A Burlingame home addition can appear straightforward on paper: add a bedroom, enlarge the kitchen, create a better primary suite, or build upward because the lot leaves little room to expand.
Then the project reaches Planning.
What many homeowners initially describe as a “permit” may actually involve two distinct approvals. First comes a discretionary planning entitlement, potentially including review by the Burlingame Planning Commission. Only after that approval is resolved can the project move through detailed building-plan review.
That distinction matters. It can determine whether construction begins during the expected season—or several months later.
Burlingame requires design review for all new houses, most second-story additions, and certain single-story additions. The review considers not only zoning metrics such as setbacks, height, lot coverage and floor area, but also architectural compatibility, neighborhood character, privacy, landscaping, parking and the perceived mass of the proposed house.
For homeowners planning a substantial investment, the most consequential question is therefore not simply:
“Can this addition fit on the property?”
It is:
“What approval path will this design trigger, and has that path been included in the project schedule?”
Design Review Is Not the Same as Building-Plan Review
A building department primarily evaluates whether construction documents comply with applicable building, structural, energy, fire and safety requirements.
Design review asks a different set of questions:
- Is the addition compatible with the existing house?
- Does its scale relate appropriately to nearby homes?
- Will upper-floor windows create privacy concerns?
- Does the garage placement fit the pattern of the street?
- Do the architecture, roof forms and materials create a coherent composition?
- Does landscaping adequately soften the building’s mass?
For a single-family property, Burlingame’s major design-review process is discretionary and generally includes a Planning Commission study session. The Commission may also refer a proposal to a design-review consultant before the project returns for formal action.
A project can therefore satisfy the numerical zoning limits and still require architectural revisions.
This is one of the most important differences between designing to the maximum legal envelope and designing a project that can be approved efficiently.
The Triggers That Surprise Homeowners
The most recognizable trigger is a second story. Under Burlingame’s design-review regulations, an addition to—or construction of—a second story or higher ordinarily requires major design review.
But second-story construction is not the only trigger.
Major design review may also be required for:
- A new dwelling
- Work classified as substantial construction
- An addition with a plate height more than nine feet above the existing finished floor
- An increase to an existing plate line that places it more than nine feet above the finished floor
- Construction of a new attached garage
- Certain rooftop mechanical equipment
These provisions mean that a project does not necessarily avoid design review merely because it is described as a “single-story addition.” A tall great room, a raised roof, a new attached garage or a scope that effectively reconstructs much of the house can change the entitlement path.
There is a narrow exception for some additions at the second story or above, but all of the qualifying conditions must be satisfied. The addition or uncovered deck must total no more than 100 square feet, its roof must be compatible with the existing roof, and its ridge cannot exceed the home’s existing highest ridge. Other design-review triggers can still eliminate the exemption.
In practical terms, this exception is unlikely to cover the type of meaningful bedroom, office or primary-suite expansion most homeowners envision.
How the Timeline Trap Develops
The timeline problem rarely comes from one unusually long review. It develops through a sequence of handoffs, comment periods, revisions and hearing dates.
Burlingame’s published design-review materials describe an initial staff review period of approximately 30 days. If the submission is incomplete—or if the plans do not communicate the project clearly—the applicant must revise and resubmit. A second staff review may follow. Once the project is ready, revised plan sets must be prepared and the application is scheduled for a Planning Commission study session.
At the study session, several outcomes are possible:
- The Commission may find the design ready to proceed toward an action hearing.
- Commissioners may request architectural changes.
- The project may be sent to a design-review consultant.
- Substantial revisions may require another study session before an action hearing can be scheduled.
The Commission normally meets on the second and fourth Mondays of each month. Missing one scheduling deadline or returning revisions too late for an agenda can therefore add approximately two weeks before the next potential meeting—sometimes longer when agendas are full.
Once the Commission takes formal action, that decision is subject to a 10-day appeal period. Only after the planning entitlement becomes final should the team treat the discretionary approval as complete.
The detailed building permit remains a separate step. Burlingame’s current building submittal guide estimates approximately 15 business days for the first building-plan review and 10 business days for resubmittals, with plans potentially routed to Planning, Engineering and other reviewing departments. Those estimates begin after a complete building submission; they do not include the earlier design-review entitlement process.
A Real Burlingame Example
A recent application illustrates how the calendar can unfold even without an appeal.
A first- and second-story addition at 1633 Westmoor Road appeared before the Planning Commission for a design-review study session on June 23, 2025. The project returned as an action item on August 11, 2025. That is 49 days between the study session and the action hearing, followed by the City’s 10-day appeal period.
This example should not be treated as a guaranteed processing time. Every application is different. It does, however, demonstrate why a homeowner should not interpret “the next Planning Commission meeting” as the likely approval date.
The study session is often the beginning of the public review phase—not the end of it.
Based on the City’s initial review period, twice-monthly hearing schedule, potential consultant review, revision branches and appeal period, a prudent design-build schedule should generally reserve approximately 12 to 20 weeks after a complete planning submission for a relatively clean major-design-review path.
That is a project-planning allowance, not an official City commitment. A design requiring significant revisions, an additional hearing, a special permit or an appeal can take longer.
Why “We’ll Fix It at Planning” Is an Expensive Strategy
Some project teams move quickly through schematic design, show the homeowners an exciting concept and defer municipal concerns until the application is submitted.
That sequence can create avoidable sunk costs.
By the time Planning comments arrive, the homeowners may already have approved the floor plan, become emotionally invested in the exterior design and authorized preliminary structural or engineering work. A request to reduce the second-floor mass is no longer a minor architectural adjustment. It may affect:
- Bedroom dimensions
- Bathroom layouts
- Stair geometry
- Roof structure
- Window locations
- Mechanical routing
- Structural calculations
- Cabinetry and interior elevations
One exterior-planning comment can ripple through the entire drawing set.
The better approach is to make entitlement strategy part of the design from the beginning. Privacy, massing, setbacks, garage treatment, roof forms and landscape screening should be considered while the floor plan is still flexible—not after every room has been finalized.
Existing Conditions Can Change the Approval Path
Older Burlingame properties often contain conditions that would not be permitted under today’s standards: shallow setbacks, garages near property lines, additions built under earlier regulations or structures whose permit histories are incomplete.
These conditions require careful analysis before design begins.
Burlingame allows work involving legal nonconforming structures only under specific conditions. An addition generally cannot increase the existing discrepancy, and work classified as substantial construction can require nonconforming conditions to be brought into compliance. The City’s regulations also address projects that remove more than 50 percent of the exterior first-floor walls, making demolition calculations and accurate existing-condition drawings especially important.
This is why an early measured survey and permit-history review are not administrative luxuries. They can reveal whether the assumed addition strategy is viable before substantial design fees are committed.
A project described casually as “keeping three walls” should never be scheduled or priced on that description alone.
Additional Review Layers
Some Burlingame properties carry constraints beyond standard R-1 zoning and design review.
Properties in the Hillside Overlay may require a Hillside Area Construction Permit for additions, accessory structures and certain roof-elevation changes. That process provides an additional opportunity for neighboring property owners to review proposed construction.
Older homes may also warrant historic-resource due diligence. Burlingame notes that buildings approximately 50 years old or older may be considered potentially historic, although age alone does not determine historic significance. Architectural quality, association with notable people, designers or events, and contribution to neighborhood history can also be relevant.
None of these conditions automatically makes a project impossible. They do, however, change the questions that should be answered before the homeowners establish a construction date.
What a Design-Build Team Should Resolve Before Concept Approval
1. Confirm the entitlement path in writing
Before advancing the preferred design, the team should identify whether the project requires major design review, a special permit, hillside review or another discretionary approval.
The determination should be based on the actual proposed scope—not merely on the homeowner’s description of the work.
2. Prepare trustworthy existing-condition documents
Accurate floor plans, roof geometry, elevations, setbacks and wall-removal calculations are essential. Burlingame’s submittal requirements call for detailed existing and proposed drawings, and larger additions may require architectural renderings and a landscape plan. Incomplete or illegible information can delay the City’s review.
3. Test massing before detailing interiors
The team should study the addition from neighboring properties and from the street. Upper-floor setbacks, roof forms, window placement and landscape screening should be resolved before the owners authorize extensive interior detailing.
4. Design for the approval findings
A successful design-review presentation should demonstrate why the project belongs on its specific site.
That requires more than showing that the addition complies with floor-area and setback limits. The presentation should explain how the design addresses neighborhood scale, architectural compatibility, privacy, garage patterns, landscaping and the relationship between new and existing construction—the same categories the Planning Commission is directed to evaluate.
5. Separate the entitlement schedule from the construction schedule
The proposed construction start should not be based on the first planning-submittal date.
A realistic master schedule should show distinct phases for:
- Planning preparation and completeness review
- Planning comments and revisions
- Study-session scheduling
- Consultant review, when required
- Planning Commission action
- Appeal-period expiration
- Construction-document completion
- Building-plan review and corrections
- Permit issuance and mobilization
This separation is especially important when the owners are coordinating temporary housing, financing, school calendars, major material purchases or the sale of another property.
The Most Valuable Early Design Decision
For many Burlingame additions, the decisive question is not whether the house should be larger. It is where—and in what form—the additional space should be created.
A second-floor addition may preserve the backyard but create greater scrutiny around mass, privacy and architectural compatibility. A rear addition may avoid some upper-story concerns but encounter lot-coverage, setback or landscape constraints. A tall single-story volume may seem simpler but still trigger design review because of its plate height or roof configuration.
The correct solution emerges from evaluating architecture, zoning, entitlement risk, construction cost and family priorities together.
That is the advantage of a true design-build preconstruction process. Planning strategy is not handed from one consultant to another after the design is complete. It becomes one of the inputs shaping the design.
Before Comparing Construction Bids, Compare Approval Strategies
Two contractors can price the same conceptual addition while carrying very different assumptions about Planning.
One may assume a direct building-permit submission. Another may include measured drawings, design-review exhibits, Planning Commission meetings, consultant revisions, landscape documentation and several months of preconstruction coordination.
Those are not comparable proposals.
For an affluent Peninsula homeowner, the lowest initial design or preconstruction fee can become irrelevant if the project misses a construction season, extends temporary housing or requires substantial redesign after engineering has begun.
Before selecting a team, ask:
What exact design-review triggers apply to this concept?
What must happen before the project can enter building-plan review?
How many planning revision cycles are included?
Who will present the project to the Planning Commission?
What calendar allowance has been carried for hearings, revisions and the appeal period?
The strongest answer will not be a promise that approval will be easy.
It will be a clear, property-specific strategy for making the project approvable.
In Burlingame, that strategy is often what separates an addition that moves deliberately through preconstruction from one that becomes trapped between an attractive concept and an unrealistic start date.
Regulations, procedures and municipal interpretations can change. Property owners should confirm current requirements with Burlingame Planning before relying on a project schedule or proceeding with a specific design.
Rich Lee
Written by Home Pride Construction