HomeMy WebLinkAbout1145 Cortez Avenue - Staff ReportPROJECT LOCATION
1145 Cortez Avenue
Item # �
Action Item
City of Burlingame
Amendment to Design Review and Special Permits
Item # �
Action Item
Address: 1145 Cortez Avenue Meeting Date: 5/22/06
Request: Amendment to design review and special permits for building height and for reduction of
parking spaces on-site for a first floor remodel and second story addition.
Applicant and Designer: JD & Associates APN: 026-163-030
Property Owners: Steve and Courtney Love Lot Area: 6,000 SF
General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1
CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1(e)(2) - additions to
existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 SF in areas
where all public services and facilities are available and the area in which the project is located is not
environmentally sensitive.
History: On August 8, 2005, the Planning Commission approved an application for design review and
special permits for building height (31'-9" proposed where 30'-0" is the maximum allowed) and
reduction in the number of parking spaces existing on site (from two covered to one covered parking
spaces) (August 8, 2005 P.C. Minutes). At that time, the Commission added a condition of approval
which required the applicant to refine the landscape plan to show more detail and have it reviewed by
the Commission as an information item. However, because additional changes are proposed, this item
was brought back as an action item. The additional changes are described below.
Proposed Revisions: The applicant is now requesting an amendment to the approved design review
application for a first and second story addition. A building permit has not yet been issued for this
project. The applicant submitted a letter and revised plans, dated stamped May 2, 2006, explaining the
changes to the project. A set of the originally approved plans and proposed plans has been included for
comparison. The following is a summary of revisions proposed:
1. Landscaping: As requested by the Commission, the on-site landscaping has been revised to
show more detail (see revised Site Plan, see sheet 1).
2. Window in Family Room: The window in the family room along the right side of the house
has changed from one 3' x 5' window to two 2' x 2' windows to match the windows in the living
room (see revised First Floor Plan and West Elevation, sheets 4 and 7).
3. Window in Den: Size of the window in the den along the right side of the house has changed
from 3' x 2'-6" to 3' x 2' (see revised First Floor Plan and West Elevation, sheets 4& 7).
4. Fireplace: The fireplace has changed from a gas to wood burning. The chimney design or
height was not changed.
5. New Utility Room: The existing lower floor utility room (241 SF) has a ceiling height of 6'-0"
and therefore was not included in FAR. In the original application, the applicant proposed to
expand the lower floor to 424 SF but keep the ceiling height to less than 6'-0" and therefore the
expanded utility room was also exempt from FAR. After giving more consideration to
construction and costs, the applicant is now proposing to demolish the existing utility room and
construction a new 322 SF utility room with a 7'-0" ceiling height and an exterior exit from the
utility room at the side of the house (see revised Utility Room Extension and East Elevation,
Amendment to Design Review and Special Permits
1145 Cortez Avenue
sheets 4 and 7). The utility room does not qualify as a basement since the finished floor above
it is more than 2'-0" above grade. Therefore, the new utility room will increase the approved
floor area ratio by 222 SF (includes 100 SF lower floor exemption), from 2,952 SF (0.49 FAR)
to 3,074 SF (0.51 FAR) where 3,378 SF (0.56 FAR) is the maximum allowed. With the new
utility room, the project will be 304 SF below the maximum allowed FAR.
Summary (includes proposed revisions, plans date stamped May 2, 2006): The existing one-story
house, with a detached two-car garage contains 1,922 SF (0.32 FAR) of floor and has two bedrooms.
The existing lower floor utility room has a ceiling height of 6'-0" and therefore is not included in FAR.
The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing first floor, demolish the existing utility room and
build a new utility room with a 7'-0" ceiling height and add a new 1,205 SF second floor. With the
proposed addition, the floor area will increase from 1,922 SF (0.32 FAR) to 3,074 SF (0.51 FAR)
where 3,378 SF (0.56 FAR) is the maximum allowed (includes exemptions for covered porch, lower
floor and chimneys). The proposed project is 304 SF below the maximum FAR allowed on this
property. A special permit for building height is required (31'-9" proposed where 30'-0" is the
maximum allowed).
With this project, the number o_f bedrooms will increase from two to four. One covered (10' x 20') and
one uncovered (9' x 20') parking spaces are required for increasing the number of bedrooms. All other
zoning code requirements have been met. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing 520 SF
detached two-car garage and replace it with a new 358 SF detached one-car garage. A special permit is
required to reduce the number of on-site parking space from two covered to one covered. The
following applications are required:
� Design review amendment for a first floor remodel and second story addition;
• Special permit for building height (31'-9" proposed where 30'-0" is the maximum allowed) (CS
25.28.060, a, 1); and
• Special permit for a reduction in the number of parking spaces existing on site (from two
covered to one covered parking spaces) (CS 25.28.035, b).
This space intentionally left blank.
2
Amendment to Design Review and Special Permits 1145 Cortez Avenue
Table 1 —1145 Cortez Avenue
Lot Area: 6,000 SF Plans date stam ed Ma 2, 2006
Existing � Proposed � Allowed/Required
i !
SETBACKS
� .................................................................................................................................t.................................................................................................................................
Front (1 st flr): 26'-10" i no change ; 15'-0" or avg of block
(2nd flr): none � 31'-4" ' 20'-0"
:...................................................... ..................................................
, .... . ,.
Side (left): 7'-6" � 9'-0" to 2°d floor ' 4'-0"
(right): 10'-0" j 10'-0" to 2°d floor � 4'-0"
:...... .. ........................................................................................................<.................... _................. . ... ....
i
Rear (Ist flr): 34'-11" to deck � no change � 15'-0"
46'-11" to house i no change
(2nd flr): none I. 46'-11" 20'-0"
.................................................... .. . .... .. .. ... . .
i �
Lot Coverage: 2207 SF ! 2042 SF � 2400 SF
36.7% i 34% � 40%
....................................................�.......................... ....
� .................................................. ..................................................................
FAR: 1922 SF � 3074 SF � 3378 SF'
;
0.32 FAR � 0.51 FAR � 0.56 FAR
... ....................................... .. . .. ...........................................�........ ....... . ................................. .. .. .... ............................................................_..................................._...._._.............
# of bedrooms: 2 4 �
(
_....� .................................................................. .............._............ .............._..._.....;......................................................................_....................................... ... ........
Parking: 2 covered 1 covered Z � 1 covered
1 uncovered � (10' x 20') ' (10' x 20')
� 1 uncovered 1 uncovered
�
� � � �
x 20 9 x 20
� .. .. .. .....................�9..............................)............._............................�..........................................�............ ._................._).............................._...........
.................................................................................................................. .....................................................................................................................................1... ............ .
Height: 22'-10" 3.1.�.-9��3 ...... ......................................'................................................_30'-0'�....................................... .......
}
DHEnvelope: complies complies i see code
(0.32 x 6000 SF) + 1100 SF + 358SF = 3378 SF (0.56 FAR).
Special permit for a reduction in the number of parking spaces existing on site (from two covered
to one covered parking spaces).
Special permit for building height (31'-9" proposed where 30'-0" is the maximum allowed).
Staff Comments: See attached. Planning staff would note that since this request is an amendment to a
previously approved project, the amendment was taken directly to action. If the Commission requires
any additional information before action, this item can be continued.
Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted
by the Council on Apri120, 1998 axe outlined as follows:
Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood;
3
Amendment to Design Review and Special Permits
2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood;
3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure;
1145 Cortez Avenue
4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and
5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components.
Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a special permit for height and for a reduction in the
number of parking spaces existing on site, 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 existing structure's design and with the existing street and
neighborhood;
(b) the variety of roof line, facade, 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 the residential 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 design review and
special permits for height and the number of parking spaces existing on site. The reasons for any
action should be clearly stated for the record. At the public hearing the following conditions should be
considered (revised conditions in italics):
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date
stamped May 2, 2006, sheets 1-2, 4 and 6-7, and that any changes to building materials,
exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require 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, 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
4
Amendment to Design Review and Special Permits
4.
1145 Cortez Avenue
professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the
certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building
Department;
that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of
the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department;
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;
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 Chief Building Official's May 13, 2005, memo, the City Engineer's,
Fire Marshal's and Recycling Specialist's May 16, 2005, memos, and the NPDES Coordinator's
May 19, 2005, memo shall be met;
8. 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;
9. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the
site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required
to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;
10. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance
which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste
Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure,
interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; and
11. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance.
Ruben Hurin
Planner
c. JD & Associates, applicant and designer
S
City of Bur[ingame Planning Commission Minutes
VII. ACTION ITEMS
4B
August 8, 2005
Consent CalendaP - Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on simultaneously unless
separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant, a member of the public or a commissioner prior to the time the
commission votes on the motion to adopt.
��
1548 NEWLANDS AVEN ,, ONED R-1— APPLICATION FOR DE �`����IEW FOR A FIRST
AND SECOND STO •.' DITION (WILLIAM AND SAND SELL, APPLICANTS AND
PROPERTY O� S; MARK ROBERTSON, DESIGNER) NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER:
report and by resol '. The motion was seconded by C. Cauchi. Chair
the motion and i assed 5-0-2 (Cers. Brownrigg and Vistica absent). Ap�
item concluded at 7:28 p.m. �
C�Auran noted that he had received a spea��"card requesting that Item 4A, 1145 Cortez Avenue, b
called off the consent calendar. This ite s moved to the regular action calendar.
C. Keighran moved approval e balance of the consent calendar based on the fa • the staff report,
commissioners comme d the findings in the staff report with recomme conditions in the staff
VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
�F"an called for a voice vote on
procedures were advised. This
4A. 1145 CORTEZ AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL
PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND REDUCTION OF PARKING SPACES ON-SITE FOR A LOWER
FLOOR REMODEL AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (JD & ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND
DESIGNER; STEVE AND COURTNEY LOVE�(63 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
C. Deal noted that he had a business relationship with the applicant, recused himself from the item and left
the dais. Reference staff report August 8, 2005, with attachments. Planner Hurin presented the report,
reviewed criteria and staff comments. Ten conditions were suggested for consideration. Commissioners
commented on a letter submitted by a neighbor and noted that the neighbor is concerned that with the
removal of the existing garage, there will be a gap in the fence between the two properties, would like the
applicant to address this issue in his comments.
Chair Auran opened the public hearing. Kris Hurley, 164 Pepper, representing the neighbor at 1149 Cortez,
noted that the neighbor has concerns that the existing garage acts as a fence, when it is removed, there won't
be a fence to keep a dog in the yard; also the height as proposed is above the 30' limit, would like to see it
reduced. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioners noted that a special permit allows heights up to 36 feet for architectural consistency and this
design fits the special pernlit criteria, it is a traditional style that blend in, there is only one section of the roof
in the middle that exceeds the 30 foot height; the existing first floor is 3'-6" above grade, height is necessary
to accommodate the second floor; a condition of approval should be added that a fence be built where the
existing garage is to be removed; would like to see landscape plan clarified, it is cryptic and incomplete,
would like to see the landscape plan come back as an information item. C. Keighran moved to approve the
application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as
shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped June 29, 2005, sheets 1-7 and G-1,
and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall
require an amendment to this permit; 2) that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes
August 8, 2005
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, 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. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 4) that prior to scheduling the roof
deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that
height to the Building Department; 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; 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 a fence shall be installed along the side property line where
the existing garage is to be removed; 8) that the landscape plan shall be refined to show more detail and shall
be brought to the Planning Commission as an information item prior to issuance of a building permit; 9)
that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's May 13, 2005, memo, the City Engineer's, Fire Marshal's
and Recycling Specialist's May 16, 2005, memos, and the NPDES Coordinator's May 19, 2005, memo shall
be met; 10) 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; 11) that the project shall comply with the
Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new
construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any
partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; and 12) that
the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and
Discharge Control Ordinance.
The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Chair Auran called for a voice vote on the motion to approve.
The motion passed on a 4-0-1-2 (C. Deal abstaining and Cers. Brownrigg and Vistica absent). Appeal
procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:36 p.m.
5. 1517 CYPRESS AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — LICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, PARKING
VARIANCE, SIDE SETBACK VAR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FIRST FLOOR
REMODEL, SECOND STO " ION AND A NEW DETACHED GAR.AGE (MICHAEL GINN,
APPLICANT AND P � Y OWNER; HOLDREN-LIETZKE DESIGN NER) (69 NOTICED)
PROJECT P R: ERICA STROHMEIER .��- '
s�l.'�
R ence staff report August 8, 2005, with attach�ertts. SP Brooks presented the report, reviewed criteria
�: •
and staff comments. Ten conditions wer�,,�i�gested for consideration. Chair Auran opened the public
hearing. Mike Ginn, property own �applicant was available to answer questions. Commissioners noted
ry
that the house looks good ov�, ,;'ave no problem with the placement of the garage given the unusual shape
of the lot, but want to t out that a portion of the side wall of the garage is shown right on the property
line, want to it clear that the eave cannot project over the property line. .. were no further
comme the public hearing was closed. �� "
Commissioners noted that the variances and conditio �s"es for the garage could be supported based on the
unusual shape of the lot, the applicant has d.� " good job warking with the constraints of the lot. C.
Osterling moved to approve the applica ', y resolution, with the following conditions: 1) that the project
shall be built as shown on the plan bmitted to the Planning Department date stamped June 23, 2005,
G�
0
� �
ASSOCIATES
BUILDING DESIGN & ENGINEERING
1228 paloma avenue burlingame, ca. 94010
fax (650) 375-8448 tele. (650) 343-6014
4-28-2006
To:
Re:
Ruben Hurin
Planning Department
City of Burlingame
Revisions to plan as per direction of Planning Commission
and as per Owner direction
Addition / remodel to existing residence
1145 Cortez Avenue
Burlingame •
s ;i"�°��,�w��<�E��
MAY - 2 2006
�ITY �F BURLINGAME
PIANPVING DEPT,
• Landscaping plans ha.ve been clarified and additional landscaping has been provided at
Sheet 1.
• Due to construction/ cost considerations the demolition of the e�cisting Utility Room has
changed. See Sheet 2.
� The new Utility Room has changed. See Sheet 4.
• Windows at the right side of the family room have changed from a 3'0 x 5-0 window to
a pair of 2-0 x 2-0 windows to match those at the living room. See Sheet 4& 7.
• Window at the right side of the den has been changed from a 3-0 x 2-6 to a 3-0 x 2-0.
See Sheet 4 & 7. �
• Interior wa11s at the existing front bedroom and den have changed. See 5heet 4.
• Fireplace has been changed from a gas fired appliance to a wood burning fireplace.
• See Sheet 4.
• Section has changed due to changed Utility Room plan. See Sheet 6.
• An e�cterior stairway has been added to the Utility Room. See Sheet 7.
The changes to the exterior windows and the basement do not alter the architectural character or
aesthetics of the project. Thank you for your consideration
0
Jerry Deal
Principal
JD & Associates
City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlingame.orQ
` IT7 �
A
�� APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMM�SSION
'�..�...: �
Type of application: Design Review X Conditional Use Permit Variance
Special Pennit X Other Parcel Number:
Project" address: l 1� J� � r�T� �
APPLICANT
Name: ��� �o C�a-�
Address: ( L-� ��� CL.�_
City/State/Zip: �jc., � ( f L�-e�l�+-�r
Phone (w): _ � � `� �' � o �
�)�
c�: �� s -�� ���
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
Name: � [�S� G��`�
Address: i�� ��[.�.�—.
City/State/Zip: � w� �
Phone (w): � �� �� ��
c��:
c�: �� �- ���
PROPERTY OWNER
Name: c� � �,� (`� �ov�
�
Address:� ��S ��C-�
City/State/Zip�(� � � ll�tqc--�, �_
Phone (w):
�): ���' B��S
c�:
Please indicate with an asterisk *
the contact person for this project.
RECEIVED
MAY 1 3 2005
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
PROJECT
�
"V' � /VP�� V�
AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of per�ury that the informahon
given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Applicant's signature: Date: �� � 3 n�
I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this
application to the Planning Commission.
Property owner's signature: Date: � `�-��
�
Date submitted: l�'
PCAPP.FRM
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT SOI PRIMROSE ROAD P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790
��`, c�Tr o.n
El�l%JNOAME
�.,m �,.�••T
The Planning Commission 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 Planning Commission in making
the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink.
Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions.
1. Explain why the blend of mass, scale and dominantstructural characteristics of the new
construction or addition are consiste�t with the existing structure's design and with the
existing street and neighborhood.
S �E A--r�-��N� �
2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevatiohs of
the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street
and neighborhood.
3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines
adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)?
4. Explain how the 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.
What mitigation is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is
appropriate.
SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION - CITY OF BURLINGAME
Love Residence
1145 Cortez Avenue
Burlingame, CA.
Special pernut for building height which is greater than 30 feet above the average top of
curb by 1'-9" (plus or minus) "
Fxplain why the blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics o. f the new
consiruction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the
existing street and neighborhood.
The craftsman style is prevalent in the neighborhood. The proposed design
incorporates massing and detailing which is architecturally positive to the proposed
structure and to the neighborhood
2 Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and
elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are cnnsistent with the existing
structure, street and neighborhood.
The new second floor and the first floor addition matches the style of the main
dwelling and is consistent with the Craftsman style and the neighborhood. The
neighborhood consists of an eclectic mix. The roof height is greater than 30 feet
above the average top of curb due to the following:
the first floor is 3'-6" (plus or minus) above grade
the second floor roof pitch matches that of the first floor at 6/12
3 How will the pro�osed project be consistent with the residential design
gurdelines adopted by the ciry (C.S. 25.57)?
The Craftsman design is compatible in the eclectic neighborhood mig and in fact
there are good egamples of Craftsman arclutecture in the neighborhood.
4 Explain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new
structure or addition is necessary and is consisteni with the city's reforestatiort
requrrements. What mitigation is proposed for the removal of any trees?
Farplain why this mitigation is appropriate.
No trees are pianned to be removed at this. time.
R�CEIV��
MAY 2 3 2005
C�TY OF BURLINGAM�
PLANNING DEPT.
SPECIAL PERNIIT APPLICATION - CITY OF BURLINGAME
Love Residence
1145 Cortez Avenue
Burlingame, CA. �
Special permit fqr .reduction of covered parking spaces from two to one. One
covered parking space is required. ,
Explain why the blend of mass, scale arrd dominant structural characteristics of the new
construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the
existing street and neighborhbod f
The craftsman style is prevalent in the neighborhood. The proposed design
incorporates massing a�d detailing which is architecturally positive to the proposed
structure and to�the neighborhood
2 Explain how the variety of roof'line, facade, exterior finish materials and
elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing
structure, street and neighborhood.
The garage matches the style of the main dwelling and is consistent with the
Craftsman style and the neighborhood. The neighborhood consists of an eclecNc mi,g.
3 How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design
guidelines adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)?
The Craftsman design is compatible in the eclectic neighborhood mia and in fact
there are good ezamples of Craftsman architecture in the neighborhood. The
driveway ruas along the south side and leads to the detached one car garage.
4 Explain how the removad of any trees located within the footprint of any new
structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation
requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the removql ofany trees?
Explain why this mitigation is appropriate.
No trees are planned to be removed at this time.
REGEIVED
MAY 2 3 2005
cI pLANNINCa DEPTME
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Staff Review:
05/13/2005
❑ City Engineer
X Chief Building O�cial
❑ Recycling Specialist
❑ Fire Marshal
d City Arborist
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
❑ NPDES Coordinator
Request for design review for lower floor remodel and 2nd floor
addition at 1145 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-163-030
05/16/2005
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) According to the City of Burlingame Municipal code "when additions,
alterations or repairs within any twelve-month period exceed fifty percent of
the current replacement value of an existing building or structure, as
determined by the building official, such building or structure shall be made in
its entirety to conform with the requirements for new buildings or structures."
Therefore, this building must comply with the 2001 California Building Code
for new structures.
4) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the
property line.
5) Roof eaves must not project within two feet of the property line.
6) Exterior bearing walls less than three feet from the property line must be
constructed of one-hour fire-rated construction and no openings are allowed.
7) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window
or door that complies with the egress requirements.
8) Provide guardrails at all landings.
9) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are more than two risers.
10)Provide lighting at all exterior landings.
11)The firepface chimney must terminate at least two feet above any roof surtace
within ten feet.
Reviewe �p ���'/
_�� --.. � / ate: `S / /�/�S �.
, �
Project Comments
Date:
05/13/2005
To: [� City Engineer
❑ Chief Building Official
❑ City Arborist
❑ City Attorney
From:
Subject:
Planning Staff
❑ Recycling Specialist
❑ Fire Marshal
❑ NPDES Coordinator
Request for design review for lower floor remodel and 2nd floor
addition at 1145 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-163-030
Staff Review: 05/16/2005
1. Storm drainage shall be designed to drain towards the street frontage.
2. Replace all displaced/damaged sidewalk, driveway, curb and gutter.
3. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works —
Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information.
Reviewed by: V V � g
Date: 5/16/2005
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
05/13/2005
❑ City Engineer
❑ Chief Building Official
❑ Recycling Specialist
[d Fire Marshal
❑ City Arborist
❑ City Attorney
Planning Staff
❑ NPDES Coordinator
Request for design review for lower floor remodel and 2nd floor
addition at 1145 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-163-030
Staff Review: 05/16/2005
Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence.
1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter.
2. Provide double backflow prevention.
Reviewed by: �� �`�%��
Date: /6 %?�T�.f
Project Comments
Date:
05/13/2005
To: � City Engineer
� Chief Building Official
� City Arborist
� City Attorney
From:
Subject:
Staff Review:
Planning Staff
X Recycling Specialist
� Fire Marshal
� NPDES Coordinator
Request for design review for lower floor remodel and 2nd floor
addition at 1145 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-163-030
05/16/2005
Applicant shall submit a Recycling and Waste Reduction Plan for
approval, and pay a recycling deposit for this and all covered projects
prior to construction or permitting.
Reviewed by: � Date: 5���/D S
Project Comments
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Staff Review:
05/13/2005
� City Engineer
� Chief Building Official
� City Arborist
� City Attorney
� Recycling Specialist
� Fire Marshal
✓ NPDES Coordinator
Planning Staff
Request for design review for lower floor remodel and 2nd floor
addition at 1145 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-163-030
05/16/2005
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: �� -f- . L.� Date: 05/19/05
�� �.,�.
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND AMENDMENT TO
DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for
amendment to design review and special permits for building height and for reduction of parkin�
spaces on-site for a first floor remodel and second story addition at 1145 Cortez Avenue, zoned
R-1, Steve and Courtnev Love, propertv owners, APN: 026-163-030;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
May 22, 2006, 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 categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19, Section: 15301 Class
1(e)(2) - additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an
increase of more than 10,000 SF in areas where all public services and facilities are
available and the area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive, is
hereby approved.
2. Said amendment to design review and special permits is approved, subject to the
conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such amendment to
design review 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 22°d day of May , 2006 by the
following vote:
Secretary
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and amendment to design review and special
permits.
1145 Cortez Avenue
Effective June 1, 2006
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department
date stamped May 2, 2006, sheets 1-2, 4 and 6-7, and that any changes to building
materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require 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, 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. Certifications shall be submitted to the
Building Department;
4. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the
height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building
Department;
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;
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 Chief Building Official's May 13, 2005, memo, the City
Engineer's, Fire Marshal's and Recycling Specialist's May 16, 2005, memos, and the
NPDES Coordinator's May 19, 2005, memo shall be met;
8. 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;
9. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on
the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be
required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District;
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and amendment to design review and special
permits.
1145 Cortez Avenue
Effective June 1, 2006
Page 2
10. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling
Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to
submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full
demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; and
11. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm
Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance.
� ��� CITY p� . .. . .
CITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010 ' � "� 016H165Q4325
' TEL: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-37
; �,.,m.,,,,,�b'��0 www.burlingame.org
� $ 00.24a
�
' H
+ � = 04/28/2006
Mailed From 940'f�
Site: 1145 CORTEZ AVENUE US POSTAGE
The (ity of Burlingame Planning fommission announces the PUBLIC HEARING
follawing public hearing on Monday, May 22, 2006 at 7:00
P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road, NOTICE
Burlingame, CA: ��
� , - M:� �
Application for amendmenf ta approved design review and �
special permits for building height and for reduction of porking � �' � '� :' .
spoces on-site for a first floar remodel and second story ., � �
addition at 1145 CORTEZ AVENUE zoned R-l. (APN 026-163-030) �- `
� � :.;
'
� .�
Mailed: May 12, 2006 �
I
�- : .,.:
_ ---= =-----___.—
(Please refer to other side)
CITY OF BURLINGAME
'i:t �..:':h.
A copy of the applicahon and ��ar�� �Q�r th�s` pro�ect may be reviewed pnor
t th eetin at`"t�� F�ann,n�r�,.�e�artment at��C���.Primrose Road,
o e m g �
Burlingame, C�hfoi�ia.
�; ,.
If you challe�ge th,e subjf
raising only t$o � �ys�fiies'`
described in �he��a���e pi
���� � F�� :.
at or prior to 3tfie 'pubr��c �
:.��:v���,�
Property owners v�ho re
their tenants ;abou� �`this �
�:,
(650) 558-72,�0�. Thank
�� �.,:,
i 9 «^ 4� ;
� � ��
Margaret Moni�s� "� �� ��.
� �,
( : y�F
City Planner `'"r;`��� �� � �
PU B`�
(Please refer to other side)
rt,
_ � ��
.-=.�
, riotice are respon
�����
��r ��
�� � �
O� E
be limited to
�blic hearing,
�d to the city
informing
please call
m