._..._.........._..............._.._....................._...._. Height: 31'-0" 2 I 30'-0" _ ..................._............. .............................................................._......................_............................._......._...................................... .................._.i............._.._..._........................................................................................................................... ... . DH Envelope: special permit required 3 ; see code ' (0.32 x 6006 SF) + 110o SF + 400 5r = 34zz 5r (u.5i rHK� 2 Special Permit for building height (31'-0" proposed where 30'-0" is allowed). 3 Special Permit for declining height envelope (54 SF, 2'-3" x 24'-0" along the left side of the house extends beyond the declining height envelope) Summary of Root Investigation: Since January 2004, the property owner, City Arborist, inspecting arborist and project arborist have met on several occasions to discuss the root investigation, possible foundation types and needed protection during construction. The arborists investigated the back-filled excavated area on Lots 9 and 10 in regards to compaction and future root growth potential. The investigation noted that existing compression strength ratings for the fill indicate normal root growth potential. After the area on Lot 9 was excavated and prior to back-filling, the project arborist severed exposed root faces cleanly back to the edge of excavation to encourage new root growth and noted that in his opinion the loss of roots at that time was not significant in regards to loss of health or support for the Redwood trees. The City Arborist agreed that this was the best way to treat the exposed roots. The inspecting arborist noted that further excavation into the back-filled area may cause more damage than the original root severing itself and that it is probably best to leave the area as is rather than attempt to re-excavate it using the air spade tool. Therefore, the back-filled area was not re-excavated. 4 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits In January, 2004, air spading occurred under the supervision of all the arborists. The air spading was done in several locations around the redwood trees, but discontinued because of the arborists' concern that the air excavation process itself, particularly given the time of year, may unnecessarily damage or destroy the fine absorbing roots. The air tool also seemed to be stripping off bark from some woody roots in the air excavated trenches. As a result, a map of the root system was not produced. In regards to the protective fencing, the arborists agree that it may remain in its existing location on Lots 9 and 10 with some additional requirements including mulching and irrigation to support the trees during the entire construction of all three lots within the protective fencing. Conditions to meet these requirements have been included as conditions of approval. Utility and Irrigation Lines: Since the last review of this project, a new 8-inch sewer line and 6-inch water line were installed in the street along this block of Drake Avenue. The new lines greatly improve sewer service and help prevent sewage back-up problems in the area. The applicant prepared a Utility Plan (see sheet U.1). Trenching for water, sewer and drainage lines would be located along the right side of Lot 10 (away from the Redwood tree grove). Gas, cable N, telephone and electrical lines would be located at the rear of the site. The City Arborist reviewed and approved the proposed Utility Plan. In a memo dated October 19, 2006, Mayne Tree Expert Company reviewed the proposed trenching locations for the utility lines and concluded that there will be little or no impact to the Redwood trees (October 19, 2006 memo from Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc. attached). The applicant also submitted an Irrigation Plan (see sheet L1.1). Trenching for the irrigation lines would be located away from the Redwood tree grove, along the right side of Lot 10. The proposed irrigation system consists of'/2-inch dripline tubing at grade. The City Arborist reviewed and approved the proposed Irrigation Plan. Material Staging (Lots 9 and 10): The applicant is proposing to build both dwellings at the same time. In discussing the material staging area with the City Arborist, he noted that heavy construction materials and equipment should not be delivered to the site or stored at the front of Lot 9 in the designated driveway area. In order to minimize any impacts to the root system, the applicant will be required to construct the house on Lot 9 from the rear of the lot. Access to the house on Lot 9 during construction would be through Lot 10, and therefore construction on Lot 9 would begin first. The applicant will be required to submit a construction phasing plan showing how the houses on Lots 9 and 10 will be constructed. The new construction plan will require all construction vehicles and deliveries to make use of the public right-of-way on Drake Avenue, including some loading and unloading. Conditions of approval require that no construction equipment or materials shall be stored on the public right-of-way. Given the constraints of building the houses simultaneously on Lots 9 and 10, construction worker vehicle parking will be allowed in the public right-of-way in compliance with the Vehicle Code (e.g., no double- parking). Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendums: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the originally approved project. An Addendum has now been prepared to reflect the changes made to the project since its original approval (see attached Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum). The Initial Study for the proposed project showed that there would be potentially significant impacts 5 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits without mitigation measures, to the Redwood trees on site, to the sewer and water systems in the neighborhood, and to the noise and traffic flow and parking during construction. The Initial Study and Addendum show that with mitigation measures proposed, the potentially significant effects caused by this project can be reduced to acceptable levels. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum is appropriate. 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum, public comments and testimony received at the hearing, and Planning Commission observation and experience are consistent with the finding of no significant environmental impact. The mitigation measures in the Initial Study have been incorporated into the recommended conditions of approval. Staff Comments: See attached comment from City departments. Planning staff notes that this project has been brought back to action as a separate item (from 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9) in order to keep the action and conditions of approval clear and understandable for each lot. A letter dated May 22, 2007, summarizing the changes made to the project, was submitted by Mark Hudak, representing the applicant. Ann Grimes, 1520 Drake Avenue, submitted an email dated May 29, 2007, discussing her concerns with the project. May 29, 2007, Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission design review study meeting on May 29, 2007, the Commission requested that the applicant address several concerns regarding the project (May 29, 2007, Planning Commission Minutes). The applicant submitted a response letter and revised plans, date stamped June 7, 2007. Listed below are the Commissions' suggestions and responses by the applicant. 1. Urge architect to look and see if the shed roof can drop fo a 3:12 pitch, even though it has already been dropped; could see roof drop a few inches. • The shed roof at the front and rear of the house was decreased from 4:12 to 3:12 (see revised Right and Left Elevations, sheets A.4B and A.5B). 2. Either the home on Lot 9 or Lof 10 should have on/y one chimney. The chimney stack in the family room for the house on Lot 10 was eliminated. The fireplace will remain, however it will be a direct vent fireplace (see revised First Floor Plan and Left Elevation, sheets A.3 and A56). Planning staff would also note that the chimney stack in the family room for the house on Lot 9 was eliminated. The fireplace will remain, however it will be a direct vent fireplace (see revised First Floor Plan and Left Elevation, sheets A.3 and A5B). Findings for an Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum: For CEQA requirements the Planning Commission must review and approve the Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND 523-P) and Addendum, 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. � Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows: 1. Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Required Findings for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit: In order to grant an Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for emerging lots, 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; (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. Required Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit for building height and declining height envelope, the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.51.020 a-d): (a) the blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the exiting structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood; (b) the variety of roof line, farade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood; (c) the proposed project is consistent with there is design guidelines adopted by the city; and (d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is appropriate. 7 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be by resolution and include findings made for the Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated for the record. Conditions of approval which have been revised or added are in strikethroughs and italics. Those conditions which are no longer applicable are indicated with a strikethrough. The proposed conditions of approval, without strikethrough and italics, can be found at the end of the staff report. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered for Lot 10: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped ��"rrnTrvn-Tv� ��P.�+� A.'1 �nrl A C.' ri�}o e�}.�mnoiJ Ar�ril 7' �nn�� choa�c� A.'�' /� '2 .+r�r! /� C. �+r�rl rl� Lll1'2 c�hoo4c L\ �I n� I 1 fnr 1 # �!l• . . � �2-6�F��i-� � �vvv-an cccs��-arrcr�-rvr�or-r� a/�C � � sheets A.9, A.4, A.5, U.1, L1.1, S.1 and D.1 through D.4, and date stamped June 7, 2007, sheets A.2, A.3, A.4A, A.4B, A.5A, A.58, A.6 and L1.0; �^�' �" ^"�^^�c c"�" �� nnncic4on4 , , �e�iev�; 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the ��n �T first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning nrl II nF� nncc c�h�+ll ho n�ncic�on� ..�i+h +ho r+l�nc ��i{�inh ��iero �nnrnvcr{ Commission review; ancTcarrvnaiiy .. .,...,.. .,., .,.,,,.,..,..,... ...... .., r......, ......... ....." ._r.r,....__ fr�r 4hi�� `��/14 h ��co 4hr�cc nl�nc+ ioro iJo#ormincrl 4r� hc nnn�+ic�4on4 in c�oa�� ror-crrr v{ ^rvrr�c v'�T � vv-v�av�c-mvav�rai�v=ncr��vzvnTrtrrvcTco o�ovrr.�racce� �c �� v artti"-t--r, 3. , , ; +tio ,.e,+;f;,.,+;,,., ,,.,,�o,- .,o.,��+„ „f .,or;,�n., that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an archifectural 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 certi�cation documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the �nal framing inspection shall be scheduled; 4. 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 and the City Arborist shall verify that all required tree protection measures were adhered to during construction including maintenance of the redwood grove, an appropriate tree maintenance program is in place, all required landscaping and irrigation was installed appropriately, and any redwood grove tree protection measures have been met; � Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits 5. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 6. that the conditions of the City Engineers' May 31, June 4, August 30, and October 15, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 18, 2007, memos, the Fire Marshal's September 3, 2002, June 22, 2005, and June 18, 2007 memos, the Chief Building '^c^�� O�cia/'s August 5, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 15, 2007 memos, the Recycling Specialist's August 27, 2002, and June 27, 2005 memos, the NPDES Coordinator's June 27, 2005, memo, and the City Arborist's September 3, 2002, and April 3 and May 21, 2003, and April 13, 2007 memos shall be met; 7. that ��m^��+;,,., �f +tio o.,,�+;.,,, c��r� �n+� �roc� �.,a any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to have a City grading permit, be overseen by �'�^� ��Q the project arborist, inspected by the City Arborist, and be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and with all the requirements of the permit issued by BAAQMD; 8. that there shall be no heavy equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or holidays during the development of Lot 10; use of all hand tools shall comply with the requirements of the City's noise ordinance; 9. that , ' ; as much employee parking as possible shall be accommodated on the site during each of the phases of development; construction activity and parking shall not occur within the redwood tree grove protective fencing on Lot 10; 10. that construction materials shall not be staged on Lot 9; all heavy equipment and materials shall be staged along the right side of the property on Lot 10; 11. that at no time shall any equipment exceeding 18,000 LBS be allowed fo be within 30 feet of the currently fenced off Redwood Tree Grove protection zone; 12. that prior to the placement or use of any motorized equipment within 30 feet of the currently fenced Redwood Tree Grove protection zone, a protecfive layer of mulch one foot deep with % inch plywood on top, shall be installed and inspected by the project arborist to avoid further soil compaction of the area; post construction the protective plywood and mulch may be removed as approved by the project arborist; -�-�: 13. all construction shall be done in accordance with the California Building Code requirements in effect at the time of construction as amended by the City of Burlingame, and limits to hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; #�c�.,�"��—��;o �7 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits � 14. that the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping areas; �? 15. that t��,., ' �^^h ,.,�+er-�+►��te�ewe--le#� °, ' n �^^' �' ch�'�-ins�al�e�--�ef�r� '; all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall be installed along the right side property line to meet current code standards and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems shall be increased at the property owner's expense if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department and the location of all trenches for utility lines shall be approved by the City Arborist during the building permit review and no trenching for any utility shall occur on site without continual supervision of �'�^�� the project arborist and inspection by the City Arborist; � 16. that the new sewer connection to the public sewer main shall be installed along the right side property line to City standards as required by the development; a-4. 17. that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed unless their removal is determined by the City Arborist to have a detrimental effect on any existing protected trees on or adjacent to the site; � 18. that prior to being issued a demolition permit on the site, the property owner shall submit an erosion control plan for approval by the City Engineer; � 19. that prior to installation of any sewer laterals, water or gas connections on the site, the property owner shall submit a plan for approval by the Ciry Engineer and the City Arborist; T? ��a�-Pr�o �o-;ms�alling�k��ewF-wa�er I+�e-�e--senFe�e�s � ' n ^^�' � � �^� �� ^^�„�^^ +h � , ; , � � ; , , � �� n nor c�h�+ll ho rc n�+nc�ihlo f�r #ho imnlomcni�+4i�n �f �hic r+l�n• /n�mr�lcfoli� vTm�. .,� �...�� ....� ..>..p,.,....�,...� .... ...,� �� ,,...,....�....,....... ... ...._ �.�. � �--...r•----i 20. that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site will be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards; 21. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 10 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declarafion, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits 22. that the project property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions to the proposed house and/or accessory structure or necessary changes to the tree protection program or to address new issues which may arise during construction; . , ; �4. 23. that should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the ��*�� '�;� Community Development Director and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City; �5: 24. that +tio �Iri�io��in�i .�nri �F�e i-Io��nholJ iv�r�no i# c�onioc f�r �ho nr�nnc�ori hniic�o nn I ni 9(1 ctia�� ;if4orl 4� +ho n�hh c�i�lo .,f +ho Ir�t ..,;+�;��ee� 4F+o rFh cirJo nr�r�crF�i linc �n�'1 the driveway shall be designed to be pervious material as approved by the City Arborist, and installed according to approved plans with the supervision of ^'�^�- ��a the project arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist; �: 25. . � _ .�:r:`r��i�- - . . . � that the established root protection fencing shall be inspected regularly by the City Arborist and shall not be adjusted or moved at any time during demolition or construction unless approved by the City Arborist; and �- that the root protection fencing shall not be removed until construction is complete on Lots 9 and 10, except if the portion of the protective fence on Lot 9 in the area of the driveway may be removed to install the driveway with the approval of the City Arborist; the removal of a section of the fence should not disturb the maintenance irrigation system installed within the tree protective fencing; � 26. A- that the driveway on Lot 10 shall be constructed of pavers set in sand, with a maximum cut below grade of 10 inches and a base compaction determined by a-ser#+�e� the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist; �: that if any roots greater than � 2 inches in diameter are encountered during grading for the driveway on Lot 10 and must be cut to install the driveway, the situation shall be documented by the ser�i#ie� project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to cutting any roots; and 11 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits G that if at any time the se�i#ied project arborist on site or the City Arborist feels the number of roots to be cut to install the driveway on Lot 10 is significant, a stop work order shall be issued for the site until the City Arborist determines whether it is necessary to relocate the driveway; � 27. �4: that ��^�^c�� ^rhnric�4 special inspections by the City Arborist, to be funded by the property owner, shall include being �on site during any demolition and grading or digging activities that take place within the designated tree protection zones, including the digging of the pier holes for the pier and grade beam foundation, {�nlo�+ fr�� }I-�c fir�+4 C+(1 foe4 �f fanno hofi�ioon I r�4c � �nri '1!1 rrvrrcv-rvrmcTrrsc-v�rccc'vrrcnv�vccrrccn ��„ a, o, a n d d u ri n g d i g g i n g o r re m ova o r installation of any utilities; � that a-�+seased-a�e�i�#;-se4es�ed-�j��l�, �i4�i �nr) fi in�� h�i 4ho nrnn� ��in�r the specia/ inspections by the City Arborist shall occur �ncnon+ #ho n�nc�r� ,,.+,,,., �,+o once a week or more frequently as required by the conditions of approval and se+�i€} shall include wriften documentation by the project arborist �^ �•��+;.,,. +„ +he �;+„ Arh�ric4 �nrl Dl�nninn Ilonnrfmon} that all tree protection measures are in place and requirements of the conditions of approval are being met; G that no materials or equipment shall be stockpiled or stored in any area not previously approved by the City Arborist; and , � � that the City Arborist may also stop work for any violation of the conditions related to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site; . ; �4: that under the observation of �^��*�f��' ^�"^��c+ the City Arborist, all pier holes for the foundation shall be hand dug to a depth of no more than 18 inches and the surface area around the hole shall be protected as required by the City Arborist; fr�� r�r1�+4i�n h'.II hc limi#orl 4� 4hc mnr�4h� �f �A��i 4n iln#�hor• � � that if any roots greater than � 2 inches in diameter are encountered during the digging for the pier holes, the property owner's on-site arborist shall call the City Arborist and determine how the pier shall be relocated and the Building Department shall be informed of the change and approve that the requirements of the building code are still met; and that � if at any time during the installation of the pier and grade beam foundations roots greater than � 2 inches in diameter must be cut, the situation must be documented by the se�+€ied project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to the time the roots are cut; 12 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits _. . A-: that, based on root locations that will be determined by hand digging on the site, the property owner shall submit a detailed foundation report and design for approval by the Building Department and City Arborist to establish the bounds of the pier and grade beam foundation and have it approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site; and that �: if at any time during the construction the pier locations must be altered to accommodate a Redwood tree root, the structural changes must be approved by the Building Department prior to the time any such root is cut or damaged; �-: 30. that the property owner shall submit a complete landscape plan for approval by the City Arborist prior to a Building permit being issued to address the landscaping and fence installation on the site, including plantings, irrigation, electricity, fences, retaining walls and soil deposits on the site; installation of all landscape features shall be overseen by the property owner's arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist, including fence post holes; and work shall be stopped and plans revised if any roots of � 2 inches in diameter or greater are found in post holes or any new landscape materials added endanger the redwood trees; �? 31. that no fencing of any kind shall be allowed for the first 65'-0" along the side property line between Lots 9 and 10; � - - - - - - -� - - -- • . �„ `32. Troo 11A�+inionr+nno: �: that for tree maintenance t�he property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the protected Redwood grove during demolition and construction work on the project and for a 5-year post construction maintenance program for the Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection. This maintenance program shall be founded upon the recommendations of the April 28, 2003 Mayne Tree Company report as well as such additional recommendations as the property owner shall receive from a certified arborist; and that � �the property owner of record shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discussed the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction (issuance of an occupancy permit) on the project and every finro years thereafter for a period of 5 years; 13 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 • :s�i�an:�::�s; . . . . � -- . fhat the property owner shall deposit with the City $118,780 based on the appraisal of the value of the four Redwood trees accepted by the City Arborist and City Attorney on Lots 9 and 10, as security to the City against one or more of the Redwood trees dying as the result of construction or within 5 years of the completion of construction due to problems attributable to construction; these funds shall be available to the City Arborist to cover any necessary removal costs, cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the grove of Redwood trees; nothing in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or /oss of trees; 34. that for purposes of these conditions property owner/developer, a certified Society of Arboriculture as an arborist; � the project arborist is a certified arborist hire by the arborist means a person certified by the International � - - - - - - - - - _. . . �&�Tee-Ma+��e+�a�►s�. �. � - - - - - - ._ - - � . _ . ■- - - - - -- - - - - Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits �� 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 - . ._ • � . . . . � 35. that before issuance of any demolition or e�s�ie+� building permit, the property owner shall record a deed restriction on the lot identifying the four (4) key Redwood trees and providing notice to the heirs, successors, and assigns that these trees were key elements of the development of the lot and: A. The trees may cause damage or inconvenience to or interfere with the driveways, foundations, roofs, yards, and other improvements on the property; however, those damages and inconveniences will not be considered grounds for removal of the trees under the Burlingame Municipal Code; B. Any and all improvement work, including landscaping and utility service, on the property must be performed in recognition of the irreplaceable value of the trees, must be done in consultation with a certified arborist, and if any damage to the trees occurs, will result in penalties and possible criminal prosecution; a� � 36. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and �+#e� Fire Codes, 2001 Edition or the edition approved by the City and as amended by the City of Burlingame at the time a building permit is issued; . :�rr_ti��:zs - -- � - - �� - - - . _ 4� 37. that before any grading or construction occurs on the site, these conditions and a set of approved plans shall be posted on a weather-proofed story board at the front of the site to the satisfaction of the Building Department so that they are readily visible and available to all persons working or visiting the site; 15 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits 4� 38. that if work is done in violation of any requirement in these conditions prior to obtaining the required approval of the City Arborist, and/or the Building Division, work on the site shall be immediately halted, and the project shall be placed on a Planning Commission agenda to determine what corrective steps should be taken regarding the violation; ,fi��:tis��. _ . • � • � . 4� 39. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall be maintained during construction on Lots-8; 10 a�-��-, and this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall not be temporarily altered, moved or removed during construction; no materials, equipment or tools of any kind are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, within this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing, the protective fencing and protection measures within the fencing shall remain in place until the building permit for each development on Lots 9 and 10 has received an occupancy permit and the City Arborist has approved removal of the protective fencing; .. . ._ . - - - � - - - - - - - - - -- 4� 40. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall install a locked gate in the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing for inspection access to the protected area in order to determine on going adequacy of mulch, soil moisture and the status of other field conditions as necessary throughout the construction period; this area shall be accessed only by the project arborist, City Arborist, or workers under the supervision of these professionals; 4� 41. that ^rir�r 4r� fho i e�i i.+nno �f � h� �ilriinn nermi4 F�r n�nc4r� �nii�n nn 1 ni �� the property owner shall �,��=:� maintain throughout construction a three-inch thick layer of well aged, course wood chip mulch (not bark) and a finro-inch thick layer of organic compost spread over the entire soil surface within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the project arborist and City Arborist; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be supervised by the project arborist and the City Arborist; the project arborist shall inform the City Arborist of the timing of installation of the course wood chip mulch and organic compost so that observation and inspection can occur; 4-� 42. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10 �^�' �+�.+;,,,, ,.. +ho �,+o �.-;�`,r�„ C� �mmcF�4, the property owner shall +�a�l--a ensure maintenance of the supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an active hose bib fr^^�'�,o +e.�,�„r,n, ,.,�+or �;.,o ,,,, �„+ o, snaked throughout the entire area on 16 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits Lots 9 and 10 within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; irrigation must be performed at least once every finro weeks throughout the entire construction period for all three lots unless determined not to be necessary by the project arborist and City Arborist; this area shall be soaked overnight, at least once every finro weeks, until the upper 24-inches of soil is thoroughly saturated; the City Arborist shall periodically test the soil moisture to ensure proper irrigation; 4�: 43. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall a##+� ensure maintenance of at least four(4), 8-inch by 11-inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a"Tree Protection Fence", "Do Not Alter or Remove" and in the event of movement or problem call a posted emergency number; 49-: 44. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lot�� 10; shall be regularly inspected by the project arborist and City Arborist during construction on Lot 10; violation of the fenced areas and/or removal or �elocation of the fences shall cause all construction work to be stopped until possible damage has been determined by the City Arborist and the property owner has implemented all corrective measures and they have been approved by the City Arborist; �45. that before issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall deposit $7,500 with the Planning Department to fund, on an hourly basis, a�ea ��^' ��ns��$pes+^� c�'�^+��' h., the City Arborist inspections as required in the conditions of approval �e-ass�c+ +.�,�-�-06� A�hr�ric�# ;., ;.,�.,o,.+;.,,. of all construction and grading on Lot 10 to insure that the mitigation measures included in the negative declaration and the conditions of approval attached to the project by the Planning Commission action are met; and a. that the property owner shall replenish by additional deposit by the 15`h of each month to maintain a$7,500 balance in this inspection account to insure that adequate funding is available to cover this on-going inspection function; and b. that failure to maintain the amount of money in this account by the 15th of each month shall result in a stop work order on the project which shall remain in place until the appropriate funds have been deposited with the City; and c. that should the monthly billing during any single period exceed $7,500 a stop work order shall be issued until additional funds to replenish the account have been deposited with the city so inspection can continue; and d. that should the city be caused to issue three stop work orders for failure to maintain the funding in this arborist inspection account, the property owner shall be required to deposit two times the amount determined by the City Arborist to cover the remainder of the inspection work before the third stop work order shall be removed; and e. that the unexpended portion of the inspection deposit shall be returned to the property owner upon inspection of the installation of the landscaping and fences, irrigation system and approval of the five year maintenance plan/ program for the portion of the Redwood tree grove on the lot; and 17 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits f. that this same account may be used for the City Arborist's selected licensed arborist inspector on lots-9-a�►d 10 selected by the City Arborist and approved by the Community Development Director. 18 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits Proposed Conditions of Approval for Lot 10 (without strikethroughs and italics): that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2007, sheets A.1, A.4, A.5, U.1, L1.1, S.1 and D.1 through D.4, and date stamped June 7, 2007, sheets A.2, A.3, A.4A, A.4B, A.5A, A.5B, A.6 and L1.0; 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 3. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 4. 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 and the City Arborist shall verify that all required tree protection measures were adhered to during construction including maintenance of the redwood grove, an appropriate tree maintenance program is in place, all required landscaping and irrigation was installed appropriately, and any redwood grove tree protection measures have been met; 5. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 6. that the conditions of the City Engineers' May 31, June 4, August 30, and October 15, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 18, 2007, memos, the Fire Marshal's September 3, 2002, June 22, 2005, and June 18, 2007 memos, the Chief Building Official's August 5, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 15, 2007 memos, the Recycling Specialist's August 27, 2002, and June 27, 2005 memos, the NPDES Coordinator's June 27, 2005, memo, and the Ciry Arborist's September 3, 2002, and April 3 and May 21, 2003, and April 13, 2007 memos shall be met; 7. that any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to have a City grading permit, be overseen by the project arborist, inspected by the City Arborist, and be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and with all the requirements of the permit issued by BAAQMD; 8. that there shall be no heavy equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or holidays during the development of Lot 10; use of all hand tools shall comply with the requirements of the City's noise ordinance; 19 Amendmenf to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits 9. that as much employee parking as possible shall be accommodated on the site during each of the phases of development; construction activity and parking shall not occur within the redwood tree grove protective fencing on Lot 10; 10. that construction materials shall not be staged on Lot 9; all heavy equipment and materials shall be staged along the right side of the property on Lot 10; 11. that at no time shall any equipment exceeding 18,000 LBS be allowed to be within 30 feet of the currently fenced off Redwood Tree Grove protection zone; 12. that prior to the placement or use of any motorized equipment within 30 feet of the currently fenced Redwood Tree Grove protection zone, a protective layer of mulch one foot deep with 3/4 inch plywood on top, shall be installed and inspected by the project arborist to avoid further soil compaction of the area; post construction the protective plywood and mulch may be removed as approved by the project arborist; 13. all construction shall be done in accordance with the California Building Code requirements in effect at the time of construction as amended by the City of Burlingame, and limits to hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; 14. that the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping areas; 15. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall be installed along the right side property line to meet current code standards and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems shall be increased at the property owner's expense if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department and the location of all trenches for utility lines shall be approved by the City Arborist during the building permit review and no trenching for any utility shall occur on site without continual supervision of the project arborist and inspection by the City Arborist; 16. that the new sewer connection to the public sewer main shall be installed along the right side property line to City standards as required by the development; 17. that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed unless their removal is determined by the City Arborist to have a detrimental effect on any existing protected trees on or adjacent to the site; 18. that prior to being issued a demolition permit on the site, the property owner shall submit an erosion control plan for approval by the City Engineer; 19. that prior to installation of any sewer laterals, water or gas connections on the site, the property owner shall submit a plan for approval by the City Engineer and the City Arborist; 20. that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site will be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards; 20 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits 21. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 22. that the project property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions to the proposed house and/or accessory structure or necessary changes to the tree protection program or to address new issues which may arise during construction; 23. that should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the Community Development Director and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City; 24. that the driveway shall be designed to be pervious material as approved by the City Arborist, and installed according to approved plans with the supervision of the project arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist; 25. that the established root protection fencing shall be inspected regularly by the City Arborist and shall not be adjusted or moved at any time during demolition or construction unless approved by the City Arborist; that the root protection fencing shall not be removed until construction is complete on Lots 9 and 10, except if the portion of the protective fence on Lot 9 in the area of the driveway may be removed to install the driveway with the approval of the City Arborist; the removal of a section of the fence should not disturb the maintenance irrigation system installed within the tree protective fencing; 26. that the driveway on Lot 10 shall be constructed of pavers set in sand, with a maximum cut below grade of 10 inches and a base compaction determined by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist; that if any roots greater than � 2 inches in diameter are encountered during grading for the driveway on Lot 10 and must be cut to install the driveway, the situation shall be documented by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to cutting any roots; and that if at any time the project arborist on site or the City Arborist feels the number of roots to be cut to install the driveway on Lot 10 is significant, a stop work order shall be issued for the site until the City Arborist determines whether it is necessary to relocate the driveway; 27. that special inspections by the City Arborist, to be funded by the property owner, shall include being on site during any demolition and grading or digging activities that take place within the designated tree protection zones, including the digging of the pier holes for the pier and grade beam foundation, and during digging for removal or installation of any utilities; that the special inspections by the City Arborist shall occur once a week or more frequently as required by the conditions of approval and shall include written documentation by the project arborist that all tree protection measures are in place and requirements of the conditions of approval are being met; that no materials or equipment shall be stockpiled or stored in any area not previously approved by the City Arborist; and that the City Arborist may also stop work for any violation of the conditions related to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site; 28. that under the observation of the City Arborist, all pier holes for the foundation shall be hand dug to a depth of no more than 18 inches and the surface area around the hole shall be protected as required by the City Arborist; that if any roots greater than 2 inches in diameter 21 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits are encountered during the digging for the pier holes, the property owner's on-site arborist shall call the City Arborist and determine how the pier shall be relocated and the Building Department shall be informed of the change and approve that the requirements of the building code are still met; and that if at any time during the installation of the pier and grade beam foundations roots greater than 2 inches in diameter must be cut, the situation must be documented by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to the time the roots are cut; 29. that, based on root locations that will be determined by hand digging on the site, the property owner shall submit a detailed foundation report and design for approval by the Building Department and City Arborist to establish the bounds of the pier and grade beam foundation and have it approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site; and that if at any time during the construction the pier locations must be altered to accommodate a Redwood tree root, the structural changes must be approved by the Building Department prior to the time any such root is cut or damaged; 30. that the property owner shall submit a complete landscape plan for approval by the City Arborist prior to a Building permit being issued to address the landscaping and fence installation on the site, including plantings, irrigation, electricity, fences, retaining walls and soil deposits on the site; installation of all landscape features shall be overseen by the property owner's arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist, including fence post holes; and work shall be stopped and plans revised if any roots of 2 inches in diameter or greater are found in post holes or any new landscape materials added endanger the redwood trees; 31. that no fencing of any kind shall be allowed for the first 65'-0" along the side property line between Lots 9 and 10; 32. that for tree maintenance the property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the protected Redwood grove during demolition and construction work on the project and for a 5- year post construction maintenance program for the Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection. This maintenance program shall be founded upon the recommendations of the April 28, 2003 Mayne Tree Company report as well as such additional recommendations as the property owner shall receive from a certified arborist; and that the property owner of record shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discussed the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction (issuance of an occupancy permit) on the project and every two years thereafter for a period of 5 years; 33. that the property owner shall deposit with the City $118,780 based on the appraisal of the value of the four Redwood trees accepted by the City Arborist and City Attorney on Lots 9 and 10, as security to the City against one or more of the Redwood trees dying as the result of construction or within 5 years of the completion of construction due to problems attributable to construction; these funds shall be available to the City Arborist to cover any 22 Amendment fo Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits necessary removal costs, cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the grove of Redwood trees; nothing in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or loss of trees; 34. that for purposes of these conditions the project arborist is a certified arborist hire by the property owner/developer; a certified arborist means a person certified by the International Society of Arboriculture as an arborist; 35. that before issuance of any demolition or building permit, the property owner shall record a deed restriction on the lot identifying the four (4) key Redwood trees and providing notice to the heirs, successors, and assigns that these trees were key elements of the development of the lot and: A. The trees may cause damage or inconvenience to or interfere with the driveways, foundations, roofs, yards, and other improvements on the property; however, those damages and inconveniences will not be considered grounds for removal of the trees under the Burlingame Municipal Code; B. Any and all improvement work, including landscaping and utility service, on the property must be performed in recognition of the irreplaceable value of the trees, must be done in consultation with a certified arborist, and if any damage to the trees occurs, will result in penalties and possible criminal prosecution; 36. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition or the edition approved by the City and as amended by the City of Burlingame at the time a building permit is issued; 37. that before any grading or construction occurs on the site, these conditions and a set of approved plans shall be posted on a weather-proofed story board at the front of the site to the satisfaction of the Building Department so that they are readily visible and available to all persons working or visiting the site; 38. that if work is done in violation of any requirement in these conditions prior to obtaining the required approval of the City Arborist, and/or the Building Division, work on the site shall be immediately halted, and the project shall be placed on a Planning Commission agenda to determine what corrective steps should be taken regarding the violation; 39. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall be maintained during construction on Lot 10, and this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall not be temporarily altered, moved or removed during construction; no materials, equipment or tools of any kind are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, within this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing, the protective fencing and protection measures within the fencing shall remain in place until the building permit for each development on Lots 9 and 10 has received an occupancy permit and the City Arborist has approved removal of the protective fencing; 23 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits 40. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall install a locked gate in the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing for inspection access to the protected area in order to determine on going adequacy of mulch, soil moisture and the status of other field conditions as necessary throughout the construction period; this area shall be accessed only by the project arborist, City Arborist, or workers under the supervision of these professionals; 41. that the property owner shall maintain throughout construction a three-inch thick layer of well aged, course wood chip mulch (not bark) and a two-inch thick layer of organic compost spread over the entire soil surface within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the project arborist and City Arborist; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be supervised by the project arborist and the City Arborist; the project arborist shall inform the City Arborist of the timing of installation of the course wood chip mulch and organic compost so that observation and inspection can occur; 42. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall ensure maintenance of the supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an active hose bib, snaked throughout the entire area on Lots 9 and 10 within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; irrigation must be performed at least once every finro weeks throughout the entire construction period for all three lots unless determined not to be necessary by the project arborist and City Arborist; this area shall be soaked overnight, at least once every two weeks, until the upper 24-inches of soil is thoroughly saturated; the City Arborist shall periodically test the soil moisture to ensure proper irrigation; 43. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall ensure maintenance of at least four (4), 8-inch by 11-inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a"Tree Protection Fence", "Do Not Alter or Remove" and in the event of movement or problem call a posted emergency number; 44. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lot 10 shall be regularly inspected by the project arborist and City Arborist during construction on Lot 10; violation of the fenced areas and/or removal or relocation of the fences shall cause all construction work to be stopped until possible damage has been determined by the City Arborist and the property owner has implemented all corrective measures and they have been approved by the City Arborist; and 45. that before issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall deposit $7,500 with the Planning Department to fund, on an hourly basis, the City Arborist inspections as required in the conditions of approval of all construction and grading on Lot 10 to insure that the mitigation measures included in the negative declaration and the conditions of approval attached to the project by the Planning Commission action are met; and a. that the property owner shall replenish by additional deposit by the 15`h of each month to maintain a$7,500 balance in this inspection account to insure that adequate funding is available to cover this on-going inspection function; and 24 Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 10 Conditional Use Permif and Special Permits b. that failure to maintain the amount of money in this account by the 15'h of each month shall result in a stop work order on the project which shall remain in place until the appropriate funds have been deposited with the City; and c. that should the monthly billing during any single period exceed $7,500 a stop work order shall be issued until additional funds to replenish the account have been deposited with the city so inspection can continue; and d. that should the city be caused to issue three stop work orders for failure to maintain the funding in this arborist inspection account, the property owner shall be required to deposit two times the amount determined by the City Arborist to cover the remainder of the inspection work before the third stop work order shall be removed; and e. that the unexpended portion of the inspection deposit shall be returned to the property owner upon inspection of the installation of the landscaping and fences, irrigation system and approval of the five year maintenance plan/ program for the portion of the Redwood tree grove on the lot; and f. that this same account may be used for the City Arborist's selected licensed arborist inspector on lot 10 selected by the City Arborist and approved by the Community Development Director. Ruben Hurin Planner c. Otto Miller, applicant and property owner 25 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 2007 31, 2006 memo, t City Engineer's, Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's April 3, 2006 memos and the Recycling ecialist's April 5, 2006 memo s be met; (4) that demolition or moval of the existing structures a any grading or earth moving the site shall not occur until a uilding permit has been issued an such site work shall be require o comply with all the regulatio of the Bay Area Air Quality Manag ent District; (5) that any chan s to the size or envelope of the fi t or second floors, which would inclu e adding or enlarging a dor (s), moving or changing wind s and architectural features or c nging the roof height or pitch, s II be subject to design review; that prior to scheduling the framing ' spection, the project archite , engineer or other licensed p fessional shall provide architectural certification that the architec ral details such as window loc ' ns and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is licensed professional involved i he project, the property owner or co tractor shall provide the certifi tion under penalty of perjury; c ifications shall be submitted to th uilding Department; (7) that rior to final inspection, Planning partment staff will inspect and note c pliance of the architectural de ils (trim materials, window type, .) to verify that the project has been ilt according to the approved P anning and Building plans; all wi ows shall be simulated true divided I' t windows with three dimensi al wood mullions and shall cont n a stucco-mould trim; (8) that all y ducts, plumbing vents, and f es shall be combined, where pos le, to a single termination and inst ed on the portions of the roof visible from the street; and tha ese venting details shall be inclu d and approved in the constr ion plans before a Building perm' is issued; (9) that priorto schedulin e roof deck inspection, a licen d surveyor shall shoot the hei of the roof ridge and provide ce ' cation of that height to the Bu' ding Department; (10) that pri to scheduling the foundation insp ion a licensed surveyor shall I cate the property corners and se e building footprint; (11) that prior underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first fl or elevation of the new structure(s and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer� (12) that during demolition of the e sting residence, site preparation and construction of the new resi ence, the applicant shall use all ap cable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's torm Water Ordinance, to prevent osion and off-site sedimentation of orm water runoff; (13) tha e project is subject to the state-m ndated water conservation progra , and a complete Irrigation W er Management Plan must be sub ' ted with landscape and irrigation p ns at time of permit applicati ;(14) that the project shall com y with the Construction and Dem ition Debris Recycling Ordin ce which requires affected demolitio , new construction and alteration p �ects to submit a Waste Red tion Plan and meet recycling requi ments; any partial or full demolif n of a structure, interior or e rior, shall require a demolition per ';(15) that the applicant shall co ply with Ordinance 1503, the ity of Burlingame Storm Water Man ement and Discharge Control Or nance; and (16) that the proj t shall meet all the requirements of e California Building Code and C ifornia Fire Code, 2001 editio , as amended by the City of Burling e. motion was seconded by C. Terrgrfes. C. Terrones called for a voice vot on the motion to approve the proje with the requested changes. The motion passed 4-0-1-2 (Chair al abstaining, C. Cauchi and C. Vis ca absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item conclud at 9:55 p.m. Chair Deal returned to the chambers and took his seat on tl� dais. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 10. 1537 DRAKE AVENUE, LOTS 9 AND 10, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EMERGING LOTS, AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR ATTACHED GARAGE (LOT 9) AND BUILDING HEIGHT (LOT 10) TO CONSTRUCT TWO NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS (OTTO MILLER, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., DESIGNER) (60 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN CA Anderson noted that he would recuse himself from this item. He stepped down from the dais and left the Council Chambers. CDD Meeker briefly presented the project description. Commission asked: where was master bedroom wall previously? 0 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 2007 Chair Deal opened the public comment period. Mark Hudak, 216 Park Road; James Chu, 55 W. 43�d Ave., San Mateo; Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; Chris McCrum, 1540 Drake Avenue; and Janet Garcia, 1561 Drake Avenue, spoke. They noted: was extensive design review when project was originally submitted; trees have had 3%2 years of breathing room and are healthy; new foundation designed to eliminate root damage, raised houses up; design of houses is virtually unchanged; master bedroom wall before was set back in an "L" shape; consulting arborist in 2004 was hired by the City; new grading restrictions; designs were approved three years ago; deposit should not be returned until 5 years after houses are finaled; designer is asking to go higher than allowed again; house too bold from street; do not want Special Permit for height approved; City Arborist letter concerning pier and beam foundation; and could work with neighbor to left concerning fencing. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commission commented on lot #9: • Not seeing on site plan or landscape plan if there will be a new fence constructed on left side property line; will it be in place of existing grape stakes?, should work with neighbor; • Is there going to be a fence to separate the two properties? • Roof pitch is being taken down, house has stepped up, but roof pitch has been made shallower? • Should eliminate the flat portion of the roof and go for a Special Permit for height; height of homes is mitigated by the extremely tall redwood trees; • A condition should be added that states the applicant shall work with the neighbor to the left concerning the installation of a new fence; • Arborists are very talented; don't think there will be any issues with the trees if the tree protection measures are carried through construction; • Landscape plan shows a fence befinreen lots 9 and 10, there should be no fence in front of the house; • Project should be brought back on action so that neighborhood does not have to pull project off Consent Calendar for discussion; and • Either the home on Lot 9 or Lot 10 should have only one chimney. C. Osterling made a motion to place this item on the Regular Action Calendar with the addition of a Special Permit for height for the change in the roof configuration; that one chimney should be eliminated from one of the two properties; and that the landscape architect should look at the redwood grove as a unit befinreen the finro properties instead of as two separate, distinct landscape plans. This motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Deal called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the RegularAction Calendarwhen plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2 (C. Cauchi and C. Vistica absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:40 p.m. Commission commented on lot # 10: Urge architect to look and see if the shed roof can drop to a 3:12 pitch, even though it has already been dropped; could see roof drop a few inches; Don't believe that the Special Permit for declining height envelope is a large impediment on neighbors; and Roof ridge is going to be set back very far from the street; shed roof would help to create some additional relief. C. Brownrigg made a motion to place this item on the RegularAction Calendarwith the requested revision to the roof pitch. This motion was seconded by C. Auran. Commission commented that the discussion of the deposit will be continued to the action hearing. Chair Deal called fora vote on the motion to place this item on the RegularAction Calendarwhen plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2 (C. Cauchi and C. Vistica absent). The 10 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 2007 Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:45 p.m. 11. 3105 MARGARITA �NUE, ZONED R-1—APPLICATI N FOR DESIGN REVIE AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION ERMIT FOR A FIRST AND SE ND FLOOR ADDITIO O A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ( E AND AMY KERWIN, APPL ANTS AND PROPER OWNERS; AND JOHN MANISCAL ARCHITECTURE. ARCHITECT 47 NOTICED) PROJEC PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN CDD N�eker briefly presented the projec�.description. There were rydquestions of staff. 12 C ir Deal opened the public comm t period. Mike Kerwin, pro rty owner; John Maniscalco, 1501 Waller t, San Francisco; and Frank git, 1560 Los Montes D' e, spoke. They noted: project is mostly excavation instead of buildin up; designed house in o er to preserve the view of the surrounding neighbors; new scheme ad esses all previous concern from previous projects on this site; roof material will be consistent; upper I el addition at right side pro erty line is at ground level then slopes down• pper level addition will effec iew from 1560 Los Montes rive; ask for story poles; and Commissione should stop by 1560 Los fV�ontes prior to action meeti when story poles are installed. There w no other comments from tl,�floor and the public hearin was closed. nmission ommented: • C sider stepping kitchen dow .; could lower upper level addition into the cr I space which would elp view from neighbors an tory poles; and • Addition is rather modest; i ue is with the view; will need to see story oles. �Terrones made a motion t lace this item on the Regular Action Cal dar once the story poles have een installed and certified y a licensed surveyor and there is room n the agenda. This motion was seconded by C. Osterlin Comment on motion: ould like to have contact number for pro rty owners at 1560 Los Montes Drive to visit site before acf n hearing; and would encourage applican o plant two smaller scale trees in the front yard. Chair Deal Iled for a vote on the motion to place this em on the Regular Action Calendar when story poles hav een installed and surveyed and there is r om on the agenda. The motion passed on a voice vote 5- (C. Cauchi and C. Vistica absent). Th Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appe ble. This item concluded at 11:05 p.m. 68 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1 — applica ' n for design review and Special Permit for an att hed garage for a first and second story addition to a ngle family dwelling (Heidi Richardson, Richar on Architects, applicant and architect; Andrew and Ta n Sutton, property owners) (85 noticed) Proje Planner: Ruben ZT Strohmeier briefly presented�l'ie project description. There were no questiorys` of staff. Chair Deal opened the pu c comment. Heidi Richardson, 319 Miller enue, Suite 5, Mill Valley, represented the project an stated that the owners have spoken with the nei bors who express no concern with the project. Commi ion commented: • Concerned wit road face of proposed garage from street ele ation; can it look more like existing setup with a paration look between house and garage? • Could gue bedroom over garage be more of an attic/gu t bedroom with a steeper pitched roof and dor rs? • Beautiful house as is with house as major element eliminated due to the scale and massiveness of th� garage as minor element, which is being garage; 11 CHU DESIGN & ENGINEERING, INC. 55 West 43rd Avenue, San Mateo, CA 94403 Tel: (650) 345-9286; Fax (650) 345-9287 June 7, 2007 City of Burlingame Planning Commission 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Lot 9& Lot 10 of 1537 Drake Ave Dear Planning Commissioners: ��07 �� Per your design review comments, we have made the following revision to the above reference project address. Lot 9: 1. A note added on site plan to reflect the replacement of fence will be determined between the applicant and the adjacent neighbar. �.�y�p 2. The fence between lot 9& lot 10 has been moved back, away from � trees, shown on site/landscape plan. 3. Flat roof eliminated. 4. Chimney at family room eliminated. Lot 10: 1. Roof pitch at shed has been reduced from 4:12 to 3: 12. 2. Chimney at family roof eliminated. Thank you all for your attention to these minor changes. Sincerely, �ames Chu Project Designer 6f. (2) APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EMERGING LOTS TO SEPARATE AND AMEND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: AMENDMENT TO DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AT 1537 DRAKE, LOT 11, ZONED R-1 CA Anderson excused himself from this agenda item because the Califomia Courts of Appeal issued two decisions that said that if a City Attorney's office takes a somewhat adversarial position with regard to an applicant pending before the City, the City Attorney's office would then be disqualified from providing legal advice to the advisory bodies or the City Council that is making the decision regarding the matter. In this case, CA Anderson was a central player in having a stop work order placed against the property, and therefore, under state law he is required to recuse himself from participation in order to protect the City's position. The City has obtained outside counsel, which will be available at future meetings if Council needs any further legal advice regarding this application. CA left the dais and Council Chambers. CP Monroe noted that the action this evening would be clearer if item 6f(2), 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 11, were taken first. Council agreed to that change in the Agenda. CP Monroe reviewed the staff report and recommended that Council hold a public hearing on this appeal and take action on the request for Lot 11, at 1537 Drake Avenue. The City Arborist was present. Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak, attorney representing the property owner , 216 Park Road; Sean Yapsa, attorney representing the neighbors, Janny Ochse, 1512 Drake, Ann Grimes- Thomas, 1520 Drake, Janet Garcia, 1561 Drake, Gina O'Neal, 1516 Drake, Chris McCrum, 1540 Drake, Dave Taylor, 1561 Drake, Bob Bear, 1510 Drake. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to uphold the Planning Commission's action approving amended conditions of approval, design review and a special permit for an attached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 1 l, for the reasons cited by the commission in their action. The motion was seconded by Councilman Coffey. Council asked on the motion if the arborist reports prepared by Levinson had been considered; City Arborist responded that he had reviewed and considered them and that all three arborists discussed and agreed that there would be no impact on the Redwood tree grove from development on Lot 11 and from using the 20 strip on the north side of Lot 10 for a staging area. Given history, not confident that this project will be built as approved unless all three lots are built a once, will reduce impacts on the neighborhood. Noted that this action includes additional conditions to protect the Redwood trees, not matter if built at once impact on the trees is different with each lot. Mayor O'Mahony called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve the amendment to the conditions of approval, design review and special permit for an attached garage at 1537 Drake, Lot 11. The motion passed on a 3-2 (Baylock, Nagel dissenting) roll call vote. (1) APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL TO AMEND THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EMERGING LOTS TO SEPARATE AND AMEND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR EACH LOT AND FOR ADDITIONAL TREE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR LOTS 9 AND 10 AT 1537 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 Burlingame City Council May 3, 2004 Approved Minutes CP Monroe reviewed the staff report and recommended Council hold a public hearing and take action on the request to amend the conditional use permit for Lots 9 and 10 at 1537 Drake Avenue. She noted that any future construction development on these two lots would require review by the Planning Commission. This action would establish conditions for each lot and would provide for ongoing maintenance activities for the Redwood tree grove until the lots 9 and 10 were developed. The City Arborist was present. Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak, 216 Park Road, Burlingame, represented the applicant; Janet Garcia, 1516 Drake; Dave Taylor, 1566 Drake; Sean Absha, attorney for neighbors; spoke. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to uphold the Planning Commission's action on Lots 9 and 10 for the reasons they noted particularly that this amendment adds more tree protection measures. The motion was seconded by Councilman Coffey. Mayor O'Mahony called for a roll call vote on the motion to uphold the Planning Commission and approve the amendment to the conditions of approval for each lot and for additional tree protection requirements for Lots 9 and 10 at 1537 Drake Avenue. The motion passed on a 3-2 (Baylock, Nagel dissenting) roll call vote. 8. STAFF � [�"CE ORDINANCE AND TO AMEND THE CONT '�OVE RESOLUTION #42-2004 STATING CITY'S �ITY OF BURLINGAME HF�PS Bell requested Council appr e the Resolution of Intention #42 004 to approve an Amendment to the �%�ntract with the California P ic Employees Retirement Syste Ca1PERS). Staff also recommends that the Council review the prop ed Ordinance to amend the City urlingame's contract with CaIPERS. Mayor O'Mahony re sted CC Musso to read the title o he proposed ordinance to amend the City of Burlingame's contr t with Ca1PERS. � Vice Mayor G�Iligan made a motion to approve�,�% Resolution of Intention #42-2004 tq�approve the Amendmen o the Contract with the by Counc' man Coffey, approved un ented Council with a Vice ayor Galligan made a motion t waive further reading of the propos ordinance; seconded by C cilman Coffey, approved un ' ously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilwoman Nagel made a otion to introduce the proposed or ' ance; seconded by Vice Ma r Galligan, approved unanim sly by voice vote 5-0. Mayor O'Mahony req sted CC Musso to publish a sumtn of the proposed ordinanc t least five days before proposed ado ion. b. T FD Nava d. ti tlining the third quarter report. MMISSION INTERVIEW lic Employees Retirement Syste�(CaIPERS); seconded y by voice vote, 5-0. C� 6 Burlingame City Council Approved Minutes May 3, 2004 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 nonconfortning. Commission noted that the plant materials were not provided on the plans. Applicant noted that plant and irrigation det ' s are still being worked and will be sh n on the construction plans submitted for a building permit. ommission asked if the parking vari is approving the nonconforming parking count or just the n conforming back-up? CP noted that e variance only applies to the nonconforming back-up dime 'on of the spaces identified. There w e no further comments and the public hear'�agwas closed. � ission discussion: support the proj as proposed, most landscaping of the b' ings in this area is ginal, this is an improvement, cla ' ed that the parking variance only applies t e nonconforming back- space and not the nonconformi number of on-site parking spaces. C. Vistica moved to approv e application, by resolution, with the owing amended conditions: 1) that the project shall be buil s shown on the plans submitted to th lanning Department and date stamped February 24, 2004, s ets A1.0 and L0.1, site plan and land ape plan; with a total of 56 on-site parking spaces and 11,03 F of on-site landscaping, with 19, 60 egree on-site parking spaces with 12 to 16 foot back-up space ere 18 feet is required for the parki spaces along the north side of the building; 2) t at the buildin all have 65,888 SF of warehouse, 8 3 SF of office and 10,000 SF of showroom, an ange to this c figuration shall be reviewed by the P nning Department and may require Planning mmission appr al; 3) that the maximum number of ployees on site at any one time will be 50 pe ns; 4) that all t existing and new landscaping to be ' stalled on site will be irrigated by an autom 'c sprinkler system that shall be maintained by the prop y owner in good operating condition at all ' es; 5) that all signage shall require a separate permit fr the Planning and Building Departments; that the conditions of the City Engineer's March 1, 200 emo shall be met; and 7) that any improv ents for the use shall meet all California Building and Fir Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the C� of Burlingame. The motion w seconded by C. Keighr . Chair Bojues call for a voice vote on the motion to approv oting that the parking varianc nly applies to the nonconf ing back-up space and not the nonco rming number of on-site par ' g spaces. The motion pas 7-0. Appeal procedures were advised. his item concluded at 10:50 p.m. 7. 1537 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — OTTO MILLER, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR. INC., DESIGNER (60 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNERS: MEG MONROE/RUBEN HURIl�T A. LOT 11— APPLICATION TO AMEND THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EMERGING LOTS TO SEPARATE AND AMEND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND AMENDMENT TO DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. C. Keighran recused herself because she lives within 500 feet of this site. She left the chambers. City Attorney Anderson also recused himself from advising the Planning Commission because of California State Law and he left the chambers. Reference staff report for 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 11, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. 36 conditions were suggested for consideration. Commissioners asked are the issues raised in the Levinson report attached to the neighbor's letter; addressed in the conditions of approval for lot 11. CP Monroe responded that they were in the amended conditions. Does this apply to the conditions for Lots 9 and 10 tonight as well. CP noted yes; in those conditions all previously 15 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 Lot 11 approved were brought forward, those no longer in effect were shown as strike outs, and the amendments to the others shown in italics to reflect what is known so far, knowledge is evolving on Lots 9 and 10. Is it the consensus of the arborist that it is all right to build on Lot 11 and the staging area on Lot 10? CP Monroe responded yes, there is a comment to that effect from the City Arborist in the staff report. Chair Bojues opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak, 216 Park Road represented the project. Longprocess to arrive here, the result of much compromise by all involved, hope not to re-do entire; only reason here is unfortunate error by grading subcontractor; not here to apply for anything new, want to break Lot 11 from 9 and 10, and proceed as originally approved, except to build the house one foot taller; we will return with Lots 9 and l O later. All three arborists agree that there are no significant roots on Lot 11; only want to raise the house on Lot 11 one foot to bring it into better aesthetic alignment with the houses on Lots 9 and 10; on Lot 9 need to know compaction of fill soil, test was done, compaction will allow roots to grow; have proceeded with foundations, investigated roots as were able given conditions, investigated location of each pier within the root zone, when done will come back to the Commission for final approval of houses on Lots 9 and 10, findings suggest raising foundations one to two feet to avoid grade at back of the lot. On Lot 11 would like Commission to remove condition 12 regaxding the water line being installed before foundation inspection, in discussion with City Engineer, may want to relocate line to the center of the street on Drake, would like to delay until before the city issues a certificate of occupancy on Lot 11. Also to cleanly break Lot 11 from Lots 9 and 10 do not want mitigations for Lots 9 and 10 tied to Lot 11 could create a legal problem if wish to sell Lots 9 and 10, so would like conditions 4, 16, 25-33 and 35-36 removed from Lot 11. These same conditions are proposed to be added to Lots 9 and 10, so are redundant and create technical problems for Lot 11, all protections for Lot 9 and 10 are in place and we will be back in 30-45 days with final foundations for these two lots. Commissioners asked: If someone buys Lot 11 couldn't the buyer and seller address the reservation and indemnity. Hudak, no way out from obligations, only like to indemnify against things one can control. From economic point of view understand cash flow reason for breaking off Lot 11, but doesn't it raise questions about the redevelopment of the other lots, foreclosing options if you build a smaller house on Lot 11. Hudak, independent arborist more confident after foundation investigation, has looked at ways to build driveway on Lot 9, owner believes it will evolve in the way he intended within the modifications and mitigations the arborist's will insist on, pretty confident they are going to do what they agreed to. What time lapse do you expect between Lot 11 and Lots 9 and 10? Lot 11 is ready now, house could be occupied this year; 30-45 days before sure on Lots 9 and 10, then back to the Commission, don't lrnow if we can do it this year, possible. Neighbors spoke: Janet Garcia, 1561 Drake; Jani Ochse, 1512 Drake; Mark Thomas, 1520 Drake; Dave Taylor, 1556 Drake; Ann Thomas, 1520 Drake; Sean Abshire, real estate attorney; Denise Balestra, 414 Costs Rica. It is unclear how the arborist report is evolving, seems applicant is trying the change Mr. Levinson's report; the compaction analysis has been done, OK; now he wants to break off development contrary to the Commission's request to see the whole as one picture; two years ago expressed concern about the Redwood Grove, have attended 12 meetings, he keeps coming back about the trees, this process is dragging out in the absence of data, it is on the agenda without data; last time he asked to separated the conditions the City Arborist was not here and he is not hear tonight, the 20 foot staging area does not agree with the arborist report of March 23; should not decide on Lot 11 without information and don't know if Lots 9 and 10 axe buildable. All tried for a workable plan, one issue keep the Redwood trees, no one knows how to build around asked for an independent arborist, first few days property owner worked on the site put the trees in jeopardy, he is very casual, want to be sure that he is supervised. There is an application for a 16 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Lot 11 March 29, 2004 fourth lot, 1551 Drake, next to Lot 11, applied for a permit to demolish and rebuild; these lots should be looks at in their totality, 4 parcels, asked City Attorney before if the standards are stricter for four lots, he said yes, not get full picture if you take Lot 11 out, premature. There are photos to show how extensively the roots were ripped up; developers behavior indicates he does what he pleases; deny all applications, City Attorney said that council would be provided the Planning Commission for the revocation of all permits, here is a newspaper article to show the Mark Hudak also has a conflict of interest. First issue is the Redwood Grove, on December 8 commission's direction was independent arborist is not obliged to accept proj ect, he notes that development could result in a decline in the Redwoods over the long term; now applicant is back making changes to Lot 11, wants to increase the height one foot, and the roofs of the other houses 2 feet taller, this is a bate and switch pattern, rather it returns us to ground zero, and discussion of a 4 lot development. Public Comment continued: Represent the neighbors who wish to preserve the Redwood trees, concerned about the General Plan and the goals in the Housing Element, proj ect proposed by Miller threatens to impact the neighborhood, I would suggest a process like that of a subdivision, and process all lots as a single unit, evaluate as one proj ect under CEQA, General Plan and impact on neighborhood; now the developer is back and wants to parcel off, this is a process to amend the conditional use permit, is it in accord with the General Plan; the conditions protect the city, by dividing he increases his opportunity and city decreased his risk; he needs to protect his investment to divide off Lot 11 and has taken advantage of the emerging lots. Commission has not asked if the conditional use pertnit should be revoked, to do that the Commission must provide notice and proper findings; the project cannot be built as originally designed, he has done detrimental damage to the property, he has not preserved the trees and has violated city ordinance, the proj ect needs to be changed, he may not come back with Lots 9 and 10 for a year. Live behind this project; all property owners all have rights, Miller owns the trees, neighbors simply looking for loop holes to stop him from developing; property was on the market for 9 months as a development project. C. Keele left the dais and chambers at 11:00 p.m. Public Comment continued with applicant's response: Comment made that applicant wishes to piecemeal development, staff is actually adding conditions; remind that city holds a$120,000 cash bond against damage to the Redwood Grove; at the last meeting asked the City Planner the number of times this developer had been in trouble with the city, she answered none noting he had taken over a problem property ; grading done in December was unintentional, still have a red tag on Lot 11, developer has a right to proceed. On Lots 9 and 10, even conditions as currently approved expected additional investigation, this has not changed, it is what you intended. There were no further comments from the floor and public hearing was closed. Commissioners comments: can the approvals on Lots 9 and 10 be revoked later? CP noted that she believed so particularly based on the situation of the tree roots or needs of the trees or site cause the applicant to make changes to the structures; applicants requests for changes to the conditions of approval, plus any we might add, makes it appear that we should discuss and bring back the conditions of approval before acting on this request; part of the problems is the three lots, this house on Lot 11 is a good design, modest size, contributes to the neighborhood, that is not the fact of all three houses; the root investigation report indicates concern about trenching within 30 feet from the Redwood trees, that is well into the second half of the Lot 10; availability of Lot 11 during construction may facilitate options for building on Lots 9 and 10, there may be some risk that Lots 9 and 10 may not be developable as approved without Lot 11 available during construction—is Lot 11 a part of the solution for Lots 9 and 10? No ordinary family is going to be able to 17 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes Lot 11 March 29, 2004 live up to and around these trees, not inclined to break this project up. Agree that applicant is requesting a lot of modifications to the conditions; could continue and look at revised conditions, by then may know more about two lots and determine the impact on Lot 11; report indicates that in this case roots have grown in an unusual pattern, location of piers and cantilevers will be key. All arborists have agreed it is all right to use the 20 feet of Lot 10 for staging; need to look at conditions, there is a clear read from the City Arborist. Key issue is permission to separate Lot 11 or look at the development as a whole. What has been approved? Are there three lots? CP Monroe responded there axe presently three lots. Chair Bojues made a motion to approve the revised conditions for Lot 11 which separates it from Lots 9 and 10 with all the conditions in the staff report and by resolution. C. Auran seconded the motion with the addition to condition 12 that to insure a continuous water source from the distribution line to the required soaker hose irrigation in the Redwood Grove the property owner maintain and continue to use the existing water line along the reax of the three lots or replace it as required by the City Engineer and add a condition that when the certificate of occupancy is granted for Lot 11 and the construction fence along the 20 foot construction zone is removed, Lot 11 shall no long be responsible for any conditions which apply to Lots 9 and 10 and these conditions shall become void. The maker of the motion accepted the additional conditions. The amended conditions of approval for Lot 11 are: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 9, 2004, sheets A.1 through A.5 and Ll; and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require and amendment to this permit; 2) 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), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subj ect to Planning Commission review; and all changes shall be consistent with the plans which were approved for this lot on May 27, 2003, because those plans were determined to be consistent in scale and mass with the overall development approved at or near the same time on adjacent lots 9 and 10; 3) that when the certificate of occupancy is granted for Lot 11 and the construction fence along the 20 foot construction zone on Lot 10 is removed, Lot 11 shall no long be responsible for any conditions of approval which apply to Lots 9 and 10 and these conditions shall become void; 4) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the proj ect axchitect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty ofperjury; 5) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans and the City Arborist shall verify that all required tree protection measures were adhered to during construction including maintenance of the redwood grove, an appropriate tree maintenance program is in place, all required landscaping and irrigation was installed appropriately, and any redwood grove tree protection measures have been met including appropriate removal of the construction staging area fence on Lot 10; 6) that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 7) that the conditions of the City Engineers March 15, 2004, May 31, June 4, August 30, and October 15, 2002, memos, the City Arborist's Apri13 and May 21, 2003 memos, and the Recycling Specialist's March 10, 2004 memo shall be met; 8)that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to have a City grading permit, be overseen by a licensed arborist, inspected by the City Arborist, and be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and with all the requirements of the permit issued by BAAQMD; 9) that there shall be no heavy : City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or holidays during the development of Lot 11; use of hand tools shall comply with the requirements of the City's noise ordinance; 10) that no construction equipment, construction material storage or construction worker parking shall be allowed on the street in the public right-of-way during construction on the site; as much employee parking as possible shall be accommodated on the site or in the construction staging a.rea during each of the phases of development; construction activity and parking shall not occur within the redwood tree grove protective fencing on Lots 9 and 10; 11) that all construction shall be done in accordance with the California Building Code requirements as amended by the City of Burlingame, and limits to hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; there shall be no construction on Sundays or holidays; 12) that the existing water line at the rear of the properties shall be retained and maintained in operable condition to supply the required soaker hose irrigation system for the Redwood tree grove on Lots 9 and 10 or a new 2-inch water line as approved by the City Engineer to provide to water source for the required soaker hose irrigation system to serve Lots 9 and 10 shall be installed before an inspection for the foundation will be scheduled by the City; and that all new utility connections to serve Lot 11 and which are affected by the development shall be installed to meet current code standards and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems any increase in capacity required shall be at the property owner's expense if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department; 13) that the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit shall not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping areas; 14) that the new sewer connection to the public sewer main shall be installed to City standards as required by the development; 15) that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed unless their removal is determined by the City Arborist to have a detrimental effect on any existing protected trees on or adj acent to the site; 16) that prior to installation of any sewer laterals, water or gas connections on the site, the property owner shall submit a plan for approval by the City Engineer and the City Arborist; 17) that prior to installing the new water line to serve Lots 9, 10 and 11 and supply the maintenance irrigation system to the redwood grove in the easement at the rear of Lots 9, 10 and 11 and prior to receiving a building permit, the property owner shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works department to replace the 2-inch water pipe in the City right-of-way; 18) that the property owner shall anange for a licensed professional to install backflow valves on the sewer laterals to 1553 Drake Avenue, 1557 Drake Avenue, 1561 Drake Avenue, and 1566 Drake Avenue at the property owner's expense and with the permission of the affected property owners; the Planning Department will advise the eligible property owners of this condition of approval, noting that it is their choice to take advantage of this opporiunity; 19) that all runoff created during construction and futuxe discharge from the site shall be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards; 20) that the development on this site shall comply with Burlingame Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 21) thattheproperty owner shall comply with Burlingame Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 22) that should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the City Planner and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City; 23) that the property owner shall submit a complete landscape and irrigation plan for approval by the City Arborist prior to a Building permit being issued; the plan shall address the landscaping, flat work, driveway design and materials, and fence installation on the site, including plantings, irrigation, electricity, retaining walls, soil deposits and driveway construction details; landscaping shall be inspected and approved by the City Arborist before the City shall issue an occupancy permit for the house; 24) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame or edition in effect at the time a building permit is issued; 25) that before any grading or construction occurs on the site, these conditions and a set of approved plans shall be posted on a weather- proofed story board at the front of the site to the satisfaction of the Building Deparhnent so that they are readily visible and available to all persons working or visiting the site; 26) that if work is done in violation of any requirement in these conditions prior to obtaining the required approval of the City Arborist and the Building Division, work on the site shall be immediately halted, and the project shall be placed on a Planning Commission agenda to determine what corrective steps should be taken regarding the violation; 19 City ofBurlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 27) that the properiy owner shall replace the existing 2-inch water pipe with a 2-inch copper pipe from its connection to the 2-inch line on Bernal Avenue in the city easement at the rear of lots 9, 10 and 11 as directed and approved by the City Engineer; this line shall be installed to connect to the existing line past lot 9; 28) that at the south property line of lot 9 the property owner shall extend a temporary, above ground, water line as approved by the City Arborist from the new 2-inch copper water pipe in the public easement to provide at least 250 feet of dry weather soaker hose irrigation to the redwood groves, there shall be no excavation for the temporary water line on lot 9; 29) that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall be maintained during construction on Lot 11, and this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall not be temporarily altered, moved or removed during construction; no materials, equipment or tools of any kind are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, within this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing, the protective fencing and protection measures within the fencing shall remain in place until the building permit for each development on lots 9, 10 and 11 has been finaled and the removal authorized by the City Arborist; 30) that prior to issuance of the building permit for construction on Lot 11, the property owner shall reinforce the existing Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing by installing 36-inch long layout stakes 24- inches into the ground with the supervision of the project arborist and as inspected by the City Arborist; there shall be one stake approximately every 6 linear feet as determined by the location of any substa.ntial tree roots, with steel wire affixed to the fence base though a hole in the layout takes to prevent movement or alteration of the protective fencing once installed; 31) that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 11, the property owner shall install a locked gate in the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing for inspection access to the protected area in order to determine on going adequacy of mulch, soil moisture and the status of other field conditions as necessary throughout the construction period; this area shall be accessed only by the project arborist, City Arborist, or workers under the supervision of these professionals; 32) that prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 11, the property owner shall cause to have a three-inch thick layer of well aged, course wood chip mulch (not bark) and a two-inch thick layer of organic compost spread over the entire soil surface within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the project arborist and City Arborist; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be supervised by the project arborist and the City Arborist; the project axborist shall inform the City Arborist of the timing of installation of the course wood chip mulch and organic compost so that observation and inspection can occur; 33) that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 11 and starting in the late SpringlEarly Summer 2004, the property owner shall install a supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an active hose bib from the temporary water line on Lot 9, snaked throughout the entire area on Lots 9 and 10 within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; imgation must be performed at least once every two weeks throughout the entire construction period for all three lots unless determined not to be necessary by the proj ect arborist and City Arborist; this area shall be soaked overnight, at least once every two weeks, until the upper 24-inches of soil is thoroughly saturated; the City Arborist shall periodically test the soil moisture to ensure proper irrigation; 34) that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 11, the property owner shall affix at least four (4), 8-inch by 11- inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a"Tree Protection Fence", "Do Not Alter or Remove" and in the event of movement or problem call a posted emergency number; 35) that the property owner shall establish a twenty-foot wide staging area strip along the north property line of Lot 10 by installing a permanent six-foot tall, chain-link fence at the location shown on the Site Plan submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped March 9, 2004, according to the specifications of the City Arborist; this fence shall be posted with the same laminated waterproof warning signage as used on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing at the same intervals; at no time during the construction on Lot 11, including installation of landscaping, shall this fencing be moved, removed or relocated without the approval of the project axborist and City Arborist; this fencing shall be removed prior to any construction activity on Lot 10; 36) that all protective fencing, staging area fencing on Lot 10 and Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lots 9 and 10, shall be regularly inspected by the project arborist and City Arborist during construction on Lot 11; violation of the fenced areas and/or removal or relocation of the fences shall cause all construction work to be stopped until possible damage has been determined by the City Arborist and the property owner has implemented all corrective measures and they have been approved by the City Arborist; and 37) that before issuance of a building pertnit, the property 20 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 owner shall deposit $7,500 with the Planning Department to fund, on an hourly basis, a licensed arborist inspector selected by the City Arborist to assist the City Arborist in inspecting all construction and grading on Lot 11 and in the 20 foot staging area on Lot 10 to support construction on Lot 11 to insure that the mitigation measures included in the negative declaration and the conditions of approval attached to the project by the Planning Commission action are met; and a. that the property owner shall replenish by additional deposit by the 15�' of each month to maintain a$7,500 balance in this inspection account to insure that adequate funding is available to cover this on-going inspection function; and b. that failure to maintain the amount of money in this account by the 15th of each month shall result in a stop work order on the project which shall remain in place until the appropriate funds have been deposited with the City; and c. that should the monthly billing during any single period exceed $7,500 a stop work order shall be issued until additional funds to replenish the account have been deposited with the city so inspection can continue; and d. that should the city be caused to issue three stop work orders for failure to maintain the funding in this axborist inspection account, the property owner shall be required to deposit two times the amount determined by the City Arborist to cover the remainder of the inspection work before the third stop work order shall be removed; and e. that the unexpended portion of the inspection deposit shall be returned to the property owner upon inspection of the installation of the landscaping and fences, imgation system and approval of the five year maintenance plan/ program for the portion of the Redwood tree grove on the lot; and f. that this same account may be used for the City Arborist's selected licensed arborist inspector on lots 9 and 10. Comment on the motion: have not had much time to review arborist report, assume modified conditions reflect these findings so am uncomfortable changing staff proposed conditions tonight, realize that the conditions for Lots 9 and 10 will come back to the commission later; its OK to separate Lot 11, it's a good idea to ease into construction, will reduce impact on the neighborhood, like seeing consensus of the three arborists, report contains a clear set of modified conditions. Independent arborists concerns are on Lots 9 and 10, he agreed that Lot 11 is OK as well as using the 20 feet on Lot 10, I agree professionally that its OK as well. What is the issue regarding the location of the water line? Sr. Engineer commented that there is a 10 foot wide right-of-way at the rear of the houses where the water line is presently located, plan to move the water line to the front in the street, the line will come off Adeline and down Drake. Does commission want to consider allowing the property owner to use the rear of Lot 10, out of the area affected by the Redwoods for additional staging area so long as the proposal is endorsed by all three arborists. Commissioners determined that they did not want to add this option as a condition at this time. Chair Bojues called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve the conditions as amended for Lot 11 which would allow Lot 11 to be developed independently of Lots 9 and 10. The motion passed on a roll call vote 4-1-1-1 (C. Brownrigg dissenting, C. Keighran abstaining, C. Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 11:45 p.m. 7B. LOTS 9 AND 10 — APPLICATION TO AMEND THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EMERGING LOTS TO SEPARATE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND FOR ADDITIONAL TREE PROTECTION REQLTIREMENTS. C. Keighran continued to abstain because she lives within 500 feet of this project. CA Anderson continued to recuse himself. Both were not present in the chambers. CP Monroe presented the staff report noting that these conditions although separated into two sets, one for Lot 9 and one for Lot 10, remain the same as those approved by the Commission on May 27, 2003, except for being amended to require additional Redwood Grove maintenance and protection for the term of construction on all three lots and the placement of a barrier fence on Lot 10 for the 20 foot construction staging area to be used while building on Lot 11. CP noted that the conditions which have already been completed are shown by strike through and the changes are shown in italics. Although the initial studies of 21 City ofBurlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 root location and impact areas and probing at specific locations for foundation piers have been done, the applicant still has foundation design and other work to complete and get approved by the arborists before these conditions are complete to cover construction. As a result the project proposals and conditions of approval will return to the Planning Commission again. Commissioners asked if the chain link fence protecting the trees should be expanded immediately. CP noted that Lots 9 and 10 would be protected from all construction on Lot 11 by the fence placed along the inner edge of the 20 foot staging area on Lot 10 and by the continued supervision of the Redwood Grove maintenance including proper placement and ongoing fence inspection by the arborist. There were no other questions of staff. Chair Bojues opened the public hearing for Lots 9 and 10. Mark Hudak, 216 Park Road, represented the applicant. Shean Abshire, attorney for the neighbors, Janet Garcia, 1561 Drake; Ann Thomas, 1512 Drake, spoke. Applicant noted that there is an existing water source on the site that the applicant can use for the soaker irrigation on Lot 9; agree with the way the process is evolving, believe as the independent arborist becomes more familiar with the site and more work is done on the foundation design, the lots will be found to be buildable; view these conditions on Lots 9 and 10 to be interim, know that they will be finalized later. Other comments from the floor: No question given the Levinson report in the record that the projects on Lots 9 and 10 do not comply; do not like the implication of Mark Hudak that the independent arborist is coming around "to our wa}�'; foundation as designed is not buildable so there is no project to attach conditions to; can't find that it is not detrimental to the property based on the record here, if it has been revised need to deny the application. Report which was given to her was not in the staff report or any finding from Mr. Levinson, a February 20 report was referred to; don't know if the conditions of approval include; the three arborists agree on the 20 foot construction staging area on Lot 10 but based on what? CP Monroe noted that there was a staff comment from the City Arborist in the Commission packet. Have been asking for two years for an independent arborist report to be put into the record, have denied due process, outrageous. Applicant submitted his arborist's report stating that there were no significant roots affected, also regarding the pier locations only 2 were affected based on site investigation on February 4, 2004. This is not a new approval for Lots 9 and 10, there are amendments to the existing report based on additional study, now the conditions as presented reflect what city wants as interim. There were no more comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: in the origina132 conditions it notes that location of the pier and beam foundation are yet to be determined and these conditions represent no change from that; on that basis should move to approve the amendment to the conditional use permit to separate the conditions of approval for Lot 9 and Lot 10. Staff was asked if these conditions are more stringent than the original? CP responded yes, these conditions provide more protection for the trees during the entire time of any construction on the lots; also more investigation will need to occur for the foundation locations, for that reason the arborist report is still being prepared, an arborist analysis/report will accompany any resubmitted plans for Lot 9 and/or Lot 10, including revised conditions. C. Auran moved approval of the amendment to the conditional use permit to separate the conditions of approval including mitigation monitoring for Lots 9 and Lots 10 at 1537 Drake Avenue, including additional conditions to address the on-going maintenance of the Redwood Tree Grove during construction on all three of the originally merged lots. C. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. The conditions for Lot 9 are: l) that the proj ect shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2003, sheets A.1 through A.5 and date stamped Apri125, 2003, sheet L- 1; and that any changes to the structure including but not limited to foundation design, height, building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building or the tree protection plan or to tree 22 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 trimming shall require review by the Planning Commission and an amendment to this permit; 2) 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), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch; and all changes shall be consistent with the plans which were approved for this lot on May 27, 2003, because those plans were determined to be consistent in scale and mass with the overall development approved at or near the same time on adjacent lots 10 and 11 shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 3) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; 4) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the proj ect has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans and the City Arborist shall verify that all required tree protection measures were adhered to during construction including maintenance of the redwood grove, an appropriate tree maintenance program is in place, all required landscaping and irrigation was installed appropriately, and any redwood grove tree protection measures have been met; 5) that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 6) that the conditions of the City Engineers April 8, May 31, June 4, August 15 , August 30, and October 15, 2002, memos, the Fire Marshals September 3, 2002 memo, the Chief Building Inspectors August 5, 2002 memo, the Recycling Specialist's August 27, 2002 memo, and the City Arborist's September 3, 2002, and Apri13 and May 21, 2003 memos shall be met; 7) thatdemolitionof the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to have a City grading permit, be overseen by a licensed arborist, inspected by the City Arborist, and be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and with all the requirements of the permit issued by BA.AQMD; 8) that there shall be no heavy equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or holidays during the development of Lot 9; use of hand tools shall comply with the requirements of the City's noise ordinance; 9) that no construction equipment, construction material storage or construction worker parking shall be allowed on the street in the public right-of-way during construction on the site; as much employee parking as possible shall be accommodated on the site during each of the phases of development; construction activity and parking shall not occur within the redwood tree grove protective fencing on Lot 9; 10) that all construction shall be done in accordance with the California Building Code requirements in effect at the time of construction as amended by the City of Burlingame, and limits to hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; there shall be no construction on Sundays or holidays; 11) that the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping areas; 12) that the existing water line at the rear of the properties shall be retained and maintained in operable conditions to supply the required soaker hose irrigation system for the Redwood Tree Grove on Lots 9 and 10 or a new 2 inch water line to serve lots 9, 10 and 11 shall be installed before an inspection for the foundation will be scheduled by the City; and all new utility connections to serve the site and which are affected by the development shall be installed to meet current code standards; and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems shall be increased at the property owner's expense if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department; and the location of all trenches for utility lines shall be approved by the City Arborist during the building permit review and no trenching for any utility shall occur on site without continual supervision of a licensed arborist and inspection by the City Arborist; 13) that the new sewer to the public sewer main shall be installed to City standards as required by the development; 14) that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed unless their removal is determined by the City Arborist to have a detrimental effect on any existing protected trees on or adjacent to the site; 15) thatpriortobeing 23 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 issued a demolition permit on the site, the property owner shall submit an erosion control plan for approval by the City Engineer; 16) that prior to installation of any sewer laterals, water or gas connections to the site, the property owner shall submit a plan for approval by the City Engineer and the City Arborist; 17) that prior to installing the new water line to serve Lots 9, 10 and 11 and supplying the maintenance irrigation system to the redwood grove in the easement at the rear of Lots 9, 10 and 11 and prior to receiving a building permit, the property owner shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works department to replace the 2- inch water pipe in the City right-of-way; 18) that the properiy owner shall arrange for a licensed professional to install backflow valves on the sewer laterals to 1553 Drake Avenue, 1557 Drake Avenue, 1561 Drake Avenue, and 1566 Drake Avenue at the property owner's expense and with the permission of the affected property owners; the Planning Department will advise the eligible property owners of this condition of approval, noting that it is their choice to take advantage of this opportunity; 19) that the contractor shall submit the "Recycling and Waste Reduction" form to the building department to be approved by the Chief Building Official that demonstrates how 60 per cent of construction demolition material will be diverted from the waste stream and the property owner shall be responsible for the implementation of this plan; (completed) 20) that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site will be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards; 21)that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 22) that the proj ect property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions to the proposed house and/or accessory structure or necessary changes to the tree protection program or to address new issues which may arise during construction; 23) that the property owner shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 24) that should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the City Planner and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City; 25) that no installation work on the driveway or landscaping on the site shall occur until the timing, design, method of construction and materials have been approved by the City Arborist, and a licensed arborist shall be on the site continually to supervise the installation of the driveway and to make adjustments based on any root impacts identified during the process of construction; the construction activity shall be inspected regularly by the City Arborist during construction compliance with the approved materials and method of installation; it shall be the responsibility of the property owner to notify the City Arborist when construction of the driveway on Lot 9 is to begin; 26) A. that the root protection fencing for the Redwood trees on Lot 9 and 10 shall be installed on site and inspected by a Certified arborist; and a written report prepared by a certified arborist documenting the dimensions of the root protection fencing for the Redwood trees shall be submitted to the City Arborist within 24 hours of the inspection, and that the written report shall be approved by the City Arborist prior to the issuance of any demolition or construction permit; B. that the established root protection fencing shall be inspected regularly by the City Arborist and shall not be adjusted or moved at any time during demolition or construction unless approved by the City Arborist; C. that the root protection fencing shall not be removed until construction is complete on Lots 9 and 10, except if the portion of the protective fence on Lot 9 in the area of the driveway may be removed to install the driveway with the approval of the City Arborist; the removal of a section of the fence should not disturb the maintenance irrigation system installed within the tree protective fencing; 27) A. that a licensed arborist shall be on site during any demolition and grading or digging activities that take place within the designated tree protection zones, including the digging of the pier holes for the pier and grade beam foundation, during the digging of the fence post holes for the first 60 feet of fence between Lots 9 and 10, and during digging for removal or installation of any utilities; B. that a licensed arborist, selected by the City and funded by the property owner, shall inspect the construction site once a week or more frequently as required by the conditions of approval and certify in writing to the City Arborist and Planning Department that all tree protection measures are in place and requirements of the conditions of approval are being met; C. that no materials or equipment shall be stockpiled or stored in any area not previously approved by the City 24 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 Arborist; D. that a Certified arborist shall be given written authority by the property owner and be obligated to stop all work on the site should any activity violate any and all conditions of approval relating to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site, and E. the City Arborist shall also stop work for any violation of the conditions related to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site; 28) A. that under the observation of a certified arborist, all pier holes for the foundation shall be hand dug to a depth of no more than 18 inches and the surface area around the hole shall be protected as required by the City Arborist; excavation activity for the foundation shall be limited to the months of May to October; B. that if any roots greater than 3 inches in diameter are encountered during the digging for the pier holes, the property owner's on-site arborist shall call the City Arborist and deternune how the pier shall be relocated and the Building Department shall be informed of the change and approve that the requirements of the building code are still met; C. if at any time during the installation of the pier and grade beam foundations roots greater than 3 inches in diameter must be cut, the situation must be documented by the certified arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to the time the roots are cut; 29) A. that, based on root locations that will be determined by hand digging on the site, the property owner shall submit a detailed foundation report and design for approval by the Building Department and City Arborist to establish the bounds of the pier and grade beam foundation and have it approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site; B. if at any time during the construction the pier locations must be altered to accommodate a Redwood tree root, the structural changes must be approved by the Building Department prior to the time any such root is cut or damaged; 30) that the property owner shall submit a complete landscape plan for approval by the City Arborist prior to a Building permit being issued to address the landscaping and fence installation on the site, including plantings, irrigation, electricity, fences, retaining walls and soil deposits on the site; installation of all landscape features shall be overseen by the property owner's arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist, including fence post holes; and work shall be stopped and plans revised if any roots of 3 inches in diameter or greater are found in post holes or any new landscape materials added endanger the redwood trees; 31) A. that the fence post holes shall be hand-dug under the supervision of a certified arborist for the fence installed along the first 60-feet of the property line between Lots 9 and 10; B. that if at any time during the hand digging a root greater than 3 inches in diameter is encountered, the post hole shall be relocated as directed by the property owner's Certified arborist and as approved by the City Arborist; 32) Tree Maintenance: A. The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance during demolition and construction work on the project and for a 5-year maintenance program for the Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection; this maintenance program shall be as recommended by the City Arborist based on site studies and experience during construction; B. The property owner shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discusses the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction on the proj ect and every two years thereafter for a period of 5 years; C. Prior to a demolition permit being issued for the project, the property owner shall submit an appraisal for each of the four (4) Redwood trees on Lots 9 and 10 from a certified arborist; upon submittal of the appraisal, a penalty amount shall be set by the City Arborist and the City Attorney based on the appraisal. Before issuance of any demolition or building permit for the proj ect, the property owner shall then submit security to the City in a form approved by the City Attorney equal to the penalty amount should one or more of the Redwood trees die during demolition or construction or the 5-year period after completion of construction that is attributed to construction on the site by the City Arborist, to cover any necessary removal costs, and to cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the trees; nothing contained in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or loss of the trees. 33) that for purposes ofthese conditions a certified arborist means a person certified by the International Society of Arboriculture as an arborist; 34) that before issuance of any demolition or construction permit, the property owner shall record a deed restriction on the 25 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 lot identifying the four (4) key Redwood trees and providing notice to the heirs, successors, and assigns that these trees were key elements of the development of the lot and: A. The trees may cause damage or inconvenience to or interfere with the driveways, foundations, roofs, yards, and other improvements on the property; however, those damages and inconveniences will not be considered grounds for removal of the trees under the Burlingame Municipal Code; B. Any and all improvement work, including landscaping and utility service, on the property must be performed in recognition of the irreplaceable value of the trees, must be done in consultation with a certified arborist, and if any damage to the trees occurs, will result in penalties and-possible criminal prosecution; 35) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; 36) that a soils compaction analysis shall be performed by a soils engineer on the area that was excavated and refilled during the week of November 24, 2003, to determine what the existing compaction is. The soils engineer and a certified arborist shall then determine what corrective steps if any must be taken to restore the area to the compaction existing in the surrounding soil and shall submit this determination to the City Arborist and City Engineer for approval. The corrective steps will then be completed before issuance of any construction permits for the site (completed); 37) that before any grading or construction occurs on the site, these conditions and a set of approved plans shall be posted on a weather-proofed story board at the front of the site to the satisfaction of the Building Department so that they are readily visible and available to all persons working or visiting the site; 38) that if work is done in violation of any requirement in these conditions prior to obtaining the required approval of the City Arborist, and/or the Building Division, work on the site shall be immediately halted, and the proj ect shall be placed on a Planning Commission agenda to determine what corrective steps should be taken regarding the violation; 39)that the property owner shall receive an encroachment permit from the City and shall replace the existing 2-inch water pipe with a 2-inch copper pipe from its connection to the 2-inch line on Bernal Avenue in the city easement at the rear of lots 9, 10 and 11 as directed and approved by the City Engineer; this line shall be installed to connect to the existing line south lot 9; and a connection provided to Lot 9 at a location approved by the City Arborist; 40) that at the south property line of lot 9 the property owner shall extend a temporary, above ground, water line as approved by the City Arborist from the new 2-inch copper water pipe in the public easement to provide at least 250 feet of dry weather soaker hose irrigation to the redwood groves, there shall be no excavation for the temporary water line on lot 9; 41) that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall be maintained during construction on Lot 9, and this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall not be temporarily altered, moved or removed during construction; no materials, equipment or tools of any kind are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, within this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing, the protective fencing and protection measures within the fencing shall remain in place until the building pertnit for the development on Lot 9 has been finaled and an occupancy permit issued; except for modification of the protective fencing as approved by the City Arborist in order to install the driveway on Lot 9; 42)that prior to issuance of the building permit for construction on Lot 9, the property owner shall reinforce the existing Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing by installing 36-inch long layout stakes 24-inches into the ground with the supervision of the project arborist and as inspected by the City Arborist; there shall be one stake approximately every 6 linear feet as determined by the location of any substantial tree roots, with steel wire affixed to the fence base though a hole in the layout takes to prevent movement or alteration of the protective fencing once installed; 43) that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 9, the property owner shall install a locked gate in the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing for inspection access to the protected area in order to determine on going adequacy of mulch, soil moisture and the status of other field conditions as necessary throughout the construction period; this area shall be accessed only by the project arborist, City Arborist, or workers under the supervision of these professionals; 44) that prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 9, the property owner shall cause to have a three-inch thick layer of well aged, course wood chip mulch (not bark) and a two-inch thick layer of organic compost spread over the entire soil surface within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; installation of the wood chip and 26 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the project arborist and City Arborist; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be supervised by the project arborist and the City Arborist; the project arborist shall inform the City Arborist of the timing of installation of the course wood chip mulch and organic compost so that observation and inspection can occur; 45) that prior to issuance of abuildingpermit for construction on Lot 9 and starting in the late Spring/Early Summer 2004, the property owner shall install a supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an active hose bib from the temporary water line on Lot 9, snaked throughout the entire area on Lots 9 and 10 within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; irrigation must be performed at least once every two weeks throughout the entire construction period for all three lots unless determined not to be necessary by the project arborist and City Arborist; this area shall be soaked overnight, at least once every two weeks, until the upper 24-inches of soil is thoroughly saturated; the City Arborist shall periodically test the soil moisture to ensure proper irrigation; 46) that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 9, the property owner shall affix at least four (4), 8-inch by 11-inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a"Tree Protection Fence", "Do Not Alter or Remove" and in the event of movement or problem call a posted emergency number; 47) that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lots 9 and 10, shall be regularly inspected by the project arborist and City Arborist during construction on Lot 9; violation of the fenced areas and/or removal or relocation of the fences shall cause all construction work to be stopped until possible damage has been determined by the City Arborist and the property owner has implemented all corrective measures and they have been approved by the City Arborist; and 48) that before issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall deposit $7,500 with the Planning Department to fund, on an hourly basis, a licensed arborist inspector selected by the City Arborist to assist the City Arborist in inspecting all construction and grading on Lot 9 to insure that the mitigation measures included in the negative declaration and the conditions of approval attached to the proj ect by the Planning Commission action are met; and a. that the property owner shall replenish by additional deposit by the 15'h of each month to maintain a$7,500 balance in this inspection account to insure that adequate funding is available to cover this on-going inspection function; and b. that failure to maintain the amount of money in this account by the 15`h of each month shall result in a stop work order on the proj ect which shall remain in place until the appropriate funds have been deposited with the City; and c.thatshouldthemonthly billing during any single period exceed $7,500 a stop work order shall be issued until additional funds to replenish the account have been deposited with the city so inspection can continue; and d. that should the city be caused to issue three stop work orders for failure to maintain the funding in this arborist inspection account, the property owner shall be required to deposit two times the amount determined by the City Arborist to cover the remainder of the inspection work before the third stop work order shall be removed; and e. that the unexpended portion of the inspection deposit shall be returned to the property owner upon inspection of the installation of the landscaping and fences, irrigation system and approval of the five year maintenance plan/ program for the portion of the Redwood tree grove on the lot; and f. that this same account may be used for the City Arborist's selected licensed arborist inspector on lots 9, 10 and 11. Conditions of approval for Lot 10 are: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2003, sheets A.1 and A.6, date stamped Apri12, 2003, sheets A.2, A.3 and A.S, and date stamped Apri125, 2003, sheets A.4 and L1 for Lot 10; and all changes shall be consistent with the plans which were approved for this lot on May 27, 2003, because those plans were determined to be consistent in scale and mass with the overall development approved at or near the same time on adjacent lots 9 and 11 shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 2) 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), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; and all changes shall be consistent with the plans which were approved for this lot on May 27, 2003, because those plans were determined to be consistent in 27 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 scale and mass with the overall development approved at or near the same time on adjacent lots 9 and 1 l; 3) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the proj ect, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; 4) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans and the City Arborist shall verify that all required tree protection measures were adhered to during construction including maintenance of the redwood grove, an appropriate tree maintenance program is in place, all required landscaping and irrigation was installed appropriately, and any redwood grove tree protection measures have been met; 5) that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 6) that the conditions of the City Engineers' May 31, June 4, August 30, and October 15, 2002, memos, the Fire Marshal's September 3, 2002 memo, the Chief Building Inspector's August 5, 2002 memo, the Recycling Specialist's August 27, 2002 memo, and the City Arborist's April 3 and May 21, 2003 memos shall be met; 7) that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to have a City grading permit, be overseen by a licensed arborist, inspected by the City Arborist, and be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and with all the requirements of the permit issued by BAAQMD; 8) that there shall be no heavy equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or holidays during the development of Lot 10; use of hand tools shall comply with the requirements of the City's noise ordinance; 9) that no construction equipment, construction material storage or construction worker parking shall be allowed on the street in the public right-of-way during construction on the site; as much employee parking as possible shall be accommodated on the site during each of the phases of development; construction activity and parking shall not occur within the redwood tree grove protective fencing on Lot 10; 10) all construction shall be done in accordance with the California Building Code requirements in effect at the time of construction as amended by the City of Burlingame, and limits to hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; there shall be no construction on Sundays or holidays; 11) that the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping areas; 12) that the existing water line at the reax of the properties shall be retained and maintained in operable conditions to supply the required soaker hose irrigation system for the Redwood Tree Grove on Lots 9 and 10 or a new 2 inch water line to serve lots 9, 10 and 11 shall be installed before an inspection for the foundation will be scheduled by the City; and all new utility connections to serve the site and which are affected by the development shall be installed to meet current code standards and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems shall be increased at the properiy owner's expense if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department; and the location of all trenches for utility lines shall be approved by the City Arborist during the building permit review and no trenching for any utility shall occur on site without continual supervision of a licensed arborist and inspection by the City Arborist; 13) that the new sewer to the public sewer main shall be installed to City standards as required by the development; 14) that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed unless their removal is determined by the City Arborist to have a detrimental effect on any existing protected trees on or adjacent to the site; 15) that prior to being issued a demolition permit on the site, the properly owner shall submit an erosion control plan for approval by the City Engineer; 16) that prior to installation of any sewer laterals, water or gas connections on the site, the property owner shall submit a plan for approval by the City Engineer and the City Arborist; 17) that prior to installing the new water line to serve Lots 9, 10 and 11 and supplying the maintenance irrigation system to the redwood grove in the easement at the rear of Lots 9, 10 and 11 and prior to receiving a building permit, the property owner shall obtain an encroachment 28 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 permit from the Public Works department to replace the 2-inch water pipe in the City right-of-way; 18) that the property owner shall arrange for a licensed professional to install backflow valves on the sewer laterals to 1553 Drake Avenue, 1557 Drake Avenue, 1561 Drake Avenue, and 1566 Drake Avenue at the property owner's expense and with the permission of the affected property owners; the Planning Department will advise the eligible property owners of this condition of approval, noting that it is their choice to take advantage of this opportunity; 19) that the contractor shall submit the "Recycling and Waste Reduction" form to the building department to be approved by the Chief Building Official that demonstrates how 60 per cent of construction demolition material will be diverted from the waste stream and the property owner shall be responsible for the implementation of this plan; (completed) 20) that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site will be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards; 21) that this proj ect shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 22) that the project property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions to the proposed house and/or accessory structure or necessary changes to the tree protection program or to address new issues which may arise during construction; 23) that the property owner shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 24) that should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the City Planner and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City; 25) that the driveway and the detached garage it serves for the proposed house on Lot 10 shall be shifted to the north side of the lot within 5 feet of the north side property line and the driveway shall be designed to be pervious material as approved by the City Arborist, and installed according to approved plans with the supervision of a licensed axborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist; 26) A. that the root protection fencing for the Redwood trees on Lot 9 and 10 shall be installed on site and inspected by a Certified arborist; and a written report prepared by a certified arborist documenting the dimensions of the root protection fencing for the Redwood trees shall be submitted to the City Arborist within 24 hours of the inspection, and that the written report shall be approved by the City Arborist prior to the issuance of any demolition or construction permit; B. that the established root protection fencing shall be inspected regularly by the City Arborist and shall not be adjusted or moved at any time during demolition or construction unless approved by the City Arborist; C. that the root protection fencing shall not be removed until construction is complete on Lots 9 and 10, except if the portion of the protective fence on Lot 9 in the area of the driveway may be removed to install the driveway with the approval of the City Arborist; the removal of a section of the fence should not disturb the maintenance irrigation system installed within the tree protective fencing; 27) A. that driveway on Lot 10 shall be constructed of pavers set in sand, with a maximum cut below grade of 10 inches and a base compaction determined by a certified arborist and approved by the City Arborist; B. that if any roots greater than 3 inches in diameter are encountered during grading for the driveway on Lot 10 and must be cut to install the driveway, the situation shall be documented by the certified arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to cutting any roots; C. that if at any time the certified arborist on site or the City Arborist feels the number of roots to be cut to install the driveway on Lot 10 is significant, a stop work order shall be issued for the site until the City Arborist determines whether it is necessary to relocate the driveway; 28) A. that a licensed arborist shall be on site during any demolition and grading or digging activities that take place within the designated tree protection zones, including the digging of the pier holes for the pier and grade beam foundation, during the digging of the fence post holes for the first 60 feet of fence between Lots 9 and 10, and during digging for removal or installation of any utilities; B. that a licensed arborist, selected by the City and funded by the property owner, shall inspect the construction site once a week or more frequently as required by the conditions of approval and certify in writing to the City Arborist and Planning Department that all tree protection measures are in place and requirements of the conditions of approval are being met; C. that no materials or equipment shall be stockpiled or stored in any area not previously approved by the City Arborist; D. that a Certified arborist shall be given written authority by the property 29 City ofBurlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 owner and be obligated to stop all work on the site should any activity violate any and all conditions of approval relating to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site, and E. the City Arborist may also stop work for any violation of the conditions related to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site;29) A. that under the observation of a certified arborist, all pier holes for the foundation shall be hand dug to a depth of no more than 18 inches and the surface area around the hole shall be protected as required by the City Arborist; excavation activity for the foundation shall be limited to the months of May to October; B. that if any roots greater than 3 inches in diameter are encountered during the digging for the pier holes, the property owner's on-site arborist shall call the City Arborist and determine how the pier shall be relocated and the Building Department shall be informed of the change and approve that the requirements of the building code are still met; C. if at any time during the installation of the pier and grade beam foundations roots greater than 3 inches in diameter must be cut, the situation must be documented by the certified arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to the time the roots are cut; 30) A. that, based on root locations that will be deternuned by hand digging on the site, the property owner shall submit a detailed foundation report and design for approval by the Building Department and City Arborist to establish the bounds of the pier and grade beam foundation and have it approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site; B. if at any time during the construction the pier locations must be altered to accommodate a Redwood tree root, the structural changes must be approved by the Building Department prior to the time any such root is cut or damaged; 31)that the property owner shall submit a complete landscape plan for approval by the City Arborist prior to a Building pernut being issued to address the landscaping and fence installation on the site, including plantings, irrigation, electricity, fences, retaining walls and soil deposits on the site; installation of all landscape features shall be overseen by the property owner's arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist, including fence post holes; and work shall be stopped and plans revised if any roots of 3 inches in diameter or greater are found in post holes or any new landscape materials added endanger the redwood trees; 32) A. that the fence post holes shall be hand-dug under the supervision of a certified arborist for the fence installed along the first 60-feet of the property line between Lots 9 and 10; B. that if at any time during the hand digging a root greater than 3 inches in diameter is encountered, the post hole shall be relocated as directed by the Certified arborist and as approved by the City Arborist; 33) Tree Maintenance: A. The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance during demolition and construction work on the project and for a 5-year maintenance program for the Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection. This maintenance program shall be founded upon the recommendations of the Apri128, 2003 Mayne Tree Company report as well as such additional recommendations as the property owner shall receive from a certified arborist; B. The property owner shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discussed the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction on the proj ect and every two years thereafter for a period of 5 years; C. Prior to a demolition permit being issued for the proj ect, the property owner shall submit an appraisal for each of the four (4) Redwood irees on Lots 9 and 10 from a certified arborist; upon submittal of the appraisal, a penalty amount shall be set by the City Arborist and the City Attorney based on the appraisal. Before issuance of any demolition or building permit for the project, the property owner shall then submit security to the City in a form approved by the City Attorney equal to the penalty amount should one or more of the Redwood trees die during demolition or construction or the 5-year period after completion of construction that is ariributed to construction on the site by the City Arborist, to cover any necessary removal costs, and to cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the trees; nothing contained in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or loss of the trees. 34) that for purposes of these conditions a certified arborist means a person certified by the International Society of Arboriculture as an arborist; 35) A. that the fence post holes shall be hand-dug under the supervision of a certified arborist for the fence installed along the first 60-feet of the property line 30 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 between Lots 9 and 10; B. that if at any time during the hand digging a root greater than 3 inches in diameter is encountered, the post hole shall be relocated as directed by the properiy owner's Certified arborist and as approved by the City Arborist; 36) Tree Maintenance: A. The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance during demolition and construction work on the project and for a 5-year maintenance program for the Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection; this maintenance program shall be as recommended by the City Arborist based on site studies and experience during construction; B. The property owner shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discusses the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction on the project and every two years thereafter for a period of 5 years; C. Prior to a demolition permit being issued for the project, the property owner shall submit an appraisal for each of the four (4) Redwood trees on Lots 9 and 10 from a certified arborist; upon submittal of the appraisal, a penalty amount shall be set by the City Arborist and the City Attorney based on the appraisal. Before issuance of any demolition or building permit for the project, the property owner shall then submit security to the City in a form approved by the City Attorney equal to the penalty amount should one or more of the Redwood trees die during demolition or construction or the 5-year period after completion of construction that is attributed to construction on the site by the City Arborist, to cover any necessary removal costs, and to cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the trees; nothing contained in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or loss of the trees. 37) that before issuance of any demolition or construction permit, the property owner shall record a deed restriction on the lot identifying the four (4) key Redwood trees and providing notice to the heirs, successors, and assigns that these trees were key elements of the development of the lot and: A. The trees may cause damage or inconvenience to or interfere with the driveways, foundations, roofs, yards, and other improvements on the property; however, those damages and inconveniences will not be considered grounds for removal of the trees under the Burlingame Municipal Code; B. Any and all improvement work, including landscaping and utility service, on the property must be performed in recognition of the irreplaceable value of the trees, must be done in consultation with a certified arborist, and if any damage to the trees occurs, will result in penalties and possible criminal prosecution; and 3 8) that the proj ect shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition or the edition approved by the City and as amended by the City of Burlingame at the time a building permit is issued; 39) that a soils compaction analysis shall be performed by a soils engineer on the area that was excavated and refilled during the week of November 24, 2003, to determine what the existing compaction is. The soils engineer and a certified arborist shall then determine what corrective steps if any must be taken to restore the area to the compaction existing in the surrounding soil and shall submit this determination to the City Arborist and City Engineer for approval. The corrective steps will then be completed before issuance of any construction permits for the site; (completed); 40) that before any grading or construction occurs on the site, these conditions and a set of approved plans shall be posted on a weather- proofed story board at the front of the site to the satisfaction of the Building Department so that they are readily visible and available to all persons working or visiting the site; 41) that if work is done in violation of any requirement in these conditions prior to obtaining the required approval of the City Arborist, and/or the Building Division, work on the site shall be immediately halted, and the project shall be placed on a Planning Commission agenda to determine what corrective steps should be taken regarding the violation; 42) that the property owner shall replace the existing 2-inch water pipe with a 2-inch copper pipe from its connection to the 2-inch line on Bernal Avenue in the city easement at the rear of lots 9, 10 and 11 as directed and approved by the City Engineer; this line shall be installed to connect to the existing line past lot 9 and a connection provided to Lot 10 shall be provided at a location approved by the City Arborist; 43) that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall be maintained during construction on Lots 9, 10 and 11, and this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall not be temporarily altered, moved or removed during 31 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 construction; no materials, equipment or tools of any kind are to be placed or dumped, even temporaxily, within this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing, the protective fencing and protection measures within the fencing shall remain in place until the building permit for each development on lots 9 and 10 has received an occupancy permit and the City Arborist has approved removal of the protective fencing; 44) that prior to issuance of the building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall reinforce the existing Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing by installing 36-inch long layout stakes 24-inches into the ground with the supervision of the proj ect arborist and as inspected by the City Arborist; there shall be one stake approximately every 6linear feet as determined by the location of any substantial tree roots, with steel wire affixed to the fence base though a hole in the layout takes to prevent movement or alteration of the protective fencing once installed; 45) that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall iristall a locked gate in the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing for inspection access to the protected area in order to determine on going adequacy of mulch, soil moisture and the status of other field conditions as necessary throughout the construction period; this area shall be accessed only by the project axborist, City Arborist, or workers under the supervision of these professionals; 46) that prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall cause to have a three-inch thick layer of well aged, course wood chip mulch (not bark) and a two-inch thick layer of organic compost spread over the entire soil surface within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the project arborist and City Arborist; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be supervised by the project arborist and the City Arborist; the proj ect arborist shall inform the City Arborist of the timing of installation of the course wood chip mulch and organic compost so that observation and inspection can occur; 47) that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10 and starting in the late Spring/Early Summer 2004, the property owner shall install a supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an active hose bib from the temporary water line on Lot 9, snaked throughout the entire area on Lots 9 and 10 within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; irrigation must be performed at least once every two weeks throughout the entire construction period for all three lots unless determined not to be necessary by the project arborist and City Arborist; this area shall be soaked overnight, at least once every two weeks, until the upper 24-inches of soil is thoroughly saturated; the City Arborist shall periodically test the soil moisture to ensure proper irrigation; 48) that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the properly owner shall affix at least four (4), 8-inch by 11-inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a"Tree Protection Fence", "Do Not Alter or Remove" and in the event of movement or problem call a posted emergency number; 49) thattheRedwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lots 9 and 10, shall be regularly inspected by the proj ect arborist and City Arborist during construction on Lot 10; violation of the fenced areas and/or removal or relocation of the fences shall cause all construction work to be stopped until possible damage has been determined by the City Arborist and the properly owner has implemented all corrective measures and they have been approved by the City Arborist; and 50) that before issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall deposit $7,500 with the Planning Deparhnent to fund, on an hourly basis, a licensed arborist inspector selected by the City Arborist to assist the City Arborist in inspecting all construction and grading on Lot 10 to insure that the mitigation measures included in the negative declaration and the conditions of approval attached to the project by the Planning Commission action are met; and a. that the property owner shall replenish by additional deposit by the 15th of each month to maintain a$7,500 balance in this inspection account to insure that adequate funding is available to cover this on-going inspection function; and b. that failure to maintain the amount of money in this account by the 15th of each month shall result in a stop work order on the project which shall remain in place until the appropriate funds have been deposited with the City; and c. that should the monthly billing during any single period exceed $7,500 a stop work order shall be issued until additional funds to replenish the account have been deposited with the city so inspection can continue; and d. that should the city be caused to issue three stop work orders for failure to maintain the funding in 32 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 29, 2004 this arborist inspection account, the property owner shall be required to deposit two times the amount determined by the City Arborist to cover the remainder of the inspection work before the third stop work order shall be removed; and e. that the unexpended portion of the inspection deposit shall be returned to the property owner upon inspection of the installation of the landscaping and fences, irrigation system and approval of the five year maintenance plan/ program for the portion of the Redwood tree grove on the lot; and f. that this same account may be used for the City Arborist's selected licensed arborist inspector on lots 9, 10 and 11. Comment on the motion: asked are these conditions more stringent than the original? CP responded yes, these conditions add requirements to both Lots 9 and 10 for maintenance and protection of the Redwood Grove for the time of construction on Lot 11 and through the completion of whatever construction to be determined on Lots 9 and 10. CP also noted that more investigation will need to take place for the foundations of structures and driveways on these lots, depending on the design and location proposed so the arborist report is evolving and will continue to be worked on since no foundation or driveway submittals have been made yet. Whatever the proposal is made it will be brought back to the commission with a fizll arborist report. Feel that this is a bad policy at this time, however the conditions are more restrictive, and will not be harmful, but this is not a good habit for processing. Chair Bojues called for a voice vote on the motion to amend the conditional use permit by separating the conditions of approval for Lots 9 and 10 and amending them for additional maintenance of the Redwood Tree Grove. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-1-1 (C. Keighran abstaining, C. Keele absent). IX. DESIGN RF..J�GIEW STUDY ITEMS 13. 312 WARD AVENUE, ZONED -1— APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIIZST AND S OND STORY ADDITION OM AND TRISH 1VICHOL, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS: ROBERT MED . ARCHITECTI (69 NOTICEDI PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Plr. Hurin briefly pres�ed the project description. T�e were no questions of staff. Chair Bojues o ned the public comment. Ro rt Medan, architect, noted that the app ' ant's family has three childre and that they need more spac , proposing to add a third bedroom. Co ission asked if the top of th oof was cut to stay within the 0' height limit? Yes, tried to stay wit � the height limit and did not w t to change the roof pitch to 1 er the height, changing the roof pitch uld have altered the overall des' envelope. Commission no d that a special permit to exceed the h' ht limit would be appropriate in e case of this architectural le in order to have the roof ternuna at a point. Architect noted that he would make the suggested anges to the roof as long as it would t delay the review process. There were no other comments fro he floor and the public hearing was osed. ) C. Auran made a otion to place this item on the have been ma and plan checked. This motion Commen n motion: Commission re be sta ' ized with the next submittal. �xft calendar at a time when the seconded by C. Bojues. the architect provide information isions.i6 the roof the chimney will CYair Bojues called for a vote on th otion to place this item on the co ent calendar when plans had been revised for the roof and chimn stabilization as directed. The m'on passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Keele absent). The Plannin ommission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 33 MEMORANDUM RE: 1537 Drake Ave. Lots 9 and 10 From: Steve Porter To: Planning Dept. Date: 4/13/07 �L ��°�� k��m �� : �6� � �"� �,,.a° �.., �.�" �s� APR 1 3 2007 C�TY OF 6URLWGAME PL?.RINING DEPT. I have reviewed the revised building plans, including the utility and landscape plans. Building design and construction methods have been adequately incorporated into the most current plans that will ensure the preservation of the Redwood Tree grove. It is my conclusion that as long as the project contractors follow the current plans, the Arborist recommendations, as well as the conditions of approval, this project can go forward and be completed with the Redwood Tree Grove intact and preserved. t e ROUTIl�IG FORM DATE: Monday March 31, 20Q3 TO: _City Engineer _Chief Building Official Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist �City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for mitigated negative declaration, design review, conditional use permit for re- emerging lots, and special permit for two attached �arages for three new two-story houses at 1537 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN:026-033-030 . STAFF REVIEW: Monday, March 31, 2003 /�?� �' G�� c i''��n� 2�S F�—n �-v�' i�. rr'�vS . ��f s�-,;� �.�5, C�y,�� -q-��. �d. �/,�/oz //�! (�L� c � /d .�-i� �2 � �, � ,�� .� �� .�;��--��. ,�,��.�� Reviewed B: `� Date of Comments: y�� Y ROUTII�IG FORM DATE: August 26, 2002 TO: _City Engineer Chief Building Official Fire Marshal �Rec�ycling Specialist �City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for design review and special permit for attached garage for a new, two-story single family dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue {A), zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-030 , art d �B 1 STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 26, 2002 � �� .� ..-- � ��r'�� Ga��a�`¢�� S .� 5 �.-��.. S _ . � _ � ,�' o � Reviewed By: Date of Comments: MEMORANDUM CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY ARBORIST DATE: 5/21/03 TO: Planning Dept./Erika FROM: Steven Porter RE: 1537 Drake Ave. Erika, since receiving the latest Arborist Report from Mayne Tree Co. (4/28/03), I have inspected the site, evaluated the Arborist Report and have reviewed changes in the building plans. I have detennined the following: I am satisfied that the conditions we prepared for Mr.Miller, (Planning Dept. Memo 4/23/03), have been met with in the latest Arborist Report from Mayne Tree Co.. The findings in this report are accurate and I am personally confident that if all of the tree protections listed in the report are followed by Mr. Miller, and his contractors, that this project can go forward as planned without significant short or long term harm to the trees in question. With regazd to the Arborist Report, submitted by Mrs. Garcia, (Barrie Coate, 4/9/03). This report appears to cite standazd, general tree protection guidelines. I believe this report was done without any actual prior site specific field analysis. Although accurate, the report does not address remedial efforts available when the general guidelines are sometimes violated. The Mayne Tree Co. report, on the other hand, is based on actual "hands on" field inspection of the specific site and situation. In this report, it appeazs that there will be no violation of general tree protection guidelines and that the construction methods to be used will cause minimal tree root damage and will be well under the critica150% root mass loss formula. However, the Mayne Tree Co. Report has cited an additional important issue: "Afier construction, installation of landscaping, irrigation, electricity, retaining wa11s, etc. can have more impact to trees than the construction itself. I recommend having the landscape plans discussed with f.he architect and the azborist. This may be a further help to keeping these trees healthy." I agree with this recommendation......sp Mar 13 07 12:57p MILLER DEVELOPEMENT 6503408435 p.3 �civa�vr intt t�:zu YAd, �i5U583�943 61AYNE TRE� E�[pERTS CO �QQp '� . '}` � � � - , � ^ � +t. �.r�l r r + N1ay�ne Tree Exper� Compa»y�, �nc. T9S I',4BUSlitD 1931 - Sl'A]'E CUN'I".3/tCIZYR"5 L[CF'NSE N0.27674i GNAIKJnTE FORE5T5R • CL•;R�fJI•"lt0 nKKOK�Si:S • PTS7 CONTROL - ADV�50RS AND O!'E[tATORS tttC:FlAltil L. N[ihlTlNGTc7N 53s [iRAGATO RDAD,S'iG. A i+�u:�i trerrr S,aN CARt�]S. CA 94070•6228 KF.ViNR.Kik[:'Y TGL.L•AI�ONL: (650)593-4400 - 1�I9i1tAl7AN4MANAGL•R ��ary $r Z�7 FA(;$IMlI.F:: {�i.503 Sy±-k443 C•MAFL' inEoam:rynetmGwm ��r oib MI�iP.r i?4. Box 121 Eiu�lingame, Cpl 94011 �e��r Mr. Mf11er, �; 153i DFtpl� AVE. (LOFS 9&!Q), BtJR�INGAME �i'his �et�er is tia r�lt�ra� past s[te plan reviews and soil testing fvr r�ots, pn Mard� i, .�004, v�rE tested 1br taooCs at s�+reral prvposed pi� hale locations. Resuits and �:onduslons are in my misdabed re�orc of February 4, z004. {it shauld have been dated �arch 4� 2tit74.) A pi� hote d',agram was inclucfed in 1Nalt �evison's r�part. ' i h�ad reviewed the lanc3s�cape plans p�pare�d by Mr, Michael Calk�n and reporbed my •apinions in rny Se�mber I8, 2006, repoK. There is essentially no Change in Mr. �EWn's Febrt�ry 5, Z007, �a� 10 Iandscape pl�n. t, thenefnre, da not �ictd problems, ori�er ti�a� aEready stated in past reports, witfi� ��opc�sed developrnertt and irnpacts b� #he redwood grove. T thin k al! potential areas af rnpads have been addr�s�d, i.e. ivundations, rlriv�eway�, and 12mdscaping. �ir�cerely, �� Ric�ard L Hundnghm �:,�rtified Arborlst WE #0119A :.�-tified Forester �1-9?3 . _ ____ _ _ _ __ . .__ __ _. �Ui:pmd RECEIVED MAR 1 3 2007 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. � Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc. ESTABLISHED 1931 STATE CONTRACTOR"S LICENSE N0. 276793 GRADUATE FORESTER • CERTIFIED ARBORISTS • PEST CONTROL • ADVISORS AND OPERATORS RICHARD L. HUNTINGTON PRESIDENT KEVIN R. KIELTY OPERATIONS MANAGER October 19� 2��6 Mr. Otto Miller Miller Development P.O. Box 121 Burlingame, CA 94011 Dear Mr. Miller, SITE: 1537 DRAKE AVE., BURLINGAME (LOTS 9& 10) 535 BRAGATO ROAD, STE. A SAN CARLOS, CA 94070-6228 TELEPHONE: (650) 593-4400 FACSIMILE: (650) 593-4443 EMAIL: info ma netree.com R�CEIVED @ Y NOV 0 � 2006 anr oF BURutvGAnnE PLANNING DEPT. On October 16, 2006, we met at the above site along with the Burlingame arborist, Mr. Steve Porter, and the project foreman, Mr. Cliff Raines. The reason for this meeting was to discuss potential impacts to the existing redwoods from proposed construction. Each lot wifl have its own set of potential impacts from excavation for driveways, utilities, and stump removal. Each lot will be addressed separately with recammendations to help mitigate potential impacts. LOT 10: This is the north lot and north of the redwoods. Lot utilities are proposed to go along the north side well outside the driplines of the redwoods, about 30 feet away. This will have little or no impacts to any of the redwoods. Lot 10 has an old tree stump in the middle, north of the redwoods. A tractor can pull out this stump if it is pulled northward, away from the redwoods, with the tractor north of the stump. This will significantly reduce potential impacts to any redwood roots, Lor 9: This lot is south and west of the redwoods. Potential impacts at this time are from the proposed driveway and utility trenching. The utility trench is to go along the south property line, about 30 feet from the redwoods. There will be little or no impacts. The more critical area will be excavation for the driveway. A standard driveway profile requires 10 inches of materiats, i.e. rock, sand, pavers. To determine how deep driveway excavation can safely go before hitting roots, a trench, 18 to 20 inches deep, was dug along the north edge of the proposed driveway. AS 1537 Drake Ave. (lots 9& 10), Burlingame - 2- October 19, 2006 A trench was dug from the sidewalk westward to the northeast front corner of the proposed garage. The nearest redwood is about 15 feet away. Roots 2 inches in diameter and larger were not cut and their diameters and locations were noted. Diameters were taken at the north edge of the trench and their depths were taken at the south side of the trench. The distance to the nearest redwood is at least 20 feet except for root #5, which is about 15 feet. Five roots were found in the upper 12 inches of the trench. Root numbers are from east to west and diameters were estimated using a tape measure. Root # Diameter (inches) Depth (inches) 1 2•75 10 2 3 4 5 9 11 9 12 2.00 2.50 3.0 7.00 The large woody growth (see photograph) from a redwood root has been exposed. It is somewhat loosely attached and will break or cut off easily without damage to the tree. During exposure of the woody growth, a 7-inch root was found, root #5, which is 12 inches below the existing grade. To conclude, the depth of driveway excavation depends on the shallowest root(s). These are #2 and #4, which are 9 inches deep. I think a 7-inch cut could be done without encountering large roots. A little deeper could be done near the existing sidewalk where the driveway is to start. This appears to then allow for a gradual raise up to the garage. Please call with any questions. I think this report is accurate and is based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, , � ,� � ' � �I' �' ��r� '�.�,�- i� , > �-�= �� <�- . Richard L. Huntington Certified Arborist WE #0119A Certified Forester #1925 RLH: pmd �o��ETY OF qR o`'PP�O �,, FIUNT�'`cBo�'o� Q�,� �y� � � � Z No. WE.0119A ; ° . * �� RT/FI ED AR��\�� _ � �' �- � , " n,."'�' ,, ti _. .� . . .aM.. . y.�.�'��, '�"'P �`' ,: t t , .. � � .r '� .� �� , yr' ,� - Y ^4''�` @"r � •• � �... ; � �„ i�"! y �"' . �Y"` �' a� .��c { �,-.�v �x�' +r . . `k .. �� ++ �� .� _ i �9ei� � �r �' V -'� 4 � • . .. j,E ''"�;� ��' 3j a;�� 'C�.,,' �,�,, .�'�, , , �ti.., ^�� '��j* � � •-i� F�i � � � x §k;$'.� '� '� " `' ::r4'�� `"�'� �y'� e k .: .�' T ��.}; � �V� � t . t I . ".��, � /, � ,. ,p.I t . . �1 a r �. . �.�� s� sA - .. ^�y�p�'�^ i'.. 1�" .. 1 . t �., `"° ^�' ,. � � �� Y �� N � ��} _y� � "�'�,'. q ms;� �.,r$ J� •{,t.:" � �fk . . . :"}. y` ::.5' � � ` iy�� '4� i'� �?X �i � � ,vt .. . . . &� � R��'6 $ '�.��.tT� •��. sa ��1'*�tr .. { � -j rt (� j r. k.., � • 'Y': � .y6t+� �I. M��Q�` �"Ya�t�' �! Y � S-�`1 r,�'... �� !'y„ . .&��'. � �,��}� �, � k�y�.,� ��.��„� w,�2;. �� ,y�. � ! '�Sz� � ,� 1 i�.4�'., • " � . k' ,,<� , � r�`�"�`'�✓.,� 'y �� 3,� �s}:a . �'� � ' . h ' :5 � +�: g M � � �+ � �� y ,. � : " k1: G � . _ �" � �.^ � ' 7�1�'i�.' ' : 4� �'. � x �p ., ^ , s.... � ¢ . : . i- i . � . , -. ,f *4 � ^"�,1 `. ti �� .�p q, � ' �`. "� �.� 2' � ' �'4.t . .a��"` °r � �W �� ''-xr' N: .. ^ �, . ' .. *�Y "a: �y ' � - �� . ... � �, .L"� . � ��,'�Y I� k ��F t �� 'ti ��d W� $ r � r ` �,�'� ��` �'n �•,. •5� fi� ,;,,�� i �'�xA �.x1 �� 'p�„"C`yp ,:t ' k `� ' 9 "� A, �,'` .r �`'r � 'r,�,v� � _i . s - . . [.' . w5 ,. -3'�, +'"` '� • � � / � �.'� L�y "`�'!Skrc^yx.x,,.�� +� . ��,.� �' -�, � � ° ` �� : �� '`�� j� �� , � , 1 wr�. ! "s �-,� � . , .' ��` s ., , '¢� .•" � #�' ;�' � i ! �_ � . �. �, .� � t � � +t, . . �'�� ' � �` �� , p �� }d ' r ` '� ��( � � 1� � .. . ! ".. _ y � � f �!�L" � 1 T �4 d � -'I: } 3 � }� �'.TJ. � ��'� .�JB' H �.� '. . ~�� .f � ... ' j.i ,� e'k 'i'� � ��*4 i�i ! a .e �' ��.• � �; :.y 7 f � � , � �. �� i T�!� . �, . ;*qM"• }� .{:�. • - ' ' . �.,..� �, . � ..� ... , - x �. r ��.� k, � .. � . � • ` - .,. . , �� .� y!_. Project Comments Date: To: From: June 15, 2007 d City Engineer (650) 558-7230 ❑ Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ City Arborist (650) 558-7254 ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 ❑ Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 ❑ City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for application for amendment to mitigated negative declaration, design review, conditional use permit for emerging lots, and special permits for building height and declining height envelope to construct a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Lot 10, zoned R-1. Staff Review: 1. A property boundary survey shall be performed by a licensed land surveyor/engineer. The survey shall show all property lines, property corners, easements, topographical features and utilities. 2. Storm drainage shall be designed to drain towards the street frontage. 3. The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway and other necessary appurtenant work. 4. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works — Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information. Reviewed by: V V Date: 06/18/2007 .-M . . ,,,� .. ,. , m,.,.. �,,, ...,. ...�. �.�:.r �,.�:� ��:a , � Project Comments Date: June 17, 2005 To: � City Engineer ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 St�ff Review: All previous comments still apply. In addition, backwater protection certification is also required. Reviewed by: V V ��'�� Date: 6/27/2005 p�'� s/ i oJ S ��+n wi e w+5 I MEMO UM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Apri18, 2002 To: Planning Department From: Vic or Voong, Enginee ' Subject: � Drake Avenue �� The Engineering Division has received several letters regazding the sewer mains an Drake Avenue. We aze aware of the problem that occurred in this azea last year. To solve this problem, the City reconstructed four laterals that had problems and removed tree roots from the sewer main. The e�cisting sewer does not ha.ve any capacity problems, however it had tree roots which caused obstruction of flows in the sewer main. Due to the shallow depth of the sewer main in the street, properties with plumbing fixtures below the street level have to install a backflow valve in their private property to prevent any possible back up of sewage. The City has removed the tree roots from the sewer main, however these tree roots will eventually grow back causing problems. Therefore this sewer main is on the City list of frequent maintenance azeas to keep free from tree roots. U_1VICTOR1Projeds�Private11537Urake.wpd 0 � � � � �;�::.�Y..� ==� �'��,� ,,. �,�.;_ � PLAS�INIl�TG DEPART'ME1�TT MEMO TO: Engineering- Syed Muituza and Donald Chang FROM: Erika Lewit, Planning RE: L?AT'E: 1537 Drake 5.31.02 Please review the following information and submit your written comments to me by S:OOp.m. on Monday, dune 3, 2002. � � Thank You, Erika . � �_ � - � w�,�— ��"� � 1 us�� o�- �•:e 2c � a�-�- w`a'`-„`— �i (.�.a.F-� , � L '� �""� ' `� � �wb��-� � � ,�- ' 1V�EMOR:ANDITM PUBi.IC WORKS DEPARTMENT � ' �_��I� FROM: CITY ENGIl� DATE: JiJNE 4, 200' SUBJECT: 1537 Draice Aveaue Residential devetopment project Staff has reviewed the in€ormation submitzed by L�izuriaga Taylor Inc. pertaining ta. potential environmental impacts and mitigations for the pmjec� Following comments shall i� add�ssed by the project developer prior to the planning commission approval: a: � Provide Location Map of the proposed sewer bacl�low preventor installation with addresses. (prior-to planning cominission meeting) b: Installation of sewer backflow preventor device is the responsibility of a private .property owner. A plumbing permit is required from the City's Building Division prior to the � installation a€ bacl�low preventor device(s). " c: S�bniit sewer flovv monitoring results with graphs of peak and average flows with dates � � and times of monitoring as a supporting document to the sewer flow calculations:(prior to � planning commission meeting) d: Provide a clear conceptual drawing of water line installation showing the limits of pipe replacement, length� valves, and size. (prior to planning commission �a�s�� e: A detail design drawing and specifications shall be submitted for City Engineer's approvai prior to the issuance Qf Building Permit. An encroachment permit is required for the construction of water line. f: Revise the `Construction Operation.Pian' to provide a note saying that `No construction equipm,ent parking and or construction workers parking be allowed on the street'. (prior to planning commission meeting) g: Provide a note.oa the `Construction Operation Plan for perimeter construction fence to be eiected to prevenCconstruction debris escaping into adjacent properties. (prior to planning commission meeting) �h: Project construction shatl comply with the City's construction hours and noise ordinance. ra�: s:w r� w«t� n��ywwwnp�. BY NamelSyed Mucd�u I�eme�s\1537 Dnte Are memo.wpd MEMORANDUM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DONALD CHANG, SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER DATE: AUGUST 15, 2002 SUBJECT: Sewer Backup Problem at 1500 Block of Drake Avenue This is to respoad to the concerns raised by the public during a June 24'� Planning Commission meeting regarding the existing sewer system at 1500 block of 17raice Avenue. The applicant has conducted a sewer study recently and the sewer flow monitoring results showed that the existiag pipe size is not a problem. The sewer backup problem was the result of the tree-root intrusion, sags in the pipe, and the age of the pipe. The Ciry has taken the following immediate measures to remedy the problem: Placed this line on the Monthly Frequent Maintenance Program. The Sewer Department will clean this line monthly beginning September to clean the grease and debris. Treat this line with chemical foam for tree-root control. In August, 2002, a Ciry contractor will inject chemical foam into the sewer main to kill the tree roots within the pipelines. This treatment will prevent root intcvsion for the next 2 years. The City will conduct a study of the line to analyze the problems and come up with a long term solution. Once a feasible solutioa is developed a cost estimate v�� :.' be prepared and this project will be included into fhe next year capital improvement program subject to City Council's approval. C: George Bagdon. Syed Murtuza, Phil Scott, Phil Monaghan, Vince Falzon, Victor Voong S:�A Pubfic Wocics Direcoo�y�Planniug Cornespond\1500 blocic Drake ROUTIlVG FORM DATE: August 5, ZQ02 TO: �City Engineer _Chief Building Official Fire �Marshal �Recycling Specialist � City Arborist ~ � City Attorney - _ FROM:. Planniag Staff SUBJECT: . Request for design review and special permit for attached garage for a new two-story single family dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue (A), zoned R-T, APN: 026-033-030 . STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002 � •: : � �,1 Re�riewed By: Vf� = Date of Comments• �� ROUTING FORM DATE: August 5, 20U2 TO: � �City Engineer Cluef Building Official F'ire Marshal Recycling Specialist _City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for design review for a new�wwo=story single family dweiling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue (B), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002 � �.� � , �� Reviewed By: �i- V Date of Comments: g�"� `�� PUBLIC WORI�.S �EP�RTNiENT ENGINEERING DIVISION - :� rLar�x�rt�.�v�w �o�rrrs ,.� �,r��: . . _ - Project Name -�_�_ { � - Project Address:_ �� 'G� � The follo ' requirements apply to t6e project 1 A properiy. boundary survey shall be �c�eformed by a licensed land . surveyor. The survey shall show all property lin�es, property corners, � easements, topograpliical featums and utilities. (Required .prior to the _ building permit issuaaoe.) _ 2 � X Tiie site and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should be made to dra.in towards die Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit . issuance.) 3: �.--� The applica�nt slmli submit project grading and drainage plans for . approval prior to: the issuanc� of �a Building permi� � 4 � The project site�is �n a flood �one, the project shall comply with the City's flood zone requirements. 5 �____�� A sanitary sewer lateral �t is required for the project �n accordance with the �ity's �tatisiards: (Required.prior to the building permit issuance.) 6. The project plans shall show the required Bayfront BikeJPedestrian trail and necessary public access improvements as required by San Francisco � Bay Coaservation and Development Commission. 7: � Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the projec� The sewer analysis - shall identify the proj.ect's impact to the City's sewer system and any sewer pump stations and identify mitigation m�es. 8 � Submit tc•affic tr�ip generation analysis for the piojec� -_ 9. - Submit a traffic imp�act study for the project. The traffic study should . _ � identify the project generated impacts and recommend mitigation �. measures to be adopted by the project to be approved by the Cify ' . Engineer. � 10. The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering - Divisioa The parcel map shall show all existing property lines, easemeats, - � monuments, and new propect� and lot lines proposed by the map. . . Page 1 of 3 . IJ:�private development�PI.�INNII�iG REVIEW CONII�N'Y'S.doc PUBL�C WORI�S DEPARTMENT E1vGINEERING DIVISION 11. A lat�st preliminary tide report of die subjed parcel of laud shall be submitted to the Public Works Engineering Division wi� the Pa�el �maP for reviev�s. . 12 . Map closum,l.lot closure calculations shall be submitted with t�e parcel . maP, . 13 ��b.e project shall submit a condominium map to the .Engineering Divisions in a�cordance with the requinements of the Subdivision Map �4ct 14 � The. pro�ect shal}, at its own cost, design and constrcict frontage pubGc � impro�e.ments incle�ding ctufi, gutter, sidewalk and other aecessary i aPP�# work. . 15 � 'Ihe project shalt, at its own c,Qst, design and construct frontage streetscape improvements including sidevv�all� curb, gutters, Parking meters �d �oles; . trees, and.streetiights in accordaace with streetscape.master plan.� i6 By the preliminary .review of plans, �it appears that the project may cause. adverse unpacts during construction to velucular traf�c, pedesfiriaa iraffic - � and public on street parking. The praject shall identify ttiese impacts and Qrovide mitigation measure acceptable to the City. 17 � The project shall submit hydrologic calculations from a registet+ed civil engineer -for the proposed creek enclosure. The hydraulic calculations must show that the proposed creek enclosute doesn't cause any adverse � impact �to both upstream and downstreain propeRies. The hydrologic � calculations sha�l accompany a site map showing the azea of the 100-yeaz �flood and existing improvements with proposed improvements. 18 � Any work witbim the drainage �area; creek, or creek banks requires a State . Department of Fish and tiame Pernut �nd �1nny Cocps of Fin�neers Permxts. , 19 . No construction debris shall be allov�ed into the creek. 20 � The project shall compiy with the City's NPDES permit requirement to prevenf storm water pollution. � 21 22� _,�,T The pnoject does not show the dimensions of existing driveways, re- submit plans with drivevv�ay dimensions. Also clarify if the project is � proposing to widen die driveway. Any wideining of the driveway is subject � to City Engineer's approvai. �t The. plans do not indicate the stope of the driveway, re-submit plans � st�owing the:driveway proSle with �elevations . � Page 2 of 3 U:�civate developmemtlPLANNING REViEw COhII��IENTS.+doc �_ ' PIJ#�3LIC WORI�S DEPARTMENT ENGiNEERING DIV�SION . � . » 23 The back of_die drivevv�ay/sidcvwalk approach.shall l�e at least 12 .above � the flow line� of the fi+oatage c�rb in the street xo prevent overflow of storm . water fmm the s� into private property. - 24. . For t�e takeout service, a.garbage reeeptacle shall be placed in front The -: sidewallc fronting the store shall be kept clean 20' from each �ide of the P�P�Y• � - � . 25. For co�al .prvjects a designated garbage bin space and cleaning ar�ea � . shall be located inside the building. � drain connecting the garbage area to _ .. the Sanitary Sewer System is requirec�. ' . �r<., . � , , Page 3 of 3 _ U�private developmentlPLANNING REVIE'W COI��IIVIEN1�.doc �Mo u� PUBLIC WORKS UEPARTMENT August 30, 2002 To: Planning Deparhnent From: Victor Voong, n g Division Subject: 1537 Drake Aven e Staff has reviewed the submittals received on August 21, 2002 and the following aze supplemental comments in addition to tHe previously made comments dated 7une 4, 2002; 1. Plans for the waterline installation shall indicate the type of pipe to be used and method of construction. 2. Sewer flow results did not show any capacity problems. Comment c dated June 4, 2002 is acceptable to the City. 3. Comments f, g and h dated June 4, 2002 aze acceptable to the. City. 4. Plans currently show that straw rolls to be installed on the two sides of the property. Straw rolls shall also be installed along the east side of the property which is common with Lot 9 to prevent erosion onto adjacent properties. 5. All other previously made comments still apply to this project. U:NICTOR1Pro jectsW rivate\1537Drake�lots9and 10.wpd MEMO UM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTN�NT October 15, 2002 To: e From: V ng, Engineering Division Subject: 1537 e Avenue Staff has reviewed the submittals dated on September 23, 2002 and the following are supplemental comments in addition to all preyiously made comments; ' 1. Project plans sha11 show details for how the new water line is to be connected to the existng water lines, i.e., 45-degree bends. 2. Utility notes shall be revised to indicate that new valves shall be made of brass with bronze handles. 3. Utility notes shall also include pressure testing of new water pipes at 225 psi for two hours and five minute flush, and information regarding disinfection or chlorination of new pipes. 4. Although project plans currendy show a 90-degree fitting at the intersection of the new pipes in the easement area, the text indica.tes a tee fitting. Plans shall indicate the proper fitting to be installed. Plans sha11 also show water service connections for adjacent propertieson Bernal Avenue and Drake Avenue. 5. Project plans shall include two one-inch blowoffs behind the proposed valves at intersection of new pipes in the easement area. 6. All other previously made comments still apply to tlus project. U:IVICTOR1ProjectsWrivate11537DrakelLots9and10.wpd Project Comments Date: To: From: June 15, 2007 ❑ City Engineer (650) 558-7230 O Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 � Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 d Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 � City Arborist (650) 558-7254 Planning Staff a NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 O City Attorney Subject: Request for application for amendment to mitigated negative declaration, design review, conditional use permit for emerging lots, and special permits for building height and declining height envelope to construct a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Lot 10, zoned R-1. Staff Review: Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly — Schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building Plans prior to approval indicating location of the device after the split between domestic and fire protection lines. 3. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. ��,�� C._��,�� .�.� JUN 1 � 2U07 c�rY r�:;- E�.��>"��c�i�,r�-�� PI.ANNifVG U�PT, Reviewed by: �� /2L�� Date: / �� _' a �, Project Comments Date: To: From: June 17, 2005 ❑ City Engineer ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney ❑ Recycling Specialist m Fire Marshal O NPDES Coordinator Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 Staff Review: Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide double backflow prevention. 3. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shatl be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. Reviewed by �� Date: � ��_� L�-- i � ROUTING FORM UA1E: August 5, 20U2 TO: _City Engineer C6ief Builcling Official . - �F'ire Marshal - Recycling Specialist � City Arborist � City Attonuey FROIVI: � Planning Staff SLIBJECT: . Request fordesign review and special permit for attaclied garage for a new two-story single family dwelling at 153'� Drake Avenue (A), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . � a.r►� (Sa . STA�F REVTEW: Monda3r, August 5, 2002 •-' R� � � �C�� 4- i�.� m� 2r a;.-.p 5 ��- �} � � , ;� ,' t Reviewed.By: Date of Comments: 3..��-s� Z- Project Comments Date: To: From: June 15, 2007 ❑ City Engineer (650) 558-7230 X Chief Building Official (650) 558-7260 ❑ City Arborist (650) 558-7254 ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7271 ❑ Fire Marshal (650) 558-7600 ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 342-3727 d City Attorney Planning Staff Subject: Request for application for amendment to mitigated negative declaration, design review, conditional use permit for emerging lots, and special permits for building height and declining height envelope to construct a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Lot 10, zoned R-1. Staff Review: 1) All construction must comply with the 2001 California Building Codes (CBC), the Burlingame Municipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal requirements. 2) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 3) When you submit your plans to the Building Division for plan review provide a completed Supplemental Demolition Permit Application. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not be issued until a Building Permit is issued for the project. 4) Prior to applying for a Building Permit the applicant must either confirm that the address is 1537 Drake or obtain a change of address from the Engineering Department. Note: The correct address must be referenced on all pages of the plans. 5) Comply with the new, 2005 California Energy Efficiency Standards for low-rise residential buildings. Go to http:l/www.enerqy.ca.qov/title24 for publications and details. 6) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the property line. 7) Roof eaves must not project within two feet of the property line. 8) Exterior bearing walls less than three feet from the property line must be constructed of one- hour fire-rated construction and no openings are allowed. 9) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. 10) Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are considered in calculating the allowable floor area. Consult the Planning Department for details if your project entails landings more than 30" in height. 11) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 12) Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 13) The fireplace chimneys must terminate at least two feet above any roof surface within ten feet. Reviewed b ; - � pate: � �(5 �� GJ � Project Comments Date: To: From: June 17, 2005 ❑ City Engineer X Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 �--�— Staff Review: 1) All construction must comply with the 2001 California Building Codes (CBC), the Burlingame Municipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal requirements. 2) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 3) Provide a title block on the plans that includes the name of the owner(s) and the name, address, and phone number of the project designer. 4) Prior to applying for a Building Permit the applicant must obtain a change of address from the Engineering Department. Note: The correct address must be referenced on all pages of the plans. 5) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the property line. 6) Roof eaves must not project within two feet of the property line. 7) Exterior bearing walls less than three feet from the property line must be constructed of one-hour fire-rated construction and no openings are allowed. 8) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. 9) Provide guardrails at all landings. 10)Provide handrails at all stairs where there are more than four risers. 11)Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 12)The fireplace chimneys must terminate at least two feet above any roof surFace within ten feet. Note: The previous building permit application for this project has expired. A new building permit application must be submitted and a new plan check fee will be collected. Reviewed bv: ��/ � y/J` 7 / Date: / /„2 .�/�,� --� ROiJTIrTG FORM. DATE: August S, 2002 TC1: - City Engineer �Cluef Building Official � � Fire� Marsfial — ,- Recycling Specialist � �City Arborist _City Attorney. FROiVI: Planning Staf�' � ,_, _._ - �'� - ;�� L�.�- � � � � _. -�-�._�-. �--. • SITBJEGT: Request for, design xeview for a new tvvb=story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue (B), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 . STAF'F REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002 G2r=S' c c.�J �/l:�f �L� S S `�'�12 � `� ✓ E' e"�,� vLv a,..-, P, o /, ,� � h,r �5-�- - ,6Q- �j.{ v-�� - `i d v � �: �-e " r� �.s � s� i°�'�' . �� s��_ . . . 0 � Reviewed .By;. Date of Comments: ��U-z - Project Comments Date: June 17, 2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff X Recycling Specialist ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ NPDES Coordinator Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 Staff Review: Applicant shall submit for approval a Waste Reduction Plan and recycling deposit for this and all covered projects prior to construction or permitting. ,_ Reviewed by: �� Date: � __ � �'7 — U,S � ROUTING FORM DATE: August 5, 2002 TO: City Engineer Cluef Building Offiiciat Fire Marshal �Recyclin� Specialist City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: � Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for design review for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue (B), �oned R-1, APN: 026-033-030 . a-�. CA� STAFF REV�W: Monday, August 5, 2002 O t..� ��- r QCu� u-�.s� �(� �"� � �� ' � � . � ��,'� �'I�L�X-CJI- . � c�,,�� ' �l-c�•� aw�r�- _ � r �'�`��-� .. � �'�.' � �� - 1,, . �� `,,�� r �[`�z � Cx� � �� " v-�, �- �.�.% !� � ' Reviewed By: ` Date of Comments: TZ �� — Project Comments Date: To: From: June 17, 2005 � City Engineer � Chief Building Official � City Arborist � City Attorney � Recycling Specialist � Fire Marshal ✓ NPDES Coordinator Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270 �� Staff Review: 06/27/05 Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution including but not limited to ensuring that all contractors implement construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) and erosion and sediment control measures during ALL phases of the construction project (including demolition). Ensure that sufficient amount of erosion and sediment control measures are available on site at all times. The public right of way/easement shall not be used as a construction staging and/or storage area and shall be free of construction debris at all times. Brochures and literatures on stormwater pollution prevention and BMPs are available for your review at the Planning and Building departments. Distribute to all project proponents. For additional assistance, contact Eva J. at 650/342-3727. Reviewed by: �; Date: 06/27/05 ++. ..�, vv i�.-�-i aaav L�f)VVG �---�T °� � f� �� . City of Burlingame Planning Department SOl Primrose Road (654) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org 4''.: � a�� ;� CITY OF BURLINGAME SPECIAI. PERMIT APPLICATI�N � , �` f w � �,,,. �F�,;t 1 � 2�0% +�I�t'r G� L+J�„!NG�•,iNE �CANNIIVi� �EP"f. The Planning Comrnission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Sec'tion Z5.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Cornmission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your requesk Please type or write neatIy in ink. Refer tu the back of this form for assistance with these questions. 1. 2. 3. Explain why the btend of mass, scale ccnd dominant structural characteristics of the aew construction or addition are consistent witl: the eacisting structure's design and with the �risting street and neighborhood The proposed new homes on lot 9& 10 are consistent with surroundii�g properties that have simitar garage pattems, mass, and scnle on tl�e "west" side of Burlingame neighborhood These homes were designed/placed fiutlier back (approxirnately 34.5' for lot 9 and 30.6' for lot 10) from the front property lu�e in order to protect the existing roots of the redwood uees. The special peimits requested are for the same reason. Explain how ihe variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of th¢ proposed new structure or addttion are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighbnrhoad The proposed ne�v homes have becn approved by the planning comraissioners via design review process, which blend well on this block without changing ihe cliaracter of the neighboxhood. How will the proposed profect be consistent with the resddential desfgn guidelrnes adopted by the city (C.S 25.57)? The proposed single-family residences are consistent with City Design Review Guidelines, pnd it compli� : with aIl zoning requirements, except for the declining height eavelope and l�eight (Special permit). '� 4. Explain how the reraoval of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What mitigadon Is proposed far the removal of any treesi Explain why this mitigation is appropriate. All existing redwood trees will be protected via cl�ain Link fencing {shown on site plan), wit6 new landscaping for Iot 9& 10 ace proposed. SYECPEF:1� FRM CARR McCLELLAN INGERSOLL THOMPSON & HORN Professional Law Corporation May 22, 2007 BY HAND Burlingame Planning Commission Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Lots 9 and 10, Drake Avenue Dear Commissioners: Mark D. Hudak 1fe � i0 ��.� f o -� P� �� i�� mhudak@carr-mcclellan.com �� V �D �1AY 2 � 2007 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. On May 29, you will be considering the revisions to the designs for the homes on Lots 9 and 10 on the 1500 block of Drake Avenue. The revisions are primarily to the foundations, made to accommodate the City's concerns about the redwood trees on these lots. On Lot 9, the house will be raised slightly to accommodate the new foundation design. In addition, we are proposing to square off the master bedroom at the rear of the house. This should not have any impact on the neighborhood and the house will still be well below allowable FAR. On Lot 10, the only change is a slight increase in the height to accommodate the new foundation design. Otherwise, the homes designs are the same as those previously approved by the Commission. We want to call to your attention the need for consistency in approving homes to be constructed close to redwood trees. Other sites have received approval to construct homes, driveways, and other improvements in very close proximity to redwood trees. I am enclosing photos of new homes at 1145 Cabrillo and 1920 Carmelita showing structures and hardscape within a few feet of redwood trees. I am also enclosing a couple of pictures of the new San Mateo Library building on Third Avenue, which was constructed within a few feet of mature redwoods. From these examples (and there are many more), it should be clear that redwoods are able to thrive under a variety of circumstances, using appropriate foundations. The pier and grade beam foundations for the proposed homes on Lots 9 and 10 will be much kinder to the redwoods than the situations depicted in the photographs and the setbacks will be P 650.342.9600 216 Park Road • Burlingame ° California 94010 F 650.342 7685 �a�uN�cA`raN� Erc � �F7'ER PREP�l�ItATIOiY �F ST.�FF R�PORT www.carr-mcclellan.com Burlingame Planning Commission May 22, 2007 Page 2 greater. There is no objective reason to apply a different standard to these lots than the standard applied to these other projects. We hope that you will approve the minor revisions to the plans on Tuesday evening so that we can construct the homes and complete the saga on Drake Avenue. In the meantime, we are asking that the Commission re-evaluate the conditions that were imposed on Mr. Miller after the unfortunate grading mixup in November 2003. In reaction to that mistake by the grading contractor, the Commission required Mr. Miller to post a deposit oi more than $118,000 to secure the health of the redwoods. (Because there are no bonds available for this site-specific purpose, the security had to be posted in cash and has been maintained in the City's accounts since it was posted years ago.) Due to the delay in beginning work on Lots 9 and 10, the redwoods have had some 3.5 years to recover from any damage that was done to their root systems and are now in fine health. Please see the enclosed letter from Mayne Tree Company certifying the health of the trees. Whatever harm was done to the trees back in 2003 has been cured. Mr. Miller intends to follow all of the industry-standard practices for protecting the trees during construction. There is no basis for requiring him to post this level of security when other builders working in closer quarters are not required to do so. We would ask that the Commission rescind the security requirement. I will be attending the meeting on May 29 to respond to any questions. If you have any technical questions that may require research to answer, please let me know in advance. Sincerely ��,/ � � ___ __.... Mark D. Hudak MDH:os Enclosures cc: Planning Department (w/encl.) Client (w/o encl.) 13600.00001 �BGLIB 1 \1331953.1 � � - . o �� _ � , r.x 'A . � _ _ , .. " _ ��. 'u�x � � �� . , � '*"��. r �,� x. �'�"'�� `�-u , 1 . �� .. . . ' � u � �g. . � � � .. �a ^ . ...�t�?$' k 4 .::.. `y. ] . ,i *k� • :�._�. "{y ' '� i '•v • f 9� -. t !� . . ,. F �� :' � ...�+ � � �� , " � � n � �ri ' , � . - ,�p �y . y _. � � _ '. � , ..�� M .� ;l� ¢ . l4k . i � .:� F.. h. �,: . , ' �-.. � ` �� 1'y� � 7` � . �T �i " : i. � , ' . Y� ' .w ,�+i�,; - _ . . : r�- t � � �� . �� _ :� � -� _' � � _ � ` �� ,� r�,�a� _ � _ , �; # � � � : �,� � � � ��' �,.,, �r.� P�' �:: � � �s� ,�m � � �� ,�,. �, ��`"' :_��- ,�s'� T� I� �r' ._ r, �� '. � , x' v; � a :, . � . r . ... � , ' . �.yj �, .. 4. » � �� .'��''�'� ^ � � ., �,°�: �``; � 5 �e �� _ , ` ,_ .. - ,,, y , < ,, ,� �--;�;, �► � .Y � _ _ ^ �. }�� .: rt+ •SF` [ � � ti � M� � t ��. r ; � . . � �. . ��# � . i�r ��. �.� _ ,� .ia�� _ � ..,�. � �°rr¢��`1iuy.�2. . �'i —� ��r . y . � . � . .! . �. I 8 k'� ; 3„t `: � � , �R � . �+� J � Ys ♦ � �, , � i� � �� '�± r k. .�^ �s- *�a' (e fg��-r . ::-..... _ .� { �� ` �" � , � L'.� '4 � ��n �y. xi 1 � d � �� . , :'1'� � �.:'tr ,0� �,�T ' �t$d }t . • s� ��' F �,��, � .��'es- .'+��'�,�� :��„a. r' �... . " . .. .. � , . � y�� ' -., s- _ • ,� . u.� s. �, t.+a y. , y�y� ��''"'. � ... � , '� � �j n�,� s �:'t�' n; �8' , _ 'ti�-.� .. � � i � ' . . � .�,r" � -' ,�',�. ? 4 �., ', ��: : �.,e;..r,�,. . � � " ..� :.�k� .�.Ny� � �- ..s _ �E+�.m, '� ��s.4 `,,,7, �,' ". : � _ * �I�i 1� +,, 2 �' ^-� ' sy ;";� K .. _ . . , � �. - � � �: � r� � . � <. �,F ' Y � r � , -, . C _ , _. „� � , :. . 9� , ;��I y ', . �� M�c� � � �� m _ . = .,,F� , � .;. , �.. : . ; �. �''��'� -_— r �` " `" � w ., _. t► � '� w . a�tp .. < �"�w 4 � �!4S _ �' ., ��,� �sy , ��- r.�. : a.. .1�. " ; . ;.. . �.. ' ,� . '' � ` �: $' . . .' '. '� ` . . ..� . �... +4a`� .... _~ a..'.. .. � � � � ' ..� . ., �' y ,� • ,R„ ^ � � "- I 3.' �:M�. �..� . ��SilY�ild�t„�, K', .� " �``��ti ,.� y', �.�.�. , :...;s ; " 1� _ . . `�� z � � '� t �-�:�^T . "X ,t , °tsii r� . � _ . � � ',r ti�� !"' --�-� ��'�^.. �..'s .�W b .i1W1 - .. . " . .. . . _. . . . � �P � �� 1 � " ,��E )" •.�`�� ' '� •.� +� � � � � ��:�. . . .-a- .-� - ' ^ ; � . u; ' . ' _' -w _ �n "��i'�.C�.'-\ .. _ ... . .. u . � ' - a . . .. �. ,� . �.. . . _ , ,.., . . . � � ,.. �,..7:' :� +� 1P� �.. � r . . .. � . E� . .. = - - � +�4•�'^� ... , S ..._ . . �� , _ .. ' ��.�.s �� _r. .<<..;._ , v'�_. � yif^if-; _�.: , � � f. �: : �f � ,� �.' �, � , , �, � k, �., . �:: . ,. � '„�- ,.�. -�. < ,� , ��'"� � � '��: �:� - . �� F, , �� _ ,� _ _ ,. , .=�.. ,�- ` �'; � �.� � �, ,' � � ., f � � s :4 „h, ��'�'�m a�t }, � — ^v^ : �: � > �., �- ;,.- i • � : � - • ; � "�' ,y�' � l,, ' 7 : �"�'""" } A"� < `' r-ti ' x � . ;' , I � g . - .. � . . . , � :L. +�} �+A<'� . .. l .:. . . � :: "i+P,:- ' � � u- e, y� ' � Wn� ♦ �1� ' ,�1"Wf . ..� 4 . - �� . . � • .. - _ . ,..iv . . - . � . . : .., . .:� �...,.. .., i♦ � �] . . "' N' y. �';�.. � ...�'u_'.. ,. . " � .._ . . � �" r � ��^d`�-f� . - i . !m � , � M.X✓i t . �M. y � ' J' �. .. . ..� .� � �'. � .. . _ � .;�e�t . �, .. _ „ _µ .• +.„. ' r. T: � � � ��; r�' �.x...__ .__. - �.ra,;=n.� � �.. - , , � r�'= ��'. .. .. ,�. ��w+,��,, ;�;rrs.a�'�•��' - _ �is; ... �;,, �. �c y. ' T �. � . . . ` � � � �.� ?; v,'., t - --.. � . � t ^ • '. � �e : • / � . ) �,. t�p . ; � �X'� . . ,�' � , , �J ' � ,+ �� . �� '. . , � � �.�,��-�y� ��+� � - - ..I . ,� J 4 � if �' �Z`i`�" �'/ > `f.' � • ' �' ` � � ,�\\i' . • f -�e� , � % �._ � 4 .. a f�' .. ,jk .M1 s�•,'�FJ r>�� , / r �` . � \ ` � � •��P � � , /� , : ...i i. � �' � � r�! r / r��+ �. � = ` `"7 . . j • .. �� w'�v ` � r y � .1. . . :' � _,yn'�"'�""-4"i. �� - � . I... �~ � J a f �� :.Y �{�'q . � , � 1�`� w , �, (` �� N '� ",R� � - _ b� ^ •. � f� � r � ' �� ' . ,� �r / � . . � ! , �� .. _I �� x . ,. - . �� . . �„ „r s � 7;c �. / ` ,is¢' . ' • �r � •" �+�' �_ ��.�' �r :�5• %� �; a • � '�' , � f, %'�f � � � �� r , r ► ..d�r I. Y'�' • i�.a' �. � . � - .F. ' . ♦ �-. � , - � � F d � y �. : {-� � . . � ••� �. y �► , �•,�+�f�'� r r%9� - . L �! . ' .��1�. . . ,` '..a -� - � . � . .i . � . � , , 5 � - - y i >.v�; �rt`i�•.- - . ` w .� � • , .. .. . - , �; , - . _ , � , . . � `'� . .. , .. �,r �, . �, .��; ^�/ * .;. . . • � � �� Y � � <<j'� � �i � � � R n ��^ '�. � 1. .��' ; �� j . � t � �� '" �,��j-,�.-� _ �. 3 �. . , • � ' . ' i � � ' �* =� �'�(y'-� ��a� . � � 4 .� ,� ,�t �.,,� y � �\ � F , .�" . �X . i • ,��r, �� T , r�'y„ ^�,r . .. ' 1, -- : - � (�Mor;� ; k, a:.: .r - . . � t ' , � � � � - •`rf�. S � �` '.Y � %1j , '+�F ' • _ � ( ' '}�� '+v � w�: . . �.. * ` 't�Ae•, .i � �._'�, � '�a�., • s � ,. � . '• .�v' f. ' 3 C lti. .. .a�� .I �` . IF ��% �� •�� r � F��A.A �w�� , ' � � � + ,�. c . � h _i � �'� R _ .. i�,� ��sF.�' a.' ' . ' ` � . ' .� . . . - , 'ti .x�. .��a � t ,¢ � _ v . ��r� '�+` .�" n ;. �- `' ". ' ' - e' � y '� a • aR` 7 �' � o-��'P' ' .'e� . {'�j r, ,:. �7 e -L� � .t•�R ��y',�4i �. ��d �y.j�r� _ �i �s[_ - . � . - - � �, .r �..�1� h -� � • ; � � �i.=. •a ' � ai � .'.� �* �,• �; • {, , ' �� :1 � � R�l...-, � '�, ` m' ' � _ -- 'x,t�i-u i �. . �� . ,!. `l�,l '�� / _ � .:r *�. �� t � �., <^- �`EL 3 - ;, ' _ } �,,, �' � -ti 4�k. s , �l'° i �y°`� - .i � �j��41�<y -�S� , � � •!� w .'C�yv. � .� _� - 'aj�� .e�- •�� r� '_ ... =�' �r,�- s, \ . _ . : a .. � �` �. � . �r � t' .� � �. � � ' . , � i. ` j �,�.'� .s' ��j � � r' � � '- , �.. _ � .� � ; I r� � _ _ . � � :►t, � , . �.� " r� .� _ � � - - �� — . s� - i°� 1 •`�- � ' — . r. � �� rr^ _ °. � . �lq, . 4 . _ �r�. Ti. . ' . . - �� - .�i.....s,-� � - r. . . / �.Y. `Y..G` - ' � .� - . �4.' M . i .�+'''. J{ � . . . ��• . _ . .�I _' � _ i" . ' - . ��" ri _ . xY s, - * � - ' , . .. c� �.' r .. - --- �� , S, ga�A_�� (;� .� '�1 ��. .._ _. � mn •�� h•� # - r��: - �''Rw F�.� i — : }^; 4�; � 'f s ��. + �. ,: � . .. � ,. . �; � �i► , �. ,r , �, 4�?.• - d ' ' , _ - . � � . ;: _. ,: ,�, , �� . m,,. . . . , , ,� • 4 ... . .� '.' .,� " , , • >s�. �s .. ,�- � J. . .�., w,� . . �- :. y.. : . ` tr � :r - -a°�".rr�- - � - "� � �i; - �'S '4{i`�tR� _�... �.. 1.�. :" . . ''�-. . �_ ., . - , . ;,; . .; � ¢^t� ; , 4 .�;� � "�' � �,i.'f � , . f� a ; � �. l ��,t � -� � .ti"'� ` ' ��f}�t—'1y�." �.,�t` � ,� �'2�': '..�,j' n - p a' , f ' , •R.., � pt3_ i s• i ; • „'y� ,c i' � �" i{:�, rF �a. v � � �� I a, .f�� Y� . i �* �:�� .t y� k ., �' .+ � % i a t". t � � y',t � I��, i ° _ � �: , y , y� ?' � f-�' � � y � / � 1 � . 1 �Qf��'' ; ; :�,.�M �.`... c'"`�M ' �.� � '� ..ti � •7' 7Ct. � l. .'�'� �,yV. • �� .-,�: : � � � , g�� `.�r: -�'�� • Y � � ' , S � M - � � _ � r S. �' �' �^''"a' � i� Q . � . t . �, y � t �,� • � �j � � : �y+P` { � ,%ye'� t,¢ a.� t-�n i�`�, di. �c" .; ;� _ ..w� }� . e � �" iv-.{,. v�via � �: �1 . 3°^ .vK..d . .�✓,... / �l �`�. '1 � ��; ; .��" �' ,�. . � ,��'�,�„ � ��` � R�,�. .. � I� � � ,�. �' � , _ • : ,s � <: t,, -�; �'�� +�'�� "s,.:: �.� �,,� � �'�� ``i �: . � .�`.. �' � r.: . .. tA _ �: �.�r1.� '�•f "{ Y',..ir ,It *�-� j:i1'y,,"�''� '�ii - e �°i� d- �A�7.� ��t�l�. .,,� fi J t.L� -�� Y S D r • 'E . kS x� t t� . _ .. � F�', � , �_:�� ` {� - r�� ' �� J � • � � � � g� y��, �r _. � j . ,� { _. �j��e�'�.r � � - t :L' y �� ?�''' 's��L � �('� � ';A � �H � j , s � ° ' _ y ai. ��4 � �. : � t �i.� � � , � -R� • 4 ! ( 3�. � . �4Y �� ! �i� f 7 �-{^. . . � z� � � . �'�" .�.yF. �+ . . `.a .x' giytr - .� F.�.- � : � 4 . . ��1 .� ��.. e ,, ._ , �q . � -�i' _ r ..r . � � w . � �`� . i'C� . � � '� i �� { - . - � `� . � � . *' '...,8 eyil 4 � d�� _ _ � t. �,y 6Jw; s,.�,Y`7 ns." - Y -/�v � `,� k � �� ''' � f ' � ~'- . � . rrt � .�� ' y'� � ° "�.. �L� , ,r'�+. �'' cni�'K o:. �. fy.- , � �� _ � ,7 = FF'"1.: , � . ,...: '� . - � , r � ._� ,�' i_:+�� r °'i �'{ .:, ''� •; } �,. ' t �.' � � � � c � . �� » v � � �i� �r. t�(.f � � �.�, � t � �� F ,i/!,_ i :: r , X'� r � Y . t � �� _ .ii". ��'i A1 . � N.�` �� 9 Y . iT' _ ..It�" � � � �` ;['(• �� , k y,. g t3 � # . -I,i �r..� � � �� y'}i.�� ' ��.- / �J `�1 P 4 `S y� „y�i� . . �� }u'�'� �y��. • •i'� . � .... . "a�A+' ��n l'�' ., y � �_ � x.lty � ' wf� � ' 1 ,.� .. ' ' . , i , { � �. � . _ ��" s ;".�e .. ;, .. .. • _ p � �� ,' y.a,,A� s:� ..ry4� :, } f„ �u� ��i... �._ �Y �.,� .� `` �Y, ��y � :'�, ��;. �/. �� s , � ��ti Y� fi J � " � •` i '�-. r;� r. � �,ik a'�vi, c�.. ^, � �.� '��3� �.''J` '�' _ � � ��` � .�r`� . �f7 �:-. ��f.:�.t x. ,,.t_ 5 r r . � ��'�f �ss- �,Y � .�. � �i . ^ t, .'f ; � '".3, F � ��: � ,� �^r �` k �. .7 };. '�i 6 '�,J's7'��C I� <>, { ly;, s�. _ �, �. t.. �' � ��,�, 1s , � .�.� �j� fP ! �; ��i._ f�. -_ "t -'r � �J f� ^ �i r T: �� n - ,. :. ' e, .�s., , R . { _ , : � � � � x -� .,, �. � �� r _ . _ � a �, , ��.:. � �� :.' � ��+;y `i > �-,�� ' �/ �� _. ' � - ��"'� �Ai '� { Y- y i � ,�� }� '� 't%� "1,. �; - - !� .'�J/f i" � � � `:' bx~� � _ �� - . . - � �'�T � � 9 - i .. � �. ' /� �: �� i i _ ,.. ,,.; .-._ _ _-_ �' •;.r.h.'��' �' ' - � � RJ ,,,: a .: � _'��^ } F..�� -"'-� i H^� �� :� � a �, ' ,,� - " ' � �� ! � y �� _ _, . � r1._ � � � / _ /n�) � w,� ;�� r �A ^ 4�; ! � _ , �3r . , �� :, ' - _ . RF �' � ' ; .�„ � �. � 'I � � ;� �� . : ,, � , �. , '� r • � , . � , �.s '�e r , a _.:. �.;= :_ ' � � ►�yA'�: " i'�" •�� -s �: _ r : �. ' d �-� �� .� I ¢ `;� ,� .F - � { � :,i; ' � � s ; � �, �.. _x a %' � r � _ �:_. %� I "' _ - � , '� � � A�. `' . �' f � " Y � � !* r . 1 _ , �, ef-� r tik � � a� !Jr r�T.: - ' �` I . .I �.. ��U ` �M1 �:ar 7 •� `,+�'�- o �.�. t '� -Y ';. 'i l� � � �' ��~ ,!' � . :�y, � . .. rv, • ; :;- �� - _ _ y� '� _�_ - � � . ; .. - . , ,:... . , ,;. . "i 2 ` ' . . ...,. , .. � . . - .._,. _a... - _ ��r .. - . ' y �� { �� .` F. � . � _ F'yy�.:�.c .�*.�'� �� .� � � � , n, . . . . � ...� . ' ". . . .. . .. N , = ,. �z -.� - ,.:., - ., . .r , . -� . r.- . ; $ , . . _ : , � , -' - - ,�:. ;c .. ,, , ,,. ,_ �, , . , : .: * , �:; . . . . . w : ,. µ � � ; = v •' ' .., . �- ' ,�.�A . �-� � . 7 •�..�� .� :• w- � � � ' ...�� — . . e� � .•�� T � �� . � t � .: � �� , J .,s_- . � 'I i�� i_7! � ? tir:. �� w�,� . -. _ ��++a's y .. . <�i�. ., , "v j M � , a � 4 - . ,� ,.. + �� .:�_s._ . '� ` __. . _ . ._ _ _,_ � �'.;ivz _ �, ,. .y � , E : " �. . _�J' .. _.. � - ' . . � .. �:X�..lC�- . :. . � _.��.: �� -�'� . �" '�.�_ - .. .-s... -- _,<�+vas..n.xv.v�-_ .. .� . __ .�. . .. . .. . i_ y ' ` X�,:'4^` C .. � - ; . , . ., �. L �, G ., r'�-� n �1^fi �F�g�"�X^as,�m� d�',a,�yM�+.•,�a �' i :- : . . v � '�'+ t °�r�5,h., P.v'°'}� `�it'¢ t�,�. A'''�'; 5�?. .� , M �, �'_` s{` 'a *r` ._ ,,,.� � w1 n r -�v + r. � � Y : v "r� ,,. � i�'i � r� "i, �„� ,�;�y a✓ ^ y + n ,y y CP W +`�S� ki ny97� .S.a F � M k� „ � w �,, y � +?- : ,� s'yk1�'3fl L�' � i � t .r��6^��M�tk��M'�h'NiT'`'�'i�' .4`�r. C :�� . ~, ., � .. . , � S °�!'".� l , i . . ._ m vwf�.:i�:. , .....o- ,C:�7>' � rlfi�r n.i .., , , .. . "".� . . . _ , . _ .�. -�:�� v��srda_."d"�wA4� ,.rc.. :.d� �1•., > . '�'. _ . f. �� . —�-. . r . .. .... .r:'ST � _ --wmC�. . - � �� $� ( {. . _�. . _ �t �� r �� :,�'' 5� ��{ " _...; ..k�,r0 ` �-:z,.:: � �*' �. 'w�r�r.' - �,.��. -�� _�, ti�:. � � t .'�� .. �' � � �6 _ � S ti r ��,,� . . . i,. * Y��S� � �� . R1 A t � � . �. .lY . � �xK"', � 1� A �i. . �.� 'M�� n...'r:+< �, �� .9 � • � � �. _ ' - .} _ " � r� �� , 1 1 � � ,� � -'ffi •,+ we�. �. �' ,,�p ��_� ' *;:� � r� , �. � � ,� -�^ � �::. A � _ .. �a.. _ � , � ,w � �� , � * �� •* � a.. �. ''�� /�.� _,� �� ` •- � �� , � :�� Y. m �� • �. �� '�,, ` �-. �::'�I ,�I �� t � �" � �. ��.�+1-' � �� . � r� � .. �..,y'`�' ��• �+ �� ' ' �,�� ' ' a'�� - , , � �i � s � � � �.' . � w,l f ' �* . ''.M •` � ~'�; �, :'�^#�e ' �'+� ,�. iIF - '� s, .t• �^ •;� rt�`y*d��i, • +• ?, � _ � y � � . �'��'� A�h ^+.• ' '�„ �i,�i. i • .} . � „�,. , '�i' ,T. �. zg' t� - ` : . - �„� , .�t�jj� . - .A <i .. '� . y, 'r� =�' � � y�� 'y� r�' � �� :. • �� +1 3`'�� "'9J %C.+� ��T�� ''lr' . ��r' t �:a�- � • . ,. .�e tr� .� � . ��,'. � ,"" ��. ' •_ 1'��."� r:: � , ' � "4: n. • w � x �, y ,,�: ' '9^�s; ;S"`� . �.. ♦ q�. �' .�; . _ C . S �, ��`� F � �� .iil� �� , �,, " ar � � ; . , , �' ��",�� " �r :: � �, . `�'` �. �� . ' ,, �: ,�' - , , �t+.. ; e.. h - : �. � ,�,� � .� n��` rp�� . � t�c a y�y� . - ��, ��,;��y�, . . . . � � � r..�„ . �• :';: �'� : ,' • � ' � � . ��, '' ' r ' Y � . �"' t 4'��t''. � , .� Y � � r 7t �' �� j • ' ,. �� , i� a�e• _ �. f -^a'� •'Ar "�'`r � � T.. ` .,. �� • �~;~ . . • � �, ': �` � - „�',�!+! � � 5�,. .�i+'„ �., .i�� S�� ' . �, ', �� ' x� , �� '� • ' . ' �_ fi � `n ' ' � �T � ~ ~ 1 � • � �+� � i �� . r.; �# ;�..i • nTT � {. k'' .'!�r 1A.�. �..�. �i�. .� 0 � .P4�' 6.:-•. _..._ . � ^ . •.� y �.: •� . � ; . ` . , _. `+w .,f• '^9�'� - . �.�.h � .,' ;� ..� Y�+ �; ,r' '— : j; �' t . - ' "'t�• u .�f,* ,`°" ¢ _ '�i *ti i ,r , ' •.. _ �� w• .� �.�t.; - .,' ' , �' �, ` � _+� � � � , .. . . . .,,r� . ,r., �, � ��- . . `� '� �.. �� ,�� p ��a.� �. � �' ; i. ,r� � -� ��':. . I� M -- I �-' `�a r �`Arr x!' �, Y .: ,� � y,,�.y�,. � � � �/?a� i .y � , r�. . ' �s: .� �� . , � '� '! Tti; ' . � �,� Y`J y ._� � ;y ' t � `. �%� I ,� � � b �$�R .�. � ��i 'p'' � _ � � `��i'S '� � ° �. r�.�.: s ��.,� - ,� . . ,� r , �, . ,.! s � �4Tr�"„� � ' , .s � y; * .a � -.�r '��i"�� - _ ' y .,s' �y�r�c*' �t,�u � 1 �' . .`�3r �• � .�� ' +r�~ � .. P. + r . . �,�' r w ��/ � : y,: , f y;� tti � X�L:.f" �1' .— "u� .1 ,. A , ' .. i �5`' � �" —"''�� °�� *� , -�•• �jr!�a. � . � _ �~�� +._ � �� .: 1'?.1-.-.;. }'� a.� .. ,� ts� i�{t�' • ��+..., . � 4ir. r .7 •�' ��' ♦�f'� ..4 " . 1 I.� .�i_ , . ��i�� . 5; Ay. `��- . ' . ,�' ' � t � . � a�" , � �. '� - .4� y , �"':�.. � ..r� +£� ��`: � � � ` � , - �T � � �, . • � ��.: � � ,�, '�[ `v' ,1-.; � � �� .. Y . � ii. ,�t. (� �, , s � . _ �. ;�� . X p � �ro . . L . .,y r.{�,+i.� �� $'. •7�`fs *�;� .. • ♦ .Y� 1 � �. , � �y _ y � r, w,,�. � 4 � , a�; �- ,�,. ` � � ��' rv� �—,� w--r n,.. , , ,b _ > , ,..,: . ;' .�� , �� _ , . , ,�i�� ; s , � ` � ` ' .. .. i . , ,� . a, � _ .�y,,�y�?��„-`� � y.,. �. . ,3�`_ q� ;.,�, V�►F�++yy� i`` `nh �. ;� * 6;{' T y��!<`�""' � 4�"�'it. 'tr.... �'' 4� � . , .: � � ��',�, � �� ., y � �~��'. �W ��` '/ A } T"".�`~� �.. �'.'. ''� k :. S� .,, � +�. . � � {� � � � � FH -0tw.� � .:Yi'i ..{'+ ' 'd . � 1 ��Y� y.'� " U,r.� ! 4 - s�v �;♦ �R � .k. �".�.. "�L � \`+� � '�- W.+N'µ -�"r. ,¢ ..y•.�p.�" ,Xy � a �M +;Y wS� �. ':`��b A " �t ,,� ...,�.4 �, _ -��. x.r�.,e.� A!''r ..+. 1�d. ��_ -3" .r 'S.� E_.. f^ •� � ,��'y� �• �� 'w�r� :�':�f I� — .,W^-�. ` . AI� � • . - ��„¢ � '�R�4�'�� £ j Y �;. � �- j� k+.` ., : „° y „ i � � _ r w : � r � y V *,R� <- � }.f � 3. F • ^+�� `, � �� , _ � • h _ �Y9i['tix:�1.�. .',��4.�uk`.�'6''..� _ , ... . .r � � � �� 14 � � £ � �. ' S �3 va. �" { r "�' i, � �� _ � P 4- Y- _ - .. � '', f�5?3�O' '� A . �� '�`�� :��A� � �.�;�� x� :�.�� t�`t"7':�i31,1�SE�ED 19�i �.,i 1A`C�i =.'t). �I��'iC�2 1 3 l..i: t��15i-; i�(3 �7'-�; t�l�:itT�F:lI<i} i-�ii's:..:'1 ii:k R (.'`.r4Tli�ki;Il �1Aii3C'ti�(,`i"?`.'�, � t>e'' +I ,. <i;�i" 3,C;+t_ > ,1�?+ lti{:?�E� ,l�,t� <`.i't t� ,F't:'�i2 i �:iC' '�id!) i iIC.Et�"i�i?vi:ilYhti �. N�Z3:!: ! S .,::-,�. t't:t:i3?�51:'�' !� :1f.;F_S f..r)AC t t�. _i�i � 4', l I��s ":TC3R Vlr. Otto Iltliller Millei Develc�pment P.E7. Box i21 E3urlingarne, CA 94011 D�ar P�(r. Mi(fer, �E: 1537 GBRf�KEAVE., �URLINGAIVIE MaY z2, 2ao7 .....:i i?}i.lc.r.`�:�-f:.'r �:�3:i��,. `?�l�.c��....e. S::`J t�: ii�:l f'-.... { = 1.;/(1 i%.i.ti i I. .t:7', <C,' :4'.t � 3,' :.;', �k';:) :c'`t'�?ii.i:: r, �, `:�.t -€-;:a; t ;�+;1�t1. >��w r , ,...� �.�>rE; This I�tter is in reg�rd tq the ��c�ve caf r�dwoc�c�s at the �1aov� referenced sifi�. The p�arpose was to �letermine general health as com�ared to the past fr�ur years. The #re�s hav� b�er� rt�utin�:ly irrigated d�ring surramer n�c�nths. Being n�tiv� trees; they do not req��ire tc�o m�ieh summer water though they are nof drought talerani. l`here �ad been minor root impact ir� the past that dae� not appe�r ta have irr�pacted th� trees. There is very I�ttls deadwood accumul�tion inside the trees and �II of the �nds exhibit r�ew grc�wth. In my apini€�n the trees ar� heafthy and ndrrr�af f+�r the species �nd using a pier-and� grade bear� shouid nat have �ignificar�t imp�ct ta these trees.. ' ( thir�k �his report is �ccuratie �nd b�sed orr s�sund arbarseultur�l p�inciples �na practices. Sincerely, ,� � �s .:„r�`� �R r t `�� fi'a�:..,� :�;Y,�=-, t�r1..�"��L.-..2 - � t , F�ichard L. �-luntingtar� Certifi�d Arborist WE #0119A ��r�ified Forester #� 925 ' s � t✓+ � e�- ��c -�p w � � � � � htee.WE-A1i�� m � � �F�f/f"lFQ �R��l�� A��f � rr, � � PLG-Monroe, Meg From: agrimes@stanford.edu �C� O� � 2� %r.�- Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 8:30 AM '�� To: PLG-Monroe, Meg r � j �" <<,' % � � _ ,' ;;!�✓L,� Subject: 1537 Drake �f�'�EI: Ph�Er'��I�1�°d%rV C�F S?'�rrrF J!: ��<<:, �' ;,� . .... .. ..:... .. ._..M..� � ,� - _ ._ ..;.�.. To the Planning Commission: ��T'�YW.� �� Because I am traveling on business today, 2 cannot attend tonight's Planning Commission meeting re: 1537 Drake. The project before you tonight has a long history dating back over four years. Since the Planning Commission has new boards members, the neighbors request that the longstanding members of the Commission make sure all members understand the history. The last time this project came before your board was March 2004 at which time the developer - according to the minutes - said he would return "within 30-45 days" with final plans for Lots 9& 10. Fast forward three years. Since 2004, there has been considerable amount of construction on our dead-end street. The applicant has built two large spec houses at the end of the cul-de-sac. Another home is scheduled to be built at the end on the street by a family who has lived on the block for over 20 years and will live in the new house. Several homes have changed ownership and another has been considerably enlarged by another developer - in a piecemeal fashion that skirted the Planning Commission proecess. THe applicant is asking for amendments to a migitaged negative dec, design review, conditional use permit for emerging lots and special permits for building height, declining height envelope and attached garage. The neigbors wish to ensure 1) that the health of the heritage grove of redwoods is maintained and 2) that the lots are not overbuilt and are consistent with the street scape. It is important that all panel members note that the report by consulting arborist Walter Levison (dated 2/24/04) points to construction of two houses on that lot as a problem and threat to the heritage grove and raises serious questions about whether the lots are buildable as proposed. According to that report, the lots best fit one house built away from the rootbeds. Also note that minutes from March 2004 Planning Commission state: "Applicant's requests for changes to the conditions of approval, plus any we might add make it appear we should discuss and bring back conditions of approval before acting on this request." Given the time lapse and many construction changes on this street, we invite you to revisit this project from the ground up and keep all mitigating conditions in place, maintain design review guidelines and height contraints, and bond protection regarding trees. Should construction go forward the neighborhood wants to ensure the block is not overbuilt and trees are protected. Regards, Ann Grimes 1520 Drake Ave. Burlingame, CA May 29, 2007 1 RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SPECIAL PERMITS RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, an Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration has been proposed and application has been made for Desiqn Review, Conditional Use Permit for emerging lots and Special Permits for buildinq heiqht and declininq height envelope for a new two-story sinqle familv dwellinq at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10, zoned R-1, Otto Miller. P.O. Box 121, Burlinqame, CA, 94011, propertv owner, APN: 026-033-270; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on July 9, 2007, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-523P, is hereby approved. 2. Said Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits are approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits are as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. Chairman I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9`h day of Julv, 2007 by the following vote: Secretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits. 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Effective July 19, 2007 Page 1 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2007, sheets A.1, A.4, A.S, U.1, L1.1, S.1 and D.1 through D.4, and date stamped June 7, 2007, sheets A.2, A.3, A.4A, A.46, A.5A, A.56, A.6 and L1.0; 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 3. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 4. 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 and the City Arborist shall verify that all required tree protection measures were adhered to during construction including maintenance of the redwood grove, an appropriate tree maintenance program is in place, all required landscaping and irrigation was installed appropriately, and any redwood grove tree protection measures have been met; 5. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 6. that the conditions of the City Engineers' May 31, June 4, August 30, and October 15, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 18, 2007, memos, the Fire Marshal's September 3, 2002, June 22, 2005, and June 18, 2007 memos, the Chief Building Official's August 5, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 15, 2007 memos, the Recycling Specialist's August 27, 2002, and June 27, 2005 memos, the NPDES Coordinator's June 27, 2005, memo, and the City Arborist's September 3, 2002, and April 3 and May 21, 2003, and April 13, 2007 memos shall be met; 7. that any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to have a City grading permit, be overseen by the project arborist, inspected by the City Arborist, and be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and with all the requirements of the permit issued by BAAQMD; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits. 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Effective July 19, 2007 Page 2 8. that there shall be no heavy equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or holidays during the development of Lot 10; use of all hand tools shall comply with the requirements of the City's noise ordinance; 9. that as much employee parking as possible shall be accommodated on the site during each of the phases of development; construction activity and parking shall not occur within the redwood tree grove protective fencing on Lot 10; 10. that construction materials shall not be staged on Lot 9; all heavy equipment and materials shall be staged along the right side of the property on Lot 10; 11. that at no time shall any equipment exceeding 18,000 LBS be allowed to be within 30 feet of the currently fenced off Redwood Tree Grove protection zone; 12. that prior to the placement or use of any motorized equipment within 30 feet of the currently fenced Redwood Tree Grove protection zone, a protective layer of mulch one foot deep with 3/4 inch plywood on top, shall be installed and inspected by the project arborist to avoid further soil compaction of the area; post construction the protective plywood and mulch may be removed as approved by the project arborist; 13. all construction shall be done in accordance with the California Building Code requirements in effect at the time of construction as amended by the City of Burlingame, and limits to hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; 14. that the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping areas; 15. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall be installed along the right side property line to meet current code standards and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems shall be increased at the property owner's expense if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department and the location of all trenches for utility lines shall be approved by the City Arborist during the building permit review and no trenching for any utility shall occur on site without continual supervision of the project arborist and inspection by the City Arborist; 16. that the new sewer connection to the public sewer main shall be installed along the right side property line to City standards as required by the development; 17. that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed unless their removal is determined by the City Arborist to have a detrimental effect on any existing protected trees on or adjacent to the site; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits. 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Effective July 19, 2007 Page 3 18. that prior to being issued a demolition permit on the site, the property owner shall submit an erosion control plan for approval by the City Engineer; 19. that prior to installation of any sewer laterals, water or gas connections on the site, the property owner shall submit a plan for approval by the City Engineer and the City Arborist; 20 21 that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site will be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards; that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 22. that the project property revisions to the proposed the tree protection prog construction; owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any house and/or accessory structure or necessary changes to ram or to address new issues which may arise during 23. that should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the Community Development Director and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City; 24. that the driveway shall be designed to be pervious material as approved by the City Arborist, and installed according to approved plans with the supervision of the project arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist; 25. that the established root protection fencing shall be inspected regularly by the City Arborist and shall not be adjusted or moved at any time during demolition or construction unless approved by the City Arborist; that the root protection fencing shall not be removed until construction is complete on Lots 9 and 10, except if the portion of the protective fence on Lot 9 in the area of the driveway may be removed to install the driveway with the approval of the City Arborist; the removal of a section of the fence should not disturb the maintenance irrigation system installed within the tree protective fencing; 26. that the driveway on Lot 10 shall be constructed of pavers set in sand, with a maximum cut below grade of 10 inches and a base compaction determined by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist; that if any roots greater than � 2 inches in diameter are encountered during grading for the driveway on Lot 10 and must be cut to install the driveway, the situation shall be documented by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to cutting any roots; and that if at any time the project arborist on site or the City Arborist feels the number of roots to be cut to install the driveway on Lot 10 is significant, a stop work order shall be issued for the site until the City Arborist determines whether it is necessary to relocate the driveway; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits. 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Effective July 19, 2007 Page 4 27. that special inspections by the City Arborist, to be funded by the property owner, shall include being on site during any demolition and grading or digging activities that take place within the designated tree protection zones, including the digging of the pier holes for the pier and grade beam foundation, and during digging for removal or installation of any utilities; that the special inspections by the City Arborist shall occur once a week or more frequently as required by the conditions of approval and shall include written documentation by the project arborist that all tree protection measures are in place and requirements of the conditions of approval are being met; that no materials or equipment shall be stockpiled or stored in any area not previously approved by the City Arborist; and that the City Arborist may also stop work for any violation of the conditions related to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site; 28. that under the observation of the City Arborist, all pier holes for the foundation shall be hand dug to a depth of no more than 18 inches and the surFace area around the hole shall be protected as required by the City Arborist; that if any roots greater than 2 inches in diameter are encountered during the digging for the pier holes, the property owner's on-site arborist shall call the City Arborist and determine how the pier shall be relocated and the Building Department shall be informed of the change and approve that the requirements of the building code are still met; and that if at any time during the installation of the pier and grade beam foundations roots greater than 2 inches in diameter must be cut, the situation must be documented by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to the time the roots are cut; 29. that, based on root locations that will be determined by hand digging on the site, the property owner shall submit a detailed foundation report and design for approval by the Building Department and City Arborist to establish the bounds of the pier and grade beam foundation and have it approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site; and that if at any time during the construction the pier locations must be altered to accommodate a Redwood tree root, the structural changes must be approved by the Building Department prior to the time any such root is cut or damaged; 30. that the property owner shall submit a complete landscape plan for approval by the City Arborist prior to a Building permit being issued to address the landscaping and fence installation on the site, including plantings, irrigation, electricity, fences, retaining walls and soil deposits on the site; installation of all landscape features shall be overseen by the property owner's arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist, including fence post holes; and work shall be stopped and plans revised if any roots of 2 inches in diameter or greater are found in post holes or any new landscape materials added endanger the redwood trees; 31. that no fencing of any kind shall be allowed for the first 65'-0" along the side property line between Lots 9 and 10; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits. 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Effective July 19, 2007 Page 5 32. that for tree maintenance the property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the protected Redwood grove during demolition and construction work on the project and for a 5-year post construction maintenance program for the Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection. This maintenance program shall be founded upon the recommendations of the April 28, 2003 Mayne Tree Company report as well as such additional recommendations as the property owner shall receive from a certified arborist; and that the property owner of record shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discussed the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction (issuance of an occupancy permit) on the project and every two years thereafter for a period of 5 years; 33. that the property owner shall deposit with the City $118,780 based on the appraisal of the value of the four Redwood trees accepted by the City Arborist and City Attorney on Lots 9 and 10, as security to the City against one or more of the Redwood trees dying as the result of construction or within 5 years of the completion of construction due to problems attributable to construction; these funds shall be available to the City Arborist to cover any necessary removal costs, cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the grove of Redwood trees; nothing in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or loss of trees; 34. that for purposes of these conditions the project arborist is a certified arborist hire by the property owner/developer; a certified arborist means a person certified by the International Society of Arboriculture as an arborist; 35. that before issuance of any demolition or building permit, the property owner shall record a deed restriction on the lot identifying the four (4) key Redwood trees and providing notice to the heirs, successors, and assigns that these trees were key elements of the development of the lot and: A. The trees may cause damage or inconvenience to or interfere with the driveways, foundations, roofs, yards, and other improvements on the property; however, those damages and inconveniences will not be considered grounds for removal of the trees under the Burlingame Municipal Code; B. Any and all improvement work, including landscaping and utility service, on the property must be performed in recognition of the irreplaceable value of the trees, must be done in consultation with a certified arborist, and if any damage to the trees occurs, will result in penalties and possible criminal prosecution; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits. 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Effective July 19, 2007 Page 6 36. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition or the edition approved by the City and as amended by the City of Burlingame at the time a building permit is issued; 37. that before any grading or construction occurs on the site, these conditions and a set of approved plans shall be posted on a weather-proofed story board at the front of the site to the satisfaction of the Building Department so that they are readily visible and available to all persons working or visiting the site; 38. that if work is done in violation of any requirement in these conditions prior to obtaining the required approval of the City Arborist, and/or the Building Division, work on the site shall be immediately halted, and the project shall be placed on a Planning Commission agenda to determine what corrective steps should be taken regarding the violation; 39. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall be maintained during construction on Lot 10, and this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall not be temporarily altered, moved or removed during construction; no materials, equipment or tools of any kind are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, within this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing, the protective fencing and protection measures within the fencing shall remain in place until the building permit for each development on Lots 9 and 10 has received an occupancy permit and the City Arborist has approved removal of the protective fencing; 40. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall install a locked gate in the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing for inspection access to the protected area in order to determine on going adequacy of mulch, soil moisture and the status of other field conditions as necessary throughout the construction period; this area shall be accessed only by the project arborist, City Arborist, or workers under the supervision of these professionals; 41. that the property owner shall maintain throughout construction a three-inch thick layer of well aged, course wood chip mulch (not bark) and a two-inch thick layer of organic compost spread over the entire soil surface within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the project arborist and City Arborist; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be supervised by the project arborist and the City Arborist; the project arborist shall inform the City Arborist of the timing of installation of the course wood chip mulch and organic compost so that observation and inspection can occur; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits. 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Effective July 19, 2007 Page 7 42. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall ensure maintenance of the supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an active hose bib, snaked throughout the entire area on Lots 9 and 10 within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; irrigation must be performed at least once every two weeks throughout the entire construction period for all three lots unless determined not to be necessary by the project arborist and City Arborist; this area shall be soaked overnight, at least once every two weeks, until the upper 24-inches of soil is thoroughly saturated; the City Arborist shall periodically test the soil moisture to ensure proper irrigation; 43. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall ensure maintenance of at least four (4), 8-inch by 11-inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a "Tree Protection Fence", "Do Not Alter or Remove" and in the event of movement or problem call a posted emergency number; 44. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lot 10 shall be regularly inspected by the project arborist and City Arborist during construction on Lot 10; violation of the fenced areas and/or removal or relocation of the fences shall cause all construction work to be stopped until possible damage has been determined by the City Arborist and the property owner has implemented all corrective measures and they have been approved by the City Arborist; and 45. that before issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall deposit $7,500 with the Planning Department to fund, on an hourly basis, the City Arborist inspections as required in the conditions of approval of all construction and grading on Lot 10 to insure that the mitigation measures included in the negative declaration and the conditions of approval attached to the project by the Planning Commission action are met; and a. that the property owner shall replenish by additional deposit by the 15`h of each month to maintain a$7,500 balance in this inspection account to insure that adequate funding is available to cover this on-going inspection function; and b. that failure to maintain the amount of money in this account by the 15`h of each month shall result in a stop work order on the project which shall remain in place until the appropriate funds have been deposited with the City; and c. that should the monthly billing during any single period exceed $7,500 a stop work order shall be issued until additional funds to replenish the account have been deposited with the city so inspection can continue; and EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits. 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 10 Effective July 19, 2007 Page 8 d. that should the city be caused to issue three stop work orders for failure to maintain the funding in this arborist inspection account, the property owner shall be required to deposit two times the amount determined by the City Arborist to cover the remainder of the inspection work before the third stop work order shall be removed; and e. that the unexpended portion of the inspection deposit shall be returned to the property owner upon inspection of the installation of the landscaping and fences, irrigation system and approval of the five year maintenance plan/ program for the portion of the Redwood tree grove on the lot; and f. that this same account may be used for the City Arborist's selected licensed arborist inspector on lot 10 selected by the City Arborist and approved by the Community Development Director. �CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD �BURLINGAME, CA 94010 TEL: (650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org Site: 1537 DRAKE AVEIVUE, LOT 10 The City of Burlingame Planning (ommission announces the following public hearing on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall (ouncil (hambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA: .� •�l � 1�'a"d. . �„� �_ � �z9 ' P � � � a�:y d a- :=� �'�� `y�$:•�:,s a•' ; �: �J16H16504325 � QQ.2�o APailed From g-^TQ�� p��e-le7E PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Application for amendment to mitigated negative declaration, - design review, conditional use permit for emerging lots, and special permits for 6uilding height and declining height envelope to construct a new two-story single family dwelling at 1537 DRAKE AVENUE, LOT 10 zoned R-l. APN 026-033-270 Mailed: June 29, 2007 (Please refer to other side) CITY OF BURLINGAME A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Flanning Departm.ent 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 i_nformation, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. Margaret Monroe City Planner PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE (Please refer to otlzer side) �s� ''�' ,��r, '?� y ,� �� . y�' .`4` r� X �.�� ..ir � . . . . � ... a .. .. � _ � .. .. r-�. r . �µ�q ��. t^ ��.....I..., 7'� f^ �Yrr�' �� .4 � �-� ; s, t�'x� � �":►' ' ��-p a �� «'t'�: t � i � �,,;� �� 1e . * 1 �; �� , +ff ; _. «c� y ,�� - . _ � . ` �' �� "� �� '� . 6' "- t `� �''.� � . �dub _.....,. � . . , , - , «� , � �. . - � (. � �� `. . .- � , �,� a � - . 4 �, � � �.�.. �,�, . _, � r�,., F 4 , �* � � � � �� " , �.. —� , , y'�c e � � � 1 � . • � , . . ,; - . . . �, � x t �' . • � � �� , ,��, � � � ' �. �: � . . �TM« � . ;.-.�„��t . -.v �, ..� �,. �' " . -;._ � .. . �c . � ,. ^ .s t �, . * y •L�. � � - f 4 �� t �� „ � � �� 3 � � � � . �i l� � �' :r i0'�� a�s'� ;�q' � �r ��y � "�; x � �} '.r � �'� ` � .� * �.lF, '� � ,� ��`'-w,'��'�'°� �, ,r. . � � '� � �� " � �" �f � � � a , < . � F ,,A . � �� ` f'; , � - � � . ,.;;, . �' Q �.,* ,m,,,��; ` ,dC; �`��.� �' ��; � A' j� I+ � M. �A...+i�'�,Q.. �,+''�'�,_iR� .�✓ �i �'� � R� , . � �� . � "" „ ,��' �'. , ' ° � � -� � �.'� � x � s� � � . �' ;�''`y E " , ��'M �;'�„ � a ;��566 �, .�. , � -° -�. � � ` � � �.� �� .� � ,�°; �_ � ..�.. ��,; � � �;�s�. � �'�^�"�, wi�'�"• t�,� . �+�. � , � i .:�A O'� ♦. � �R�� « :i„ � �'. _ I'" �� i � �� ,. .� �; � : � �"'��,i � � '� �- � r< � 95 � .. � ��w � . . a '': � � � ,a�a � � / "h . ��Ft. � �c t, . � R : t� n;�,� . � � :a r 4a;ia» � . '� � ;A .+� . ; '� `r+(�� . � , ! a�+�'`�*� � ,�t," . . x�" •�k, �� •.�� +*� ,5+� � .. �,. 5�� ; �F, � � �� , t ;h ,°�'y � � � rt ' '�w5�!,r � �'a � , �v �� `� , , v . .x„ . , � , � � a� , ,� •r , � • � ,'�� } i wi�. / `� �tiS*. � , � •� �'� �� i " �� . '4+ ,� ��.�'�,,�'�T" ,�. `��,'� . "�� .+ ' . � � 9� � k �� ,r� �'a'., y - :. ., � , . A I -�` r � � � L� ��• : � ` � ��,: �. 5+��', �w� �� .. � k � +• �' �. �,��h',�� . � �� ;�� ,� i�, . ' ¢ . . '�y �`��'� '� ` � � � �t� . , , ,. � i�` ` � f . � � � � � � ;�. �F � ,i$��+ � } � " 5 ..;. ,� , � ' � , ' � �:; '� " ., � .. � � ".� . ' r �� F,� � � ��. ��'��.�: ��, . � . ��rtf�*r '� � ,�. i- .8 ' ` � . �� r, .�. ��,�, �� -� .�' � � � � � � k � �*''�_ f� ,}� �+ ,,� � � r ;.�;�: � �; 1� „ , > .. , , ,r � � .. . ^ , e �' f ?�� . , , „ � ��r . � �, : ; � �� "��,, • � � * ��'` S � �� 'r � . ` �.�� , .� - � w�.�r � ,f �, � '_ � �w ,'� . � �; �`' '�7'�� '��' ti. . „ .., . , . �, � � � . �. � � , p �� k� � . � ` � � � . .� R vo � 9 �y . � 4 ' 'y�� T .f�`� �� • . �� ,. � , �,.,, T � �::. � „ `� `"�k� � �% � � � . � q�a .� � .�� . / � r � "' r ' . . .� , . . ` ,y�M • .. ' ��. . - � n . , . , •. . _. , w� R. � � .�i'. L : . LL ` , ,�4^ .:�, ,� .. �'� � l 'S.�' �'F ��'�7e � ,� { k . � �.� :�;�;r�.F ,� '� �:ai � �r � � � a` r� .fi�`". ( sl •t `l �,,% � i.A�, � �� " `�� .� '3 �' . .. _ , ` �a- :�� 'i� � , �� rs�� i .�'' • .. .}�, h vY � �w��r. `� .� � .'d7 r �r *,��a..�, �'� ��,..�� ''" r �� ,��. iq, � �� ' i .• ��t „�•.. ' V' . / � '� r�S��l , � � q �. .'V` . t ''' .� •d l ,F. `° , ��'; , rE,,✓' �"�f ,• r;� � � s= �J�.. L � � � ' � �' ^� d . 'w " A t 1�",� � � � { M ,� � ��` xy� .y °�wiy� ry, ' r ... je�t� 4 �iA '..��kb�! . d.��' �� 1 � �" ..�6 � � t�� . A ' �r ' � �� "a�?� , .: . , , � . #:a k� �� v ' � �- ? � 4 C� � � q �/ / �_ � ¢ � A v . . Y �A � � � � � . � i . L g � ': T �J-� , �$� �� . � � r ��..`�»7'.��. • i.' 'x7'�" « . �4� "�'�� '�2� �C' !� � � �. ` � � � }�,p� . '�� tid � .�., � � � . � . . � � r � � �. A�: • y � f � .4� .:5� �,�IT tS� � s ��-�,�#. �� 1ML � '� 1 k '.. City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 9, 2007 3. 1537 DRAKE AVENUE, LOT 10, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EMERGING LOTS, AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR BUILDING HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS (OTTO MILLER, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., DESIGNER) (55 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated July 9, 2007, with attachments. Planner Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Forty-five (45) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Deal opened the public hearing at 7:57 p.m. Mark Hudak, 216 Park Road, Burlingame, represented the applicant. There were no Commissioner comments. Janet Garcia, 1561 Drake Avenue, encouraged retention of the cash deposit related to the Redwood grove. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed at 7:18 p.m. CommissionerAuran moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2007, sheets A.1, A.4, A.S, U.1, L1.1, S.1 and D.1 through D.4, and date stamped June 7, 2007, sheets A.2, A.3, A.4A, A.4B, A.5A, A.5B, A.6 and L1.0; 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 3. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 4. 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 and the City Arborist shall verify that all required tree protection measures were adhered to during construction including maintenance of the redwood grove, an appropriate tree maintenance program is in place, all required landscaping and irrigation was installed appropriately, and any redwood grove tree protection measures have been met; 5. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 6. that the conditions of the City Engineers' May 31, June 4, August 30, and October 15, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 18, 2007, memos, the Fire Marshal's September 3, 2002, June 22, 2005, and June 18, 2007 memos, the Chief Building Official's August 5, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 15, 2007 memos, the Recycling Specialist's August 27, 2002, and June 27, 2005 memos, the NPDES 10 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 9, 2007 Coordinator's June 27, 2005, memo, and the City Arborist's September 3, 2002, and April 3 and May 21, 2003, and April 13, 2007 memos shall be met; 7. that any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to have a City grading permit, be overseen by the project arborist, inspected by the City Arborist, and be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and with all the requirements of the permit issued by BAAQMD; 8. that there shall be no heavy equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or holidays during the development of Lot 10; use of all hand tools shall comply with the requirements of the City's noise ordinance; 9. that as much employee parking as possible shall be accommodated on the site during each of the phases of development; construction activity and parking shall not occurwithin the redwood tree grove protective fencing on Lot 10; 10. that construction materials shall not be staged on Lot 9; all heavy equipment and materials shall be staged along the right side of the property on Lot 10; 11. that at no time shall any equipment exceeding 18,000 LBS be allowed to be within 30 feet of the currently fenced off Redwood Tree Grove protection zone; 12. that prior to the placement or use of any motorized equipment within 30 feet of the currently fenced Redwood Tree Grove protection zone, a protective layer of mulch one foot deep with 3/4 inch plywood on top, shall be installed and inspected by the project arborist to avoid further soil compaction of the area; post construction the protective plywood and mulch may be removed as approved bythe project arborist; 13. all construction shall be done in accordance with the California Building Code requirements in effect at the time of construction as amended by the City of Burlingame, and limits to hours of construction imposed by the City of Burlingame Municipal Code; 14. that the method of construction and materials used in construction shall insure that the interior noise level within the building and inside each unit does not exceed 45 dBA in any sleeping areas; 15. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall be installed along the right side property line to meet current code standards and local capacities of the collection and distribution systems shall be increased at the property owner's expense if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department and the location of all trenches for utility lines shall be approved by the City Arborist during the building permit review and no trenching for any utility shall occur on site without continual supervision of the project arborist and inspection by the City Arborist; 16. that the new sewer connection to the public sewer main shall be installed along the right side property line to City standards as required by the development; 17. that all abandoned utilities and hookups shall be removed unless their removal is determined by the City Arborist to have a detrimental effect on any existing protected trees on or adjacent to the site; 18. that prior to being issued a demolition permit on the site, the property owner shall submit an erosion control plan for approval by the City Engineer; 19. that prior to installation of any sewer laterals, water or gas connections on the site, the property owner shall submit a plan for approval by the City Engineer and the City Arborist; 20. that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site will be required to meet 11 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards; 21. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior tllumination Ordinance; July 9, 2007 22. that the project property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions to the proposed house and/or accessory structure or necessary changes to the tree protection program or to address new issues which may arise during construction; 23. that should any cultural resources be discovered during construction, work shall be halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the Community Development Director and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City; 24. that the driveway shall be designed to be pervious material as approved by the City Arborist, and installed according to approved plans with the supervision of the project arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist; 25. that the established root protection fencing shall be inspected regularly by the City Arborist and shall not be adjusted or moved at any time during demolition or construction unless approved by the City Arborist; that the root protection fencing shall not be removed until construction is complete on Lots 9 and 10, except if the portion of the protective fence on Lot 9 in the area of the driveway may be removed to install the driveway with the approval of the City Arborist; the removal of a section of the fence should not disturb the maintenance irrigation system installed within the tree protective fencing; 26. that the driveway on Lot 10 shall be constructed of pavers set in sand, with a maximum cut below grade of 10 inches and a base compaction determined by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist; that if any roots greater than � 2 inches in diameter are encountered during grading for the driveway on Lot 10 and must be cut to install the driveway, the situation shall be documented by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to cutting any roots; and that if at any time the project arborist on site or the City Arborist feels the number of roots to be cut to install the driveway on Lot 10 is significant, a stop work order shall be issued for the site until the City Arborist determines whether it is necessary to relocate the driveway; 27. that special inspections by the City Arborist, to be funded by the property owner, shall include being on site during any demolition and grading or digging activities that take place within the designated tree protection zones, including the digging of the pier holes for the pier and grade beam foundation, and during digging for removal or installation of any utilities; thatthe special inspections bythe CityArborist shall occur once a week or more frequently as required by the conditions of approval and shall include written documentation by the project arborist that all tree protection measures are in place and requirements of the conditions of approval are being met; that no materials or equipment shall be stockpiled or stored in any area not previously approved by the City Arborist; and that the City Arborist may also stop work for any violation of the conditions related to the protection, conservation and maintenance of trees on the site; 28. that under the observation of the City Arborist, all pier holes for the foundation shall be hand dug to a depth of no more than 18 inches and the surface area around the hole shall be protected as required by the City Arborist; that if any roots greater than 2 inches in diameter are encountered during the digging for the pier holes, the property owner's on-site arborist shall call the City Arborist and determine how the pier shall be relocated and the Building Department shall be informed of the change and approve that the requirements of the building code are still met; and that if at any time during the installation of the pier and grade beam foundations roots greater than 2 inches in diameter must be cut, the situation must be documented by the project arborist and approved by the City Arborist prior to the time the roots are cut; 29. that, based on root locations that will be determined by hand digging on the site, the property owner 12 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 9, 2007 shall submit a detailed foundation report and design for approval by the Building Department and City Arborist to establish the bounds of the pier and grade beam foundation and have it approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site; and that if at any time during the construction the pier locations must be altered to accommodate a Redwood tree root, the structural changes must be approved by the Building Department prior to the time any such root is cut or damaged; 30. that the property owner shall submit a complete landscape plan for approval by the City Arborist prior to a Building permit being issued to address the landscaping and fence installation on the site, including plantings, irrigation, electricity, fences, retaining walls and soil deposits on the site; installation of all landscape features shall be overseen by the property owner's arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arborist, including fence post holes; and work shall be stopped and plans revised if any roots of 2 inches in diameter or greater are found in post holes or any new landscape materials added endanger the redwood trees; 31. that no fencing of any kind shall be allowed for the first 65'-0" along the side property line between Lots 9 and 10; 32. that for tree maintenance the property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the protected Redwood grove during demolition and construction work on the project and for a 5-year post construction maintenance program forthe Redwood trees and their root structure on the site, including deep root fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection. This maintenance program shall be founded upon the recommendations of the April 28, 2003 Mayne Tree Company report as well as such additional recommendations as the property owner shall receive from a certified arborist; and that the property owner of record shall submit a report from a certified arborist to the Planning Department that discussed the health of the trees and any recommended maintenance on the trees or other recommended actions on the property no later than one year after the completion of construction (issuance of an occupancy permit) on the project and every two years thereafter for a period of 5 years; 33. that the property owner shall deposit with the City $118,780 based on the appraisal of the value of the four Redwood trees accepted by the City Arborist and City Attorney on Lots 9 and 10, as security to the City against one or more of the Redwood trees dying as the result of construction orwithin 5 years of the completion of construction due to problems attributable to construction; these funds shall be available to the City Arborist to cover any necessary removal costs, cover any unperformed maintenance or other corrective activities regarding the grove of Redwood trees; nothing in this condition is intended to limit in any way any other civil or criminal penalties that the City or any other person may have regarding damage or loss of trees; 34. that for purposes of these conditions the project arborist is a certified arborist hire by the property owner/developer; a certified arborist means a person certified by the International Society of Arboriculture as an arborist; 35. that before issuance of any demolition or building permit, the property owner shall record a deed restriction on the lot identifying the four (4) key Redwood trees and providing notice to the heirs, successors, and assigns that these trees were key elements of the development of the lot and: a. The trees may cause damage or inconvenience to or interfere with the driveways, foundations, roofs, yards, and other improvements on the property; however, those damages and inconveniences will not be considered grounds for removal of the trees under the Burlingame Municipal Code; b. Any and all improvement work, including landscaping and utility service, on the property must be performed in recognition of the irreplaceable value of the trees, must be done in consultation 13 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 9, 2007 with a certified arborist, and if any damage to the trees occurs, will result in penalties and possible criminal prosecution; 36. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition or the edition approved by the City and as amended by the City of Burlingame at the time a building permit is issued; 37. that before any grading or construction occurs on the site, these conditions and a set of approved plans shall be posted on a weather-proofed story board at the front of the site to the satisfaction of the Building Department so that they are readily visible and available to all persons working or visiting the site; 38. that if work is done in violation of any requirement in these conditions prior to obtaining the required approval of the City Arborist, and/or the Building Division, work on the site shall be immediately halted, and the project shall be placed on a Planning Commission agenda to determine what corrective steps should be taken regarding the violation; 39. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall be maintained during construction on Lot 10, and this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing shall not be temporarily altered, moved or removed during construction; no materials, equipment or tools of any kind are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, within this Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing, the protective fencing and protection measures within the fencing shall remain in place until the building permit for each development on Lots 9 and 10 has received an occupancy permit and the City Arborist has approved removal of the protective fencing; 40. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall install a locked gate in the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing for inspection access to the protected area in order to determine on going adequacy of mulch, soil moisture and the status of other field conditions as necessary throughout the construction period; this area shall be accessed only by the project arborist, City Arborist, or workers under the supervision of these professionals; 41. that the property owner shall maintain throughout construction a three-inch thick layer of well aged, course wood chip mulch (not bark) and a two-inch thick layer of organic compost spread over the entire soil surface within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the project arborist and City Arborist; installation of the wood chip and compost shall be supervised by the project arborist and the City Arborist; the project arborist shall inform the City Arborist of the timing of installation of the course wood chip mulch and organic compost so that observation and inspection can occur; 42. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall ensure maintenance of the supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an active hose bib, snaked throughout the entire area on Lots 9 and 10 within the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing; irrigation must be performed at least once every two weeks throughout the entire construction period for all three lots unless determined not to be necessary by the project arborist and City Arborist; this area shall be soaked overnight, at least once every two weeks, until the upper 24-inches of soil is thoroughly saturated; the City Arborist shall periodically test the soil moisture to ensure proper irrigation; 43. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 10, the property owner shall ensure maintenance of at least four (4), 8-inch by 11-inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a"Tree Protection Fence", "Do Not Alter or Remove" and in the event of movement or problem call a posted emergency number; 44. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lot 10 shall be regularly inspected by the project arborist and City Arborist during construction on Lot 10; violation of the fenced areas and/or removal or relocation of the fences shall cause all construction work to be stopped until possible damage has been determined by the City Arborist and the property owner has implemented all corrective measures 14 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 9, 2007 and they have been approved by the City Arborist; and 45. that before issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall deposit $7,500 with the Planning Department to fund, on an hourly basis, the City Arborist inspections as required in the conditions of approval of all construction and grading on Lot 10 to insure that the mitigation measures included in the negative declaration and the conditions of approval attached to the project by the Planning Commission action are met; and a. that the property owner shall replenish by additional deposit by the 15`h of each month to maintain a$7,500 balance in this inspection account to insure that adequate funding is available to cover this on-going inspection function; and b. that failure to maintain the amount of money in this account by the 15th of each month shall result in a stop work order on the project which shall remain in place until the appropriate funds have been deposited with the City; and c. that should the monthly billing during any single period exceed $7,500 a stop work order shall be issued until additional funds to replenish the account have been deposited with the city so inspection can continue; and d. that should the city be caused to issue three stop work orders for failure to maintain the funding in this arborist inspection account, the property owner shall be required to deposit two times the amount determined by the City Arborist to cover the remainder of the inspection work before the third stop work order shall be removed; and e. that the unexpended portion of the inspection deposit shall be returned to the property owner upon inspection of the installation of the landscaping and fences, irrigation system and approval of the five year maintenance plan/ program for the portion of the Redwood tree grove on the lot; and that this same account may be used for the City Arborist's selected licensed arborist inspector on lot 10 selected by the City Arborist and approved by the Community Development Director. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Terrones. Commissioner Osterling asked if the cash deposit would still be retained if Condition 33 were eliminated from the conditions of approval for Lot 10. Community Development Director Meeker responded that since the requirement for the deposit remains with Lot 9, the applicant would still be required to leave it on deposit with the City. Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-2 (Commissioners Cauchi and Vistica absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:02 p.m. 15