HomeMy WebLinkAboutAmendment - document type/separator unknown/missingCity of Burlingame
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
Address: 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Item #2
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, declining height
envelope and attached garage to construct a new finro-story single family dwelling with an
attached garage at 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9, 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: 026-033-280
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 property owner's arborist's reports and compliance with them during construction.
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permifs
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, declining height envelope and attached
garage to construct a new finro-story single family dwelling with an attached garage at 1537 Drake
Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1. Currently, Lot 9 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 9,
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 9, 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.
Summary of Proposal on Lot 9(plans dafe stamped March 13 and June 7, 2007)
The proposed single family house on Lot 9, with an attached one-car garage, measures 2,944 SF
(0.49 FAR), where 3,020 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed. The proposed house is 76 SF
below the maximum allowed FAR. The house includes four bedrooms; two parking spaces are
required on-site, one of which must be covered. The single-car attached garage (10' x 20' clear
interior dimensions) and one uncovered parking space in the driveway (9' x 20') meet the on-site
parking requirement for a four-bedroom house. A Special Permit is required for the proposed attached
2
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
garage. Special Permits are also required for building height (30'-8" proposed where 30'-0" is the
maximum allowed) and declining height envelope (7 SF, 0'-6" x 14'-0" along the right side of the house
extends beyond the declining height envelope).
The applicant submitted a Landscape Plan and Irrigation Plan, sheets L1.0 and L1.1, respectively,
documenting that the six existing significant Redwood trees on this lot will remain after construction.
With the six existing Redwood trees, the site is in compliance with the Urban Reforestation and Tree
Protection Ordinance (six existing trees to remain where a minimum of three 24" box landscape trees
are required). In addition to the existing trees, 14 new trees will be added on the lot to screen the finro-
story house. The following species are proposed on Lot 9: Tasmanian Tree Fern (7 —15 gallon), Yew
Pine (4 —15 gallon), Citrus (2 —15 gallon), and Japanese Maple (1-24" box-size). The applicant is also
proposing to plant a pear tree in the planter strip in the public right-of-way in front of Lot 9.
The City Arborist and project arborist have reviewed and approved the proposed Landscape Plan (see
memo from City Arborist, dated April 13, 2007, and letter from Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc.,
dated February 8, 2007).
Changes fo Lof 9 Projecf Since May 3, 2004 Cify Council Meefing: Since the City Council meeting
on May 3, 2004, the applicant has made several changes to the project proposed on Lot 9 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 near the Redwood tree grove (see
sheet S.1) and a footing foundation for the rest of the house (see sheet D.2). Based on root locations
that will be determined by hand digging on the site, the pier locations for the pier and grade beam
foundation will be determined. 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. With this foundation system, the piers will be set in the ground and the beam
will be above grade. As a result, this foundation system raised the house by 4'-4" from what was
previously proposed.
The finished floor of the attached garage was only raised by approximately 10 inches to minimize the
amount of fill above existing grade. The new driveway and walkway would be constructed using
interlocking pavers set in sand, a sub base and mirafi geotextile between the existing grade and sub
base (see Concrete Unit Paver detail on sheet L1.0). In a letter dated October 19, 2006, Mayne Tree
Expert Company, Inc., investigated the location of the proposed driveway and walkway and concluded
that a 7-inch cut could be done without encountering large roots. He further notes that a little deeper
could be done near the existing sidewalk where the driveway is to start. This would allow for a gradual
rise up to the garage.
Planning staff would also note that an additional 32 SF was added on the second floor at the rear of
the house. In the previous design, there was a notch at the right rear corner of the master bedroom.
The revised design includes filling in this notch so that the walls above line up with the walls below.
With this revision, the proposed FAR increased from 2,912 SF (0.48 FAR) to 2,944 SF (0.49 FAR)
where 3,022 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed.
3
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
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 an attached garage at
1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9;
� Special Permit for building height (30'-8" proposed where 30'-0" is the maximum allowed) (CS
25.28.060, a, 1);
• Special Permit for declining height envelope (7 SF, 0'-6" x 14'-0" along the right side of the
house extends beyond the declining height envelope) (CS 25.28.075); and
• Special Permit for attached garage (CS 25.28.035, a).
1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Lot Area: 6,006 SF Plans date stam ed: March 13 and June 7, 2007
Proposed Allowed/Required
i
SETBACKS I
1 ..............................................................................................................................................................................................
Front (1st flr): 34'-7" ; 21'-1"
(2nd flr): 55'-1" � 21'-1"
� ..............................................................................................._.............................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................... .
Side (left): 4'-0" � 4'-0"
(righf): 7'-0" � 4'-0"
................._............................_......................................................... ,
...............................---................_..........................._..........................................._.
Rear (1st f/r): 16'-0" � 15'-0"
(2nd flr): 20'-0" � 20'-0"
�
9 ............... .................................................... ....... ... ........ .............................................................................................. .......... ........... ...... . ............
Lot Covera e: 1,820 SF 2402 SF
30.3 % � 40%
........................................................................................................................................................................................... . ... .. ,
FAR: 2,944 SF � 3022 SF'
0.49 FAR i 0.50 FAR
_ ....................................................................._................................ ....................................................................................................... .. ...
� ..............................................................................................................................................................................................
Parking: 1 covered � 1 covered
(10' x 20') (10' x 20')
1 uncovered 1 uncovered
(9' x 20') (9' x 20')
attached garage 2 Special Permit required for
attached garage
..................... ...................................... .
� ............................. ....... ......................................................................................... .. ........................... ................
# of bedrooms: 4 i ---
' (0.32 x 6006 SF) + 1100 SF = 3022 SF (0.50 FAR)
2 Special Permit for attached garage.
4
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Lot Area: 6.006 SF
Proposed
Height:
DH Envelope:
30'-8" 3
Plans date stam
special permit required 4
1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
: March 13 and June 7, 2007
Allowed/Required
il 1
see code
3 Special Permit for building height (30'-8" proposed where 30'-0" is allowed).
4 Special Permit for declining height envelope on Lot 9(7 SF, 0'-6" x 14'-0" along the right 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.
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
left side of Lot 9(away from the Redwood tree grove). Gas, cable TV, 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).
5
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
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 left side of Lot 9. 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
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 10) 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.
�
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review,
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
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. Nof seeing on site p/an or landscape p/an if fhere will be a new fence constructed on left
side property line; will it be in p/ace of existing grape stakes, should work with neighbor. A
condition shou/d be added that states the applicant shal/ work wifh fhe neighbor fo the left
concerning the installation of a new fence.
A note has been added to the Site Plan indicating that "the replacement of the existing brick
pillars separated by grape stake fence to be determined between the applicant and the
adjacent owner" (see revised Site Plan, sheet A.2). A condition of approval has been added
(see Condition #46).
2. Is fhere going fo be a fence to separate the two properties? Landscape p/an shows a fence
between lots 9 and 10, there should be no fence in fronf of the house.
The Site Plan and Landscape Plan has been revised to show a new 6'-0" tall wood fence
befinreen Lots 9 and 10. The new fence begins at the rear property line and extends only to the
front of the house on Lot 9, approximately 65'-0" back from the front property line and away
from the Redwood Tree Groves (see revised Site Plan and Landscape Plan, sheets A.2 and
L1.0). There is no fencing proposed between the properties at the front of the lot; the area at
the front of the lot would remain open with landscaping (see revised Landscape Plan, sheet
L1.0).
3. Roof pitch is being taken down, house has stepped up, but roof pitch has been made
shal/ower? Should eliminate the flat portion of fhe roof and go for a Special Permit for
height; height of homes is mitigated by the extremely tall redwood frees.
Since the original approval, the roof pitch was slightly decreased from 8:12 to 6:12 and the roof
peak replaced with a flat roof to help reduce the height of the building. Based on the direction
from the Planning Commission at the design review study meeting, the flat portion of the roof
has been replaced with a peaked roof (see revised Front Elevation, sheet A.4A). A Special
Permit for building height is now required (30'-8" proposed where 30'-0" is the maximum
allowed).
4. Arborists are very ta/enfed; don't think fhere will be any issues wifh the frees if the tree
protection measures are carried through construction.
• There are several proposed conditions of approval which include compliance with tree
protection measures throughout construction.
7
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
5. Either the home on Lot 9 or Lot 10 shou/d have on/y one chimney.
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 A56).
Planning staff would also note that 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).
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.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted
by the Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows:
Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood;
2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood;
3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure;
4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and
5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components.
Required Findings for 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.
�
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Condifional Use Permit and Special Permits
Required Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a Special Permit for building height,
declining height envelope and attached garage, 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, fa�ade, 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.
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 and Addendum, 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 9:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department
date stamped nn�,-,.,� ,�L�`��eo�4TTA.'1 �����nh� A�+ �nrl iJ�#o c4�mnorl�Z���o�
r"��� +�� March 13, 2007, sheets A.1, A.4 through A.6, 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.48, A.5A, A.58 and L1.0; 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 to the tree protection plan
or #a tree 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 ��,�;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,; aa�' �" ^"�^^�� c".�
� ,
,�.,�� .,���� +tie ��.�,o +;.�,o ,,,, �a,�,.o.,+ �„+� � n.,.,,� �� shall be subject to Planning
Commission review;
3. , ,
�
,
�
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
+ho ,.o.+;f,,..,+;,,., ,,,,,�or r�cn�lfii „f ..e ,�n-; 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 Engineer's April 8, May 31, June 4, August 15 , August 30, and
October 15, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 18, 2007 memos, the Fire Marshal's September
3, 2002, June 23, 2005 and June 18, 2007 memos, the Chief Building '^c^�� 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 ��^,^'�+;,,., .,f +he e,,,�+;.,� �+r,,,.+,,,-o� ��.+ 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 9; 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 9;
10. that construction of the house and attached garage on Lot 9 shall be completed through Lot
10 at rear of Lot 9;
10
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
11. that heavy construcfion materials and equipment shall not be delivered to the site or stored at
the front of Lot 9 in the designated driveway area;
12. that at no time shall any equipment exceeding 98,000 LBS be allowed to be within 30 feet of
the currently fenced off Redwood Tree Grove protection zone;
13. 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
% 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;
�& 14. 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; "cr{..�„�
;
� 15. 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;
�? 16. that t#�-r��,., ' �^^" ,.,�� '^� ��eaFe--4s#�r°��--ar� '�1 s#a�'��-+�►�ed� �� �„
i���+i.,n fnr +ho fr�� �r„J�4i�n �.�ill ho c.�horl� �lo.-I h.� +ho !''i+.�� �n.a all new utility connections to
serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall be installed along the left
side property line between the driveway and property line to meet current code standards;
a�d 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-4+c�e+�sed the project arborist and inspection by the City Arborist;
�: 17. that the new sewer connection to the �a-bl+s sewer main in the street shall be installed along
the left side property line to City standards as required by the development;
�-4 18. 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;
� 19. 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;
� 20. 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;
. ,
�
�rl '1'1 �niJ r�ri�r f� r�. ' iiniv � h��ilrlinn r+��� nr�n��i�T�-���II �h4�in �n
i
11
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
�:r-t.�r�n:r�s�enzra
, , ,
; '
, �
�� ��
n��ir+er c�hnll ho roc�r�i+ncihla f�r 4he imnlomon4�4ir�n �f 4hic nl�n• /nmm��o4er��
vr � ..�....� ,... ..�.,p.............�.� �... ....� .. �r.�.����.......,.�.... ... .... r........� �.,... .r...�_.�_.�
�9: 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;
�--22. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance;
�? 23. that the project property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions
to the proposed house a���^�^�sey�s��st�+re or necessary changes to the tree
protection program or to address new issues which may arise during construction;
. ,
\A/n}or �A�+n�lvomcn4 �nr1 flie�nh�rlva i��n+rr�I /irliin�nno•
�
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 �'�+����
Community Development Director 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 �'�^Q-„o ^�Q the project 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 for 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.
• -- • � - -
-- -
- - - � - - - - -
- • - - -
�: that the established root protection fencing shall be inspected regularly by the City
12
Amendmenf to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
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;
27
� that ' special inspections by the City Arborist, to be funded by the
property owner, shall include being b�-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� ���rinn +ho /'IIA/YIY1/'1 �,f +ho fo.,,.o .,,,�+
h„�o� f�r +ho firc�# C.(1 foo# �,f fonno hafi�iccn �„+� o�.,,� � �, and during digging for removal or
installation of any utilities; and
n c c� r1 h�i #ho (�i4�i �r�ri fi inrlc��h�� rE�i�ncr
� that a--I;oe��ed-a�e�+s�, �e�c=ste�z �. ,�rt e
special inspections by the City Arborist shall occur �^�^�^+ +�o n�nc#r� �n#i�n �,+o once a week
or more frequently as required by the conditions of approval and se�i#� shall include written
documentation by the project arborist �^ .�,r�+;.,,. +„ +ho �;+., Arhr�ric� �„a Dl�nninn Ilon�rfmcn4
that all tree protection measures are in place and requirements of the conditions of approval
are being met; and
a�Ru+ ^��er-����eq� ����e�-s#a;l-�-��sk�i�ed--e�s�e��� +a an�area ne�
.
� �
� that 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
�4: 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; and
;
� that if any roots greater than � 2 inches in diameter are encountered during the digging
for the pier holes, the ^�^^��*„ ����nor�c� ,,.,_�,+o project 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
13
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
G 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, the report shall be �^�'�"��,�R approved prior to the issuance of a building permit
for construction on the site; and
�: 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
�y-evwae�'s project 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 �rst 65'-0" a/ong the side property line
between Lots 9 and 10;
� - - - - - - - - -
_. .
.
�e�i�r�s_T�,� ��r:sr�:�:�sa
� 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; e+a +"�� 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; and
� that t�he property owner of record 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
14
Amendment to Mitigafed Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
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;
.
. �_ • �
.
.
� '-
.
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 Aftorney 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 thaf the City or any other person may have regarding
damage or loss of trees;
3�- 34. that for purposes of these conditions the project arborist is a certi�ed arborist hire by the
property owner/developer; a certified arborist means a person certified by the International
Society of Arboriculture as an arborist;
34: 35. that before issuance of any demolition or s�e� 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 l��i#s�+ Fire
Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
15
Amendment to Mitigated Negafive Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
:r_�es�.
- -- , _ . .. -- --
.
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;
• - - - - - - --�
'- � - - - - - - • � -
• • .
. � • .. Trl�
�
�
•
39. 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 permit 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;
. •
._ .
- � - - - - -
- - - � - - - - - - - - - - --
4� 40. 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
16
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
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. 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 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 Ciry 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 9�^�' c+��+;.,,. ;., +ho ��+e
�r��E��'��me�2A84, the property owner shall �a ensure maintenance of the
supplemental irrigation system of approximately 250 feet of soaker hoses attached to an
active hose bib f�^m +ho #omr��r�r�i ,.,,+or �;,,o „n ��+ o, 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 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 9, the property owner shall
a#i� 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;
4-� 44. that the Redwood Tree Grove Protective Fencing on Lots 9 a�d-�� 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; a�d
4-� 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, ^��^�^c�� ^rh�ric# incncni�r �e�o,.+o,� h„
the City Arborist inspections as required by the conditions of approval +�?�;�+ +��
on Lot 9 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
17
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
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;
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 �,",� �'�+., Arh�ric4�c �o�o,.+ea a licensed
arborist inspector on lots 9 selected by the City Arborist and approved by the Community
Development Director a�a�-�8.
46. that prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall work with the property owner adjacent to
Lot 9 to determine the type of fence and/or landscaping to replace the existing brick pillars
separated by grape stake fencing.
18
Amendment to Mitigafed Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
Proposed Conditions of Approval for Lot 9(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 through A.6, 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 and L1.0; 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 to the tree
protection plan or tree 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 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 Engineer's April 8, May 31, June 4, August 15 , August 30, and
October 15, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 18, 2007 memos, the Fire Marshal's September
3, 2002, June 23, 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;
19
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Conditional Use Permif and Special Permifs
8. that there shall be no heavy equipment operation or hauling permitted on weekends or
holidays during the development of Lot 9; 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 9;
10. that construction of the house and attached garage on Lot 9 shall be completed through Lot
10 at rear of Lot 9;
11. that heavy construction materials and equipment shall not be delivered to the site or stored at
the front of Lot 9 in the designated driveway area;
12. 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;
13. 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;
14. 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;
15. 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;
16. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development,
shall be installed along the left side property line befinreen the driveway and property line to
meet current code standards; 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;
17. that the new sewer connection to the sewer main in the street shall be installed along the left
side property line to City standards as required by the development;
18. 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;
19. 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;
20
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
20. 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;
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;
22. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance;
23. that the project property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions
to the proposed house or necessary changes to the tree protection program or to address
new issues which may arise during construction;
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 Community
Development Director 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 the project 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 for 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. 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;
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; and 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; and that 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. 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; and that if any roots greater than 2 inches in
21
ZZ
'saa�� }o sso� �o a6euaep
6uip�e6a� aney �(eua uosaad �ay�o �(ue �o �}i� ay� �ey� sai��euad �euivai.a� .ao �ini� .aay}o �(ue
�(enn �(ue ui �ivai� o} papua�ui si uoi�ipuo� siy� ui 6uiy�ou :saa�� poonnpa� �o ana6 ay� 6uip�e6aa
sai�ini��e ani��a.aao� aay�o ao a�ueua�uiew pauaao�adun �(ue aano� `s�so� �enouaaa i(.iessa�au
�(ue �ano� o} }siaoqay �(�i� ay� o� a�qe�iene aq ��eys spun� asay� `uoi��n��suo� o� a�qe�nqi���e
swa�qad o� anp uoi��n��suo� �o uoi}a�duao� ay� �o saea�( g uiy�inn ao uoi��na}suo� �o
��nsaa ay� se 6ui�(p saaa� poonnpa� ay� �o a�ow ao auo �suie6e �(}i� ay� o} �(�ian�as se `p � pue
g s�o� uo �(auao��y �(�i� pue �si�oqay �(�i� ay� �(q pa�da��e saa�� poonnpay ano� ay� �o an�en
ay} �o �esieadde ay� uo paseq pgL`g��$ �(}i� ay� y�inn �isodap ��eys �aunno �(}�adoad ay� �ey� '££
`s.aea�( 5�o pouad e �o� �a}�eaaay� saea�( onn} tiana pue ��afoad ay�
uo (�iwaad �(�uedn��o ue �o a�uenssi) uoi��n��suo� �o uoi�a�dwo� ay� aa��e �ea/( auo uey; �a}e�
ou �(�adoad ay� uo suoi��e papuawwo�a� �ay�o ao saaa� ay� uo a�ueua�uieua papuauauao�a�
�(ue pue saa�� ay� �o y��eay ay� sassn�sip �ey} �uaw�aedaa 6uiuue�d ay� o� �si�oq�e
pai�i�a� e wa} �oda� e�ivaqns ��eys p�o�aa �o �aunno �(�adoad ay� �ey� pue `uog�na�suo�
6ui�np a�uaiaadxa pue saipn�s a}is uo paseq �si�oq�y /(}i� ay� �(q papuauauao�a� se aq ��eys
uae�6oad a�ueua�uieua siy� 'uog�adsui �eui� uodn 6uiuui6aq '6uizi�i�a� �ooa daap 6uipn��ui
`aan��n��s �oo.a aiay� pue saa�� poonnpa� ay� ao} wea6ad a�ueua�uieua uog�na�suo� �sod �ea�(
-5 e ao� pue ��afoad ay} uo ��onn uoi}�na�suo� pue uoi}i�ouaap 6uianp anoa6 poonnpa� pa;�a;ad
ay� �o a�ueua�uieua ao� a�qisuodsa� aq ��eys �aunno �(}�adoad ay� a�ueua�uiew aaa� ao� }ey� �Z£
:p� pue g s�o� uaann�aq
aui� �(}�adoad apis ay� 6uo�e „p-,59 �sai� ay� ao� paMo��e aq ��eys pui�{ �fue �0 6ui�ua� ou }ey� � �E
:saaa� poonnpa� ay� �a6uepua pappe s�eiaa}eua ade�spue� nnau �(ue ao sa�oy �sod
ui puno� aae aa}eaa6 ao aa�auaeip ui say�ui Z�o s�ooa �(ue �i pasinaa sue�d pue paddo}s aq ��eys
��onn pue :sa�oy ;sod a�ua� 6uipn��ui `�si�oq�y �(�i� ay� �(q pa��adsui �(��e�n6a� pue �si.aoqae
��afoad ay� �(q uaasaano aq ��eys saan�ea� ade�spuel II� �o uoi�e��e�sui :a�is ay} uo s�isodap �ios
pue s��enn 6uiuie�a� `sa�ua� '�(�i�i���a�a `uoi}e6iaai `s6ui�ue�d 6uipn��ui 'a�is ay� uo uoi�e��e�sui
a�ua� pue 6uide�spue� ay� ssa�ppe o� panssi 6uiaq �iw�ad 6uip�in8 e o� aoi�d �si�oqay
�(�i� ay� �(q �enoadde ao� ue�d ade�spue� a�a�dwo� e�ivaqns ��eys aaunno �(}�ado.ad ay} �ey� �p£
:pa6euaep ao �n� si �ooa y�ns �(ue auai� ay� o� aoi�d �uaua}�edad
6uip�in8 ay� /(q panadde aq }snw sa6uey� �e.an��na}s ay� `�oa aaa} poonnpa�{ e a�epouauao��e
o� pa�a��e aq �snua suoge�o� aaid ay� uoi��n��suo� ay� 6uunp auai� �Cue �e �i pue :a�is
ay� uo uoi��n��suo� �o� �ivaaad 6uip�inq e}o a�uenssi ay� o� aoiad panoadde aq ��eys �oda� ay�
'uoi�epuno� uaeaq apea6 pue aaid ay� �o spunoq ay� ysi�qe�sa o� �siaoq�y �(�i� pue �uaua�edaa
6uip�in8 ay� �(q �enoadde ao� u6isap pue }�odaa uoi�epuno� pa�ie�ap e�ivaqns ��eys aaunno
�(}�adad ay} 'a}is ay� uo 6ui66ip puey �(q paui�u�a�ap aq ��inn �ey� suoi�e�o� �ooa uo paseq `�ey� '6Z
'�n� aae s�oa ay} auai� ay� o� �oi�d �si�oq�y �(�i� ay� �(q panadde pue �siaoqae ��afad
ay} �(q pa�ua�.un�op aq �sni.0 uogen�is ay� `}n� aq �snua �a�aweip ui say�ui z uey� aa�eaa6 s}oa
suoi�epuno� uaeaq apea6 pue aaid ay� }o uoi�e��e�sui ay� 6uianp auai; �(ue }e �i �ey� pue `�aw ��i�s
aae apo� 6uip�inq ay� �o s�uawaainba� ay� �ey� anadde pue a6uey� ay� �o pawao�ui aq ��eys
�uaua}�edaa 6uip�in8 ay� pue pa�e�o�aa aq ��eys �aid ay� nnoy auiva�a�ap pue �si�oqay �(�i� ay�
II�� Il�us �siaoq�e ��afoad ay� `sa�oy aaid ay� �o� 6ui66ip ay� 6uianp pa�a�uno�ua aae aa�auaeip
s}�waad �e��ads pue ��uuad as/� �euo���puo�
g�o� — anuan y a�e�a �£g� `nna►na� u8�sap `uo��e�e��ap an�;e6a�/ pa;e6�;iW o; �ua►.upuawy
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
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, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
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 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 permit 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;
40. 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;
23
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Condifional Use Permit and Special Permits
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 9, 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 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;
43. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 9, 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 9 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;
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 by
the conditions of approval on Lot 9 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;
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
24
Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, 1537 Drake Avenue — Lot 9
Conditional Use Permit and Special Permits
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 a licensed arborist inspector on lot 9
selected by the City Arborist and approved by the Community Development Director.
46. that prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall work with the property owner adjacent to
Lot 9 to determine the type of fence and/or landscaping to replace the existing brick pillars
separated by grape stake fencing.
Ruben Hurin
Planner
c. Otto Miller, applicant and property owner
25
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
May 29, 2007
31, 2006 memo, the Cit ngineer's, Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's April 3, 2006 memos and
the Recycling Speci ' t's April 5, 2006 memo shall be met• 4) that demolition or removal o e existing
structures and an rading or earth moving on the site all not occur until a building p mit has been
issued and suc ite work shall be required to compl ith all the regulations of the Ba Area Air Quality
Managemen istrict; (5) that any changes to the s� e or envelope of the first or seco floors, which would
include a ing or enlarging a dormer(s), mov' g or changing windows and hitectural features or
changin the roof height or pitch, shall be su��ct to design review; (6) that pri o scheduling the framing
inspe ion, the project architect, engineer or other licensed profession shall provide architectural
ce ' ication that the architectural detai s�such as window locations and ays are built as shown on the
proved plans; if there is no licensed-�rofessional involved in the proje�the property owner or contractor
shall provide the certification uncl�r penalty of perjury; certificatior�� shall be submitted to the Building
Department; (7) that prior to fir� a1�inspection, Planning Departme�n#'staff will inspect and note compliance of
the architectural details (trim.r�5aterials, window type, etc.) to ve ify that the project has been built according
to the approved Planning 'd Building plans; all windows sh �be simulated true divided light windows wit
three dimensional wo� mullions and shall contain a stu�-mould trim; (8) that all air ducts, plum ' g
vents, and flues sh�I I'be combined, where possible, to a�single termination and installed on the po ' ns of
the roof not visib �from the street; and that these v ting details shall be included and appro d in the
construction pJa�s before a Building permit is issue ;(9) that priorto scheduling the roof deck' spection, a
licensed su eyor shall shoot the height of the oof ridge and provide certification of th t height to the
Building epartment; (10) that prior to sch, uling the foundation inspection a licen d surveyor shall
locate e property corners and set the buil ' g footprint; (11) that prior to underfloor ame inspection the
sury yor shall certify the first floor elev ion of the new structure(s) and the v�r%us surveys shall be
a epted by the City Engineer; (12) t t during demolition of the existing resid ce, site preparation and
onstruction of the new residence, t applicant shall use all applicable "be management practices" as
identified in Burlingame's Storm ter Ordinance, to prevent erosion an ff-site sedimentation of storm
water runoff; (13) that the pro� ct is subject to the state-mandated w er conservation program, and a
complete Irrigation Water M a� agement Plan must be submitted with I dscape and irrigation plans at t i rr�
o f p er mi t a p p l i c a t i o n; ( 1 4 a/ t h a t t h e p r o j e c t s h a l l c o m p l y wi t h t f� C o n s t r u c t i o n a n d D e m o l i t i o n D e k� f r i s
Recycling Ordinance whi requires affected demolition, new co�'struction and alteration projects t ubmit
a Waste Reduction P n and meet recycling requirements;�y partial or full demolition of a ructure,
in terior or ex terior, s a l l require a demo li tion permit; ( 1 5) a t t he app lican t s ha l l comp ly wi Or dinance
1503, the City of rlingame Storm Water Managemen nd Discharge Control Ordinanc , and (16) that
the project shall eet all the requirements of the Calif nia Building Code and Californ' Fire Code, 2001
edition, as a, nded by the City of Burlingame.
The mot�n was seconded by C. Terrones.
C. T rrones called for a voice vote on the otion to approve the project h the requested changes. The
tion passed 4-0-1-2 (Chair Deal abs ining, C. Cauchi and C. Vistic absent). Appeal procedures were
dvised. This item concluded at 9:55 p.m.
Chair Deal returned to the chambers and took his seat on the 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?
�
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%z 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 between 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 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
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 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
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 MARGA AAVENUE, ZONED R-1—APPLICATI FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND HILLSIDE AREA
CONSTRUC ON PERMIT FOR A FIRST AND SE ND FLOOR ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY
DWELLIN (MIKE AND AMY KERWIN, APP ANTS AND PROPERTY OWN�4S; AND JOHN
MANIS LLO ARCHITECTURE. ARCHITECT (47 NOTICEDI PROJECT PLANf�1.�R: LISA WHITMAN
Meeker briefly presented the projecJ�description. There were no questigrfs of staff.
Chair Deal opened the public comm t period. Mike Kerwin, property ow r; John Maniscalco, 1501 Waller
St, San Francisco; and Frank S git, 1560 Los Montes Drive, spo e. They noted: project is mostly
excavation instead of buildin p; designed house in order to eserve the view of the surrounding
neighbors; new scheme add sses all previous concerns from p vious projects on this site; roof material
will be consistent; upper le el addition at right side property li is at ground level then slopes down; upper
level addition will effect ew from 1560 Los Montes Drive; k for story poles; and Commissioners should
stop by 1560 Los M tes prior to action meeting whe story poles are installed. There were no other
comments from th loor and the public hearing was sed.
Commission cQlmmented:
• Con der stepping kitchen down?; coul lower upper level addition into the crawl space whic ould
h view from neighbors and story oles; and
• ddition is rather modest; issue i ith the view; will need to see story poles.
C. errones made a motion to plac his item on the Regular Action Calendar once t story poles have
b en installed and certified by a' ensed surveyor and there is room on the age a. This motion was
seconded by C. Osterling.
Comment on motion: woul ike to have contact number for property owner at 1560 Los Montes Drive to
visit site before action he ring; and would encourage applicant to plant smaller scale trees in the front
yard.
Chair Deal called r a vote on the motion to place this item on t� Regular Action Calendar when story
poles have bee installed and surveyed and there is room on t�agenda. The motion passed on a voice
vote 5-0-2 (C Cauchi and C. Vistica absent). The Planni Commission's action is advisory and not
appealable his item concluded at 11:05 p.m.
12. 1268 ortez Avenue, zoned R-1 — application for sign review and Special Permit for an a ched garage
for first and second story addition to a single f ily dwelling (Heidi Richardson, Richar on Architects,
plicant and architect; Andrew and Taryn Sut n, property owners) (85 noticed) Proje Planner: Ruben
ZT Strohmeier briefly presented the pro' ct description. There were no questio s of staff.
Chair Deal opened the public co ment. Heidi Richardson, 319 Miller venue, Suite 5, Mill Valley,
represented the project and state that the owners have spoken with the n ghbors who express no concern
with the project. Commission ommented:
• Concerned with bro face of proposed garage from street e vation; can it look more like existing
setup with a separ tion look befinreen house and garage?
• Could guest be oom over garage be more of an attic/g est bedroom with a steeper pitched roof
and dormers?
• Beautiful h se as is with house as major element nd garage as minor element, which is being
eliminat due to the scale and massiveness of t proposed 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
1te: Lot 9& Lot 10 of 1537 Drake Ave
Dear Planning Commissioners:
�
�.� _.. �_, �,,:;.
-°s- . �.u�(
� � ��_ ...
��._=r,;,,,,._ ., - �.
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 neighbor. ���
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 California 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
11, 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
5
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.
a.
)LUTION #42-2004 STA
THE
ES' RETIREMENT
THE
INTEDYI' TO AMEND THE
�T'I'Y OF BURLINGAME
�iI� 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 a1PERS). Staff also recommends that
the Council review the prop ed Ordinance to amend the City urlingame's contract with Ca1PERS.
Mayor O'Mahony re sted CC Musso to read the title o he proposed ordinance to amend t�City of
Burlingame's contr t with Ca1PERS.
Vice Mayor G igan made a motion to approve e Resolution of Intention #42-2004 t pprove the
Amendmen o the Contract with the Californ' ublic Employees Retirement Syste (Ca1PERS); seconded
by Counc' man Coffey, approved unanimo y by voice vote, 5-0.
Vice ayor Galligan made a motion t waive further reading of the propos ordinance; seconded by
C ncilman Coffey, approved una 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 summ of the proposed ordinanc t least five days
before proposed ado ion.
b. THIRD UARTER FIN�
FD Nava p sented Council with a
d.
the third quarter f,rhancial report.
6
Burlingame City Council May 3, 2004
Approved Minutes
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
March 29, 2004
nonconforming. 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. mmission 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 heari�g was
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 HURIN
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. Long process
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 regarding 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 know 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 are 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
project, 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, project proposed byMiller 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 project 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 permit 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 properly ;
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 are 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 imgation in the Redwood Grove the property owner maintain and continue to use the existing
water line along the rear 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 L1; 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 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 adj acent 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 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 underpenalty 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 area 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
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 all runoff created during construction and future 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 Department 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 of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
March 29, 2004
27) 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; 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 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; 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 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; 33) that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 11 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; 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 arborist 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 permit, 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�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 15t" 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 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 sepaxate 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 REOUIREMENTS.
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 of Burlingame 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 way"; 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 April 3 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 BAAQMD; 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 property owner shall a.rrange 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
adj ustments 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
Ciry 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 determine how the pier shall be relocated
and the Building Department shall be infortned 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 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 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 of these 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 project 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 permit 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 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; 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
�
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
March 29, 2004
compost shall be accomplished by a method approved by the proj ect 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) thatpriorto issuanceofabuildingpernut
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`" 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.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 11;
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 Arliorist 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; 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
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 Deparhnent; 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 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
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;
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 of Burlingame 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 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, imgation, 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 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 April 28,
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 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
�
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 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
iinal 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
38) 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 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 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 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 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 proj ect 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 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) 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 property 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 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 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 full
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�IEW STUDY ITEMS
13. 312 WARD AVENUE, ZONED -1— APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND
S OND STORY ADDITION OM AND TRISH NICHOL, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY
OWNERS• ROBERT MED ARCHITECT 69 NOTICED PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
Plr. Hurin briefly pres ted the project description. T re 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 with' 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 termina 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.
� calendar at a time when the
seconded by C. Bojues.
the architect provide information
isions,i6 the roof
the chimneywill
C'iair 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
\/ \/_ � � _._ 1
RE: 1537 Drake Ave. Lots 9 and 10
From: Steve Porter
To: Planning Dept.
Date: 4/13/07
������.`m�����
:qP2 � � 2007
cirr c�= �,u�L!r�G.4nnE
PLA�iN4�lG� GEP'f`,
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 �
Mar 13 07 12:57p MILLER DEVELOPEMENT
vcivo��r lntt tt�:Gu t'eLi 1i5U5H:l4943
'� .
�ri ` '„i
.�' ,;. ,-y��/ �+ +►
�# ` �
MAYNE TREE EXPERTS CO
6503408435 p.3
�f 002
Nlayne Tree Exper� Compa���, Xnc.
. CS fABUSHtD 1931 - 5'1`A'1'E (:UN'I".3A[:IC}R•�s uct�rvsr r,o. x7a�9�
GRAI�IJATE_FORE5TER • {.'I:Kfll7�l�ARHOK�Sl:y • PF_STCQTJTFtOL - ADV150RS/1TlDO!'ERATO[t5
�tti:FlA1tU �. Hi1P!'fINGTt7N 53S [3RAGATO RaAD.3'TG. A
rtu_si�ern• SANCARiA� CA 94070.622&
KF.VfN R.ICie1:'Y TL•LL•AI�ONL: (654)593-4400 -
ttil'i:ltnt'I6N4MfANAGGR ��ary �, 2�7 FA(:$IMlI.F': {fi50} Sy:i-4447
LMAfL: in(o tt maynetnawm
��Ir Ot�o Mi�iei
i? Q�. Bpx 121
E3urlingame, CA 94011
��3r Mr. Mflla;
�: 1537 �EtAKE AVE. (LOFS 9&!O), BURLIIYGAME
� fhis IetCer is to relterd�te p�st site plan reviews and soi! Ces�ing fo r foo�ts. pn Mardt i,
.t�04, v+re t�ested far roofis at s�veral prvppsed pier hole loratians. Resuits and
�:a�ndusJans are in my misdafied re�ort of February 4, 200�. {Tt strauld have been dated
�rch 4, 2�q4.) A pier hote d;agram was irxlucfed in V►�aft Levis�n's r�port '
# h�ad reviewed the IanctScaPe pla►u p�epared by M� Michael Calk�n and reporbed my
•apinions in rny Se�t�mber i8, 2006, report. There is e�entially na change in Mr.
�Elan's February 5, 2007, �a� 10 landscape plan.
[, therefore, cio not fi�td prablems, �ther than aEr'eady stated irr past r�e�orts, wit�
�rtipased dev�eloprn�►t and irnRacts tc� id� redwood grove. I thm k a!! pobentia{ areas of
rnpads have been acl�dressed, i,e. fioundations, dri�eways, and lrmdscaping.
�ir►cerely,
/- �� `�..c���-
��� z �,-�� �...
Ric�tard L, Hundnybon
:�ertified Arborist WE #0119A
�rti�ed Fc3rester- #1925 _.. - ---- ----. . ._.
Rl.N:pmd
R�CEIVED
MAR 1 3 2007
CITY OF BURL�NGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc.
ESTABLISHED 1931 STATE CONTRACTOR"S LICENSE N0. 276793
GRADUATE FORESTER • CEP.TIFIED ARBORISTS • PEST CONTROL • ADVISORS AND OPERATORS
RICHARD L. HUNTINGTON
PRES IDEN'I'
KEVIN R. KIELTY
OPERATIONS MANAGER October 19� 2�06
Mr. Otto Miller
Miller Development
P.O. Box 121
Burlingame, CA 94011
Dear Mr. Miiler,
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
ciry oF BURUNc-�an�e
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 will have its own set of potential impacts from excavation for driveways,
utilities, and stump removal. Each lot will be addressed separately with
recammenda�ions 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 impact�.
The more critical area will � 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 inches in
diameter and larger were not cut and their diameters and Iocations 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 littie 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 6 -I ,l�, %-� �L.
.r�-T-r.•' � �� zs . .
Richard L. Huntington
Certified Arborist WE #0119A
Certified Forester #1925
RLH: pmd
���1ETY OF �
o�Q.Q'�0 t, NUIyT�Nci
�
� �
Z No. WE-0119A
�
�
CFRTIFI ED P�%
c
�
m
�
� �... : r�� �-�� .
{ . �- V�� � - � � f � �� 5� -� <"..., .,' . --.u.. , . . ;..- :�� � Y �' .
�` _ „p � �
yr A t
fF: {'
F ` i�. I'�I _ I }� ^,�,
"� �5,• . � '�'a ,�� � � ��v . �`,�,: � .'�"^, e � I 'KI, � � ,�,a,'��r.� +
- . 1 ,. .x :� ... Ya } a 4 �r . . ..,
f� ',� F � � � i �4 �^�;` � `� ��s��� �� -- � f � `.
� � `���y � ' 8 f k� �. �� y�d'� >—�*'� `�' j.r .�- � 4
'�� ; � 1 E : rY� �i .
C � �� ':T`��ti . �' � N 3 ' s a-Yu�i�,:'T �t �� . �� ..
T : t .r .b' `_ ✓ : ! .: .+.-( t r � i,�i= * . y R � .+� � - i s� � .
1,�t� � _ �5 �a � ��t� r�'t .. � . � �� 1� .
.� i �#x' -. �?+.• lr ': l , : . sT.1.� <.3+ ���� mtii' �'.W�'., . „
�ti �,� { t-r� � . ,r� ���d� ~�� , r.�'�`'�`� r�
�,ja, � k : s ��` . . �c p+`+ �r. : r r �� s+" + � � � � "! �'r" ,,
� Y Qt : T Y� % - ���
s:�� .::_ f ��%� � � F �;`�i'Sv�� "�� � . '� � ,'���_�.'`�� . � Sr-�� �� i�y' F4
� • � M,; t�`}� � �'t� � j��A�t�"F + � � �y'�"�� �r'E �� �� �_�°s '.
'_ y,,
!: � �wi"�'. . R' V ' r .:. ' i ,$#- _,� ,� §+� � �� �`��?'vr , y.-- }�:r
� h-
3 - a ' � ' �' . ' : F .
� • ,,,;..-- ,:���� ;� 1 -�t.rz� + � \ ' � �n; i . � 4
� - �r' ` � : . �r S,.
�� � �, r � �'�^� �,. ..� ' .tk��...�c
�,. ' . -. - �.... �� ... # -� a � - � 4- . y. � _ , .
_ . � a'.4' ��,. . .:K' . �� -:s
;a9J. (
� Ka a
. �. � : ;'°, � . .
�. ' $'
r ,
. "
y .
'� � _�,�,,;"'.. _ ' � � - . � _ �
. . :� -t ,`-. �� Ps
�
rt- < � � ,.� � �� t
,f.J��` ;� l . � ` . � ,.f� , . � d. y,"`+t�� M 'k
! � r +r ''6 ,�
-t E - . . ' ,� r � 1f"� �� ` �i
���d=. � - . - R+ y .' .l {'
� �
Y .' ' ' � .
� ,, � �� 3 , r, y �,, � �
;, ,
} � Y h . �� . � i � � � �'. W �
4� '�) "J+�..�;: �� }� l�il�':' T� }t
' �r ' � i ' 1 . . ..�. ! h �... � _ � ��, h '. p S], +n,. .
,�$ � � � � v. `$ -/ �Z'� N .44. Y . r 'W�
� .'�. tl�; Rm. f . .� _ . ` ..- � .
. �: � t� t.`.` � :� �c �� � `. , �� ... - � . ... . $ � ,. , ,`;��b,.]�,rR�'.r,,:r � ��.�� k - x
tc �'f��'
_ . . -� � -�-. � ;*y
.
. .., . _.T ,�h- �.s"y'qF+a� . :^ T� �?gyF. �� "�2��
� � Y.d ` � �T ���, r ��� ��� `' ��� �¢'��'
! i' �
. t .;;a� � �" �� ' _. . . . �,; x' ti
r 6{°' ji� t, - � '�` s�"kc �i S
_ e t'_ : .. , _ _. m. ���`'�z�._,,.., . ' '�' _ . - _.. . �` .� .
ROUTIl�TG FORM
����
Monday March 31, 2003
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 garages for three new two-story houses
at 1537 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN:026-033-030 .
STAFF REVIEW: Monday, March 31, 2003
/�?s'! i'�,8ct�.�-�c. �"��n�2�s F�-rL �-v� ��(�'/�.c,�s a�-L
��� s�-,;� �.�s, C�y,�� ��. �o. �/,�/oz ,��
//�! (�L� C +E /a .���
�,
p�L � � �� �''�L! C� L y f+ Ir�%{E �E�
�
R viewed B: °��'�� Date of Comments: y���
e y
ROUTING FORM
DATE: August 26, 2002
TO: ,_City E�igineer
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
, arti d �B 1
STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 26, 2002
S �--�i�- � ✓� cs -f �� .�— �
���"��- G�-n�e`}��� S �' .. .
� - ts: � �' ° a
Reviewed By: Date of Commen
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
deternuned 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 regard to the Arborist Report, submiited by Mrs. Garcia, (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 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: "After
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 the azchitect and the arborist. This may be a further help to keeping these trees
healthy." I agree with this recommendation......sp
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 attached garage, building height and declining
height envelope to construct a new, two-story single family dwelling
and attached garage at 1537 Drake Lot 9, zoned R-1.
Staff Review:
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
� �Project Comments
Date:
�C�
From:
June 17, 2005
[� City Engineer
❑ Chief Building Official
CI Recycling Specialist
❑ Fire Marshal
❑ City Arborist
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
❑ NPDES Coordinator
Subject: Request for design review and special permits for declining height
envelope and an attached garage for a new, two-story single family
dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-
280
Staff Review:
All previous comments still apply. In addition, backwater protection certification is
also required.
Reviewed by: V V �y�
Date: 6/27/2005
Pf'e v i a� 5 G� w� rH c r►.-�5
MEMO UM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
April 8, 2002
To: Planning Department
From: Vic or Voong, Enginee ' D
Subject: � Drake Avenue
���
The Engineering Division has received severalletters regarding the sewer mains an Drake
Avenue. We are awaze of the problem that occurred in this area last year. To solve this problem,
the City reconstructed four laterals that had problems and removed tree roots from the sewer
main.
The existing sewer does not have 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 ha.ve to install a backflow valve in their
private property to prevent any possible back up of sewage.
The Ciry 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_1VICTOR1ProjedslPrivate11537Urake.wpd
`; c�rx
� �
.8!lRLNGI�ME
�,, ' �.
���
\
PL�►��TNING DEPART'1V�NT MEMO
TO: Engineering- Syed Murtu�.a and Donald Chang
FROM: Erika I.ewit, Planning
RE: .1537 Drake
DATE: 5.31.02
Please review the following information and submit your written comments to me by S:OOp.m.
on Monday, dune 3, 2002. �
Tharik You, Erika
� �-►� �u " `�`'(.� -P-�.
� o c—��e
- � i,,� (a.�P�.���v . 1�-��� O
,,�- ��.-�wu-�-� '"� .
� � � ��—
��, � ,,,,�a�- �i (,•�P
�
MEMOR:ANDUM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
�'O: PLANNING D�
FROM: CTTY ENGINE]
DATE: JUNE 4, 2002
SUBJECT: 1537 Drake Avenue Residential devetopmept project
Staff has reviewed the information submitted by Luzuriaga Taylor Inc. pertaining to. .patential
environmental impacts and mitigations for the project. Following comments shall-� dddressed
by the project �developer prior to the planning commission approval:
a: � Provide Location Map of the proposed sewer backflow preventor installation with
addresses. (prior-to plannin�g commission meeting)
b: Installation of sewer bacl�low 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 af bacl�low preventor device(s). `
c: Siibmit 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 fo � ..
planning commission meeting)
d: Provide a clear coaceptual drawing of water line installation showing the limits of pipe
replacement, lengthx valves, and size. (prior to planning commission m�e����
e: A detail design drawing and specifications shall be submitted for City Engineer's approvai
prior to the issuance of Building Permit. An encroachment permit is required for the
construction of water line.
f: Revise the `Construction Operation_Plan' to provide a note saying that `No construction
equipment.parking and or consiruction workers parking be allowed on the street'. (prior
to planning commission meeting)
g: Provide a note.oa the `Construction Operation Plan for perimeter construction feace to be
erected to prevent construction debris escaping into adjacent properties. (prior to planning
commission meeting)
�h: Project construction shall comply with the City's construction hours and noise o�inance.
Fdc: S:1A Pubiic Works Di�cto�y\Audar, By Name�Syod Mucwrs I.ecoccs11537 Dnt� 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 respond to the concems raised by the public during a June 24`� Planning Commission
meeting regarding the existing sewer system at 1500 block of il7r�ice Avenue. The applicani 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 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 City contractor
will inject chemical foam into the sewer main to kill the tree roots within the pipelines.
This treatment will prevent root intrusion for the next 2 years.
The Ciry 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 included into the next year capital improvement program subject to Ciry Council's
approval.
C: George Bagdon, Syed Murtuza, Phil Scott, Phil Monaghan, Vince Falzon, Yictor Voong
S:1A Pubfic Works DirecrorylPlaoning Correspond11500 blocic Drake
ROUTING FORM
DATE: Aug�st 5, 2002
TO: �City Engineer
_Chief Building Official
Fire �Marshal
,_Re�ycling Specialist
� _City Arborist
�_City Attorney -
FROM:. Planniag Staff
SUBJECT: ..Request for design review and special pemut for attached 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 -
„� , .
� •. . � �;�
Re�riewed By: V�-v = Date of Comments- �� �
ROUTING FORM
DATE: August 5, 2002
TO: �City Engineer
Chief Building Official
Fire Marshal
Recycling Specialist
_City Arborist
�City Attorney
FROM: � Planning Staff
SiJBJECT: Request for design review for a nevwi.`wo-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
i�► '�� ♦ 4 ��
Reviewed By: v- U
�
Date of Comments- �(�`�� . -
i- PUB�.IC WORK.S �EPARI�NT ENGINEERING DIVISION
� : PLANNING.REVIEW COIVIIVIEIyTS � ��t��= � .
_ . � Project Name�,_ �u-{�
. --�---� .
- Project Address:_ �� 'la'�� �
The fotlo ' requirements apply to the project .
� 1 A properiy. boundary sarvey shall be preformed by a licensed land
. surveyor. The survey shall show all propert� Iu�es, Property comers,
� easements, topograpliical f.eab�res and utilities. (Required .prior to the
. _ building permit issuauce.) _
2 � X The site and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should .be made to
drain towartis the Frontage St�rcet. (Required prior to the building permit
- - issuauce.)
�� 3.� = The applicant shali submi# project grading and drainage plans for
. approval prior to: the iss.uance of a Building permi� �
4 � The project site�is �n a flood zone, the project shall comply with the Ciiy's
� flood zone requirements.
5 �_� �A sanitary sewer lateral fi�t is required for the project in accordance with
the Ci�y's �tandards: (Required.prior to the building permit issuance.)
6. The project plans shall show the required Bay&ont BikelPedestrian trail
and .necessary public access improvements as required by San Francisco
" Bay Conservation and Tsevelopment Commission.
7: � �Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the projec� The sewer analysis
- shall identify the projecYs impact to the City's sewer system and any
sewer pump stations and identify mitigation _measures.
8 _� Submit t�rafftc trip generation analysis for the piojec�
�: 9. - Submit a traff�c unpact 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
. Eugnneer.
- 10. � The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering
- Division. The parcel map shall show. all existing property lines, easements,
� - monuments, and new properly and lot tines proposed by the map.
: � - . Page i of 3
U:�pri�a�e developmentiPL�1NNING REVIEW CO�TS.doc
P`UBi,�C WORK.S DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISIO�T
11_ A: latest preliminary tide report of the subject parcet of land sl�all be
sebmitted to the Public Works Fngineering Division with die parcel �map
for reviews. �
12. �_ . Map closurel.lot closure calculations shall be submiited witli �e parcel
maP- -
13 �_ '�he project shall submit a condominium map to the .Engineering Divisions
in a+ecordaace with the requirements of the Subdivision Map 1�ct
14 � The. pro,�ect shal�, ak its own cost, design and conshuct frontage public
improveanents including curb, gu#ter, sidewalk and other necessary
� aPPurtenan# work. _
15 � The project shall, at its owri cost, design and +construct frontage streetscape
improvements including sidewalk, eurb, gutters, parking meters �d �poles;
t�+ee.s, and.streetlights in accordance with streetscape. master plan.
16 By the preliminary .review of plans, it appears that the project may .cause.
adverse impacts during con.struction to veh�cular traf�c, pedeshrian traffic
and public on sh�eet parking. The project shall identify these impacts and
provide mitigation measure acceptable to the City.
17 _;, T'he project shall submit hydrologic calculations from a registered civil
engineer -for the proposed creek enclosure. The hydraulic .calculations
must show that the proposed creek enclosure doesn't cause any adverse
° impact �to bofh upstream and downstream properties. The fiydrologic
�.calculations shal,l accompaay a site map showing the area of the 100-year
flood and eacisting improvements with proposed improvements. �
18 - Any work within the drainage �area; creek, or creek banks requires a State
Department of Fish and �ame Pernut �nd �1rmy Corps of F�►p,ineers
Pernuts. . �
19 No �onstruction deb�ris shall be allov�ed into the creek.
20 � The project shall compiy with the City's NPDES permit requimanent to
� prevent` storcn water pollution. _
-� 21 �^ 1he project does not show the dimensions of existing driveways, re-
submit plans with driveway dime�sions. Also clarify if the pmject is ..
- � proposing to widen the driveway. Any widetiing of the driveway is subject
� � to City Engineer's approval. �
�� 22� . �t The. plans do not indicate the slope of the driveway, re-submit plans �
- � showing the:drive�vay profile with �elevations .
. - Page 2 of 3 � .
U:1priystt.development'1PLANMNGREY�V�iC;Oh�IIVIENTS_doc -
." PUBLIC WORI�S DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
� - �
23 The back of_ihe dri�eway/sidewalk approach shall lie at least 12 .above �
the flow line� o€ the frontage c�rb ia the sh�eet to prevent overi�ow of stotm ..
water from the street into private P�P�Y- -
24. . For ti�e takeout service, a.garbage reeeptacle� shall tre placed in fron�. The -
sidewallc fironting the store shall be kept clean 20' from each side of the .
. P�P�Y• � -
25.� For commenciial.projeots a designated garbage bin space and c�eaning area�
shall tie located inside the building. A drain connecting the gazbage area to
- the Sanitary Sewer System is required.
� . kr._, .
� � -
� . Page 3 of 3
U�private developmentlPLANNING REVIEW COIVIIVIEN1�.doc
MEMO UM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
August 30, 2002
To: PIanning 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 aze
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 �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 rolls to be installed on the two sides of the properiy. Straw
rolls shall also be installed along the east side of the property wluch is common with Lot 9 to
prevent erosion onto adjacent properties.
5. All other previously made comments still apply to this project.
U:MCTORWrojectslPrivate\1537DrakelLots9and10.wpd
MEMO UM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTNIENT
October 15, 2002
To: e
From: V ng, Engineeri.ng Division
Subject: 1537 e Avenue
Staff has reviewed the submittals dated on September 23, 2002 and the following are
supplemental comments in addition to a11 previously made comments; '
1. Project plans 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 iwo hours
and five mi.nute flush, and information regazding disinfection or chlorination of new pipes.
4. Although project plans currently show a 90-degree fitting at the intersection of the new pipes
in the easement area, the te�ct indicates a tee fitting. Plans shall indicate the proper fitting to
be installe�. 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 area.
6. All other previously made comments still apply to this project.
U:1V ICTOR1Projeds�Private\1537Drake\Lots9and 10.wpd
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
June 15, 2007
O City Engineer
(650) 558-7230
� Chief Building Official
(650) 558-7260
� Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7271
d Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7600
O City Arborist
(650) 558-7254
Planning Staff
O NPDES Coordinator
(650) 342-3727
� City Attorney
Subject: Request for application for amendment to mitigated negative
declaration, design review, conditional use permit for emerging lots,
and special permits for attached garage, building height and declining
height envelope to construct a new, two-story single family dwelling
and attached garage at 1537 Drake Lot 9, 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.
�� ����� ��� �
_`�� 1 � �OCt7
�t�� Q� a�R�tt�u,�,� �
(.ANNII�G pEPTe�'� E
Reviewed by: �-�� �L���� Date: /� l�� 7
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 permits for declining height
envelope and an attached garage for a new, two-story single family
dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-
280 ---
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:,�'' //I6���I�
� ��
Date: �., � ,�_�r
Project Comments
Date:
1 �I
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 permits for declining height
envelope and an attached garage for a new, two-story single family
dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-
280 ----"
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:, � //1����2�
� {'�
Date: �.., 3 ,�,�
La� �
ROUTING FORM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
August 5, 2002
__City Enginee=
Chief Building Official
�F'ire Marshail
_RecYcling SPecialist
City Arborist
�_City At#or�ey
Plantiing Staff
SLTBJECT: . Request for design review and special pernut for attachetl garage for a new two-story single
family dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue (A), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030 .
a.r►� (B� .
STAFF REVTEW: Monday, August 5, 2002
� y��'�-���' a�c,�s q— �.� w-.� �zr-
a.�s--2 s � `�� � y
�
�
1
.1
.'
�
Reviewed By: ����� Date of Comments: �_.��—+� 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
❑ 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 attached garage, building height and declining
height envelope to construct a new, two-story single family dwelling
and attached garage at 1537 Drake Lot 9, 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.enerqy.ca.qov/title24 for publications and details.
6) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that
complies with the egress requirements.
7) 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.
8) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers.
9) Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
10) The fireplace chimneys must terminate at least two feet above any roof surface within ten feet.
Reviewed
Date: � ��� ���
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
June 17, 2005
❑ City Engineer
X Chief Building Official
❑ Recycling Specialist
❑ Fire Marshal
❑ City Arborist
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
❑ NPDES Coordinator
Subject: Request for design review and special permits for declining height
envelope and an attached garage for a new, two-story single family
dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-
280
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) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window
or door that complies with the egress requirements.
6) Provide guardrails at all landings.
7) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are more than four risers.
8) Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
9) 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.
._........-- -----_
Review�----��-"���; ��- �--��� Date: �
/ �y `" � •� �/a�
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Staff Review:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
June 17, 2005
❑ City Engineer
X Chief Building Official
❑ Recycling Specialist
❑ Fire Marshal
❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
Request for design review and special permits for declining height
envelope and an attached garage for a new, two-story single family
dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-
280
All construction must comply with the 2001 California Building Codes (CBC),
the Burlingame Municipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal
requirements.
Provide fully dimensioned plans.
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.
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.
Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window
or door that complies with the egress requirements.
Provide guardrails at all landings.
Provide handrails at all stairs where there are more than four risers.
Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
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.
.�_�._�--���, / o �
Reviewe�a----��-�'` � Date: � � �i�}
- !
� ROUTII�IG FORM � _
�� DATE: �ugust s, Z002 �
TO: . City Engineet
�ZChief Building Official.
Fite Macsbal
Recycling Specialist
City Arborist
_City Attorney
FROM: Planning Stat�
s
�� SUBJECT: Request for design i�eviey�r and special permit for attached garage for a new i�vo-story single �
� family dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue (A), zoned R 1, APN: 026-033-030
STAFF REVIEW: Monday, August 5, 2002
/ � L-I VI h s r O O��j ✓� c�`,e/��e Co `�l On �y � 2. �Z /y �S -�c�/j�%>a
CCG2<�,. h� �1'���/ �t a-�e.s j�-� d C�Os � �� �j o vs� �cJal�
�� P e N� �� U S e a S a S d. l�•� U�% c�t �jb✓ia� c� .
� c uJ� �(� Ic�SS �2� " r�� ��
�►^d�/9r � v s� p QG(e ��i U!c ��Ye- O'��S/..S
� G�� ,
_�:.
0
;�
R�viewed By:� �� Date of Comments: ��S ��> ..
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 permits for declining height
envelope and an attached garage for a new, two-story single family
dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-
280 -----�
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: - �-}
/
�
�il G�
�_
Date: � -- � 7 - v.�
� ROU'TIl�TG FORM
DATE: August 5, 2002
TO: City Engineer
Chief Building Offiicial
Fire Marshal
�Recycling Specialist
_City Arborist
_City Attorney
FROM: Planning Staff
0
SUBJECT: Request for design review for a new two-story single family dwelling and deiacned garage
at 1537 Drake Avenue (B), �oned R-1, APN: 026-033-030 .
a.✓�- C A�
STAFF REV�W: Monday, August 5, 2002
� l.-e.� ���- r 1'�u`�" d-�.l� �.�c�-��.�^^�1�1
U U
� y � � � � ����
� .
s -�- -
�� � �� �
� .
�=��"� ..
� ��' � �,� �"
.
�1 — � �_ r �[�
� GL.� � � �
1�`C�� [� �'�- L�-� � � '
Reviewed By: ` Date of Comments: �TZ ��� �—
Project Comments
Date:
To:
Frorn:
Subject:
StafF Review:
June 17, 2005
� City Engineer
� Chief Building Official
� City Arborist
� Recycling Specialist
� Fire Marshal
✓ NPDES Coordinator
� City Attorney
Planning Staff
Request for design review and special permits for declining height
envelope and an attached garage for a new, two-story single family
dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-
280 �---,
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
aa, v�. ..v a:.z: .sav q�.JVVG
.�..�(- °� � �d �� .
City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(654) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.org
R
er�' "`
BUl{L�tiG�►ME
`��,..� �°
CITY OF BURLINGAME
SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION
���'_�`�«��'���R,��
ri ,� ,.. � � ., l �4 .
����d � � 2Q07
�..I���Y �.':' �}�,i1-i;_n,,s(�;!',?'f�
y�E �,i',��I�!'t;i; �L�'!'.
The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance {Code
Sec'tion 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making
ihe decision as to whether the findings can be made for your reques� Please iype or write neatIy in ink.
Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions.
1.
2.
3.
Explain why the blend of neass, scale ctnd dominant siructural charaeteristics ojthe new
construction or addition are consistent witls the existing structure's design and with the
�risting street and neighborl:oo�
The proposed new l�ames on lot 9& 10 are consistent with surrouading properties that have similar gara�e
patEerns, mass, and scate an tlie "�vest" side ofBurlingame neighborhood These liomes were
designed/placed furttier back (approxirnately 34.5' for !ot 9 and 30.6' for lot 10) from the iront property
lu�e in order to protect the exisiing roots of the redwood trees. The special permits requested are for the
same reasvn.
Explain how the variety of roof line, facude, ezterior finish materials anct elevations of
the proposed new siruchcre or additio�: are consistent with the existing structur� street
and neighborhood.
The ptoposed ne�v homes have becn approved by the plaaning comraissionecs via design review process,
which blend well on this block without changing the el�aracter of the neigl�boFhood.
How will the propose�l project be consistent with the residential design guicielines
culopted by the ctry (C.S 25.57}?
The propused singte-family residences are consistent witl� City Design Review Guidelines, and it complic :
with all zoning requirements, except for the declining heigGt envelope and l�eight (Special permit). �
� 4. Explain how tke removal of any trees located within the footprint nf any new structure or
addition is necessary and rs eonsistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What
mitigation is proposecl for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is
appropriat�
All existing redwood trees will be protected via chain tink fencing (shown on site plan), with new
ia�ldseaping-for Iot 9& 10 are proposed. seEcrEFs Fxt�c
� CARR McCLELLAN
lNGERSOL.L THC�MPSC�iV & HC}RN
<.^,9essinn�i l.:�tiv t�c�r{„.pr;�t€<7r��
/��'�'� k� ��
�� �I�1�#�'It����Eti°�,a�i ��f �.`t�� �i �'�..
T�� i"R.��T"��1,�' t�i,�'G" i t�v�
��s�`,��`�' ����
Mark D. Hudak
mhudak!'a;carr-rnccielian.cr�rn
� ��� �����
� �
� ;: €� °� s���,.q;}
3�'� ,i-i i � <r a�.. V tJ �
�'1c��' 27, �nf)%
�i�r �-i�'�ivii
F3urlin��me Plaranir�� (:,an�zmissi��n
�3�irlin�a���e C:ixy Hall
sar �����-�5� �����
�3urlizi�ame.. C �� �)4C� 1(}
Re: Lots �) at�d 1{), .Drakc; ��.:ei�ue
D��r Conlin�issior�ers:
���r, .��,.
;s;'?"i' t��F ��t7z�i_i� a�;-:t,� ,�
�'LANf�I^;�"a v��T.
C�» t�'Iay 2�, y'alY ���ill be corisicierina khc revisions t� the dcsi�ns 1-or the hc��mne� on I..ots �J and 1O
on tl�e 1 �00 block �f Drake zAvent�e. The revisi�ns are ��rimarily to tl�e �'c�unciatioris, r�lac�t. io
accc��n��lociate t.hc C'ity's cc�x�cerns abotit t�lse redwc�vd trees c��� these Ic�is.
On I:�c�t �), t1��, housc ��r�ill �Se rais��i sli�l�tl�� to �ec�n�ztn��date thc ne��� fotuld�tic�tl dcsi��i. In
additic�n, v+�e <�r� �r��pc�siYl�,� tu 5c�uare o�t thU rz��ster tae�iroc�In at the rear of thc; h�li��. "I'his sht�ul�
not� lla�re a��y impact o�i� t��c, raei�}lborhood anci t�1�e hol�se will still be «��11 beloti�• <�ll�«�a}�le F.�R.
C�7n Lot l t�, tl7e only c}��r��� is a sli�l�t ii�cr�:ase ir� t3�� heigllt to accor7�l��odate tl�� n�tiv fc>un�iai�ic�n
c�esign. �theru�ise, thc l�arz�es ciesi,�r�s are thc, �at��� as thi�se previot�sly a��ro��ed hy thc
t, OI11IT11 SSl OII.
V4'e want to call t� your ��ttention thc need for consistency in apprc�vin� hames to be cvnstructed
close t� redwoc�c� tY-ees. Othc,r sitcs have recei��ed approval to construct ho�zi�5, drivcways, an�
oth�r iz�.pr�ve���e�1ts in vcr� close proximit�y t� redtivoc�d i�r���s. I am eraelt�sa��� pl�atn� �>f r�e�.�
h���tes at l I4S Cabrilio an�� 1920 C��rn�elit43 sl�o�viri� structures and hardscap� ���ithiu a fe�w f�.�t
af re�����c��c� Crees. I� am also enclosing a ccuple c�f pic.Curc;:� o�f thc ne��� San M�ateo I..ibrary=
t�tiilding c��n `I`lxird Avenike, ����l�icfl c��as e�n�tructcc� u=ithin a fe�w f�:e�;t of �►�Zat�i:re .r�,c���,���c��s. �r�m.
thesc exan�pl�s (aiid there are n�.�ny more), it should be ele�r that rcdwo�ds �re able tc� ti�ri�e
under a�-ariety Uf circumst�a�nces, using appr���riate foundatior�s.
Tl��e pier anci �rade bcarr� �'ounc�ations �(�ar tl�<. �rc�poscd }�c�r��ts �n I,ots � a��d 10 u-il1 bc n�uch
kinc�er to tl�e red�voc�ds than the siluati�ns �t�icted in t�he �hc�togr�p}is an�i t�ie sctbacks w�ill ��
P E5fl 34�.;3F��C}
21 � P� rk F�aad •�r.ar!ingame ° Caiiforni� 94C}1 � F r��0 '"��4� ?�£s5
�+w�v.c�rr-mrci�llan.com
F3urlin���ra��e �,P1az�aliri� C:omi7��issio��
May ?2, 2C}�7
P���e 2
�re��ter. There is z�c� �bjectivc r4zsoil to ap�ly a clifFcrctit st��nciard t�o tl�esc lots tlia��t� �t�3c stanc�t�r�
�ppli�,d io th�se c�t}��;r prc�jects. �'4� � hc���� tl�at y��u ��-i11 si}a���ro�r� ttie �ni�nor revisic�n� tc� tlY� ��Ir���s
on ��T`uesci�y e.v�nii�g so t1���t ��ve c:an cc�nstruct t�}�e homes r�nci coiza��l�tt� tl�e s�iba c�n L7r��kc .�'�v�;n���.
In th� a���ea�z�tisn�, wc are askin� t}lat tl�e Cc�n��nission �•e-�.v4�h��tc tl�e; cc��nditions �l�at �uere
iz���osed on l���r. :1�Sille�• 4�ft�.r t��e un�itart��rl4�ta �radin� �nixcrp ii� l�c�vemt�er 2(}03. In re�acticm t�
��h�zt n�istak� by �l�e �;r��t��in� conlr��et��r, th� C'���mmissi��� rcq��ired t��Ir. ��1ill�r to pc��t a depc�sit �l�
m�re il�ai� 5l 1�,00O to s�.ciire �tl�e }a�;�ltlz �f th� i•ec3��c�ocls. (B�;c�ause t��e;re ��re �Icz l�c�nc�s a�-ail��i-�le
F�r t}1�i5 site-s�ec�ific pui�}�o�e, the s�,curity had tu b� posted ir� cash ��i�d ha� be�n maintain��c� in the
City's accc�unts sinc�� i.t w��ts ��c�st�.d years a;o.} L?u�. tc� t�z� di:lay ir1 %��ii�ni��� wrc�rk c>rl I..��ts �J and
1(?, tt�e rE�t���oocis lzav� }�ad somc 3.� years la �•cc��Fer fror�l ���1}' ciamage tl��at ���as �lane ia tllc��ir
rc>�at sysCe�ns al�ci are no��� i�� f.iz�z l�e<�lth. Pica�e se� th� ��Zc�oseti I�tt�r f�ron� :��ayn�� "I'r��
C'c�zn�any certi,Cyiri� t�t�e h�alth L�f th�; tr�,es. ti'�Ilat���ur h��nn ���a� eic�.n� to th� tr�e�s bac� ir� ?C?C) i
l�as b�.en ctircd.
'�rlr. I�-liller ia�tci�cjs to f�ilo��✓ al�l oft.he int�ust�-y-starici�rd practices fc�r prot�:ctin� tl��, tre�;s ����rin�
�c�nstru�tic�n. �I�'here is no ba�is tc�r re�c}izirir�� }airi� to post this level af security ti�'he�� other
builcicrs ���Qi-kii.i� iz� closer ��ur��rt�e.rs are n�t rc;qiiirec� t�c� cic� sa. ��'e ���oi�ld ask that th� C'c��n����5sic�n
reseinci th� security rec�uirctne�lt.
I���ill be attendin� the rnee�t�ing ��n Ma}, 29 to respor�d to ��ny q��estions. �T�f yoti hav� any tec�}�t�ic��l
c�uestic�ns tliafi: �nay rec�e�iire r��earch to ans«°er, pleas� let me know� in adv�tnc�e.
Sinccrely
.- ��,. ,
� .P i
, ;,f, f �ry '��,.-� �- _
'�1ark D. I-�udak
;ti-ZllH:os
E��closures
cc. Yianni�z� Departz�l���t (ti�vleizcl.)
C'li�:nt (t�-,'o �ncl.}
t�C,a��.tt�)(ir)i���3C3LIIi1'=.t�314)s3 i
�
�N��
� �"��A�
�,�.
�
�. .� � _ ~ ��x
' �, .
�,�� �� .
, �����
n�;, ,
a � �.
°.� � ,4.
� .,�:
�;
��.
�-;
� "��.�� .� . �
4 .�A . ��;�
g�"
� �,.
;'.��;
�, . �'����
� ��
�� �
��. z
� �.�:
' � `.
� ,.
��
: ��� �,�;��, �
�tf'� IPio �'���!";
, f . , T s Ii « . 'F .� �� +b.,�'� �;4`°'q�a_.:, :
�s �
7 i i@� - ,�. 1 1� .- .
�4 . ` �� ,� '� � , � /�" � `�'�l1f r� .
.�... � ' ��t�. � �s y �
� ° � '� .� �r � '�' +t �/. s� �..t+�R •r;�y
' i � ' ��,.,,�� 't+ • f� �� ""r ,.�
- • � i!'�, � ,j,R �, , � ' � �,+/`w r�
. . �� �, � : �
, , j�^ �, ,. � � � � .� �.,� �, ��.
^ �� M Y ��y ., ,� .
� . a ..
'°^.,�� ' ,�g`.► ♦ ,�� �
.c ^ \�,.. . S , � . +� y�
' � :
. • �
" ,. . .> . . f�► i � `'C ; - � x -3. �,„,,,,.
� ' F ; �� �. x � �r '�
- �i� r- •,�c ` i'�� � ���+ � �e� �,,, <�'-
w . ��6 "�,,y. - M. x '�lr a `�.. � � � ,����a � ����` �
.e " • .. . � . . ,� _. � �,� �. �� . �;�n ".
. . D � w , �-�:*%a, �
�. i .
�� . �� � �.#` _
M ' .,>�(` ,
4�, � y i�I@� ��x� i�, �
�? S�. T s �� +�t � A ' 4'.��„ `
� � . � R ^ i � � 4 4 �.
a . � � � . •
� . . ��� : . �t ��� ' � �' � �.'{ *_
�;
� � . ���� �
fi��' ` { � !
� � �. � ��,g °t
„, <' �`Sa �� ,r fa.
���s ...R :.�
, . `��ax � ' � .r.'�. ��
�•�-� ; �' ��` `
� �� - , �F_
�. "f.� � ��' �,� �
. � c
� �.
ax ._ ._..a� �� , t ^7 �' � _
� � +y,+y , 9 L Y � �
L� $f
� � � r
','�.�� i �' ya >R
,36 � .. � �_ r�°' �'' \ «.�.a�� 'fi's
E� a��a$, q i. °`� f�
..� . .. . �� r �� �"��� -- � '-
r�',?r���"' . r ,.�'�'^ ' ,��, ��/
�z�s �``aY �s � �, `�' '
� � • �..
Y� p
� x � *�` ,"-; . ' � �` '�
�
� . . �� ���'��.
a - a
��i � k' �� - . •
� � � 4 � �����
� � � ' �
� �,,, ,� .,.�
� .t�. � � � � �y�" ���. � ��
� � � � .
� . ��� ����° ; � x � "`� �
x4� +»
�';m' f� '�'� ' _ � n'
�r - ' � #.. Z"'��Y;ro �i �,§'�, "q.�� � .
a , y s u__ 3yx <_ � �.
f � -�� ��
y
,� , .� � � �.
� � , g�
��� �„',�, �� ��� � -�x � � €a
a' ,, a- ° � .e�� ; . , ' ..
,s � � "�,' �° � y
ri � �•. � +� ; .—
+t � '�-� � � �xL ,
.��, -- �o• .
�� .. �� .,-��..
������t � � �:� .. � a.
� ���r �,+, ; }`". � � �EQ .
r * g ,.: ; 1 _�s 5 . �� , .;K� ��t k se '
� *`' - � � �=r � � . ..
' - ; d
� '� : �a ',' A 3 � . `�°�'•F � % �
L� � � a� � ; - . . � ��`�'°3"F , �� ,k � ,�-� � ' P�, ew°` �S
} , Y � � i� � ,� , � r�, � �" ^+� � '' _ � �
y� . �'� �. 4� "°„g� p 4�� .1���� � r � � t � d
Vt
�;�u � i�! `Cs � � ��z �� „ � � � '�i��� g� �� �* • '
��� p�'a ,� �� �, ;�.,, �,�: "�` �S _ ��� �a. � �,
„�� � -„ ,K� . � � �j
.ti • ,: � .
� ���p��� � �, £a �,` �^ * � �*„ `'� �
B �.� £ , F F y " . ♦�k
. . � � � ��, d�,�#� � N `� � M. . � � :�
� � f �f �, �� � �"
' .�'� ��, �. '�:
� 5 .?F
� � ,..'��: � aw��� ��y�..� s, _
� �
_ . � � ��� �` � �� ''��' _
_.� . . • � �a;�_ s, ���-
� t v q
� . ,. _
� � �� , �l -
�
.
L'a '
� � � #�' �. � � ,- �.�€ 4 �. v"`� s �
s
w ' �
� : + . N,f. ' a�;' a �°-,a �-
� - �. �s�t€"
'�' � �� ' x; • � � .># A . ��� +"�,�P`'+ .t�mw:.'^''� � .
. ,..�R��.1� .i� • �a�', � �,..m , �. .
� �.,� ;�,, V� � � � ,�
����`
� �'� > .e. �:+
" � "��-s•.. . � . . .�,�.� �` i .
�
ic �
�
�
�
� ���-,et��� �
�� �.._.
a . . � � �. �, `- �
� ,� �
r^.4�'�
�. _ � �
�^� � �
` �' � �� A�r,y �.
"r��� �x.k
�''�
��
��
n.,� � r'
�'i��
a:
k
♦ � �a.�.:
i`
�
.r � . . � . �: y,1 �,.�p �
.b����� .� ��� � ���� �' � � �
s �
�}y �� r I �.� �: � :"w �. ,�, ._ � ,
,y+; e,�' i�, ,.� .�""�.tt `` � � ; c� � � � �� �: r
E. � � �x
�"`_, s ti � ,
� � � � . . ��� � ��
� � �',„�.�,pa["°P. � µ��p�� . ,�.:'.� �
�, .Y,�.�., h'�3 . y�a �,� �. �s, y n4� ���� ..�� �
' _ 3 «- > . � -�N�r . . 'A�fi . �k � >. n. ..
�... �,rt � �� �"�' � "� ��F �
� - - � s 4*P�,�-� � 9
- � � � 8 h ���`VC � �.
�, �� - ... vn M .. � �..;�..... , ��
�' >�- �t, �� � 1 � w%P:-a � � a � �� � �..
���"�
� .�, �
�' R
r � $ �
' t s�
w,k+
# � `" � - w
' �
h m,. .�.
�� �
w �" �
���
�.: " - � � � � ,s .,� .�"c� � � � � � �". � ' ..< . .. .. �� . r r � h �s� .
� .. � ;. . � ,...
� _ '� :" � � � � a;.n ��. � #. � � . ,,�.�� � §� . , .
� �.. - �� � ,.,�- � _ e ���"a� - a' - � � 3 . .
g
� ����i "R +� �`, ,�p. .^_.-, . .d. a ���g�. `� w: � . , - . • � ., � t .
< _�°
. � � � ,,,, � � �;�.' �
.. .w.,-.A. -^ � "
� �'�' ° � "� '� " � � � �� .�"� "�' .
�- `" �G �r _ �� " , �
� � ���<�,__., ,�,. �� ��'� ¢ ,, ,..
- - s 'R �� � �� � =�, �k� .�� .
� o �
_... .. s �.. t ��n �.�". � ,��,
.
� � �' � �„ a ,� . � . v�� ,� �
�
„ � '�
s4
„ . , � � �: x
,, ,
��a � ,�
, � a
� :
-t'° � . i r° �1' , � < *� �.
. , .
. . , .
� ♦ '.�,,� y< � � �- � - �`+� _
. `�. . � � �-" . . , � � � ��' � � • � � t �::` �^��� -
� sr�` p � �F '*' � 4"�i�` '��� S ��. � �=n •�'6''a � '��` �� .� F �� .
" �b. �� �_ ;e,p v s� �. E� �� ���' .. . � , ` �'� .
� , � �� .. �a� ,�... � � ir �� ��° . � � �� z�D�<.� � �?3�... . �� s' , � t'ak� `, «
` S5w -,� ,
��'� � � � ���� �� � � � ;, i 3 '�`' ..€ � � � ' ,� z
,w�� k, � . �• a,� ��� $� � �" Y a ��'' � � ,.�+� �y ��:
�. � �: ' � �._ ��n',��m� �' ��t� ��'� • ":'�+ �a t, � #'�:, e j ��ta � . , �:;,., -,*�.
� ..� "� ��� � �i �' �"��,�°�,��. dr1 �""Y � � ,�a;. �a � �� { ���. .,'4_ �
z� ���I%`+`? 1 �
� ���� ''� �� � ����� ` �➢� A� $ { ;��i
�a �� �s � j �q� r�.�, 1° �. y' �'��� �y'� ...�, �.�, k. `. � � ^
<'4
� �¢ � '� ,
.
. � .
, � = :
. �t
� ±h� T • �6 !'�. ��M.
^
� �p
� � � �. ��k :�ty $�_ ,,.�p�}r�,4°�� { &;'v � SYi �g �` . � . y' � .
� � �:At<�.,� a 4 � �'',�,•:P75"`r 3. r �R a+'#„�.. � �"ry'� a'� � '�
��- ,"°"y�� j� .�;� � y+ '��' ,.�` x,.,,�-� '�I„ .. �^ o-, - rt� ,.� � «C...��
. .� ;,M � �" � v -`�. ; m�� "� l�` traY - .. . 4 vi'� �..`a` �' I�F
� }Y. . � tu� '� i�, ' #?' +��` ��� , ' - , ' '�F � � � R
� �k .�` 4, �'". ''� F . � ^�w ' '
`�4:fr� ' � � �. , � �•. ,
� �r �' ¢ '"�'.�- Soror�.
'�y �, ��t � ,.: _ o .
+ � °' +�"° e `� �p�.a Me"` " hs�`
�<a .� ��na3.• � � ._�.a ,�p� ,''£�':� .�4f�.. �.
��;°� .F. � �p � . �x; ;.r '��, ,, , ��.. ,� , � "t � ° ;? g , ,
x `-�,� ,�- , �"" �"4 a"'� � � �i, .�. ., • -�
- �e,��+`av r��s
' . "ni w"'<.a�s..- ' � ' .,� y{.�... . g'-..
�. , . � . „...� ....,. „ � a- . � . . . , .. ...
� � 'w� � A�^ � w �e .
��- � � '�"' � .
Y
� -�� .�' �. >�`
j � � ` � . � f �'p� &.' �
y?�� _. �` _ "�� � .. � � �:4t`� 'i �y�` .
" + „, "
. , ........
, . � � , � . � • � (, ���
..:� . '.-,i .. � e. ' . _ � ' � r �.
r _ ,�_
7 ` � Y �
. � .-i: r .". �. . "" �,yg ,aa.,.
m
k t �
. � . ......,�, �;
-. �� . �' � - • . _ � „�,...u„ _. � .
'C �., � �. .►^'.wi"" ` tµ. �*if`.f' i.' �I y`4� '".s� '�r'�3�'� 'y�';.
� . �.
� � � . ....� ...���� .._
.�e..c§,,,,..��. � > > T.a: � � _ �� � .. ffi a _ � � 'd'+;>.... _ � ^��.. . ... �
+d� h� �k" :.
� $Lu�
�,, � � �
�.,°,
_: .
� �'�
� .
r',
i
�` _ .
. 1�
� � �
�^:;�'f'h,�'- ...
3; �
.'"..�,.. ��1�^�a'�',v
" '�
�
��' �
a�WP� w ,;,
�
yr�`- ��•; k" �� $ ;�"� �. ',. ��%a
� w .. � � ���� � � ���� .� � � �
�X' , �, . �r ��g �
�;�A�.��,��. �� -. �� � .. . . . � A � V ;,��a •� �,�r� � �:._
' � �� �'�.,. ��' <� �" �� i .r`s���
�. "���,,��� _'�.�,� �� �,
�.. � � ib. � �'�ky �,:,. k ��,�,} � $ ��': " � .: � ' �,
�� i ",�: �: &�: � ,g.q.
, � � ��' � � ,�
��� .�
�� � � ".e
y 5, �,'.i�'
��� � �v
d � �
> � � �� ��
:� � �,� � ���� � � ..�� s�� � ����"
• '��� < ;:�"' •,
� � , , �� e �„�.
s� � '� �° x � � `� " ,� �s_'
�.
. '(, � � :Pp' k , . � �
: i .w,� :.'� � �c �. '�, 4 ,� , �
� � `� . �� g��. re . �
.. ,�.+x °.1�as-s � � �" _..
r. � ; .
�tt. � � g �����ni,� �,�� �
� '��.. ... � . .. nit � �� '.� °`�..' `
�� 'S" • ,��.
.. � � �� � r" A, � •�� ���e&
� � g
�
. �� � ��z a � ' .4
� ¢
sn � '� w
. . . .. . .. .�
. . . , � / � b^, . .,. � .
. ..a�m�' � r`�
.. . .. . , , .. � 5
� � � � ��
3�'
��.:
� s
i �--� ��_ �g.�
H+
�, m��
�a
� � � �
W. �i .. ,_- _,a, .. .. � ��
�^' : " �' � ,._ ,.... , -Q ... � ,��
„�,�.,,�'d°" , !� ,..r ,��"`w.�.��;'.�,�
� '�r � � ,� g" � � � `.. � � �; � �:' ' � .', f ��' � � .� � <.
�` � �� k �� � � �.� � � � �_ �� �., � . � - -
� , ,.�_ E r. :
� i ;F��1� 1 , _ . .. � � £'> ? � . _ t:: . . . , � � . �
. . . .: i E a ��. , � �'�! � i � ��.
��C �t�� il�{��ncr
%'Ji��iC� �i�iFk?F`4+}���i:�:.
� �) . �� G:+E � . i
�?��r!'r�,g�iry�� �.;� �4C;�,j.,
��r ��'���. ��il'�r,
F;�:: 1 �v � C:;� � ��.� r'"-�' �a=_, ���s�L ��C:<�v���;r�
�°✓iu`p� � r:, ����
, t .,
i
ji"i€,r, ��t�f) i.S 9E�1 €`�t��t-�f �Ci i��� ti;°`i?'�rE.' �� (w<.aL'�J�t?(7S :�?' i�'� za�t:)'•.��' t"���iW'1�,�=-:� ���E;. �:'i�
(�P.ii(sx'tS`�.' 'v^�t`3' W tO �'.��-..'ie:!"i?�I(l� C,�.F:f1t;C:�C �l�'�il��°i ;: � :;%i"pl�"�rE�,�, t.s� .'�,�> eix3.�"i� $':�'ti�" �'�° 1P�`.n
i il:`' i���;.�^" �`l<�Si�' J�'C11 `tJII�(C€t��� fC't"l.�c��:'C� �UE1�7� S'�i;`Tii".�::?� ii�i�;ri`��:}";.�'s ,:'�i("tCe¢' :''t��lir£� ECr�,�'`�
� � r �� :3 : t��� t�n:.��,�c�#� `�ev ��� t� r-,��f ,.,rr,�u hi ;�3�� _
�`f�,�;y ���e� r���t ��c��,ir� ��� €���z�h �� ��-� ��� � s.
r.`;��'c; tlu� �'��(1 eil.r`iC9r f'CtC7� {ti'."��i :�i I�t�~: ��:;�� .� c�s :�t�}�� P;�3T A�:!w��r.�" `L7 iic�v''� ti7i�d'�C��,r�
,`i� $i'"�c�. �"'�:'"�' �� Y�i� .��t� .��"e�'c�C}i1��C:i.i¢{ �iC:�::l�2;Y,,;;�;:1�',rti €[�.^'"�'C�ic� �i;€? CCiw�� �st��' c -� C;i� ���c>
�E�£:.�`i �;K��v'it iiw'.`,�e? �i,`"'.+''���1.
ii"i .116� E��31('!:'�`�?"1 �t�°"!t? i(�'�S �C� il�'.e�i��`'� 'sa�?4i Plvr="iia�� �t�(' ?.r'�: ��°�'t,%i�'S �€!t� �.i.S!?"Pt� tE �;s�S`-<3ti a_
'qi "�«'�a' ��::3I"Tt ��?�;�i� t`�}� �'ism1�� '�'L'��li���c?31t ;l'I��.�:�i�I tG ;:��f?� � �it?x:s.
t �'?I;l a�i� r�}�C�iT fS` �.��.tt'c"��'.�':�€'it� �`��SP.,:x Ci(1 ��lit"tt;$ �-�?�1te;'iGl_zlt�..it��� �G�'"st"iutC:�^:a �"1C�
�rl"�:;��I�'�:;
ti j i�=�=' "�.'; �r, �°
; 3 ,� r «,�
� � "T< � tI # � � , � �;t; t� i Y �
,�' � � a I � ._ �d° r: � � � �, �% � � �z� � � ' «r�'�""�_"'M�
� �a'�' �1., F�tdP���-� ��,;,� �� p.P'��F��.
, ���....c- �._�. _ � _ ,�'"
� �' c''�,� �'�� ' �--� <�,^``'"�' �„'`�`Ll � �4d,�,.�"�
�ict���� L. `t-{�.�r�fir����r� � �- �'� �� �� .��
�a�,'��--tt3i ���,
���:fi�� �� b�rist `��'� #�11 [�f=, �`, "'�� ;� 'R
�er°rfi�� ��r�ster # #�2� ��� �� ,� �
�
�
y� �r��y ��`�""� ``�'�,.r� ���°� �
�3 i S, li�''U �.. � fi �",��j'a. �'. �..�'.
. q`'�..::+.".- Ilg^.°T. -i:'''�',�
���.�"� ��'� _.�.��
PLG-Monroe, Meg
From: agrimes@stanford.edu ��--�`� ��f` � 29 U'—
T d M 29 2007 8•30 AM `�
Sent.
To:
Subject:
ues ay, ay , .
PLG-Monroe, Meg
1537 Drake
To the Planning Commission:
Because I am traveling on business today, I cannot attend
meeting re: 1537 Drake.
�'OMMUNICATION RECLIVED
AFTER PREPARATION
��" ST'AFF REPORT
ic�
tonight's Planning Commission
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 Design Review, Conditional Use Permit for emerginq lots and
Special Permits for buildinq heiqht, declining heiqht envelope and attached qaraqe for a new
two-story sinqle familv dwellinq at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, Otto Miller, P.O. Box
121, Burlinqame, CA, 94011, propertv owner, APN: 026-033-280;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
Julv 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 9
Effective July 19, 2007
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 through A.6, 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 and L1.0; 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 to the tree protection plan or
tree 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 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 Engineer's April 8, May 31, June 4, August 15 , August 30, and
October 15, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 18, 2007 memos, the Fire Marshal's September 3,
2002, June 23, 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 9
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 9; 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 9;
10. that construction of the house and attached garage on Lot 9 shall be completed through Lot 10
at rear of Lot 9;
11. that heavy construction materials and equipment shall not be delivered to the site or stored at
the front of Lot 9 in the designated driveway area;
12. 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;
13. 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;
14. 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;
15. 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;
16. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development,
shall be installed along the left side property line between the driveway and property line to
meet current code standards; 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;
17. that the new sewer connection to the sewer main in the street shall be installed along the left
side property line to City standards as required by the development;
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional
Use Permit and Special Permits.
1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Effective July 19, 2007
Page 3
18. 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;
19. 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;
20. 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;
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;
22. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance;
23. that the project property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions to
the proposed house or necessary changes to the tree protection program or to address new
issues which may arise during construction;
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 Community
Development Director 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 the
project 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 for
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. 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;
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional
Use Permit and Special Permits.
1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
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; and 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; and that 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. 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; and that if any roots greater than 2 inches in
diameter are encountered during the digging for the pier holes, the project 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,
the report shall be approved prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the
site; and 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 project 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 9
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;
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; and that the property owner of record 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 (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;
36. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001
Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional
Use Permit and Special Permits.
1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Effective July 19, 2007
Page 6
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 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
permit 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;
40. 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;
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 9, 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;
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional
Use Permit and Special Permits.
1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Effective July 19, 2007
Page 7
43. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 9, 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 9 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;
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 by
the conditions of approval on Lot 9 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 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;
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 a licensed arborist inspector on lot 9 selected
by the City Arborist and approved by the Community Development Director.
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for Amendment to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional
Use Permit and Special Permits.
1537 Drake Avenue - Lot 9
Effective July 19, 2007
Page 8
46. that prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall work with the property owner adjacent to Lot
9 to determine the type of fence and/or landscaping to replace the existing brick pillars
separated by grape stake fencing.
�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 AVENUE, LOT 9
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the
following pu6lic hearing on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 7:00
P.M. in the (ity Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road,
Burlingame, CA:
Application far amendment to mitigated negative declaration,
design review, conditianal use permit for emerging lots, and
special permits for building height, declining height envelope and
attached garage to construct a new two-story single family
dwelling at 1537 DRAKE AVENUE, LOT 9 zoned R-1.
APN 026-033-280
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 Planning Department at 501 Primrose Road,
Burlingame, California.
If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, y,ou may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing,
described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city
at or prior to the public hearing.
Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing
their tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call
(650) 558-7250. Thank you.
Margaret Monroe
City Planner
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
..�,� f.,
• • •1��� L
.� �a ��.�s �-�.- � a �
� �'Y�. • a�'� =
�.'3 � er���a� �3 .
i���''��'�'`�3•�`
0'i6H165U4325
` it �t
�.�ai;ed From 5%+UiU
l3� P�Si'AGiE
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE
(Please refer to other side)
�$ S ls���� 5 ,��1.',. � .
�,�. I ���� � '�i.• , �; � M � �a��� ��',
�I
�,'ti' �i`�""�� ��� ,
� � a
�� ;a�`a �,'�;�� �,1 r.. r � aff
7 ;i+,`t
'� M1 SJ �.;Y �
,..1 f [.' � � " .y,.� .. �''�'� �
r ' .t . �t t. `��'�, N
.+'i �ta s� � �r
4 `�`" �'� l • �aq.r ` z� ;s�, � �� �` 4x�'��c�'
� • �:. } '"� � s � 4'� �e x: � A� �i. �� � a a
. �* � "�,.,,� �,x'..
��.R �� i� �• $� . .. i 'J � ,-.:
if '` �q,. �„!... �+�.. ..:_ k7� } �`F,�3, F��yk a7� T'��,��`� � s4 0 �. _3��'Y�'�' .: k � � .,`1I.
+ ' , �� . � t ���r ~`�S. .i.- � r L y.�,{� r : �� t E � � . .,.,�
S ` .�. ',,,�' �� ..� '�e, s� � ti' .�6� �
R6°St fl � � � �/.� � a.y14� �'�r�42 s �' ��'_ �'
� � ��� �a�t �,�
�K
������'�� ¢ ��`� � � . M' ���..'�+""�4� `: . P1�1XS'T^
�
.
p _ �� "�� •P+ j .ap � '.: /� � � r,� � ,�, Sro�:� . ��'� {� e 'F"Rc � '` ��. , yry����,17c:.'_:
` �� rt.
,g �4� ,,,, " ""' �' i .: n 4 ;. .� �'� "'°M ,.`�` d°'�,��'i a � , t � a �'�E
}�� n y-� ,� „„ .�+��, t
., �,� . �..".� 4� �.t . ,�,� �� . . 'r�gk .!. ,� . +*' x pv
ot n"yr,f a'-'" '�a "w�` � �' : A � ,, � `i� '�
. �. n�mk� . � p`w[ ' L 1'* �3 �• y�' , q` � ' ` Y' ; �.
� � .
,� " r� ��`' � ; ,��66 �, .�. � � � .�. , '
{a J�>g� ' w'.,��i'�t��r . .� . � t/� #.. ` . � ,+ ., n _, Cr� '�"!r� ��ri
! ' ��yU'P�%t ,�rl' , sY�' '� � � � �.' 1 ��
a .:: �y, s�. rw � .� ��, �...,�4�*�G... " r ,, . � ��� ��� i
;?ztJft� h, i: t .. � {!'+9 �y q . ' �° �+� y r'�' .'�. n t �" a� ♦
�' a�ti�'�{'as`''�'�� y � ..ti° S �e2 �:�y � � ��! ��i�',�t �'��,° � � '�y' .. � 5..-:
�q�y� n`�ScF7, h q�'`ti: y� WR�,� p�,i,�w•' � f,�a, �s �.' i e ��`�� . ,i a:�:-�:
!'? . �`�T �FA •<,-.. �'csi' ' ..M. . � �' .
�. 3 R�•. Y ,' s 5: ,..� �t� "��.v � ' / �
V�!. ' y�. t�; �'3
j�+�';� �vA' tM.2 9�. 4. b"W �. a v .+ n, f, s p»t,� �., x *, M �
�#�. �!. "g h� �Y�+"�, x ♦ 4'�ri . � 7�`k '#"
� <�r" ¢''ea / �.�h�{: tl ,i�� �.
{� h �� ' �f �
� �;�� 4�'�� � j � �kt''���'m��''i' �� . t O
��'ky�', r.�,tir� 4'�'��' �,, . �,r":.+. ' " `. , 4 y ,
�r , ��` �, �,, r'� . ��, , �ti�„ � f � t»,�',�• 1*.�° `,� ,� ' y
�` w _ � "w . > y� '� a � j°�,'�
w a" � �
e v q, 41,¢,�' �S-�� " aY �.� +�js, �•' � y ,F'�
�
�- ::-.: ,.�. �
���:4 , : � -� .. %
���ry ,•! �.. � ��� � r ��`.� k ° 7�� pr � i .:�' �j i
f''�'�`c1� N�':. ��.. :.' � � � �'' ��..� .�r/ ?
�:� ,•�•� ��' s 4: � �' ...� �.`t� �`+Sy.�K` 4� �
� �� 'w � � �. � ¢ � "a :�. ♦ .,f �'�,�.,�'�_..' �
J . . D,. �'� . '�"4Y�'.
}' ����:
f�, � � J , x� b l�f .
. 4 j%4„a/ ! a ti�,r�,�y�� �q.� '` � �� S��`' +�, �� � .. / s
�" � ,�ryy'.� � r}�`. �4 d" `�'_iy,�i . , . ,5� . ��e ,�, �F '
,q �'g���'�Ee"��',�y3`, yy �'-'�'�\' `� -� �` a " �gr �!- "':. ?�- •� �% . ,a �" . ::� �� ".. ,'
Y ��;'T _.yi�+4�'�p � �, �A� �`..T �� l� ..�p� �. � ' .F '.. ;y�jNt'J' • ..! � N M' �
����� ��y,� � t� „v_1�.. . #a� � ��� � T �i�* . + ° # 5\� 'P�� �' '++�
� �a �ii . v � �
��y � � � z ��1 �9
;"'�J.,{�( a p * �r',.. w ��y'� 'a "R. :f i
ar !Ip
��y,�r„K ..�£s- � �:�i; t .�. ��.w' -�RA. � �. '�{3 ,�, � •
�r'R- ,�.� a �`�,����' � � y � ' � �ra t� �, ��
ti �,'°'' � . i '��L�� ♦� � .. ., ��t f � I � �? ..
��-`• '..* ',y',���♦ � .� / . � ', �;
,• , �
i9� �`At�a,`��; �+� J diy �. �i
N � � .:� � . e ..� 'y' Q ' �'!;: '� .
,
�
.. .. _f ,., :. ;. .
)� '
1§�"- .s:y� '9 .� , i'�fi' :�' "
�., '
�+'��,,/ '�� �,�,�It ,t a
, . ,
�W� �� <. `�+ � � � �@'" * � � ; �$ �� e r: � �� � �1 �� � '>
�A �� '� ` �!�m r : � � -aAr % 4 ,� . . ��F' ��
�� '.� �, r ' ;� ../,•. �'''� sy �36�'� a�'
..
.
� � � ,
:.,�. � .., �
�•� ��w � � . � '£ .. .. .. . � q � �. ��
� . � t�' •�� � �.Vps"�, � � a5y
. ��' P � S � � �,,. � �o ..Y� a� � � t.�', ,
� � �, r i��* > ?", � �,t, ,�
��":r� ,,;nr � ,,t � 2 '`�,�' /J ''�, �` /` �� r�'
G ,�,�" h. . : �h' , � r. ' . / '" >': , �('Y �; -''...'
.. � �+e����`5_iw '�a,»'r .. F � �. ` .�, � r
t� '.'�".,, �° ' `�t�" � �'��' „�.' yr� ^� n �
' py�.fi � 1 . F'� E d :�,�' ° t �. . : / ,� . �` . ..j.
r-
�xi�� '9��,... � �ak � t' _s// �. J''.' d :
°�� t a �� `�hr�� k�^� r'b
.%�''� ��•. � _ '.., � �. � 5 /' , �' ��. .,"'�,�"�y.
�� � .it��,.�ky�� �r � � /
� "� � ya �w ,y�Yt�X �"�. :�.. ��� .. -�q .
��'�� 'r���' �!^`'"� �',`,� '� 1� � -1 �� .�_
�� ,�j"�.�" � � 1�4 � 9 �t�"T' ���I'� ' � �' � ..� Y f 1 '�
; s a �+ �, i . ! '. . d
'�' �.� . . � . � � '�f�'� �"
. .,�. ,� a
r r � r �� -ry s ,�# � .. . x,�.Y .' � k. � , a .� } ,`
� �' r�'���,.�, rS�j �� py ; � �„ ,�� x ,-�,
� �ykj,��3� � . 1 .� y � �.{JS �y,t i `�tY.�.•^ .�r Ar�:.. �y' �.� b
�'�- "t ',)�Y,�. �u h� �' V � - t ..: '�y.
`�p,� y,�9 ` � � R �ur , � r � y� , � a v x :, . .�t P � ``�'�,� .
�, ��. . �„� � � ,
. � �k� � - � •Pµ � ? +� H.:P � � �;:. � �'.
�,¢: �'r 4
•vk" 2a� , �..�. - � 3 °�� ' � �� � � .+ti �
"..a . � � � ti'1 �, .,�,�1 f&�� ,s� - '
� ���5 �. �,, � � r � �� � at „:' � f - � .
,,
;h�t%,'"`qn,�,�q �,� �,'Y. '�$tti t „4 '. • �,' ,Q Y'' � �g,
� Y�� a �� ,� f `�"t ! r!"� y �� �%r � ' \� ,f - ' ,� .- �..
�w�,d'•+ � � ��" � t � ..�'�.�. .o� �, �,� �' * i ����°�. Y���� {
.a.....
i � . ,
'���y� ����;� �t
' � �• • � • � 1
�: I�' i�R , , � , � r
�,
_,� `"� p � � t''�t�Tt�$d� � - �. ,°�"Y � \ r. ��yb '�:� �,. +g ��sr:�.
.£ � • aw, �k.� r� � '6' g ��" �� !=etr� �
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes
VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
Ju/y 9, 2007
2. 1537 DRAKE AVENUE, LOT 9, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EMERGING LOTS,
AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR BUILDING HEIGHT, DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND ATTACHED
GARAGE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (OTTO MILLER,
APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., DESIGNER) (57
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-six (46) conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chair Deal opened the public hearing at 7:27 p.m.
Mark Hudak, 216 Park Road, Burlingame, represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ With respect to the root protection fencing referenced in Condition 26, are the posts driven into the
ground and not skid mounts (yes).
■ Discussed the cash deposit of $118,780 referenced in Condition 33 as a means of guaranteeing the
viability of the Redwood grove. Ultimately determined that the cash deposit should continue to be
retained.
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, doesn't think applicant has suffered any punishment by City. Feels that
applicant is intent on developing all emergent lots in City and building large homes; eliminating affordable
housing units. Developers do not pay for damage to City streets as a result of new construction projects.
Cash deposit should not be returned for at least 5-years after completion of project. Suggested lot split
resulting in dedication of the portion of Lot 9 containing the Redwood grove to the City.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed at 7:50 p.m.
Commissioner Auran 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 through A.6, 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 and L1.0; 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 to the tree protection plan or tree 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 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
4
City of Burlingame P/anning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 9, 2007
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 Engineer's April 8, May 31, June 4, August 15 , August 30, and October
15, 2002, June 27, 2005, and June 18, 2007 memos, the Fire Marshal's September 3, 2002, June 23,
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 9; 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 9;
10. that construction of the house and attached garage on Lot 9 shall be completed through Lot 10 at rear
of Lot 9;
11. that heavy construction materials and equipment shall not be delivered to the site or stored at the front
of Lot 9 in the designated driveway area;
12. 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;
13. 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;
14, 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;
15. 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 sfeeping areas;
16. that all new utility connections to serve the site, and which are affected by the development, shall be
installed along the left side property line between the driveway and property line to meet current code
standards; 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
5
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes
July 9, 2007
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;
17. that the new sewer connection to the sewer main in the street shall be installed along the left side
property line to City standards as required by the development;
18. 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;
19. 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;
20. 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;
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;
22. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance;
23. that the project property owner shall obtain Planning Commission approval for any revisions to the
proposed house or necessary changes to the tree protection program orto address new issues which
may arise during construction;
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 Community Development Director
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 the project 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 for 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. 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;
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; and 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; and that 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. 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
.�
Cify of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes
July 9, 2007
by the City Arborist; and that if any roots greater than 2 inches in diameter are encountered during the
digging for the pier holes, the project 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, the report shall be approved
prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction on the site; and 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 project 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; including deep root
fertilizing, beginning upon final inspection; this maintenance program shall be as recommended bythe
City Arborist based on site studies and experience during construction; and that the property owner of
record 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 (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:
7
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minufes
July 9, 2007
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,
as amended by the City of Burlingame;
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 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 permit 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;
40. 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;
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 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;
42. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on Lot 9, 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 9, the property owner shall ensure
maintenance of at least four (4), 8-inch by 11-inch laminated waterproof signs on the Redwood Tree
8
, , ,
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 9, 2007
Grove Protective Fencing warning that it is a"Tree Protection Fence", "Do NotAlter 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 9 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 properry 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, the City Arborist inspections as required by the conditions of
approval on Lot 9 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;
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 a licensed arborist inspector on lot 9 selected by the City
Arborist and approved by the Community Development Director.
46. that prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall work with the property owner adjacent to Lot 9 to
determine the type of fence and/or landscaping to replace the existing brick pillars separated by grape
stake fencing.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Terrones.
Commissioner Osterling noted that he would vote against the motion since he believes that the cash deposit
for the Redwood grove should be released.
Chair Deal called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 4-1-2 (Commissioner
Osterling dissenting, Commissioners Cauchi and Vistica absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This
item concluded at 7:50 p.m.
E
, Citti� of Buriingam�
,1�r��ric�ftxzc�r��t t� I.�c�s•ign Re��ietiv, Cnr�c,litiar�al l:�:se �'er»rif.for Lrner-ging I.,vis
und ,S�ecicrl I'�rrr�rls
�dd�ress: 15�7 �Drt�ke :����nue ������ Lot�s 9 and 10
Item #
Design Revie��� Stud�
I�teeting Date: Si29r`�7
€Zeque�st: Ap}�licatio�� for :�n����d�nent� to Des.ign Revie��r, �"anditioz�al Use I'emlit Ear En�er�in� L,ots;
Sp�cial Pcn��its for attaci7ed garage dnd deelining lieight enti•ela��e on I.�t 9; an�i S�ecial
Pertni�s fo� l�uilciirtg (3�ight ai�c� declinii�� �l�ei�h� c�nvelo�e on Lot 1O, to cozxstruct Twc�, ne���
tu.ro-st�ary sizlgle I�:arniiy d«�elli.n�s at 1537 Drak� Avenue, Lots 9 a»c�t 10, zoned R-1 .
Applicant and Proper�' �J��zie�r: C}tto �Viill�r
llesi�ner: Jam�s C��t�, C;hu I7esig�� c� Engr., inc.
General Plan: Low I:��«sity Residc;ntial
C'E{,�� Status: I`�e��ti�,fe Declaratic�n ND-�23-P a�rld �1cic�ei�duin
AP�1: c)26-0>3-2so (I.,at �)j
026-03�-27Q {I_,at l t?)
Lot �rea: 6CiC�6 SF (cach lot�
7oning: R-]
Bae�grou�3d: "I'l�� rnos�t r�cent actic�i� on thas site occurrec� on �l�'[�}r 3, 2t}{)�, t�=hezi Che C`it�� C;oul�cil
apprc�ved an A�n�ei7cincle��t to t�h� original Cond�itional U�se .Pertnit for em�rging lots iz�► c�rder to s�par��te
and an�e7��d ca��ditions af apprc�tral for Le3ts � and 1(? from Lot 11. Sinee fihat action thr�e y�ars llave
passec�. Plan.ning staff has ��xouided � l�istc�ry oftl�e proj�ct be1o1��.
Hist�r}' of the C)ri�;inal Yroject: Oii '��I��y 27, 2QU�, th� Planning Cryomn3issic�n a��proved a l�-'[ifiigateci
Ne�ative L}eclaratic�n «�itl�� a tni�igatio�n n�c�nitoring plan inclu�ed as a paz-t c�f tl�e conditions of apprc�val
�or tl�e ze-e�nergcnce as�d develo�n�ent of tt�ree lots �t 1537 Drake x����nue, zoned R-1 (Ma�r 27, 20C1�3
P.C. ;Minutes). "I`iie� �lannin� pernlit �.pglicatioi� was for a C°o�aditic�nal Use Per�z�it :f�or three re-
eaner�ing lots, Desi�� R�view for three nc��� houses (one an eacl� lot) and Special Per-mits fc�r ��n
attacl:�ed garagc for Lots �3 and 11 at 1537 Drake �venue. Of major concern a�a this siie ti�,��re stanc�s of
Redwoa�i tz-�es d�ter�nine�i to �.-�e� si�nificant. The ?�te�afi�°e D�claration prepared fc�r tl�is �roject c�°as
b�sed oi� tl�� pr�����isc tllar tl��, tree prot�cfiion n�easures req�iired in t}�e environmei�tal dc�cunlent ai�d
i�nple;��tlente� through the conditians of approvai «�ould b� adhered to throughout the praject frc�rn
demalition of tlie inau� stru�tures ozi the site t� five y�ears c�f t��r�;e nlaintenanc� fUllo��in� vccupanc�` of
th� sitc, tl�E�s r�ccl�cing the i�mpacts o� developmcnt on the si��iificanC groves �f trec,s io a lcvel
accc}�table to thc caT7in�unity.
A der��olitiot� pertx�it far tlie� esistin� house and ��c�cessory s�ructures �uas issuzd oii �:�Io�=ernber 12, �OC�3.
Dez�iolitiUa� �f aIl exist�irzg struct�ures on tl�e si[�� ���as compieted by� fit�e e�1ci of �Io��en�b�r, 20fJ3. Os�
I��c�ti��znl�er 25, ?00i, the contract�r b��an �rading oz� I�.ot 9 at thc locatic�n of th� signif��ca�nt stands c�f
Redti�jood trees. The �rading ���as based on a sei of faundati�n plails whicl� t7ad not becn rcz�iewed c�r
approved lay the �Buildin� or PIa�lniri� De�artl����nts. Bas�d az� the Plai�zii�� Conzinis�iozi approval, no
�;radii�g shoul�i haie oc.curr�d in the area being exca�-ated since the c�oi�ditions af appr�val required that
a root locati�n cxploratior� bc campleted aa�d a��ier and �rade-beatn f'ounc�ation be designed to a�=aid
tne major roots ide�ltified, ant� ther� a pi�r f�r��i �ra�ie-beain founciation be hatic� ciu� uilder tlae
eoniii�uoirs o��-site super��isic�n o�t' a l�icez�sed arborist. There «�as no root locafiior�� id�Y�tificatio��, no
i�otificati�z� to anv arbori�t a�nd z» ��as arbarist on sit� �urin� the �;ra�ii�� �xca��atioz�. �t itlat rime, a
stc�� �rork orti�r �k�hich appli�d to the entire site {LQts 9, lU and 11) ti�Jas issuec� 1�y� the City. 'I�l�e project
ti�Jas placed �n the Deccmber 8, 2C)03, Planning Commission calendar far review of t%e proj�et.
�� tl�� I7ecember 8, ?003, meetin� thc Carnznissior� continued the iteiz� until tl�e root dama�e had b�en
properly in��estigateci and the foundation t}-pe for the hc�u�es on the lots (9 at�d 10) which eauld affcct
th� r�c�ti��aod grave haci been d�vel�ped afid the con�iitic�i�s of appro�=al revis�t� accordi�ibly �December
r
�m��rarlrrlerTl i�� Dts�ign Kt�vfc�ti+�, C`nrrditinrarrl t,'se P�rr�rit arrz� Specarel Per•rrzlts 1 S.i7 Iarcike.�v<��ri��w> -- Lr�t � irnrt 1 �)
�, ?U�3 P.C. �'[irxut��s). At� that m�eting the Cair�l3�ission also requesC�d s�veral otl��r it�iY�s to �be
co�n�leted by the property o��•t�er i��c��luc���g; inti�esti�;atic�n c�f the root c�s3nia�� in the e�cav°atecl area ar�d
mappin� of t��� detennination of the ap�ro�imate loc�tion oftree r�ots, �'o���adatior� t}�ae and location �af
protecf.i�re fencin�. r'�n i�nde�p�,ndent arhorist, ch�sen by the City and paid for by the propti.rty ou�iter,
t�e�ai� ����rki�ng ��•ith t17e �iC� t'�rborist to assist I�i��1 in o�=c,rseeiz�� t11� root in��esligation as ti�-el1 as
�;valuating the pro�ei�ty own�r's art�orist's re;�orts and caznplianc� with them during c�nstructio�l.
All three hou�es ���ere c�ri ;inally �pprr�v�d ��•ithin one set af conditions ��-liich assumed, as prap�sec� b_y
Che c�eveloper, tI-�at �il three li�auses v��ould b� bui�lt si�nultaneously. 7`he pro�aerty owrzc�r wished to be�i�i
construction of the house c�n L,t�t 11 ���hil+� the fout�d�tion c�esi�n basec� c�n ihe root in��e5tigatian
continu�d for the houses an Lots � and 1Q. In order to �a at�ead on Lot 11, tlle Conditic�a�����1 Use Perrz�it,
��hich c���nt�iz�ec� sin�le sct nt inte�rtu��ined co�lditic�ns for all three lot�s, l�ad tc� he �sne�ndeti so tl��t t�he
conditi�ns of ap�rc�val ���ere se��arat�d, one set of; canditions for eacll 1ot, �1n applic�atioz�� tar an
��irlenr3ine�at� to the original Coz�dition3l U�se Pez�nit for emei•gin� lats in orcl�r to separate �nri ar��cz�t�
cor�difiians of appro��a1 fe�r Lots � and 10 ��ras revie���ed and apprc�ved by thc Plailnir�� Commissioza oi�
1�1arc1� ?�). 2004 (1�'larch 29, 2UU� F.C. I��Iinutes). The Planning Com�nissian's �iecision was app�aled t�
the City Cauncil. At their meetin� c�f May 3, 2004, th� City Cottzlcil upheld the P�lai�ning
Co�z�missic�n's de�cis�ion af ti�e condifiions of approval fe�r Lots �, 10 arlc� ] 1 (I�1ay 3, 2{)O� C.C.
1i'[ini�Ces}.
�onstruction of che l�ouse an Lnt 11 ti�•as campleted in Jun� of 2()(}>. Tli� pratective tree fencin�,
�nulclli�ig anci irri�ation have b�en ad�quately r7aaiilt�t�ined �iro�n J�ul�, 20C?4 to h��a}r, 2�07, �nd �11e tr�.es
l�aF�� been �erio�icall}= cl�eci�ed hy Cbe City l�rb�rist for their health. T11e applicant no��r is �rec�uestin�;
re�-ie-��� of �1e1�• sin�le fa�nily cil��ellin�s propc�sed ��� Lc�t$ 9 and 10.
Fresei�t I2equest {based an plans ciate stamped I�iarch l3, 2007}: The a}�plicant is requestin;� a�i
Alnendinent to Desiga Revie�v, C�t�ditianal Use Per�nit for E�nerging LUts; Special Pernlits for
ai�tache€� �arage and declining heigl�t en�reiope on Lofi �; and Special Pernlifis for building hei�ht and
declinira� hei�lat e�nvelo}�e o��� Lat 10, to ��tanstnzct t��a, a7ew tti��o-story sir�gle family dti�-ellings at �1537
Drake A�Jcz�ue, I..ats 9 and 1(l, zoned R-l. Currently, Lots � anc� 1Q are vacant and contain na
structures, ��°ith the exception of tree proiection 1�ncing ar�unt� the existi7�g Red�a�c�od tre� �roves.
Gha��ges ha�ve beei�� made to the desi�n of t�he hous�s sipc� tll�ir origi�r��.l �ppra��al iz-� ?OtJ3, basec� c�n the
r-c�ot i��c��sti�a�ions. The project li�s been brou�ht foi-rh�ard as a d�sigz� revi���� study iiez��. Thc
fallowii�i� pages anclude sun�t�ari�s af the prc�posed prc�jects ori Lc�ts 9 and 10> chaz��es �nade �ir�ce t1�e
]ast activn �neeti�i�, ap�alications requested, a cie�relapment t�ble for each lot and i�ifonnation on t}�c;
roat in�t�sti�,��tioi�, ��tilityldrainage �lia��s ar�d �naterial staging.
�In a xnen�o dated ��gril 13, ?OQ7, tl�e Cily Arborist natc�s that based oi� thc proposed pia�is, "th� b�i�ildinb
ci�si�1 aaZd construction inetllods i�a��� been adequately incarporat�d iz�to tl�e n�ost curreilt plans �hat
4vi11 �nsure the prescrc�ation of t�he Redwood Tree Grov�." He also zlotes "tllat as I�n� as the proj�et
�
�
�1rn�nctrne:r�t a�<� D�s�igr� R� view, C'r�rirlitivtaca�l Cise I'c�rmtt arld S/aee•ia! t'ermits 153? 13r�czk� ,4 rc>r�u<� — Lot y ancl !0
contr�ctars follo��� the cui�re�nt plans, th� Arborist rccon�m�neiatians, as ��e11 �s the condit�ioras c�f
approval, tllis �roject can �0 1-an�jard at�d bc catnpleted ���if11 the R�{I4Voad Tree Grove intact anc�
presei-�red." Gi��en tlle cdnclusions fram the rc�ot inl�esti�ation, the tnethads �roposed far coi�striz�;tin�
tMe foi�nd�t�iozi a31d �ri�re���ayr lc�r Lrats � azid 10, the pro�os�d trench Eocafiions �or untier��rount� ut�ilit}�
lines and or.�-site irri�atioz� and ��dditi�nal conditians to be added to the prc�jcct, tt�e Cit�y �rborisf did
rlt�t �require any ddditianal arborist's reports.
Sumrrr�c�r�' of Proljasa! on �ot 9(Prans r�ute starn,�erl �1�arch 13. 2tJ07}
The prop�se� si�ngle far��il�r house oi� Lot 9, «�ith az� attacl�ed c�ne-ear aar��e, m�ast��-es 2,9�=� SF
((?.t?.�� FAR), 1��ller� 3,U2Q SF (U.50 FARj is th� m�ximum a13����eci. "I'1�� �roposed li�use is 7� SF
beloti�� the maximtizn aliawed FAR. �'l�e l�ouse inclt�d�s four bedrooms; two parking spaces are required
c�n-site, o�le of whiciX must �be covered. The sin�le-car at�tached �ara�e (�0' x`?�` clear iizterior
dime�lsians) at�d o�ze �Lncovered parkiz�� space in the c�riveuray (�' x 20') �a�ect the on-site parkiz�g
reqt�irement far a four-bedroc�m 13ouse. r'i Special P�rniit is requireci f�r the pro�ased attacheci garage.
"I`he ,3pplicant s�ibmitted a Landsca�pe PI� and Irrigation Pla�r�, sheets L�1.0 and L.1.1, respecti�-•ely,
documenting th�t the six existiz3g si�iiii�ant Redwaod trees on this lot will re���aii� after cc�nstructic�n.
'vt'ith tt�e si�: existi�z� Reci���oaci trers, fihe� site is i�a con�pliance ����ith the �L;r}�an Reforestatian a�d Tree
ProtecCic��� Or�linanc� (six existing trees ic� ren��i�n ���herc � nlininlun� of th.re� 24" be�x landscape trees
are required}. I�� add�tion t� tiie e�xis�tin� tr��s, l� new tr�es ���ill be added o�� tl�e iot to scr�en the tti��o-
story house. 'I'he follo��•ing species are proposed t�n Lot 9: Tasn�arlian Tr�e Fern (7 —15 �all�n�, Ye���
�'ine (4 _ 15 gal3on), Citrus {2 —I S gal.lon), and Japanese :�'Ia�ale (1-2�" box-size). The applic�iz�t is a1sc�
prc�posin€� to plant a p�ai• tree in �he planter strip in tize public ri�I��-c�f ��-ay in frUn� of Lot �.
The City �rt�orist and project ark�orist have re��ie�ved and ap�rov�d the �rc�pc�s�d L��ncise��p� Plan (see
men�o �ron� City �rbQrist�, �at�ed A�arit 13, 2007, and letfier from ��i�yne Tree ExperC Cor�Ipany, In�.,
d��te�3 Febi-u�ry 8, ?(�C?7).
Cl�ar��c�s tt� Z.at 9 Sitzce May 3, 2�I0� Cit�� Cou�rcr�l Mc�ezir��g: Sinc.e t�7e Ci�y Coua��il ineetin� on May 3,
2004, the a�plieaa�t has tz�ade several changes to the projc.ct pr�pased on Lat 9 to miti�ate ar�y� in�pacts
�o tlic ��isCi��� Re�i��rooc� �r�e �i-ove, To �niniinize any impacts tc� ��1e tree t�c�c�ls, the a��plicant is
prc�posiia� to use a pier a�id �rade beam fo�undation near tl�e Red��oo� t�ree gro��e (sce sheet S.1 } a��d a
footiYzg %l�ridaCio�� �o�r the resf o�f the h�t�se (��c sheet D.2). B3sed o�n root locatiQ��s tt�at ����ili be
detel-mined by hand dig�iz�g on tl�c site, the pier locations for the pie�r a�1c� grade ����i� fo�tn�idtia�z will
be c�eCernlincd. The property owner ��ill be required t�c� subinit a detail�d f�t�i�ciatioz7 report and desi�n.
for appraval by the Building Departznent and Cit}� Arborist to establish the bounds ofthe pier and ��•ade
beaYn faundation and have it a}�pro�3ed prior to the issuance af a buildirag perrrait for construction c�n the
site. �'4�ith this foundation system, the piers l�1iil be set in the �round and the bean� will be above gradc,.
As � result, this fotindation s�rstern raised the l�ouse by 3'-8" from what ��ras pre��iausly propose�i. I�i
c�rder to stay� within the buildii�g height li�nit, the r�of canfgurat�c�n ti���s res�is�d to eli�ninate i1�e peak
at the center of' fihe roof (sec s�eet A.�A}, E[ow��rer, a sp�cial pennYt for dcclining height envelc��e is
noi�� reql�ired far a r��it�or e�icroachn�e�z�t alona the right sicie of the l�t�u�e (7 SF, �)'-6" x 14'-t)" aloi�� tlie
riglit side of the house extends �beyond fihe deciini���� 13eight en��eiope}.
3
ff rri�rlut�rz�:nG tu [?t�s�i�*rt li'�>��ic�u�, C'c�rr�iti��rrrll Cts'<r P�rr�rriir arri�l Spe�cial Perrrzits 1�37 Dr�rzke A��>�nu�� — l.r�t 9 z��ad 70
The fillisl�e� flopr o�F the attached g�ra�� 4vas c�i11y t��ised by' a��r�xilnat-el_y 10 ii�c�l�c�s tt� r��inizz�izc the
amount of fii] abo��e exisiin� �z•acie. Th�: ne«• dri�•eway �3nd ti�Jalkcvav ���ouid bc constrl�ct�d t�sin�
iY7�cric�cking pavers set in sand, a sub t�ase a�i1d rn�iraF �eotexti�lc betu��een f�ic �xisti�Ig �r��i�cie az�ci sub
base (see Concrcte Clnit Paver detaii o�i sl�eet �I11.t�). In a le�ter dated Oclober 19, ?C.106, 1�1ay�le Tre�e
�Expert C'ompan��, �nc., izlvesti��Cec� the loeation o� tl�z� proposed d�rive��ay anc� �,valk�•ay� a�ld canc�lud��i
that a 7-inch cut couid be done without encounterin� large roots. H� further not�s that a little dee��er
cot�ld be da��e near Che existing side��'alk �vl�ere the, �iriveway is to start, This ���ould allr�ti�� for a brac�ual
rise u� t� the garage.
T'lanning st�a�'f v��ould ��Isc� iloi�e that an actditic�t�al 3'2 SF was acided on Che secarlcl floor at z1�e rear of t��e
housc. Cz� tt�e pre1rious c�esi�z�, therc «�as a nc�tch a.t tla� ra�ht rear cc�rner of' the master hedroom. `I'Ize
r�vis�c� ci�s�igr� iz�cludcs �Iling ir� t11is nofich so tllat th� �valls ab��ve line u�p �vith t��� ���all� belo«�. �'4'it��
�l�is revisio►i, t�he �propos�d FAR i��cre;a5ed fro�1� ?,�I2 SF (0.�8 FAR} to 2,94� ST (Q.��) F�R) «�her•e
3,C�22 SF (0.�(� �`�R) is the �maxiri�um 4�llowed.
Sr�t�rmar�� afI'roposal o�s I.ot ItI
The prc�pased hause an L�t 1�, ���itl� a cle;tached t�vo-car �arage, measures 3,�2? SF (0.5? F�R), rn-l�ere
3,�22 SF (U.S7 FAR) is the nl�xin�un7 allc����eci. The pr-oposed l�c�use is at the niaYi�azu��l a11oz��eci FI�R.
Tll� proposed house ��as five bedroams; tl�ree parki�a� s�aces are requixed on-site, t��tc� of wilicl� lnust
be cov�red. Tl�� t�t��a-car detached gara�e (2O' x 2t)' clear ini�rior din�ensions) ant� c�n�; L�nco���;reci
parki��g space in t��e dxive���_y (9' x 20'i n1ee� k�1e �arkin� requirement for a five-laedroom house.
The a�plicant subn�itted � I�anciscape P1an as�d I�z-igation Plan, shc�ts Idl.f� a��d I..l.l, respectivel}r.
Sheet LI.Q shoti�,-s that l l new trees ����ill be �dd�d on the l�t to scre�,n t�he tv�•o-st�ory l�ouse an�i �arage.
The %ll�wii�� species are prc�posed t�n Sheet :L1..O far Lot 1(J: C'reciaa� Lat�rel (2 —15 �allorl��,
Swaanpinyrtle (1 -?�" box), Ye«r (� —1� �allon). Pittosparunz (1 �--2��,� bax size) a�nd 1�taliat� Cypress (? --
17 gallon}. The sitc will ta� in eozalplian�e tiv�ith the Llrbai� I2eforestat�ion and Tree Protection Qrdii�ai�ce
(�wa, 2�" %�� ar2d eigl�t, 15-;a1Io31 tre�es proposec� ����er� a n�i��itnrizn of ehree ?�"' bc�x landsrape tr�,es
��re re�quire�i).
Clr�ri,�c.�s to Lot .10 .Sirrc� �'1�ny 3, 2C10� Cit�� Couricil r't3eetin�: Since the City Coui��i1 iY�eeting on May
�, 200�, the applicant has mac�e several cli��ng�s to the project propased an I.,�t 1(7 to ri�iti�ate any
irnpacts ta t��� e�istiiig Redv�rood tree �ro��e. To rninin�ize az�y irnpacts tc� the tree roo�s, th� a�}�plicanfi is
propcasing ta use a pi�r az�d grade beaxn fc�u.ndatioi3 for the e►itire hau�e �se� sheets S.1 ancl D.?). Tll�;
pi�i• locations for thc pier �ind �racie bean� foundation ���ill be bas�;d on root lacatians c�4tern�iYicd b��
l�and dig�;�in� on �he sit�. `Ihe praperty o�i�ner u�ill be �required to subz�ait a de�i�a�iled foiu�dati�n re�ort
ai�d desi�i f�r appro�=al %y the �3uilding Dcp�z-tment ;�nd City riz-borist to �stablish the bo�inds af� thc
pier and �rade l�e�nl faund3lia�i and have it ap�roved �rior to thc issuanee of a buildiiig �en�lit fc�r
cox�structic�n on the site. As a result, this foundation system rais�d the lz�use bv 2'-9" from wl�at ��.as
previt�usly prapos�d. Tl�e roof pitch f�r the main roc�f of the lzc�use ���as deereasc;d fro�n 10:1? to ��:12
tc� �niti�ate the increas�: in hei�ht. Ho���ever, t1�e house nc�ti�T exceecis the nlaxinium height lin�it by 1'-0"
�
,4rrt�it�lm�r3r i�� DErsigYx R���i�w�. C'c�rtrlr'tinrial C;'s�� P�>r-n:it ar�d S`Pecia! PE�r-nzita� 1��? I�r-�k�. rtvE�nz��> — L,e�t 9�rr�r� I t)
a�d requires a speci�l p�rn�it {31'-�1" �rc�p�as�d v�-her� 3t)"-U" is a(lo���ed). �urthe�rn�orc, a s�e�ci��l ��ef-mit
is alsa r�quireci for dcelining hei�ht ��lon; rhe le�.� sici� of tl�e house (�� S�, 2'-3" x?�`-O" along the I�:f�
sidc of th� house extends beyo�ld tiie dec�li���ir�g .l�ci�ht er��•elope).
Tl1e �p�l.icant is requesting the folIoGi=ing:
� Arz�cndtticnt to Desi�n Revie�� anc� Condi�ional L,rse Permit for Eni�;rging Lats to construct t��-a,
neti�- t����a-st�r-� sin�i� family d��rc}li�ngs at 15�7 I�r��ke ��.�elxue, Lots � anc3 10;
Rc.�r�uc�sts crr Lot 9:
� �pecia.}. Permit far attached gara�� on Lot 9(CS ?52�.035, a);
� Special Permit ��l'c�r dec�linin€; hei,��t en��elop� on Lot �(7 SF, 0'-6" x 14'-0" al���ig thc rig�t side
of th�. house extet�ds beyond ilie decli»ing height envelope) (CS 25.?8.f)75);
R�quests f�r� �Qt 1 fI:
• Spec;ial P�rniit f�:or buildin� hei�;ht c�n I<c�t l{} (31'-(�" prc��osed «�13er� 30'-(�" is allo���ecl) (CS
25.28.(�60); az�c�.
• Special Pern�if for declining llei�ht ez�velo�e ozi Lc�t 10 (54 SF, 2'-3" � 24'-0" alon� t�}�� le�� side
of the ilause e�tencis taeyr�nc� ti�� declii�ing hei�ht en�-elope) (e5 25.2�.Q7�}.
This s�ace 1r1tE�rrtir�aaally� IEfI l�lcrrzk�.
5
tlrn�ncfnxent tr� l�e.st�tt Re�•ie�i=, Cc'rrttltliunrzl Cis� Pc�r'rnrt ��ir1d ;�j�ecial P�r�nits 153' LJrithc� .A����rau�> — 1<nt 9 aiari 1 t1
1537 Urake Averyue, Lots 9 ancl IO
1_�nt rlrea: G,UUb �il+� each IUt Ytans Uate Stari� eCi: lvlarrti 1.3, �UUI
Proposed - Lut �) F'roposed - I.at 10 Al1a���edJRequired
SE 7 Bt�4 CI+�S
Frniet (1sC flr). 3�'-7„ �(}'-�" ? 1'-1 ��
(2�rc1 ftr): S 5'-1 " 36'-8" 21'-1 "
Sidc� (left): 4'-C1" c)'-la�� �'_(�'�
(YX�=ft!): ?'-0„ 4'-5" ��-U��
Reur (lst f7r): I Ci'-0" `iti,_�" 15'_0"
(2ratl flrj: ?C�'-0" 3�i'-5" 20'-0^,
I,nt C'avera�g>e: i,b20 SF 2, i 2� S�` 2-�f)2 �I�:
�0. i `;Io 37�i� �0",%1
1�;9R: 2,�4� SF 3,422 SI� 3(J22 tit�� (1:..c�t �} '
�.49 Fr�R �.57 Fr�It 0.�0 I�f1R.
3�22 SF (Lc�t 1 �J} =
0.57 Fx'�R
Pa�kirrs��: 1 cc��ere�di (10' x"?0') 2 cc�vered'' (?0' x 20') L.ot 9:
1 tinco��ercd �(9' x 2�`) 1 unco��°er�ci 1(�' � 2CJ'} I ccr�°ered-`(t �' x 2�')
1 unco�jere� {t3' x 20')
AtTache�i C�i��ra�;e ' Dc�tache�i �',ara�e
T.,aT 1 C7:
2 cover�:ci:` (20' x 2O')
1 ui�c�c����red ! (9' x �0'}
# �if bedro�nrs: � 5 ---
Hei,�ht: ���_8" 31'-0" � 30'-(3"
(29'-1O" ��revia��s) (28'-S'" pre���ious)
DH�Er:vc�l�pe: special �permit re�quired � specia] ��rmik rc�c��iret� �' see cocie
' {Q.32 x ti�06 S�) + i l0U Sfi = 3022 S� ((:).50 F11R)
- (t).3? x 6006 S:F) + I 1 QO SF +��Q SF = 3422 SF (0.57 FAR)
� 5�:��cia1 �'ermit %r attaclied �ara�e on Lot 9.
`' Special Pe�rniil far building hei�ht on Lot 10 (31'-0" �rroposed ���here� 30'-0" is allo��-ed).
' S��eci�l Pern�ii Fc�r c��clining hei�ht enveiope on Lot 9(7 SF, U'-E�" � 1�'-Cl" �ic�n� the ri�ht side of the la�+u��
extez�c3s beyc�nd the declinin� he�i�ht enve��c�pe).
" Special Pcnnit tc�r declinine �height envelope a.n I.c�t I.0 (>=� SF, 2'-;�," x 24'-t)"' alon� thc; lef� 5ide ofthe house
c�;tenc�s be_y�nd tt�e d��linin� h�i�ht envelope)
Ci
.trtrca7ctn2errt to L�cs�igrz Re����rr>�v. Corarlitiorar�l Usi> Perrr�it and .Specic�l Per-�ttits /�37 ��rctkE� A1�enrat� —(.c3t ��rnd 1(I
Summary af �Root Investigation; S�inee J�nu��ry 200�, the propez-ty o���ner and arbarists ha��e n2�i c�71
seve;ral occasions to discuss the root investigatic�n, possible fc�undation t}pes i:c�r the houses on Lats 9
and IO .���d zae�ec��ci �rc�tection during coi�stnictian. The arborists in��esti�ated the back-#illed excal-�ited
area oi� Lots � and 1(? in regards to co�npactia�a ai�d f'i�ture rot�t �rowth potential. The in��estigation
nc�ted rhat existiz�g com��aressian strength ratings far the fill indic��i� :r�nrr��.�l rooC bra��°tJa potential.
t�ft�r the area on Lot 9�ras excavated art�d prior to l�dck-filling, tlle projec�t arborist severed cx�osed
rac�t faces cic az�ly back to the; edge of exca�-atic�n tcr encourage ne�� rc�ot gro�=ih and nc�te�i that ira hi�
opiz�iot� the loss of roats at fih�� time ��fas not sig��if�cas�t in re�;ar�is to loss of l�eG�lYl1 or sup�ort fc�r tl��:
I�ec���Tt�oci tr��,s. Thc City �rt��arist agreed that zhis u��as �th� t�est ��ray to tr�at ti�e ex�osed roc�Cs. Tl�e
inspectin� �rborist �not��d that furth�r exca��aCion into tl�e b�ck-tille� ar�a �lay cause n�c�re cir�7na�e� itlan
th�; c�1-iginal r�ot �evering itself a�ad th��t it is �robabi�r best to leav� the ar�a as is ratlzer tha.r� atfien����t t�
re-exca�rate iC usin� tl�� air spati� taol. Therefore, Cl�ie back-filled area ���as ���ot re-excavated.
Ir� January, 2�)()4, air spading occu�red ua�der the su�en�isic,n of all thc arborists. Tl�c air spading ���as
c�one in several I�cations around the reciwood trees, but discozltinucd bec�use of the arbarists' COIIC�i1]
th�t the air e�cavatio�n �rocess its�lf, particularly gi��e�n Che tizne c�f y�ar, inay uni�ecessarily cia�r�lage or
dest�rc��,° thU �ne al�sorbin� �rc�oC�. '�l�e air tc�ol aiso seer�iec� to be st�ripp�i�Yg off t�ark fron� sc�nle �voody
roots i�l tlle air excavated tre�lclies. As a r�sult, a map of thc root system t�ias not praduced.
T�z r�,�ards to tl�.e �rotecCi��e feneil�g, the ai•borists a�►-ee that it may remain in its existi��lg lacatio�� o��
Lots �) and 10 ��•illi some additional i•ec�uireznents incl�.�c�ing ��nulct�i��� a�1d irrigation to su�port the trees
dllrill� the entiz'� constt-�.�ciion oi all thr�e lots ��-ithir� the protectik•e fencin�. Coi�ditians to me�t tl�ese
requiren�ci�ts 4vi11 �e added as canditians of apprnval.
Utilit�= and lrrigation Lines. Since the last revie�u of this project, a new 4-inch se4ver ]inc and 6-inc}i
«��t�r lii�e w�re installed in th� street along this block o�F�rake ��rei�ue. Tt�e ne�ti� �ines �reatly impr��ve
se�cer ser��ice a���d help }�rc���ent s���ra�� l�ack-up problems in the are�. T�Ze applica7�t pr�pared �� t;tility.
Flan far bc�th properties (see slzeet U.1 for Lots 9 anc� 10}. For Lot 9, trenc31i�1g for water, sewer ar�ci
drainabe lines ��ould b�; located alon� the le�t side oEt}ie property {�r,��ay from thc Redi��oc�d tree �rc�ve).
Gas, eable T1�, tele��l�ane ai�d ete�-trical lines for L,ot 9��•auld be locateci �t tl�e i•ear c�f the site.
For I.,ot 1C), tr�nch.ing for ti�=at�r, se«�er and d�razn��e lines tar ���ould he locateci a1on� t�he ribh� side af
t��e prop�riy (a�xray frc�m th� Red��ooti tr�� grc���e). Gas, cable Tt�', telephone anc3 el�ctrical lin�s f:o�r
Lc�t 10 ���c�uld be lacated at ihe rear of t11e site. T1�e C:ity Arborist reviewed and approv�.d the prapased
Utility Pla�n %r botl� Lots 9 and 10. [n a��Ze�i�i�a dat�d CJctober 19, ?(3{)6, �I�yne Tree Expert Ca«�p4��1}r
re��iewed t��e propos�c� tr�nehin� lc�catians for the utilify li��es and conclude�i i�hai there �-i11 be littl� or
nQ i�a�pact to t.l�e Red���=aod trees (October 1�, 2006 mcrno f-rom �v1ay��c 1�ree Exp�:rt Gc��m}�az�y, Inc.
a�tacl��ed).
7
.9ntcrr�d�ztcrrt rr� 1?c�.s�z,�n Rc�vi��1°, Conrlii�ic�rrrrl C�sc> I'c��rr��it crrid Spe<,�ral Pernzits 1.53: l�rake ,9+��rraae — I.ait 9 rrFr�l ll)
T��� a�plic�i�t also sub�init�e� an In-ibaCion Plan for Lc�ts � aiid 1tJ (see sl�lcct I11.1 f�or Lots �1 and l�J).
Trcnclling f�r the irri�ation lines t��ould he located a���ay fronl th� Rc,d��c�od trc;� grove, alon� t�1e Icf�t
side property line oi� I:,ot 9 ai�d along the i-ight side pra�erty line on Got l�}. 1'he pr�pc�s�ci �irrig�tion
syrsten�l cc�n�ists of �iz-inch dripline tubing at �rade. Tt�e City �1rbc�risl reviewed anc� ap}�roveci tl7e
proposed 1rri�,�tio�n I'lazl for Lr�ts � an� l(J.
1�1��te�-ial Staging: The a�pli�ant is propasit�g �i�o build both d��vellings at tiie sam� tir�ie. The t;tility
I'lat� (shect L1.1) shc�w°s �a�ater•ial sta�ing areas oi� I.�ots ��€nd 10 at tt�e frc�nt c�f tl�e lot, outsic�e of t��e
protecti�=e feaicin� f�r t:h� Redi�:•ood Crev grove�. The Cit�� Arborisf r�vicwed thc pro�rasee� locs�tic�ias :�z�d
agre��s that� it ���ill ziaf violate t}�e re�c�tr�m�ncied tre� �rotecti�n n�easures. T�1 order t� niinimizc a1�y
iinpacts to tht; raat syst�em, �tlle applicant ���ill be required tQ constr�.iction the housc fl�i Lc�t 9 fro��� t(�e
rear c�f the lat. Acccss to #he �atrse o�� Lot 9 duri»b canstruction ��°c�uld k�e t�axo�ig�i Lot 10, anc3
thercfore cc�nstruction on Lc�t 9 would be�in frst. Tlae a�plicazlt ���ill ��e re�quired to submit a
constructaon phasir�g plan sh�«�ing luati�� t}�e l��uses on Lols 9 a��d 10 ��iill be ec�i��truct�;d.
Tl�e ne��� coilsfri�ctio�� �lar� ���i11 requirc all construet�o7� �ehicles ant� c�elivei-i�.s to ma�ke use of the
p��blic ri�ht-af �vay ar� Drakc r`��=c�iue, iticludi»g some laadi��g ai�d unloading. Cond�itions aF �����ro�ra]
re��uire; t}�at no c;onsCniction equipt��ent c�r m�terials s}�all �e stored o�n the �aut�lic right-of-"�ay. �.ii��en
the �.onslrriinis o�' buildin� the l�ouses sin�ult;�Y�eously c�7i L�ts 9 a�ad 1Q, eor�st,ructic�r� �orkcr ��ehic,l�
parking ��°ill b� allt���cc� in the public ri�l�t-of ���ati iYl compliance ���itt� the� �'el�icl� Gade (�.�., no
dauble-park�ing�.
Staff Comments: See ��ttac�i�d cc�a-�znaent from G'ity departmet�ts. Pl�nnin� staff recommc:nds tliai this
}�roj�et be l�rougE�t faack to action as t1�•c� se�ar�te items in c�rder to keep the action and cc�nditions of
4�p�z�ova] clear ���d understandable for each lot. The ��re��ious cozaditions of a�prc�val, ch�nges to
eorzditic�ns of a��rer���l ��ci �ropos�ci conditions of�a�proval w�iil be prope�sed for eaeh lot bas�ti or7 t�l�c
ir�fonT�ati�iz in this stat��#� repc�rt, discussions at t�I1�� ci�si�n re��iec�� study mc;etii�g a�»� a�ditic.�nal
in%���atic�n prc���idec� l�e%re the �et�ion ��zeetin�.
IZub�n Hurir�
Plan�ner
c. C7tta Miller, ap�licant anc� pr��pert�t o��-ner
$
6f'. �2} �pPEAL OF' T[IF. PLANNIIIG COI�I;�TISSI�N'S :�PPRQV�I� t�r' AI�I:END:4�IENT Tt7
�1'HE� Ct�ItiDITIOI�tAi: USE PE:I2:��1t"T FOR E�►1FRGI:�tG LCiTS TQ �FPAR�`I'E AND
�IYtF'�1D CONDITIC?l�iS pF APPR4�FAL� AI�1E:�1�Dti1EN'I' TO DES]GN �R�;�fIE«' AND
SPF C'i.�1L PER.11�tIT FC?R �►TTACHED GARAGE FOI2 A NE"t'�' T�'��O-STORI` SI'i�1GLE
F.�I1�iL.Y' Dti�'F.,I.I.I�tiG �►T I537 I}RAKE, I:C}T 11, ZONED R-1
C;A .�rzdcrsoii excuseci l�in�self fron� this a��nda iter�i becacis4 t1�e C'alifornia Courts of A�p�at issue� t��°o
dccisit�zis tl7�t said tl�at i:�"a C��ity Attorney's oflicc takcs a sonlewhai aclv�;rs�rial position ti�rifill re�ard to an
applicant ��el�ciin� beforc, the C�it�y, the City Attorncy's of#ice w�ot�lcl then be disqualifi�d frozzl providin� lebal
ad�-i_cc to th� ad��isory bodics or t}ae City C'�uiZeil that is maki�a� tl�e d�Gisiorl rc�axdin�; th� mat�ter. I�i th,is
cas�, C� �nciersc�zi ���as a c�ntr�l pl��yer in l�aving a stop work c�rcler plac�4d a�a�inst tt�e pt•opert}�, a�id
fiher�fiore, unci�r state law• he is rec�t�ired ta recuse t�ir��self froa�1 pal�ti�ipati�n irt7 order to protec# rhe C-rty's
�aosiiic�tl. T���, Cifiy %as c�bt�iit��c� outsi�e cc�unsel, t����ich �-i11 b� a�-ail�ble �t futur� n��eli3�gs if C'oiincil �ieeds
any fiari}��;r le�al ��e�vice re�arc�ing this ap�lication. CA left fi11� dais a�nd Council C'hair�b�rs.
GP'�9_��nro� ��teci tlaai tl�e actio�� t-his Gveniza� tiv�i�ld b� cle�srel- if itenl 6f(2), 1 �37 L�rake flti�enu�, �[.ot 1 I,
w�cr� taken frrst. Council a��=�reec� to that �hangc in tihe �gencia.
C.P 'vlonra� i•e��ie����d the staff re�ort anc� a-econlmend�d that Counczl l�old a publie l�earin� on this appeai ��nc�
take ��ction oi� tl��; requ�st for L�ot �l 1, a�t 1_537 Drake A�-etlue. The C:ity� �rl�orist was �res��zt.
'��ay�ar O"��lahor�v opez�ed tl�ie �ublie hearing. l���ark Hudak�, attorney repr�.sentiilg ih� prop�;rt�= o�vi�er , 21Ci
Par� Rodd; S�a�� Yapsa, aYton�ey representin� the neigf��c�rs, J�nny t�el�se, t 5�l � D1-ake, �z�r� Grir���es-
Tl�on7�s> �1520 �L?rake, Janet Gaa•cia, 1561 I�ral:e, Gina O'Neal, 151 f.i Dr�ke, Cliris ��1cCru�77, l 5�O Drake,
Da� e'Taylar, l SCi 1 Drak�, Bob Bear, 151 t) Drake.
4'�ice �T�y�or Ga11i�a�a macie a�t7�tioz� to u�ahold t�l1e Pl�nnin� CommissioT�'s action ap��ro�°ing ��7��endcc�
coi�ditions of approval, desi�z r�viec�� ar�d � sp�eial pern�it fc�r an attacl�e� �arage at 15a7 Drake Avenue, I.�ot
1 l, fc�r the r�asc�ns cited t�y tl�e com��7iss�on �ir� t�l�eit• action. Thw r��otion was s�,c�c�nd�d by Gauzlcilnlan
Cotfey.
Ct�u��cil �skct� ar� t�l� n�otioi� i�f the arboris� reports prepare� b}r L�viilsot� had beez� c�c�n�idere<ia City .�rborist
res}�ozided thai� he l�ad revie�x�ed anci considered t��e�n ai�d t�fi.�t all thre� arbori�ts di����ss�c� �nd agreed th�t
there� ���oulci be no in��act on the Re�i��ood t�ree grove from de�=elo��fxle�nt on Lot 11 aY�d frc�n� u�iz�� the ?f)
stri� on t11e north side oi Lot 10 for a sta�in�; area. Gi�ren history, noC conCdent that� this projec�t ����iil bc l�uilt
��s ��gprc��red unless all tl�re�e lots ar� buil[ a�1�ce, will reduce in��acts c��i t,he neigl�l�orl�oo�.. Noleci t1�at tl��is
action includcs ad�itiox��l eonditioils to protect th� Redwood tr�es, not Iz�att�r if k�uilt at oz�ce in��act on tl�e
trees as different wi.th �;ach lot.
'�1�y�r O'?�Zahon}f call�d for a roll call vote on the nzotio�� ta appro��e tlae anlendment to t}Ie conditao��s �f
a��pro��al, desi�n revi��v and speGial pernuf for an attachcd gara�e at I537 Dral<e, I�at 11. "I'he rnotian passed
ras� a 3-2 (Ba}�lock, Na�e1 dissenting) roll eal�l ti-ote.
(1) fiP'FFA�I OF THE P[ �NNING CO�IMISSICEN .APPROVAL TO AI��IEND THE CG1N��DCTit3NAL
USE PFR:VI�I'I" FOR Eh1ER�I�1G LOTS TG SEPARATE AND A1�T�END C4I�DITIONS (?�
AFPR�D�Ai � FOR E�CH I OT AI�D FOR �.DDITI(?N�L TREE PROTEC'rION REQUIRFi4�I�N:N'I'S
Ft7R I.OTS 9.1ND 10 �►T 1537 DItt11iE A,V'F,NUE, Z10NEll R-1
5
F3urlin�atne CiTy C'ouncil �`1�Y �� ��0'�
.�ppr�»�ed i��liniites
C: P'��a��rc�e re��ie��red th�, staff re�art and recomn�ended Ccauncil t�old a public he4�ring and take actian on the
rec�uest� to a�m�.pd the cc�i�ditional iise pern�it for Lats � and I(} at 1537 Dr�ke Avenue. Slle� z�ot�d t3idt ��x�y
future cc���slructian develo�am�nt on ihese t���o lots would requii-e review b�� the Plan��inb Comi�aissi�n. Tr�is
actio���� ti��ould establish coz�ditio��s for e�h �lat a�ld ��-oulc� pro�•ide for o�ngoi��1� Y��aintcna��c�. acfii��ities for t}�e
Redti�%ood tre,e� grc�ve� u��t�il the lots 9 anc� 10 w�re develc�ped. The Gity r'�rbs�rist ���as �.��rescY3t.
��ay�c�r 4'M�hoi1}� a�e»ed the public hearin�. ��ark H��dak, 216 Park Rc�ati, �Burii��ga�Yr�e, rcpresented the
.��aplica�it; Janet Garcia, 151 f� Drake; Dave Taylor, 15�6 Drake; Sean Absha, att�n�ey #'or 1�ei�hbc�rs; spc�kL.
Vic� 1��1aye�r Galligan ��zade a rt3oCion tc� u�l�t�id the Planning Ce��rnn�ission's acC�ion an Lots � and lU for the
reasoYas t�l�ey noted partic�ilarl}� fhat lllis amez�dm�nt adds more tree proteckiQza ��aeasures. "I`l�e motial� �•as
secc�nciec3 by Cauncilman Caffey.
Mayour O'�f��h�1�}� ealled �f�or � roll call ���te on thc rt�otion t� up�lold the Plannin� C.ommis�ion at�d app�•ove
th� amends��ezit tp t���� cc��iditiorls oiap��ro�=al for each lot and fcar ac�ditional tree prc�tection requirLn��;nts for
Lots 9 a�z�d 10 at 1537 Drake AF�enuE. Thc naption pa�ssed on a 3-2 (B�yloc�k, Na�el dissentinC7) rc�ll call v°ote.
$. S'I'r�Fl�' I2E1'�RTS
a. ��i�1TRt.�D CF ORDIN.4�CF �,h�� �PP�tQ'4rF. RES{JI,L.�TI(7N #�2�-20�� STATIi�'G C
C'� , �'C)RN�I� FL�BI,IC �F�'1PLO �� ;ES� �RETIRE�IYIE�'T SYS'1'E�1! � �:aEPERS _i?�vD THE
Y C1F BUR[�I:�'GAA1E
H� Bell requ�ste�i C���nei1 appr �� �� tl�e Resol�utic�i7 of I�ltenfiic�n �42 �.00� to a��prave an .4n�endment t� t}ie
� ntrac� tivith the California P ic En�playe�s Retirern�;nfi Systei� .a1PERS). Staff aiso recot��n-�ei�ds that
t}�e, Co�incil r�vie��r ihe prop ed CJrciinance to amen�l the Gity urlingame's coa�itract with GaIP�LRS.
N1a_yc�r Q'�I�ha�iy re; sted CC Mt�ssa to read t}ie title o l�e pro�osed ardina�7ee tc� atalend thc City of
I3urii�l�a�ne's contr, t «jith Ca1PERS.
�rire ��ayo;r G ligan made a motion tc� approve e Resolution of Intention #�2-20�4 t pprvve the
�nlez�d�a��za � o the Cc��3tract ��itl� il�e CaliForn�� ublic E�n�plt�yees Retire�i�e��t Sys#ei (C�IPERS); secc�ndc�i
�y Couzl ' zi�an Coffey, .�gprov�d �xr�anin�o }� by� voic.e vnte, 5-0.
ti'ice ���ayor Galli�an i�aade a n�otion t�����ive �urtller rea�iz�� af the p
Cq�incilmE�n CoCfe}r, appz�oved un�� ' nously by �-oice vot�, S-0.
orc�inance; 5�co��deci by
C'ouncilti��an�at� T�'ag�;l made a otion to introduce the proposed or ' ance; secoxidcd by Vic�:1��1a r
Calligan, ap�roved u��az�ini sl�� by �-oice vote 5-Q.
Mayc�r O'Nta}iony req sted CC ?��Iussc� �to pul�li�h a su�mm� � of llle �prc�posed ordinanc at least fi��e days
befc�re prc�posed ac�o ion.
b. �I'HII2D GART'ER FIi�tANGlt�t.� 1
FD Na� a p sented Counril «�itll a�resenCati
ining tl�e third quarter %�fiancial repvrt.
�
�
I3urlin�amt C'ity Cnuncil ?41aY >> 2U0�
Approvcd �linutcs
C'it�� r�f�l3t�trlr�tgr�rrte F'lurrrtrnag Ccrrrzr�iissir,n� ;��firaure.5
,49r�r•c•Ir :?�. 'OlI4
noz�conforr��i���. Ca�n���ission noted t�hat tl�c, pl���i n�at�rials �vere not �rovidc:�i or� the �aians. ���plic�u�t� notcd
t1�ai plant and irrigatic�n det� ' s a�re sti11 b�i�r�� work�d and �-ill be sh �n o1� ttae constr�uctiall p1�ns srii�mi��t�,cl
for � buildii�g per��ait. , n1i7�issio�l asked if tlle parki��tg ��aria� , is appro�=ing t1�e n�Tlca7-�foni�i���: ��arl:u�g
count or j�isi� �tlxe i� conforn�ing back-u�`? CP nated t��at � e variaY�et; only a�plics ta th.e noncat�forn7in�
t��ck-u� c�imet 'a�1 of tl�e sp3ces icic�z�tif cd. Th�re ��� �� no furtl�er colnments and li�e public he��� «-as
�losc,d. ,�
C`r��lz ission dYscu�sioi�: sti}���ort the proj �� as pra�c��ec�, mast la7�dscapii�g ot tlie t� ' ings i�n this area is
i� bin�l, t�his is ��ir� irnp�-ovem�nC, elar' � ed thaf� t,he parkiz�g titari�tice anl_y a��plies t�e noz�coni�oaa��in� k�ack-
up space ai�€� not fh� noncoa�Carnzi number of on-sitc parkin� spaces.
C. Vistic�i maved to a�protr � e> a�plicatia��, �y rc,sc�ltrtzc�n, ���ith tli� f o��-iz�� ainended conditions. t) that
th� }aroject sha11 be buil � s sha���n on the pla�7s subn�itted ta th Iannipg Deparim��7fi a�nd ciat� stampeci
�E�ebruar_y 24, 2C}04, s �ts A1.0 ���d L�.1, site plan and land apc �31an, ���itl� a tc�t�l Qf S6 ot�-site parkin�
spaces �nc� 1 i,t�3 �� F ol� p��-site la�ndsca�aizz�, ��iith l�� f�O eg�rce orl-�itc �arki�n�� s�r�ces ���ith 12 to Ifi too�t
bacl�-up s�ace � a�re 18 feex is reqtiiired for Y�e parkii � spac�s �lang i�he nc��rt}� sicie of t��e buildin�; 2) t at
t}�e buildin�� all lldve 65,8$8 SF� of v��arehnuse, 8 3 SF af ofiice antl 1 f�,OCiO SF of shawroom, anv �az��e
tr� this c f;uration sl�a1�1 be reviewcd by tlie P�t�nin� Departxn�nt and ►��ay rec�uir� Planni�nb �' r��n��issic�n
<�ppr al; �) that the n�axir��tirn. nLullt�er of � ployees on site at an}F e�ne tir1�� ��ill be 5(� �� izs; �) tllat all
t} existiilg as�d new 1����dsc�aping !o b� ' sialJed on site ���i�ll t�e irrigated ��}r az� alitoi�� �'e sprinkler systr�na
tl���t sl�all be z�7�aat�tairac� by th� pr�� � y owner in good operatin� c�onditian at all ' �es; �) that ali si�na��
shall rcquirc, a se��aratc �cr�nit fr 7 the Planning and Builc�in� Depart�i�ents; that the cnnc�itions of tlle
City En��ii�lee�r`s �M��u-ch 1, 2�t� � n�rnQ shall be� tx�et; �ad 7) t��at any in�prav ients f�r tl�e use shall meet all
C=ilif��-nia �3uiltiin� a�ici �ir Co�ies, 2Q01 Editiozz, as a�n�lei�ded by the C� �� of BtXrli7��ai���. The a��otiaz� ti��•
secoilcied �y C. E�eighra . �
Chair Bc�jues call � 1i�r a vo�ice voie on t�he motion to approv atin� thaC the park�ing �=a�ianc �� nly ap��li�s
to tl�e noiiconf n�i��g t��ct;.-up space and nc�t the nc�n�a� � rsning nu.Y7�b��r of ot�-site p�r '� spaces. Tl�e
tnoti��i� pas;,� 7-Q. l�.ppe�l procedures we�-e adviseci. ' his ite�n c�nclucjed .�t 1 U:50 �.cz�,
7. IS3'7 DRAKE AVENUE, �-t}�ED R-1 — OTTCl MTLLER, APPLICA�IT A�'�ID PROPERTY Ot��tFR;
i.�111IES CIiLf, CI-IL' DESIGN d'c E'�tGR. I'�C'., DES (C�N:ER (C�t) NC)TICEDj PR(�JECT PLAN�ERS: :�1:EG
MO:�IROEiRUQE1�' HURII�T
�. LUT 11 — APPI�IC'A'I'IO�I�� "I'C? A:V1EI'v`D THE CU�I'�iUIT�ION��L L�SE YER:�TT`i FOR E�h�iEIiGF�rG
LC3TS TO SEP �RATE A'�I� :���EI�D CQ1�IaIT10NS OF APPR�V�L AND �'vIENDR'CENT TQ
DESTGN RE�'I�EW A1�D S�PECIAL �PER�!I1"T' FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE FQR :� N'EW
'I'�'�O-STOR�' SI'�GLE FAh�1IL�' DVi�ELLING.
C. heigl�r�n recused l�erself bec,-�use sl�e lives «�itllin SQO feet of t11is site. St�� l�ft tlae chamb�rs. City
Att�c�rney Andersoii also recused himself �t'ram ad�ising xh� Planning Cfl�nn�ission l�ec�us� of C�ali��'ornia
State Laek and }1e left the chan�bers.
Reference staffreport for l 537 Drake Ave��ue, Lot 1 l, wit}� attachments. CP'�fionroe preser�ted the repart,
2-�vie���d criteria and staff comzne��ts. 36 canditioiis were su�ested for consideration. Cominission�rs
asked ar�; tl�e issucs raiscd in the I.e��ins�n report attachec� to th� neighbor's letter; acidressec� in the
conditions of ap�rc�val for IoC 11. CP Monroe responded t11at they t��ere in the amendcd cone�itions. Docs t1�is
apply to tl�e eonditi�ns for Lots 9 aaid 10 tonight as �-ell. C.P nated y�es; in ihose coz�ditio7�s all pre��io��sly
15
(;i�}� of�Ba�rlr'rtv,carne Planrrin� Contrrris,s°i��rr t411�rutes It4<rrc1� ?�, 2(N)-f
�..0 t 1 �
a�pru�=�d ��ere l�rou�ht �f�or«�ard, those r�c� lc�nger in effect ���ere shown as strike outs, and il�e a�l��;ndn_�erlts t�o
the othe�-s shc�t�ai i7� italics to �reflec�t vuh�t is knowr� so far, kn��vlecige is e���lvin� on Lots 9 arid 10. ls at th�
consex�su� of ttle arb�srist �1�aT it� is all right to �builci oi1 I�at 1 l and #�ie sta�in� area oz� L,ot� 1 E)`? C�' R��onroe
�•espaa�cieci yes, ihere is a cc�m�nent t� that ef:fect f:rom the City Arborist in th�: staff report.
C�lidir- Boaues op�:r�e.d t��e public hearing. Mark HLida�k, ? 16 Park� Roa�i represe��ted the pr�ject. I,on� prc�cess
t� arrive here, the result of much coixlprotY�ise by all inval�=ed, h�pe not tc� re-c�t� errtire; �nly resson l�ere is
uiafc�rt��ai�te error by �r�tiin� subcontractor; not here to �pply fc�r an3�hing ne��=, �vaizt to l�re��k� Lat 1�l froii� �3
��nci 1{}, an� ��roceet� as originally ap�rc�v�ed, ehcept t�a build t}�e ho��se one fac�t taller; w�� �,�Fill return ���itl�i
I,ats 3 and 1O la�er. All th�•�� �rbarists d��ree that there ar� ��o si�ni�cant ruats �n I�ot 1 I; only want tc� raise
tlle hQus� on L,ot 11 can� #'oot to bring it i��ato better, �esthetic ali,��nmer�it� wit.�� �t�e houses on Lc�ts 9 anci 10; on
Lvt ���eed to k.rio«� compaction nf �11 soil, test w�a5 done, co�i�paction �vill �ll���f roois to �`Qw�; ha�•�
proceedeci witll found<itions, iii�=est�i�ated re�ots as ��ere able g�i�=e�n c�c�nc�itioris, invc�sti�ated locatic��n «f eacl�
pi�r ��°ithin the root zoT�e, w�}�le�n cio»e «�i11 come bac� to t��e Con�n�issioz� �or final ap�roval of lious�� an Lt�ts
t� anc� 1(), �ndings si���est r�isiil� foundations ane to t��o ieet to avoid grade at back of t13e ]at. On 1..,�t 11
��-oiilcl like Colnmission to remove canditiorl 12 regardin�; the ti��ater linc be;it}g iristalled befare f�unc�ation
ins�ecti.�n, X�» discuss�ion w=ith City Er��ineer, may ���an�t to relocate line t� i�he center of t�» street c�z1 Dt�ake,
���ould like to dela�� un�til l�efor�� 1i�� Eity issues a cei-tificate oFoccupa��ey o��i Lot 1 l. Also to elea�zly t�reak
t..ofi� 1� f'rom Lois 9 ar�c� 10 do not warlt r�liti�a�ions far Lots � az��i lt� tied t�� Lc�t 11 cot�id crcate 3 le�al
}�roblezn if ��ish to sell Lots 9 an� 1 U, so tivould like e�onditions �, 16, 2�-33 and aS-36 rcmc���d fron� Lc�t 11.
Thes� sa.me eo»c�itioi�s a�re prQposeci to be added tt� Lc�t� 9 at�d 10, so arc reciundant and cr�ate tec��f�ical
prc�k�lems fbr L�t 1 l, all prot�ctiQ�ns far Lot � ai�d 10 are in �lace ancf ��-e ��rill be b��ck in 3�-�5 c��ys ��=ith
�nal foundatic�ns far tl�ese tw=o lats.
C'o�nr�lissioia��rs asked: Tf son�eone buys L•ot 1 1 cauldn't the t�uyer az�d seller �dc�r�ss the res�:n�at�iara and
ir�deil�_nity. Hu�a�k, no ����� out frarr� abli�ations, oz�ly lik� to indemnify agdit�sC things or�e can co��trol. Frotn
ectano���ac }�cai7at of �-iew• und�rstarid ca�h flo��� r�asan for t�reaking off Lot 1 i, btit cioesn�"i if raise yuestions
about th� i-ecietirelo�nient of tl�e other lots, foreclosi�Ig �ptinns if ��ou build a sn1a13er house on Lot 1 l.
Hudak, ii�lde�enclent art�t�rist� more ct�i��den� after foundation investi�a�tio��, has loak�d at u�ays t�c� k�uild
c�ri�e���a1 on I.ot 9, o«°ner believcs �it ���ill e��ol��� in ihe w==ay he i�t�7�dcd �rithin t}��e modi�cati�ns a���
�nitigatic�ns �Cl�� arborist's ��-i11 insist on, pretty eonfde�lt �tlie}r are goin� tc� do ��-hat t�aey a;ree�3 tc�. �'�1��1�
time lapse da }'au �;Ypect beT���ecn I,ot 1 l and I.ats 9 and l 0:' Irot 11 is ready nc���•, l�ousc could be c�ccupied
Chis }�ear, 3f�-�5 days b�fare s�ir� o�� Lots 9 and 10, then back to tl�e Cainn�ission, doz�'t Ikno«� if ��te cai� cic� it
this ����r, pc�ssibl�.
I�ei�hbors spoke: Jat��t C'a�rcia, 1561 Drake; J��i Ochse, 15I2 Drakc:-; M�.rk Tl3an��s, 152t} Drakc;, Dave
Taylor, 1556 Drake, Az�n'I'l�c��nas, 1520 Drake; Se��� rlbshir�, i•�al estate attort�e�y; :I�enise B�l�str�, �l�
Costs Rica. It is unclear ho�E the arbo�rist re�ort is e�•olving, seems applicaz�t is try-in� the clld���e I4Zr.
Levinson's rcpart; t��e c�mpaction axtal}��is has heen doxlc;, OK, no�• he ��•anis to k��reak oi��1' de��ctopz��ent
coi�t�rary tc� t�he Co�.nznissian's request to s�e tl�e u�l�ol� as o��e picture; two years a�o e�pressed concern about
fh�; Red«rood Gro�r�, ha�=e attenc�ed 12 i��eetings, he keeps coz��in�;� �ack about thc trees, th�is process is
c�rag�ir�g c�ufi in t1�e absence of data, it is c�n the agellda ���ithout data; last time l�e asked to separated tlie
conditioz�s the City Arbarist 1�=as not l�cre and he is not hcar t�nigt�t, tl�e 2t� foot stagin� area does not a�ree
with tl�e arborist report of N�arch 23; should not decide on Lot 11 ��rit�l�out info�nnation �n�i don't k�naw� if
Lots 9 and I 0�e b��ildable. 411 tcied for a��arkable �lan, one issue ke�p th� Re�i��•ood t�rees, no oi�e; kiio��-s
ho�v to build around 3sked for an indepencient arhorist, first fe��l days praperty o���ner wark�ci on the site put
the trees in jeoparc�y, 11e i� very casuai, ���ant t� be sure tlaat he is su�cn�ised. Thcre is an applieatibn for a
16
C,1�j° �>f l3i�i�lingtr�riz YTcrrr�ti�r�; f-'ornrrtissi�rr ;t�lirtartes
l:oi 1 r
,11arrlt ?9, ?(?l)4
fc�ti�rth 1ot, 1551 Drake, next f� Lot 11, a�pliec� for a p�rmii� 2o demolisll ai�d rebuilcl; these lols shot�lci be
look�s �t i�l t�heir tc�tality, � parcels, asked City Attomey be,forc i�'ii�e st�r�dards are stricter for four lcsts, he
said y�s, not get �u11 �icture i f vou tak�e LoC 11 otit, prem�t�ure. There are photos to show ho�r exte�7si���ly �he
1-oc�ts ���ere ripperJ eip; de�-��Itape�-s b�havior indica�es he does ���hat l�e �leases; d�ny al� ap�lications, Ci�t}�
�ttorney said that couneil ����auld be prc�vided the Planning Cr�r���nissio�l for the r�.voe��tion of all permits,
h�re i� a ne��rspaper articic to s�1o��� the i1�'Cark Huc�ak alsa has a conflict of iiiterest. First issue is tl�e
IZ������e�od Crrove, or� :Uecember 8 r.omzi�ission's c3irection 1�Fas independei�t a��l�orist is ��c�t al�liged tc� accept
praject, he r��at�s ti�at d�v�Ioprn�nt cc�uld result in a d�cline iz� tl�c RedG��oods over thc lc�x�g teriY�; noti�
appl�icant is t�ack nz�k�ir�� ch3nges to Lot 11, wan�t�s to iiicre�se �t}�e �lleight o�le� ,foot, an�i t�l�e rt�of's aftf�e atl��r
hauses 2 fe�t taller•, this is a bate and sw�itch p�tt�rn, ra�her it reriirns us t� �rc�tu�d �crc�, and disc�t�ssion of a 4
I�t deti-�elopr�i�r�t.
Public C:omment continued: Represet�t the nci�h6ars who wish to prese��e tl�e Rcd«�aod trc;es, concei-neci.
about the G�;ner�l Plan ane� tl�e �oals in the Housing E1en�ent, pi•oject pra�osed b1� �'[ill�r tlireatens to impact
t�l��e ��eigl�boi-hood, I��c�uld su��est a praeess lik� tliat aFa subciivision, az�d pro�ess all ic�ts as a si��gl� unit,
evaluate as or�e pro.ject under CF.,QA, General Plaz� at�d impact c�n neigtlhorhood; �1��v thc de��eloper is back
�nd w�ar��s t�c� parcel o�f, this is a process Co anie�Id the conditional use pertnit, is it in accarci ��ith tlxe G���eral
Plan; t�he c��nrlixions protect the city, by ciividing h� i��creases his opppr�unit}� �nd cit� c�e��r�a�sed his cisk, hc
needs to protect t�is invcstn�ent tc� di�-ide of�' L�t 11 anc� has taken advantage of the emergi��g l�ts.
Car��ri�i�sic��n h�as n�t a��keci if t�l�� coz�ditional use pernlit should t�e rev�aked, to do tnat t}ie Can�mission ri���st
provid� notice and proper fir�c��ii�gs; the prvject c��anat be built. as ori�inally designed, he� has cic�i��e
�etrirnental damagr; to the �roperty, h�, l�as z�c�t preserved the trees and has violated city ordin�lce, thc project
n�eds to b� clian�ed, he inay not cQn�le back with Lots � anc� lt) for a year. Li��c be��ind this prt�ject; all
��rc���c�rty o��r»ers all ha�ve rights, �Vliller o«�ns the t�rees, nei,�hbors si�nply loc��in� for loop }aoles to �top him
fr•om cieti•�,lc�pi�ng; prapc,rty o�atas c�n thc market for 9�7�onths as a develop»�1�i1t prajec�t.
C. Keele left tl�e dais and chambers at 11:00 p.m.
Public Comn�enfi eor�tinueci w�ith applicant's response: Gomn3er�t made ttaat ap�alicant wisl�es to piecel��ea1
ci�v�lopment, st�f.f is achtally addin� c�nnditions; rc�mind il�at eity halds a�120,OOt� cash bond against
c3ar��a�e to tl» I2e�i���ood Gro��e; at t}xc last mceCin� asked ihe City P1an�rt�er tihe i�umber o�' tinles liis
d���eloper had l�een ii� trouble �vith the city, sl�e ans�c-ercd none natin� he ha� taken c�ver a probl�m ��roperty ;
gracling cione in Dec�mber ���as ui�int�ntio��al, still have a red t�g on Lat ] 1, devel�}�er has a right to �roce�d.
t�n Lc�ts � and 1Q, even canditions as currently approvec� ea.peeted a�iditional investi��tion, t�l�is has nofi
chan�ed, it is ti��l��►t you iritendcd. There «�er� no further c�n�ments fron� tt�e �laor a�ld public hearinb «�as
closed.
Commissioncrs comments: can the appratirals �n Lots 9 and 10 be revoked later? CP noted that she bclie��ed
s� �articul�-ly based an the situation o�ithc tree roots or needs af the trees or site cause t�l�e applic�a��t to r���e
ellanges tQ the struct�ur�s; a��plicants rer�uests for chan�es to ihe cond�itions of �appro��a1, plus any� we mi�T11t
add, n�akes it appear that «re shoulci ciiscuss and bring back tile conditions c�f appro��al bcf�re actin4 on this
reque�t; part of tl�e problems is the three lots, this ��ouse on Lai 11 is a�ooci desibn, rnoe-i�st size, cdntributes
to the neighborllood, t��at is nat the fact of all tt�ree houses; the roat investi�ation r���ort indicates coi��ern
abaut trenehing within 30 fee�t fron� t�11e Reci«�ood tr�es, that is w�ell intc� tlie second half oCthe Lot ld;
availdbility of LQt 11 during constn,ietion may facilitate optians far bUiiciin� on Z,ots ��nnn� 1(?, ther� r��ay be
some risk thai I.ots 9 and 10 znay not be c�e�-elopable as approved t��ithout Lot 11 available durin�
coi�st:rUctian—i� L�o� 1 l a��art of the solution for L�ots 9 axld 1 U? No ordinary far��ily is �oin�; t� be able tQ
17
("ui� <>j F3urlin�cxr;�ca f'7czrrnl`ng Cnnrrnissrc>n ,tifinztires
Lot 1 l
;1�9crrr.h ��2 20/1�
liti�e u� tt� anci. arotx7lc� t}�es� trees, not inclined te� h►•eak this project u�a. A�ree that a��licanf is rec�u�stinb a
Idt of �3�c�c�i�eatic�ns to th� eunditiflns; could cc�i7tii�u� and loc�k at revised eonditior�s, �t�y ther� may knoc�� more
a�out C���-o lots and detcrn�ine the impact on Lc�t 11; report indicat�e� tY�at i�ti this ease roots lla��e groti��n in an
unusual pat�te�rn, lc�c�tion ofpicrs and car�tilevers i��ill be kcy. All a�rborisCs }�ave a�recd i� is all ri�ht tv i�s�,
tli� 2O f�;e�t ofLnt 10 for stagirl��; ne�d t� l�ok at cc��iditie�ns, there is a cl�ar read f�rotn i��e C"ity,�lrbarist. �Key
is��e is pe�rtnission to se�aarate Loti 11 or look� at t11e development as a w��ole. l�'1��-� has k�een app�-oved? .gr�
there thre� lats? C.P �4�c�n�-�ae rc�sponded th�re �r� presently� �t�l�ree Iots.
C:hair Boju�s n�ade a naotio��� Yo appro<<e th�. re�rised co��ditic�ns Eor Lot l l�vhiclx s�.parates ii� iroz�� L�t� 9 and
10 u�ith ali tl�� c���ditioz�s in tl�e� 5taff report and by resalution. G. Aurara seeoz�dec� thc r��n�tion ���itl� the
adciition to eanclitiot� 12 tl�at to i�lsure a eontinuaus ti��ater so�arc�� frc�m th� c�istri�but�ion 1i1�� t�� tt�e requii-eci
soak�n c��se irrigat�ion irt t}le RedwQad Grove the }�roperty owner maintain and contiz���e t� us� th�: exist�i7b
��<<�Cer iit�� alon� the rear of tlle thre� lt�ts or re�lace it as req�iired b�r the Cityr :Enbincer and add a cc�nditic�n
tl�zat ���he�1 tl�e cer�i�C�ate of oecupancy is �ranteci f�r Lot 11 �u�d tll�: construc�tion fez�ce �lan� tl�e 2(i foot
canstructic�ti zo�1e is ren�ovcd, Lot 11 sha]l no lon� be respansible Cor an}1 conclitions ��Jl�ieh apply to Lc�ts 9
and 1{� anc� Chese contiitiotis shall b�c�ine ��aid. �i'he �naker of tl�e r�lofie��t� ac�ce�pte� �he additional cc�nditi��ns.
"I'he an�erzd�d eonditio��s vf ��a�roti•�al for Lat 11 are: 1�} thaC th� project shall bc built as s�lowi� on the plans
s�il�Tnittec� to t1�e Flai�nin�; Department date stainp�d March 9, 2O��4, sh��;ts A.1 thrott�}� A.5 ancj L 1; and that
��y chan�es t�o �t�uileii�b n�-�aterials, ehteriar fin�isl�es, fo�at�print or floe�r area of tt�e: t�uildis�g s��a11 require aric�
amendri�ent to tl�is p�.rn�it; 2} that any chan��s to tl��, size ar envelo��e o�the l�asernerlt, fixst nr seconci fl�ors,
or �ara��, ��llich ti�rould include addin� or ez3lar��in� a dorn�er(s), n�c��•in� or ch�nging ti�-inclowvs anc�
architectt�ral %atures or cha���in� fhe roofheight or pitct�, shall b� su�j�ct� t�o Plannin�; G.omn�ission rc��ieti��;
and all chariges shall be cotisistent «7itl� tl�e �la7�s v�hich «ere approvecj for this lo� on I��1�y 27, 2f.)()�i, because
t.laose pl��1s ti���ere c�etermin�d to be c�nsistent in sc�le and zl�ass with tl�e c��rerall d���e�lopment a��prQveci at c�r
x�ear ti1� sarne time on adjacezlt lots � an� 10; 3) that ��%hen the ccrtifica�te of c�ccupa»cy is �raz�tec� for L.ot� 11
a��� t���e constructian fence alon� tt�� ?f� foot ec�nstrue�ion zc�xle an Lat 1 C} is remo��ed,l.ot 11 shall 7�� 1on� be
respoz�sibie for dn�,= condi�io�ls of approval �°hi.ch apply to Lots 9 anti 10 arld thes� condifii�ns sha11 bec�ome
�=oici; �) t�IXat prior to sched�ling the framin,� inspecrion, t�lie projecC arclaiCect, cn�ineer or othcr licensed
profcssic�r7�►1 shall provide architcctural eertificativ�l tha� the architectural detaiis such Gis ���inda��j loc��tions
an�i k�ays are bc�ilC as �hflwi� on the approti-ed plaY�s; if there is no licel�s�d pro�fessis�r�al invol�=�d in the
�roject, the prc�pez�y c����ner or �onrractor shail p�rov�ide the certification und�r �enalt�v c��fperjurv; 5) thai �rioz•
io final insp�cfiic�n, Ylanning D�part��zlent st�ff ��ill �ins�ect and iaole cc�mpli�.nce of th� architect�.iral details
(trizn nzat�rial.s, ��indow ty�e, ctc.) To Gc�ri�'y that t1�e project has beerl built� accordin� to t��e appro�red
P1a�lnix��; a�z1d B«ildin� plans �nd fhe C�ityArbr�rist shall Ferify that al1 rec�u�i�rc�� trec� pro�ection ia�easuz�es wer�;
adl�ired ic� durir�g ��onstruction ineluc�ing rz�aii�t�nance ofthe red«�aod �ov�, a�a ap�ropriate trec maintena�ncc
pro�rain is in place, al�l reyuir�d l�ndsca�ping a�nd irrigation was iristalled appropriafely, ai�d a�zy� re.d���c�od
brc�r�e tree protection i�n�asures 11a�-e t�een naet includin� ���ra�riate remo�r�l ofthe canstruction sta�ing area
fe�nce c�n L�ot l0; Ei) thai all air ducts, �lumbit�g �sents, az�ci flues shall be con�bin�d, ti�-l�ere pca�sible, ta a
sin�le i�rnlitlation dnc� installed �n the partions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these veaitin�;
details shal] be included an� approved in the co�istruction plans he%re � Building pe�rs�ait is isslied; 7) that
t�}�e conditiozls of tli� City Enginecrs ?��Iarch 15, 20C�4, �May 31, June �, Augt��t 30, ai�d C}ctot�cr I 5, �O{�)?,
memos, thc City rlr�or�st's April � anci I��a�� 21, 2C1�31ne���os, and t��e Recyclin� Spec.ialist's h�larcli 1 d, 2f)Q�
mer��a shall �e met; 8)tti�t den�olition c�f the existin� structures and ar�y� �rac�in� or earth rnc�t�ing on the site
shal] 1�� ret�uireci to l�a�e � C`itv gradu�g �errY7it, b� ove�rscen by a licenseci arboi-ist, izls�ect�d by the C�ity
Arl�t�rist, and be required to cox�aply with all the regt�latior�s oi the Bay Area Air Qualit_y Mana�enae�it
L7istrict� an� �•ith all the requiretner�ts o.f the pernlit issued b� BAAQML�; 9) Ch�t th�re sla�ll t�� no hcavy
1$
Cin' of f3i�r�lirt�;rzrrte's Plc7tarrirz�,= Cr�rratrzissivn ;?�iint�tsa'
:t9ttr-ch 29, 2f)(74
equi�an7ent operation or t�auling �e�rmit�t�d on weekends or I�alidays durinb t��e de��elopment of L,ot 1 l; use of
hand toc�ls shall cor�iply v�ith the requirements oftl�e C'ity's n��ise v�rdinance; lOj tt�at no cons�n�ctian
equi�pi�ent, construetiot� inaterial stora�e or const�ructifln «=orker �arki��g �1�a11 �e �11o��-ed on tlle stre�t in th�
public ri�ht-c�f-u�ray= durir�� construction on tlle site; as much ei��lployee parkinb as �ossible shall �e
accon�modated oil fhe site ar in the construction staging a�rea during each af the phases of cie4r�}opra�e��t;
eanstruetion activity and parking shalI n�t occcir t�;ithizl the reci�uooc� tree �ro�-e pratective fencing on Lots 9
and l t�; 11) th�t all const�ructioEi shall be doz�e in accordance ��rith t�t1e Califon�ia Building Code rcqtiirements
as ame�iicied by the City of Burlii�i�ame, and li�lits to hours of corlstruetion ir��posed by ����e City c�f
Burliilgame Municipal Code; tk�ere shall Y�e� na consirucCion on Su��da�ys or halidays; 12) tliat the �aisting
1��ater lin� at the rear af the properties sh�ll b� retained azld maintain�d in operable condition to suppl�� the;
r�quired soaker hose irrigatioc� systerz� for ti7e I2edwaod tree �rave on Lots �1 �zid 1() or a iaei�v 2-incla �vater
line a� apprc�ved t��t th� �ity Engi��eer tc� prQ��i�ie to v��ater source Cor the requir�d soak�r hose irrigati�n
sys������i to ser��e Lots 9 anci 10 shall be installed before a�n inspection for the f�undation ��°il�t �e sch�duled by
th� Gity; and tr�at all new utility cpnneetaans Co serve L,ot 1 I and whieh are af�ec�ed by Yhe develc�pnlent shall
be installed lo ���eet currenk c�c�de stanc�arcls and ]ocal ca}�acities o�f�ttle ccsll�;ction and disfibutic�n systems any
il�cre�sc in capacity re�quired sh��ll b�; at the prop�rt�y ow7�er's e�pense if det�nninecl to be z�ecessary by tile
Public Works �D�partaneiat; 13} t1�at fi}ie r��ethoci c�f cc�nstructi�n anci n�aterials used in constniction shall
ins�ire Lh�t tiie �interic�r i�ois� le�-e1 ���itllin Cl�e building and ii7sicie each unit shall nof exce�d �S dBA in any
sleepin� areas; 14} that the ne��:� seti��er con�aection, t� the public seti�rer main shall �e installcd to City
standards as required by t��e de��elapment; 15) that all ab�r��oned utilities and hool:t�ps st�all be rzmoved
��nicss t�ieir r�n�o�ral is de�tern�ined by tl�e City Arborist t'o �lave a detrimei�t�l �ffecfi �n aliyr existin� �roteeTec�
trees nn or acijacent to the site; I�} that pric�r fic� installatia�l of ariy se��jer laterals, ��rater or ga� c�nnectic�ris
c�n the site, th�. �roperty o�trner shaIl submit a�lan far ap�ro�ral hy the City Engineer anc� the City :�rborist;
17) that pric�r to installing tl�e �lew ���atc,r liY�e ta serve L,ots 9, 10 anc� l 1 and su�ply ttic r��aintena��ce
�irri�;�tior� systenl to the redwood gro��e in th� easeir�ent at the rear of Lots 9. 10 ai�d 11 and priar fio rec�ivii��
a hi�il�iiz�� ��nnit, tlle propez�y o�vner shall abtain an encroachment pennit fram the Public �,�'orks
depar�ment to replace tl��e 2-inc11 waficr pipc in the� C�it}� right-�f-i��ag�z 1�� that the property ����ner shall
arra�n�e for a licens�d �rr�f�ssional to install b�ck�lawr ��al��es on the s�,�er laterals to 1553 Drake A��en�i�,
1 �S7 llrake Avenu�, 1561 Drake r1�•enue, and 15�6 Dr�ke A��er�ue at tl�e �roperty oi�.�ner's expense �nci ti�°ith
the p�mlission of the affected property o«�ners; the Planzzing Departrnent l�tilt advise the eligible propertv
o���ziers of �this corldition af ap�rot�al, notiT�g that iC is tlleir choice t�o take aciva�nta�� af this opporCunity; i 9)
that all runof� createc� durirag cozlstruetic�il and f'ut�re discharge fron� tl�e site sl�all b� r�quired to meei
�I�atio���l Pollufiion Discharge Elir��ination Sy�stcm (I��PI)FS) standards; ?(}) that the rlevelo��me�nt o�t� this sit�e
shall camply «�ith Burlinga�r��e 4rdi�nanee No. I477, Exterior [Iliaz��i�latiozl f�rdin�z�ce; 21) t}�at thepro�ert�y
u���ner sl�all comply with Burlin�ame Ordinance 150�, the City of Burlinga�ne Starm ��'ater Mana�ement
anc� Discharge Control Ordinaz�ee; 22) that should ar�y cultural r�so�rrces l�e disca�r�red durin� construction,
��ark shall be l�alterl u��til they are fully in�-esii�ated by a professional accepted as qualified by� the City
Planner and ihe recornmendatiesns af the expert ha�•e been executed tfl the satistaction of �he C�it}r; ?3} that
the property ov�%ne;r shall submit a cc�nzpl�;te ]andsca��e and irri�;ation plan far approva] by tl�e Cit}7 Arbarist
priar to a Builc�ing p�rrnit laeiz�g issued; t11e� plan shall ad�ress tl�e landseaping, fi1at «�ork, c�ri�tea�ay de�is,��
and materi�is, and �f�nce installation an the sit�, inclu�ing pla��tings, irri�;atioi�, electricity, reta�inin� �rdlis,
sail ��posits at�d drive�w�ay canstructian details; landscapi�n�; shall b� inspe�cted and appra��ecI �y thc� C7fiy�
Arborist befc�re th� City sl�all issue an occupaney pez-init for the house; 2�) that the proj�ct shall n�eet� all t��le
rcquireme��ts of the Califarnia :Buildin� and Unifonn Firc Codes, 20�1 Edition, as an�cnded by thc City �f
Burlingasn�, or edition in effect at tl�e time a building permit is issu�ci; ?5) tl�at before att�� �rading or
constniction accurs on the site, t��ese conditions and a set of appro��ed plans shall be postcd on a�vcatller-
prot�fed story board at tl�e front af che site to the satiisfaction of the Quildii�� De}�artn�ent sa that they are
readil�� visible and available to a11 persons �vorking or visiting tlie site; 2G) that if work is do��e in violat�ion
of any requireznent in these conditions pric�r to obtainin� the required approval of the City Arborast and th�
Building Di�ision, ��•ork on llie site sball be in�medi�tely halted, �nd the project shall be �laeec� c�n a
Planizing Comn�issian agenda to det�c�rniiz�e v��hat correcti��e steps sho�ild be taken re�arcling the viol�iiion;
19
C"in-� of Bur�til7gc�rne i'larrr�ir�� C;ommi.ss�i��rx .'t�t�trutcs�
;'t1ti,�cl7 29, � r�r4
27} tl�at t�lie� prflpert�y ����ner shall replac� tlle existing �-inch w�ater pipe ir°ith a?-ir�ch c��per pipe fr�in it�s
cQn��ection to the 2-inch tine on Bcrnal Avenue in th�; eity ease7nent at the rear of lot�s �), 10 anci 11 as
dir�,cted ai�ri ap�raved by t�ie City Et�gineer, this �line shall Y�e i�i�stailed to cannect� to t�l1e existin� lin� plst iot
�; 2�} that .�t tl�e sauth praperiy lii�e of lot 9 tl�e property owne.r shall �xtez�d a t�.naporary, aba�je �rc�und,
u�atcr lirae as approvcd b}f thc Cit}r Art�orist fron� t�he neva� 2-inch copp�r ��•a��er �pipe in tl�� public easemez�t to
p�rovide at least 25(� feet ot �iry ���eather soaker 11as� irrigation to tl�e rcdti��ood �rov�s, tl�ere s���ll be no
�xca�ration for tl�� ternporary G�rater line �a�n lc�t 9,, 29) that �11e Redwaad Tree Crave Protective Fencin� shs�11
be mair�tained during constructic���� c�n Lot 1 l, as�d tl�is Reclv��ooci "I��r�c Grc�ve Prc�teet�i�te Fezlcing shall not be
texn�ararily �ltere�i, znoti�ed car rema�fe� ciuring eonstruction, no materials_, �,c{ui}�7ncs�t �r t�ols o f'any kind arc
to t�e placec� or cluinped, even tetnporaril}�, ��Fithzn tl�i� Redti��ood Tree Grove Pratective Fencin�, t11e
prvtecti��c fcr��in� and p�rotecCio�n measures ti�iCllin the fe��cii�g shali re�nain in plac�e unlil the building pem�it
for each de��-elopnient aillots 9, 1� anc� �l I has beei� finaled al�d the removal autl�c�rizcd by thc Cit}r �rk�orist;
30) that prior ta issuar3ce o�C the buildirl� per�t�it for coz�struction or� Lot 1 l, the pro�e�rty c�«�ner shd(1
reinforc�e tk��. e�xisting Rec�ti�vaoci Tre� Groi-e Pratectiee ���zciil� by installing 3E�-inc111on� la��out stakcs ?4-
inches into the �rounci t�ritla the supervisic�n �f the prc�ject arborist a�nd as insp�:�cted by t��e City ,�r�oa•ist;
th�re s�ia11 �Se� ��ne stak� ap}�roxii��Cely e��ery F� linear fe�t� as detennined by tl�e location oCan}r substaT�tial
t�re� roats, ���ith steel ���ire affixed t� tl�e fetice base thau�h a�ole in the layout tal�es to pretirent n�o�r�e;n�ent ar
altcration of th�, protcctitire f�;ncirag once i�istalle�d; �l) that prior to issua��ce of a builciin� pei-�tiit Iar
cc�r�struction on L�� 1 l, the prc,perty owner sl�al] in�tal! a lock�ed gate in fil�e Red��-ood Tree G�ro��e Protecti��e
�encing for inspaction aecess to the prvtected area in orcier to dcCeru�i��e ox� �;c�ing adequacy c�f rnulch, sail
moisture anci the status �f c�thcr �ield ccanditions as necessary tl�roug��out the constructiaT� period; this area
sha11 b� accesseci oniy bv the prajeet arborist, Gity Arborist, or ���orkers uncier the supeiti�ision a# thes�
p�rofessiozial�; �?} tha�t �pric�r to the issti�nee of a b�iiic3i�ig pennil for coi�strueiion on Lot 11, the prop�;rty
a�4°n�r shall cause to }lave a three-in�h t�hick la��er of u�ell a��d, coursc woc�d c%ip mutch (not bark) a11d a
tti�o-inch thick layer c�f orb�sii� eompost spread ov�r th� entire soil surfac� ���itl�iii t�he Redti4•c�od Tree Gro1��
Protective Fencizig; installation of the ��iooc� cliip and cax��past shall be acconlplished by a methad a�proveci
by the projcct arborisf and Ci�y Arbori.st, inst��liation o#'the «•ood chip anci cozn�ast shali l�� �upen�ised �y
thc, project drborisC a�nci tk�e Git�� r�rbori�i; lhe project arborist shail infarm the Cit�v Art�orist of the timinb of�
instatlation af th� course ��jood chip mulch and arga�lic con��ost sr� that obser�a#ion and ins�cction can.
accur; 33) that prior to issuancc of a buildir�g �ern�it for �onstruction o�� Lot l i and starting i7a tlae late
Spring,`Earl�= Summer ?0O�, tlie� ��roperty own�r �li€�Il install Gi su�pleza�cx�tal ir7ig��tioz� syst�iZ� af
a��roxill�at�ly 250 f�et of soaker 1�oses attached to ar� ac�tive hose bib �"rom th� teznporar}� water I�nc on l�,�at
9, sz�aked throughout the e��tire area �n Lots 9�r�d 1O ��=it}�in the Rc,d�vond TrL� Grove Fre�tccti�c Fencing;
irrig�tion must be perfo�znec� at lea�st once every two �veeks throu�l�out tl�e entit�e cc�Ilstru.cl�i�n �erioii for all
thre� lats unless c�etern�in�d nat to be necessar}r b�j the project arborist anci City Arborist; this area shall be
soaked o��ernight, �t least once cve�ry two weeks, until the upper �?4-ii�ches of�oil is 1}3orou�hl�� satur�ted; Yhe
City �1i-bc�rist sliall �eriodically test the soil moisiure to ensure proper iY-ri�atioa�; 3�) that priar to issuai�ce af
a building pern�it far constnict�it�n on Lat 11, the property oti��r�cr shall affix at least fc�t�r �A�), 8-in�I� by 1 l-
iz�cl� iaminated �vater�roaf si�ns on tlle Redw�od Tree Grove T'rotectave F"encin� «rarnin; tliat it is a"Tree
Protec�tion Fence", °`Do P�'ot Ali�er �a� Ren�o��e" and in the e���nt o�F rnave�n��lt� or prablenl call a posted
�m�r�en�y number; �5) tl�at the property o«�ner sha11 establish a t��rent�}r-��c�nt ��•id� sCa�ing �rea strip al��n�
the nt��tl� pro�erty liz�e of Lot t0 by �nstalli�rt� a�ern�ianen� si�-foo� ta11, chain-link feTace at t�}�c locataoti
�hc�ti�-n on t��e Sit�; Plan submitteci to the Pla�nni�lg De�parlment ancl date sta�np�d March 9, �00�, accorciing tc�
the specificatioz�s af t.he City Ark�orist; this fence sh�ll bc posted ��v°i.th the s�ane lan�inated ��jaterproof
��fanling si�nage as used on the Redwooci Tree Grove Prntective F�nei�7g a�t the s�me inte�ralsa afi no fii17Y�
�iurin� tl�� canstruction on Lot 1 l, includin� installation of landsca�ing, shall this #'encing be moved,
re�l�ov�d or reloc3ted �.�fithoi�t the apprc���al c�f the project arborist an�i City f�rk�orist; this fencing sl�all be
r�m���ed p��ior fio any corrstructinn activity on Lot 10; 3G} that a11 pratectiv� fencii�g, staaing area fencin� on
I.ot 10 and Rec���vood Tree Gro��e I'rc�tectiG°� Fenci�ng o�n Lots 9�nd 10, shall be regutarl}� inspEeted by the
proj�ct arborist and CiCy Arborist durin� c�onstrtzctiQn on Lr�t 11; viol�tion �fth�, fenccd a.reas and/�r rcmoval
or relocation of t1�e f�nces shall �ause all construetion ����c�rk to be stc�pped until possible d43mag� has been
de�ei•��nined by Che City �rborist �nd the properCy owner l�as i.rzz�lemen�ed all correcti�-e ni�asur�s a1�d they
havc becn appcor��d t�y tt�e City Arbc�rist; and 37} t�1at l��fore issuanc� of a building� pernlit, the pro�p�rty
��
C`it�� «f�F3zcr•(zrr�r�zr�ic: Plc�rrr�if��r Cr������r:issivn hlirautes�
�i�trrc{t ZS+, ?11r14
o���ner shall c��pc�sit �7,5fi)ii r��itk7 th� Planni�n� Dcp�rtrnent to fi�i�ci, on an 1lourly basis, �� li�e�lsed arborist
inspector selected b}j tl�e City Arborist to assist the City Arborist in ins�ectii�� all c�nstruction ar�d gra�ing
at� Lot 11 a��d in the 20 foot st3ging area �n �Lot 1 t} #o su�port cc�nst�ru�Cic�i� on Lot 11 to illstzre tl�at th�
fnitig�tion m�as�ires included in t�ae negaiive declaratio�i and the condiCions of appra�val attached ta the
project by the Planning Commissio�n acfiion are zalet; anc� a. that �he prc��erty c����«er shall repl�nish by
attditional de�posiT by the 15`h of each ra�or�Ch Co m3intai�� a S7,5C)O l�al�nce in tlzis insp�ctio�7 accoui�t io ins��re
tl�at �dequate �ut�ding is �vailable to cc�ce�r tl�is on-�aizi� inspectic�n function; and b. �hat� failar� to ���Zaint�,in
t���e anaoui�t of zno��ey ir� this �ccount by th� 15�' pf each month shall result in a stop tivork ordcr on t}�e
praj�ct which shall remaii� in place until the apprapriate funds h��fe becn deposited ��rith thc Cit�°; and c.
that s�i�otild the n�o��thly billii.�� durin� anv sin�le period exeeed �7,SOf? a stop ���t�rk arder sha11 be issue:d
until additional funds to repleriish the accouni h�ve been clepositeci w°it}� the city so inspectiancan.conti��ue;
a��d d. thaC should the city be caused to issue ���ree sto� �ork ordez-s for fail�ure t�o inaiz�taizn tl�e� futiclin� i�1
this arbor�ist inspectioz� account, the property owner shall be reql�ired ta deposit t��vo ti�nes the amount
detennined by tl�e City Arborist to cover the remainder �f the i�3s�ection ��=ark befc�re the tl�irc3 stc�p «�o�-k
or�er sh�ll t�e r��n1c��=�d; and e. t}�a� the ui�expende�i portic�n of the inspectic�n d�posit s11all be r�tuz-�1�;d to tl�e
prUperty owz�er u�pfla� iiaspeckiaa�l of the insta�llati�n of �he landscapin� and fenecs, irri�ation systen� a�nc�
appr�val ofti�e fivc year ma�inC�eraanc� �lanr` pro�ram fr��r the ��ortio�i of t11� lZedv��ood tree gro��e on tlle 1ofi;
and f. t}lat this same account ma}r be used for the City Arbarist's selected licensetl arborist inspector ozl lots
�) a�z1d 10.
C;omr��cnt on th�; motion: have nc�t had muc�a time to re��iew= �rbo�st repo�-t, assuine ixioc�ified cor»iit�i�i�s
reflect tl�es� fai�dings so am «1�com�'ortabl� clza�xgin� staff propos�ci conditi�ns ta��ig}�t, rcalize that thc
conditioi�s for Lots 9 and 10 ���i11 c�mc back ta t�he con�n��ission lazer; i�� OK to ��parate L�t 1 l, it's a gQod
ide3 t� e�se into co�lstruct�ian, «�ill r�c�lzce impact oTi t��e neigllborhoori, like seeing c�nsensus of t13e thr�.e
arb4rists, repc�rt co�itains a clear set of mc�c�i�ed conditi�ns. Inde�endent arbarists concerns ace c�r� I:�ts 9
ar�d 10, he agreecl t}�iat Lc�t �l l is t�K as u�ell as usira� t��� 20 feet an Lot 1�, I��r�e professic�n�ily that its OK
as ��jell. ��'hat is the issuc regardir�g the lacation of the w�ater lit7e? Sr. Engineer comTnented tl�at tl�e��e is a
10 faot l�•ide ri,��t-of-���ay at the rear af the houses «•here the �vater iine is presently lacated, plan ta inove th�
«ater li�se to th� front in the street, the line will co�ne off Adeline a��d dov��n Drake. Da�s comtniss�ion wa��t
to consider allal��ing the property a��ner to use thc rc,ar of L�t 10, ocrt �f t}i�; area affected bv tl�e Redu��oocis
for adc�itionai sta�in� area so Io1�� as the proposal is endorsed bv all thz��e arborists. Caminissioners
detcrnlined that they did ilot ���a�nt to add tl�is option as a cc�nditian at this time.
Chair Bojues called far a r�l� call <<°ote or� il�e m�tion to ap�rove the co�aditions as �mendcc� �or Lc�t 1 l url�ic��
��•ould �llour Lot 11 to be de��eloped inde�end�nCly of Lots 9 and I(l. TYzc motion passcd on a roll cail vote
�-I-1-1 (G'. Bro���n.ri�� disscnting, C. Kei�h.ra�l abst�ining, G. �eele a�k�se�rzt). �'�p�»al }�rocedur�s w�ez�e�
advised. Thi� i��n� coi�cludeci at i 1:�� p.m.
7B. LQTS ��N� i0 — 4PPLICATI01�� TO AR=�END THE CONDITI(J�tA�L liSE PERI�II�T FOR
E;VIERCING L4TS TO SEPA.R�TE CONDITItJ1��S 4F �PPRO��IL .�ND FOR ADDITIQ'�r�L
TREE PRt�T�ECTIO�T REQL`IREI��IENTS.
C. Keighran �ontinued Co abslain because she lives within 500 feet of this �roject. CA Anc�erson �ontinu�d
t� rccuse himself Both «�erc not present in the chanlbers.
CP Monroe presenfi�d tlle staff report r�oting t�llat these conditia�7s a�lthou�;t� separated it�to t�wo sets, o��e fc�r
Lc�t 9 ax�d one Cor Lot l 0, rem�ii� the sa�ne �s those approved by ihe Gonalziissior� c��� �Zay 27, 2003, except
for being alnended to rec�uire additzonal Red�-oad Grove inaintetiance and {�rotectiotl for the tern� af
const�}ction on all three lots and ihe placenle��t of a barrier fence on Lot 10 for fl�e 20 fUoi constructioi�
stabing area to be u.sed wl�ile buiidin� o�� Lot 1 l. CP noted that the� condition� �vhich �ave already beei�
com�leted are shc����z�► by strike t}�rougl� and 1he chan�es are showY� in italics. Although the ii�itial studies of
21
Cit��� taf�Bur�lirt;�ar�ie Plrzrrriing Cc>n2rraissic�rr :19irtutc�s
;�faf'c•h '�, ?(?�_�
root loeatioii and i�npact areas and probiiz� at spe.cific 1c�catior�s for faundatior� �rie;rs have been c�o►�e-, t}7e
ap��lica�at still has founda�tion desi����l and otller ���ork to campletc; �u�d �et a��proti•�c� by the az•l�or�ists b�fore
these cnzaditions are ec����al�te to co�-er cc�n�truction. As a r�stflt th� project proposals and conditions oF
approval ���i11 rett�rn to the Planning Cammis�ioi� ag��i�i. C'ommissiol�ers aske�i i�f tl�c ch�ir� link fence
pr�tecti��� the trees sf�ould be e�panc�ed immediately. CP n�ted that L�ts 9 and I 0���ould be protected from
all construction on Lot �11 �bv tl�c fciace placed alang thc �nner c;c�ge of�Che �0 faot sta��in� ��rea o�1 Lot l 0 and
h}� thc contir�ued st�pervisioY� of the ��Redwood Grove maintell�nce ineludin� propc;r place.mci7t az�d oY��oirx�
fer�ce insp�ction by th� ari�t��ist, T}�e,r� utere nc� ot}�er questions of staff.
CtZair Bojues o�er�e�d the public ��e�rin� far Lots � and 10. i��ark Hudak, �? 16 P�rk Rc�ad, r�presetlted Cl�e
a�plic�nt. S�Zean Abshir�, at�torne_y f�i- t}ie iieighbors, Janei Garcia, 1561 Drak�e; �nn T��onaas, 1512 I)ra�e,
spake. ���plic,-��t rlot�d that t1�er� is an existitlg ��raier sourec o�n the site i�l»t� tt�e a}�plicai�t can use for fh�.
soak�r irrigation on Lot 9; �grec t�it1� tl��. ��.a�� the� pro��ss is e�rolvirl�� bciiev� as the inde�a�z�dent arborist
t�econ�e�s n�ore fan�iliar ���itli t�he s�ite anc� more w�rk is do7�e on tl�e foundatian cl�,sig��, thc lc�ts �,��i11 �e� fou:nd
t�o be build�ble; vie�r ti�ese conditions an Lats 9 arzd 1(? to be in9eri�x�, k��o��r Cliat tl�ey u�ill t�e �i�ali�cd later.
(Ji��er cama��e�its frorn the ��oor: l�`o question �ive7� the. �C.��rinson report in tl�e recoz-d that the prc�j��ts c�n
L�ts 9 a��d 10 do not con���ly; do �iot like the im��l�ication of �v1ar� Hudak �hat the ii�dcpendent ar���rist is
co��ung arc�und "to our way�,'; foundation as desi��7ed is ���ot builda�le s�� t�cre is no projec�t� to attac,h
con�iit�io�ls tc�; c��1't find that ifi is �i1ot� de�ri�nc�ntal t� thc prc�perty based on t(�e record l�ei-e, if it ]Zas been
revised ne�ed ta tien�' the applicati��Y�. Re�ort ��rl�icla ���as �i��en t� 1�er was n�t in th� stal'f report c�r ar1��
f-�n�in� frt�m Mr. L�.vinson, a Febru�ry 2() rz�ort �vas refea-red to; da�1't know ifthe coalditic�ns ofap��raval
include; tl�e tllree arborisfis a�re� on the 2Q ft�ot coi�strticfiion st�gin� area on Lot 1O �ut based on ti��l�at? CI'
I�1oz�roe i�oted lhat there v,ras a staff com�ment fron� Che City Arboris�� in the Gc��n��lission pacl�et. Ha�=e been
asking f�r t��=o years f�r� an indc;�ea�de�nt arbarist report to be put into Xhe recotd, have c��,nied c-iue proc�css,
out�rageous. �pplicazat su�znitted l�is art��rist's report stating xhat t��ere were x�o sign�ific�nt roots affected,
also re�arc�ing �he pYer �locations onty 2��<ere affected based on site investig.3tic�n c��� Fet�1-uai-y �, ?OC��. Tl�is
is not a�zew appraval for L,ots 9 and 1�, ihere ��re amendments to tile existing rep�rt based on additronal
sh�dy, �na��r the canditions as pr�sen��d re�lect v,rlaat city ��rants as interirr�. There we;re rl� rn�re ec�t�un�7�ts
ft•on� t�lie floor �nd tl�e }�ublic l�earing �vas cic�sed.
Corii�inissioz� disc�issioi�: iz� the ori�ind�l 32 c�nditions it �tc�t�s that lt�catiot� ti�f th� �i�r anc� 1�can1 fotin�ati��nn
ara yet ta h� rietc�rn�i�led anc� t}��;se canditzans represent iio cl�ange from that; c�n tl�at basis sllould mc���e tc�
�p�ro�e t1�c am�ndm�nt to t1�e cQzlditio��al us� permit to separate the c�nditio�s o�f appro���al %r Lc�t 9 and
Loi 10. Staf� �vas ask�d if these conditiotis a�re n�c�re strin�ent th�u1 tlle ori�inal`? CP respondec� ti�es, these
conditic�t�s �ro���ide mc�re prc�tectira�z� far the trees du�rin� the eritire tirne crf any constructian oi1 the 1ot�s; a�lso
r��ore investigatian will iieed to accur far the ft�unciatic�n locations, far that reasan tl�e arbarist r�port is still
b�;it�g �re�areci, a�� drborist analysis:'report will aecompany any resubmittec� �71ans �or Lot 9 arui;'ar Lot 10,
inc-ludiz�g re�riseci conditions.
C. �uran mov�ci approval 4f the amendnzci�t to the conditional use pernlit to �cparate the co��ciitic���s c�f
a�prov�l in�luding initi�atio�� �nonitoring for T.ots ) aiyd Lots 10 at 1537 Drak� Avenue, incl��din�
additional eonditions Co addr�ss tt�e on-gaing maintenance ofi th� Re�3s�•c�od Tre� �roti�e dttrin� cozlstr�iction
on all three of the originally znergec� lot�. C. The motion ���as seconded t�y C. Osfierlin�.
The cot�ditions for Loi 9 are: l) lhat t�he project shall be builfi as sho���t�l on t�he plai�s suht��itted to tl�te Flatlning
De�artz��ent date starnped I�1are1� i 3, 2003, sheets A.1 thrc�u�h �.5 and date stam�ed :��ari125, ?()03, s}i�:et L-
l; as�d that any cha��ges Co tile strucCure includin� but n�t 1in�i:ted Co found�tion design, hei�l7t, builc�in�
r�laterials, exte�rior fii�isk��s, t�otprir�t or floar ar�a of tl�e buildin� or the tree prot�ct�ion plan o�- fo tre�e
��
C;rty� r?f L3urlta��rcrn�e PIGrr2r�arz�;r C`�trrini�i�s�s�ivri ,'t�irrutes
,i9a�rch z9, -'�04
trin�n��u�g shal] require revieG�� by tl�� Plannit�g C'a�nn�ission anci an am�nciznenfi to tl�iis permit; 2) C11at a�iy
c�l�an�es to t�he size or en�-elope of tl�e basei��e�1t, first or s�corid �loors, oi• garage, �i�liich would include
adc�ix�� or e711arging a d�nr�er(s), n�oti-ing or c�l�at��in� «°in�iows and arcl�itectural leatti�res ar chai��in� the
r�of he�i��t� or pitch, �nd all c}ra�n�e�s shall be cor�sist���t ti�i�h thc plans ��rhieh v�-ere a�proved foa• this lot� c�il
N1ay 27, 2U(}3, becaus� those }�ias�s ���ere detennir�ed to be consist�nt i,n scaie a�nd mass with the a��erall
dev�lo�an�zeut a�proti�ed at or near tlze sam� time on adjacc�nt� lo�ts 10 and 11 s17a11 b� subject t� Pl�nz�in�
Go�xmiss�on revie��; 3} tllat prior to scheciuiir�� th� fra�in�ii�g insp�ction, tlie project a�rchitect, en�;iz�cer or
other licens�d professional sl�all provide arc�liite�ctul•al �;erti�caticsn tt�at thc arcl�it�ctural de�ails sucll �s
���i�ldo«J Ic�cations and bays are built as slloun c�n the a��prov�;d �lans; if there is no licensed pr�fc.ssi�nal
in��fllved in t�he proje�t, t1�1e propertv ou�ner or contra�ctor shall provide t�ie certification �inder pen��lty c�f
perjury; 4j that prior t�o tinal inspeciion, Pla���t�in� I��.partm�nt sCaff�vill i�Ispeet and ��ote coinpliai�c�: c�f th�
3rchiteciu�ral ci�lail� (Trim mat�rials, r�=it�do��= t}�e, etc.) to ���rify tl��t ihe praj�ct has b�en built aecardin� to
t��e approved PlaY�ning and Builciing plans and t11� City Arborist shall tierif}� that� all requiret� t�r��pr�tectic�n.
mcasures ���cre adhered to duriz�g ca�lstructian including inaintenance of tt�e reciwG'aod bro�Je, an apprt�priate:
tr�e rnai��tenance pro�raztl is in place, all rec�uired landscaping and irri�ation ��Jas installed ap�rc���riately, and
any redwoo�i �ro��e tree protectian nl�;as�ires have been met; 5) t�hat all air duct�, pli���nbing vents, aild f3ues
sl�ali be combi��ed, i��i��er� possi�le, t� � sii��le tern�inati�n at�d installeci oi� xhz portions of the rooi t�ot
visible froln th� street; ai�cl that tl�esc <<eniing details slla�ll he included and a}��roved in t�hc coristn�ctic�r� plans
before a �Building �ern�it is isst�ed; G) tliaf tl�e cpnditions of t�he C;ity Er���in�ers �pril 8, N2ay 31, Jui��: ��
�u�ust 15 , Aagust 30, and Qctober 15, ?002, �nemas, the Fir� Marsha}s Septeinber �, 2�J()2 men�o, the
C�hi�f Builciing I�lspectors AugusC 5, 2(}02 n��eino, the Recyelin� Specialist's 4u�ust 27, 2i)02 rraemo, a�lc� ttae
C'it}�� AI-borisfi's Septemb�r 3, �t)(}2, and April 3 anci �viay �1, 2003 mernos shall be n�et; 7) t}Zaxdemalitic�na�i�
tl�e existi�ng s��rueture� and any gr�c�irrg c�r �arth movir�g on ttic site shall be r�quired to have a City gradin�
�e�rnliC, b� o�-��rseei� by a lieensed arborist, inspected by the City �rborist, anc� b� re�quiret� to eoznply t���ith all
th� regulatians ot"i��e T3a5�:Area .Aix {�uality Mana�en�eizt Dist�ri�t and ��vitl� �11 ti�c: r�:quiren�ents ofthe �em�it
issued by BAAQ'1r1 D; $) tltat there shall be no heavy �quipnient operation ar l�atiling perinitted on ti��eekerlcis
�ar holida�rs durin�; the detirelopm�nt oF Lot 9; �ise of lland tnois shaIl c�mply wit�l� tl�e r�quire»�i�ts t�#�th�
City's i�oise ordinance; 9} tllat t7o canstniction eqtzipn�e��t, eai�struction �nat�rial storage or con�truction
��=orkcr parkin� shall be allo���ed on the sireet in tl�� public ri�;�hC-of-wa�; during collstruction on the site; as
mucl� eniploye� parking as passiblc shall be �ccominociatetl on the sit�, durin� each of' ihe pt�ases af'
�level�pn�e��t; canstruction acti�fity anci parkin� sl�all nc�t occtir �vithin the redw�od tree �rave protectiti��:
:Cc;n.cin� pn Lot �); 10) tilaat �ll earist�ructioi� shall. be dot�� in accordance wit�h the California Building Codc;
req�iiremenls ii� effect at �he tizne o�'construcfiion as �me�z�ded by�t�lle Cit� ofBurlingain�, a�ici limits to hours
�f canstruction impased by �he Cit}� of Bt�rli�nga�ne I�lunicipal C'ocie; t11er� shall b� no co��structican o���
Sunci�ys or ]aolidays; 11 j�l�at the m�tt�od of construetion and materials usc.d in constr�iction s��ail instire t1��C
the irlteric�r noise 1ev�1 va�ith�in the builciirag an.ci i.nside cach unit does n�t exce�d 45 dBA in any sleeping
are<�s; 12� that ���e existin� w�ter line at the rear c�f tile properties shall be retain�d and maintain�d in
v�erabl� coiiditions ta su�pplti� the required soaker hos� irri�atio� system for t��� f�eci��vood Tree Grot•e c�.n
Lats �) �nc� 1 Q or a nec�= 2 inch �,=ater li��� to serve lots 9, 10 and 11 s11a11 be iustall�d 1�ef�re a�1 iz�s�ection Ec��r
tlae foundation «rill be schec�uled by ll�e Citv; azzd �11 ne��� utilit�� conncctiol�s to sen�e the site anc� �vllich are
affecte�i by the de��elopment sl�a�l be installed to me�t current code st�andards; and lr�cal ea�acities c�f the
coilectic�n anc� distribution sysfien�s shall be increased ak the property av�mer's expense if detcnl�ined to he
i��eessarybv the Public ��`orks I3ep�irtznent�; and the location o�fall trenches forutitit�rlin�s shall 1��, ap�ro��ed
bu the City Arbo�ist during Cl�e buiiding pern�it review and z�o tr�nching for az�y utility sl��ill accur on site
ti�Fithout continual �upervision of � lie�nsec� arborist and i��zspection by the City A.rborist; l 3) tl��afi t11� n����
s�wer to the public sc���er main shall bc installec� to City standards as reyuired b}� the cievelo�ment; 14) that
all abandoned utilities �i�d h�ok�i�ps shall l�e re�nc���ed unless tl�eir r�rno��al is deternlined by tl��, Gity.Arb�rist
to ��ave � detriinez�tal effect on any e��:isting protect�ed trees on or adjacent to th� s�ite; 15) t�iatpz-iorCobeing
23
C"Ktr c�J�l3ur•lirigrrmc� f'l�urning C'or���n��is�.x�ion ,1�inartcs
:1�cr��c�f1 ?9, JI)0-�
issued a den�olitiozl pemiit ar� the sit�, tl��e }�ra��rt}� o�-tzer sh��ll sub�i3�it an erc�sion cont�rol pian for approval
b}� the City Engine�r; 16) tha�t prior to installation af ai��y se��er lateral5, �vater or �as connecti�ns ta t��ie s�ite,
th� praperty owner srzall subr�lit a plan for apprQval h}� the �ity Engine�r ����d the City Arbc�rist, 17) tl��at priol•
to installing t}�e new «�ater• liiie to ser��e Lots �, 10 ar1� 11 a7�d sup�lyin� t1�ae i�laintenaz�c� �n-ibat�ion systenl to
the red���oa�i gro��e iz� ihe easer��er�t at the r�ar oFLots �, l 0 ar�d 1 1 and prior to rcceiving a huilding per�nit,
t�7e property o«�t�er shall �btain an �;ncroachri�ez�t }�crmit tron� the PL�t>1'rc ti�'c�rl:s departm�;nt ia repl��ce the 2-
i1�e11 ��rater pipe in �tiTe Cit}� right-of-�vay; 1 S) that tlle praperi_y aw�nei- shall arr�n�e �a�- a licensed �rc�f�ssic�rial
tt� i�lstall ba�kllc�«� �,3alves on tlie se��=er lat�rals to 1553 Drake r�venue, 155�7 �rak� �11���nue, ISCiI L?rake
���cnitc�, az�d ] 566 �.I�rak� Avent�e at the� prc���rty ow-ner's expens� and v�°�ii.�� t�7� pzrn�issic�i� of the affecfie�tl.
p�rap�rt}� a��-ners; the Plan►�ing De�paz-tmer�t ���ill advise tlze eligible property c�wners of t�his co��s�itio�� of
a�apro��t, ilotizlg that it i� tl�eir choice to take advanta�e of this c�pportunity; 1�) �t�at the �or�tractor s��aU
s�zbmit the "Rccycling and t'�%aste Rcductio��" forr�� to th�, buildirig c�ep�rtix�cnt to be a}��rc�veci hy the Cllief
Buildiz�� C?f��ciai that dernor�srrates hoti�- Ei{) per c�nt of consti-uction d�molitic��l n�at�rial v✓ill be diveirtGd
from t�l1e ���aste strean�i ai�1d tl�e pro�erty otivn�;r sl�all k�e r�sponsible for the ira�pl�mentation �f t�}�l�i� ��lan;
(completed) 2(}} tt�at� all rut�c�ff cre��teci durin�; const�ilxckic�i� al��d fut�trl-e cii�cl��r�� froin tlle sit� ���+rill be rec�lxiret�
tc� meet hational Pc�llution Disch�trge Eliminatioil Systenz {hPDES) stanclar�s; 21)tl���t this prajec[ shall
com�al}< «°ith Clydinai�ce N�o. 1477, Exterior �llu�ninati�n {�r�iina��ce; 22} tl��t ilie proJect prc�pert}� o���ner sliall
t�btain Planning Con�inissio�� ap�roval for any revisions to t13e propt�sed house atici,%o�- accessor�t strucfure c�t•
iaecessary� chang�s Co tlze t�ree �ratectian pro�ram c�r ta address ne��• issues which naay aris� dttrin�
canstruction; 23) that th� prop�rty own�r shall con�pl}� ti��i�ll C)rdinance � 503, t�iae Cit}� of Burli�ng�n�e St�nn
Water I�4�anagensent ��r3d Discharg€; Cor�trvl Ordi��za�tce; 24) that sh�uld a�r7y culYural resourccs �e discovereci
C�LIt'ICI�? CC}i1S1T'liCt1021, ��rork sla�ll l�e halted until they are ful(y it3��esti ;att;d by a profe;ssi�nal acee��ted as
qualified b}� th� Ciiy Planner azld tl�e r�con�mendaCi�n�s c�fthe exp�rt have been exe;cuterl to tlle sa�isfact�iol�
c�f t}a� City; ?S) �h�C �no installat��ion «°ork on t�» driveti�tay or landscaping c�n the site shal] occur until the
�iznin�;t �esi�l, iaiethod af coi��truci�ion a��cl materials Ila��� betn appro�•ed b�� tl��; C:ity �rborist, and a
licei��sed arborist shall be on �he site co�ntint�ally to su�c��isc the i�nstall�Cio�z7 of t}ic, drive��-a}� ar�d �o �n��ke
adjustnlc��ts bas�d c�ri �z�y root �in��pacts identi�ed duriYl�; the pcoc�ess ofcoz�structian; t��e construetion act�i��ity
shall be inspected re�ularly by the Cit_y Arborist c�uring c�i�stru�tioz� conapliance wit�� tlle a�prc�ti ed mat�rials
���d �aaethod of i��stallation; it shall tae the respo�lsibility of the �ropert�y o�v��er �o notif}- the C��ity .4r1�c�rist
��•hen c�onstrucEion af tl�e dri��eway on Lc�t 9 is to be�in; 2Gj .A. that tl�e root protcct�ion f��ncin� for the
�Redwoad trccs on Lot 9 and 1{) Sha11 be itastalled Qn site az�d ins�ected by � Ce��i.fied ��rbo�rist; ancl a written
r��ort prep�r�d b}r a��rtificd �rborist docur���ntin� the dimer�sions of thc ro�t protection fenci»� fc�r the�
Rcd��ro�ad trces sh�ll be submitt�d tt� th�� Cit�rArborist s�it�hi�r3 2� hours c�f i��e inspection, anc� that fl�e ��xittzn
r�port shal l be approved by tl�e Gity .11.rborist prior to the issuance ofany deii�olitioal or canstr�iction permzt;
B. t]�at tl�e �st�ablished raa�t� protectio�� fen�i�ng s�ail t�e iz�s�accted re;ularl�� by the C�ity ,Arb�rist atld shall not
be adjusted or moued at any� time durix�� de�nalitior� or cc�flstnaetion ui�less �.}��rov�d by the C'ity t`lrborist;
C. that t�l�e root }aratection fencin� sliall not be renlo���d urlt�il cor�structian i� car�zplete oi� L,�1s 9 and 1 U,
e:�cept if the poriion of the proteeti�se fence on Lot 9 izi the area of the dri��eway� �nay� b� remov�d to instal1
the cirive���ay with the appz-oval c�f the Cit}r Arborist; the remaval c�f a section af tl�e fenc.e shc�uld not disfiurb
the maintenane� �irrigaCio� systern installed «iihin the tr�e protectiti�e fencing; 27) :'�. thatalicez�e�arbc�nst
sl�all be �n site durin�; any demalition and grading c�r diggin�; acti��itie;s tlaat t�ke place u�rithin che desiynated
��ree �Srot�ection zones, incltidin� t}�� �:Iigging altlle pier l�oles fc��' the pier azlci gr�c�� hea�tl founcEa�tor�, dur�ing
tl�e digging o�f the fe»�e post holes for the frst Ci0 feet of fence betk��een Lots 9 and 10, and during diggilig
fc�r rExnova] ��r i�nstallatiozl ot any �itilitiesi B. that a lic�nsed arborist, �eiected by tl�e C�ity aiad fiz��c�ed by tl�e
�ro}�erty o���iler, shal] inspect #he construntioz� site once a uteek or 1-�1�r� frequezltly as requirec� by th�
cc�nditions of appra��al and certify in i��riting to fihE City �irbarist and Planning D�.partn�ent that all trce
pratecti�n measures arc in plac�; arad requirenients af t}�e canditians of a��:roval are bein� met; C. that no
niaterials or equipcnent shall be stockpiled or stored in ��ny area not preti�iol�sly appro��ed by llie Cit_y
�4
E"it�= n1'Brrr-Tr1��>zrrne� Plar:r�irr�� Ct»rarnis�s�ion :�ii�zut���
:1�ar�ch ?�. ?t)04
Arborist; D. tilat a Certitled arborist shall be bi�-en «�ritfien a�itharity� by tllc �roperty awt�c;r and be obii�atcd
to stdp a11 work on t11e site should any acti�.�ity viala�ie any and all e�ilditions of ��proval rel�ti��� �a tt�e
pr�tection, caxiservation and maintenance af trees on the sit�, and E. the C.ity A.rborist shall also st�p ���ork
for dny �iolation cyf the cc��iditio��s re�aCed to thc prc�t�ction, conserv�ation ��nd maintena�lce of�trees on tl�e
sii�; 2�) A. that under l.he a�se��ati€�n of a c�rti fie�d arborist, all pier hol�s for th� Coundatic�n sl�all t�e hand
dug to a depth of no n�are thar� 1� inehes ��nd tlze surfaee area arou��d the lic�lc shall be }�rotectecl as rec.luiz�ed
�y ��l�e Git}� �'�rbarist; ehcavation acti��ifiy for the fo�u�da�i�n sha11 be liiniCed Ca tlze mo�xt�7s of I�iay=to October;
B. that if any rQots gre�ter than 3 irichcs ial diamet�ir are encountered durin� t1�e cii��i�1� tc�r the pier holes,
tl�e property� owner`s on-site arboris� shall c�ll the City Ar[�orist and d�tcrmine }zou• th� pier sl�all b� relocat��d
�nd fille Builditlg Depari�nler��t shall b� infon��e�d of tt�e char�ge and apprc�ve that tlie requiren�ei�ts o� thc
�uildin; c�dc are still met; G. it af a�nv ti�ne during thc� installation o1'�he pier ar�d ��racie %ean� iQundati�z�s
roots �reat�r than 3 i��che�s in diazt�eter mtzs� be cut, thc situation must� be docun�ented }��� th�; certi�ed
arborist ai�d appro��ed hy the City A.rborist prior- to the l�im� t11e rocrts ar� �t�t; ?�) .�. �hat, based c�n root
lo�ations thai will be cietennined hy t�a��d dig�ing an the site, Che prc�perty� o�uner sh��ll sulanlit a tietailcc�
fau��dation �•epc�rt ai�d desi�n for apprpti-al hy tl�e Building U�partment and City .Arborisfi tc� establisl� the
bpurids af the; picr and �ratie beam faundatiotY and have it appro��ed prior to the issuance of a t�uilding p�nnit
for construction an the site; B. iFat atly time tiurit�g tl�e constructio�� th�: pier locatioi�s r�iust b� altered to
accommc�ciate a Red�vaod lree roat, the structural changes n�ust be app�roveci by tl�e �3uilding De�artn�e��t
prior to the �i�ne any suct� root is cLiC or damabed; 3�}) t�hat �the property owner shall su�mit a c�n�pl�te
landse�pe plan far approval by the City r'�rbr�rist pric�r to a Builc�in� pern�it being issued to addre5s the.
IantisEapztz� an� fe��ce inst�allat�io�t1 c�n �h� sitc, includi��� plantings, irrigation, elec�tricity, �Cer�e�;s, retainir��
��u�lls and soil depasits dn the site; �installation of all l�zdscape �eat�ures shall b� o���rseen by t11e prope�-t}�
o�r�t�er`s �.r%arist and re�ul�rly in�p�cted by the Cit}t Arbarist, inciuding fenc�. past holes; and ��vork s��all be
st�pped �nd �lans re�•is�d if any roots of 3 inches in clian�eter ar greater are found ii� �ast hales or ai�y �I���v
landscapc, materials added endan�;er tl�e red��ooc� trees, 31) �. tllal the fence pc�st h�les sl�all be hand-dug
under the su�ert��ision of a certi�ied arborist for thz f�nce installecl alonb t}ie iirst 60-feet of thc property line
bet���ee�i L�sts 9 and 1 Q; B. that ifat an_y time during the hand di�gi�1� a root greater tl�an 3 inches in diatneter
is encauntcred, the post hole shall be relocated ��s directeci b_y tlze praperty o1���ler's Certified arborist �nd as
a�pro���d b}r the City Ar�orist; 32) Tree Mai7lt�nance: A. The property owner sI�a11 bc responsihle for
x�aintena��ce duri��� den��olifi�iora ax�d constructic�t� «ork on th� proj�ct and fQr a 5-yz�ar n�aii�ter�ance pra�rai7�
fnr the R�;dwood irees and t1�e�ir ro�t struc�ture o�� tl�e site, iilcludin� dee� root fertilizin�, be�i�7r�in� u�Qt�
final inspectioii; this maiz�tenance pro�rain shall be as recon�nt�ndec� by the City ArborisC t�ase;d an site
siudies and experienee during coX�strttci.ic�n; B. T�te �roperty owner sliall submit� a re�part fr�rn a c�rtif e�c�
arborist to thc, Pta�zning De�parErner�t that discusse� t�l�e� l�ealth �fthe tr�es and any r�cc�i��mendcc� inaintc;nanc�
on tlle trees or otl�er recommended actians on the praperty n� later t1�an one ycar �fter the ccampletic�rl af
co��struction on the project and every tw�o years thereafter for a�eriod of 5 years; G. Prior lo a demolition
���nnit bein� issued for th� project, the pro�erty o���ner shall submit an appraisal for each o1'tlie ft�ur (4)
Re����ood tr�es on Lats 9 and 10 frpz7a a certified arborist; u�pt�n subn�itt�al c�f th� appraisal, a perzalty amount
shall be set by the �ity Arborist and the Cityj �ttorney k�ased on the appraisal. Befare issu�nce c�f any
dcrrzolition ar lauilding per-rr�it for tlze praject, the property otivner shall th�n submit security ta ti�c City in a
fonn approved by the City Attorney equal to the perlalty arnot�nt should o�ie or �nore of the Red�vood trees
die durin� den�plitic�n ar cc�nstruction or the 5-year period after campletion of eonsiruc-tiozi that is attributec�
ta constructian at� the sit� by tlle City �rbnrist, to c•over azly necessary renloval costs, and tc� cavc.r a��y�
ui�perfarn�ed maint�nance ar other corr�cti�Te activities regardin� the trees; nothiz�� contaiz�ed in this
cc�t�ditian is intended to litnit in aily ti��ay an}� other civil or criminal penalties that the City �r any �tl�er
pe�•san nzay have regardin� c�axna�e or l�ss af th�, trees. 33} that far purposes c�f t�1�se et�nditians a eertified
arborist mea�is a persan c�;rtified by the Iiiternation�l Scaciety of �1 rborici�lture as an arborist; 34) that befor�
issuanee o�f ai�iy demoliiion or eonstructios� pern�it, t��; property owner shal] record a deed r�st�rictior� oi� the
��
C:Ytt� ��j`13urlin,��zmE� f'latvrrr�zg C��r�rrzrrii.ssinrt r1�ltrrule,�'
hlnrc�h i9, 2Ot)4
lo� id�ntif}�ir�� tiie four (�) ke_y Rcc�t��ood trces an�d providi��g ziotice to tl�e heirs, siiccessors, and assi�;�zls �t.}��at
Cl�lcse fr�es c��er�; kc;y ele�zt�etlts of thc developr7�ent of fh�,lot and: ��. Tll� tr�es lnay c��use daana�� or
inec�ilvei��i�nce t� or int�erfe��e ���i�l� the dri��e�vays, foundatie�ns, roaf's, yar�ls, anci other im�rovements on thc
properCy; hc���ever, thos� dama�es and incoilvei�iences ���ill not be cc��sidercd grc�unds tc�r r�,ni����l of the
tr��s us�d�r t�l�e Bl�rlin�ame Municzpal Code; B. Any a�nd all in�provementwork, incl�iding l��ndsc�pin� ��nd
uti)ifiy ser��ice, an t}�e propertu must he perfarn�ec� in reco�i�ition af the irz�e;place��ble value of th� trees, must
be done in consulCati�n �v�it11 a c�rtilied arborist, ancl if ai��� dama�e to the trees occtirs, w��i.tl res�«lfi in penalties
and-�ossibl� crzminal prosecutic�n; ��) that fhe praje;et shall zne��t all t}�� requirements of t11e C��lifornia
B�iildir�,� and LJnifor�i� Fire Godes, `?OC)1 E�ition, as amez�ded by` thL Ciiy of F3urli�ngamc; 3C) tliat a soils
�ompaction analysis si�all be �erforn�ed t�y a soils engineer on the are� Ch��t ti�•�a�s excav��ted at�d re� lled ciL�ring
the ���eek of Nc�v�n�ber 2�, 2(?03, tc� detern��ir�� ti4�hat th� existin� campactic��� is. The soils engil�ee�r arlci a
ccrti�ec� arbaris�t shdli then c�et�rnlin� what corr�cti�fe steps if any n��st �c taken tc� re�tore the area to t��e
comp�ctian e�istiz�� i�t`� f�l�e s�urroundin� soil and shall subn�it this c�eterrt�iriatio�� tc� tlie City Ar�orist and City
Engineer for appro�-�L The corre�tive steps �rill thei� l�e completed befoi•� issudnce o� a��y constr��ctia��
p�:n��its for tile site �complet��); �7j d1.�t befor� a�ny braciiz�,� �+r coiistn�etion c�cctirs c��-� the s�ite, these
co�lditians and � se1� af a��az-c�� ed plans shail be posted on a��•cather-proofed sto�ry b�t�rd at th� front of tE�e
site to ti�e satis�'action �f th� al�ild�i�r3g Departn�ez�t sc� tlz��t t���y are readily visible ��ad availdbl� t�o a11 persons
wc�rkit�� or visilin� tlze site; 3�} tl�at if«�t�t-k is clane in vic�latic�n of'anr� requiren3ent in th�;se ca�tditic���s priar
to ok�taiaaiz�� the reqtiired a�proti�al of the City .Arborist, and!or the Buiidiz��; L�ivision, «�af-k on the site shall
be imn�c�diat�ely halt�d, and tt�e �aroject shal�l b� �lac�d o�� � Pla��nii�� Coir����7issiozl agenc�a Co detern�ine ��=�at
correctivve steps 5hould be t4�ken re���rdin� ihe violation; 3�)that th� property o«���cr shall recei��e ��n
�ncroac��inent pern�it frn��n the Citpr and �l�all replace tl�e cxis��irl� 2-inch ��raCer pipe with a�-is�ch cop��er pipe
fram its conn�etion t� ihe 2-inch line on Berna1 Aventre in tl�c city eas�r�lent at� the r�ar of lots 9, 10 at�ti 1 1
as direc��d and apprv�=ed i�v Che City Enbi�neer; �his ]ine shall b� installed to conn�ct tc� t11e existin� line south.
l�t� 9; and a connection proti-i�ieci to Lot. � at a locat�in� ap�raved b�� tl�e City Arborist; �U) thaf at the sauth.
�roperty 1����e af 1�t 9 th�; }�ropert}� o���ner shall ext��r�d a ternpor�r, �b�a��e �roux�d, ��ater line as a��pr����d E�y
the City r�rl�ori�t froin the n���� 2-inch capper v�=at�r pipe in tl�e puhlic easemex�t to �rovide a� least '�5{) feet
of diy weather soaker l�ose irri�ation to tl�e red��roati groves, tl7ere shall �e no excavation for ti�e tei3lpc�r��ry
G��ater line c��r l�az 9; �l) that the Red��•oad Tree Grove }'rotectiue F�zic�irl� shall be znaint�ned during
canstructiean �n L�t 9, a��c� t��is R�c�woe�d Tre�e Gro<<� I'rotective Fencin� sllall �not be temporarily altercd,
n�oved ar remoti�ed during constructinn; t�o z�aaterials, equipment or toc�ls of� �ny kind are tU t�c ��lace;d �r
du1��p�cj, eti��n tempora�-i�y, �vithin this Red���ood Tree Gro��� Pr�t��ctive �`ez�cing, the protecti��e fencing and
prc�tection z��easures ���i�}tin tla� fencin� sh�ll rer��ain in �I�ce «11ti1 t}�e building perr�lit for the de� elopi��cnt oi�
I.ot � has be�n fin�lecl and az� occu�ancy pernZit issueci; except far modi.fication of the pratectiv� fec�eing as
apprc��-ed b}r t�te �''iiv Arborist zn order to insfall thc c�:rivew�y oz1 Lot 9; 42)f�liat prior la issuance of th�:
bui]dix�� pcn���it for co�lstr��ction on Lot �, the �r��ez-tyo u��=i�er s11a11 rein�fc�rce tl�e existan� Rcdwoo� Tree
Grc�ve Prote�cti��e Fencing by installing 3G-inch laz�g IayQut stakcs 2�-inchcs into the grois�nd ��ritl7 the
supen�ision c�f the pr�aject arborist and as iilspecC��i by t�e �'�ity Arborist; lhere shall b� on� stake
approYinlately eti�ery fi linear feet as detennined b�r the lc�cation af an}r substaniial tr�e roots, ����ith steel wire
affi�eci to the fenc� base thou�h a}Zc�3e in the layout takes to pre�rent mov�ment ar alter��tion o�the protecti�Te
fc.zlcing once installed; 43) t}��t prior to issuance of si builc�ing pennit far construction o1� Lot 9, tb�. prc��erty
a��•nc;r sl�all ii�stall a locked gate in the Redt��aoci Tree Grave Protective Fencing for it�s�ection acccss to thc
�arotected ar�� i�� or��r �o d��e��-mine on �oing ade��uacy of ml�lch, soil nloisture and thz status of other fielc�
conditio��s �s necessary throu�hc�iit the canstructi�n period, this area sha11 be accessed only by tlae project
arborist:, City Ar�orist, or w�rkers under the supczti�ision �af these praf��sionals, 44) thd�t prior to tb� issu�r�ce
o('a buildin� permit for co��struc�tion o7� Lc�t �, �he prop�rty� ov��ner shall eause to ha�re a tluee-ii1c11 thiek layer
oi���e11:�4�d, caurse 4�.�aod chip mulch (t�ot bark) at�d a t���fl-inch thick iayer oforgarlic compast spread o��er
th� entire soii surface ���ithin tt�e Red���ood Tree Gro��e Protective Fencin�, iz�slallalic�n of tl�e �rc�c�ci �hip atad
26
C:-r°I�� c�f i3u�•litagcx�ra�tc� f'l�rnniri,� �'o�nrrzi.rsi�ri ,ilinr�tc�s
:t��lr�c•I�i ?9, 2Q0=i
c;on��c�st sl�all be accamplist�ed by a zraethod a�prnt�ed by ihe project arborist and City Arborist; install��tio�i
of'tlz� ��ood chip aaid co�npast sl�all be supen�ised t�y thc project arboi-is� �n� the Cit�y �i-t�c�rist, tl�e project
arbarist sllall ix�fan�� the City Arborist of rh�; tirnill� of ins�aliation of' the caurse 4voad cl�i�� �mt71���� and
�rganie con7post so tilat abservatio�a andinspection ca�� oecur; 45) that�riortoissuanec�afabui}din�permit
for �o��structio�3 0�l Lot 9 ar�d startit�� i��� tlle lat� Sprin�lE�rlv Sumnler 2(J04, the property otivner s��ali install
� su�ple�ne�ltal irz-ig�tin�1 system af approxin�ately 250 fcet af soal�er }ioses attached ta an �ictive 11�se bib
tron3 tl�e temporary ��ate;r ]ine Qn I,ot 9, snaked thrc�u�hoiix the ent:ire area o�� L�ts 9 and l t) ���ithi7� the
Red«�ood Tree Grove Prat�ctil�e Fencing; irrigation must be perforn�ec� at least once e��ery two ���eeks
tl�roug�l�out the entire constructio» per�od for all three lots unless deiermined nat to be nec�ssary by thc
�roject arbc�rist and Cityd Arb�rist; tliis area sl�all t�e soak�c� o��ernigl�t, at least once every h�•o «�c�ks, uaxt.il
th�: tappc�r 2�-i��ches c�fsoil is tfaorou�hl}� sat�ur�tec3; the Cit�;��� Arborist shall p�ri�dically tesC tlle soil nlc�istu�re
to ensurc; �ro�aer �irrigatian; 4�} ihaC �rior to issua�nce c�f a hl�ildin� permit far c�c�x�struction an Lot 9, the
��rc�perl�� crL��z3er s11�11 ai�fix at leasi fal�r (�}, 8-i�1ch by 11-inch laminatec� v��aterprc�of si�ns on ehe I�ed�,�oc�d
Tre�, Grat�c Protective �eiicing «•a�rtiing tliat� it is a"Tree Pratection .Fe�nee", "Dc� �Ic�t �1Cer or Ret��o�r�" at1c1
in f�7� ec°ent af rt��verri�nt c�r �roblc.m cal.l a po�ted einer�ency numb�r; �i7) iliaf t17e R�d���ood Trc�; Gr���e
Protc;ctivc Fencin� on Lc�ts 9 ar�ci 10, shall be re�ularly inspected by t��c praject �rbarist and City A��l�orist
during canstruction on Lot 9; ��iolatiQn of the fenced areas a.ndlor ren�aval r�r reloc.at�is�n o�lil�e �cXlces shall
eaus� all ct�nstrt�ction w�c�rl: tca be stppp�d u�itil �ossible dam�ge has Ueen det�rnlin�ci by tl�c C�`ity ,�rborist
a��d the property au-ner }�as implemented all correctiv� measures and t}�ey ha�e laecn appro��ed t�y� the City
Arbc�rist; and �8) that before issuance ot'a building pernlit, t17e prop�rty awner sh�ill dep�sit �7,500 �vith the
Plannin� I)e�arttnent to fuzld, az1 an hourly basis, a licensed �rbc�rist �izlspector s�,lected by t}�e City Art�orist
to assist �I�e City° A.rb�rist in i��s�ectang aI1 c�onstruction and �rading on Iac�t � ta insure fhdt th� mitigatioal
�neast7res u�cluded in �he ne�ative ciec�i�ratic��x anc� t1�e c�andi.tiqns c��a���ro<<al attached to klze proj�ct by th�;
Planning Comznission a�tian are n��t; and a. that the pro�gerty ov�rner shall replenisll by addifiio�.na1 depc�sit b}�
the 1�`h of each month to main�ain a$7,SQU balance in this insp�,eti€�n acc�u��t to .insure ihat adequale
ft��ndi�ig is available to cov�r this on-�flz��� ins�ectiox� Cuz�ction; an.d b. th3C failure to t��3int�ain the amount o�'
mon��� in tli�is aceoi�nt �by Cl�e 15`�' of each mar�th shall res�rlt in a siop ���ork orc�er o�» t�e praject tivhick� sl��ll
re�nain in place until t�l�� a�pro�riat�, fiizads hati�� k��ei1 c��.�pasitec3 u�itl� the City, a�id c.tt�atshvuldthemontl�ly
billing durin� any sin�le �eriod exceec� $7,SOf� a stop work order shall be issued until ddditional funcis ta
reple��isl� the aceoiu�t have been depasit�d tivith tl�e c�ity so inspection can cor�fiin��e; a�Id d. t�1��t sl�o�ild t1�ac
ciCy be caus�d to issue three sfop �vork orders for failure to n1di��tain th� fu�nding in this arborist inspeclion
acaa��nt, the prc��}�erty o��iaer st�all be re�uired to �eposit tti��o tin�es the ���oui�t dete�rii�ille�d by the �ity
Arbo�rist to cover tlle remain�er of the inspection w�ork b�fore i�i� tllird stop 1�:°ork t�rder shall be removed;
��nd e. that tlae unexpended �ortiot� of'tl�e inspection d��asit s1��11 be rcturned to t��e prap�r�y a«�11er �3poti
inspecti�n of the installation oithe lanclscapin� and fenees, irri�atic�n system and a�pro���l of tize f�r� year
n�ainter�a��ce planr' pro�ram for the pori7on c�f t��� R�c����aod tre� gra��e o�� tile �lat; anc� �'. tliat this s�zne
accou�at may be used far tl�e Gitiy Art�c�rist's select�d lieensed arbarist ii�s�ector on lQts y, 10 and 1 l.
Conditions of appraval for [�ot 1Q are: 1) tl�at tlie project shall he l�uilt as sho���n on the plans submitted to
the �Plannin� I�epa�-tn�ent da�e stan7ped March 1 �, �003, sheets r1.1 azld A.6, date stamp�d �prii 2, 2C�0�,
sl�eets A�?, A.3 and A.S, and date stamped April 25, 2003, sheets A.4 and Li fc�r L,ot 10, and all cl�.�n�es
sIyall b� consister�t ti�-itla tl�e plans ��rhieh u�cre approv�d for t��lis Iot an May 27, 2UO3, because those ��1ans
were cieiermin�d to be cons�istent in scale and rnass �uith the ove�rall deve3opment approved at or ne�r the
sa�lze t���� on adjacent lots 9 and 1 1 sliall be sub}ect to Planning Cornr�issian revie��, Z) t��a�t at�y chazl�es to
il�e size ar envelope of tl�e basement, first t�r secc�nd floors, or garage, whicll �uoulci i�7clude adding or
ez�largi�ag a d�rmer(s}, movin� or chanbinb ���indoi��s az�d architeetural features ar e�anging the ro�ihei�ht or
pitcl�, shall bc subje�ct to Plai�nin� Co7t�Tt�ission reviev�-, and all chang�s �hall bc cotls�istei�t «�ith the plans
«�1�ich s�3ere apprac ed for this lot on Ma�J ?7, ?003, because thase plans ���ere cleternlicled to be c�nsisient i��
��
��t11�` C��ES'tfT"�l1t�QPT2L' i��QYtTttll�,r i-�OtI21)IISSIOPt iiiit2lllCS
:�Y�f11^Cft � �. �l%t)4
scale and mass wit}� tl�� o�rerall develapn7ent dpproti�ed at or n�ar tht; sat��e� tin�e c�n �djacenY lots 9 and 1�1;
3) that prior to sc���c�uli»g t�}�e framing ins��eetion, the prajact arehitec�t, �n�i��e�r or otller lic�i�s�;d
���oCessio►Xal sha11 pro��id�. arcl�itect��ira1 certifcation tl�al t�1�� aret�ite�tural details suel�� as windo«• locations
and �ays are built �s shown c��a tl�e �pprovec� plans,, if the,re is no lic�ensed prnfessional zn�r�lveci in tl�e
��•c�ject, t-l�e pra�ert� owner ar contract�ar shall providc the ecrtification undez• penalfiy ofpezjuzy; 4} that �ric��r
tc� f i�al ins�acctioi�, Plar�ning Dep�-tme��t staff tivill iz�spect an� nate compliance ot'the architectural details
(trim z��aterials, �iriz�ciow tiy�e, efic.) ta v�rify that tt�e project� has k�c�er7 b�ilt �ccQrdin� to tihe ap�t'oved
P lailning and $uilciinb plal7s anc� tlle City r�rt�orist shall veri�fy t��at a1] reqirir�d tree protect�ion nleasures were
adhered to �iuring cailstructiarl includi�a�rtiaintenanc� ofil�e rec���-ooei �rov°e, ar� appropriate tr�e� mainten��nce
pro�ratl� is in plaee, all required latle�seaping anc� irrigation ��ras i7lstallccl ap}�r�pz�iatcly, and an}� r�cjtivood
grc�vc tree prQtecti�n n�easures l��ive b�en it�et; S} that all air ducts, plumbing verrts, and fZu�s s}�all l�c
combizzec�, where possible, ta a single tern��ir�ation z�z�d install�d on �h� partions �f the r�o��nat �risible from
tl�e stre�t; ar�c� tli�.t illese veniinb details shal] be includ�.d ailc� approve�i iz� the canstructie�n plan� t�efor� ��
Buildir�g permit is Yssu��; 6) Chat tt7e coi3ditiolzs c�f the City E���in�.�rs' M�ay 31, ,itirn� 4, Au�ust 3t?, ai�d
Oc��ob�r I5, ?Ot�2, me�nos, tl�e Fire N1ars�tlal's Septemb�r 3, 20O'� r�ae�nlo, tl�e Ghi�f Bui�ldin� Inspeetor's
Au���st 5, 20Q2 i�le�no, the R�;cycling Speciaiist's August?7, 2Q02 inemo, asld tl�� C�it���� Arborist's z�pril 3 anci
N1�y �l, 2003 ineznos shall b� met; 7j t��at deznolitio�r� c�f the existin� s�rucfiures and axly ��rading or ��rth
mo�ri��g on tl�e site sha11 t�c required to have 3 City gradin� pennit, be oV�ers�eri �ay a licensed arborist,
inspected by the City �rt�orist, and t�e required to comply witli �ll the r�gulat�ions of the B�y Area Air
Quali�y I�1a��ager��e�nt Distr�ict arld ���itli all th� requiren�ezlts Qfth� permit issu�d by BAr'�(�MD; 8} t}7�t Cher-e
sl,�a�l1 �be no l�eavy equipn�e�z�t oper��tion or hauling pennitted on ���eekends or l�oliday=s dur�in� tlze
develo��nent ot Lot 10, us� c�f I��nc� tc�ols sl�all camply �:�ith the require�z�ieilts of the; City's n�is� ordinance;
y} t��at� r7o consiruction et�uipr��e�.n�f, c�nstru�tion materi�l stora�e c�r eo�lstruction c��arker parking sl�ail be
r�llo«�ed c�n the s�r�;et in th�, pu�lic ri�ht-of-t�ray ciuring co�istnictioil on tl��e site; a�.s sl���c�a cn�plc�yee parking as
}aossiblc shall be accon�n�odated r�n the site duri�Zg each af the phascs of de�-elopinent; eonstruc-tic�n activityj
an.d parl:ii�g shall z�ot oc�eur ��=itl�in tl�1e r�d���ood tree grat-e protective feneii�� oT� Lat 10, i 0) all con.s�ructic�n
shall be dc�z�e in accordanc� wi�h the California B�ii�din� Cod� requirements in �Cfcet at the �i�z�e� c�f
constructiozn as ame,nded by t.hc City of B��rlingam�, an� liznits t�o haurs of constructic�n imposed by� the City
of Burlirlg�tne 1�lunicip��1 Ca�ie; �tl�ere shall be no consCructican on Su�ndays c�r }�oliciays; 1�l�) that the n�cCl�oc�
of constructian �nd n�aterials t�sed 'rn constructioT� shall insure that the interior t�oise lc���l «�ithi�� the buildin�
and inside each unit does not eace�d �5 dBA in any slecpin� �reas; 12) that th� existing water line at thc�
r��.r af the prop�rti�s s11all b� retained and rnair�t�ined in aperabie conditians Eo suppl��� the r�.quire� soaker
hos�; �i_rri�ation systet�� for th�; F�edwcroci Tree GrU��e �a�� L�ts 9 and 14 or a netiv 2 ine}a ��rater lane tc� ser��e lois
9, l0 ac�d 11 sha.11 be ir�stalled before an inspectian for the foundation ti�•ill be scl�eduled b}t the City; and all
ne��- utilifiy conneciions %o serr: e the sit� atld which are affeeted k�y tile develaprnent shall be installed to �me�t
current code st�andards ar3d lt�cal cap�ciCies �f the cQllection a��d distribution systet��s shall be incz-eas�d at the
�roperfiy� o���ner's expense if determi��ed to bz neces�ary by tlae Public VVar.�s D�partr�l�;nt; �.nd the locdtioi� of
all teezacta�,� far utility lules sli�ll be ap�arov�d by t�he C°ity Arbarist during �the building pe�nni� re��ie��� and no
trenching fiar any utility shal) c�ecur o�l site ��rithout coi�tinu�l supery-ision �af a licensed arbc�rist ��nd
ins��etian b}� t�l�e �'�it�y �rborist; �13) that the ne��r sew�.r to t�7e public s���-er tnaii� slj�ll b� izrts2all�d tc� Ciiy
standarcls as requ.ired by the de�jelopment; 1�) that aIl abando�tec� utilitics ar�d }ioakups shall be reti�o�red
ut�J�ss ti�eir renaa�=al is d�ten�ai�iec3 by tl�e Cit�� Arborist tc� hati�e � detri.znez�Cal effect oli ��y e�isting protected
Trees aii or adjacent ta the site; 15} that prior to being issued a de�nolitioz� pern�it on the site, tlze �ro��ert��
owner sl�all submit an eros�on. control plan for appro��al by the Ciiy El�gineer; I 6) that prior to installatio�� of
aa���r sc«���r laterals, ��fater or �as con�aectioi�s on the site, the property o«rner shall subrz3it a plai� tor appro�°al
bSr the Ci�y En�ineer and th� City Arborist; 17) that prior to it�stallin� tl�e new �=aier lir�e t� serv� L.�ts 9, 10
and 1 l a�1d su�plyin� the rnainten�nce irrigatio�� sy�t:�ni to th� r�d���ood gro��� in f]Ze eas�m4nt at the re3r of
Lots �, 10 and 11 and prior to receiving a buildin� permit, t�l1e pro�erty Qti��ne�r shal] obtdii� az� �ne1•�aclzmei�lt
�g
C:`it�1 r�ff3tcr�ingczrr2C� Plarir�in,� Cc�n:rrtis,s�ir�fr :1�htutc�l�
:i�etrc�li ?). 2�1O4
permit fro�n Che. Pi�blic t�'4'c�rks d�.p�rtn�c��t Co r��lacc tl�c 2-inch w°ater pipe in the City i•ig�lt-afi=ti�ray; 18) Y}�at
the property o�vner shall arz-a1��� for a lic�ensec� professiollal to install backf7ow�� valves on the se��•�r latcrals to
1553 Drake Avenue, ISS7 Drake �lvenue, 15G1 Dr�ke �.�Fenue, aric� 1566 Drake ��=e�auc at �he property
ot��ner's expcnse and u��itli tllc �cr�nission of tl�e afitected property o��fners; th�; Placlning Dc;partmec�t ���ill
advis�, the eligible �roperiy owners of ihis condition of ��p�roval, noting that it is t}�eir cta�ice to take
��d<<anta�e ofthis �pportunity, lt)) that the cnntractor shall sub��lit filze "R�cyeIing az�d Waste �Rcc�uctic�z�"
For��� to �he buildir�� t�epartit�c�nt to be approved by t}ze Chie:E'.Buildiz�g C7fticial that c�en�c�nstrates ho��� GO per
ce�nt of et�nstniction dem�lition materi��l will be diverted �`rorn the «rasie strearn and i1��e pt-ope�-t�vc�t��zler shail
b� responsible fc�r t}�Ze impieznentat�ion of tl�is plan; (con��l�tecl) 20) �hat all rizr�oif created d��rin�
constructia�n and future dischar�e fron� Che site wilt bc� rcquired to me�t �l�atioz7al Pollution Diseliar��
Elix�a�ii�ation Sy°sten� (N�PDES) stai�d�rds; 21)that this pz•oject sl�<�lt co7npl}� ti�ith Orclinailce No. 1�77,
Exterior Illuniiil��tio�i Ordiiiaz�ce; ?2} that t�lZe }�roj�ct property o�r�n�r shalt c�btaiY�� Planr�ing �:ommissio��
apprc�val far any re��isions to th�; proposcd }iouse and/or accessory $tructure or necessary cl�anges to tl�e tr�e
protection prc���rarn or to adc�res� new issues «°laich nlay ��-ise ciurin� construction; 23� t:hat the propert�r
c�wn�r sh�ll co��aply v�ritll Ordi�aance IjU3, tl�e C'ity caf Burlin�a�ale Storm tVater :1�lanabernent ar�d Discllar�c:�
Contral Ordi��a���cc; 2�) that s}iauld a��y culhiral resourc�e� be discover��3 durin� coi�str��ction, �ork sllal�l be
la�lted urit�l t���y� a�re fulEy i�rlvesti�ated b_y a profess�onal ace�pted as quali�:zed b}� tl�e City Flann�r anc�l �he
r�cot������ndatio�s o�f the expert hati�e hcen e�ecuted to the satisFactior� of tl�c City; 25) that the drive�����}� and
tlle detached gara�e it serves for the propc7seci house c�n Lc�t 10 silall �e shift�c� to ihe north side c�f the lc�t
��=ithin 5 feet of tlie ��ortl� side �roperty liz�c and the driti�c��ay shall �e desi�ned tc� t�e pervious material as
app�•o��ed by the C:ity �rborist, and installed aucordin�; to appraved �alan� «ritli tl�e sup�rv�isio�n of i� licens�d
arborist and regularly inspected by the City Arbarist; �6) t�. t��at llie rac�t protectir�n fenci��g for the
Rec�ti�'csod tre�s an Lot 9 and 10 sl�all be iTlstalled on site and inspected b�r a Certified arborist; and a ti��ritten
re�o�rt pr�pared by 3 certifi�d �rborist doct�inenfiing t}�e dimai�sions otthe roof proteclion f�ncing :f'�r the
Redwooct tr�es shall be sut�naifited to t�1�e City �4rlaQrist w�ithir� 2� hours of �he inspec:tian, ai�d tha# thc ti��ritten
rcport s�a11 be a�pprov�d by 191� City �'lrborist prior to ih� issuai�ce of any deinolition or coi�struction permlt;
B. tl�at the establisl�ed root proteGtio�� f'et�cing sl�all be inspect�d re�ularly �iy the City �rborisC a��d �h�ll rtot
b� adjusted or �moti�ed at an}� tin�e d��rin� den�olition or con�tr�cti�n unless approved by tlie City t�rl�orist;
C. t}1at th� root protectioFl fencing shall not be removet� until construetic�n is cotnplete on Lots 9 and l�J,
except if the portion of the protectilFe fence on Lot 9 in the area of the c�riv�;���ay may be ren�oved tc� install
t31e drive«�ay ���itl� the appr�aval ol�the City �rborist; thc; renio��al of a sectio�l af'the fience s}�ould not ciisturb
tlle maintenance irrigati�n systen� installed ���ithin the tree protective fencing; 27) A. tllat dri��e���ay c�n Lc�t
�0 �hall be canstructed of pavers set irz sant�, with a rnahi���ut�� cut 1�elow grade of 10 �iz��l�es and a k�ase
comp�ctian detern�in�c� �y a certi�ed arborist and approved t�}� the City Art�orist; Q. t1��t if ar�y roots �reater
fiha1� 3 inches in diaineter are encountered ciurizl� gr<�c�ing for the driveway on Lot lfl ancl inust be et�t to
instal�i the drive����iy, t1�e situ�ation sl�all be ciocumei�ted by �he �crtifsed arborist �nd approv�d by the City
rlrborist prior to cuttin�; any roats; C. t�zat if at any time the certiF�d arE�orist �an site or the City Arborisi
feels t�1e �t�umbe�r of roots to be etit to install the driveway on Lot 1 fl is signi��ic�nt, a stop ��ork order shall l�e
issued for the site until the City Arbarist detennines wl�ether it is ne;cess�ry to reloc�te the driveway; 2$)
A. that a licE.nsed arbarisfi sha11 be on site during any deznolikion and gradin� or ciiaging ��ctivities that take
place writh�i�n tlzc ciesi�n�t��d tree �rotection zones, incluciing the digbi��g af the pi�r l�oles for t�1e ��icr ar�d
�racie b�;aaia fo���dation, duri�ig �l1� di��ing o�ft�be fence past holes for the �rst fi0 fect of f�nce bet«��ez� I�ats
9 and 10, aY�d durin� di�gin� far removal or installation of any utilities; B. lll��t a lic�nsed arborist, selecteci
E�}� t11e City a�nd funded by the properfiy a��•ner, sha11 is�speci ihe ca�nstrt�ction site o���ce a week ar n�nre
�'rcquently as required by t}le cc�nditicans of approval and certify in ��,�i•iting to fhe City rlrbnrist and I'lanning
Department that all tree protection measures are in place ar�d req��iren�ents of the conditians af approval are
being met; C. thaf no materials or equipm�nt sliall be stockpil�d or st�ored in any area not previ�usly
app�rov�d t�v the Git� �rborist; D. that a Ceriifizd arbarist shall be �iven written aut�ority by th� prt�perty
2�
(.:�it>> r�fl3urlutbcanac�a 1'kinizi'ir�r C't�mraiis.eivrt N9irrutcrs
,tlitrc�lz '9. 2f,)%14
c�����i�1• a�nd be obli�at�ci to sto� a11 work on tlie site shot�ld atiy acf�i�it�� v�i�lat�� any and aIl �:�c�3lciitic�n� of
approti�al rel��tin� to th� protectzon, conservation and znaintenancc c�f trecs on the site, and E. tl�e Cit}�
:lrborist t�1a}� also stop r��vark for any �;iolation of the conditi�ns related tc� thc �rotec.fiion, conser��atior� anc�
maintenaa�ce of tr��s oil fil�e sii�;29) A. ti�iat under the abser-�<atiQ�l of � certi.ficd a�-borist, all �ier �lc�les f�r the
fou�adaCion st�a�ll �e har�d dt�g To � de��th oFno n��re than 18 ii�ches anci the sur�1'ace are� aro���lic� tl�e hole� sla<�ll
be prot�efied as r�c�uired by t(�e Gity Arborist, �xc��;�atio� acti��ityr f�r the fotindation shall b� 1r���iT�d io t}�e
r��onths o.f May to Uctc�ber; I3. that if any roots ,�reater tI1an 3 i��ches ii�� cli�meter are e�acountered d�rin� th�
di�giz�� for lhe pier ]ic�les, the pro�pertSr �t���,r3er's on-sit� arborisT s�lall call t�ie City r�rborist� �nd dete�rnline
ho��� th� pi�r s�11al1 be reloeat�d ,�nd t1�e Building De��artnlei�t sh�ll be it�forn��d o�'tl�e ch�nge a�nd a�a�ra�-�
thaT �h�; rcquiren7e�nts c�f the b�ildin� code ��re stiIl lnet; G. if at az��.r time duriiig the installatio�n of tla� �-�ier
and �rade l�e�ni fot�.ndatic�ns rc�ots �r�ater than 3 inclZ�s in ciiameter niust l�e cut, tl�e situatio�i must be
c�ocuin�nt�ed by t.he certified axborist and approti�eci �y the City �rborist �rior to th� ti�lTie tl�e roots are cuC;
30) A. tha�t, base� c�i� rnt�t lacatians that ��;�ill �be detea���ined by l��nd dig�ing on t�» site, the pro��rty o��-ner
sl�all su��nit � detail�d fou�ldati�rz r�port� ar�d dc�i�;�� f�x appro�ral by ih� Buildin� D�partiz�ent aa�c� C�ity
�rborist to establish til�e botu�cls af the pier a�1d �rdde bea�m fout�ddtio�n and hav°e it appraved priar tta th�
iss��ance �f a builciing permit far constructican on tl�e site; B. if at any time ciuring the constn�ction ihe pier
locatic�ns must be altered to �cconar���c3at� � Rec�ic��nd tree root, �}Ze �tr��ctural chan�es must b� a�p�roved by
the Building Department prior to thc tin�� ai�y sti�ch root is cut nr dart�abec�, � 1)tlaafi il�e property owner s�l�all.
stibn�it a cotn�lete l�ne�sca��e plan for a�praval hy the City Arborist �rior tc� a�3ttitciin�; ��ern�it bein� issued to
address the 1����ciscapin� and tenee installatian on Che site, incluciin� pl�ntin�s, irri��tic�n, clectriciiy, fences,
retai��ir�� t�r��ils anci soil r3�p�sits an t�he site; ins�allation of 311 laa�dsca�e fe�tures sh��ll b�; o��ersee�� b}� the
pruperty a��rner's arbprist and re�ularly i��spec�ted by the CiCy �t�t�c�rist, includi3�� tence ��ost �»Ies; ��nc� work
shall b� st�app�d a�nd pla��s revised if any roots o���3 arlel�es i31 diar��eCer or �r��ter are fou�7d in pc�st l�oles or
any i�ev�� I�ndscape� r�aaterials adcied endanger th� r�dwood trees; 32) A. tl�at the fen�cc� prast tiale�s shall be
hanc�-dug under the su��ervision of � ccrtified arbvrist for tlle fenee installed alo��� the first Ci0-fe��t of the
pro�er-cy line 1�et��reen Lots 9 atid 10; B. tl�at if' �t any time during t}ie hat�d dig�ing a root greater than 3
iiich�s izi diazneter i� encounter�d, the post l�oiz shall be relacateci as di�rected by� tl�e Certitied arborist and as
ap�rovecl b}� the Ciky Arb�risi; 33) Tree I�laintenanc,e: .�. 'lhe pro�erty awrler �ha11 t�e respc�nsible for
maii�t�nai�c� during d�,rnolition and eonst�nictiQi� ��ork on �11e project anci �or a 5-}rear �nai�ate��azlce �ragraz��
Cc�r the Redwoc�d trce;s and tl�eir raot structure on the site, inciuding deep raot fertilizizlg, be�innin� up�n
final inspectiai�. This maintenaz�ce progi-am sl�all b� foui�de�d upa�� the recc�inln�ndatic�ns ofth� Apri) ?8,
?{}t)3 :�'I�ynt Tree Companv report as �ve11 as such additio��al reco�»i��endations as the property o��=ner shall
receive fron� a cerii��d arboris�l�; B. Tl�e �i•ape�rty o��n�r sh�lI subn�i� � re�art fror�� a certif eci arborist ta the
I'la��z�in� D�partm�r�t that discuss�d th� health o�'thc tr�es and an}� �rccomn��endcd n�aintenanee oz� the trees
nr c�tl�er recoznn�ezicieci �ctions on the property no iater than one year after the coni�l�;tion af coi�struction c�Y�
the project and e�reiy twa years thereafter fc�r a periad of 5 years; G. Priar to a dernolition pe�nit being issuec�
for Che p:roj�ct, the prc�pc�rt�� o���ner shall submit an appraisal Cor each of the fc�ur (�1) Red���o�d ir�es on I��ts �
�uid l0 fram a certified arl�orist; u�on si�bmittal of the appraisal, a penalty amount shall be set by the City
Arborist anci the City Attonley based ai� tk�e appraisal. I3efc�re issuance of any de�nolitian or t�uilc�in� per�i�it
for the �roject, i��� praperty owner shall ti�en subn�it security to t1�e C'�it}� in a form approved by th� City
Attonl�y eyual to the penalty amount shocald one o�r n��ore of tlle R�dwot�d tree� c�ie durin� dcn�olition or
ec�nstnictic�n or the S-yea� period after coia�pleiioi�l o�lco��s�rti�ciiozi tliat is attributed to constnzctic�iz on the site
by the City t�rborist, to cnver any necessary remov��l costs, and to cover 3zzv unperforn�ed mainten�nce c�r
other conrecti��e act�vities �re�a�rdin; the trees; notl�ir�b cc�i�t�.in�d irt fil�is condttion is intend�d fo limit iz� aily
��jay axiy at�7er ci�=il ar crimir�at penalties that the City c�r any otlier �erson may have re�as•ding cit�rnage ar loss
of t11� tre�s. 3�t� that� far purpos�s c�f t�l�ese conditions a certifiied arl�orist n�cans a perso�� certifed by t11e
Ir�ternational Society of Arbarieultiir� as a�1 arbt�rist; 35} A, tl�at t��e fenc� past holes shall be ���nci-dug
rinc�er t�h� supen•�ision ofa certi�ed a�rbarist for tl�ie fence installed alor�� the �rsC G(�-feet of the propert}< 1iz�e
30
C�'atr� cx/'F,trrlirtarrrnf= Flrzri�u��� Gt�ir��rr�tissuar� h�9inu�e.c
�furc h ?), 2l)(�:�
t�e��tiveen Lots � and 1(}; B. that if at �s�yr timc dari��g tl�e l��a�d dig�ing a roc�t �-eater �than 3 incl�es in dian��et�er
is encott��tcre�d, th�; post I�ole sliall be relocated as dit•ect�d by th� property own�r"s Certified art3�rist anci as
a��pra��e� b�r tl» City l�rborist; 3f.i) Tree 'V[ai�zte��arice: A., Tl�e prop�rty owu�r st�all be responsible far
tnaintenance during deiz�olitio�� a�n�i consiructioil woi-k on tile pr•oject ar�d for a S-y�;ar tnaintei�aiac� pro�z�an�
for the IZ�dwooci trees and th�ir rc�ot stnicture on ihe sifie, includiz�� t3ee}� raot fertilizing, b��innin.� upozz
final insp�ction; this rn�il�ter�at�ce pro�;ranl s�iall be as r�comnZ�i�cied b}r t;he City �1.rbe�rist� l��seci on site
stuciies and e�p�rience during constructio��; Ei. Thc property �wncr shall submii a report fra�n a certified
arbo�ist to the Planning Department that discusses the health of �he trees and anyr recon�mer��ec� mainfi��lance
on tl7e trees or ott7er rccomrnendcd actions on the propei-ty i�o lat�r than one year after the campleti�n af
co��a�truction an th� project� az�d e��ery t���o ye�ars thercafter for a period �f S years; �. 1'riar t�� a derTlolit�io�n
perrz�it being issued for the proj�ct, the pro�erty a��jziet- shall submit an ap�r�is�l for each c�f tlle four (4)
R�;d�vood trec;s oiZ Lots 9 anci l0 from a c�rtified arborist; upon submittal ofthe appraisal, a penalty amc�u�7t
s�lall bc scC b}r the C:ity Arborist �nc� the City Attorn�y based on the a�praisal. B�,forc; iss�i��n�� Q:f' at�yr
c��n�olitic�n or buildiz�� per�nit for t�ie prc�je�et, thc pro�aerty �k�rn�r s1�a11 Cl1ei� suL�mit� seeurit}r to the City in a
foi-m �pprc�ved by fl�e Gity Attai��ey equal tc� the penalty an�ot�nt �hould ane ar more af tlie Reclv��ood trees
die clurin� demolition or constriiction or the 5-year period af�er cornpletion of �onstniction that is attributc�d
to corlstn�ctian c�n tl�e site lay the Gity Arharist, to cQ��cr any necessary rei��o�•�il costs, and to co��er any
uz�p�rfani�ed rt�aintenailce or otl�er con�ective activities regardin� the trc,es; nathin� cantai�ze�i in this
conditio.�� is i_t�ten��led to lin�it in any way aily atl»r civil or criminal pe,naltics th.at tJ�e City� or any otl�er
person �nay have re�ardin� dan�a�e or loss of'thc trc;es. 37) that before issu��nce of any dc;molition or
�ailstruciion pernait, �i1� propert�t� owner shall record a deed restrictioi�l oi�� fihe lot identi f��in� th� �fc�ur (�} key
Red���ood trees and prc�vidin� notice to the heirs, suecessors, anc� �ssi�ns tY�at these tr�;es ��ere key eler��ei�ts
c�f �l�e d�� elc��pment af the ]ot and_ A. The trecs may c�use darnage ar inconvenience to or �i��terFere ti��it�� the
c�ril�e4vays, foundati�ns, roofs, yarcis, �uid other iznprovet�lcnts on the property; ho��je�fer, tl�ose daii�a��s ��nci
i.ncon�=ez�iences ��ill 7zot be eonsidered grc�unc�s �'Qr remo�=al of th�, trecs under tJ�c Bt�rlir�gaine Municipal
C;adc, B. A��y and al.l im�rovea��tent ��rork, i�lcluding landscaping and utility ser-��ice, on fhe pr���erty tnusfi be
��erfortx�eci i�t1 reco�;nition of Yh� ��rreplaccable ���iue ofthe tre�s, must� l�e do7�e i�i co�n�ultattan with a c�rtifi�i�;d
arborist, and if any daznage to the trees c�ceurs, «.��ill result in �enalties and �c�ssibl� criJnuial prosecutic�t7; ai�ci
38} that the project sl��ll mect all t1�e requiremen�s of tl�� C�alifornia Building and U�ni�orn� Fir� Cnde�, 2{�01
Editioi� ar t.he editi�n approved by the �'ity� a�z7d as amended by the City of Burlin�ame at tl�e tin�� a buildin�;
permit is isst�ed; 3�} that a soils co�npaction a.xlalysis sl�all he perform�d by a soils engii�eer on fl�e area tllat
was excati�ated and r��lled durin� th� ��-�ek of Noven�ber 2�, 200�, to deter��lii�e 1��hat the exist�ing
conzpaction is. The soiis eilgineer anr3 a certifi�d art�orist slzall then d�tez-�nine what eorrecti��z ste�s if any
n�lust bc taken to r�store the area to the compaction existing in the s��rround�ing soil and shall submit t�l�is
determinatian to the City A.rborist and City Eta�ineer for appraval. T'l�e correcti�•e, steps ���ill thcr� bc,
coznpieied be�or� issua�nce of d��y= e�Qnstructic�n �ermits f�r the site; (co�npleted); 40� that before �t�y gr�din�
c�r construction o�curs an thc site, tllese conditiat�s a�1d a set of approved plans shall be pc�sted on a���eather-
proafed story bo�rd at the front of the site to the satisfaction oC t11e Buildin� I�epartm�nt so that they are
readil}� �•isible a�nd a�-ailabl� tp al� perso�ls «ork�in� c�r visiting the site; 41) that if`work� is cion� iz� ��i�lalian
of �y �;t�uire�n�nt in these conditians pz-ior to abtainin� the required appro���l �f thc City �rborist, �a�dt`or
tl�e $uildin�; Divisiot�, ���ork o� t}le siCe shall be imrr3ediately halted, at�d tlle prr�jeet s}�all be placec� on a
Planr�ing C'amn�ission abencla to detenniT�e whai cor�•ective steps should be taken regarding ihe violatian;
42) that the pra�erty o���ner shall replacc the existi7�g 2-inch ��ater pip� ���ith a 2-ir}ch co�rp�.r pi�e Crot�a its
col�nection to the ?-inch line an Be�nia] A��e���ue in the city �ascrr�ent ai the rear of lots 9, l t? and 1 l as
directed ar�d a�pre�ved by tl�e City Engineer; this lipe shall be installed to canr,cct to the �xisting liii� pasx lot
9�nd a conneciic�n provided Co LoC 10 sllall be pro�=ided at a lueatian approc�ed by t��e City Arb�rlst: �3} tl�at
t1��e R�dwood Tree Gro��� Pratectiv°e �encin� s11alI be nlai��tained during eonstruct�ion otl Lots 9, I(7 and 1 1,
and t}�is Recii�•ood Tree C�r��-e Pratective Fcncing shall not be temporarily altered, nzov�;d ar r�znoved d�zring
il
C��ity t�/'13arrlira�,rrune I'IrYrtnirag Gc�rrzn�ri.rsi[�ia 119irtut��s'
�r�x,-���t 2�. �r�t�a
const�-�iction; no materials, ec�ui�am�nt� or tools of any kind arc to be placed o�r dun�ped, ev�n tei��pora.rily,
witl�iz� tl�is Red���ood TreE �rove Ptatecfive �encing, the pratecti<<� �encin� and protection n�casi�re� wit��in
tl�� %ncing shall rein��in ir� �la�e uratii the buildin� pern�it for eac13 de�relo�pment e��� Iots 9 anci I(J l�a�s
reeeive�d an occ�upancy peimit and th� City tlrbQrist llas ap�praved ��rerz�oval o�i' �1�e �rotecti��e fencing; ��)
that prior to issuance of th� btiildin ; permit %r coz�s�ruction on Lot I 0, the �F�roperty owncr shall �reirlfc�rcc tl�e
existiiag Red��oaci'I'ree Gr�vc Protec�ti��e Fenc�in� by° installing 36-inch lon� lay��ut� stdkes 24-inches ii�to t�he
graune-� ���itl� the supervisian of the pr�ject arborist anci as ins�ecteci �y the City Arl�orist; filler� sliall be �n�
stake appro�imately c��ery 6linear #'eet as c�etern�in�ci bu tl�e Ioc�tiQn of �u�y substantial tree roots, with steel
���ire aff�a.�ec3 1a fhe Fe��ce basc thau�h � h�le in the lay4�ut takes ic� pz'e�rezat axaovem�nt or alt��ration of t�he
protective fe��cinb ance installed; �5) that prior to issi�ance of a building p�rtnit fc�r corlsti-uctio�l a�1 Lc�t 10,
ttie proper-tti� c�wner sl�zall itlsi�ll a locl�ed g�t�� it� the Reciv�Fc�oci 'I'ree Gro�re Pr�tective �Fenei��i� f�or inspectic�n
acc�ss to thc; prot�c�t�d arca in order t� deic��rn� on going ad�quacy oiznulch, soil rsloist��-e a��� the �tatus of
other field cai�ditions as necessa�y througl�o�it t�ae cotistruction period; th�is az-�a shall be accessec� ozlly by the
project art�orist, Cit_y tar��orist, c�r wc�rk�rs u7lder ttie super�=isit�n of these }arafessic�nals; 46) th�t prior to the
issual�ce of a builcii��� �ern�it f�or c�nstrucfiion c�n Lot 10, tt�e property own�r s���ill c�use to }aa�=� a C}�r�e-ine�z
thick layer c�f ��reil aged, course �vnc�d chip mulcll {not k�3rk) and a ti�-o-inch t}�ick lay�r �f orgat�ic co�z�post
spr�aci over th� entire sc�il surface witl�in filie Ret����t�od Tzee Grt�r�e Pt-atec,ti��e Fencing; ins�talldtiorl of tiae
wc�od cl�ip and coi7�p��st shall �be accomplished by � method app�roved b�r tka� ��.roject arborist azzd City
r`�rborist; �iT��tallation o�t��e v�=ac�d chi� aT�� eon�posfi shall be supervisec� 6y the �roj�et �-l�orist and the City
Arbarist; tl�e �roject arborist sl�all infor��1 the City Ar�orist oftl�e timit�g of installatic�n of the course ���ood
�l�ip ��t�utc�h aald or�aa�ic compost so that observ°ation and i�t�s�p��Tion c�an �ecur, �7) that prior ta iss��az�ce ol
a building perniit for const�ruction an Lat 1Q a��d st;�rti��g in the laie SpringlEarly= Su�zinler 200�, the prop�.z-t���
o«�►�ier shall �install a s��ppl�n�enCa1 irrigation systein of approxiindtel�� 250 �ee�t of soal�er �aoses atCa�ct�ed to �n
acti��e hos� bib fro�n tlle �e�����orar�r ��r�ter iin� on Lc�t 9, snaiced throu��l�out tl�e ei�tir�� ��rea o�� Lots 9 and 1 U
���iChin tl�e Redw�oc�d Tree Grove Protect.ir�-e Fancizl�; irri���Ciar1 rn�ist be �erfortnc�t a� Ica�t t�nce cve�ry t���o
���eeks tZlrou�haut the c;ntire constniction p�,riad f�r all tht'ee lots unless determine�i i�ot ta be necessary by
the project arborist arad Git;r Arl��rist; this �.rea shall be saaked ovc,rr►i�ht, at least once every t�va ���eeks,
u��til th� upp�r 24-ii�r�hes of soil is thorou�hly satur��ted; Yhe City 4rt�orisC shalt �erioc�ically test the sozl
n�oistii.re tc� ensure proper irri�atton; 4$) that prior to issua�lc�e of a bk�ilding pem�it %�t' constructi�n o�a :Lot
1(), the property ou��ner shal] affix at least fot�r (4), �-iilcl� by� 11-inch lar�linated cvater�roof si�i�s on the
�edtivoad Tree Gi-nve Protective Fencin� warning tkiat it is a"Trcc Prat�ctic�n Fence", `'Dc� Not Alter c�r
Re�novc" anc� in the e���nt of r������n�ent or problem c�ill a posted en�ergency numb�r; �9) tl�attFleRe����oat1
Tr�e Grove Protecti.�<e Fen.cin� o� :i. ofs 9 and 10, s1�all be reg�ul�rly i�lspected by� tl�e project arborist anci GiCy
Arborist during canstruction on Lot �l 0, viol�tion of tl�e fe�3ced areas andlor rerz�ov�al or r�loeation o�1 �11e
fences shall c�us� all e�nstruc�tion wark to be sCopped uniil possible dama,�e has bee:n detern�ined by the City
r1rl�orist a�i�d the property ow�ner has in�plerr�ez�t�d all cc�rrecti��e measures arid tl�e}� hati=e been approved by
the C`it}= �rbo�rist; anc� 50� t�hat bcfore issuane�e c�f a building perniit, the �roperty� owz��r shatl deposit $7,5(}0
��ith t1�e Planniii� Depar�rr�ent tr� E'und, on an hoizrlybasis, a lieensed arbt�rist inspector s�lected byr tlie City
Arborist to ��ssist the City Arbarist i�a ins�eGtipg al1 ct�nstructian azld grading on Lot 10 tn insure that tP��
tniti�ation n�easures inclucled in tt�e neg€�iive declaration and the coxiditio�s �f a�pro��al attached to the
�roject by t��e Pl��lnin� Com�7�ission action arc� n�et; anci a. tl�at the property owner shall replenist� by
ac�ditional d�posit by the 1 S`� af each mc�ntl� i�o n�ainl��irz a�7,�O(} �alanc� in this i�s�p�ctioi� accoi�nt to irasure
t���t at�eqi�a�te fundin� is availak�le to �oti�cr this on-�oin,� iz�spection fu.�lcfiian; ��nd l�. tl�at failure to znaine��in
the amou�Zt c�f mon�y in this account by tiae 15`� of �ach manth sh�ll result in a stop ���ork ardei• on the
project ��•hich shall re�main ira �1ace u�1ti1 the appropa-iate fiinds have been deposited ��ith tbe City; and c.
tl���t should tE�e mc�ntl�l�j billing durit�� az�y sin�le period exceec� S7,50C? � stop l��c�rk order shall be issued
tintil additional �funds to reple�iisll the accaunt }�ave been d�pt�sited ���ith il�� cit�= so iiispe�etion c-an contizaue,
�sld d. that sl�ould thc city be caused to issue three stap work orders for failurc, tc� mai��taii� thc funding in
32
C`it>> c�f I3�1-Itr��cltrte f'l�zr�rairag Ct�n�rr�issian ;l�irtarles
:�9�lreh 2�, 2tJO-t
ihis arborist ii�spectian account, the �araperty au�ner shal) be requir�c3 to cie�osit two time;s thc a�nount
deternii.nec� b�• the CiCyr Arborist to cover tile rel�laindcr of the iz�spection wc�rk before f}ae third stop ��rork�
order sh�11 be r�moved; and e. tl�at the iinexpe�l�ied portion of the inspecti�n de�o�it s��all bc rei�urnzd to tl�c�
propc,rty owner u�on insp�ctian oi tl�e inst�allatic�n crf tta� la�ndscaping and fenees, irrigation syst�m and
��aproval ���tl�e �v� }�ear rr�aintenance plail� pro�;ram For the portivn of'the Ret3���c�od �re� ���te or� the lot;
and f. tiiat this saizie accc�unt may be use;d for the City Arborist's select�d licezxsed dr�iorist inspectar an
lots 9, �1 � and l l.
Comment on the ntol�ion: askeci are these co��ditio��.� n��c�re strin�ent tlian thc �ri�inal'? CP respon�ied yes,
Ches� ct�z�ditians add requiren��ents to both Lots 9 and 10 for n�aintenaa7ce and prt�tec.tiQn of the Red4vooci
Gr���e f�r the time� o(' constructio�� Qn L,ot� 11 ���d throu�h the �o�n��pl�taoi� c�f ���}3atever corzstructit�n to be.
detern�i���d an Lots 9 and l Q. CP also ��c��ecl Ehat mrare it�vestig:�Cion �vill need to take place for th��
f�u�ldatic�i�s of struct�ires at�d drive��jays c�n these lots, dep�ndin� on the cieszgn and locatac�t� properscd sc� tl3e
arborist re��oi-t is e��alving ancl «�ill cc�ntit��.ie to b� w�orl��d on sinc� r�c� �faund�tioY3 c�r drive��ray subinittals
t�a��� L�een rT�ade y�t. W��te�rer the pro�osal is m�c�e it v��ill bt; brflu�ht back t� the cc�inmission «��it�11 a fitll
arborist report. Feel that this i5 a�ad policy at this time, hawz��er the co�iditi�ns zre more restrictivc, a��d
wi1�l nat t�z liana��ful, bt�t this is not a;o�d habit for process'sng.
Chair BQjues called for a���aice vate on thc anotion to ax��end ihe cc�ndition�l use p�rruit by separatin� the
can�iitioras of a}�proval fcrr Lo�s 9 and 1(} anc� ���eziding them Cor addi�tiatlal n�aintenance af ���e Red�rn��
Tre� Crovc. The mation }��ssed on a�Toice vote S-0-t-1 (C. Keighran abstaining, C. Ke�;t� absent}.
iX. D�;SIGN� R�'Xf`L�E�' �'T�UDY' �ITEI��S
13. 312 �'fiRD AVENUE, 7,O�ED -1 —APPLTCATION FC}R DESIGN REVTL��' FOR.A FIRST:�I�D
S.. OND STORY ADDIT:IC?N Q11r� A'�!L? TRISH NICHOL, APYL}Cr�hTS :�ND PROPERTY°
tJ�'�'NERS; ROB;ERT 1��ED�1 , ARC:�IITEC"1�} (69'�10TICED) FROJECT PLAi'tlNER; RUBE1`v HURII�
P1r. Hurin k�riefly �res�fte�i t��e project ciescription. T�•e «rer� no questions of staff.
Chair Boju�s o�ned tht public cot��n��ent. Ro .rt ;�1�_edan, ar�l�it�ect� r�c�ted tl�at the app � azlt's f��mily h�s
tl�re� ci�ildr� and �hat i1�ey �r�ced znor� spac �, proposing to ad� a thirci be�droom. Ga nission ask�;cl i�'the
top oftl� � oof i��as cut to st��y w�itlrin th� 0' 1leight ]imit'? �'es, t.ried t�o siay� ��ritl�' � th� l�eight Iir��it anc� did
1�ot w� t to chan�e tl�e rQof pitch to 1�er th� l�ei�l�i�, changing the roof pitch uld ���i�=e altered th� o��e�rall
des', env�lope. Conlmission no �d that a special pernlit to exce�ed thc 1�� ' ht lin�it would i�e app�-opriate in
e casc of this architectural =le in ordc.r to I�ave the �roof tez�nina at a pt�int. Architc:ct not�d th��t he
u'ould nlake the slzggestec� an�es to Che roof as lon� as it wauld t delay the review process. Thcre «ere
ria other can�ments froi he floor and th� public hearing was osec�. �
C. �uran �mad� a� otioi� to place tl�is iter�� ox� the coils � t calendar at a tirne «r�1en t1�e re��ision ��h� raof
have been ma and plan checked. This motion w seconded by C. $ojues.
Col���ner� � ta na�tion: Commission requested � at the architect� provid� in�fannation � i�a��- tt» chim�ne�� v�-i11
be sta ' ized �vith the next submittal.
C'7zair Bojues callec� for a vate o�1 Cl� � natiozl to place this itean oz� t1��; coi �ni calei�dar when pla�is l�ad bcen
r�vise�d for the roo���nd cl�imr� �stabilizatiola as c3ir�ct�d. Tlle tn 'on passcd �i1 a�o�zcc; vot�� li-�?-1 (C.
Keele �bsent), Tl�e Pla��in� on�niissian's action is acivisory and 11ot appealable. This item cc�ricluded �t
33
, . _ ... .. .. _ . . < , . .... y.r,J v v c.
�-�� `� � �� ��� .
Git� of Burliixgatrte Pianning Degariatent 501 Primrose Road P{650) 558-725U F{650) 696-3790 www.buzlingams.or�
M,. ��.
�
.����
CITY OF BURLINGA.IVT�
S�PECiAL P�RiMTT APPLICATII�N
�,�
�.�. �,�=
� � ��� t
The Planning Cammission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance {Code
Section 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Plaiuiing Commission in znaking
the decision as ta whether the finciiugs can be made fnr your requesk Please type ar �vriie neatIy in ink.
Refer ta the back of this form for assi�t�nce with ihese questions.
X.
2,
3.
�ilair� wh,y the hleretl of muss, scale rtrtd dominat[1 strueturat chatacterisstics o, f'the new
construcxion or addirron ure eonsistent with the e�tisiing str,uctur�e'x des%g,� tcnd with the
��risting street unri nei,gl�httrl:ood
The proposed new bames on lot 9& IO are cansis2ent with surrounding properties that have simitar gara�E
patterns, mass, and scale an t2ie "tivest" side of Burlingame neighbor�ond 'I'hese l�omes wcre
desigr�esilplaced fi.ttrslier back (agpronii�satety 34.5' far lat 9 arid 3t?.6' for tot 20) from the front praperty
iine in arder ta protect the existis�g roats af the zedwood trees. The sgecia! permits requested arc far ihc
same re�ss�n,
�x;plaia how ihe variety vf roof tine, fr�cude, exterir�r f:n�sh r�ateriats and eievaltv�t� v,f'
the �nropa,��d new strurhrre r�r additinn are cvnsistent �vith the existing structure, srreet
ar�d neighburhvod
The proposcd ne�v harnes have becn approved by the plapning cammissianers via design reviecv prsscess,
whicb blend weil an this black withoui cl�nging ihe cliaracter of thc neigiiborhaod.
How �vill rhe prvposerl prv,jecr b� corrsister�r wirh the residentiai desigr� gufdetines
uu'a�ated hy lhe city (C.� 25.5?)p
Ths �rogosed sin�le-faraily residences are cc�a�sisteni witts City I}esign Review Guidclines, �nd it cornplic :
with af1 zoriing requirements, cxcegt for the deciining height envelope au�d l�eight (Special permit).
��: �ptain htlw tl:e removal ofany treeslocated within the faotprit:t r�fany new structure vr
addition is necessary ar�d is cu�sisterit with the city's refnrestation requirernents What
n:iYigution is proposed far the remavul of uny treesP Explain why this rrii�igaiirrn is
ap�ropric�te.
All existin� redwaod trees witl be prQtected via chain Iink fencing �shawn on site �tan), with naw
iandscapingfor Iot 9& IO are proposed. srEcr�t;� Fttta
:'�-1 F. it1 C} R_�►'�` Dli i�'I
R_F :
r�-�r�,
"I'o:
llate:
15 �7 Di-ak� Av�. l.,c�ts 9 and 1()
Steve I't��-tc;�-
�f'laa�t�ir��; D�pt.
4r'` 131`t�7
� ° , ,"�`" �
� = �.; � g� ��(� r
.., , _ `,� �.
] h.���� a-�vie«�Gd t}Zc re�rised b�iildin� plans, irlclu�in� 1�1e utility a��cl landsc�a�pe plaris.
Bt�ilciiz��, desibn �3�z��ci constru.ction rnctlaori5 ha��� be�:t� ad4�yuatcly- i��eorpor�tc� iizto t�(�e
n�c�st eurrc���t plaias t�l����l ��-ill ensurc the }�reservation c�f t}7�� I2eci���a�ad Tree �rc.��-c�.
1�t is my �onclusi�zl thal as 10�3�; as tl�c� projeet contractors foilo��� t�i1e c��n-ei�t plans, tlae�
A.rl7orist ��t�coi�si����r�c�atic�rxs, as ti��ell as th� c��>��clitic�ns c�f a�pr����l, this pruject cari �c�
(i�n���rti and be cc�t�p3eted wit�}�. tlle I��d«���c�c3 Tre;t; Gro��r: i�ntact r�z�d �res�r�•ed.
��,
r � <
r,4ar 13 C7 1�:�7� �Y;1L�ER Dc�1EL�PEr:IENT 6�340843v ;�•3
�civa.�ur 1nu tts:'LV 2^?►.X ti5U5a3�9�3 MAYTdE TRE� E�PER"TS Ct� �40:.
'♦ :
.�
`7 't ! iw �'^/' � `''' e
�" �� "�•,t'�1"�� ,IS�,,. .,r.
.,. �� �
Mayne Tree Exper� �c�mpa�sy� �nc.
t5 I'ABLJSti�,q !93 f � �"liCi'E Cf3iv'C.R!►CI'UR"5 LICti'�tSY !v'0. 27b79i
GRA�t7itTE EOREST'SR • C4R"CIE�1tt>A�tµ4h15t:! � PrSTCAi�TTROL • ,1DV2SOR5 hND OnG[2hT�Z
:t tt: F; AttU �. Ht i IV"II1vGTt'�N S35 QRAGATO ROAD. STG. A
r�u,�:;Urrrr 5R2V C,iRtAS. Clt }»fl?b-622L
kFvt�t tt. xt�Z: 'Y TL•L.LPNpNi: (654) 593-4464 ..
t�.'�'un'st(},aSM'qNA.G"rER �����1�M? 'r"A(;$!Mlt.i:� {(i54j5yS�-4i4,i
�tr �hiA1Lr infc�'tt,�maynr.ir�scwm
�'+T£. C�Lt�1 i�+Jl�i4�i'
i?t'�. Sqx 1�1
E3�rfingarne, Cl� 9�4Q11
3�a�r Ntr. M�liet;
�; 153� DFi�4t�E AV'�, (LCTiS 9&�0), BIJ�tLINGAME
t"his (et�' is tp relter�L� p�st site pl�n revieSnrs attd soii tesQirg fnr �c�. t,�n M�rt;� I,
�Ot}4, we i�est� f�r ra�o�s at se+��ra1 �v�Ci ��- hr�le iocations. R�:suits and
:c�duSior� are in �ny misctat3ed r�c�rt af i=�bruary 4, 2t�04. (Tt sh�td have beer� dated
+��ch 4, 2t}t}4.) A pier h�e diagram was i�cl�.tdec! �n VYait L�vistan's r��ort ,
i t�ad resrievved the landscape pl�ns Ae+epare.�i by M� M�cc�ttaei Caikrn at�i reporf�ci �ty
-a�in�ns in rn�r ��b�r �8, 2006, report. There is e�sentially no cha�nc�e in Mr,
�E&�n`s Fei�uary 5, 2�t}7, tt� 201ands�ape plan.
• • r • • • • • � e� . a r, as y �� � a,
t• :.• t' ` •;1� 1 �. Yi ! ` 't •�� • • ♦�s:. /. {
�.�k. - r^- .i� - -or • t.tf t .� a:. .• a
�i±tCfli'E"�}Fr
t �a.- ���.c��..,.,,.4�-.�- .
.��� � ���� �
Rnr�tard L, NUntirx,�b�n
�f,ifi�ct At�borist WE #0119A
�.�rfii#'ted Ft�� #�925 . _ __ . �._. _...... . . _,_..�,__ _.. _ �.... _ . _ .. .._
�EN:pmd
����� V ��
�A� � � �ao7
�iTY C7� BU'�iUNGAME
Pi._A9�1i;#tNG t�EPT.
Nlayne 'Tree Expert Company, Inc.
ESTABLiSI�iED 1131 5TATE C(7NTRAC7'OR"S LICF\�S� :ti�. 2 T679�
GR/�,UL?�ITE FO�STEki • CERTIFIEI] ARBQRlSTS • PES'C Ct�NTROL • ADVt�E7RS .�hD OPERAT'ORS
RIC:HAR.D L. Ht;N'CI'vGTt.)N
E'RF..SiBL^?d'I'
ke:vi:�� rt, x�rLr��
r�rer�ar�cr��s ��ra�Ac�:x t�Ctt7k�r 19, 2006
Mr. C7tto Milier
Milier Development
P.f?. Bax 121
Burlingame, CA 9�011
Dear Mr. Miiler,
S1TE: 1537 QRAKE AVE., BURLINGAME (LOTS 9& 10)
535 £3FiAG<1Tta Kt);ila, S"I'G.11
sa� c�c�s, cr� ga�r�a-�z2�
�iEi.EPtIC�N�' (6507 �93-44t?O
E.�CSI'v9[LE: (E,?(3) `9�-1443
F'v}�11L: inidu-rnaynetree.cum
��V�) V �� �
�ov o � zoos
cmr o� �uRur�c��
PtANNtNG DEPT.
C}n Oetaber 16, 2��6, we met at t�e abave site along with the Buriingame arborist, Mr.
Steve Porter, and the �roject foreman, Mr. Cliff Raines. The reascan fc�r this meeting was
ta discuss �tential impacts to the existing redwoods fr�m praposed c�nstruction.
Each lot will have its own s�t of �atential impact� from e�ccavation for driveways,
utilities, and stump removal. Each iat will be addressed separately with
reeommendations to help mitigate potential impacts.
loT 2Q:
This is the north lot and north of the r�wcr�ds. Lot tttilities are prc��sed to ga along
tfie nflrth side we41 outside the driplines of the redwoais, about 3Q fe�t away. This wil!
have little or na impacts to any pf the redwoods.
Lot 10 has an ald tree sfiump in the middle, north af the r�lwoods. A tractc�r can pull
aut this stump if it is pullecJ northward, aw�y from the redwoQds, with the tractor narth
of the stump, This will significa�tly reducs patential impacts ta any redwaxi r�fis,
Lc7�' 9:
This lot is sauth and west of the redwoods. Potential impacts at this time are from tt�e
prapasee! driveway and utility trenching, The utility trench is t�a go along the south
property (ine� a�aut 30 feet from the retiwoais. There will 1� littfie or no impacts.
The mare critica! area will be e�ceavation for the driveway. A standard driveway prafile
requires 10 inches af m�terials, i.e. rock, sand, pavers, Ta determine haw deep
drivew�y e�ccavaticrn ean safely go before hittirtg roots, a trenchr 1$ tQ 20 itlCheS d�p,
was dug alang the narth eclge of the proposed driveway.
1537 Drake Ave. (iots 9& i0), 8uriingame - 2-
C3cCober 19, ZQ06
A trench was dug from the sidewalk westward tQ the nartheast front c�rner af the
proptased garage. The near�st redwaod is about 15 feet away. Ro�ts 2 inches in
diameter and larger were nc�t cut and their diame�ers artd locations were noted.
Diameters were taken at the narth edge of fihe trench and their deptf�s were t�ken at
the south side o€ the trench, The distance to �he nearest redwaod is at least 20 feet
except far root #5, which is abc�ut 15 feet.
Five ror��.s were found in the upper 12 inches of the trench. Roc�t numbers are from
east ta west and diameters were estimated using a tape me�sure.
Root # Diameter (inches) Depth {fnch�s}
1 2.75 �.0
2
3
4
5
,2.OGt
2.50
3. f�
7.00
9
11
9
12
The large wc�dy growth (see ph�tograph} from a redwoQcl root has been exposeci, It is
samewhat Ic�sely attached and will break trr cut off easily without damage to the tree.
auring expt�sure of the woody grawth, a 7-inch raot was found, raat #S, which is 12
inches below the eacisting grde,
To conclude, the depth af driveway excavation depends on the shallowest roc�t{s).
These are #2 and #4, which are 9 inches deep. I think a 7-inch cut could be done
wifihc�ut �ncountering large rovts. A iittie deeper could � dr�ne near tt�e existing
sidewalk where the driveway is to start. This appears ta then allow �r a graduai raise
up ta the garage.
Please call w'rth any questions. I think this report is accurate and is based on s€�und
arboricu�tural principles and prctices.
Sineere�Y,
��4� � �
.�+ ' .
., �,h. �,e.�/�+i �J' G�,! .
r �
�.�f��.t� ��� y .�
%
Richard L. Huntington
Certi�'i�d ArbC�rist WE #Oi19A
Certifietl Forester #1925
' • •
�U�,1EiY Qfi q�'
�Q����,� U HGN jj���o��'c�
�
`ta�. V� 4„�, �
G
w ��O.WE-0it9A �
:
�
�
���
���/FIE�7 ���'`��
1537 Drake Ave. {lots 9& Ipj, Burlingame - 3- {�ctober 19, 2406
�.arge waaty growth on ret�wot�d root.
Date:
��- -
Project Comments
�lune 17, 20Q5
Tt�: � City Engineer
C� Chief Building Official
O City Arborist
� City Attomey
From: P1�nning Staff
CJ Recycling S��ecialist
❑ Fire Marshal
❑ NPpES Coordinator
SG�bject: Request far design review an�.� special pem�its for declir�ing height
envelape and an attached qarage for a new, two-story single family
d�n�elling at '1a37 Drake Avenc��, Lot 9, zaned R-'i, APN. 026-033-
280 ��—
Staff Review:
AI! previous cor�-�ments skill appEy. In addition, b�ckrr�ater prat�ction certification is
�Iso :equired.
�Zeviewed by: V V ���
Da#e: 6/27/2005
��e�'i €��� �s�� c���
�Y1U�Y1��C�ti�� V M
PUBI,IC WORf�S 1�EPARTMENT
April S, 2002
Ta: Placining Departtnent �
Fram: Vie ar Voong, �Engineeri
Subject. � Drake Avenue
,���
The Engineering Division has re�eiwed severai lettcrs regardin�; fhe sewer mains c�n Drake
Avenue. We are aware of the prt�btem Lhat oc�urred in this area last year. To solve this problem,
the City reconstructed four laterats that had problems and remaved tre�e rao#s f"ram the sew�r
main.
The existin�; sewer does nat have any capacifiy problems, howev�r it had tree roots which caused
obst�rruction c�f flaws in the sewer �nain. Due tt� ihe shailow depth of t�e sewer rnain in the street,
properties with plumhing fixiures belaw the street levet have to instaii a backflaw vaive in their
private property to grevent any possible back ug of sewage.
The City has reniaved the tree rciats from the sewer main, however these iree roats will
eventually graw back causing prablems� Therefore thas sewer main is on the City list of frc,c�uent
maintenar�ce areas to keeg free frc►m tree roots.
U.tV1CTt3RIP�ojedsiF�rivate11537Orake.wpd
f1 `i �
[�"i"�'c7;�
� ��
��tsi ,-,
.�
�. �
� • � r �•� �
"I'O: Engineeriug- Syad Murtu�.a and ilonald Cbang
....",,,,,, �,,,.; �,,, �
FRQM: Erika Lewit, Placuiing
RE: i 53? Drakc
I?ATE: 5.31,02
Pi�ase revi�w the following informatiQn and submit your written cornments ta me by S:Ottp.m.
on M+onday, dune 3, Z�02. �
Thank You, Erika
�.�, ��n,�.�,��-�..a.Ks�"- �=�.-�-�� �C.� -P�-�
�" lusFi�-�r��,,,�. , `1�--��-t
, �,,�
" � t � ` °�
,� �' w�w�ti'� � '
`JL.� �i�� ���-~-
�t, ��.,�. ���.,,� r� (,,-a-.C.Q
��� ��
1r1�1Y1�,.l�L\.L'l.l r 1�/ 1„1 �
rusr.�c �ra��s r��rr�u��rrr
TO: PLANMNG D�
[�� # !
DATE: JITNE �i, �IXJZ
SUB3F.��'I': IS37 Drai�e Ave�ue Residentiat deveiopment �rtoject
Staff has reviewcd t� infom�ation submitted by Iuzuriaga Taylor inc. pertaining to potentiat
�nviroumencal impacts and nutigatians for the pc�oject, Foli�owing eomments shall � add�ssed
by t�:e pc�ject develop�r priar t�r the pi�n�ing cam�nissic�n agpraval.
a: PrQvide LQcatian Map of the proposed sew�r backflow prever�tor installation with
addresses. �prit�r to piannir�g cc��rrunission meeting)
b: Instaliation of sewer bac�.fiow greventar device is the resgonsibility of a private property
ow�r. A plumbiug germit is required from the City's Buitding Division prior to the
instaliatian of bacicflow preveutor devi�(s}.
c: Submit sewer flow monitQring results wirh �raphs of peak and ave�age flaws with dates
and times vf manitvring as a supporting dc>cusnent ta the sewer flow caiculativns.(ptic�r tfl
pian�iing cammission meeting)
d: Provide a c�ear canceptual drawiug c�i water linc i�stallation sh�awing the limits c►f pipe
replacement, len;gth, valves, and size. (Qrior to planning comtm�ssian aneat�=�.?
e; A detail de�ign drawing �nd sp�cifications shall be submitted for City Fngineer's agpmval
prior to the issuancc of Buiiding Permit. An encroach�nt permit is rcquired for the
constnuction of water line.
f; Revise the `Construction t�peratian Plan' ta provide a ntite saying that `No c�astruction
equiptnent pa�rtcin� aixi or coastrectian woricers parking be allowed ar� t�e street'. (privr
to glanniug cc�mrnissic�n rt�;eting)
g: Provide a note on the `Canstzuction C)peration Ptan far perim�ter construction fence to i�re
ei�cteci to grevent constructian debris escaping iuto adjacent pr�gerties. (prior to planning
commission meeting}
h: Fhroject eonscruction shal! comply with the Gity's con,struction hours and naise ord'u�nce_
1�: S:IA Pubtic iVorie.c I?e�ylAu�cu, By Na�iSyod Murwza t,.cttesx1i537 llratx AYe mcma-trprl
� � � � �
PUBLIC �'VQRKS DEPARTMENT
TO: PLANNING C4MMISSION
IROM: DQNALD GHANG, SEMOR CIVIL EN�INEER
I?ATE: AUGU�T I5, 20(}2
SUB7EGT: Sewer Backup Probtem at 1 S00 Block of Drake Avenue
This is to respand to the concerns raised by the public during a.�wrze 24� Pla�i.r�g Commissic�n
mee�ing regarding the e�isting sewer syscena at 1500 btc�ck of 1.�?raic� Avenue. The applicant has
coziducted a sewer study r�centiy and ih�e sewer flow mc�nitr�ring resu�ts showed that the existing
pipe size is not a probiem. The sewer backup problem was the result of the tr�e-root intn�sion,
sags in the pi�e, and the age of the pipe,
The City has taken the faliowing irnmediate measures to remedy the problem:
Placed this lzne on the M�nthly Frequent Maintenance Prc�granl. The Sewer De�artme�t
wiii clean this iine monthiy beginning September to clean the grease and debris,
Treat this line with chernicai foam for tree-root cantral_ In August, 2fl02, a City contractc�r
wili inject chem'rcal faam into the sewer main ta ki11 the tree roots within the pipetines.
T1�is treatment wixl preveni roac �nt.zusion fc�r the next 2 years.
The City will canduct � siudy �f the line to analyze the problen�s and come up wiCh a long terrn
sotutian. 4nce a feasible solution is develo�d a cc�st estimate u:�! be pz-epared and this praaect
wiI[ be included into the next year capital improvemen.t program subject ta City Counci�'s
aggroval.
C: George Ftagdan, Syeci Murtuza, Pi�il Scott, I'hil Monaghan, Vince Faizon, Victor Voong
S:1A Public Works DirectnrylJ'tannic+g {'ames�wtd115t)0 btrrck Drake
RfJLTTIN� �taRM
DATE: August �, 2042
T�. �City Engiz�eer
Chief �uilc�iug Ufficial
Fire Marshal
`RecYclix�g Specialist
City Arborist
�City Al#orrcey
FRUM: Piauni�g Ststt
SUBJEG"T: R.equest for design review and special permit far attached garage far a new two-story singie
fa�nily dweliing at 1537 Drake Avenue {A}, zoned R-1, APN: 026-�33-Q34 ,
STAFF REVIEW. Monday, August 5, 2002
` � � ' i �~;�
R.eviewed $y: V�- L�ate of Cornments: �( �
'� 1 �'
DATE: E'�ugust S, 2flQ2
TO: �Gity Engineer
Chief $uild'uag Of�cial
�ire r!iarshal
,�Recycling Sgeciale'st
,City Arbt�rist
City Attorney
FRUIVt: Plancung 5taft
S[TBJECT: Request far design review fc+r a newiwo-siory singie farniiy dwelling and detached garage
at 15�7 Drake Aveuae (B), zozzed R-I, APN: 426-03�-430 .
STAFF REVTEW: Monday, August 5, 2002
,� ►, :, . s �
Reviewed By: V- U Date of Carnments: "�! '"'� `�""�
: PUBLiC WC}I7�S ��PARTPViENT EN+GINEERING DiV%SICJ►N
FLAt�T7'+IIIY� REVI�W COMMENTS � ��t�� .
Project N�me����-D�i"�.-u-�+�.
- Fr4ject Address:_ �'��, ��`� Lk�
The fotto ' g r�luirements apply ta the project
1 A F�P�Y ���'Y survey shall �►e g�efc�rined by a liceas�d iand
surveyc�r. Ti�e suxvey shall show all properfy Iines, F�i��Y corners,
e�semen#s, topogt�aphic;al featu�t�s and tifii"cts�s. �RR�uit�d p�ior to the
building penrnit i.�ua�nce,)
� �`Ihe site anci maf clra.inage shaii t�e shc�wn on p�ans and shouild be made to
drain towa�nds the Fmntage Street. (Required prior to the t�uilding pezmit
i�sua��.)
3. T6e appticant s1mi1 submit pmject gcading and drainage ptans for
- a�Prvval pzior tu the isseaa�ce c�f a Building permi�
4 The project site is in a flocx� zane, the groject shall comply wzth the City's
flood zane requirer�ents.
5 �_ A sanitary sewer i,ater�l �st is required far the praject in accardance with
the �ity's standards. (Requirect prior ta the building permit issuance.}
6. The grctject glans shall show the required Bayfrant BikelPedestri�an traii
and ne�ess�uy public acc�ss imprc�vements as required by San Francisc.o
Bay {:anservation and Developmeut Gcamirxission.
?. Sa.nitary ��wer ana2y�is is r�qniret� for ti�e groject_ The s�:wer �natysis
- shall identify the project's impa.cf tca the City's sewer system and auy
sewer pump staiians aud identify ruitigation measiu�s.
8 Submit t:raffic trig �eneratic�u analysis for the groject�
9. Su�mit a tr�ffic impact study for the prvjec#. The traff�ic study shocild
identify the praject geuerated impact� and recommend mitigation
' measures to be adopted by ihe pmject to �ie approv«1 by the Citiy
, E�giu�er.
tU. The project shall file a parcei map vvith the Pubiic Works E:ngineering
L?ivision. The pareel n�a� shatl shaw all existing P�P�Y �, �����,
- mouumeats, ar�d new groperfiy and Iot Iines proposed by the nnap.
Page [ of 3
U:�pcivate deveiopmer�tiPLAI�iNING REVIEW CUMMIs`N'1'S_dac
PUBZ,i� Wt3P:KS L�EPART�N"T E1�GIiYEERIlVG DTVT�i01�
ll. A lat�t pr+elirninacy title r�rort af the subject par�ei c�f ta��d shaiI be
submitted to t�e Public Wor�Cs Fr�gi�ring Divisiou wittl the Parcel mag
frrr re�riews.
12, Ivtap clas�a�re/!ot closur� calcula�tions shali be subsnitted with tfie paccel
maP.
i3 �he projeci. shali submit a cc�ndominiucn map ta the Engineeri�g Divisiaas
in �ccorda,nce with the re;qu�reme�ts af the Subciivision Map Ac�
I4 TI�e. gr�oject sha.�i, a# its own cast, desigu and construct frontage pubtic
i�npmve�ments includi�g curb, gutter, sidewalk and other ne�ess��ry
t �PFurt�n�nt wc�r�c, ,
15 The projec# shall, si its awri cost, ciesign and con.�truct frontage s�reet�caPe
improvern�euts iucluding sidewaik, e�ufi, guEters, Pa�`king meters �.s� poles;
tzaes, az�d streetlights in aact�ndanc� with st�reet�cc,ape master pian.
lfi By tl�e �reliminary.review of ptans, it appea�s that the proj�ct may cause
adverse iu�pac#s during constxuc#ivu to vehicular t� af�c, pedes�ian tr�xc
and public on stre�et parking. The praject shall identify ttiese impacts and
provide �itiga�ion measure ae.cept.able to the City.
i7 The project shail submit hydralogic calculations from a registered civil
engin�er f4r t1�e prapt>sed creek enclosure_ 'T'�e hydraulic calc�ations
must show that #he prc�posed creek euclosure doesn't canse any adv+�rse
impact to both upstr�eam and downstream properties. The hydrologic
calculations sha�l acco�n�any a site m,ap show�ing the area of the lt�}-year
�cx�d and existin� impnavemer�ts with propasexl impccavem�ents.
18 � .�iy work wiihin the draivage ar�a, creek, or craek banks requires a State
Department of Fish and Game Pemut �nd Army Corps of F*ip�,ineers
Perm'sts. �
19 No construction debris sha11 be allawed into the creek.
20 __� The project shall couzpiy with the City's NPDES permic requi.rement ta
prevent" storm water pallution.
22 _�:� The project do�s nvt show the dimensiatis oF existing driveways, re-
se�bmit ptazas with driveway dimensians, Alsa claiify if the preject is
� pmpasing to widen the driveway. Any widening of thc drive�ray is subje�ct
� to City E�ngineer's approv�l.
22 �L The plans do not indicate the slope of the driveway, re-submit plans
. � shawing the drive�ray prvfite with eievatians
Fage 2 of 3
U:iprivaie devebp�entiPLANNING REVIERr COMMI:N'tS.doc
a
" �"USLI� �`+C)P;�� I)�P�'T'tVIE�iT EIV+��1'�EERIl�IG DIVISIO�+i
� - »
23 The back of,#f�e cirivew�y/sidew� approach shait be at least 12 above
the flow li�� of the fr�ntage c�rb in the stre�t ta prE.went ovecflow of sturna.
water fnam th� street into privaie pmperty.
24. For the takec�ut scrvic�, a gar�ge ree,eptacte shall be glac�:d in fron� The
sidewaik &onting the stare shall be kept clean 20' from each side of thc
ProP�Y•
. 25. For commercial prvjects a designated �arbage bin space and c�eaning area
.. shall be k�cat�ed ir�sir�e ti�e building. A�irain connecting the garbage area to
the .�'ianit�azy Sewer System is requireci.
� :-,�,µ . �
0
'�8�,*C � 4f �
U:lprivaie developmeutlE'I.ANNING REYIE�V COMMEN["S.dt�c
1Y1�.1Y1V��.1- `1�--� V �Yl
PUBLIC W+QRKS DEPARTMI�NT
Augu�t 30, �Q02
To: Plannzng Department� ,�'' � �
Fram: VictQr V�n�, n � g Aivisir�n
Subject: 1537 Drak� Aven e
Staff has revie�ved the subsr�zttals received on August 21, 2002 and the follawing are
supplemental comments in addidon ta t�e previously made comments dated June 4, �Op2;
1. Plans %r the vJaterline installatian shali indicaie the type of pige to be used and �n�thc�d of
cansixuction.
2. Sewer flow resul�s did nat show any capacity problems. Camment c dated Ju.ue �, 2002 is
aeceptable to the City.
3. Comments f, g and h dated June 4, 2002 are acceptable to the City.
4. Plans currently shaw that siraw rolls to be installed on th� two sides of the property. Straw
rolls shall also be installed along the east side of #he property which is cammon with Lot 9 ta
prevent erasion anta �djacent properties.
5. All other pr�viously made comments still apply to this project.
U:IVICTORWrojeds�Private11537QrakelLots9and 1 Q.wpd
� � ! � �
I : � •' ��`�' 1:�
t}ctober 15, 2{}02
To: e
Fram: V ng, Engin�ering I�ivisian
Subject. 1537 e Aveuue
Staff has reviewed the submittals dated on September 23, 2002 a.nd #he followirzg are
suppiemental comments in addition to all pceviously made comments;
1. Fraject plans shall show details for how the new water 1'uae is tc� be connect�d to the exis�g
water lines, i.e., 45-degree bends.
2. U#ility notes shall be revised t4 indicaie that new vatves shall be made of hrass with branze
handles.
3. Utility notes shall also include pressure testing of new water pipes at 225 psi for tiva hours
and five minute flush, and information regarding disinfection or chlarination of new pipes.
�. Althou�h project plans currently show a 90-degree fitting at the intersection of the new pipes
in the easement area., the text indzeates a tee fitting. Plans shatl indicate the proper fitting to
be inst�lted. Plans sha11 also shaw water service connectit�ns for adjac�nt properties on Bemal
Avenue and Dt�ke Av�nue.
5. Praject plans shall include two ane-inch blowoffs behind the praposed valves at intersectiorz.
c�f new gipes in the easement area.
6. All other previously made comments stiil apply to this project.
U:t11tC'TOR1ProjectsWTivate1153?Drake�tots9and t Q.wpd
Project Comments
Date:
Ta:
f�'ii 7��
June 17, 2005
C! City Engineer
X Chief Bui9ding Official
D City Arlaorist
❑ City Attom�y
❑ Recycling Specialist
d Fire Marshal
Li PJPQES Cc�ordinator
Planning St�ff
Subjec�: Request for design review and special permits far declining height
envelope and an attached garage for a new, two-story single family
dwelfiing at 'i537 Drake Avenue, �at 9, zQnet! R-'t, APN: 02fi-Q33-
28fl
Staff Review:
1} All construction must comply with the 2QQ'I Caiifomia Building Codes {CBC};
the Burlingame Muni�ipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal
requirements.
2} Provide fulCy dimensioned p(ar�s.
3) Prc�vide a title blc�ck on #he plans that includes the name of the owner(s} and
the name, address, and phone num�er afi the project designer.
4� Prior to applyir�g fQr a Building Permit th� applicant must obt�in a change Qf
address from the Engineering D�partment. Not�: The correct address must be
referenced on all pages of the plans.
�) Roorns t�at can be used for sleepin� purposes must have at least one window
or d�or that complies with the egress requiremer�ts.
6) Provide guardrails at all iandings.
7) Pr�vide handrai(s af �11 stairs where there are more than four risers_
8} Provide lighting at aIi exterior landings.
9� The firepl�ce chimneys rnust terminate at least two feet �bove any roo#
surface within ten feet_
Note: Tt�e previous building permit �pplication far this project has expired. A new
building permit application must be submitted and a new plan check fee wili b�
collected.
Re�ie�nre��- ..__-� �, , � �� � > �,,�� Da�e: ,� ,,���'-�-��
�.�� _..�.�..`� � c� V_�� ----�..�..`" � �"_.
,,�...... .W ,. , ,.. . _ .. . . . . . .» z .,.. �
Project Comments
Date:
�.
�
June 17, 2005
O City Engineer
Cl Chief Building Officiai
C Gity Arbarist
❑ City Attorney
❑ Recycling Specialist
m Fire Marshal
CI NPDES Caordinator
Planning Staff
Subject: Request for design review �nci speci�l ��rmits for declining Ei�ic�ht
enve(c�pe and an attached garage far � ne��v, two-stc�ry sinc�le family
dtivelling �t 1537 Drake Avenue, l.ot 9, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-
280 .`��'
Staff Review:
Provide � residenti�l fire sprinkler throu�hout the r�sidence.
1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter.
2. Provide double backflow prevention.
3. Drawinc�s submitted to Building D�partment for reviev�r �nd ��prov�} sh�ll
clearly ir�dicate Fire Sprinklers shail be installed and shop drawir7gs
shal( be approved by the Fire Department priar to installation.
Reviewed by: � �,,.-'?�` .�
�. ��,�
D ate : � � ; ; <----�-a: �'
0
Date:
�
From:
Project �omments
June i7, 2005
C7 City Engineer
❑ Chief Building Official
❑ City Arborist
O City Attorney
Pianning Staff
�( Recycling Specialist
❑ Fire Marshal
I� NPQES Goardinator
Subject: Request for design reviev�r and special permits far declining height
envelape and an attached garage far a new, two-story single family
dweiling at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, APN: 026-A33-
280 `�----
Staff Review:
Appiicant shaii submit fr�r approv�l a Waste Reduction Plan and recycling deposit far
this and a(I covered projects prior to canstruction ar permittin�.
Reviewed by: � �°
: ,�
w
�
W�
�.--�'�� ��°�,r` u
��
�
�
�ate: �� �a � -� ._ ��_E..
>'
, Project Camments
LII�
To.
Fror�:
June 17, 20Q5
�"'' City Engineer
�'" Chief Building Official
�' City Arbe�rist
%► �ity Atto�ney
r► Recyc{ing Specialist
`'' Fire Marshal
✓ NPDES Coo�dinator
Pianning Staff
Subject: Request for design review and special permits for declin�ng height
envelape and an attached garage far a new, fiwo-story single family
dwelling at 1537 Drake Avenue, Lot 9, zoned R-1, APN: Q26-033-
280
Staf� Review: 06/27/Q5
Any consiruction project in the City, regardiess of size, shall comply with the City
NPDES permit requirement to prevent sto�mwater pallutit�n including but not limited
to ensuring that all cor�tractQrs implement construetion Best Management Practices
�BMPs) and erasion and sediment contr�i measures during AL� phases of the
canstruction praject {including demolition).
Ensure that sufficieni amount of erosion and sediment cr�ntrol measures are
available on site at a(f times.
The pub(ic right of wayleasement shail not be used as a cnnstruction staging and/or
storage area and shali be free of constructic�n debris at a!i times.
Brochures and literatures an stormwater poNution prevention and BNfPs are available
for yaur review at the Pianning and Building departments. Distribute to all project
pr�aponents.
For additianal assistance, contact Eva J. at 650i342-3727.
Reviewed by: ��
Date: 06I271Q5
i,
` Project Camments
Date.
June 17. 2005
To: � Ciry Engineer
❑ �hief B�aildin� Official
❑ Gity Arbari�i
C� City Attarney
From: Pl�anning Staff
O Recycling Specialist
C� Fire Marshal
Cl NPDES Coordinaior
Sub�ect: R�quest for desigr� revie�u and special per-mit for heigi�t for a nel�r,
tv�{�-stor-, single family d�velling and detached gar�ge at '1537 Drake
Avenu�, �ot 1q, zoned R-1, APN: 026-433-270
�
Staff Review:
l�I1 previous comments stil! apply. In addition, backwater protection certification is
�Isa rec{uired.
�2eviewed by: V V �Y`��,
Date. 6/27/2405
Praject Comments
�
To:
From:
�u�,� ��, �oa�
❑ City Engineer
X Chi�f Building Official
O Ciiy Arbarist
CI City Attdrney
D Recy�ling �peeiaEist
� Fire Ma�shal
� NPDES Cc�ordinator
Planning Staff
�ubjeet: Request for desic�n r�view and speciai permit for height fr�r a new,
two-story single family dweiling and det�ched garage at 9537 Drake
Avenue �c�t 'i{� zo�ed R-1 APN: 026-Q33-270
� > >
.�-------
Staff Review:
1� AJ1 constructian must camply with the 2Q01 C�lifornia Building Codes (CBC};
the Burlingame Municipal and Zaning Cades, and all ather State and Feder�f
requirements.
2� Provide fiuVfy dimensioned plans.
3} Provide a title b#ack or� the plans that includes the name of ihe �wner(s} and
the n�me, address. and phone number c�f the prt�ject designer.
4� Prior t� applying fc�r � Bui4ding Permit the app(icant must ob#ain a change af
acfdress feom the Engineering D�partmen#. Note: The correct ad�ress must be
referenced t�n aI( pages of the plans.
5} Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot c�f th�
prc�perty 1ine.
6} Rcaof eaves must nat project �rithin two feet of the property line.
7} Exterior bearing walls less than three feet from the property line must be
c�nstructed of c�ne-hour fire-rated construct�on and no c�penings are allowed.
8) Rooms that �ar� be used for sieeping purposes must have at least c�ne window
or door that complies with tha egress requirements.
9} Provide guardrails at ali landings.
10}Pravide handrails at �li stairs where there are more than faur risers.
11 �Prc�vi�fe lighting at a!I exteriar landinr.�s.
12)The fireplace chimneys must terminate at least two f�et above any roof
surFa�e within ten feet.
Not�: The previous builcling permit appfication for this project has expieed. A n�w
building permit applicatian must be suk�mitt�d and a n�w plan check fee will be
collected.
�. -��. ��--------___e. � _..� �'
Reviewed bv: ,r� i' l" �' / a.-,-'"' Date: �'� ,%`..2.. "-�-��'--��;� ""--
� � 7 Project Comments
�
...........�� ...�„
D�te:
�
From:
June 17, 2005
Ci City Enc�ineer
❑ Ghief Building Official
Cl City Arborist
❑ City Attorney
p Rec��cling Sp�ci�list
(�l Fire f���rsh�l
O NPDES Coc�rdin�tor
P#anning Staf�f
Subj�ct: Request far desigr} revi���� �nd sp�ci�l p�rr�iit fe�r heic�i7t f�r a r;e��.°�,
tGv�-s�ory singl� famil}� d�veiling and �ei��ch�d c��r�c�e �fi 1537 Drake
Avenue, L.ot �t�, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270
Staff Review:
Provide a residenti�l fire sprinkler throughout the r�sidence.
1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter.
2. Provide daub(e backflflw pree�ention.
3. Drawings submitted #o Buildin� Dep�rt��r�ent fior re��iekr� �3nd �p,��o:�al sh�li
�leariy indieate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop dr��vi�rgs
shall be appraved by tt�e Fire Department priar #o insta!latian.
F2eviewed by:���__� �,- �,
Date: �-
-�.. ;_-,�..�.... t� �
Project Gamments
Date:
To:
�
June 17, 2005
❑ Gity Engineer
❑ Chief Suilding Jfficial
❑ City Arbe�rist
❑ City Attorney
Pianning Staff
X Recycling Specialist
D Fire Marshal
� NPDES Caordinator
Subject: Request far 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: 026-033-274
Staff Re�iew:
Applicant shall submit for approval a Vilaste Reduction Plan and
recycling deposit for this and all covered projects prior tt� c�nstruction or
permitting.
Reviewed by:�.-=?
�
r
�
�°
;�
��� `��
Date: � - ,� � �- �:��
�.......,
t Project Cammen#s
�ate:
70:
From:
June 17, 2005
%' City Engineer
�'' Chief Buiiding Official
�"` City Arborist
�" City Attorney
�► Recycling Specialist
�' Fire Marshal
✓� NPDES Coardinator
Pianr�ing Staff
Sub�ect: Request for desi�n review and special permit ft�r height for a new,
twa-stary single family dweliing and defached garage at 1537 Drake
Avenue, Lot 1Q, zoned R-1, APN: 026-033-270
----�-_____
Staff Rev'r�w. 06i27/05
Any canstructian proje�t in the Gity, regardfess of size, shalf camply with the City
NPDES permit requirernent ta pr�vent stormwater pt�llution including but nt�t limited
to ensuring that all contractors implement cor�structior� Best Management Practices
{BMPs} and erc�siQn and sediment contrc�l measures during ALL phases c�f the
construction project {including demcalition).
Ensure that su�cient amount af erosion and sediment cantrai me�sures are
avaiiable on site at al( times.
The pub(ic right saf wayJeasement shall not be used as a constructi�n staging and/ar
storage area a�d shall be free of constructican debris at all times.
Brochures and liter�tures on stormwater pollutian preventic�n and BMPs are availabie
fQr yt�ur review at #he Planning and Building departments. Distribute to all prc�ject
prapanents.
For additianal assistance, contact Eva J. at 650/342-3727.
R�:viewed by: � .}-_
E}ate: Q6/27IQ5
i��;� CITY OF 8t1RUNGAME
�� PI.AMNING D�PAR'iMENT
BURt�iNGAME S01 PRIMROSE ROAD
� '1 BURLlNGAME, GA 94Q10 '�"�; . e��;
� �4 �
� TEL: (650} 558-7250 • i650j 696-3790 ,�,,m� �,
��. t'"'" �..� � �
www,burlingame.arr� - �� ._.
. .� � , �-s
�� � �
�,i ,�.� ��-�
� ��-.�r
s�t�: � s�� ��A�� Av�r�u�, LDTS 9 AND i 0
;;14��f �v50 =32�
i
tr;:3:(e: �tcn ri.'.t�l;;+
�� �������
The City of Buriingame Pla�ning tor�mission announces ihe PUB�IC HEARIIVG
fallowing pubfic hearing on Tuesday, May 29, 2Q07 at �pTIGE
7:00 P,M, in ihE City Half Countii thamber�, S�1 Prim�ose
Road, Burlingame, CA:
Application fa� amendme�t ta mifiigatetl oegative dec{aration,
design review, conditionol u�e p��mit for emetging lats, and
sperial permits for builtling heighi, dsclinfig 6eighi e�velope
and attached garage at I537 DRAKE AYENUE, lots 9 and
l0, zaned R-1. APMs 026-033-270 and 42b-033-2811
Mailed: May i 8, 2�07
(Pleu.sa rc�fer t� trtfrcr sicf�j
C'II'Y f)f�, RURLI�'�(,���11E
:� copy tr��f� tl��c a�pli.c�aCit�n af�d plazis 1�or t��is �rc�ject 11���y 1�� a-e.viewecl
p�-�ic�r �c� f-hz rne�;t:iri�� at tYre Pla��nitl�r L)e�a�-tr�zerit at 5O1. Priza�r�se 12t>�td,
�Bui-1i���Ti�i�ie, Calil�o�lia.
If r�ou chall�n��, tl�e s�zbject ����licati��n{�) iri cc���rt, yoi� rn;�y be li►i�iteii tc�
�-aisin`�� c�r�ly lhc��c issues �c>u c�r sorrz�:cr��� c.Ise r.�ise�i at the put?lic he�rrir��,
�e�cribe�i in tl��: r�otice ��r in ti4�rittei� corr•��p�r�dene� delivez��cl tca thi city
��t c�r ��rior tc� tl�e �u��lic il�;�riz��.
Prc���ertt� c�«=z1��-s G�•hc� receic-e ttus nc}tic�, ��re responsib�t f�c�a- ir�t`t�rri�in�
tl��eir ter�ant� aE�c�Eit t�his r�ot�ic.e. Fcsr additic�izal infr.�rm���ti�7n, �?Ie��se c��ll
(�i5t)1 5>$-7?�(}. T}l��rik� y't�lz.
:��lar;�aret �f'[c�i�ro�
C:iC}' �'lanner
RUBLIC HEARING NQTiCE
(1'�casE^ refer tv otlzc�r ,side)
�J1ie C� �a� a��' " .
OFFICE OF THE
CITY ATiORNEY
July 10, 2009
Mr. Mark Hudak, Esq.
Carr McClellan
Professional Law Corporation
216 Park Road
Burlingame, California 94010
CITY HALL — 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997
RE: Aqreement Between Citv and Otto Miller Regardinq Redwood Trees at 1537 Drake
Mark:
TEL: (650) 558-7204
FAX: (650) 342-8386
Web: www.burlingame.org
Thank you for the signed agreements regarding the preservation and maintenance of the redwood 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 retired City Attorney Larry Andersen and he has verified that no
interest was to be paid on this deposit. This fact was stated in the original agreement. Specifically, Larry said that there
was no provision in the agreement for interest because any interest earned constituted an adjustment for ortlinary inflation
to the original deposit amount. Larry further statetl that you, Otto and he may have talked about re-writing the agreement
because the project dragged for such a prolonged period, but that never happened. However, he was clear that no
interest was to be paid on the deposit.
Please have Mr. Miller direct Borel Bank to issue the irrevocable letter of credit and have it forwarded to my attention.
Once I have receivetl the letter of credit, I will authorize the Finance Director to release the deposit to Mr, Miller. I will
notify you when that authorization has been matle.
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
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 ("Cit}�') amend that
agreement between them dated November 7, 2003 and agree as follows:
1. Factual Backgr., ound:
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. Initial 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 five years after 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 No. 33. Construction on lot 11 proceeded and was
completed. Construction of the residences on lots 9 and 10, however, did not
commence until the late suinmer, 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 were 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 AQreement:
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 \l 408423.1
them dated November 7, 2003. Accordingly, the prior agreement is terminated.
3. Term of Agreement:
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 Securitv
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 and/or 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
I 3600.00001 �BGLIB 1 \1408423.1
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.
f. The irrevocable letter of credit shall be in the form attached and
incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
5. Owner's Obli�ations:
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 purposes shall decline annually by an amount
equal to Owner's cost of providing the required maintenance
b. Tree Death: Owner shall be responsible for the removal, disposal and
replacement of each and all of the four trees 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 Owner'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
I 3600.00001 �BGLIB 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) yeax 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
order 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 irrevocable 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. Citv'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 \ l 408423.1
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 to be notified. Notice shall be deemed
given as of the date of personal delivery, or if mailed, 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
13600.00001 �BGLIB 1 \1408423.1
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 Agreement shall
supersede any and all prior agreements, oral or written, regarding the subject matter
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 Attorne�s Fees.
The prevailing 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 California shall govern this Agreement.
13600.00001 �BGLIB 1 \1408423.1
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Wil iam Meeke ,
Community Development Director
13600.00001 �BGLIB 1 \1408423.1
OWNER
C�� j���.�.
Otto Miller
Date: �?-' (.��
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
.-� f�,�� -
Mark Hudak, Esq.
Date: /7 l )
� . - _, / // '
IRREVOCABLE STANDBY
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 and Trust Company ("Issuer") hereby establishes an Irrevocable Letter of Credit
number , in the amount of 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 Mateo 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 deternrined 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 Borel 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.
C�7i
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
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 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 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 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
fuhue 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 to consider this Letter
of Credit renewed for any such additional period.
Borel Private Bank & Trust Company expressly agrees with City that all drafts drawn under and in
compliance with the terms of this Irrevocable Letter of Credit will be duly honored by us as specified if
presented at this office on or before 4:00 Pacific Time, _/_/ (One year from issue date) or as
renewed.
Except so far as otherwise expressly stated herein, this Letter of Credit is subject to the Intemarional 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
IRREVOCABLE STANDBY
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 and Trust Company ("Issuer") hereby establishes an Irrevocable Letter of Credit
number , in the amount of 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 Mateo 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 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 Borel 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 the 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 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 Inevocable 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 elects not to consider this Letter
of Credit renewed for any such additional period.
Borel Private Bank & Trust Company expressly agrees with City that all drafts drawn under and in
compliance with the terms of this Irrevocable Letter of Credit will be duly honored by us as specified if
presented at this office on or before 4:00 Pacific Time, _/_/ (One year from issue 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