Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03-02-1983 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
C111% Or Si uv " {iCi�\ ,A=%DA BILL NO. 40 3 DATE: March 2, 1983 D�Ac7I:�T: Community Development Initial: q� Dept. fld. SUr,Tr_Cr: Claim of B & P, Inc. for return of fees and deposits, -- - - - - -- Tract No----. 6850, Saratoga Avenue ------------------ - - - - -- -----------==---------------------- Issue S�" Ymary Use permit for condominiums expired and application for renewal was denied on appeal by the City Council. During the period that the use permit was active a final map was recorded. Inasmuch as the condominium project cannot now be built; the developer requests refund of fees. Refund of fees is ' inappropriate as long as the final map for which they were paid is still of record. Recc7r endaticn Deny request for refund until status is adequately modified. Fiscal Imcacts None .0 E:<hibits /Atta&iTcnts 1. Staff Report 2. Claim for Damages 3. 8/3/82 letter, City Manager to B. P. Hagan 4. 4 /.26,/83 letter, Director of Community Development to B. P. Hagan 5.- 4/15/82 letter, B. P. Hagan to Director of Community Development 6. 3/25/82 letter, Director of Community Development to B. P. Hagan Council Action 3./2: Mallory /Fanelli moved to deny request for refund. Passed 5 -0. k it - ��_ :,�. X11 _ � • �;� �� � CITY of SARATO GA �IFOR REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: 2 -22 -83 COUNCIL MEETING: 3-02-83 SUBJECT Claim of B & P, Inc. for return of fees and deposits, Tract ---------------------------------------------------------------------- No. 6850, Saratoga Avenue - - - - -- B & P, Inc. has requested refund of fees and deposits paid to obtain final map approval for Tract No. 6850 involving that property commonly referred to as the Teresi property on Saratoga Avenue at Bucknall. The loss of the use permit for condominiums on this property, coupled with a recorded map for condominiums, creates a complex situation. The City Attorney and I have explained to Mr. Hagan that as long as the tract map for Tract No. 6850 remains in its current recorded status, no refund of such monies is appropriate or possible. I have explained in my letter of April 26, 1982 that the appropriate action is a reversion to acreage of this map. With the reversion to its original status we will be able to return all unused fees. Mr. Hagan is in a difficult position now to pursue this course of action because he no longer controls the property and only the property owner can make the request for reversion. However, as of the last meeting with the City Attorney and me, he had not approached the owner to make such a request. RSS:cd tb-� . Robert- S. S o0 Director of Community Development ft )p r " - , , WARNING: While claims against the City of Saratoga may be submitted on the following form, if the claimant has any questions regarding his legal rights or duties, or pertaining to the manner or tulle of submitting such a claim, he should consult his own attorney. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES Pursuant to Section 910 of the Government Code of California, the following claim for dariages is respectfully submitted: 1. Name and post office address of claimant: B & P, Inc. 2270 Bay Road Redwood City, CA. 94063 2. The post office address to which claimant wishes notices to be sent: 2270 Bav Road Redwood City, CA. 9406 3. The date, place and other circumstances giving rise to the claim: Miscellaneous fees and deposits paid during July 1980 through �7?nuarr1...q- � =-r�Yl Tract tt68�'O— �- Tg�'�S� P�'G1�°rtcr nn C�r�i -nrr� Z1rcniir�� . This is a claim for refund of these fees, etc., since the City Council refused to grant the permission necessary for the project to 4. A general description of the indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or go ahead. loss incurred, so far as known to claimant: See Exhibit P. 5. The name or names of the public employee(s) causing the injury, damage or loss, as far as known to claimant: n/a 6. Amount Claimed as of date of presentation of claim, and basis of computation: See Exhibit A Dated: 1/31/83 B & P, �� / Signature Note: Claim must be signed by claimant or by some person on his behalf. (Government Code Section 910.2) SARATOGA PROJECT Storm Drain Connection Fee. . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,655.70 Park Development Fee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 26,900.00 Engineering & Inspection Fee . . . . . . . . . .$ 8,400.00 Cash Deposit Re: Improvement Contract . . . . .$ 10,000.00 Deposit to Connect Sewer to Adjacent Residence . . . $ 600.00 Fees - Letters of Credit . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 641.55 Building Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 12,750.76 subtotal: $ 65,948.01 Interest at 12% per annum for period 3/3/82 through 2/15/83. . +$ 7,566.85 Grand Total:$ 73,514.86 ` RECEIPT OFFICIAL RECEIPT 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARA7'OGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 887 -3438 7 � DATE RECEIVED FROM J - ADDRESS 2 L G FOR AMOUNT FOR AMOUNT BUSINESS LICENSE 213340 $ PROPERTY TAX $ BUILDING PERMIT 213350 $ SALES /USE TAX 213280 PLUMBING PERMIT 213360 REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER 213300 $ ELECTRICAL PERMIT 213370 s VEHICLE CODE FINES 413410 PLAN CHECK 213390 $ MOTOR VEHICLE -IN -LIEU 213430 $ SUBDIVISION / BUILDING SITE 213710 ; GAS TAX $ CONSTRUCTION /MAINTENANCE 453450 GASTAX ZONING FEES 213730 $ SPECIAL MATCHING 463460 $ STORM DRAIN FEES 873870 L - e FRANCHISE TAX $ PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES 923920 S b �C�� CIGARETTE TAX 213290 $ 3 / F0 $4 e, L)II INTEREST 213510 $ OFFICE OF rATY,CLERK NO,:-51 0 7 4 RECEIVED BY /I);- Flmoon QMOOn Bmm foby, a 6 s 8 N0 BERNARD .r. HAGAN GnDO ES_ &- HAGAh k �. 2 7 A $AY ROAD- C - RE3WIOOD 3 CITY. CAORNIA 9406'3 d� : — 5f1210 LIF ��A. vs.rr -� x+t- .n .fir- e+c += _ -?'.l ___ .'4s- a���ll•....;r' .- •t�� l� _, 4 _ lit = TUT RE —" OR1 ER -.� •tom. r -'�- .. -: - --r - Fes^^ =yrz� -!'' _ __ � ��y Y '-°" _ -c -•�. c 6. �a� dG� �` :z -'�' -�c� �'r� _ • � _ty'Z� �._�L .t- Sa.��n41�. T:C -� �"J' - -' rr _-- .�..�« -_ . � .s -cry r •� _ v � _ 1200 9RPA�!hAr - CAKCANO .:. ..d.....� '►_ -^�- �-• � _ .rte -� j - Y '^�"_�.�.- `-a-^ r - c.. -.� .i=. —r - - - � --..._ -x .,�.�._..�.,+-- .���.� '-� - pct"°" - - •� ---•�. - -m.� F �_ t" ;emu ■00 6=1�a =+ 3� ,� $' _� 9 °'� _ ITa'- -_ 1— �-� 6'6S5'7 —_ 37 . s ..... A-a. J E,�- � _ ` '>,-�. N- . ''` :.+. - `'` ="- "rte_ - - - -� -•. sa S ply►. r - - a L. "' s '�" '_ - �i�tii��. ^t. ��[ey'!/-�.v.- •—•��/ �«�_�.r.�— �• /:cam =� r.� � - Y -y" -�- � .�3 � r t° SAt2 :�.'�ClaCQ Sit° -., y ' •� - - _ - �r ".{i V /L..- • LS. '..�ar� -� G �'. -1 s. #' i� _ � � 4 � -�+a�3 B 'ARD P. HAGAGNN N2- -1617 ER N I DOLORES HAA; 22.70 BA Y .ROAD ----7e REDWOO - D CItY, CALIFOR -,--,_ V. TO THE - ORDER OF, .1200 BROADWAC a4KLAND-. Qk� -14612 r J tL � � , i' • , t tt �.' � t i 1 jl I'AY 1'n' 1 kiF< phbEfts Q�' . C` 9113591 • SARA((:GA U1 -FJCE 9Q,35yi FOR DE'PQ,SlT} (�1 iy .,IYY IF ,�- SARATbC�A ,ACcbU,lt'c'�!': Savings , 'tit 032 ©1 r6i'1� {i4J11li:i t ,4 it.'''r , r, I , •jli i it ' b� ?1 k'a' ' 'iD ;�yli`l' it • F j r F f Al 4 � 7A1 t I �,•:, J �, I is J. ,>r ,� ',i ii,, �1,�t '5, 11$x') ,��'� � ��• � it 4 • 1+ J f r Ir f I'I i'� �' • ,. 11 a �, k �' a l �'• � I w I ,, . lye ���!_ r•� ;' K ' s° NL� "'1F ,Il�•.1i{Fe4'► c2'�( lFy i p 1 1i 1 r r x { 'I� J,1 EE� , f lit, { a SIN, iiNVI,. •'J i f t i,, { i 1 If i } 1�i r I ly r r a , i t+l ITV • , i � + 1. ` 'j' - if 6'f fi OAR OF � .. TC v[s+Ua.' r.?�.ruya•�a.�er � '+c.]al+rm'� � -i _ =.�rc.�e'wC � � -��� `�. - -�' t � ol4 Itax. -BANK ,vhr - �� - s_`.T `r. c� -: y _._ —_.ee• of . ERCA� �. 4tJD�i7,'41A1bFF,Ir'r -. ���i _r.. A,. - _ � C�- � --^im�r W a"9d `� ��-sv i� . '�''�'♦ .- 1: 2Oo BRO�DNl4a' O ASD A: 84612 - - j ;ir � �41�'tl�lri, IMt �r ��r l,� iwv +, 1 ��, 1f Ir1 II ' •' i }, ��1 I ! I r= s pus, +`s qj' i; {I �9G3S9T 5A�A '! OFFICE''f 359T` 5 , O P(1 MrQN'l'�f VTT DIRIR ,WATQQAr�'��¢� r ,1461 =i4 �` 4 r i A" fr •' if I, ia.:. (IkH :�16Gj i r`..',.1��i'•( ,� r �.�ji#:"� !31 %� �, 430 1101�b Pr _(+ i��`: �T �r��y����•t 1` ;�1, •74, P�.�j1 }� r'1.:,� „l,,, yf��W,MV�J +1�4i.1 I'"�"�"T''��i(•' � . 0 ti•Jr FI 1,� I[lt , .� �tl � b A Y +,� "� ;,f+iif�i(y�L?;� } +�I�h�iF��q ail` I�yI�IA�7 /lfr}r�ti�� "rtl�f +ip� {lr���j �} 1�! „b114��r�irljri'�Syift4.'�k�gfu ,l ,a�•i I, ��.�.'s•�1 ���-- �����1 f 'o �,(�� ,if}1�1� �e�tj�hl {c��, Id 6f } 1 1 , � -� + J � f 1k � 111 1 ' �' (, � �+ �', •k' r � �„, 4 'n 4tt •� +' I} � � i) � Y gyp, -i, � �7 ��t�l,(�j( }�S�f�,'. �•C� Jl Ii., Cllr ��1111 t� �Fh, f�Vi, ,.l •, dl, r4�.l di,y 7 lrf, i }�IkI ��� rl', iti;�il� q•1,” }��Ly F ftta'`! f ',i��i ,�t } I 44 l i1 r��ltv,l� 1�' �.lir9� I�'�a �4 f �1'f i >r {tf r .t�l1i�a;':fc,e7 lir fL ' f.y 1;f / if, - �[ tl 1 11 1 } I 4, Wolf, as f6 : ;J2' , , ,I • BANK of AMERICA WORLD BANKING DIVISION SERVICE CENTER IMPORT LETTER OF CREDIT TO: HAGAN CONSTRUCTION CO 2270 BAY ROAD REDWOOD CITY9 CA 94063 LC NUN ISSUED CURRENT AMOUNT 101957 07/10/80 S34v00C.00 DATE: 04/09/82 PRCT EXPIRY DATE 100000 07/01/82 BILLING FROM 04/09/82 THRU 07/01/82 = 84 DAYS COMMISSION DUE OTHER CHARGES TOTAL $79.33 OeOC S79e33 �!1 r4 , YOUR ACCOUNT HAS BEEN DEBITECe t ) PLEASE REMIT CHECK PAYABLE TO: BANK OF AMERICA NT E SA OAKLAND MAIN OFFICE -;0251 r PLEASE DIRECT ALL QUESTIONS TO YOUR LOCAL CREDIT OFFICERe BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS ASSOCIATION • BOX 37020 • SAN FRANCISCO. CA. 94137 39e67 Ci BANK OF AMERICA . al WORLD BANKING DIVISION SERVICE CENTER IMPORT LETTER OF CREDIT- TO: HAGAN CONSTRUCTION CO 2270 SAY ROAD kEDMOOD CITY• CA 94063 LC NUM ISSUED 101912 07/02/80 CURRENT AMOUNT S 115* 000.00 DATE: 04/01/82 PRCT EXPIRY DATE 100000 07/01/82 BILLING FROM 04/01/82 THRU 07/01/82 = 92 DAYS COMMISSION DUE 1293.89 OTHER CHARGES 0000 _______ G .T71L $293.89 D' G c � U v ( ) YOUR ACCOUNT HAS BEEN DEBITED. t 1 PLEASE REMIT CHECK PAYABLE TO: BANK OF AMERICA NT E SA OAKLAND MAIN OFFICE 00251 PLEASE DIRECT ALL QUESTIONS TO YOUR LOCAL CREDIT OFFICER. BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS ASSOCIATION • BOX 37020 • SAN FRANCISCO. CA. 94137 146.95 O1 BANK of AMERICA WORLD BANKING DIVISION SERVICE CENTER IMPORT LETTER OF CREDIT TO: HAGAN CONSTRUCTION CO 2270 BAY ROAD REDWOOD CITY* CA 94063 DATE: 04/01/82• LC NUM ISSUED CURRENT AMOUNT PRCT EXPIRY DATE 101911 07/02/60 51059000000 100000 07101182 BILLING FROM 04/01/82 THRU 07/01/82 = 92 DAYS COMMISSION DUE $268.33 OTHER CHARGES 0000 <\�n ----- - - - - -- i ,UTAL $268.33 c { ).YOUR ACCOUNT HAS BEEN DEBITED. { ) PLEASE REMIT CHECK PAYABLE TO:. BANK OF AMERICA NT E SA OAKLAND MAIN OFFICE 90251 PLEASE DIRECT ALL QUESTIONS TO YOUR LOCAL CREDIT OFFICER. BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS ASSOCIATION • BOX 37020 • SAN FRANCISCO, CA. 94137 134.17 01 THE CITY OF SARATOGA _ J. Wayne Dernetz City Manager August 3, 1982 Mr. B. P. Hagan, President ` Hagan Development Company 2270 Bay Road Redwood City, CA 94063 Re: Saratoga Avenue and Bucknall Road Project Dear Mr. Hagan: I have received your letter of July 29 in which you ask that r reconsider your request for a,refund of the Park Development fees paid on the above project. The Park Development fees in the amount of $26,.9100 were charged for final subdivision approval in accordance with Section 13.8 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance (See attached final approval checklist.) There is no fee attached to the Conditional Use Permit except a processing fee. Therefore, all the fees noted on the final approval checklist attach to the subdivision, and the only way to obtain a refund of any unused portion of those fees is by reversion of the subdivision to acreage. Sincerely, Wa` e Dernet ck CC: City Councilmembers ,4�. S. Shook 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE, SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 R ��o 0�1 ogu,ff Qo O&M�&190)0& 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE. - SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 April 26, 1982 Mr. Bernard P. Hagan, President Hagan Development Company 2270 Bay Road Redwood City, CA 94063 Dear Mr. Hagan: I am in receipt of your letter of April 1S, 1982 concerning building permit fees and other fees relative to Tract 6850. Your letter suggests that this office should have notified you prior to the expiration of the 180 -day period following the payment of fees for building permits, and therefore should refund the building permit fees. Let me clarify that it is not the City's responsibility to track on these permits or notify applicants of expiring time limitations. Therefore, I must refer you to my previous letter indicating the restriction placed on the Building Official by the Uniform Building Code. Regarding your request for refund of all fees paid to the City of Saratoga on Tract 6850, it will be necessary for you to file a reversion to acreage on this subdivision if you wish to have these fees returned and letters of credit released, etc. Should you make auch a request and the City Council holds the appropriate hearings and reverts this subdivision to acreage, we will be in a position to refund the unused portion of the checking and inspec- tion fees, along with the unused portion of all other fees. Reversion to acreage can be instituted by your request and sub- mission of a reversion to acreage map prepared by your engineer. The procedure requires only a public hearing before the City Council. Should you have any questions relative to this procedure, do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, o ert ok Director of Community Development RSS:cd � r HAGAN DEVELOPMENT State License #240064 COMPANY 2270 Bay Road, Redwood City, California 94063 • Phone: (415) 367 -8555 DEVELOPERS & GENERAL CONTRACTORS April 15, 1982 Mr. Robert Shook Director Environmental Planning Town of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA. 95070 Dear Mr. Shook: 'APR 191982 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT In response to your letter to me of March 25th, you should recall that you denied our claim that we had com- menced construction during the 180 day period following the fee payment. Your denial did not come until after the 180 day period expired, rendering us unable to file a timely claim. Consequently we again renew our request for a full refund of our permit fees. Please also consider this letter a request for all fees paid to the City of Saratoga on Tract 6850. Since there are provisions in the code for refunds to be made in timely fashion, we therefore make such a request. It is still possible that we will request the City Council to approve a subdivision at Tract 6850, but that will be done later. BPH:llr Yours truly, r Bernard P. Hagan President j 6&aIC4 10�� March 2S, 1982 Mr. Bernard P. Hagan 2270 Bay Road Redwood City, CA 94063 Dear Mr. Hagan: Reference is made to your letter of February 24, 1982 requesting the refund of building permit, Enclosed for your information is a copy of Section 304 of the Uniform Building Code. I direct your attention to the last paragraph of that section which prohibits the Building Official from authorizing the refund of any fee paid except upon written application filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of the fee payment. I therefore find no way to comply with your request that the permit fee be refunded. Sincerely yours, Robert S. Shook Director of Community Development RSS:cd Enclosure cc: City Attorney v CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO: Initial: Dept. Head DATE: March 2, 1983 City Atty DEPARTMENT: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Maintenance City - - - - -- Mgr SUBJECT: Final Payment - Mt. Eden Road Culvert Issue Summar The emergency project to install a new culvert on Mt. Eden Road has been completed. The Agreement called for a unit price of $368 per cubic yard of in -place sacked concrete riprap. We had estimates the need for 30 cubic yards, but in order to properly complete the project, 35 cubic yards were actually used. Recommendation 1. Approve Contract Change Order # 1 (Final) 2. Adopt Resolution Appropriating $1,840 to cover the over -run 3. Approve final payment to Contractor Fiscal Impact The additional $1,840 will come from the Storm Drainage Fund. A++nrhmpn +c 1. Invoice dated February 15, 1983 2. Resolution appropriating additional funds 3. Contract Change Order #1 (Final) Council Action 3/2: Mallory /Fanelli moved to approval Change Order #1, final payment, and appropriations adjustment for work by resolution No. 1099.13. Passed 5 -0. 1_ Form No. CITY OF SARATOGA CALIFORNIA CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER C PROJECT: MT. EDEN ROAD CULVERT , CONTRACTOR: GLAGE UNDERGROUND CONTRUCTION RE.'. 027 . CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 (Final) DATE: February 23, 1983 DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE: Increase in the quantity of sacked concrete riprap from 30 cubic yards called for in the Contract to 35 cubic.yards.installed. FOR CHANGE: The increase was needed to properly complete the outfall structure. =ME CHANGE: N/A COST OF CHAr1GE: $ 5 cubic yards at $368 = $1,840 APPROVED: See Attached Bill Contractor APPROVED COPY TO: Engineer of work Inspector Bond Counsel RECOMMENDED: DIRECTOR OF Maintenance.. APPROVED: �r M GLAGE UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION, INC. 1116 DELL AVENUE - P. O. BOX 961 CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008 Phone 379 -3010 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave, Saratoga, California. 95070 L J INVOICE LICENSE #271492 DATE February 15, 1983 DATE CHARGES CREDIT BALANCE Install Approximately 55 l.f. of 60" CX.P. with rip rap out fall structure P. 0. #14765 Lump Sum $35,010.00 Additional: 5 Cu Yds Concrete Sacked rip rap @ $368.00 per cubic yard $1,840.00 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE $36.850.0( i i I ACCOUNTS DUE 1st OF MONTH FOLLOWING PURCHASE AND PAYABLE BY THE 10th. OVERDUE ACCOUNTS SUBJECT TO SERVICE CHARGE OF 1 %2% PER MONTH PAY LAST AMOUNT IN THIS COLUMN C11% Or Si uu`iiC�\ AG MA BILL NO. SOS DATE: March 2, 1983 Community Development Initial.: Dept. Fki. ' A SUBJECT: A -847 Ernest and Mi.gnona Westbrook, 14689.Aloha Ave. Issue Sc^tmary Applicant has requested Design Review Approval to construct'a two -story single family dwelling. A condition was included with the subdivision in which the site is located which stated that "one -story design shall be encouraged Neighborhood concern has been expressed regarding the compati- bility of a two -story structure in the neighborhood. The Planning Commis- sion voted 4 -2 to deny design review for two -story structure on this lot. Recc=endaticn 1. Conduct a public hearing on the appeal. 2. Determine the merits of the appeal and approve or deny. 3. Staff-recommended approval of the design review to the planning'Commis- sion. Fiscal Im=acts None noted. E-<h i b i is /A ttach.^ren is I. Letter of Appeal 2. Staff Report dated 1/4/83 3. Subdivision Staff Report, page 3, dated 4/1/81 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated 1/26/83 S. Land Development Committee Minutes dated 4/x/81 6. Exhibits. B' and C 7. -Correspondence received on the project. Council Action 3/2: Moyles. /Clevenger moved to deny appeal. Passed 5 -0. Date i�eceivei: ` �E3 Q i.`�93 Hearing Date: COMMUNirl DEVEL OP-NIENT Fee Q� CITY USE ONLY APPEAL APPLICATION Name of Appellant: Ernest Westbrook Address: 5012 Adair Way, San Jose, Ca. Telephone: 356 -5274 Name of Applicant: Ernest Westbrook Project File No.: A-847 Project Address: 14689 Aloha. Ave. Project Description: Single family residence Decision Being Appealed: Design Review THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF :`.",THE DATE OF THE DECIS ON. February 2, 1983 City of Saratoga City Council 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 RE: Design Review Approval Appeal, Application A -847 Dear Members of the City Council: We feel that the proposed structure is compatible with the surrounding dwellings and that we were denied approval because of some unfounded fears of a few neighbors. There are other two -story structures in the neighborhood that do not look out of place or obtrusive. Also there are two huge evergreen oaks (60 -100 feet tall) located behind the proposed structure which will provide a wonderful backdrop and blend the structure into its surroundings. The neighbors fear that we will be able to see into their back yards. This will be physically impossible because of the distance of most of their homes and also because we intend to plant tall - growing evergreen shrubbery in our side yards, (as recommended in the staff report dated January 14, 1983). The neighbors also seem to think that a two -story home will block their view. The proposed home will not block their view to any greater extent than a one story home since a one story home would be located closer to the front property line. Please see attached drawing. We have closely followed all of your requirements and hope that you will follow the recommendation of the staff report signed by Sharon Lester, dated January 14, 1983, and grant us Design Review Approval. Respectfully Yours, Ernest Westbrook c/�M�ignona West(bbroo��k�`J� /� 15386 TAMSON COURT MONTE SERENO, CALIF. 95030 1 -29 -83 T r D EV EL C.,'; ult E ['-1 We the neighbors located within 500 feet of the build - site; do hereby give our consent for a two -story single family dwelling to.be built at 14689 Aloha Street, Saratoga. The plans for this dwelling have previously been approved by the staff of the Design Review. Date: Address: Signature: r ZI/ .4 t(_7 L12 '�Vrall7w 1 7 , ( t REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: :1/14/83 Commission Meeting: 1/26/83 SUBJECT' A -847 Ernest & Mignona Westbrook, 14689 Aloha ---------------------------------------------------- REQUEST: Design Review approval to construct a two -story single family dwelling. OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED: None PLANNING DATA: PARCEL SIZE: 15,000 sq. ft. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential ZONING: R -1- 15,000 NOTICING: Notice of this project has been sent to property owners within 500 feet, posted on site and advertised in the Saratoga News. SITE DATA: SURROUNDING LAND USES: SITE SLOPE: 30 Single family residential SLOPE AT BUILDING SITE: 3% NATURAL FEATURES & VEGETATION: The site contains grasses and shrubs. and a 34" diameter evergreen oak to the rear of the property. PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS: HISTORY: This site is part of a 4 lot subdivision (SDR- 1487). This is the first lot to be developed. GRADING REQUIRED: Minimal grading is required. SETBACKS: Front -38' Rightside -12' Left side -12' Rear -63' Report to the PiCning Commission Page 2 A -847 1/14/83 HEIGHT: 30' maximum SIZE OF STRUCTURE: 1st floor: 2,754 sq. ft. 2nd floor 1,475 sq. ft. FLOOR AREA: Total: 4,229 sq. ft. 4,300 sq. ft. is allowed by ordinance standards. This project meets ordinance. requirements. IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE: 29%, 50% is allowed by ordinance requirements COLORS & MATERIALS: exterior: brick, white stucco and wood trim roofing: wood shingles SOLAR: Poor orientation, a minimal amount of roof area faces south. LANDSCAPING: A conceptual landscaping plan has been provided by the applicant. Staff has discussed this plan with the applicant and pointed out that the proposed gazebo to the rear does not meet set- backs and would also require use permit approval. FTMnTN(_C • 1. Avoid Unreasonable Interference with Views & Privacy Presently, neither parcel on either side of the proposed structure is developed. Staff suggests (condition 1) that if this project is approved, evergreen trees, and tall - growing shrubbery be added to the landscaping in the side yards adjacent to the house. 2. Preserve Natural Landscape The natural landscape of the site will not be significantly altered by this proposal. No ordinance -sized trees will be removed. 3 & 4. Minimize Perception of Excessive Bulk and Compatible Bulk & Height Contained in the subdivision staff report is a condition which was added at the Land Development Committee meeting on 4/2/81, it states: "Design Review approval required for each structure, Single -story structures shall be encouraged." Staff feels the proposed structure is compatible with the surrounding dwellings. The neighborhood contains primarily one story structures to the south and across the street, and two story structures to the north toward Saratoga -Los Gatos Road. Therefore, the area is not predominately one -story in design. Staff feels the Tudor -like style of the proposed structure is compatible with surrounding structures. Also, located behind the proposed structures ale two evergreen oaks, (60- in height on the subject site, 100'- in height across.the property line) which help blend the structure in with its surroundings. Other tall (60' -100') redwoods and oaks are located on surrounding parcels. Report to the Planning Commission Page 3 A -847 1/14/83 5. Current Grading & Erosion Control Standards The proposed site development plan incorporates current grading standards used by the City of Saratoga. 6. Preserve Natural Landsca There is no change in contour proposed with this project as the site is almost level, and no trees are proposed to be removed. RECOMMENDATION: Approve per staff report dated 1/14/83 and Exhibits "B" and "C" subject to the following condition: A. Prior to issuance of building permits the applicant shall: 1. Submit to the Permit Review Division for review and approval and a revised landscaping plan which includes 3 -4 evergreen trees along the side property lines adjacent to the structure. The plan shall also include tall. growing evergreen shrubbery along these sides. Approved: SL /bc P.C. Agenda 1/26/83 1UU,1 Sharon Lester Planner .i . , i Staff Report � 4/1/81 SDK -1487 Page 3 VI. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT A. Sewage disposal to be provided by sanitary sewers installed and connected by the developer to one of the existing trunk sewers of the Sanitation District No. 4. Prior to final approval, an adequate bond shall be posted with said district to assure completion of sewers as planned. B. Domestic water to be provided by San Jose Water Works. VII. —SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT A. Applicant shall, prior to Final Map Approval, submit plans showing the location and intended use of any existing wells to the Santa Clara Valley Water District for review and certification. VIII. SPECIFIC cnNT)T'TTnmg - PT ANINTTNTr _nVDAD- PX=ATT A. Design Review approval required for each structure. ,structures shall be encouraged. g IX. COMMENTS Single story A. Tree removal prohibited unless in accord with applicable City Ordinances. Kathy /Kerdu� A /ssistant Planner KK /clh LDC Agenda: 4/2/81 Planning Commission r Page 7 Meeting Minutes 1/26/83 A -845 and V -602 (cont.) design of the home, was noted. Nancy Olsen House, 13223 P ero Court, stated that some of the concerns re the swale and the tree have been answered. Mr. Heiss clarified for her that no excavation of the nose of he creek bend will be done. , He,explained that there will be a series of piers for the de to avoid the roots of the large oak tree. Mrs. House expressed addition concerns regarding the size of the house, since the buildable area is ve small, and also that.the house is located too close to the creek in the ne plan. Jim Lally, 13245 Padero Court, sta that there should be no variances to the NHR Ordinance for this developm nted , since there are a number of ways that a home can be built that is con istent with the style of the neighborhood and ordinance. William Kohler, 21842 Via Regina, Pr esi ent of the Pierce Canyon Homeowners Association, stated that he felt the Co mission should have a study session on this matter and listed the following oncerns: (1) It is not conforming with neighborhood, since there are no two story homes there; (2) It is dangerous to build up to the creek; (3) th size of the lot. It was explained that this is a lot of record and was subdi 'ded before the Initiative. There was a consensus that the major issues re design, size and compatibility with the lot. It was directed that this matt %e be .continued to a study ses- sion on February 1, 1983 and the regular meeti on February 9, 1983. It was suggested to the applicant that he come bac with some other alternatives. Commissioner Crowther requested Staff to supply formation as to what would be required under the NHR Ordinance, to give some idea what the maximum size should be. Staff indicated that NHR requires 3.9 cres for a single house on a to i, 310 slope. 6. A-847 Ernest Westbrook, 14689 Aloha Avenue, Request for Design Review Approval to locate a two-story single family dwelling The proposal was described by Staff. The public hearing was opened at 10:55 p.m. Roger Kohler, the architect, spoke on the project and appeared to answer any questions. Tony Pozos,14704 Aloha, stated that there are only three two -story homes on Aloha, all very close to the highway and not visible. He added that he would prefer that the Commission give a variance to build a large single story rather than a two- story. Jack Martin, 14718 Aloha, expressed his opposition to a two -story and the fear that the other vacant lots in that area would be built with two- stories. Ann Onton, 14690 Aloha, inquired about the trees on the property. Carol Kososicommented that it should be pointed out that there have been recommendations in the past that only single -story houses be constructed in that area. Hugh Brunner, Aloha Ave., spoke against the two -story design. Mr. Kohler explained that if they go to a one -story home the land will be covered up much more and they would have to come forward; with the Tudor roof pitch the impact would probably be more than this design. He indicated that they would be willing to set the house 10 or 15 ft. back to lessen the impact of the two -story house on the street. The landscaping plans were dis- cussed. It was noted that in the original SDR approval it was stated that single story structures shall be encouraged. Staff stated that the Staff has reviewed this application and concluded that this particular design will be compatible with the neighborhood. Kay Crawford, 14711 Aloha, indicated that when they were going to add on to their home they considered a two -story design, but decided against it after talking to the neighbors. Commissioner Nellis stated that he agreed that the character of the neighbor- hood is single -story dwellings and he feels that it should be preserved. fie 7 - Z/ Planning Commission C 'Meeting Minutes 1/26/83 Page 8 A -847 (cont.) indicated that he could not make the findings regarding the excessive bulk and compatibility with the neighborhood. Commissioner Crowther agreed that he could not make the findings, stating that he would like to stay consistent with the tentative map approval. Commissioner Siegfried moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Hlava seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Commissioner Siegfried stated that he questions the bulk; however, he does not know that the answer is necessarily no two- story. He added that he is not sure that a large single story home is always the best alternative. Commissioner Hlava stated that, even though she was not on the Commission at the time, there was a commitment made that the Commission is going to encourage single story homes and she feels that should be followed. She indicated that she could not make the findings, and that a two -story will stick out in the area. Commissioner Crowther moved to deny A -847. Commissioner Nellis seconded the motion. Commissioner Schaefer stated that she lives in a neighborhood where there is a mixture of different types of homes; yet she understands the total desire for privacy. She commented that she will vote against the motion, only because she feels that perhaps with greater setbacks this could have been worked through in a study session. The vote was taken on the motion. The motion was carried 4 -2, with Commis- sioners Schaefer and Siegfried dissenting. The applicant was encouraged to work with the neighbors, to take a look at the setbacks and some different options. The 10 -day appeal period was noted. 7. A -848 - M. C. Johnson, arcel A, Tract 6526, Parker Ranch Road, Request for Design Revi w Approval to construct a one -story single family design Staff discussed the proposal. The public hearing was opened at 11:20 p.m. Bud Johnson, the applicant, sp ke to the application. It was noted that the location map was incorrect. Co missioner Crowther commented that he apparently had looked at the site marked o the map and asked that this matter be con- tinued so he could look at the p oper site. Discussion followed on the white color used, rather than earth ton s, as others in the subdivision. There was a consensus to add a condition to equire it to conform to earth tones. Commissioner Hlava moved to close t e public hearing. Commissioner Bolger seconded the motion, which was carri d unanimously. There was a consensus to continue the item to the Consent Calendar for the meeting of February 9, 1983, to allow iewing of the proper site. 8. A -849 - William Belote, 12414 De Sa ka Avenue, Request for Design Review Approval to construct a seco d -story addition to a one -story single family dwelling It was directed that this matter be contin'�ed to February 23, 1983. 9a. A -851 - Michael Mauldin, Bohlman Road, Request for Site Modification to 9b. V -603 - modify a front yard setback an Design Review and Variance Approv- al to construct a two -story sin le family dwelling on a site of over 30% in slope The Land Use Committee gave a report on the on site visit. The public hearing was opened at 11:30 p.m. Bob Schwenke, the designer, concurred with the taff Report. He commented that he felt they had addressed the questions th t the Planning Commission had last year with the larger home. Commissioner Siegfried moved to close the public earing. Commissioner Hlava seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously` - 8 - \ Y-0061.1' LAND DEVELOPMENT COMM'IT'TEE MINUTES DATE: Thursday, April 2, 1981 - 10:00 a.m. PLACE: Crisp Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ROUTINE ORGANIZATION A. Roll Call Committee Members Present: R. S. Robinson, Commissioner Laden and R. S. Shook- Staff Members Present: K. Kordus, 11. 'rrinidad and R. Harison B. Minutes It was moved and seconded to waive the reading of the minutes of March 5, 1981 and approve as distributed. The motion was carried unanimously. II. SINGLE SITE APPROVAL A..SDR -1491 - Dean and Susan Nowacki, Glenmont, Tentative Building - - - - -- -Site Approval - 1 Lot, Over SO% Expansion Mrs. Nowacki was present for the discussion. Staff explained that the applicants were requesting Tentative Building Site Approval since they wore expanding their house over Soo. A use permit for the second story was not required, since the lot in question has a slope over 10,,. The major concern on the conditioning related to the eater requirement for 1,000 GPM for two hours, ::,hich might not be available within SOO' of the Nowacki house. Mr. Shook also indicated that the Council had discussed an urgency ordinance, relating to height, at their meeting the night before, that might impact the proposed Nowacki plans. He explained to Mrs. Nowacki that their action today was only on the tentative map and not on the proposed structure. Staff also indicated that the conditions needed to be modified to delete the condition for storm drain foes on the SO. expansion. After discussion with Mrs. Nowacki of the condition for water and the potential ordinance on height, it was moved and seconded to approve SDR -1491. Mr. Shook explained to Mrs. Nowacki that, if she wished to appeal any of the conditions, she needed to do so within 1S days. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS :1. SDR' 1.487 - aratoga __ -- ;uildin� Union School District, Aloha A ire nuc, - tentative Site Anprovald Lots = and Negative Declaration Staff explained that the School District was proposing to divide their property into four lots, one parcel being 7.3 acres and the other three hero- 15,000 sq. ft. or greater. It was noted that the City Council had amended the General Plan to shoe this as residcn- tial Cleve lopment, .is proposed, The LDC reviewed the square footage Of the lots proposed and determined that they Would he, as required, IS,000 sq. ft. minimum. The public hearing was Opened at 10:30 a.m. Warren Ileid, nrrltitect, questioned the necessity for a condition requiring sin;;le -story designs. The LDC, after, nothing that a puhlic. hearing was required at this time, revised Condition VIlf -:\, to road: " Design Review required Nor each structure, with single story structures heing encour;igcd." Ei . D FEB 0 6 1983 January 31, 1983 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Dear Neighbor: The vacant property owned by the school district on Aloha has been subdivided and one of the lots sold to Mr. Westbrook, who would like to build a.two -story Tudor style house on it of approximately 4200 square feet. The proposed structure would be about 29 feet high on a lot that is about 7 feet higher than the lots across the street. Last Wednesday the Saratoga Planning Commission denied permission for the two -story house after hearing from both Mr. Westbrook and his architect and a number of neighbors adjacent to the subject property. Planning Commission approval was required because most of the neighborhood lots are already developed and to conform with the conditions established by the Land Development Committee when the school property was subdivided on April 2, 1981 stating that: "Design Review approval required for each structure, single story structures shall be encouraged." Mr. Westbrook advises that he will appeal the denial to the City Council, so a number of us who believe that the character of the neighborhood will be damaged by such a high structure are organizing an effort to present our opinions and beliefs to the City Council at the required public hearing which will be scheduled for some date during the next three weeks. While we respect Mr. Westbrook's right to build on the lot, and believe his design to be pleasant if not beautiful, we also believe that a large house more than 30 feet higher than the street level would be inconsistent with the neighborhood and an exception to the generally sound policy that new construc- tion in the area be one story. Roof heights on Aloha now average.15 1/2 feet. In the interests of fairness and good relations with a prospective neighbor, we have consulted a developer and are arranging to retain an architect to review the construction plans and give expert opinion on the house's suitabil- ity, for the neighborhood. Unless we are advised that our "lay" conclusions are incorrect, we plan _to proceed with opposing a two -story home on that lot. Our purposes in writing are just to inform you of this development, our plans, and to ask you to refrain from signing any petitions until we are able to present our beliefs and facts to you for your consideration. While we believe that we are writing for at least 6 other Aloha families, we have not signed their names since we believed it better to get this letter to you today than to delay for the extra day that would be required to secure their signatures. Our next note will have all the names. Cordially, S Caryl Tony Po s 14704 Aloha Avenue (408) 741 -0400 eA.X4k P#- 7 • PETITION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned neighbors, either within 500 feet of or within the immediate environs of 14689 Aloha Avenue, respectfully petition that the Planning Commission's decision denying approval for the construction of a two story house at the foregoing address be upheld. nature Sia Address ' MM11 Date 4 I • /,: d - .3/2-/93 PETITION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned neighbors, either within 500 feet of or within the immediate environs of 14689 Aloha Avenue, respectfully petition that the Planning Commission's decision denying approval for the construction of a two story house at the foregoing address be upheld. Signature Address Date •. 141 Va&,tl i� r�OJ,4WD E-3 r � i 1, PETITION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned neighbors, either within 500 feet of or within the immediate environs of 14689 Aloha Avenue, respectfully petition that the Planning Commission's decision denying approval for the construction of a two story house at the foregoing address be upheld. Signature Address Date 7;� Z- r te M C • PETITION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned neighbors, either within 500 feet of or within the Immediate environs of 14689 Aloha Avenue, respectfully petition that the Planning Commission's decision denying approval for the construction of a two story house at the foregoing address be upheld. Signature Address Date () �9ara 02.1 #h , • • PETITION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned neighbors, either within 500 feet of or within the Immediate environs of 14689 Aloha Avenue, respectfully petition that the Planning Commission's decision denying approval for the construction of a two story house at the foregoing address be upheld. Signature Address Date A / 1 //71/0 1 e �c %1 4 -C— �2 �3 -7 QJr /�7.3L i PETITION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned neighbors, either within 500 feet of or within the immediate environs of 14689 Aloha Avenue, respectfully petition that the Planning Commission's decision denying approval for the construction of a two story house at the foregoing address be upheld. Signpture A • Address Date 212 Y2-.' c3 � 8-s- �-ZZ-�3 72-- -z �� �9 2/ >3 03 • PETITION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned neighbors, either within 500 feet of or within the immediate environs of 14689 Aloha Avenue, respectfully petition that the Planning Commission's decision denying approval for the construction of a two story house at the foregoing address be upheld. Signature Address Date PETITION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned neighbors, either within 500 feet of or within the immediate environs of 14689 Aloha Avenue, respectfully petition that the Planning Commission's decision denying approval for the construction of a two story house at the foregoing address be upheld. Signature Address Date 17,E FEB 2 4 1983 February 23, 1983 Members of the City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Re: Appeal of Denial of Design Review Approval to locate a two -story single family dwelling at Aloha Avenue near Forest Hill Drive in the R -1 -1500 zoning district. Dear Council Members: On behalf of ourselves and other owners and residents within the immediate neighborhood of the proposed two -story structure at 14689 Aloha Avenue, we respectfully request that the Planning Commission's denial be upheld. After meeting with the appellant, the neighbors, a contractor, and an architect who is familiar with the neighborhood, the proposed structure, and practices in Saratoga, we have con- cluded that a two -story house on this property is absolutely inconsistent with the neighborhood for the following reasons: • The neighborhood is overwhelmingly comprised of single -story residences. • The proposed roof height of 29 feet is almost double the average Aloha roof height of 15 1/2 feet. • The proposed structure would be built on a lot that is about 7 feet higher than the lots across the street. • The few other two -story houses on Aloha are sited very unobtrusively towards the bottom of the street, with much smaller mass or quadruple the set back proposed for this structure. • The proposed structure's height, mass and bulk would cause it to overwhelm the character of an already almost completely developed neighborhood, that is comprised of much smaller, lower residences. • Our neighborhood's asthetic qualities would be irreparably damaged by this proposed structure. February 23, 1983 Page 2 We honestly do not fear that the appellant will be able to see into our backyards, as stated in his letter of appeal, since some compromises are necessary in any neighborhood, but we do strongly believe that such a high, massive, and bulky structure will change for the worse, our otherwise pleasant Saratoga neighborhood and-possibly even diminish the values of our properties. We have carefully and thoughtfully evaluated this proposal with the help of expert counsel and ask that you: 1. Allow us 5 minutes at your hearing for our presentation; 2. Receive the petition at the hearing signed by numerous neighbors who oppose this structure, and 3. Uphold the denial of the Planning Commission. For your information prior to the hearing, we have enclosed copies of letters sent to the appellant and to the neighbors. Sincerely, The Antonidies 14732 Aloha 867 -2367 The Martins 14718 Aloha 867 -3928 The Yrunners 14662 Aloha 867 -9683 &AI�4 Y The 45ozos 14704 Aloha 741 -0400 Q14 aka Vic` The raawf ords 14711 Aloha 867 -2602 January 31, 1983 Dear Neighbor: The vacant property owned by the school district on Aloha has been subdivided and one of the lots sold to Mr. Westbrook, who would like to build a two -story Tudor style house on it of approximately 4200 square feet. The proposed structure would be about 29 feet high on a lot that is about 7 feet higher than the lots across the street. Last Wednesday.the Saratoga Planning Commission denied permission for the two -story house after hearing from both Mr. Westbrook and his architect and a number of neighbors adjacent to the subject property. Planning Commission approval was required because most of the neighborhood lots are already developed and to conform with the conditions established by the Land Development Committee when the school property was subdivided on April 2, 1981 stating that: "Design Review approval required for each structure, single story structures shall be encouraged." Mr. Westbrook advises that he will appeal the denial to the City Council, so a number of us who believe that the character of the neighborhood will be damaged by such a high structure are organizing an.effort to present our opinions and beliefs to the City Council at the required public hearing which will be scheduled for some date during the next three weeks. While we respect Mr. Westbrook's right to build on the lot, and believe his design to be pleasant if not beautiful, we also believe that a large house more than 30 feet higher than the street level would be inconsistent with the neighborhood and an exception to the generally sound policy that new construc- tion in the area be one story. Roof heights on Aloha now average 15 1/2 feet. In the interests of fairness and good relations with a prospective neighbor, we have consulted a developer and are arranging to retain an architect to review the construction plans and give expert opinion on the house's suitabil- ity for the neighborhood. Unless we are advised that our "lay" conclusions are incorrect, we plan to proceed with opposing a two -story home on that lot. Our purposes in writing are just to inform you of this development, our plans, and to ask you to refrain from signing any petitions until we are able-to present our beliefs and facts to you for your consideration. While we believe that we are writing for at least 6 other Aloha families, we have not signed their names since we believed it better to get this letter to you today than to delay for the extra day that would be required to secure their signatures. Our next note will have all the names. Cordially, .e� Caryl nd To Po s 14704 Aloha Avenue (408) 741 -0400 February 10, 1983 Mr. Ernest Westbrook 5012 Adair Way San Jose, CA 95124 Dear Mr. Westbrook: As mentioned earlier, we, a group of your prospective neighbors on Aloha, planned to secure the advice of expert counsel prior to taking a position on your appeal of the Planning Commission's decision denying approval for the construction of a large two story home at 14689 Aloha Avenue. We chose this approach in the interests of desiring to establish and maintain good relations with a prospective neighbor and to be satisfied that our conclusions were based on competent assessments of pertinent factors rather than "lay" opinion. We have consulted an architect and a builder, each of whom possess credentials, experience and competence that are recognized by their peer professionals and others in our county. In addition, each practices in Saratoga and is familiar with our neighborhood and your building plans. After carefully considering their counsel, substantial discussion among ourselves and conversations with other neighbors, we have concluded that we are opposed to the construction of a two story house in our neighborhood and will oppose the granting of a permit for such con- struction. Each of us sincerely empathizes with your desires but cannot reconcile this structure with our neighborhood. Cordially, The Antonides 14732 Aloha The Martins 14718 Aloha The Brunners The Crawfords 14662 Aloha 14711 Aloha The Pozos 14704 Aloha February 10, 1983 Dear Neighbor: During recent weeks, we have been carefully and thoughtfully evaluating the proposal that a large two story house be built on one of the three lots into which the school district's property on Aloha has been subdivided. After retaining an architect, consulting with a builder and talking with a number of other neighbors, we have concluded that such a house would be inconsistent with the character and qualities of our neighborhood. We have advised Mr. Westbrook, the owner of the lot, that while we consider his design to be pleasant, if not beautiful, that we will oppose his appeal to the City Council and ask that the Planning Commission's denial for a two story building permit be upheld. After considering the advice of expert counsel who know the city, .the . neighborhood, and the proposed house, we conclude that its bulk ( 4200 square feet) ; height (29 feet on a lot about 7 feet higher than those across the street as compared with an average Aloha roof height of about 15 -1/2 feet) would damage the continuity of the neighborhood, obstruct certain vistas, and develop the potential for other two story houses in a neighborhood that is overwhelmingly single story. While this does not exhaust the reasons for opposition, we consider these to be sufficiently objective and significant to justify our conclusion. Now that we, have come to this decision, we would like to explain our thinking to you and, if you agree, enlist: your support by signing a petition asking the City Council to uphold the Planning Commission's denial. During the next several days, we will be walking the neighborhood to talk with you and begin the other, preparations that will be necessary for our presentation before the City Council. While we don't expect that everyone will agree with us. we do hope that our facts will be convincing and that you will join us in this neighborhood project. Cordially, At�t,&�Ia I The Antonides The Bru ners The Crawfords 14732 Aloha 14662 Aloha 14711 Aloha 867 -2367 867 -9683 867 -2606 The Martin The Fyozos 14718 Aloha 14704 Aloha 867 -3928 741 -0400 February 28, 1983 Dear Neighbor: This is just a reminder that the Saratoga City Council will meet on this Wednesday, March 2nd, at the City offices at 8:00 p.m. to hear the Westbrook appeal con- cerning construction of a two -story house at 14689 Aloha Avenue. This item is scheduled as the first of those to be heard, so it should begin promptly at 8:00 p.m. at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue in Saratoga near the new Post Office. Those of us who are opposed to this particular structure believe it essential that the neighborhood opposition be personally present to voice our concerns directly to the City Council. We ask that you join us in this effort and be present for this public hearing which has the potential of changing the architectural and asthetic character of our neighborhood. T Antonidies 14732 Aloha 867 -2367 The Martins 14718 Aloha 867 -3928 The BrunnG7rs The Cr wfords 14662 Aloha 14711 Aloha 867 -9683 867 -2606 a4t&_��4 The 0ozos 14704 Aloha 741 -0400 CITY or SidZ1YVGQN AGaNDA BILL NO. 40 Initial: Dept. Hd. DATE: March 2, 1983 C. Atty. DEPI1I,=: Community Development C. Mgr. SUEJECT'Tract 6632, Montalvo Road, Gerald Butler, Release of Bonds Issue SL=ary On January 5, 1983, the City Council approved the final map for Tract 6632. Gerald Butler had provided a cash bond of $74,000 and $2000 for street improvements and -a - monument bond for the above tract. These bonds have been replaced by security bonds by United Pacific Insurance Company Faithful Performance Bond number U453066 and Monument Bond number U453067. Recoamondation -It is'therefore appropriate to release the cash bonds. Fiscal Imoacts none Evh ibits /AttachTcn is none Council Action 3J2: Approved on Consent Calendar 5 -0. V w CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL N0: _40F Initial: Dept. Head: DATE: March 2, 1983 City Atty DEPARTMENT: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Maintenance City Mgr - - - - -- SUBJECT: Diabetes Society Ninth Annual Bike -A -Thon Issue Summary The Diabetes Society of Santa Clara Valley will be holding its Ninth Annual Bike -A -Thon on May 15, 1983. They are requesting permission to use the City streets as indicated on the map attached. They are expecting about 600 people participating in this event and riding bikes from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.. Recommendation Authorize the Diabetes Society of Santa Clara Valley to use City streets for their Bike -A -Thon with the stipulation that they will provide the City with a Certificate of Insurance naming the City as an additional insured, will be responsible for coordination and payment of additional sheriff patrol if required and will be responsible for clean -up of related debris. Fiscal Impact None Exhibits /Attachments Letter requesting permission to hold Bike -A -Thon. Map of route. Council Action 3/2: Approved on Consent Calendar 5 -0. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Thomas Barbao President Richard Cherlin, M.D. First Vice President Lynn Bennion, M.D. Second Vice President Anthony P. Rowe Treasurer Eileen Brutsche Secretary John Wilcox Immediate Past President Bruce Anderson, D.D.S. Horace Campbell Manolo Diaz Monroe A. Gross, M.D. John Herman, M.D. Kenneth Johnson Robert Jolly Linda Macdonald Thomas O'Rourke Pearl Rosenthal Claude L. Shipp Ervie Smith Charles Thompson Keith Wade Peggy Yep, R.D., M.P.H. HONORARY BOARD OF DIRECTORS Frank Alvarez Walter L. Arons, M.D. Lawrence V. Basso, M.D. Samuel Cohen Doris Constenius, R.D. Honorable Rod Diridon Adrian Dronkert, M.D. Maurice Fox, M.D. Ray Hintz, M.D. Peggy Fleming Jenkins Allan Lavetter, M.D. Kathy Letterman Yaya de Luna Martinez Robert E. Perez Gerald Reaven, M.D. Paul Robbins, M.D. Ronald Shelton, M.D. James Striebel, M.D. David Walworth, M.D. John A. Walker EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Rochelle McNamara 10-11 0 February 9, 1983 Dan Trinidad 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Trinidad, I am writing on behalf of the Diabetes Society of Santa Clara Valley to get approval for the route the Diabetes Society will use for its 9th Annual Bike -A -Thon scheduled for Sunday, May 15, 1983. A map of the route is enclosed. There will be approximately 600 people partici- pating in this event, riding bikes from 8:30 AM until 4:30 PM. Please let us know if there is any reason we may not conduct this event as usual. Thznk you. BC /vm enclosure Sincerely, <. `t- ti Barbara Carey Coordinator, Bike -A -Thon \_Rh ey Q C �X ¢ oc :Kic �Q KN HOMEs-tEAZ V O. 1�1) 6> KIIIII ELCAIMINO 33L7 ELCAMINO R,AZ.(l.AVAY6'ff6)- 6.C. _ 1356 W. 3NN CARUOS �. b . —r� 10.76 W ILLOW - 3•�, 1384 CSURTNER laVel. Cpl- 1= 4�vEN.) --:AN IbMA' PLAZA CCAMPt3e L A� t 4N TbP�tA UI N0) CAMPBCCL CRLA 5AZA3 PrAPk CRAINsow� 81A N611) - 5.T. -- OAVPiON'T 5QV%A" _ COL-t4 �! i Home5'TEAO) - cuPE(?-'C1N(3 COM NO l REAL C N06t u) - t), C. 4002 Ac.rf"tA6EN LO5 PA :&-OS PARR C ;AWA -MRESA SL-VD) - 5 .?T ®� (46q CAi4ALAN (SANTA Ste. 6> KIIIII ELCAIMINO