Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-07-2006 Planning Commission Packet CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING:.COMMISSION SITE VISIT AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - 3:30 p.m. 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 ' TUESDAY, MARCH 7, 2006 ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA AGENDA 1. APPLICATION #05-270 (386-07-037) LU,12546 Palmtag Dr.; -Appeal of a Denial of a Tree Removal Application. Staff has denied a tree removal request from the applicant to remove three trees on the subject property. Two trees are Elm and -are in the front yard, and the other tree is an Ash and located in the back. yard. The applicant is appealing Staff s denial to the Planning Commission. (Kate Bear) 2. APPLICATION #06-229 (393-43-042) RODRIGUEZ,13664 Camino Rico; -The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct an addition to an existing single- familyresidence consisting of 263 square-feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence will be 2,785 square- feet including garage. Proposed renovation will include a reduction of impervious coverage from 62% to 51 % of the lot. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be not higher than 22-feet. The net lot size is 10,003 square- feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000. (Therese Schmidt) 3. APPLICATION #06-075 (397-28-052) SAGARCHI, 20433 Walnut Avenue; -The applicant requests Design Review Approval to remodel an existing one-story single- family residence and add a new 906 square foot second floor. The existing detached garage would be removed. The total floor area of the proposed residence including a new attached two-car garage will be 2,850 square feet. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be not higher than 25 feet. The net lot size is 7,600 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000. (Lata Vasudevan) 4. APPLICATION #06-216 (517-09-043, 517-09-018, 517-09-044) SUBWAY SANDWICH SHOP (tenant)/ATOGA LLC (property owner), 14410 Big Basin Way; -The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to establish a sandwich shop in an existing approximately 960 square foot vacant tenant space in the newly remodeled Corinthian Corners commercial complex. The sandwic~ shop will face Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. and will be situated in a tenant space between Starbucks Coffee and a proposed retail bicycle shop. Continued from February 22, 2006 meeting. (Lata Vasudevan) The Site Visit Committee is comprised of interested Planning Commission members. The committee conducts site visits to properties that are new items on the Planning Commission Agenda. The site visits are held on the Tuesday preceding the Wednesday hearing, between 3:30 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. ' It is encouraged for the applicant and/or owner to be preset to answer any questions that 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, March 8, 2006 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ' ROLL CALL: Commissioners Manny Cappello, Jill Hunter, Robert Kundtz, Linda Rodgers, Michael Schallop, Mike Uhl, and Chair Susie Nagpal PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of February 22, X006 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 regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staff. . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS- PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTION TO STAFF Instruction to staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on March 1, 2006. 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/Agpellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. 1. APPLICATION #06-216 (517-09-043, 517-09-018, 517-09-044) SUBWAY SANDWICH SHOP (tenant)/ATOGA LLC (property owner), 14410 Big Basin Way; -The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to establish a sandwich shop in an existing approximately 960 square foot vacant tenant space in the newly remodeled Corinthian Corners commercial complex. -The sandwich shop will face Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. and will be situated in a tenant space between Starbucks Coffee and a proposed retail bicycle shop. Continued from February 22, 2006 meeting. (Lata Vasudevan) 2. APPLICATION #06-075 (397-28-052) SAGARCHI, 20433 Walnut Avenue; -The applicant requests Design Review Approval to remodel an existing. one-story single-family residence and add a new 906 square foot second floor. The existing detached garage would be removed. The total floor area of the proposed residence including a new attached two-car garage will be 2,850 square feet. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be not higher than 25 feet. The net lot size is 7,600 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000. (Lata Vasudevan) 3. APPLICATION #06-229 (393-43-042) RODRIGUEZ,13664 Camino Rico; -The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct an addition to an existing single-family residence consisting of 263 square-feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence will be 2,785 square- feet including garage. Proposed renovation will include a reduction of impervious coverage from 62%, to 51 % of the lot. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be not higher than 22- feet. The net lot size is 10,003 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000. (Therese Schmidt) 4. APPLICATION #OS-270 (386-07-037) LU, 12546 Palmtag Dr.; -Appeal of a Denial of a Tree Removal Application. Staff has denied a tree removal request from the applicant to remove three trees on the subject property. Two trees are Elm and are in the front yard, and the other tree is an Ash and located in the back yard. The applicant is appealing Staff's denial to the Planning Commission. (Kate Bear) DntECTORS ITEM - Explanation by the Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer regarding procedures for Planning Commission continuation of applications. COMMISSION ITEMS - None COMMITNICATIONS - None ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, March 22, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA ~`-`-~ In compliance 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 ctclerk@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, Abby Ayende, 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 March 1, 2006 at the oj~ce 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.sarato ag ca.us • If you would like to receive the Agenda's via a-mail, please send your a-mail address to planning(a~saratoga.ca.us • MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION • DATE: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Nagpal called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cappello, Hunter, Kundtz, Nagpal and Rodgers Absent: Commissioners Schallop and Uhl . Staff: Associate Planner Lata Vasudevan PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of February 8, 2006. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Rodgers, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of February 8, 2006, were adopted as submitted. (5-0-2; Commissioners Schallop and Uhl were absent) ORAL COMMUNICATION There were no Oral Communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Associate Planner Lata Vasudevan announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on February 15, 2006. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Chair Nagpal 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). • Planning Commission Minutes for February 22, 2006 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR ,~ There were no Consent Calendar Items. *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 1 APPLICATION #06-216 (517-09-043, 517-09-018, 517-09-044) SUBWAY SANDWICH SHOP (tenant)/ATOGA LLC (uroperty owner), 14410 Biq Basin Way: -The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to establish a sandwich shop in an existing approximately 960 square foot vacant tenant space in the newly remodeled Corinthian Corners commercial complex. The sandwich shop will face Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. and will be situated in a tenant space between Starbucks Coffee and a proposed retail bicycle shop. (Lata Vasudevan) Chair Nagpal: • Read a letter from the applicant into the record. The applicant is asking for a continuance of this item to the Planning Commission meeting of March 8, 2006, to allow more time to explore more options to make this project more compatible to~the Downtown. • Asked staff if the applicant is present. Associate Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that the applicant is not present. Commissioner Hunter advised staff that there is a lack of information in the staff report on the number of businesses selling sandwiches in the Village. She asked that this information be added to the staff report for the next meeting. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that she would put this information together for the next meeting. Commissioner Hunter asked staff if the Commission must accept a request for a continuance. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied no. Commissioner Rodgers urged the Commission not to go forward this evening since it is implied that a request for continuance is generally approved. Chair Nagpal suggested a straw poll to determine if there is a consensus in the Commission. Commissioner Hunter said that in the past, the Commission has usually approved such a request for a continuance but that she wonders if it is possible not to grant such a request. Commissioner Kundtz pointed out that this request was based upon the desire for an opportunity to pursue alternate signage. However, there is enough information available to render a decision tonight. Planning Commission Minutes for February 22, 2006 ,Page 3 Commissioner Cappello pointed out that during the site {'visit yesterday, the applicant was asked to pursue alternative signage and is therefore reacting to that request. Commissioner Hunter advised that she has sent emails to the Saratoga Village Development Council, a list of 85 people, to advise them of this continuance. Commissioner Rodgers said that it would be a departure from. normal practice to deny this continuance since they are usually granted when requested. Planner Lata Vasudevan added that she does not know what if-any justification exists in the Code to deny a continuance. Chair Nagpal said that she was in favor to allow the continuance. but is willing to take a straw poll if the Commission so desires. Commissioner Hunter said that if a continuance is granted a list of those stores in the Village that sell sandwiches should be include in the report for the March 8~' meeting. Chair Nagpal asked if a straw vote is necessary. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied no. Commissioner Kundtz said that in fairness to-all parties the continuance should be allowed. To go forward would deny the applicant as well as neighborhood representatives from coming forward to speak about this project. He said he is inclined to favor a continuance. Commissioner Rodgers said that testimony should be allowed from anyone present tonight who wishes to speak. Chair Nagpal: • Advised. that the Commission is going to accept the request for a continuance to the March 8, 2006, meeting. • Encouraged all. present this evening to come out to that meeting too. • Added that the Commission is willing to take public testimony this evening. Chair Nagpal opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Ms. Chris Oakes, President, Saratoga Chamber of Commerce: • Reported that the Chamber took a quick poll of its members on the subject of this Subway proposed for the Village. • Gave the poll results as follows: 4 members support this Subway; 18 members do not support this Subway (with 9 members strongly opposing); 8 members were neutral and responses are pending from 16 members. Commissioner Cappello asked if these people polled are merchants. Ms. Chris Oakes replied yes, they are business owners along Big Basin Way. Planning Commission Minutes for February 22, 2006 Page 4 . _._ Mr. Bill Cooper, Owner, Bella Saratoga: • Said that the Commission does not need to settle for a reschedule to the Stn • Said he has trouble understanding how this business can select a location without immediate parking for a business that consists of quick drop in business. • Assured that this Subway would not affect his business except for perhaps during the summer when it might encourage people not to come. directly into the- Village but rather stop at the entrance and then be on their way. • Expressed concern for long-time businesses and said that this Subway would represent a dilution of what we have and offers nothing new to bring people into the Village. • Said that he detests big chains at the entrance to the Village more so than he would further inside the Village. • Estimated that Starbucks has diluted other coffee. businesses in the Village by about 10 percent. • Said that he hates to see small local people who have built out Saratoga lose out. Mr. Darryl Lupretta, Lupretta Deli, 14480 Big Basin Way, Saratoga: •. Said that the Village needs new retail and a mixture of retail and food. • Stated that this sandwich shop won't bring any new foot traffic to the Village. • Pointed out that there are already traffic impacts with just one tenant in this building. • Reminded that the Village is a special and unique area. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Cappello, seconded by Commissioner Rodgers, the Planning Commission CONTINUED to its meeting of March 8, 2006, the consideration of a Conditional Use Permit (Application #06-216) to establish a sandwich shop in an existing approximately 960 square foot vacant tenant space in the newly remodeled Corinthian Corners commercial building on property located at 14410 Big Basin Way. (5-0-2; Commissioners Schallop and Uhl were absent) *** DIRECTOR'S ITEMS There were no Director's Items. COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Hunter advised that last week the Village Ad Hoc Commission went to Pleasanton and had atwo-hour-visit of their 17 block long historic downtown area. Commissioner Rodgers asked if any hints were given on how to attract business to a downtown. Commissioner Hunter said that Pleasanton has a formula for how many of each type of store is allowed. . Planning Commission Minutes for February 22, 2006 Page 5 Chair Nagpal asked if there is a specific percentage for retail uses. Commissioner Hunter reported that when the representatives from Pleasanton learned- that Saratoga's Village has 11 restaurants within its three blocks they were amazed. Chair Nagpal reminded the Commission of the joint meeting with Council on March 1St Commissioner Kundtz said that future discussion on the notion of denying a continuance should be held.. He added that the presumption is that such a request is accepted. Chair Nagpal said that this is a procedural issue. , Commissioner Hunter said that the applicant usually appears in person to request a continuance. Commissioner Rodgers asked if the City Attorney has or could be consulted. Planner Lata Vasudevan reported that the City Attorney would be in attendance at the March 8th meeting. COMMUNICATIONS There were no Communications Items. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Kundtz, Chair Nagpal adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission meeting of March 8, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk • i {~ i.. r_. ~ • MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, March 8, 2006 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Nagpal called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. . ROLL-CALL Present: Commissioners Cappello, Hunter, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers, Schallop and Uhl Absent: None , Staff: Director John Livingstone, Associate Planner Lata Vasudevan, Planner Therese Schmidt, City Arborist Kate Bear and Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of February 22, 2006. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Rodgers, the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of .February 22, 2006, were adopted with a correction to page 4. (5-0-2; Commissioners Schallop and Uhl abstained) ORAL COMMUNICATION Mr. Paul Fortenot, 19537 Eric Drive, Saratoga: • Reminded that he had made comments at the joint Planning Commission%City Council meeting held in October 2005.. • Stated his belief that Saratoga is exposed without having a Wireless Facilities Ordinance. • Said that the City of Saratoga needs to take .control. • Suggested that the City consider the City of Cupertino's Wireless Master Plan as it offers an approach that Saratoga should look at. • Pointed out that Cupertino has a Telecommunications Commission. • .Said that these steps would remove any ambiguity and provide awin-win. for :the community. Mr. Ray Muzzy, 19548 Eric Drive, Saratoga: • Explained that he also emailed the Council with his comments. • Said that Saratoga is facing the issue of resources and that the City's Planning staff is working on difficult issues. t - .~ Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006' ~ Page 2 • Stated that a Wireless Master Plan is a very important tool to provide guidance. • Agreed that the City should go out and take a look at plans such as Cupertino's and tailor them for Saratoga. • Said that there is no reason to wait to do the whole thing from scratch, as there are good examples out there. • Pointed out that the City of Saratoga does not have tre technical advice that other cities have. The issues are complex and involve advanced technology. This Master Plan would provide a framework for judgment to make good decisions. • Commended two installations saying that Crown Castle did a good job along Saratoga-Los Gatos Road and the flagpole in front of the Saratoga Library. • Stated that a lot can be done if the City is proactive and provides guidance to providers.. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTION TO STAFF , Commissioner Hunter said that this is primarily an issue for Council. Director John Livingstone: ' • Said that this issue is of interest both to Council and the. Planning Commission. However, it has not worked its way up the priority list. • Added that cities often try to borrow Ordinance drafts from other cities as a resource. • Cautioned that the City is currently dealing with State-mandated Ordinances-right now. Chair Nagpal asked if the issue of a Wireless. Master Plan is on the priority list right now. Director John Livingstone: • Replied that there is a large list of desired Ordinances and this is on that list. • Stated that Council had to pick five to six to tackle this year and this was not one of those selected. • Explained that right now the City must react to laws that require supporting Ordinances on issues such as Density Bonuses. Chair Nagpal clarified that Council sets the priorities. Director John- Livingstone replied yes. Chair Nagpal suggested that this issue could be raised , at the next Planning .Commission Study Session. Commissioner Kundtz said that he has consistently asked for a strategic plan from cellular providers whenever an application comes forward and asked if there was.- something the Commission could do to ensure that this issue gets reviewed. Director John Livingstone replied talk to Council. Chair Nagpal introduced Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer. / .. ~ Saratoga Planning Commission, Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 3 Cit Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that it was good to be here. Y REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director John Livingstone announced that, pursuant to Government Code. 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on March 1, 2006.: REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS Chair Nagpal 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. *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 1 APPLICATION #06-216 (517-09-043, 517-09-018, 517-09-044) SUBWAY- SANDWICH • SHOP (tenant)/ATOGA LLC (property owner), 14410 Big Basin Way: The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to establish a sandwich shop in an existing approximately 960 square foot vacant tenant space in the newly remodeled Corinthian Corners commercial complex. The sandwich shop will face Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. and will be situated in a tenant space between Starbucks Coffee and a proposed retail bicycle shop. Continued from February 22, 2006 meeting. (Lata Vasudevan) Associate Planner Lata Vasudevan presented the staff report as follows: • Stated that the applicant is proposing a Subway Sandwich Restaurant at Big Basin Way. .__ • _Remmded .that the._Planning Commission continued -consideration of this .application at .its __ --_- e _-- ----- . __ meeting of February 22, 2006, to this meeting. • Explained that this proposed Subway would be one tenant at the Corinthian Corner building. • Said that the tenant space faces Saratoga-Los Gatos Road and consists of approximately -960 square feet.. It is located between Starbucks and a proposed bicycle shop. • Reported the proposed operational hours as being between 9 a.m. and 9:30 p.m. daily. The peak operational hours are between 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. There is little evening activity. • Stated that deliveries would occur one-'time a week at 10 a.m. when there. is no conflict with parking demand. • Added that deliveries for Starbucks occur between 2 and 3 a.m. • Said that there would be two Subway signs, one for each facade of this corner space. The • signs would consist of individual metal letters with exterior illumination. The lamps are proposed to match those used by Starbucks. The lettering is yellow and white and the applicant will provide sign material samples tonight. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006' ~ Page 4 • Reported that two additional emails in opposition to this request were received. One is .from Mr. and Mrs. Formico and the other is from Laurel Perusa. • Said that the proposed 'Subway is classified as a restaurant, which requires the: granting of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. This process allows the Planning Commission to impose conditions. The Use Permit is based upon findings. • Recommended that the Planning Commission make the required findings -and adopt the attached Resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit for Subway. • Said that she was available. for any questions. Commissioner Rodgers reported that she was at Starbucks today at about-10:15 a.m. and that there was a delivery truck on the street. She asked if this was a violation. Director John Livingstone replied yes, this is a technical violation if the Conditions set specific times for deliveries. The Commission can propose and condition specific delivery times if it wishes to do so. Assistant-City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer asked staff if the Commissioners have seen these emails. , Planner Lata Vasudevan said that they were originally sent to the Planning Commissioners. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer asked if they were part of the staff report. • Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that they were sent separately, after the report had already gone out. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer suggested that these emails be read into the record. Commissioner Kundtz read the email from Marte and Linda Formico, 14456 Sobey Road, into the record: • -- Just .read; the__acticle _in the Saratoga. News about. Subway. Sandwiches in Downtown. Saratoga. I dons think that is the direction for Downtown Saratoga. I think the Starbucks is great but we do not need another sandwich shop. Chair Nagpal read the second email from Laurel Perusa, 15085 Oriole Road, into the record: • How fortunate we are to live in Saratoga. How many California residents are able to refer to their downtown as a Village? Not many. The Village already has a multitude of businesses that sell sandwiches in our Village. An additional sandwich shop. will not enhance our Village. A sandwich franchise at the Village entrance or any other location is not appropriate, detracting from the Village. Our Village is unique. A sandwich franchise does not lend itself to the existing charm of the Village. Please give the Subway Sandwich application careful consideration. Commissioner Rodgers asked between Use Permits, CH-1 and Land Use Impacts, which Ordinances pending for updating are a priority? Saratoga Planning- Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 5 • Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that they all fold in together and that no one is' more or less important. Commissioner Hunter: • Reminded that she had asked staff about the number of sandwich shops in the Village and Planner Lata Vasudevan has said 15. • Read. a list into the record: Mediterranean Deli, the gas station, International. Coffee Shop, - Coffee Ground, Vienna Cafe, Starbucks, Village Rendezvous, -Buy & -Save, Blue Rock - Cafe, Pat Smith's, French Tailor, Tapioca Express and the Napkin-Ring. Commissioner Rodgers disagreed that all those mentioned by Commissioner Hunter actually sell sandwiches. She said that Starbucks does not have sandwiches and she asked to be sure.. She added that the sandwiches sold at the gas station are not equitable. Commissioner Hunter .said that she is listing businesses that have items available for lunch and not just sandwiches. She added that this list is actually shortchanged. Chair Nagpal asked if staff is suggesting that the number of restaurants selling sandwiches is actually 15. Director John Livingstone said that the Saratoga Village Development Council originally • provided the list. He added that staff did a drive by attempt at a list and it appeared to be approximately 15 places. Chair Nagpal reiterated that the approximately number is 15 shops. Director John Livingstone reported that staff had received two calls this evening at about 5:30 p.m. in opposition to this Use Permit. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that the alleyway is narrow and questioned what the plan is ~:__r_egardmg=impacts during_tieliveries_ _ _ ,_ Director John Livingstone: • Advised that there are several ways to deliver including use of the back alley and the front parking lot. The least intrusive option would be used. • Assured that the City would intervene in the event that problems occur with deliveries. • Pointed out that there are not too many complaints received by staff regarding deliveries in commercial districts. Commissioner Hunter asked if a back exit to this tenant space is required since baking occurs on the premises. Director John Livingstone replied no. This site complies with Code requirements for this use.. .Chair Nagpal asked what types of uses would be permitted in this location without a requirement for a Use Permit. -~ Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006' ~ Page 6 a. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied that retail uses are permitted by right. She added that each • zoning district has a list. of allowed uses. .Chair Nagpal clarified that this request is before the Planning Commission for a Conditional Use Permit because it is not listed as a permitted use. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied correct. ' Chair Nagpal asked if a traffic evaluation was done on the potential impacts of this use. Director John Livingstone said generally speaking such traffic evaluations are done when the site is developed as was done with this building renovation. This is a safe corner as designed. There is no hazard and the circulation pattern dges work. Chair Nagpal pointed out that this evaluation did not include this type of business. Director John Livingstone advised that a traffic evaluation was done, for Starbucks. Commissioner Hunter said that the traffic evaluation for the building was done in 2002. Director John Livingstone advised that the City's Traffic Engineer looked at that report again for the Starbucks application. He added that a 900 square foot tenant space does not trigger a nexus for a traffic study. There is not much more of a draw anticipated for this use than any active retail. ' Commissioner Hunter asked for the total number of retail spaces contained in this Corinthian Corners building. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied six tenant spaces. -Commissioner Uhl pointed out that the bike shop is using two spaces. Commissioner Rodgers clarified that both the bike shop and the telecommunications shop use 1.5 tenant spaces each. Chair Nagpal opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Ms. Miya Glasauer, Applicant, 19991 Braemar Drive, Saratoga: • Stated that she is honored to have this opportunity to address the Planning Commission for this Conditional Use Permit to allow her to establish a Subway Sandwich at this location. • Explained .that this franchise was founded 40 years ago and now has 25,000 stores worldwide. • Said that Subway enforces its operational guidelines and violations result in revocation of the franchise license. • Reported that Subway has a monitoring system by which a field consultant makes unannounced monthly visits to each restaurant to verify compliance with standards. ,- Saratoga Planning Commission, Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 7 • -Said that Subway has strong-purchasing power that equals reasonable prices for its customers. • Added that Subway locations are remodeled .every five years.. They are well maintained all year round. - - • Advised that she is the-owner of two Subway restaurants, one in Santa Clara and the other in Downtown Los Gatos. She has been a franchisee with Subway for four years. She also owns two Baskin Robbins restaurants and has been a franchisee .for nine. years. • Stated that she has received numerous awards from both Baskin Robbins and Subway. • Reported that she moved to, Saratoga in February 1991 and is raising her 11 and 14- year old sons here. They are active in Little League and soccer. She and her husband are active in the community and volunteer. • -Said that she is-happy to be involved in community fundraising through her business, as she is aware of the importance of community. • Pointed out that there are a lot of empty tenant spaces in the Downtown. • Added that a brand name business does-not have a negative impact but rather would help revitalize the activities in Downtown Saratoga. • Reminded that Subway offers a quality product and services for. the residents. • Assured that there is plenty of pie for everyone to share. • Expressed her admiration for the dedication and sacrifice of the Planning • Commissioners and thanked them for their time this evening.. Commissioner Rodgers -asked to see the sign materials samples. Ms. Miya Glasauer said she has them available and would like to present them la#er after the Use Permit has been discussed. Commissioner Hunter asked Ms. Miya Glasauer if her Subway location in Los Gatos is in the historic.-part of the town. Ms. Miya Glasauer said yes. She added that a big deal was made at the time of -that application. Commissioner Hunter asked if the tenant space is not located down by the DMV. Ms. Miya. Glasauer replied yes but this is also considered a part of the historic downtown. Commissioner Hunter asked Ms. Miya Glasauer if she is certain she can function with just one delivery per week. Ms. Miya Glasauer replied yes. She said that Subways has high quality refrigeration as well as well-packaged produce. She added that this is not anticipated to be a high • volume store. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006' 'Page 8 ~~ Director John Livingstone suggested that Ms. Miya Glasauer provide. the sign .materials S now. Ms. Miya Glasauer said that she surveyed the signs in Saratoga, which has its own identity. Chair Nagpal asked Ms. Miya Glasauer what she is proposing for signage. Ms: Miya Glasauer replied that she was flexible between uses- of metal or wood letters Chair Nagpal asked if there are no changes proposed to -page 5 of the staff report pertaining to signs. Ms. Miya Glasauer said. that she cannot change the registered logo but can change the ' materials used to create that logo. Commissioner Cappello asked Ms. Miya Glasauer to clarifying, that most business for a Subway location occurs during lunch. Ms. Miya Glasauer replied that two-thirds of the business has occurred by 3 p.m. Commissioner Cappello asked how many transactions that might reflect. ' • Ms. Miya Glasauer said that it is hard to tell. She said that this is not considered an A- level location but more a B-level or C-level location. Commissioner Cappello asked Ms. Miya Glasauer why she does not select a big and popular site for her Subway franchise location. Ms. Miya Glasauer said that her Santa Clara location has a huge shopping center nearby. There is not a lot of traffic here in the Village. Commissioner Cappello said that Ms. Miya Glasauer seems to be saying-that her Subway shop won't attract new business ,but rather would leverage the existing traffic already there. Ms. Miya Glasauer said that her restaurant would offer ponvenience. She pointed out that the average lunch break is actually 30 minutes. Patrons usually pick up their sandwich and go back to the office to eat. She said that half of her business would be neighbors who would walk to her restaurant. Commissioner Cappello said that one objective is the revitalization of the Village: He asked how a Subway fits with that objective. Ms. Miya Glasauer: • • .Reminded that she has been a Saratoga resident since 1991. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 9 • . Reported that she had lost interest in the Village, as there- has not been much to -make -her come there.. • Assured that she does not want to wipe out existing businesses but that she does support the right of choices. • Pointed out that Westgate was a dying center that rtiow has been redeveloped. There are many choices there now. ' • Added that there are no negatives with having a Subway in the Village. Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that Ms. Miya Glasauer had estimated about 60 people during the lunch hour as mentioned during the Commission's site visit. Ms. Miya Glasauer said that she believes that approximately 50 is-more accurate but that it is hard to estimate. ' Chair Nagpal asked Ms. Miya Glasauer if she does not have a business model. Ms. Miya Glasauer said that she is not comfortable speaking about her specific plans during a public meeting but would speak with Commissioners individually. Commissioner Kundtz said that it is imperative that Ms. Miya Glasauer forecast the traffic impacts of this business if that number exists, as this detail is part of the decision-making • process for the Commission. Ms. Diana Kazarian, Subway Representative, 2001 Gateway Place, Unit 270, San Jose: • ~ Explained that she has been with Subway for 21 years. • Said that the anticipated traffic in this neighborhood is between 30 and 40 during peak lunch, approximately 15 between 3 and 5 p.m. and approximately 20 between 5 and 7 p.m. • Stated that Subway customers are in and out. It does not draw huge crowds. -Commissioner- Hunter- asked -about the ovens needed to prepare the fresh bread. Are they located at the rear of the restaurant? Ms. Miya Glasauer said that the ovens are located at the front of the restaurant where customers can see them. Commissioner Rodgers asked for a description of the interior materials. Commissioner Hunter said that they are included in the staff report but are not required as part of the Commission's review. Ms. Miya Glasauer provided material samples for the signs and said that they do not reflect the proposed size or color of her sign but just the proposed material of which the . letters would be constructed. Commissioner Kundtz asked if green background is used. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 10 Ms: Miya Glasauer replied no. The sign is comprised of individual channel letters; Ms. Marilyn Marchetti, 20701 St. Charles, Saratoga: • Identified herself as a resident in the Village.- • Said that Saratoga's Village is different. It is quaint, unique and charming. • Stated that franchises would cause the Village to lose some of that charm.- • Suggested that the Village needs different niche types of shops that draw customers to .the Village. • Said that she is not -sure that a Subway is the type of draw wanted for the Village. • Pointed out that the potential patrons for this Subway are already in the Village and frequent existing shops already. , • Stated her concern about the appearance at the Gateway, saying -that aSubway- is not unique. Allowing a Subway here sets precedence and she would like to see some controls such as additions to the design guidelines that would prevent such uses in the Downtown. • Reiterated that it is not a historic and charming Downtown with chain stores. Ms. Jennifer Young Taylor, 14672 Oak Street, Saratoga: • Said that she has been a resident since 1952 when she was eight years old. • Stated that she feels strongly againsf this proposal and that a sandwich counter is -not needed here. • Pointed out that there are already many fine dining choices available. • Stated that an in-and-out place is no draw for foot traffic and- shopping on the street. • Added that parking is a problem. • Advised that the Village is doing fine and is not dying. It is a beautiful place! • Opined that Subway is ordinary. • Said that having a franchise sign in an historic area is unfortunate and would belie the beautiful and historic ambiance of the Village. Ms. Laurel Perusa, 15085 Oriole Road, Saratoga: - - • Said that she feels fortunate fo-live in unique Saratoga, a city tha# is distinguis a rom other communities in California. • Added that this is a beautiful area that is quaint and charming. There is much to be proud of and appreciated. • Stated that Subway does not lend itself to the character of the Village but is rather Anytown/Anywhere USA. • Reiterated that there is no need for another sandwich shop in Downtown Saratoga. • Asked the Commission to give this careful consideration. Ms. Virginia Fiorentino, 12029 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga: • Explained that this building owner, Nasser, spent two years completing this project and is proud of it. • Said that Nasser is hoping that the Planning Commission is pleased with the result. • • Assured that this revitalized building will bring more visitors to the Village and that Subway would be a viable and strong tenant for this building. • Said that this building filled would bring in tax revenue to the City. ~~ Saratoga Planning Commission, Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 1.1 • Pointed out that this franchisee, Ms. Miya Glasauer, cares slot-about Saratoga and its Village. • -Said that this is an opportunity for more tax dollars. • Asked -the Commission to approve the Use Permit for this Subway,- which offers another option and variety. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that this proposal represents the fifth tenant -and asked Ms. Virginia Fiorentino how many tenant spaces there are in the Corinthian Corners. building. Ms. Virginia Fiorentino replied that there is a double space available. Nasser wants a single tenant in that space that consists of approximately 5,000 square feet to serve as an anchor tenant. Commissioner Cappello asked Ms. Virginia Fiorentino what an anchor tenant means. Ms. Virginia Fiorentino replied that an anchor tenant brings in business. -She said that since there are so many schools in the area, Subway would also draw new business to the Village with its fresh and good food. Commissioner Cappello asked. if it would be drawing people who would not otherwise be going there. Ms. Virginia Fiorentino said that Subway would increase business in the Village. She added that eating there is more cost effective for young people. Chair Nagpal asked if Subway's patrons would not simply drive in and leave. Ms. Virginia Fiorentino said that there would be a mixture. Some would leave and others would stay and eat. The majority would arrive by car and she believes that the local _ . businesses.would still patronize-their original sandwich shops. Ms. Juliette Bloxham, 14419 Big Basin Way, Saratoga: • Identified herself as a nearby business owner and landlord across the street. • Stated that the Village needs foot traffic in that location to help support other business in the Village. • Said that Starbucks has helped and has been a good addition to her shop. • Said that a new antique store is coming. • Stated that Subway does not provide interesting charm to the Village. • Pointed out that the renovated Corinthian building is beautiful and great.- • Said that the bicycle shop would be a good addition. • Asked .that franchises not be brought into the Village. . Commissioner Kundtz asked Ms. Juliette Bloxham to distinguish between the benefits of Starbucks versus the lack of benefit for a Subway shop. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006' gage 12 Ms. Juliette Bloxham said that Subway is not charming and the difference is the kind of - people it attracts. Ms. Lillian Benson, Benson Antiques, 20603-5 Third Street, Saratoga: • Advised that she has operated an antique shop in Saratoga for 27 years. • Said she is the unofficial "Queen of Saratoga." ~ . • Said that she is disappointed. ~ • Pointed out that there are few Victorian Villages left. , • Expressed concern for other merchants in Saratoga. • Said .that she has sad news to report in that the Rendezvous is out of business due to a rent increase. • Said that she knows of 15 people interested in establishing business in Saratoga' but they can't afford the rents in the Village. • Suggested that Corinthian consider reduced rental- rates for the first year to allow new and unique businesses to establish themselves in Saratoga. • Stated that Subway does not belong here. Another sandwich shop is not needed. Commissioner Hunter advised that Ms. Lillian Benson would be leading :the Easter Promenade this year: Ms. Lillian Benson: • Said that coordinating the Easter Promenade is no problem as she has done it before. • Added that she is now 84 years old. • Suggested that businesses in the Village need to keep later evening hours as she sees lots of business from the restaurants' dinner patrons. Ms. Diana Kazarian, Subway: • Said that they appreciate the uniqueness and charm of the Village. • Disagreed that customers of Starbucks and Subway are different. • Recounted that her own Subway franchise is located- next- to a Starbucks. Both businesses share customers. • Said that Subway provides nutritional information. • Assured that Subway restaurants do draw and would be a wonderful addition to the Village. • Pointed out that Subway has a $600 million annual advertising budget. • Reminded that no exterior changes are proposed. , • Said that this is a small shop of only 900 square feet and includes nice interior decor. Commissioner Rodgers asked Ms. Diana Kazarian about the demographics of Subway customers. Ms. Diana Kazarian replied that their main demographic is between 18 and 36 years old. That is their targeted advertising market. • Commissioner Kundtz asked if there is flexibility in signage. + ' , 1 Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8,_2006 Page 13 • Ms. Diana Kazarian replied that the sign color and logo are identifiable corporate trademarks -but that sign materials are flexible: Commissioner Rodgers asked about the signage used at the Santana .Row Subway location. Ms. Diana Kazarian replied that they are individual plastic channel letters. Commissioner Rodgers asked Ms. Diana Kazarian if Subway would work with Saratoga on the signs. Ms. Diana Kazarian replied absolutely. Ms. Caryl Pozos, The Butter Paddle: • Said that The Butter Paddle has been in business for 39 years and includes 70 people. • Asked that the Commission protect the unique businesses in Saratoga. • Said that she is concerned about the possibility of opening the- door to too many franchise chain stores. • Stated that she is in support of revitalization of the. Village. Mr. Joseph Masek, Owner, La Mere Michelle, Saratoga: • Pointed out that 21 restaurants in the Village employ 250 people. • Said greedy landlords raise rents that-put small business out. • Said that Subway would not draw to the Village. Ms. Miya Glasauer: • Said that she hears the concerns and resistance. • Said that she would be open seven days a week for the same number of hours. • Assured that she would create activity in the Village as well as provide healthy food. • Reminded that she is an individual owner of a Subway. Commissioner Cappello said that while Virginia Fiorentino has said that Subway is a ' strong tenant that would not leave in one year, if business were not good it could close up in a year. Ms. Miya Glasauer:- •. Explained that she is asub-lessee. • Advised that Subway's Headquarters is the lessee with 20 year's of options. Subway's Real Estate Corporate Department manages the company's leases. • Pointed out that many landlords would love to have Subway as a tenant. • Agreed that any business that does not do well -could close. • Reminded that this is her fourth year with Subway and her sales have doubled. • Informed that customers are very health conscious. • Said that she has a hard time understanding why Subway is not perceived as unique and charming. It is a beautiful and upscale store. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 14 Chair Nagpal thanked Ms. Miya Glasauer for her time and presentation. Chair Nagpal .closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Chair Nagpal- asked the Commissioners to base its discussion. on the findings required for a Conditional Use Permit. , ~ , Commissioner Hunter: • Stated that she disagrees totally with the staff recommendation. • Said that there are lots of restaurants and sandwich. shops in the Village. • Added that something other than restaurants is needed. • Pointed out that new salons have been prohibited after nine were established in ,the Village. • -Said that this use would affect other sandwich shops. • Stated that Health & Safety concerns are not answered. • .Said that there is a parking shortage. • Informed that other merchants have told her that they have seen na improvement as a result of Starbucks. , • Said that she has lived near the Village for 25 years and is there nearly every day. It is one of the most special places. • Added that she moved here because of the Village. , • Said that vacancy is not high and shops are doing very well.- This is a vibrant • Downtown with many things happening. • Said that a Subway does not fit with the CH-1 Zoning District and is totally wrong for the Village. Commissioner Kundtz: • Echoed Commissioner Hunter's comments. • Advised that he too disagrees with staff's recommendation, as a Subway does not add to the mix in the.Village.. __._ . _ _ _ _ _ • Reminded that he also voted again§f the Starbucks. • Reported that he has ari acute sensitivity about safety. • Said that the traffic pattern for this use would not enhance the Village. • Concluded that he could not support this request. Commissioner Schallop: • Agreed with Commissioners Hunter and Kundtz. • Said that the location is in the entry or gateway to the Village. • Said that due to traffic and image reasons, the findings are too difficult to make in the affirmative.. • Said that since there are impacts, he cannot vote in favor of this use. • Added that it is more of a political issue for Council. Commissioner Rodgers: • Expressed concern over the accuracy of the list of existing restaurants serving sandwiches in the Village, separating full restaurants from sandwich shops. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 15 • Pointed -out several on the list that she -knows for certain do not- sell sandwiches, including Starbucks and the Napkin Ring. Commissioner Hunter said that Starbucks is coming up with a full line of sandwiches in the future. Commissioner Rodgers said that a gas station does not qualify as a sandwich shop. She pointed out that another business listed, Village Rendezvous, has just been announced as going out of business. Commissioner Hunter pointed out that that restaurant was in business for 2'0 years. Commissioner Rodgers: • Said that many on the list are closed at lunch. • Said that there are good sandwich shops. • Explained that she visited a number of shops in' the .Village today and bought lots of sandwiches. • Said that she does not want to base decisions on this list. • Added that a mix of uses is needed. • Advised that this slot won't impact the Village that much as it is a small isolated space. • Said that it would not be a negative and would draw in the younger crowd. • • Pointed out that the CH-1 Zoning talks about providing enhancement and diversity. • Said that she cannot make negative findings against this proposal. • Reminded that rents are high. • Stated that issues of signage matter more. • Pointed out that the Trotteria is also a franchise and said that Starbucks has ~ been a good addition to that corner, bringing people to the area. Commissioner Cappello: • Assured that he came tonight. without a preconceived decision. -- • Added that he is still undecided to a large degree.- , • Said that he is surprised to hear that Subway is not expected to bring in new foot traffic to the area as he expected it to. • Said that there is an inconsistency between Subway and the character of the Village with its mom and pop unique shops. • Said he would have no problem saying no to McDonalds or Burger King for the Village but that Subway falls somewhere in between.- • Said a unique feature of Subway is that it bakes its on bread on the premises. They offer a fresh product. There is a certain market segment and age group for this product and Subway compliments Starbucks since they have different peak hours with Starbucks in the morning and Subway at lunch. • Pointed out that Subway offers a strong tenant with a strong brand name. • Reminded that the interior of the shop is a very fashionable and quality shop. • Said that he can make the findings but it is on the cusp. He is on the fence but would likely vote to approve. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 16 a~ Commissioner Rodgers stated that she is kind of on the cusp too. • Commissioner Uhl: • Said that he feels very strongly and does not agree with the staff recommendation at all. • Stated that there are- Health & Safety concerns with~.this corner.: It is not safe. This is a major intersection for a stop and go shop. • Added that on a bigger scale, he has a big concern about this type. of use in the Village. • Suggested that the Code needs to be re-looked at. • Pointed out that people live in Saratoga as an escape from the Valley. • Stated that in his opinion the Commission should not even be having this conversation. Chair Nagpal: • Thanked the applicant and other speakers. • Agreed that the Village is very unique. • Said that she too came to this hearing with an open mind but she is unable to make the findings to support this use. ' • Stated that the use does not enhance the Village. It doesn't provide a mix of specialty uses. It is detrimental to Health & Safety as there are traffic impacts. • Reiterated that the required findings cannot be made in the affirmative. ' Commissioner Rod ers asked the ur ose of the CH-1. ~ • 9 P p Chair Nagpal- replied enhancing the pedestrian character: Commissioner Rodgers asked how a retail shop would-service to enhance the pedestrian character. Chair Nagpal reminded that retail uses are permitted and would not even come before the - Commision..- _ .. _.. __ _ __ _- . Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that since it is clear that the majority supports the denial of this Use Permit, the draft Resolution must be modified. The findings need to be crafted for denial and the conditions of approval removed. Commissioner Kundtz asked why not make a motion to approve and defeat it. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer drafted three findings for denial that include the fact the applicant has not met the burden of showing uniqueness of the proposed use, that the use would not encourage a mix of uses and that the use would be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community. Each finding for denial received a five to two (5-2) vote. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Uhl, • the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution DENYING a Conditional Use Permit (Application #06-216) to establish a Subway sandwich shop in Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006. Page 17 ~, an existing approximately 960 square foot vacant tenant space in the newly remodeled Corinthian Corners commercial building on property located at 14410 Big Basin Way, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Hunter, Kundtz, Nagpal, Schallop and-Uhl NOES: Cappello and Rodgers , ABSENT: None ' ABSTAIN: .None *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.2 APPLICATION #06-075 (__3.97_-_2.8-052) SAGARCHI, 20433 Walnut Avenue: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to remodel an -existing one-story single-family residence and add a new 906 square -foot second floor. The existing detached garage would be removed. The total floor area of the proposed residence including a new attached two-car garage will be 2,850 square feet. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be not higher than 25 feet. The net lot size is 7,600 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000: (Lata Vasudevan) Associate Planner Lata Vasudevan presented the staff report as follows:. ' • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review Approval to allow the remodel of an • existing single-story residence with the addition of a second story, the removal of an existing detached garage and the addition of an attached two-car garage. • Said that the total square footage would be 2,850. The maximum height would be 24 -feet, 5 inches. • Described the lot as 7,600 square feet. • Explained that the area includes smaller lots. Several homes in the area have recently been built or remodeled. • Pointed out that the second story is smaller than the first story with an increased setback - that provides adequate articulation--and that the proposed -siding is compatible. • Stated that the Arborist Report adds no requirements as there are no root zones impacted. Commissioner Rodgers asked for clarification of the west setback. Planner Lata Vasudevan replied six feet. Chair Nagpal opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Mr. Salim Sagarchi, Applicant, 20433 Walnut-Avenue, Saratoga: • Said that he is the owner. • Stated that this single story single-family house will have approximately 1,000 square feet added. • Assured that it would be compatible with the neighborhood. Chair Nagpal.closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. !" ~ Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 18 Commissioner Hunter: • Agreed that this neighborhood has undergone a huge change over the last five years. • Said that this project is just fine. It is nice and will enhance the neighborhood. Commissioner Cappello agreed and said he could make the findings to approve. Commissioner Rodgers said that this home is well situated on a small lot with good articulation. It is perfect for this location and she can make all findings to support this application. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Cappello, seconded. by Commissioner Kundtz, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution granting Design Review Approval (Application No. 06-075) to remodel an existing one-story single-family residence and add a new 906 square foot second floor on property located at 20433 Walnut Avenue by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cappello, Hunter, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers, Schallop and Uhl -NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 3 APPLICATION #06-229 (393-43-042) RODRIGUEZ, 13664 Camino Rico: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct an addition to an existing single-family residence consisting of 263 square-feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence will be 2,785 square feet including garage. Proposed renovation will include a reduction of impervious coverage from 62% to 51 % of the. lot. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be not higher than 22 feet. The net lot size is 10,003 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000. (Therese Schmidt) Planner Therese Schmidt presented the staff report as follows: ' • Advised that the applicant is seeking Design Review Approval for an addition to an existing single-family residence of approximately 263 square feet for a total of .2,785 including the attached garage. • Pointed out that there would be a reduction in impervious surface from 62 to 51 percent. • Said that the maximum height would not exceed 21 feet, 5 inches. • Stated that the site is zoned R-1-10,000. • Explained that the reason this application is before the Commission is the height in excess of 18 feet. • Said that one tree, a Eucalyptus, would require protection.. • Said that all findings can be made and recommended approval. Commissioner Hunter asked if the rock for the facade is river rock or stacked rock.- • Planner Therese Schmidt distributed the sample board. __ __ Saratgga Planning Commission .Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 19 Commissioner Rodgers asked about the Eucalyptus tree as the report mentions a palm. Planner Therese Schmidt reported that the tree. is in fact a Eucalyptus and the mention of a palm in the report is in error. Chair Nagpal opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Mr. Michael -Ryan, Architect: • Said he has nothing to add. • Reported that his clients want to update their home. • Stated that this proposal falls within the Design Guidelines. • Said he was available for questions. Commissioner Cappello asked Mr. Michael Ryan why the height proposed was necessary. Mr. Michael Ryan said that his clients want a storage attic. He has. incorporated a steeper roof to create more of an attic space. He added that his clients- like a. Craftsman .style and the home will incorporate river rock. Commissioner Rodgers said that this project design meets the architectural integrity standard • to support the proposed height. She asked if there would be two or three fireplaces as she .can only see two chimneys on the plans. Mr. Michael Ryan replied three. Commissioner Kundtz asked if spark arresters would be incorporated. Mr. Michael Ryan replied yes, copper ones. Chair: Nagpal asked if the_mass of the roof is required _for the attic space, Mr. Michael Ryan. said. that the slope is existing and is not being increased so much. They have used dormers to break it up somewhat. He said that with .the porch condition, the roof would shallow out. Chair Nagpal closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Commissioner Kundtz: • Stated that this is better than good design and is really quite nice. • Said this home would compliment the neighborhood and meets design criteria. • Added that with the protection of the Eucalyptus this project has his support. . Commissioner Uhl said he agrees that this is a great design and nice home. Commissioner Rodgers agreed and said that the home has architectural integrity. She said she could easily make the findings to approve. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006' Page 20 ~, Motion: Upon- motion of Commissioner Kundtz, seconded by Commissioner Rodgers, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution granting Design Review Approval (Application No. 06-229) to construct an addition to an existing single-family residence on property located at 13665 Camino Rico, by the following roll call vote: -AYES: Cappello, Hunter, Kundtz, Na'gpal, Rodgers, Schallop and Uhl NOES: None ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None *** , Commissioner Cappello advised that he must recuse himself from the next item as he lives in the neighborhood. He left the dais and the chambers for the duration of this hearing. Assistant. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer advised that when a Commissioner must recuse from participating in a hearing, while the Commissioner may elect to provide testimony as a local resident, he or she must leave the room during the ~ actual deliberations by the Commission. PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO.4 • APPLICATION #05-270 (386-07-037) LU, 12546 Palmtag Drive:. Appeal of a Denial of a Tree Removal Application. Staff has denied a tree removal request. from the applicant to remove three trees on the subject property. Two trees are Elm and are in the front yard, and the other tree is an Ash and located in the back yard. The applicant is appealing Staffs denial to the Planning Commission. (Kate Bear) City Arborist Kate Bear presented the staff report as follows: • _ Advised that the property owner has appealed the staff level denial of a Tree Removal .. Permit to allow the removal of three trees. • Explained that the property owner says that two of these trees (Elms) cause allergies and the third has created cracks in the backyard patio. • Reported that staff is recommending that this property owner be allowed to remove one of the requested trees, a Siberian Elm, but recommends that the removal of the other two trees be denied. • Added that the Elm that is supported for removal is interfering with utility lines. Chair Nagpal asked Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer for direction. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that while there are not specific findings to be made, a decision. is made based upon an evaluation of nine criteria. Commissioner Hunter asked Arborist Kate Bear for her recommendation for the Evergreen • Ash. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006. Page 21 • Arborist Kate Bear said that this tree is located in the rear yard and staff recommends that a root barrier be installed next to the patio to keep the roots for pushing up the patio surface. Chair Nagpal asked if staff could not make findings to support removal of that particular tree: Arborist Kate Bear said that she couldn't find adequate evidence .that the cracks in the patio are caused by-roots from this tree. Commissioner Rodgers asked what kind of evidence would support this position. Arborist Kate Bear: • Reported that she had recommended .the use of an air spade to investigate the presence of roots beneath this patio. • Added that a significant change of grade is also evidence or the presence of a root. right at the point of the crack. Chair Nagpal asked if staff's recommendation would change if those things are done or would staff still stand by its current recommendation. ' Arborist Kate Bear said that first staff recommends use of mitigations ~to see if they work in order to retain the tree. • Commissioner Hunter asked about the allergy impacts of the Elms. Arborist Kate Bear pointed out that the tree blooms for a short time during rainy season. She said that this rational of allergy impacts does not fit the criteria. Chair Nagpal asked if there is any medical evidence that has been submitted to support this claim of allergies. ..Arborist .Kate Bear said Ghat the. applicant :has a medical .report .and. is willing to .show it but does not want this personal medical information included in the permanent public record. Commissioner Rodgers asked if there are other Elm trees in this neighborhood. Arborist Kate Bear replied that she found one other in the ~{icinity. Commissioner Hunter said that she has never heard of an allergy to Elm trees before. Arborist Kate Bear said she is not aware how common it is. Chair Nagpal opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4. Ms. Lu, Appellant, 12546 Palmtag Drive, Saratoga: • Stated that she has issues with the City's process of such requests. • Said that these trees are causing physical damage to the improvements of and enjoyment of her property. r Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 22 • Said that it is important to balance the rights and privacy of property owners. • .Said that she has a problem with Elms and when she took an allergy skin test the Elm tree created the highest reaction. • Added that she does not want her medical record in the public record: • Reported that September and October are the worst times of impact for her but- that there are many periods of troubles. • Advised that her kids also have allergy symptoms now. • Stated that allergies can impair the quality of life and can lead to asthma. • Asked for a Tree Removal Permit to remove two Elms from her property .and said that she could plan evergreen replacements. Commissioner Kundtz asked why the replacement trees are proposed for the side of the property rather than in the exact same spot as the trees to be removed. Ms. Lu said that the ground has to be repaired, including root removal. She added that she also does not like the tree positioned right in front of the front door. Commissioner Hunter asked Ms. Lu how long she has resided on this property. Ms. Lu replied 12 years, having moved in the home in May 1994. She said that her allergies started in 1997 or about three years after moving in. ' Chair Na al asked Ms. Lu for a copy of the medical information which could be reviewed by • 9P the Commissioners and then immediately returned to Ms. Lu. She said that she appreciates Ms. Lu's need for privacy. Ms. Lu: • Provided pictures of the Elm tree in the rear yard. • Said that this is a huge tree with a 48-inch diameter that. is close to the house and deck. • Stated that the crack has already damaged the deck almost in half and that the roots .are bulging up. • Said that a root barrier is recommended during the planting of new trees and not for old , trees. • Said that she wants a Tree Removal Permit for the Ash, which she would replace with a Magnolia, Eucalyptus or some other evergreen tree. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that somehow the medical information must be made a part of the record. He suggested that Ms. Lu make a direct statement into the record of the allergy impacts of this type of tree. Commissioner Kundtz said that he thought this was the hearing of last resort. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said no longer. Action tonight by the Planning Commission could subsequently be appealed to Council. , '~ Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 Page 23 • Chair Nagpal asked Ms. Lu to read a statement into the record to document her allergy to the Elm. Ms. Lu reported her results from a skin test for allergies with the Elm tree having a ranking of four plus. Zero means not allergic.. One or two is minor allergy. Four is pretty allergic. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer asked Ms. Lu to provide the identifying number for the Elm trees proposed for removal as documented in the Arborist report. Ms: Lu said the Elm tree is #26. She added that there is no separation between the-two types of Elm tree on her property. She is allergic to both. ' Commissioner Kundtz asked if this allergy test reports only on trees. Commissioner Rodgers asked if there is any information available on the children's allergies. Ms. Lu said no. The children have not been tested and she-hopes they won't need to be. Commissioner Rodgers asked Ms. Lu to describe -the symptoms of her allergies. Ms. Lu said that it-feels pretty bad. She suffers from a runny nose, tears and the rubbing of . eyes and noise that makes her appear as if she has been crying all day long. Chair Nagpal asked Ms. Lu if she is not interested in implementing the recommendations made by the Arborist. Ms. Lu said right. The recommendation is fortwo-foot barriers with. afour-foot diameter. Chair Nagpal asked Ms. Lu if she has consulted with an Arborist to support her position against the root barrier. Ms. Lu said no. Commissioner Rodgers asked where the photographs taken by Ms. Lu and provided to the Commission this evening were taken. Ms. Lu said that some of the photographs are from her property and others are Elms located at McCullough Elementary School. Commissioner Rodgers asked Ms. Lu what the difference is in the height of the crack. Ms. Lu replied one centimeter. Commissioner Rodgers said that equates to about a half inch. She asked if this patio has been in place since Ms. Lu purchased this home. Ms. Lu said yes. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006' Page 24 a. Commissioner Rodgers asked Ms. Lu if the patio appeared to be -new at the time she purchased this property. Ms. Lu said that it didn't appear to be new. Commissioner Uhl asked about other trees on the propert~Y. Ms: Lu said that there are orange, lemon, Walnut, Pine and palm-trees. Commissioner Hunter asked Arborist Kate Bear to comment. Arborist Kate Bear reported that she noticed a palm in the front yard, the Ash in the backyard and a citrus tree. ' Chair Nagpal asked staff when the'first permit request was made. Arborist Kate Bear replied on August 31, 2005. Commissioner Uhl asked what the proposed replacement tree size and species would be. Ms. Lu replied 10 gallon or nine-foot high trees, perhaps Redwood. ' Commissioner Hunter pointed out that the allergy test report is 10 years old. Ms. Lu agreed that it was prepared in 1997. Chair Nagpal asked if there has been any recent testing. Ms. Lu replied no. Chair Nagpal closed the Public- Hearing for Agenda Item No: 4. Chair Nagpal said that there are three separate trees under consideration here. Director John Livingstone clarified that the standard for replacement would be 24-inch box trees. , Commissioner Hunter said she supports staffs findings. Commissioner Rodgers: • Said-she too supports the Arborist as well. • Reminded that the allergy test is from 1997 and that it is unclear what the rankings mean. • Added that allergies do not impact enjoyment of property. • Stated that if everyone takes down trees, there would not be any left. • Reiterated support for the Arborist's recommendations. • ~J ~ ~ Saratoga Planning Commission,Minutes for March 8, 2006 Commissioner Uhl: • Said that this is a tough case. • .Advised that he is in favor of tree preservation. • Agreed that the allergy report is from 1997. • Added that the applicant has provided no alternatives to removal. • Stated his support for the staff recommendation as well. Chair Nagpal pointed to page 3-and asked if at least one criterion must be met Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer advised the. Commission to look at and base its decision on all of the criteria. Chair Nagpal said that the old data provided is not as clear as she would like to see. She said that she supports the staff recommendation. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Uhl, the Planning Commission DENIED an appeal and UPHELD the staff level denial of a Tree Removal Application (Application #05-270) to remove three -trees from property located at 12546 Palmtag Drive, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Hunter, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers, Schallop and Uhl NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Cappello Chair Nagpal advised Ms. Lu that she has the option to appeal this action to Council. Commissioner Cappello returned to the dais following the conclusion of Agenda Item No. 4. *** DIRECTOR'S ITEMS Presentation by City Attorney on the Issue of Continuances by Planning Commission Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer: • Advised that State Law allows any public hearing to be continued from time to time. • Added that there is broad discretion and said that use of discretion is a good thing. • Reported that Council has an adopted policy on continuances. • Stated that Code says that appeals mast be heard on the next agenda- and minimally within 30 days. The appellant must agree to extend that time frame in writing. Chair Nagpal explained that this issue came up at the last meeting and asked if there are issues with Permit Streamlining. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer replied yes, there could be. He added that if an .item is continued to a date certain, additional advertising is not required. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006 ~ Page 26 ~~ • Commissioner Hunter asked whether anything could be .done if the reason given by an applicant for a continuance' is later not substantiated. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer replied no, not really. Commissioner Hunter asked whether the Commission has the right to deny a continuance if an applicant does not show up at a public hearing to request a continuance in person. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer replied yes. He added that Council requires a request for a continuance in writing. Commissioner Hunter asked if a request for continuance from Council requires the applicant to be present. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer replied no. Commissioner Kundtz said that there is an issue on amount of notice of a continuance. He pointed out that some members of the public came to the last meeting to speak about the continued item since there was no-time to notify anyone of the intent to continue. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer reiterated that there is discretion on whether or not to grant a request for continuance. One consideration may be if the request came in too late. , Commissioner Kundtz said that if the applicant is not present that puts pressure not to deny the request for continuance. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer pointed ou>~ that a medical reason is a good reason to allow a continuance. Commissioner Hunter said that the reason given for the most recent request for a continuance was a desire to redesign the sign but no obvious changes were provided tonight for that sign. Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer said that once a continuance is granted nothing can be done. Director John Livingstone: • Recapped by saying that the Commission has complete discretion on a case-by-case basis on whether to allow a continuance or to act on an application that evening. • Said that if an application is continued to a date certain, no re-noticing is required. • Stated that if major changes are required, an application can be continued to a date uncertain and that project would be re-noticed when it is ready to be heard. Commissioner Rodgers said that staff would be required to let an applicant know that their request for a continuance might not be approved. • . Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2006. Page 27 • Director John Livingstone pointed out that staff works very closely with applicants and can advised them accordingly. COMMISSION ITEMS Chair Nagpal. announced that tonight is Commissioner Uhl's last meeting.- She-said that it has been a privilege to serve with Commissioner Uhl and that everything he has done is appreciated. She expressed hope that Commissioner Uhl would continue to participate in the activities of the City of Saratoga in some way and said that a party would be planned for April. Commissioner Hunter said that Commissioner Uhl would be missed terribly. , Commissioner Kundtz -said he wished he had had the. opportunity to get to know ' Commissioner Uhl better. He thanked Commissioner Uhl for his points- of view and his objectivity. Commissioner Rodgers said she enjoyed Commissioner Uhl's descriptions and his passion for the City of Saratoga. ' Commissioner Uhl said that it has been a pleasure. He had a good #ime working with this great group that has done great things. He said he enjoyed his tenure on the~Commission in so many ways and assured that he will be around. • Commissioner Hunter: • Advised that Commissioner Uhl's mom is in the audience this evening visiting from Michigan. • Informed that the Heritage Tree Society is having its first meeting tomorrow night at which time the 20 most beautiful trees in the City will be announced. A map will be provided to help locate these trees and the information will be added to the City's website. COMMUNICATIONS- - There were no Communications Items. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Uhl, Chair Nagpal adjourned the meeting at 10:45 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission meeting of March 22, 2006, 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: 06-216;14410 Big Basin Way, Bldg. B (Area 1-Corinthian Corners) Type of Application: Conditional Use Permit Applicant/Owner: Subway (tenant and franchise owner Miya Glasauer)/Heikali - Aloga LLC (owner) Staff Planner: Lata Vasudevan AICP, Associate Planner~V Meeting Date: March 8, 2006 (Cont'd from February 22, 2006) APN: 517-09-018, 043 ~ 044 ~ Department Head: a~ John F. 'vingstone, AICP v ,TOGA-SIJNNYV GATOS ;' ~,. ~; IN WY ~`~ ~" 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 km i ~ ~~ ~% \. / , t 14410 Big Basin Way, Subway oooooi ,\ ~'~~. EGA-L06 GATCSS EXECUTIVE SUM~VIARY CASE HISTORY Application filed: Application complete: Notice published: Mailing completed: Posting completed: PROJECT DESCRIPTION OU04/06 03/OU06 02/08/06 02/07/06 02/16/06 The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to, locate a Subway sandwich shop in one of the tenant spaces located within an 11,836 square foot commercial property known as Corinthian Corners. The site is located at'the corner of Big Basin Way and Saratoga-Los Gatos Road and was formerly occupied by a flower shop. The sandwich shop will face Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. and will occupy an approximately 960 square foot tenant space between Starbucks and a bicycle shop. At the applicant's request, the Planning Commission voted to continue this item from the February 22, 2006 Planning Commission hearing to the March 8, 2006. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Conditional Use Permit application with conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. /~ • 1 ooooo~~_. File No. 06-216;_ 14410 Big Basin Way -Bldg. B, Area 1 Conditional Use Permit -Subway; March 8, 2006 Planning-Commission Meeting Date PROJECT DATA ZONING: CH-1 District: The CH-1 District has been written to implement the Saratoga VillageSpecificPlanand achieve the following objectives with respect to the Village. (1) Preservation and enhancement of the small-scale, pedestrian character of the Village to make the area more inviting to potential shoppers and diners; (2) Preservation and enhancement of the architectural and landscape quahry of the Village; (3) Encouragement of a town center mix of specialty shops, restaurants, convenience shops, services and residences; and- (4) Conservation of historic structures. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: The General Plan designates this area as CR -Retail Commercial. The property is located within Area J, which is the Village Area. MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE:16,180 square feet SQUARE FOOTAGE OF TENANT SPACE: 960 square feet AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: Average Slope of lot is less than 10% GRADING REQUIRED: The applicant proposes no changes to the grade ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project consisting of the conversion of an existing small structure from one use to another is Categorically Exempt from, the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (c) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). PROPOSED EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND COLORS: Other than new signage, the applicant does not propose any changes to the exterior of the property.' • 00000- File No. 06-216;14410 Big Basin Way -Bldg. B, Area 1 .... Conditional Use Permit -Subway; March 8, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting Date ' PROJECT DISCUSSION ~~ The applicant is proposing a change of use and interior tenant improvements to locate a Subway sandwich shop in the Corinthian Corners commercial complex at the southwest corner of Big Basin Way and Saratoga Los- Gatos Rd. The tenant space is on the ground floor next to Starbucks, with its store entrance facing Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. The sandwich shop also has a portion of its facade with a window facing Big-Basin Way. The floor area of Subway will be approximately 960 square feet with 6 tables for seating 16 people. Subway will-have a maximum of 3 employees. No exterior changes are proposed to the facade or to the off-street parking configuration where there are six spaces. Facade improvements to the Corinthian Corners complex were approved as a design review application by the Planning Commission on September 22, 2004. Requirements for a ConditionallyPermitted Use The proposed Subway is classified as a restaurant pursuant to the City Code. Establishing and operating a restaurant in any of Saratoga's commercial zoning districts requires the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit from the Planning Commission. This process acknowledges that this use maybe permitted if specified findings can be made, and allows the Planning Commission to impose conditions to ensure that a project is compatible with surrounding land uses and in compliance with applicable City regulations. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit shall be based on the findings stated in City Code Article 15-55. A discussion of these findings is provided below. Correspondence, Comments and NeighborReview Staff has received one written comment from the public as of the writing of this report that was originally sent to Commissioner Susie Nagpal. The applicant has spoken with adjacent tenants in the Village and four review letters indicating support from these tenants is attached to this report. , At the February 22, 2006 meeting, the Planning Commission heard comments from three citizens who were all opposed to the proposed Subway. Also at the February 22nd meeting, Commissioner Hunter .expressed that she would like information on the number of existing sandwich shops on Big Basin Way. Staff has determined that are are approximately 15 establishments that serve sandwiches.. Hours of Operation The operating hours 'are from 9:00 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. everyday. The primary peak time is during lunch from 11:30 to 1:30 p.m. There is very little customer activity during the evening. The applicant has indicated that deliveries to Subway are once a week and can occur at 10:00 a.m. when demand for parking spaces for the adjacent businesses are low. Deliveries for the adjacent Starbucks coffee shop occurs in the middle of the night (2 - 3:00 a.m.). Staff has added a condition of approval requiring that deliveries for Subway occur at approximately 10:00 a.m. so that there is minimal conflict-with delivery times of adjacent businesses. ~UVUU~ i ~' File No. 06-216;14410 Big Basin Way -Bldg. B, Area 1 Conditional Use Permit -Subway; March 8, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting Date Parking and Circulation The City of Saratoga recently adopted a zoning text amendment which relaxes all parking requirements in the Village. This ordinance was adopted on January 18, 2006 and became effective February 18, 2006. The new ordinance specifies that no off-street parking shall be required for applications that are deemed complete between March 1, 2006 and February 28, 2009. Therefore, based on the parking ordinance, no additional off-street parking will be required for the proposed sandwich-shop. The new ordinance identifies a current parking surplus which serves as the basis for relaxing the off-street parking requirements in the Village. The identified parking surplus would accommodate 41,850 square feet of new floor area or irtensification of use in the CH zoning districts. The establishment of a restaurant is an intensification of use from the prior flower store that was located at this site. In application of the new parking ordinance, the square footage of 960 feet will be deducted from 41,850 square feet of gross floor area, leaving 40,890 square feet that would be available for development in the Village. The Corinthian Corners complex has 6off-street parking spaces which are not being credited towards the parking needs for Subway because they have already been allocated toward the parking needs for Starbucks. Customer on-site parking may be available for Subway since its peak hours of business are different from the morning peak hours for Starbucks. It is likely that customer parking demands for the proposed bicycle shop would be sporadic and likely to not consistently coincide with the peak times of Subway and Starbucks. As a side note, a condition of approval, like the one imposed on the conditional use permit for Starbucks, prohibiting on-site employee parking has been included in the attached resolution. Signage The applicant is proposing two `Subway' signs; one on each facade. The letters will be individual metal with exterior illumination from one goose neck lamp for each sign. The applicant would like to match the goose neck lamps that currently illuminate the Starbucks signage. The corporate colors of yellow and white will be used-for the letters. Since signage is a highly visible feature in the character of a business, the applicant will provide material and color samples for the signage at the public hearing. Design Review Design Review approval is not required for this application. No exterior changes to the facade are proposed in this application. Project Findings Finding #1: The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which - the site is located. The General Plan designates this area as CR -Retail Commercial. ooooQs' File No. 06-216;14410 Big Basin Way -Bldg. B, Area 1 Conditional Use Permit -Subway; March 8, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting Date General Plan Land Use. Policy LU 7.1 states, "The City shill consider the economic impacts of all land use decisions on the City." Establishing any restaurant requires- considerable time and investment from the business owner. It is very difficult to determine the success of this sandwich shop or any restaurant use at this time. However, Staff does not see any reason that a sandwich shop or any other type of restaurant use located in a relatively small tenant space could have a negative impact on the economic viability of the Village. Furthermore, the CH-1 District is designed to implement the Saratoga Village Specific Plan and achieve the following objectives with respect to the village:- (1) Preservation and enhancement of the small-scale, pedestrian character of the Village to make the area more inviting to potential shoppers and diners; -The proposed sandwich shop is a small- scale establishment situated adjacent to a retail shop- and a coffee shop that could be found to promote a healthy pedestrian character with its visible outdoor seating. Any ' sandwich shop that is located at the relatively small tenant space would not; in Staffs , opinion, climuush the pedestrian character of the Village. (2) Preservation and enhancement of the architectural and landscape quality of the Village; - No exterior changes are proposed to the Corinthian Corners building as a result of this application. ' (3) Encouragement of a town center mix of specialty shops, restaurants, convenience shops, services and residences; -The proposed sandwich shop contributes to the mix of businesses in the Village and provides an alternate option for a convenient meal. Its location next to the bicycle shop is very complementary in that one can envision a customer frequenting .~ both establishments in one outing. (4) Conservation of historic structures. This objective is not applicable to this proposal. Finding #2: 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 or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The applicant will be required to meet all Fire District, Uniform Building Code, and applicable health and safety regulations and the project will not be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Finding #3: The proposed establishment will comply with all applicable provisions of the Saratoga Municipal Code. This requirement is satisfied by means of the conditions of approval included in the resolution which grants the Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of Subway. Finding #4: The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. The proposed Subway is a franchise establishment that is widely known because of its various locations. Based on the known character of Subway it is anticipated that it would not have an adverse impact on surrounding businesses. There are other sandwich shops in the vicinity. However, competition is not considered an adverse impact on existing or anticipated uses. In Staffs opinion, the location of the proposed Subway complements the retail character and services OOUO~~- + ' I File No. 06-216;14410 Big Basin Way -Bldg. B, Area 1 ' Conditional Use Permit -Subway; March 8, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting Date provided by the adjacent 'bicycle shop and can be seen as a benefit to the other establishments in the Corinthian Corners. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make all of the required Conditional Use Permit findings required by Article 15-55 of the City Code and adopt the Resolution attached to conditionally approve Application No. 06-216 made on behalf of Subway. Arrac>~lvz's 1. Resolution 2. City of Saratoga Notice, Noticing Affidavit, and Noticing Labelsl 3. Letter of Justification from Applicant 4. Letters from citizens 5. New Village Parking Ordinance No. 240 6. Applicant's Plaris, Exhibit "A° • 1 Since this application was already noticed for the February 22, 2006 meeting and continued at a public hearing to the March 8, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, additional noticing for the new meeting date is not required. OOU00`~' '~ a. Attachment l it • • ~~voQS R RESOLUTION NO. _ Application No. 06-216 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Subway; 14410 Big Basin Way, Bldg. B Area 1 WHEREAS, the Ciry of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow Subway (a sandwich shop use) in a remodeled tenant space within the Corinthian Corners commercial complex. The sandwich shop will be approximately 960 square feet. The site is located in a Commercial Zoning District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted 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 Planning Commission finds the proposed project consisting of the conversion of an existing small structure from one use to another is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (c) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that all. of the findings for approval required within Article 15-55 of the Ciry Code can be made in the affirmative..Thefollowmg is a discussion of each of the findings: .Finding #l: The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which the site is located. The General Plan designates this area as CR -Retail Commercial. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 7.1 states, "The City shall consider the economic impacts of all land use decisions on the City." Establishing any restaurant requires considerable time and investment from the business owner. It is very difficult to determine the success of this sandwich shop or any restaurant use at this time. However, Staff does not see any reason that a sandwich shop or any other type of restaurant use located in a relatively small tenant space could have a negative impact on the economic viability of the Village. Furthermore, the CH-1 District is designed to implement the Saratoga Village Specific Plan and achieve the following objectives with respect to the village: (1) Preservation and enhancement of the small-scale, pedestrian character of the Village to make the area more inviting to potential shoppers and diners; -The proposed sandwich shop is a small- scale establishment situated adjacent to a retail shop and a coffee shop that could be found to promote a healthy pedestrian character with its visible outdoor seating. Any OOU009'' File No. 06-216;14410 Big Basin Way -Bldg. B, Area 1 Conditional Use Permit -Subway; March 8, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting Date sandwich shop that is located at the relatively small tenant space would not, in Staff's opinion; diminish the pedestrian character of the Village. (2) Preservation and enhancement of the architectural and landscape quality of the Village; - No exterior changes ire proposed to the Corinthian Corners building as a result of this application. . (3) Encouragement of a town center mix of specialty shops, restaurants, convenience shops, services and residences;. -The proposed sandwich shop contributes to the mix of businesses in the Village and provides an alternate option for a convenient meal. Its location next to the bicycle shop is very complementary in that one can envision a customer frequenting both establishments in one outing. (4) Conservation of historic structures. This objective is not applicable to this proposal. Finding #2: 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 or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The applicant will be required to meet all Fire District, Uniform Building Code, and applicable health and safety regulations and the project will not be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Finding #3: The proposed establishment will comply with all applicable provisions of the Saratoga Municipal Code. This requirement is satisfied by means of the conditions of approval included in the resolution which grants the Conditional Use Pexznit for the establishment of Subway. Finding #4: The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof.. The proposed Subway is a franchise establishment that is widely known because of its various locations. Based on the known character of Subway it is anticipated that it would not have an adverse impact on surrounding businesses. There are other sandwich shops in the vicinity. However, competition is not considered an adverse impact on existing or anticipated uses. In Staffls opinion, the location of the proposed Subway complements the retail character and services provided by the .adjacent bicycle shop and can be seen as a benefit to the other establishments in the Corinthian Corners. Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the proposed use and floor plan and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application for a Conditional Use Permit approval for Subway is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: • OOUO'10 " ' File No. 06-216;14410 Big Basin Way -Bldg. B, Area 1 Conditional Use Permit -Subway; March 8, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting Date PLANNING 1. The Planning Commission shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Conditional Use Permit and may, at any time, modify, delete or impose any new conditions of the permit to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. 2. The store shall operate as represented on the plans marked Exhibit A. The signage is also approved as shown on Exhibit A with the condition stated in item #4 below. 3. Any intensification of this use shall require approval of an amended Conditional Use Permit. 4. The approval of this conditional use permit is granted based upon Staff having deemed this application as complete as of March 1, 2006. Approval of the signage will be based on the action of the Planning Commission after reviewing the sign materials at the Planning Commission Hearing. 5. Prior to issuance of Building Permits for any internal tenant improvements, detailed construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division for Zoning Clearance to verify consistency with the approved Exhibit "A" plans. The construction drawings shall incorporate a copy of this Resolution as a separate plan Page• 6. Subway employees shall not use any on-site parking spaces. 7. Deliveries shall occur at approximately-10:00 a.m. in order to ~nimi~e impacts on parking demands for the adjacent businesses. 8. A Building Permit shall be obtained for the proposed signage. 9. If required by the Santa Clara County Health Department, prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance for the proposed tenant improvements, the owner/applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department verification from the Santa Clara County Health Department showing proof of compliance of the proposed facility with the Health Department's requirements. 10. The proposed use shall at all times operate in compliance with all regulations of the City and/or other agencies having jurisdictional authority over the use pertaining to, but not limited to, health, sanitation, safety, and water quality issues. 11. The applicant shall obtain a Business License from the City of Saratoga prior to conducting business. FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 12. Applicant shall comply with all Saratoga Fire District requirements. OODU~1' File No. 06-216;14410 Big Basin Way -Bldg. B, Area 1 Conditional Use Permit -Subway; March 8, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting Date CITY ATTORNEY 13. Applicant agrees to hold Ciry 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 or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. Section 2. A Building Permit or Business License must be issued and construction or business operations commenced within 24 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State,. County, Ciry and other Governmental entities must be met. ' Section 4: Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-55.080 and 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective ten (10) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Ciry of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 8th day of March 2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susie Nagpal Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: C CJ John F. Livingstone, AICP 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 OOU012 • II• ,I • Attachment 2 • pyD0O~3 ~, A City of Saratoga a Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 ' 408-868-1222 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces a public hearing on the item described below on: Wednesday, the 22"d day of February 2006, at 7:00 p.m. The public hearing will be held at the Civic 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. The public hearing item is: • APPLICATION #06-216 (517-09-043, 517-09-018, 517-09-044) SUBWAY (tenant)/ATOGA LLC (property owner), 14410 Big Basin Way; The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to establish a sandwich shop in an existing approximately 960 square foot vacant tenant space in the newly remodeled Corinthian Corners commercial complex. The sandwich shop will face Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd. and will be situated in a tenant space between Starbucks Coffee and a proposed retail bicycle shop. 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 maybe 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, February 14, 2006. 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 ~UOi4 . • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) I, ~ ~ ~. lf~~ ~ i%LQV~ ,being duly sworn; deposes and says: that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of l8 years; that acting for the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on the ~ day of ~ .2006, 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. if ~ ~?/~ ~_ Signed • a~~O~rJ Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide lJtilisez I'e gabarit 5160® SOWOLLA KRIS A & CAROL A TRUSTEE or Current Owner 219 JACKSON ST LOS GATOS, CA 95030-0000 CALIFORNIA STATE OF or Current Owner SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SARATOGA CITY OF or Current Owner SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SARATOGA FEDERATED CHURCH INC or Current- Owner 14370 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-5953 SARATOGA FEDERATED CHURCH or Current Owner 14370 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-5953 ARATOGA CITY OF tir Current Owner ARBELECHE LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 GUNK SONJA A ETAL or Current Owner PO BOX 2095 SARATOGA, CA 95070 ENGINEERING INFORMATION SYSTEMS INC or Current Owner P:O.-BOX 25 SARATOGA, CA 95071-0025 ~3UNCAN GORDON A & HELEN J ~~r Current Owner 20531 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5868 HIGGINS WILLIAM L & VIRGINIA B TRUSTEE or Current Owner 20550 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5800 1~1 ~ ~ vvww.avery.com ~ 1-800-GO-AVERY COX FLORA M TRUSTEE ETAL or Current Owner ' 20465 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-5909 {~ SARATOGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST or Current Owner SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 , SARATOGA FIRE DIST or Current Owner SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SARATOGA FEDERATED CHURCH or Current Owner 20390 PARK PL SARATOGA, CA 95070 OSTROWSKI JOHN L & M. CLAIRE ETAL or Current Owner 12750 IONE CT SARATOGA, CA 95070-3804 3D PROPERTIES or Current Owner P O BOX 234 SARATOGA, OR 95071-0234 G & G MCCANDLESS PROPS LLC or Current Owner 545 MIDDLEFIELD RD 130 MENLO PARK, CA 95025 or Current Owner LAVELLE THOMAS R & GAYLE S or Current Owner 20571 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5868 JACOBS HUGH A & GLORIA M TRUSTEE or Current Owner 20510 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5800 Aa3nd-o~-oos-~ ' ~ AVERY.® 5160® SARATOGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST or Current Owner SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SARATOGA CITY OF or Current Owner SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 CALIFORNIA STATE OF or Current Owner SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SARATOGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST or Current Owner SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE or Current Owner 14376 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-5953 JAVANMARD GHOLAMREZA & EZAT or Current Owner 20440 ARBELECHE LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5439 SCVWD or Current Owner SARATOGA AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SEAGRAVES MARGARET TRUSTEE or Current Owner 13371 SARATOGA AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-4535 HIGGINS WII,LIAM L &. VIRGINIA B TRUSTEE or Current Owner 20550 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5 800 BROCKETT PATRICK J or Current Owner 20620 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-5 831 ,0915 31b-1dW31®tianb ash Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide www.avery.com r ~ AVERY 5160® -• Utilisez le gabarit 5160® ~ 1-800-GO-AVERY IJ ~JOHNSTON DAVID S or Current-Owner BROOKWOOD LN TOGA, CA 95070-5831 2':'OSCO MARKETING CO DC17 Yir Current Owner P.O. BOX 52085 `•~HOENIX, AZ 85072 INN AT SARATOGA INC. or Current Owner 20645 4TH ST SARATOGA,. CA 95070-5867 CANCELLIERI ROBERT & SHIRLEY TRUSTEE or Current Owner 14860 CODY LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-6018 SARATOGA CITY OF or Current Owner 4TH ST SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 PAYNE GEORGE M TRUSTEE or Current Owner 15940 ROCHIN TR LOS GATOS, CA 95032-0000 CASABONNE YVES G & ANNETTE E CRAWFORD OTTO M & BETTE R TRUSTEE TRUSTEE or Current Owner or Current Owner P O BOX 247 12471 GREENMEADOW LN EL VERANO, CA 95433-0247 SARATOGA, CA 95070-3032 ' '~1=,OXHAM FAMILY LP tir Current Owner ;14610 BIG BASIN WY TOGA, CA 95070-0000 BLOXHAM FAMILY LP or Current Owner 14610 BIG BASIN WY SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 SULLIVAN L M & LOUELLA M TRUSTEE ETAL or Current Owner 20570 CANYON VIEW DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5876 WALLACE BERNARD. A or Current Owner P O BOX 1060 DISCOVERY BAY, CA 94514 LEES PARTNERSHIP or Current Owner 14493 BIG BASIN WY SARATOGA, CA 95070-6093 qr Current Owner CUNNINGHAM DENNIS M or Current Owner 14407 BIG BASIN WY SARATOGA, CA 95070-6080 ANDERSEN LLP or Current Owner PO BOX 192202 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94519-2202 MASEK JOSEPH C ~: MICHELLE or Current Owner 14467 BIG BASIN WY SARATOGA, CA 95070-6093 or Cun ent Owner ADDRESS NOT AVAILABLE-5 KK CAROLYN HOLM or Current Owner 1 GOODWIN CT REDWOOD CITY, CA 94061 FRANK L BURELL III or Current Owner 470 VANDELL WY STE A CAMPBELL, CA 95008 CANCELLIERI ROBERT 8c SHIRLEY TRUSTEE or Current Owner 14860 CODY LN SARATOGA, CA 95070-6018 or Current Owner ADDRESS NOT AVAILABLE-5 KK PAYNE GEORGE M TRUSTEE or Current Owner 15940 ROCHIN TR LOS GATOS, CA 95032-0000 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE or Current Owner PO BOX 6000 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-6000 ' BLOXHAM FAMILY LP or Current Owner 14610 BIG BASIN WY SARATOGA; CA 95070-0000 MELTON THELMA D TRUSTEE ETAL or Current Owner 4710 SANTA LUCIA DR WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91364 ROSENFELD JAMES I & ARLENE H TRUSTEE or Current Owner 14219 OKANOGAN DR SARATOGA, CA 95070-5549 CLTNNINGHAM SUSAN K or Current Owner P O BOX 2230 CUPERTINO, CA 95015-2230 STARK CHARLES D & KATHIE L or Current Owner P.O. BOX DRAWER 219 APTOS, CA 95001 FRANK L BURELL III or Current Owner 470 VANDELL WY STE A CAMPBELL, CA 95008 OODU16~ Aaand-o~-oos-~ ,0915 31V1dW31191IGan~r as0 Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide www.avery.com D AVERY® 5160® Utilisez le gabarit 5160® 1-800-GO-AVERY _ KLEAR ELIZABETH P TRUSTEE or Current Owner 20387 THELMA AV ~ARATOGA, CA 95070-4946 FITZSIMMONS JOSEPH J TRUSTEE ETAL or Current Owner 14611 BIG BASIN WYE a~ SARATOGA, CA 95070 ~iTZSIMMONS MICHAEL D TRUSTEE SORENSEN DAVID L ETAL or Current Owner or Current Owner 14493 OAK ST 165 SUMMERFIELD ST SARATOGA, CA 95070-6025 DANVILLE, CA 94506 GASIK JEFFREY F or Current Owner 21070 DORSEY WY SARATOGA, CA 95070-5336 FITZIMMONS JOSEPH J TRUSTEE ETAL or Current Owner 1.4611 BIG BASIN WY E S_aR.ATOGA, CA 95070 ~rRANK L BURELL III or Current Owner 470 VANDELL WY STE A CAMPBELL, CA 95008 HELM RONNIE I: or Current Owner 14516 OAK ST SARATOGA, CA 95070-6087 OUR LADY FATIMA VILLA INC or Current Owner 20400 SARATOGA/LOS GATOS RD ~:ARATOGA, CA 95070-5927 SARATOGA CITY OF or Current Owner SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 JACKMAN ERNA B or Current Owner 14515 OAK ST SARATOGA, CA 95070-6025 ELLENIKIOTIS ANTHONY J & GEORGIA TRUSTEE or Current Owner 14451 CHESTER AV SARATOGA, CA 95070-5624 JAMES KENNEDY or Current Owner 540 SANTA CRUZ 215 LOS GATOS, CA 95030 KIM JOUNG S & YOUNG H TRUSTEE or Current Owner 7221 SILVER LODE LN SAN JOSE, CA 95120-3356 FITZSIMMONS JOSE~'H J TRUSTEE FRANK L BURELL III ETAL or Current Owner or Current Owner 470 VANDELL WY STE A 14611 BIG BASIN WYE CAMPBELL, CA 95008 SARATOGA, CA 95070 HIRSCHFELD HAROLDINE M TRUSTEE or Current Owner or Current Owner 14524 OAK ST SARATOGA,,CA 95070-6026 ESPINOSA GARY H & DIANAGAY J ALLEN JOHN N & MARY TRUSTEE or Current Owner or Current Owner 14500 OAK ST 14510 OAK ST ~ SARATOGA, CA 95070-6087 SARATOGA, CA 95070-6087 SARATOGA LODGE NO FOUR TWO EIGHT IOOF TRUS or Current Owner POBOX54 SARATOGA, CA 95071-0054 SARATOGA CITY OF or Current Owner SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 ATLAS PROPERTIES LLC or Current Owner ' 48 ATLAS AV SAN JOSE, CA 95126-3101 OUR-LADY FATIMA VILLA or Current Owner or Current Owner 20400 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-5927 DOMII~TICAN SISTERS OF THE CONGREGATION CONS or Current Owner 20400 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA, CA 95070-0000 or Current Owner • or Current Owner or Current Owner or Current Owner 04UU1~' Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide _,Utilisez le gabarit 5160® Klaus & Yvonne Pache 55 Big Basin Way ~ato a, CA 95070-6013 g ~' H Davies ~. O. Box 2039 Saratoga, CA 95070-0039 LaBarbera 1426 Fruitdale Avenue ,, San Jose, CA ~ 95128 Tyler -13611 Saratoga Vista Ave Saratoga, CA 95070-4937 3ladys P Hernandez :'9641 Charters Avenue toga, CA .95070-44.07 ~: Y.~ r ' i. . . • ® ~ www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY Donald Hunt 14658 Nelson Way San Jose, CA 95124-3517 Jeff Gasik 21070 Dorsey Way Saratoga, CA 95070-5336 Joseph & Ann Fitzsimmons 14611 Big Basin Way E Saratoga, CA 95070-6073 Srinivasam 400 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Ruth M. Long P. O.-Box 2095 Saratoga, CA 95070-0095 A213AV-09-008-1 U AVERY 5160® Theresa & Richard Sudholt 20610 Lomita Ave Saratoga, CA 95070-6024 Virgil & Evelyn Herring 14995 Wonderland Blvd Redding, CA 96003-8522 Barbara & Michael Purcell 200 Via Genoa Newport Beach, CA 92663 Trafalgar Inc 1735 Westbrook Avenue Los Altos, CA 94024-5321 o~oos~ . ~ ®0915 31y1dW31.~an~r ash Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide Utilisez le gabarit 5160® Abbott Usability 14407 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 <~ssn for Investment 14567 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 The Bank Bar 14421 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Blue Rock Shoot 14523 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ~ ~ www.averytcom 1-800-GO-AVERY Aegis Gallery of Fine Art 14531 Big Basin Way a, Saratoga, CA 95070 The Basin 14572 Big Basin- Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ~, Bella Saratoga 14503 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Big Basin, LLC 14573 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 _~he Braid Box Knitting Studio Bruce Bartlett D. D. S. 14554 Big Basin Way 14567 Big Basin Way #C Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 The Braid Box 14567 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Brenner Financial Group, Inc. 14471 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Bangkok Palace 14515 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ='he Coffee Grounds '!4567 Big Basin Way Saratoga; CA 95070 Carol's Gallery 14455 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Cathleen M. Peterson, E. A 14583 Big Basin Way #4 Saratoga, CA 95070 Brian Berg Berg Software Design 14500 Big Basin Way F Saratoga, CA 95070 Coldwell Banker/NRT 14506 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Curve's 14456 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Claudia Quella 14664 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 AVERY s16o® Advanced-HR,~ Inc. 14407 Big Basin Way ~~ Saratoga, CA 95070 Bank of America 14476 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA -95070 Benjamin's Salon 14583 Big Basin Way Saratoga; CA 95070 Big Basin Chiropractic 14471 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Bob Ray Creative Services, Inc. 14567 Big Basin Way Saratoga,,CA 95070 Butter Paddle Gourmet Kitchen 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Christine's Collection 14416 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Commerica Bank 14401 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 C & R Motors 14585 Big-Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Clymer Cook 14440 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 00001 Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide ~ www.avery.com a gVERY® 5160® Utilisez le gabarit 5160 ~ 1-800-GO-AVERY ?diamonds by Filice 10 Big Basin Way `~ atoga, CA 95070 ~.; Deborah Buonfiglio 14567 Big Basin .Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Daisy Beauty Studio 14435 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ~'-loral Fantasia Saratoga 4440 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 The Front Window 14510 Big Basin Way itoga, CA 95070 The Fat Robin/La-Mesa 14429 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Dancing Yogi 14598 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ~~ Deja & Company 14567. Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 The Design Atelier 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 The Echo Shop 14477 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 FloBell 14519 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ' Fringe Culture 14577 Big Basin Way #B Saratoga, CA 95070 Gedanken 14500 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Divine Wear 14419 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Exclamation Point 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga;'CA 95070 The Florentine Rest. Group -14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga,- CA 95070 The French Tailor 14577 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Gervais Restaurant Francais 14560 Big Basin Way Saratoga; CA 95070 r ;olden Mirror Gallery Saratoga Co/op, Inc. Hair Studio f 44.15 Big Basin Way 14435 Big Basin Way 14451 Big Basin Way '~aratoga, A 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Harmonie Skin & Body Care Hedge Trackers, LLC The Hair ConceptionlDu Pont 14501 Big Basin Way # A 14407 Big Basin Way 14451 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Hill Design Home Choice Pharmacy, Inc. Hillview Cleaners 14577 Big Basin Way 14440 Big Basin Way 14440 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 ?ong's Gourmet Home & Finance Assoc, Inc. Hyper.Calm %510 Big Basin Way .14583 Big Basin Way #5 14577 Big Basin Way =.~aratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 r~l !! A213nb~-09-008-L UUU~~rV - x,0915 31H'IdW31 nntianb- ash impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide ~ ~ www.avery.com ~ o A~/ER~® 5160® Utilisez le gabarit 5160® ~ 1-800-GO-AVERY ~Iakone Foundation Gift Shop James Craig Stanley/ Options John Greene Insurance Agency 21000 Big Basin Way 14567 Big Basin Way ~, 14500 Big Basin Way Sarato a CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070. Saratoga, CA 95070 g , International Coffee Exchange 1447.1 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 KCR Communications 14407 Big Basin Way `aratoga, CA 95070 knitting Arts 14554 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Kirk & Co. Hair Design 14443 A Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Kristy's of Saratoga 14531 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 La Fondue La Mere Michelle 14510 Big Basin Way 14467 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 T_~~ittle Amsterdam ~ Louise M. Smith, M. S. 14490 Big Basin Way 14567 Big Basin Way #B 4aratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 L'Avenir Salon Martin B. Fenster, Attorney 20601 Third Street 14625 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Mechanical Technology Services Madam Shaunas 14660 Big Basin Way A 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 ~ilichael Steinberg Photography 1.4572 Big Basin Way aratoga, CA 95070 Kurt Heisig Music 14428 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 .Law Offices /Thomas W. Davies 14625 Big Basin Way Saratoga, ~CA 95070 Lupretta's Delicatessen 14480 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 M. E. Benson's Antiques 20603 Third Street Saratoga, CA 95070 Masu Japanese Bistro 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Pacific Art & Design 14577 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 1'elio & Associates. Inc. The Perfect Trainer Paperfunalia 14573 Big Basin Way 14584 Fifth Street 14486 Big-Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 ~OVO~~~ • ~' Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide ~ www.avery.com ~ AVERY® 5160® Utilisez le gabarit 5160® ~ 1-800-GO-AVERY Pat Smith's Extravaganza 43-Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Per-Am Ventures Inc. 14560 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ~'at Richard Insurance Agency 14540 Big Basin Way Saratoga; CA 95070 Rose Deli & Market 14445 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Rezi/Reve 417 Big Basin -Way toga, CA 95070 :`eve un Salon 1.4415 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga Dry Cleaners, Inc. 14495 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ~taratoga Kitchen & Bath Design 14482 Big Basin Way ratoga, CA 95070 Studio 67 14440 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Prime Cuts ~~ 14529 Big Basin Way #~ Saratoga, CA 95070 Parkmark 14654 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ~~ The Plumed Horse 14555 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Remax Team Advantage 14471 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Premier Real Esate Fin. Service 145 83 Big Basin Way #2B Saratoga, CA 95070 Preston Wynne 14567 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 RTM Enterprises, Inc. 14612 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Robert S. Pollack 14500 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Rapunzel 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Surfaceink Corporation 14415 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Stewart Works, Inc. 14573 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Shoe Topia 14440 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga Chamber of Commerce 14485 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Skin Prophecy 14531 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga Oaks Lodge 14626 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga Buy & Save Market .Sandra Kamiak, M. D. 14440 Big Basin Way 14567 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 00~+(1~~ Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide ~ ~www.a~lery.com ~ A~R~ 5160® Utilisez le gabarit 5160® ~' 'I-800-GO-AVERY , Saratoga Barbers 14440 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Sent Sovi 14583 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 ,, Saratoga Cafe 14445. Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga Wine Merchants, Inc. Shanthi Madrieddi 14500 Big Basin Way A 14567 Big Basin Way , .`$aratoga, CA 95070. Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga Pool Service 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga Nails 14511 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga BP 14395 Big .Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Stephen M. Howard, °~emologist x.4419 Big Basin Way >aratoga, CA 95070 Stoneham Design 14567 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga Travel, -Inc. 14479 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Tanner Asset Management Group The UPS Store #1291 14417 Big Basin Way 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga, CA 95070 Viaggio 14550 Big Basin Way }aratoga, CA 95070 Venz Fine Photography 14567 Big Basin Way #3'A Saratoga, CA 95070 Warren Lampshire 14457 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Village Shoe Repair 14440 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Saratoga Plaza Bakery 14440 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Stephen D. Hall, CPA 14457 Big Basin Way Saratoga,. CA 95070 Southwest Electric 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Santa Clara .Construction 14428 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 The Trattoria Restaurant 14500 Big Basin Way #A Saratoga, CA 95070 U. S. A. Nails 14479 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Vienna Woods Delicatessen 14567 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Village Rendezvous 14420 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 • OOUO~~~ Impression antibourrage et a sechage rapide ~ ~ "www.avery.com rte, AV~RY~ 5160® Utilisez le gabarit 5160® ~ 1-800-GO-AVERY 1J , Wells Fargo, Investments 8 Big Basin Way aratoga, A 95070 Ronald & Barbara Worden P. O: Box 52085 Phoenix, AZ 85072-2085 Warren B. Heid AIA & Assoc. 14630 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Zambetti & Associates 14540 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 W. Jeffery Heid 14630 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Zazoo 14510 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Downey Savings & Loan Assoc Bloxham ' L M & Louella Sullivan P. O. Box 6000 P. 0. Box 95 20570 Canyon View Drive Newport Beach, CA 92658 Aptos, CA 95001 ~ 'Saratoga, CA 95070 -Otto M and Bette Crawford ~ Casabonne Elizabeth P. Klear 12471 Green. Meadow Lane P. 0. Box 247 20387 Thelma Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070-3032 El Verano, CA 95433-0247 :Saratoga, CA 95070-4946 Robert & Shirley Cancellieri George M. Payne N D Matheny 14860 Cody Lane 15940 Rochin Tern 720 Market. Street 250 toga, CA 95070 Los Gatos, CA 95032=4823 San Francisco,: CA 94102-2500 Bernard A Wallace James & Arlene Rosenfled 1999 Windward Pt . Thelma D Melton 14219 Okanogan Drive 4710 Santa Lucia Drive Saratoga, CA 95070-5549 Discovery Bay, CA 94514- ;woodland Hills, CA 91364-4218 9512 Lees Partnership Bank of Amer N T & S A ~ William & Julie Carlson 14493 Big Basin Way P. O. Box 192202 621 Del Roy Court Saratoga, CA 95070 San Francisco, CA 94119-2202 Campbell, CA 95008-1834 Carl and ET Holm Helen & Joseph Brozda Mitch & Tracy Cutler 1 Goodwin Court :235 Linden Street 14480 Oak Place Redwood City, CA 94061-2446 ~ Santa Cruz, CA 95062-1019 Saratoga, CA 95070-5929 Wanda & Robert Pollack 14500 Big Basin Way C Saratoga, CA 95070-6076 Charles &. Elisbeth Stauss 20 Chestnut Avenue ~,os Gatos, CA 95030-5804 Ruth M Long P. O. Box 2095 Saratoga, CA 95070-0095 Freda & William Wyant 13991 Saratoga Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070-5457 Cali Investments Jose W San 14510 Big Basin Way 374 W Santa Clara Street Saratoga, CA 95070-6090 San Jose, CA 95113-1502 040424. J1213AV-09-008-L ~~ ®09L5 31b~1dW31®tiant/ ash Attachment 3 • O(~002~ ~.. • Letter of Justification -- Subway Sandwich Shop1 ~ G ~ ~ `U is 14410 Big Basin Way, Saratoga ~~ o~~~ ~ 3 zooE cnvo~sak,a~~~:~~; The Operation • Franchise operation, with more worldwide locations than any other food service, providing sandwiches, salads, beverages, soups, chips and cookies • Hours of operation: gam - 9:30pm, 7 days a week • Primarily a noontime lunch business, peaking from 11:30am - 1:30pm • Known as a healthy, fresh sandwich shop... and not for it's volume sales • Number of employees: 2 - 3 Community Benefits • Provides healthy food and convenience to neighbors and merchants in the area • Well-known and quick service sandwich brand • Owner believes in contributing to community, such that there's a mutually beneficial relationship. We are willing to support the Fire Department, Police Department, Little League, City Hall and schools in the spirit of recognizing/enabling those who make our community run. • Jobs for residents r~ ~~ Negligible Traffic Impact • Peak business time is 11:30am - 1:30pm • Rush-hour time analysis lam - gam Not open 4pm - 6pm Low customer count ~ No impact to rush hour traffic Other issues to consider • Owner is proven successful, has won numerous success awards for Baskin Robbins and Subway franchise .operations. These include the Subway President's award and multiple Baskin Robins annual recognition awards for excellence. • Owner has history of positive CUP experiences with city of Los Gatos • Store adds economic value to the existing area, e.g. higher revenues, more taxes, and more jobs compared to the present situation • Subway restaurant chain honored at Governor Schwarzenegger's September 15 summit on health, nutrition and obesity, for it's healthy eating commitment • 40 years of successful franchise 1}istory means that this is a long term operation with staying power, which delivers satisfaction to both customer and owner ~~ o~U~~~ ~~ ~~~®~~. I• Laurel Thanks you for your note. We hear this application on March 8th. Please come to the meeting to speak if you would like.. I am also Icing the planning staff so that this is put into the record - and incase you would like to talk to them as well. Thank you again Susie • laurelperusaQcomc ast.net To 02/27/06 09:11 AM CC Subject -u ~~~~ d~ FEe 2 ~, 2406 +~UN/TY OGA YOFSA~T DEVEL po.,,,t ._, susie vedanthamc~URSCorp.com Subway Sandwich in our village Dear Susie, How fortunate we are to love in Saratoga. How many California residents are able to refer to their downtown as a village? Not many. OODU~B Saratoga Village has a multitude of businesses that sell sandwiches. I see rio need for another business+~that sells sandwiches in our village. An additional sandwich shop will not enhance our village. A sandwich franchise at the village entrance or any other location is not appropriate, detracting from the village. Our village is unique, a sandwich franchise does not lend itself to the existing charming ambiance. Please give the Subway Sandwich application careful consideration. Sincerely, Laurel Perusa ' 15085 Oriole Road ~ Saratoga OOVU~~ • • ~~ • City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form• /~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ .Date: !2 ~~"~ a,~ ~ PROJECT ADDRESS: /~t}~~ ~/q ~aht~ ~i1 A~/~ft" ,(~ ~~~ 0 3 ?_006 CIl'Y OF $AR.4TOGA Applicant Name: ~~7~ G~ASQL1e~ •`t'~i•r:r;}r~,r•~ Application Number: Staf~`'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. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. ~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 ~(~l,U 1 c~ I-~(~ r n~ D ~_A- ~ r~.~-cam owl ~ c~-e S ha D Neighbor Address: _ Neighbor Phone #: (p 50~5~ 0 ~.~q Signature: Printed: ~aU~~ ~~~~~~ L O~~ / ~O _ • City of. Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form ~ ~ ~ ~~ di Date: /Z~~o ~°~ ~ JAN f 3 2006 n. j? PROJECT ADDRESS: ` `~= ' %4' ~~~ ~:JGtih1i1 t `vu~ ~ ~"~ I3 r~ I ~ Clll' Gi= 5A1.:4T0.:: .. ~ ,.- . Applicant Name: ~'I T~~~ G ~ ~i 5~ (~Y ~'' ; ~ ~~I ~ ~% ='~ `,j Application Number: ' 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. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion at a 1 ter. date during the actual public review and appeal periods. 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 t'he 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: ~'6 ~ ~-- ~ ~- ~ ~ ~~ Neighbor Address: Neighbor Phone #: , ~~~ ~(Pg ' ~2~ v Signature: Printed: a,va,( ~ ~i -b11 v~1u~ OOUO~1 n=_._______ _. „___ __~__ ___. • • • • City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification F,orm~ -Date: ~~- ylo~ PROJECT ADDRESS: 1 ~ ~~ D u/q Bah//? ~A~ ~ ~ Applicant Name: /~/~G+ G~QSaU~~ ,S~f~l~~`7~ Application Number: ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~ - I~ L~ .jaN 0 3 2006 ctrv of s:ak,~~roc,a 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. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve tl~e right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. ~~jj L'~JMy 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): f ~ // ~ Neighbor Name: V ~ h'J ~Gt ~// l~l~/" ~ ~ ~'1 ~'1 'e Neighbor Address: ~ ~~~ ~ /~, ~ ~QS/n way Signature: Neighbor Phone #:' Printed: 1 i ~ S'u~~! d~ 000032 T7_. _______ _. T ___ __y__ ___a ,. City of Saratoga ,Neighbor Notification Form Date: 1 ~~~~f~`~j~ f , PROJECT ADDRESS: % ~`EI'~ ~ ~j',< ~~ ~~ ~; ;"ti~~ ~- A Applicant Name: i `~ ~ 1'G~ ~ ~~i S~ G~~ E" i`a ~ L~ ~+~G`~~ -T Application Number: I Jf~~ Q 3.2006 cis v or s.a~:~;~~oc:; 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. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. 1 signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I understan '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: ~~car,~~ Neighbor Address: r Neighbor Phone #: ~ S ~ ~ ~~ J' f 1 ~ T Signature: ~ Printed: ~Q~-~~~ ~ . ~2~~~-~~~ ~~ ~.. r n olJVO~~ n~ ------=-- - n --- ---~--- ---` • • • Attachment S • ppU034: ORDINANCE 240 a, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SARATOGA CITY CODE CONCERNING PARKING REQUIREMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: .Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds and declares as follows: a. The City of Saratoga's Village business district has long been recognized as an area that has a mix of businesses that included cross section of retail, service, restaurant, and personal service industries that contribute to our residents' quality of life. b. The City's Village Design Guidelines and Village Improvement Project both contain numerous goals to create a vibrant downtown where the mix of retail and service based businesses exist. c. A nationwide economic recession has reduced the demand for many retail goods resulting in retail business failures and increasing retail space vacancies in~the Village. d. There is surplus parking capacity in the Village and this capacity can be used to attract new uses to the Village to promote a more diverse economic climate. e. The General Plan designates the downtown Village area as CR -Retail Commercial. General Plan Land Use Policy LU 7.1 states, "The City shall consider the economic impacts of all land use decisions on the City." Accordingly, relaxing the parking requirements .would provide greater flexibility in attracting tenants and/or promote greater investment in individual properties which would be consistent with Policy LU 7.1 and the City's goals to revitalize the Village. f. The Circulation and Scenic Highway Element of the General Plan states under Goal CI.7.Oa, "Provide adequate parking for non-residential uses to minimize intrusion into adjacent neighborhoods.' CI.7.1, states, "Review on-street parking policies and utilization in the Village area" as a policy. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan in that the proposed amendment relies on a review of current utilization of parking in the Village. g. The City Council has adopted a resolution pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) adopting a Negative Declaration and finding no evidence that the amendments contained in this ordinance may have a significant adverse effect on the environment. • 1 oooo~s Section 2: Adoption. , The Saratoga City Code is hereby amended by adding the text shown in bold italics (example) and deleting the text shown in strikeout (fie) in the sections listed below: 15-35.020 General requirements and regulations for off-street parking spaces. (a) Except as specified in subparagraph (k) of this Section 15-35.030, at the time of initial occupancy of a site or structure or at the time of an alteration or enlargement of a site or structure,- there shall be provided off-street parking spaces for automobiles in accord with the schedule ofoff-street parking space requirements prescribed in Section 15-35.030. For the purposes of this Section, the term "alteration or enlargement" shall mean a-change of use or 'an addition which would increase the number of parking spaces required above the total number required prior to such change or addition. The number of parking spaces provided for an alteration or enlargement of a site or structure shall be in addition to the number existing prior to the alteration or enlargement, unless the pre-existing number is greater than the number prescribed in Section 15-35.030, in which instance, the number in excess of the prescribed minimum shall be counted in calculating the number provided. to serve the alteration or enlargement. (b) If, in the application of the requirements of this Article, a fractional number is obtained, one parking space shall be provided for afraction ofone-half or more, and no parking space shall be required for a fraction of less than one-half. (c) If more than one use is located on a site; the number of parking spaces provided shall be equal to the sum of the requirements prescribed in this Article for each use. (d) The off-street parking requirements of this Article may be satisfied by a common parking facility; provided, that the total number of spaces shall be not less than the sum of the individual requirements, and provided further, that a contract between the parties setting forth the agreement for joint use of a common parking facility is recorded in the office of the County Recorder and a certified copy there is filed with the City. (e) Where parking requirements are determined by gross floor area, such area shall not include enclosed or covered areas used for off-street parking or loading or interior courts of a building not occupied by a use for which off-street parking is required, but such gross floor -area shall include any exterior balcony used as the sole means of access to a business establishment and any basement, or portion thereof, occupied by a use for which off-street parking is required. (f)The Planning Commission may require that off-street parking spaces in excess of the number prescribed in Section 15-35.030 be provided for use on a site, if the Commission finds that such additional spaces are necessary to avoid traffic congestion or shortage of curb spaces. (g) For a use not specifically listed in Section 15-35.030, the number ofoff-street parking spaces shall be determined by the Planning Commission or the Community Development Director, based upon the number of spaces required for the most similar specified use and such information as may be available to the Planning Commission or the D'^-~„~-~^ r'"'°^+^'' Community Development Director concerning the parking requirements of the proposed use. 2 OOUO~~ (h) In all districts except a C-H district, the off-street perking spaces prescribed in Section 15-35.030 shall be located on the same site as the use for which the spaces are required, or on an adjacent site or a site separated only by an alley from the use for which the spaces are required. In a C-H district, the off-street parking spaces prescribed in Section 15-35.030 may be located within three hundred feet of the use for which the spaces are required, measured by the shortest route of available pedestrian access. (i) With respect to any site or structure located within a C-N, C-V, C-H, P-A, R-M or MU- PD district, nut more than twenty=five percent of the riamber of required off-street parking spaces may consist of compact parking spaces. If, in the application of this subsection, a fractional number is obtained, one compact parking space may be provided for a fraction of more than one-half and one standard parking space shall be provided for a fraction of one- half or less. (j) No repair work or servicing of vehicles shall be conducted in any parking: area: (k) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code, for applications deemed complete between March 1, 2006 and February 28, 2009, no off street parking shall be required of Tiny new, altered, or enlarged site or structure in any CHDistrict until such time as a total of 41,850 square feet ofgross floor area beyond that existing on March 1, 2006 ("surplus floor area') has been constructed or otherwise allocated as set forth below in the CH Districts. This provision shall be administered as follows: (i) Surplus floor area sliatl be allocated on a first-come--firstserved basis, based on the date that the application submittal is deemed complete by the Community Development Department; ~ • (ii) The amount to be deducted from the surplus floor area for a new or enlarged site or structure shall be the increased gross floor area calculated using the methodology for determining gross floor area in ~~ection 15-35.020(e); (iii) Tlie amount to be deducted from the surplus floor area for a change in use in or alteration to an existing site or structure that does not increase the gross floor area of that site or structure shall be determined based on the gross floor area subject to the change in use reduced by 450 square feet for each parking space allocated to the prior use. Tl:is shall be calculated as follows: The total square footage subject to the change in use or alteration ("changed use area ") shall be the gross floor area of that portion of the site or structure determined in accordance with Section 15-35.020(e). The existing parking credit shall be calculated by determining the number of parking spaces allocated to the prior use of the area proposed for a change in use or alteration and multiplying that number by 450 square feet. The amount to be deducted from the surplus floor area shall be the changed use area minus the existing parking credit. For example, for a proposed change in use of a 2000 square foot structure with four parking spaces allocated to the prior crse, the changed use area would be 2000 square feet and theparking credit would be 1800 square feet (4 parking spaces multiplied by 450 square feet); this means that the amount of surplus floor area allocated to the change in use would be 200 square feet (the 2000 square foot changed use area minus the 1800 square foot parking credit). Notwithstanding the foregoing, no deduction from the surplus floor area shall be made or 3 OOU~~'~ ,. required for any change in use in or alteration to an existing site or structure within a City parking district that does not increase the gross floor area of that site or structure. (iv) Allocation of surplus floor area to an application shall be removed at such time as the application is de~zied or withdrawn and, for applications that are approved, upon the expiration of that approval. If an application is modified by the applicant or the approval in a manner that changes the gross floor area associated with the application, the allocation shall be adjusted accordingly; (v) The Community Development Department shall monitor and maintain an account showing the amount of surplus floor area that has been allocated pursuant to this section and the amount that remains to be allocated; and (vi) Any proposed new, altered, or enlarged site or structure in any CHDistrict that would add more gross floor area than the remaining surplus floor area shall comply with the. off street parking requirements set forth in Section 15-35.020(a) and elsewhere in this Code as to the excess floor area unless the applicant applies for and pays the costs of a parking study to be completed by Ciry Traffic Engineer and that study is approved by the Planning Commission and determines that excess parking capacity is available in the CH Districts and recommends that the amount of surplus floor area be increased at least by an amount that would accommodate the proposed new, altered, or enlarged site or structure. Section 3. Severance Clause. The City Council declares that each section; sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance is severable and independent of every other section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance. If any section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held invalid, the.City Council declares that it would have adopted the remaining provisions of this ordinance irrespective of the portion held invalid, and further declares its express intent that the remaining portions of this ordinance should remain in effect after the invalid portion has been eliminated. Section 4. Publication. This ordinance or a comprehensive summary thereof shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Saratoga within fifteen days after its adoption. [The Remainder of This Page is Intentionally Blank] • 4 OODU~ ~1 The foregoing ordinance was introduced and read at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the 4th day of January, 2006, and was adopted by the following vote following a second reading on the 18th of January 2006: AYES: Councilmembers Kathleen King, Nick Streit, Ann Waltonsmith, Vice Mayor Aileen Kao, Mayor Norman Kline , NOES: None ' ABSENT: None ,,~~ .~= ' ABSTAIN: None ~: ` ,.:', Norman T~line MAYOR, CITY OF SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA APPROVED AS TO FORM: ~-' ~--~ Richard Taylor CITY ATTORNEY • • • OODU3 • Attachment 7 • ppO040 ~1 ~i~ ~A~ir. hq~ .~\ // , 4 ~- T I .., _~ 1 ~. -,c ' I _. -4 ..- .._ ~~ 1 ..!- _~ - ._ ~~I ~ 4 • h- 1 P1 b ~ zmu 4 8~ r m ~~~7~~ ~~fi .F ~ °a ~ D D A ~ ~ ~g ~ ~ t10 ~ ~q~ a~ ~~ e ~ z~ ~ ~ a~ ~ o ° ~ A `- ~~0~7 ~~~ ~ ~ ~` A ~ ~ ~ ~ ® u ~ ~.~~ A A gbh i-- ~~~ R ~pp ~ I ~x D DOD ~ e 0 ~ ~ ~ z ~p _ a ~6g~ 3R ~ _ rn z ~ n ~ ~ ~ r-- "Rii; 3u E ~' ~ ~ _ r; ~,; ~ ~ Y ~ _ - Bbl l - ~ - ~ ~ i - • O b I al ~ ~ ~ °• ~ ~_ 9 ~ _ bag ic___:c`.-v_ _..._._ _ _=~ Q fii (rte b.• ~ - br i A ~~~ 1 1 1 L"og E 22 E E c o"g ~~ ~ Zzy~~Ar• i HH i' ~ - ~~ `~NX O ~ ~~ - as ~-~ tip' < _, ~ I 1 - -- ---~- -- -- $-- -- -- -----------------~-j;~----+--- ~' S uD , ` ~ < - y :_ ~- N i ~'V~ ~ I i. i ~p -1 Z V rn 1 r-.• ~~-e• ~DD;D S a° i ::-`- .I v - - d i . =- _ - _ 1 - I ' _ s ~Ag i O~ I !b; 'g~ ,, 1 ~ ~; Y~ ~, - A - -- - ~p---- ------_- I _I I ~___________________~:~----- - ------- ---- ~~ ~ -o ~ a Q , V O I :~ 1• , I < '1 ______________ ________~___.- ___-._ Tae - . 1 ~ ' n~~yi~ 1 77pp- ~ ( -~- 1--~ SI ~~~0 fll~ D\ ~ - s_rp L Oa~.a:7 ~ ~. ~ i rn DDA1 j ~~ a~ y l ~ D'1 z y D lI JI (bT, ._l.. ~~4€6 ~~~aS~1RFF i gg ;v~ hl i ~s~~ ~ D Z I ;"I \-1/ ~~~ ;- aba=~8- I F, ~ .; D 'sue •b>. , ~ rn ~ ~ ' w 9{ $$ba8 ~b~£akg ~s~ i 1=0 ~ - . ~ ',;,' - 6E~ ~ i I ~ ~~e~ F~~aiiFA~ ~z~zi~= ^~$ I=~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ 4~F3 g~~S ~*~" ~~F " o ~^ ~ ~ ~3=b ;~g Y ~ a$ R ~1~ ~. a ~_ ~, - rO z rn b'ga~ ~~ °# ~~ r rn ~"_ ~ ~ 4 - ss :~~R < ~ ~ y as~~,~a ~~poa~ -o rn m ~~~~ ~~ ~ d" r d b y3~ao a~~a~ ` z ~1 k~ 9 8 . 1~ .:~~~ ~~rv or 5 ~ "I\IITV \\ ~;~ N . D A~ D r N -~\ ~ D _~ O \\ ;' V D d b .« B R a~'a~~~ e~~~'^~ ~~~~~ r og " ~ ' ; ~ ~ Lf..-- J s Eee .xo rouplraar rannlu ernuenma wrJlanee sox YOUNG AND BORLIK 4SSER HIEKALI ,,~""~, ~` ••`"""T' '"`°"°'""° 410 b 14418 BIG BASIN WAY =a~nwt ~'`,,'~. ulxwNaror+~vsNVe.stmE:le 1508 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD. ~~ ~,'.' ~ ee~oelro.uw°I 1RATOGA, CA 85070 ;~--'_ '" rElEreoarE Fes` (65°166Y-Ino ('mil atlll3 i'~'~~~ i~'I',~j'!Ii a~ ;~ f~ €~ 4q~ t~ a ~ • • • 1 C ~ m y ~ j N ~11J! ~ y~l7g3,{~~~~~ ~~~k~~ii Pem~ ---- I~ ~1-- ~- ~+ ~ t ~ ~' P S$'S yS~ i<`F=.= y`~~-7 ~, ~ ~ ~, Z - I ~( 1 f~P g~ Is /, fk.~ „n ~~~~~,~ ~ _~ E , rte: ,, ,', ~ ~ ~ . z •F~ ' J - ~ - ~ ~ ' C Jai 9 ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ I ~ ~ `.. ~,' - ~ ,J ':` , rlt-,'I ' a/ ~~ ', - ~_ ~ C fft i ~E~ I I E a o BIG B A S I N WAY I '^ qtr,°b~ ~ r<~z; S~3 '~ ~ >! ~s}s ;~ K Px~ ob ~~ ~a ' ~r~ og;~ a~3F f o'9r dM~ ~°~ ~g~ >~~ °'1 o~f: R~C g ~~~ gss~ qu ~~ ~~> ~ _an°° ; ~'~ d Bii :b.j h~ . ~ .}1)I ~~15)'~ ~ R ~RB~ b ~~ a~~€5~~8 LL .• . 6 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~> c _ o p ~~is 1 __ 1 _ ~ ~ .. --' - r , - ,/ y ~ ~1-t- L.l-.: i y ;, --'I :. ~ -scx I ~ ~ -. 1 ' + I o~~~~ A ; ~~ ~R rn rn ~ _ ~~.~a ~~ o ~ ~x uL i ,: -- ~ K~> v I . ,' ~ N ~ 9 ~ ~~ ~f K~~ ~u D ~ z--I ~ N ~ ~ ~ -- ~ ~ s $~ ~ u ~„ ~ ~ s ~"° ~ ~- ' ~~ A i ii b ioI Sy ~ ~ ~I O ~ ~~~~ k ~C rn z 1 o~D oho `~ 1 ;~a . 5 \ '~~o YI 1 . e $I ~ '~rl ;a$ ~~ 0 _r II :; b~ O ' ii ~ A I : ` ~~ D Sl ~ ~' I :a Ise, • A R 1 ~I~ °}> ~~ ~; ( r ~~ ~ ~~ - -- -- ----------`-- { >ra ~ 8xE ~~ 0 ~ ~~~ it Rai A ~ "~ ~ j~ b~ N ~ ;r rR_~ a ~ny `~A~Z~~IJ ~'~~.Ai a ~ -{~~ I 1 _ t G D I ____ • -_-_ A ~ <O S~ z~ ___QL ____ ________ .-- ~ ,. I 'l ___- ~~ D - ._ - -~ O _` _ N I~' ~ ~`u ~ NA1j D bA~~ -ammZ;A o nDD~D I ~ ~~I~l ~ O ' mr~ 1 '( c --- ----------•--- -- D N A R ~-------------- - 3d o D -- ---------- -- rn - ~ O- . O , $a~ ___ - r 1 ~ nl ' ll }(~i~ I ~ c 3 t ®~ m. s. c• ~ _ O i / / p l /S ~ i - J O.. '~~~ &~~~Yg~ ~~d ~~ 3 D ~~ ~ ~ rn r ~ ` to ~~R ~~~$~~ ~~~ 5( ' "A O u -----1--- --- 2` \ iA ~u l ~Si Oimnl, ~ a A Q kn ' ~ - / ( ,_ o ~R ` ~F ( ; i JI ~~ ` J ~t s~ 0 T o 'a E y A - ~ rY Y r r~~ 'e€!<~:~ ~i1. h~~ ~ ~! ~€LS ~s ii= nn~ uro rowxrurr s~Aniu arnucru,u w~~s sore ~ YOUNG -AND BORLIK NASSER HIEKALI ,.••~•~ `• .r~A,*r~*•. ,A~°r.Ae.*e. 14410 8 14418 BIG BASIN WAY ='cans' ~4-°--- ssreuNaroNevsNthsuneas 20506 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD. ~~ _6.' se~oe~ro,uww, SARATOGA, CA 85070 ';~.-.: ~' fE,.~N~NF: Fwx: 1~ol ane.,sw rom>u,u: IN 0 3 ~OOE -Y OF SARA'lOGrS ~\IIT" flF\/F!-"- 1 ~K ~~ r C -~ ~'S n W 0 fi ti ~. 0 .~ ~~~ FZ~Z~ O N O~~ ~~~ ~~ e~ C ~~ ~A~ 0 3 zoos CIl Y OF ~AItA"TOGA ~~~ r'~~ a~ ~' i ~ i ~ "1 o j t 1 i y I i ~ ~~ .~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~, ~ ~~ ~. . ~ ~,~ _ 1 ~- y-~ a.r.eeo. w~ ...b wr,e, ~ ~ N r ~~~ ~ ~ ~I ~~~ ~~ 4~~ ~:~ ~ r~~ ~~~ ~_~ y ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ .~ - `1 6 ~ y °. n c ~ . ~' ,a~ ~p v a ^~; ~~ S/td Wd60:~0 9002 bT 'G'ad ~bZ0L6z: 'pN Xtid Wpdd I. ~1 E I G E A S I N W A Y ~i ..IAN 0 2 CITY OF $ RA7 - . n 1\IITV \/CI ... . ,. ~ ,- _ .- ~ - 1 ,. _. 1 _ ~~~YYYY ,~~ L;_ (~ 1 ~ ~`; m rn #g "' D I ~~ ~g~~~~~ ~~~ x` Y r D ~r ~ a~~ ~ o ~ 1 A D a i~a ~s~~ ~~ a ~~ _ ~~ ~ ~ O D • • ~ r >, ~~I ~ I,_ _ 1 O jE _ L- f O V ~ I 1 \ G / ~' X1:4 8 1- ~~F ~ ~. 1 ~~ o ~ 1 ^ I - ~ -~ .r.. V` ~ ( ~}} a>~ Ors ~ ;~ ,«~ ~ ~ ,~ g E ~~ a ai i<, I ;F ~ r ~A -~ ~ f D ~• o '1 Ls -- -- • z z :a 1 I ~ a o ; ~ -~ ------~--, ~E~ ; ~ -...-__.-____- _i... _._.~.~.t s I ., ~p 1 v `" N ~ ~B fij 1 ~ i ~ t1~ 7p I ~ -- .y i 'e ~~ i ~ UI71 r~i L'~ - _ ~I N ~ I,i~~~~ RD~tiD ;~r• „ ~~ O .1 ` IS mr~ _ R ~~ ,~ a, , D.. J 1 v 1 emu. ~~g i 0 ,~~ -- 1 - 1 _ _ ------- - 1 ~~~ o g ' zi ;. a fli i ~ o~~pD ~ \ p I \) A ~s~ 1 ~• 1 y .~ 1 m ~ jy j g gg' ^ y b $1i f ~ D ~0~ 1 ~ - m D 1 ~ ,YY i ~gya~~~ek ~ .Ye• Xli rr iw ID ~ gg ~ _~€ ~ .~ S#~~ ~a~~ ~~ a = Rig ~ y o o ~~~~~~s S €~~g ~; . 3~~sg~~X i / 1Js 6 (~~ ~~ J wot .ND rotuNT,uT NNNnIU erNUCnwu uYeNwo~Y sort YOUNG AND BORLIK rill ', ~ - ._•',• NASSER HIEKALI ,. - ~'~ ttCNITtCL. IYCD>TOt4TtD '~i ¢6• 14410 6 14418 BIG BASIN WAY 'wows ~ ~~'-~~ al xw.rnml+~vwdcumtm ~ o i ~ I - - IAIA AL70.utW101 ..+ F' ~ 5 TT = $ 20508 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD. ~ ~ ;~;•': ~` ~~ T~ C%" = SARATOGA, CA 85070 i•3-~'_ ~ . roDl ae.teD Neq>mur= T •• _ 1'It ' ~~ ~~ ~^ y 1 ~tf ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 • • S N A ~. ~- - -r~~~ ~-~~ „i i '..S 1 iyyy j)ff((jj ~~'(~~~{~ ~ S [ I ~ ~ W ~ ~ '' F ~~~ ~ ` 1 1~ BIG B A S I N WAY I ~ ~F~~ ~~~~~ ~~a ~~~~~~ ~g ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ a~ 3 e k ;fig ; ~~ ~~~~ ~ A~ a _ -.. _- - .~- - - __ - .y : "~s _ .: uu CC ~t i~ . ~ _. ~ Y aa~ fAll In ~ - i - i ' ,^ 7° o ~~~~~ ~ > ~' ~ 0 O ~a • ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~z~ ~~ ~° ~ ~ z ~ ~ Q .z,;~ : e ~ ~~ ;~ ~ ~- I 1 1 a gar ga d ~ ~; 3 a~~ f y ~ a z D ~ D ~ ~ ~ a~ rn _ b~ a j a ~-~ ~~ ~r ' 11 O E ~ 1. € .,. II ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~s ~ ~ # oaf e o ~~€ ~ ay~~~A ~ ¢~ ` ~ , ~ ~~> _~~~~~°p v ~~ * i D ~ z Z _ ~a - - , . ~ -' ~ ~n D ~mr~~D ~ ~° " ~~ 1 ~• u ~ ` ' ` ,~ ~ A 5 ~ r'E ~ D ` D rnri ~'~I ` ~ 8 0 ~__ ' -- ---- O-~, i ~ D v g ----°- b~~ ~ ~ f '~~, N -i-~- r --- - ~~ m u ~_ b y - - ~ A } I!~B i~ Zz Q1 ~ ~ 1 i I ( IOA~ ~ ~ gDDym ' ' ~ ,i~ ~~a~fi ~ ~~1Ya~ ~€~ gF 8 RY ~ rn ~ F5 ~ D 1 ` tp ~ s~sp~. > e ~~ ~ a -i---- a r ~~~ s~~~~~ ~~~ ~ o ° ~F --- I - -- 4 - .. . _~ „~.. ~, D :; . 3 'o "s ~ 6' Aoe AMO rawrMr sMiW eTAUCfuRAt v6Re0le sac ,.,,, ~ NASSER HIEKALI ,, 'q % 14410 8 14418 BIG BASIN WAY = u,,,es =4 20508 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS RD. ~~ °s SARATOGA, CA [15070 YOUNG AND BORLIK ~.,,.~... ~ ..ee fil elAee61DN AVFNUL SVIIE 3L -AIA AL70.G (1101 Tmxo7+6 iwx: p~q YLIfJO Itle]arnn ,~ ~'1q~I' i ;~ €~ ~~ ~ l~1 ~ ~ U N03200 Y Of SARATUG ' nIrTV nF11Fi "' ~ r C ~V 1 w 0 ., :~ • r- 9 ~~ 0 .~ ~~ j fi-------~~-~----# 1 t~ E i i ~ ~ m = ~~ ~ ~ - ® ®i n i ~ ~ ~ ®~ i ~ ®~ i ~ ®~:r ~ aN .., ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~.. ~~~ ~~~ F~~ ~~ ~~ e~ .i ~ ~~~~ U t5 L JAN 0 3 2006 CITY OF SAKA"TOGA I • • ~~~ r~~ a~~ 3':" F ~~ ~ «- ~ .1 i 1 `11 1.1 y t: .l ~ ,, ~t ~~ ~~ `\ ~~ ; ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ 1 ~~ yT 1_ i w y-~ sw.es~• iM~ Wt, r~qr ~~~ r ~ ~ ~~ ~~> ~ N ~~~ ~~~ ~a ~~~ ~ • ~ ~~; ~ s ~ ~'" ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ,- .~ ~ ~ ~, ~-- ~ ~ Tiid Wd60:£0 9002 bT 'Qa~ £bL0L6z : 'ON Xti~ ~ y ~. ^~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \0 v ~ ~ 3' ~~ WOE •uoz~niosar pa~iae~~ azi~ ~u?~dop~ ~q suo?~?puoa u~rm SLO-90 uo?~eazidde nnaznar u~zsap anordd~ uozsszuzuzo~ ~uruueid azi~ ~~zi~ spuauzuzoaar 33~~S ~oiidau~w~o~~ ~.~is •an?~euut~~u azi~ uz apeuz aq uea s~uzpuzd nnazna~ u~zsaQ aigeazidde a~i~ ~o iii ~~u~ spin 33~~5 `wins uI uozsn1~uo,7-- •~zodar sni~3o ~u?~un~ au~~o s~~~e~S ~Cq pan?agar uaaq an~ezi iesodord azi~ uo s~uauzuroa anz~e~au ou pug sraunno ~adord ~uaaefpe o~ su~id pasodord auk zznnozis sou ~uea?idd~ auZ •uoz~?pp~ pue ~u?iapouzar pasodord azi~ ~iq pa~a~duzz aq pinonn ~~~ saau pa~aa~ord ~o sauoz~oor ou are araq~ asneaaq iesodord s?q~ rod parmbar you senn nnaznar ~suogr~ ~z~ •~uzp?s oaan~s pug poom ~o uo?feu?quzoa ~ ane~i ~~u~ poozirogti~?au ati~ u? sauzozi ratio a~i~ ~?nn aiq?~eduzoa aq tI?~ ~uzp?s poonn pasodord atiZ •uo?~eina?~.re ap~3e3 a~~nbap~ ap?Hord aieas raiieuzs pine s~ia~q~as pasearau? s~? pug `rood ~srg ati~ u~zi~ raii~uzs ~igerap?suoa aq ii?nn auzoti ati~ ~o ~iro~s puoaas aziZ •~.zadord ~aaCgns azi~ uzor~i ~aa.t~s ati~ ssora~ pine ap?s ratio?a uo pa~en~zs are sauzoti ~ro~s one pug paiapouzar ro ~imq ~i~uaaar uaaq aneti ~aaz~s s?zi~ uo sauzozi i~ranas •~aa~ arenbs 000`OI ~s~ai ~~ are l~u~ s~oi ~~o~~res prepue~s o~ an?~eiar ii~uzs axe ~uauzdoianap s?u~ u? s~oi3o ~~Y~I.000`Oi-I-2I pauoz s? a~zs ati~ pue ~aa~-arenbs 009`L s? az?s poi tau atiZ •saziauz S - ~aa3 ~Z aq ii?~ aauap?sar pasodord ati~ ~o l~tati uznuz?xeuz atiZ •~aa~ a.n?nbs psg`Z aq ii?nn a~ere~ rya-onn~ patia~~e nnau ~ ~uzpniau? aauap?sar pasodord ati~ ~o ears .zoom i~~o~ atiZ •a~e.ze$ rea om~ patiae~~e u~ anezi ii?nn aauap?sar paiapotuar ati pine `i~nouzar rod pasodord sz ~i~radord ati~~o .tear ati~ ~~ arn~azu~s a~ere~ patia~~ap ~ •uo?~?pp~ tizo~s-om~ ~ ~anr~suoa pine auzoti ~ro~s -auo ~ur~s?xa u~ iapouzar ~ii~?~ue~sgns o~ ienorddE nnaznag u~?saQ s~sanbar ~uea?iddu atiZ uoissn~siQ i~~roxd SLO-90 ~nu~n~ snu~d~ ££bOZ ,.. Item 2 • C REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 06-075; 20433 Walnut Avenue Type of Application: Design Review Owner/Applicant: Mr. Salim Sagarchi Staff Planner: Lata Vasudevan AICP, Associate Planner Meeting Date: March 8, 2006 APN: 397-28-052 Department Head: ~ ~ ' John F. Livingsto e, AICP i __ ~ L ~, I _ ~ \ I I , ~SVtATOOA•SlN~ ~ v _ ter.: J '~.*+puri~ ~~ ~\ \~ . ., "< LYNDEAV `y" "(\'• A _ -- ,AVICTAAV / _ _ ~ ' .__ sav X a (~ -- I ,L . ~\ ' \" y~-_..~ __._ SUN 1. j: ~ l~` ~`/) ~\`~ i >> -i`uivDN DR •~_ f ~ I {~ y - ~ r 1 ~~~ ~l 1~•~ ~v / .6R1~1~t NV~IMI.OT~ ~- ( _`j ~ - '~ ~yt7LLO~N/i/ `~ ~. ~. /I Jam` i~iST J MWNIL Y~ .W1~11{UT~V ~_/ _ _ ~~-~ / ~~ - i. '' II I ~ j. LOMARDeR ,`\ I \~' }SUNNI I, ~ t ~- l / \`'\~/ / / ~,`` / ' I f ~ gyn.." ~ ~ ' ~ ~l~ ~~ .6FAGgAVES,W V / iuAR~RD I" L j ~ \ I j~• y / ~ \~ ~+•Y1ATO0 ~ ~ ~ ~\, / JsNiAT001 AV r ~~ W ORO~i.W Y i" \ _ _ -,~ "" "~--\ ~ / `\~~~ •~ ~ 20433 Walnut Ave. " ~ ~ " ": ". ""ffy 150 ;~00`•,. 450" 600~~~~~~ I \\ ~• ~_° parcels w ithin 500 ft. ~ ._nr~ i :~ ~'~ARATOQMSUNN ~ALE~ \\~..._........:.._..____.._. __ ~ ^~ \ TN6~IYW~\~:. 20433 Walnut Avenue oouci ~ I ~ Application No. 06-075,• 20433 Walnut Avenue EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY: Application filed: 08/23/05 Application complete: 02/02/06 Notice published: 02/22/06. ,' Mailing completed: 02/18/06 Posting completed: 02/23/06 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to remodel an existing one-story single- family residence and add a new 906 square foot second floor. The existing detached garage would be removed. The total floor area of the proposed residence including a new attached two-car garage will be 2,850 square feet. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be 24 feet - 5 inches. The net lot size is 7,600 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1- 10,000. ' STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve this Design Review application. OOU002 • Application No. 06-075,• 20433 WalnutAvenue ~i~ • • STAFF ANALYSIS ~~ ZONING: R-1-10,000 ' GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential M-10 (Medium Density) 4.35 Max Dwelling Units~per Acre MEASURE G: Not Applicable PARCEL SIZE:- 7,600 square feet (gross and net) SLOPE: Level Lot GRADING REQUIRED: None ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project involving a substantial remodel and addition to a single family residence and removal of a detached' garage is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuanx to 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 site is located within an existing developed residential subdivision served by all utilities. MATERIALS AND COLORS: The materials- and colors for the remodeled home include pewter gray colored wood siding for the main body and trim and darker silver color for the wood shake siding, cultured stone accents with split shake dark gray colored roofing. A "materials and color board" is on file with the Community Development Department and will be presented at the site visits and public hearing: 000003 ,.. Application No. 06-075,•20433 WalnutAvenue ~ . PROJECT DATA ~ ; Proposal ~ Code Regwirements Lot Coverage: 44 % Maximum Allowable Residence, incl. garage, 2,030 sq. ft. 60% porches Driveway, walkway, and 1,321 sq. ft. patio TOTAL 3,351 sq. ft. 4,560 sq. ft. Floor Area: Maximum Allowable Existang: Floor Area Detached garage Proposed: First Floor 1,524 sq. ft. Garage 420 sq. ft. Second Floor 906 sq. ft. TOTAL 2,850 sq. ft. 2,880 sq. ft. Setbacks: Minimum Requirement Front Lot Line 27 ft. 25 ft. Rear Lot Line 1St story 58 ft. - 8 in. 25 ft. 2nd story 62 ft. - 2 in. 35 ft. Side (West) 1St story '7.~n. ~~j~ 6 ft. .2nd Story 11 ft. 11 ft. Side (East) 1St story (existing wall) 5 ft. - 8 in. 6 ft. 2nd story 11 ft. 11 $. Height: Maximum Allowable 24 ft. - 5 in. 26 ft. Lowest Elevation Pt. 199.24 ft. Highest Elevation Pt. ' 201.04 ft. Average Elevation Pt. 200.14 ft. Elevation at topmost Pt. of Structure 224.56 ft. 226.14 000004 Application No. 06-075,•20433 WalnvtAvenve PROJECT DISCUSSION The applicant requests Design Review approval to substantially remodel an existing one- story home and construct atwo-story addition. A detached garage structure at the rear of the property is proposed for removal, and the remodeled residence will have an attached two car garage. The attached Exhibit A indicates that less than 50% of the existing exterior stud walls will be removed. This data is included to indicate that the project is categorized as a remodel and addition pursuant to Saratoga City Code Section 15-45.060 (a)(8). According to this code section; removal of 50% or more of the existing exterior walls is considered a new structure- and processed by the Community Development Department as a new structure.- The total floor area of the proposed residence including a new attached two-car garage will be 2,850 square feet. The maximum height of the proposed :residence will be 24 feet - 5 inches. The net lot size is 7,600 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000. Many of lots in this development are small relative to standard .Saratoga lots that are at least 10,000 square feet. Several. homes on this street have been recently built or remodeled and two story homes are situated on either side and across the street from the subject property. The second story of the home will be considerably smaller than the first floor, and its increased setbacks and smaller scale provide adequate facade articulation. The proposed wood siding will be compatible with the other homes in the neighborhood that have a combination of wood and stucco siding. Trees City Arborist review was not required for this proposal because there are no rootzones of protected trees that would be impacted by the proposed remodeling and addition. Geotechnical Clearance None required. Neighborhood Review The applicant has shown the proposed plans to adjacent property owners and no negative comments on the proposal have been received by Staff as of the writing of this report. General Plan Findings The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan Policies: Conservation Element Policy 6.0 -Protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering. the visual impact of new development. The proposal will retain and extend the life of the City's housing stock and will protect the rural .atmosphere of Saratoga ~DD~~Jr Application No. 06-075,•20433 WalnutAvenue by utilizing an existing residential site instead of developing a vacant parcel. The proposal will not block the views of the surrounding hills from neighboring parcels, nor will it be visible from major streets. Land Use Element Policy S.0 -The City shall use the design review process to assure that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings. As conditioned, the application meets -the Findings required for Design Approval. ~ 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. The project has been designed in a manner that minimizes interference with views and privacy to adjacent properties, including setbacks that meet or exceed the minimum- setbacks required by Code. There is expected to be some interference with privacy since the homes are situated on narrow lots and are also two stories. However, such interference with privacy is not unreasonable given the narrow width of the'lots on this street. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. The use of earth-tone wood .siding and the roofing will blend with the natural enviroriment. Since this is an already developed lot, there is very little of the natural landscape to preserve. There are no protected trees on the property. (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees. There are no• native or heritage trees on this property. (d) Minimize perception of excessive bulb Architectural details such as varied rooflines, varied and recessed wall planes, arched windows, stone trim, wood frame windows and doors break up building lines to create architectural interest and reduce mass and bulk. (e). Compatible bulk and height. The residence has been designed in a manner that minimizes the appearance in height and bulk and does not exceed the maximum height allowed in the area and zoning district. The proposed home will look very similar to the adjacent homes in terms of architectural style and scale. (fl Current grading and erosion control methods. The applicant is required to maintain stormwater on site, where feasible. However, no grading is proposed on this level lot. (g) Design policies and techniques. The proposed project conforms to all of the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook in OOUOOO Application No. 06-075,• 20433 WalnutAvenue terms of compatible bulk, and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views as detailed in the findings above. Conclusion .Staff finds that all of the applicable Design Review findings can be made in the affirmative. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve design review application 06-075 with conditions by adopting the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution of Approval for Design Review. 2. Affidavit of mailing notices, public hearing notice, and copy of mailing labels for project notification. 3. Neighbor review letters. 4. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A." • ~i ~4~~~~ Qo~QQ~ • RESOLUTION NO: {' Application No. 06-075 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Sagarchi; 20433 Walnut Avenue WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning ,Commission has received an application for Design Review Approval to remodel an existing one-story single-family residence and add a new 906 square foot second floor. The existing detached garage would be removed. The total floor area of the proposed residence including a new attached two-car garage will be -2,850 square feet. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be 24 feet- 5 inches. The net lot size is 7,600 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000; 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 proposed project involving a substantial remodel and addition to a single family residence and removal of a detached garage is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 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 site is located within an existing developed residential subdivision served by all utilities; 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 Saratoga City Code Section 15-45.080 and the City's Residential Design Handbook have been determined: NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The project has been designed in a manner that minimizes interference with views and privacy to adjacent properties, including setbacks that meet or exceed the minimum setbacks required by Code. There is expected to be some interference with privacy since the homes are situated on narrow lots and are also two stories. However, such interference with privacy is not unreasonable given the narrow width of the lots on this street. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. The- use of earth-tone wood siding and file roofing will blend with the natural environment. Since this is an already developed lot, OOOOQ9 ~.~ Application No. 06-075,•20433 WalnutAvenue there is very little of the natural landscape to preserve. There are no protected trees on the property. (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees. There are no native or heritage trees on this property. (d) Minimize perception of excessive bulb Architectural details such as varied rooflines, varied and recessed wall planes, arched windows, stone trim, wood frame windows and doors break up building lines to create architectural interest and reduce mass and bulk. (e) Compatible bulk and height. The residence has been designed in a manner that ' minimizes the appearance in height and bulk -and does not exceed the maximum height allowed in the area and zoning district. The proposed home will look very similar to the adjacent homes in terms of architectural style and scale. (f) Current grading and erosion control methods. The applicant is required to maintain stormwater on site, where feasible. •However, no grading is proposed on this level lot: (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 as detailed in the findings above. Section 1. After .careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, application number 06-075 for Design Review Approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The remodel and addition of the existing home shall be constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" incorporated by reference, with the colors'and materials as shown in the submitted color/material board. 2. Four sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution shall be included on the plans submitted to the Building Division for permit plan check review. The drawings shall include a stamped and signed boundary and topographic survey. 3. Final Landscape plans for the front yard shall be incorporated into the construction plan set and shall take into account the following requirements: • ~~~~~® Application No. 06-075,•20433 WalnutAvenue • Landscape plan shall be designed' with efficient imgation to reduce runoff, promote surface infiltration and minimize use of fertilizers and pesticides that can contribute to water pollution. • Where feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat storm water runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff. In areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolong exposure to water shall be specified. • Pest resistant landscaping plants shall be considered for use throughout. the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. • Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. • Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall be retained and incorporated into the landscape plan to the maximum extent possible. • A note shall be included on the site plan stating that no construction equipment or private vehicles shall park or be stored within the dripline of any ordinance protected trees on the site. 4. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final occupancy inspection. 5. Any changes to the approved plans must be submitted in writing with a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. No downgrading in the exterior appearance of the approved residence will be approved by staff. Downgrades may include but are not limited to garage doors, architectural detailing, ~ stonework, columns, shutters, driveway materials, etc. Proposed changes to the approved plans are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director and may require review by the Planning Commission. 6. 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." 7. 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. 8. Water and/or runoff from the project site shall not be directed toward the adjacent properties. ~~001 Application No. 06--075,• 20433 Walnut-Avenue 9. All processing fees, in the form of deposit accounts on file with the community development department, shall be reconciled with a minimum $500 surplus balance at all times. In the event that the balance is less than $500, all staff work on the project shall cease until the balance is restored to a minimum of $500. FIRE DEPARTMENT 10. The applicant shall comply with all Fire Deparlmetit conditions. CITY ATTORNEY 11. 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 wifh respect to the applicant's project. Section 2. Construction must commence within 36 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 8th day of March 2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susie Nagpal Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: John F. Livingstone, AICP 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 aclo-~owledges 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 ooh®~ I• • Attachment 2 • QQaO~~ AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES I, Denise Kaspar ,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 18th day of February , 2006, that I deposited in the United States Post Office, 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 (updated February 7, 2006) as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property described as: 397-28-052, 20433 Walnut Avenue; that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. i ~\ . ~ ~~ enise Kaspar Advanced Listing Services • 0~0~~~. ~ ,. ' 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 8th day of March 2006, at 7:00 p.m. The public hearing will be held in the City Hall theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. The public hearing agenda item is stated below. Details of this item .are available at -the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Please consult the City website at www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures. APPLICATION/ADDRESS: #06-075 - 20433 Walnut Avenue APPLICANT: Sagarchi APN: 397-28-052 DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to remodel an existing one-story single-family residence and, add anew 906 square foot second floor. The existing detached- garage::would. be removed The total floor. area ;of the__proposed residence including a-.new-:attached two=car garage will be 2,850 square feet. The maximum height of the~proposed residence~will be not higher than 25 feet. The net lot size is 7,600 square- feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000. 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, February 28, 2006. 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 prof ect. 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 , tfiis notice This will ensure that ' everyone:. yin -your Community :has -as :much information as possible concerning this-Project. . ... Lata Vasudevan ~' Associate Planner.. 408-868-1235 40001 Feb 22 06 10:50a Denise Kaspar 949 361 3923, ~~ Advanced Listing services y . ~ Ownership Listings & Radius Maps ~J~ P.O. Box 2593 • Dana Point, C,4 •92624 "`~ Office: {949) 351-3921 •~ax: i949J 36I-3923 ww~,v.Advancedlisting.corn I, Denise Kaspar, hereby certify that the attached list contains the names, addresses and assessor's pazcel numbers of all persons to whom all property is assessed as they appeaz on the latest available assessment roll of the County of Santa Clara within the area described by the required 500 foot radius measured from the exterior boundazies of the property legally described as: APN: 397-28-052 ' Subject: 20433 Watnnt Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 February 21, 2006 , Denise Kas~az Advanced Listing Services {Information as of February 7, 2006) • ~~~~~~ Feb 22 06 10:50a February 17, 2006 • 500' Ownership Listing Prepared for: 397-28-052 Salim Sagarchi 20433 Walnut Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5426 Denise Kaspar ~ 949 361 3923 p.3 'E . Advanced Listing Services / ~ Ownership Listings & izadius Maps P.O. Box 2593 • Dana Point, CA • 92GZ4 OFFrce: j949} 3b I-3921 • Fax: (949J 3G 1-3923 . wwwAdvar~cedlis[ing.com 397-26-021 397-26-022 397-26-023 Christine & Jae Cho Polk & Anne Laffoon Allen J & Cynthia Ruby Or Current Resident Or Current Resident Or Current Resident ] 4173 Squirrel Hollow Ln l4 ] 9I Squirrel Hollow Ln 14205 Squirrel Hollow Ln Saratoga CA 95070-5417 Saratoga CA 95070-5417 Saratoga CA 95070-5417 . 397-26-024- 397-26-025 Mohammad & Farimah Massoumi Su Chia Fei & Huelling 397-27-007 Or Current Resident Or Current Resident Saratoga City Of 14215 Squirrel Hollow Ln 14204 Squirrel Hollow Ln Or Current Resident Saratoga CA 45070-5417 Saratoga CA 95070-5418 Saratoga CA 95070 397-27-008 397-27-009 397-27-010 Jawed Umerani John Marshall Lotus F Shin 509 San Felicia Way PO Box l 696 1120 N IOTh St Los Altos CA 94022-1755 Los Gatos CA 95031-1696 San Jose C~ 95112-4409 397-27-011 397-27-012 397-27-013 Rajiv & Minakshi Mathur Daniel Kaypaghian Michael M Shadman Or Current Resident Or Current Resident Or Current Resident 14185 Victor Pl 14200 Victor Pl 14190 Victor Pl Saratoga CA 95070-5425 Saratoga CA 95070-5425 Saratoga CA 95070-5425 397-27-014 397-27-017 347-27-018 Mahdavi Trust M L Brewer Cynthia Kerr Or Current Resident Or Current Resident Or G~urent Residem 14180 Victor Pl 14170 Victor Pl 14160 Victor PI .Saratoga CA 95070-5425 Saratoga CA 95070-5425 Saratoga CA 95070.5425 397-27-019 397-27-020 39?-27-025 Chien Liu Erik Friedberg Gmver B & Maryann Steele Or Current Resident Or Current Resident Or Current Resident 14158 Victor Pl 20434 Walnut Ave 20410 Walnut Ave Saratoga CA 95070.5425 Saratoga CA 95070-5447 Saratoga CA 95070-5447 397-27-026 397-27-030 397-27-031 S C V W D David J & Terri Morrison Executive ~Townhomes Of Saratog Or Current Resident Or Current Resident . Or Current Resident Saratoga CA 95070 4100 Moorpark Ave 201 20480 Blamer Dr A San lose CA 951 I7-1708 Saratoga CA 95070-4371 397-27-032 397-2?-033 397-27-034 Thomas Lindsay Jon R Soon Kang Thanh Hoge >~ Or Current Resident Or Current Resident Or Current Resident 230 Mount Henson Rd 204 20520 Arbeleche Ln 10705 Dublin Canyon Rd Scotts Valley CA 95066-4034 Saratoga CA 95070-5464 Pleasanton CA 94588-2803 00001'7 ,....Fe•b 22 06 10:50a 397-27-035 Leo E & Judith Chavez Or Current Resident 20580 Arbeleche Ln Saratoga CA 95070-5464 397-27-038 Michael L & Carol Mauldm Or Current Resident 15345 Bohirnan Rd Saratoga CA 95070-6356 397-28-004 Mike J & Erin An Or Current Resident 20451 Walnut Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5426 397-28-012 Laura C & George Elliott Or Current Resident 20462 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5428 397-28-O15 Gloria Felcyn Or Current Resident 20440.Williams Ave Sazatoga CA 95070-5428 Denise Kaspar ' 397-27-036 Jason C & Kathlyn Hunter Or Current Resident 20890 Arbeleche Ln Saratoga CA 95070-5464 397-28-001 Jinsong Hu Or Current Resident 20411 Walnut Ave Sazatoga CA 95070-5426 397-28-005 Rabert D & Karen Fitt Or Current Resident 20461 Walnut Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5426 397-28-013 , David & Andrea Knight Or Current Resident . 20460 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-428 397-28-016 Jay S Hidy Or Current Resident 20430 Williams Ave Sazatoga CA 95070-5428 397-28-019 397-28-020 Subramanian & Charumathy Ganesan Judith L Teeple Or Current Resident ~ Or Current Resident 20470 Williams Ave 20480 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5428 Saratoga CA 95070-5428 397-28-022 397-28-023 Frances C Miller David 8z Connie Eshleman• Or Current Resident Or C~urent Resident 14600 Wild Oak Way 14130 Alta Vista Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5550 Sazatoga CA 95070-5459 397-28-025 397-28-027 Libin & Jennifer Z.hang Ojala Trust Or Current Resident Or Current Resident 14110 Alta Vista Ave ]4054 Alta Vista Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5459 ~ Saratoga CA 95070-5422 397-28-033 397-28-034 397-28-037 Frieda Mckenzie . ~ Rockwood 1999 Or Current Resident Or Current Resident 15311 Bellecourt 20445 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-6466 Saratoga CA 95070-5427 397-28-040 397-28-041 John P & Kay 1\ on Wei & Annabe] Chang Or Current Resident Or Current Resident PO Box 73 14078 Alta Vista Ave Saratoga CA 95071-0073 Saratoga CA 95070-5422 949 361 3923 p.4 397-27-037 Fund & Susannah Ahmad {' Or Current Resident 20850 Arbeleche Ln Saratoga CA 95070-5464 397-28-002 Steven C & Flora Hoffman Or Current Resident 20431 Walnut Ave i ' Saratoga CA 95070-5426 397-28-006 J & Mazcia Manzo Or Cutrent Resident 20471 Walnut Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5426 397-28-014 John V4T 8c Christine Pace Or Current Resident 20450 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5428 397-28-018 ~ Benjamin $ Leilia Peake Or Current Resident 20400 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-426 397-28-021 Richard J Bietz Or Current Resident 14081 Alta Vista Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5421 397-28-024 Waldemar M & Lucyaa Pastuszka 1 I i6 Walsh Ave Santa Clara CA 95050-2646 397-28-032 Chazley Griffon Or Current Resident 20365 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5458 ' 397-28-038 Anthony & Linda Kerin Or Cutrent Resident 20461 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5427 397-28-042 Sazatoga Parent Nuns Ery School Or Current Resident 20490 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5428 ~Q~~~ "1= eb' 22 06 10 : 50a 397-28-043 Saran Raissi Or Current Resident 2048 ] Walnut Ave Saratoga CA 95070-542b 397-28-049 Braden S & Cecilia Kwan Or Current Resident 20473 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5427 397-28-052 Salim Sagarchi Or Current Resident 20433 Walnut Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5426 397-28-055 Paul A Bonnet Or Current Resident 20900 Big Basin Way Saratoga CA 95070-5750 397-28-059 Aleksandar & Gordana Ponce Or Current Resident 20405 ~~Villiams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5427 7-29-012 39 H Los Gatos Or Current Resident Saratoga CA 95070 503-22-06 T Ronald G & Linda Lawson Or Current Resident 14090 Elvis St Saratoga CA 95070-5815 503-Z2-066 'Von S & Kyung Kim Or Current Resident ' 20520 Reid Ln Saratoga CA 95070-5323 503-22-071 Sandra S & Shu Lin PO Box 112202 Campbell CA 950 1 1-2202 503-22-082 Estlter Calvanico Or Current Resident 14063 Sazatoga Sunnyvale Rd Saratoga CA 95070-5834 Denise Kaspar 397-28-044 Tat H Taw d, Or Current Resident 14100 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Saratoga CA 95070.5836 397-28-050 Sarvesh Jagannivas Or Current Resident 20485 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5427 397-28-053 Taira-Geeng T & Kai-Jung Chu Or Current Resident 20435 Walnut Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5426 ; 397-28-056. 397-28-057 Theodore & Victoria Hart Or Current Resident PO Box 427 Saratoga CA 95071-0427 397-28-066 Khanmohammadbaigi-Winner Or Ctrrent Resident 20345 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5458 397-29-014 Chia-Chin & Sung-Wu Ku Or Current Resident 20466 Gerald Zapelli Ct Saratoga CA 95070-5400 503-22-062 William D Foley Or Current Resident 14080 Elvis St Saratoga CA 95070-5815 503-22-068 George & Lena Viers Or Current Resident 14071 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Saratoga CA 95070-5834 503-22-075 Michael J & Theresa Dahlbeck Or Current Resident -14051 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Sazatoga CA 95070-5834 503-22-094 James J & Treacy Eller Or Current Resident ] 4098 Elvira St Saratoga CA 95070-5815 949 361 3923 p.5 397-28-045 Debbie L Goni Or Current Resident 14080 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Saratoga CA 95070-5836 397-28-051 Savio T & Maria Leung ~5 Verbalee Ln Hillsborough CA 94010-7435 397-28-054 Lorine Paxton Or Current Resident 20426 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5428 , 397-2$-058 Howard Lee Or Current Resident 20401 Williams Ave Saratoga CA 95070.5427 397-28-067 So Hock C Or Current Resident 14001 Alta Vista Ave Saratoga CA 95070-5421 397-29-015 Ren Wang Or Current Resident 20442 Gerald Zapelli Ct Saratoga CA 95070-5400 503-22-063 Etvest Atondo Or Current Resident 14060 Elvira St Saratoga CA 95070-5815 503-22-069 Kuojim Huang Or Current Resident 14091 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Saratoga CA 95070.5834 503-22-081 Joan Lambert Or Current Resident 14030 Elvis St Saratoga CA 95070-5815 503-22-095 James D & Doreen Molzon Or Current Resident 14094 Elvira St Saratoga CA 95070-5815 ~~~~~:~ Feb 22 06 10:51a 503-22-096 Vernon D Swart 15413 Lone Hill Rd Los Gatos CA 95032-2803 503-23-012 Howazd Allen Or Cun:ent Resident 20520 Marion Rd Saratoga CA 45070=5816 503-23-Oi~ Aldo & Heidi Oliveri Or Current Resident 14225 Sazatoga Sunnyvale Rd Saratoga CA 95070-5822 Denise Kaspar -' 503-22-098 Tai S Wong Or Current Resident 14111 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd Saratoga CA 950?0-5834 503-23-013 John R & Phyllis Feemster Or Current Resident 18800 Ten Acres Rd Saratoga CA 95070-5664 City of Saratoga Attn: Lata Vasudevan Or Current Resident 13777 Fnutvale Saratoga CA 95070 949 361 3923 P~6 SD3-22-099 Holland W & Helen Ham Or Current Resident 14121 Sazatoga Sunnyvale Rd Saratoga CA 95070-.5834 503-23-014 Neale Trust Or Current Resident 230 Mount Hermon Rd 204 Scotts Valley CA 95066-4034 ~~JJ ~J ~J • 00000 ' Feb 22 06 10:51a Denise Kaspar • 949 361 3923 p.7 t, 11 ,..at ~ ~.,~ + \~ •D ~ /~ ~ •d ~ t4 ~~ \N o O I!' - - ~ ~r '~' N y,-11' 6A11 1 60 ST.67 1 %b5 t2.7e " ~~ ~,.-- \o v- ~~ ~ ~~ ELVlRA Ho,. „°.. ,.o.° .b.° ~ ST. \~ 1"a ~ 164 ' 97.92 ¢4 '1~Q~ 6 ~~ ~i~ 91,04 171 t fn m 1 w ~• . y ~ 1 O • Nf ''-y+ J • •\ 3.60 04b pe` .a ?i J ~1•~~ `;J~ ~ f' ` i ~ -~p,I-~, N/°/- i~110/0- -II071- .y. y `'..?d,, • ~ a+~a e+.3e at.)7 N.~e tale 10406 9L 98 it _ 61p1]0.17~.?~ 89.98 '~~= ~„ ~ SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE e.as.rn/~t RD. r' ~~ - N/!!! Y Ap iy:l s~.l ar .rn ,Mnrn _ a ' nt~+ u^~. fxlrrrt tl 1O1 ~ --««- i.le•e- ~ i ~ e 1 p TO.] 1 '• ~ • fKL,- ~'-3i1L'4r7r1.~-1 a+n JO A113~Nyd-~="_-'S A ,°, ° ' •p°i °~ w • t o n+l ' ~ ~ ;`fj y a - ~ It 8 7~ C ' ~b . r 1 .a ~ ~. ' ^ ~, -- nw. 1 i _ +.Lr ~ = ~'~ 1---='-'=._~. S't+rld '~r el'o; i X'Kne ror uro ? _r2 ._ la.~ a x Y,"~ .. to ~ •A ~ 6 ~~ a ~` o7O tvlnd rov aro„ i „'-w7d '~v ttv ~ CA z ~ -_ _~ I i ~ - ~ a~ +•R t~ xyl. Aw ~ ~ ° i u ~(.t • 'NYtd.'JY 91ro i•~e w h+~%~~~ ysy (7 n ~9~: 7Y LI'~w j w'Mf7d '7Y Ll'0 _ ~ ~ ~ •i M MIN ~ 1 -1 •~ ~ ~ •\ t7+v' ' +` I"' d' D 3.tcyav ~olrom - ~ = ~ _ - v-~ ~ g> C71 y :+~' \ z 1'n ,•1°'' - ss s i ~ d A w . ~r-'-=-L"__- m ----:~la~'~a- awti '~ -iar(~ ~~v ~I'o ~ ~~D ~ 7ir_olro ~ i cn m o ~ pl.;w ro \ ~ . 4,~ y - 1' E 1 L - ~ -----~~-- t---.NYie •sli ci'o _..-.~-- - ~j i ++- ++ ++ 6 J • rt'/w _-_! ' M 1.. um R ; >S ~ ~ ; e ~ ~ ,~_ ~1/ ut'0 100~j q ~. _ y_..____~~___ , i ~~ +••l~ ~~ ^ ~ 9 ` t137YYd~ s 57.'LC' s ~ 'NY7d '~Y [l'D # ~$`+~^'NYId '7Y_91'0 ,~ ~ ~ '~~ : ~+:e y 4 Z'13]liVd ~ Si ,y+3 Yrv~d~~r Lt'o -- --- a _ ~n.e~ -----~ y ~ ~ .~ ..; ~p 31 -.~ ~ P rr +~J~Il ~-_.~~ \ N ^, ir__.-_...___ ___ , ~ 'Mrld •~Y Q171 "- 1'~q•~ a ~ P dQ ` w'1 N'Hlrld 'Jr 9l'0 ? ___- 1 j ~ ~ ~~ 1 ~~~ ~ 1 a. ~ ~ c • .... do ~,d fiats Pi 'Q~ *~ N m 'Nrid yr Yt.O v_ l ' v~J+` '~Y 6lti'f ` `.1A ~1~+~~1 1 QL?+'~~ 1 n ~R• +V ~. ~ ~- 1 YYYTD YlM1~•S •~. .. \\_]~\ ~e + i 4 ¢,... ~ 1 '+n ~.' vrir .~ ~ ~ - ` •~'e•9C r¢ C ••~, • .pit ~ • S, ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ KR n + • r - ` ~ APN: 397-28-052 Subject Address: 20433 Walnut Avenue 500° radius ,. 'Saratoga, CA 95070 ~..~ .~ Attachment 3 .. , ,. ~~~ r~ • Nei hbor Notification Tem ~ to for g Development Applications -- Date: /~ PROJE T ADDRESS: Z© ~-~ 3 ~ ~''~-'~' /"J~'~ j Applicant Name:~~ ~.~~ Application Number: The Saratoga Planning Commission reguires applicants to work with their neighbors to address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior to the evening of v the public hearing on the proposed project. The Planning Commission does riot 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. (~vly 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: I\ ~ ,`~N ~~ Nf~ J ~ ~ ~'/ Neighbor Address: ~~~~%~ ~ ~ Neighbor Phone #: ( ~~ ~~ Oe7~2 2 ~' 'V ' `Signature: Printed: City of Saratoga OQQ~~`y Planning Department ~eighbor Notification Templat~r ~ . Development Applications 'Date: ~ J PROJEC ADDRESS: a 3 GV Z ' a -~' `~ Applicant Name: 5~,~~/-/1 S'~ ~~~~~ Application Number: 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 nzay 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, ~~~hich after discussion with the applicant, have not been addressed. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Neighbor Name: ~~ ~~ Neighbor Address: ~~ ,~ ~9 Neighbor Phone #: ~~ ' 7~l' ~ol~~ Signature: Printed: • City of Saratoga Planning Department Q~~~7 • i h r N tiff ation Tem to for Ne g bo o c Development Applications -• Date: ~-;~ ~='~ S _ ~ ~Ja ~~ ~-- ,q~ ~ r .PROJECT ADDRESS: ~~ ~ 3 ~ ~ `l f f Applicant Name: ~~n/l ~~}~- Application Number: The Saratoga Planning Commission requires applicants to work with their neighbors to address issues and concerns regarding development applications prior to the eveni~zg 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 documetzt 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. y 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 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ Neighbor Address: 2 ~ Neighbor Phone #: Signature:. Printed: s ~~ City of Saratoga Planning Department ,.' ;~. ~Q~~-' • Neighbor Notification Tem~te for , Development Applications --- Date: C~ ~ ~' ~S ~~ PROJECT ADDRESS: -~ ~'~`~' Applicant Name: ~S,~ ~/~~ ~~77 D.-~, [; ;.'~~`;" Application Number: ..~~ 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 projeot 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: ~~/ N ~~/~ - • • Neighbor Address:, ~~~ ~ {~ 6 ~ (~ Neighbor Phone #: Signature: G~ Printed: ~i~~~ L~ ~ • City of Saratoga n~'~"~'-~~ Planning Department Neighbor Notification Tem~te for Development Applications -• Date: ~ ~~- ~S ~ ~ ~ ~ a PROJECT ADDRESS: ~ ,;~ ~~ ` L Applicant Name: ~~r~// ~'~/;~ c~~ l// l Application Number: The Saratoga Planning Commission reguires 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: ~"~~~/~,f/it/ ~1'~L~~ Neighbor Address: ~~ , , y~r~ , '~ Neighbor Phone #: t~~?~' ~~~ ''~~ Signature:. Printed: - ~ ~ ~~ .~ :. . City of Saratoga ,K<s Planning Department ::~, Date: $'2212AOS ~eighbor Notification Template~r Development Applications 2B ~f33 wy+~~v~ {~ ~: PROJECT ADDRESS: Applicant Name: S a i l n~ S Q G-Prc ~C 4~ 1 Application Number: 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. L"JM signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the,project .plans; I Y 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: $~{(~ri.,~ Tl~~jrh~l~n Neighbor Address: ZD ~ 31 WA LN uT S~R~4TDGf1 9 ~ 0 ~ Signature: ~. ~~ Neighbor Phone #: Printed: y08 2`f2 Zz~~- ST~iJ -EFo~FnAA~ • • City of Saratoga ~~~~ Planning Department • Attachment 4 i ~,J~~Fat~~~ • I {. ~. .'~~~+ eo? ~= or,. V: zz aaj ca. FrG __ _,e~ a:-?;E~:~ueld\:n ;; er'•,q:NY\ L j s ~~. ~_~ ~j„ ~ ~ 7 0 ~: ~ ., Z ~~ m~ _~ ~~~ s~ga=g ~-~ ~~= d~ '`dJ01`d~IdS ~i ~I I ~ W ~ Z ~ ~ ~ 3 W. rcp ,~ z~ ~ ~~` Nvx ~ N~ 3f1N3nd 1(1NldM £EbOZ W ~ r Z o c jJ~ ~. ~ `~ ~ ~~" db'W .13n2if1S ~bY/aNf108'8 ~IHdd2iJOd01 ~ ~ ~' o C ` L~ ~ " ~~ ~ N z I w J a ~ a ~ i r < ° I ~ z p w ~ ; , O '~' 3 0 ~ '- ~ 3 I 5 O '- Z i N w d L 'Y ~ 2 ' w w O a < 1 ~ ~ w ~ fn ~ J Z < w ~ d ~ u ~ } Z J I ~ O \ ~ J M 1 O I ~ ° ~ C ~ wo ~ o p g O O ~° 2 I Z ii Z V_ Z < Z C ~ ~ C ~ E ~_ Z -~ I :7 J U• L7 ~ ;n r w a ~ L¢ ~ a m ~ a ---- --- - ------ ------ - ----- -- - s'- o ~~ z ~ -' ~ < -- - - -- - Z > C ~ o Z = ~ x ~ r ° ° ~ ° _ i ~ W O_ N r r •n f M w w L7 < N p T ~ ~ Q ~ iDO Q ~~ <° n } p II , j -~ C 0 4; ~ w U Z Z~ w o r ~ '1 ¢ W ° T Z ~ , I j ~ o ~~ s w <r. s 3 m ~ C p w ~ O- w~ n Z--' ^ LJ C ~~ , N i ' W < d' p Q O~ Z ~ N V: ~ n ~~ O ~ ~ Z Z (n n L7 L7 p N ~ ~ ~ O , C < = O7 C < pt - T W ~ f2 O \ I I ~ _ y a' ~ L , I m U\ W c0 `"~ O ~~ C L 'v „~ G Oj ~~ iv ~" OIC \\\\\\\ \\\\\\'~\\\\\ \\\\\\\`\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\`< ~ tf) .Ci `~, G J .~ r- U v O, o c ~, r ° ~\ ,~ c5'LZ c ~- `..n .., ' .39'8. ~ t«ZRR~C[\\ ,~ \\1 ' _ ' __ v, u; ~' ~' ~ ~ 00+ ~ti ~ p 3 I - ~ O \ ~ Z C N ~i~ ,9L~bZ ~ W ~ ~ -~ ,\` r Q C O n R ~ I\ ~ -\\\\\\O ~ C U O O \L L`~ `-' . [L ~ [`\ N ~ o LIJ u1 \ ~ o e Z I ~ I ij ~ ~ ~ v I - O .°p `~.. \ tf)V B. y ~ i n1.~\.. Q ' [ iii U p>+ ._ ~, ~\ O 'D N!~ ..~;_,.. N ar.- ~~ w Ala` o~ '\ a'3Q ~ ~ ~'. N --~--`----------=~ i Nw `'C6 ~----- ~ ----------~------ - ~ N --•-- IfLM~p' p%~' ~I ~ I ~ C ;~ i U U'b' '~dl r o p ~~ \ h -a ~ ~ 1.t1M3Ala4 'X3 ~ ° N ~ ~` , ~ i ~C7{E~ rail \ c _ U N G ~ __ ` ~% ~. ~------------------- -NCO°Oc~~10„W- _~a _ Y"~"'~ - - _ - -- _ _ -------.----- --_ ------- N - ~ e- a- ~ e o z~-_ - -LL- ~ c c cal ° .° _ _ T_ _ T i52,8~' \ ~~ u i ii Gi ~o OI c- i i Z tU O ~ ~ ~n N5 ~ ~ ~; o ~ ~ I `~ ti ! ] c;a., ~ m ~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\V o~a .-~ ~ N - y (CxDI .- I ~ i ~ x I `~ I O i ! ~ i ! O O I N U . r, C I -~ I I i i ~ _ I :J I _G ~ I ! o ~ CV , j I N -.. °~ M , c ~I z U F ,A I ~ O I v~ 11J I ~ J ~ I v O E x V N/~y , Z I w w ~ ~.L ; > H O w z w p~ Q J N W o ' W o>~> w z o o m ~~? ~ I w ~ JO ~ g ~ ppJ J a rn m m J JJ) /'~~ W ~ F- w > J ~ U C C t d m ~ U J m U W F ~~ I U > ~ D 2 w ~ O N i O ¢ ~xu a x x ~ V W LL w ~ ~ Z I ~ ~ = U ~ > F ~ xr x~ v~i N 5 > r ~ W~ U K O O i LL. W i ~ 3 3 LL LL ~ ~ ~~~--cc g ~1 W W w a C~7 ~ U U w~ a v~i 3 a i ~ ~L~_/O~', i m l i I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - - I ' I I N ~ ~ ri I N Cs i I I t cnC2 Et ~E::v; ~? 4=i JaN :::+G':-1\ldc_\lfni 5PS-E2t;2\fCrd\N57S ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ i 9762 20 at :E: EO '-e^ aa: f .- ce;z-a; aa\30->:-?:E~~_oe,j~-.._~roteu\N:hi\ d ~ \ O b l~I~rld ~I00'I3 ZS2II3 Q~SOdO?Id / OI~IIZSIX~ o = N W ' ~ , o a a Z Z U O .C a'f '° a ~ O Q Y ~ N S l L 1 3 U' O _ ~ M II O O r ~ =~~ g ~ a, M J a ~ ie oe~ a 3 0 a P z :~ nM! a. ~Gt u<. B o a INN F 2I ~ / - _J ~ZSI rrr J `_xl~ l C~ ~'. I 1 N+ it -- z r_____~ o i ~ ~---- _ FRICGE ~ i i I r- - -- ------ -- a - - ---- --l ~ J Z ~ ~ C~ i, - . > i , i I, I ~ :Hi aco-~ cnz ~ ©I© Z ~h'=' I o Z . . -- I E~© ~ I i ~ y i 1-- ' u ~ ~- I w I ~., I ° ~ I I ~ i I I ~. a I I ; I ~ N ~. I -------- 1 ° ' ~ I I I I I ~ 0 ~ I i a p~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ 31 I I I / I I I ,~ %I ~ z ' ~ I ~ ~ I I ,. I I I _ __ ---.-_-. I - i } ~ I I ~ ~ I I O I, ! a I I ,I ~ I i` Z i I I ~- -----------J ~ I O = -__ -_~--____ __ ~ `~ ~ w ~ I -~ _ ~" ~ `I --.G-.G~ II~ ~ a ~ ~ o ~ I ~I ° i II J (~' i ' blldd"d3a3T65 ~~ II ., _ ~ ! ~ \ I \~~I - -, -- - -- '~ - I~!~~~~~;=ICI - I ~ __ - ~ - ~^-h~~ ~:;, - U ~, ,ZS~ ~ ~ ¢ z I %~~``~ z a o .... 3 w ~ Z ~ O ~ ~ r - ~ w (~ ('J O J -~ d' O p Q WWI W CI] r ~ ~ J J H X J ?~ w J ~ ~ J Z W Z Q ~ Q W Q¢ W 3 N ~ 3~p n II w m oo~ ~ ~ ~ M I I I I ~ u X X ,w w w J ~ ~ a l „z-,4 i ,G-,ei ~~ T------------- I , I I I I 41 I I I I I I I I ~; I I I ae l I 1 -I I ~ I I II I I I I r_--1J ~~~~ H I II ~ I' ii I I I ~ II I 1 I I~ I tit-~---- m r f ---~ I I I I I I r I ------------- -------------~0-------------------------- ------- --- ------ I ~' -`~ I } ------- II I - - - II II II I II II I I ~ I II ~ 3 II I JI II II I ~c=7~-~ II I ' I j I 11 II II I II\ /II I II I I it II II I =`I 11 1~======al j ~ II \/ II I tl A II I II II I ~~~I I Z I ~ II Ii I ui Dui i ii ~ 1~' I ii 1~--'~ ~--tr-y ~ r--- n ~ id~~ ! Q ~ II ~ ~ I Ir II II u ii ~ I I ~31p~ J j m I II II jl II jl li II ii 5 olW IiI ~ IZj~,I ~I 1 ~ J ____________ I ~ __ =~ ~___-~ c=======f====b __ ________ ,,,"I hi ~Im• > lil I II ~ II ~~ __J '~1----------------------------------------------- ;alo ml~,l ~ h1 ~/ I ------~------------- --------- --- I I~==== i~ LL > c _ ___~ I - r------~r------------,~ ---------ti7 I II r ~ ~--~ i I Yi O i ii Ii I ~ z L II ------------ 1 I II II ------ ~ II II I it=~ ~'===JJ jl I I ~ I 11 I Q I IL J jl ~ I r I n I - - t_ v __ ~ --, j III ~ I , ~ I Ir ~ Z II ~ I r I I o- Ij ~ II I I -~ I I z I Jj ¢ I z II I ~ I I I I I I E I ==P=te°==_~ ' ~-~ I I I _ -,, n l II II I I I I I z M :,~ ~ I __ ---------- ~ i X ._L_ ~ II II L________J I z it II I o ---------r 11 11 I I ~ 11 I _ .Z-,4l ,9-.R } - O n II ...,,: aO :Et :Ei E] ue^ 2^~ 6np-suzid ~P~I:CSC-o:-?~5'~:~.Pe[d'~.]rv.:aM~N7HV\:3 I ~ ~ ~ 1 f l ~ j - ~ W I~ I I ~ I I o° i ~ 6 l~I~''Id 3002 rn~~ ~ ~oo~~ Q~o~~s rn~~ z Z~~ Z 0 U W cn . 0 u > ~~ W ~ 'i 7 \ _~J? 52 ~E[:if EO -~Ef and Erp~sae[e -=~:~~59-0;-?[5o:u~x;:\;~ul'=r.\\vNi\ 3 i I 8 u Z o 0 R \ 0 u s~oli~~naz~a ~~x~ ~ Z z 0 ~ W v N 1 U z> ~ O < vi ~ ~ ~ g~a ? U e ° ~ n x` ~ U a3~ ~ aD ~ u u „~ U O O~ ~ ~~~ S M w~~ J a ~ ~ W ~ Q N V! y 6 d i ~- ~. // \ ~ "- - _. _ i Tie -~ I -. ~ ~ i .• _ - i li ~ ~T ~- ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ ;~ ~ I~ ~ ~ i J . - ~i • ~ _ ~ ~ ~ _ i _-- - ---- ;j -~ --- -----~ I ~ :o ,r LL ~ ~~. a a i - - > II ' ` •- -- ~ W ~ Z ~- I 4 SJCd Sf :Et Et E"v ae^ an[ Erp-5aE[d -COI_\,SO-V[-Z:Ea:O~f t~\irm[eX.\NVN:\ ? 0 0 "v ~ 0 01 z o chi z s~oli~n~~a ~~QZIng z $.:z -_{ :G: CJ J'el' ofll -^U-$~:~:1J~$`..~iO-):-Z[EJ[J~FI~--.:"~.°-+.\Vi nV`~.-i I! 1 y O W Q N ' ~ U o > P _ a o O y c ~a >> a C9 Sl~IOI L~~ ~'I~ ~I~LIQ'II11S K °Q 3 a S ~ Y LL r F c $ °a° Q a" z 3° ~ F z O \ Z 3 ° ~ ~~ a K a 3 o N a d Q N e ~~ ~ nl mNN g p c z d }.7^I::: ~~ ~ I ~~ - _' ' I - ~ ` --~r '~, j I I ~~`-`= ~ i 3NIl A1tl3dOtld ~ ~ ~ ~~v ~~~ ,~~- i III I I it i ! III i ~ I - - :~ . ~ I I ~_ l ~ ; I--C I ! ~, ~ I I- - III I~- L -_ I I IIII I ~_-- I ll ~ ~~~- lii'I li:~ ,~ I ~~ I " mss. ~ il I III III IIII III~'I ~ , I I III I it I i I I O ~i l i I ~-_-- ~I I I~ j! Z ~~ I II it ~l I~ ~ ~i ~ ~ I '~j; I - " ~ Q _ I L r ~ I I ~ ~ Q ~ Bill I I' I i -' ail l''l W J i I I!II_- I illlll-i i ~---~ ~; I~ ',I ~II~II!i ~ W -- - -- - l ~ - I ~" IIII i ;~ W ~~ I~ ~ ~~~ J `;i 'I I o ~~ :, ~, i ~ ~ i i i ~; ~ I~~ W o l I , I ~ ~ I I i ~ I I I~ ,~ II I I ~~ I I '~ ~ I I ~ I Q u ; "I, II;~IIIII~ ~-- ! ' ICI Iljl ' ~ l~ I ~ I I I; I , ~ I, W~ ;; ill I ill ~ li f I: ~ I ~ u ICI i I I I I! i - ' ~ I I ; I I ~' ' ` ~~ ~ ~~ - ~ I ~ IIII ,II I - ~ I I ~ I ~ ~ i~ i l; I I ~ I I ~~ it Dili I,. - I ; I .I _ ~I ~ I I ..I : I II W v , i I 1 ' ' III I I - ~I ; , III; III I lil I I i .l Ill il i i ! ;! I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .o-,a aNn unadoad ~ o- e i l i ; ,,I„I' II. l li I, ~ ' ~ . , ~ a I l ~~ ~ I i I qq n Gv :I -~ II g ~ I I I II Ill g •~ ° i ~ I i~ Ili i I~il.l n ~I i ~-i I .I,I ~•~ ~ ~ I I ~ II ~ l' '~I ' ~' i ~ I- I C I I a O F N LL .0-,B ,0-,9 ~ ~ .f-,9Z i ~ N .I _ ° `, I o i I II a _ < ~ ~/ Q I F ~ I I F"' ~~ _ ,I ~ 'I _ ~ I ~ I O ~~ l i o II ~ ~ ~ w J 9cGZ E' E° c[ ~. CEP an: ;nC~iNC€_FS`5v-vP~-5v:~c-,_~ r~lex,~,nvnv`,. 3 8 i e SI~IOIZ~~S ~I~IIQZIIlg o d Z ~ ~ p Za o ~ a ~~ ~ o WJ Z ~ etl 3 ~ NaQ ~ \ O u~ Z 3 0 Z n 2 O c =~e M F 9~~ J < O ~ h ~ . 3 _ O Q Q e~ k a m N N y 1 ## rv F p 8 SI i / / N WI I v . I ..0-,8 ~ ,A-,8~ / O j C ' ~ a I I , / m, I ~ ~i ~I / I _F I ~ I' I ~ i Z -i ~~ I ~ ~~ ~ ' ! I_ _ _ j ` f # 1 = ~ f E ~ ~' ' j O 0 ~ i ~ ~~ I Im i v „6-,6 (3 ) Q I W ~ Y: ~ ; . ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ I j m W 10 ~ ~~ ~ Q r ~, I ''.Z I ' I I i i i I Z ~ 'I j ~ 'I - - ~ _ ~ I C II j I -~ ' - o I ¢ i-' .- i ' . . I p0 - ~ II ~~ m I i ! U I, I~ ~ L! ~I~ ~ (~ II \ ! W~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ _~ W ~ ~ ~o-.s 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N I Il_ I ~ j j j 1 I ~ I I i L_1._ ~ ~ ~ N a ~ I fV ,.i I ~. ~-,Z i I a ~- 4 a 4 , „0-,8 ,0-,9 ~ G' I I Zi I I i I I i ..9-,6 ~I i I 1 1 I I '_'^ V J C` 'I p I a w C` '~ - ~ - ~ F ~ jo ~ ~ ~ u ~- V - ~ i G: O II w j O ;~ w w J °"'= d 4 ,~~.. 9CC2 EE °= FI i0 ',.z,, z~i Ex.9 SvO:i~=S\57-e~-2{s'+:~-~ei2\:n~-[ey`~.;:nv''. ~i I J ~ ~ j , ~. I Item 3 REPORT TO ~`HE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 06-229/13664 Camind Rico Type of Application: Design Review _ Applicant/Owner: Lupe Rodriguez(Owner/Applicant) ~~ Staff Planner: Therese M. Schmidt, Associate Planner Date: March 8, 2006 APN: 393-43-042 Department Head: ~~ John Livin stone, Director '~.. r - --'--..... _ - --._...._....._.__ ~ - 1 ~. ••., : ~ '~ R~w~oxa,w---r- - I F --.. _ _ _ _ - ; i•.~ i«a+aRi~DRY=_-.l c~Yae~oR ~. - - -~`' Y'p'r°rt ~ ~ ~. ~ • ~ •.. ' i ,__ ~ I r ..~ r `, i- ~ ', I I I ~ ! ~ ~ I ! j ~ j ] i ~ I p Rafter zones around ra55a can:n racoz ~ I~_ I I i njew ~~ - -- - ¢te~ tassaGrtilDl3eo ~--~-RRI _.~ ,,eR ~~ - T ~ ~ Q 500 ft notice i i 1 i I _ ~' I I j I~ - i' ~ ~ j I Street l.e6e§ ~.dcr ~ J~ . I - ~ ~~ -.. ' i ~ Streets I I _" I ,~" _ - 1 - L.. .__ [- ~ 1 \\ 10)ei AV •' i Y DDR DR L: -,, _. . ~ i -=~- _: ._ _. ; I / r 1 ~ !! 1 V i~ i eRRegm{'4i, Y._ ~-; .: I ~ .-____. _.. _ ~ I 1 I oto {nee wr_ 1-i -! 1 ~ I~. , YDR I _ 11~ ` I ~\ 1 _.~_~ - _ I 1 I L ~y j i `! Ym'o3RW~YR~ %~ ~~'. I . _. ~. i -.- --- ~ W I ~•~Y Y i~ F i I i - I~_._., , .-._ . ~ ~ ~. __ --- I _ _.. ~ I okYe I g Y ~ ..i ` / \, f I '--~~ t6~ii 500 II 13 664 Camino Rico ,. ,~ Application No. 06-0229; 13664 Camino Rico/Rodriguez EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY Application filed: Application complete: Notice published: Mailing completed: Posting completed: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 01/18/06 02/13/06 02/22/06 02/22/06 02/14/06 • The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct an addition to an existing single-family residence consisting of 263 square-feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence will be 2,785 square-feet, including attached garage. The proposed renovation will include a reduction of impervious coverage from 62% to 51 %. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be not be higher than ~ 21-feet 5-inches. The net lot size is 10,003 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000. STAFF RECONIlViI;NDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the application for Design Review with required fmdings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. • • ~~~~Qi~ 2 Application No. 06-0229; 13664 Camino Rico/Rodriguez . STAFF ANALYSYS ZONING: R-1-10,000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MDR (Medium Density Residential) MEASURE G: Not applicable ~ PARCEL SIZE: 10,003:5 Sq. Ft. _ • i~ AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: -Level GRADING REQUIItED: None Proposed ENVIRONMENTAL DETERNIINATION: The proposal is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, 5`New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resol}rces Code (CEQA): This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. PROJECT DATA: , Lot Existing Coverage: Proposed Residence & Garage Proposed & Existing Hardscape TOTAL PROPOSED Floor Area: Setbacks: Height: Existing Proposed Addition Proposed Demolition TOTAL PROPOSED Front Rear Left Side/North Right Side/South Proposed Residence Proposal Code Requirements 6,236 sq. ft. (62%) .Maximum Allowable - 2,785 sq. ft. 2,333 sq. ft. 5,118 sq. ft (51 %). 2,614 sq. ft. 263 sq. ft. 92 sq. ft. 2,785 sq. ft. 1-story 25 ft 25 ft 15ft 22 ft 6,001 sq. ft (60%) Maximum Allowable - 3,360 sq. ft. Min. Requirement 1-story 25 ft. 25 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 21' S" Maximum Allowable 26 ft. 3 000003 Application No. 06-OZ29; 13664 Camino Rico/Rodriguez PROJECT DISCUSSION Zoning Code Section 15-45.060(3) states that whenever an addition to an existing single- story structure resulting in construction over 18-feet in height is proposed Design Approval by the Planning Commission is required. The applicant requests Design Review Approval to add 263 sq. ft. to an existing one-story home and raise the height of the structure from 15- feet 2-inches to 21-feet 5-inches. The proposal is located in a mature neighborhood of Saratoga consisting of predominately one-story residential structures. The existing home is less than 50-years old and has not been identified as a cultural resource. The architectural style proposed is French Eclectic farmhouse with classic features including dormers, asingle-story tower element, and a mix of exterior building materials including earth-tone stucco, copper for flashings and vents, wood trim, cultured stone, and river rock veneer. An attached two-car garage is proposed with decorative garage doors containing three dimensional relief and windows to reduce the mass of the structure from the front facade. ~J Two fireplaces are proposed in addition. to an existing fireplace. A condition of approval has been incorporated requiring a maximum of one wood burning fireplace. All others must be gas. Neighbor Correspondence The applicant has circulated the City's Neighbor Notification Form and has received twelve (12) responses, none of which have expressed any concerns or issues. Copies of the Forms are located in Attachment 3. Geotechnical Clearance Geotechnical Clearance is not required for this application. Trees No trees are proposed for removal. One ordinance size tree, anon-native palm, located in the front of the parcel may be affected by the proposed addition; however, appropriate mitigation measures have been incorporated and significant impacts are not anticipated. General Plan Findings The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan Policies: Conservation Element Policy 6.0 -Protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. The proposal will retain and extend the life of the City's housing stock and will protect the rural atmosphere of Saratoga by utilizing an existing residential site instead of developing a vacant parcel. The proposal 4 (~QO~~~ Application No. 06-0229; 13664 Camino Rico/Rodriguez will not block the-views of the surrounding hills from neighboring parcels, nor will it be visible from major streets. Land Use Element Policy S.0 -The City shall use the design review process to assure that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings. As conditioned, the application meets the Findings required for Design Approval. . Design Review Findings The proposed project is consistent with all the following Design Review findings stated in Saratoga City Code 15-45.080: (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. -The maximum height of the proposed single-story dwelling is 21-feet 5-inches. The structure will be approximately 25-feet -from Comino Rico, 25-feet from the rear property line, 15- feet from north side-yard and 22-feet from the south side-yard. -The neighboring properties have mature landscaping, providing a natural buffer from the proposed site. The proposal will not unreasonably interfere with the views from Comino Rico, the surrounding hills, or the privacy of abutting neighbors. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. The proposed site currently has minimal landscaping. One ordinance size trees could potentially be affected by the proposal; however, with appropriate mitigation measures, as required in the conditions of approval, the tree will not have to be removed. The applicant is proposing a reduction in impervious services which will enhance the parcel. (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees. The proposal is not requesting removal of Native and/or Heritage Trees. In addition, the proposal, as conditioned would not impact Native and/or Heritage Trees. (d) Minimize perception of excessive bulb The applicant is proposing neutral color pallet for the exterior building, window trim and roofing materials as well as incorporating varying rooflines, stone veneer accents to reduce the perception of excessive bulk. (e) Compatible bulk and height: Residences in the area are predominately one-story with a few two-story homes located within 500-felt of the residence. The proposed square footage is compatible to surrounding homes and will not appear excessively large. The proposal is compatible in bulk and height with the neighborhood. (f) Current grading and erosion control methods. Since the building site is relatively flat and the proposal is for a relatively small addition no grading is proposed. In addition, the proposal shall be required to conform to the City's current grading and erosion control standards, when applicable, as determined by the Building Department. 5 OU©+~~5 Application No. 06-0229; 13664 Camino Rico/RodrigueZ (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 as detailed in the findings above and the staff report. Conclusion Staff finds that all of the applicable Design Review Approval findings can be made in the affirmative and the proposal is consistent with the General Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the application for Design Review with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. ' ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of Approval. 2. Affidavit of Mailing Notices. Public Hearing Notice, Mailing labels for project notification. 3. Neighbor Notification Letters. 4. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A." • • ®~®~~~ 6 • Attachment 1 OOU00'~ RESOLUTION NO. Application No. 06-229 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Rodriguez: 13664 Camino Rico WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Review Approval to construct an addition to an existing single-family residence consisting of 263 square-feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence will be 2,785 square- feet including garage. Proposed renovation will include a reduction of impervious coverage from 62% to 51 % of the lot. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be not higher than 21-feet 5-inches. The net lot size is 10,003 square-feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000; and WHEREAS, Zoning Code Section 15-45.060(3) states that whenever a new any new single-story structure or addition to a single-story structure is over eighteen-feet in height review and approval by the Planning Commission is required prior to issuance of building permits; 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 proposal 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; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Design Review, and is consistent with the following General Plan Policies: Conservation Element Policy 6.0 -Protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. The proposal will retain -and extend the life of the City's housing stock and will protect the rural atmosphere of Saratoga by utilizing an existing residential site instead of developing a vacant parcel. The proposal will not block the views of the surrounding hills from neighboring parcels, nor will it be visible from major streets. ~®~~~-~~ Application. No. 06-229; 13664 Camino Rico/Rodriguez Land Use Element Policy 5.0 -The City shall use the design review process to assure that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings. As conditioned, the application meets the Findings required for Design Approval. ' WxExEAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Design Review approval, and the following~findings-have been determined: (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The maximum height of the proposed single-story dwelling is 21-feet 5-inches. .The structure will be approximately 25-feet from Comino Rico, 25-feet from the rear property line, 15- feet from north side-yard and 22-feet from the south side-yard. The neighboring properties have mature landscaping, providing a tlatural buffer from- the- proposed site. The proposal will not unreasonably interfere with the views from Comino Rico, the surrounding hills, or the privacy of abutting neighbors. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. The proposed site currently has minimal landscaping. One ordinance size trees could potentially be affected by the proposal; however, with appropriate mitigation measures, as required in the conditions of approval, the tree will not have to be removed. The applicant is proposing a reduction in impervious services which will enhance the parcel. (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees. The proposal is not requesting removal of Native and/or Heritage Trees. In addition, the proposal as conditioned would not impact Native and/or Heritage Trees. (d) Minimize perception of excessive bulb The applicant is proposing neutral color pallet for the exterior building, window trim and roofing materials as well as incorporating varying rooflines, and stone veneer accents to reduce the perception of excessive bulk. (e) Compatible bulk and height Residences in the area are predominately one-story with a few two-story homes located within 500-feet of the residence. The proposed square footage is compatible to surrounding homes and will not appear excessively large. The proposal is compatible in bulk and height with the neighborhood. (f) Current grading and erosion control methods. Since the building site is relatively flat and the proposed structure is in the general area of the existing residence, minimal grading is proposed. In addition, the proposal shall conform to the City's current grading and erosion control standards. • 2 Application 1Vo. 06-229; 13664 Camino Rico/Rodriguez (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 pnvacy~and views as detailed in the findings above and staff report. Now, TxExEFOxE, 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, the application for Design Review approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" date stamped February 27, 2006, incorporated by reference. All changes to the approved plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes and are subject to the Community Development Director's approval. 2. The following shall be included on the plans submitted to the Building Division for the building plan check review process:. a. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page. b. The following note shall be included: "A maximum of one wood-burning fireplace is permitted and it shall be equipped with a gas starter. All other fireplaces shall be gas burning." c. The following note shall be included verifying building setback: "Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the Licensed Land Surveyor of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per approved plans." d. The following note shall be included: "To protect the Ordinance size palm tree located near the front property line from damage during construction a five foot high chain-link fence, mounted on blocks, shall be installed prior to issuance of building permits and shall remain in place until issuance of final building permits. Said fence shall be removed prior to issuance of occupancy permits." 3. A storm water retention plan indicating how all storm water will be retained on-site, . and incorporating the New .Development and Construction -Best Management U 3 o~~~~:~ Application No. 06-229; 13664 Camino Rico/Rodriguez Practices, If all storm water cannot be retained on-site due to topographic, soils or other constraints, an explanatory note shall be provided on the plan. 4. Landscape plan shall be designed with efficient irrigation to reduce runoff, promote surface infiltration and minimize use of fertilizers and pesticides that can contribute to water pollution. 5. Where feasible; landscaping shall be designed a'nd operated to treat storm water -runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff In areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolong exposure to water shall be specified. 6. Pest resistant landscaping plants shall be considered for use throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. 7. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological ,consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. 8. Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall be retained and incorporated ' into the landscape plan to the maximum extent possible. 9. Staff shall not approve downgrading to the exterior appearance of the approved residence. Downgrades may include, but are not limited to, garage doors, architectural detailing, stonework, columns, shutters, driveway materials, etc. Any exterior changes to approved plans resulting in a downgrade shall require filing an additional application and fees for review by the Planning Commission as a modification to approved plans. Any other exterior changes to the approved plans, which are not deemed a downgrade by staff, shall require a Zoning Clearance issued by the Community Development Director with payment of appropriate fees. 10. All processing fees, in the form of deposit accounts on file with the community development department, shall be reconciled with a minimum $500.00 surplus balance at all times. In the event that the balance is less than $500.00, all staff-work. on the project shall cease until the balance is restored to a minimum $500.00. FIRE DISTRICT 11. Applicant shall comply with all Fire Department conditions. r~ L QQ~®1~ 4 ~ I Application No. 06-229; 13664 Camino Rico/Rodriguez 'CITY ATTORNEY 12. 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 or 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 City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. • • 5 O~D~J~1~ - r Application No. 06-229; 13664 Camino Rico/Rodriguez I I a~ '~ PASSED ANn ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 8th day of March 2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susie V.,Nagpal Chair, Planning Commission ' ATTEST: John F. Livingstone, AICP ' Secretary, Planning Commission • i~ 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 aclrnowledges 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 ,~ • a. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES I, Denise Kaspar ,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 18th day of February , 2006, that I deposited in the United States Post Office, 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 (updated February 7, 2006) as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property described as: 393-43-042,13664 Camino Rico; that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. 1 -, ~ (~G ~ ~. enise Kaspar Advanced Listing Services • ~~~~~ ~ Feb 22 06 10:48a Denise Kaspar 949 361 3923 p.7 -- -----•AVE. t _~~- ~~-_ SARATOGA VILLA ~ ,•TAACT N!518 ~ - THI=LMA - - _ '°'°° '°>a° ~ ,Y,.I R .A r^..u ,, AVE.---L=-;- a ' IOIfO fDMl AIM. ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ „ ~. ~ 91.7 97 97 .b5 1 72.50 57.27 67 6 M ~ 1 .~ - ~ ~ ~ O.J7~ ~ t I ~• q 94 ~ ~ , ~c ru,. tai ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ i ~ ~ I ~ ,~ ,. ^, I . 1 ~_ ,^ ~ _1 ~r 16 _1 l~ ~; ~ ~; lag ~ ~ Q 3 ~6 ~ ~ ~ ~ 14 ~ $' 1 . ' . ' xt ~ zo ~ tc 1e I I ~ I _ ' _ ~ . -i...~.~..-..i .7 ' ,. to In f ,7 ~ Ic ~ Is a I s 7 ( s -!~... ce_ ~ ; 3 ; S ~ los ... t7D.7G ~145A1 r " J~ ' "~ ~ ~ ~ ~I s ~~ c S ~ ra l14 a j ~ R $ - +s .~ 11S - j; ~ 1t ~ Q e ~ 't 'SI - I. Ig a ~ Q ~i ~O - O . ••~ _ i -7` SS o~ta wc. PU6 : x e , i ~ ~ ~ ~ '°' I•I ' w.w• ~• ~ ~ r1s5 ?, lei - - - - • y - - - xuls roues loaoa Cs.5B +r, "F ~ ~ _ y,sb rop» _ _ _ 'A ,~,. ~ yy F, .. AVE. !" ~ 10 " I7 ~ ~ Q A ~ ~ I+ Iz ~ i Z ~ eodN ww~ ra 70II~ r, S r ; p _ 102 LOIN ~~ ~ ~ . toz loz roe ea~5 ~,~ ean. ~,r~ ~~ . ~ ... _.ISS-.oI- _ Q - !u~- - _ Ino ~ 1 ~ ~~ R I '>~. I 1 j ? I .~I s xl6 -a ~~, mil" t 1 "a;~ 'a g3 ~ ~ vai ~ ~ is .~ II ' +: m :+ • ~ .~. I I li I tc I Is 1 i4 ~ . r3 ¢t Iz ~ ~ s Ia - co' r:5.r: a ' '°' a l02 ~•••• _ ~ n7~ ,,•• o ~SARATOGA- - --VISTA. --• ~ _ CT ~'4 SA IOOA c^.al I I 1~8 / '^ o rw ;, z : « lq p S.w •..6 _ ~" ~ . e e ^ i-- SARATO VISTA ~~ ~' "~~ ' CT. ~'~a '~ - _ - 1KS9 - " , ~ - ;~*_5.- _ 8 ° ~ ~ I ` >, m+w N! 2 w ~ i ~ W o b~ - i Ul 1,0 ~ to ca 7 90 9s Y sZ "'is pp~~ 3a s - - ., ~ w ,~ ~ ~~: s !" z~ ei 1tl ., ..-<Subject- - - " i~00' r- D _IOI.os J'r~` tvs _ IN^ ~~ ~ 1 ., ~t Iol.o7 = G r ~ D . ~. ~ t~ftK ~ p ' Y ~ ~' .l2_Y9 .' 7.1 ~r - ~ ~ ~ "- ~ ,6 ~ ~ F - . . ~^ - _ - O ~ {,~ _ .- . . ~. .... 1 • ~ A~ X118 3ug h y Rw ~ o b ~ I o 4 •y~ ~ a n I~~ r Ip ~» ~4 ;o ---~• ~ IV ~ --~.~- .rte.- • i:.. q.11 ~ ~ di ~ 6 ~ w ~ y1 ~ a ~ w w ~~ ~ {-- MERRICK Rbt T•M•s, ~°", "~' '°"' • ~ v M >~+'~ O `, uas9 ao too no 61.4) ~.."' g -t - - - ' I I I y ~_ ~ ~~ S V _ - - to ~ I~ ko I It1I !v i$ lo, ~ O - "I -- w a - _ , ~" 8 3 • 75 c oo ~ too I I ~ w tO 8 : o ~c.zs ~~ ~CALLE ,J+M TR M! Iszl ACUB `S 3 ~ . ' ' `. . - - - r - - - - ~, h1EARlCK V1LUl +' •0.07 /7 Io 05 as U6.44/ ^• . - - - y ~ g ~ ..- ~. p h b y~- I t $ } y ~ I {~ r~~ti ~ ~~+ ~ f~ ' L ~ ... 14iA1 a ... ~ - -. d i . 10}•' •• ~.1-r.~... ' ~~,',D9w 11'~,79.97 ~ 3 N ~ v ;i. ` » I,O g - ~. » ~ °.0 1 7..s~ s . ~ try I ~~ by ~ .~:f g w Iro » C M tq,b7 6617 cr.a7 I .... ~ .. _ I ... ~ __. _ ~ I I5' 1~ , v 'III $ ~ ' I: - ~~ r ~ I i APN: 393-43-042 Subject Address: 136b4 Carnina Rico Soo' radius Saratoga, CA 95070 ~ f ~I 1~ Attachment 3 • ,, City of Saratoga ~~ Neighbor Notification Form Date: ~l ~ p~P PROJECT ADDRESS: I ~ G% ~r- ~ ~~ ~ r n ~ ~i~ C f ~ 1 t-t ~~ Applicant Name: ~ ~ ~ ~~~! ~ ~ ;~4-- ~~~ rl~ ~ F"Z Application Number: ~ ~ - v'~ ~ ~% - 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 properl)~. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; L~nctPrc and the ccnpp 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. • pMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; j1~nderciand the cc ,ne 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: ~lendvi m I Jv' Neighbor Address: I~~D ram ins lc~ ~r~~~~ , ~ • ~iS~~ L Neighbor Phone Numbe • ~ -° ~~= +~U - FE~ 0 7 ~iQF ~. c ~ ; e::: ?:::: - • Panted: ~~ ` Signature: ~ "-~ ~ ~ ~- •C ~ CY~I~' Gt n'1 i i ~ Z • • • a. City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form Date: ~ '.~ 7- 0 PROJECT ADDRESS: ~3 l~% ~ ~I ~< i~ r,/) c /) J t-t Applicant Name: ~n ~ ~ ~~~ r^~ U , ~ Ctd ~'!~ 4 f"~ Application Number: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Sta, ff 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 opt your property. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. mdprctand the ccn P of y signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; Lt 1~--- wn _rk. 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. pMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; j~ind rc and he cco P of work; and I have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant,. have hot been addressed. My concerns are the following (please attach additional- sheets if necessary): Neighbor Name: ~-,;~~-t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t - `~ Neighbor Address: - ~~~ 13~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~-~ ~~ ~~ ~ ;~ ~~ --~ ~~ fl ~ ~ ~~ i= ' '! F ~ ~ G r ;its,: It(, ~ ~~ ., C~ Neighbor Phone Number: 4 C'~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ C'~`~:'^ r.. ~ Printed: :%. Signat 're: `, ~. ! t ~~ ,~~~, ~ ~ ®~~~2 6of6 • City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form Date: / _ ~ 9' C PROJECT ADDRESS: ~~ G~ ~ y ( fi r-r~ , n ~ ~l~ t-C'~ Applicant Name: ~ -~= ~ ~~~ ~^-~ Q i, 4-- Od r i~ ~ ~a Application Number: ~ ~ - ~ ~ y S[aff and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors take this opportunity to express any concerns or issues they may have directly to tl:e applicant. Please ensure the signature on this document is representative of all residents residing o,: your property. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. ~y signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; L>>n rc and tt,e ccnl)e_At ~atnrk; 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. pMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; i understand t s .nne 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: , Neighbor Address: Sc~ r~fa~ga, ~ qso ~~~ Neighbor Phone Number: ~~~~ c~~7 / ~a``~ Signature: Printed: Sue C<~et7Q ~~®~~ ~~ i = I` ~; i t L{ ~~CG • 6of6 • • a. a~ Date: - ~ ~ City of Saratoga 1lTeighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: ~ 3 G% ~ S~ ~~ j~ r ~/t !; ~t ~l~=n Applicant Name: ~ =:= ~ ~~G r~ tr r'`4~ Dd ~'i~ ~ ~'z Application Number: ~ ~ _ ~ ~ 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 resider:ts residing on your property. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion: at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. ~My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; Lu*-~P*=~ and h c _n~f ~acork; 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. pMy signature below certifies the following: I-have reviewed the project plans; hmd .rs#and the scone ~f ~atork; and I have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant, have ~fot been addressed. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Nei hbor Name: ~ ~ ~ g Neighbor Address: / j~~ V ~~C Neighbor Phone Number: ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~~ - ~ ~:- - ;4 ~: i` FED-~,.~ ~~ ~~ ~ F J Printed: '' Signa ure: 1 ,._ S ~G ~:,~ ~; ~~c~~~s 6of6 • City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form Dater ~~ // ~+ , PROJECT ADDRESS: `~ G ~ y ( Fi` ,~ r r] G ~!~ ~-r Applicant Name: ~n-~= ~ ~~~,^~ a , ~ ~Od r'!~ ~ ~'L Application Number: [~ ~ - ~ ~ cI 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. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to ame~:d your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal .periods. '~My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; ~inderc and tie ccop~nT 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. pMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I and rc and he sco P ~f wok; 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 ~, ~ ~~ Neighbor Address: a t~2 r~~ Sa 2K ~-~ Vr's-l G l~. Sec ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ Gj'`v ~'~' -.S. . Neighbor Phone Number: `~ `` ~ - - ,: ~: `~ F t u G f ?~"" Signature: Printed: -- - E.- ,~ ~~us~i~ ~ • • a. i~ City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form Date: ~ - ~7 ~ PROJECT ADDRESS: 13 ~~ ~ ~ ( Cr ~~ , ~r7 r ~t ~C-t7 Applicant Name: ~ -~- ~ l~~-~~ o r'~-- o~ri~ ~ ~z Application Number: ~ (t' ~ ~ ~ c/ 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 o~: your property. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you , reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. j~iy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; j~inderstancl the cSnn~nf_ rwnrk; and I do NOT have any concerns or issues which need to be address by the applicant prior to the Ciry's public hearing on the proposed project. pMy signatwe below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; Tunderctand xhP_cc~nne of work; and I have issues or concerns, which after discussion with the applicant, have snot been addressed. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Neighbor Name: `~ ~~ ~_ ~ ~ ~~ = ~"~-1~ t-~ Neighbor Address: ~~'~>~I ~/,r'~ii=+~1- 1 Gl,'d ~~I ~iT Ja ~-\V tom, i _~ --. l:~ _. - ~_ Neighbor Phone Number: ~-G'~ ~~ =~ `~ -~ ~ ~- "-' FE~~ G 7 2~C~6 - - ... 7 :~: ... ..... _ Signature: Printed: ...y ~~ 1 ~~ %~ ' /"2-vl,t -~C` ~~-~= ~%~ ~ :,,.x - .LAy~ t= 5 _ ~ , ~ ~lG~- ~e' Asa t~~ _ ~~0~~~ bof6 • a. • City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form Date: - - L% ~ '' PROJECT ADDRESS: 13 G~ ~ y ( G t~ ~ ~rt ~ ~t~ C-t Applicant Name: ~ i~t nY= ~ ~ ~ r~ tt , 4 b4 ri~ y ~z Application Number: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c/ Staf~''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 propert)~. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. ~My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; T and -rc and the scone 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. pMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; L>>ndertt~+nd the scone 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): 1~ ~s ~ a~ lq~, ~0 ~r j , Neighbor Name: ~7 ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~~ Neighbor Address: i3~~~ Sa~fa ~~sf~ eve Sa~f°~ , C~ 9~~~~ Neighbor Phone Number: ~~ Signature: ~/~ ~~ Printed: ~ '~ HnwtE V~~1N~ ®~c~®~ ~~~ ~Z~ ~'~~~ '' F ~ F' ~ ~' ~ n .. f ~-• ~,ta,r. u ~.y . • 6of6 • • a~ City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form Date:- ~ 7 ~ b PROJECT ADDRESS: / 3 G% ~ ~ ~G t~ , ~r~ c ~t~~c-t? , Applicant Name: ~ -~= Application Number: r ~~ ~ ~ ~ Stafj'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. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to ame~td your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. ~My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; J understand the scone 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. pMy signatwe below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; j.>>nderstand the Scope of work, and I have issues or concerns, ~i~hich after discussion with the applicant,- have not been addressed. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): G • Neighbor.Name: \) C>i~/V ~~: ~. j ~~ Neighbor Address: •z ~ Neighbor Phone Number: ~~~ L J~ ~ ' t ' Signature: :Z. Printed: ,~~.- -- ~~®®~ a ~.._ ~~ s or 6 I • ' • Ci ~ of Sarato a ~ g Neighbor Notification Form Date: ~7 ^ O /~i j f~I r ~h C ~!~ C-17 PROJECT ADDRESS: l 3 G ~ cI Applicant Name: -~ ~ ~~~ -^~ ~ , ~ bd ri~' ~ ~"G Application Number: ~' ~' - ~ ~ y 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 ddcument is representative of all residents residing orz your-property. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal . periods. ~vty signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I>>nderst^nd tl,P scn~ of /wnrk_ 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. QMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; L>>ndPrstand he scnn~f_ 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): s Neighbor Name: h~2~ete ~ • ~n~ ff~SCr~ Neighbor Address: ao223 ~.r~~,~ Vas t.~. Gt. S~.r~ tc~~ CA ~ s~ ~o . Neighbor Phone Number: ~U ~ ~ y~ ~ y~ / ~ -- - w ~. Signature: Printed: O~t~~ 6of6 • , ~ ', ` • • ,~ f Sarato a City o g Neighbor Notification Form Date: a? -7 ` ~ !2 / /f ~ i~3 r,r ~~Jt .C-t PROJECT ADDRESS: I3 C° ~ ~ ( / t Applicant Name: ~ -~= ~ 1~~ ~ ~ a - - oc ri~ 4 r=~~ Application Number: C' ~' _ ~ ~ ~/ 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 residi~:g on your property. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion: at a later- date during the actual public review and appeal periods. ~My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans;l nnderctand fihe seine 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. pMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I>>nderstand the scene 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: ~ ~ Neighbor Address: Nei hbor Phone Number: ~~ d g Signature: ~ Printed: ` ~~~~~:~ 6of6 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form • Date: `:~ - O 1C PROJECT ADDRESS: ~ ~ G'~ ~ ~ ( c % r~ , ~~ 1; ~1~ t-~'? S Applicant Name: ~~-{= ~ ~~~,"-a ~ r'~ C~c~('!~ `~ ~"~ Application Number: ~ ~' ` ~ ~ ~ Sta,~`'and the Planning Commission prefer that neighbors take this opportunity to express anyconcerns, or issues they may have directly to the applicant. Please ensure the signature on this document is representative of all reside~:ts residing on your propert}~. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve the right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public reviely and appeal periods. y signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; j~ind rc and the scone of 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. pMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; I.rn~erstand the ccQpe ~f 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): ~~~ C ~ `~ Neighbor Name: ~'l . Neighbor Address:'_ ~i ~~~~~ // C/ ~ ~`•~/( 6~s/L-f, .cis l/G ' ~lc.~- . / ~ CD X r r I ~ ?' ~ cam' Neighbor Phone umber: ~G~ ~' /~~`} Signatur •.. ~`~ G' ~!%~~ l-~'.~t- ~~Fc.- ~ ' /tom ~: `- ~- U u Printed: ~b - l ~, ~I:~-;~cc,~tl~ ~" ~ ~`~ '~ V ~~~~~. 6of6 • a. PROJECT ADDRESS: / ~ U ~ y Applicant Name: ~,~= ~ ~~~,^-b Q~L\Odf ~'~~'~ Application Number: to ~ - ~ ~ ~ City of Saratoga 1\Teighbor Notification Form / ? Date~/~~G ~~ ~~~ Stafj''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. Regardless of the opinion expressed below, you reserve tl:e right to amend your opinion at a later date during the actual public review and appeal periods. ~~My signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; T ]nderc and the sccl;le 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. pMy signature below certifies the following: I have reviewed the project plans; Ljlnd rc and the scn P of ~ar~rk; 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 Nam Neighbor Address: /! Neighbor Phone Number: !~ 4: ~~~~ Sigi~atu ,:~~ ~ Printed: ~' i ! ,~ - ~~ ,. 6of6 ,i i~ a ent 4 • 04Uv3~ • ~~~~5 ~~~ ~ ~ m ~ ~eiwo;i~e~ 'e6o;e.~eg ooia ouiwe~ y99£ L ase~PPy ~afad ;•~•'~ ~ ~_ ~ _ ; ° Fa~~ OLOS6 b~ 'e6o~e~e xo PPH ~a~~o~ S £9SE 8 'O'd .ssa~ ~ `~lC $ g s ~ ~ W o ~ ~ aouapisa~ zanfiiapo~ adn~ •saw '8 •aw ~~ ~~1~~ ~ ~ ~ ""~ ~ s -, ,s ~.. ~Fti • z ~, n~.r. 0000 >,,~;~ 'a ~ a ~°' ~S. ~ - N i> f•- . N N ~ N ~ a 5: ~ ,~ d M x tyM+: E w,; _ ~, - - - - -- _ `~-- n ~ _'. st[tJBYAk ~,,,,. as ~ ; ~ s ~ ~ ~ t S ~ ~ 1L S1L _1 SlL .. ..r.. -4 U. ^ ~ N -- t + + + ~~ ~ ~~ O ° ~ `6 - --- ----- _. Y -- ~, w ~ y ~ ~ ~" N € o~ - I. ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ g ~~~~ ~ ~ _ ''{} ~ ~ ~ S ~ O _~ L ~ ~ ~ 3 3 N V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y~ v ~ ~ ..~i ~ ~ v I ~ki ;~ _ N• ~ N C. t` N ~ N ~~ ~o~ N°jN~ m ~ 0 NNo~~N ~_ typ~ sYf j ~ ~ .. - - ~ ~ d N. ~ 4- i1 z \ y~ ~ ~F z z z z z z - .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. ,k ~ ~ o 1' N + _ _ ~ ~ ~~~~~v ~~ ~ ~~ M ~ ~ ~ N N N m ~ ~ N N ~ o s~ggN~N ~, ~~ooo~~x ~~~ ~~~~~ N ~ OJ z ~ ~ o ~ N z 11] N N ~ • 00 0 ~ •elwo;yeo 'eBo~e~eg ooia oulwe~ y99£ l :ssa~PPd l~~o~d i,~ ~ c Fa ~a~~~ OL056 dp 'e6o~eaeS £99E xo8 'p'd :ssa~PPd ~aluop :a:~ga ~ ~ ~-- s ~~o ~~s~~: aouapisa~ zanfiiapo~ adn~ 'saw '8 ~aW ;!`i6° ~ ~ Q I TR/~ C T 537 I TOT 27 ., TOT 2 _" FNC i 1 --- ----- - ----- - - - - - ------ _] ----- ,~ ~•~.._ a - T__ I i --- -__- ~_-__-_ --- - ------ -- , I £ T I i ~ .... '. --_'°_ l~ J i ~ I I ~E I I Iii I I ~ r , cam= - i I ' I. --- I I -- ---7 ~ i ___, ~ I I I ~ ~ a . ~ DE I `-- I 'K C Sy" i ~ -- ~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~ DECK - O , - I I I I i i 1 . ~_________~ ~;I '. I I ~ ' " ~ ~ 7 FNC- I ' j ~ --------- ~ ------• - I ------ ------------ ~ ---1'~ ~ _ ,~ _ I I I Fj -- ,i-- ~ _-_ ~____ ___ - - - ---- - ~- -- ~-- ~~---- l- - --i -- -PLTR 1 III I I !i 5~ I e I ~,~ ~ -~ I ~ I \~ `:~. I i i I ~ I l LAMB I ~ i I I , ~Y' l~ PLTR I. II ~ I i I I I - - T I - I ~==II I , I ' I' '; i ~ ~_~:. I I I j I S" FNC I ' I I I I ' I ~ I I y I I I ~ 'I ~ I \ ~7 I I I ~ _ ~ ~ I ~ I c i I ,~ z ~ Y ; ~ --- r N ~ ~ o i '1 I~ SEP ~y I O _ ~ I ~ I I ~ CO<J~' ; p Z ~ II ip ti \ I I I ,I I i y _. ,• DECK I FF I ' d fA I ~' I i ~ I ~ I I T I I ' ~ I ~' ~ I I '`•\~~ ~ I I ` ~ FF I I ' i I I I I ._ i -_= I .. ~ ~ , ~~ 1, y -- 1 ' I - - -__~_ __ I: --- '' _ = r-T--- --- - - -- i i I , I ~ , I ' ~ FLTR I I ~i - y --- ( I GAR GE '-- I I I `~ - ~ y==- __ _ - ' -_ \~~~ ~ SNED I FF I N' ; I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I I y ~~ --- ~ P TRH ~ PL TR I PL ~R ' I' --y ~ ~ .;,~ .~ I; I i I : , I ~ I I i i Oi i ~! ~ji li I I PL rR ~~` I `~ n: ~ \ i/ I ]] ~ ,, ~L TR i ii I I~ I I II - c~' ~ ~~~~ --- ; --- - , ,j - -- `~•~ --- ~ COLUMN 5"CM WMB G RAPHIC SCALE 10 0 5 10 20 10 ~j ~a / II ~~ ( IN FEET) 1 inch = 10 ft. - - - - - - - C~~i1I1~0 RIC'0 60 ' 1~0 T~-- ~- - - s ~. `!V\ ~~~os _~~ 8 W z ~ ~e~wo;yeo 'e6oleieg o~ib ouiwe~ y99E l :ssa~PPd lead ~,g''~ 'e6o e~e • • ` _ < ° ~ $'~ ~~ N ~ p S £9SE xo8 OLOS6 d~ d :ssa~PPd ~e~~op :j, _ ; ~ s~~ ~ ~ o ~ Q ~ ~ o ~ a~uapisa~ zanfiiapo~ adn~ 'saw '8 ~aW ~~~~~~ ~ N fl c _~ a ~ k3 o c X ~~ IV 3 Z y~ N. L w w ~ ~ • _/ -a, \ s' a '~ s ~~ " u a ~ ~ ~eiwo;i~e~ 'eBo~e~eg oa~a ouiwe~ b99E l :ssa~PPd ~(ad ~,~•.~ ~ ` _; ° ~_~~ OLOS6 d~ 'e6o~e~eS E95E xoe 'p'd :ssa~Ppy ~ae~uo~ fg;~~P o o M ~~o ~~~~~~ aouapisa~ zan6iapo~ adn~ •saw '8 •aw ~1~~~~ ~ ~ Q I I' 6 I~ __ >. i:v.~ >. a _ 2 T° T - - ~_ _ _ b ~. ~~ ~ s L I, ~~ I I I ~ I /_ i - " ~ `\\\\ \ 1 1 ~' \ „~ i _ ~ ._ ~~ ti j \~. ~ ~ . i \~. i I ~ j ~\~~\ r i~ ~ °~ I f ,~ S ~ V is ~~1 . ~~1 ~____. i .- ~v ~ t ~ - --P ~ ~ ~~ ~! -' ,~ - _ .._ ~~ ~ ~ z ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ..iz {~` \ __ ___ ~~ I, -~ry v I y _ ~ ~ W ~ o ~ ~ ~ o s I 3 ~ ~ - ~' i s ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ E - ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _, .- ~ .~ ~ 3 i i I __~ __. ___~___-_~_____.___._ i _~..~ ___ _ __._ - - r _~ i ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ s _~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ z z z z 3 ~ t --- - - 3 ~ v2 m '`6' ~6 I z _ I I ~ ... 5 U1 w _ o __ ;; ~ - _ _._ ~ ~ °' _ ~ _ _, __- E a cn ~ ~' ' ~~ ~~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~: is ~ ~ o~ - ~ I#;i~+ ~ 3 Z ~I I / ~~ I ~(:~i I +; l,,~i~ ~1~ ~ ! ~I~~+`.-f~ I~ i i I~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,;, _ __ o - 1, r ~, ~¢ }~ -IE - ~~ , , _ - - ---! i - -- - - -- - r ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ! ; ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ z z z z I ~ I ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ fi € g _~~ ~ ~ -~h~ ~ ~ g i . , i ~, ~~~ ~rti ~o ,as ~~~ ~~ IY.¢ V~ O ~ f ~ ~eiwo;yeo `eBo;e~eg ooia ouiwe~ bg9E l :sswPPd 1~(o~d e 'e6 ' ' ~~ ~ q~ p o~e~eS £95£ xo8 OLOS6 d~ d :ssa~Ppy l~~luo~ ~ =~F ~ 5 ° ~ - ~ g Q ~ o }, ~ = ~ aouapisa~ zanfiiapo~ adn~ •saw '8 •aw d~i~~~ I ~~~ z~~ ;{~ ~f ~, , ____ I I~ ~ z ___ ~_ __ __ (4~ 3 ~ z ~ ~ "s' ~ m " ~ - ~ m ° ~ o ~ c ~ _ a ~ It z ~ r r ~ _` ~ F m ~ m ~ ~ ~ z ~ , e z . z 0 - - - - - 3 v - - - - i -I - - - i 1 ~ ~ ( ~ i . _ _ .... . ~ i ~~ x z I .. .. _~ ._.._ .. 3 ' 1 3 i I ~~ ' ~ z ~ ( Z ~ 1 ` / C ` ~ ~ ' O ~ d ~ _ ~ I ~I I ~ 1 W z 111 ~ ~ ~ ~ . . ~ o i _ 1 !. a J II ~ ~ .. _. . . . 3 .. .._ 'Oy rA ~_ - - - - ' •~ - N - - - " - - "_' - ~ - ` ~ ~ a u i ~ - i E s z .. ~~~ I .. I Item 4 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 05-270; 12546 Palmtag Drive Type of Application: Appeal of a Tree Removal Permit Applicant/Owner: Mie-Chien Lu, Appellant and Property Owner n Staff Arborist: Kate Bear ~~ Meeting Date: March 8, 2006 APN: 386-07-037 Department Head: ~~ John Liv- gstone, AICP --_ ..._i ~ I - ~ - ''""!l6NiATOGAORE6(DR _ BROOKVEW Dft , j I - ~ I ' ~ j I j ~ - - _ /.~SICN DRa(f ~-.... _ -- ~_ _.J I I ~ i I ~ "~~ ~"KOSC -' I j I I BROgICVEW DR BRGOK`~W QR ~-.. -\~~ ~ ,~ I ' L- ~ v ~, ___: _ 1 _ - r ~ -~' f` _ \ _ ~.S~ARATOGACR~B(DR - -~ I ~+~ i i , ~ 1. \ ALMDUTNt~T TRUSAV t._ 1 ! y \.~/ ~ \ /F ~• ,• TNAMP~ON DR NOflDigLlRiOfiDft r i- ~ ~ ~ ~ n i \\\ - ./\~`` _` ~~ ~~. ,~ r~ '~ ,. \v s3aagGACRC~~- .~~~W~rvEw~ I t ~ ~~ v. I ^NOR AM[~fON O'T~ - I(~~ ` ~ ~~ ! ~' O - -~5 V ~ i \\ ~ ~; i f- j - y--_ i;' .c --~ ~. _~ i - ,• :~- I I ) ~, y _ f ~ ,, ^ \ i ~~'. j _. I -r . ~ _ _ I I i~` -, l--"--~ i I I ~ I - RALEIGH ~.. I l'~ .__ ~ ~ _ ~ _ X14 _ rI _ I. i " ., ~\ :: ., -~__ ~BEttWOORDR__ \ ~ :' ~-- I .~ 1 - SVtATOUACVSEB(DR~~ '`i'EY0. 1 i T-~~nDR '~ \ ~ ~ _ _ TRUSNV I f (~`.unoD PR - F .. . \ ~ : _ ~ i ~~ ~ ~~~,~~ FATOw dR~, ____...~. _. TItUSAV _ _ `\_~ \. _. ~` _ ~ i -` -- _ I / ~ ~ ~~ j ' ,, . ~. _ _ ,_ .;- _. 1 ~ _~ ;; YENDURACT _,.--. .~- \ / I ' ~ ~ -SJtAT ._ 0. -. . i ~ 1 I r-'" -I j i I `~..% ~ ~ !"-BROCKGLEN DR _ '~` \ 'R i _...-TRUSAV ~ I i ,~ . `~ : ~ __ 9 _ ._..a~o--Leo=""aso .soo ~t _ ~ 12546 Pal _ `; --- - `: r_ N LN __ _ _ ~.~ ~......_....__._ I - ~~~ _..._.._ ~ _ I _~ ~. ~ ~ ~ r ' I .~~ - - - ~ _- Y-- - __ SNt~GLENPI ' r \ ` flAGH DT - ...... ROGONLGT_._. - J f. _ ~ /- , - ~ ~ BROOI~LEN OT - _ v ~ ~~ ~~ l . ~` ` i ~ ~ ~ '' 12546 Palmtag Drive ~C~:O .` Application No. OS-270;12546 PalmtagDrive EXECUTIVE SUMMA,~2Y CASE I31STORY Tree Removal Permit Application filed: 08/31/05 Tree Removal Permit Application denied: 09/01/05 Tree Removal Permit Second application filed: 10/20/05 Tree Removal Permit Second application denied: ~ 10/22/05 Appeal Application Filed: 10/31/05- Notice published: 02/22/06 Mailing completed: 02/22/06 Posting completed: 02/14/06 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The owner of the property at 12546 Palmtag Drive has filed an appeal of Staff's denial of a Tree Removal Permit to remove three trees, because the owner says that two of the trees, a Chinese elm and a Siberian elm, are causing severe allergy problems: She says the third tree, an evergreen ash, has caused cracks in their back yard patio. The applicant has made two prior requests for the tree removal permits, both of which were denied. The Chinese elm in the front yard is 16 inches in diameter, the Siberian elm in the back yard measures 10 inches in diameter, and the evergreen ash, also in the back yard, measures 48 inches in diameter. All measurements are diameter at breast height (DBH), as required by the City Code. Three trees have been previously topped, but appear to be healthy. STAFF RECOIVIlVIENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission deny the application for tree removal of the Chinese elm and evergreen ash, and approve the removal of the Siberian elm planted under the power lines by adopting the attached resolution. • 2 Application No. OS-270;12546 PalmtagDrive • STAFF ANALYSIS PROJECT DISCUSSION The applications for removal of the three trees were denied two times because the trees appeared to be in good health and did not appear to be unstable, hazardous, or to interfere with utilities or cause damage to any impervious structures. In subsequent review, the Siberian elm tree was found to be planted directly under power lines, which will result in interference with the utilities in the near future, an~ Staff now recommends that tree be approved for removal. Staff recommends denying the application to remove the remaining two trees. The Chinese elm tree blooms for a short period of time during the year producing allergens only during these few weeks. Methods other than tree removal can address the problem with the evergreen ash tree and potential damage to the patio. FINDINGS Saratoga is primarily a residential community where economic property values are inseparably connected with the attractiveness of the area resulting from the native and ornamental trees planted throughout the city. The goal of the City is to balance the rights and privileges of property owners for the use of their land .with criteria for establishing and sustaining an urban forest, including the establishment of basic standards and criteria for the removal and replacement of trees. The General Plan supports preservation of the City's landscape trees to maintain Saratoga's scenic character through the Conservation Element Policy 2.4 (control the removal or destruction of trees). Pursuant to City Code Section 15-50.080 in order for a Tree Removal Permit to be issued; the tree removal permit application must meet at least one 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. All three trees appear healthy and-none appear to be in imminent danger of falling. However, the Siberian elm is a large, fast growing species, which has been planted under power lines and the branches are likely to interfere in the near future, resulting in potential interference with utility services. (2) The necessity to remove the tree for physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. 3 Application No. OS-270;12546 Palmtag Drive There is no evidence at this time that the cracks in the back yard patio are caused by the evergreen ash tree. There are no roots at the surface of the soil in the location of the crack. A root barrier can be installed adjacent to the patio to prevent roots from causing damage. The two elms do not appear to threaten any improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. (3) The topography of the land and the effect the tree removal would have upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of` surface waters. Erosion is not an issue in this case. (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees on-this and neighboring properties and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values and established Standards of the area. All three trees provide scenic beauty, provide some shade, and add to the landscape value of the property. (5) The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to. support according to good forestry practices. These trees are not crowded and there is room for additional 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 Chinese elm does not require an alternative to removal as the bloom period is quite short. There is an alternative available to removing the evergreen ash; a root barrier can be installed to protect the patio from damage. Therefore both trees can be retained. (7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article. Approval of the request to remove the Chinese elm and evergreen ash are in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article, which is to preserve and protect the trees in the 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. At this time, no additional information is available which requires the Chinese elm or evergreen ash to be removed to protect the health, safety or 4 Application No. OS-270;12546 Palmtag Drive general welfare of the public. (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. It is not necessary to remove these trees for economic enjoyment of the property. Elm trees are in bloom for about two to three weeks each year, during the rainy season. Impacts from allergens would be considered minor. With the installation of a root barrier next to the patio, damage to the patio from the ash tree can be prevented. CQNCLUSION Chinese elm Removal of the Chinese elm tree is not adequately supported by the criteria of the City Code and it is recommended for retention. Reconstructive. pruning of the canopy is required and can be done by a tree service under the direction of a certified arborist. Siberian elm The Siberian elm is a very large, fast growing species that was planted under power lines. It has already been pruned away from the lines and its branches are likely to interfere with them in the near future, creating a hazard. Removal of this tree and replacement with another tree of a more suitable species and in better location is recommended and supported overall after consideration of the criteria set forth in the City Code. Evergreen ash Trees do on occasion impact impervious surfaces but in this case it there is insufficient evidence that roots from the evergreen ash are causing the damage to the patio or that removal of the tree is necessary. Installation of a root barrier next to the patio and continued maintenance of the tree by a certified arborist can prevent damage to the patio. This tree is recommended for retention after consideration of all of the criteria in the City Code. In addition to installing the root bamer, this tree is in need of ongoing care to reconstruct the canopy. -This work can be performed by a tree service under the supervision of a certified arborist. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution of Approval for the Siberian elm and Denial for the removal of the Chinese elm and the evergreen ash. 2. Tree removal permit applications, including applicant's site map and City denial. • 5 Application No. OS-270;12546 Palmtag Drive RESOLUTION 06- Application No. OS-270~~ CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ' STATE OF CALIFORNIA Mei-Chien Lu: 12546 Palmtag Drive WHEREAS, the City of Sazatoga Planning Commission has received an appeal of an Administrative Decision denying a request to remove three trees at 12546 Palmtag Drive; 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 present evidence; and WHEREAS, Saratoga is primarily a residential community where economic property values are insepazably connected with the attractiveness of the azea resulting from the native and ornamental trees planted throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the goal of the City is to balance the rights and privileges of property owners for the use of their land with criteria for establishing and sustaining an urban forest, including the establishment of basic standards and criteria for the removal and replacement of trees; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to the Municipal Code, in order for a Tree Removal Permit to be issued, the tree must meet at least one of the criteria stated in section 15-50.080; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of. proof required to support said application for Tree Removal Permit for one Siberian elm, and the following findings have been determined: (1) Application of the criteria regarding a permit for removal of a tree, which criteria aze set forth in City Code Section 15-50.080 supports the removal of the Siberian elm for the following reasons: The Siberian elm appears to be healthy and not in imminent danger offalling. However,. the Siberian elm is a large, fast growing species, which has been planted under power lines and will grow into them in the near future, resulting in potential interference with utility services. WHEREAS, the applicant has not met the burden of proof required to support said application for Tree Removal Permit for one Chinese elm and one evergreen ash, and after application of the criteria regazding a permit for removal of a tree, which criteria aze set forth in City Code Section 15-50.080, the following findings have been determined: 6 Application No. OS-270;12546 Palmtag Drive (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 Chinese elm and evergreen ash appear to be healthy and not in imminent danger of falling or interfering with utilities. (2) The necessity to remove the tree for physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. -There is no evidence of physical damage from the Chinese elm. There is insufficient evidence of physical damage from the evergreen ash. (3) The topography of the land and the effect the tree removal would have upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters. Erosion is not an issue in this case. (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees on this and neighboring properties and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values and established standards of the area. The Chinese elm and evergreen ash provide scenic beauty, provide some shade, and add to the landscape value of the property. (5) The number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. The Chinese elm and evergreen ash are not crowded and there is room for additional 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 Chinese elm does not require an alternative to removal as the bloom period is quite short. There is an alternative available to removing the evergreen ash; a root barrier can be installed to protect the patio from damage. Therefore both trees can be retained. (7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article. Approval of the request to remove the Chinese elm and evergreen ash are in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article, which is to preserve and protect the trees in the City. 7 Application No. OS-270;12546 PalmtagDrive (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. At this 'time, no additional information is available which requires the Chinese elm or evergreen ash to be removed to protect the health, safety or general welfare of the public. (9) It is necessary to remove the three trees for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. It is not necessary to remove these trees for economic enjoyment of the property. Chinese elm trees are in bloom for about two to three weeks each year causing only a brief period where allergens -are in the air. With the installation of a root barrier next to the patio, damage to the patio from the ash tree can be prevented. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: The Siberian elm maybe removed. The Chinese elm and the. evergreen ash must be retained. CITY ATTORNEY Applicant agrees to hold the City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of city in connectign with the City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's request. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City or other governmental entities must be met. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. A Tree Removal Permit must be issued and a replacement tree installed within three months from the date of adoption of this resolution or approval will expire. 2. Anew tree of 24 inch box size must be installed. Spitable species for the property would include trees that can provide screening such as Pittosporum, Photinia fraserii, or Prunus caroliniana, or a native species such as a redwood, coast live oak, buckeye or valley oak. If the native species is planted is must be located in a spot away from the power lines. 3. The Chinese elm must be pruned under the supervision of an ISA-certified arborist, to correct previous incorrect pruning practices and to reconstruct the canopy. 8 • I C Application No. OS-270;12546 Paimtag Drive 4. The evergreen ash must be pruned under the supervision of an ISA-certified arborist to correct previous incorrect pruning practices and to reconstruct the canopy. r~ i~ 9 Application No. 05-270;12546 Palmtag Drive PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of ~, California, March 8, 2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susie V. Nagpal Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST:. John F. Livingstone, AICP ' 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 10 1 I Item ~ . REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION • • Application No./Location: 05-270; 12546 Palmtag Drive Type of Application: Appeal of a Tree Removal Permit Applicant/Owner: Mie-Chien Lu, Appellant and Property Owner //~ Staff Arborist: Kate Bear ~l~ Meeting Date: March 8, 2006 APN: 386-07-037 Department Bead: John Liv~ gstone, AICP ~~~ , 1G~`fV rA11111.Q~' L11VC Application No. OS-270;12546 Palmtag Drive EXECUTIVE SUMMAaRY CASE HISTORY Tree Removal Permit Application filed: 08/31/05 Tree Removal Permit Application denied: 09/01/05 Tree Removal Permit Second application filed: ~ 10/20/05 -Tree Removal Permit Second application denied: ' 10/22/05 Appeal Application Filed: 10/31/05- Notice published: 02/22/06 Mailing completed: 02/22/06 Posting completed: 02/14/06 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The owner of the property at 12546 Palmtag Drive has filed an appeal of Staff s denial of a Tree Removal Permit to remove three trees, because the owner says that two of the trees, a Chinese elm and a Siberian elm, are causing severe allergy problems. She says the third tree, an evergreen ash, has caused cracks in their back yard patio. The applicant has made two prior requests for the tree removal permits, both of which were denied. The Chinese elm in the front yard is 16 inches in diameter, the Siberian elm in the back yard measures 10 inches in diameter, and the evergreen ash, also in the back yard, measures 48 inches in diameter. All measurements are diameter at breast height (DBI-~~as required by the City Code. Three trees have been previously topped, but appear to be healthy. STAFF RECOA~IlVIENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission deny the application for tree removal of the Chinese elm and evergreen ash, and approve the removal of the Siberian elm planted under the power lines by adopting the attached resolution. ~2 F 1' Application No. OS-270;12546 Palmtag Drive • STAFF ANALYSIS PROJECT DISCUSSION The applications for removal of the three trees were denied two times because the trees appeared to be in good health and did not appear to be unstable, hazardous, or to interfere with utilities or cause damage to any impervious structures. In subsequent review, the Siberian elm tree was found to be planted directly under power lines, which will result in interference with the utilities in the near- future, an~ Staff now recommends that tree be approved for removal. Staff recommends denying the application to remove the remaining two trees. The Chinese elm tree blooms for a short period of time during the year producing allergens only during these few weeks. Methods other than tree removal can address the problem with the evergreen ash tree and potential damage to the patio. FINDINGS Saratoga is primarily a residential community where economic property values -are inseparably connected with the attractiveness of the area resulting from the native and ornamental trees planted throughout the city. The goal of the City is to balance the rights and privileges of property owners for the use of their land .with criteria for establishing and sustaining an urban forest, including the establishment of basic standards and criteria for the removal and replacement of trees. The General Plan supports preservation of the City's landscape trees to maintain Saratoga's scenic character through the Conservation Element Policy 2.4 (control the removal or destruction of trees). Pursuant to City Code Section 15=50.080 in order for a Tree Removal Permit to be issued, the tree removal permit application must meet at least one 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. All three trees appear healthy and none appear to be in imminent danger of falling. However, the Siberian elm is a large, fast growing species, which has been planted under power lines and the branches are likely to interfere in the near future, resulting in potential interference with utility services. (2) The necessity to remove the tree for physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. 3 Application No. OS-270;12546 PalmtagDrive There is no evidence at this time that the cracks in the back yard patio are caused by the evergreen ash tree. There are no roots at the surface of the soil in the location of the crack. A root barrier can be installed adjacent to the patio to~prevent roots from causing damage.. The two elms do not appear to threaten any improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. (3) The topography of -the land and the effect the tree removal would have upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters. Erosion is not an issue in this -case. (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees on this and neighboring properties and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values and established 'standards of the area. All three trees provide scenic beauty, provide some shade, and add to the landscape value of the property. (5) The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. These trees are not crowded and there is room for additional fees on the property. (6) Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on the protected tree. The Chinese elm does not require an alternative to removal as the bloom period is quite short. There is an ~ alternative available to removing the evergreen ash; a root barrier can be installed to protect the patio from damage. Therefore both trees can be retained. (7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the ,general purpose and intent .of this Article. Approval of the request to remove the Chinese elm and evergreen ash are in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article, which is to preserve and protect the trees in the 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. At this time, no additional information is available which requires the Chinese elm or evergreen ash to be removed to protect the health, safety or 4 Application No. OS-270;12546 Palmtag Drive general welfare of the public. (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. It is not necessary to remove these trees for economic enjoyment of the property. Elm trees are in bloom for about two to three weeks each year, during the rainy season. Impacts from allergens would be considered minor. With the installation of a root barrier next to the patio, damage to the patio from the ash tree can be prevented. CONCLUSION Chinese elm Removal of the Chinese elm tree is not adequately supported by the criteria of the City Code and it is recommended for retention. Reconstructive pruning of the canopy is required and can be done by a tree service under the direction of a certified arborist. Siberian elm The Siberian elm is a very large, fast growing species that was planted under power lines. It has already been pruned away from the lines and its branches are likely to interfere with them in the near future; creating a hazard. Removal of this tree and replacement with another tree of a more suitable species and in better location is recommended and supported overall after consideration of the criteria set forth in the City Code. Evergreen ash Trees do on occasion impact impervious surfaces but in this case it there is insufficient evidence that roots from the evergreen ash are causing the damage to the patio or that removal of the tree is necessary. Installation of a root barrier next to the patio and continued maintenance of the tree by a certified arborist can prevent damage to the patio. This tree is recommended for retention after consideration of all of the criteria in the City Code. In addition to installing the root bamer, this tree is in need of ongoing care to reconstruct the canopy. -This work can be performed by a tree service under the supervision of a certified arborist. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution of Approval for the Siberian elm and Denial for the removal of the Chinese elm and the evergreen ash. 2. Tree removal permit applications, including applicant's site map and City denial. 5 Application No. OS-270;12546 Palmtag Drive RESOLUTION 06- Application No. 05-270'' CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Mei-Chien Lu: 12546 Palmtag Drive WHEREAS,-the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an appeal of an Administrative Decision denying a request to remove three trees at 12546 Palmtag Drive; 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 present evidence; and WHEREAS, Saratoga is primarily a residential community where economic property values are inseparably connected with the attractiveness of the area resulting from the native and ornamental trees planted throughout the City; and • WHEREAS, the goal of the City is to balance the rights and privileges of property owners for the use of their land with criteria for establishing and sustaining an urban forest, including the establishment of basic standards and criteria for the removal and replacement of trees; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to the Municipal Code, in order for a Tree Removal Permit to be issued, the tree must meet at least one of the criteria stated in section 15-50.080; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of. proof required to support said application for Tree Removal Permit for one Siberian elm, and the following findings have been determined: (1) Application of the criteria regarding a permit for removal of a tree, which criteria are set forth in City Code Section 15-50.080 supports the removal of the Siberian elm for the following reasons: The Siberian elm appears to be healthy and not in imminent danger of falling. However,. the Siberian elm is a large, fast growing species, which has been planted under power lines and will grow into them in the near future, resulting in potential interference with utility services. WHEREAS, the applicant has not met the burden of proof required to support said application for Tree Removal Permit for one Chinese elm and one evergreen ash, and after application of the criteria regarding a permit for removal of a tree, which criteria are set-forth in City Code Section 15-50.080, the following findings have been determined: • '6 ,_ Application No. OS-270;12546 Palmtag Drive (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 Chinese elm and evergreen ash appear to be healthy and not in imminent danger of falling or interfering with utilities. (2) The necessity to remove the tree for physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. There is no evidence of physical damage from the Chinese elm. There is insufficient evidence of physical damage from the evergreen ash. (3) The topography of the land and the effect the tree removal would have upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters. Erosion is not an issue in this case. (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees on this and neighboring properties and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values and established standards of the area. The Chinese elm and evergreen ash provide scenic beauty, provide some shade, and add to the landscape value of the property. (5) The number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. The Chinese elm and evergreen ash are not crowded and there is room for additional 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 Chinese elm does not require an alternative to removal as the bloom period is quite short. There is an alternative available to removing the evergreen ash; a root barrier can be installed to protect the patio from damage. Therefore both trees can be retained. (7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this ~~rticle. Approval of the request to remove the Chinese elm and evergreen ash are in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article, which is to preserve and protect the trees in the City. 7 Application No. OS-270;12546 PalmtagDrive a (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. At this time, no additional information is. available which requires the Chinese elm or evergreen ash to be removed to protect the health, safety or general welfare of the public. (9) It is necessary to remove the three trees for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. It is not necessary to remove these trees for economic enjoyment of the. property. Chinese elm trees are in bloom fQr about two to three weeks each year causing only a brief period where allergens -are in the air. With the installation of a root barrier next to the patio, damage to the, patio from the ash tree can be prevented. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: The Siberian elm may be removed. The Chinese elm and the evergreen ash must be retained. CITY ATTORNEY Applicant agrees to hold the 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 the City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's request. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City or other governmental entities must be met. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. A Tree Removal Permit must be issued and a replacement tree installed within three months from the date of adoption of this resolution or approval will expire. 2. Anew tree of 24 inch box size must be installed. Suitable species for the property would include trees that can provide screening such as Pittosporum, Photinia fraserii, or Prunus caroliniana, or a native species such as a redwood, coast live oak, buckeye or valley oak. If the native species is planted is must be located in a spot away from the power lines. 3. The Chinese elm must be pruned under the supervision of an ISA-certified arborist, to correct previous incorrect pruning practices and to reconstruct the canopy. 8 '~ Application No. 05-270;12546 Palmtag Drive ,. 4. The evergreen ash must be pruned under the supervision of an ISA-certified arborist to correct previous incorrect pruning practices and to reconstruct the canopy. • i• 9 Application No. OS-270;12546 PalmtagDrive PASSED AND ADOPTED bythe City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, March 8, 2006 by the following roll call vote: ~~ AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ' ABSTAIN: ~ . Susie V. Nagpal Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: John F. Livingstone, AICP ' 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 • 10