Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-14-2004 Planning Commission PacketCITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Susie Nagpal, Linda Rodgers, Michael Schallop, Mike Uhl, Ruchi Zutshi and Chair Mohammad Garakani ABSENT: None STAFF: Planners Livingstone, Oosterhouse, 67 Vasudevan, and Minutes Clerk Shinn PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of June 23, 2004. (APPROVED 6-0-1, ZUTSHI ABSTAIN) ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regardingOral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staf f. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on July 8, 2004. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application" with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR - None PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the Public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. 1. APPLICATION #04-048 (517-13-027) PINN, 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3); -The applicant requests Design Review and Use Permit approvals to construct a 5,530 square foot two story home with a basement on a vacant lot in the Les C~teaux de Notre Dame subdivision. The applicant is seeking a Use Permit pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-12.100 because the proposed `French Country' style home will have a maximum height of 30 feet. The net lot size is 52,838 square feet and the property is zoned R-1-40,000. (LATH VASUDEVAN) (APPROVED 6-1, RODGERS OPPOSED) 2. APPLICATION #04-152 (397-28-061) -Appellant MARATHE, Site Location -13997 Alta Vista Avenue; -Appeal of an Administrative Decision to DENY a Tree Removal Permit at 13997 Alta Vista Avenue to remove a large Coast Live Oak tree. The tree in question is a 35-inch diameter 25-foot tall, mature Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) and has a canopy spread of 40-feet. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE FoR Tolvt SULLIVAN) (APPROVED 7-0) APPLICATION #04-158 (393-21-006) AT~T Wireless, 13000 Glen Brae Drive; -Request for modification of a Use Permit approval to install one 2-foot diameter microwave dish at the top of existing utility lattice tower. Use permit approval was granted in the fall of 2003 to install six panel antennas and an equipment enclosure at the location of an existing utility lattice tower near Congress Springs Park along the railroad tracks at Glen Brea Drive and Chardonnay Court. The panel antennas, equipment enclosure, and landscaping have been installed. (CHRISTY OOSTERHOUS) (APPROVED 7-0) 4. APPLICATION #04-106 - AT~T, 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road, CalTrans right-of-way at the corner of Saratoga Los Gatos Road and Fruitvale Avenue; -Request for Modification to an existing Use Permit approval to add fixtures to an existing wireless antenna system. The project is located in an R-1-40,000 zoning district. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE) (APPROVED 7-0) DIRECTORS ITEM - For your information, an appeal to the City Council has been filed for a proposed second dwelling located at 15301 Peach Hill Road. The appeal is scheduled for the August 4, 2004 City Council meeting. COMMISSION ITEMS - None COMMUNICATIONS WRITTEN - City Council Minutes from Regular Meetings on June 16, 2004 ADJOURNMENT AT 9:40 PM TO THE NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA Incompliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Ciry Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerh@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II). Certi f icate of Posting of Agenda: I, Kristin Borel, Office Specialist for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted on July 8, 2004 at the of fice of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us If you would like to receive the Agenda's via a-mail, please send your a-mail address to planning@sarato ag ca.us CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION M SITE VISIT AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 -12:00 noon PLACE: City Hall Parking Lot, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue TYPE: Site Visit Committee SITE VISITS WILL BE MADE TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR WEDNESDAY, JULY 14, 2004 ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA AGENDA 1. Application #04-106 - AT &t T Item 4 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos 2. Application #04-048 - PINN Item 1 15960 Cuvilly Way 3. Application #04-152 - MARATHE Item 2 13997 Alta Vista Avenue 4. Application #04-158 - AT Fst T Item 3 13000 Glen Brae Drive SITE VISIT COMMITTEE The Site Visit Committee is comprised of interested Planning Commission members. The committee conducts site visits to properties which are new items on the Planning Commission agenda. The site visits are held on the Tuesday preceding the Wednesday hearing, between 12:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. It is not necessary for the applicant to be present, but you are invited to join the Committee at the site visit to answer any questions, which may arise. Site visits are generally short (5 to 10 minutes) because of time constraints. Any presentations and testimony you may wish to give should be saved for the public hearing. • CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Susie Nagpal, Linda Rodgers, Michael Schallop, Mike Uhl, Ruchi Zutshi and Chair Mohammad Garakani PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of June 23, 2004. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staf f accordingly regarding Oral Communications underPlanning Commission direction to Staf j: REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on July 8, 2004. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application" with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR - None PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the Public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. 1. APPLICATION #04-048 (517-13-027) PINN, 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3); -The applicant requests Design Review and Use Permit approvals to construct a 5,530 square foot two story home with a basement on a vacant lot in the Les Chateaux de Notre Dame subdivision. The applicant is seeking a Use Permit pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-12.100 because the proposed `French Country' style home will have a maximum height of 30 feet. The net lot size is 52,838 square feet and the property is zoned R-1-40,000. (LATA VASUDEVAN) 2. APPLICATION #04-152 (397-28-061) -Appellant MARATHE, Site Location -13997 Alta Vista Avenue; -Appeal of an Administrative Decision to DENY a Tree Removal Permit at 13997 Alta Vista Avenue to remove a large Coast Live Oak tree. The tree in question is a 35-inch diameter 25-foot tall, mature Coast Live Oak (Quercus agriEolia) and has a canopy spread of 40-feet. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE FOR TOM SULLIVAN) APPLICATION #04-158 393-21-006 AT&tT Wireless 13000 Glen Brae Drive• - R ( ) equest for modification of a Use Permit approval to install one 2-foot diameter microwave dish at the top of existing utility lattice tower. Use permit approval was granted in the fall of 2003 to install six panel antennas and an equipment enclosure at the location of an existing utility lattice tower neaz Congress Springs Park along the railroad tracks at Glen Brea Drive and Chazdonnay Court. The panel antennas, equipment enclosure, and landscaping have been installed. (CHRISTY OOSTERHOUS) 4. APPLICATION #04-106 - AT&tT, 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road, CalTrans right-of--way at the corner of Saratoga Los Gatos Road and Fruitvale Avenue; -Request for Modification to an existing Use Permit approval to add fixtures to an existing wireless antenna system. The project is located in an R-1-40,000 zoning district. (JOHN LIVINGSTONE) DIRECTORS ITEM . - For your information, an appeal to the City Council has been filed for a proposed second dwelling located at 15301 Peach Hill Road. The appeal is scheduled for the August 4, 2004 City Council meeting. COMMISSION ITEMS - None COMMUNICATIONS WRITTEN - Ciry Council Minutes from Regular Meetings on June 16, 2004 ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA Incompliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerh@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II). Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Kristin Borel, Office Specialist for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted on July 8, 2004 at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location The agenda is also available on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us • If you would like to receive the Agenda's via a-mail, please send your a-mail address to planning@saratoga.ca.us o MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Garakani called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Hunter, Garakani, Nagpal, Rodgers, Schallop and Uhl (arrived at 8:10 p.m.) Absent: Commissioner Zutshi Staff: Director Tom Sullivan and Assistant Planner Ann Welsh PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of June 9, 2004. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Schallop, the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of June 9, 2004, were adopted with corrections to pages 10, 13, 16 & 20. (5-0-2; Commissioners Uhl and Zutshi were absent) ORAL COMMUNICATION There were no Oral Communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director Tom Sullivan announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on June 17, 2004. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Director Tom Sullivan announced that appeals are possible for any decision made on this Agenda by filing an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15.90.050(b). CONSENT CALENDAR There were no Consent Calendar Items. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 2 *** PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO.1 APPLICATION #04-087 (503-16-0261 BHATIA, 13228 Pierce Road: Request Design Review approval to construct a 1,739 square foot second floor addition to an existing 2,814 square foot single- story structure for a total floor area of 4,553 square feet. The height of the structure will be 24 feet, 6 inches. The gross lot area is 21.052 square feet and the parcel is zoned R-1-40,000. (ANN WELSH) Assistant Planner Ann Welsh presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review approval fora 1,739 square foot second story addition to an existing single-story structure. The first floor would increase by 98 square feet for a total residence of 4,553 square feet. • Described the proposed building height as being 24.5 feet and the existing height as 14.5 feet. The zoning is R-1-40,000 and this parcel consists of 21,052 square feet. • Stated that the proposed architectural style is Mediterranean with a front balcony feature and alow- profile front entry. • Said that the neighborhood consists of a mix of single and two-story structures in a variety of architectural styles. • Advised that this project would not interfere with views and offers a minimal perception of bulk. ' • Informed that the neighbor to the east is concerned with preserving their view shed and are asking that a tree be planted. Staff has added a Condition of Approval for that tree. • Recommended approval. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that this is a half-acre lot and questioned whether the other half is located behind. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh explained that the vacant field is part of the parcel behind this one. Commissioner Hunter asked how this parcel could consist of only 21,000 square feet when it is zoned R-1-40,000. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh explained that it is an existing non-conforming parcel, adding that there are quite a few in the City of Saratoga. Commissioner Nagpal sought clarification that the allowable square footage for this lot is equal to a 21,000 square foot lot rather than a 40,000 square foot lot. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied that the allowable square footage is based on the specific lot and not the zoning designation itself. Commissioner Rodgers said that she thought that the height of rooms above 15 feet affected the allowable footprint and asked staff if there is any square footage that is above 15 feet in height. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied no, confirming that any space over 15 feet in height would be double counted as floor area. She added that none of the cross sections show that. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 3 Commissioner Rodgers sought confirmation that none of the space has been double counted. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied no. Chair Garakani opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Thomas Lu, Project Architect: • Advised that they had taken into consideration the location of second story windows to avoid any privacy impacts. They also tried to make the house as low as possible at 24 feet, six inches, instead of the maximum allowed 26 feet. • Assured that the second story would not be visible from the neighbor's home due to existing shrubs. • Added that they feel additional screening trees along this shared property line are unnecessary and asked the Commission to reconsider that Condition of Approval. Commissioner Hunter asked staff how the decision to require story poles is made. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied that the policy, as she understands it, is that story poles are required for new two story residences or anything in the Hillside District. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that this home would be visible from Pierce Road. Director Tom Sullivan advised that it is not easy to put in story poles on an existing house. Chair Garakani pointed out that using balloons on strings at each corner is an effective means of depicting heights. Commissioner Hunter said that this home will be very visible from a major road and that she thought that story poles should be used to show the community the impacts of an addition such as this one. Director Tom Sullivan said that her point is well taken. Chair Garakani asked for the existing height of the home. Mr. Thomas Lu replied 14.5 feet. He added that this house would be visible but that there are heavy tall shrubs. Commissioner Hunter replied not from the front. Mr. Thomas Lu advised that the appearance is of a one-story home from Pierce. Commissioner Nagpal expressed concerns about the large paved area at the front and asked its purpose and proposed materials. She asked if it is for parking or access. Mr. Thomas Lu replied that they plan to utilize some kind of decorative pavement, adding that they want to have a gate at the driveway with a horseshoe turnaround. • Commissioner Rodgers expressed support for any reduction possible to the impervious area in front of the house, facing Pierce Road. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 4 Mr. Thomas Lu reported that the area is needed in order to turnaround on site as well as for parking additional cars. Chair Garakani asked Mr. Thomas Lu if he were willing to make this area pervious to allow water to drain. Mr. Thomas Lu replied yes, they could consider that request. Commissioner Rodgers asked Mr. Thomas Lu for the interior height of the living room. Mr. Thomas Lu said it goes up to the roof or to 17 feet. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh advised that, upon further review of the plans, it is evident that this area has been double counted as part of the second floor. Mr. Hans Stellrecht, 13200 Pierce Road, Saratoga: • Identified himself as the neighbor to the east. • Advised that he has resided on Pierce Road for 25 years and has seen a lot of construction in the area. • Stated that he had some concern regarding this project and looked at the proposed plans. • Added that taking into consideration that there is already another two-story home nearby, he thought it is reasonable to have atwo-story here. • Said that he is asking for a minor modification to put in a couple of trees to shield the view of this second story from his property and wants this requirement to be a provision of this project approval. • Advised that he planted a tree a couple of years ago that shields this house pretty well and that he felt that additional screening is a small concession to make. • Added that if additional trees can be planted in the right-of-way section, owned by someone else, that there might be the possibility of the Bhatia's not having to plant one in their proposed driveway area. Chair Garakani asked Mr. Hans Stellrecht if he would be willing to put in a tree next to his silk tree. Mr. Hans Stellrecht said that half of that area does not belong to him and that anything planted here would be fairly close to his house. Commissioner Hunter said that this detail could be worked out in the resolution. Mr. Hans Stellrecht: • Said that he understands the Bhatia's concerns about planting in their proposed driveway area. • Stated that if something can be worked out with his other neighbor it won't be necessary. • Reiterated that he thinks this is a simple request and he can back off from it if this additional tree becomes unnecessary. Commissioner Rodgers asked Mr. Hans Stellrecht if this house would block his views of the foothills. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 5 Mr. Hans Stellrecht replied that this was an initial concern but this house is over to the side and the impact is not a big deal. Added that if he had bought the Bhatias' house, he too would want to have a second story addition. Mr. Bhatia, Property Owner and Applicant, 13228 Pierce Road, Saratoga: • Explained that he previously resided in Cupertino and had many friends in Saratoga. • Stated that his wife was determined to find something for them in Saratoga where they could build. She found this property, where they want to build something bigger than what is there. • Said that they had no choice but to go with a second floor addition due to setback requirements and trees, etc. • Advised that he has met with Mr. Hans Stellrecht. • Stated that there are two trees near the garage already and that he does not feel it is advisable to put a big tree there due to nearby utility wires. Chair Garakani asked Mr. Bhatia if he would consider options such as Italian Cypress. Mr. Bhatia said that this is not a problem but this would not do what Mr. Hans Stellrecht wants. Chair Garakani explained that Italian Cypress grow quite tall. Commissioner Hunter stated that after this house is built, the applicant could work with Mr. Hans Stellrecht to screen his property as necessary, adding that it may be determined that additional landscape screening is not necessary. Pointed out that Mr. Hans Stellrecht has lived here many years and is being very nice. Mr. Bhatia said that he was willing if necessary screening is required. Chair Garakani asked Mr. Bhatia if he tried to speak with the third neighbor. Mr. Bhatia replied that his wife had and that this neighbor told her he is not sure what he plans to do. Commissioner Nagpal asked if it is possible this neighbor might clear out that area. Mr. Bhatia replied that he is not sure. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that the entire area between the house and the right-of-way would be paved and that some paving may have to be removed in order to plant trees. Chair Garakani asked if staff could control this issue. Director Tom Sullivan replied sure, adding that the decisions could be made at the time of framing. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Bhatia if he is willing to make the paved area pervious. Chair Garakani explained to Mr. Bhatia that pervious surfaces allow water to percolate. Mr. Bhatia said yes, he would look at that. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 6 Chair Garakani closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Rodgers said that when she was on site yesterday, it appeared as if the house would be closer to Pierce Road than she had initially thought from looking at the plan. Stated that this gives it a massive and bulky appearance that may change the character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Hunter asked staff if they agree that this house is close to Pierce Road. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied that the conceptual landscaping plan shows a good bit of shrubbery and pointed out that they are going up and not projecting any further toward Pierce Road. Commissioner Rodgers said that the added height of the second story would be visible from Pierce Road. Chair Garakani said that planting would soften the impacts. Commissioner Hunter agreed with Commissioner Rodgers' concern that this home would be prominent from Pierce Road and said that this is a good point. Director Tom Sullivan pointed out that this is an existing non-conforming lot. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the applicants had considered a different architectural look. Chair Garakani pointed out that they are building on top of an existing home. Commissioner Hunter reminded that there are a couple of Mediterranean style homes going in nearby. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh agree, saying that one in that style is under construction two lots down the street. Commissioner Nagpal reiterated that her concern is the big piece of pavement that would be visible from Pierce Road. Commissioner Hunter asked where they could park if they did not have that area. Commissioner Nagpal suggested screening along the wrought iron fence to soften the impact. Chair Garakani said that there is already some landscaping in place there. Commissioner Hunter said that Pierce Road has a lovely country feeling and that it would be nice to be able to retain some of that look. Commissioner Nagpal asked if there is a color board available. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied yes. Chair Garakani said that this area could be look at after the framing is done. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 7 Commissioner Nagpal stated that this is not a shoe horse but rather where the owners plan to turn. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh reminded that they couldn't park on the street. Chair Garakani asked if requiring athree-foot wide strip of vegetation to screen the paved area is a problem. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh said no, not as long as it does not interfere with the views to leave the driveway. Commissioner Nagpal agreed that this lot is constrained and these owners need atwo-story to be able to add on to this existing home, saying that a second story is not out of character with what is going in there recently. Commissioner Rodgers said that this neighborhood is still changing. Chair Garakani asked what kind of facade change the Commissioners would make. Commissioner Hunter asked how large the balcony is. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied that it comes out about six feet. Commissioner Nagpal suggested perhaps wrought iron instead of stone. Commissioner Hunter said that she liked it as it is. She added that they could pull back the balcony to make it less imposing. Reiterated that she wished that story poles had been installed. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh said that perhaps that issue needs to become some sort of policy. Chair Garakani asked if there would be stone on the wall. Commissioner Nagpal replied yes. Chair Garakani asked what color. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied pretty neutral. Commissioner Rodgers: • Pointed out that this is a half-acre lot and not much can be done to it. The setbacks have been reduced so the house appears larger. • Said this house is maxed out and it will look like a large house. • Stated that the house looks too large and appears bulky. Chair Garakani re-opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Ms. Karen Bhatia, Owner and Applicant, 13228 Pierce Road, Saratoga: • Reminded that the total square footage of 4,552 square feet also includes the double counted stairway and living room space. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 8 • Said that the current home is 2,200 square feet and they are adding 1,100 square feet upstairs or two rooms. • Stated that this is a small house when compared to others in the area. Commissioner Hunter asked if the footprint is the same except for the patio. Mr. Karen Bhatia replied yes. Director Tom Sullivan reported that per the Design Review Section of Code, the maximum size of floor area allowed would be 7,200 square feet. Chair Garakani: • Said that this is a constrained property as the owners cannot move toward the setbacks. • Pointed out that they are only adding two rooms with approximately 1,100 square feet. • Said that there is no issue here and any concerns can be mitigated with the planting of good trees. With that, the Bhatias will have their house and the City will have its views. Commissioner Rodgers expressed support for the idea of native trees, proposing that a big Oak tree be ` planted up front. Commissioner Nagpal suggested giving staff guidance to finalize tree placement. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Nagpal, the Planning Commission approved a Design Review request to construct a 1,739 square foot second floor addition to an existing 2,814 square foot single-story structure on property located at 13228 Pierce Road, with the following requirements: ^ Plant a screening tree for the neighbor to the east, upon consultation with the neighbor to see if it is found to be necessary once framing of the second story addition has occurred; ^ Provide landscaping along Pierce Road, using native trees; ^ Require the use of attractive pavers for the driveway and paved area at the front of the property both for drainage and appearance; by the following roll call vote: AYES: Garakani, Hunter, Nagpal, Rodgers and Schallop, NOES: None ABSENT: Uhl and Zutshi ABSTAIN: None *** Commissioner Uhl arrived at 8:10 p.m. and joined the Commission at the dais following the conclusion of Agenda Item No. 1. PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.2 APPLICATION #04-034 (397-08-091) OVERLAND DEVELOPMENT, INC., 15145 Sobey Road: Request Design Review approval to construct a 26-foot high single-story structure on a vacant lot with Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 9 an average slope of 16%. The size of the home is 5,681 squaze feet with a 845 squaze foot basement. The lot size is 46,082 squaze feet and the parcel is zoned R-1-40,000. (ANN WELSH) Assistant Planner Ann Welsh presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review approval to construct on a vacant pazcel. • Stated that the new single-story home is proposed at 26 feet in height and would include 5,681 squaze feet with an 845 squaze foot basement. • Described the lot as consisting of 46,082 square feet with access from Sobey Road through a 20- foot wide access easement. • Said that this project could be consistent with Design Review guidelines if conditions of approval aze met. • Said that neighbor concerns include issues of proximity of the gazage to an adjacent pazcel and the access easement. Commissioner Hunter questioned the proposed placement of the house and garage at angles and asked for the reasoning behind that site design. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh deferred that question to the project azchitect but said that they probably don't want to see the gazage when they drive up to the house. Commissioner Hunter asked why not place the garage at the back of the house. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied that this would interfere with a future pool site. Commissioner Na al asked how man homes the access easement serves. gP Y Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied that this issue was addressed for the previous subdivision. Reported that minutes from the public hearing consideration of the subdivision indicate that staff had recommended the widening of the paved portion of the access at the time of subdivision to 18 feet. The Planning Commission had recommended that it stay as it is, which is a 20 foot wide easement of which 14 feet is paved. Commissioner Nagpal asked if this easement is serving four lots, including this one. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied that it is a matter of interpretation. The front lot has about 90 percent of its driveway accessing directly from Sobey Road frontage. Three other lots use this easement and this would be the fourth lot to use it. Commissioner Nagpal asked clarification that a previous Planning Commission decided that the access easement served four lots and did not require widening. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied yes, correct. She added that a neighbor appealed this decision when it was made in 1983. However, Council upheld the Planning Commission's decision. She reminded that the subdivision plan shows access from Sobey Road for that pazcel. Commissioner Hunter asked what the grounds were for the appeal that occur in 1983. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 10 Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied there were a couple of issues including access for five lots and not four. Commissioner Rodgers asked who owns this access road. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh: • Advised that the access easement is 291 feet long and is owned by four different people. Mr. Coe owns a portion. Another person owns 20 feet, a third owns 200 feet and the fourth owns 50 feet. • Stated that the applicant for tonight's project had a title report that states that they have access to the 20-foot wide easement. The final recorded map shows access to Sobey Road. Commissioner Nagpal asked if there is a copy of the restatement of right-of-way. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh said that final maps don't usually have proposed building footprints on them. She added that the subdivision was approved based upon that access easement agreement. Director Tom Sullivan advised that within the City's existing Subdivision Ordinance it is made clear that conceptual architecture is not approved. Commissioner Nagpal said that it is not the architecture but rather its placement on the site that is of concern. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh said that the original location was up high on the property. One neighbor would prefer that the house not be placed where it had originally been conceptually placed on the Tentative Map. Chair Garakani asked if there is room available for the enlargement of the access road. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh said that to do so would encroach on trees, etc. Chair Garakani asked again if it is possible to enlarge to 20 feet. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied that it would be difficult as it would require the okay from the four different property owners who would lose three feet of their property. Chair Garakani said that this is an issue that should be looked into. Commissioner Nagpal said that it could be looked at as part of Design Review. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh agreed that it could be made a condition of approval. However, she spoke with Public Works and Fire staff and it is not their policy to require widening in apre-existing condition. The 14-foot wide paved access easement with two-foot shoulder is sufficient for fire access. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the authority to require expansion is available during the Design Review process. Director Tom Sullivan replied yes, the Commission could exact off-site improvements. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 11 Commissioner Rodgers asked if the Commission could impose a condition that affected non-involved • property owners. Director Tom Sullivan replied no, only on the owner before the Commission. Chair Garakani opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Mr. Michael Davis, Project Designer: • Apologized to the Commission for missing the site visit as he was called into a meeting. • Said that the design and placement of the house minimizes the impact of grading of the site. • Explained that there is a 15-foot difference from the lowest to highest point with a 10-foot rise from the garage to the house. They are tucking the house into the hillside. • Added that building higher on the lot would equal a steeper slope. • Stated that they also wanted to keep the house away from the nearest neighbor. • Pointed out that the required setback on the east side is 20 feet. They have gone to 38 feet. • Said that they have staked out the home. • Said that the placement of the home allows fire truck turnaround on site. • Explained that the access easement serves Mr. Coe, his client and two other properties. • Stated that widening the access would require tree removal and that Fire is happy with what is there. • Reminded that there are not a lot of trip counts for this access easement. • Reported that the upper neighbors to the west, Dr. and Mrs. Johnson, are concerned if the house is raised up higher on the site. • Said that they are taking out few trees and will provide screening in consultation with the Johnsons. • Said that he personally spoke with five neighbors, four in person and one over the phone. Commissioner Hunter asked for an explanation on the footprint of the house and the garage being way up front near the Stocks' property. Mr. Michael Davis replied that the placement is to limit grading. Placing elsewhere would cut into the hillside more. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that the garage would be seen from the neighbor's deck. Chair Garakani asked what other problem would occur for neighbors if the house placement were to be moved. Mr. Michael Davis replied visual impacts. He said that they would extend the landscaping. Chair Garakani asked if Mr. Michael Davis has considered both neighbors' concerns. Mr. Michael Davis said that they have considered neighbors' concerns and met with these neighbors. He said that there would be an eight-foot landscape buffer. Additionally, if the house is placed higher up the lot, it looks higher while they are tucking the house into the site where it is located. Said that their home is aFrench-country style with a steeper roof pitch. Chair Garakani suggested that this particular parcel does not support that architectural style and asked if the applicant would be willing to change his architecture. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 12 Commissioner Hunter asked if this home is for sale. Mr. Michael Davis replied yes, it is a spec home. He added that it is a stepped house with four levels to keep the house tucked in. There have been no neighbor concerns raised regarding height. Commissioner Nagpal asked if there would be geotechnical considerations if the house were moved further uphill. Mr. Michael Davis replied no, the site is good. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Michael Davis if they had considered atwo-story home with a smaller footprint. Mr. Michael Davis replied that this was considered to be out of the question for this site. Commissioner Rodgers asked if they had considered lowering the height of the structure. Mr. Michael Davis replied yes. Commissioner Rodgers asked why the client wants this specific style since they won't live in this house. Mr. Michael Davis replied that this is the style that they like. Commissioner LJhI pointed out that they have made concessions on the setbacks so that it does not appear too close to the neighbor. Mr. Michael Davis reminded that where a 20-foot setback is required, they are proposing a 38-foot setback. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh pointed out that the front setback is 30 feet, the other side is 78.6 feet and the rear is 73 feet. Commissioner Hunter asked whether the circle in front of the house is required by Fire. Mr. Michael Davis said that it is one option acceptable to Fire, the other being a hammerhead. Commissioner Rodgers asked whether a hammerhead represents a smaller area than a circular drive. Mr. Michael Davis replied yes. Commissioner Rodgers asked about tree preservation. • • Mr. Michael Davis said that they lost one additional Oak tree when the moved the house eight feet further. He added that no pool area is proposed. Chair Garakani pointed out that sports court depicted on the site plan. Sazatoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 13 • Mr. Michael Davis advised that they had to show what could be put in but that they don't plan to actually put it in themselves. An eventual owner could pursue this. Mr. Tom Coe, 15217 Sobey Road, Saratoga: • Said that he and his wife, Norma, live on the northern boundary of the subject lot. • Said he submitted a letter. • Advised that they received the public hearing notices on June 14`x. • Asked the Commission to postpone its decision. • Reported that the house number on the notice does not fit correctly in sequence with existing homes in the area and suggested that this proposal should be re-noticed as some neighbors aze unaware of the proximity to their homes due to this confusing address. • Said that the major issue is that this project will result in the over-burdening of the right-of-way to Sobey. • Said that the subdivision was appealed to Council because the access serves four lots already. This is a violation of the Subdivision Ordinance to have an access easement serve more than four parcels. • Reported that the access is substandazd right now. On trash day there is no place to put out cans. One more home would equal more cans. • Stated that this is not land locking this lot as there is an easement in place to Monte Vista. • Said that there are lots of issue and that he would like more time to prepare. Commissioner Hunter asked Mr. Tom Coe for his opinion of a one-story versus two-story home on this site. Mr. Tom Cce said that this is not an issue for him. The bulk of this house is like atwo-story already and includes considerable attic space. Said that he can appreciate the azchitectural aspects of dormers but that he had not been allowed to incorporate them into his own home's design a few yeazs ago. Commissioner Rodgers asked Mr. Tom Coe for the height of his own home. Mr. Tom Coe said that his two-story home is 26 feet tall. He pointed out that the house size proposed for the subject lot during the time of subdivision was significantly smaller that the one currently under consideration. Mr. Larry Williams, 133 Glenridge Avenue, Saratoga: • Said that he is the property owner who bought this property three yeazs ago with the cleaz understanding that he had an easement. • Stated that the neighbor, Mr. Coe, has caused problems with previous proposals. • Said that he original planned for a mega home but backed off from that to a 5,600 square foot home. • Pointed out that Mr. Coe was well aware of this pending project as he ran into the project superintendent several weeks ago and discussed the project with him. Ms. Shinku Sharma, 15211 Sobey Road, Saratoga: • Said that she moved here eight years ago and that the owner at that time explained the easement as being shazed with three neighbors. • Said that four to five years ago, this subject lot went on sale. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 14 • Said that when she received the public hearing notice, she went looking for 15145 Sobey Road and couldn't find it. She was confused with the numbering and didn't realize this property was so close • to her property. • Said that she has had no time to look at plans and that no one approached her with the plans. • Expressed concern for traffic on the access easement and pointed out that she owns the largest portion of this easement. • Said that she would like to come back and address the issue of the easement. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh explained that there is typically no address for a vacant lot. When she searched the Assessor's Parcel Map, the project site was labeled with the address 15145. Another address source had a different address. She said that to cover all bases, she had the project site posted. Suggested that if the project is to require re-noticing, perhaps both address could be included. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the old address is prior to subdivision. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh replied that she did not know. One informal map of addresses has one address and the Parcel Map has this address. Usually the corresponding address to the Assessor's Parcel Number is used. It is the address used for the plans. . Commissioner Hunter said that property owners who receive notices usually compare addresses to their own to see the proximity to their own homes. Ms. Barbara Stock, 15249 Sobey Road, Saratoga: • Stated that she has lived here for 39 years and that her property is immediately adjacent to this subject property. • Announced her objections as the garage entrance will face her rear property line with no room for a landscaping buffer. • Recommended rotating the garage by 90 degrees toward Sobey Road and the relocation of the main portion of the house by 12 feet. • Said that a 26-foot tall single-story house is not in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood and suggested a reduction in height by at least six feet. • Pointed out that the attic could be illegally converted into living space. • Said that this is a spec house. These people will leave the area but she would have to live with the consequences of this project for the rest of her life. Commissioner Hunter asked Ms. Barbara Stock for the height of her own home. Ms. Barbara Stock replied that she was not certain but that it is asingle-story. Commissioner Hunter estimated that a typical height for asingle-story home is about 18 feet. Mr. William Johnson, 18955 Monte Vista Drive, Saratoga: • Stated that he lives to the west of this lot. • Said that if the home is moved uphill, it would cut off their valley view. • Said that he has lived here for 50 years and has a lovely view. • Suggested that trees and landscaping be limited to 25 feet in height. • Pointed out that the site has very high weeds and asked that these weeds be disked. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 15 Commissioner Hunter reported that the Fire Department sends out letters for such matters. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. William Johnson if he is open to the concept of access for this lot via Monte Vista. Mr. William Johnson said not from the private road but that from Monte Wood it would be okay. Mr. Michael Davis: • Reminded that the 1983 issue regarding access has already been addressed and that Fire is comfortable with site access through this easement access. • Stated that this issue has been put to rest already. • Reported that there is no easement on record from this lot to Monte Vista. • Said that this is the fourth lot to access the easement. • Stated that Planner Ann Welsh raised the issue of confusion about the address for the site and that they posted the site immediately when she asked them to do so. • Said that the neighbors saw the story poles in place. Commissioner Schallop asked Mr. Michael Davis if he had met with all of the neighbors who spoke this evening. Mr. Michael Davis said all but Mrs. Sharma. Chair Garakani asked when these conversations occurred. Mr. Michael Davis said prior to installation of the story poles. Chair Garakani asked Mr. Michael Davis if any contact occurred prior to submitting designs. Mr. Michael Davis replied no. Chair Garakani advised that the application process requires applicants to discuss their plans early with their neighbors prior to the submittal of plans. Director Tom Sullivan disagreed with that statement. Commissioner Hunter said that this requirement is often hard to accomplish. Commissioner Nagpal added that something has to be drawn up in order to have something to show. Mr. Michael Davis: • Said that they can bring a plan to neighbors but that the story poles give an idea of the bulk and proportion. • Said that he talked to Mr. Johnson just last week. • Reported that spinning the garage would put it closer to them at 30 feet instead of the proposed 38 feet as it is now. • Said that they could go seven feet higher uphill, keep the garage as it is and drop the roof pitch. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 16 Commissioner Nagpal said that there have been a lot of comments today and asked Mr. Michael Davis if he is open to a continuance of this project. Mr. Michael Davis said that reaching a compromise today would be preferable. Chair Garakani closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Commissioner Hunter said that she feels this item must be continued as the proposed house is very tall, close to the Stocks' home and there are a number of issues to consider. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that there are 34 names on the notice list and said that posting the site correctly is important. Commissioner Schallop replied that the notice is not improper and a continuance of this project is not required for noticing reasons. Said he would support a continuance if doing so would be productive. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that she could not find the site when she went looking for it. Commissioner Hunter said that there are more issues than just the noticing. Commissioner Schallop said that the Commission must give instructions on what to do. Commissioner Hunter said that the story poles have only been up for five or six days and there area number of reasons to support continuance. Chair Garakani said that he has an objection to the design, saying that the parcel should be able to support the design. This project is both wide and tall. The applicant could go with atwo-story structure with a smaller footprint. The whole design is disturbing. Commissioner Uhl said that a lot of neighbor feedback has not yet been incorporated and that four of the six required findings cannot be made in his opinion. Commissioner Rodgers agreed. Commissioner Nagpal: • Agreed with Commissioner Uhl. • Suggested that the house be slide up the hill using a smaller footprint and two-story design and reconfigured garage. • Said that such a design would be more sensitive to trees, particularly Trees 3, 4 and 5, which are Oaks. • Stated that there is not enough information available on the access easement and some research should be done to see if there is an easement available to Monte Vista. • Said that she could see how a 14-foot wide driveway serving five homes is quite an issue. Commissioner Rodgers cautioned that the easement is a legal issue that may not be in the purview of the Planning Commission. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 17 Director Tom Sullivan reported that the 1983 Council action was final. The next avenue available to the appellants was Court action, which was not pursued. Assistant Planner Ann Welsh reminded that the first home was interpreted as not using the easement for access since most of their own driveway was within the City's right-of-way. Commissioner Schallop asked what options are being offered to the applicant. Chair Garakani replied the options include outright denial, which seems to be the direction the Commission is leaning toward if action is taken this evening, or continuing the application in order to work with the neighbors and City to work out design issues. Mr. Michael Davis asked if they would return for the next meeting. Director Tom Sullivan replied no. This item would have to be re-noticed and be worked into a future agenda. Mr. Michael Davis reminded that the Planning Commission and Council already granted approval of the Subdivision in 1983. Said that there is no concern that there is legal access to Sobey Road via this easement for this lot. Commissioner Schallop asked staff if the City Attorney could be consulted on this issue of the access easement. Director Tom Sullivan said that an interpretation can be obtained. Chair Garakani cautioned that this body should not judge on that issue. Mr. Larry Williams reminded that he purchased a property with a recorded easement. This is an improved lot for which he paid two million dollars. Reminded that the easement is a Title issue. Chair Garakani informed Mr. Larry Williams that the continuance is not based on the easement but rather on design issues. Chair Garakani re-closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Uhl, the Planning Commission continued consideration of a Design Review application to construct a 26-foot high single-story structure on a vacant lot with an average slope of 165 located at 15145 Sobey Road to a date uncertain with the following instructions: • That the project be re-noticed; • That the project be brought back to the next available meeting; • That the applicant meets with neighbors regarding design issues; • That a legal interpretation on the issue of the access easement be obtained by the City Attorney; • That the applicant consider the design comments made by the Planning Commission during this evening's hearing; Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of June 23, 2004 Page 18 • That a project incorporating a smaller footprint, perhaps atwo-story, be considered; • That Trees 3, 4 and 5 be considered for preservation; • That the placement of the garage be reconsidered; and • That a detailed landscaping plan be prepared; by the following roll call vote: AYES: Garakani, Hunter, Nagpal, Rodgers, Schallop and Uhl NOES: None ABSENT: Zutshi ABSTAIN: None *** DIRECTOR'S ITEMS There were no Director's Items. COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Uhl apologized to the Commission for being late for this evening's meeting. COMMUNICATIONS Written City Council Minutes from Regular Meeting on June 2, 2004 and Special Meeting on June 9, 2004. There were no Communications Items. Miscellaneous Information Director Tom Sullivan advised that a meeting with the Chamber of Commerce was held, the first meeting for the re-writing of the Sign Ordinance. Chair Garakani advised that he would be out for the July 28`~ meeting as would Commissioner Rodgers. Commissioner Uhl and Schallop both advised that they would be out for the July 14`~ meeting. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Schallop, Chair Garakani adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission meeting of July 14, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk • Item 1 • REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 04-019 / 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3) Type of Application: Design Review and Use Permit Applicant/Owner: Greg A. Pinn, owner Staff Planner: Lata Vasudevan, AICP, Associate Planner Date: July 14, 2004 APN: 517-13-027 Department Head: //~; ~ .~ 15960 Cuvilly Way OOi~01 Application No. 04-048; 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3) CASE HISTORY: Application filed: 03/03/04 Application complete: 06/23/04 Notice published: 06/30/04 Mailing completed: 06/28/04 Posting completed: 06/25/04 ZONING: R-1-40,000 (Single-Family Residential) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RVLD (Residential -Very Low Density) MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 1.242 acres (gross) and 1.213 acres (net) AVERAGE $ITE SLOPE: 22% GRADING REQUIRED: 280 cu. yd. of cut and 130 cu. yd. of fill with a net export of 150 cu yd This is not a large amount of grading since most of the construction is at-grade. The City Code does not count basements as grading. Therefore, the basement excavation is not factored into the proposed cut and fills indicated above. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project consisting of construction of a new single-family residence is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. The home will be situated on a vacant lot created as part of an eleven -lot subdivision approved November 2001 for which an environmental assessment was prepared and buildable areas were determined The property is located in an urbanized area. Pursuant to 15061(3) of CEQA it can be seen with certainty that the proposed home and the grading associated with its construction would not have a significant effect on the environment given the environmental review conducted in conjunction with subdivision approval and the geotechnical peer review process that has occurred for this project. • ~~~ Application No. 04-048; 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3) • 7 • PROJECT DATA: Lot Coverage: Floor Area: Setbacks: Height: Building: Driveways, Porches &x Lightwells, landscape elements: TOTAL: (Impervious Coverage) ls` Floor: 2nd F100T: Garage: (Basement) TOTAL: Front: Rear: ls` floor 2nd f100T Side: (west/right) ls` f100T 2nd HOOT Side: (east/left) ls` floor 2"d floor Residence: Proposed Code Requirements Maximum Allowable: 19.6 % 35 % 4,265 sq. ft. 6,110 sq. ft. 10,375 sq. ft. 18,493 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable: 3,759 sq. ft. 1,264.7 sq. ft. 506 sq. ft. 1,816.5 sq. ft. 5,529.7 sq. ft. 5,532 sq. ft. Minimum Requirement: 56 ft. -0 in. 30 ft. - 0 in. 141 ft. - O in. 50 ft. - O in. 148 ft. - 0 in. 60 ft. - 0 in. 20 ft. - 0 in. 20 ft. - 0 in. 40 ft. - 0 in. 25 ft. - 0 in. 35 ft. - 0 in. 20 ft. - 0 in. 80 ft. - 0 in. 25 ft. - 0 in. Maximum Allowable: 30 ft. - 0 in. 30 ft. - 0 in.l ' The maximum single family dwelling height of 30 feet is allowed subject to the granting of a Use Permit pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-12.100 (a). ~?+~003 Application No. 04-048; 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3) PROJECT DISCUSSION: The applicant requests Design Review and Use Permit approvals to construct a 5, 530 square foot two-story home with a 1,817 square foot basement. The maximum height of the home will be 30 feet. The home will be constructed on a vacant lot that was created as part of the Les Chateaux de Notre Dame eleven -lot subdivision created by the Sobrato Construction Corporation. The lot is relatively level in the front and then significantly slopes upward at the rear portion of the lot. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section [MCS] 15-12.100, approval of a Use Permit in conjunction with Design Review approval is required because the applicant proposes to exceed the 26 feet height limit. The purpose of MCS 15-12.100 is to allow homes to adhere fully to a certain architectural style without making modifications to the design to comply with the 26 feet height limit. It is clearly stated in this code section that the Use Permit is granted after carefully assessing the purity of a proposed architectural style. In this case, the applicant has proposed a French Country home. Unfortunately, "A Field Guide to American Houses" does not have a good discussion of French Country architecture. Therefore, Staff requested the applicant to provide photos of distinguishing elements of French Country architecture to help verify the purity of the proposed design. The various elements of this architectural style are shown on a separate plan page in Exhibit A. • French Country architecture has its roots in the hillsides of rural France, where each province has its own colloquial style. This style of architecture reflects a wealth of diversity where old and new, formal and informal elements are mixed in homes ranging from cottages to chateaus. Common elements include tall, thin windows, often with slat-board shutters, steep slate or wood shingle roofs that flare upward at the roof-eave junction, wide chimneys, multiple gables, and assorted arches. Stucco and stone with oversized grout are commonly used, trimmed with painted timbers, wrought iron railings and brick highlights around doors and windows. In the past, necessity demanded a variety of materials to be used on a home. For instance, if a previously used stone or wood became unavailable, builders doing an addition were forced to turn to something new, giving the home a patchwork effect that is often mimicked in this architectural style today. This application is the first ever to seek Use Permit approval to exceed the height limit pursuant to MCS 15-12.100. Staff carefully worked with the applicant to achieve the presented design, with the appropriate materials, shown in Exhibit A. A color and material board will be brought to the meeting to further assist in visualizing what Staff finds is a very attractive andtrue-to-style French Country home. Neighbor Review The only neighbor in the immediate vicinity of this proposed home is the property to the southeast at Lot 1 owned by John M. Sobrato. Mr. Sobrato has reviewed the proposal and has no issues as indicated in the attached neighbor review letter. All of the other parcels in this new subdivision are yet to be developed. Staff has no pending design review applications for the adjacent vacant lots. Nevertheless, Staff is requiring in the attached Resolution that the 0~~ Application No. 04-048; 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3) final landscape plan include additional screening trees to minimise any impacts on adjacent Lot 5. Trees The attached City Arborist Report identifies 17 protected trees on the property. They include two Black Acacia (#16, 17), six Coast Live Oaks (#3 - 8), one Deodar Cedaz (#2), one Fremont Cottonwood (#1), two Modesto Ash (#13,14), four River Red Gum Eucalyptus (#9 - 11, 15) and one Tulip Tree (#12). Tree #1 is in poor health and the Arborist Report recommends its removal. Trees #11,15,16 and 17 would be significantly damaged as a result of the proposed construction for which replacement trees are required. All of the Arborist Report requirements have been made conditions of approval. Geotechnical Clearance Geotechnical Cleazance was granted with conditions, which have been incorporated in the attached Resolution. Fencing Staff has advised the applicant to provide details regazding the proposed fencing for the site. The design and location of all proposed fencing will be brought to the Public Hearing for review and approval by the Planning Commission as an addendum to Exhibit A. Design Review Findings The proposed project is consistent with all the following Design Review findings stated in MCS 15-45.080: (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. No homes can be viewed from the subject property. The surrounding lots -other than Lot 1-have not yet been developed. Given the location of the proposed home in relation to what may be constructed on neazby vacant lots, it is anticipated that there would not be any significant impacts on views. The proposed home does not have any second floor windows on both side elevations further minimizing any potential impacts on privacy toward the newer homes that would be built in the future. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. Since the home will be situated on the relatively level portion of the lot, substantial amounts of grading are not proposed. The style of the proposed home will be in keeping with the general appearance of the natural surroundings through the use of natural, earth tone colors. (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees There are no heritage trees on the property. Of the five trees proposed for removal, none are of the species native to the Saratoga region. 0~~~•5 Application No. 04-048; 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3) (d) Minimize perception of excessive bulk The residence will be situated faz back from Cuvilly Way and will be surrounded by tall existing trees. The facades of the proposed French Country home will be well -articulated with gables at various heights and different richly textured materials such as heavy grouted stone, slate roofing and brick accents which successfully reduce a perception of bulk. (e) Compatible bulk and height. Although the home at its maximum height is 30 feet, the varying rooflines will greatly minimize any impacts of the maximum height of the home. There are no homes on the immediately adjacent lots (other than Lot 1) in this new subdivision. However, it has been determined that the scale of the home is proportionate to the size of the lot and it is anticipated that this home will be compatible in scale to future homes on the surrounding vacant lots. (f) Currentgrading and erosion control methods The proposal would conform to the City's current grading and erosion control standards. (g) Design policies and techniques The proposed project conforms to all of the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook in terms of compatible bulk, and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views. The home is also designed for energy efficiency by including covered porches and use of energy efficient heating and cooling systems. Use Permit Findings The proposed project is consistent with the followmg findings stated in MCS 15-55.070 necessary to grant Use Permit approval to exceed the 26 feet maximum height limit for single family residences. (a) The proposed location of the conditional use is m accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district on which the site is located. Staff finds that the proposed home with a maximum height of 30 feet is in accordance with the MCS 15-12.100. This code section allows an applicant to exceed the maximum height of 26 feet for homes in order to adhere to a specific azchitectural style. It is clearly understood in this code section that purity of a specific architectural style is what shall be assessed in supporting a Use Permit approval to exceed the height limit. It has been determined that the proposal has all of the architectural elements of a French Country home, and will be compatible with the natural surroundings and the `French' character of the new subdivision, appropriately called `Les Chateaux de Notre Dame: (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Allowing the increased height for a single family residence over the permitted 26 feet will not be detrimental to public health, safety and welfare. • ~~~s Application No. 04-048; 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3) (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter. The use is single family residence which is a permitted use. Conclusion Staff finds that all of the Design Review and Use Permit findings can be made in the affirmative. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conditionally approve Design Review and Use Permit Application 04-048 by adopting the attached Resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2. City Arborist Report, dated March 16, 2004. 3. Letter signed by neighbor. 4. Affidavit of Mailing Notices, Public Hearing Notice and List of property owners who were sent notices regarding the public hearing for this application. 5. Reduced plans, Exhibit "A°, date stamped July 6, 2004 ~~~~~ • Attachment 1 ~~~®~8 • APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. Application No. 04-048 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Pinn;15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3 of Les Chateaux de Notre Dame Subdivision) WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Review and Use Permit to construct a new 5,530 square foot two-story home with a 1817 square foot basement with a maximum height of 30 feet; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the project, which proposes to construct a new single-family home, is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to construction of a single family home in an urbanized area; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is in accord with the objectives set forth by the Planning Commission in their approval of the Tentative Subdivision because the proposed project complies with the Conditions of Approval found in Resolution SD-99-003 and SD-99- 003 (A); and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for design review approval, and the following findings specified in Municipal Code Section 15-45.080 have been made in the affirmative: (a) Avoid Unreasonable interference with views and privacy. No homes can be viewed from the subject property. The surrounding lots -other than Lot 1-have not yet been developed. Given the location of the proposed home in relation to what may be constructed on nearby vacant lots, it is anticipated that there would not be any significant impacts on views. The proposed home does not have any second floor windows on both side elevations further minimizing any potential impacts on privacy toward the newer homes that would be built in the future. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. Since the home will be situated on the relatively level portion of the lot, substantial amounts of grading are not proposed. The style of the proposed home will be in keeping with the general appearance of the natural surroundings through the use of natural, earth tone colors. (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees. There are no heritage trees on the property. Of the five trees proposed for removal, none are of the species native to the Saratoga region. ~~OU9 (d) Minimize perception ofexcessive bulk. The residence will be situated far back from • Cuvilly Way and will be surrounded by tall existing trees. The facades of the proposed French Country home will bewell -articulated with gables at various heights and different richly textured materials such as heavy grouted stone, slate roofing and brick accents which successfully reduce a perception of bulk. (e) Compatible bulk and height. Although the home at its maximum height is 30 feet, the varying rooflines will greatly minim~e any impacts of the maximum height of the home. There are no homes on the immediately adjacent lots (other than Lot 1) in this new subdivision. However, it has been determined that the scale of the home is proportionate to the size of the lot and it is anticipated that this home will be compatible in scale to future homes on the surrounding vacant lots. (f) Currentgrading and erosion control methods. The proposal would conform to the City's current grading and erosion control standards. (g) Design policies and techniques. The proposed project conforms to all of the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook in terms of compatible bulk, and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views. The home is also designed for energy efficiency by including covered porches and use of energy efficient heating and cooling systems. WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Use Permit approval pursuant to MCS 15-12.100, and that the following findings specified in MCS 15-55.070 have been made in the affirmative: (a) The proposed location of the conditional use is In accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district on which the site is located. Staff finds that the proposed home with a maximum height of 30 feet is in accordance with the MCS 15-12.100. This code section allows an applicant to exceed the maximum height of 26 feet for homes in order to adhere to a specific architectural style. It is clearly understood in this code section that purity of a specific architectural style is what shall be assessed in supporting a Use Permit approval to construct a home with a maximum height of 30 feet. It has been determined that the proposal has the architectural elements of a French Country home, and will be compatible with the natural surroundings and the `French' character of the new subdivision, appropriately called `Les Chateaux de Notre Dame: (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Allowing the increased height for a single family residence over the permitted 26 feet will not be detrimental to public health, safety and welfare. • ©00010 (c) That the proposed conditional Use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter: The use is single family residence which is a permitted use. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, Design Review and Use Permit approvals for Application No. 04-048 are hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A° (incorporated by reference, date stamped July 6, 2004) and in compliance with the conditions stated in this Resolution. Any proposed changes, -including but not limited to facade design and materials - to the approved plans shall be submitted in writing with a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Proposed changes to the approved plans are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director who may refer the proposed change for Planning Commission approval. 2. Four sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution and the Arborist Report dated March 16, 2004 as a separate plan page shall be submitted to the Building Division. 3. No retaining wall shall exceed five feet in height pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-29.010(8). 4. The site plan shall be stamped and signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor. 5. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: "Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans." 6. A grading and drainage plan combined with a storm water retention plan indicating how all storm water will be retained on-site, and incorporating the New Development and Construction -Best Management Practices, shall be submitted along with the complete construction drawings. An explanatory note shall be provided if all storm water cannot be maintained on site. 7. The construction set shall include a final landscape, imgation and utility plan. The final landscape plans shall show the required replacement trees. The utility plan shall show locations of air conditioning units. Any proposed undergrounding of utilities shall take into account potential damage to roots of protected trees. L` 011 8. The final landscape plan shall include additional screening trees to minimize potential • impacts on adjacent lot 5, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. CITY ARBORIST 9. All recommendations contained in the Ciry Arborist Report dated March 16, 2004 shall be followed. 10. A duplicate set of grading and drainage, final landscape and imgation and utility plans shall be submitted to the Planning Division for City Arborist review and approval prior to issuance of Ciry Permits. This duplicate set should be submitted concurrent cif possible to submitting the full construction drawings to the Building Division to avoid possible delay in obtaining City Permits. 11. Tree protective fencing and other protective measures, as specified by the City Arborist in review of the final plans, shall be installed and inspected by Planning Staff prior to issuance of City Permits. 12. Prior to issuance of City Permits, the applicant shall submit to the City, in a form acceptable to the Community Development Director, security equivalent to 100% of the value of all retained trees to guarantee their maintenance and preservation. 13. All ro osed landsca in and a roved fencin shall be installed rior to Final P P P g PP g P Building Inspection approval. 14. Prior to Final Building Inspection approval, the City Arborist shall inspect the site to verify compliance with tree protective measures. The bond shall be released after the planting of required replacement trees, a favorable site inspection by the City Arborist, and payment of any outstanding Arborist fees. GEOTECHNICAL CLEARANCE 15. The applicant's geologic and geotechnical consultants shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the final development plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, landslide mitigation, and design parameters for foundations, pavement and retaining walls) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The results of the plan review shall be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. 16. The geologic and geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspection shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for keyways, foundations, basements, and 00~~12 retaining walls prior to the placement of fill, steel and concrete. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall observe and log foundation pier holes and excavations for basements, foundations and cutslopes during construction, and utilize that data to modify geotechnical recommendations in the field (as needed). The consultant shall verify that all piers extend into suitable bearing materials, and should consider extending all piers a minimum depth into Santa Clara Formation materials. The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project shall be described by the geologic and geotechnical consultants in a letter(s) and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final project approval. 17. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the City Geotechnical Consultant's review of the project prior to Zone Clearance. 18. The owner (applicant) shall enter into agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related andlor erosion related conditions. FIRE DISTRICT 19. Applicant shall comply with all Saratoga Fire District conditions. CITY ATTORNEY 20. A licant a ees to hold Ci harmless from all costs and enses, includin Pp ~' tY ~P g attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. Section 2. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga Ciry Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, the 14th day of July 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: €~ClU~1,3 ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission This ermit is hereb acce ted u on the e ress terms and conditions hereof, and shall have P Y P P XP no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date C~ J • Attachment 2 • ~~~~~s ' - ARBOR RESOURCES ~ Professional Arboricultural Consulting & Tree Care • A REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 15960 CUVILLY WAY SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA OWNER'S NAME: PINN APPLICATION #: 04-048 MAR 17 2004 U CITY OF SARAT(>GA Submitted to: -"~M11N~nFVF~ ~~~ - __ Community Development Department City of Sazatoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Prepared by: David L. Babby, RCA Registered Consulting Arborist #399 Certified Arborist #WE-4001A March 16, 2004 P.O. Box 25295, San Mateo, California 94402 Email: arborresources@earthlink.net Phone: 650.654.3351 • Fax: 650.654.3352 • Licensed Contractor #796763Q~U~~6 David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist March 16, 2004 • SUMMARY The proposed project designs exposes 17 trees of Ordinance size to potential impacts. I recommend the removal of tree #1 due to its weak structure and susceptibility to failure. Replacements for this tree are not suggested. By implementation of the proposed design, trees # 11 and 15, 16 and 17 would be severely damaged and considered a loss. Replacements are recommended whether they remain or are removed. The grading design should be revised to be no closer than 10 feet form the trunks of trees #3,4and5. The portion of driveway within 18 feet of tree #2's trunk shall be established entirely on top of existing soil grade. The tree protection bond is required to equal 100% of the appraised value of trees planned for retention, which is $19,230. INTRODUCTION • The City of Saratoga Community Development Department has requested I review the potential tree impacts associated with the proposed construction of a new single-family residence on a vacant lot at 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3), Saratoga. This report presents my findings; provides measures for trees being protected and mitigation for those being removed or severely damaged; identifies each tree's condition, species, size and suitability for preservation; and presents tree appraisal values. Data compiled for each inventoried tree is presented on the table attached to this report. Plans reviewed for this report include Sheets C1.0, C2.0 and C3.0 (by Kier & Wright, dated February 2004) and a landscape plan (by Robin Atherton, not dated). The attached map was created from Sheet C3.0 (Grading and Drainage Plan) and identifies each tree's number, location and canopy perimeter, as well as the recommended locations for protection fencing. Metallic labels were found attached to the trunks of most trees inventoried for this report. The label numbers are shown on the attached table next to the column showing new tree numbers used for this report. • Pinn Property, 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3), Saratoga Page 1 of S City of Saratoga Community Development Department OO+~tD~.'~' David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist March 16, 2004 FINDINGS . The proposed project design exposes 17 trees regulated by City Ordinance to potential impacts.. They include two Black Acacia (#16, 17), six Coast Live Oaks (#3-8), one Deodar Cedar (#2), one Fremont Cottonwood (#1), two Modesto Ash (#13, 14), four River Red Gum Eucalyptus (#9-11, 15) and one Tulip Tree (#12). Trees #11, 15, 16 and 17 would be severely damaged by implementation of the proposed design. The damage would cause the trees to become unstable and result in the decline of their health. As such, they will be considered a loss whether they remain or are removed. Tree #1 is a Fremont Cottonwood in overall poor condition and is at significant risk of splitting apart. I find the most prudent course of action is to .remove this tree regardless of the proposed development. Tree #2's survival is endangered by the installation of the driveway within five feet of its trunk. The damage can be sufficiently mitigated provided the entire driveway is established entirely on top of existing soil grade with no soil excavation. Since a driveway using pavers typically requires a 12- to 18-inch deep soil cut, the use of concrete is appropriate. The proposed grading would significantly impact trees #3, 4 and 5. To minimize the impacts, I recommend no soil fill or excavation be designed within 10 feet of their trunks. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any grading, surface scraping or heavy equipment arriving on site. It shall be comprised of five- to six-foot high chain link mounted on two-inch diameter steel posts {galvanized) that are driven 18 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 12 feet apart. Once established, the fencing must remain undisturbed and maintained throughout the construction process until final inspection. The fencing shall be located precisely as shown on the attached map. It shall be placed at or beyond the outermost canopy edge (i.e. the furthest overhead branch). Where this is not practical, it shall be placed no further than five feet from the proposed home's footprint and two feet from the proposed driveway and retaining wall. 2. Protective fencing shall be installed in two phases for tree #2, one for grading and construction and the other for driveway installation. See attached map for the recommended fence location. 3. A chain link fence must be installed along the entire western property boundary prior to grading or other development activities occurring. 4. Unless otherwise approved, all construction activities must be conducted outside the fenced areas (even after fencing is removed) and off unpaved soil beneath the canopies Pinn Property, 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3), Saratoga Page 2 of S City of Saratoga Community Development Department ~~~~~~ David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist March 16, 2004 of Ordinance-sized trees (inventoried and not inventoried). These activities include, but are not limited to, the following: grading (both soil fill and excavation), surface scraping, trenching, storage and dumping of materials (including soil fill), and equipment/vehicle operation and pazking. 5. The portion of driveway (including any side walls) within 18 feet of tree #2's trunk shall be established entirely on top of existing soil grade (i.e. no soil excavation). The sub-grade shall not be compacted. However, the sub-base materials can be but not by more than 70-percent. 6. A four-inch layer of tree chips must be spread beneath tree #2's canopy prior to commencing grading. 7. Ten-foot grading setbacks from the trunks of trees #3, 4 and 5 must be established. Grading within the fenced area shall be performed manually and soil fill shall not be compacted. A temporary four-foot opening within the fencing can be created for grading only, but must be immediately closed and remain so throughout the construction process. 8. Prior to commencing grading activities, the applicant or his or her representative shall stake the limits of grading and review those locations with the grading contractor. 9. The digging of the storm drain within the fenced area for tree #7 shall be performed manually using hand tools. All roots two inches and greater that become encountered during the process shall either be tunneled beneath or cleanly severed using a hand or chainsaw neaz the soil cut line. The freshly cut root end shall immediately be wrapped in a plastic bag secured by tape or a rubber band. 10. Great Gaze must be taken to avoid soil fill from falling downhill beneath tree canopies. Where this may occur, the soil should be manually removed within one to two days. Any erosion control device(s) must not require soil excavation beneath a tree's canopy. 11. From March thru September, 200 gallons of supplemental water shall be supplied to tree #2 during the entire construction process. The water should be supplied every three to four weeks through soaker hoses placed on the existing soil surface at its mid- to outer-canopy. 12. Plans to use unpaved land on adjacent lots for the storage or placement of materials (including excavated soil), the area shall be reviewed by the City for tree impacts. Any recommendations provided by the City shall be implemented prior to development activities commencing. 13. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited beneath canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage beneath canopies. Herbicides and pesticides used beneath canopies must be labeled for safe use neaz trees. Pinn Property, 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3), Saratoga City of Saratoga Community Development Department Page 3 of S ~~~~~~ David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist March 16, 2004 14. The pruning and removal of trees must be performed under supervision of an • International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist and according to standards established by the ISA. Information regarding Certified Arborists in the area can be obtained by referring to the following website: http://www.isa- arbor. com/arborists/arbsearch. html. 1 S. Stumps created by the removal of trees shall be ground rather than pulled from the ground using an excavator. 16. Underground utilities shall be established outside from the fenced areas. Where this presents a conflict, I should be consulted. 17. All downspouts shall be directed away from beneath the canopies of trees #3 thru 7. 18. The utility and any landscape plans (planting and irrigation) should be reviewed for tree impacts and approved prior to issuing permits. 19. All plant material proposed beneath an Oak's canopy shall be drought tolerant and comprise no more than 20-percent of the dripline area. Irrigation spray is not recommended beneath the canopies of Oaks and shall come no closer than five feet from the trunks of all other trees. 20. Stones, mulch or other landscape features should be placed no closer than one-foot from a tree's trunk. The installation of bender board or rototilling should not occur beneath a tree's canopy. 21. Irrigation trenches planned parallel to a trunk shall be no closer than 15 times the diameter of the closest trunk. Irrigation trenches installed radial to a trunk can be placed no closer than 5 times the diameter of the closest trunk and at least 10 feet apart at the canopy's perimeter. Irrigation spray shall come no closer than five feet from a tree's trunk. Please note trenches dug for electrical lines should be installed by the same guidelines. TREE REMOVALS AND REPLACEMENTS The combined value of trees #11, 15, 16 and 17 is $3,260. Replacement trees equivalent to this value should be installed somewhere on site. This amount is equivalent to two trees of 36-inch box size and one of 24-inch box size. Refer to the replacement tree values and sizes presented on the attached table for alternate replacement sizes and amounts. Acceptable replacement species include Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia), Valley Oak (Quercus lobata), Black Oak (Quercus kelloggii), Blue Oak (Quercus douglasii), Scrub Oak (Quercus dumosa), Big Leaf maple (Ater macrophyllum), California Buckeye (Aesculus californica), Douglas Fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens). The sizes and species shall be shown on the proposed landscape plan. Pinn Property, 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3), Saratoga Page 4 of S City of Saratoga Community Development Department r~ OO~~~r~ David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist March 16, 2004 • • TREE PROTECTION BOND The combined appraised value of trees that would be adequately protected is $19,230. In accordance with the City Ordinance, a bond equivalent to 100% of this value is required to promote their protection. The appraised tree values shown on the attached Tree Inventory Table are calculated in accordance with the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9`h Edition, published by the International Society of Arboriculture, 2000. Attachments: Tree Inventory Table Site Map (Copy of the Grading & Drainage Plan) Pinn Property, 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3), Saratoga City ojSaratoga Community Development Department Page S of S 00~02~ ARBOR RESOURCES Professional Arboricultural Consulting & Tree Care • TREE INVENTORY TABLE -- .~ ~ b ~ ~' ' ~ ~a ~ ~ ~ a ~~ b ~$ o ~ V ~~ ~S > TREE ~ ca ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ fib~,, ~ ~ 'b ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ . ., ~d ~ ~ ~ a NO. NO. TREE NAME ' a ~ ~ ~= Fremont Cottonwood 1 None Po lus orrtii 17, 13 50 40 50% 0% Poor Low 4 - SO Deodar Cedar 2 217 (Cedrus deodara 22 55 40 100'/0 100% Good Hi 2 - 56,100 Coast Live Oak 3 272 erar~s a 'olio 11 30 30 100% 75% Good 2 - 52,030 Coast Live Oak 4 273 er~cus a 'olio 13 35 30 100'/0 75% Good 2 - S2,620 Coast Live Oak S 274 er+cus a 'olio 11 35 30 100% 75% Good 2 - 52,030 Coast Live Oak g 26g ( er+cus a 'olio) 9, 7 20 30 100% 25% Fair Moderate 5 - 51,620 River Red Gum 9 None (Euca tus camaldulensis 16 50 30 509/0 25% Poor Low 3 - 5150 River Red Gum 10 266 (Fuca tus camaldulensis 9, 8 65 25 50% 50% Fair Low 4 - 5140 River Red Gum 11 265 (Eucal tus camaldulensis 9 40 20 50% 75% Fair Low 1 - S110 Tulip Tree 12 None (Liriodendron tali i era) 11 40 30 75% 75% Good Moderate 4 - 51,020 Modesto Ash 13 263 Fiiaxi»us v. lliiodesto') 16 40 40 75% 50% Fair Moderate 3 - 5230 Modesto Ash 14 261 (Finxinus v. Zvlodesto') 12 35 40 75% 75% Good Moderate 4 - S190 REPLACEMENT TREE VALUES gallon = 5150 24-inch box =5420 36-inch box = 51,320 48-inch box = 55,000 52-inch box = 57,000 72-inch box =1 Job: 1S9N Crri~y Wq, Sooaoto Prgorljor: Cpq ojSe~o ~ ~ ~ Prod bj: Dewi~L Bobby RCA ! oj1 000 .~vloa 0-~0022 ~ ARBOR RESOURCES Professional Arboricultural Consulting & Tree Care TREE IlWENTORY TABLE -, ~ 3 .. ~ 3 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-. ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ j ~$ -~ r ~ q U ~ w q ~ '~ ~s ~a~ ai ~ ~C ~ ~ of ~ TRUNK ~ ~ ~ ( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° Q TREE LABEL ~ : ~' ~ ~ $ $ ~ ~ > n NO. NO. TREE NAME -~ ~- ^~ River Red Gum 1S 493 (Eucalyptus cmnaldulensis) 11, 8 30 20 75% 50% Fair Law 1 - 5200 Black Acacia 16 260 Acacia -nelan lon 13.5 40 30 100% 50'/o Good Moderate 1 - S790 Black Acacia 17 259 (Acacia »eelan lan 24 45 40 100% s0% Good Moderate 1 - 52,160 • C] REPLACEMENT TREE VALUES ~ s- siio,~ = s~ so za-inch box = Sato 36-inch box = 51,320 48-inch box = SS,ooo s2-inch boa = s7,ooo n-inch box = S I s,ooo roe: ss9so anJ4r w~~ sodog. AY~e/lor: City ofs®ntosa Co~rwiry DeveioPn~ui-De~ P-god br: Dodd L ~Y, RCA 1 oj2 ~~~ 000©~3 " ,. - ~ ;. _-~~~ , '' ~ --'= ~`: C:~. sArirraa• 15960 Cuwlly Way, Saratoga ~" / ,~ -. ' ~ / .. ~- ~- • City of Saratoga Community Development Depermleot Aw.' ~ ~,~ •y~~' - ~: The map identifies 19 trees of Ordinance siu. Iviep has beeo reduced in size and is not to scale. /,-~ ,/ Canopy perimeters are approximate. 11, ~"~ ' \ ~ Qom: March 16, 2004 \\ j' /1 // , '~` ~" :; ~~dt--`°'_~,~ ~ ..~ ~ PROTECTIVE FENCING ~' Y ~ b (All Phases) ~ ~~~1 ' fL ~ y ~.~ ~` `~a4r ~. ~ ~' - ~' ~ ~ ~ y- . ~, - "i` -f- -f- PROTECTIVE FENCII~IG " ; .~ ' •;1C % • 17 ~ (Grading/Cooatruction Phan ~ o 1 i. -~ / • • i ~ EN 1, ~ . ~- - _ ~ • • PROTECTIVE FENCING •,% ~ ~% ~ i ~ /~ -~` e'- ~ ~) ~ ~~- (Driveway Installation Phua , ' i - .. ;~ !' ' '15 ,o, I IIG I j~ 6 5 ----` i~ i ~ ' 1 ' ~' ~ I I . -,~ t ,' ; ~;~~ ~ ~ 'Ili i > ~`-~.~'1 1 ~' ~I ill, _ -' ----- -1--- _ /~ 111 ~~~ 6ar ..1__---- - _`/1 1 ,~,. ~ / it ~ ' i i,{;-fix -'~ - .~ " .~ / ~w~ ~~ I sari / ~' I~ ~%~f `llf-,~Plo i -- ~ ._. _ I - - ~ o ~• i . ~ ~~ ~ I ;;, ~ T' ~ /, _ ~ i i - t lr ~ n9.az"=-j..,~ J ~~ - - ,~... c `!~ 1 ~ ~ /' ! -soo: "- ~ ~~.> -~'f~= -__-- Prepared By: :, ~'~ ~ ~ e~ o~ r ~~ `_ -- _--__ ARBOR RESOURCES ~ /l / ~ r •' SryENT i'.-~s-JNF__ey ~ ~~~ ' '` ~~ ~~,/---• ~- '~ -~ ~,. -- Projealond Arberlarlfrrd GasrlNws ~ Tr~r C~r~ ~~ ../ ~/ ~" ~ C~f-~ ~, ~ ~ sr~ ~i--]~ P.O. Bas 25295 • Sul Maoeo• CA • 9NOI ~~~ / ' ~ / / ~ r;. pMne: (630) 654.3351 • Bnuil: ubo(raowar~arlWmk•au \ • ~D~~~24 C Attachment 3 • Q~~~~rs ?~i eighbor Notification Template for Develupureut Applications Date: ~' l - ~4 PROJECT ADDRySS: ~ 5960 Cuyi I lY WAy ApplicaztName: _ Gre4 A• Pihh Applicnli ui: Ivuu:bcr: The Saratoga Planning Commission requires applicants to work with their neighbors to .address issues and con~Prn.s regarding development applications prior so .the evening of the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does got look fnvarnhly upon neighbors who fail to voice their concerns and issues when solicited by applicants prior to the public hearing. Staff and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors lake this opportunity to express any concerns or issues they may h+m~e directly to the applicant. Please e~isure the signature on this docunten[ i~• .•eyresz~ctarive of all residents residing on your property. Irrespective of the opinion expressed below, you may reserve the re~ht to amend your opinion at a later dale and comm~iniratE it to the City of Saratoga. i I My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of w~ik, and I do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the City's puUlic hearing on the pro ~ osed project. ^My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of w~ik; and I bave issues or concerns, which after ducttssion with the applicant, have not been addressed. My concerns are the following (lease attach additional sheets if necessary): i Neighbor I~Tame: ~'~'"V M• fG~~'QTD Neighbor Address: /6Daa Cave y ~. ~~tro~ G4 ~~-~ Neighbor Phone r: i ~-~?0-~1"~? • • Printed: i Planning Drnar:ment~~~a~ ~aN-a~-zaea a~:~, 1~x ~. ae City of Saratoga • Attachment 4 • ~~~~2'7 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) I, p~~ V ltS I.C.UI ~ I/ll~t~ ,being duly sworn, deposes and says: that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of 18 years; that acting for the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on the ~~day of ~(~-f/~ ~_ 2004, that I deposited in the United States Post Office within Santa Clara County, a NOTICE OF HEARING, a copy of which is attached hereto, with postage thereon prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses shown, to-wit: (See list attached hereto and made part hereof) that said persons are the owners of said property who are entitled to a Notice of Hearing pursuant to Section 15-45.060(b) of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Saratoga in that said persons and their addresses are those shown on the most recent equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of Santa Clara as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property to be affected by the application; that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. t Q'~!~®~8 ' - City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 408-868-1222 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Wednesday, the 14tH day of July 2004, at 7:00 p.m. Located in the City Theater at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Details are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. PROJECT NUMBER /LOCATION: 04-048 / 15960 Cuvilly Way (Lot 3) APN: 517-13-027; Greg A. Pinn, property owner • l~J The applicant requests Design Review and Use Permit approvals to construct a 5,530 square foot two story home with a basement on a vacant lot in the Les Chateaux de Notre Dame subdivision. The applicant is seeking a Use Permit pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-12.100 because the proposed `French Country' style home will have a maximum height of 30 feet. The net lot size is 52,838 square feet and the property is zoned R-1-40,000. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order for information to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before Tuesday, July 6, 2004. This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor's office annually, in preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S. Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project. Lata Vasudevan, AICP Associate Planner 408-868-1235 1 ~ ~ \' \ ~` ~. .~ N ~\ i ~ ~ _ ...... _ :, -`, _: , ,, ' , ~ ~_ f ~'` O \t. '.`\ ~ `YF ~, 1 -L_.._, ~ ,li I ~0©f~29 FOX, BONNIE & GREGORY T APN: 517-13-020 15175 NORTON AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-6334 CAGAN, MARTIN R & LYNN M TRUSTEE APN: 517-13-023 15001 BOHLMAN RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 GREG A. PINK APN: 517-13-027 20855 SARATOGA HILLS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070 SOBRATO CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION APN: 517-13-030 10600 N DE ANZA BLVD 200 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SOBRATO CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION APN: 517-13-033 10600 N DE ANZA BLVD 200 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 FOX, GREGORY T & BONNIE APN: 517-13-021 15175 NORTON AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-6334 SOBRATO, JOHN M TRUSTEE ETAL APN: 517-13-025 106000 N DE ANZA BL 200 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SOBRATO, JOHN M TRUSTEE APN: 517-13-028 10600 N DE ANZA BL 200 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SOBRATO CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION APN: 517-13-031 10600 N DE ANZA BLVD 200 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SOBRATO CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION APN: 517-13-034 10600 N DE ANZA BLVD 200 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 FOX, BONNIE & GREGORY T APN: 517-13-022 15175 NORTON AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-6334 SOBRATO CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION APN: 517-13-026 10600 N DE ANZA BLVD 200 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SOBRATO CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION APN: 517-13-029 10600 N DE ANZA BLVD 200 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SOBRATO CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION APN: 517-13-032 10600 N DE ANZA BLVD 200 CUPERTINO, CA 95014 • BUTLER, JUDITH L & GERALD D APN: 517-18-031 20622 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-6346 THURMAN, ROBERT L & JOANNA BUTLER, JUDITH L & GERALD D SO, FRANK C & JOANN C C TRUSTEE APN: 517-18-034 TRUSTEE APN: 517-I8-033 20622 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR APN: 517-18-042 20634 VICKERY AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-6346 20650 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-6320 SARATOGA, CA 95070-6364 MORLEY, JAMES S & LYNDA J APN: 517-18-043 P.O. BOX 9706 SAN JOSE, CA 95157 JASWA, RAJEN & KALPANA R TRUSTEE APN: 517-36-002 20972 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-6344 NOLLER, DAVID W & ANNE M APN: 517-18-044 15243 MONTALVO HEIGHTS CT SARATOGA, CA 95070-6300 JASWA, RAJEN & KALPANA R TRUSTEE APN: 517-36-003 20972 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-6344 PEARCE, DAVID B & SHARON A APN: 517-36-001 20932 HIDDEN VIEW LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-6344 • ~~®~~~ ~_ ~ 1 • ?; =.: ,~ __~ ~4 •t ~ i•;.:, ;L ., . ,~+'~ ~.~ ~~ ~ ~~, :~:. .~: ,. • i V•. , _.• .,~~ ~~ .~ ~`. ~~ ., .;,., ,~ f .~ a r ~.,i =.:~. .~ ~~ 1 Y:.# ~, ~i, '~ • i i "Z ^ , ~' >~t~% ` • l~. .. 'ti r ~ ~ • ~~~~ ';~' ~'' ~~- ~~_ ~~~ y ~r V U W w ~~~ ~ ~~~~ N ~' Q .. 3~~~~ -- ~ ~o ~~ W ~~ O ~U YQ ~z 0 W~ ~oa ~u~ W~ a ~~ o, ~ o' 0 ,~ • ~~ ~~ ~ a r/] ~ ~ a 1 W a~ ~~ ~~~~~z~+~ ~ F ~HV,c~oa~v,a~~~~,~i~~~a ~ ~ ----------_ W ~ ~ 6 N~ Y Q t I .. y j- ~ ~ • h 0 U V W w ~z 0 z~~ ~9 ~U~ ~~~ a~ A. d t49S-LZL(B04)XYd 4SOS6 o~wo;i~o0 'ouo10 o~uos dlNaOdlldO d001dad5 ~ £ lOl - 0££6 lOd2i1 ~ ~ ~ O S999-LZL(BOb) ZZ 6u~p~irre 'piona~no8 17o~S OSf£ 3~N3aIS3~f NNId ~32i9 '~N I 'Sb0A3A21f1S '8 S2133N 19N3 ~ I A I~ M e< V„ 1H~12~M ~8 ~31~i Jl3nliflS ~bdQNf108 '8 ~IHddaJOd01 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r r n.ti r Y ZO e ~ ~~ f a p ~ ~ m~~~~~ ~~~g~~~~~~` ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~°~ ' o Z ~ ~~s=_a~~a ~~~a~~ a~~~ W W wW 8aa®~~~ia~~~~.~~~~'a~ J { i ~ O °l ~ ~ III ~ ' gs I I i I Q o oa ^ ®< Io J~ i l i~ ~~ `, ~ i~ ~ s ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~tl~~~ff ~ i~~~S~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~W~ e ~N~F~ K ~~~~~W :~ogffi ~ ~~_~~_ ~. ~~g~~~ ~g ~~ ~;, ~~~~~~ ~W t r r t + i • • • o r t~F #~i c?~'o0\` ~ ado ~w >~ 3 N ~~ ` c o b d g dp. ..y3~ G~ ,r, o ~ a r U < a Fri ~ O O ~~~~~ [t9S-LZL(906)xY~ 4SOS6 oiwo;~to0 'DJD~~ D}UD$ VINa0dIlV~ V~OIV2JV5 5999-LZL(804) ZZ 6utp~ing 'pJOna~nog }1DaS OSff £ 101 - 0££6 1~V2i1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ +ohz/o ~~ '~NI 'Sa0A3Abf1S 'P Sa33NI9N3 IIAI~ M 3~N3oIS32~ NNId ~3d~ ~ < CV ., w ~ +aw~ 1HJ12~M ~ 2~31~1 NH"td 311S ~ ~ ~' ~ ~U ~ ~~~ *r~ a " ~ a ,~ .~ ~ 4 1~ o u W ~ ry N ~ 1 3 ' O O ~ w ~ Q O Y ~I Q O m d3l5 #c. y Q I Z Q Q N F-I.IN FF- a'VI N ~ d. 3 O Z G~ U~~ H N~~ J ~ W M '~ 4 ~ a O » ~ V < (h O q ~ Z O~ J ( ')WUN~ I~ III IIO~ ...~ V ~ ~ II ''- SQ ~ ( 1 m~ SUN ~ p ~ m ~ ~Fn ~ ~ v ° # ~ ~ ,~ ~ «~ p ! N Kp IIH ~w Z ~~ c>p Opwwpp¢ 'F ~ Q~ W a0 ~ ~..~ " N ~W ~ ~ OM W NZ N W 'N N X W O b JJ UV N a n K 2~W~~ W m '~ ~ c! j ~1y O0 i ~- Z I- p; p C'i O ~pJOWNO~ ~N(~6'I~v QZ N GH Z SSSS s~ rc [ N ppp a p U a s 3~~i ~ W Q ~] U p W la. 2 J d K M U l ._. S S a '+ ~ ~ ( N ~~~ r^ +~I ~O ~O ~~ N to O ~k ~ ` ~~ I ~~~~Vtl Un ~ ~~~ ~<~ n ~j, ~N ~ QZ ~~~<~ ~W 1 1 ~ E • L49S-LZL(904)XV.i 4SOS6 oiwo~~~o0 rom(~ oleos vwao~nv~ voolvavs S999-LZL(BQ4) ZZ 6uIPlln9 'pone no ~~oa f lOl - OL'£6 lwal c s s ogee ~ ~ ~ ~ O, ~ ro/+t/H ~,~~~ '~NI 'Sa0A3AaRS '8 Sa33NI`JN3 lIAI~ M 3~N341S321 NNid J32~`J ~ 7 ~ n 3 w . ~~ „~Hu~ ~ 1H~~2~M ~ b~l~ Nb`id 3JWN~Vba ~ JNiaaa~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~v W Z Q W x g g z ~ p ~ ~~~~ ro i ~u~~ -"+u ~ z ~° 3 < <W ~ 3 ~ ..1qq z <14yS' yyu "< ~< 3 ; ~ZW. W < ~" ~ ~F ~ N S`~ ~° u u^ ~ ~ ~ ~ f3 L1~vi ~ ~~WW~ 1A~~7yi, 3 ~Oy~SOo z1rttttZU ~~=~~° "~~d < Z~WZ ~ y?a{ ~ W $m ~~ I ~ ~ ~~ ~ F~ ~~~`"r~)5 ~O< ZOOO~n~~C~~ <"r ~~ ~~mgW }j< t VI ~g° G~ V~TA~2i~3 O > ~ ~ H~ J JF " 00"~~lA ><~i J~~~S<~ox ~<a Ono FU W~ ~ F O ~ n SS p yp~ J` ZQ$F yy m oruLL ~ rok'u<$ }y> ; < ~IiS k `oS' ~y ~ > ~~ Z ~ <UOU r° ~ ~y ~ FIL ~~ 6U W ~ 20W ~"] ~~~' ~ Y>~ >, p ~ ~H O~U~f6 ~u(F y ~ ~c~< S »yy> ~~ ~ < z ~JXtlln h vI~WC~ ~ _~ yz ~~~", a4r "~ CI ~< ~ rcp yJ«~~F °(<{~ U 6 ~ > ~r~W <F~~ ~1~ ~" < ~ ~O ~ m <" O~O 2< ~bJ'pg~q5~ i ~ ~ '~ ~ ~,.~`~sp ~~~0~3~ 2 I ~ p~~' ~~' ~ xi~ -sg~iWm °~`~ og ~ ~ "~~ oz~< i <~ k'8 Y~~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~> I>:~°e ° '" ~ $,. ~(~pby({ ~<~~"C ~ ff~~= o i z~~~n =ff rcx ° ~~ ~€' ~~ J+ tl 01 ~I'Ja~ K2~~~**AA~J ~f 1ygJ SE Z 1/y~~ ~ ~ 1~~[pyy~~+~Y~M"p WFYyS~ O(! ~ p ~ G~yp~" 2_a m ~ OJ ~ ~ ~ ~Z~F ~~5TZy~ yWI [~j¢m ~ 00 >(FS ~~< ~~FRYIpWQJ<~~ O~~ y Z ~O~< 42 KK ~ N ~2 ~ •~'¢<C-a ~~ ~ <Z O Z"Z~ >w-_ t~~t~~[[SWW3 mm ~m L \ ~UXyp~ 01 ~yK~ ~<I¢. yyyIII Z> < ~~ ~I22S~ >W> ~ Ja ~O 3 m ~K O ~CC~Ki <¢~~ O ~ W~r ~~ F3 ~O~< W~ pp " ~ "~tf ".x..<2 O~w ~ > FOW$ F ~_` m O~ ~ A ~ < O "i~~P.W U" Im~~ tj ~I-~~~~ U'jSW~ "~FFOO < ~W Q~~~< It° < ~i00 ~ <~ ~<yl~a~ t£~ 111~~~ ~ pY, qq um< Q ~3 ~'~' ~a7 ~~o> z~zr ,> °~ > yZ~ O a a ,~ y/ c R~~~ rj2'1, ~~ W g < ~ ~ > n ~YW ~UKO] ~$ OSSVV~~ LxS ~J"~E <W ppF ~g~ o~ZpZpW R<"p~ ~<~"£i~+~}'CC6"y~yWqW ~~'z~~i ~<o~~ i~~wwk'jy Wm o IIIJJJ ~g~ ~ ...~ L^o>zZ>~L Z PjV W ANN Z ~ "FU `~' W ~O ~ " t<bU~00 ~~u~ R~C~ w~Y~U ~ ~ ~ < ~ s° ~>~o~~ m~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~A ~~~rc '~~~~ i~~`LL <"~8 '~'"<g> ni°m4~ ~ n ~ ~~z '~~' k' ~~o~'a0'z ((gg~~ + ~+~'~<QQ ~' ~J ~~~ O~~` ~$~ $~ y, ~t `~~' ~~A ff'"~b fi~~~t ~°~ ~ o~ ~ 3. ~ ~ ~ oly, `~~~">: -~vy ~~A Q ~~~<~~~ ~ ~~ Z r€"~iJF~ln u zwti "< ~a~ t-s ~A B{~ §ndur xS lp~ 88 ~ k~" u ff~~gr ~ a"~§}1 ~ ff"7~<Iri' ~ ~ ~j<1p"J rc33n~ ~~$~~#jF In0 ~ ~ ~~~ i yolk ~JZ 1;~Y~ ~yle ~ d ~ u~ A ~ Uy/ U~ ,y~~{~q~y~Q Q<~y4~~(~Z$] K<~a "~~~f2~j(~nV ~.~{~< O~N1. FN~46U~`j~~ y<i (i ~$ Zp6 < ~>j I- NVI =<>y~y5 ~i<K~~ Zp &G1~ ~ ~m~~~~<~t ~h~~yO~ZF~^j JUIyN~S ~~2~C~0~~~ ~&~~ ~~Y71-.1 <r ~«2FZ~1 C~~ G V ~~~ ~ 000~~ 3~033~~y U ~ ~ ~ ~ Ou J <s uN^<ZW ~ ~O~F~bI' ~'JI'i>&'~suLLlnz ~~a vl?bf~ <m>nJ ~ ,~ ~ ~~ ~ n ~ \. ~ < ~ ~~~~ W ~~~ ~~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F m < r ~ < ~ \ S'HS9 ~ ~ ~~4 ~~> ~ ~ag~ ~ ~~g~ =1~ ads "b~~ ~ ~3 ~mr ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ 6~ ~ ~~ ~ e~ ~~~~o~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~s~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~"~ O m<~~~~~ ~ ~~nw5 xw i~ n $ lY% ~ ~~ o^ ° ~ ~~ ~~i ~ ~ O~ g Y I ~~>~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~W~yyy C~ ~~~ ~a ~~~~~ ~ ~~ seJ ~m ~~~ N ri Y r Ic I I I ~~ s~ ° a ~ ~~~~ p ` n i~ IYm~§~ ~ ~°S~~ ~ O ~<~ ~ " 2 V ~ N ° ~°~~m 8~ ~~ ~~m< ~ s ~~ Q~~~ ~~ ~9 o Q u ~'~ <i~O ~~>a ; ~~ ~ ~F~ ~~ g~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~ s ~ ~ ~~w~~s s~ r cG P I i i 1 i ~ i xvw ; ~ /~ ~' ~. ~, I I I ~J+~ ~ ~ o ~~ ~V I ~ ~ f ~I i ! I I ~' .., ,~ ~ ~ s ~~ ! \ \ ~ yy.•A\.` ~\\\ \ ti\ \ `r . \ ~\\\ ~~ \~ `• ~ \ \ ~ ~' \\ \ • ,. ... !~ i . . '~; ' .~ 6 \I `~ 1111\\ ~`'\\\ r.vy ~ I s //I ~ .. ,A\~I~.~ \ ,, ~ x~ ~ i 11 F ~ i~ Sp ~., ~~ I ~ \`~ ~ ~'' \ j ~,~` ~,~~~ -'~v , , ~ ~ \ ~q8 y ~. ~ ~ .c... r`1 I ~~~ ~`~I I `I ~ `I ~,~~,\\11~~a~ \ , ' ~ 111 /' of I ~! ~dv' ~ I i ,~+~ `, .~ '~ ~ I I I ~' ~ ---,-~-~- ~ I S .C i'8~~ _--II_ ~~~ ~ I I I ~' ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 r r a '1 I \ 1 sry ire i o ~" ~-------j- --7, 3-"1 ~' I'I I DTI I ~' `1 )~\\, ~`\~~ I 9 I ~ ~ I ~ I r ~ ~ '~ \ ~' -. • ~ J a ~~ ' ` r/1 ~' ~~~ V ~ r 1 \ ~~~~ \ ~,, ~ ~ ~ ,, C~ `~, ,'1 I O~1oB A l'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ';~ - ~~.~. ~\ °~ \\ l ~ II \ \, 41 \~ < ~ ~', ~\ I 1 r~ ' Z ~~ ~~~ ~.~. y ~\`~ . ~\~ ; ,: ~ ~~:11` , t-- I i~'~ t i i i / / r i i ~i I/ -~•r- n h .o l T 1~ N M ~ .o ~ ~ ~(,?; II i.I~,~ I ~ ~\~y~\~~,A ~;y \ ~~ \ \~\, ~ \ g\\1,~\ \ \~~\\ \ ~\\ \ ~ a \~ S ~~~~~~~ e ~ p p V W 4~ G a C ~O Q Y < ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ i ~ ff ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~~W~ta~~ ~ ~ ~ m ~` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ° O VI l%r < ~~ \ ~\ \ 1\ \ -I _ 0 ,\ .., s2 ,~ ~ ~ ~ _*~_- 1 ~~~. ~ , .~ ~ ~'" ~. __ -_- ~~ -~1_ \, my, M ~ ~ ~, ~~_ -_ 1 ~ BV5 ~ I ~ /~ / ~~ ~ ~ ~ , , ~" - -- i ~ M~ U U U U ~~~~~}jjCCC I pp1 I I 0°D M O N N ~- Y ~~ ~Jao y ~ J ~ X glLL) Uta_-W ~- ~ ~~~ *Y/y rl~ SO ~~ do b H y r g r ~ ~= - ° ~~ 4 ~ -- o~d3lS #S,' K F ° ~ a. y tP ~ IS' ~ UO"~ W 4<- ° O ~~n~.~ ° N ~. ~~~~ g a~"~~ _~ A ~3~~ ~~~ zW y"j~F~4~ o?~ a pa pn0 F- I pp P SOU ~y<Y~,Z= ~b~ < Cilj I ~N bf x~ N< ~u-S~<a~ ~y~ W V ~ ~ ~ U w ZO F > p < g N ° = ~ 3 6 F4 w ~~ i~~ W F ~ I" ~~w U z~g ~ 3~~yy ~~~n o~~~~S V Kqq "<~y,~~~"~ r ~F ~''~y~n~y~ <w ~ k'~~ i - u ssyyy~~~ ~ ~~ ~ yyyy ~ ~~ ~~~Yyp ~~~ ~~ Z <yF-~~ ~~^~~~ pWF ?~30 ~~~w ~ ~~ ~ ~ 3 < ~~~ Z N~ ~ 4 3 ZO I~~J~ZKE y W~U>"OW~ <~1-C "~ ~ b< I I K ~ ~ o << ~" ~1g1ayW~ '~'u tj~,<~~e,ro,~l$n ~~~""z ~ < "~5 ~"}~5m F`~~j>< z 73~°$~~i~~~~7~ ~$U~~3~~i <~;,~ ~ a o ~U~ S C W~ <JWO K ~~ ~"FF31-WW's' " ~ F<~ y fib- ~b~E" ~ ~~~o~i~'~~'SY~=~ ~~~'~~~°~'~ d'a; i o ~ Fug ~~~s ~ ~o~~€~~~~~~~ ~~~~g~F~~ m~~~ ~ W ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~~aa~~~~Z =_~~a~~~~< ~~~~~~ ~a a Wad ~ a $ N H N N N N A ~ \ M ~W i ~ ~ /,, h- ,,\ ,. i y \ \ \ 1 ,~, ,~ $9 ~1 v ,~ -.~' r \ ~~ \ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ v~ ~ ~• . Y,~) ~ ~ ~~_,~ ~. ~ \\ \ ~ 'tom `a ~~ '~ ~~~ A;~, -,A,` ~ v~,v ~ ~V~ ,,, ~~`~\ t t-t I it L ~ r~ II 4 a rt I~~ ~_. ~- ~. __~._-_ I ~~ w~ ti ~~~~ ~~ N N ~ 6 •• m~OC >-ap 3~ ~~ -. N ~ ~ ~ LW r ~ozo WW6W O G~ Y Q~ I I I I r--_~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I +---t I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I a _ _ - - Y I I I I I I I I I I I I I m I I I I I I ~ r-------Y I fi' I I I I I I 1 I I I r-+ I ~ I I ~ I I ~ I I , I I , I I . I I ~ I I `~ I 1 `~ I I ' -~ I I I I I I r~----Y r-----a I I I I I I I I 4_--_-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r+ I 4 _ _ -.~ y r _ -_ _.1---~ _ __ _ _ __ __ _______.1 I 4.-.._ w 0 N lq h 10 LL= N O~ ~O~ on ~' ~ s1°<b C. ~LL <jW ~H<< 'T~~ pm Q `yit K J ~ ~ < ~z 0 U] hod "~ ~~~ m a ~a d 's ~3 T I I F I I I I I I I I I I I I I .~- .01-101 ~, ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ C ~ x <~ ~ II m Ti it i___ _______________, II I I _ _ _ ~ I I I I I ~ i i I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~I I I t I I I- I. ~ i I J ai 0 N l9 b h IL - (ID O A Oi ~~n Oy NLL O tb~l^ 0-~8 JW LL C ~ J Q 3 p ~~`' QI~JfA `fit` !C .pa~~< __~" II U ai F X 1O~ ID ~ N OX i~~ i ~I ~ I I I ~ I ~ t==de ~ I i I/ ~`I I t I ~ ~ I J I'~- ~ ~I r T .. ~ I I I I I_____ I I ______ _____ I I i I I I I I I I I I l :Q W ~ I I I I Al i x I I I ~Q : I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I g I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~_____ ______ _____. I -------- l i I' I I ------ ~ ~i I I I I I I I I ~-------- --glg--- 1 -----• ~6 ~ __~_~ a ~ ----~ I I I I I`~ ~~'---------I r I I `` I ~ I L I-'-~~--__ -'-I ~. ~: I ---: i ~, .~-I~ I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I ~ ~ ~ X ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I I I I ~ I ~ LL I I 1 ti ~~~~ ~ ti ~~ ..~m ~~ ~~ ~~~ W W Q O N w Y Q~ a ~z 0 ~~~ ~u8 ~q ~~j~~ i~ Fld9 W~ i ~~ • I 1 '--------------------' II I I I I If I 1 I I I p `4 i ~ I ~ ~ I i y ;~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I j I ~ I I I I I ~ ~ I I I I I I __ I _ I -----~ I 1 ---- I I ~ ~ _ ~ i I I I I I I I Z`1 Imo, ~ I ~ x ~~ I I `Q .gyp I c~ ~ ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ---------------4- --- 1 I I Y I ~ I I ~ X 1 1 I 1 ~ M I I ~ I I I I _______: I 1 ------ I 1 I Fq 6 I ~~ N O n h LL ~y n A y0~ O~ ~LL ttl~0 o•oo ~LL ~`~oWe ~~~~ o~ fA .`.~ ~~<~ K 00~~ uu ~~ ~ ~~~_ ~ ..}~ ~ ~~ 3~ ~~ y N ~~ W W O W Y Q ~z 0 p~ ~ U~ ~ ~c ~~~ z~ o~ ~~ ~~ 0~ a~ ~a g _~ s i • r r~ ~~ ~~i a; ,:, ,. ~..__. ~_, _ _ ___ __. _~~:_ ~,. a a a o ._ o .__- ~ i rrww V1 i i i i i ~i w i j ~ ,__.._ . z ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~h~~ Q~~~~~~~~~~Q~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~ A ~~ ~ ~ L ~~ ~ ~ '• 23 ~O ~ .OOr eV ~ ~ ~ .fir b b +, ~ ~ ~ ~ i~7 ~aQj ~ii IC M M N M Y N M ~ ~ N Y N ,.1 ~ `~, ~ ~ < ~ ~'+ •W7 ~~~~~~,~~~ ~~N~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ • . • . • a 0 0 _._.__ , i ~ ~ o ~ w ~__~__ a 0 0 F s~ ~a~~~ U pp ~ON~N CCVV ~ ~ .. ~~~ 3~ ~3m~~ J W h ~~ ~W Y ~~ ~z 0 w~ u w~~ hod yu ~~~ ~am a a~ n h b ~n ~; I ~~ ~_ U yyQ N N ti a ~- ~~ ~~ m~¢aw 3 ~-- ~ ~__ ~~~ cQi~ySo ~ N W ~Q W Q~ ~" 0 Z ~~ YQ~ ~x 0 u~ poi ~%V ~y,y~4 y0% r~ a w~ «~ t r • • ~ I °€ s id ~! 3i ~ ~ p ~ E ~ B ~ a ~~ 3 3~fi~f ~ . g ! I i ~8~03~~~~~~4§~i~B~~I Se y $ ~ ~~~ N ~" ~ .. R ~o °~ W i- W ~~ ~ N~ Y Q H O !~ U~ Z~ p~l~~ z. o~ ~~ ~~ 0~ ~~ ~a ~ ~ i i • !~ e ~ o , o ~ 9 ~ ~' 6 ~ililPB9~6~~II~EI~E a i ~~~~~ N ~[S ~ . • CC}VV ~~ ~ ~o °~ W t- w ~~ F- 0 Z ~~ Y Q ~z 0 u~ w~~ ~U~ °~mS ~~% .~ ~~ ~ 1 • ~ ~ ,o-,oe ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~I ~I I ~I ~ ~I 1 ~- ~- ~, 0 a~ 0 U U' d~ m ~ Z ~ ~ ~ r ~ ;~ R ~~ ti ~ ti ~~ ~N ~~y~iA ~wa°D 3 i-- ~ ~ ~~ .... N ~ O LW r W O Y Q~ ~z 0 u~ ~~~ ~~Q N~g ~~~ ~a~ a~ ~~ n, 0 ~a ~~ pl ~• .. U $~ N~ ~y ti a ao 3~- ~~ ~~~o U ~ 06 W ppp ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I `~ W ~ ~ ~ O F- Vr~I ~ V1 ~ W 7 6 m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q a ~z 0 p~ u U~ ii_______T~ .. ~I ~I ~~ I ~~ p~ ~ ~I ~~ _, ~~ i II II w ~~ ~~ I~ II u .~II ..ll ~~ ~~ ~I ~ ~ II I I ~ r , II `M. ~~ ~~, I II I. .________11 II II II II ~~ II II II II o~ II II WM ~ II II II , II II z II ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ o ~I II II II II II II _________I~__ ~i 0 04 ~ i ~ ~ t 1 . . _ ~. ~,. '.~I111~'tlJ0lb2itlS ~`Yw7`Y~6U1YYY9 O-'~(J-%r~'~'~..~' \ i OVOY 3~N OSOCI .lb'M loll I~R~ E IOI N91S30 3dY~SONYI `__~ '~'-~,~, ~~,~ ~.""'"' - 3~N3aIS32! NNid N01Z'1~4-I1~' NIE~OZI ~ _ - :173n1Yd .:- ~ .~bM.~~~lnn~-- 1 D9L vnoNDYwtleonw nmoNrlraBVnoNDVw u .z. ~ +' y _~ .~ ~~ ^"' Z Bra 3etl1 MO7T/1 i83Nllq Wntl3dtlre38 Wnldw 91 --. , ~J ~' s ~ ., 9 efL Te1VN ie3NVdVl` Wtl .f1X1'X nDNVe. Wf11VW'1Vd tl30V fl ~~c 7" s. ~ ~~ ~ '`.J ~~'f'~* ~ ~~ ,• wb~• `` '" \ I f erL OMOitl Ntl7leiM LL1fIW 9f1Y1N3010008k7tl30 El L s ", 1 \ IE ~ IC 9 afL Atltl31YJ ONIM3M0'Id ONINBOA ateN3003AXBfINf9Jd Ll _ \,~ s ~ ~ `• '" C 9eC 3l1tlAW 3dVtl0.VtlOtlO0Bfl1. YOIONI YIW30tlleU3DYl Ll .. 7 'd ' \.,`C'\`'~\ ..+~ t ~ ~1~ `\ I ' ~ _ ;~' \ ~.. ~'~ OOL Dl V11NV2NYW .ladtll•9 Q1VtliWe. .lidtlY03. 90'IAHdV18010tlV ~ 7 d }. ~~ \ ~ ~~~~ \Y~^•:: ~~~ \ 1 oez oL 3-nWIAVU3dauvMa tloNlww.xaln ® ,.I `w ~ \ '''~ l ~ \~ •~~ ~?,r' .> , , ~f oe D9 WOM%Oe N9nDNa woountldns enxne se y \\ ~ \~ t f E p9 ATONdWMO VONf110tl V1fMtl00 X311 LE - ~ r~ ~~/"' _ ~ \ ~ 6 ~ f ~ ,>. E D9 meaY A98(Y70 AI3HJf100 atlvmD3. Yn3eY LE SWr~ 9L Ol 3NIWBYf Wle 83010NIW9Vf'HOWL OC \ E 09 wtllde.tl8N3LYM ANONIM/. V07YW'1f1B V3tlld9 6L , '9 \ \ ~ ' LL 09 WnHOde01lW dWMa dM0 Stl7T13HM WnNOdeO1Ld ~ ih~ ; \ \ .. \ \ Y I I `r" 9 !% WnNOd9O1W Oi1VD31WA v1VEHN1Yn WfltlOdBOllld [Z \ ',.Ir r OL Ol ' Y90NinV1 .OileNfY4 VY70N3nV'I OL .. "\ \ \ ,air `( t 09 7NNOHLMVH3LHMdWMO W1Y V1YT1ieWn 91d3101HdVHtl 9L ~• '~ ~~ ? ? l~~ Ol D9 e3eotl vawwnaid uIIlA1 .Otlf1B7J1. e3MJ3de wotl fl }/'I ~ ~ `•,~ el D9 3NtlauMVNdwMa .1MItl3T1w.41d33011WVHtl sL e D9 N3nY3N do1uv3tle XNld wnwcnnd vw3NO3ioo tt µj• -- 9 09 3D'Y6 NYOD(MI VH1NVOf131 YlAT/9 lL ~ ~ E t. \ xs 9 09 7NtlON1MYN )IP/W .3WLLONNd9.9W3106idVHtl OE __ -~ A c ~~ \~ 60L Ol .e1Vtl190W NVJNItl00. e3YJ3dB SfYlIUYWSOtl 6L ~ ~f,. G ~ ~ ~'. ' .f ~ ~ ~ k}' oc end ivNOerde tlDwommNrrY eL •awr e ov NotlvNe do ieotl srlov6ue sroereiN u / ' ~ ~ ~ ,+.., rv~+ «q .; . \\~ ~ ~\ ~_ \ ~~~ 9 09 OV1n BItlVDInn vONItlA9 9l ~? 9L fi9 AIiVW380tl 1ND9AM1 .ifl'1e NYO9R1.9nNItlVW80tl 9l n' y ~ .. t L E>n nn iH01N1tl01 VLlD3n 931310 f l 4 ~ h * ~.~ oc DL .otloavn3ls.eanluva 43YJ3d861'13YJOtl3YfdN eL ~, I \ •j 9 09 vmaWro,IwMOXNw dwlnavX.rnoNV9Y9vm3wvo zl ~ `.C II 6 sql m1NldtlvMD .wn.ernw3ltlovmHl Ll w*.*' y\~ \ •1 • D9L 963NdA0vM0.waVNlo1. verueo6ltlVdA03YWVH0 0l ~ $ sl D9 ViMVNtlilll104 YOXNIINtlaH17WeV3MV e 1 ,} ,``~^,l`'} Cl 09 YNgNVN dWMO .rYwtll9 dlnE). VNIOM/N 9 4 ,2LZt t L D9 Oliedpl31drN1d V3tlfldtlnd YBO091n V3N0000 G ~ ~ .. ~ '` ~ I .. L L 09 vnh'w 31ddwNw VNWM0713e YOn3d 9 ~~ c ' 9l D9 N3nY9H d0 HLV3tlB O'IOD A30D 139Nn8. YW3N03100 S ~ ~. - ~ ~ `~ ~ ~~ ie~ ~ . f L D9 3NId OHOf1W DHOnw B/1NId f ~ ~ - ~, '.1~. ~ Alfa ~' ,` r p. O 4LZi i. 9 D9 NOtlON30000/M B3103dB NOl10N3OOOOHtl E / ~ "'^i ~~~ ~ of D9 Quin v9~tlodrlYO rYw1tlYH nw. snHloNV3o z ~' ,'~ " ~ \\ ^• • _ ~ \.'• 9L Dv OYlnwawdlxJ xuinoo3owr.enHloNV~ l _ jNC• .. ~ 'k~ {t c,..' :,' _ ~. a. uD ^ae Now sawvNmmlNYloe wAe - .' '~ ?r ++ '`r.Lti ^ ~r • ,~'' _ t ,. ., SN011`d~1~1~3dS 1Ntfld ~ , ~' " ' " ~' J,( ( , _-___.~ ._____. ~.-- _ ... ~5 ~ _ . . 9LL1 .. / _ 9F -s 4 _ . 63215 ONY ~ LtLl ' ~ (., ~ - ` r,.' '., '. 53103dS tl0d 1tlOd3tl 335 •S'13BY10111Y13W H11M 03DOV1 ~ /~ '~ , . , IF ~!7-^ ~f., , - 3tlY ONY 6661 'f i AtlYf1NYf 031V0 NVNVNV100W S3WVf gprj *~,C ~ ,y 7.' A8 03A3ntlnS A'ISn01A3Nd 3tl3M S33tl1 DNIMO'IIOd 3H1 L9Lt A ~ ( ~.• ' ~- +b,ryi~ .._.rt_ C9E1 ~ { L .oL wnoaatltl3Mtl ereN3'Inamvr7audAwx1a 9eL1 '~ -.- ~.~... <I ~` - . L .Ll 33tll dnfL W3dldnfLL NOtlON3001tl11 Y9Z1 - A[ ~~ t .Cl H9V 019i00W .VtleV'10.YNLLnl3n aflNlXWd E9Ll '1• ~ / ~. ~4,f,. \ z L ZL H9'Y 019300W htleY10.VNW1"l9n eflNEMld 1921 ~:. .. l .9L VYJYJV OOOMXOY'1e NOIAXONVI3W YIOVOY 09E1 l .9L YIOYJV OOOMXOV78 NOIA%ONV13W VgY0'/ 69L{ J •-- , ! l .LL tlV030 tlV0030 tlV00i08f1tl030 Llil •e~ ~•. ,, tt '. I. ~ IGZ'1 . __.. . _._. _.._.......... ~ ...' ~ fix/ 6665 '02 A•W'LL OIHdY 031V01HOd3a 335 ~ ~ - ' 31V00 31tltlY9 AS 3115 NO 0310N S33lll ONIMOIIOd 3H1 ~' _ k I I 3 t '-" sfl99-LaL (8@tS.. . ' ~ fS056 VO ~'Yl1V90 YSNYS ~~ ~ ~ • } LL 'oo~a 'aavn3'lnoe uoas ogre '~ Xi ~ -• ` ,: ,;. ~N3!lVd3ild NV~d ~. i n 1 ~ r ... .,, 3N(LLOnil1S 9NI151%3 ON'Cl.. `",t '.ry ~ i ~ ~ }_ ..... ., ~.. ~, ~. ~~ ~ ', at ~ 1 ~ ~ .t ,.,' ~... YLZ 9dOlS 3115. 'OnY jX / ! a r, ~ ~ , .~ ~ ~ .... ~ u µ. .:µ ~ i • ~ I iYG'f 315 'OOIB lY 3d0~5 (r / (` ~ - _ ~ ~':L i (Y3tlY 315 1V101 d0 YZ'Bl) / ~ \ ,. _ ~` f ~ '1'S SLf'Ol ~ SnONtl3dWl (I '~T,~j' r ~~ 1~ ' 'd'S 4B0'l ~ 1N3W3SYS: \ ~` -¢ ~" ~ "afi._, ~i' (~I ? 'd'SOBf-~ 30YNV0 .... .~,i ` ''~ _~:.~`~~"~?" ~ •~ \~ mss" llC'l ~ tl001! ONZ ~.. ~ ~•.,,'` 1. -Yy ~ ~~ ~ i ~ ~\ t;~{CG' ZfL'L~SSOtlO J' iJ (~'\/ ' OObr^'t~d'Y0IMMIC'~NI11(}2r• 3' ~`$~, ~ ~ ,~'' ~ ~1! lOl 1NVOYn 350 ONI1SDf3 (0 NNId 03tl0 ~tl3WA0 (0 V- ~a ~~ r ~' i 4 Yc ~.. \ _~_ OCC6 lOVill 'C 10'1 (B s`~ -(~ ~ v dx^ ~• ". ":,1 .~I~ '~.:~~"+,! AVM ATiNn0 .09691 (Y',; •/•6lf\ ~ '~~4~~ .. ~~. , __ _ _ __ t .~_ ,; ;, _ ..~ /~ V ,.., ` `J . ' i .~ Yr '. ~ '~,,~ i`r~T ', ,..,x'0'1 ~ 1 rtt L,;,~ dC -1 \` Tp t~ ,, 4 9~,~~-~~ ' ~ ~ v = ~ \ /P ~ u ia'A^ r ,. ., .. r ..,.1. ~ ~ ,_ 1 1 .. _.~._,_-_~-_. ~-1~ --~. •\ I L ry~~n~,f'~ -~f•~~Y '4f1© ..h.1 L.i71 ~- ~~ ~ _~~~~ ~ A~ J ~ ! ~ °GV~ .. I I I I I 1 ~ r Nb'ld N011~3102id 3311 o i a 3~ a „• i y$ (a~ ~9p .• ¢~ ©© k K i~.''t~ ~ ~{$p~~ ~~~~ i4~ Fp 5q g a .3~ f ~ rz6K°, Y ~9p~ ~ ~ i i? --~ ~ _ a ~ ~ ~ 'f \ z ~' i.: ~ w \~ S• r i. ~ 'tlIM .0-~L f.YZ.Yx)I w 7 T~S ) ~)LYY ~i ~ ~^ Tarr a.os .x x.a. oof F" '~':e.Jsx'~ :: ~r.,'~T+ aY=•_ - xarxa .noer arse .I..~ rra~ x L ~.;y 7~.,v .. ., M.yyG •• ~ WSO.J M IIDLLO. K ~ •Iml ~L f.al.rx)_ 1 ~ Y1 la ^' ~ .. ,• ~y iJ ~ y ~ 7~Yd a ~ 3Jt~ ~ . 6'' ap{ ~g jai ~1 !~1 •ti ~~~ ~~idi ~ ~ ~~ t~d a.9pa ~ ~~~ ~ ~~l vi ~ -~ r ~i ~~ ~. is ~ ~~J~~~~'~6 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ pY~ ~ a~ ~ ~~~x~ i~a ~ ! ~~~ xr9 ~~~ rig ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~i~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ h~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ti~~;r ,~~ J ~ ~~~ =~ ~ ~~• ~ ~~~,1 a j { ~~ ~. ~s~pJ as ~ ~ s~~ ~~9 d =A1 ' a ~ ~- J~a~l~~~f ~!~ ~~ ~l ba~ a~~i! ~~ ~~~~~ ~i x~~~x~ aga !aa a ~~ ~1 i ~;~ ~. ~ ~: ,; Y a + w 3f i~ ~ . N €~ ~~ ~ ~~~. ~,1 ~~~ F x h1 X.. \ ~«~ ~' ~~tl'!'~~ ~'~t~{;, ~,;: ~I =~ ~i w J m 0 z w Z w w F- ~~~ ~~ ~~i a ~'~ ~~d ' ~~ Y~~ ,~ 1 ~ ~~~~ '~ ~~j iaa~ ~ i a ij~ ~'# i~#~a ~Afl ~~ 9,t ~~' ~ ~ ! ~~` ~b~ ~ ~ ~ta ~; ~~ J ~a ;~ ~~ ! ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ t ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~_~ s, ~ ~~~ ~~ i al~r ~l~e~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~f~l ~!~ ~~~.:fi ~i~~ ~~ 1 9 ~ ~ ~~ y ~~e~~ ~~;~'~; } : ~ !e ~ ~ ~ jg ~~ ; I ~' f i ~~ ~ ~ ~~ y tiY ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 i • • Item 2 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No.: 04-152 Location: 13997 Alta Vista Avenue Applicant/Owner: MARATHE I Staff Planner: Thomas Sullivan, AICP Community Development Director Date: July 14, 2004 APN: 397-28-061 Department • • 'cwtNOUm AICiAN W ... .. IHWMAN AV _........ ...... *'TALN,~MANA!lQMAN AV ... ' 164fALW AV ~. ~~ ~ Buffotoles fGUM M4fiATl'E ~saAewAV LAHJVfR SAMTOG.L ~ ~ M>fd47FE ' aAY rouow - SAMTOWM .v (~ ~ : Firnels .. .... - . srAeecT ~ ~ ~ $ ~^l"""`° J ~ IQV9IPA~WQ ' H9WMWIAV .... .v : ~ 541ATQi.L9NfNNFb `A SAMTOW AV ~ yyy wT E ..NA~ J~oa . .. lTN[fR s Je~1¢FS 581•EII!T ALTA VISTA AV SAMTO[pWy ~ - . 1HDW ~ .' - - - - SAgATOGA AV SfWJOW GAYS - 54UTOGA-SilNYVALkID. ..... .... WiLL7AMC AV lNE ' MST ... ... _ . .._._. _. DQPA,ASSW ' - .._ 'LWM WOOF . .. . swaTm~-SUNIYAeb ~ ~ ' 0 150 300 450 600 750 ff ~ - AITA VISTA AV ' - ... 'S481fB W - SAWTQiAAV M5f WAWUf AV WAW RAV. .. S1MTM.vSilFAVMEb L ~ - ~ WOODV1IW IN - VICfC4K ". 6FASPAVES WY - ~ . - DOl6USSW . '. `.. - .. JIMTB LN - ~ _ - ~ 1 SMAT06AaV - ~IAQIP \ ~/ i~ ,..,.,.,,. ..., QAALL AQES 13997 Alta Vista Avenue - MARATHE 000001 • PROJECT DESCRIPTION The appellant is requesting the Planning Commission reverse a Staff denial of a Tree Removal Permit application. The Appellant submitted a request to remove a mature Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) on 4/28/04. This request was reviewed in conjunction with the criteria found in Section 15-50.080 and was subsequently denied on 5/7/04, the property owner filed the appeal on S/18/04. Following is the criteria prescribed by the Ciry's Tree Regulations to be used to make the determination on request for Tree Removal Permits. The bold italic bullets represent Staff's analysis of the criteria. 15-50.080 Determination on permit. (a) Criteria. Each application for a tree removal pruning or encroachment permit shall ° be reviewed and determined on the basis of the following criteria: (1) The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures and interference with utility services. • The tree appeared to be healthy to the Staff Inspector. However, city Arborist David Babby discovered a substantial amount ofdecay. (2) The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. No (3) The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters, particularly on steep slopes. • The topography is not an issue. (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values, erosion control, and the general welfare of residents in the area. • There are other mature trees on the property (5) The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. • There are other healthy and large trees on the property. (6) Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on the protected tree. The property owner has indicated that this is the only area on the parcels that lends itseh`for the construction ofa pool. (7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article. The provisions of IS-50.010 of the Tree Regulations do not fully support the removal of the tree, however one phrase in that section does support the removal. That phrase is, "To compliment and strengthen zoning, subdivision and other land use standards and regulations, while at the same time recognizing the privileges of private property ownership, the City Council ODU00~ adopts this ordinance to establish basic standards and measures for the maintenance, removal, and replacement of trees. Thus, this ordinance is designed to provide a stable and sustainable urban forest to preserve and protect significant historic heritage values, and to enhance the unique aesthetic character and environment of this City." (8) Any other information relevant to the public health, safety, or general welfare and the purposes of this ordinance as set forth in section 15-50.010. • The owners ha ve submitted a letter and a site plan, which have been attached to this report. (9) The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. . Arguably this criterion can be met in that the property owner has indicated that this is the only area on the parcels that lends itself for the construction of a pool. Following the appeal, Staff directed the Ciry Arborist to inspect the tree and provide a report. Staff has attached that report for the Commission's review. Staff has also attached a portion of a previous Ciry Arborist Report prepared by Barrie Coate as part of the development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the two Arborist Reports Staff is recommending the Commission reverse the Inspector's denial. As such, Staff is recommending the Planning Commission Grant the appeal with the condition that the City Arborist's recommended mitigation be followed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2. Arborist Reports 3. Letters from the Appellant and Neighbor 4. Notice Map and mailing list S. Plans • p00003 • Attachment 1 • 00004 • RESOLUTION NO.04-013 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an appeal of a Staff Denial of a Tree Removal Permit at 13997 Alta Vista Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the City Arborist has prepared a report identifying significant decay and has recommended the removal the Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) and mitigation measures to be taken, and WHEREAS, the appellant has met the burden of proof required supporting said appeal, and the following findings have been determined: ^ The proposed removal of the mature Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) is consistent with the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080 (Determination on Permit) of the Tree Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: The Appeal of Staff denial of a Tree Removal Permit for a mature Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) located at 13997 Alta Vista Avenue is hereby GRANTED. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, July 14, 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: • Secretary to the Planning Commission ®~~®~5 Attachment 2 • DO~OQ16 .:. TkEE SURVEY' AND PRESERVATION RECOIvAdEi~TD~ATIONS ~ Z _ ,.~ `.~- ' ~ ~1T THE BLACKWELi;.PROPERTIES, 14000 ALT~A VISTA AVE.; LOT 2 . ~ , ~T SARATOGA Trees that are-:at risk of damage during proposed landscaping and.constrncftion activities. have~been rated according to their health~and ~structural.attributes as fnllo^vvs: California Sycamore: Trees #158, l71 Coast Live Oak:. :Trees # 151, 159, 168; 1.70; 173;: ~ 74 .Fine. ' Fair 1Vlarginal., .Poor;.. . S ecmens , S ~ ecimens . S ecimens:. - S ecimens I59,168,170;~_ 151 173:, 174... .158. Fine specimens must be retained if possible but .without ~ rnajo~ .design revisions, ~ ~ . ' :Mitigation. procedures ,recommended here are intended. tb limit .damage within .accepted ~ ~ , -horticultural. standards in. order to prevent decline: , ,. Fax 'specrnens'~ are worth retaining.. but;:'`have::eitlier , marginal ~ h'ealth; or potentially .. ; ~~ hazard4u5 :structure. Many :of .these defects axe :repairable. Mitigation is~~ intended td prevent>decline or to reasonably correct structural hazards: ~ . .11'Yargnal. specimens are typically worth;Tetamn~ but could be-rem~sved~.tf; necessary to ., £ac~litate corstruetion: ,These: typically ~ have reduced health;: an .actively. hazardous , structure, or both. Where these specimens, are retained; mitigation is designed to prevent . . ' ~ decline and7or reasonably correct a struchtralhazard. Poor specimens cannot significantly improve regardhess~ of care. ;For any considered .'hazardous,, removal is recommended. For~those retained, mitigation may not be•typically q ested: , re u ~Speci~c ~'~ees ~ ~ . . The.current fencing around Tree #1S9 is inadequate ta:prevent root .coriipscEio beneath the-dripiine. The amount of absorbing root mass potentially damaged by:~tlus compacxion . is approximately,40%, Typically, `trees cannot withstand' ap absorbing root mass loss of . more,than 15 - 20%. 20% root mass loss is considered dangerous.. Ifa lar$er area'can be. . prot~eeted, ~..I-oot regeneration after construction will be more .successful. Tree protection ~ , fencing erected at canopy. dripline is the minimum amount of .protectiion #hat: should ~ be , given if reasonable health. and:::long. term: survival :without. serious ~ decline ~ is desired. Suggested fencing'extensions are-given in the `recommendations' section.. ,< . ~. ,. Presence of Ehrhorn scale (Mycetococcus ehrhorni) was. observed on.the lower sides of manstems pf Tree #159 at the time ofswvey. This, scale insect"lives symbiotically with a white fungal .maf which looks similar to-lichen. This insect.~~and .fungus .relationship is usually found on smooth bark in hady. areas with poor air movement. Due to the severity, ;; of .soil :.compaction ;'around .this specimen.;: tree, it is .not reconunended :.than thinning. pruning be~ done to increase air .flow` through the. tree..Pruniiig wounds. cause biological ' _ stress as the tree attempts, sometimes unsuccessfully, to grow over the wounds from Prepared by: Walter Levison May 5, 1999 ~~~®08 -~ ARBOR RESOURCES Professional Arboricultural Consulting & Tree Care AN EVALUATION OF ONE COAST LIVE OAK AT 13997 ALTA VISTA AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA OWNER/APPLICANT: MARATHE .APPLICATION #: 04-152 Submitted to: Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Prepared by: David L. Babby, RCA Registered Consulting Arborist #399 Certified Arborist #WE-4001A May 29, 2004 P.O. Box 25295, San Mateo. California 94402 ~ Email: arborresources@.earthlink.net Phone: 650.654.3351 • Fax: 650.654.3352 ~ Licensed Contractor #796763 ~a~JO®y .• David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist May 29, 2004 INTRODUCTION • The City of Saratoga Community Development Department has requested I review the Tree Removal Permit Application by Bharat and Vaishali Marathe, dated 4/28/04, requesting authorization to remove one Ordinance-sized tree from their property at 13997 Alta Vista Avenue, Sazatoga. I visited the site on May 25, 2004 and my findings, conclusion, and recommendations aze presented below. The tree's location is presented on the applicant's Tree Removal Permit Application (#04- 115). A tag numbered `173' is attached to the trunk. Specific information regazding trunk diameter, tree height, canopy spread and appraisal value was derived from the City Arborist report by Barrie D. Coate and Associates, dated 8/13/97, prepared in connection with the recent development of the property. FINDINGS The subject tree is a Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) located in the backyard near the home's east corner. It has a trunk diameter of 35 inches, is 25 feet tall, has a canopy spread of 40 feet, and contains an appraised value of $8,182. The tree's canopy appears healthy as leaf color, shoot growth and leaf size aze optimal. However, the tree has a significant structural defect. At an estimated six feet along the trunk from grade, athree- foot long by one-foot wide cavity was found on the trunk's north side. I observed a substantial amount of decay; estimated to encompass approximately 40- to 50-percent of the trunk's total circumference. The tree also grows with a severe lean towards the northwest. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The subject tree does contribute a significant amount of shade and value to the property. However, it also presents a significant risk to public safety as it has the capacity to fail in the near, foreseeable future. This risk is further increased by the trunk's severe lean. Based on my observations, I recommend the subject Tree Removal Permit Application be approved. The removal is supported by Article 15-50 of the City Code. Mitigation for its removal is suggested to include installing one tree of 48-inch box size. Acceptable replacement species include Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia), Valley Oak (Quercus lobata), Black Oak (Quercus kelloggii), Blue Oak (Quercus douglasii), Scrub Oak (Quercus dumosa), Big Leaf maple (Ater macrophyllum), California Buckeye (Aesculus californica), Douglas Fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens). Nlarathe Property, 13997 Alta Vista Avenue, Saratoga Page 1 of I City of Saratoga Community Development Department ®00010 • Attachment 3 • UUU®11 ~, , ~2 t~~wLev~ c~-~tec~ ~3~1"l~y °4 :c'~~ ~ . ~ 0 o~rea~ ~ , a.C~ ~,0 0 4 ~ ~,` Q. ~~- ~ ~ ., e rcn~ back. ,~~ Gc~w L e-~.~- f~rle ~ lJ ~-wt R.~~ ~ o~,GL o9 ~~ ,Bi-~ c,c,~c.c~.C;Gc.~. c~,~zfo~ Cad, ~ ~ ~~~ - ~ ~o ~ ~ waa-ram- ' ~ ~~.e,~a~~ ~ -~~ ~~~~. ,~ ~ '~ ~ o~~ ~. ~- ~~ ~ ~" , ~ ~~~ ,~ °uR' .2~~~ ~', ~ ,~ ,~~ . ~ ~~-c- ,vim ,~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ . ~~~~ b ~ ~I U ~v~.or~ ~ ~~ ~~,~ ~ `~ ~ °~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~a~'~ ~ ~~~ ~u~ -~ ~ ~ ~z ~~t JS~~v?NO~L~2h .~~ ~~z~~c.u-~rr~~L ~ ~ .~ dcee~o , ~ „~ ~ G~ ~~, thee, .~.~ ~ ~.~,~ ~~e.~ v'ar~.~e. , ~.Gd- vt-~-~- ~- .~ ~ ~ v~.~ C~b ~~ ~-~ ~- ~ ~~~ b~ ,~~. • ~~ ~ , -~~ / Q P. S . ~- ~-rbo. /-~o~- ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ rwC~ ~a-~- • -~- ~~ ~ ~- MAY 1 ~ 2004 CITY OF SARATOGA ^arner!*.nTV TIFVELOPMF~r"' Q~V~~~ • City of Saratoga Planning Commission Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga California 95070 6/24/2004 Dear Commissioners and Planning Department Staff, I have just received my Notice of Hearing about removing a 35 inch oak on Alta Vista Avenue. I must go to a meeting on the evening of the hearing, July 14, and therefore I would like to register my opinion by mail. I would like to recommend that the commission reject the appeal and support the decision of the Planning Department staff. I see no reason why a healthy or minimally diseased mature oak tree should be sacrificed because the property owners would like to thin out this old grove of oak trees, appropriately called Miner Grove. I know that the city arborist, the developer, the project architect, and probably the planning department staff carefully evaluated the subdivision and development of Don and Shirley Miner's parcel when it came on the market. I think that they judiciously thinned the grove to permit construction of very large houses while having minimal impact on this oak canopy ecosystem. The trees that remain standing are there because of community policy and guidelines. I urge you to stick to community priorities and preserve our healthy live oaks. It is the community policy and tree removal guidelines which are correct and well reasoned for the good of all Saratogans. There will be constant appeals to compromise our goals. Although I have no knowledge of why the owners of this property want to destroy a magnificent tree I believe there is probably no indication that this tree is a hazard to life or property. Therefore I urge you to stick to community policy over other agenda matters of the property owners such as more light in the breakfast area, less moss or leaves in the back yard. I urge you to evaluate their rationale very critically. Sincer G David 14054 Alta Vista Avenue u° JUG p 1 2004 CITY OF SARq rOG '`~nsrfMlTV A !~EVFLOPMFr ~~ • • ~~®®~`~ Attachment 4 L ~Q~®:~5 City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 408-868-1222 NOTICE OF HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Wednesday, the 14`h day of July 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Details are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Thursday from 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. APPLICATION #04-152 (397-28-061) -Appellant MARATHE, Site Location - 13997 Alta Vista Avenue; -Appeal of an Administrative Decision to DENY a Tree Removal Permit at 13997 Alta Vista Avenue to remove a large Coast Live Oak tree. The tree in question is a 35-inch diameter 25-tall, mature Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) and has a canopy spread of 40-feet. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before the Tuesday, a week before the meeting. This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject of this notice. The Ciry uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor's office annually, in preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of -date information or difficulties with the U.S. Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project. Thomas Sullivan, AICP Community Development Director • 000®16 YpA1C4F9lNAIMEPo IF:Qa+TpJ CT iAYMCaTI I M CAMIVOGYV gAT(N M IMAJ1l9YTMNM tEpgIkRJM Is4RW~M llNT'CT SiAWSA AE iO ~N[IUI10W . IMEF M ~EEiPAwRPMpICt PNOIItt 1JEPRUNVM lwJOE M SNAW6AN SIYATOSM xE PD JE-NiMNM JEhPH50Y lwi~E GT BYE4CT LY~IDE M AM SIYA QEID VJ YRAIC6A A' A SAAATOLM9lflM'WF AO CLTM KIDw MIDW WHLL4lSM FIVIDASf tDIfiAYW 0 150 300 450 600 750 N cA`no+vrtwac srmwor-cr r vewci ~s ~ 5pp W7ICEAF~4 saATawM N uJU¢.wro H~IDAST ~~~ ~ AYIRATFE ~r ypATCGA ~~ 1Q~" 1yt'~~ E ' ^ 3 ~Y ~ ~ woowrtww M'RCNPG ANfiM pp IYJIFI.l6 W S~OAIOGAM 111YYYJG~RIAIMB'C~. • • V ~©~~ Jam Free Printing Use Aveiy TEMPLATE 5160® 4~ANG, RAY SHU-NING & LISA KING FONG 13871 RIVER RANCH CL SARATOGA, CA 95070-5424 RODRIGUES, GARY M & FIONA D 14098 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5413 HUR, JIM R ETAL 19933 DOUGLASS LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5522 CHU, HENRY H & SALLY S TRUSTEE 14081 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5412 ALLEN, C DONALD & SARA B 14101 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5412 GERHART, DOUGLAS A & JUDITH S 14011 JUNE WY SARATOGA, CA 95070-5410 FOUNTAIN, STEVEN S TR & MARCIA L TRUSTEE P.O. BOX 2939 SARATOGA, CA 95070-0939 COLEMAN, SANDRA L & NORMAN R TRUSTEE 14000 JERRIES DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5411 MCCOY, HELEN M TRUSTEE 2865 BRISTOL RD KENWOOD, CA 95452-9012 KENYON, B T III & KAY T TRUSTEE 14024 JUNE WY SARATOGA, CA 95070-5410 ~ vvww.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY TAM, MARISA CHING SHUT 13891 RIVER RANCH CL SARATOGA, CA 95070-5424 FRITSINGER, FRED J & HELEN TRUSTEE 14051 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5412 KOO, SHAWN MYUNG-KWAN & TERESA Y 14069 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5412 SANQUINI, RICHARD L & ANNE M TRUSTEE 14087 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5412 SCVWD SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SUCKOW, JOHN R & SALLY C 14020 JUNE WY SARATOGA, CA 95070-5410 STAHLMAN, GLORIA D TRUSTEE 14001 JERRIES DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5409 MANDELL, BRADLEY S & KATHRYN) 14031 JERRIES DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5409 SPADES, JOSEPH F & FRANCES L TRUSTEE 14090 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5413 Q AVEItI(® 5160" DUJARI, SITYAM & ANJALI 14969 JERRIES DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5408 LIN, YEN CHUNG & SU IN HSIEH TRUSTEE 14057 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5412 LIU, YUAN KWEI & 7iJ PING CHANG 14075 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5412 CALLAGHAN, JOHN B & MARY L 14093 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5412 NOLAN, JAMES J & TERESA 14040 JUNE WY SARATOGA, CA 95070-5410 • HEESCH, MORGAN L & PATRICIA H TRUSTEE 1022 VIA TORNASOL APTOS, CA 95003 NISSLY, KENNETH L & MARJORIE J 14011 JERRIES DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5409 NATOLI, JOSEPH T & JENNIFER D 14041 JERRIES DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5409 RUIZ, SAL S & MARTHA S 14082 LOMA RIO DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5413 QQ~®~.~ ~o~~ ~,.~~~w.,. 171 wand-o~-oog-~ Jam Free Printing ~ www.averycom ~ AVERY® 5160• Use Av~erye TEMPLATE 5160® ~ 1-800-GO-AVERY .IrNILL, JOHN R & SUSAN H SALVADORE, JOSEPH M & IlVIlMANUEL LUTHERAN 14058 LOMA RIO DR STEPHANIE A TRUSTEE CHURCH OF SARATOGA INC TOGA, CA 95070-5413 14050 LOMA RIO DR 14103 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-5413 SARATOGA, CA 95070-5437 SMITH, JACKS & MARGARET O SEIPEL, ROBERT S & JOAN V VICK, PATRICIA & GARY J 13881 RIVER RANCH CL 1988 LIV TRUST T 14137 SQUIRREL HOLLOW LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5424 14127 SQUIRREL HOLLOW LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5417 SARATOGA, CA 95070-5417 WEISMAN, WENDIE E CLEMENT, ALBERT & DIANE M MARTIN, DAVID N & ROBEN S 14147 SQUIRREL HOLLOW LN 14157 SQUIRREL HOLLOW LN 14167 SQUIRREL HOLLOW LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5417 SARATOGA, CA 95070-5417 SARATOGA, CA 95070-5417 GLASS, JACQUELYN M WETTERHOLT, DAVID G S C V W D TRUSTEE 14054 ALTA VISTA AV ALTA VISTA AV 14410 SQUIRREL HOLLOW LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5422 SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 CHANG, WEI & ANNABEL W SCHAEFFER, THOMAS H ETAL TRUSTEE ETAL 14078 ALTA VISTA AV 13995 ALTA VISTA AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-5422 SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 ACKWELL PROPERTIES BLACKWELL PROPERTIES BLACKWELL PROPERTIES 125 E SUNNYOAKS AV 125 E SUNNYOAKS AV 125 E SUNNYOAKS AV CAMPBELL, CA 95008-6607 CAMPBELL, CA 95008-6607 CAMPBELL, CA 95008-6607 BLACKWELL PROPERTIES 125 E SUNNYOAKS AV CAMPBELL, CA 95008-6607 GLAZER, DONALD A & ALICE A HSU, WEN C TRUSTEE ETAL CHENG, GARY Y TRUSTEE PO BOX 3687 14029 OAK HOLLOW ETAL SARATOGA, CA 95070-1687 SARATOGA, CA 95070-5449 14043 OAK HOLLOW SARATOGA, CA 95070-5449 FREEMAN, JERRY E & LIANE D BAC, STANLEY & SUSAN LOS GATOS H S D 13993 ALTA VISTA AV 13990 ALTA VISTA AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SARATOGA, CA 95070-5421 SARATOGA, CA 95070-5422 COGGINS, REBECCA & AIN L 14005 OAK HOLLOW SARATOGA, CA 95070-5449 not c ~ 1).17 AM n ~a3nv-o~-oos-~ ~~~~~g.. • • • Application No. 04-106; 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY: Application filed: 4/22/04 Application complete: 5/20/04 Notice published: 6/30/04 Mailing completed: 6/23/04 Posting completed: 6/25/04 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for modification of an approved use permit to install two cabinets, and one GPS antenna to the existing equipment pad, and exchange the two existing antennas on the utility pole with larger antennas. Use permit approval was originally granted in October 1999 to install the existing wireless facility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission conditionally approve the modification to the approved use permit by adopting the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of approval 2. Affidavit of mailing notices, public hearing notice, mailing labels for project notification 3. Statement of intent from the applicant 4. Letters from the Neighbors 5. Hammet & Edison Report 6. Photo simulations 7. Reduced Plans, Exhibit A • ®~®~2 Item 3 • REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 04-158;13000 Glen Brae Drive Type of Application: Modification to an Approved Use Permit Applicant/Owner: AT&rT Wireless Pacific Gas ~ Electric Staff Planner: Christy Oosterhous AICP, Associate Planner~lJ- Date: July 14, 2004 APN: 393-21-006 Department Head: • • ~~a®01 13000 (slen brae llrive Application No. 04-158; 13000 Glen Brae Drive EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY: Application filed: 5/25/04 Application complete: 5/25/04 Notice published: 6/30/04 Mailing completed: 6/22/04 Posting completed: 6/25/04 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for modification of an approved use permit to install one 2-foot diameter microwave dish at the top of existing utility lattice tower. Use permit approval was granted in the fall of 2003 to install six panel antennas and an equipment enclosure at the location of an existing utility lattice tower near Congress Springs Park along the railroad tracks at Glen Brea Drive and Chardonnay Court. The panel antennas, equipment enclosure, and landscaping have been installed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission conditionally approve the modification to the approved use permit by adopting the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of approval. 2. Affidavit of mailing notices, public hearing notice, mailing labels for project notification. 3. Statement of intent from the applicant. 4. Photosimulations. 5. Manufacture specification sheets on dish. 6. Radio Frequency Report 7. Reduced Plans, Exhibit A. • ~~~®~~ • C7 STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: Residential GENERAL PLAN: Residential Medium Density Maximum Dwelling Unit Per Acre 3.48 MEASURE G: Not Applicable PARCEL SIZE: 2 acres AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: level GRADING REQUIRED: Not Applicable ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project which includes construction of an equipment enclosure and installation of six panel antennas is categorically exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to new construction of limited small new facilities; installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures. MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED: The microwave dish shall match the color of the existing lattice tower. ®Ud~03 PROJECT DISCUSSION: AT&T wireless requests a modification of an approved use permit to install one 2-foot diameter microwave dish at the top of existing utility lattice tower. Use permit approval was granted in the fall of 2003 to install six panel antennas and an equipment enclosure at the location of an existing utility lattice tower near Congress Springs Park along the raikoad tracks at Glen Brea Drive and Chardonnay Court. The panel antennas, equipment enclosure, and landscaping have been installed. The parcel is owned by Pacific Gas and Electric. The 2-acre parcel is long and narrow and abuts the raikoad tracks. Existing improvements to the parcel include a pathway, a parking lot, and wireless facilities including two equipment sheds and several panel antennas. Surrounding land uses include Congress Springs Park and single-family residences. Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC has exclusive jurisdiction over RF emissions from personal wireless antenna facilities. Pursuant to its authority under federal law, the FCC has established rules to regulate the safety of emissions from these facilities. The applicant has provided a cumulative RF exposure report which evaluates both the proposed and existing wireless facilities as well as the proposed microwave dish. The report concludes that the RF energy is well below the Maximum Permissible Exposure limit established by the FCC. The applicant has provided written statement that describes the purpose of the proposed microwave dish (please see attachment 3). Use Permit Findings The proposed modification including the installation of a 2-foot diameter microwave dish supports the findings for use permit approval; therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission approve of the proposed modification based on the following findings: • That the proposed modification is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located in that it is a conditionally permitted use that is visually unobtrusive and that the aesthetic impact of the facility will be less than significant. • That the proposed modification of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity because the facility will be operated under the restrictions imposed by the FCC to insure safety with respect to limiting human exposure to radio frequency energy. • That the proposed modification of the conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter in that the location, height, size and use proposed is conditionally permitted in this zoning district. ~~~?®04 • Conclusion The project satisfies all of the findings required within Section 15-55.070 of the City Code. The 2-foot diameter microwave dish is not expected to be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare nor are they expected to be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposal further satisfies all other zoning regulations applicable to antenna facilities. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission conditionally approve the modification of the approved use permit by adopting the attached resolution of approval. • • ~'®~®05 C Attachment 1 Q~~~O~ APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. Application No. 04-158 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA AT & T Wireless;13000 Glen Brae Drive WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for a modification to an approved use permit to install a 2-foot diameter microwave dish at the top of an existing 125 foot tall utility lattice tower; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the project, which includes the installation of a 2-foot diameter microwave dish is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to installation of small new equipment and facilities; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for a modification to an approved use permit, and the following findings specified in Municipal Code Section 15-55.070: • That the proposed modification is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located in that it is a conditionally permitted use that is visually unobtrusive and that the aesthetic impact of the facility will be less than significant. • That the proposed modification of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity because the facility will be operated under the restrictions imposed by the FCC to insure safety with respect to limiting human exposure to radio frequency energy. • That the proposed modification of the conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter in that the location, height, size and use proposed is conditionally permitted in this zoning district. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, application number 04-158 for a ®~®~~ modification to the original use permit approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. Four sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page shall be submitted to the Building Division. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining all equipment, structures, and landscaping to the city's satisfaction. 3. Within 30 days of cessation of business, the applicant shall remove all equipment and structures. 4. The Planning Commission shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Use Permit and may, at anytime modify, delete or impose any new conditions of the use permit to preserve the public health, safety and welfare. CITY ATTORNEY 5. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. Section 2. Construction must commence within 24 months or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen days from the date of adoption PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission. State of California, the 14th day of July 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: • ~®®®~~ r~ • Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date 4~®409 • Attachment 2 • Q~©+~10 . AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES STATE OF CALIFORNIA SS. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA I, C h ~ ~ ~ 1.,x.5 ~ ~ ,being duly sworn, deposes and says: that I am a citizen of the ited States, over the age of 18 years; that acting for the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on the~~ day of ~~ 2004, that I deposited in the United States Post Office within Santa Clara County, a NOTICE OF HEARING, a copy of which is attached hereto, with postage thereon prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses shown, to-wit: (See list attached hereto and made part hereof) • that said persons are the owners of said property who are entitled to a Notice of Hearing pursuant to Section 15-45.060(b) of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Saratoga in that said persons and their addresses are those shown on the most recent equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of Santa Clara as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property to be affected by the application; that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. ~~ ~U t Signed • ©®~'1~ City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 408-868-1222 NOTICE OF HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Wednesday, the 14`h day of July 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Details are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Thursday from 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. • APPLICATION #04-158 (393-21-006) AT&tT Wireless, 13000 Glen Brae Drive; - Requestfor modification of a Use Permit approval to install one 2 foot diameter microwave dish at the top of existing utility lattice tower. Use permit approval was • granted in the fall of 2003 to install six panel antennas and an equipment enclosure at the location of an existing utility lattice tower near Congress Sprmgs Park along the railroad tracks at Glen Brea Drive and Chardonnay Court. The panel antennas, equipment enclosure, and landscaping have been installed. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before the Tuesday, a week before the meeting. This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor's office annually, in preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of -date information or difficulties with the U.S. Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project. Christy Oosterhous, AICP Associate Planner • ~~Q~12 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO S TOGA CA 95070-0000 CALIFORNIA STATE OF SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 CALIFORNIA STATE OF SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 BURGESS, LAWRENCE R & ELIZABETH S 13102 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4038 SCVWD COX AV SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 ADDRESS NOT AVAILABLE-5 KK VUTZ, PETER & DORIS J 19640 JUNIPERO WY SARATOGA CA 95070-4432 KING, FRANK S III & L MONDAY 13098 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4463 NASIRI, STEVEN S 19500 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4530 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION CO SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION CO SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 SARATOGA CITY OF SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 SARATOGA CITY OF SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 KORBAY, BEVERLY J TRUSTEE LEVI, MEIR & LYNN A ETAL TRUSTEE 13148 ANZA DR 13126 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4038 SARATOGA CA 95070-4038 YIN, MINGTANG ETAL 13527 TONI ANN PL SARATOGA CA 95070-4853 CHEN, JANG PING & HSIU MEI L TRUSTEE 13068 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4038 CALIFORNIA STATE OF SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO COX AV SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 GUERRA, MARIA R & REED A 19660 JUNIPERO WY SARATOGA CA 95070-4432 WONG, BILL N & MARY L TRUSTEE 13076 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4463 LIU, LI Q & NING Y 19486 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4530 LEN, JOHN F & BARBARA J HU, HUNG K & JING-MEI 2 VIA REAL DR 19430 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4530 SARATOGA CA 95070-4530 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION CO SARATOGA AV SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 WOOD, RALPH H & FRANCES L 19661 JiJNIPERO WY SARATOGA CA 95070-4432 FIELDS, GERALD A JR ETAL 13110 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4430 KORANDA, JOHN J & LORRAINE 19522 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4530 CRONIN, GREGORY R 229 UNIVERSITY AV LOS GATOS CA 95030-6018 BAIlZ, SITYH-SITYONG & HUEY- CHING 19445 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4516 ~~~~~~ ROSSI, ADRIANO D & MOW, JO A PRENTICE, RICK F & FRANCINE L 19449 VIA MADRONAS CT CATHERINE A 19447 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4516 19451 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4516 SARATOGA CA 95070-4516 LIN, FONG-JEI & PEGGY 19450 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4516 STRAUSS, ROY L & GENEVIEVE B 19448 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4516 LEUFGEN, MARIE E TRUSTEE ETAL 19446 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4516 BOARDMAN, CHARLES E & LAURA J TRUSTEE 19444 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4516 CHI, MA-LI 13132 VIA MADRONAS DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4518 HUNG, YIEN D & SHIN W 19403 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4529 MCPHERSON, WILBUR F & LOIS M 19449 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4529 VENKATRAMANI, KUMAR & VEENA N 19495 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4529 BALASUBRAMANIAN, C.S. & INDIIZA 13010 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4427 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO SARATOGA AV SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 EBENHAHN, ROBERT A & EILEEN B TRUSTEE 13166 VIA MADRONAS DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4518 SELVI, CLAIRE & ALDO TRUSTEE 13120 VIA MADRONAS DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4518 NARASIMHAN, SUBRAM & AKILA S 19425 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4529 YAMAUCHI, FUJIO & HELEN H 19471 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4529 HAGGETT, CHARLES R & GLADYS V 19517 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4529 SCVWD VIA MADRONAS DR SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO SARATOGA AV SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 SCVWD SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 PIMSAKUL, UTIT & SUPAWAN 13154 VIA MADRONAS DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4518 MCCARTNEY, JOHN J & MARGARET D TRUSTEE 19381 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4527 CORNELIUS, RICHARD M III TRUSTEE ETAL 140 CALLE MARGARITA LOS GATOS CA 95070 CHEN, JEN-TUNG & MARIA L~ 19483 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4529 OGAWA, JOY M TRUSTEE ETAL 19529 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4529 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO SARATOGA AV SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 COOK, THOMAS H & LOREN 19329 VIA CRECENTE CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4514 ~~~~~~ . BLACKWELL, DONALD A & MARGARET A 19331 VIA REAL DR TOGA CA 95070-4527 SIlVIlVIONS, WALTER J & JEANETTE B TRUSTEE 19367 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4527 YU, CHESTER T & LOUISE 19346 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4528 LIN, JY KUANG ETAL 19343 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4527 ELHOFF, WILLIAM C & JOAN C TRUSTEE 19379 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4527 JONES, EDITH E & MALCOLM E TRUSTEE 13135 VIA ARRIBA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4534 GIANSIItACUSA, MICHAEL D & KAO, CHIIMING & AILEEN EDITH M TRUSTEE 13143 VIA RANCHERO DR 13121 VIA RANCHERO DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4553 SARATOGA CA 95070-4553 NASSER, MOHAMMAD S & DIANE TRUSTEE 19568 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 ~CHER, ERICA & VIVIAN M TRUSTEE 19542 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 CHAN, ANDY PENG-PUI TRUSTEE ETAL 19546 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 CHIAVETTA, GARY G & MADELINE S TRUSTEE 19548 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 CHUNG, TAEIM & NOEL R 19574 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 BITTNER, GERALD L TRUSTEE 890 SARATOGA AV 100 SAN JOSE CA 95129 AN, BYOUNG EUN & SANGMI 13049 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4400 KAI P & MARIA W TEE 19588 VIA ESCUELA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4459 ARUNKUMAR, NAGARAJ & GEETANJALI TRUSTEE 19582 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 JOSHI, SUNIL P & SHAILA S 19551 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 GROTZINGER, WILLIAM G & BARBARA F 13073 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4400 GOU, PERNG-FEI & BINNIE C TRUSTEE ETAL 19606 VIA ESCUELA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4442 WILHOIT, KATHLEEN J & JOHN W 19355 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4527 NABAR, NILESH R & KALPITA N 13124 VIA RANCHERO DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4526 CRIMI, FRANK P & ANNA M 13146 VIA RANCHERO DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4526 LIN, CHANG-AN & KIYOKO 13165 VIA RANCHERO DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4553 CHENG, STEPHEN S & NANCY 19538 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 LARSEN, REED W & GWYNNE L 19560 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 LEE, SHAWN & JANE TRUSTEE 19577 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 CHEN, HOREN & JENNY H 19567 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4460 HUNG, JACK S.D. & SHU GUZ TRUSTEE 13097 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070-4400 WANG, ALEXANDER C & LING- RU C 13034 VIA ESCUELA CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4461 ~Q~®~~.5 LEE, DAVID A TRUSTEE 13012 VIA ESCUELA CT SARATOGA CA 95070-4461 C7 E~~~Qg~ • Attachment 3 ®~®~~~ .-•.~ AT~TWireless May 20, 2004 Crty of Saratoga Community Development Christy Oosterhous 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga. CA 95070 l~ ~~~0~ MAY 2 5 2004 CITY OF SARATOGAAr, . . ,, ,a~,TV nryc~ RE: Application to Modifv Microwave Antennas at Existing AT&T Site Located ate 13000 Glen Brae Drive, Saratoga Dear Christy. AT&T Wireless has submitted an application to modify an existing wireless • communications site in the city of Saratoga. Your department has already approved the existing equipment. The site is located at 13000 Glen Brae Drive on an existing PG~.F. lattice transmission tower. .AT&T is requesting cit}~ approval to place one 2-foot microwave dish at the top of the tower. l~he new microwave dish will be used to supply a T-1 telephone line to the equipment. ~;veiy cell site needs to have a landline connected to the equipment in order to process the cell phone calls back to the switch. The switch is the central control of any telephone network. It routes each call to the desired location. During the initial application process, AT&T tried to bring telephone service to the site in t11e usual manner. That is to order the service from SBC. However that option was not available to us at this site. SBC does not have the necessary T-1 lines in the area and to bring it in from the closest available point was cost prohibitive. AT&T did approach Verizon, who is also on the tower.. abo~l~ a cost sharing agreement that would allow AT&T to use their phone lines. Verizo;~ lead purchased all the available T-1 lines in the area. Verizon denied our request. We feel we have designed a site that ~~~ill blend into the area with minimal visual impact. The antenna is located near the top cif he tower. next to the Verizon antennas. The antenna has centerline of 129 feet in the air. 7~1ie dish will be painted matte silver so it will blend into the tower. I have submitted a set of photosi~;~s that shoe the antenna from • Recycled Paper ~r ~®~~$ two different angles. Considering the size of the dish and the height it is mounted, it is almost unnoticeable. The proposed facility would be used strictly as a wireless transmitting and receiving facility, and for no other purposes. The facility is completely self-operating and therefore unmanned. Once the facility has been constructed, a technician from AT&T Wireless will visit the site approximately once per month for maintenance purposes during normal business operations. There is ample off street parking behind the access gate. We will be able to service the site without interfering with any traffic. There is ample space to park a service technician's vehicle (usually a sport utility vehicle or a minivan). I hope that I have addressed all of the issues regarding this project. If you have comments or questions please feel free to contact me at 925-899-1999. Sincerely, Bob Gundermann NSA Wireless Agent for AT&T Wireless 925-899-1999 phone 925-335-0672 fax bob.gundermann@nsawireless.com ~~®~19 Attachment 4 • ~®(D®2~ • 'TM ,~, ,~~J~ `~~ _ F- , AT&T 5/t 0/04 'i r ~ ~, Hwy 85 & Saratoga ~. ": ~ 4 13000 Glen Brae Drive ;~ ~,:fi Saratoga, CA 95070 `~{`' - site # SNFCCA0585A Pliotosirrwlauon by Applied knagineGOn 510{{911-0,00 - ~®~J®~~ ~~~ ~: s, ~' ~, ~ ~n G ~. ~* _ -""`_~_ `. ,, y! • ~,~_.. • Attachment 5 C 0~~®23 5.25 - 5.85 GHs AMenne Inpuh. All antenna VSWR values are specified wfth Type N Female connectors. Other optional inputs may result in equal or slightly VSWR. Contact Andrew for details. •lYeY1O•Ylr VYIIIIIIIYIIYY IVia 1/v •V••11 Type Diameter RPE U.S. FCC ETSI ETSI Gain, d61 Beamwidth Pal. Ratio max. u.....tie. x L..1 W.In6.•/al ~n1 7A 7R Cl.ee G.in 1 nw MiA-R~nd Tnn nlnnroos rlt.c dR dR !R I dRl Unlicensed Radios Including Spread Spectrum, NII, and ISM -Single and Dual Polarized Antenna Input: Type N Female P2F-52 2 (0.6) 4528 - - - - - 29.U 29.2 29.9 5.4 3U 4;i 1.bV (14.U) PX2F-52 2 (0.6) 4740 - - - - - 29.0 29.2 29.9 5.4 30 43 1.50 (14.0) P3f-52 3 (0.9) 4529 - - - - - 32.3 33.0 33.3 3.8 30 44 1.50 (14.0) PX3F-52 3 (0.9) 4741 - - - - - 32.3 33.0 33.3 3.8 30 44 1.50 (14.0) 5.6-6.2GHs* Alaenne Inpuh. All antenna VSWR values are specified wtth CPR and PDR flanges. Other optional flanges may result in equal or slightly higher VSWR. Contact Andrew for details. ..vyr.r....~ v..... /...r...v RPE U.S. FCC ETSI ETSI Gain, dBf .L..w../.. ~m ~• ~e rl.... eel.. 1 ..... YIA_nenA r .. '~ ' Ultra Hiph Perlonnance Antennas -Dual Polarization UHX ~ ',• Antenna Inputs: CPR137G and PDR70 UHX10-56 10 (3.0) 1636, 1637 A - - 3 2 42.5 42.9 43.3 1.1 36 72 1.06 (30.7) UHX12-56 12 (3.7) 1638, 1639 A - - 3 2 44.0 44.5 44.9 0.9 36 73 1.06 (30.7) HPX Hiph Performance Antennas -Dual Polarized ~. ;' Antenna Inputs: CPR137G and PDR70 HPXO-56 8 f2.4) 1025 B - - 3 2 40.5 41.0 41.4 1.6 30 68 1.06 (30.7) 5. T25 - 6.425 GHs Antenna Inputs. All antenna VSWR values are specified with CPR and PDR flanges. Other optional flanges may result in equal or slightly higher VSWR. Contact Andrew for details. Pros:urizetion. Feeds are pressurizable to 10 Ib~nz (70 kPa). ReOulatory Compliance Cross F/B VSWR Type Dlameter RPE U.S. FCC ETSI ETSI Gain, dBi Beamwidth Pol. Ratio max. Number tt (m) Number(s) 101 74 78 Class Galn Low Mid-Band Top Degrees Disc., dB d8 (R.L., dB) HP « Hiph Performance /Wide Band Antennas -Single Polarization '~.. Antenna Inputs: CPR137G and PDR70 Standard/Wide Band Antennas -Single Polarized Standard and Low VSWR Antenna Inputs: CPR137G, PDR70, and Type N Female Reference ETSI Document EN300633 for 3 to 60 GHz. 'Multiband antennas are available in this frequency band. See pages 93-94. • U.K. 0800-250055 • Australia 1800-803 219 • New Zealand 0800-441-747 Visit us at: www.andrew.com ANDREW. Revised 5/01 ~~i '~ ~, Antenna Types Standard Parabolic Antenna Standard Parabolic Antennas P, PL, PX and PXL Series Standard Parabolic antennas are unshielded parabolic antennas that provide eco- nomical and reliable service where a high degree of back and side radia- tion suppression is not necessary. • Low-VSWR versions minimize echo distortion for less noise on the system • A vertical tower mount is included. Optional mounts and radomes can be ordered separately for versatility of installation • Single and dual-polarized options are available in most applicable fre- quencies • Spun aluminum reflectors provide long term reliability and minimize environmental distortion to protect system investments • Rugged, high-quality performance at low initial costs Standard Focal Plane Antennas FP and FPX Series Standard Focal Plane antennas are ideal for use in higher capacity systems where improved front-to-back ratios are required. Special deep reflectors and a unique beam-shaping feed or spe- cial edge geometry achieve efficient pattern performance. The antennas combine reasonable initial cost with very long-life performance, thus assuring long term economy. • Single and dual-polarization options are available • Includes a vertical tower mount for ease of tower interface Flat Panel Array Antennas The Flat Panel Array (FPA) Series antennas are designs that provide solutions for many applications including spread spectrum and UNIT frequency band operation. The low profile has an aesthetically pleasing appearance and eases the planning and zoning process. The antennas incorporate a convenient rear mount- ed connector. The mount is easily assembled and readily attaches the antenna onto a vertical pipe. The antennas are available at a variety of frequencies. Contact Andrew for more information. NOTE: See page 120 for default packing options. ANDREW. Customer Service center -Call toll-hee from: • U.S.A., Canada and Mexico 1-800-255-14 9 ~®~~2~ Standard Focal Plane Antenna Flat Panel Array Antenna • Attachment 6 • . AT8~T Wireless • Base Station No. SNFC 0~~~ 13000 Glen Brae Drive • Saratoga, Cal rnia MAY 2 5 2004 Statement of Hammett 8~ Edison, Inc., Consulting~.~~iSAe~eT~A •~ •~ r*r+TV 11FVFj.(1n11Ar„~- The firm of Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers, has been retained on behalf of AT&T Wireless, a wireless telecommunications carrier, to evaluate the base station (Site No. SNFCCA05858A) located at 13000 Glen Brae Drive in Saratoga, California, for compliance with appropriate guidelines limiting human exposure to radio frequency ("RF") electromagnetic fields. Prevailing Exposure Standards The U.S. Congress requires that the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") evaluate its actions for possible significant impact on the environment. In Docket 93-62, effective October 15, 1997, the FCC adopted the human exposure limits for field strength and power density recommended in Report No. 86, "Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields," published in 1986 by the Congressionally chartered National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements ("NCRP"). Separate limits apply for occupational and public exposure conditions, with the latter limits generally five times more restrictive. The more recent Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ("IEEE") Standard C95.1-1999, "Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz," includes nearly identical exposure limits. A summary of the FCC's exposure limits is shown in Figure 1. These limits apply for continuous exposures and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. The most restrictive thresholds for exposures of unlim several personal wireless services are as follows: Personal Wireless Service Apyrox. Freauen Personal Communication ("PCS") 1,950 MHz Cellular Telephone 870 Specialized Mobile Radio 855 [most restrictive frequency range] 30-300 ited duration to radio frequency energy for y~ Occupational Limit Public Limit 5.00 mW/cm2 1.00 mW/cm2 2.90 0.58 2.85 0.57 1.00 0.20 Power line frequencies (60 Hz) are well below the applicable range of these standards, and there is considered to be no compounding effect from simultaneous exposure to power line and radio frequency fields. General Facility Requirements Base stations typically consist of two distinct parts: the electronic transceivers (also called "radios" or "cabinets") that are connected to the traditional wired telephone lines, and the passive antennas that send the wireless signals created by the radios out to be received by individual subscriber units. The transceivers are often located at ground level and are connected to the antennas by coaxial cables about ~,~~~ HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. `, ~'^' CONSULTING ENGINEERS AT5858596 ~EN$i~%' SAN FRANCISCO Page 1 of3 ~0-~002'~ AT8~T Wireless • Base Station No. SNFCCA05858A 13000 Glen Brae Drive • Saratoga, California 1 inch thick. Because of the short wavelength of the frequencies assigned by the FCC for wireless services, the antennas require line-of--sight paths for their signals to propagate well and so are installed at some height above ground. The antennas are designed to concentrate their energy toward the horizon, with very little energy wasted toward the sky or the ground. Along with the low power of such facilities, this means that it is generally not possible for exposure conditions to approach the maximum permissible exposure limits without being physically very near the antennas. Computer Modeling Method The FCC provides direction for determining compliance in its Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, "Evaluating Compliance with FCC-Specified Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation," dated August 1997. Figure 2 attached describes the calculation methodologies, reflecting the facts that a directional antenna's radiation pattern is not fully formed at locations very close by (the "near-field" effect) and that the power level from an energy source decreases with the square of the distance from it (the "inverse square law"). The conservative nature of this method for evaluating exposure conditions has been verified by numerous field tests. Site and Facility Description AT&T proposes to mount a 2-foot microwave "dish" antenna, on the side of an existing 133-foot PG&E lattice tower, located near 13000 Glen Brae Drive in Saratoga, for interconnection of the AT&T base station at this site with others in its network. Based on information provided by AT&T, including zoning drawings by J.E. Schuricht &Associates, dated February 2, 2001, there are presently mounted six panel antennas on the tower: three Andrew Model DB858DDH65 antennas at an effective height of 50 feet above ground, for cellular operation, and three EMS Model RR6518-OODP antennas at 581/2 feet above ground, for PCS operation. The two sets of antennas are each arranged with 120° spacing, to provide service in all directions. The maximum effective radiated power in any direction is 3,380 watts, representing 1,690 watts each for cellular and for PCS service. Also located at the top of the PG&E tower are similar antennas for use by Verizon Wireless. For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that the Verizon operation is identical to the AT&T cellular operation. There are no other wireless communications facilities located within 300 feet. Study Results The maximum ambient RF level at ground level due to the AT&T operation by itself is calculated to be 0.0027 mW/cm2, which is 0.45% of the applicable public limit. The maximum cumulative level for the simultaneous operation of both carriers is calculated to be 0.53% of the public limit. It should be noted that these results include several "worst-case" assumptions and therefore are expected to overstate HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. ~ + CONSULTING ENGINEERS AT5858596 , SAN FRANCISCO ~y~~~$ AT&T Wireless • Base Station No. SNFCCA05858A 13000 Glen Brae Drive • Saratoga, California actual power density levels. The microwave dish antenna will be in point-to-point service and is so directional that it will make no significant contribution to RF exposure conditions at ground level; therefore, the RF levels are expected to remain unchanged after the addition of the dish antenna. Due to the different frequencies used by the AT&T microwave antenna and the Verizon cellular antennas, there is expected to be no interference from one operation to the other. No Recommended Mitigation Measures Due to their mounting location on a PG&E tower, the AT&T antennas are not accessible to the general public, and so no mitigation measures are necessary to comply with the FCC public exposure guidelines. It is presumed that PG&E already takes adequate precautions to ensure that there is no unauthorized access to its tower, as it is understood that PG&E limits access to its power line towers only to PG&E personnel. To prevent exposures in excess of the occupational limit by authorized PG&E workers, it is expected that they will adhere to appropriate safety protocols adopted by that company. Conclusion • Based on the information and analysis above, it is the undersigned's professional opinion that the AT&T Wireless base station at 13000 Glen Brae Drive in Saratoga, California, complies with the prevailing standards for limiting public exposure to radio frequency energy and, therefore, does not for this reason cause a significant impact on the environment. The highest calculated level in publicly accessible areas is much less than the prevailing standards allow for exposures of unlimited duration. This finding is consistent with measurements of actual exposure conditions taken at other operating base stations. Authorship • The undersigned author of this statement is a qualified Professional Engineer, holding California Registration Nos. E-13026 and M-20676, which expire on June 30, 2005. This work has been carried out by him or under his direction, and all statements are true and correct of his own knowledge except, where noted, when data has been supplied by others, which data he believes to be correct. May 14, 2004 ' ~ ;~ ~~ ~ HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. ~''~~^ ' ~ CONSULTING ENGINEERS kkv ~i~ ~''~ 2 L.'i SAN FRANCISCO AT5858596 ~~~ i ~ .. 1000 The U.S. Congress required (1996 Telecom Act) the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") to adopt a nationwide human exposure standard to ensure that its licensees do not, cumulatively, have a significant impact on the environment. The FCC adopted the limits from Report No. 86, "Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields," published in 1986 by the Congressionally chartered National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, which are nearly identical to the more recent Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standard C95.1-1999, "Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz." These limits apply for continuous exposures from all sources and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. As shown in the table and chart below, separate limits apply for occupational and public exposure conditions, with the latter limits (in italics and/or dashed) up to five times more restrictive: Frequency Applicable Range (MHz) 0.3 - 1.34 1.34 - 3.0 3.0 - 30 30 - 300 300 - 1,500 1,500 - 100,000 L ~~ ~' ~ aQ3 E 100 10 1 0.1 FCC Radio Frequency Protection Guide Electromagnetic Fields (f is freauencv of emission in MHz Electric Magnetic Equivalent Far-Field Field Strength (V/m) Field Strength (A/m) Power Density (mW/cmZ) 614 614 1.63 1.63 100 100 614 823.8/f 1.63 2.19/f 100 180/ 1842/ f 823.8/f 4.89/ f 2.19/f 900/ f2 180/f` 61.4 27. S 0.163 0.0729 1.0 0.2 3.54ff 1.59ff 1~f /106 ~f /238 f/300 f/1 S00 137 61.4 0.364 0.163 5.0 1.0 ~ FM •` / ~~ Public Exposure Cell ~~~~~ i 0.1 1 10 100 103 104 105 Frequency (MHz) Higher levels are allowed for short periods of time, such that total exposure levels averaged over six or thirty minutes, for occupational or public settings, respectively, do not exceed the limits, and higher levels also are allowed for exposures to small areas, such that the spatially averaged levels do not exceed the limits. However, neither of these allowances is incorporated in the conservative calculation formulas in the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65 (August 1997) for projecting field levels. Hammett & Edison has built those formulas into a proprietary program that calculates, at each location on an arbitrary rectangular grid, the total expected power density from any number of individual radio sources. The program allows for the description of buildings and uneven terrain, if required to obtain more accurate projections. Occupational Exposure PCS ` HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS FCC((G~~u{{~~,.i,,dR~e~~l~~ines ~~ .: SAN FRANCISCO oOVUV~ iZFR.CALCTM Calculation Methodology Assessment by Calculation of Compliance with FCC Exposure Guidelines ess re uired 1996 Telecom Act the Federal Communications Commission "FCC" to The U.S. Congr q ( ) ( ) adopt a nationwide human exposure standard to ensure that its licensees do not, cumulatively, have a significant impact on the environment. The maximum permissible exposure limits adopted by the FCC (see Figure 1) apply for continuous exposures from all sources and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. Higher levels are allowed for short periods of time, such that total exposure levels averaged over six or thirty minutes, for occupational or public settings, respectively, do not exceed the limits. Near Field. Prediction methods have been developed for the near field zone of panel (directional) and whip (omnidirectional) antennas, typical at wireless telecommunications cell sites. The near field zone is defined by the distance, D, from an antenna beyond which the manufacturer's published, far field antenna patterns will be fully formed; the near field may exist for increasing D until some or all of three conditions have been met: 1) D>2~ 2) D>Sh 3) D> 1.6~. where h =aperture height of the antenna, in meters, and ~. =wavelength of the transmitted signal, in meters. The FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65 (August 1997) gives this formula for calculating power density in the near field zone about an individual RF source: 0.1 x P power density S = 1~ x ,~ x D x h ' to mW/~2~ where 9BW =half-power beamwidth of antenna, in degrees, and Pnet =net power input to the antenna, in watts. The factor of 0.1 in the numerator converts to the desired units of power density. This formula has been built into a proprietary program that calculates distances to FCC public and occupational limits. Far Field. OET 65 gives this formula for calculating power density in the far field of an individual RF source: power density S - 2.56 x 1.64 x 100 x RFF2 x ERP , in mW~~2~ 4x ~x D2 where ERP =total ERP (all polarizations), in kilowatts, RFF =relative field factor at the direction to the actual point of calculation, and D =distance from the center of radiation to the point of calculation, in meters. The factor of 2.56 accounts for the increase in power density due to ground reflection, assuming a reflection coefficient of 1.6 (1.6 x 1.6 = 2.56). The factor of 1.64 is the gain of a half-wave dipole relative to an isotropic radiator. The factor of 100 in the numerator converts to the desired units of power density. This formula has been built into a proprietary program that calculates, at each location on an arbitrary rectangular grid, the total expected power density from any number of individual radiation sources. The program also allows for the description of uneven terrain in the vicinity, to obtain more accurate projections. ~~" a~~``~~" HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. ~~`' ~ y£~'. CONSULTING ENGINEERS Methodology F. ~b~x~ SAN FRANCISCO C~00®31 Figure 2 • C~' • • ~ ~F' ~ ~ proposed relocated microwave dish f ...~.. ~ ~~~~. :~ ~_,1 ._:~} AT&T 5/10/04 f j ~ ~~a7r::4 ~ Wis. - Hwy 85 & Saratoga 13000 Glen Brae Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 site # SNFCCA0585A -.._., _, . +.~ Photosnnulation by Apphetl Irnaquiahon S10 Jt4-OSW • • f f;. `'i ~~. ~ ~i ~~ ~~ ,, _~-~~ ,. -...~, ~. .~.~ JL.v...1 \. ~"` ~ A ^.r^_ w^j:~^w ~_,la.u'VLf' ~~~' - iMM1r'VLIV ,. M~ W **..... .i.. X W ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ N ~ y F ~ Y ~ °aS o _ ,~ itaz~ <~i~ ~ ~.n C ^~,• V n + ~ ~ n ~ n M ~ ~ W ia~O ~^~ c~ N ° lf~ o ~ ~ ~ N Z ~ a ~ a$ W N ~ ~p ~ ' Z Z ~ j J^~W [.~ GAT ~ }' ~! > ~ ~ Q a ~ W ~ ¢ n Q a a ~ m Z~N~ Z Q n ^_n ~ U ' U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - F' ~ N iC. C2~y~ <~d2 < 0 ~$ /-~ a ~ U Z ~ 8 W m O =U~~ ~~ ~ ~ Z^g ~ ~ ~ Z O ~ ~ $ a Z ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ U ~~~~ ~ ~~ 010 ~~~ Z NO o ~ ~g ~ ~ ~ 4 < ~ `' ~ ~ Q ~ F a V ~ O NN ~z~im^~•I ~~ ~~ v ~ <c3C'~ U g ~,~ ~ ~< ~~ ^ Z o~ ~ ~ ~ ~n ~ o ~ ~ ~ = J o Z ~ ~, ~ Q ~ ~ ~ S Z~aF4 ~ <~Obd ~ ~ Z lA~ Zn Z` G.n~ ~a R'v ~nn^pQ• <1D IA h~14 N ~ v 11~Z Mf U > M) > ~ ~ ~ ~ v _ ~ N _ y LW f ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ Z ~ W I A N ~ a ^ a i 9 3 ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ v. W a C < ~+ ~ ~ a-~ ` ~ i.i Z ~ ~~~ < ~ d ~y ~ p Vj ~ 8 ~ o ~ s ~ ~ S Gl ~ c~ aS ~i \ ~ ~ Z s~ J < ~ ~ ~ J Q ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ n a ~, o W~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~~~~ w ~ a ~~.1 ` ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ a ~ t t ~ ~ a - o < U ° °C ~~~ ~ ~ Q ~ o W ~ ~ H ~ a ~ ~~yWy~ W~~`O Q ~ ~ •iq ~ Q ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~~ Z ~ ~~~~& ~ ~ m ~ ~ a N~ ~ ~ ~~V~Od' 9 ~ ~ ~ ¢~ ^ ^ jy~~O FF << W X U / ~ !!~~"TT F O Q ~ d ~ ~~i1 Q A ~ W ~ f ~'04N1~ ~~~~ 'ml XMNNfL4 ~ YlIVS S O O ~ W oo ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~'o a J W L1J ~ z O ~ ~~~ ~~aW= ~~ Z _ r ~ ~; ~ 4Wl pppp~p o 3a~E0U~ o ~ Dod QU ~ ~ W N O N N O O O O O O O O O ~ a W N N O Z Q F N y J a ~ ~ a c w ~ Q ~ c o U F ~ a z a g o Q ~ z z o g a } ,y + > F = V W vs W J (9 Z O ~ a a 0 7 V z N a g a ~ °--` z ai F ~~ °z ~ ~~ a a (~JJ N U a ~ U fn W C7 O ~ N N ' T O F V ~ ~ O a ~ O a ~ O a ~ O a ~ O O a a ~ ~ O O O W W W ~ ~ ~ ~ O W W ~ ~ N ~d p~~~ ~ i M ~ a a a a a a a a a a a a J W LLI 0 0 a a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 0 a a 0 0 0 a a a 0 0 a a ~ ~ ~ O -~ ~n~ JN 0 Z U V V V LL W Z Z V V W Z U V {L Z V V IL Z V V tL Z U U V V lL IL Z z U V V V V V {L IL 1L Z Z Z U U V V IL 1L Z Z U ,n = ~.~`1 ~ O ~'' ~ Z fA Vl ~ ~ a a Vl ~ a fA ~ a d1 ~ a V1 ~ a fA fn ~ ~ a a N Ul t/1 ~ ~ a a~ dl r a a 41 F Z Z .. o~=~ v 3 N N T T ~ ~ ~ ~ N T ~ ~ N T ~ ~ N T ~ ~ N T ~ ~ N N T T ~ 7 ~ N N N T T T ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ N N T T ~ ~ ~ ~ d Oa ~ o Q 0 ~O~p! O^1 ~ O~ N W ~ ~0p1 ~ ~ O^! ~ ~ ~ Op~p1 O^! Off ~ ~ n ~Op^p! ~ M N ~~ N N N N lUd n~ LG •tlS•W tUUG/lL/4U °i^VJ41C ltiU\~"~V\tlSNY ICU\S1~3P08d\~N • • • ~ ~ o ~Ys~~~ ~ ~ b~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~_ ~~~~ r ~~~~ ~ > ~ ~ O t' y~ ~ ~ ~~W~ $ ~.QF"i ~ i ~ Q ~~ d ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ \ ~ r > ~-j ~ '^ ~'~~ }y~~ i3 ~yy~ 8 3 ~ ~ j ~~~~ ~ < ~ °~~~i ~ y q ~ ~ I~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a ~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ s ~ ~R~ ~a ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ r Q R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ < ~ N ) 7 y~ L ~ O~ ~ t~ ~~ ~ ~ a eZ ~ <N ~ ~ p A S m~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~r~~~voo ~rC F ~ ~~ ~ 3 R _ O j ~ Z i m € ~ 992211 ~ ~i1~ ~ ` F RP ~ I ~ ~ JJ N` F ~~ ~~ ~(('a jt1{C MFiQ Vl S C F ~- 8 ~ g W ~ p ~S ~ L ~ ~~ ~L,~ ~ ~ wsx~pr O ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ g v ~~ ~ 5 s~~~~~ s~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a < :~ ; I ' ~ ~ ~ `' ~ ~ ~ a ~'p / ~ ~n 6 / "~ H ~ (~ a `~~ ~ ° ` \ \ly~ "Q.'•. ~ ~ E+ I ~ ~ / ~ o 1` ~7 ~ (y~~ ~ g O A W a a. ~ i ~ / /~ yf h ~YQI 3 ~ ~ i bd ~\ i a aN \ I I O W / / gg ~S ~ gg~~ O ~~ ~~\ /! f1~ ~~ '~a~ ~~!! 9 ! I ...~ / ~ , ~ ! ~ ~ ~ $ H \1~ g~ ~V ~~ / a ~ I n ~ ! / ~ ~~ ~ ~ / /' ~~ !J~! ~ ~ W ~ ! aid g~ ]'~ , Q Q y o ~ ~ V `~ .. . / . ~~ I ' ~ I ~ I~ I pu I N~~ _ p ~:i ' X I 1 / d L ~ ~ N A ` ^ ~ (~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ." I ~ ~ ~ ~ O W ~ ~ ~ -< I i~ gr X 't ~II~ / ~ ~. ~ - ~. °wg~ ~`~' b ~ ~~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a~° ° J n ~ ,~. ~ ~. ~"• 1 g~'r '~'~ '~ ~ ~' ! ~ ~ a ~ ' L?S( 0 x n a ¢ x ~ ~:{ / ~ I /~ I ~~• c. i ~ I I J I I ~~~~. O I , ~~~ N' I I ~ ~~ll C ~~~"V~ ..{{LL L ~~_~~~~~ ~ ~ ~'' _ _ R ~4 Fri N ~ ~ ! I i , u n N ~N'' N _ "~ ~ ~ 'S ~~~M i nn^~ GLEN BRAE DRIVE . QQ ~ QUtnOn ~ ~_ ~~ ~ ~~ oa d ~n ~ ~ N ~' lSd WV 60~4£~LO £0/£0/Zl 6MP'VSN£lf0\6MP\VSN£lf0\S1~31'021d\~N • • • i // // % ~l~' ~/ / cI / % i ~ i ~ i ~ '~ ;'~' ~~~J j ~ ~I ~/ / / ~, ~ / i ~ ~ ~ Q q ~ ` ~ ~ a ~ a y~ u~ g8 S ~ ~~ p ! ~ N G ri ~ ~ 2 F ~ ~ ~ ~~777 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ MI Itl ~ ~~~ ~~ R ~ 8 R s~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ - ~ ~~~~ ~~ - ~J A i d d ~ d d d B \\ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ h i ~ LL ~~ m V p^ A-A~-{ F a O~ q ~ b ~~ ~~ __._._._ R N J H W D QZ J a `w N I~~I N n N O ~~ tl tl aa~ ~ ~:~~~ E- ~ ~ ~~ Q N ~ ~~ ro ~~ a o~~~ 0 ac)iyo~ Nzm~ ~y~~ c~ ~~~~ =N~ ~~ Z4~SZ~ZO 40/OZ/40 MP'OlVflfO\6MP\VSN£ J ~N - N " p.~1A d. OJ~IM m ~ ~ -.-.t0 ~~~^ U=~i j F 1- W x ~ O x U = W oa°' 0 N • • • ~~ ~I N t ~+~ ~o .. ~ w ~~~~~~ .~. ~ Z ~ •I N h~ Q ~ fpp~~ >~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ a for 'vA-sct - SYNN3LPIr dol ror '~.o-.ezt - ttsa anr~totfant a3tn3~ ara ltW '~.[-.1z1 ~ lLit101 dOt g x~~ 'dQv FOf '.~~._ ~~~~ ~s~~ ~ ~ v` .® .s ~ .ll-,l .0-Al lDr '~,tl-AY ~ SVNa3LNr l3Nrd t1Ut10tk1 .tS a3lN3D GVa d lDr 'i.z-.99 ~ SrlN3lNV 131Nd TILLRII .tS N3Lp30 Ora a ~ ~ ~ p lDtl '~.a-,tK ~ a3NOl 31t1Nr ~ n nT ~~~~~ ~o~~. tl W ., . ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ' ~ ~~ ~A ~~ .._e -~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ .._. ~ a ~ a o~~~ ~ _ _ ~~~~ yZm~ ~N ;... ~W~~ =y^ ~l~ \; ... r ~ ~~ t ~r^ b ~ O ~~ N '~ t~ ~kr`N lA ~Of"M ~" - - •~~~ „< ~ m ~~ ~ dnQ ~ ~ O_J~.. V +~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ Uz ~v ~~ ; ~~ ~ .~ ~~ a Z Zj~ 1 ~ ~- O pQ w n~~Q~~ ~~~SSS ~ _ ga b3~$ ~~ N lOd Wd b9~lf~ZO 40/OZ/i0 6MP'OZVfI£0\6MP\rSN£lf0\S1~3fOLld ~N ~~ ~~ ~ _. ~ I~ ~ ~;~ - R~ . ' ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ s -~ ~~ fwy ~ 7~ b ~ ~ - O ~~E i ;~ ~ ~~ e n a ._ a s~ ~ ~~ ~~ Q~~ z~~ Q ~~ w d A ~O ~~~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~~:~ r „~ ~ ~ ~ i i _ _ ~' 1~ ~ ~ • .~ ~ ~ ~ _d •/ - ! I , ~ j~ ~ _ f r l ~ . ] ~ i_ ~ _ b ,r ~ ~~ ~ GLEN BRAE DRIVE 0 }~ Z a w a U Z 4~ Q i N I~!I ~I ~~all~ ~!I H a ~ ~~~ a ~ ~ ~g~ a Q Q O ~ °n 0 oacv~~ a,zm~ ~N~~ ;o"~ z ~~~ y ~~ 1Sd WV 4L~L0~90 £0/£0/Zl O N ~N~ Q_ IA D~iM m n ~ ~ ~UtO^ V) ~.-.~ U=ONi~ „v H W O O U =~ OQra M N ~~ J ~d\ ~N J ~ o a ¢ a a LL ~ ~ N Z N O d N !~ N v ~ O np~ ^ ~ y y O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ N ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~s ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ a ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ .~ W ~ ~~ ~ ~:~ ~ ~ ~~ a ~~ ~ ~a ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~g ~ ~ ~~ R ~ ~~~ ~b ~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~~ M ~ ~, ~ ~~ E~ ~~ R ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~s a ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ; ~~ ~ ~ ~~<~ n ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~ d~~~~ ~ ~ yy~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~ Q~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~0~~ ~ ~~ R~ ~ R ~~ ~~ ~ Itlb R ~ ~~~~~~vv~~~~~~ ~~`~~ St q~w`~ ~~ ~ ~ .:~d~~d~f ]7dd u~1:d ~ ~aSnuaa~~~~~ b`J~ia rri ~ p ~ s 8 F R ~~ ~ `~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~R ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~y~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ yy~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tllQ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ S <~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ .~R~~ '~ z ~ ~~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ a ~ ~~ 7~~ a ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ a a~~R ae ~ ~ ~ ~e ~ ~R~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ R ~~~~~ ~~ a ~' ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~;~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ :gp VSNf a a po~°n 0 ~~~~ a~m~ ~o~~ Z ~~~ O N N In pp~~~-- J ~~ M ~~ °~ .~ J U=~i j ~~ ~W ~~ U = 4. oaa M N ~N Item 4 • • REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 04-106;19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road Type of Application: Modification to an Approved Use Permit Applicant/Owner: AT&T Wireless Caltrans Right-of-way Staff Planner: John F. Livingstone AICP, Associate Planner ~ ~~ Date: July 14, 2004 APN: N/A Department Head~~ 500 radius around 19491 Saratoga Los Geoos ~ ~ /~ ~~ - Parcek w Ulan 500 ft of 19191 Saratoga Los Gatos ~ u i ~ ~ ~ ,, /I , ._.. ~ ~~ -r --i `--vEn _... ~~ ~_ - I~ I. _.~; ..- 16~MTO~LOfl JG rev \ _ _ ~uF;l N '~ ~~ %~'~'~~~ - sK ,;~ t ,; ;;- . ~ , \~~. / /' ~' %~ ~/ ~~ 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road • Q~®~~tD1 • • • STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: R1-40,000, Single Family Residential GENERAL PLAN: Residential Low Density MEASURE G: Not Applicable ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project is categorically exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to new construction of limited small new facilities; installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures. MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED: The antennas and cabinets shall match the color of the existing equipment. PROJECT DISCUSSION: AT&T wireless requests a modification of an approved use permit to add new equipment to an existing wireless facility. Use permit approval was originally granted in October 1999 for the installation of the existing wireless facility. The new equipment will consist of two new cabinets that will be added to the existing cement pad and a new GPS antenna also located on the existing pad. Two new antennas will replace the existing antennas on the utility pole. The antennas will be located in the same place as the existing antennas. The current antennas are 28"X11" and the proposed antennas will be 51"X10.3". The visual impact of the new antennas will be minimal due to the existing trees that surround the site. Use Permit Findings The proposed modification to the existing site supports the findings for use permit approval; therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission approve of the proposed modification based on the following findings: • That the proposed modification is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located in that the proposed additional equipment is minimal and is visually unobtrusive and the aesthetic impact will be less than significant. ~~~~®3 • That the proposed modification of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity because the facility will be operated under the restrictions imposed by the FCC to insure safety with respect to limiting human exposure to radio frequency energy. • That the proposed modification of the conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter in that the location, height, size and use proposed is conditionally permitted in this zoning district. Conclusion: The project satisfies all of the findings required within Section 15-55.070 of the City Code. The additional equipment is not expected to be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare nor are they expected to be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposal further satisfies all other zoning regulations applicable to antenna facilities. Correspondence The applicant has shown the proposed plans to the adjacent neighbors as documented by the applicant. Two of the adjacent neighbors made comments on the Neighbor Notification form provided to them by the applicant. Both neighbors had concerns about health issues related to the facility. Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC has exclusive jurisdiction over RF emissions from personal wireless antenna facilities. Pursuant to its authority under federal law, the FCC has established rules to regulate the safety of emissions from these facilities. The applicant has provided a cumulative RF exposure report by Hammett and Edison Inc. that evaluates both the proposed and existing wireless facility. The report concludes that the RF energy is below the Maximum Permissible Exposure limit established by the FCC. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission conditionally approve the modification of the approved use permit by adopting the attached resolution of approval. • ~~~~©4 • • Attachment 1 • ~~~~~~ APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. Application No. 04-106 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA AT & T Wireless; 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for a modification to an approved use permit to install two small cabinets, and one GPS antenna to the existing equipment pad, and exchange the existing antennas on the utility pole with larger antennas; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to installation of small new equipment and facilities; and • WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said • application for a modification to an approved use permit, and the following findings specified in Municipal Code Section 15-55.070: • That the proposed modification is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located in that the proposed additional equipment is minimal and is visually unobtrusive and the aesthetic impact will be less than significant. • That the proposed modification of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity because the facility will be operated under the restrictions imposed by the FCC to insure safety with respect to limiting human exposure to radio frequency energy. • That the proposed modification of the conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter in that the location, height, size and use proposed is conditionally permitted in this zoning district. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Q'~'~®®~ Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, application number 04-106 for a modification to the original use permit approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Four sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page shall be submitted to the Building Division. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining all equipment, structures, and landscaping to the city's satisfaction. 3. Within 30 days of cessation of business, the applicant shall remove all equipment and structures. 4. The Planning Commission shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Use Permit and may, at anytime modify, delete or impose any new conditions of the use permit to preserve the public health, safety and welfare. CITY ATTORNEY 5. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. Section 2. Construction must commence within 24 months or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen days from the date of adoption. • ~~"®®®~ PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission. State of California, the 14th day of July 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date • Q®©®Q8 • Attachment 2 • ~~~~~9 C AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) 1. John F. Li~-ingstone, being duly sworn, deposes and says: that I am a citizen of the United States, Deer the age of 18 years; that acting for the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on the 23"{ day of June, 2004, that 1 deposited in the mail room at the City of Saratoga, a NOTICE OF HEARING, a copy of which is attached hereto, with postage thereon prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses shown, to-wit: (See list attached hereto and made part hereof) that said persons are the owners of said propert}' ~~'ho are entitled to a Notice of Hearing pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance of the Cit}' of Saratoga in that said persons and their addresses are those shown on the most recent equalised roll of the Assessor of the County of Santa Clara as being owners of propert~~ within 500 feet of the property to be affected by the application 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road; that on said day there ~~~as regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses sho~~~n aboee. n ; ~ /. ,, - /John E. Li~~ingst~ e A1CP i Associate planner • ~~~~~,~ • City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 408-868-1222 • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on Wednesday, the 14`h day of July 2004, at 7:00 p.m. Located in the City theater at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Details are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. APPLICATION # 04-106 - AT~T,19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road, CalTrans right-of-way at the corner of Saratoga Los Gatos Road and Fruitvale Avenue; Request for Modification to an existing Use Permit and Design Review approval to add fixtures to an existing wireless antenna system. The project is located in an R-1-40,000 zoning district. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order for information to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written. communications should be filed on or before the Tuesday, a week before the meeting. This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor's office annually, in preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of -date information or difficulties with the U.S. Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project. John F. Livingstone, AICP Associate Planner 408.868.1231 ~~©~~t.~ • • 500 radius arourb 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos . Parcels w ithn 500 ft of 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos ~ ~ ~ ~, _. ~ ~~~ . OEP~T W _ .__ I I r \ ,~_ ~ - _ - .~ _ ~~ _- ~ _ ~uF 1 ,.~ W L 1 ~ ~I' ,, -- ___ I' 8 -- i ~__.._...-.._..._-....... i~ _. ...~urarcr .._ _ i ,_ _. rr -' ~. X11 __.. I ~ ~ lLE ~~'\pi ~ V/.u~ IT' CR\ ~ I i '.~ I -, i ~~ .~ l ~ ~ ~~~~A'0N li \ ~ l I t' ~ ~~ . jII , \ ~~ i i r`\ ~ ,/ ~~: ~~ i `~brw \ \\\ VM ~dl \ \\ ~ \ \ \ \..~ ~ ` x i ,... ~ ' ~ _- I ~ i {.I/ .1 - . / au<w~Wa+ - ..~ __._ _. at«uuoa_ ____ _- ----- %, L ~rur.-_~ ; %' .,1 I _.~UQ O+ ~~ 0 150 J00 I i 450 TSO ft \\ 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road ~ \ T.vilieJt¢=w i~ ~I \ II \ < , `~j \\~ I rwlsowiocµ~ral~ i\ \ ` ~ • goo®~~ GIANNELLA GIOVANNI P & JULIA B Current Owner, APN 39710005 1 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS DAS CHANDER P & RAJIV P TRUSTEE ETAL Or Current Owner, APN 39710008 19884 BUCKHAVEN LN SARATOGA CA 95070-5014 LAWRENCE EDGAR C & BETTY J TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39710011 15200 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070-6272 HUANG MIN SIU & PI YU Or Current Owner, APN 39710017 19388 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6220 ROBBINS CHARLES H & SARAH H Or Current Owner, APN 39710020 19348 MONTE VISTA DR TOGA CA 95070-6220 TER ANITA L Or Current Owner, APN 397]0025 19327 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6219 YBARRO EDWARD & JOSEPHINE P TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39719012 15275 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070-6265 KAZMISAEED &FARHEEN Or Current Owner, APN 39719032 15163 ALONDRA LN SARATOGA CA 95070-6446 ALTER RUTH TRUSTEE ETAL Or Current Owner, APN 51005023 19511 GLEN UNA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6411 ~RENSON WILLIAM H & ITH Or Current Owner, APN 51005038 PO BOX 2295 SARATOGA CA 95070-0295 • ANDRUS WALTER S & GERTRUDE B Or Current Owner, APN 39710006 19431 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD CHENG CHIEN-FENG K & JUI- HUAN HTRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39710009 15288 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070-6272 CHIEN ING-SHENG & FRANCIS Or Current Owner, APN 39710012 15160 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070-6271 DORSA SHIRLEY A TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39710018 19372 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6220 MELEHAN PATRICIA E TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39710021 19336 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6220 SULLIVAN JOHN J. &PATRICIA M TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39710026 19341 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6219 SCHMIDT WILLIAM F & MARIANA A Or Current Owner, APN 39719030 15217 ALONDRA LN SARATOGA CA 95070-6446 FONG ROCKY & LINDA Or Current Owner, APN 39719036 PO BOX 2654 SARATOGA CA 95070 MCCONNELL MICHAEL L & STEPHANIE A TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 51005026 19540 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD VISWANATH PREMNATH TRUSTEE ETAL Or Current Owner, APN 51005039 19501 RUE DE GLEN UNA SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 • DRESSLAR F H TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39710007 187 CASTILLON WY SAN JOSE CA 95119-1502 FAR ALIT & PANTEA B Or Current Owner, APN 39710010 15230 FRUITVALE AV SARATOGA CA 95070-6272 YU MICHAEL H & JOSEPHINE K Or Current Owner, APN 39710016 19396 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6220 DU BOIS FRED E & DOLORES A TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39710019 19360 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6220 COMISKEY HANNAH S Or Current Owner, APN 39710022 19324 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6220 RAO FRANK M & SOPHIE D TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39710027 19385 MONTE VISTA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6219 HAMMETT JOHN B &PATRICIA C TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 39719031 15185 ALONDRA LN SARATOGA CA 95070-6446 ERSKINE ROGER W & DOROTHY K TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 51005020 19581 JUNA CT SARATOGA CA 95070-6419 HALL MARSHALL R & MARCIA P Or Current Owner, APN 51005036 19519 GLEN UNA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-6411 MORRISON DAVID J & TERRI E TRUSTEE Or Current Owner, APN 51005041 19590 JUNA LN SARATOGA CA 95070-6419 ®~~~~~ KVAMME E F& M J GENTZKOW PAUL F& Or Current Owner, APN 51006003 BARBARA G TRUSTEE 19490 GLEN LINA DR Or Current Owner, APN 51006064 SARATOGA CA 95070-6412 19508 GLEN UNA DR SARATOGA CA 95070-0000 • • ~~ ~°~~'~ Attachment 3 • ~~~~~5 Apri121, 2004 VIA HAND DELIVERY Community Development Department Planning Division City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Request for Modification of Existing Conditional Use Permit by AT&T Wireless UMTS 850 GSM Project: System Maintenance and Performance Upgrade at 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road, California Department of Transportation Right of Way Highway 9. INTRODUCTION AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. is a wireless service carrier that seeks to provide high- quality wireless services and offer an enhanced mobile voice and data telecommunication network to its nationwide customer base. As of December 31, 2003, AT&T Wireless had 21.98 million consolidated subscribers and its affiliates and partners held 850-megahertz and 1900-megahertz licenses to provide wireless services covering 99% of the population of the United States. AT&T Wireless Services of CA, LLC and its affiliates are registered telecommunications license holders for the San Francisco Bay Area with both the FCC and CPUC. Now, AT&T is in the process of upgrading its entire network. The purposes of the current initiative are to provide enhanced data transmission capabilities to its customers and to comply with the Federal mandated E911 regulations. The current AT&T Wireless initiative is two fold. The first is adding 850 GSM and UMTS technologies to the AT&T Wireless Network. The second is to bring the site into compliance with the Federally mandated E-911 regulations. The network upgrade will allow AT&T Wireless customers faster and more efficient access to the wireless web and give our customers the opportunity to transmit pictures in real time. Current dialup data is transmitted at about the 35-40 kbps. The 850 GSM and UMTS equipment we are proposing to install will allow our customers to transmit data at 350 kbps. ~~~~~~ • BACKGROUND OF SITE AT&T has an existing site located at 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road, in the California Department of Transportation Right of Way. This site was approved on January 5, 2000 by the Community Development Director, City of Saratoga and permitted the installation of two antennas on a wooden utility pole and a ground mounted equipment cabinet. MODIFICATION REQUEST AT&T has modified its existing encroachment permit with the California Department of Transportation for the site at 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, to modify its existing equipment space to accommodate two (2) additional cabinets; replace the two (2) existing panel antennas with two (2) new panel antennas mounted to an existing utility pole and add one Federally mandated GPS antenna for E911 compliance. The California Department of Transportation has authorized AT&T to file for the CUP Modification. AT&T would like to place a Nortel Mono BTS cabinet (47.25" H x 23.62" D x 18.11 W) on the existing concrete slab located within AT&T's existing equipment area. AT&T will also hang on the uni-strut at the back of the existing cabinet an Ericsson RBS 2308 cabinet (24" H x 17" W x 9" D). The antennas, currently installed on the utility pole with a centerline of 20 feet, will need to be exchanged. The antennas current on the utility pole are Allgon 7339 (28" H x 11" W x 4.9" D) the antennas AT&T Wireless would like to exchange these antennas with are Kathrein AP 14/17 (51"H x 10.3" W x 5.5"D). The GPS antenna will be mounted to the uni-strut at the back of the existing cabinet and will stick up about 12" inches above the existing cabinet. AT&T Wireless will also need to have an arborist trim the trees around the antennas on the utility pole to allow the antennas to operate properly. The facility will be unmanned and, following completion of the project, will only be visited monthly for routine maintenance. The facility will emit no noise above acceptable levels, glare or odor nor does it have any signage other than those required for identification. The facility will comply with the strict guidelines of the FCC and FAA, which are designed to protect public safety. To ensure structural integrity of the facility, AT&T Wireless will construct and maintain it in compliance with all federal, state, and local building codes and standards. Everyday, over 75,000 "911" call are made from wireless phones. The proposed AT&T Wireless telecommunication facility modification enhances the general welfare of the community by improving the overall infrastructure for these calls, as well as providing vital means of communication during times of emergency when traditional land lines are not available or in cases of power failure. The carefully selected and designed facility allows these calls to occur while remaining a site that meets the needs of the community now and in the future. All exhibits to this Statement of Intent are incorporated by reference into the same. ~~~®~~ AT&T Wireless respectfully requests approval of its application for an Amendment to the Existing Conditional Use Permit. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me with any questions or comments. Respectfully Submitted, L Christopher Fowler Contract Representative To Applicant AT&T Wireless 1._J • ~'~~~~8 Attachment 4 • ®~~.~~~9 Neighbor Notification Template for Development Applications i~ Date: 06/08/04 PROJECT ADDRESS: 19491 Saratoga=Los Gatos Road Applicant Name: AT&T Wireless/Christopher Fowler U JUN 3 0 2004 CITY OF SARA I OGA '~~I INITV T1F\IFI ~"' Application Number: 04-106 The Saratoga Planning Commission requires applicants to work with their neighbors to address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior to the evening of the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does not look favorably upon neighbors who fail to voice their concerns and issues when solicited by applicants prior to the public hearing. Staff and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors take this opportunity to express any concerns or issues they may have directly to the applicant. Please ensure the signature on this document is representative of all residents residing on your property. Irrespective of the opinion expressed below, you may reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date and communicate it to the City of Saratoga. ^My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of work; and I do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the City's public hearing on the proposed project. UMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of work; and I have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant, have not been addressed. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): +M we ,,U w.r~t~V~ ~e 5 • • ..,-~ ~,: ~.PQ s o hs~r-~ L~- ~ cccss ~ Neighbor Name: ~ni ~J ~o- S Neighbor Address: -u - s~~t `~~-+~ ~ l~csuv~~~+na~~--~ t llkd.y< < M l ~i ~ o ~~ Vl.e C~U' ~ ~ ~~~ ~` ~ o~-gG ~- -SZ Z-Z ~~~-z~-F~ 5 ~~~Neighbor Phone #: Signature: Printed: _,~, ~~ ~ City of Saratoga Planning Depart~er~t~®2~ • • Date: 06/08/04 PROJECT ADDRESS: Neighbor Notification Template for Development Applications 19491 Saratoga~Los Gatos Road Applicant Name: AT&T Wireless/Christopher Fowler CITY Of 5ARATOGA Application Number: 04-106 The Saratoga Planning Commission requires applicants to work with their neighbors to address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior to the evening of the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does not look favorably upon neighbors who fail to voice their concerns and issues when solicited by applicants prior to the public hearing. Staff and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors take this opportunity to express any concerns or issues they may have directly to the applicant. Please ensure the signature on this document is representative of all residents residing on your property. Irrespective of the opinion expressed below, you may reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date and communicate it to the City of Saratoga. ^My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of work; and I do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the City's public hearing on the proposed project. ~My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of work; and I have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant, have not been addressed. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): '-e v~- I S ~-"I-C C ~'2'v ~ a~'Yl~f~~ C ~,~. JJ,~, Neighbor Name: ~"h`~"l-t fvl ~ ~ ~ Neighbor Address: ~I 1~.'~-z,~o ~~ .(~' ~ Neighbor Phone #: ~~0 ~3 ~~ ~° l Signature: Printed: City of Saratoga Planning Department IJn)l ~(~[~~dL~~IlI,II uu JUN 3 0 2004 U Neighbor Notification Template for Development Applications Date: 06/08/04 PROJECT ADDRESS: 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road Applicant Name: AT&T Wireless/Christopher Fowler Application Number: 04-106 The Saratoga Planning Commission requires applicants to work with their neighbors to address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior to the evening of the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does not look favorably upon neighbors who fail to voice their concerns and issues when solicited by applicants prior to the public hearing. Staff and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors take this opportunity to express any concerns or issues they may have directly to the applicant. Please ensure the signature on this document is representative of all residents residing on your property. Irrespective of the opinion expressed below, you may reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date and communicate it to the City of Saratoga. ~My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of work; and I do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the City's public hearing on the proposed project. ^My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understand the scope of work; and I have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant, have not been addressed. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Neighbor Name: ~- ' `~ v~ ~~~~~~ ~ " " ~N ~~~~~ ~ Neighbor Address: /~~9b~~~~ai/ l/i~f~ ~iP. ~~ie~ ~( ~~t Neighbor Phone #: ~~JB ~i~~ ` ~~1~~ Signature: Printed: City of Saratoga Planning Department ~?~~ X22 • Attachment 5 • Q~®~v~3 AT8~T Wireless • Base Station No. SFE-093 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road • Saratoga, California Statement of Hammett 8~ Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers The firm of Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers, has been retained on behalf of AT&T Wireless, a wireless telecommunications carrier, to evaluate proposed modifications to its existing base station (Site No. SFE-093) located at 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road in Saratoga, California, for compliance with appropriate guidelines limiting human exposure to radio frequency ("RF") electromagnetic fields. Prevailing Exposure Standards The U.S. Congress requires that the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") evaluate its actions for possible significant impact on the environment. In Docket 93-62, effective October 15, 1997, the FCC adopted the human exposure limits for field strength and power density recommended in Report No. 86, "Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields," published in 1986 by the Congressionally chartered National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements ("NCRP"). Separate limits apply for occupational and public exposure conditions, with the latter limits generally five times more restrictive. The more recent Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ("IEEE") Standard C95.1-1999, "Safety Levels with .Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz," includes nearly identical exposure limits. A summary of the FCC's exposure limits is shown in Figure 1. These limits apply for continuous exposures and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. The most restrictive thresholds for exposures of unlimi several personal wireless services are as follows: Personal Wireless Service Approx. Frequenc Personal Communication ("PCS") 1,950 MHz Cellular Telephone 870 Specialized Mobile Radio 855 [most restrictive frequency range] 30-300 ted duration to radio y OccuUational Limit 5.00 mW/cm2 2.90 2.85 1.00 General Facility Requirements frequency energy for Public Limit 1.00 mW/cm2 0.58 0.57 0.20 Base stations typically consist of two distinct parts: the electronic transceivers (also called "radios" or "cabinets") that are connected to the traditional wired telephone lines, and the passive antennas that send the wireless signals created by the radios out to be received by individual subscriber units. The transceivers are often located at ground level and are connected to the antennas by coaxial cables about 1 inch thick. Because of the short wavelength of the frequencies assigned by the FCC for wireless services, the antennas require line-of--sight paths for their signals to propagate well and so are +~~ ~''" HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. ~t~yx,''~`~ CONSULTING ENGINEERS i3,fl rk~ i'8s ~: SAN FRANC15C0 AT0093596.1 Page 1 of 3 • • • E~~~~24 AT&T Wireless • Base Station No. SFE-093 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road • Saratoga, California installed at some height above ground. The antennas are designed to concentrate their energy toward the horizon, with very little energy wasted toward the sky or the ground. Along with the low power of such facilities, this means that it is generally not possible for exposure conditions to approach the maximum permissible exposure limits without being physically very near the antennas. Computer Modeling Method The FCC provides direction for determining compliance in its Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, "Evaluating Compliance with FCC-Specified Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation," dated August 1997. Figure 2 attached describes the calculation methodologies, reflecting the facts that a directional antenna's radiation pattern is not fully formed at locations very close by (the "near-field" effect) and that the power level from an energy source decreases with the square of the distance from it (the "inverse square law"). The conservative nature of this method for evaluating exposure conditions has been verified by numerous field tests. Site and Facility Description Based upon information provided by AT&T, including zoning drawings by Velocitel, dated May 11, 2004, it is proposed to replace the existing antennas on a 110-foot utility pole located near 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road in Saratoga with two dualband Kathrein Scala Model AP14/17-880- 1940-065D directional panel antennas. The antennas would be mounted at an effective height of about 22 feet above ground and would be oriented toward 120°T and 330°T. The maximum effective radiated power in any direction would be 385 watts, representing simultaneous operation at 330 watts for PCS service and 55 watts for cellular service. There are reported no other wireless telecommunications base stations installed nearby. Study Results The maximum ambient RF level anywhere at ground level due to the new AT&T operation is calculated to be 0.013 mW/cm2, which is 1.3% of the applicable public limit. The maximum level at the second floor elevation of any nearby building is 2.1% of the public exposure limit. It should be noted that these results include several "worst-case" assumptions and therefore are expected to overstate actual power density levels. Recommended Mitigation Measures Since they are to be mounted on a utility pole, the antennas are not accessible to the general public, and so no mitigation measures are necessary to comply with the FCC public exposure guidelines. To prevent occupational exposures in excess of the FCC guidelines, no access within 3 feet directly in front of the antennas themselves, such as might occur during maintenance work on the pole, should be + HAMMETT & EDISON, 1NC. ~~^° m;vsu~n~cFNCCC.s~~.~ AT0093596.1 u ~~~'i`k°i snn~ ra,~NCisco Page 2 of 3 ~~~'.i~~ AT8~T Wireless • Base Station No. SFE-093 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road • Saratoga, California allowed while the base station is in operation, unless other measures can be demonstrated to ensure that occupational protection requirements are met. Posting explanatory warning signs" at the antennas and/or on the pole below the antennas, such that the signs would be readily visible from any angle of approach to persons who might need to work within that distance, would be sufficient to meet FCC- adopted guidelines. Conclusion Based on the information and analysis above, it is the undersigned's professional opinion that the AT&T Wireless base station located at 19491 Saratoga Los Gatos Road in Saratoga, California, can comply with the prevailing standards for limiting human exposure to radio frequency energy and, therefore, need not for this reason cause a significant impact on the environment. The highest calculated level in publicly accessible areas is much less than the prevailing. standards allow for exposures of unlimited duration. This finding is consistent with measurements of actual exposure . conditions taken at other operating base stations. Authorship The undersigned author of this statement is a qualified Professional Engineer, holding California Registration Nos. E-13026 and M-20676, which expire on June 30, 2005. This-work has been carried out by him or under his direction, and all statements are true and correct of his. own knowledge except, where noted, when data has been supplied by others, which data he believes to be correct. ~ j 3 E-13028 ~~ ~ M-20878 ~n William F. mett, P.E. July 6, 2004 ~ Ems. 8-30.05 ~ Warning signs should comply with ANSI C95.2 color, symbol, and content conventions. In addition, contact information should be provided (e.g., a telephone number) to arrange for access to restricted areas. The selection of language(s) is not an engineering matter, and guidance from the landlord, local zoning or health authority, or appropriate professionals may be required. ,,~~ HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. ~'~k AT0093596. ] t~' ~ CONSliLTING ENGINEERS +li` '~s'{.-~~'~; s,arv Fa:~NCisco Page 3 of 3 • • aoaa2~ FCC Radio Frequency Protection Guide ~J r~ ~~ The U.S. Congress required (1996 Telecom Act) the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") to adopt a nationwide human exposure standard to ensure that its licensees do not, cumulatively, have a significant impact on the environment. The FCC adopted the limits from Report No. 86, "Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields," published in 1986 by the Congressionally chartered National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, which are nearly identical to the more recent Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standard C95.1-1999, "Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz." These limits apply for continuous exposures from all sources and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. As shown in the table and chart below, separate limits apply for occupational and public exposure conditions, with the latter limits (in italics and/or dashed) up to five times more restrictive: Fre uency Applicable Range (MHz) 0.3 - 1.34 1.34 - 3.0 3.0 - 30 30 - 300 300 - 1,500 1,500- 100,000 1000 100 ~~ ~ 10 o ~ a p ~ 1 0.1 Electromagnetic Fields (f is freauencv of emission in MHz Electric Magnetic Equivalent Far-Field Field Strength Field Strength Power Density (V/m) (A/m) (mW/cmZ) 614 614 1.63 1.63 100 100 614 8 23.8/ f 1.63 2.19/ f 100 180/ j~ 1842/ f 823.8/ f 4.89/ f 2.19/ f 900/ f? 180/ 61.4 27.5 0.163 0.0729 I.0 0.2 3.54~f 1.59fj ff/106 fj/238 f/300 f/1500 137 61.9 0.364 0.163 5.0 1.0 / Occupational Exposure ` f/ PCS ~ Cell ~ FM ~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~ Public Exposure 0.1 1 10 100 103 104 105 Frequency (MHz) ~#~r~s fifi! ?~T - ~y_f~3"in~l y°Lt}~"~! bF~ ~,°` Higher levels are allowed for short periods of time, such that total exposure levels averaged over six or thirty minutes, for occupational or public settings, respectively, do not exceed the limits, and higher levels also are allowed for exposures to small areas, such that the spatially averaged levels do not exceed the limits. However, neither of these allowances is incorporated in the conservative calculation formulas in the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65 (August 1997) for projecting field levels. Hammett & Edison has built those formulas into a proprietary program that calculates, at each location on an arbitrary rectangular grid, the total expected power density from any number of individual radio sources. The program allows for the description of buildings and uneven terrain, if required to obtain more accurate projections. HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. corvsv[.•rtNC ErvC,mt:~:r~s FCC Guidelines SAN FRANCISCO Figure 1 t~~~Q2'~ RFRCALCT"' Calculation Methodology Assessment by Calculation of Compliance with FCC Exposure Guidelines The U.S. Congress required (1996 Telecom Act) the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") to adopt a nationwide human exposure standard to ensure that its licensees do not, cumulatively, have a significant impact on the environment. The maximum permissible exposure limits adopted by the FCC (see Figure 1) apply for continuous exposures from all sources and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. Higher levels are allowed for short periods of time, such that total exposure levels averaged over six or thirty minutes, for occupational or public settings, respectively, do not exceed the limits. Near Field. Prediction methods have been developed for the near field zone of panel (directional) and whip (omnidirectional) antennas, typical at wireless telecommunications cell sites. The near field zone is defined by the distance, D, from an antenna beyond which the manufacturer's published, far field antenna patterns will be fully formed; the near field may exist for increasing D until some or all of three conditions have been met: 2 1) D>2~ 2) D>Sh 3) D> 1.6~, where h =aperture height of the antenna, in meters, and ~. =wavelength of the transmitted signal, in meters. The FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65 (August 1997) gives this formula for calculating power density in the near field zone about an individual RF source; 0.1 x P power density S = 1~ x n x D xnh ' in mW/cm2, where OBV, =half-power beamwidth of antenna, in degrees, and P1et =net power input to the antenna, in watts. The factor of 0.1 in the numerator converts to the desired units of power density. This formula has been built into a proprietary program that calculates distances to FCC public and occupational limits. Far Field. OET-65 gives this formula for calculating power density in the far field of an individual RF source: power density S = 2.56 x 1.64 x 100 x RFF2 x ERP 4x ~rx D2 in mW/cm2, where ERP =total ERP (all polarizations), in kilowatts, RFF =relative field factor at the direction to the actual point of calculation, and D =distance from the center of radiation to the point of calculation, in meters. The factor of 2.56 accounts for the increase in power density due to ground reflection, assuming a reflection coefficient of 1.6 (1.6 x 1.6 = 2.56). The factor of 1.64 is the gain of a half-wave dipole relative to an isotropic radiator. The factor of 100 in the numerator converts to the desired units of power density. This formula has been built into a proprietary program that calculates, at each location on an arbitrary rectangular grid, the total expected power density from any number of individual radiation sources. The program also allows for the description of uneven terrain in the vicinity, to obtain more accurate projections. l }~~~~ HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. ~~~p'~ f~~~~ CONSULTING ENGINEERS °',tA~'t~= J'? SAN FRANCISCO Methodology Figure 2 • • .7 • • ~ w ice.; 1 ~~ ~ ~ ~^ may~,.p ~','J~ :t.`yl~"1~:A' ~ ' T,+-~ - ~G 'r. f<1N / W Ntft<r ~~t a J . + ~, o s t ~~ • 1 pr~~Ex~se~i ~~ntenn~~s .~ ` ~ ~ _ ~ .~ , ~s` ~#~ ~ •. .s ~ 1~ ' fi '. 1+r ~~ _ Y ~~' + . ~~i;. ' . fi'` .~', -~ ~L.JS~:: . µ~l ~ tuN, KIN7 lA ~,'~:;z ~~rc~~x~st~~l E~r~ui~>r~t~t~t br~huui 1~3ndsc~E~ln~~ .fit ~ r~~` ~ c AT&T 3/.3~/~4 Photosimulahon by Ached hnaquiation S10 J14-o5W • • W $ 8 ~ ~ ~~ g W W U ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N W ~ ^ V ^ /~/// Z ~ ~ {~, O O~y~ WF ~ Q O Qp U U ~ ~ O y ~ ~ O CC ~ y~ ~ ~ as W O ~ < 2j0 aO ~j~ W ~,y U /V//1 IL ~ ttyy Z ~ Lt~ I W ~ ~ U Q ~"1 Q ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f- ~ Gi ~ ~<Gf ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F" _ ~ ...J ~ ~ ~ ¢ U) ~ U << Z ~ ~ ~ ` W K ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1O-C (n . Z ~j ~ Z f y/ ~l ~ ~ _ C ~ ~ ~ Z v ~ K O ~ ~ i N ~ W~ Z Q jG ~~ { 1 O N O N 8 ~ U ~ I ~ ~ ~ .. y~ NU' N~ N v yW~ K~' UU Z ~ ( ~ f,~„ (Q~ i~ ~ W U' s Z ~ ~ ~ ~ _ Z < W W W~oz _<~ ~ K ~~p N W ~h ~ Up a Z <z< ~~ S O ~_ ~ ~ U ~ _o n ~~ Z z 4 n• ~~~ ~ ~ Z j~ ~ i O~ W ~ ~ Z W ~ ~ ~ 2 O O ~ < ~ ~ V `Z'' M QZ F j ~ ~~ Z~ ~ V1 ~ t ~ Z a m ~ ~ z O ~ K ~~ WWUVI W i } W ~ 333 Z ~ O } 01 F ~ J - ~ Z ~ tyylf ~~ Wit ( ~ j Q [~ ~ ~ C> WW 2 J 0~~2 y~ ZWZO~ Q W ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ ~~~jjj ~ V ~ O < WJJ W W~ 7 i C~ O W ~ O~U~ ~ ~ yJ F ~Q F ~ ~ ~ HH ~ ~ i•. CO Z ~ ~ Z < ~~ U S2 7 Y ~ ~ Z xx OW~ n' ~~//1~ ~ vJ a ~ _ ~ v - ~ ~ z ~ t _-- ~~ ~ ~ m Z G7 U ~ZWU O~~ ~ aa t iiSS ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~O~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ cn v ~ a ~~w ~ o ~ ~ ~Q ~ V N ~ ~ ~` ~~~ ~~ j ~~ ~ ~o ~ ~ ~ _ _ 1 1 ~ ~ ~[ ~v~i3W ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i, ~' ~ ~ ~ p ~pN ~ O_m! U~ a I ~ C.3 U Z ~ ~ OC ~ .~ ~~ ~ ~ U n ~ ~ 5 ~ O ~U ,~ 04.21_ UO~ ' W D D D D ~.. c~ D -. a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~n Sd ~~ {~<~< UOU ~ ~` j ~ ~ Y ~rZ V F ~ ~ -K... V ~ ~v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O ~~~{`O ,.,I Z u Wu 7u IA 4012K N O ? A Y ii Z C Z r r r r r Z ~ ~ ~ lA ~ ? Q. c a..~~ ~ _ryI ~ H1210NZ ~ R ~ ~ '25~ a ~ ~ m , m ~ ~ 14c : g ~ d . d ~ ~ ~ ~ y1 j~w 1~Y ~ 3 S ~ QQ ~ o < Q ~ $ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ 4 4 ~ V~ ~~ t D D D o ~nN°<a` Z ¢ O O ~ ~ ~+ y: ,~ ~ b ., v S~ L!L'1 Z Z Z Q ~ O ~ M 'n ~ ~ 4 4 ~- Q ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~<<? , a ~ 3 ~ N ' v ~ Z¢ >- I ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ < RtU1NALE Ave -' ~ ~ ~~a Z H F wQQZZZ fn fn Z Z oo Z /H ~ 8 ~d < ~(a~ 2n ;,.~~i~p Z ~~ ~ ~ ~7pp~7~~o in > `a ~ ~ ~ VOC 7~ ~ ~ ^+~ n ~i ~~~ > ~O1io < ~ < ~ W fA W W Oo~ ~~O1W t N ~ ~ t~ N N ~ W ~ ~ = ZZ 1D 31138 ~j p ~ j • 0 0 0 p ~p~jj ~ O YZ < < < O~ O W W W Z W W ~ .i t - ~ ^ F~~ C7 U c~ U Z Q U U ~ v~ W z ~ O p ~ " ~,~ "' N'I 2l3dd3d } 3 LL LL LL Z2Z ~ ~ ~ LL LL ZZ ~ ~ O yty1 4 ~ _O O'~8~~ (! ~ ~ <~~~~ w ~ z Q ~~ ~v ; O WWW WW ON ~ S °J~U~ W ~ ~~F'O K ~~-~s'~ ~ O Q FO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t 1 O F J ~ W~ _ ~~ <Z F n 0 ~ ~ ~ y u `~ OY ~ ~O~CW W(J ~ SSSB~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~Z~ ~ ~ _~ == U W N Q WW ((JJJJ CJ O1~ ~ tL1C7 ~ OJ IIILLL J W ,~~ . W 1W n ~ W ~ ~ =m ~y 1 ~ ~ < O W a4 7 Y ~la W~ ~ W ~ 1n~ fJ ~ 6 ~t 8 ?; W ~W U.Z~ -~~J t44J!! ~~ 3KW C~O a ~ W G ~= ~ O Wps N ~ ij ~ ~ w _ ~ <N ZZNO ~ ~~ .L ~ U W N O ~ SQ4{] y ~~~ ~J ~i< ` ' ~ ~W << K< O ~ UN ~ .< U V1 N WO a:~Za ~K<O ~4WOWN OY~ W ~ n `~ U ~~ ~z1Z~ UO U 3 C O ? ~ ~ 1 ~ ~. ~ ~C4E ~N ~- ~ ~ o Z .;.I aka ~ ~ f~~ z ~ ~ ~S , ._+~~r L'j~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~z ~ ~ 0 3 < ~ ~ W ~~ O ~ ~~ ~~ << K O µt ~t g ~~S j~ ~ OO ~yy ~!~/1 ~ < W ~Z ~ 8 F tt. O~ ~ ~~ {/~ ~+ m ~5 K <f!~ ` F p~WyUZ.•~ ~p4~ Wg~j~ m ~t WO ~ ~ Q ~J ~N ~ 1~~ z O N ~ ~ o O 2 < ' ~ Z ~~ ~Z W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~~ j~ O 4. = F~ ~a O ~N } ~~ N yI - y~ ~ N ~~ O 0~2~ O~WZ W ?? ~ ~~ ~~ rr 2~ ~ Z~ ~ O ~ ~ N W C~ ~ QZ WW O Z _I ~ U~ ~ ~ O W ~~ g~ j m (7 vi J~ ~~ ~O ?V ~~ n~ <~ ~ Q ~~ F n~ (~ cZ7 OJ ~ ~~~f o~ (~0x U OW 4.2 ZW~ ~Z~ O O ~<W m] W< ~o X t- IOJ ~j CW~~ ~ ~ p,~ W 3 ~1• X1J ~~ ? W U ?Z ~~ Op W < ~~ W m ~ rn ~ ~ W ~ k ~ ~ ~ O~ t y ~ ~U ~o S ~ ~ ~ 7Z p to .O qt -2 - ti Z ~ 1 1 1 ~ O ~~~ } rn ~z ' W m ~ ~ ~ `~i~~~ ~ c3~WF- O • ~ _ k ~~,'3 ~ '~ m~ ~ ~ ~`~ ~ q` W ~f ~ e ~ ~ p 2 U~ ~ ~ ~33 ~ ~ 3~ U~ WZ ~~O ~ QF Z ~pO< 2 ~( W~ U ~ ~~ q ~ $ ~ K rnN m1r W ~W O ~ ~ ;~25~ i ~ 3 y nW m & ~~ ~ -Wl~ ~77f , ~ 2 ~ ~- n ~ ~ G~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n d jVf 1v~i 0{ 3~ ~ 4 ~ ~? ~~ W ~ p <O ~'a ~ pp ~= 1~ `~'~ < Z ~ ~ O 4 ~KaO1 N gW ~ ~ ~ ,~~~ DC.3 -~~O ~ ~ ~~ cz ~ -g~ N~ ~i7 f ~L yQjZ iC< <~ ~ 3~ W m ~ ~Z < ~ i ~ WW _~ O ~y~ ~` ~x {~ O ~ ~ SS Q~ Z ~<St'IF ~~ p 3f,~ ~z O ~lr ~ ~ pp~~W O~ - ~ W~ ~ fA ~` Vf ~ W~ ym 7~O}F^ IYQ~~ ~ W?OZO i~~ mN W ~ ~ ~ } ~< W ~ /+~ ~j t ~~ o~ 3 fJ ~ ~ ~ } J SC 4W! ~ Q: O ~ ~~O K~nU ~ rj~ `. . .7 ~ p~ j O ~ Z ~~~ ~< 01A ~ t,t~ ~~ ~ y ~ '.+~ p ~W y Vl~ •m ~~~ ~ Z ~~~~. ~ (90~ ~ ~~ ~ 1Y "• O~" C Z ~yJ ~ < ~ ~ ~•_ ~ ~ N ~ O ~ _ ~FF ZZ ~• V 3O ~ $~ EE p ~Q.i Y~ `~(A ~ 114114------ (CZZ77 '" LL ~ ~ OZ~ W/~ N( ~ ~ ~ ~ x~~ ~~~ ~xZ ~Z ~ Z ~O ~ Z K t~ ~W m ~ ~j ~ ~ C ~ UU Q _yCJ 000 O m W~ r3 - S Spp2 aWa ~~a~ ~UU ~N OZZZ]<~ Vf WZ`, ~3 WU ~m ~~ U 1 ZZ~ i 1)LW W 71 5 ~ p W W ~t~~. ~<~J~j )W~n ~?OUZ ~J~ ~t S<~ ~ Wd ~W~ j ~ Vf~ ~p Sy? WY~ W ZO F~ ~tO Z !fK to N WO ~t~ ~ to U = W07 ~HN 4 . . nI M + IA 1C P Iq 01 O N M ~- h 10 P m 01 N N 'l3lH'J38 2i0 5MV i0 tJ01SSIWa3d N31_lllJM JH.I tLLIM ld]~X3 VINO! 1,NV NI 035(1 210 0301'IOOild321 39 AVW 1N3YY(1000 SIHL .'!0 12iVd ON 'SMtl N1VA 1N3W33210V NV 2L30Nf1 NOLLV210d2100 '13I,H03Q 210,1 O~IY.l>.la S:~><~ !N'iiNll,'FOA SIF11. • • • z o~ c~ 0 ~^ o~ o $ ~~ d ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ I~ - ~~ _~ ~ 9 a i ~~ ~~ ~Q ~ ~s 4 s I ®o®®o®~© ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ m ON O F W a ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ W 5~ ~K~ ~~ffi ox X~ S W ® ~~ ~ ~~ 8~ ~1 J ~ Lif.J-o ~`~..fi ~~r.S ~ ti ~ v Z 00 O 00 0000 ~~ ~ ~~~ p~~ VJ ~~W ~po~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ W ~~ ~ ~~ a ~~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~~ . ~~~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ < ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ L~ O ~~ V z ~m ~~ ~`os~ Y ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~ cgs z ~ ~~ ~~~g ~"~~ Wo U ~ ~~ x W ~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ t~s by~~ ~m~~ b9oo~ m~~~ ~~~~ ~~ W W p r ~~ ~~~ a S ~m o ~~ ~~W J W ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~a~ S ~Q~~ K ~$$'°~ Inaa~rc x= ~tJ~ ~ ~~ <O H~~V ~~ ~~~~ ~ . ~~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~Z ~~~~ ~~F W O ~~~ ~~~ ~~~W ~ ~ '~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ `'' ~ ~ a In ~~ ~~ x~~~ ~~~ ~FJ,p ~W~ ~~ ~ ~Q o ~e ~~ ~~ ~ ~ I_ K z ~m U ~~~z ~~~ m Z J w Z 0 N m' Q z U_ w Ora ~~ ~ T s W v " J ~a F_ Z ~ Z ~Z "' ~~ ~~ ~~ a ~ m x N x N C ~ ~ i x a, x ~ x N I- O ~-. Q p J •~ F-- `~ Z~' W ~~ W, U z LL ~o O~ Sa zw W -- ~o az d W Z W C.7 ~~ ~~~ Q ~~ ~~s V1 N W ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~° ~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ C ~ N~ .; ~-+ ~ ~ ~ ^ s ~~ ~ o , ~; b~ F V 'l"111~~0343 tNJ FMa .JO NOISfifrilJ~d N3J.L1?JM 31Lt H.LIM Jd~X3 WHO.J ANV NI 0.'~.Sf1 ?JO 030ft00Hd321 a8 .IYW 1N3Wf1000 SIHI .i0 1MVd ON '$Ma NJ.VA LNJW732!`Ja NV 2J30Nf1 NOUVlJOd>i00 131N03f7 llOj 03La32q SaJA JN::1E`~<.t;~i~iJ ::~<ai • • • °d 11Nf1 Ndj/M S8i! .~~ ~~ e~ ~,~ 0 ~~ 0 X ~^O n ~ Y \ r_ J ~ ` X goN~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~~ o~ "~~ 7 Li .. Q J Q Z Z W H Z a ~,o~~ ~~ ~~ s~ H O ~ ~W'' ~ Q ~ ` ' ~ AS ~ ~ W ~~ t"' ' I w- ~~~ p ~t ~~ a ~J 0 J ~ Q ~ 0~ O C~ ~ O~ O/ ~ ~ ~. ~~ m r rn ti ti d` v y ~~ C ~gy ti ~3 V V b~ . ~k O V '13111;13[7 1J0 S,MV :10 NOISSIW2J3d N31..I.RVA 31{L 11A IM Ld3~X3 W2i0J ANV NI 0.3Sf1 210 Q30(10021d321 3E7 AVW 1N3Wf1004 SIHI. ~0 121Vd ON 'SMV HI.N{ LN3W3'72)OV NV 2J30Nf7 NOI1V210d2)00 131 N038 210 031V32J0 SVM 1N'H'+i ::~i~t1 ~:I11;. N 1 n g z ~ g ~ a ~ ~ N ~I m N • • • I z ~{ ~I I I <I Z ~IJ ~1 jl~ ~ J ~~o a 11 W I NN 3 ~; T I I -1 c~ ' J ~ ... t O W m vv Z' O Q W Q '. .f1~ _: AX a' L ~1I'J 61~~ ~I.W `u'l ~~ qN O ~1 L1 O W,,~ N a~a h ~ ~iW \ \., • ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ S Q ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ 4 C' a: ~ ~ ~.,., ~~.; ~.. ~~ ~~„ ~:: ~, ~ k Vi :~ I ~~~ O v U l~ r L ~jp_ 'ifv t 4: lr, ' y C' .Q .! b~ C ~~ >r C ~J '111FY.)3t3 LIO SMV :10 NgiE:SIWli3d N3l1RIM 3H.1 FIiNt J.d3~X3 W210.i ANV NI 0'~f1 Hp a3~flWiJd3?J 3fl AVW 1N3WIl~OQ SIHL i0 12JVd ON 'SMtl H1W1 1N3W33lpV NV 2L'~aNfl NOLLVL10dM0a 131NJ3f1 !/Oj 031V321~ SVa1 .tn.:.. i • • • z 0 ~a a .~ >; J. w~ ~~ Q I I I ~~J ~IC9 O ~O '1 ~y~~ N h~l ~ _I ~' ~ ~ ~' ~ I g ~j x 0 K~~ O ~I ~ WyW W J ~ j > i p ~ W ~v~ < (~2 O Q ~ y ~ I y, `'' 00771.1. 0~~~ ~~~ 1 O ~ ~ ~~ 1 C7 Wtf ~ ~ O~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~, J ti ~~ d N ~ ~ti ,y F•Tr'j o ~ ,~ r ~ O 'm ~v v ~ ~ ~~. ~ i r { { 3 V _..___.._... _.._ ___ .. ___..._ ..___ ..... ... ___....._ ..~-......,....... ~,...... ,.......~......, .. .. ., III. tl I ~ ~ : • . r • ~ • f • 'l3J.liJ3A 21b SMV .i0 NOISSIWH3d N3J.l.IKM 3HJ. HI.IM 1d3~X3 W2i0! ANtl NI 035(1 2!0 Q3~f14021c13JJ 30 AYW 1N3W~YJOp SIHL ~0 12Jdd ON 'SMV H11AA .LN3W332J~Jtl NV l13UNf1 NOLLVLIOdL10'J l31.H:S38 LION Q3JV321~ SVM 1N3Wf1~0C1 SIHI ~ w • ~"131.H~:3A Hfl SMV 10 N~ISSIWH3<:I N3LJ.IliM 3H1. HI.bN 1.d3aX3 W2lOi ANV NI 03Sf1 2!0 43~f1f]OHd3H 38 AtlW 1N3Wf1~OCl SIN1 i0 12iVd ON 'SMV H.1 VA 1N3W332J`Jtl NY H30Nft NOILViIOd?J0~ 131FYJ38 2JOi Q31tl32l~ SVM 1.N3Wf~0C1 SIHI r ~ ~ • MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL NNE 16, 2004 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in Closed Session, Administrative Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue at 5:00 p.m. Conference With Legal Counsel -Initiation of Litigation (Gov't Code Section 54956.9(c): (3 potential cases) Conference With Labor Ne otg iators (Gov't Code 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager & John Cherbone, Public Works Director Employee organization: SEA Conference With Labor Negotiators (Gov't Code 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager & Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director Employee organization: Non SEA Members Conference With Labor Ne otg iators (Gov't Code 54957.6): Agency designated representative: Dave Anderson, City Manager Employee organization: SMO The City Council of the City of Saratoga held a Joint Session with the Friend of the Saratoga Libraries in the Administrative Conference Room, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, at 5:30 p.m. Mayor Waltonsmith welcomed the Friends of the Saratoga Libraries. The following members of the Friends were present: President Virginia Parker, Bill McDonnell, Tom Blaisdell, Sharon Pierce, Sarah Model, Judy Johnston, Brenda Yamasaka. President Parker stated that the Friends of the Saratoga Libraries purpose was to support the Saratoga Library with things outside their budget. President Parker highlighted a few accomplishments of the Friends this past year: • Held more day and evening meetings in order to expand their audience. Some meetings featured special guest speakers. • Do more outreach to the community. Friends held a luncheon for the volunteers who volunteered at the local school libraries. A book in each volunteers name was donated to the Saratoga Library. • Held a Holiday Party at the Book-Go-Round • Produced four newsletters • Membership numbers up President Parker explained that 2/3 of the Friends income comes from sales from the Book-Go-Round. President Parker noted that the Friends gave the Library over $150k in grants last year towards books, check out machines, children's programs and rubber bumpers for the book carts. On behalf of the Library JPA, Councilmember Kline thanked the Friends for their hard work and dedication to the Saratoga Library. Commenting on the bond that was passed a few years ago to renovate the library, Councilmember Bogosian stated that the Friends should take the credit for the bond passing and noted that the Friends are stronger now than ever. A discussion took place on how to donate used books to the Friends and how to become a member. Bill McDonnell thanked the Council for their recent approval to spend bond money to upgrade the security at the library. A discussion took place regarding the mud being tracked into the library. The Friends explained that students from Redwood Middle School walk through the Heritage Orchard and drag mud through the Library, which is ruining the carpet. The Friends stated that some students take their shoes off and wash them in the bathroom sinks. Mayor Waltonsmith thanked the Friends for attending tonight's joint meeting. The City Council adjoined to open Session at 6:20 p.m. to interview candidates for the vacancies on the Parks & Recreation and Public Safety Commissions. MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Waltonsmith reported there was Council discussion but no action was taken. Mayor Waltonsmith called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Stan Bogosian, Norman Kline, Nick Streit, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Ann Waltonsmith ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager Richard Taylor, City Attorney Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Peter Kolf, Interim Finance Director Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director , John Cherbone, Public Works Director Cary Bloomquist, Administrative Analyst 2 REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR JUNE 16, 2004 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of June 16, 2004 was properly posted on Junel 1, 2004. COMMUNICATIONS FORM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following person requested to speak at tonight's meeting: Jill Hunter stated that Saratoga is a beautiful city and is concerned regarding the slow destruction of the Village. Pointing out the five historic buildings that have recently been sold in the Village, Mrs. Hunter requested that the City not allow the new owners tear down the buildings. COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS Virginia Parker, President/Friends of the Saratoga Libraries, stated that earlier this evening the Friend's of the Saratoga Libraries meet with the City Council. President Parker pointed out highlights from the meeting. Report from the West Valley College AdHoc Committee: Councilmember Bogosian noted that due to a conflict of interest he would abstain from this discussion. Councilmember Bogosian stepped down from the dais. Mayor Waltonsmith explained that the issue of a football stadium at West Valley College has been a controversy in the community for over 35 years. This issue has been the subject of legislation, court cases, and political maneuvering. Most recently in 1996 the City and the College went to court over an issue of whether the College could exempt the stadium from City regulation. Ultimately, the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the City and the California Supreme Court declined the District's request to review the case. Mayor Waltonsmith stated that towards the end of the litigation the West Valley Mission College District hired Chancellor Arterbeny. He pledged to work towards resolving the issue so that all parties could move forward. In 2003, three-party talks were initiated between the College, the City and the neighbors. These initial talks did not result in an agreement but were constructive in that they helped the participants to know one another better and to understand each other's perspectives. Over the last three months the three- party talks were re-instituted with an eye towards codifying the results of the discussions in a contract that would be signed by all three parties that would lay out a final resolution on this issue. Mayor Waltonsmith noted that a conceptual agreement was negotiated by all parties and is before the Council tonight for consideration. If Council approves this document, the City Attorney will work with the attorney of the College District to formulate the final three-party agreement. 3 Councilmember Streit explained that the most significant elements of this conceptual agreement as follows: - The District will comply with the City's code and use permit requirements governing use of the footbalUtrack facility and will limit the use of the facility by outside groups (only K-12 school or non-profit youth groups will be allowed). - The District will not challenge the legality or enforcement of the City's code with respect to the footbalUtrack facility or initiate or implement any action that would permit construction of an athletic stadium on the West Valley College campus. - The City will recognize the current uses of existing athletic fields and the District swimming pool as legal non-conforming uses not subject to the code's restrictions on matters such as seating and amplified sound. This applies only to existing uses of existing facilities. Any new or expanded uses would be subject to the code. For atwo-year period the City will use its enforcement discretion in a way that allows the District to use portable hand held amplified sound equipment at two specified track events each year. - The neighbors will create a formal neighborhood organization with legal status allowing the organization to be a party to the agreement. - The agreement will be for 30 years and will provide that it maybe amended by agreement of all three parties. The agreement will include provisions to make it enforceable by and against any of the three parties. Stan Arterberry, Chancellor, thanked City Manager Anderson for his leadership and vision Mr. Arterberry noted that without City Manager Anderson this agreement would not exist. Mr. Arteberry stated that the College recently hired a new President and would be bringing him to the August City Council meeting for a formal introduction. Mr. Arterberry noted that this agreement has brought closure to a long time issue. Jack Lucas, President Board of trustees, noted that he completely supports the proposed agreement. Cynthia Barry, West Valley College AdHoc member, noted that the other two neighborhood representatives, Evan Baker and Vic Monia, were unable to be preset this evening. Mrs. Barry thanked City Manager Anderson, Vice Mayor King and Councilmember Streit for their participation on the AdHoc. Mrs. Barry noted that all parties compromised something. Mrs. Barry noted that the attorneys would figure out the enforceability issues. r~ L 4 KLINE/KING MOVED TO ACCEPT CONCEPTUAL AGREEMENT AND DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO WORK WITH WEST VALLEY COLLEGE'S ATTORNEY TO DEVELOP A FINAL AGREEMENT. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSTAINING. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Referring to Mrs. Hunter's comments. Councilmember Kline suggested that she attend the Village AdHoc meetings. Referring to the joint meeting with the Friends of the Saratoga Libraries, Councilmember Kline requested that the issues regarding the trail through the Orchard be agendized for the next meeting. Assistant City Manager Tinfow noted that an AdHoc Committee is scheduled to meet next week. The AdHoc consists of two Library Commission members, two Heritage Preservation Commission members, Councilmember Kline, Public Works Director John Cherbone, Library Director Dolly Barnes, and Matt Novakovich. Councilmember Kline asked if the AdHoc was formally approved. Assistant City Manager Tinfow responded that there was no formal action to set this committee up. Mayor Waltonsmith stated that she directed staff to move forward with the committee in order to expedite the process. Councilmember Kline asked that this item be agendized on a future agenda. Councilmember Bogosian concurred with Councilmember Kline's request. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Waltonsmith announced that the City of Saratoga would like to invite the community to participate in the collection of signatures and well wishes for a special Condolence Book to be bound and sent to the Reagan Library. The "Signature Page" would be available in the City Council's Office during normal City Hall hours. Mayor Waltonsmith noted that on June 19, 2004 a Grand Opening celebration would be held at Wildwood Park. CEREMONIAL ITEMS None 5 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR lA. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES -MAY 5, 2004 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FROM MAY 5, 2004. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH WALTONSMITH ABSTAINING. 1B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES -JUNE 2, 2004 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FROM NNE 2, 2004. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSTAINING. 1 C. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES -JUNE 9, 2004 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FROM JUNE 9, 2004. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH BOGOSIAN ABSTAINING. 1D. REVIEW OF CHECK REGISTER STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve check register. STREIT /KLINE MOVED TO APPROVE CHECK REGISTER. MOTION PASSED 5-0. lE. CONGRESS SPRINGS PARK VERTICAL BYPASS DRAINAGE PROJECT -AWARD OF CONTRACT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Award contract. STREIT/KLINE MOVED TO AWARD CONTRACT TO COLONY LANDSCAPE & MAINTENANCE, INC F OR THE CONGRESS SPRINGS PARK VERTICAL BYPASS DRAINAGE PROJECT. MOTION PASSED 5- 0. 6 • 1 F. SARATOGA MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding and authorize City Manager to execute. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 85.9-137 Councilmember Kline requested that item 1F be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Kline noted that staff would like to clarify a change in the agreement. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that reference to the wok furlough was added to the last page. KING/STREIT MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE SARATOGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION. MOTION ASSED 5-0. 1G. SARATOGA EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding and authorize City Manager to execute. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 85.9-136 Councilmember Kline requested that item 1 G be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Kline noted that staff would like to clarify a change in the agreement. Assistant City Manager Tinfow stated that the version of the SEA MOU agreement in the staff report was a draft. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that over the last couple of days she has received input from the Human Resource Department, SEA, and the City Attorney. Councilmember Kline stated that the City Council reviewed all the detailed changes in Closed Session. KLINE KING MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE SARATOGA EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION. MOTION ASSED 5-0. 7 1H. RESOLUTION AMENDING COUNCIL AGENCY ASSIGNMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 04-053 Councilmember Kline requested that item 1H be removed from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Kline stated that he would be the alternate on the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority. KLINE/STREIT MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 OPERATING BUDGET STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolutions that Establishes the FY 2004-OS Appropriation Limit, Establishes Expenditure Appropriations, Approving the Operating Budget and Establishes the FY 2004-OS Schedule of Fees. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: 04-050, 051, 052 Dave Anderson, City Manager, presented staff report. City Manager Anderson stated that the budget would be presented in three parts: 2004-OS Budget Situation, Structural Revenue Problems, and Unfunded Infrastructure & Facility Needs. City Manager Anderson briefly explained that budget situation for FY 04-OS noting that the General Fund revenues should increase by $496,388 over last year, mostly through increased VLF generated by the increased car sales. City Manager Anderson stated that sales tax and transit occupancy tax are flat. City Manager Anderson stated that a substantial threat t the City's General Fund sources of revenue continues to be the uncertainty associated with possible actions at the State level. The State took more that $576,000 of VLF revenue from the City in FY03-04 and expects to borrow from the City an additional $319,381 in property tax in each of the next two fiscal years. The Governor's promised payback of borrowed property tax in 200506 has not been approved by the State legislature nor has the State's budget been finalized. City Manager Anderson noted that while expenditures have been reduced; the budget this year included a net $350,000 increase in the Sheriff's Office contract for costs beyond the City's control. In addition to the Sheriff's contract increase, the City received significant increases in costs for employee benefits. • • • 8 . City Manager Anderson explained the budget cuts from the past few years: • Fiscal Year 2002-2003, more than $734,500 was cut from the existing budget. • Fiscal Year 2003-2004, the budget was reduced by $1,320,560 • Fiscal Year 2004-2005, the previous cuts continued and new reductions were implemented. Expenditures reduced by more than $1,037,000 City Manager Anderson discussed the structural revenue problems. City Manager Anderson stated tat the City of Saratoga's primary source of revenue is property tax. As a whole the City generates approximately $69 million, but because the City's low/no property tax designation and the effects of Proposition 13, the City receives only a small fraction. City Manager Anderson stated that while the valuation of homes continues upward, that valuation does not translate into dollars until there is a sale of property and the selling price becomes the basis for the next taxable assessments. City Manager Anderson stated that declining revenues have been a steady problem since the early 1990's when the State acted to shift approximately $695,000 per year from City property tax revenue to support the schools (also known as "ERAF shift"). City Manager Anderson stated that a total conservative estimate of cumulative loss for the period of 1992-2006 in the City is $17,514,762. City Manager Anderson explained the unfunded infrastructure and facility needs. City Manager Anderson stated that the annual shortfall and a backlog of deferred infrastructure and facility maintenance totals $18 million. In conclusion, City Manager Anderson stated that since incorporation in 1956, the City has been a minimum service city with low tax rates. The conflict between the resulting low revenues and the ever-increasing costs presents a significant challenge to provide the high level municipal services expected by the residents and businesses. Peter Kolf, Interim Finance Director, briefly explained the General Fund Balance, the City's reserves, budget adjustments for Fiscal Year 2004-2005, and the reconciliation of the General Fund balance. . Mayor Waltonsmith opened the public hearing and invited public comments. Dick Allen, Chair/Finance Commission, noted that last night the Finance Commission reviewed the budget and anonymously made the following motion: "The Finance Commission believes that the current needs of the city -particularly in street and building maintenance -are underfunded by more than $2 million in the proposed budget. We recognize that certain structural deficiency issues exist; issues that cannot be solved tonight or in this budget. Furthermore, we believe that . the work done by City Staff and the City Council is both professional and responsible and is the best that can be accomplished under the circumstances. 9 We recognize that passage of a budget is mandatory, and therefore recommend passing the budget as proposed this evening. In addition we strongly recommend ' that the structural problems be addressed urgently. We believe that if these problems are not addressed, the quality of life and the property values in our city will deteriorate." David Mighdoll noted that he reviewed the proposed budget and doesn't agree that it is balanced budget. Mr. Mighdoll stated that after his review if the budget he found a $288k deficit in the General Fund. Mr. Mighdoll requested that the Council balance the budget before they approve it this evening. Peter Knight requested a list of approved CIP projects and a list of projects that were not approved and funded. Marjory Bunyard stated that she has lived in Saratoga for 33 years. Mrs. Bunyard stated that the streets in the City are in terrible condition. Mrs. Bunyard urged the Council to find a way to generate revenue into the City. Mrs. Bunyard requested that the City Council inform the citizens what need to be done and how much it will cost. Mayor Waltonsmith closed the public hearing. Councilmember Streit stated that this-year the City has made more cuts than past years. Councilmember Streit stated that the City laid off two employees and the employees associations recently signed a 2-year contract with no merit and only a 2% increases in each of the two years. Councilmember Streit noted that he supports the proposed budget. Councilmember Bogosian noted that this was his 8~' budget since he's been ~on the Council and this year has been the hardest. Councilmember Bogosian stated that in his 8 years on the City Council this was the fist time citizens have come to the meeting to speak on the budget. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he has mixed feeling regarding the proposed budget, but will support it. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he feels the budget is balanced with short-term fixes and that the Council has not looked at the management at City Hall. Councilmember Bogosian stated that mid level employees were laid off and the Council did not even look at high-end employees. Councilmember Bogosian stated that the CIP should be revisited and the North Campus should be opened up for public discussion. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he would support a revenue measure but not an unspecified WT. Councilmember Kline thanked the residents for attending the meeting and noted that the budget is acceptable. Vice Mayor King that the State takes 11% of the $8.7 million dollars in property taxes from the City. Vice Mayor King stated that the City has had an 8% reduction in employees over the last 4 years. In regards to the North Campus, Vice Mayor King stated the property value has gone up in 50% it was bought. Vice Mayor King stated that she supports the proposed budget. 10 Mayor Waltonsmith stated that over the last 51/2 years since she has been on the Council the budget shortfalls are increasing. Mayor Waltonsmith stated that she supports a UUT. Mayor Waltonsmith stated that a UUT is the only tax the State • cannot take away from the City. Mayor Waltonsmith stated that she supports the proposed budget. STREIT/KLTNE MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS THAT ESTABLISHES THE FY 2004-05 APPROPRIATION LIMIT ESTABLISHES EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS, APPROVING THE OPERATING BUDGET AND ESTABLISHES THE FY 2004-05 SCHEDULE OF FEES. MOTION PASSES 5-0. OLD BUSINESS None Mayor Waltonsmith noted that Councilmember Kline would not be present for the rest of the meeting. NEW BUSINESS 3. MARSHALL LANE SCHOOL TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Councilmember Streit noted that due to a conflict of interest he would abstain from this discussion. Councilmember Streit stepped down from the dais. John Cherbone, Public Works Director, presented staff report. Director Cherbone explained that for more than two years the City has been working with the Campbell Unified School District to improve traffic safety and vehicular flow around Marshall Lane School. With the District's recent passage of a school improvement bond and the City Council's approval of the Sobey RoadlQuito Road Traffic Improvement Project sufficient funding is now available to perform the desired work. Director Cherbone stated that the main goal of the project is to increase safety for school children being dripped off and picked up from school. Director Cherbone thanked Dale Thurston, Assistant Superintendent for the Campbell Unified School District, who has diligently worked with the City on these issues. Director Cherbone explained the main elements of the project which include an internal loop road and student drop-off/pick-up area, pedestrian pathways on Sobey Road and Marshall Lane, right turn lane improvements at the Quito Road/Pollard Road intersection, and left turn lane improvements at the Quito Road/Marshall Lane intersection. • 11 Director Cherbone noted that all work to be performed on school property will be ' funded and administered by the Campbell Union School District and conversely all work to be performed within the City's right-of--ways will be funded and administered by the City. Director Cherbone noted that a community meeting was noticed and held at on April 6 at the school to explain the proposed plan to the neighborhood and to parents of students who attend Marshall Lane School. Director Cherbone stated that a notice of tonight's meeting was mailed out to the same area residents as was the Apri16 Community Meeting. Dale Thurston, Assistant Superintendent/CUSD, thanked the City and staff for working with the District and coming up with up with great solution. Rosemary Woodward noted that she has lived in this neighborhood for the past 50 years and is well aware of the changes that have happened over the years. Mrs. Woodward noted that she attend to meeting held at the school and commended the efforts of all parties involved. Mrs. Woodward stated that she is not sure that the proposed changes will help the current situation. Gene Bernald asked if the City would review the area in a few months and asked if the City would hold more public meetings. Mayor Waltonsmith responded that the Public Safety Commission would review the area on a regular basis. In regards to the pedestrian access gate, Mr. Bernald asked if it would be closed off. Director Cherbone responded that the gate would remain closed and a new internal pathway would be installed across from Evans Lane. Wayne Levenfeld stated that he supports the proposed plan. Mark Publicover stated that he has lived in this area for the last 8 years. Mr. Publicover stated that he supports the proposed plan. Radu Barson noted that he has lived in this neighborhood for the past 8 years. Mr. Barson noted that conceptual the plan makes sense. Councilmember Bogosian asked if there would be enough room to accommodate cars on the school property and won't back up on Sobey Road. Director Cherbone responded that he does not think cars are going to be problem on Sobey Road. Consensus of the City Council to direct staff to proceed with Marshall Lane traffic improvements. 12 4. RELOCATE THE CITY'S HISTORIC FIRE BELL M STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the relocation of the fire bell from Oak Street to the new Fire District headquarters building. John Livingstone, Associate Planner, presented staff report. Planner Livingstone explained that the background. Planner Livingstone noted that the in 1987 the Sazatoga Fireman's Social Organization gave the bell to the City. As required by the resolution the City is responsible for all costs of moving, installation, and maintenance. Planner Livingstone noted that at the June Heritage Preservation Commission meeting the HPC recommend to the City Council that the fire bell be moved from its current location to the new fire district headquarters plaza. Planner Livingstone noted that it would be approximately $5,000 to move the bell. City Manager Anderson noted that the cost might be able to be included in the Sazatoga-Sunnyvale Signalization Project. Gordon Duncan, Chief/SFPD, noted that he did present the design for the placement of the bell to the Heritage Preservation Commission and will not hinder the line of sight from the corner of Sazatoga-Sunnyvale Road and Highway 9. Chief Duncan noted that the District would help supplement the costs if the City is short. STREIT/KING MOVED TO APPROVE THE RELOCATION OF THE FIRE BELL FROM OAK STREET TO THE NEW FIRE DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS BUILDING. MOTION PASSED 4-0-1 WITH KLINE ABSENT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION WORK PROGRAM ITEM TO PLACE FIVE CITY OWNED PROPERTIES ON THE STATE HISTORIC REGISTER STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct the Heritage Preservation Commission to submit applications for four City owned properties, the McWilliams House, Warner Hutton House, Original Sazatoga Library (Book-Go-Round), and the City Museum, to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places. John Livingstone, Associate Planner, presented staff report. Planner Livingstone stated that at a joint meeting with the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) the City Council requested that the HPC submit applications for the California Register of Historic Resources for the four City owned properties: McWilliams House, Warner Hutton House, Book-Go-Round, City Museum. 13 Planner Livingstone explained that the reason for the request was to further recognize and preserve the structures for future generations and to increase the ' probability of obtaining grant money for the care and restoration of the restoration of the structures. Planner Livingstone pointed out that while researching the request to place the properties on the Register the HPC discovered that Hakone Gazdens was already on the California Register of Historic Resources. Planner Livingstone stated that the Book-Go-Round building is the only building in its original locations. Planner Livingstone stated that in a document from the State Office of Historic Preservation, the relocation of historic buildings is discouraged. Also, the Stated discourages placing several historic structures together in an artificial historic pazk like setting. Planner Livingstone noted that at the June HPC meeting the Commissioners expressed their desire to work on the application themselves. The Commission felt it could be accomplished within asix-month time frame depending on the Commission workload. The HPC also recommend making the applications to the National Register instead of just the State. Direct the Heritage Preservation Commission to submit applications for four City owned properties, the McWilliams House, Warner Hutton House, Original Sazatoga Library (Book-Go-Round), and the City Museum, to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places. 6. COMMUNITY WIDE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PLAN STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Lorie Tinfow, Assistant City Manager, presented staff report. Assistant City Manager Tinfow explained that at the conclusion of staff's presentation of the new Emergency Plan in March, Councihember Bogosian commented that the City should be doing more and offered to put together a strategy for consideration by the Council Councilmember Bogosian noted that the report consist of things that aze currently being done and things that should be done. Mayor Waltonsmith asked if Councilmember Bogosian's report went before the Public Safety Commission. Assistant City Manager Tinfow responded no. Councilmember Streit commended Councilmember Bogosian on his report. Councilmember Streit noted that the Fire Department and the Sheriff's Office might have plans written already regarding safe shelters at the schools. 14 Consensus of the City Council to direct the Public Safety Commission to review the report and contact the City's Grant Writer to investigate any grants for emergency preparedness. 7. FEE WAIVER POLICY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, presented staff report. City Clerk Boyer stated that at the June 2, 2004 City Council meeting staff was directed to develop a policy regarding request for fee waivers. City Clerk Boyer stated that s several times throughout the year community groups approach the City Council to request a fee waiver. For example, the City Council recently granted a fee waiver of $450 to the Saratoga Rotary for their "Building Bridges" event to be held in October 2004. In 2001 the Council granted fee waiver of the $200 fee for Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council Annual Community Auction Fundraiser held in the parking lot. Other groups for which Council has waived the fees include, the Saratoga Community Band, Friends of the Saratoga Libraries, and the Saratoga Taiko Drummers. City Clerk Boyer stated that regular user groups use City facilities at no charge such as Elected State and Federal Official, League of Women Voters, SASCC Saratoga Sister City. City Clerk Boyer added that currently nonprofits such as Boy Scouts and Eastfield Ming Quong and city employees are given a 50% discount on use fees. Mayor Waltonsmith asked how many fee waivers the City grants throughout the year. Joan Pisani, Recreation Director, responded that the fee waivers that the Council has approved in the past have always been done on an individual basis. Genie Dee, Executive Director of Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC) explained that SASCC needs to maximize their membership in order to support the programs. Executive Director Dee noted that there isn't enough facility space for recreation programs and senior programs. Executive Director Dee requested that the Council waive the use fees for SASCC to use the North Campus. Consensus of the City Council to continue to grant fee waivers on an individual basis. 15 AGENCY ASSIGNMENTS Mayor Waltonsmith reported the following information: Santa Clara CountYCities Association -recent Bocce Ball Tournament -Monte Sereno won. Vice Mayor King reported the following information: SASCC Liaison -recently installed a new Board of Directors. Councilmember Bogosian reported the following information: KSAR Community Access TV Board -Director Carolyn De Los Santos recently resigned. Board is focusing on fundraising. Councilmember Streit reported the following information: West Valley Sanitation District -Approved the FY 04-OS Budget. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Vice Mayor King noted that Councilmember Kline concurred with her that a discussion regarding one citywide celebration need to be agendized. Councilmember Bogosian announced that on June 24, 2004 at the Saratoga Library the Good Government Group would be holding a public forum on "Consider Yourself a Candidate" for the upcoming November election. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Waltonsmith adjourned the meeting at 10:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk • 16