Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-08-2007 Planning Commission PacketDATE: PLACE: TYPE: Tuesday, August 7, 2007 Approximately 3:30 p.m. 5:00 p.m. City Hall Parking Lot, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Site Visit Committee ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA AGENDA 1. APPLICATION #07 -337 2. APPLICATION #07 -396 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION SITE VISIT AGENDA SITE VISITS WILL BE MADE TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 12945 Saratoga Avenue Shultz 15400 Peach Hill Road Arimilli 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 that the applicant and/or owner to be present to answer any questions that may arise. Site visits are generally short (10 to 20 minutes) because of time constraints. Any presentations and testimony you may wish to give should be saved for the Public Hearing. During the Site Visit, the Planning Commission may only discuss items related to the project. The agenda does not allow any formal votes or motions on the proposed project or other matters. The Site Visit is a fact finding meeting where the Commission may discuss the item and ask questions from or hear statements from members of the public attending the Visit. No comments made during the Site Visit by the Planning Commission are binding or required to be carried through to the formal public hearing where actions will be taken on the proposed project. P: \PC SITE VISITS\Site Visits\2007 \template.doc CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, August 7, 2007, 5:00 p.m. PLACE: Administrative Conference Room located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Adjourned Regular Meeting ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on August 2, 2007. 1. APPLICATION ZOA07 -0001 (City -Wide) Updates to existing regulations regarding fences, walls, and hedges. 2. APPLICATION ZOA07 -0002 (City -Wide) Proposed Newsrack Ordinance: The Planning Commission will consider a draft ordinance to regulate the placement of newsracks on public property in the City of Saratoga. The ordinance would establish permit requirements and procedures, newsrack design standards, placement specifications, maintenance requirements, and enforcement and appeals procedures. 3. APPLICATION 'ZOA07 -0003 (City -Wide) Proposed Blight Ordinance: The Planning Commission will consider a draft ordinance to set standards for the minimum level of maintenance of private property in Saratoga. The ordinance would establish standards for (1) general property maintenance (e.g., overgrown vegetation, unsecured structures, or conditions of deterioration or disrepair that creates a substantial adverse impact on neighboring properties), (2) single family residential use landscaping, (3) multifamily residential use landscaping, and (3) parkstrips between sidewalks and City streets. The ordinance would also specify enforcement and appeals procedures. The Study Session is a fact finding meeting where the Commission may discuss the item and ask questions from or hear statements from members of the public attending the meeting. During the Study Session, the Planning Commission may only discuss items related to the project. The agenda does not allow any formal votes or motions on the proposed project or other matters. No comments made during the Site Visit by the Planning Commission are binding or required to be carried through to the formal public hearing where actions will be taken on the proposed project. Adjournment To Regular Planning Commission Meeting Wednesday, August 8, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers /Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TO: FROM: MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: DISCUSSION TOPICS: PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEMORANDUM Planning Commission Shweta Bhatt, Assistant Planner August 07, 2007 Fence Ordinance Update Application ZOA 07 -0001 Item 1 STUDY SESSION REQUIREMENTS: The Study Session is a fact finding meeting where the Commission may discuss the item and ask questions from or hear statements from members of the public attending the meeting. During the Study Session, the Planning Commission may only discuss items related to the project. The agenda does not allow any formal votes or motions on the proposed project or other matters. No comments made during the Study Session by the Planning Commission are binding or required to be carried through to the formal public hearing where actions will be taken on the proposed project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the current fence ordinance and provide input to staff regarding updates. Possible goals of the code update include, but are not limited to: add an exception process for property owners that would like to exceed the maximum allowable six -foot fence height; add height limitations for fences within triangles of visibility around driveways; add diagrams to better explain the code; amend sections of the code that are difficult to understand and/or implement. Fence codes from several other jurisdictions have been attached to this memorandum. FUTURE PROCESS: Staff can continue to work with the Planning Commission through a Study Session format or an ad hoc committee of two commissioners. Planning Commission Study Session .klemar-andun. 2 Zoning Ordinance ,4m-eri.dntent 07 -0001. Fence (hdinanca' Update ATTACHMENTS: 1. Current Saratoga Fence Code 2. Maximum Allowable Fence Heights Survey 3. Fencing Code /Guidelines from: a. Cities: i. Los Gatos ii. Los Altos iii. Los Altos Hills iv. Cupertino v. Hillsborough vi. San Carlos vii. Novato viii. San Mateo ix. Palo Alto x. Santa Monica b. Counties: i. Santa Clara County ii. San Mateo County Attachment 1 Sections: 15- 29.010 15- 29.020 15- 29.030 15- 29.040 15- 29.050 15- 29.060 Article 15 -29 FENCES, WALLS AND HEDGES Height restrictions. Fencing within hillside districts. Fencing to mitigate noise from certain arterial streets. Fencing adjacent to scenic highways. Barbed wire prohibited. Fences adjacent to heritage lanes. 15- 29.010 Height restrictions. (a) General regulation. Except as otherwise speci- fied in this Article, no fence or wall shall exceed six feet in height. (b) Front and exterior side setback area of re- versed corner lots. No fence or wall located within any required front or exterior side setback area of a reversed comer lot shall exceed three feet in height, except as fol- lows: (1) A fence or wall lawfully constructed prior to March 20, 1987, may extend to a height not exceeding six feet, if such fence or wall does not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to or from adjacent properties; provided, however, that upon the destruction or removal of more than one -half of the length of such nonconforming fence or wall, any replacement fence or wall shall not ex- ceed three feet in height. (2) Wrought iron entrance gates, designed with open- ings to permit visibility through the same, may extend to a height not exceeding five feet. (3) Safety railings that are required by the Uniform Building Code shall be excluded from the height require- ments of this Section. (c) Street intersections. No fence, wall or compact hedge located within a triangle having sides fifty feet in length from a street intersection, as measured from inter- secting curblines or intersecting edges of the street pave- ment where no curb exists, shall exceed three feet in height above the established grade of the adjoining street. (d) Recreational courts. Fencing around recreational courts shall comply with the regulations contained in Sec- tion 15- 80.030(c) of this Chapter. (e) Pilasters. Pilasters constituting a part of a fence, in reasonable numbers and scale in relationship to the na- ture and style of the fence, may extend to a height of not 327 15- 29.020 more than two feet above the height limit applicable to the fence containing such pilasters. (f) Light fixtures. The height of a fence shall not include light fixtures mounted thereon at the entrance of driveways and sidewalks leading into a site. Not more than two such light fixtures shall be installed at each driveway and sidewalk entrance. (g) Retaining walls. No retaining wall shall exceed five feet in height. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no re- taining wall located in a front or exterior side setback area shall exceed three feet in height. (h) Fencing adjacent to commercial districts. The Community Development Director may issue a special permit to allow a fence up to eight feet in height where such fence is installed along a rear setback area or interior side setback area of a residential site which abuts a com- mercial district. The Community Development Director may impose such conditions as he deems appropriate to mitigate any visual or other adverse impacts of the fence, including, but not limited to, requirements with respect to the design and materials of the fence and landscape screen- ing. Applications for a special permit under this subsection shall be filed with the Community Development Director on such form as he shall prescribe, and shall be accompa- nied by a processing fee in such amount as established from time to time by the City Council. (Amended by Ord. 71.86 1, 1991; Ord. 71 -106 6, 1992; Ord. 245 2 (Att. A) (part), 2006) 15 29.020 Fencing within hillside districts. In addition to the regulations set forth in Section 15 29.010 of this Article, fences and walls located within an HR or R -OS district shall comply with the following regu- lations: (a) Length of solid fences and walls. Solid fences and walls, having no openings to permit visibility through the same, shall not have a length exceeding sixty feet, as viewed from any street or adjacent property. This restric- tion shall not apply to retaining walls. (b) Parallel fences and walls. Parallel fences and walls shall be separated by a horizontal distance of less than five feet. Where two or more fences or walls are ap- proximately parallel to each other and separated by a hori- zontal distance of thirty feet or less, the combined height of such fences or walls shall not exceed ten feet. (c) Area of enclosure. Except for fencing around recreational courts and fencing which constitutes part of a corral, no fencing on a single site shall encompass or en- close an area in excess of four thousand square feet (ex- cluding the area of any pool) unless approved by the Plan- (Saratoga Supp. No. 13, 12-06) 15- 29.020 ning Commission, which approval may be granted in any of the following cases: (1) Where the Planning Commission finds and deter- mines that the visibility of the fence from public streets and adjacent properties will substantially be reduced by the topography, landscaping or other features of the site. (2) Where the Planning Commission finds and deter- mines that the fence is required for safety reasons. (3) Where an exemption from the restriction against fencing enclosure has been granted by the Planning Com- mission for a "designated neighborhood area," as hereinaf- ter defined, in response to a petition for such exemption signed by the owners of lots comprising not less than sixty percent of the designated area. Before granting such ex- emption, the Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the petition, with notice thereof sent by mail at least ten days prior to the date of the hearing to all persons owning property located within the designated neighbor- hood area and within five hundred feet from the bounda- ries of such area. As a condition for granting an exemp- tion, the Planning Commission may establish alternative rules concerning the enclosure of sites in the designated neighborhood area, including, but not limited to, rules per- taining to the amount of enclosure, the design and type of fencing, and mitigation of visual impacts; provided, how- ever, in no event shall such rules permit enclosure of more than sixty percent of the gross site area, or the installation of any solid fences or walls, or use of any fencing material having exposed sharp points, or the installation of any fencing within an area dedicated as open space. The term "designated neighborhood area," as used in subsection (cX3) of this Section, means a geographic portion of a hillside zoning district, as designated by the Planning Commission, consisting of not less than ten lots which are contiguous to each other. Lots which are separated only by a street shall be considered contiguous. If a petition for exemption is presented by owners of any lots shown on a recorded subdivision or tract map, the Planning Commis- sion may, in its discretion, require that all of the lots shown on such map be included within the designated neighborhood area. Additional contiguous lots may be annexed to an existing designated neighborhood area upon application by the property owner and approval by the Planning Director, based upon his determination that the additional lot has similar topography, visibility, or other features shared by the lots within the designated neighbor- hood area. (d) Wildlife trails. No fence shall unreasonably im- pede the movement of wildlife animals utilizing an estab- lished trail or migratory route which crosses the site. (Saratoga Supp. No. 13, 12-06) 328 (e) Wire fences. Wire fencing, other than chain link, barbed wire or galvanized wire, shall be permitted only if the space between the wire is sufficient to allow the unob- structed passage of a sphere having a diameter of four inches and the wire is black or otherwise colored to blend with the terrain. Chain link fencing shall be permitted only for recreational courts and shall similarly be colored to blend with the terrain. No barbed wire fencing shall be allowed except as permitted by Section 15- 29.050 of this Article. (f) The provisions of this Section shall not apply to any property located within and constituting a part of Tract 7763, as shown on the subdivision map thereof recorded in the office of the County Recorder. (Amended by Ord. 71.89 1, 1991; Ord. 71.98 4, 1991; Ord. 71.113 3, 1992) 15- 29.030 Fencing to mitigate noise from certain arterial streets. (a) For the purpose of noise mitigation, a fence ex- ceeding the height otherwise prescribed in this Article as the limit for such fence may be located within any required setback area abutting Prospect Road, Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road, Quito Road, the portion of Saratoga Avenue be- tween Fruitvale Avenue and Lawrence Expressway or the portion of Cox Avenue between Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road and Saratoga Avenue, upon the issuance by the Commu- nity Development Director of a fence permit and subject to the following provisions: (1) Where the fence is located within an exterior side setback area or rear setback area abutting one of the arte- rial streets specified herein, the fence shall not exceed eight feet in height at the property line, plus one additional foot in height for each additional five feet of setback from the property line, up to a maximum height of ten feet if the fence is still located within a required setback area. (2) Where the fence is located within a front setback area abutting one of the arterial streets specified herein, the fence may be located no closer than ten feet from the front property line and shall not exceed eight feet in height, plus one additional foot in height for each additional five feet of setback from the front property line in excess of ten feet, up to a maximum height of ten feet if the fence is still located within the required front setback area. (3) Where a street line is located within a site. the location and setback of the fence as specified in subsec- tions (a)(1) and (2) of this Section shall be determined by the street line rather than the property line. (4) The applicant shall landscape and permanently maintain an area parallel to and along the entire exterior side of the fence facing the street, in accordance with a landscape plan approved by the Community Development Director. All or any portion of such area may be located within the public right -of -way, subject to approval by the Community Development Director. The landscaped area required herein shall be not less than five feet in width, except that where the available space between the fence and the interior edge of the sidewalk, or the edge of the street pavement where no sidewalk exists, is less than five feet, the Community Development Director may approve a landscape area of not less than two feet. Prior to issuance of the fence permit, a landscape maintenance agreement shall be executed by the applicant and recorded in the of- fice of the County Recorder, which agreement shall consti- tute a covenant running with the land. (5) The design of the fence shall be subject to ap- proval by the Community Development Director, based upon a fmding that the fence is compatible with existing or proposed structures on the site and upon neighboring properties. (6) No permit shall be issued if the Community De- velopment Director finds that the fence will constitute a hazard for vehicular or pedestrian traffic or will otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. (b) Applications for a fence permit under this Section shall be filed with the Community Development Director on such form as he shall prescribe, and shall be accompa- nied by a processing fee in such amount as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. (Amended by Ord. 71.110 2, 1992; Ord. 245 2 (Att. A) (part), 2006) 15 29.040 Fencing adjacent to scenic highways. In addition to the regulations set forth in Section 15- 29.010 of this Article, fences adjacent to State designated scenic highways shall comply with the following require- ments: (a) Fence permit. No person shall construct any fence or wall which faces and is located within one hun- dred feet from the right of way ofa State designated sce- nic highway without first obtaining a fence permit from the Planning Director. Application for such permit shall be submitted to the Planning Director on such form as he shall prescribe, and shall be accompanied by a processing fee in such amount as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. (b) Setback. No fence or wall shall be constructed within fifteen feet from the property line abutting the right of -way of a scenic highway. The Planning Director may require this minimum setback to be increased to a maxi- mum of one hundred feet if he determines that such in- 329 15- 29.040 creased setback is necessary to preserve the scenic quali- ties of the highway. (c) Color, material and design. Fences or walls ad- jacent to scenic highways may be constructed of wood, stone, stucco, Masonry, wrought iron or similar material, but no chain link, plastic or wire fencing shall be permit- ted. The design, color and materials of the fence or wall shall be subject to approval by the Planning Director, based upon a fmding that the fence or wall will not ad- versely affect the scenic qualities of the highway and will be compatible with the natural terrain. (d) Landscape screening. The applicant shall land- scape and permanently maintain an area parallel to and along the entire length of the exterior side of the fence or wall facing the scenic highway, in accordance with a land- scape plan approved by the Planning Director. Such land- scape plan shall provide for the planting of trees and vege- tation that are native to the area, fast growing, and require little or no maintenance. The Planning Director shall not approve the landscape plan unless he finds that the pro- posed landscaping will effectively screen the fence from public view and enhance the visual appearance of the sce- nic highway. Prior to issuance of the fence permit, a land- scape maintenance agreement shall be executed by the applicant and recorded in the office of the County Re- corder, which agreement shall constitute a covenant run- ning with the land. (e) Height. The height of any fence or wall adjacent to a scenic highway shall comply with the regulations set forth in Section 15- 29.010 of this Article; provided, how- ever, where the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that his property is subjected to greater noise impacts from the scenic highway as com- pared generally with other properties located adjacent to such highway, the Planning Director may approve a fence or wall not exceeding eight feet in height. As a condition of such approval, the Planning Director may require in- creased setbacks and landscaping to mitigate the visual impact of the higher fence or wall. (f) Exemption. This Section shall not apply to a fence lawfully constructed prior to March 20, 1987, if such fence does not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedes- trian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to or from adjacent properties; and provided further, that upon the destruction or removal of more than one -half of the length of such nonconforming fence, any replacement fence shall comply with the permit requirement and re- strictions specified in this Section. (Saratoga Sapp. No. 13, 12-06) 15- 29.050 15- 29.050 Barbed wire prohibited. No fence or wall constructed or installed within the City shall contain barbed wire unless approved by the Planning Commission, based upon a finding that the barbed wire is necessary for security purposes and that measures will be taken, when appropriate, to mitigate any adverse impacts of such wire. 15- 29.060 Fences adjacent to heritage lanes. In addition to the regulations set forth in Section 15- 29.010 of this Article, fences adjacent to a designated heri- tage lane shall comply with the following requirements: (a) Fence permit. No person shall construct any fence or wall which faces and is located within fifty feet from the right -of -way of a designated heritage lane, and which exceeds three feet in height, without first obtaining a fence permit from the Community Development Direc- tor. Application for such permit shall be submitted and processed in the manner provided in Article 13 -20 of the City Code. If the Heritage Commission recommends issu- ance, the Community Development Director shall issue the permit in accordance with those recommendations and any condition related but not limited to the design standards set forth in subsections (c), (d), (e) and (f) of this Section and pursuant to the process prescribed in Article 13 -20. (b) Supporting data. The level of detail of the sup- porting data required by Section 13- 20.030 shall be deter- mined by the Community Development Director to allow adequate review of the proposed fence or wall. (c) Setback. No fence or wall which exceeds three feet in height shall be constructed within the required set- back area fronting a heritage lane. This minimum setback may be required to be increased to a maximum of fifty feet upon the finding that such increased setback is necessary to preserve the historic qualities of the heritage lane. (d) Color, material and design. Fences or walls ad- jacent to the heritage lane may be constructed of wood, stone, masonry, wrought iron or similar material. The de- sign, color and materials of the fence or wall shall be ap- proved based upon a finding that the fence or wall will not adversely affect the historic qualities of the lane and will be compatible with the design and materials of existing buildings on the site and structures on adjacent properties. (e) Height. The height of any fence or wall adjacent to the heritage lane shall comply with the regulations set forth in Section 15- 29.010 of the City Code. (f) Landscaping. The applicant shall landscape and maintain an area within the right -of -way, parallel to and along the entire length of the exterior side of a fence or wall in excess of three feet in height and facing the heri- tage lane, in accordance with a landscape plan approved (Saratoga Stipp. No. 13, 12-06) 330 by the Community Development Director. Such landscape plan shall provide for the planting of trees and vegetation that are native to the area and require little or no mainte- nance. The landscape plan may be approved by the Com- munity Development Director upon the finding that the proposed landscaping will effectively blend the fence with its environment and enhance the visual appearance of the lane. (g) Exemption. This Section shall not apply to a fence lawfully constructed prior to September 16, 1992, if such fence does not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to or from adjacent properties; and provided further, that upon the destruction or removal of more than one -half of the length of such nonconforming fence, any replace- ment fence shall comply with the permit requirement and restrictions specified in. this Section. (Ord. 71.110 1, 1992; Ord. 245 2 (Att. A) (part), 2006) Attachment 2 Other Comments All fences over 6' require a building permit. All fences over 6' require a building permit. Exceptions Process All fences over 6' require a building permit and planning director approval. If greater than maximum height, building permit is required. Variance 'Variance 01.1"dasn Use Permit If needed for noise attenuation or buffering of adjacent land use, an 8' fence may be erected with an administrative permit. Over 8' requires a use permit. If greater than maximum height, building permit is required. r No fence heights above 8' are allowed. Planning Commission may modify height requirements where topography conditions justify such changes. Use Permit Fences over 8' are not allowed. pJOA coati i-- o :o :o :o :o .o .o .o m is- :o co Interior Side Yard N. .o .o .o :o .o .o .o .o CO i� .o co Street Side Yard Street Side Yard w /in Setback in .o in ,5•£ in in PJOA ;uad "so Co Front Yard w /in Setback in in in in ,6'£ in in M SIAOQ Butte County (Grass Valley uioouril 'Live Oak 'Nevada County uyploodI ail!Aasoa 'Sutter County I i puoipooM A4uno2 oloA 'Yuba City Yuba County Maximum Allowed Fence Heights Other Comments Any fence over 6' requires a building permit. Permits required for any new fences. Any fence over 6' requires a building permit. Building permit required for fences over 6'. Fences limited to 6' in Specific Plan Area. 7' fence allowed with a permit and engineering. Building permit required for fences over 6'. Any fences over 6' requires staff approval and engineering. No chain Zink allowed. Exceptions Process Up to 8' with a sign -off from adjacent neighbors and an administrative use permit. Staff can approve an 8' fence with a Special Use and Development Permit. Architectural Commission may approve fences higher than 6' for security reasons. Variance Up to 8' with a sign -off from adjacent 'neighbors. Fence Exception Process for a fence higher than 8'. Variance Variance Variance Use Permit required for any fence over 7.5'. l Use Permit for up to 8'. Fence Height. Exceptions require approval from the Planning Commission. puoA read 0 0 :o :o :o o Co :o :.o :o :o 0 0 Interior Side Yard :o :o 0 00 :o o :o :o :o 0 Street Side Yard Street Side Yard w /in Setback ,6'£ Front Yard 6'E Front Yard w /in Setback o6o;s!lop •1uouaaroID 6u!u.ioo I 'Crescent City Cupertino 'Eureka 41 'Hanf 'Lafayette Lakewood 'Lemon Grove 3JowraA! i 3 DJ911!W (Mission Viejo Other Comments Building permits are required for fences. With a building permit, 8' fence allowed if property abuts a trail, canal, utility right -of -way or a public street. Concrete mason walls over 6' need a building permit. Top 1' of 7' fence must be open lattice. 'Building permit required. I Any fence over 3' high must obtain a building permit. Up to 8', if top 2' is lattice material. Exceptions Process Variance 2' open (such as lattice) extension allowed with consent of adjacent neighbors. Planning Director can approve a 2' increase through an exception process (notification, no objections, does not affect public safety, and approved design). Through an Administrative Adjustment, a 7' fence can be approved (adjoining neighbors must be aware and approve of the proposed height increase). Rear Yard .O .0 .0 ao r- 00 1 CO .0 f .0 Interior Side Yard .0 •0 .0 CO .0 N. CO CO '0 N- PJDA aP!S 4. Street Side Yard w /in Setback M Front Yard V' Front Yard w /in Setback Montclair 'Pacifica i Pleasant Hill Rohnert Park S OUNDS o�puoa� uoSl San Mateo County 'San Ramon 1 Santa Barbaro (Santa Fe (Scotts Valley ow!agl !Turlock Yorba Linda Attachment 3 LOS GATOS Sec. 29.40.030. Fences, hedges and walls. City of Los Gatos (a) In residential zones, fences, hedges, and walls not over six (6) feet high are allowed on or within all property lines, except that no owner or occupant of any corner lot or premises in the Town shall erect or maintain upon such lot or premises any fence, hedge or wall higher than three (3) feet above the curb in a traffic view area unless a permit is CORNER secured from the Town Engineer. A traffic view area is the area which is within fifteen V 0'L' .�y (15) feet of a public street and within two hundred (200) feet of theright -of -way line of an intersection. Barbed wire or razor ribbon wire is prohibited in all zones. (b) The following exceptions shall apply: (1) Properties within historic districts or have a Landmark and Historic Preservation 7 si D1e-1 G Overlay shall not have fences, hedges, and walls higher than three (3) feet in a front yard in except as provided in subsection 29.40.030(b)(2). Any fence, hedge or wall erected in a front yard shall be of open design. (2) Gateways or entryway arbors may be higher than six (6) feet in any zone including 61tivkys historic districts and shall be of open design but in no case shall a gateway or entryway arbor be higher than eight (8) feet, have a width greater than six (6) feet, or have a depth F3teS greater than four (4) feet. All gateways and entryway arbors shall be constructed of open design. No more than one (1) gateway or entry arbor per street frontage is allowed. (3) Boundary line fences or walls adjacent to commercial property may be eight (8) feet high if requested or agreed upon by a majority of the residential property owners. (4) Properties not on a street corner, may have side yard and rear yard fences, hedges, or walls behind the front yard setback that are eight (8) feet high if the property owner can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that the following conditions EXCePTION exists: a. A special privacy concern exists that merits the need for the eight -foot height and that WM these concerns cannot be practically addressed by additional landscaping or tree s aj r screening. Written justification shall be provide to the Planning Department which documents the special privacy concern, and the higher fence height may only be approved at the discretion of the Planning Director. gy b. A special wildlife /animal problem affects the property and merits the need for the D'G higher eight -foot height because no practical alternatives exists to address the problem. Documented instances of wildlife grazing on gardens or domestic landscaping may be an example of such a problem. Fencing proposed for rural or hillside areas shall be of an open design that does not detract from the scenic nature or character of the surrounding area. (Ord. No.1316, 4.10.020, 6 -7 -76; Ord. No. 1493, 3- 17 -81; Ord. No. 1873, I, 10 -7 -91; Ord. No. 2049, I, 10 -5 -98; Ord. No. 2062, I, 6- 21 -99) LOS ALTOS http: /lordlink.com /codes /Iosaltos /index.htm Chapter 14.72 FENCE REGULATIONS 14.72.010 Short title. 14.72.020 Maximum fence heights. 14.72.030 Barbed wire and electrified fences. 14.72.040 Public nuisances. 14.72.050 Fencing of private swimming pools. 14.72.010 Short title. This chapter shall be known and cited as the fence regulations of the city. (Prior code 10- 2.2601) 14.72.020 Maximum fence heights. City of Los Altos The maximum height of any fence, wall, or other similar structure erected, constructed, F-0201,1 7 or maintained in the city shall not exceed six feet, with the following exceptions:_ A. No fence located within the required front yard setback and no fence located within /4 r five feet of the exterior side property line of a corner lot shall exceed four feet in height. B. The city planner may approve an exception to allow the exterior side yard of a corner EX/ /c lot to be considered the front yard, and adjust the other yard orientations accordingly, for s /Pe the purposes of fencing. This exception may be granted only when it is clear that this alternative orientation is consistent with the orientation of the home itself. C. In order to ensure visibility, no fence exceeding three feet'in height shall be located Gop.4457a within a twenty -five (25) foot triangle at the intersection of two streets as outlined in InsAotL rti Exhibit "A" of this chapter. D. In order to ensure visibility, no fence exceeding four feet in height shall be located jIV -`f within a fifteen (15) foot triangle on either side of a driveway where it intersects with a VIAf)ILI1‘( street as outlined in Exhibit "A" of this chapter. E. The provisions of subsection D of this section shall apply in those instances where a driveway on an adjoining property is located within fifteen (15) feet of the intersection of a rear property line and a secondary street property line of a corner lot or where such adjoining property is vacant as outlined on Exhibit "B" of this chapter. F. Fences or walls may exceed six feet in height: 1. For the purposes of providing noise attenuation and screening between residential and commercial properties as required by the Los Altos general plan and as provided for in Chapters 14.32, 14.34, 14.36, 14.38, 14.40, 14.46, 14.48, 14.50 and 14.54 of this title; 2. In conjunction with an assessment district for the purposes of attenuating noise as determined by an acoustical analysis; 3. In conjunction with city, county, state, or federal road projects for the purpose of pXC.'li,P't1mS attenuating noise as determined by an acoustical analysis; 4. To allow up to two feet of lattice, or material other than lattice that is typically at leas•O 6- LOS ALTOS http: /ordlink.com /codes /losaltoslindex.htm fifty (50) percent open to the passage of light and air when viewed horizontally, to be added to the top of a fence or wall in the rear or side yards, and provided the lattice is determined by the city planner to be substantially open to the passage of light and air and compatible with the design and materials of the fence or wall. G. Decorative columns, post caps, or similar features not more than one foot in height (,OLVhINS may be added on top of fences or walls which adjoin a street or public walkway, or those poc fences or walls which the city planner determines to be physically detached from an CM'S adjoining residential property. Such features would typically not be less than eight feet apart, and must be consistent with the design and materials of the fence or wall. H. A single arbor -style entry element, substantially open to the passage of light and air, �5 may be allowed on a residential property provided the entry element is located over a walkway or pathway, and does not exceed eight feet in height, five feet in width, and F JT ?y three feet in depth. The entry element shall not be considered as lot coverage. p-LP41 521 (Los Altos Supp. No. 5, 4 -05) 14.72.020 LOS ALTOS http: /ordlink.com /codes /losaltos /index.htm 6' solid* 2' open lattice Fence Regulations Insole Lot 9 *See accessory structure 4' HIGH 6' HIGH; PLUS 2 OPEN LATTICE 2 t eg for higher fences LOS ALTOS http: /ordlink.com /codes /Iosaltos /index.htm (Ord. 04 -267 7) A sTRE EX 1S1T 'F$p 14.72.030 Barbed wire and electrified fences. LOS ALTOS http: /ordlink.com /codes /Iosaltos /index.htm Barbed wire, electric, or other fences or walls dangerous to persons or property shall not be constructed within ten (10) feet of any property line which adjoins a street or public walkway. (Prior code 10- 2.2604) 14.72.04.0 Public nuisances. A fence, wall, or other structure maintained in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a public nuisance. (Prior code 10- 2.2606) 14.72.050 Fencing of private swimming pools. A. A private swimming pool is defined for the purposes of this section as a swimming pool, wading pool, fish pond, or other outside body of water created by artificial means and maintained in connection with a single family or multifamily residence, apartment house, motel, hotel, or any other type of building, which pool has any depth in excess of twenty -four (24) inches, whether above or below grade, and whether intended to be temporary or permanent in nature. B. Every person who shall own or be in possession of any premises, whether as purchaser under contract, lessee, tenant, or licensee, on which there is situated a private swimming pool, as defined in subsection A of this section, shall maintain on such premises and completely enclosing such private swimming pool a fence, wall, or other structure not less than five feet in height; provided, however, there shall be no holes or gaps in the enclosure or gate, which normally should be solid, except as may be approved by the building inspector, who shall be guided in approving or disapproving the same by the principle that the construction of the enclosure should not be such that the enclosure would be readily climbable by children; and provided, further, that a dwelling house or accessory building or any other type of building may be used as a part of such enclosure. Any gate or door in such enclosure shall be equipped with a self closing and self latching device designed to keep such gate or door (except a door leading to the interior of a building) securely closed at all times, with the latching device either placed at least four feet nine inches above ground level or otherwise made inaccessible from the outside to children. C. Existing private swimming pools shall, on or before June 1, 1962, comply with the requirements of subsection B of this section. D. The enclosure referred to in this section shall be deemed to be a structure within the meaning of the Building Code of the city. The final inspection and approval of all private swimming pools constructed shall be withheld until all the requirements of subsection B of this section have been complied with. (Prior code 10- 2.2607) (a) Structures. No structure or part of a structure shall be constructed or altered to exceed twenty -seven (27') feet in structure height in any permitted location, except that primary dwellings shall be permitted a maximum structure height of up to thirty -two (32') feet subject to all of the following requirements: (1) For each one (1') foot increase in structure height above twenty -seven (27') feet the minimum required side and rear yard setback lines, as defined by Section 10- 1.505, shall each be increased, in distance from the property line, an additional three (3') feet. No portion of the primary dwelling structure shall be located between the property line and the setback line. (2) For each one (1') foot increase in structure height above twenty -seven (27') feet the minimum required front yard setback line, as defined by Section 10- 1.505, shall be increased, in distance from the property line, an additional four (4') feet. No portion of any structure shall be located between the property line and the setback line. (3) Eligible structures shall have sloped roof surfaces only with a minimum roof pitch of 4:12 that terminate at a ridge. (4) The maximum continuous wall height shall not exceed twenty -seven (27') feet. (5) Dormer rooflines shall not exceed a maximum height of twenty -seven (27') feet. (6) The current maximum overall building height of thirty -five (35') feet, as described in subsection (b) below, shall not be exceeded. (b) Special height limitation. No structure shall exceed a height of thirty -five (35') feet, measured as the distance between the lowest natural grade topographical elevation of the structure along the building line and the highest topographical elevation of the roof of the structure. No point of the building may exceed thirty -five (35') feet above the lowest pad elevation of the building. (c) Exceptions. The following structures or elements of structures are exempt from the height limits to the extent indicated: (1) Chimneys and appurtenances can extend above the twenty -seven (27') foot height limit. However, the maximum height including chimneys and appurtenances shall not exceed thirty -five (35') feet and all points of the building must lie within a thirty -five (35') foot horizontal band based from the lowest visible natural or finished grade. (d) Walls and fences. Wall or fences (herein referred to collectively as "fences shall not exceed a maximum height of six (6') feet when located between setback lines and property lines, provided, however, the height of any fence along a road shall be determined by the openness of the fence and its distance from a "reference line," and provided, further, that no fence shall be erected on the roadway side of the "reference line." (1) The "reference line" for a fence along any road shall be: (i) The existing right -of -way boundary line, or (ii) A line located thirty (30') feet from the centerline of the right -of -way of the road, whichever is farthest from the centerline of the road. (2) The maximum height of a fence erected on the "reference line" for that fence shall be: (i) Three (3') feet for afence with less than fifty (50 percent open area (when viewed perpendicular to the plane of the fence). LOS ALTOS HILLS http: /www.bpcnet.com /codes /losaltoshills/ Sec. 10- 1.504. Height. City of Los Altos Hills LOS ALTOS HILLS http://www.bpcnet.com /codes /losaltoshills/ (ii) Four and one -half (4 1/2') feet for afence with no less than fifty (50 percent open area. (3) The maximum height of afence erected on the property side of the "reference line" may be increased by one (1') foot for each ten (10') feet the location of the fence is moved from the "reference line" for that fence, provided, however, no fence shall exceed a maximum height of six (6') feet when located between the "reference line" for that fence and the structural setback line for the property on which the fence is located. (4) Walls or fences shall not exceed a maximum height of three (3') feet in an area bounded by the centerline of intersecting roads or easements for vehicular access, public or private and a straight line joining points on such center lines eighty (80') feet distant from their intersection in order to provide an unobstructed view of approaching traffic on the intersecting roads. The Planning Commission may prescribe greater restrictions than the height set forth in this paragraph where unusual conditions make such additional restrictions desirable in the interests of the public safety. (e) Trees and shrubs. In an area bounded by the center line of intersecting roads or easements for vehicular access, public or private, and a straight line joining points on such center lines eighty (80') feet distant from their intersection, all shrubs and plants shall be pruned to a height not to exceed three (3') feet above the road level at its nearest point. All side limbs of trees in such area shall be pruned to a height of not less than six (6') feet above the road surface. The purpose of the provisions of this section is to provide an unobstructed view of approaching traffic on the intersecting roads. The Planning Commission may prescribe greater restrictions on the heights and distances set forth in this section where unusual conditions make such additional restrictions desirable in the interests of public safety. (f) Ornamental garden structures. Ornamental garden structures without roofs and which do not exceed six (6') feet in height may be located between property lines and setback lines provided they do not exceed three (3') feet in height when located in an area bounded by the center line of intersecting roads or easements for vehicular access, public or private, and a straight line joining points on such center lines eighty (80') feet distant from their intersection. (g) Antennas and dish antennas. No antenna, whether freestanding or attached to a building, shall be erected or installed until any permit required by Section 10 -2.301 shall first have been obtained and the allowable height thereby determined. The height to which any antenna may be extended, whether freestanding or attached to a building, shall mean the vertical distance at any point from the natural ground level of the property on which the antenna is erected or installed and which existed prior to grading for any structure, or from any building pad on the property if excavated below natural ground level, whichever elevation is lower, to the highest part of the antenna directly above. (h) Driveway light fixtures. Driveway light fixtures may extend no more than one (1') foot above the height limit for walls and fences as specified in Section 10- 1.504(d). (i) The standards set forth in this section for height are maximum standards. The City Council and Planning Commission have the discretion to apply stricter standards to reduce height where site specific constraints dictate further limitations, such that the purposes of the ordinances and Design Guidelines are complied with. Some examples of site constraints include, but are not limited to, the shape or natural features of the lot, easements which restrict development, or high site visibility. LOS ALTOS HILLS http: //www.bpcnet.com /codes /losaltoshills/ 1, Ord. 305, eff. October 3, 1986; 1, Ord. 326, eff. September 16, 1988; 4, Ord. 370, eff. May 20, 1994; 3, Ord. 389, eff. August 15, 1997; 1, Ord. 421, eff. August 17, 2002) 16.28.010 Sections: 16.28.010 16.28.020 16.28.030 16.28.040 16.28.045 (Cupritino 6-001 Chapter 16.28 FENCES* Purpose. Definitions. Fence location and height for zones requiring site review. Fence location and height for zones not requiring site review. Vehicular electronic security gates. 16.28.050 Proximity of plants and fences to public streets. 16.28.060 Exceptions. 16.28.065 Temporary fences for construction: 16.28.070 Violation—Penalty. For statutory provisions making fences taller than ten feet a nui- sance, see Civil Code 841.4. Prior ordinance history: Ords.112, 686, 852, 1179, 1630, 1637 and 1777. 16.28.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the location and height of fences and vegetation in yards of all zoning districts in order to protect the safety, privacy, and property values of residents and resi- dent/property owners of the City. (Ord. 1788 1 (part), 1998) 16.28.020 Definitions. The words and terms used in this chapter shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: A. "Fence" means a man-made structure which is designed, intended or used to protect, defend or obscure the interior property of the owner thereof from the view, trespass or passage of others upon that property. B. "Fence height" means the vertical distance from the highest point of the fence (excluding post caps) to the finish grade adjoining the fence. In a case where the finish grade is different for each side 446 City of Cupertino of the fence, the grade with the highest elevation shall be utilized in determining the fence height. C. `Plant" means a vegetative matter. D. "Setback area, required front" means the area extending across the front of the lot between the front lot line and a line parallel thereto. Front yards shall be measured either by a line at right angles to the front lot line, or by the radial line in the case of a curved front lot line. The front of the lot is the narrowest lot line from a public street. E. "Setback area, required rear" means the area extending across the full width of the lot between the rear lot line and the nearest line or point of the main building. F. "Setback area, required side" means the area between the side lot line and the nearest line of the building, and extending from the front setback line to the rear setback line. (Ord. 1788 1 (part), 1998) 16.28.030 Fence location and height for zones requiring site review. A. The Design Review Committee, Planning Commission and. City Council shall have the author- ity to require, approve, or disapprove wall and fenc- ing plans including location, height and materials in all zones requiring design review. B. The basic design review guidelines for the review of fences and walls are as follows: 1. Fences and walls separating commercial, in- dustrial, offices, and institutional zones from resi- dential zones shall be constructed at a height and with materials designed to acoustically isolate part of or all noise emitted by future uses within the commercial, industrial, offices, or institutional zones. The degree of acoustical isolation shall be deter- mined during the design review process. 2. Fences and walls separating commercial, in- dustrial, offices, and institutional zones from resi- dential zones shall be constructed at a height and with materials designed to ensure visual privacy for adjoining residential dwelling units. The degree of visual privacy shall be determined during the review process. 3. Fences and walls shall be designed in a man- ner to provide for sight visibility at private and public street intersections. (Ord. 1844 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1788 1 (part), 1998) /61 wog or 16.28.040 Fence location and height for zones not requiring site review. A. In the case of an interior residential lot, a maximum six- foot -high fence shall be permitted in the rear yard setback area and in the side yard set- back areas. A maximum three- foot -high fence, mea- sured from finish grade, shall be permitted in the front yard setback area. B. In the case of a corner residential lot, a maxi- mum six foot -high fence shall be permitted in the required rear yard setback area and on the side yard lines, excepting that fence heights within the side yard setback area adjacent to a public street shall be regulated as described below. No portion of a fence shall extend into the front yard setback area or forty -foot corner triangle. 1. Situation in which the rear property line ad- joins a rear property line: The minimum side fence setback line for a six- foot -high fence shall be five feet from the property line. 2. Situation in which the rear property line ad- joins the side property line of a key lot: The mini- mum side fence setback line shall be five feet from L Dr the property line, except that the setback line within ten feet of an adjacent side property line shall be maintained at twelve feet. 3. A fence not exceeding three feet in height brag measured from finish grade can be constructed on 2/ ,.an y location within a required yard except the forty- foot comer triangle. C. Where a six-foot fence is allowed, an eight foot -high fence can be constructed in lieu thereof subject to building permit approval and upon receipt of written approval from property owners. D. In the case of parcels zoned residential hill- side (RHS) or open space (OS), the fences shall be governed by Section 19.40.080. or ,(.1NIdi 16.28.045 Vehicular electronic security gates. Vehicular electronic security gates may be ap- 447 16.28.030 proved through a fence exception if the development meets any one of the following conditions: is a mixed -use development, where the parking for different uses needs to be separated to assure avail- ability of parking for each use; if a development includes a below -grade parking structure, where the gates are required to secure the below grade park- ing; if gates are required for a development to ob- tain federal or state funding; if the development is secluded; if the electronic gates are needed for dem- onstrated security reasons; or if the electronic gates were in existence prior to September 20, 1999. (Ord. 1833, 1999: Ord. 1802 (part), 1999) 16.28.050 Proximity of public streets The proximity of plants streets shall be controlled by ter 14.08 of the Municipal (part), 1998) plants and fences to and fences to public the provisions of Chap Code. (Ord. 1788 1 16.28.060 Exceptions. Where practical difficulties, unnecessary hard- ships, or results inconsistent with the purpose and intent of this chapter result from the strict applica- tion of the provisions hereof, exceptions may be granted as provided in this section. A. Application and Fee. Application shall be made in writing to the Design Review Committee on a form prescribed by the Director of Community Development. The application shall be accompanied by a fee as prescribed by City Council resolution. B. Public Hearings. Upon receipt of an applica- tion for exception, the Director of Community De- t ictrnot 4 velopment shall set a time and place for a public jw hearing before the Design Review Committee and order the public notice thereof. Mailed written no- DRC... tice of the hearing on the fence exception shall be given by the Director of Community Development to all owners or record of real property (as shown in the last assessment roll) which abut the subject property, as well as property and its abutting proper- ties to the left and right, directly opposite the sub- ject property and located across a street, way, high- way or alley. Mailed notice shall include owners of (CSipenino 6 16.28.060 property whose only contiguity to the subject site is a single point. Said notice shall be mailed by first class mail at least ten days prior to the Design Review Committee meeting in which the application will be considered. The notice shall state the date, time and place of the hearing. A description of the fence exception shall be included in the notice. If the Director of Community Development believes the project may have negative effects beyond the range of the mailed notice, particularly negative effects on nearby residential areas, the Director, in his discretion, may expand noticing beyond the stated requirements. Compliance with the notice provisions set forth in this section shall constitute a good-faith effort to provide notice, and failure to provide notice, and the failure of any person to receive notice, shall not prevent the City from proceeding to consider or to take action with respect to an application under this chapter. The Design Review Committee shall hold a pub- lic hearing at which time the committee may grant the exception based upon the following findings: 1. The literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will-result in restrictions inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter. 2. The granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially detrimental to the public health, safety or .welfare. 3. The exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of the prescribed regulation and the minimum variance that will ac- complish the purpose. 4. The proposed exception will not result in a .hazardous condition for pedestrian and vehicular traffic. 5. The- proposed development is otherwise con sistent with the City's General Plan and with the purpose of this chapter as described in Section 16.28.010. 6. The proposed development meets the require- ments of the Santa Clara Fire Department and Sheriff's Department, and if security gates are pro- posed, that attempts are made to standardize access. (cups oo 6-00) 448 After closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission may approve, conditionally approve or deny the application for exception. C. Appeals. Any application for exception which received final approval or disapproval by the Design Review Committee may be appealed to the Planning Commission as provided by Section 19.136.060 of this code. (Ord. 1844 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1822 (part), 1999; Ord. 1802 (part), 1999: Ord. 1788 1 (part), 1998) 16.28.065 Temporary fences for construction. The Chief Building Official may require persons constructing structures in the City to erect and main- tain temporary fences around all or a portion of the construction site in order to secure the site from entry by the general public. (Ord. 1777 (part), 1998) 16.28.070 Violation Penalty. Any person who violates the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of an infraction and upon conviction thereof shall be punished as provided in Chapter 1.12. (Ord. 1788 1 (part), 1998) AW AL City of Hillsborough Height Limits Building Envelope: A building envelope is established at every setback line, out of which no structure except chimneys can penetrate. The envelope starts at existing grade at all setback lines, rising to a height of 22 feet directly above grade, then extending at a slope of 45 degrees inward (away from the property line) to a maximum height of 32 feet measured from a warped plane parallel to existing grade. The following diagram illustrates the building envelope profile, including the 32 -foot height limitation, for 0 and 30 percent slopes. 20' Interior 30' 22' setback area Property line Building Envelope Profiles 45 deg. 32' 45 deg. 22' 25' I\Street line setback area 4 0% Slope Street Street line 30% Slope Flagpoles: The maximum height of a flagpole is 12 feet. Flagpoles are not allowed in any setback areas. The maximum size of a flag flown from a flagpole is 3 feet by 5 feet. SuE3 100' Fences, Columns, etc.: The maximum height of any fence, gate, column, pillar, post, light post, or similar lighting standard fixtures located within the street or street line T D setback area is 8 feet. This is measured from existing grade at the property line or the pavement. Keep in mind that the fence height most often approved is 6 feet. Retaining Walls: The maximum height of retaining walls is 6 feet, measured from finished grade at the base on either side of the wall. If the retaining wall is located in the interior setback area, the maximum height is 4.5 feet. SAN CARLOS http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SanCarlos/sancar18.html#18 Chapter 18.117 FENCES* Sections: 1.8.117.010 Purpose. 18.117.020 Definitions. 18.117.030 Standard fences Height, regulation and exceptions in Residential Zoning Districts. 18.117.040 Special fences Height and regulations. 18.117.050 Prohibited fences. 18.117.060 Fencing in Commercial Zoning Districts. 18.117.070 Fencing within the public right-of-way. 18.117.080 Building permit and staff approval requirements. Prior ordinance history: Ords. 1143 and 1200. 18.117.010 Purpose. City of San Carlos To provide residents with greater security and protected outdoor living space through fencing of property while allowing light, views, access and visibility for the health, safety and welfare of the citizenry. Limitations on fencing also serve to maintain the aesthetic value of the City. (Ord. 1278 1 (part), 2000) 18.117.020 Definitions. r "Fences" are horizontal and vertical structures described in Section 18.08.770 of this title that are intended to separate properties, retain soil materials and provide security; or as defined by the Building Official. Fences may also be walls, hedges and screen planting. "Front -most wall" means the facade of the residence (exclusive of accessory and appurtenant structures such as decks, stairwells, etc.) which is located closest to the front property line. "Front property line" means the public right -of -way line closest to the front of the property, as determined by the City Engineer. SAN CARLOS http: /www.codepublishing .com/CA/SanCarlos /sancarl8.html #18.117 Height Measurement. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, height of fences or walls between the setback line and lot line shall be measured from highest finished grade adjacent to the structure to the top of the structure as determined by the Planning Director. "Irregular lot" means any lot which does not conform to the definition of a corner lot or an interior lot including, but not limited to, through lots, pie and reverse pie shaped lots, flag lots, triangular lots with double street frontages, multisided lots and other lots in the opinion of the Planning Director which are irregular. "Lattice" means a patterned, crossed material (excluding chain link fencing) that is arranged to allow at least fifty percent of light and air through the crossed material. Arrangements allowing less than fifty percent will be considered solid. Lot Lines. Rear and side lot lines shall be those defined in Section 18.08.540 of this Code, or as required by the special setback requirements of specified zoning districts. Front lot lines shall be those defined in this section. However, a property owner of a corner lot may designate which property line abutting a public right -of -way is his/her front and side property line, for purposes of this chapter only, regardless of the definition outlined in Section 18.08.540. No more than one property line abutting a public right -of- way may be designated as a front property line and no more than one property line abutting a public right -of -way may be designated a side property line. "Replacement" is defined in this chapter as the replacement of any post or rail. Posts or rails cannot be "paired" or reinforced to avoid replacement to current code. Board repair or substitution does not constitute replacement. "Sight distance triangle" means a minimum area of unobstructed view that occurs at street intersections, as outlined in Section 18.1.17.030(C) and (D). "Statuary structures" include decorative objects such as birdbaths, fountains, wells and figures. (Ord. 1311 1(A), 2002; Ord. 1278 1 (part), 2000) 18.117.030 Standard fences Height, regulation and exceptions in Residential Zoning Districts. A. Front Yards. No fence, wall, hedge or screen planting of any kind located between the 4 tvrt front property line and the front -most wall of a residence establishing an existing front setback (or the required front setback, whichever is less) shall be constructed, grown or 4.1161 N `N maintained to exceed four feet in height. However, front yard fences within the sight distance triangular area on a corner lot as provided in subsection (C) of this section shall not exceed three feet in height unless an exception is obtained pursuant to Section 18.117.040(N). CVISA-+ Q Ma4T wlkU— SAN CARLOS http:// www. codepublishing .com/CA/SanCarlos /sancarl8.html #18.117 1. Exceptions. This provision shall not apply to the following items provided that such amenities do not significantly obstruct vehicular or pedestrian visibility or significantly obscure light and views to adjacent properties: a. Specimen trees or shrubs that do not form a continuous barrier; b. Light poles, pillars or pilasters (not to exceed six feet in height and eighteen inches in width); c. Front yard fence posts with attached lights (not more than two permitted; posts not to exceed four feet in height and eighteen inches in width and depth plus a two foot -high light fixture); d. Gates no higher than four feet in height and four feet in width for pedestrian gates; fourteen feet in width for driveway gates; e. Trellises used for pedestrian purposes (not to exceed eight feet in height, five feet in width and five feet in depth); f. One mailbox.structure not to exceed six feet in height; M 41 LF3b g. Up to three statuary structures not to exceed four feet in height, two feet in width and °F.CAWill'i ttS two feet in depth each; h. Other structures which in the opinion of the Planning Director are of a similar nature. B. Rear and Side Yards. Fences, as described in Section 18.117.020, located between the front -most wall establishing an existing front setback (or the required front setback, whichever is less) and the side or rear property line, shall not be constructed, grown or maintained to exceed six feet in height plus one foot of lattice. If the fence falls within a 4t' comer lot or driveway area, the fence must also meet the requirements of subsection (C)K9S of this section. LGE C. Corner Lots. Fences, as defined in Section 18.117.020, shall be maximum of three feet in height within the sight distance triangular area formed by the intersecting curb lines (or edge of pavement when no curbs exist) and a line joining points on these curb lines at a distance of forty feet along both lines from their intersection, unless an exception is obtained from the Building Official as outlined in Section 18.117.040 (N). Trees, or any portions thereof, that are located within this sight distance triangle shall have a clearance of seven feet high minimum between the lowest portion of the canopy and the sidewalk, and thirteen feet high minimum between the lowest portion of the canopy and street. (Ord. 1311 1(B), (C), 2002; Ord. 1278 1 (part), 2000) .t. ug(v) 18.117.040 Special fences— Height and regulations. F3lRD8Arr -11N1 c-ANoYy 8c SAN CARLOS http:// www. codepublishing .com/CA/SanCarlos /sancarl8.html 18 117 Special fences are subject to review and approval by the Planning Department. Staff may impose reasonable conditions or restrictions including, but not limited to, neighbor notification, setbacks and landscape screening as staff deems necessary to secure the purpose of this title and to assure compatibility of the special fence with adjoining properties and those in the general vicinity, and may require guarantees and evidence that such conditions are being, or will be, complied with. Special fences include, but are not limited to the following: A. Recreation Area Fence. Fences not to exceed twelve feet in height may be located around tennis courts, badminton courts, basketball or volleyball courts and similar play areas, providing that all parts of the fence over six feet are made of open -wire F 14A j construction or other corrosion resistant material; B. Security Fences. Fences not to exceed eight feet in height may be located around industrial, manufacturing or research uses where required for security purposes, screening, or containing and protecting hazardous materials; C. Swimming Pool Fences. Fences required for swimming pools are governed by pot l� Chapter 15.40 of this Code. Swimming pool fences are not subject to Planning Department approval unless they exceed the standard fence height regulations stated in g(,v-,5 Section 18.117.030; D. Abutting Nonresidential Fences. Where residential properties abut industrial or s �GS commercial areas, or public property other than a public street, fences may be constructed A1•161 to a height not to exceed eight feet, and meeting minimum sight distance triangle pN S requirements; V E. Trellises used for pedestrian purposes exceeding eight feet in height, five feet in width and five feet in depth; F. Statuary structures exceeding the exemption limit of three structures and/or exceeding four feet in height and two feet in depth; G. Fence posts greater than eighteen inches in width or depth; H. Front yard fence posts with more than two attached lights. In no event shall such posts exceed four feet in height plus a two- foot -high light fixture; I. Chain link fencing in residential areas is permitted in the side and rear yards with vinyl- coating and landscape screening. Chain link fencing shall not exceed six feet in height in these areas. Chain link fencing in front yards in residential areas is not permitted; J. Fences not to exceed six feet in height with an additional one foot of lattice for any portion of an irregular lot between the house and property line adjacent to the public right -of -way; SAN CARLOS http /www.codepublishing.com/CA/ SanCarlos /sancarl8.html #18.117 K. Fences not to exceed six feet in height with an additional one foot of lattice for any portion of a lot two hundred feet in depth or greater between the house and property line adjacent to the public right -of -way. Such fences shall not be located closer than fifteen feet to the front property line; L. Fences not to exceed six feet in height with an additional one foot of lattice within front yards when not located in front of a primary residence and not closer than fifteen feet to a front property line; M. Gates exceeding four feet in width for pedestrian use or fourteen feet in width for driveway use; N. Exceptions to sight distance triangles if the necessity for the fence outweighs concerns for public safety as determined by the Building Official; O. Other structures which in the opinion of the Planning Director are of a similar nature. (Ord. 1278 1 (part), 2000) 18.117.050 Prohibited fences. The following types of fences are prohibited: A. Barbed wire or razor wire; except as follows: 1. The use of barbed wire fencing may be permitted (in Industrial Zoning Districts only) at the top portion of a fence which is at least six feet in height upon securing a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission, after demonstrating a need for security purposes; B. Electrically charged fences; C. All wire, twine or rope fences consisting of one or more strands; D. Fences constructed or maintained in the public right -of -way without an encroachment permit; E. Fences constructed or maintained closer than three feet to any fire hydrant; F. Fences constructed or maintained so as to sag or lean; G. Dilapidated fences; H. Fences creating a safety hazard to motorists and/or pedestrians; I. Construction fencing where no active building permit exists or where not required by the Building Official; SAN CARLOS http:// www. codepublishing .com/CA/SanCarlos /sancarl8.html #18.117 J. Chain link fencing in front yards in Residential Zoning Districts. (Ord. 1278 1 (part), 2000) 18.117.060 Fencing in Commercial Zoning Districts. All fencing over six feet in height within commercially zoned districts shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Department. In no case shall fencing exceed eight feet in height. (Ord. 1278 1 (part), 2000) 18.117.070 Fencing within the public right -of -way. All fencing within the public right -of -way requires an encroachment permit from the City Engineer and shall be subject to all requirements of this chapter, in addition to those of the Public Works Department. (Ord. 1278 1 (part), 2000) 18.117.080 Building permit and staff approval requirements. A. No person shall erect, construct or maintain any solid fence or wall exceeding six feet in height (exclusive of lattice) without first obtaining a permit from the Building Division. B. No person shall erect, construct or maintain fences in combination with retaining walls of any height without first obtaining a permit from the Building Division. C. No person shall erect, construct or maintain pressure treated wood retaining walls over three feet tall without first obtaining a permit from the Building Division. Walls three feet and under must have backfill no steeper than 2:1. D. No person shall erect, construct or maintain concrete or masonry retaining walls over four feet tall, measured from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall without first obtaining a permit from the Building Division. (Ord. 1278 1 (part), 2000) 19.20.040 Fences, Walls, and. Hedges. A. Applicability. 1. All Fences, Walls, and Hedges. The provisions of this division apply to all fences, walls, and hedges, unless otherwise stated. 2. Fences and Walls in the Flood Hazard (F3) Overlay District. All fences and walls in the F3 overlay district shall require a building permit, and shall comply with all requirements of the F3 overlay district in addition to the requirements of this section. 3. Exemptions. These regulations do not apply to fences or walls required by regulations of a state or federal agency, or by the city for reasons of public safety, or to retaining walls which are regulated by section 19.20.100 (Setback Requirements and Exceptions). B. Height Limitations. Fences, walls, and hedges shall comply with the height limitations shown in table 3 -1. See figure 3 -2. Perimeter fences and walls with a height greater than six feet and greater than 50 feet in length, adjoining a public right -of -way, shall require design review in accordance with section 19.42.030. ;Within front yard setback Table 3 -1 Maximum Height of Fences, Walls, and Hedges Location Maximum Height (1) 3 ft. within 15 ft. of the back of sidewalk, or The back of curb, if there is no sidewalk, or the edge of the improved roadway if there is no sidewalk or curb; 6 ft. elsewhere within !front setback. See also section 19.20.070 D 1(Sight Visibility Area Required). Within side and rear yard setbacks 6 ft. (2) (3) !Within street side setback l At intersections of alleys, streets, and ;driveways within sight visibility areas. 1Outside of a required setback 16 ft. and also see section 19.20.070 D (Sight (Visibility Area Required) and Section 119.20.040 D. 13 ft. and also see section 19.20.070 D (Sight !Visibility Area Required) As determined by the height limit for structures within the applicable zoning district. ;Within a zone where no setback is required 8 ft. !Notes: 1(1) Additional height may be authorized through design review approval (section ;19.42.030). 1(2) Fences and walls may be allowed up to eight feet in height within 3 feet of side or gear property line when the portions of the fence above six feet are of an open design !(e.g., lattice, wrought iron or grille work that will allow visibility through 50 percent of City of Novato the material). (3) Solid fences and walls set back greater than three feet from side of rear property line may be allowed up to eight feet in height. !(Ord. No. 1456 2(A)) C. Measurement of Fence and Wall Height. 1. Fence height shall be measured as the vertical distance between the finished grade at the base of the fence and the top edge of the fence material. 2. The height of fencing atop a wall shall be measured from the base of the wall. 3. In cases where finished grade differs from one side of the fence to the other (as on a slope or retaining wall), the height shall be measured from the side with the lowest natural grade. See figure 3 -1. Where fences are arranged or terraced on a slope with a minimum of two feet (measured horizontally) between each fence or each fence and retaining wall, to allow for landscaping, each fence height shall be measured in accordance with subsection (C)(1) of this section. Fo rce Retaining =REn Wall YI uEII'mil ILL11 rw Ill= n�.. c[euCiamUIEu_ia tr ;v— properly Line Max. Allowed Fence Height Figure 3-1 Fence Height ,Measurement D. Specific Fencing and Wall Requirements. 1. Fences Abutting Right -of -Way. Fences in rear or side yard areas that abut a public right of way and exceed three feet in height shall provide a minimum setback of 10 feet from the edge of right of way, except where a minimum 10 -foot landscape parkway is provided within the right -of -way. Gcncrnl 'rnperty Dcvcluptruni and Lin Surmrfarilx le Street side ro tb it* an S iraet Side Ps petty Erse B' Ids holteit 5 vuLSF. a of sight a'ara><au arose mrd, 15'c, n W 0 f r e m from Frut j, 'Non 67s!ffi &stance area 8' mart', height wf 11'i f of f v.ntprcper �a 6' nia+t. f0 i01 uIft I 16' at mom burn Pao hoc* of sidenntre. or No berk of clot wham Mao is na sidrwafir, or tesd o toad vay f nprorOni al N4truO adds no s, tes-atx of a olo. 517'afp.ht distance Figure 3-2 Fence and 1'10Ight Lhiaiir General Property Development and Use Standards 2. Fencing Between Different Land Uses. Fencing between different land uses shall be provided in compliance with section 19.20.090 (Screening). 3. Swimming Pools, Spas, and Similar Features. Swimming pools /spas and other similar water features shall be fenced in compliance with section 4 -3 of this code. 4. Outdoor Equipment, Storage, and Work Areas. Screening of outdoor uses and equipment shall be provided in compliance with section 19.20.090 (Screening). 5. Temporary Fencing. Temporary fencing may be necessary to protect archaeological or historic resources, trees, or other similar sensitive features during site preparation and construction. This fencing shall be approved by the director. (Ord. No. 1441 2(A)) City of San Mateo rrtttttrtttnntnnnrttnti City of San Mateo Section 1. Fences 'Inhere are three reasons why the City of San Mateo regulates the height and location of fences: To allow privacy and security for single family homes and properties; To maintain an open feoling in neighborhoods when viewed from the street; To eliminate visual barriers for the safety of pedestrians and drivers, particularly at street comers and driveway locations. Section 1 of this handbook answers the most commonly asked ques- tions about fences on single family properties. The specific fence regulations are found in Chapter 27.84 of the Zoning Code. What is a Fence? A fence is any wooden, metal or masonry structure used to enclose your property. It includes lattice, chain link, concrete block and other materials. How is the Height of a Fence Measured? Height is measured from the ground level to the highest portion of the fence, including posts, entry features or trellises. Soil cannot be mounded adjacent to a fence to artificially decrease the height measurement. If your fence is located on top of a retaining wall or a foundation, the height measurement includes the fence and the foundation down to the ground level (Figure 1.1). MS i, O i. 1 2 O 1 7 Q 3 'a O 0 O 0 (.3 till s u 2 a c... a h h a i s h L E- N O. a) o if. 2 0 L p0 C 0 M V 0 s LL 0 a co y C ''PN R R 00 0 L L CO x O.) a E .r E s s E s 0 y i. ta) c 2 i -o 0 L Q., �.v•a E GL 0 a c s0 00 E c" R o s ao O 0 s P. c c s m 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 L. 0 Ti, R C L or s aIn CV 0) .r. 4..3— O Ct 4) L O w U R E o C L o 0 0 M 9 .o o c 0 et Sm. Y 0 00 6.) .0 3 0 00 0 M. 0 G) s cos co 0 0 -0 y .E .O T. p. N R U C U C y Z r L x 0 •6 0 0 c cc c y L 0 00 y O a) 0 0 R a0 S. -0 Q. 00 •0 0 0 0 0 s c •v c bd Q) v j 1:1 VI d C O a L .r 0 L C C 0 Q R c y c a O 0 E O O. J a' o h a) o Q C U >1 y 0„ w 'N^ 4.. y 42= O L •0 U' R D... C R c y 0 y 0 0 0 L O 0 0 A 00 1-40—o— o V a y.EY=0oo s•o 2 C v v 'fl 0 O X 0 0 O -0 00 0 d C S y 0 y w .0 R 0 LL 0. "0 0 s Q. s 0 c 0> s,. y 0.) E R R Q 00 L 0 •C e� o s 00 c -0 O CD 0 E 0 y O 0 A y .0 0 L Q vs V 0 0. U O C' A O y> C C... L 0 C s_ ci 4.. h L CO, O 0 i. R L "C E .0 s.... ac t 1- to a op O iii O a) 3—,- o -a-, 1 uJ� .23 00c0 Y 0 0 C y 3 4) a) C E o t o y 3 9 E -o w i 0 0 c 4) g C 0 t` a) 0 01. GID 2 O 0 ti 0 a) i 1 0 0 U 0 A a) t° E t3. a) 0 V h a) U C U 0 0 o U C y 4.. t° v1 R 3 N a) 0 t° s O 0 C R E C7 E S 0) w QI O 8 E 11 cn •E 'vs 0 it U 7► O y L 0 'Q a d h a C O 0 W c a V) L a (0 0s La s 3 0 �yi F. y 0 L V R 0) M r U la o y w U y co L 0 00 .0 O U y C( o s 35 e. 3 g y a) t s 6. t; U O 0 0) i y t. 0. 0 O c E C .J E Emi W y x 12 E y O e n d U C t° .D 0 ��rLr�� fA R t° a V y s a 0 d .0) t° k 5 a) 3 L y C r. 00 fS. 0 0 y a 0 E a) 0 x 0 F a 0.) 2 01 E v y t(0 y E a) 00 0) c a y C 0 y L U 7 0 R y L r w Q s ..r O o v1 0 v��O t�o ba o o E ^ma d 3 .o 3 t]. h U y CD E v 5 o Q 'l '0 CD t U ca) C e a C 1` 0 ea j O Q o 0 C ia 'C3 es o d To U 0 i? t 4] G. 3 w d y CPI L 0' 0 -v h a a i a) V U V s t C so 3 ea L w a) h IL c 0 y op c V et v i Q 7 t L7 0 h Te oD eA a ...%e L •`Q To a Wcl• r 3 E a.: C 0 O a)� 0 o c a is W 0 V S. et on U a, E 0 0 a) O U t,• 5 ea E y H e0 s c h U 2cc Q sEw3, EA o0 ct O p h a U o ea C C 1.L e'.. r L a) 2 s a 0 8 g 7. r w a s h a .r 0 0 tao ea L,' 0 Ol d O C0 U n- .L ...et ti 4) h h Q a5 a a) r 0 o A 0 U T co 0 a A h V ea r o E'=s v 3 8a=i L as w u a T a) ea O cLo p U b0 L 0 T Q s .y Y 0 'U tr. to a) h U s. 0 a) a s O-? 0 Do O O .r co ea E es L U h 0 i CO Q ca a) 0 c� 0 v) L C .C o .0 0) 7 0 E 0. w ti s o C1 a. y a. ccz G c 0 0 00 c s o F 0 3 c u s 0 r s U G7r to a c 'p .2 h C O y a 0- `0 o ez c a) 0 o- a) o E o o U E 0. o 0 es L 4. a y o 4. 3 a E a. L 0 i i to V O a� oo 0 C= p p 0 L L.- ea ea y 0 o L 0 r? 0 0 O O o. 9 O 0 O N 0 Q h Q 0 L w "Co 0 f� w a) a) U N i XI G.). a E '5 E a E s D y E s o.0 o 0 3 u 0 =a.c ea R Oa U y w 0 a E H o C "0 w O v 0 0 W 3 U a O CD 4) c et a) Q e 3 C w Q 4. h A C 2 y 3 r .0 W 0 0. x I a 4) 0 a C et E.., ea LL R CD O 3 0 0 0 as 1 Y D 0 04 O a L 0 r 0= et it ea D R 3 00 E C 4 ca i o U 8 =o Y. r L U Q t-• O 2 0) 0 1 0 E a) c u R a) U ai C U O c o U OD 0 c`. E a) m R o f o ea C 0 vi N c e O. E o. O 'a y O U O O y S a 0 N R y am n C4 c 3 R O.. h R 0 R s E c o U -5w s R qp a) c O C s OD a) ca E 0 a c 0 to '',7 O h F R a) N C E c E o o �•t 0 {.101 2 C. h 0) 0 0 CID •.r L O a) ea To c a) h a R c E 3 w CD .0 .O ra O y h _•0s C y v 0 y R b0 0 h E u) C -o I.. y C c) G O a) a) 0' R 3 Z U R 0 a.3._ Fr 0 y d R vi R um a) m E &a is •a) 0 R a a) 0 o C" 0. .0 "c 'C 0 y R O C. L R E O U GO o c r d O by 0 O F4 U y Co) 0 '0 0 0 cn 42 c7 .0 U 4.. G C� U C h O R O 0 a) d M r: .0 3 0 3 la) 3 0 1.. a w .0 0 ,v L ea 0 O C CD 23 s D 0 OD 0 O a R Y ep 0 GA m c ZS 0 y 0' R a) .O 0 y m L Co) C' L M M U r s M 3 C r_ 0 0 00 h c a) .0 0 R L L c O ea U X O o 0 •C -0 d 0 O 0 c .U, L 0 a E y 0 s a) R 7 t O .0 a) R O s >,.01 U Q) 0 0 c O I i h a) v R a) ea 3 a) a) e ra O C R two 0 c=) d C ;y 4.• c e o ea CO a R E u 3 ta .c. 0 L R s R to OD -0 R 0 M O L te y 0 C R 'C 0 C d R R> w 0 o C R 0 3. y CL) c z CO 3 0 CZ 6. 60 0 to) U C es i t 0 E •o e 0. a. o R -0 a o ?N L m 0 ee b o Q c G E L O ac R N R 0 0. (1) o ti op 0 0 w y 0 ON11H X3 !7 by Oi �r 0 N E 0 0 w 0 abvA gais awn gals N N 0 0 rn LL r Y r v E (N N N cr. .0 V y N c :5 ea N y c L O M 0 LP d w 4 a4, a .0 :3 t v s E 0 a3 s a0 1 ca -2 c z i ti C> 0 C i 0 ,t 0 t 0 E a CI) L s E =y -v E '3 E N a U 3 E s s 2 3 0 cp W N V7 r d b0 h0 U y et 0 y U E c E E E 0 c E 3 o c O y M a 0 0 t d O E> a0 Q E N °?til QE c 32 0 0 M 0 03 L y Q .0 to w La L W t c ca 5 0 L (0 0 R 'Q c E c c •y CO 0 J O d C oL a t o .0 CA L O ca.c 3 O J 0 0 c O O E Y 0 o C113 tu L e0 Y y as r a c t O 14 a) 0 i- a i3.Y O p' a F a 1- U U RS C. h O 0 0) y CZ Y .X CQ L t c a'0 a Tcs ca) Ca y) t0 O L L 'v O O O DD tQ E, ti y t0 041• R'• O ti C U d 5 d0 U d U L a) 0 a a a 3 O 6) Q U 'A p. Q t°. Q G 6 X '0 0 CI. 0 Chapter 16.24 FENCES* Sections: 16.24.010 Definitions. 16.24.020 Standard fences Height and, location regulations. 16.24.030 Special fences Height and regulations. 16.24.040 Fences at intersections. 16.24.050 Fences on residential lots abutting frontage roads. 16.24.060 Fences on corner lots. 16.24.065 Fences on through lots. 16.24.070 Prohibited fences. 16.24.080 Violations Penalty Enforcement. 16.24.090 Variances. Editor's Note: Prior ordinance history: Prior code 34.501 34.510, and Ordinance Nos. 2104, 2863, 2865 and 2960. Reprinted December 2002 Page 2 of 11 City of Palo Alto 16:24.010 Definitions. Throughout this chapter, the following definitions shall apply: (a) Height Measurement. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, height of fences or walls between the setback line and lot line shall be measured from natural grade, as determined by the chief building official. (b) "Lot line" means any boundary of a lot. Definitions of front, interior, rear, side and street lot lines shall be those contained in Chapter 18.04 of this code. (c) "Street setback line" means a line established by this code or any ordinance of the city. of Palo Alto to govern the placement of buildings with respect to streets and alleys, and shall be measured from the lot line. (d) Definitions of all "yards" (front, interior, rear, side and street yards) shall be those contained in Chapter 18.04 of this code, or as required by the special setbacks of Chapter 20.08 of this code. (Ord. 3754 1 (part), 1987) 16.24.020 Standard fences Height and location regulations. (a) Fences Between the Street Setback Line and the Lot Line. A fence, wall, or other structure in the nature of a fence located between the street setback line and the lot line, shall be permitted up to four feet in height, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. Support posts or columns, not exceeding five feet in height or eighteen inches in width, and pedestrian gates and trellises used as entryway features, not exceeding eight feet in height, three feet in depth or five feet in width shall be permitted. Coo iJ (b) Fences Beyond Setback Line. (1) Front Yards and Street Side Yards. A fence, wall, or other structure in the 1...01 nature of a fence, located beyond the street setback line in a front yard or other street side yard shall not exceed six feet in height, except that, where a street setback line exceeds sixteen feet, such fences or walls may be constructed to within sixteen feet of the lot line. (2) Interior Side Yards and Rear Yards. A fence, wall or other structure in the nature of a fence, located beyond the street setback line in an interior side yard or rear I N •_1oR. yard, shall not exceed seven feet in height, except that where a street setback line exceeds sixteen feet, such fences or walls may be constructed to within sixteen feet of the lot line. 1,01—e- (c) Fences on University Avenue. A fence, wall or other structure in the nature of a fence, up to six feet in height, except as otherwise provided in Section 16.24.040, may be located within the front and street side yard setbacks on residential property having street frontage on University Avenue, between Middlefield Road and the eastern city limit, provided that the fence complies with the following: (1) Fences shall be located on private property, no closer than five feet from the edge of the sidewalk nearest the house; (2) Structural and decorative posts or columns, not exceeding seven feet in height or eighteen inches in width, and spaced no closer than six feet apart, from center to center, shall be permitted; (3) The color, material and design of the fence shall be compatible with the architecture of the main dwelling unit on the site; (4) Screen landscaping and associated irrigation shall be installed and maintained on the street side of the fence; (5) Fences exceeding four feet in height shall not be located within a triangular area (a "sight distance triangle measured from a driveway, as shown in Figure 1*. Gates, which when in an open position, are entirely outside of the "sight distance triangle" shall be permitted. (d) Fences Adjacent to San Francisquito Creek Flood Control Expansion Area. A fence or wall up to ten feet in height may be located at the rear of any single family residential site adjacent to San Francisquito Creek and fronting on Edgewood Drive if the portion of the site subject to a permanent easement in favor of the Santa Clara Valley Water District (or its successor in interest) for flood control purposes is reconfigured after January 1, 2002. (Ord. 4751 2, 2002: Ord. 4224 1, 1994: Ord. 3754 1 (part), 1987) Editor's Note: Figure 1, referred to herein, may be found at this point in a printed edition of this code. 16.24.030 Special fences Height and regulations. The following special fences are permitted in accordance with the regulations contained in each subsection: (a) Fences Around Tennis Courts. Fences not to exceed twelve feet in height may be located around tennis courts, badminton courts, basketball or volleyball courts and similar play areas, providing that all parts of the fence over six feet are made of open wire construction of galvanized steel or other corrosion resistant material, and that the fences are behind the zoning setback line. (b) School Fences. School play areas may be fenced to the street line; provided, that the fence is made of open wire construction and does not exceed ten feet in height. (c) Security Fences. Fences not to exceed eight feet in height may be located around industrial, manufacturing, or research uses where required for security purposes, screening, or containing hazardous materials. (Ord. 3754 1 (part), 1987) 16.24.040 Fences at intersections. A fence, wall or structure in the nature of a fence located at the intersection of any street improved for vehicular traffic, shall not exceed three feet in height above the adjacent curb grade, within a triangular area formed by the curblines, and their projection, Reprinted December 2002 Page 3 of 11 l,atS( (-/wW5 and a line connecting them at points thirty -five feet from the intersection of the projected curblines. (Ord. 3754 1 (part), 1987) 16.24.050 Fences on residential lots abutting frontage roads. Where residential properties abut frontage roads, railroad rights -of -way, industrial or commercial areas, or public property other than a public street, fences of solid board or similar materials may be constructed to a height not to exceed eight feet. The height of such fences behind a sixteen -foot setback line shall be measured from natural grade. (Ord. 3754 1 (part), 1987) 16.24.060 Fences on corner lots. Where corner lots are adjacent to each other with rear yards joining, a six -foot fence is permitted on the street side yard lot line at a point beginning fifty feet from the radius point of the corner, except that where a driveway occurs in that area, no fence may be constructed for a clear distance of twelve feet from the point of intersection of driveway and property lines. This provision shall not apply to corner lots whose rear or side yard abuts an interior side yard of an adjacent property. (Ord. 3754 1 (part), 1987) 16.24.065 Fences on through lots. On a through lot, a six -foot fence is permitted on the rear lot line. The rear lot line is the property line abutting the street that does not provide the primary access to the lot. (Ord. 4081 2, 1992) 16.24.070 Prohibited fences. The following type fences are prohibited and are a nuisance constituting an unsafe and unlawful condition, and may be abated pursuant to Chapter 9.56 of this code: (a) Barbed wire fences; (b) All wire, twine or rope fences consisting of one or more strands of wire, twine or rope less than three feet in height and within three feet of any public sidewalk. (Ord. 3754 1 (part), 1987) 16.24.080 Violations Penalty Enforcement. (a) No person shall erect, construct or maintain any fence, wall or structure in the nature of a fence which does not meet the requirements of this section. (b) Violation of any provision of this chapter is an infraction, punishable as provided in this code. Each day of violation constitutes a separate offense and may be separately punished. (c) Persons employed in the following designated employee positions are authorized to exercise the authority provided in Penal Code Section 836:5 and are authorized to issue citations for violations of this chapter: chief building official, assistant building official and code enforcement officer. (Ord. 4305 8, 1995: Ord. 3754 1 (part), 1987) 16.24.090 Variances. A variance to any of the requirements of this chapter may be granted in accordance with the provisions and procedures set forth in Chapters 18.90 and 18.92 of Reprinted December 2002 Page 4 of 11 this code, except that no variance may be granted to the requirements contained in Section 16.24.040 or 16.24.070. Application submittal requirements and fees shall be the same as for a zoning variance application, as set forth in Chapter 18.90 of this code and in the municipal fee schedule. (Ord. 3754 1 (part), 1987) Note: Fences required for swimming pools are governed by the Uniform Building Code, Appendix Chapter 4, Section 421 as amended by PAMC. A separate informational handout is available for the public. Reprinted December 2002 Page 5 of 11 Reprinted December 2002 Figure 1 Page 6 of 11 t 16' STANDARD FENCES INTERIOR LOTS t -7' maximum sides rear Palo Alto Municipal Code References: Definitions 4' fences 6' fences 7' fences Posts gates Rear property line 16.24.010 16.24.020(a) 16.24.020(b)(1) 16.24.020(b)(2) 16.24.020(a) City property illill11 Sidewalk I!!Illll1111 NOTE: Your street —side property line may not begin at the sidewall The location of the property line may vary from 0' to 10' in from the inside edge of the sidewalk. Check at the Planning Division counter for the location of your street —side propety line.. Reprinted December 2002 Page 7 of 11 5' Posts may be up to 5' tall and 18' wide rte' EXAMPLE INTERIOR LOT FENCING Reprinted December 2002 le-- 5' --31 Exceptions for posts and gates in 4' fence 16.24.020(a) Pert), lire Pedestrian gates and trellises may be up to 8' tall and 5' wide 18' Palo Alto Municipal Code References: Definitions 16.24.010 4' fences 16.24.020(a) Posts gates 16.24.020(a) 6' fences 16.24.020(b)(1) 7' fences 16.24.020(b)(2) Page 8 of 1 1 See below for fences at intersections 1 ■1 ■1 •1 •1 ■1 ■1 ■1 ■I ■1 ■1 1 3' maximum fence height in shaded area 6' 6' Corner lot 7' 7' 111111 :•111111111 Reprinted December 2002 STANDARD FENCES CORNER LOTS EXAMPLE CORNER LOT FENCING Inter' or lots Street 7' Corner lot 6' 7' 6' 3' maximum fence height, measured from adjacent curb, within triangle formed by curb lines (and their projection) and a line connecting them at points 35' from the intersection of these. projected curb lines. 16.24.040 oti r \b NON Palo Alto Municipal Code r 0. References: "r y Definitions 16.24.010 3' fences 4' fences 6' fences 7' fences Posts .1 gates 1 16.24.020(a) 16.24.020(b) 16.24.020 (b) 16.24.02(a.) Page 9of11 N ls. SPECIAL FENCES BACK -TO -BACK CORNER LOTS •-i6L 5 0' --1 No fences permitted 5 0' EXAMPLE BACK —TO —BACK 1 �!Y n_p 1''•! rr i. ���v� Reprinted December 2002 6' See below for drive- way area Corner lot x• 16' ti Garag 7' 3' maximum fence height in shaded area 7 Corner lot 7' 5 See below for intersection restri ctions 6 FENCES AT DRIVEWAYS Driveway 12'- No fences permitted MMEMEMIMMEMEMMUM MMEMMUNUMEMEMMUM Page 10 of 11 FENCES AT INTERSECTION 3' maximum fence height measured from adjacent curb, within triangle formed by curb lines (and their projection) and a line connecting them at points 35' from the intersection of these projected curb line Palo Alto Municipal Code References: 3' fences 16.24.040 4' fences 16.24.020(a) 6' fences 16.24.020(b)(1) 6' fences 16.24.060 7' fences 16.24.020(b)(2) Definitions 16.24.010 Posts Z1 gates 16.24.020(a) At driveways 16.24.060 Example 16.24.050 OTHER SPECIAL FENCES, PROHIBITED FENCES, PERMITS AND VARIANCES Residential property abutting frontage ae roads, railroads, industrial or commercial areas, or public property (other than streets) 16' T Fences around school play yards: May be fenced to street line. Fence may be 10' high, and must be open wire. 16.24.030(b) Security fences: Fences around industrial, manufacturing or research uses or where required for security, screening or containing hazardous materials, may be up to 8' high. 16.24.030(c) Architectural Review Board Approval: Fences erected on property used for anything other than single family dwellings or duplexes require ARB approval, as do fences built in zones requiring site and design review. (O Example 16.24.030(a) T I NL41 c. Fences around tennis and badminton courts, basketball and volleyball courts and similar play area may be up to 12' tall. Only the lower 6' may be solid; the upper 6' must be open wire. The entire fence must be beyond the building setback line. (R -1: 6' or 8' sideyard, 20' fror and rear yard. R -E: 15' sideyard, 30' front and rear yard. Prohibited fences: Barbed wire fences Wire, twine or rope fences consistin of one or more strands less than 3' in height and within 3' of any publi sidewalk. 16.24.070 Variances: Variances may be considered for any of the requirements of the fence ordinanc except for the sections governing fens at intersections and prohibited fence=' A variance must be applied for and approved by the Zoning Administrator. 16.24.090 Reprinted December 2002 Page 11 of 11 F: \atty \muni\ laws \barry\hedgesamendext8- 9- 05 -12d City Council Meeting 9 -13 -05 walls :.violations. ORDINANCE NUMBER 2169 (CCS) (City Council Series) 1 City of Santa Monica Santa Monica, California AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA EXTENDING AND ADJUSTING THE MODIFICATIONS TO FENCE, WALL AND HEDGE STANDARDS, INCLUDING CHANGES TO THE HEDGE DEFINITION, ALLOWABLE HEDGE HEIGHTS, DEFINED FRONT YARD AREA, FRONT YARD ORNAMENTAL STRUCTURES, FRONT YARD SAFETY GUARDRAILS, AND TERRACED WALLS; GRANDPARENTING EXISTING NONCONFORMING HEDGES, FENCES AND WALLS, AND ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE AND DISCRETIONARY HEIGHT MODIFICATION PROCEDURES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findings and Purpose. The Council finds and declares: (a) During the past several years, the City received numerous complaints regarding fences and hedges that exceed the City's height limits and the lack of enforcement of these regulations. (b) In response to these complaints, the City's Code Enforcement staff began a program to encourage compliance and increase enforcement. (c) In 2003 -04, the City initiated hundreds of complaints for fences, hedges, and (d) The enforcement procedures undertaken by the City and the number of violations that the City pursued resulted in a significant public negative response. (e) Based on this public reaction, at City Council direction, enforcement of fence, hedge, and wall height violations, except safety related violations, was stayed until the regulations and enforcement practices could be reevaluated. (f) On October 12, 2004, the City Council heard extensive public testimony and discussed current regulation and enforcement practices pertaining to wall, fences, and hedges. At this meeting, the City Council directed to staff to consider a number of issues including alternative wall, fence and hedge height limits, opportunities to seek height adjustments, appropriate standards for design elements such as pergolas, and enforcement of nonconforming hedges. The Council also directed staff to review regulations in neighboring cities and conduct a public workshop. (g) City staff held the public workshop on March 9, 2005. The Planning Commission addressed these issues at a public hearing on April 6, 2005. (h) On May 10, 2005, the City Council reviewed regulations from other cities and results from a public workshop and received extensive public testimony. (i) Many people testified that the excessive regulation of hedge heights raise issues of paramount importance including infringement on personal security and privacy. Others residing adjacent to nonconforming hedges testified that these hedges impede their access to Tight and air and create detrimental shade and shadow impacts. This testimony highlighted the significant concern in the community regarding the appropriate standards that should govern walls, hedges, and fences. 2 0) At the May 10 hearing, the City Council directed staff to return with an interim ordinance which would retain certain existing regulations but authorize greater hedge heights in side and rear yards, allow decorative features in front yards, grandparent existing hedges, and establish a low cost height modification process. (k) As detailed above, the existing fence, wall, and hedge Zoning regulations pose a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents. For these reasons, the Zoning Ordinance requires review and revision as it pertains to the appropriate standards that should govern fences, hedges, and walls. (I) Pending completion of this review and revision, which will occur as part of the Land Use Element/Zoning Ordinance update, in order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, it is necessary on an interim basis to change the current fence, wall, and hedge standards, including changes to the hedge definition, allowable hedge heights, defined front yard area, front yard ornamental structures, front yard safety guardrails, and terraced wall; to grandparent existing nonconforming hedges, wall, and fences, and to establish administrative and discretionary height modification procedures. (m) In light of the above mentioned concerns, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2161(CCS) on July 26, 2005 changing the current fence, wall, and hedge standards, including changing the hedge definition, allowable hedge heights, defined front yard area, front yard ornamental structures, front yard safety guardrails, and terraced wall; grandparenting existing nonconforming hedges, walls, and fences; and establishing administrative and discretionary height modification. procedures. However, Ordinance Number 2161 (CCS) will expire on October 25, 2005 unless extended. SECTION 2. Interim Zoning. Subject to the hazardous visual obstruction requirements of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.02.090, any fence, wall, hedge, or flagpole shall comply with the following standards: (a) Definitions. (n) As described above, the City Council finds that an extension of this interim ordinance is necessary because there exists a current and immediate threat to the public safety, health, and welfare should the interim ordinance not be adopted. Consequently, this ordinance extends Ordinance Number 2161 (CCS) up to and including March 31, 2007. This extension will allow sufficient time for a comprehensive planning process to revise these standards on a permanent basis in conjunction with the Land Use Element/Zoning Ordinance update. (1) Hedge. A boundary or barrier of plant material formed by a row or series of shrubs, bushes or trees that enclose, divide or protect an area or that prevent a person from passing between any combination of individual shrubs, bushes, or trees. (2) Front yard area. The area between the front property line and the nearest building wall or front setback line, whichever is the shorter distance. (b) Maximum Heights in Front Yard Area. (1) Hedges, fences and walls shall not exceed forty -two inches in height. 42 (2) One pergola or similar feature limited to eight feet in height and width, and three feet in depth shall be permitted. Ornamental attachments atop a fence, wall, or Pero(A -5 hedge shall be permitted up to twelve inches above the maximum height limit with a maximum width of twelve inches for each attachment and a minimum distance of five feet between each attachment. (3) A guardrail may exceed the maximum height limit for a fence or wall, but only to the minimum extent required for safety by the Building Code. Safety guardrails must be at least 50% visually transparent above the fence or wall height limit. (4) Each terraced fence, wall or hedge, or combination thereof, shall be set back a minimum distance from each other equal to the height of the nearest fence, wall or hedge. V(14 (c) Maximum Heights in Side and Rear Yards. (1) A hedge shall not exceed twelve feet in height, except that there shall be no -1Av>es 12 PEtr height limit for hedges adjacent to an alley. (2) Fences and walls shall not exceed eight feet in height. '°'C vets vs W tU (3) A guardrail may exceed the maximum height limit for a fence, but only to the minimum extent required for safety by the Building Code. Safety guardrails must be at least 50% visually transparent above fence height limit. (d) Measuring Heights. The height of a fence, wall, or hedge shall be measured from the lowest finished grade on either side of the fence, wall, or hedge. (e) Height Modifications Administrative Process. The owner of a fence, wall or hedge may request that the Zoning Administrator administratively grant a modification to the height limit of side and rear fences, walls and hedges provided the height modification does not extend more than four feet above the height limit established in tLc-spfl ti -oc- subsection (c) of this Section. The Zoning Administrator may grant this modification request if the following findings of fact are made: �ls (1) The adjacent property owner(s) that share a common property line nearest to the fence, wall or hedge have agreed to the proposed increase in height. (2) The adjacent property owner(s) have provided verification of ownership in the adjacent property, have executed a notarized letter agreeing to the proposed height modification, and have agreed that notice of the modification determination can be recorded on their property with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office. The Zoning Administrator modification determination is not appealable and shall be recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on each property. DISCeellOthi (f) Height Modification Discretionary process: If an adjacent affected owner not agree to a proposed fence, wall, or hedge height modification in accordance with subsection (e) of this Section or if the owner of a fence, wall or hedge requests a height modification in excess of four feet in the side or rear yards or any modification to the height limits in the front yard area, the owner of the fence, wall or hedge may request that the Zoning Administrator grant a height modification to allow greater fence, wall, or hedge height in the front, side, or rear yard of the subject property based on the following findings: (1) The subject fence, wall, or hedge will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood and is required to mitigate impacts from adjacent land uses, the subject property's proximity to public rights -of -way, or safety concerns. 6 (2) The granting of such modification will not be detrimental or injurious to the property or improvements in the general vicinity and district in which the property is located. (3) The modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence, wall, or hedge is located. This modification process shall be conducted in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.10.040. However, the variance application findings set forth in Section 9.04.20.10.050 shall not be required. The decision of the Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Planning Commission within 14 consecutive calendar days of the date the decision is made in the manner provided in Part 9.04.20.24, Sections 9.04.20.24.010 through 9.04.20.24.050. (g) Existing Nonconforming Hedges, Fences and Walls. All existing nonconforming hedges, fences and walls shall be grandparented at their existing Dtst" heights as of the effective date of this interim ordinance unless an objection is filed in CSN accordance with the following procedure: (1) Within 60 days from the effective date of Ordinance Number 2161 (CCS), adjacent property owner(s) or tenant(s) with intersecting or shared property lines with the owner of the nonconforming hedge, fence or wall may file a written objection to the nonconforming hedge, fence or wall with the Zoning Administrator. Upon receipt of the written objection, the Zoning Administrator shall send notice to the nonconforming hedge, fence or wall property owner(s) and provide an opportunity for them. to submit any relevant information in response to the objection within ten calendar days. The Zoning Administrator may grant the objection only if the Zoning Administrator finds that ltirm allowing the hedge, fence or wall to remain at its existing height would be significantly detrimental or injurious to the complainant due to the hedge's, fence's or wall's substantial impact on Tight, shadow, air, or safety, or other objective quality of life impacts. It is the complainant's burden to demonstrate this substantial impact. In assessing the objection, the Zoning Administrator shall take into account the nonconforming hedge's, fence's or wall's location, age, height, and other related features. If the Zoning Administrator grants the objection, the height of the hedge, fence or wall shall only be reduced to the extent necessary to address the identified impacts. The Zoning Administrator's determination shall be in writing. The decision of the Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Planning Commission within 14 consecutive calendar days of the date the decision is made in the manner provided in Part 9.04.20.24, Sections 9.04.20.24.010 through 9.04.20.24.050. (h) Flagpoles. Freestanding flagpoles may not exceed the height restrictions of the district in which they are located. (i) Registration_ The City Manager shall promulgate rules to permit the registration of grandparented hedges, fences and walls in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance. SECTION 3. To the extent of any conflict between this Ordinance and the hazardous visual obstruction requirements of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.10.02.090, the hazardous visual obstruction requirements shall control. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect after March 31, 2007 unless prior to that date, after a public hearing, noticed pursuant to Santa 8 Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.22.050, the City Council, by majority vote, extends this interim ordinance. SECTION 5. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 6. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 7. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from its adoption. APPROVED AS TO FORM: M'SHA S MOU RIE City Attorney 9 Approved and adopted this 13th day of September Noes: State of Califomia County of Los Angeles ss. City of Santa Monica 1, Maria M. Stewart, City Clerk of the City of Santa Monica, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2169 (CCS) had its introduction on August 9, 2005, and was adopted at the Santa Monica City Council meeting held on September 13, 2005, by the following vote: Ayes: Council members: Mayor Pro Tem Katz, Bloom, Genser, Holbrook, McKeown; Shriver Council members: None Abstain: Council members: None Absent: Council members: Mayor O'Connor ATTEST: Maria M. Stewart, ty Clerk ayor Pro Tem K 1. roor 2. L,tMtr SANTA CLARA COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 4.20: SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS provided that its area is not less than 3,750 square feet and it complies with all other applicable land development regulations. B. Setback Exceptions. See §4.20.110 for special setback exceptions for substandard lots. 4.20.050 Fences A. Fences In Urban Residential Districts. Fences in all R1, R1E, R2, R1S and RHS districts, and Al districts within urban service areas are subject to all of the following regulations: Fences or hedges shall not exceed three (3) feet in height within any portion of 41 t (54— a lot within 20 feet of the front lot line (or edge of front right -of -way). Zo F T Fences or hedges shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height within any other portion of a lot, except as specified in subsection 3 below. 3. On corner lots, fences along the exterior side lot line (or edge of side right -of -way). /24,16g may be as tall as eight (8) feet, except that a three -foot AA height limitation shall apply w within the following areas: (a) within the 40 -foot sight clearance triangle defined by Section B17-69 of the TI 4 iL County Ordinance Code, which relates to vehicular vtcAltuiii sight clearance on intersecting streets, and (b) within a 20 -foot sight clearance triangle where the rear of a corner lot abuts the front and side yards of a key lot. REV: APRIL 2006 Fig. 4.20 -8 Fences— Urban Districts County of Santa Clara 3' MAXIMUM HEIGHT 8' MAXIMUM HEIGHT 3 r SANTA CLARA COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 4.20: SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 4. Where architecture and site approval is required for the establishment of a use, the regulations specified in this section may be modified through the architecture and site approval process (Chapter 5.40). 5. Fences that reasonably must exceed the height limitations specified within this section, such as enclosures for tennis courts, or due to physical circumstances such as unusual topography, or for consistency with and preservation of neighborhood character, may be allowed subject to the design review provisions of Chapter 5.50. 6. Fences in -d" and "-sr" combining districts shall be subject to the design review provisions of Chapter 5.50. B. Fences in Rural Districts. Fences in A, AR, HS, RR and RS districts and Al districts outside of urban service areas are subject to all of the following regulations: 1. Fences or hedges not exceeding six (6) feet in height may occupy any portion of a lot within 20 feet of the edge of any street right -of -way. However, on corner lots where two (2) or more streets intersect, Section B17-69 of the County Ordinance Code relating to sight clearance for fences and hedges applies. 2. No fence may be built in a manner that significantly obstructs the view from vehicles exiting a driveway of approaching vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Within a triangle formed by two (2) 20 -foot sides measured from the point of intersection along the edge of pavement and the edge of driveway, no fence may exceed three (3) feet in height, unless design review approval is obtained under Chapter 5.50. ,j, 20' EDGE OF PAVED ROADWAY Fig. 4.20 -9 Fences Rural Districts 3. Fences or hedges not exceeding eight (8) feet in height may occupy any portion of a lot other than the restricted areas described in subparagraphs (1) and two (2), above. S TE CLEARANCE TRIANGLE 3' MAXIMUM HEIGHT 6' MAXIMUM HEIGHT 8' MAXIMUM HEIGHT one REV: APRIL 2006 SANTA CLARA COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 4.20: SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REV: APRIL 2006 4. Where architecture and site approval is required for the establishment of a use, the regulations specified in this subsection may be modified through the architecture and site approval process. 5. Fences that reasonably must exceed the height limitations specified within this section, such as for tennis courts, or due to physical circumstances such as unusual topography, or for consistency with and preservation of neighborhood character, may be allowed subject to the design review provisions of Chapter 5.50. 6. Fences in -d" and -sr" combining districts shall be subject to the design review provisions of Chapter 5.50. [Fig. 4.20 -9] 4.20.060 Manufactured Homes Manufactured (factory- built) homes and mobile homes shall be certified under the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974. 4.20.070 Motor Vehicle Repair and Storage in Residential Districts Intent. It is the intent of this section to limit certain activities associated with the repair and storage of motor vehicles that occur on residential property so that such activities do not disturb neighboring residents. Limitations. On any residential lot in any zoning district, the servicing, repairing, assembling, disassembling, wrecking, modifying or otherwise working (hereinafter referred to as "work" within this section) on any motor vehicle or the placing or storing of disabled or inoperative motor vehicles, motor vehicle bodies, parts, equipment, machinery, tools or other metal materials of any kind is only permitted if all of the following are met: 1. Work may be performed only on a motor vehicle registered to a person residing on the lot. 2 Storing disabled or inoperative vehicles. A disabled vehicle is one that cannot immediately be started and moved under its own power or is not currently registered for use on the public right -of -way. a. Disabled or inoperative vehicles shall be stored in areas screened from public view and from adjacent properties. b. No more than two (2) disabled or inoperative vehicles are allowed to be stored or worked on per lot. 3 Motor vehicle repair and storage shall not constitute a legal, nonconforming use, and this provision shall supersede any contrary provision of Chapter 4.50. County of San Mateo (b) In the case of an interior lot abutting upon one (1) street, no detached accessory building shall be erected or altered so as to encroach upon the front half of such lot. In the case of an interior lot abutting upon two or more streets, no accessory building shall be erected or altered so as to encroach upon the fourth (1/4) of the lot nearest either street. In the case of a reversed corner lot, no accessory building shall be erected or altered so as to encroach on the area between such street and lines drawn approximately parallel to such streets, respectively, in such a manner that each of such lines divides the lot into two (2) equal areas. In the case of other corner lots, no accessory building shall be erected or altered so as to be closer to any street side lot line than a distance equal to the width of a side yard required for this lot. No detached accessory building shall be closer to the side lot line of the front one -half (1/2) of any adjacent lot than one -half (1/2) the width of the side yard required for such adjacent lot; provided, however, that no accessory building shall be Tess than five (5) feet from such side lot line. (g) Notwithstanding any requirements in this article, the foregoing rules shall not require any detached accessory building to be more than seventy -five (75) feet from any street line bounding the lot. SECTION 6412. Fences, walls and hedges shall be subject.to the following regula- tions, except as provided in Section 6412.1: (a) Fences, walls, and hedges not exceeding four (4) feet in height may occupy any front yard area. (b) Fences, walls, and hedges not exceeding six (6) feet in height may occupy any side or rear yard area, provided: 1. That they do not extend into any required front yard. 2. That, in the case of a corner lot, they do not extend into the side yard required along a side street or into that portion of the rear yard abutting such side street which is equal to the width of the side yard required on said side street. (c) On any parcel of land having a street frontage of one hundred (100) feet or more, and located in any "S" District requiring a minimum building site of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet or more, fences, hedges, or walls not exceeding 22.11 22.12 six (6) feet in height may be erected in any part of the yard area, except as limited by Paragraph (d). (d) On any corner lot, the maximum height of fences, walls, hedges, and growth COPri located within fifty (50) feet of the intersected street lines shall not exceed four (4) feet in height; provided that nothing in this section shall prevent any fence, Lor wall, or hedge from occupying any portion of the lot area that a main residence may occupy under the terms of this Part. (e) Where trees are located within fifty (50) feet on the intersected street lines, the main trunks of such trees shall be trimmed free of branches to a height of seven c4 E and a half (7.5) feet above the curb grade. SECTION 6412.1. With regard to the height limits set out in Section 6412, whenever there exists an abrupt shift in the height of the land at the boundary line between two DEG different property owners, the lower owner may erect a fence, wall or hedge on the sft boundary to a height limit set out in Section 6412, and in no event more than twelve (12) feet high. T SECTION 6412.2. On parcels located outside the Coastal Zone, the Planning Director may approve an exception to allow fences or hedges to exceed the height limits set forth in Section 6412 by up to two (2) feet, providing that: 1 Written notification of the exception request is sent to all owners of property. O located within 300 feet of the parcel where the fence or hedge is proposed to be placed, and to any member of the public requesting such notification, and ss (2) Written notification of the exception request is sent to all recognized organizations or associations that have been established to represent the property owners in the neighborhood surrounding the parcel where the fence or hedge is proposed to be placed, and to any organization or association requesting such notification. An organization or association shall be considered recognized if it has been in existence for at least six months, and has scheduled meetings, and No member of public nor organization or association has submitted to the Planning Director written objection to the exception request, and (4) After consultation with the Director of Public Works, the Planning Director finds that approving the exception will not jeopardize public safety, and (5) After viewing the parcel where the fence or hedge is proposed, the Planning Director finds that approving the exception will be compatible with the neighbor- hood surrounding that parcel, and will not be detrimental to the public welfare, and (3) (1) Approving the exception will not jeopardize public safety, and (3) 22.13 (6) The Planning Director finds that the proposed fence or hedge promotes or enhances good design, site relationships and other aesthetic considerations, in accordance with San Mateo County General Plan Policy 4.14. In order to make this determination, the Planning Director may condition the exception with certain requirements, including design, location, materials, colors, and landscaping requirements. The Planning Director's decision on an exception authorized by this section shall not require a public hearing. The Planning Director's decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission, accompanied by a fee, as set by resolution of the Board of Supervisors. Appeal: Upon appeal, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing, shall review the Planning Director's decision, and may approve an exception, providing all of the following findings can be made: (2) Approving the exception will be compatible with the neighborhood surrounding the parcel where the fence or hedge would be placed and will not be detrimental to the public welfare, and The proposed fence or hedge promotes or enhances good design, site relationships and other aesthetic considerations, in accordance with San Mateo County General Plan Policy 4.14. In order to make this determination, the Planning Commission may condition the exception with certain requirements, including design, location, materials, colors and landscaping requirements. The decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the Board of Supervisors. Appeals to the Board of Supervisors shall be subject to the same procedures and requirements as appeals to the Planning Commission. Application: Application for the exception authorized by this section shall be made in writing on a form provided by the Planning and Building Division, and accompanied by a fee, as set by resolution of the Board of Supervisors. At minimum, the application shall include a site plan and elevation identifying the location, height, design, material and color of the proposed fence or hedge. Notice of Administrative Decision: At least ten (10) days prior to the Planning Director acting on an exception request, written notice of the pending decision shall be sent by first class mail to all owners of property located within 300 feet of the parcel where the fence or hedge is proposed to be placed, and all recognized organizations or associations that have been established to represent the property owners in the neigh borhood surrounding the parcel where the fence or hedge is proposed to be placed. Concurrently, written notice shall be prominently posted in the front yard of the parcel where the fence or hedge is proposed to be placed. Written notice shall contain at least the following information: (1) The date and time when the decision will be made. (2) The name of the property owner and applicant. (3) The location of the property where the proposed exception would occur. (4) A short, general description of the proposal, including the fence or hedge location, height, design, material and color. (5) A statement that any written objection to the request must be received by the Planning and Building Division before the date and time when the decision will be made. (6) The name and address of the staff person who may be contacted for additional information or to file an objection to the request. Objection: Any objection to the proposed exception shall be received by the Planning Director in writing before the date and time when the decision will occur. Notice of Hearing on Appeal: At least ten (10) days prior to the Planning Commission considering an exception request that is under appeal, written notice of the Planning Commission hearing shall be sent by first class mail to the same individuals and organizations who received notice before the Planning Director's decision on the proposed exception. Written notice shall contain at least the following information: (1) The date and time when the decision will be made. (2) The name of the property owner and applicant. (3) The location of the property where proposed exception would occur. (4) A short, general description of the proposal. (5) The name of the staff person who may be contacted for additional information. SECTION 6414. No electric or luminous signs containing red or green colors shall be erected within one hundred fifty (150) feet of an intersection containing stop lights without securing a use permit as specified in Chapter 24 of this Part. SECTION 6415.0. MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PRE APPLICATION PROCEDURES. 22.14 SECTION 6415.1. PURPOSE. The purpose of the pre application procedures process is to foster early public involvement and input on major development projects and, to the extent feasible, resolve potential issues before the formal County review process begins. SECTION 6415.2. GENERAL REQUIREMENT. A proposal shall comply with the pre application procedures described in Sections 6415.0- 6415.4, if the proposal requires consideration at a public hearing, and involves: (a) Major subdivision, i.e., a proposal to create five (5) or more new parcels, (b) Lot line adjustment that reconfigures at least five (5) or more existing parcels, (c) (f) (g) Residential development involving ten (10) or more new dwelling units, (d) Visitor serving development (e.g., hotels, hostelries, restaurants) involving or requiring: (1) Ten (10) or more new hotel or hostelry lodging units, or (2) Sixty (60) or more new restaurant and /or bar area seats, or (3) Two (2) or more density credits (rural Coastal Zone only), (e) Institutional development, including, but not limited to, educational, religious, cultural, health care or community care facilities that would typically result in forty (40) or more people congregating on the property at any one time, Any development proposal involving more than ten thousand (10,000) square feet of new structural floor area, Any development proposal which, in the opinion of the Planning Director, is similar in type and size as those projects in (a) (f), and warrants early neighborhood input due to potential environmental impacts, or (h) Any General Plan or Local Coastal Program land use map amendment that would increase the allowable land use density or intensity. A development permit application for a proposal involving one of the development types identified in Section 6415.1 will not be deemed complete pursuant to the State Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920 et seq.) if such proposal has not complied with the pre application requirements of Sections 6415.0- 6415.4. SECTION 6415.3. EARLY ASSISTANCE MEETING. Prior to submitting a development permit application for a proposal involving one of the development types identified in Section 6415.1, the applicant shall request an early assistance meeting 22.15 with County planning staff to allow staff to explain the land use planning issues, policies, and process applicable to the proposed development. The early assistance meeting required by this section is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061 (General Rule) and 15306 (Information Gathering), due to the fact that the required early assistance meeting is solely for information gathering purposes and has no potential for causing any effect on the environment. The applicant shall provide staff with a preliminary plan and descriptive materials necessary to convey a general understanding of the tentative proposal. The staff shall (a) acquaint the applicant with the significant land use planning issues, key general plan policies, and zoning and other development regulations applicable to the proposal, (b) suggest changes to the proposal that would result in better compliance with the County requirements; (c) describe any additional County expectations related to the proposal, (d) explain the permit review and decision process, and (e) describe applicable fees. Within ten (10) days of the early assistance meeting, staff shall provide the applicant with a brief written summary of the key points discussed at the meeting. SECTION 6415.4. PUBLIC WORKSHOP. After the early assistance meeting, but prior to submitting the required application forms and fees for the development permits for one of the development types identified in Section 6415.1, the applicant shall request, in writing, that staff sponsor a pre application public workshop. The public workshop is intended to allow community members and public agency representatives the opportunity to provide the applicant with project input before the preparation of final development plans. Similar to the "scoping" function (CEQA Guidelines Section 15083), the public workshop may result in pre application project modifications, and solve problems that would otherwise arise in more serious forms later in the review process. The public workshop is for informational purposes only and shall not confer or imply any approval or rejection of the proposed project by the County of San Mateo. The public workshop required by this section is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061 (General Rule) and 15306 (Information Gathering), due to the fact that the required public workshop is solely for information gathering purposes and has no potential for causing any effect on the environment. When requesting a pre application public workshop, the applicant shall provide staff with the following materials which would convey a preliminary description of the tentative proposal: 22.16 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jana Rinaldi, Code Compliance Specialist MEETING DATE: August 07, 2007 SUBJECT: Newsrack Ordinance STUDY SESSION REQUIREMENTS: The Study Session is a fact finding meeting where the Commission may discuss the item and ask questions from or hear statements from members of the public attending the meeting. During the Study Session, the Planning Commission may only discuss items related to the project. The agenda does not allow any formal votes or motions on the proposed project or other matters. No comments made during the Study Session by the Planning Commission are binding or required to be carried through to the formal public hearing where actions will be taken on the proposed project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the Newsrack Ordinance and provide input to staff regarding updates. DISCUSSION TOPICS: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Newsrack specifications PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEMORANDUM Possible goals of the code include, but are not limited to: Regulate newsrack vendors; Newsrack design; Newsrack permit process; Regulate newsrack placement Item 2 FUTURE PROCESS: The project has been scheduled for a public hearing with the Planning Commission on August 22, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Theater. Traditional 49-16/100 -7-, TK-100 TK-100 with with Center Slanted Top Radius Top Click 1 Options for 1 Prices Impressions I Sho-Racks to be Displayed TRAYS 15 3/8" deep (front to back) PEDESTALS 18" Wide, 6 3/4" deep, 14" x 14" base MB #1 Single Width 24 1/4" wide 14 lbs. Shipping Wt. MB #2 Double Width 48 1/2" 22 lbs. Shipping Wt. MB #3 Triple Width 72 3/4" 31 lbs. Shipping Wt. MP #1 15 1/4" high 26 lbs. Shipping Wt. MP #2 19" hig 28 lbs. Shipping Wt. MP #3 23" high 32 lbs. Shipping Wt. One K-100 One Needed One Needed Two K-100's One Needed One Needed Three K-100's One Needed Two Needed Two Needed Two K-49-16 (Stacked) One Needed One Needed Two K-49-16 (Side-by-Side) One Needed One Needed Three K-49-16 (Side-by-Side) One Needed Two Needed Four K-49-16 (Stacked) 2 High 2 Wide One Needed One Needed Six K-49-16 (Stacked) 2 High 3 Wide Needed One Two Needed to-Rack Traditional 49-16/100 http://www.shorack.com/coinoperated/Traditional49-16_100.htm Home Place Order Broadsheet Modulars Tabloid Mechanisms Free Mech Seminars Decals Impressions Color Chart Contact Us COIN OPERATED NEWS RACKS MODULAR Kaspar Co. I Sho-Rack I Die &Tool 1 KASELCO 1 Wire Works 1 Kaspar Outdoors I Electroplating 7/31/2007 7:20 AM One K -100 and Two K -49 -16 (Stacked) One Needed One Needed Two K -100 and Two K -49 -16 (Stacked) One Needed Two Needed One K -100 and Four K -49 -16 (Stacked) 2 High 2 Wide One Needed Two Needed ho -Rack Traditional 49- 16/100 f7 http://www.shorack.com/coinoperated/Traditional49-16_100.htm Place Order Kaspar Co. 1 Sho- Rack 1 Die Tool I KASELCO Kaspar Wire Works 1 Kaspar Outdoors 1 Electroplating Company History 1 Contact Us 1 Careers (a7 Kaspar's 2000 Kaspar Corporation. All rights reserved. 7/31/2007 7:20 AM DISCUSSION TOPICS: TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jana Rinaldi, Code Compliance Specialist MEETING DATE: August 07, 2007 SUBJECT: Blighted Property Ordinance ATTACHMENTS: None PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEMORANDUM Item 3 STUDY SESSION REQUIREMENTS: The Study Session is a fact finding meeting where the Commission may discuss the item and ask questions from or hear statements from members of the public attending the meeting. During the Study Session, the Planning Commission may only discuss items related to the project. The agenda does not allow any formal votes or motions on the proposed project or other matters. No comments made during the Study Session by the Planning Commission are binding or required to be carried through to the formal public hearing where actions will be taken on the proposed project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the proposed Blighted Property Ordinance and provide input to staff. Possible goals of the code include, but are not limited to: Buildings that are vacant and unsecured that could harbor animals or intruders or otherwise serve as an attractive nuisance; Buildings in a state of disrepair (e.g., building exteriors, walls, fences, retaining walls, driveways, or walkways that are broken or deteriorated to the extent that the disrepair is visible from a street or neighboring properties); Overgrown, diseased, dead or decayed trees, weeds or other vegetation that substantially detracts from the aesthetic and property values of neighboring properties; and Other conditions of deterioration or disrepair that creates a substantial adverse impact on neighboring properties. FUTURE PROCESS: The project has been scheduled for a public hearing with the Planning Commission on August 22, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Theater. CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, August 8, 2007 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers /Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Manny Cappello, Rishi Kumar, Robert Kundtz, Susie Nagpal, Linda Rodgers, Yan Zhao and Chair Joyce Hlava PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MINUTES: Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of July 11, 2007 ORAL COMMUNICATION: 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: REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA: Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on August 2, 2007 REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS: If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an "Appeal Application" with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15- 90.050 (b). CONSENT CALENDAR: None PUBLIC HEARINGS: All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants /Appellants and their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the Public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant /Appellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. 1. APPLICATION #07 -319 (510 -06 -069) Adams, 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road The applicant requests Use Permit and Design Review approval to construct a new two -story single family residence, including a basement, and to allow a height exception of approximately three feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence and garage will be approximately 5,013 square feet. The lot size is approximately 1.9 acres and the site is zoned R -1- 40,000. (Suzanne Thomas) 2. APPLICATION #07 -337 (389 -06- 014,015)) Shultz, 12945 Saratoga Road The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the installation of an emergency power back -up generator in association with an existing medical facility. The emergency generator would be located on the right side of the building, screened from public view, and would be located approximately 24 feet from the right side property line. Zoning. P -A (Chris Riordan) P:\PC Agendas\2007\Agn 080807.doc 3. APPLICATION #07 -396 (517 -22 -075) Arimilli, 15400 Peach Hill Road The applicant requests Design Review and Use Permit approval to construct a new two -story single family residence, including a basement and an attached Secondary Dwelling Unit, and a request for a Height Exception to allow the project to exceed the maximum 26 foot height limit by 3.5 feet for a total height of 29.5 feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence and garage will be approximately 6,713 square feet. The net lot size is approximately 1.6 acres and the site is zoned R -1- 40,000. (Chris Riordan) DIRECTORS ITEM: None COMMISSION ITEMS: None COMMUNICATIONS None ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Wednesday, August 22, 2007 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 August 2, 2007 at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us If you would like to receive the Agenda's via e please send your e address to plannina(a)saratoga.ca.us NOTE: To view previous Planning Commission meetings anytime, go the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us P:\PC Agendas \2007\Agn 080807.doc DATE: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 PLACE: Council Chambers /Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Hlava called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cappello, Hlava, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers and Zhao Absent: Commissioner Kumar Staff: Director John Livingstone, Contract Planner Heather Bradley, City Arborist Kate Bear and Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Meeting of June 27, 2007. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Rodgers, the Planning Commission minutes of the regular meeting of May 27, 2007, were adopted with corrections to pages 2 and 9. (5- 0 -1 -1; Commissioner Kumar was absent and Commissioner Kundtz abstained) ORAL COMMUNICATION There were no oral communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director John Livingstone announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on July 5, 2007. CONSENT CALENDAR There were no consent items. REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION Chair Hlava 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). Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for July 11, 2007 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 Application #07 -319 (510 -06 -069) Adams, 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct a new two -story, single family residence, including a basement, and to allow a height exception of approximately three feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence and garage will be approximately 5,013 square feet. The lot size is approximately 1.9 acres and the site is zoned R -1- 40,000 This item will be continued to a date uncertain. (Suzanne Thomas) Chair Hlava advised that Item No. 1 was to be continued to a date uncertain. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 2 APPLICATION #07 -342 (286 -10 -043) McDonald's USA, LLC, 18578 Prospect Road: The applicant is requesting Design Review Approval and modification to a previously- approved Conditional Use Permit to occupy an existing 4,090 square foot vacant commercial building previously occupied by. Krispy Kreme doughnut. Design Review Approval is necessary to allow minor exterior modifications to the building. The lot size is 2.14 acres and the site is zoned CN (Commercial Neighborhood). This item will be continued to a date uncertain. (Heather Bradley) Chair Hlava advised that Item No. 2 would also be continued to a date uncertain. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 3 City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer advised Chair Hlava of the need to open the public hearing to see if anyone present wishes to address the Commission. Chair Hlava opened the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Nagpal, seconded by Commissioner Kundtz, the Plan ning Commission CONTINUED TO A DATE UNCERTAIN Design Review Approval and Modification to a previously approved Conditional U se Permit (Application #07 -342) to allow a McDonald's restaurant to establish in the former Krispy Kreme location at 18578 Prospect Road, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cappello, Hlava, Kundtz, Nagpal, Rodgers and Zhao NOES: None ABSENT: Kumar ABSTAIN: None Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for July 11, 2007 Page 3 APPLICATION #07 -160 (510 -03 -012) Labio, 15211 Bellecourt Drive: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct a new two -story residence of approximately 6,008 square feet (including garage) with an approximately 2,267 square foot basement. The proposal includes demolition of the existing 2,365 square foot residence. The maximum impervious coverage is approximately 34.4 percent of the site. The maximum height of the proposed buildings is 26 feet. The lot size is 45,784 square feet and the site is zoned R -1- 40,000. (Heather Bradley) Contract Planner Heather Bradley presented the staff report as follows: Advised that a letter has been distributed this evening that was received from the neighbors to the rear after the reports had already gone out to the Commissioners. Explained that the applicant is seeking Design Review Approval to allow the construction of a 6,008 square foot home on a 45,780 square foot lot. Added that an existing house would be demolished and the new home with basement constructed. The architectural design is Contemporary Mediterranean including stucco walls, a slate tile roof and stone veneer wainscoting. Stated that this property is heavily wooded. She. explained that 32 of 86 trees on site would have to be removed, one of which is actually on the neighboring property that is being removed with the permission of that neighbor. Reported that at Tuesday's site visit the applicant's Arborist recommended the removal of Tree 29, a coastal redwood, due to poor health and proximity to the house. The City Arborist (Kate Bear) has recommended retention of that tree. Said that a sport court is being constructed at the rear of the property and the rear neighbor has expressed concern about noise, view shed and removal of Trees 66 and 67, both of which are coastal live oaks. Said that the City's Arborist has recommended that grading activity for the sports court be kept at least 10 feet away from those two trees, which is incorporated into the conditions of approval. Stated that staff can make the determination that this project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA and that Design Review findings can be made in the affirmative. Recommended approval. Commissioner Kundtz asked about how Condition 14 can be enforced. It requires that during construction trees be watered every three weeks. Planner Heather Bradley advised that the conditions are copied onto the construction drawings and the contractor will be required to supervise the activities on site. She added that the City's Arborist would review the condition of the trees. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the City Arborist would be making comments this evening or is she just available in the event there are questions. Planner Heather Bradley replied whichever the Commission prefers. Chair Hlava opened the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Mr. Labio, Applicant and Property Owner: Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for July 11, 2007 Page 4 Thanked the Commissioners for their site visit. Explained that he and his wife started this project early last year. Assured that it was their goal to comply with all City regulations and no exceptions to regulations have been requested. Added that another goal had been to create a home that is energy efficient. It includes features such as natural light, preservation of as many trees as possible to provide shade and natural cooling, good insulation including walls, windows and foundation as well as use of energy efficient appliances. Said that they will use green building techniques. Reiterated that much effort has been put to tree preservation. Stated that since the first design, the sports court has been reduced, the lawn has been confined to an area to the rear of the pool and in -law structure. Advised that they secured the services of Landscape Architect Jeffrey Heid. Recounted that they have considered a variety of locations for the sports court in order to minimize the need for tree removal. Added that during the site visit, he had forgotten to show the trees located at the front of the property including seven Douglas fir, a grove of cedars, a grove of redwoods at the southeast corner, and a large tree #21) on the northeast corner that is being preserved by rerouting drainage. Said that the house was originally proposed for further to the left and up. Said that of the 31 trees slated for removal, 9 are unhealthy and 22 are healthy. Pointed out that while that sounds like a lot of trees for removal this property has 86 trees and that does not include smaller trees that are not surveyed. Reported that this is a one -acre property that is actually overcrowded with trees. They are preserving 55 of the existing trees and adding 10 new trees. Assured that a lot of work has been done to preserve trees and care will be to place new trees on site. Commissioner Zhao asked Mr. Labio if he has had the chance to read his neighbor's letter. Mr. Labio: Explained that he had met with the Michaels at their home for a one -hour meeting. They expressed three areas of concern. One was the potential removal of Trees 66 and 67 due to a negative impact on privacy with that removal. Added that he could still try to save Trees 66 and 67. Said that as for privacy impacts, a grove of trees between the two properties provides a lot of screening between the properties. Said that the level of the sports court is lower than the neighbor's property and a retaining wall would be used. Informed that he was thinking perhaps a wood fence could also be added although he believes it would be hard to see this sports court from their property. Suggested that the noise from his sports court would be less of a noise impact that a dog or to kids playing in a yard pool. Added that the court would not be in 24/7 use. He said that one hour a day would be a best case. Said that noise can be mitigated and would only be heard from the edge of their property. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for July 11, 2007 Page 5 Said that if this remains a big concern, he is willing to consider alternate designs in consultation with Planner Heather Bradley and City Arborist Kate Bear. Commissioner Nagpal asked Mr. Labio if he is willing to save Trees 66 and 67 as well as Tree 29. Mr. Labio said he was willing to preserve Trees 66 and 67 but is not comfortable with retaining Tree 29. He added that Tree 29 is described in his Arborist's report as being in deteriorating condition that is already a moderate hazard to the existing house. Commissioner Nagpal asked if Trees 56 and 57 are being removed to accommodate other landscaping there. City Arborist Kate Bear explained that they are being removed due to poor health. Commissioner Nagpal sought clarification from City Arborist Kate Bear that of the 31 -32 trees being removed, only 10 are because of poor condition. City Arborist Kate Bear replied yes. She added that even if there were no construction proposed those trees should be removed due to decay and /or poor health. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the conditions require retention of Tree 29. City Arborist Kate Bear replied yes. Chair Hlava asked City Arborist Kate Bear to elaborate on the statement made that this property in general has too many trees and that crowded trees affect their health. City Arborist Kate Bear agreed. She said that this is a heavily forested lot with large trees, with trunks ranging between 15 and 30- inches in diameter. The trees shade each other out to a point that there are not enough branches growing and nutrients in the soil are stressed. Chair Hlava asked if preserving the cedar and redwood groves are worthwhile. City Arborist Kate Bear replied yes. Chair Hlava said that Trees 66 and 67 look really nice. Since they are so close to Trees 62 through 65 could the two trees be removed without problem? She added that on the other hand these are really nice trees so maybe the sports court could be moved a bit so they can stay. City Arborist Kate Bear said that she likes Trees 66 and 67 a lot. They are beautiful oaks but they will not survive construction of a court in that location The fact that there are so many oaks on site is the only reason she would support removal of these two to allow the sports court. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for July 11, 2007 Page 6 Commissioner Nagpal said that she is very protective of trees and thinks that Trees 66 and 67 are good species. She told Kate Bear that it seems like she would like to preserve those trees perhaps through a redesign of the sports court. Mr. Labio said he is willing to do so with input from Heather Bradley and Kate Bear. Commissioner Nagpal asked about Tree 73 too. Mr. Labio said that he is not able to preserve Tree 73. Commissioner Nagpal asked if the court could be moved more to the north or east. Mr. Labio said it might be possible to reduce the length and width of the sports court while still achieving a functional court. Commissioner Rodgers asked about relocating the court vertically instead of horizontally. Mr.. Labio said that the court needs to be parallel to the rear boundary but perhaps could be made a bit more diagonal. He said that he thought that might be the way to save Trees 66 and 67 and perhaps also give more setback distance to the Michaels' property. Commissioner Rodgers asked if the lawn and sports court could be swapped. Mr. Labio said he always had thought of seeing lawn from the house but he could consider that option. He reiterated that he is open to looking at relocation of the sports court and will try to save Trees 66 and 67. Commissioner Zhao asked Kate Bear how she feels about removal of Tree 29. City Arborist Kate Bear said that it is going to be impacted by construction and may need to be removed and mitigated instead of retained. She said it might not be possible to preserve Tree 29. She said that perhaps the basement would need to be redesigned to be further from this tree. Commissioner Rodgers asked Kate Bear about Tree 45. City Arborist Kate Bear said that Tree 45 is a very nice oak. She advised that Mr. Labio is trying to preserve it by redesigning his sports court. She cautioned that this is a difficult site and other trees could be impacted if the lawn and sports court positions are switched. Commissioner Rodgers asked Kate Bear to list her order of preference as far as retention of Trees 28, 45 and 66. City Arborist Kate Bear said that Tree 45 is her first choice tree. Tree 28 is second and Trees 66 and 67 are ranked third. Tree 74 is after all of those. Commissioner Nagpal asked Kate Bear if she believes any others are worth preserving. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for July 11, 2007 Page 7 City Arborist Kate Bear replied no, she has gotten what she has asked for. Ms. Debbie Ellis, Consulting Arborist for the Applicant: Said that she originally looked at the trees on this property in January in order to prepare an appraisal of value. Said that she was called back last week to look again at three trees (29, 45 and 74). Advised that she compared her notes from the last visit with this more recent and found. that Tree 29 had declined noticeably. It is not in good condition as evidenced by the depth of older needles. There is branch flagging, which equals dead branches. Added that she is very leery in keeping Tree 29 even without new construction on site. She said that she is not comfortable with the safety of this tree near a house. She said that now is the time to take it out. Commissioner Rodgers asked that it be placed onto the record that there are no additional people in the audience this evening. Commissioner Cappello expressed support for the applicant getting together with the City Planner and Arborist to relocate and /or reduce the sport court. Mr. Labio said that reduction is his preferred option. If that were not possible, he would consult with Heather and Kate for relocation options. Chair Hlava closed the public hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Commissioner Cappello asked what would happen if the applicant works further with staff to find a satisfactory location for the sports court and such a location is not found. Planner Heather Bradley said that per Condition 6, the issue would be brought back to this Commission. She added that the applicant is proposing shifting the court more toward the street. Commissioner Cappello asked if this requires five feet or a more significant distance. Planner Heather Bradley said that distance would be determined by the City Arborist in order to preserve Trees 66 and 67. Commissioner Rodgers cautioned that relocation should not impact Tree 28. Commissioner Kundtz pointed out that not one word was raised on the issue of the house itself. He said that he finds it lovely and compatible with the neighborhood. He concluded that he could make the findings to support the house itself. Commissioner Nagpal said that of more concern was the issue of trees on this site. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for July 11, 2007 Page 8 Commissioner Rodgers said that she agrees with Commissioner Kundtz. She made a suggestion to split the heating /cooling zones of the house. One zone to serve the formal areas that may not be used as often and the other zone to serve the family spaces. Commissioner Zhao said that this is a very nice design and the applicant made a real effort to save trees on his property. She expressed support for the plan to use green building techniques. She concluded that she too could make the necessary findings to support this project. Commissioner Cappello said he agrees. However, the sports court is a significant element of the Design Review process. He added that he could make findings for the rest of the project. Commissioner Rodgers said that the house design is nice and reiterated her suggestion for heating /cooling zones. She said that removal of trees is a big problem for her. She said upon closer look at Trees 29, 30 and 31 she can see there are more beautiful trees elsewhere so she can compromise with these. She stressed the need to go with Kate Bear's recommendations to retain Trees 45, 28, 66, 67 and 74. Commissioner Nagpal: Agreed with Commissioner Rodgers. Reminded that there would be 54 trees remaining on this lot. Said that she would rather not doom a tree until that tree is truly doomed so she would save Tree 29 and remove it only if it does not survive construction. Reiterated her support of saving Trees 66 and 67. This offers a good compromise. Stated that a tennis court should be located at the back rather than closer to the house. Commissioner Rodgers said that closer to the street is fine with her. Chair Hlava: Said that she absolutely does not like Tree 29 as it is too close to the house and there are no branches on one side. Said that she is more inclined to agree with Ms. Ellis on Tree 29 that it is not a good idea to leave it in place Stated that she has no problem with the house design. It does not look too big. Advised that she is in favor of retaining Trees 66 and 67 partly for privacy for the neighbors and also because she just can't give up on oaks. Informed that a tennis court needs to be facing north and south. If it is east and west facing, someone serving always has sun in their eyes. Asked if slightly tipping the sports court on its axis might help. Reiterated that Tree 29 should be gone. Stated that she can make all necessary findings and said that she appreciates the fact that there are no exceptions and /or variances required. The project meets all rules. Pointed out that were it not for the tree issues, this project would have been easily approved. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for July 11, 2007 Page 9 Planner Heather Bradley asked the Commission to get feedback from Arborist Kate Bear. If Trees 66 and 67 are preserved, there may be an impact on Tree 74. City Arborist Kate Bear said that Tree 74 is a cedar. Commissioner Nagpal said that Trees 66, 67 and 74 should all be able to be saved. Chair Hlava asked Kate Bear for any changes to conditions she might recommend. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer offered the following proposed amendments: Condition 6 add text "in addition to the trees required to be preserved per the Arborist Report, Trees 66 and 67 shall also be preserved." Condition 1 add text "the sports court shall be redesigned in accordance with Condition of Approval 6." Condition 5 remove reference of arborist report dated December 27, 2006. Condition 1 remove reference of arborist report dated December 27, 2006. Commissioner Zhao asked if Arborist Kate Bear can identify how much further and /or smaller the sports court would have to be to preserve Trees 66 and 67. Arborist Kate Bear said that she would need to look again but the general guideline is five times the trunk diameter, which in this case is 13- inches. She said that the edge of the canopy must be determined, which is done by looking at the tree on site. She concluded that she likes the idea of working with Mr. Labio in finalizing the design of the sport court. Commissioner Zhao suggested leaving this issue up to Kate Bear to determine which trees to save. Commissioner Nagpal said that Kate has already done that. Commissioner Cappello said that she should be given the opportunity to find the best solution. Chair Hlava said that she is willing to let Tree 29 be removed and asked if the resolution needs to be changed and how. City Attorney Jonathan Wittwer suggested adding text to Arborist's Condition 1 to read, "Tree 29 may be removed." Chair Hlava reiterated that proposed changes: CDD Condition 1 says that the sports court will be redesigned per Condition 6. Condition 5 deletes the December 27, 2006 arborist report date. Condition 6 includes Trees 66 and 67 for preservation. Arborist Condition 1 delete reference to December 27, 2006 arborist report and allow the removal of Tree 29. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Zhao, seconded by Commissioner Kundtz, the Planning Commission granted Design Review Approval (Application Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes for July 11,2007 Page 10 #07 -160) to allow a new residence on property located at 15211 Bellecourt Drive, with the amendments to the conditions as outlined by Chair Hlava immediately prior to the motion, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cappello, Hlava, Kundtz, Rodgers and Zhao NOES: Nagpal ABSENT: Kumar ABSTAIN: None DIRECTOR'S ITEMS Director John Livingstone reminded that on July 18 the appeal of the Zambetti project by two different parties would be heard by Council. In August a joint Planning Commission /Council session will be held. COMMISSION ITEMS There were no Commission items. COMMUNICATIONS There were no Communications Items. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Upon motion of Commissioner Cappello, seconded by Commissioner Zhao, Chair Hlava adjourned the meeting at approximately 8:15 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission meeting of August 8, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: 07 -319 —19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road Type of Application: Design Review Use Permit for a New Single Family Residence with a Request for a Height Exception Owner: Staff Planner: Meeting Date: APN: Chris and Saskia Adams Suzanne Thomas, Assistant Planner -S August 8, 2007 510 -06 -069 Department Head: John Livingstone, AICP z. 12 Vi O 0 N s7 4 36 )14 c. Subject: 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Rd. APN: 510 -06 -069 500' Radius 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road Item 1 CASE HISTORY: Application filed: 04/10/07 Application complete: 07/02/07 Notice published: 07/25/07 Mailing completed: 07/18/07 Posting completed: 08/02/07 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review Approval and a Conditional Use Permit for a Height Exception to construct a two- story, single family residence with a basement on a vacant lot. The total floor area of the proposed house and garage is 5,013 square feet, which does not include the basement. The applicant has proposed a 29 -foot maximum height for the proposed residence. The lot size is approximately 1.94 acres and the site is zoned R -1- 40,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Design Review and Conditional Use Permit application to exceed the 26 -foot height limit by 3 feet for a maximum height of 29 feet with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. Staff is not recommending any permanent conditions of approval. Application No. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: R -1- 40,000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RVLD Very Low Density Residential MEASURE G: Not Applicable PARCEL SIZE: Gross: 1.94 acres gross (Parcel 2: 1.317 acres and Remainder: 0.630 acres) Parcel 2 Net: 1.066 acres (46,435 sq. ft.) SLOPE: Approximately 11.3% average site slope and 8% at building site GRADING REQUIRED: 74 cubic yards of cut for the yard and driveway, which will be retained on site. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed new single family residence is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single family residences. MATERIALS AND COLORS: Materials and colors include brown- stained shingle, white wood -framed windows and door trim, limestone veneer along the front base, metal eyebrow roofs over the dormers, composition shingle roofing, and smooth white pre -cast polymer columns. A colors and materials board is available on file with the Community Development Depaitiuent and will be presented at the site visits and public hearing. Application No. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road PROJECT DATA: Proposal 24.2% 3,076 sq. ft. 1,803 sq. ft. 254 sq. ft. 4,894 sq. ft. 1,196 sq. ft. 11,223 sq. ft. Code Requirements Maximum Allowable 35% 16,252 sq. ft. Lot Coverage: (impervious) Residence Porches /patio Walkway Driveway and fire truck turnaround Future pool and deck TOTAL Floor Area: First Floor Second Floor Basement (not included in Floor Area) TOTAL 2,879 sq. ft. 2,246 sq. ft. (2,239 sq. ft) 5,125 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable 6,000 sq. ft.' (After slope reduction of 14 Minimum Requirement Setbacks: Front Rear Left Side (1 floor) Left Side (2" floor) Right Side (1 floor) Right Side (2 floor) 83 ft. 4 in. >100ft 35 ft. 0 in. 51 ft. 8 in. 35 ft. 9 in. 35 ft. 9 in. 35 ft. 50 ft. 20 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft. 25 ft. Application No. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road PROJECT DATA: Application No 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road Height: Lowest elevation pt. Highest elevation pt. Average At the topmost point of the structure (as conditioned) Maximum height At the topmost point of the structure (alternate proposal by applicant) Maximum height 547 ft. 10 in. 553 ft. 2 in. 550 ft. 6 in. 576 ft. 6 in. 26 ft. 579 ft. 9in. 29 ft. Maximum Allowable 26 ft.* *The Planning Commission may approve additional height up to 30 feet. Application No. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road PROJECT DISCUSSION The applicant requests design review approval and a conditional use permit for height exception to construct a two- story, single family residence with a basement on a vacant lot. The total floor area of the proposed house and garage is 5,013 square feet, which does not include the basement. The lot size is approximately 1.94 acres and the site is zoned R- 1- 40,000. The average slope of the property is 11.3 The property consists of a flag lot with access. from Los Gatos Saratoga Road and a remainder parcel that extends from the rear of the flag lot, across San Tomas Creek, to terminate at Bainter Avenue. Building Height The maximum allowable height of single family dwellings is 26 feet and the proposed height of the project is 29 feet. However, additional height can be approved pursuant to a Use Permit and Design Review by the Planning Commission (Commission) if the Commission finds the additional height to be necessary in order for the project to adhere to a specific architectural style. Per section 15- 12.100(a) of the Saratoga Municipal Code, the Commission is to use the book entitled the "Field Guide to American Houses" and other resource material approved by the Commission as resource documents to assess the purity of architectural design. The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission during a Study Session on July 10, 2007 to discuss the height exception: The Commission reviewed two sets of elevations and renderings of the home that had identical eave lines but differed in their roof pitch and height (26 feet or 29 feet). The applicant is requesting the height exception to allow the 29- foot height but has provided the 26 -foot height plan set for comparison. The discussion included the concept of architectural purity, the visual comparison of the different roof pitches, and the need for additional articulation in the design. Architectural Style The proposed structure most closely relates to the style category called Shingle Style (1880 1900). (Refer to The Field Guide to American Houses by McAlester for architectural references). The applicant has requested an exception to extend the roof to a height of 29 feet in order to achieve the more steeply pitched roof line that is traditional in this style. These homes are typically covered with "wall cladding of continuous wood shingles" and no corner boards.' (Composition shingles are now being used to replace the wood shingle roofs of this style.?) The Shingle Style, along with the Queen Anne Style on which it is based, typically has a "asymmetrical facade with steeply pitched roof lines intersecting cross gables and multi -level eaves. The extensive porches, which may be absent in an urban setting, are often framed by Romanesque or Syrian arches or traditional porch railings, are often under, the main roof line, and may have foundations of Virginia and Lee McAlester, "A Field Guide to American Houses," (Knopf: New York, 2003), 289. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid, 289 -290. 4 Ibid, 289. 5 Ibid, 290. Application No. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road heavy masonry or stone. 6 S slender columns and Palladian, bay, or multiple windows are characteristic and tower roofs are found in approximately one -third of these homes.' The proposed structure is consistent with the style in its use of continuous wood shingle cladding and composition shingle roof. It incorporates slender columns, multiple windows, and gables. Although the proposed project would not be considered asymmetrical, commonly seen in this style, it is similar to a "symmetrical example" of a shingle house shown in The Field Guide to American Houses (pg. 292, photo #4). There is a lack of intersecting cross gables (gabled surfaces that are perpendicular to each other). Although there are eaves at both the first and second floor levels, none extend from one floor to the next as is seen in many (but not all) of the examples in The Field Guide. Again, the proposed home more closely related to the aforementioned home shown on page 292. The use of gable and eyebrow dormers is typical. White trim is proposed for the windows and doors and the applicant has provided photographs of numerous homes in Saratoga that are shingle -sided with white trim. Staff has found several online examples of Shingle Style homes that are trimmed in this way. Virginia McAlester, the author of the Field Guide, reviewed the three- dimensional views of the home that were in the Study Session packets and made design recommendations, which have been incorporated into the plans. These include the use of a specific type of eyebrow dormers, the addition of "sculpted shapes" to the front of the house (the front gables have been extended and bay windows have been added below them), the use of stone rather than shingle for the chimney covering, an increase in the depth of the rear porch, and the use of varying window heights on the front facade. She stated: "With these multiple changes made, I now feel comfortable writing a letter stating that in my opinion the house you have proposed is a Shingle style house." She was not concerned about the symmetry found in the rear facade, commenting that this "calmer" appearance is more common on the Shingle homes that are built today (Attachment 5). Trees The applicant has retained the services of certified arborist Dave Dockter, who will provide assistance through the design and construction of the project. A retaining wall has been reduced in size and located in such a way to minimize compaction. The proposed trenching locations for utilities are acceptable and irrigation lines and equipment shall be located outside of the tree canopies. Per the City Arborist, the proposed driveway path is the optimum route for minimizing impacts to trees. The Arborist Reports prepared by David Babby and Dave Dockter and reviewed by the City Arborist identified sixty -one trees regulated by City Ordinance that are in the vicinity of the project. These trees were identified as #28 -81 and #83 -89 and include numerous Coast Live 6 Ibid, 291. Ibid, 290. 8 Ibid, 292. 9 Ibid, 291. Application No. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road Oaks, Valley Oaks, and Coast Redwoods, along with Grand Fir, Englemann Spruce, Deodar Cedar, Monterey Pine, and California Black Walnut. Three of these trees #36, 61, and 88), all Coast Live Oaks, will be removed and replaced with native species that are equal in value ($7,950). Tree #36 has split trunk defect that is considered serious and uncorrectable. Trees #61 and 88 are both in fair condition but have a structural integrity rating of only 25% (100% =Best, 0 Worst). The Arborist Reports dated May 10, 2007 and June 15, 2007, along with the aforementioned reports, shall be included in the final building set. Compliance with all Arborists' recommendations shall be included as a condition of approval to ensure that all ordinance size trees will be protected during construction. Tree protective fencing, as shown in the May 10, 2007 report, will be installed prior to issuance of permits. These measures have been added as conditions of approval of the project and will be monitored by the City Arborist during the construction phase of the project. A bond amount of $340,430, which is equal to 100% of the total appraised value of trees #28 -35, 37 to 60, 62 -87, and 89, will be required prior to obtaining building division permits (Attachment 3). Geotechnical Clearance This application requires geotechnical review. Geotechnical Clearance was granted with conditions. The geotechnical conditions have been incorporated in the attached Resolution. Neighbor Correspondence The applicant has provided the City's neighbor notification templates and letters of support for the use of the white trim from several nearby properties. All parcels within 500 feet of the parcel have been notified by Staff and no comments have been received as of the writing of this report (Attachment 4). General Plan Findings The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan Policy: 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. Use Permit Findings The proposed project is consistent with the following findings stated in City Code Section 15- 55.070, which are required to grant Use permit approval to exceed the maximum height limit for single family residences. (a) That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the proposed home with a maximum height of 29 feet is in accordance with City Code Section 15- 12.100. This Code section allows an applicant to exceed the Application No. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road maximum height of 26 feet for homes in order to adhere to a specific architectural style, using "A Field Guide to American Houses" as a source. The author of this book has stated that the home, as proposed and with her suggested modifications, is a Shingle Style house that reflects the more contemporary interpretation of the style. (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the increased height for a single family residence over the permitted 26 feet will not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare since the project will be required to obtain a building permit and conform to all requirements of the Building Department, as well as receive approval of the Public Works Department and the City's consulting geologist. (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the use is a single family residence, which is a permitted use in the R -1- 40,000 zone, and it has been determined that the project is in compliance with all applicable development standards of City Code Section 15 -12. (d) That 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 This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed residence will not impact the neighbors' viewscape due to the topography and size of the lot. The nearest homes on Bainter Avenue are over two hundred feet away and the highest point of the proposed roof will be lower than the floor level of the nearby homes on Saratoga -Los Gatos Road. Design Review Findings The proposed project is consistent with all of the following Design Review findings stated in City Code Section 15- 45.080: (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the setbacks exceed the minimum required by Code. The site is located more than 80 feet from the front and rear setback lines and 35 feet from the side. Visibility of the project site is shielded by mature trees, topography (the site sits below the level of the homes on either side and to the front), and distance (more than 200 feet to the nearest home on Bainter Avenue). Additionally, the project has been designed to preserve and enhance most of the existing mature trees on the site. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed residence and landscape plan incorporate the existing mature Application No. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road vegetation on the site. The use of stained wood shingles and composition roofing in earth tones will blend with the natural environment. Minimal landscaping using drought and deer resistant plants is proposed near the home. These measures serve to preserve and enhance the natural landscape of the site. (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that of the 61 trees, which are protected by City Code and located within the vicinity of the construction area, only three trees will be removed. These will be replaced with native species. The applicant is proposing to retain the remaining 58 ordinance- sized trees while implementing recommendations by the City Arborist to ensure protection -of the trees. All Arborist Report recommendations have been made conditions of approval of the project to ensure a high degree of survival for all trees retained on the site. (d) Minimize perception of excessive bulk. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that architectural details such as varied rooflines, varied and recessed wall planes and architectural detailing have been incorporated in the design. In addition, the elevations include shingle siding complemented by columns, eyebrow and gable dormers, fenestration details such as multiple lights above a single pane, and a carriage style garage door to create architectural interest and reduce mass and bulk. (e) Compatible bulk and height. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed residence has been designed in a manner that minimizes the appearance in height and bulk through the use of varied planes. The house and garage have a footprint of less than 2,900 square feet on a lot that almost two acres (gross) in size and will be comparable to other adjacent two -story homes. However, because it is in a valley, lower than most of the homes, it will have the appearance of being smaller. (f) Current grading and erosion control methods. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposal will conform to the City's current grading and erosion control methods and will include the use of shrubs and retaining walls to minimize erosion. (g) Design policies and techniques. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that 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. Conclusion Staff concludes that the Design Review and Use Permit findings can be made in the affirmative and the proposal is consistent.with the General Plan. Application No. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find this application exempt from CEQA and approve the application for Design Review and Use permit with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of Approval. 2. Neighbor Notification templates. 3. Arborist Reports and tree fencing by City Arborist Kate Bear, dated May 10, 2007 and June 15, 2007; Tree inventory and map (David Babby, 9/2/05); Supplemental tree inventory (Dave Dockter, 3/2/07). 4. Affidavit of Mailing Notices, Public Hearing Notice, Mailing labels for project notification. 5. Memo from applicant providing an overview of Shingle Style homes with an appraisal of the project design from Virginia McAlester, author of the "Field Guide to American Houses." 6. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO Application No. 07 -319 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Adams; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Conditional Use Permit and Design Review approval to construct a new residence with an extended height at 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road, which is located in the R -1 -40 district; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly, noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the project, which includes the construction of a residence is categorically exempt from the California 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. 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 Policy: 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. WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for use permit approval, and the following findings specified in Saratoga Municipal Code Chapter 15- 55.070: (a) That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the proposed home with a maximum height of 29 feet is in accordance with City Code Section 15- 12.100. This Code section allows an applicant to exceed the maximum height of 26 feet for homes in order to adhere to a specific architectural style, using "A Field Guide to American Houses" as a source. The author of this book has stated that the home, as proposed and with her suggested modifications, is a Shingle Style house that reflects the more contemporary interpretation of the style. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road; Adams (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the increased height for a single family residence over the permitted 26 feet will not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare since the project will be required to obtain a building permit and conform to all requirements of the Building Department, as well as receive approval of the Public Works Department and the City's consulting geologist. (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the use is a single family residence, which is a permitted use in the R -1- 40,000 zone, and it has been determined that the project is in compliance with all applicable development standards of City Code Section 15 -12. (d) That 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 This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed residence will not impact the neighbors' viewscape due to the topography and size of the lot. The nearest homes on Bainter Avenue are over two hundred feet away and the highest point of the proposed roof will be lower than the floor level of the nearby homes on Saratoga -Los Gatos Road; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to meet the following criteria for Design Review specified in Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15- 45.080: (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the setbacks exceed the minimum required by Code. The site is located more than 80 feet from the front and rear setback lines and 35 feet from the side. Visibility of the project site is shielded by mature trees, topography (the site sits below the level of the homes on either side and to the front), and distance (more than 200 feet to the nearest home on Bainter Avenue). Additionally, the project has been designed to preserve and enhance most of the existing mature trees on the site. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed residence and landscape plan incorporate the existing mature vegetation on the site. The use of stained wood shingles and composition roofing in earth tones will blend with the natural environment. Minimal landscaping using drought and deer resistant plants is proposed near the home. These measures serve to preserve and enhance the natural landscape of the site. (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that of the 61 trees, which are protected by City Code and located within the vicinity of the construction area, only three trees will be removed. These will be replaced with native species. The applicant is proposing to retain the remaining 58 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road; Adams ordinance -sized trees while implementing recommendations by the City Arborist to ensure protection of the trees. All Arborist Report recommendations have been made conditions of approval of the project to ensure a high degree of survival for all trees retained on the site. (d) Minimize perception of excessive bulk. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that architectural details such as varied rooflines, varied and recessed wall planes and architectural detailing have been incorporated in the design. In addition, the elevations include shingle siding complemented by columns, eyebrow and gable dormers, fenestration details such as multiple lights above a single pane, and a carriage style garage door to create architectural interest and reduce mass and bulk. (e) Compatible bulk and height This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed residence has been designed in a manner that minimizes the appearance in height and bulk through the use of varied planes. The house and garage have a footprint of less than 2,900 square feet on a lot that almost two acres (gross) in size and will be comparable to other adjacent two -story homes. However, because it is in a valley, lower than most of the homes, it will have the appearance of being smaller. (f) Current grading and erosion control methods. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposal will conform to the City's current grading and erosion control methods and will include the use of shrubs and retaining walls to minimize erosion. (g) Design policies and techniques. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that 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 NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, application number 07- 319 for Use Permit and Design Review approval is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. Conformance to plans. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" (incorporated by reference, date stamped July 23, 2007) and in compliance with the conditions stated in this Resolution. Any proposed changes, including but not limited to facade design and materials to the approved plans shall be submitted in writing with a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road; Adams Proposed changes to the approved plans are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. 2. Arborist Report and Recommendations. Owner /applicant shall comply with all recommendations and conditions stated in the arborist reports, dated August 1, 2005, September 5, 2005, March 2, 2007, May 10, 2007, and June 15, 2007. A monetary bond, in the amount stated in the arborist report ($340,430.00) shall be posted and be on file with the. Community Development Director prior to issuance of City permits. Tree protective fencing as shown on the plans must match that required by the arborist. Proof of installation of tree fencing shall be provided by the applicant. Any impact to any ordinance size tree (as defined by Saratoga Municipal Code) shall be minimized during the construction process. No construction vehicles shall be parked or driven within the dripline of any ordinance size tree, and any type of construction materials shall not be stored within the root zone of any ordinance size trees. A note stating this shall be included on the site plan. 3. Building Height. The height of the structure shall not exceed 29 feet as defined in Saratoga Municipal Code in regards to the height exception. 4. Building Division Submittal. Four sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution shall be submitted to the Building Division. 5. LLS Stamp. The site plan shall be stamped and signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor. 6. Site Plan Notation. 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. Encroachment Permit. Applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the City Public Works Department for any work in the public right -of -way. Subject to Public Works approval, low walls /columns are typically allowed within the right -of- way portion of the lot if they are situated at least 5 feet from the edge of the street pavement. 8. Minimum Balance. The applicant shall, at all times, ensure that a minimum balance of $500 is maintained in the planning account for this project until the project receives fmal approval. FIRE DISTRICT 9. Comply with conditions. Applicant shall comply with all Saratoga Fire District conditions. GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW 10. Comply with. conditions. Applicant shall comply with all conditions of the Geotechnical clearance dated June 6, 2007. 07 -319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road; Adams 411 CITY ATTORNEY 10. Hold Harmless Agreement. 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. PERMANENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 11. There are no permanent conditions of approval for this project. Section 2. Construction must be commenced within 36 months from the date on which this Use Permit became effective 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. 07-319; 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road; Adams PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 8th day of August 2007 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Joyce Hlava 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 Attachment 2 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: i Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. 1 ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project proves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga 's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. 4101 j L I cuO Date: y Neighbor Name: Signature: V\ Neighbor Address: C1310 SA,LAA-ol..1 If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: Application Number: City of Saratoga Revised 10/24/06 Neighbor Phone tt: 4 7 3 3413 0 7- 3 /1 Date: Planning Department MAY 1 `5 2007 CITY OF SARATOGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: 9 s 5 5c--cc 30 L1)5 611435 Rd Dear Neighbor, 1 am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. 1 ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. Neighbor Na e: a MI Date: g/970 7 a '4 Signature: Neighbor A 1 'a$ 22art:tC'r 4oc ap 79:15A Neighbor Phone ‘.5:29 If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: C f a Ls 4 t ■ct A Date: Application Number: City of Saratoga Planning Department Revised 10/24/06 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: Ids jS S ro- rA to5 C11/44-c6 `v► Dear Neighbor, 1 am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. 1 ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. Neighbor Name: v 1 3 n g Date: Signature: Neighbor Address: 34° -Oc L U S C os -Lb If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: 1. h.t r5 So WO Wt) Date: Application Number: Neighbor Phone L i1 (ego)/ City of Saratoga Planning Department Revised 10/24/06 PROJECT ADDRESS.: Dear Neighbor, 1 am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. 1 ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans Neighbor Name: evtki Signature: Neighbor Address: W.0.0-)\ S cA If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: C 1 r!3 City of Saratoga Revised 10/24/06 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form S5g Sara-1-00 Lc) 6A-1-05 1204 Neighbor Phone o 3 1 1 St.43kCiA Date: Date: Application Number: 0.14 ©5 Planning Department City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: 10 5 3Cr7+43 1j 4 5 Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. 1 ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. ate: 5) 3) )o)-- Neighbor Name Signature: Neighbor Addres f 3 I,vS` 6rons f Neighbor Phone 364 r- a If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: C kris 2 s dket> Date: Application Number: City of Saratoga Planning Department Revised 10/24/06 PROJECT ADDRESS: City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form 15;i O E 1 Yt S' S(Gu' kx4-0 ii to 4 t S "1'l APR 17 2007 Dear Neighbor, CITY OF SARATOGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. I ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans Date: Signature: Re. =11'x` Neighbor Name: r TC' Neighbor Address: f /9p 7z City of Saratoga Revised 10/24/06 Application Number: i .9 Applicant Name: Date: Neighbor Phone y- j vt??Y If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Planning Department J Attachment 3 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Rd. ARBORIST REPORT APN 510 -06 -006 Owner: Chris and Saskia Adams INTRODUCTION Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Califomia 95070 Application 07 -319 June 15, 2007 Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Phone (408) 868 -1276 The property owners of 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road have submitted revised plans to construct a new two -story home with a basement and driveway on their vacant lot. Drawings reviewed for this report include the Cover Sheet, Sheets land 2, Grading and Drainage and Site Plan, by Westfall Engineers, Inc., dated April and May 2007. SITE OBSERVATIONS, PLAN REVIEW AND TECHNICAL DISCUSSION What had been previously shown as a four foot high retaining wall as the driveway approaches the turn around oak at tree #48 has been changed to a 2.5 foot retaining wall gradually lowers to become a one foot at the closest point to the tree. It will be supported on concrete beams and this is acceptable. It remains far enough away from the tree and the engineering of the wall and drive to minimize compaction and loads mitigates for it adequately. Tree numbers have been corrected on the plans. Trenching locations for utilities are shown on the submitted plans and are acceptable. The locations between trees #59 and 60 should avoid cutting roots measuring 2 inches or larger. To avoid cutting larger roots, the trenches for water and gas should be bored under tree roots when under the canopies of these two trees. The proposed location for the power pole down by the creek is acceptable. Irrigation lines, valves and controller locations should be located outside of tree canopies on the final plans. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. When installing utilities for the project, the section under trees #59 and 60 shall be bored under any roots measuring 2 inches or larger. 2. Locations for irrigation lines, valves and controllers shall be located outside of tree canopies. 3. Excavation for the basement shall remain outside of tree canopies. Page 1 of 1 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Rd. ARBORIST REPORT APN 510 -06 -006 Owner: Chris and Saskia Adams Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Califomia 95070 Application 07 -319 May 10, 2007 Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Phone (408) 868 -1276 INTRODUCTION The property owners of 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road have submitted plans to construct a new two story home with a basement and driveway on their vacant lot. This property was identified as 19350 in previous arborist reports. This report reviews additional information provided by the applicant and his project arborist with respect to the proposed route for the driveway, provides a revised tree protection bond amount and comments on drawings submitted for review. The inventory in David Babby's report numbers trees from 28 to 81; the report provided by Dave Dockter starts numbering at 83. There is no tree #82 for this project. Drawings reviewed for this report include the Cover Sheet, Sheets 1 and 2, Grading and Drainage by Westfall Engineers, Inc., dated April 2007, and Conceptual Landscape Plan by Chris Adams. SITE OBSERVATIONS, PLAN REVIEW AND TECHNICAL DISCUSSION Driveway Path The owner has retained the services of certified arborist Dave Dockter, who will provide assistance through the design and construction of the project. After reviewing information and recommendations from the project arborist and considering it carefully, it appears that the proposed path for the driveway on the submitted plans is the optimum route, given the constraints of the site. The owner has obtained an easement from the neighbor to cut across the corner of his property with the driveway. The fire truck passing lane that would have impacted the Monterey pine #70) has been relocated farther from the tree and this will probably enable the tree to survive construction. The proposed driveway minimizes grading necessary to negotiate the hill. Piers will be used to support the road bed along trees #48 59. The impact to the root systems will be mitigated using a biaxial grid material that spreads the load of vehicles and significantly reduces the compaction of soil. The project arborist will supervise the construction of this portion of the driveway. A four foot high retaining wall is specified as the driveway approaches the turn around oak tree #48. Although this is about 30 feet away from the tree, it is not clear how high of a wall will be required at the points closest to this tree. The height of the retaining wall at the closest points to the tree should be clarified. Page 1 of 3 19358 Saratoga Los Gatos Road Some trees are labeled incorrectly when compared to the report prepared by Dave Dockter. The tree in the driveway path is not numbered at all and neither is another tree just outside of the driveway. The one in conflict with the driveway should be #88 based on the arborist report prepared by Dave Dockter and the one outside of the driveway should be 86 or 87. One tree has been left off of the submitted plans and should be surveyed and included. It is either #86 or 87 based on my review of the arborist report. Trees labeled 87 and 88 on the plans should be numbered 89 and 47. Utilities The submitted plans don't show all trenching locations for utilities other than drainage. All locations for trenching and utilities (including water, sewer, drainage, gas and electrical) should be shown on the plans so they can be evaluated for impacts to trees. If irrigation will be included for landscaping, irrigation lines, valves and controller locations should be shown so they can be evaluated for impacts to trees. Tree Removal, Replacement and Protection Bond This set of plans shows trees #36, 61 and 88 to be removed. Their total appraised value is $7,950. Replacement trees equal in value to the value of these trees should be planted as part of the final landscape. The landscape concept plan shows three oak trees to be planted to replace the removed trees. Their size is not specified, but the species are acceptable. Acceptable species for replacement trees include coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), blue oak (Quercus douglasiana), black oak (Quercus kelloggii), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens). Replacement values are as follows: 15 gallon $150; 24 inch box $500; 36 inch box $1,500; 48 inch box $5,000; 60 inch box $7,000 and 72 inch box $15,000. The Tree Inventory Table prepared by David Babby shows trees #58 and 59 in conflict with the project. The project has been redesigned so that these two trees are no longer in conflict. Per City Ordinance 1 5- 50.080, a bond amount of $340,430, which is equal to 100% of the total appraised value of trees #28 35, 37 60, 62 87 and 89, is required based on the current design. This amount may change once the design is finalized. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The final building plan set shall include the Tree Inventory Tables for all trees and the arborist recommendations from all arborist reports provided. The Site Plan shall show locations of trees and protective fencing. The maps from the previous arborist reports identifying tree numbers and canopy spreads shall be included in the final building set. 2. Owner shall provide a tree protection bond in the amount of $340,430 prior to obtaining building division permits. 3. Owner shall plant trees equal in value to $7,950, the total appraised value of trees #36, 61 and 88. Acceptable replacement species include coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), blue oak (Quercus douglasiana), black oak (Quercus kelloggii), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), California buckeye Aesculus californica), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens). Replacement values are as follows: 15 gallon $150; Page 2 of 3 19358 Saratoga Los Gatos Road 24 inch box $500; 36 inch box $1,500; 48 inch box $5,000; 60 inch box $7,000 and 72 inch box $15,000. 4. Plans shall show locations for all trenching and utilities including electrical, drainage, water, sewer, gas and irrigation. 5. The height of the retaining wall that will be closest to tree #48 should be clarified and details provided for evaluation of potential impacts to the tree. 6. Trees labeled 87 and 88 are numbered incorrectly and should be corrected to 89 and 47. Tree number 86 or 87 has been left off of the plans and should be included on the plans. Trees #86, 87 and 88 are not numbered at all and should be numbered on the plans. 7. If landscaping will occur, design the plans to show the following: a. Locate valve boxes, controllers and irrigation lines outside of tree canopies. Design irrigation so that it does not spray trunks of trees. b. Select plants with similar water requirements to the trees under which they will be placed. c. Design lawns so that there is room between them and the trunk of any tree; confine lawn areas to the outside 20% of the area under the canopy. d. Plant only drought tolerant plants compatible with oaks under the outer 20% of the canopy. Do not include lawn within the drip line of any oak tree on the property. I recommend placing mulch under the canopy instead of a lawn. e. Design- topdressings so that stones or mulch remain at least one foot from the trunks of retained trees and 6 inches from the trunks of new trees. f. Do not allow tilling or stripping of the topsoil beneath tree canopies. g. Establish edging material under tree canopies on top of existing soil grade by using stakes. Attachment: Locations for Tree Protective Fencing Page 3 of 3 10, 1 30 I 30 100% 50% Good I High I 3 I I X I X 1 52,3301 29 30 31 Coast Live Oak 33 Quercus agrifolia) 8.5 20 20 100% Coast Live Oak 34 Quercus agrifolia) 16.5 45 45 100% 35 37 38 39 40 41 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia) 1 20.5,16 35 55. 100% Coast Live Oak 17, 12, (Quercus agrifolia) I 10, 6 I 30 I 40 100% Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia) 17.5, 8 35 50 100% Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) 16.5 25 30 100% Coast Live. Oak Quercus agrifolia) 19, 17 40 45 75% Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) Englemann Spruce Picea en elmannii Grand Fir (Picea grandis) Valley Oak (Quercus lobata Coast Live Oak 42 I (Quercus agrifolia) 9, 6.5, 6 Site: 19330 Saratoga -Los Gatos Rd, Saratoga Prepared for: City of Saratoga Comm. Dev. Dept. Prepared by: David L. Babby, RCA TREE INVENTORY TABLE 30 30 100% 50% I of 4 75% 75% 25 50% 75% 75% 25% 25% 75% 19 I 30 40 100% I 75% 14.5 40 30 100% 1 100% REPLACEMENT TREE VALUES Good High Good High 4 Fair High I Good I High 3 Good I High 3 Good High Fair I Moderate Fair 1 Moderate Fair Moderate 4 Good High 4 Good 1 High 1 4 20, 18, 14 70 110 100% 50% Good High X 15- gallon =1120 24 -inch box =1420 36 -inch box $1,320 48 -inch box 15,000 52 -inch box 17,000 72 -inch box =115,000 9/5/2005 515,800 515,600 I 57,200 I 51,110 54,480 55,900 I 54,050 I 53,520 I $1,400 X 1 55,300 I X I56,200I X I565,000I 57 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia) 14, 10 35 35 100% 75% Good High 2 $4,750 43 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agriflia 36, 28 80 100 100% 50% Good High 4 X $32,500 48 Deodar Cedar (Cedrus deodara) Coast Live Oak 45 Quercus agr folia 14, 12, 11 10 Site: 19330 Saratoga -Los Gatos Rd, Saratoga Prepared for: Ciry of Saratoga Comm Dev. Dept Prepared by: David L. Bobby, RCA TREE INVENTORY TABLE 70 30 60 15 50% look 2 of 4 50% 75% Fair Good High High 3 3 X $20,500 $1,700 46 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 8 30 15 75% 75% Good High $980 `Valley Oak (Quercus lobata 47 40 30 100% 75% Good High X $2,800 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia 20,14,11, 11,10,8 13 35 35 40 35 100% 100% 50% 75% Good Good High I High 5 $17,100 $2,810 .50 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia 15, 14 35 40 75% 25% Fair Moderate 5 $6,900 51 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia 17.5,11.5 ,10.5 35 40 100% 25% Fair Moderate 4 $6,100 52 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia 7 25 10 100% 50% Good Moderate 4t $720 53 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 17, 17 35 40 100% 5090 Good High 4 1/ S8,300 54 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia 8.5 25 15 100% 50% Good Moderate 3 v $1,030 55 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia 10.5 35 20 100%o 50% Good Moderate 41/ $1,640 56 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia 14.5 40 35 100% 50% Good High 4v $3,070 REPLACEMENT TREE VALUES 15- allon 5120 24 -inch box 5420 36 -inch box 51 320 48 -inch box 55,000 52 -inch box 57,000 72 -inch box 515,000 9/5/2005 58 59 61 F6 7y 65 67 69 70 72 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 10 35 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia) 14, 13 50 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) 22, 12, 5 40 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agr folia) 14.5 25 Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Deodar Cedar (Cedrus deodara Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) Site: 19330 Saratoga -Los Gatos Rd, Saratoga Prepared for: City of Saratoga Comm. Dev. Dept. Prepared by: David L. Babby, RCA 41 50 22 50 24 60 35 45 35 30 80 50 50 28 60 55 36 I 50 I 45 24 I 50 I 30 17.I4540 I 38 65 I 60 TREE INVENTORY TABLE 10 0% 100% 75% 75% 100% 75% 75% 75% 100% 75% 100% 75% 10 1 40 I 25 100% 3 of 4 50% 25% 50% 25% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% .75% 75% 50% 100% Good Fair Fair Fair Good Fair Fair Fair Good Good Good Fair Good Moderate Moderate High Low High High High High High High High High High 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 REPLACEMENT TREE VALUES 15- gallon $120 24 -inch box $420 36 -inch box $1,320 48 -inch box $5,000 52 -inch box $7,000 72 -inch box $15,000 9/5/2005 $1,500 $4,180 $8,000 S1,790 I $3,910 $1,620 I $3,200 $1,500 I S860 I $2,800 $1,630 I I 17 65 70 I I 100% 1 75% I Good High 1 4 1 1 1 1 $7,200 58 59 61 F6 7y 65 67 69 70 72 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 10 35 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia) 14, 13 50 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) 22, 12, 5 40 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agr folia) 14.5 25 Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Deodar Cedar (Cedrus deodara Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) Site: 19330 Saratoga -Los Gatos Rd, Saratoga Prepared for: City of Saratoga Comm. Dev. Dept. Prepared by: David L. Babby, RCA 41 50 22 50 24 60 35 45 35 30 80 50 50 28 60 55 36 I 50 I 45 24 I 50 I 30 17.I4540 I 38 65 I 60 TREE INVENTORY TABLE 10 0% 100% 75% 75% 100% 75% 75% 75% 100% 75% 100% 75% 10 1 40 I 25 100% 3 of 4 50% 25% 50% 25% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% .75% 75% 50% 100% Good Fair Fair Fair Good Fair Fair Fair Good Good Good Fair Good Moderate Moderate High Low High High High High High High High High High 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 REPLACEMENT TREE VALUES 15- gallon $120 24 -inch box $420 36 -inch box $1,320 48 -inch box $5,000 52 -inch box $7,000 72 -inch box $15,000 9/5/2005 $1,500 $4,180 $8,000 S1,790 I $3,910 $1,620 I $3,200 $1,500 I S860 I $2,800 $1,630 I TREE INVENTORY TABLE 73 Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) 10 40 25 100% 100% Good High $1,630 74 Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) 12 45 30 100% 100% Good High $2,310 75 12 Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) 45 25 100% 100% Good High 3 $2,310 76 Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) 8 35 20 100% 100% Good High 3 I $1,080 77 Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) 20 80 50 100% 75% Good High 5 X I $5,300 78 Monterey Pine (Pines radiata) 42 85 70 100% 100% Good High 5 X X $5,400 Coast Redwood 9 Sequoia sempervirens) 8 35 20 100% 75% Good 4 X $920 80 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia 18 40 40 100% 75% Good High 4 X $5,300 81 California Black Walnut (Juglans hindsii) 23 35 40 75% 50% Fair Moderate $1,160' 1 15- gallon 3120 24 -inch box S420 REPLACEMENT TREE VALUES 1 36 -inch box 11,320 48 -inch box 15,000 52 -inch box 17,000 72 -inch box 115,000 Site: 19330 Saratoga -Los Gatos Rd, Saratoga Prepared for: City of Saratoga Comm Dev. Dept. Prepared by: David L. Bobby, RCA 4of4 9/5/2005 Tree No. Tree Name Size Diameter" HT x CS' Overall Condition Suitability for Preservation Impact (1= Highest, 5= Lowest) Tree Appraisal Value Coast Live Oak 4" Poor 83 (Quercus agrifolia) 17 x 0/6 Leaning Low 4 5120 Suppressed Coast Live Oak 6' Fair 84 (Quercus agrifolia) 12 x 0/9 Leaning Moderate 4 5720 Suppressed Valley Oak 12" 85 (Quercus lobate) 38 x 8/15 Good High 3 52,400 Valley Oak 10" 86 (Quercus lobate) 35 x 12/12 Good High 5 51,640 Coast Live Oak 12" Poor 87 (Quercus agrifolia) 22 x 0/25 Leaning Low 5 Suppressed Coast Live Oak 13° 88 (Quercus agrifolia) 35 x 15/10 Fair Moderate 1 52,200 Crowded Proposed Removal Coast Live Oak 8" Poor 89 (Quercus agrifolia) 10 x 15/6 Leaning Low 5 $420 Suppressed Tree Inventory Table (added trees to previous Babb y surve Attachment 4 enise Kaspar Advanced Listing Services 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 18` day of July 2007, that I deposited 36 notices 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 as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property described as: Address: 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road APN: 510 06 069 that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City of Saratoga's Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on: Wednesday, the 8 day of August 2007, 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: #07 -319/ 19358 Saratoga -Los Gatos Road APPLICANT: Adams APN: 510 -06 -069 DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Use Permit and Design Review approval to construct a new two -story single family residence, including a basement, and to allow a height exception of approximately three feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence and garage will be approximately 5,013 square feet. The lot size is approximately 1.9 acres and the site is zoned R- 1- 40,000. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order for information to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before Monday, July 30, 2007. A site visit will be held on the day preceding the hearing date listed above as part of the standard Site Visit Committee agenda. Site visits occur between 3:30 and 5:00 p.m. The site visit is open to the public. The Site Visit Committee will convene at the City Hall parking lot at 3:30 p.m. on the day preceding the hearing and visit the site listed above and may visit other sites as well. For more information please contact the Community Development Department at 408 868 -1222 or review the Site Visit Agenda on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. 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. Suzanne Thomas Assistant Planner 408 868 -1212 City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 408 868 -1222 JULY 18, 2007 •WHERSHIP LISTING PREPARED FOR: 510 -06 -069 CHRIS SASKIA ADAMS 19358 SARATOGA -LOS GATOS ROAD SARATOGA CA 95070 397 -09 -004 WILLIAM D ZANKER 969 BUCKEYE CT SUNNYVALE CA 94086 -8258 397 -10 -004 PAUL J DAS OR CURRENT OWNER 19371 SARATOGA LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6434 510 -06 -007 SHEI -HUEI MAY LIAO OR CURRENT OWNER 19310 SARATOGA LOS GATOS RD *TOGA CA 95070 -6435 510 -06 -043 DONALD P BLYTHE BACCI PO BOX 942 LOS GATOS CA 95031 -0942 510 -06 -046 DONALD Y NANCY LESSER OR CURRENT OWNER 19266 CITRUS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6410 510 -06 -054 JUDY LOMAS OR CURRENT OWNER 19405 BAINTER AVE LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2917 510 -06 -066 JOHN RANKIN 5388 GREENBANK CT SAN JOSE CA 95118 -3033 -069 C S SASKIA ADAMS 22431 PALM AVE CUPERTINO CA 95014 397 -10 -002 CLOYD E MARY MARVIN OR CURRENT OWNER 15355 VIA COLINA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6249 510 -06 -003 EF &MKVAMME OR CURRENT OWNER 19490 GLEN UNA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6412 510 -06 -011 KEITH CRANE OR CURRENT OWNER 19298 CITRUS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6410 510 -06 -044 ALBERT M SUSAN SABES OR CURRENT OWNER 19273 CITRUS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6410 510 -06 -049 HENRY C VICTORIA WU OR CURRENT OWNER 19290 SARATOGA LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6435 510 -06 -063 ROBERT A SANDIE OR CURRENT OWNER 19400 SARATOGA LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6435 510 -06 -067 RICHARD J JUSTICE OR CURRENT OWNER 19510 GLEN UNA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6474 510 -25 -009 MARGARET J NOONAN 19651 GLEN UNA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6465 397 -10 -003 ESMARALDA DAS OR CURRENT OWNER 19351 SARATOGA LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6434 510 -06 -005 DANIEL A LYNN DUC 14107 WINCHESTER BLVD H LOS GATOS CA 95032 510 -06 -031 SANTA CLARA COUNTY PO BOX 36006 MILPITAS CA 95036 510 -06 -045 MARK A LESLIE ROBERTS OR CURRENT OWNER 19295 CITRUS LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -6410 510 -06 -050, 51, 52, 53 ROBERT A GEORGIANNA SPINAZZE PO BOX 3089 SARATOGA CA 95070 -1089 510 -06 -064 PAUL F BARBARA GENTZKOW OR CURRENT OWNER 19508 GLEN UNA DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6474 510 -06 -068 PETER TRAN 19330 SARATOGA LOS GATOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070 510 -25 -011 MICHAEL R BLACK OR CURRENT OWNER 19520 BAINTER AVE LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2942 510 -25 -024 HILARY WILLIAMS OR CURRENT OWNER 19317 REDBERRY DR LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2928 510 -25 -062 FRED T YUKIKO YONEMOTO OR CURRENT OWNER 19351 REDBERRY DR LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2928 510 -25 -068 JUNG LEE OR CURRENT OWNER 19380 BAINTER AVE LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2901 510-49 -013 MATTHEW THERESA HARRIGAN OR CURRENT OWNER 19544 GLEN UNA DR LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2919 510 -25 -056 CHARLES DANA DUNCHEON OR CURRENT OWNER 19384 BAINTER AVE LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2901 510 -25 -066 REV DORR OR CURRENT OWNER 19460 BAINTER AVE LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2900 510 -25 -069 JOHN C KATHERINE COTTINGHAM OR CURRENT OWNER 19350 BAINTER AVE LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2901 CITY OF SARATOGA ATTN: Suzanne Thomas 13777 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 510 -25 -058 JILL 0 ROGER MILTON OR CURRENT OWNER 19392 BAINTER AVE LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2941 510 -25 -067 THOMAS E JENNIFER STILL OR CURRENT OWNER 19480 BAINTER AVE LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2900 510 -49 -006 JAMES J VIRGINIA ASHER OR CURRENT OWNER 19544 SKY OAKS WAY LOS GATOS CA 95030 -2932 Advanced Listing Services P.O. Box 2593 Dana Point CA 92624 Attachment 5 Re: Use Permit for height exception per 15- 12.100 19358 Saratoga Los Gatos Rd (Application 07 -319) From: Chris and Saskia Adams (owners) Date: July 23, 2007 In this application we ask for a Use Permit to allow a structure height of 29', as allowed by section "15- 12.100 Height of structures" of the city code. Note that this is not a variance. We have already submitted a both the primary 29' plan, and a backup 26' plan that does not require the Use Permit. The two plans differ only in the pitch of the roof, and therefore the shape the gables, ie are the triangles flat or more normal. The heights of the eaves are the same for both versions. We believe that the 29' version is noticeably more attractive, and fitting of the Shingle Style. In this report we cover four topics: 1. Our building site has an unusual degree of seclusion and isolation from neighbors. 2. Our design is consistent with the well known American architectural style referred to as "Shingle Style" 3. The higher pitch roof is much more attractive 4. Example images and renderings of our design. In addition to this we included three attachments: 1. Supplementary images of Shingle Style Homes 2. Table of analysis comparing our proposed design with all of the examples in the Field Guide to American Houses and those in Attachment 1 3. A letter of appraisal of our design from the author of the Field Guide to American Houses, Virginia McAlester Those who love the Shingle Style enjoy the coloring and complexity of the natural wood siding, contrasted with simple but refined trim such as classical columns, flush gables, soffit eaves, and window treatments. In many cases the homes enjoy extensive light though the use of the "strips of windows" feature common to this style, and in many cases this has migrated to "strips of doors Notably, America's most famous architect, Frank Lloyd Wright, chose the Shingle Style for his own home, as did Teddy Roosevelt and many other notable Americans. Please enjoy these and other examples in Attachment 1. 1 MOVE JUL 2 6 2007 CITY OF SARATOGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. SECLUSION We suggest that the degree of seclusion of a site is an important factor in considering the height exception Use Permit. If for example, a site were completely private, its appearance would not impact anyone in the community, and arguably there would not be any reason for anyone to complain. It would be hard to be 100% private. We aren't 100% secluded either, but it would be hard to find many sites in Saratoga as secluded as ours. The best way to appreciate the seclusion is from the site visit. To summarize the key points: o The home is not visible from any public road. o Saratoga Los Gatos Rd is 500 feet away, and the home is 30 feet below road level. You cannot see even one inch of the house from this road. o Bainter Ave is 400 feet away and heavy screened by around 30 mature trees. You may be able to make out glimmers of small portions of our home from some point on this road, but for all practical purposes it is not visible. o In the normal course of life, our neighbors will not see the house. o Of all our neighbors, the Tran house immediately above our building site could have the most visibility, but: Their first floor is 3' higher than the top of our roof at 29'. The existing grove of -13 oak trees screens off the second floor and roof of our house. Our proposed roof is completely screened. We will be planting (per landscape plan) three new mature oak trees to fill in the screening even more. Per the Tran's request we have agreed to erect a redwood fence along the driveway and along the top of the hill. This will complete the screen of our first floor. o The Duc house is at a higher elevation and even more heavily screened. You have to go to some effort to see their home from anywhere on our property. o The Lao home is at a lower elevation than the Tran's but you have to go to some effort to see their home from our property. o The Lomas home is at a lower elevation, down by Bainter Ave. There are a number of trees in the line of sight between homes. The homes are hundreds of feet apart and the Lomas home focuses forward to the Bainter side. Nonetheless we plan on planting more screening. Most importantly we have made every effort to interact with our neighbors about our plans throughout the development of our project, and we believe we have good relations and support from them all. 2 2. ASSESSMENT OF SHINGLE STYLE In the Study Session last month we focused most of our attention on the input provided to us by Virginia McAlester (author of the book referenced in the Saratoga code). In this package we include a formal letter from Virginia, and in addition we will address specific informal questions we heard during and after the Study Session. a) Letter of assessment from expert and author of the book referred to in the Saratoga city code, Virginia McAlester. b) Does your design have all of the required design elements? We review required vs optional features of Shingle Style Homes. c) Should your design look more "Victorian"? d) Is your design as articulated as the examples in the Field Guide? 2a. Letter of Assessment A letter from Virginia McAlester is included as Attachment 3. As we disclosed in the Study Session last month, Virgina had a number of suggestions to improve our design, all of which we adopted. It was not easy to earn her blessing! The bottom line quote is: "...in my opinion the house you have proposed is a Shingle style house A side note on the changes we made: (1) the first was the eyebrow window shape, but as it turns out the original architectural drawings had the correct glass but the 3D renderings did not, (2) the suggestion to add more protruding gables was a good one but not absolutely necessary as only 67% of the example Shingle homes have this feature, and (3) the bay windows were also a good idea but only 33% of the example homes in her book have them. This is why she considered the original design to "essentially" be Shingle style in the first place, although she likes the final design much more. Virginia also touched on the topic of section 2c regarding Victorian styling. As she noted, the Shingle Style is evolving. We have provided a lot more information in section 2c, and numerous less ancient examples in Attachment 1. Feature Field Guide Examples Other Examples Adams Home Shingle siding 100% 100% Yes Steep roof pitch 100% 87% Requested Flush gables and/or coffered eaves 97% 100% Yes Porches 88% 87% Yes Multi -pane windows >82% 87% Yes Strips of (rectangular) windows 73% 93% Yes Protruding Gables 67% 60% Yes Dormer windows 45% 40% Yes Stone trim 42% 20% Yes A porch covered by a main roof 39% 27% No Bay windows 33% 40% Yes Turrets. 30% 7% No Palladian windows 27% 40% No Stone columns' 27% 13% No' Shingled columns' 24% 7% No' Classical columns' 21% 73% Yes' Plain columns' 21% 13% No' Hipped dormer 15% 7% No Gabled dormer 15% 0% No' Round or oval accent windows 9% 33% Yes Rounded porch 6% 13% Yes Shed dormer' 6% 7% No' Polygonal dormer 6% 0% No Eyebrow dormer' 3% 20% Yes Recessed window 3% 0% No 2b. Required vs Optional Features of Shingle Style Homes The Shingle Style includes a number of design elements that you can draw on, but in no case that we have ever seen does a single design use all of the elements. In fact typically each design uses a fraction of the possible elements. Therefore, although it is certainly easy to find features in various sample photos which we did not include, it is unfair to expect that our design, or any other one design, would include all such features. To illustrate which features are common, and to compare our design, we ran some statistical analysis of the features used in the 33 example photos shown in the Field Guide, and 15 other examples in Attachment 1. These evaluations are done on the front facade only since most photos where of the front fagade. The detailed analysis is included as Attachment 2, but we summarize with the table below and some commentary afterwards. Table 1. Analysis of Features in Shingle Style Homes Any one design uses only one of four column styles 2 We didn't find any examples where more than one dormer style was used in one design 3 Other examples are provided in Attachment 1 4 The first observation is that our design includes all of the common design elements that occurred in >40% of the example photos. Of the eleven "No" cases, seven are situations where an architect would only pick one out of a set of choices, e.g. pick one of four column choices, or typically one (or zero) of the dormer window styles. That leaves four features that we did not include. No house in the Field Guide included more of these features than our design, and very few had an equal number. We included all of the common features, ie that occurred in >50% of the examples, plus of the less common we included eyebrow dormers, stone trim, bay windows, classical columns, oval accent windows, and a rounded porch. Of the very common features it is worth noting the "flush gables and/or coffered eaves" feature. This is a feature that we highlighted in the Study Session as an example of the fine detailing and carpentry we planned for the home. Not until we ran this statistical analysis did we realize how ubiquitous it was. The example illustration on page 291 is drawn this way, but nowhere in the text is this feature mentioned. We discussed this point with Virginia, and she will be adding this point to the new edition of the book coming out soon. Thank you to the City of Saratoga for the contribution to the second edition! Note from the statistics of the photos in Attachment 1 that modern Shingle Style homes are trending more towards the use of the Classical column style, the eyebrow dormer, round/oval accent windows and bay windows consistent with our design. To emphasize again no Shingle style home includes all of the design elements, and our design includes more design elements than most. While keeping that in mind, this is the summary of features we did not include. Recessed windows were present in only 3% of the Field Guide examples and none of the other examples we found. Recessed windows appear to be a rare feature anyway. Palladian windows were present in 27% of the examples. Of the nine examples of homes that had proper Palladian windows, none had bay windows, ie architects tended to choose one or the other. The one partial exception is fig 4 on p 296 which has a square Palladian like window and also a bay window. Turrets were present in 30% of the examples. We simply don't like turrets and we hope you can forgive us. We do have the rounded front porch to capture the basic shape element. A roof that covers a living area and then slopes over a porch roof was present in 39% of the example photos. We actually considered this feature, but we could not fit it in with all of our other design objectives. In any case, it is not a required feature. In summary, we are more than comfortable that we have adopted enough of the common features of the Shingle Style. We adopted the features which suited our personal taste, as one would hope to do when building your own home. 2c. Should the House Look More Victorian During the study session Commissioner Susie Nagpal asked whether our design should look more "Victorian We will contribute the following to the discussion: The architectural definition of "Victorian" Additional examples and reference information from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982" Example photos in the Field Guide which demonstrates that many Shingle style homes do not look Victorian, ie the style does not require a Victorian look. The Shingle style has evolved over 130 years, and the benchmark is not any one decade or the other a good thing, since building materials have improved so much. Virginia's comments on this question (see Attachment 3) It is true that the chapter on Shingle Style homes is in the Field Guide section on "Victorian Houses (1860- 1900) Before going further, please review Virginia's definition of this category (page 239). "...In American architecture, however, it is those styles that were popular during the last decades of her reign from about 1860 to 1900 that are generally referred tows "Victorian In other words the Shingle Style was included in this section because it emerged during that timeframe, but not because it resembles more common Victorian styles like the "Queen Anne" or "Second Empire One of the most highly regarded texts on the Shingle Style is "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982" by Morgan and Roth. They trace the identification of this style to the January 1874 issue of "The New York Sketchbook of Architecture This first example of the Shingle Style home is the photo below. Clearly (i) it is hardly Queen Anne style, and (ii) the Shingle Style has evolved over the last 130 years! 6 The referenced "Field Guide to American Houses" includes photos mostly of homes built a very long time ago. Even with these examples there are numerous cases that don't look even remotely Victorian (in the common sense of the word, such as Queen Anne style). For your convenience, a subset of such examples are immediately below. All of these are from the Field Guide except the bottom left photo which is from the Morgan and Roth book. See Attachment 1, Example 11, for a very old Shingle home that looks fairly modern Frank Lloyd Wright's own home. Furthermore, the Field Guide (published 23 years ago) doesn't attempt to examine the evolution of the style in the same way that "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982" does. Virginia is currently working on a new edition of the Field Guide and will update the Shingle Style section to cover some of its evolution. She addressed this point in her letter, when she stated: "The Shingle Style houses being designed and built at present tend to have fewer Victorian details on them than those built in the late nineteenth century. They typically appear a bit calmer, as does your home design." Most of the examples in Attachment 1 are much less than 100 years old, and is a useful reference for current trends. 2d. Articulation Another question Susie asked at the study session was how our "articulation" compared with the examples in the book. To evaluate this question objectively, we looked for metrics to use to compare designs with. We took our design, all of the photos in the field guide, and the extra photos in Attachment 1 and used these metrics to compare articulation. The first metric we used was to count the number of unique surface planes in the front facade, ie planes of different depth. Our design has seven planes as summarized in the drawing below (note that two of the gables protrude 16" from the plane below them, and the larger gable protrudes but by a lesser amount so we did not count it as a unique plane). Four of these planes (1,2,3,4) are interrupted by the porch that divides the bottom and top half, as well as stone work at the base. Two of the planes (1,4) include a bulging bay window. One of the planes (3) has a round porch in front of the bottom half. The average uninterrupted surface is about -15' wide by -8' tall. If we had counted uninterrupted surfaces then our design has 11 surfaces or 13 if you include the bays. We counted surface planes in the example photos of the Field Guide and the photos in Attachment 1. We used a fixed set of rules so the results would not be arbitrary (front facade, not counting planes from porches, dormers or bay windows etc as these were counted in the feature metrics). We found the average number of surface planes in the photos in the Field Guide was 3.3, half of the seven in our design. No photo in the Field Guide had more than five surface planes. Even if we have an error here or there, it is clear that our design is at least as articulated as any of the example photos, by this objective measure. The second metric we used was to count the number of window shapes used. Our design has four (strips of rectangles, bay, oval, and eyebrow). The average for the 33 photos in the field guide was 2.3. Only two examples had four styles and the rest had less. To summarize Our design has 7 surface planes vs an average of 3.3 in the Field Guide Our design has 4 window styles vs an average of 2.3 in the Field Guide Per section 2b, our design included as many features of the Shingle Style as any of the examples in the Field Guide Even if our assessment is imperfect, we are still far above any objective bar we can think of. 8 I f° .s t 4 .,t 1 2 4 2d. Articulation Another question Susie asked at the study session was how our "articulation" compared with the examples in the book. To evaluate this question objectively, we looked for metrics to use to compare designs with. We took our design, all of the photos in the field guide, and the extra photos in Attachment 1 and used these metrics to compare articulation. The first metric we used was to count the number of unique surface planes in the front facade, ie planes of different depth. Our design has seven planes as summarized in the drawing below (note that two of the gables protrude 16" from the plane below them, and the larger gable protrudes but by a lesser amount so we did not count it as a unique plane). Four of these planes (1,2,3,4) are interrupted by the porch that divides the bottom and top half, as well as stone work at the base. Two of the planes (1,4) include a bulging bay window. One of the planes (3) has a round porch in front of the bottom half. The average uninterrupted surface is about -15' wide by -8' tall. If we had counted uninterrupted surfaces then our design has 11 surfaces or 13 if you include the bays. We counted surface planes in the example photos of the Field Guide and the photos in Attachment 1. We used a fixed set of rules so the results would not be arbitrary (front facade, not counting planes from porches, dormers or bay windows etc as these were counted in the feature metrics). We found the average number of surface planes in the photos in the Field Guide was 3.3, half of the seven in our design. No photo in the Field Guide had more than five surface planes. Even if we have an error here or there, it is clear that our design is at least as articulated as any of the example photos, by this objective measure. The second metric we used was to count the number of window shapes used. Our design has four (strips of rectangles, bay, oval, and eyebrow). The average for the 33 photos in the field guide was 2.3. Only two examples had four styles and the rest had less. To summarize Our design has 7 surface planes vs an average of 3.3 in the Field Guide Our design has 4 window styles vs an average of 2.3 in the Field Guide Per section 2b, our design included as many features of the Shingle Style as any of the examples in the Field Guide Even if our assessment is imperfect, we are still far above any objective bar we can think of. 8 3. Impact of the higher pitched roof on the appearance of the home The roof eaves are at the same height regardless of the 26' or 29' version. What changes is the triangle shape of the gables. At 26' the triangles are squished, and just do not look right for this style of home. The difference is quite meaningful to us, the future residents. Gables with 29' Roof Gables with 26' Roof 4. Design Details of the Proposed Home This section will be addressed as follows: a) Photos of features, from existing homes, which we will adopt in our proposed home b) Computer 3D Renderings of the proposed home 4a. Photos of Features Our gables have no roof overhang, as is most common for Shingle Style, and will be finished with molding similar to the photo below. The gutters come part way around the corner to the front of the gable to create an accent. There is an accent band .across the bottom of the gables which wraps around and continues under the eaves. The areas under the eaves have soffits (no exposed rafters). 10 The windows and doors have wood trim. The windows have an exterior sill with crown below the sill. The first floor windows and doors have crown molding accenting the top. The porches are finished with elegant columns (ours are the classic round columns), with large finished beams, and bead board ceilings, much as in the next photo. 11 The garage has a trellis and a .rotruding gable The roof will have eyebrow dormer windows similar to this house below: 12 The front porch is rounded similar to the porches in the shoto below: 13 4b Renderings In the study session we were asked to provide more 3D views. That was two weeks ago so we had to use the model we already had. That model is something I did myself for fun, using a $99 piece of software from Fry's. Expectations need to be calibrated. Before starting this project I was advised by a local architect to never submit computer renderings to any planning commission because they never go over well, as they are overly synthetic. And he was referring to higher end modeling tools. Sketches are preferred by architects because they are less precise and somehow have more character, but they are not 3D. To visualize this house you have to be able to super- impose the character and detailing of the photographs in section 4a on the general shape of the computer renderings. That is easy for us to do but we are particularly familiar with all of the details. Some specific reasons why computer 3D renderings are less pleasing Often the software limits the shapes you can generate, e.g. we cannot make the computer illustrate the correct shape of the eyebrow window The computer has a limited number of colors and shades of each color, so a lot of detail is lost, e.g. the nuances of shape in a piece of molding painted a single color like white. In the rendering the molding looks like a simple flat piece of wood instead of having depth and detail of molding. Patterns and textures are much more repetitive than in real life Color control between the screen image and printed image is not perfect, e.g. what looks like the correct stone on the screen may look wrong on paper. The attempt to bring off axis perspective views (vs simple elevations) requires the computer to distort the shape to give the impression of depth on a flat screen or piece of paper. As a simple example to calibrate what you can expect from a computer rendering, below is a view of an actual gable of the type we will build, and a 3D simulation. The simulation is lacking a lot of the detail that gives the house its full shape. So, with that said, the following pages have some 3D renderings of our proposed home. 14 Front View. Eyebrow dormers are the wrong shape and placement see architectural drawings for exact shape and placement. Actual porch depth is a bit deeper. Notice the bay windows on the second floor, with the classic protruding gable over the bay window. 15 Rear ri:ht. (s orch ends not re resentative, actual s orches are dee s er) Rear left Attachment 1- Case examples of current Shingle Style Homes Examples 11 -15 are taken from "Shingle Styles, Innovation in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 You may take particular interest in examples 11 and 15, from two of America's most famous architects Example 1: Architectural Digest #1 Example 2: Martha's Vineyard (from Weekend Homes) Example 3: (source unknown) Example 4: Butano Terrace, Saratoga, CA Example 5: Mountain Home Road, Woodside Example 6: Olive Hill Lane, Woodside Example 7: Architectural Digest #2 (Hamptons) Example 8: Southhampton Example 9: Northwest Beach Home Example 10: Architectural Digest #3 Example 11: Home of Frank Lloyd Wright America's most famous architect Example 12: Teddy Roosevelt's Sagamore Hill Example 13: Woods Hole, Massachusetts Example 14: Flinn House Example 15: Sasalito's Women's Club by architect Julia Morgan, who also did the Hearst Castle and the Saratoga Foothill Club 17 Example 1: Architectural Digest #1 18 Example House 1 Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No No round porch Roof overhang Flush gables, soffit eaves Flush gables, soffit eaves Protruding gable Yes, but minimal Yes Porch Yes (roof not clear) Yes, extensive Porch support Classical columns Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone None visible except chimney Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows Yes Yes Palladian windows Yes No Recessed windows No No Oval/round- accent windows Yes Yes Dormer windows Shed style. Eyebrow style Surface planes 7 7 round porch Example 1: Architectural Digest #1 18 Example 2: Martha's Vineyard Home (Weekend Homes) 19 Example House 2 Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No round porch No round porch Roof overhang Flush gables, soffit eaves Flush gables, soffit eaves Protruding gable Yes Yes Porch Yes (small) Yes, extensive Porch support Classical columns Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone Yes Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows Yes Yes Palladian windows No No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows Yes Yes Dormer windows Eyebrow Eyebrow style Surface planes 2 round porch 7 round porch Example 2: Martha's Vineyard Home (Weekend Homes) 19 Example 3: (source unknown) 20 Example House 3 Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Slight overhang with soffit Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable Flare style Yes Porch Yes (small) Yes, extensive Porch support Classical columns Classical columns -Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone No Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows Protruding yes but not classic bay shape Yes Palladian windows No No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows Yes Yes Dormer windows Gable style Eyebrow style Surface planes 8 7 round porch Example 3: (source unknown) 20 Example 4: 14800 Butano Terrace, Saratoga, CA 21 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Flush gable, soffit eaves Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable Slight on one gable Yes Porch Yes Yes, extensive Porch support Classical Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone No Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows Yes Yes Palladian windows No No Recessed windows No No OvaUround accent windows No Yes Dormer windows No Eyebrow style Surface planes 5 7 round porch Example 4: 14800 Butano Terrace, Saratoga, CA 21 Example 5: Mountain Home Road, Woodside, CA 22 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Minimal, with soffit Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable Yes Yes Porch Yes Yes, extensive Porch support Classical Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Multi -pane Yes Stone No Yes Strips of windows .Yes Yes Bay windows Yes Yes Palladian windows No No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows Yes Yes Dormer windows Eyebrow Eyebrow style Surface planes 7 7 round porch Example 5: Mountain Home Road, Woodside, CA 22 Example 6: Olive Hill Lane, Woodside 23 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No (round porch) No (round porch) Roof overhang Flush, soffit eaves Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable No Yes Porch Yes Yes, extensive Porch support Classical Columns Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Multi -pane Yes Stone Yes Yes Strips of windows Strips of doors Yes Bay windows No Yes Palladian windows Arched No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows Yes Yes Dormer windows No Eyebrow style Surface planes 8 7 Example 6: Olive Hill Lane, Woodside 23 Example 7: Architectural Digest #2 24 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No round porch 2 ❑d floor No (round porch) Roof overhang Flush gable, soffit eave Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable Yes Yes Porch Yes Yes, extensive Porch support Classical (square) Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone No Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows No Yes Palladian windows No No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows No Yes Dormer windows No Eyebrow style Surface planes 5 7 Example 7: Architectural Digest #2 24 Example 8: Sotheby's Southhampton 25 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Mostly flush gable and soffit eaves Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable Yes Yes Porch Yes (small) Yes, extensive Porch support Classical Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone No Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows No Yes Palladian windows (square style) No Recessed windows No No OvaUround accent windows No Yes Dormer windows Eyebrow Eyebrow style Surface planes 7+ 7 Example 8: Sotheby's Southhampton 25 Example 9: Beach House Ionics Away From I1.O111C 26 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Flush gables Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable Yes Yes Porch Yes Yes, extensive Porch support Classical Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone No? Yes Strips of windows Yes (strips of doors) Yes Bay windows Yes Yes Palladian windows Arch window No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows Yes Yes Dormer windows No Eyebrow style Surface planes 7 Example 9: Beach House Ionics Away From I1.O111C 26 Example 10: Architectural Digest #3 27 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No? No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Soffit, hipped style Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable No Yes Porch Not in this view Yes, extensive Porch support Classical Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone Yes Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows No Yes Palladian windows Yes No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows No Yes Dormer windows Hipped Eyebrow style Surface planes >7 7 Example 10: Architectural Digest #3 27 Example 11: Home of Frank Lloyd Wright (Americas most famous architect) (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 A very old house that does not look very old (Victorian) 28 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Flush gable Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable No Yes Porch Yes (side) Yes, extensive Porch support Plain Classical columns Multi pane w indows on top half No Yes Stone No Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows Yes Yes Palladian windows Yes No Recessed windows No No OvaUround accent windows No Yes Dormer windows No Eyebrow style Surface planes 4+ 7 Example 11: Home of Frank Lloyd Wright (Americas most famous architect) (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 A very old house that does not look very old (Victorian) 28 Example 12: Teddy Roosevelt's Sagamore Hill (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 Other than the awnings, this is a straight forward Shingle Style. Y7 �i�Bm�fliIitIIl P� un$II"#7wq 29 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No? No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Flush gable Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable Yes Yes Porch Yes Yes, extensive Porch support Classical Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone Yes? Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows No Yes Palladian windows No No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows No Yes Dormer windows No Eyebrow style Surface planes 7 7 Example 12: Teddy Roosevelt's Sagamore Hill (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 Other than the awnings, this is a straight forward Shingle Style. Y7 �i�Bm�fliIitIIl P� un$II"#7wq 29 Example 13: Woods Hole, Massachusetts (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 30 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No! No Turrets No? No (round porch) Roof overhang Overhangs but soffit Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable No Yes Porch No Yes, extensive Porch support Na Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half No Yes Stone No Yes Strips of windows` Yes Yes Bay windows No Yes Palladian windows No No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows No Yes Dormer windows No Eyebrow style Surface planes 4 7 Example 13: Woods Hole, Massachusetts (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 30 Example 14: Flinn House (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 31 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Flush gable Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable No Yes Porch Small Yes, extensive Porch support Shingle Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone No Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows No Yes Palladian windows No No Recessed windows No No Ovallround accent windows No Yes Dormer windows No Eyebrow style Surface planes 7 Example 14: Flinn House (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 31 Example 15: Sausalito Woman's Club (by the architect of the Hearst Castle) (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 32 Example House Adams House Looks Victorian No No Turrets No No (round porch) Roof overhang Overhang, soffit? Flush gable, soffit eaves Protruding gable No Yes Porch Yes Yes, extensive Porch support Plain Classical columns Multi -pane windows on top half Yes Yes Stone No Yes Strips of windows Yes Yes Bay windows No Yes Palladian windows No No Recessed windows No No Oval/round accent windows No Yes Dormer windows No Eyebrow style Surface planes 7 Example 15: Sausalito Woman's Club (by the architect of the Hearst Castle) (from "Shingle Styles, Innovation and Tradition in American Architecture 1874 to 1982 32 Attachment 2 Table of Statistical Analysis of Features A -ckvneoi ThI P Attachment 3 Letter from Virginia McAlester. 34 07/22/2007 12:05 2148275416 July 22, 2007 Mr. Christopher Adams Tallwood Venture Capital Re: Style of design for Adams Family Home Anthony Ho, architect Dear Mr. Adams, "VIRGJNIA MCALESTER 5703 SWISS AVENUE DALLAS, TEXAS 75214 214 -707 -7728 HOME TEAM PRODUCTION On July 3r you first called me, and then sent PDFs with three dimensional views of a new home you proposed to build. You asked me if I could answer the question "Is it a Shingle style house." My response was that yes, it basically was Shingle style. However, the design had problems that bothered me and I was therefore unwilling to write a letter for you. Four specific things bothered me. First was the odd and jarring elliptical shape of the two roof dormers; these were a very poor attempt at creating the "eyebrow" dormers sometimes found in this style. You have since found a window in a far more suitable shape (an Anderson "Full Chord that will in my opinion create handsome eyebrow dormers. Second was the lack of any three dimensional features on the front of the house there were no "sculpted shapes" that are typical of the style. You have since extended two of the front gables and added bay windows below them, as seen on the Newport, R.I. house (number 3, p. 294 in my copy of the Field guide) and in a larger size on the Low House (picture 8, page 295 of same). These create small triangular cut -away areas on the gables above and give more of a three dimensional or sculpted feeling. Third, you showed a chimney covered with wood shingles not at all typical. You have since changed this to a stone chimney. Fourth, I felt the side portions of the raised rear porch were too shallow and you have now made these side portions six feet deep. In addition you have varied the window size on the front facade by making one window grouping a taller height. PAGE 02 07/22/2007 12:05 2148275416 With these multiple changes made, I now feel comfortable writing a letter stating that in my opinion the house you have proposed is a Shingle style house. You told me that some were concerned that your home's rear facade was symmetrical. This did not bother me. As you can see in the Field Guide, there are a number of symmetrical examples shown, even among examples built one hundred years or so ago. In addition, I believe that symmetrical facades are even more common on the Shingle homes being built today. The Shingle style houses being designed and built at present tend to have fewer Victorian details on them than those built in the late nineteenth century. They typically appear a bit calmer, as does your hone design. In writing this letter, it is important to make clear that I have not examined your detailed plans and specifications only looked at the big picture provided by the three dimensional renderings produced by your computer program, and at the specifications for the new dormer window shape. These have given me, I believe, a very good idea of the overall appearance of your home —which is what I believe you want me to comment on but does not allow me to discuss specific small details. If you or anyone working or reviewing this project has any questions that I might be able to help with feel free to contact me at the phone number above. All the best, Virginia McAlester HOME TEAM PRODUCTION PAGE 01 f Attachment 6 soi la /I E p a o 1 1 1 a g 1 1 1 1 8 1 i i s Lax. w i�T� w )341 TMt! r soi la /I E p a o 1 1 1 a g 1 1 1 1 8 1 i t 133HS 33S 3NI1 HD1V1.1 T a E0 c U `O N O O O O t O of 0,0 (V 0 U CO 0° a` 0 0 0(.3 a D O 0 W y 0 o N o 0 a p0 a$° `>>.6 O D 8 0 U O C E °2 o Oa a O f ual no N 0 D m o :2-=2 050 Y j 3 0, =0 a so aai y< n O O `o pN- U O p ar m,p c o rn P 0 N u0 p an O p 0 O O C O W� 01�w J N0, N N 4 O N N S S U U cC O N Z .8 WW L:“."' N N W O U Z H LLJ W Z H Z L�J W a m U 0 Y w 0 responsibility of the permittee to identify, locate and protect ENERGY DISSIPATER h appropriate erosion control measures in WESTFALL 14583 BIG BASIN WAY, SARATOGA, CA 95070 (408)867-0244 STANDARD GRADING PLAN NOTES DATE. MAY 2007 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \1 I I 81 8 I 0 ce MS 13 'd'4 145 13'44 30Va0 I I 1 _I I I 1 I I sodoad J I 30VaO 03504 I 1 VaV 055 s'1 1 I Ad la 1 t I N 30380 0 m 95'135 13 "d'4 f 1 I .'195 '13'44 ONf1080 0NJ$1X3 I z 931.35 13 '14 04196 13'4'4 r PROPOSE] I .1.1110a0 0811518 0N0080 ONLLJ r I 1X3 J I I 0 M 1 M C N 31 U 0)1 7I In 0 In1 O U 0 La ,0 W NO 1 t 133HS 33S 3NI1 HD1V1.1 T a E0 c U `O N O O O O t O of 0,0 (V 0 U CO 0° a` 0 0 0(.3 a D O 0 W y 0 o N o 0 a p0 a$° `>>.6 O D 8 0 U O C E °2 o Oa a O f ual no N 0 D m o :2-=2 050 Y j 3 0, =0 a so aai y< n O O `o pN- U O p ar m,p c o rn P 0 N u0 p an O p 0 O O C O W� 01�w J N0, N N 4 O N N S S U U cC O N Z .8 WW L:“."' N N W O U Z H LLJ W Z H Z L�J W a m U 0 Y w 0 responsibility of the permittee to identify, locate and protect ENERGY DISSIPATER h appropriate erosion control measures in WESTFALL 14583 BIG BASIN WAY, SARATOGA, CA 95070 (408)867-0244 STANDARD GRADING PLAN NOTES DATE. MAY 2007 N 4Q y� J P nt Tren Gns Meter TTSS G y tf tt �t0 Water Trench i TURNOUT w O NOTES O N 0 y 1. Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the LLS of record shall provide a written N 74 certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans. a Kw•" Oz.? m 2. All dimensions in feet, unless otherwise specified. 10,p9„02. °1 a as 3. Trees specified as dbh, species, overall condition (per David Babby arborist report). Detailed .....44.4- Nze q0• 111 report n file. 4. Distance from creek to structures 1 ref House —350 feet Primary Power PG &E Transformer 8 (Joint trench with gas) 1 Future pool —250 feet 4 \Q I Proposed utility pole -'50 feet e o BS z 5. An Ingress/Egress Easement has been granted, and filed with the County Recorder, for the Existing Sewer from 0 PL portion of the driveway that crosses the corner of the neighbor's (Trap) property. neighbors house e A. 0 411114`------ .e•TREE r Q., 4 4 P ,L \,269 ti u O S3° 91 o l2' 1'2EE e 4 e7.07' S1'49'g4' a 59.70' 9y f %R O 21•EUa ..Me CFOs) l0TREE 27 O<FO� .j r 4,4 018' OAK Q 36'CE,... r,� P a `.9 O 24• OAK 014•0AK .../.1.4,4,4. J? q S Kas (Go oa) cf. s� Existing 5' wire fence on neighbor's (Due) property °S o New sewer trench S q r.. o 7, x36 5 <c°.� g4 o 1, r. 3 219 B•GAKS 4 (Good. (Good) 4 N PL 40' C o 18 OAK L A 219, 7• (FO r> 0°1! 0 p e g P 9,4CeS° N C 1 O 3b•0� JP olY9AT AKN36 0 a e9.OAK 018,0 SFOIr, f'T o 0 1 2• 000 irecM41 mGnos) O18.OgKN49 8 yy 20 I4 il, r O10'OgK O 2 d1K 0 4B'P1NE 2 Good) e p 24 OAK III 6 G�P� y�7 004 t o°; �se t ea kg r V- .,.�1 z' Volley Oak #2.5 (co°d) 1\ 547.8 iA NBB N j. 44 51'/ 00'648'1- 00'648'1- 00'648'1- i A3 YY O O cff 22, 13• 3' 52.f. Neighbor has a dog house right on property line Bound to O(Good) 4� 4 i o a VICINITY E 4 °°'d Remainder 'arc�A 4' P 20• •y 'F 2 podi 16 'g yk 4 �°n ALLOWABLE 11.0012 RRPA f. iLCI;IA'I'FgNS e9 ,�j9 °h1 A�traye slope (SI =0.00n9ILA 4 q e Area of parcel (A) 1.304 acres 538 Conrn,r. Inlrnai ire( o Length of cortoar (L) 3 ?2(i fu, KN3 (I p J et. GA .1Vt:RAGF SLOPL E'OR. PAP.CEL S 11.3':.,112.1) i 19 S e! a r01 �,f pan el (a 1.001 acres 1( 1.1 1 O 38'PINE pL operc u t ion LM, x7 -14? ur 6,5R! q.R. RcAxai net arra ?9,x34 o.. feet Maximum Roar ata 1,000 square het Existing wire fence on neighbor's (Lomas) property AVERAGE SLOPE. AT BUILDING SITE 8°'a i NO. BY DATE REVISION BY DATE DATE JULY 20 2007 T JOB NO SCALE HOR. 1' =20' S 1 T E PLAN 2007 -029 DESIGNED CA BY, LANDS OF ADAMS SHEET CHECKED DATE 19398 SARATOGA -LOS GATOS ROAD, SARATOGA OF 2 PROD. ENGR CA v v e, 1 1 1 '40 Qog 5 1 1 1 1 T nl 1 1 L r leg paa 6,6 1m_ A _le i A -.16 6,6Z z. I 11 0 .f e-m 4@ II 571. �eamsvl I gig I 4@ 4L,6 Z IL 01 6, 44 0.61 .f u -a 6,41 s1 •57256101ltrAlf. gat 7i 000 00 I7V an r r .he vhl L -r ce fe w 0 r I 0 L I J /ire Air1210911 c ti TT 6 <c) I II I II /I/ 1 I 0 20 40 60 1�' 2 2. MOM O 2 40' Z {G 1hF, F W 1 12 o 2 0• SYC. YAW y t t 17" SYf N •EUC. W u 3 t; 9 1.1 A yo2 SYG. o i� o s'OAN x, 020 U )1111k o lo•src. H. xo 411 i lliii i 2•p l 27•E. ik I iiiik i fir 0 1 Iz Q as NO. BY DATE REVISION BY DATE DATE: JULY 20 2007 SITE PLAN JOB N0. SCALE: HOR. 1' =20' 2007 -025 DESIGNED R CA BY LANDS OF ADAMS SHE2T CHEC DATE 19358 SARATOGA -LOS GATOS ROAD, 079770GA OF 2 PROJ. ENG8 CA 1 c i s IO 5 if 1 I T esC 1 u 1 'J r A pans L 4 IJ dal 51 142110/L/12liYI96I a g d NL 6 A,9Z ft 441 w w 1 u J 1— d 10 a II 49,0L L- W f N a k L _J r 7 I f I A-M k 000 00 R,9 �ai•,l A-AL U w w U aL-0Ll 0Ih4L aL' oL -091 1 of9-0S A-03• J 0 P i t v R a_ r a OMNI i I.0 1 I 11h09 ,B .e -c ,v,ct 4 -c MEM! n I II 019-099 110.03• t 09-03 411 Il ll i V ill It 0 r--, 0 ot_ D e 41 r L 1 ,o -13•I IA'a'1 I 1 ffi r 1 1 *elf 5 if 1 1 1 N N j f 4D A,S erILL .M L,L 4-4 a t L,Z A,L 4D 0 4D 0 e4,L4 4® 0 c,a 0 LIJ -J J Ps at X 4D A-hb 4® a0-104 01-11, dl-i9l nt-t6L u iuuuir o g e g .fi- Si N I d-nZ .Z-IL i a r I ii O R i t lia tils:Niti1 O M.\■-- .—.110111011ivo.- J J P 4ID 60,S .L -IL dl-gl 4 .C-1Z vC-ISZ e,fZ .o, L ot 1 I i M.1 1 j a 1 g:( co e 1 1 b 4® 4® 5 11 M 1 1 1 1 T Q 41.111.0•00 WYO. f a O 0 0 J z z 0 A W 0 Q 0 N ce a w P.• J 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 cos v 1 1 j a 2 i 5 if 1 r m eit r; IN NS g mg 1 5 N1 je LL z 3 Bfl1itl1 L mg 1 C C c C 1'0 2 No I I a 7 9 3 e. 1 1 3 b a 1 er v lg g 1 1 C9 g 11 1 1 1 mii- vriw rr'=- 1v7.1nrai iini iw �mii iiv i. rim. .1.1.1 ronrwarars. et I; 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 if i 1 1 1 11 IUI W O F O O W ce O N t t g t g g g t t II g h tiii z O tttt gggg a¢za tt gg g kr w Ae wa.cre uwn Wxmwa.waa FLOOR AREA CALCULAllON PLAN OL I I 4 L I II i i J Iii Q UM I Y Afl Ilk 1 11 I OL 'VW Ii I anZ I 1 et I; 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 if i 1 1 1 11 IUI W O F O O W ce O N t t g t g g g t t II g h tiii z O tttt gggg a¢za tt gg g kr w Ae wa.cre uwn Wxmwa.waa FLOOR AREA CALCULAllON PLAN tell 5 if 1 g< 0 1 i 1 i ./I shL W CD Q 0 0 I W 0 N tt gg t g 3 s eta gggg O RR et 43 El I0 '1.14 41.01M1.1.5,00Z/M.OTOWIIIM15,3 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item 2 Application No./Location: 07- 337/12945 Saratoga Road Type of Application: Conditional Use Permit for the installation of an Emergency Generator Applicant/Owner: Karl Shultz (Applicant) Elbert Cheng (Owner) D Staff Planner: Christopher A. Riordan, AICP, Senior Planner CR Date: August 8, 2007 APN: 389 -06- 014,015 Department Head: John Livingstone, CP, Director Subject: 12945 Saratoga Rd APN: 389 -06 -014, 015 500' Radius Application No. 07- 337/12945 Saratoga Road CASE HISTORY: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Application filed: 04/23/07 Application complete: 07/02/07 Notice published: 07/25/07 Mailing completed: 07/20/07 Posting completed: 08/02/07 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for the installation of an emergency generator to provide a backup power supply for a medical office. The proposed generator would be located on a concrete pad within a proposed six foot tall wooden fence enclosure at the right side of the building. The lot size is .40 of an acre and the site is zoned P -A (Professional and Business Office). Medical offices are a permitted use in the P -A zone district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit Application to install an emergency generator with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. 2 Regulation Proposal Code Requirements Setback 24 feet from the north property line 10% of the lot width 13 feet Noise Level 61.5 dBA at the north property line Daytime 65dBA at the north property line Application No. 07- 337/12945 Saratoga Road STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: P -A (Professional and Administrative Office) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Professional Administrative MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 17,754 square feet GRADING: None TTl1 7T!'T T A T A ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project is categorically exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to new construction of limited small new facilities; installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures. Project Description This application for a Conditional Use Permit is for the installation of an emergency generator that would provide backup power for a medical office. The diesel powered generator would be located along the right hand side of the building on a concrete pad with a 24 foot setback from the north property line. A six foot tall wooden enclosure would be constructed around the generator for both the aesthetic benefit of shielding the appearance of the generator as viewed from both on and off site as well as reducing the noise emitted by the generator during its operation. The wooden fence would have a trellis attached to the exterior side which would allow vines to grow thereby softening its appearance. Additional vegetative screening as viewed from Saratoga Avenue would be achieved by bushes that are proposed to be planted along the right hand side of the southwest building elevation. The subject site is located on a parcel that is bordered by Saratoga Avenue and other nonresidential land uses. Section 7 -30 of the Saratoga Municipal Code (Noise Ordinance) limits the daytime maximum decibel level (dBA) for all outdoor uses in all zone districts to 65 dBA. Daytime is defined as the 12 hour period between 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M. The operating hours of the medical office would be between 8:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. and there would not be a need to operate the generator for emergency power requirements during the evening or at 3 Application No. 07- 337/12945 Saratoga Road night. Additional daytime operation of the emergency generator would be limited to periodic testing of the generator to ensure it is in working order. This testing will not exceed twenty -six (26) hours per year at a rate of thirty (30) minutes per week. Based on the Noise Assessment Study (Attachment 2) submitted by the applicant, the noise produced by the generator during operation would be 64.5 dBA, as measured along the north property line, which would be less than the maximum 65dBA daytime noise limit as specified in the Noise Ordinance. The report also states that the proposed six foot tall wooden fence enclosure would provide an additional 2 -3 dB of additional noise reduction. Use Permit Findings The proposed project is consistent with the following findings stated in SMC Section 15- 55.070 necessary to grant Use Permit approval to install and operate an emergency power generator. (a) That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the proposed emergency power generator to be a conditionally permitted use in the Professional Administrative (P -A) zoning district, the generator will not be located within the required building setbacks, and the noise emitted by the generator during its operation would not exceed the noise thresholds for daytime use as specified in the Noise Ordinance. (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity: This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the project site is located adjacent to Saratoga Avenue and other sites used for nonresidential uses. Additionally, the generator will meet requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance, and will be surrounded by a six foot tall wooden fence that will provide both visual screening and additional noise attenuation. Furthermore, the generator will be only be utilized for emergency purposes when thereis an electrical power outage. The generator is also conditioned to meet all building code standards and Saratoga Fire Department requirements. (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter: This finding may be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the proposed site of the emergency generator will be used for a medical office that is an approved use if the Professional and Administrative Office zone district and it has been determined that the project is in compliance with all applicable development standards of Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15 -80 (Miscellaneous Regulations and Exceptions). 4 Application No. 07- 337/12945 Saratoga Road STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the Use Permit Findings can be made in the affirmative and that the proposed emergency generator would not exceed the noise thresholds for daytime use as listed in the Noise Ordinance and would conform to all of the standards and requirements of Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15 -80. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the application for a Conditional Use Permit with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit. 2. Applicants project description, dated July 20, 2007. 3. Noise Assessment Study prepared by Environmental Consulting Services, dated April 4, 2007. 4. Emergency generator manufacturer specifications submitted by the applicant. 5. Neighbor review letters. 6. Affidavit of mailing notices, public hearing notice, and copy of mailing labels for project notification. 7. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A." 5 Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO. Application No. 07 -337 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Facial Rejuvenation Center 12945 Saratoga Road APN 389 -06 -014, 015 WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for a Conditional Use Permit to install an emergency power generator in association with a medical building in the P -A (Professional and Administrative) zone district. The net lot size is approximately .41 acres; and WHEREAS, Zoning Code Section 15- 80.030 states that any emergency power generator that is not located within a required setback area may be permitted upon the granting of a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission; 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 to install an emergency power generator is categorically exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to new construction of limited small new facilities; installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Use Permit approval pursuant and the following findings specified in SMC Section 15- 55.070 have been made in the affirmative: (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the proposed emergency power generator to be a conditionally permitted use in the Professional Administrative (P -A) zoning district, the generator will not be located within the required building setbacks, and the noise emitted by the generator during its operation would not exceed the noise thresholds for daytime use as specified in the Noise Ordinance. (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road improvements in the vicinity: This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the project site is located adjacent to Saratoga Avenue and other sites used for nonresidential uses. Additionally, the generator will meet requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance, and will be surrounded by a six foot tall wooden fence that will provide both visual screening and additional noise attenuation. Furthermore, the generator will be only be utilized for emergency purposes when there is an electrical power outage. (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter: This finding may be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the proposed site of the emergency generator will be used for a medical office that is an approved use if the Professional and Administrative Office zone district and it has been determined that the project is in compliance with all applicable development standards of Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15 -80 (Miscellaneous Regulations and Exceptions). Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application for Conditional Use Permit approval are hereby granted subject to the following conditions: PERMANENT CONDITONS OF APPROVAL None CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL CONDITIONS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" date stamped July 20, 2007, 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. Operation of the generator is limited to the daytime hours (7:00 A.M. 7:00 P.M.) and shall only be used for providing emergency power during power outages. The operation of the emergency generator shall at all times be subject to Saratoga Municipal Code Section 7-30 (Noise Ordinance). Weekly testing of the generator to ensure it is in working order shall not exceed twenty -six (26) hours per year at a rate of thirty (30) minutes per week. 3 A landscape plan shall be submitted with the application for building permit. This landscaping shall be planted to soften the appearance of the wooden fence enclosure for the emergency generator as well as screening the views of the enclosure as viewed from off site. The landscape plan shall also include landscaping that will screen and soften the appearance of the concrete ramp and handrails that connect the rear of the building to 2 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road Saratoga Avenue. The proposed landscaping plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. 4. The following shall be required and/or included as to 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. 5. 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 6. Applicant shall comply with all Saratoga Fire Department conditions. CITY ATTORNEY 7. Owner and Applicant agree 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. 3 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 8th day of August 2007 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Joyce Hlava 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 or Authorized Agent Date 4 Attachment 2 Shultz Associates Architects July 20, 2007 City of Saratoga Planning Division 132777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 39350 Civic Center. Rd Suite 150 Fremont, CA 94538 Fax: 510-796-5434 510- 796 -7801 Re: Generator Use Permit Application for Facial Rejuvenation Center at 12945 Saratoga Ave., Saratoga, CA The proposed out patient facility will provide surgical procedures for medical and cosmetic applications. The Facial Rejuvenation Center will be applying for a AAAHC certification. With this certification, the patient facility to be recognized as a facility that has life safety measures in place that will accommodate safe completion of surgical procedures during emergency or unusual situations. With regard to this use permit application, the back -up generator will provide power during an unusual situation such as a main service supplier power failure. The facility will only be in operation during regular business hours and will the generator will not be activated if a power failure occurs after regular business hours. Respectfully submitted: Karl Shultz Attachment 3 Location L L1 North property line 51 60 62 69 Environmental Consulting Services 18488 Prospect Road Suite 1, Saratoga, CA 95070 Phone: (408) 257 -1045 stanshell99 @toast.net FAX: (408) 257 -7235 Mr. Karl Shultz, AIA, Shultz Associates, 39350 Civic Center. Dr. Suite 150, Fremont, CA 94538 Re: Noise Study of Proposed New Cummins 25 kW DKAF Diesel Generator Installation for the Facial Rejuvenation Center, 12945 Saratoga Avenue, Saratoga Dear Mr. Shultz, In response to your request for a noise study for the subject project, I have evaluated the location and noise level of the proposed standby generator. The potential noise impacts of this installation, as well as compliance with City of Saratoga noise requirements, are described in this letter. Existing Noise Environment Field noise measurements on site were made during the midday period of March 31, 2007, with a CEL -440 Precision Noise Meter and analyzer, calibrated with a B K Model 4230 Sound Level Calibrator. The measurement location was chosen to represent the on -site noise level at the north property line boundary shared with the adjacent medical building. Noise levels were measured and are reported using percentile noise descriptors: L90 (the background noise level exceeded 90 of the time), L50 (the median noise level exceeded 50% of the time), L1 (the peak level exceeded 1% of the time), and L (the average energy equivalent noise level). Measured noise levels are presented in Exhibit 1 below. The long term Ldn/CNEL noise levels would approximately equal the measured L in this location. The levels are shown in the table below. Existing Noise Levels -12945 Saratoga Ave (dBA) April 4, 2007 The measured ambient noise levels are consistent with a location that has a relatively high volume and moderate speed arterial such as Saratoga Avenue traffic adjacent to it. Potential Noise Impacts from Generator Use The manufacturer's specified noise level for the 25DKAF Generator, with a F173 Quiet Site II Second Stage sound enclosure, are as follows (in dBA at 23 feet from center of unit): radiator end (front) 62, alternator end 61, right side 63.5, left side 61.5. Except when there is a power outage emergency, the generator would only be run for test purposes at most once per month, and this would be during the daytime for a maximum duration of one hour. No evening or nighttime generator use would be required. The properties adjacent to the project site are all commercial (non residential). The proposed generator installation would be approximately 25 feet from the north property line On the other side of the north property line is a parking lot for the adjacent medical office building. The property line in back of the Facial Rejuvenation building (west) is approximately 90 feet away, also a medical office use. Facial Rejuvenation Center Generator Noise Study, Saratoga Page 2 of 2 Compliance with City of Saratoga Noise Standards The noise produced by sources in Saratoga are limited by section 7.30.040 "Ambient Noise Standards of the Muncipal Code, which allows a maximum daytime noise level of 65 dBA at the property line of any adjacent commercial or non residential property during daytime, 55 dBA during evening hours, and 50 dBA at night. Hence if the generator is installed with the quietest side toward the north property line (radiator facing the back of the property), the generator noise level at that property line would be 64.5 dBA, including adjustments for reflection of generator noise from the building. Therefore, considering the manufacturer's data on the noise level of generator fitted with the best sound attenuation enclosure, as well as the physical characteristics of the site, the generator would be just under the daytime noise limit at the adjacent commercial property line. Discussion of Optional Noise Fence Although a noise fence/wall around the generator is not required in order to meet the 65 dBA daytime noise limit, if a wall or fence is desired for aesthetic or security reasons, the following design recommendations should be considered to provide 2 -3 dB of additional generator noise attenuation: 1. Solid wood construction, 6-7 feet tall (the height of the generator and fuel tank is about 6 feet), and with boards at least thick. 2. Adjoining boards should be overlapped so that there are no cracks or openings between boards, even as weathering and shrinkage occur. 3. Bring bottom of fence down to ground so there is no opening/space under the fence. If 1 can be of further assistance on this project, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Sew Sietty, H. Stanton Shelly Acoustical Consultant Board Certified Member (1982) Institute of Noise Control Engineering CC: Elbert Cheng, M.D. Jacqueline Cheng, M.D. 777 Knowles Dr. Suite 6A, Los Gatos, CA 95032 Environmental Consulting Services Saratoga Attachment 4 Diesel Generator Set Model DKAF 60 Hz EPA Emissions 25 kW, 31 kVA Standby 23 kW, 29 kVA Prime Description The Cummins Power Generation DK- series commercial generator set is a fully integrated power generation system providing optimum performance, reliability, and versatility for stationary standby or prime power applications. A primary feature of the DK GenSet is strong motor starting capability and fast recovery from transient load changes. The torque- matched system indudes a heavy -duty Kubota 4-cyde liquid -doled diesel engine, an AC alternator with high motor. starting kVA capacity, and an electronic voltage regulator for precise regulation under steady -state or transient loads. The DK GenSet accepts 100% of the nameplate standby rating in one step, in compliance with NFPA110 requirements. The standard PowerCommand digital electronic control is an integrated system that combines engine and alternator controls for high reliability and optimum genset performance. Optional weather protective endosures and coolant heaters shield the generator set from extreme operating conditions. Environmental concerns are addressed by low exhaust emission engines, sound- attenuated enclosures, exhaust silencers, and dual -wail fuel tanks. A wide range of options, accessories, and services are available, allowing configuration to your specific power generation needs. Every production unit is factory tested at rated load and power factor. This testing indudes demonstration of rated power and single -step rated load pickup. Cummins Power Generation manufacturing facilities are registered to IS09001 quality standards, emphasizing our commitment t to high quality in the design, manufacture, and support of products. The generator set is CSA certified and is available as UL 2200 Listed. M Cummins Power Ge co wo ass ma prehensive warranty program and s ide networ14f$70 distributors a oiwith waktall, segic ee, parts, tglice6supp4r o. i0 D w fu U E- a C N 2 2 i 2 E E cn m c i ii a D V y u Q 2 N e O V E O ti U C O ,a r‘ o cm IX c j e' j nj n C C w o a E o L E g D 0 0 _l a a e® 0. m n a A, a d2 u 2 z a E a, CJ a m c m 2004 -2006 Cummins Power Generation R Ju v Eiv R 1 C EA, law C a a n c- o. 0 f m U 03 0 0 N N 0 CC r to Power Generation Features UL Listed Generator Set The complete generator set assembly is available Listed to UL 2200. Low Exhaust Emissions Engine certified to U.S. EPA Nonroad Source Emission Standards, 40 CFR 89, Tier 2. Kubota Heavy -Duty Engine Rugged 4 -cycle, liiquid- cooled, industrial diesel engine delivers reliable power, low emissions, and fast response to load changes. Alternator Several alternator sizes offer selectable motor starting capability with low reactance 2/3 pitch windings, low waveform distortion with non linear loads, fault clearing short circuit capability, and cuss H insulation. The alternator electrical insulation system is UL 1446 Recognized. Control Systems The PowerCommand electronic control is standard equipment and provides total genset system integration induding automatic remote starting/stopping and precise frequency and voltage regulation. Optional features include alarm and status message display, output metering, auto shutdown at fault detection, and NFPA110 Level 1 compliance. Cooling Systems Standard cooling package provides reliable running at the rated power level, at up to 50 ambient temperature. Integral Vibration Isolation Robust slid base supports the engine, alternator, and radiator on isolators, minimizing transmitted vibration. E -coat Finish Dual electro- deposition paint system provides high resistance to scxatd es, corrosion, or fading. Enclosures Optional weather protective enclosures are available. Fuel Tanks Dual wall sub -base fuel tanks and in -skid day tanks are also offered. Certifications Generator sets are designed, manufactured, tested, and certified to relevant UL, NFPA, ISO, IEC, and CSA standards. Warranty and Service Backed by a comprehensive warranty and world wide distributor network. Specifications subject to change without notice S -1236p (6/06) Power Output Standby Prime Gross Engine Power Output, bhp (kWm) 44.8 (33.4) 40.8 (30.4) BMEP at Rated Load, psi (kPa) 104.0 (717.1) 92.0 (634.3) Bore, in. (mm) 3.43 (87.1) 3.43 (87.1) Stroke, in. (mm) 3.62 (91.9) 3.62 (91.9) Piston Speed, ft/min (m/s) 1091.0 (5.5) 1091.0 (5.5) Compression Ratio 23.0:1 23.0:1 Lube Oil Capacity, qt. (L) 132 (12.5) 13.2 (12.5) Fuel Flow Fuel Flow at Rated Load, US Gal/hr (L/hr) 3.5 (13.4) 3.5 (13:4) Maximum Inlet Restriction, in. Hg (mm Hg) 2.0 (50.8) 2.0 (50.8) Maximum Retum Restriction, in. Hg (mm Hg) 5.8 (147.3) 5.8 (147.3) Air Cleaner Maximum Air Cleaner Restriction, in. H2O .(kPa) 25.0 (62) 25.0 (6.2) Exhaust Exhaust Flow at Rated Load, cfm (m' /min) 213.0 (6.0) 200.0 (5.7) Exhaust Temperature, F (°C) 970.0 (521.1) 910.0 (487.8) Max Back Pressure, in. H2O (kPa) 41.0 (10.2) 41.0 (102) Fuel System indirect injection, number 2 diesel fuel; fuel filter, fuel/water separator, automatic electric fuel shutoff, distributor injection pump with integral mechanical governor. Fuel Consumption Standby Prime 60 Hz Ratings. kW (kVA) 25 (31) 23 (29) Load 1/4 1/2 3/4 Full 1/4 1/2 3/4 Full US Gal/hr 0.90 128 1.72 2.33 0.84 1.17 1.60 2.02 LThr 3.4 4.8 6.5 8.8 3.2 4.4 6.1 7.6 Engine Kubota heavy -duty diesel engines provide stable power, low fuel consumption, quiet operation, and fast response to sudden load changes. Mechanical goveming is standard. Electronic goveming is available for applications requiring constant (isochronous) frequency regulation such as Uninterruptibie Power Supply (UPS) systems, non linear loads, or sensitive electronic loads. Optional coolant heaters are recommended for all emergency standby installations or for any application requiring fast load acceptance after start -up. Specifications Engine Base Engine Displacement In (L) Overspeed Limit, rpm Regenerative Power, kW Cylinder Btodc Configuration Battery Capacity Battery Charging Alternator Starting Voltage Lube Oil Filter Types Standard Cooling System Kubota F2803, naturally aspirated, diesel fueled 167.0 (2.7) 2100 350 9.00 Cast iron, In -line 5 cylinder 450 amps minimum at ambient temperature of 32°F(0 °C) 40 amps 12 volt, negatveg gmund Single spin-on, full flow 122 (50 ambient radiator pooling system 2004_2006 Cummins Power Generation Spedfications subject to change without notice S-1236p (6/06) Cooling Standby Prime Fan Load, HP (kW) 3.4 (2.5) 3.4 (2.5) Coolant Capacity with radiator, US Gal (L) 3.1 (11.7) 3.1 (11.7) Coolant Flow Rate, Gal/min (1../min) 13.0 (49.2) 13.0 (492) Heat Rejection To Coolant, Btu/min (MJ /min) 2055.0 (22) 1781.0 (1.9) Heat Radiated To Room, Btu/min (MJ /min) 420.0 (0.4) 370.0 (0.4) Maximum Coolant Friction Head, psi (lc Pa) 3.1 (21.4) 3.1 (21.4) Maximum Coolant Static Head, ft (m) 29.5 (9.0) 29.5 (9.0) Air Combustion Air, scfm (m' /min) 74.2 (2.1) 74.2 (2.1) Alternator Cooling Air, scfm (m' /min) 250.0 (7.1) 250.0 (7.1) Radiator Cooling Air; sdm (m' /min) 3500.0 (99.0) 3500.0 (99.0) Max. Static Restriction, in H2O (Pa) 0.50 (124.50) 0.50 (124.50) Generator Set The general specifications provide representative configuration details. Consult the outline drawing for installation design. Specifications General See outline drawing 500 -4224 for installation design specifies. Unit Width, in (mm) Unit Height, in (mm) Unit Length, in (mm) Unit Dry Weight, Ib (kg) Unit Wet Weight, Ib (kg) Rated Speed, rpm Voltage Regulation, No Load to Full Load Random Voltage Variation Frequency Regulation Random Frequency Variation Ra dio Frequency Interference 2004-2006 Cummins Power Generation 31.0 (787) 38.6 (980) 66.9 (1699) 1314 (596) 1371 (622) 1800 t2.0% ±1.0% 5% ±0.5% (Isochronous optional 025% Meets requirements of most industrial and commercial applications Rating Definitions Standby Rating based on: Applicable for supplying emergency power for the duration of normal power interruption. No sustained overload capability is available for this rating. (Equivalent to Fuel Stop Power in accordance with IS03046, AS2789, DIN6271 and BS5514). Nominally rated. Prime (Unlimited Running Time) Rating based on: Applicable for supplying power in lieu of commercially purchased power. Prime power is the maximum power available at a variable load for an unlimited number of hours. A 10% overload capability is available for limited lime. (Equivalent to Prime Power in accordance with 1S08528 and Overload Power in accordance with IS03046, AS2789, DIN6271, and BS5514). This rating is not applicable to all generator set models. Base Load Continuous) Rating based on: Applicable for supplying power continuously to a constant load up to the full output rating for unlimited hours. No sustained overload capability is available for this rating. Consult authorized distributor for rating. (Equivalent to Continuous Power in accordance with tSO8528, IS03046. AS2789, D1N6271, and BS5514). This rating is not applicable to all generator set models. Site Derating Factors Rated power available up to 1600 ft (488 m) at ambient temperatures up to 77 °F (25 °C). Above 1600 ft (488 m), derate at 4% per 1000 ft (305 m) and 1% per 10 °F (2% per 11°C) above 77°F (25 °C). Specifications subject to change without notice S -1236p (6/06) Alternator Several alternators are available for application flexibility based on the required motor starting kVA and other requirements. Larger alternator sizes have lower temperature rise, for longer life of the alternator insulation system. In addition, larger alternator sizes can provide a cost- effective use of engine power in across- the -line motor starting applications and can be used to minimize voltage waveform distortion caused by non linear toads_ These single- bearing alternators couple directly to the engine flywheel with flexible discs, for drivetrain reliability and durability. No gear reducers or speed changers are used. Two thirds pitch windings eliminate third -order harmonic content of the AC voltage waveform and provide the standardization desired for paralleling of generator sets. The excitation system is a self (shunt) excited system with the voltage regulator powered directly from the generator set output. Alternator Application Notes Alternator Sizes On any given model, various alternators sizes are available to meet individual application needs. Alternators sizes are differentiated by maximum winding temperature rise, at the generator set standby or prime rating, when operated in a 40 C ambient environment. Available temperature rises range from 80 to 125 Not all temperature rise selections are available on all models. Lower temperature rise is accomplished using larger alternators at lower application, and density. Lower temperature rise alternators have higher motor starting kVA, lower voltage dip upon load appl" they are generally recommended to limit voltage distortion and heating due to harmonics induced by non linear loads. Alternator Space Heater is recommended to inhibit condensation. Available Output Voltages Three Phase Reconnectable 120/208 139/240 120 /240 Delta [1 240/416 277/480 D 2004-2006 Cummins Power Generation Single Phase Non- Reconnec table Three Phase Non- Reconnec table 120/240 220/380 347/600 Specifications subject to change without notice S -1236p (6/06) io Specifications Alternator Design Stator Rotor 410 Insulation System Standard Temperature Rise Exciter Type Phase Rotation Alternator Cooling AC Waveform Total Harmonic Distortion Telephone influence Factor (TIF) Telephone Harmonic Factor (THF) Revolving field, single bearing, 4-pole, brushless, drip -proof construction. Skewed stator and 2/3 pitch windings minimize field heating and voltage harmonics. Dynamically balanced assembly. Direct coupled to engine by a flexible drive disc. Complete amortisseur (damper) windings help minimize voltage deviations and heating effects under unbalanced loads. The rotor is supported by a pre- lubricated, maintenance -free ball- bearing. Gass H per NEMA MG1 -1.65 and BS2757 At rated bad is less than 125 at standby rating, per NEMA MG1.22.40, IEEE115 and IEC 34-1. The excitation system derives its power from the main output of the generator, eliminating the need for a separate excitation power source. A (U), B (V), C (W) Direct drive centrifugal blower Less than 7% total no load to full linear load, and less than 3% for any single harmonic Less than 40 per NEMA MG1 -22.43 Less than 3 Three Phase Table Feature Code Voltage Ranges Surge kW Motor Starting kVA (at 90% sustained voltage) Shunt 80° C 80° C B257 120/208 Thru 139/240 240/416 Thru 277/480 26 111 6269 120/208 Thru 139/240 240/416 Thru 277/480 26 111 80 C 220/380 26 111 80° C 6305 347/600 28 111 105 C 6256 120/208 Thru 139/240 240/416 Thru 277/480 26 70 105 C 6268 120)208 Thru 139240 240/416 Thru 277/480 26 111 105° .0 B385 220/380 26 90 105 C 8304 347/600 26 70 125 C 8255 120/208 Thru 139/240 240/416 Thru 277/480 26 70 125 C 8267 120/208 Thu 139240 240/416 Thu 277/480 26 111 125 C 8384 220/380 26 90 125 C 8303 347/600 28 70 Full Load Current Amps at Standby Rating INZEI 139240 220/380 240/4 6 277/480 347/600 87 75 48 43 38 30 Notes: 1. Single phase power can be taken from a three phase generator set at up to 2/3 set rated 3 -phase kW at 1.0 power factor. Also see Note 2 below. Single Phase Table 8274 B256 8268 8273 8255 8287 120/240 120/240' 120240' 120/240 120240' 120240 Feature Code Voltage Ranges Surge kW Motor Starting kVA (at 90% sustained voltage) Shunt 80 C 80 C 80 C 105 C 105 C 105 C 125 C 125 C 125 C 8275 120/240` 25 62 B257 120240' 26 8269 120240' 26 83 44 44 83 44 44 83 Full Load Current Amps at Standby Rating 1202409 120/240 69 104 Notes: 1. The broad range alternators can supply single phase output up to 2/3 set rated 3 -phase kW at 1.0 power factor. 2. The extended stack (full single phase output) and 4 lead alternators can supply single phase output up to full set rated 3 -phase kW at 1.0 power factor. 2004 Cummins Power Generation Specifications subject to change without notice S -1236p (6106) Control System PowerCommand (1301) Control Standard Operator Panel Optional Operator/Display Panel PowerCommand Control The PowerCommand Control is an integrated generator set control system providing isochronous governing (optional), voltage regulation, engine protection, generator protection, and operator interface. Control provides battery monitoring and testing features, and Smart-Starting control system. InPower PC -based service tool available for detailed diagnostics Standard PCCNet RS485 network interface to devices such as remote annunciator for NFPA110 applications_ Control boards are potted for environmental protection. Suitable for operation in ambient temperatures from -40C to +70C, and altitudes to 13,000 feet (5000 meters) Prototype tested; UL, CSA, and CE compliant Operator/Display Panel (Optional) AC Protection Over current waming and shutdown* Over and under voltage shutdown Over and under frequency shutdown Over Excitation (loss of sensing) fault Field Overload Alternator Data Line to Neutral AC Volts* Line to Line AC Volts* 3 -phase AC current* Frequency* Total kVA' Digital Governing (Optional) Integrate digital eiectmnic isochronous governor Temperature dynamic governing o Local Operator/Display Panel Digital Electronic Governing o Auxdliary output relays (2) u 120/240 V, 100 W heater Engine Protection Overspeed shutdown tow oil pressure warning and shutdown* Hlgh coolant temperature warning and shutdown* Low coolant level warning or shutdown* Low coolant temperature warning* High, low, weak battery voltage warning* Fad to start (overcrank) shutdown Fail to crank shutdown Redundant start disconnect Cranldng lockout Sensor failure Indratiot low fuel level roaming or shutdown Fuel -in- rupture-basin warning or shutdown Engine Data DC voltage* Lube oil pressure' Coolant temperature* Digital Voltage Regulation Integrated digital electronic voltage regulator 2 -phase line to fine sensing Configurable Torque Matching o Emergency Stop Switch Remote Annunciator with (3) configurable inputs (4) configurable outputs Manual Off switch Alpha-numeric display with pushbutton access, for viewing engine and alternator data and providing setup, controls, and acfustments (English or international symbols) LED lamps indicating genet running, not in auto, common warning, common shutdown, manual run mode, rernote start Suitable for operation in ambient temperatures from -20C to +70C Other Data Genset model data Start attempts, Starts. running hours Fault history RS485 Modbus Interface Data Logging and Fault Simulation (Requires InPower Service Tool) Control Functions Tune delay start and cooldown Glow plug control (some models) Cycle cranking (2) Configurable inputs (2) Configurable ousts Remote Emergency Stop *Optional Operator/Display Panel required to display warnings and sensor data, and for NFPA 110 and CSA 282 applications. Options o PowerCommand for Windows remote monitoring software. (Direct connect) u Auxiliary, configurable signal inputs (8) and configurable relay outputs (8) 2004-2006 Cummins Power Generation Specifications subject to change without notice S -1236p (6/06) Generator Set Options Engine 120 V, 1000 W coolant heater (thermostatically controlled) 240 V, 1000 W coolant heater (thermostatically controlled) Electronic governor t Fuel System 24 hour dual wall sub -base fuel tank 48 hour dual wall sub -base fuel tank Alternator 80 rise alternator 105 C rise alternator 120/240 V, 100 W anti condensation heater Extended stack (full single phase Full single phase output (Non Reconnectable) Single phase 4 lead Exhaust System Critical grade exhaust silencer Industrial grade exhaust silencer Residential grade exhaust silencer Set mounted critical grade exhaust silencer 2004 -2006 Cummins Power Generation Specifications subject to change without notice Generator Set Batteries Battery charger Export box packaging UL 2200 Listed In -skid fuel tank Main line circuit breaker Sound attenuated enclosures with mounted silencer Spring isolators Weather protective enclosure with mounted silencer 2 year prime power warranty 2 year standby warranty 5 year standby power warranty Available Products and Services A wide range of products and services is available to match your power generation system requirements. Cummins Power Generation products and services include: Diesel and Spark Ignited Generator Sets Transfer Switches Bypass Switches Parallel Load Transfer Equipment Digital Paralleling Switchgear PowerCommand Network and Software Distributor Application Support Planned Maintenance Agreements S-1236p (6/06) Warranty All components and subsystems are covered by an express limited one -year warranty. Other optional and extended factory warranties and local distributor maintenance agreements are available. Contact your distributor/dealer for more information. Certifications UL The generator set is available Listed to UL 2200 Stationary Engine Generator Assemblies. CSA This generator set is CSA certified to product class 4215-01. PTS The Prototype Test Support (PTS) program verifies the performance integrity of the generator set design. Products bearing the PTS symbol have been subjected to demanding tests in accordance to NFPA 110 to verify the design integrity and performance under both normal and abnormal operating conditions induding short circuit, endurance, temperature rise, torsional vibration, and transient response, induding full load pickup. 1SO9001 This generator set was designed and manufactured in facilities certified to 1509001. See your distributor for more information Power 474 1,74 Cummins Power Generation 1400 73rd Avenue N.E. Minneapolis, MN 55432 763.574.5000 Fax: 763.574.5298 www.cumminspower.com Cummins, Onan and PowerCommand are registered trademarks of Cummins Inc. Detector and AmpSentry are trademarks of Cummins Inc. important: Backfeed to a utility system can cause electrocution and/or property damage. Do not connect generator sets to any building electrical system except through an approved device or after building main switch is open. 2004-2006 Cummins Power Generation Specifications subject to change without notice S -1236p (6/06) Attachment 5 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: 12945 Saratoga Avenue Saratoga Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. I ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga 's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature-below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. Neighbor Name: Edward A. Hinshaw Date: July 31, 2007 Signature: Neighbor Address: 12901 Saratoga Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Applicant Name: Revised 10/24/06 P:\Forms Proceduresldesign review applications.doc Neighbor Phone (4 0 8) 861-6501 If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Date: /c Application Number: 5 4. PROJECT ADDRESS: r! Z� S� 7 41/ 5, Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. I ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408- 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. Aft My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary Mir project plans. Neighbor Name: Sign Neighbor Address: /VA L1- Neighbor Phone %t t�(w If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: Revised 10/24/06 2, el F Sin P: \Forms Procedures\design review applications.doc City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form 1 Date: Application Number: *0 7 5 Neighbor Name: Signature: Neighbor Address: Applicant Name: OVA.. 5h14 Application Number: Revised 10/24/06 7 ^337 P: \Forms Procedures\design review applications.doc City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: I i g 4.� C Y rai-a ar hilt 5 m a 1 Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. I ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY' ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may contact the City of Saratoga's lann n Divis' n at n time t re ww any changes that may occur. p� q g y Q��' �un 6Gdt er rns't�(X i a h c; urs ie each n ei bor to ir>!'dicate i'f o aratoga -asks tha�f�this and a re�ueec�'sons� d y ��e C that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these p lans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408-868-1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. Date: Neighbor Phone 7/31 07 MYa.- 44 I kJ If I have any initial concerns with the project I ma li them below_ h s arellie folio mg (please attach additional sheets if necessary): 5 Attachment 6 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 August 2007, 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: 07 -337 12945 Saratoga Road APPLICANT /OWNER: Karl Shultz APN: 389 -06- 014,015 DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the installation of emergency power back -up generator in association with an existing medical facility. The emergency generator would be located on the right side of the building, screened from public view, and would be located approximately 24 feet from the right side property line. Zone District: P -A (Professional and Administrative Office). Design Review approval by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15- 45.060. 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. Christopher Alan Riordan, AICP Senior Planner (408) 868-1235 addresses shown above. 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 20th. day of July 2007, that I deposited 45 notices 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 as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property described as: Address: 12945 Saratoga Road AP N 389 06 014. 015 that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the Tune 20, 2007 ;00' Ownership Listing 'repared for: 89 -06 -014, 015 ;hultz 2945 Saratoga Road ;aratoga CA 95070 86 -14 -011 'RINCE OF PEACE EVANG LUTH CH )F )R CURRENT OWNER 2770 SARATOGA AVE ARATOGA CA 95070 -4147 86 -15 -004 OSEPH OLGA SHEREDY )R CURRENT OWNER 9095 COX AVE ARATOGA CA 95070 -4133 86 -15 -017 VALDO CAROL MIRANDA )R CURRENT OWNER 2803 SARATOGA GLEN CT ARATOGA CA 95070 -3547 86 -15 -031 ALAH A SHAYESTEH AHMED )R CURRENT OWNER 8943 PALO OAKS CT ARATOGA CA 95070 -3521 86 -15 -034 ;HRIS E LESLIE VASQUEZ )R CURRENT OWNER 8979 PALO OAKS CT ARATOGA CA 95070 -3521 86 -15 -037 :RIC T NOEL BREWER )R CURRENT OWNER 8994 PALO OAKS CT ARATOGA CA 95070 -3521 89 -06 -003 RACELAND LLC )R CURRENT OWNER 9040 COX AVE ARATOGA CA 95070 -6601 89 -06 -006 >AAC N ABRAMS O BOX 2067 ARATOGA CA 95070 -0067 386 -15 -002 SHENFIELD OR CURRENT OWNER 19063 COX AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 -4133 386 -15 -005 NUNILON N MANGUINO OR CURRENT OWNER 19111 COX AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 -4133 386 -15 -018 DENNIS E JOANNE MCCONNELL OR CURRENT OWNER 12817 SARATOGA GLEN CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -3547 386 -15 -032 GEORGE GLORIA JANAC 12832 STAR RIDGE CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -6511 386 -15 -035 MAURICE R LOUISE BARR OR CURRENT OWNER 18981 PALO OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -3521 386-15-038 LUIS T CLARA WU OR CURRENT OWNER 18972 PALO OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -3521 389 -06 -004 NORMAN N JANET ABRAHAMS 208 MONTCLAIR RD LOS GATOS CA 95032 -1614 389-06-007 BRADFORD F MARTIN OR CURRENT OWNER 12961 VILLAGE DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4158 386 -15 -003 HAN KIM OR CURRENT OWNER 19079 COX AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 -4133 386 -15 -016 STEPHEN E ANITA MORROW OR CURRENT OWNER 12789 SARATOGA GLEN CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -3547 386 -15 -019 TIMOTHY E DEBORAH ELLIS OR CURRENT OWNER 12824 SARATOGA GLEN CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -3547 386 -15 -033 BARBARA A DEZUR OR CURRENT OWNER 18967 PALO OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -3521 386 -15 -036 JOHN E MALLET OR CURRENT OWNER 18993 PALO OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -3521 386 -15 -039 ALBERT TENG OR CURRENT OWNER 18950 PALO OAKS CT SARATOGA CA 95070 -3521 389 -06 -005 SARATOGA PROFESSIONAL BLDG LLC 3470 HAAS DR APTOS CA 95003 -3218 389 -06 -008, 009, 010, 011, 013, 016 MEDICAL VILLAGE SARATOGA LL PO BOX 2067 SARATOGA CA 95070 -0067 89 -06 -012 DWARD A BARBARA HINSHAW )R CURRENT OWNER ARATOGA AVE OGA CA 95070-4110 89 -06 -017 /WS COMPANY 'O BOX 2067 ARATOGA CA 95070 -0067 89 -12 -017 UPERTINO VILLAGE ASSOCS LLC 0 E 4TH AVE AN MATEO CA 94401 -4002 89 -44 -009 ;ENJAMIN T LEE )R CURRENT OWNER 8813 BELLGROVE CIR ARATOGA CA 95070 -4566 89 -44 -012 HINWU CHIANG )R CURRENT OWNER 8821 BELLGROVE CIR OGA CA 95070 -4566 89- 4 -015 )ING DENG )R CURRENT OWNER 8829 BELLGROVE CIR ARATOGA CA 95070 -4566 89 -44 -037 ICHARD J WONG )R CURRENT OWNER 8812 BELLGROVE CIR ARATOGA CA 95070 -4565 389 -06 -014 T I CHENG INVS LLC 3400 CHURIN DR MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94040 -4533 389 -06 -018 SCVWD 5750 Almaden Exp San Jose CA 95118 389 -44 -007 MICHAEL G ROBBIN COHN OR CURRENT OWNER 18809 BELLGROVE CIR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4566 389 -44 -010 RICK BLESZYNSKI OR CURRENT OWNER 18817 BELLGROVE CIR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4566 389 -44 -013 DAVID M DEBRA YOFFIE OR CURRENT OWNER 18823 BELLGROVE CIR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4566 389 -44 -035 TOH -SENG NG OR CURRENT OWNER 18818 BELLGROVE CIR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4565 386 -14 -029 CITY OF SARATOGA ATTN: CHRISTOPHER RIORDAN 13777 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 389 -06 -015 PATTI GRAY 12967 SARATOGA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 -4131 389 -06 -020, 021 STURLA PO BOX 1234 SARATOGA CA 95071 -1234 389 -44 -008 BRIAN G CYNTHIA SASAKI OR CURRENT OWNER 18811 BELLGROVE CIR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4566 389 -44 -011 HUA XUE OR CURRENT OWNER 18819 BELLGROVE CIR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4566 389-44-014 DAVID WANG OR CURRENT OWNER 18827 BELLGROVE CIR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4566 389 -44 -036 ANDY S YU OR CURRENT OWNER 18816 BELLGROVE CIR SARATOGA CA 95070 -4565 Advanced Listing Services P.O. Box 2593 Dana Point CA 92624 Attachment 7 0 0 0 U REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item 3 Application No./Location: Type of Application: Applicant/Owner: Staff Planner: Date: APN: 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road Design Review Use Permit for a New Single Family Residence with a request for a Height Exception Rao and Sita Arimilli (Owner /Applicant) Christopher A. Riordan, AICP, Senior Planner August 8, 2007 517 -22 -072 Department Head: g John Livingstone, CP, Director Subject: 15400 Peach Hill Road APN: 517 -22 -072 500' Radius Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road CASE HISTORY: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Application filed: 06/07/07 Application complete: 07/20/07 Notice published: 07/25/07 Mailing completed: 07/21/07 Posting completed: 08/02/07 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review Approval and a Conditional Use Permit for a Height Exception to construct a proposed 6,713 square foot new two -story single family residence on a vacant lot that will exceed the maximum 26 foot height limit by 3.5 feet for a total proposed height of 29.5 feet (The Project). The project will also have a basement that will include a four car garage and a Secondary Dwelling Unit. The net lot size is approximately 1.6 -acres and the site is zoned R -1- 40,000 (Single- family Residential). Zoning Code Section 15- 45.060 states any new multi -story structure or whenever, as a result of proposed construction, reconstruction or expansion, the gross floor area of all structures on a site will exceed 6.000 square -feet Design Review approval is required by the Planning Commission. The proposal consists of a new multi -story structure and exceeds 6,000 square -feet; therefore. Planning Commission review is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the Design Review and Conditional Use Permit Application to exceed the 26 foot height limit by 3.5 feet for a maximum height of 29.5 feet with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. Staff is not recommending any permanent conditions of approval. 2 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road STAFF ANALYSIS Zoning: R -1- 40,000 General Plan Designation: RVLD (Residential Very Low Density) Measure G: Not applicable Parcel Size: 76,535 sq. ft. (gross) and 49,423 sq. ft. (net 28% reduction in lot area for slope adjustment) Average Site Slope: 18.9% Grading Required: 1,236 CY of cut, 869 CY of fill, 717 CY of export. (350 CY of cut to construct the basement is not included) Materials and Colors: Materials and colors will include brown stained wood windows, doors, and shutters. Gutters, downspouts, and the roof of the bay window to the right of the entrance door will be constructed of copper. Decorative wrought iron railings will be installed on the terrace that is accessible from the family and living rooms as well as the kitchen. Pre -cast stone columns that are tan in color will be used as roof supports for all of the terraces. The roof will be composed of two -piece clay roof tiles with an "earth blend" tone. A colors and materials board is available on file with the Community Development Department and will be present at the site visit and public hearing. Environmental Determination: 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. Proiect Data: 3 Proposal Code Requirements Lot Coverage: Maximum Allowable 35% Building 5,692 sq. ft. Covered Porches 1,778 sq. ft. 24,028 sq ft. Patios/Walkways 619 sq. ft. Driveway 5.783 sq. ft. TOTAL PROPOSED 13,872 sq. ft. (20 Floor Area: Maximum Allowable Residence 5.692 sq. ft. [6,200 sq. ft. 10% increase Basement where the finished 1,021 sq. ft. (620 sq. ft.) 6,820 sq. ft.] floor is greater than 42 inches Deed restriction of second above grade: dwelling unit for rental to TOTAL PROPOSED 6,713 sq. ft. below market rate households Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road STAFF ANALYSIS Zoning: R -1- 40,000 General Plan Designation: RVLD (Residential Very Low Density) Measure G: Not applicable Parcel Size: 76,535 sq. ft. (gross) and 49,423 sq. ft. (net 28% reduction in lot area for slope adjustment) Average Site Slope: 18.9% Grading Required: 1,236 CY of cut, 869 CY of fill, 717 CY of export. (350 CY of cut to construct the basement is not included) Materials and Colors: Materials and colors will include brown stained wood windows, doors, and shutters. Gutters, downspouts, and the roof of the bay window to the right of the entrance door will be constructed of copper. Decorative wrought iron railings will be installed on the terrace that is accessible from the family and living rooms as well as the kitchen. Pre -cast stone columns that are tan in color will be used as roof supports for all of the terraces. The roof will be composed of two -piece clay roof tiles with an "earth blend" tone. A colors and materials board is available on file with the Community Development Department and will be present at the site visit and public hearing. Environmental Determination: 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. Proiect Data: 3 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road Project Discussion Background The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission during a Study Session on July 10 2007 (Attachment 2). The applicant has included material in the plan set (Attachment 7) to address the comments made by the Commissioners during the meeting. Project Description- The applicant requests Design Review and Use Permit approvals to construct a 6,713 square foot two -story single- family home that includes a 3,418 sq. ft. basement that is not included in the floor area. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be 29.5 feet tall and will be constructed on a vacant lot. Pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section (SMC) 15- 12.100, approval of a Use Permit in conjunction with Design Review approval is required because the applicant is proposing to construct a single- family residence exceeding the 26 foot height limit. The purpose of SMC 15- 12.100 is to allow homes to adhere fully to a certain architectural style without making modifications to the design to comply with the height limit. It is clearly stated in this code section that the Use Permit may be granted after carefully assessing the "purity" of a proposed architectural style. Code Section 15- 12.100 directs staff to use the "Field Guide to American Houses" and other resource material as approved by the Planning Commission as resource documents to assess the "purity" of architectural design. Based on the comments provided by the Commission during the Study Session, staff has requested the applicant to provide a written description and photos of distinguishing elements of French Country architecture to help verify the purity of the proposed design. The applicant has submitted the written description and photos as requested and has attached them to the back eight pages of the Project Plans (Attachment 7). French Country architecture can trace its origin to the hillsides of rural France, where each province has it own unique, colloquial style. This style first became popular in America during the first part of the twentieth century in a style that has been titled as "French Minimum Requirement Setbacks: 1-story 2 -story 1 -story 2 -story Front (south) 40 ft. 40 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. Rear (west) 60 ft. 60 ft. 50 ft. 60 ft. Left Side (east) 99 ft. 99 ft. 20 ft. 25 ft. Right Side (north) 61 ft. 61 ft. 20 ft. 25 ft. Height: Lowest Elev. Pt. 496 ft. Maximum Height Highest Elev. Pt. 514 ft. 531 (26 Feet) Average Elev. Pt. 505 ft. Topmost Pt. 534.5 ft. (29.5 ft.) Second Dwelling Unit: Located in Basement 783 sq. ft. Minimum 400 sq. ft. Maximum 1,200 sq. ft. Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road Project Discussion Background The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission during a Study Session on July 10 2007 (Attachment 2). The applicant has included material in the plan set (Attachment 7) to address the comments made by the Commissioners during the meeting. Project Description- The applicant requests Design Review and Use Permit approvals to construct a 6,713 square foot two -story single- family home that includes a 3,418 sq. ft. basement that is not included in the floor area. The maximum height of the proposed residence will be 29.5 feet tall and will be constructed on a vacant lot. Pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section (SMC) 15- 12.100, approval of a Use Permit in conjunction with Design Review approval is required because the applicant is proposing to construct a single- family residence exceeding the 26 foot height limit. The purpose of SMC 15- 12.100 is to allow homes to adhere fully to a certain architectural style without making modifications to the design to comply with the height limit. It is clearly stated in this code section that the Use Permit may be granted after carefully assessing the "purity" of a proposed architectural style. Code Section 15- 12.100 directs staff to use the "Field Guide to American Houses" and other resource material as approved by the Planning Commission as resource documents to assess the "purity" of architectural design. Based on the comments provided by the Commission during the Study Session, staff has requested the applicant to provide a written description and photos of distinguishing elements of French Country architecture to help verify the purity of the proposed design. The applicant has submitted the written description and photos as requested and has attached them to the back eight pages of the Project Plans (Attachment 7). French Country architecture can trace its origin to the hillsides of rural France, where each province has it own unique, colloquial style. This style first became popular in America during the first part of the twentieth century in a style that has been titled as "French Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road Electic with a preference to emulate farm buildings and manor houses of the French countryside, and with some houses of this style being symmetrical manor -house types. Typical architectural detailing will include tall, thin windows, often with slat -board shutters, steep slate or wood shingle roofs that flare upward at the roof -eave junction, wide chimneys, multiple gables, and assorted arches with construction materials that will include stucco and stone with oversize grout, wrought iron railings and brick highlights around doors and windows. The applicant has identified the architectural style of the proposed residence as "French County Manor" as the design would be reflective of many of the manor houses that can be found in the French countryside and would contain many architectural details as described in the above discussion of French Country or French Eclectic Architecture. Proposed building materials will include tan colored stucco as an exterior finish with natural colored stone accents for the front architectural projections. All entrance doors, shutters, and the sectional garage door will be "dark brown" colored stained wood. Gutters, downspouts, and the metal roof of the bay window to the right of the entrance door will be constructed of copper. The windows will be made of wood with exterior metal cladding that is brown in color with brick trim and sills used for the three arched dormer windows of the front elevation. Decorative wrought iron railings will be installed on the terrace that is accessed from the family and living rooms as well as the kitchen. Pre -cast stone columns that are tan in color will be used as roof supports for all of the terraces. Two- piece clay roof tiles with an "earth blend" tone consisting of combination of green, tan, and brown tiles are proposed for the steeply pitched (7:12) roof. Secondary Dwelling Unit The proposed project will include a 783 square foot Secondary Dwelling Unit that will be located in the basement. Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15- 56.030(d) does allow a one- time ten percent increase in site coverage and allowable floor area if an applicant agrees to a deed restriction that will restrict the rental of a second unit to below market rate (BMR) households. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) publishes an annual list of income limits for Santa Clara County households that would qualify as lower (80 very-low (50 or extremely -low (30 income households that would be eligible to rent a BMR housing unit. All percentages are based on the 2007 Santa Clara County median income level of $94,500. As an example, a couple with a combined yearly income of $67,900 (80% of the median) would be eligible to rent the proposed secondary dwelling unit. A condition has been added to the project requiring that the deed restriction be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit. The provision of the BMR second unit would allow the applicant to construct an additional 620 square feet of floor area on the site above the maximum allowable floor area of 6,200 square feet for an allowable floor area of 6,820 square feet. The total floor of the proposed project is 6,713 square feet. 5 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road The parking requirements for a secondary dwelling unit are a minimum of one off street parking space within a garage. The garage requirement may be waived if the second dwelling unit is deed restricted. Nonetheless, the project will include a four -car garage thus meeting the parking requirements for both the main and the secondary dwelling unit. Neighbor Correspondence The applicant has shown the proposed plans to neighbors as indicated in the attached letters (Attachment 3). No negative comments have been received at the time of the writing of this Staff Report: Geotechnical Clearance JF Consulting prepared a Geotechnical. Investigation for the proposed project, dated June 12, 2007, which was reviewed by the City's Geotechnical Consultant. As conditioned, the project has received geotechnical .clearance to proceed. Trees Existing trees on the lot include 18 trees that are protected by City Ordinance 15 -050 and would be potentially impacted by the proposed construction. These trees include nine coast live oaks, one Arizona cypress. one Deodar cedar, three Austrian Pines, one black oak, and three eucalyptuses. The project is proposing to remove five trees that would be in conflict with the location of the residence. These trees include one Deodar cedar, one Arizona cypress, two Austrian pines, and one multi -trunk coast live oak. The City Arborist has determined that all but the coast live oak are in fair or poor health and should be replaced with new trees. The applicant has expressed a willingness to relocate the coast live oak to the landscaped area in the center of the proposed driveway turnaround however, the City Arborist has determined that the tree may not survive being relocated and would be a better choice to replace the coast live oak with a new coast live oak tree in this location. The City Arborist has recommended that replacement trees are be valued at a minimum of $7,960. Energy Efficiency A list of the applicant's proposed measures to incorporate energy efficiency into the design of the project is included in Attachment 3. These techniques include energy conserving measures such as an "in floor" hydronic heating system. Hydronic radiant floor heating systems use a heat source to heat up hot water and a pump to circulate the hot water in plastic pipes embedded in the floor. These pipes transport heated water that conduct warmth to the surface of the floor where it radiates heat into the house. Other energy saving measures will include upgraded floor, wall, and ceiling insulation and a photo voltaic (solar energy) system to provide the majority of the power for the residence. Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road General Plan Findings The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan Policy 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. Design Review Findings The proposed project is consistent with all the following Design Review findings stated in Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15- 45.080: (a) Avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed home will not unreasonably interfere with neighboring views or privacy in that it will be located on an approximately 1.8 gross acre site with surrounding parcels also in excess of an acre. The proposed residence would only be visible from the home across the street and the home to the left that is screened by existing vegetation and new proposed trees would provide additional screening. Behind the proposed building the site slopes down to a drainage channel and the dense landscaping in this area blocks any views in this area from offsite. The parcel to the right is vacant. The building is placed toward the front of the lot thereby providing increased setbacks than the minimum required by the Municipal Code. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that there is no natural landscaping to preserve on the site. The site is covered with native grasses and 18 existing trees that are protected by City Ordinance. Five of these trees will be removed for the construction of the proposed residence and would be replaced by new trees. The remaining trees that would be impacted by the proposed construction would be protected during construction. The proposed project will be introducing new drought tolerant landscaping to the site that would include both native and ornamental bushes and trees that would include a number of 24" box sized trees. (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that existing trees on the lot include 18 trees that are protected by City Ordinance 15 -050 and would be potentially impacted by the proposed construction. The project is proposing to remove five trees that would be in conflict with the location of the residence. The City Arborist has determined that all but one is in fair or poor health and should be removed with new trees. The applicant has expressed a willingness to relocate the coast live oak to elsewhere on the site however, the City Arborist has determined that that the tree may not survive being relocated and it would be a more prudent choice to replace the coast live oak with a new coast live oak tree. The City Arborist has recommended that replacement trees are be valued at a minimum of $7,960. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant would be 7 Application No. 07- 396/15900 Peach Hill Road required to submit a bond to the City in the amount of $95,560 which is equal to the appraised value of the trees that are to remain. This money will be refunded to the applicant upon completion of the project and after the City Arborist has inspected these trees and made the determination that they were not damaged during project construction. (d) Minimize perception of excessive bulk. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the applicant is proposing a residence with a wide building footprint while placing below grade the garage and some of the living space. Proposed exterior materials would include both stucco and natural stone. A neutral earth -tone color pallet will be used for the stucco, window trim, doors, and roofing materials. To further reduce the perception of bulk the proposed project would be well articulated and detailed and will include varying rooflines, dormer windows, projecting architectural elements, a steeply pitched roof, arched wood windows, and stone columns. Compatible bulk and height. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that although the proposed home will be 29.5 feet tall, the varying rooflines, architectural detailing, steep pitch of the roof, and the mix of exterior materials would minimize the visual perception of bulk. The increased height would not have_a negative impact on neighboring lots given the large setbacks and existing and proposed vegetative screening from the existing home on the left and the house in closest proximity is located on the opposite of Peach Hill Road. The proposed house will be larger than adjacent structures however this difference in size is mitigate d by the physical distance that separates them from the proposed project. (e) Current grading and erosion control methods.. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the applicant has submitted a grading and drainage plan, which incorporates appropriate grading and erosion control methods; and the proposal shall conform to the City's current grading and erosion control standards. (g) Design policies and techniques. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the proposed project conforms to the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook in terms of compatible bulk, and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views. (f) 8 Application No. 07- 396/15900 Peach Hill Road Use Permit Findings The proposed project is consistent with the following findings stated in SMC Section 15- 55.070 necessary to grant Use Permit approval to exceed the maximum height limit for single- family residences. (a) The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district on which the site is located. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the proposed home with a maximum height of 29.5 feet is in accordance with SMC Section 15- 12.100. This code section allows an applicant to exceed the maximum height of 26 feet for homes in order to adhere to a specific architectural style. It is clearly stated in this code section that purity of a specific architectural style is what shall be accessed in supporting a Use Permit approval to exceed the height limit. It has been determined that the proposal has the architectural elements of a French Country styled home that The Field Guide to American Houses refers to as "French Eclectic" and the applicant describes as "French Country Manor (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that allowing the increased height for a single- family residence over the permitted 26 feet will not be detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare since the project will be required to obtain a building permit and conform to all requirements of the Building Department as well as receive approval of the Public Works Department and the City's consulting geologist. (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of SMC Section 15 12 (Single family Residential District. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the use is a single- family residence with a secondary dwelling unit which is a permitted use in the R -1- 40,000 zone and it has been determined that the project is in compliance with all applicable development standards of SMC Section 15 -12. Conclusion Staff finds that all of the Design Review findings and Use Permit findings can be made in the affirmative and the proposal is consistent with the General Plan. Staff Recommendation Staffs recommends the Planning Commission find this Application exempt from CEQA and approve the application for Design Review and Use Permit with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. 9 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road Attachments: 1 Resolution of Approval for Design Review and Use Permit. 2. Planning Commission Study Session Memorandum, dated July 10, 2007 3. Design Information, dated June 7, 2007, prepared by applicant. 4. City Arborist Report, dated June 18, 2007. 5. Neighbor review letters. 6. Affidavit of mailing notices, public hearing notice, and copy of mailing labels for project notification. 7. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A." 10 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that allowing the increased height for a single family residence over the permitted 26 feet will not be detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare since the project will be required to obtain a building permit and conform to all requirements of the Building Department as well as receive approval of the Public Works Department and the City's consulting geologist. (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of SMC Section 15 -12 (Single-family Residential District. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the use is a single family residence with a secondary dwelling unit which is a permitted use in the R -1- 40,000 zone and it has been determined that the project is in compliance with all applicable development standards of SMC Section 15 -12. Conclusion Staff finds that all of the Design Review findings and Use Permit findings can be made in the affirmative and the proposal is consistent with the General Plan. Staff Recommendation Staffs recommends the Planning Commission find this Application exempt from. CEQA and approve the application for Design Review and Use Permit with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. Attachments: 1. Resolution of Approval for Design Review and Use Permit. 2. Planning Commission Study Session Memorandum, dated July 10, 2007 3. Design Information, dated June 7, 2007, prepared by applicant. 4. City Arborist Report, dated June 18, 2007. 5. Neighbor review letters. 6. Affidavit of mailing notices, public hearing notice, and copy of mailing labels for project notification. 7. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A." 9 Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO. Application No. 07 -299 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Arimilli; 15400 Peach Hill Road APN 517 -22 -072 WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Review and Use Permit to construct a two- story, 29.5 feet tall, single family residence on a vacant lot in the R -1- 40,000 zone district. The net lot size is approximately 1.6- acres; and WHEREAS, Zoning Code Section 15- 45.060 states any new multi -story structure or whenever, as a result of the proposed construction, reconstruction or expansion, the gross floor area of all structures on the site will exceed 6,000 square -feet Design Review approval is required by the Planning Commission. The proposal consists of a new multi -story structure and exceeds 6,000 square -feet; therefore, Planning Commission review 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 in an urbanized area 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 Policy: 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. WHEREAS, 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. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed home will not unreasonably interfere with neighboring views or privacy in that it will be located on an approximately 1.8 gross Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road acre site with surrounding parcels also in excess of an acre. The proposed residence would only be visible from the home across the street and the home to the left that is screened by existing vegetation and new proposed trees would provide additional screening. Behind the proposed building the site slopes down to a drainage channel and the dense landscaping in this area blocks any views in this area from offsite. The site to the right is vacant. The building is placed toward the front of the lot thereby providing increased setbacks than minimum required by the Municipal Code. (b) Preserve Natural Landscape. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that there is no natural landscaping to preserve on the site. The site is covered with native grasses and 18 existing trees that are protected by City Ordinance. Five of these trees will be removed for the construction of the proposed residence and would be replaced by new trees. The remaining trees that would be impacted by the proposed construction would be protected during construction. The proposed project will be introducing new drought tolerant landscaping to the site that would include both native and ornamental bushes and trees that would include a number of 24" box sized trees (c) Preserve Native and Heritage Trees. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that existing trees on the lot include 18 trees that are protected by City Ordinance 15 -050 and would be potentially impacted by the proposed construction. The project is proposing to remove five trees that would be in conflict with the location of the residence. The City Arborist has determined that all but one is in fair or poor health and should be removed with new trees. The applicant has expressed a willingness to relocate the coast live oak to elsewhere on the site however, the City Arborist has determined that that the tree may not survive being relocated and it would be a more prudent choice to replace the coast live oak with a new coast live oak tree. The City Arborist has recommended that replacement trees are be valued at a minimum of $7,960. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant would be required to submit a bond to the City in the amount of $95,560 which is equal to the appraised value of the trees that are to remain. This money will be refunded to the applicant upon completion of the project and after the City Arborist has inspected these trees and made the determination that they were not damaged during project construction (d) Minimize perception of excessive bulk. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the applicant is proposing a residence with a wide building footprint while placing below grade the garage and some of the living space. Proposed exterior materials would include both stucco and natural stone. A neutral earth-tone color pallet would be used for the stucco, window trim, doors, and roofing materials. To further reduce the perception of bulk the proposed project would be well articulated and detailed and will include varying rooflines, dormer windows, projecting architectural elements, a steeply pitched roof, arched wood windows, and stone columns. 2 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road (e) Compatible bulk and height. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that although the proposed home would be 29.5 feet tall, the varying rooflines, architectural detailing, steep pitch of the roof, and the mix of exterior materials would minimize the visual perception of bulk. The increased height would not have a negative impact on neighboring lots given the large setbacks and existing and proposed vegetative screening from the existing home on the left and the house in closest proximity is located on the opposite of Peach Hill Road. The proposed house would be larger than adjacent structures however this difference in size is mitigated by the physical distance that separates them from the proposed proj ect. (1) (g) Current grading and erosion control methods. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the applicant has submitted a grading and drainage plan, which incorporates appropriate grading and erosion control methods; and the proposal shall conform to the City's current grading and erosion control standards. Design policies and techniques. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the proposed project conforms to the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook in terms of compatible bulk, and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views. The project will include energy conserving measures that would include 1) an "in floor" hydronic heating system 2) upgraded floor, wall, and ceiling insulation, and 3) a photo voltaic system to provide the majority of the power for the residence. WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Use Permit approval pursuant to SMC Section 15- 12.100, and that the following findings specified in SMC Section 15- 55.070 have been made in the affirmative: (a) The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district on which the site is located. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the proposed home with a maximum height of 29.5 feet is in accordance with SMC Section 15- 12.100. This code section allows an applicant to exceed the maximum height of 26 feet for homes in order to adhere to a specific architectural style. It is clearly stated in this code section that purity of a specific architectural style is what shall be accessed in supporting a Use Permit approval to exceed the height limit It has been determined that the proposal has the architectural elements of a French Country styled home that The Field Guide to American Houses refers to as "French Eclectic" and the applicant describes as "French Country Manor (b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that allowing the increased height for a single family residence over the permitted 26 feet will not be detrimental to 3 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road public health, safety, and welfare since the project will be required to obtain a building permit and conform to all requirements of the Building Department as well as receive approval of the Public Works Department and the City's consulting geologist (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of SMC Section 15 -12 (Single Family Residential District. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the use is a single family residence which is a permitted use in the R -1- 40,000 zone and it has been determined that the project is in compliance with all applicable development standards of SMC Section 15 -12. Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application for Design Review approval and Use Permit are hereby granted subject to the following conditions: PERMANENT CONDITONS OF APPROVAL None CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL CONDITIONS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" date stamped July 17, 2007, 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 project shall utilize materials illustrated on a materials board dated June 1, 2007. 3. The following shall be required and/or included as to 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." 4 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road 4. A storm water retention plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval indicating how all storm water will be retained on -site, and incorporating the New Development and Construction Best Management 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. 5. 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. 6. To the extent 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. 7. To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape areas. 8. 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. 9. Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover, if applicable, shall be retained and incorporated into the landscape plan to the maximum extent possible. 10. 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, or similar items. 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. 11. 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. 12. The applicant shall record a deed restriction for the secondary dwelling unit that restricts it so that it may only be rented to below market rate households, prior to Building Permit issuance. 13. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final occupancy inspection. 5 Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road FIRE DISTRICT 14. Applicant shall comply with all Santa Clara County Fire Department conditions. PUBLIC WORKS 15. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the final development plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations) to ensure that the plans, specifications and details accurately reflect the consultants' recommendations. The results of the plan review shall be summarized by the Project Geotechnical Consultant in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for review prior to issuance of permits for project construction. 16. The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, retaining wall excavation, and foundation construction, prior to placement of fill, steel and concrete. The results of these inspections and the as -built conditions of the project shall be described by the Project Geotechnical Engineer in a letter(s) and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to Final (as- built) Project Approval. 17. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the City Geotechnical Consultant's review of the project prior to Zone Clearance. 18. The owner (applicant) shall enter into agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions. CITY ATTORNEY 19. Owner and Applicant agree 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. Application No. 07- 396/15400 Peach Hill Road PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 8th day of August 2007 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date Joyce Hlava 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. 7 Attachment 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner C 2 MEETING DATE: July 10, 2007 SUBJECT: Proposed two -story residence -15400 Peach Hill Road Application #07 -396 (APN 517 -22 -072) STUDY SESSION REQUIREMENTS: The Study Session is a fact finding meeting where the Commission may discuss the item and ask questions from or hear statements from members of the public attending the meeting. During the Study Session, the Planning Commission may only discuss items related to the project. The agenda does not allow any formal votes or motions on the proposed project or other matters. No comments made during the Study Session by the Planning Commission are binding or required to be carried through to the formal public hearing where actions will be taken on the proposed project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the proposed architectural design and project plans on a preliminary basis and provide input to the applicant and staff on the following categories: o Neighborhood compatibility o Bulk o Height o Design PROPOSED PROJECT: Background The applicant is requesting Design Review Approval to construct a new 6,713 two -story single- family residence with a basement garage on a vacant 1.6 net acre lot in the R -1- 40,000 zone district (The Project). The maximum height of the proposed residence will not be taller than 29.5 feet. The applicant's architect has identified the proposed architectural style of the project as "Country Manor It would include traditional architectural features including: a stucco exterior finish with stone accents on the west (front) and south (right) building elevations, Planning Comnaission. Study Session hle'naorandum Design Review 07 -396, 13100 Peach Hill Road slate roofing material, a recessed entry porch, arched windows, pre -cast stone columns, wood frame windows and patio doors, and decorative wrought iron window railings Building Height The maximum height of single family dwellings is 26 feet and the proposed height of the project is 29.5 feet. However, additional height can be approved pursuant to a Use Permit and Design Review by the Planning Commission (Commission) if the Commission finds the additional height to be necessary in order for the project to adhere to a specific architectural style. Per section 15- 12.100(a) of the Saratoga Municipal Code, the Commission is to use the book entitled the "Field Guide to American Houses" and other resource material approved by the Commission as resource documents to assess the purity of architectural design. Staff will have copies of the book available the meeting. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Reduced Plans (Commissioners Only) Attachment 3 figESIGN INFORMATION and DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS MINIMIZE PERCEPTION OF BULK THIS PROJECT MEETS THIS DESIGN POLICY BY THE WAY THE RESIDENCE IS SET BACK FROM THE STREET AND LOCATED IN THE CENTER OF THIS LARGE 1.6 ACRE PROPERTY. THIS DESIGN ALSO ACHIEVES A LOWER PROFILE DUE TO THE HIGHER ELEVATION OF THE PROPERTY IN THE BACKGROUND. THE USE OF STUCCO, NATURAL STONE AND NATURAL SLATE ROOFING IN EARTH TONE COLORS ALLOWS THIS RESIDENCE. TO BLEND INTO THE NATURAL SETTING. CREATING A GOOD BALANCE AND VARYING THE HEIGHT OF THE ROOFLINE MINIMIZES THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT. THE "COUNTRY MANOR ESTATE" ARCHITECTURAL STYLE IS VERY CONDUCIVE TO THIS AREA OF SARATOGA AND WILL COMPLIMENT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD GREATLY. INTEGRATE STRUCTURE WITH ENVIRONMENT AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED THIS DESIGN HAS A MINIMAL AMOUNT OF MATERIALS AND ALL ARE NATURAL EARTH TONE COLORS. THIS DESIGN WAS PURPOSELY CREATED IN ORDER TO BLEND INTO THE EXISTING TERRAIN AND ENCOURAGES TIMELESS ARCHITECTURE. ALL OF THE ORDINANCE SIZE TREES WILL BE PRESERVED AND PROTECTED WITH THE BEST OF CARE. THERE ARE FOUR TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED DUE TO THEIR POOR CONDITION. N LANDSCAPING AND TREES WILL BE ADDED TO ENHANCE THE BEAUTY OF THIS PROPERTY. THIS "COUNTRY MANOR ESTATE" ARCHITECTURAL STYLE PROPOSED IS UNSURPASSED AND INCORPORATES ONLY ONE DESIGN THEME. AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED THE PROPOSED DESIGN CONSISTS OF MATERIAL AND COLORS THAT BLEND INTO THE NATURAL SURROUNDINGS. THE USE OF SMOOTH STUCCO, NATURAL STONE AND SLATE ROOFING WILL HELP TO MAINTAIN THE NATURAL SETTING THAT SURROUNDS THIS PROPERTY. AVOID INTERFERENCE WITH PRIVACY INTERFERENCE WITH PRIVACY IS NOT AN ISSUE WITH THIS PROPERTY. THE HOME ACROSS THE STREET TO THE WEST IS APPROXIMATELY ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FEET AWAY WITH MATURE OAK TREES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. THE HOME TO THE NORTH HAS THE SAME CHARACTERISTICS. THERE ARE NO STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH AND EAST. PRESERVE VIEW AND ACCESS TO VIEWS THIS PROPERTY SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. THERE ARE NO ISSUES PERTIANING TO VIEWS. THE PROPOSED DESIGN DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS VIEWS, NOR DOES IT IMPOSE ON THEM. DESIGN FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROPOSED ELECTRIC SOLAR PANELS WILL PROVIDE ENERGY FOR THE ENTIRE HOUSE. THE PROPOSED HOME WILL HAVE A HYDRONIC HEATING SYSTEM, WHICH WILL PROVIDE A MORE COMFORTABLE AND EFFICIENT HEAT SOURCE. THE COVERED PORCHES WILL PROVIDE SHADE IN THE SUMMER AND FAMILY ENJOYMENT ALL YEA• ROUND. THE INSULATION TO BE USED FAR EXCEEDS THE CURRENT REQUIREMENT. Attachment 4 15400 Peach Hill Road ARBORIST REPORT APN 517 -22 -072 Owner: Rao and Sita Arimilli INTRODUCTION Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Califomia 95070 Application 07 -364 June 18, 2007 Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Phone (408) 868 -1276 The property owner of 15400 Peach Hill Road has submitted a preliminary site plan to the city to construct a new home on a vacant lot. Eighteen trees protected by City Ordinance 15 -050 and potentially impacted by construction were inventoried for this project. Each tree was numbered with an aluminum tag for ease of identification. Data for each tree is included in a Tree Inventory Table at the end of this report. Tree locations are noted on the attached copy of the Site Plan. The plans reviewed for this report include a Site Plan, dated April 2007 and prepared by Dunbar and Craig, a Grading and Drainage Plan dated May 21, 2007 by B. A. Zuhdi Consulting Engineers and a Landscape Plan dated May 21, 2007 by Koch Associates, Inc.. SITE OBSERVATIONS, PLAN REVIEW AND TECHNICAL DISCUSSION Eighteen trees are potentially impacted by construction. They include nine coast live oaks #1 3, 6 10 and 12 15), one Arizona cypress #4), one Deodar cedar #5), three Austrian pines #7, 8 and 11), one black oak (#9), and three eucalyptus #16 18). Tree #13 is not shown on the plans and should be surveyed and included on the plans. Trees 4 8 are in conflict with the project and proposed for removal. They include one deodar cedar, one Arizona cypress, two pines and one coast live oak. All but the oak tree are in fair or poor health or have poor structure or both. Pine #7 has cankers in the trunk which indicate decay sites and it could fail at these points. The coast live oak tree has two main trunks and included bark where they meet, and, although it can be relocated, I do not require it for this project. The owner may relocate the tree if desired, but I recommend selecting a site other than the area within the turn around for vehicles on the driveway. It is acceptable to remove these five trees for the project and replace them following construction with new trees. Replacement trees should be valued at $7,960. Replacement values can be found at the bottom of the Tree Inventory. Table that is attached to this report. This translates into 16 trees of 24 inch box size or five trees of 36 inch box size and one tree of 24 inch box size. At least four of the trees should be from the City's list of natives. The applicant has requested the ability to remove the trees following Planning Commission approval and prior to issuance of building division permits. This is acceptable. The driveway should be constructed of pervious materials on top of existing grade within the canopies of oak trees #1 3. A soil cut exists about two feet from tree #2 and, if a retaining wall is needed at this tree, Page 1 of 4 15400 Peach Hill Road ID it should be no closer to the trunk than the existing cut. No excavation to construct the driveway should occur within 6 feet from trees #1 3. Drainage for the driveway involves a drain line about 6 feet from tree #1. This should be bored under roots and no trenching should occur to install it. No roots measuring 2 inches or larger should be cut for any of the drain lines. A second driveway is proposed in the vicinity of trees #10 —15. It will impact trees #10, 11, 14 and 15. It also, should be constructed of pervious materials on top of grade under the canopies of these trees and no excavation should occur to construct it within 10 feet from tree #11 or 8 feet from tree #10. Drainage is proposed under the driveway that will require the removal of trees #10, 13 and 14. Rip rap structures should not be placed under the canopies of the oaks or within 10 feet of pine tree #11. Retaining walls are proposed near trees #9, 16, 17 and 18. They should be constructed with footings rather than continuous trenching under the canopies of these trees. Tree #9 is a black oak in excellent condition and the retaining wall should remain at least seven feet from its trunk. The walls near trees #16 18 should be at least 15 feet from the trunks of these trees. The drainage between trees #17 and 18 should remain at least 15 feet from either tree. Roots measuring two inches or larger should be tunneled under rather than cut to install the line. All locations for utilities (including trenching for water, sewer, drainage, gas and electrical) should be shown on the plans so they can be evaluated for impacts to trees. Landscaping plans, including irrigation lines, valves and controller locations should also be shown so they can be evaluated for impacts to trees. Per City Ordinance 15- 50.080, a bond in the amount of $95,560, which is equal to 100% of the total appraised value trees #1 3, 9 11, 14 —18, is required. This amount may change as the design is developed. Appraisal values are calculated according to the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9`" Edition, published by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), 2000. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. This entire report, including the Tree Inventory Table and the map showing locations of trees and protective fencing, shall be incorporated into the set of final building plans. 2. Tree protective fencing shall be installed as shown on the attached map and established prior to obtaining building division permits. It shall be comprised of six -foot high chain link fencing mounted on eight foot tall, two -inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. Once established, the fencing must remain undisturbed and be maintained throughout the construction process until final inspection. 3. Owner shall provide a tree protection bond in the amount of $95,560 prior to obtaining building division permits. The amount of the bond may change if the design of the project changes to impact fewer or more trees. 4. Owner shall replace trees approved for removal with replacement trees equal in value to the total appraised value of the trees. Replacement trees shall total $7,960 in appraised value. Replacement values of trees can be found at the bottom of the Tree Inventory Table following this report. Page 2 of 4 15400 Peach Hill Road 5. Trees approved for removal may be removed following Planning Commission approval and prior to issuance of building division permits. 6. At least four of the replacement trees shall be from the City's list of natives: coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), blue oak (Quercus douglasiana), black oak (Quercus kelloggii), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens). 7. Any grading or trenching under a tree's canopy shall be approved by the city arborist prior to performing work. If approved, it shall be done manually using shovels. Any roots measuring two inches or larger shall be retained and tunneled under; roots measuring less than two inches may be cut with a sharp pruning instrument. This includes installation of drainage to rip rap structures. 8. Plans shall show locations for all utilities including electrical, drainage, water, sewer and gas lines. 9. Trees shall be watered every three weeks during the dry summer months or more often as necessary to ensure their continued good health. Water using a soaker hose or drip line midway between the trunk and the edge of the canopy. Use enough water so that the soil is moist to a depth of one foot deep. 10. Unless otherwise approved, all construction activities must be conducted outside the designated fenced area (even after fencing is removed). These activities include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: demolition, grading, trenching, equipment cleaning, stockpiling and dumping materials (including soil fill), and equipment /vehicle operation and parking. 11. Any approved grading or trenching beneath the tree's canopy shall be manually performed using shovels. 12. If landscaping will occur, design the plans to show the following: a. Design irrigation so that it does not spray trunks of trees. Locate valve boxes and controllers outside of drip lines of tree canopies. b. Select plants with similar water requirements to the trees under which they will be placed. c. Design lawns so that there is room between them and the trunk of any tree; confine lawn areas to the outside 20% of the area under the canopy. d. Plant only drought tolerant plants compatible with oaks under the oak trees. Do not include lawn within the drip line of any oak tree on the property. e. Design topdressings so that stones or mulch remain at least one foot from the trunks of retained trees and 6 inches from the trunks of new trees. f. Do not allow tilling or stripping of the topsoil beneath the trees' canopies. g. Establish edging material proposed beneath tree canopies on top of existing soil grade by using stakes. 13. Any pruning of trees on site must be performed under the supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist and according to ISA standards. 14. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil, gasoline, herbicides, rinse water from paint or concrete, or other harmful materials) is prohibited beneath tree canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage beneath tree canopies. Page 3 of 4 15400 Peach Hill Road Attachments: Tree Inventory Table Map Showing Tree Locations and Protective Fencing Page 4 of 4 1 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14.6 25 80 80 Good High 2 Conflict with Proposed sign )t Shown on Plans )cated on Adjacent operty $3,930 2 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 8.1, 8.9 25 90 70 Good High 2 $3,080 3 Coast live oak Quercus a rifolia 12.6 20 80 80 Good High 2 $2,950 4 Arizona cypress Cupressus arizonica 13.5 12 20 20 Fair Low 1 X $560 5 Deodar cedar Cedrus deodara 19.5 30 30 10 Fair Low 1 X $1,320 6 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 8.4, 9.3 20 90 40 Good Moderate 1 X $2,090 7 Austrian pine Pinu ni ra 27.5 40 10' 10 Poor Low 1 X $820 4 8 Austrian pine Pinus nigra 31.1 45 30 20 Poor Low 1 X $3,170 9 Black oak Quercus kelloggii 9.8 12 90 90 Good High 2 $4,040 10 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 14 15 60 70 Fair Moderate 2 $2,940 11 Austrian pine Pinus ni ra 32.1 45 60 80 Good High 4 $14,200 12 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 7.9 6 80 80 Good High 4 $1,100 13 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 5.7, 5.9, 6.4 15 90 60 Good High 4 X $3,010 14 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 3.6, 4.4, 4.7 10 80 10 Good Low 3 $500 15 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 9.7 20 100 90 Good High 2 $2,520 16 Eucalyptus Eucalyptus leucoxylon 28.1 35 90 80 Good High 3 $16,300 17 Eucalyptus Eucalyptus leucoxylon 28.9 35 90 80 Good High 2 $17,200, TREE unk Diameter (in,) per side for Plant Appraisal timated Canopy Spread ,alth. Condition (100% st, 0% worst) iictural Integrity (100% st, 0% worst) reran Condition uitability for Preservation [igh/Moderate/Low) tensity of Impacts Highest, 5 Lowest) Conflict with Proposed sign )t Shown on Plans )cated on Adjacent operty Appraised Value NO. TREE NAME TREE INVENTORY TABLE Address: 15400 Peach Hill Road June 18, 2007 III TREE unk Diameter (in,) per side for Plant Appraisal timated Canopy Spread ;alth Condition (100% st, 0% worst) uctural Integrity (100% st, 0% worst) reran Condition itability for Preservation igh/Moderate /Low) :ensity of Impacts Highest, 5 Lowest) Conflict with Proposed ;sign )t Shown on Plans Icated on Adjacent Dperty Appraised Value NO. TREE NAME 18 Eucalyptus Eucalyptus leucoxylon 38 45 90 80 Good High $27,900 Total Appraised Value Replacement Tree Values TREE INVENTORY TABLE 15 gallon $150 24 inch box $500 36 inch box $1,500 48 inch box $5,000 52 inch box 7,000 72 inch box $15,000 Should any tree listed above become damaged owner will be required to repair the damage. Should any tree listed above be removed owner will be required to replace that tree with trees equal in value to its assessed value. $107,630 Address: June 18, 2007 15400 Peach Hill Road Attachment 5 N..' XL''' 'III I I LL J l lot i Wild,: 1111 i cl% i r ---1 o.. 1 ..r .s- vvi .--':=.flN fp,; ..S ,-.9 C o •-:N., N i o i 3' 1 w 1..! ARC— t 1 t N ST'PAFiK ,....10..11•;;'--=' ROBIN v 1 1 ..L.., "C, .041 m a i c c_ 1 ce V ;z e- i I itla iVIontaili i .-L L _DNA O I N 1 I Villa Montall --1 1.0 i fArboreturr 4-• \_------7---- i a .-4 a Dear Neighbor, City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: 7Q7/"c I I, /5400 2c./ Hill Road Sara I am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. I ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may ,contact the City of Saratoga 's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408-868-1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. Neighbor Name: Signature: Neighbor A ess: 'Rat Neighbor Phone Date: If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: Date: Application Number: 6 of6 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: ParCe/ 1, /5-400 oc /111/ Road SQr Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. I ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may :contact the City of Saratoga 's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be sided by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. Neighbor Name: i-n ri& J- 6 i<S Date:r -np, 2 Signature: Neighbor Address: R S Q Neighbor Phone #:4IO 7 -O /y 7 If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: Date: Application Number: 6 of 6 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: Parcel 7, /5400 P 2cJ All Road SQ'f4 Dear Neighbor, 1 am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. I ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY may be changed as the project moves forward. You may .contact the City of Saratoga 's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. O (3L Ri 2 t Cc A ()A lt D (o 0 7 Neighbor Name: Signature: Neighbor Address: t5L(tet leePtec4 F cC kLf S Acre-km G-h Neighbor Phone S-67— 9 q If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: bate: Application Number: 6 of 6 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form PROJECT ADDRESS: F?PC€/ 1, /5400 c. /RI Road, oad Sara& Dear Neighbor, I am proposing a project at the above stated address and would like to provide you with an opportunity to review the proposal and provide comments. All of the adjacent neighbors and the neighbors across the street from the property are being provided this notice as a courtesy in advance of the standard City Notice which will be sent out prior to a decision being made on the project. I ask that you familiarize yourself with the preliminary plans for the project. These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may be changed as the project moves forward. You may ,contact the City of Saratoga 's Planning Division at any time to review any changes that may occur. The City of Saratoga asks that this form and a reduced set of plans be signed by each neighbor to indicate that they have had an opportunity to review the proposal. Please be advised that these plans are preliminary and may change. If you have further interest in the project, you may contact the City of Saratoga at 408 -868 -1222 and speak with the assigned project planner. My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposed project and have reviewed the preliminary project plans. Neighbor Nam, a-e" I =V) Al6 Date: 5 A 8/07 Signature: Neighbor Address: 5r /Q../�iD f3 E r' Q Neighbor Phone /4": e(.0 If I have any initial concerns with the project I may list them below. My concerns are the following (please attach additional sheets if necessary): Applicant Name: Date: Application Number: 6 of 6 Attachment 6 Christopher Alan Riordan, AICP Senior Planner (408) 868 -1235 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 August 2007, 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: DR 07 -396 15400 Peach Hill Road APPLICANT /OWNER: Arimilli APN: 517 -22 -072 DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review and Use Permit approval to construct a new two -story single family residence, including a basement and an attached Secondary Dwelling Unit, and a request for a Height Exception to allow the project to exceed the maximum 26 foot height limit by 3.5 feet for a total height of 29.5 feet. The total floor area of the proposed residence and garage will be approximately 6,713 square feet. The net lot size is approximately 1.6 acres and the site is zoned R -1- 40,000. Design Review approval by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15- 45.060. 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. JUNE 20, 2007 500' OWNERSHIP LISTING PREPARED FOR: 517 -22 -072 MARY MCCANDLESS 15400 PEACH HILL ROAD SARATOGA CA 95070 510 -02 -017 MARION C JOHN CONNOLLY OR CURRENT OWNER 15405 HUME DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6416 510 -52 -004 DAVID A JOAN DRENNAN OR CURRENT OWNER 15365 HUME DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6416 510 -52 -007, 008 PARK FAMILY TRUST OR CURRENT OWNER 15269 HUME DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6415 517 -22 -041 GARY E.& LANAYA DIX OR CURRENT OWNER 15404 MADRONE HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6401 517 -22 -070 SARITA -K JOHNSON OR CURRENT OWNER 15277 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6469 517 -22 -074 DARRELL E ANGELIN DUKES OR CURRENT OWNER 15329 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6402 517 -22 -087 ROBERT L PATRICIA DALE OR CURRENT OWNER 15419 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6402 517 -22 -100 MEHDI AMINI -RAD OR CURRENT OWNER 15397 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6402 510 -02 -024 LESTER G SACHS OR CURRENT OWNER 19941 SUNSET DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6438 510 -52 -005 BANNICK M M OR CURRENT OWNER 15387 HUME DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6416 510 -52 -009, 010 MICHAEL S PLINER OR CURRENT OWNER 15257 HUME DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6415 517 -22 -055 HORINE FAMILY TRUST OR CURRENT OWNER 15250 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6448 517 -22 -071 MARY MCCANDLESS 16326 RIDGECREST AVE MONTE SERENO CA 95030 517 -22 -078 JOHN CAROL GIANNANDREA OR CURRENT OWNER 15363 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6402 517 -22 -088 WILLIAM J BARBARA ELFVING OR CURRENT OWNER 15451 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6402 517 -22 -111 IQBAL HUSAIN 20140 MENDELSOHN LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5904 510 -02 -025 CHAIHO TAEOCK KIM OR CURRENT OWNER 19977 SUNSET DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6438 510 -52 -006 DAVID A SHEILA BROWN OR CURRENT OWNER 15391 HUME DR SARATOGA CA 95070 -6416 517 -22 -024 DAVID WHITNEY OR CURRENT OWNER 15374 MADRONE HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6401 517 -22 -068 CHARLES J ROMONA BROOKS OR CURRENT OWNER 15355 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6402 517 -22 -072 MARY MCCANDLESS 16326 RIDGECREST AVE MONTE SERENO CA 95030 517 -22 -079 FREDERICK S SHARON ANDRES OR CURRENT OWNER 15255 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6469 517 -22 -099 THOMAS C JUDITH LAVEY OR CURRENT OWNER 15375 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6402 517 -22 -112 DAVID J TERESA CAREY OR CURRENT OWNER 15320 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6448 '517-22-121 TERESA R DAVID CAREY fir PEACH HILL RD TOGA CA 95070 -6448 517 -23 -021 IQBAL HUSAIN 20140 MENDELSOHN LN SARATOGA CA 95070 -5904 386 -14 -029 CITY OF SARATOGA ATTN: CHRISTOPHER RIORDAN 13777 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070 517 -22 -122 CLYDE R WALLIN OR CURRENT OWNER 15288 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6448 517 -23 -022 RICHARD A DEBRA BELGARD OR CURRENT OWNER 15571 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6472 Advanced Listing Services P.O. Box 2593 Dana Point CA 92624 517 -23 -001 YUPAN WEN OR CURRENT OWNER 15481 PEACH HILL RD SARATOGA CA 95070 -6402 517 -38 -002, 004 W L PELIO 14573 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA CA 95070 -6801 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 21St day of July 2007, that I deposited 31 notices 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 as being owners of property within 500 feet of the property described as: Address: 15400 Peach Hill Road AP N: 517 22 072 that on said day there was regular communication by United States Mail to the addresses shown above. Denise Kaspar Advanced Listing Services mmoN i:n Y 1 1 Yy 8 Q ti w 44 S a o Subject: 15400 Peach Hill Road APN: 517 -22 -072 500' Radius S o F. s 4 •3 P `4 Attachment 7 5 p op 1 ;N ir Ilk 412 IW 41 96 4 of I tt 4 >If I 11 a !iii 11 M 1 1 g El g St If VI fQl a g C G G C 5 &1 II i 'g' 1 i i li b1g1ill; bL gg s E N g 8 D t iPii g 1 1gjg 1118 IttEt 8555 t nil' 42.; NOISIA311 v v alma "'Pi Ce0999Z-IMP rei MSS V3 VSOIINS 31NON VN3f18 Nem S.1:133NION3 0.NLLTISNO0 laHnz 9 NYld :ONV,QNICIVkie OLOS6 V3 'efoleieS .pea8 IIIH !Peed ()OKI. '1. lowed 33N34IS31:11111011171V V1.IS OV1i 1 Csa „zi` 1=th. HIllut,7 HE TI =1 1-1 111= E 111= 111=- 1' ML-=_I 1 IEEIL1' 1E1 I 1=1 1 11*- 11 11 7:1 1 i E 1 11 117 101 I ril-_-_-THEITI=1 7 4, 'fr...' 44 46/ %Ivo 1 4 1111 ,4... f ital I" 111-.6... Srel L, •Nisrie .01 vik.1...1...... toov,,tr, %Amp we Nt Or 4, wiTAT:70 Atil to Allk. vs- It.J1 0 i 5 ,ti i s a OLOS6 •f3 VOOLVAIIVS WON flIH H3V3d 000S1. 131311W IIIVIENZVEV vats wort* ONTO 110an soaciamsave Ot•61:ELATclOt Loge; r!i.:,/ 'vEoir.,ec; :cum lautaog s3 r, Nelsaa Pue ONININVicl S3IVI3OSSV Pue A37)1V0 *A '10" 1 qiv 11 4 i -41.07Ara ut.Lrd iwcarA ire far- !IMAM MEMO, 11111111:11M MEM IIMPOIN 4111MiLIIIr;NE- 1 Illi11111111111 0 -,ZI 1100111111111111111 S r AIINA VI, If' 1 7 1: EON NE MI MI Mit MUM 1311111 NM N RE hi NMI 111111111111111111S1 111111111111111111111111, I I 111.1.1111111111•11.1111 'IMW1111.111111111M11.15 -AZ— 0 m 1 w• O Cl) tu 0 w s Z W N H J 0 LL.: 8 OLOS6 'VO 'VDOLVHHVS OV021 HOV3d OOPS*. `1. 13021Vd IgriEtNenity Vane IO'S @MU Of OLO 6 L1 'e6ole.leg h auoydalal ReM 1a uuog ti£06l NJIS90 pue DNINNVld S31VIDOSSv pue A37)IVO Jr—) gg 1 1 aa©ioa«o tiev&oll 1 aralo 311/O9 1 L. 1 aor alas «a 6 do aaa «a a 0 OLOS6 'V9 'VOOIV1IV9 OV011 H0V3d OOPSL `1 113311Vd rinamenrir vows wall oval O1 auo ydaps OLOG6 eRuJO4J;e7 `66O1eJec, 'C'M 1 VC:061 NJls a pue JNINN ar ld S3.LVI3OSSII PUe A37YVO 4 01.096 aVO21 TIIN H nrimuntv nova v0 VooJ.v IVS 0113d OOPS I, `L 1301UVd VMS DI= WOW Ob6l'3L9'80t7 OL0g6 e!u.lo}!leD e6o�eaes auoydalal CUM 1auuOg b206L NJIS9a pue JNINNt7�1d S3IVI3OSSV pue A37MVO OOO O Oo NOO{{0pO(0(pOOe�pOOOOO ilig4 nNWN 4 9§VQII 0 11 11 0 0 11 0 0 II 11 0 n n 0 0 n n AgMNW4Vo Ng'vhNNb xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx "A^ nariOn= �No)'C ltf f01�6)OiG e-Nt7 Yxf 0fA N 0 0 m N 0 0 m J w w -J z 2 LL 0 0 m N NN 01 S N m N LLL :''.''l 0 0 0 o R p 1 q�+ o 1U 6i §N §0 i LLe de flic 0 J d ffi iigpq 0 N F E N 0 il■■■■■■■■■■■■■■u i•■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■�'i II■■■■IUIIU ■Y■■.u1 9 •Pa”0 Q Z Q a LL 0 0 0 0 2 m a a 0L086 'VO `VOO1Vt1VS avou TIIH HOV3d OOPS4 `L 930ZIVd atalsznerav VMS WM ®tea ROA 0 Ot'6t'ZL8'8017 OL0g6 e!uao /HeD 'e6o�eaeg Ruo CeM 1auuog {,8061 NJISa° Pue JNINNtild S3111I30SSV Pue .A3731V0 080309# qI a (m 1 %Yd 89901)81019 EZ9gl0WBPN DIVO'08011I9 10899£908 83 8 was •owo 4 4+ 0 0 O08 9M10881800 4 38f10311838 V 3d8000881 031880 d 8 0 0 8 1 Sa1VIOOSSV S HOO) elwome3 'e6o;eJes PB2i II1H 1 -1 3 e ?d 00•SI• 90U9P!Seli HIPPY eq j ueid edepspuei :QUOIQIneu 1111w1.AI:ou got' (d:Aq um p u0- f0Z.81 L O'lZ'S e loP i 1 1 l J i g 4., L -0 a) 0 0 .0 a) O 0 V' o C 0� E U 'v) "0 COaV(aaL o ca a) a) U a) U L L (a (o u� 3 a) c L p 3 a� ,0 V 5. 0 0 O Vf o C o taW vo 0)o wL E. a) O 3 ova., .c a c c vi EQ 3 u f °cL c (n D ��caoa;rnw.° u L a D C C L 0 L C U C (o (0 L 0 �O E .fl 115 a) C p L a., 0) a �0 voi -c cu 01 aE o /4 O ,o o cc o w w E w 'L N c c 0 0 a)(ooEta,o ro o o 0 E 5 -5 -0o a) as ccwt ia 2 0 0•v L 03 f°.0 0 O L. O L I a) E a) (0 C L�. a) (0 N O 0 i O a) 0w U2 O 0) 0�3 �-+�o o o 4.; v Z C .o O co fC.; 0 O C O O c o p 0 0 c0 (n 0 c, o ,C 0 L O C p C a) v .G r, O U u, 4-3 t4- u) a_ o c'''0 M N t0, a •0 w 3 cn O V L 1 'D N u. x p 0 d o 0 L 'y, a a a. O L cn p 0 a O •L U a) L p t a) a e E a) Q 4 (0 C O C U 0 (0 L" d O C C 0 C a E o (0 3 E �s L )4-4 (CI N L O 0) O� .Fa a) U E a -C (n L 4U+ O O C C ow OI 3 L N L -cc a•' (1 W� C1) p 4"1 Ry a.+ a) O v1 0 a) a to N 3 O O _a in v a) =(DLOv) aJ O .L3, o� (o- 0 0 rn 2 p o ai R La LJ o a o c c o �L co f0 o� p v o v I >>..00 a O c N N w E a I•- a) r u o C L 0 (0 te a) E LpN L -�OC� O a) rn0 L u q E o x L o 0 O O U E o c a.a� N L 0 4 .oE O�a��° w O.C N v w O a) (o o L 0 N O O U c L. of U •0 0 0 0 C 0 o .c n�a, 7 (19 -'v'v, oN o o L o a) 0 40 (1" L .0 v 'L .0 y.. C 0 C 4 v .0 C a) to ,4 j a) Q 0 O f0 .c 6 O .c O a) 01 a) .0 U O O a., ad w c o U c L L 0 O ,O 0 a.+ co u 01.- E v_ 0 0 0 (a 01 a 1 V V .0 C U O U t 3 L 'O 'C a N O a 74:5 4.-, fi N c4 C c Fr- R' co p o-0 V c C u) L v L b tO cu i O o L O 4., O p 0 0 (a L a (a (o .c aJ a� ro a) 0)Lc z o L L C p o "E CN ro, �v •C c O a) Q N L O (n U L. L. o O O (0 X N N a) E C L t 0 of p, L e. O l '0 'e N s- N r. 3 .c O 0 w c (n p tf o L E a) L- ti-, C cn C L L O o N o •a)•0) cat o c �j o 6a c� o u v c B o= c E O O o �M E E t a a 000)0) c c y v 7 L O p N 3 (D p a-' a) O ,C L o I-U u (n OL C to.c,.,I,,.5 (0 U I- a O Q n E I- (n O V C D_ Z. aw'� aoC o 4.3 cn 0) o. a) N ao V E c, o c a) oc, ..a a go c .L u o O c c E (0 u O c a) 3) a) a) a c L E ..cn N C (0 t0 O 0 a) .0 0 .CC '0 m (0 0 0 (0 O 4 L 0 'C3 C L- c CD o D L C O O Q O U ca 0 To 'C to co C o D 3 c w a N L y.., L .0 �1 a) 01 (n t L (a r o •u L C I.L. 0n 0 rnC u •C 0) oNL 0 5 1 le 1 c L.. o o c a o 0 a) 0 L L o N U a tC E' .Y s N E (�0 c a•' v 0 0)v ii o E N t= o °U �'c 4- c v a 0 v to o 0 p c (a a) L o a) L o a) O o :i 13 0 3 U 0 t> O C O a N u) ao 3 0 0 "�(oC a)COQ oL 0) N= C O'0 Via .c 0 0 Vf L. O c O a) G C a) C p, 4E' C O 0 c ;2' '0 0 a C 0 L N co 0 a U a) G L L a) c l L yLU., 3 0 L 3 O. L. u� a Y E I- cn I- cn a a o i C a) 0� o a Q L H (CI .6 UV R CD 3 N N D, c L LNO,..(a a)'0 a) 0(0 .0+. O o EOtt 3 (o a) O o 0 N c Q L L a) "c w a) a) aii e J 0 co rt a O 0 0 0 0 u_ a. a Z w 0 1 0 S 1- m U. S LU 0 CL co 0 6 0) 1 Z a U Z LLI -J Z w- w 0 a w W Z =a w wz coco g Z Q La. w O F- 2 �a o 1-_ Lt W w Z z o W o Lt a1- J Q. W 0 N O Z Z z1 o c75 L O J V 1421j Y o w M J co 0 cn z w 1 L7 0 m� z Z W U W a Z L z 0o O Wa O> DM J O 1- w F= 1 2 co a W w 0 zY u- ix O cQ W WELL O W o� W X y 1- w 0 N H6- H? 1 2 Z i .cc 3 c a -p .o 0 e .821.0 .c .0 cc.0 O a) C c N -c E O E '11 c aNi =Om E 3 m v) 0 N oa) E -o E =o o 6 y o,C c •E ai -vim a) 0 c E o 0 E ,u) t N cn c 2 O 0 .r 8 0 O a N' +m EO (00 c 0 0 o o .5 c o (1) o) o co) o 4- cm 5 c o C Z. t E Cii co 2 N C c o U o Q �o CO -C co O. O O O 5 -c Q) c o L N 0 0 N N O C -4 N v.. E o E 0,_ a) N C N N Y 3 o=-55§ 0 0 O 0) c CA Y O O c,.....- C N 0_ c •E 0 m v o 5 'a E co O t15 p co C O N- o -o� fl. N 'a c O t O a •o .0 x m 5 O E- C p .Q O N N 'a C 'C N m V E t C E 0. A m Q 4 O O E O C°) p o 0o E 3 0 o 'a"C N•X 5 o C C C p tC (A k E W O c E O 3 E (5 '.0) 01 0 c� a o 3 L -a .N c 2 O. oO c -c 4? L- 0 c) c Q2 _0 Q0) cIn ucoa in w S 1- w N z W z J u. 0 0 w S 1- u. 0 H 0 w S w 1- 0 z re 0 z w U z 0 0 a 0 1= 0 U 2 cis 1- O w U 0 z 0 ma J w 1. wo J0 0 cn 0 S J go m 1- S W z 20 m Z W CO cc 0 0 Z z Q 00 Pt w Z W 0 W H W 0 N W z C w 0 CO H z O0 z w o 2 O co cc 0 w g Q2 Q O j 0 1- 1- �z a 1- WZ W 0 a m0 0 z C4 IZ a JO 2 a z 1-ow 5 co a I= (n 0 ct J J W w a co W 0 I 0 N S WwI- W U. 1- 0 H 0 co 0 z a 0 0 DW cc co 0 0 ¢o a co 0 m W 1- z g 0 W 2W co 0 co cc co wwZ J o w a a w w a 0 w 0W U z0 co O yw WW 00 I W W U 2 0-z J �W 0- w W 0Q ¢1- a =o>- wo Wm Liz W00 Qza F' fam 1-0 I Z00?. J S W W J W 1 cc o c ce WO Nw w0 O Va O W� �Z Z_' Do= cn a w 0;k 1- j. H a a Q zi_ SSA Q O W Z Z §2L 4 F- �Qa 4 zw D w c0 I W �Q E 01- O U. 1- pa w c w n g a re cn ct ce o 00 0w0 W n Ja z (0 °-W W1- I-W <0 1- S ¢m I-Z Q Q 0 z Z cc w a 0) W 0 w w W S 1- tl: J w 0 Y w 0 a a. 1-- H co w 0 0 0 m 0 0 Z u_ ce z v O W Z L L C7) Lu CC 0zZ D O W a L110 N w cc 0 w 2 a a 0 Z iii 0 w o a O 0 -J Z w re S J U z E Q s 0 O E 0 0 c z F.. w 0 S 0 z 0 z O w 0 a a v a J 0 CO =0 0 co .1 a 1- Q 5 0 a s 1- Ce J z J J W S. O v) CD 0 gw U 1- Q 0 0 a w w m w o 0 s a w 0C 0 aL 0 °z w� WD 1 Hm Q co W g aZy Lcil ,c1 w 00 C c J ina CCS a ce a O 40. t O 0 J 2 °o W Z O w z K w N F O O w w f Q~ w O C 3 z cd O N W oz3 a p O p 3 W mu 0 m ez g ::!m's N N 0 w O O W w O O 0 0 3 0 2.. u �tN W 0 1° 3> N3 W 'U CCC Q J O J J; C 1 Q OC U W p OOCC U Q O O O w O V d ZinZZ°3uuo0-o 0 0 s 3 3 j ...4 E 00 y z -5 t; g r 7 ,1 E. E O C 12 -0 z.; r, v io a c c f J V id ill fli f T 4 u u a t." o 20 0 E E 7 g .2 _C .E ,I 1 T, 5 0 o 8 a a i ‘.6 1 1 cn 1 Q Ef t' 0 4 '0 i a I) 8. E T 3. .2 I... C v x -0 E c, c'4 .5 e J .4 17, 7'0 72 ..c -5 E .1 -c i 2 0 8 0 ti t C. z -0 c i .15. 5 -C 2 0 2 2 E 0 c 0 E lc 5 c.. F-4 -4 -5. 0 000 8 -F. Z .0 c ,t ..4 k.• E 2 E 5 4 5. -5 FP. m 74 v c i-. F, 2 3 .0' f g c a_ e 41 7 04/ F 4., .o a.■ 7. .0 t 2 o v cz .gg 2 4 ri, 1 1 E t° 1,3 E *c A .1' 0 11 L•'' .4- •r, 45 1.-- t 8 cc, 2 E a u 2 0 pc a c 14 .5. .c F; -g r.■ c4 'a 4, ..,f, :'=4 V -5 1 I.. o 4; 4 .c o...... ...0 1 74 C E I pi ry ,il le Oe a iso s�ayto v r rip i i T '311a01374 yauaad sanea alBUR1S �opny lanai -nlnw 1.1 '0 's 7 7. 1 -4 .8 7. 0 c,3ct:c., r..... AR k 0 usually ICU 1111111 sa wed m co C 1 I 1 pua alge8 to sweaq asleJ 1 1 i sanea page padegs Other roof IF YOU SEE towers, square if roof -top cupolas decorated verge boards trusses in gables Roof -wall junction IF YOU SEE TRY THESE FIRST I eA!AaH 7133 Prairie uo!ssm ,illeuo!seaao 'a!geid •aauessteuag ueyetj 'ateuegeij Craftsman, Mission Dormers IF YOU SEE TRY THESE FIRST Prairie, French Eclectic, Shingle Craftsman, Colonial Revival, Adam, Georgian Shingle, Queen Anne, Stick, Gothic Revival, Tudor, Chateauesque, j French Ecletic Dutch Colonial, Craftsman, Colonial Revival French Eclectic, Second Empire, Beaux Arts d French Eclectic, Beaux Arts Colonial Revival, Georgian, Adam Gothic Revival, Chateauesque, Richardsonian Romanesque, Mission Shingle, Richardsonian Romanesque c 4 1, iicia 1111 paddiy pa pays arched top ICAO JO puno.t pedimented wall dormers eyebrow slight Cave overhang with wide band of trim below wide eave overhang, boxed without brackets wide Cave overhang, boxed with brackets wide eave overhang, open, not boxed g 0 g eX cc cc 0 E 0 t g 3. E 8 E. 0. 3 0 0 a, E VI E o ,24 0. E TRY THESE FIRST Prairie, italianate z o 0 z 0 a z 0 0 o a_C O co 0 00 00 0 00C 00= N y C a) N a) .0 N a) T '3 .0 p. a�i v C O q 0 oo .715>..2:21 .G U N i I Q f, ea a) o 1) ,p G4 O" F C C 3 o a O .G O w 4: x ni c _N r G. N O 0 E O O :..,6 Q w b a) CL N _O A O C y cd ty cd a>i N e0 `13 iN. E O yG :j 0 of O 1~ T •y .L" yR' a) U 0 O 0 W. v 00 N O 0 b a N O 'C 4 y o O •b o O C Q„ in c� y w .o a) A. a) N C a a) ai O a) pp b0 c0 5 4 u V w E 8 o O O U q O a) y u C U 'O y O a) y C 1' t !C O U '3 .0 O w b O a) N .0 a l CI' O 1 o .0 a) cd N C N N O A U a") C C N b u a u a) .0 0 0 O N a) C ai. et el Q O y ar A N N .0 3 .0 T O> N N U N 3 I T N v C C E a) N w d 0.T cE F N o C C co 0 O d O C H 0 O K v 0 L. ti O a J C .0 �O O N 3 y O w 0 a) w 'C a) a) C C .a E .N 0 O id ti C3 N O O[ u v �T n, 6) e.) i 3 T 4.. y U o o'O .0 N a) i a a) a) O cd f. U C y c� O p 0 U U «f O u i 6 ate+ t i y i C y 4 61, t U O :.N F y: y O 4 •c 4 N u 2 G1' b O G. L"' lC E O. a) U O f� 'C N a) m N i N CT N U O a i u u y t al c i U rn c� :1,01- c O tu p C a i C O O v H 0. a i v G. v N O 3 p q u 3 .0 b y a i o fl U 6 N a) ON o o> O F u S v c v v u O c o u" e o NbL. N N U O a+ N N.C.�b O L: R w '...0 u .2 U.0 a) cd O C et N U eO tl O v O y a a U ..y o 3 W io b O V c N. C u O N U .o 'C .0 C N Z to v o a a) p O p O N fd L. O O 00.0 N pp 6. w C a� `n C o W O a) a v g C C v 5. El 3 ca a Q O cd at O 3 N oo cis=00 G N C a[. C p N n 0., O N .c v 0 a p O «s 0 o i d .fl O R, O v O G O N OU U C O I C 4. f.' O 3 O W U U b C ctt °E b/) L 0) c 4 A To E co o N c C E C o v c •O CO N l ro G 00 2 c N ro N T n 00 3 C N T N N O G) L O L GJ f" y N c Q ro C c w o c ro ro E ro m N CT 41 OG j W N L V c LL O E 0 O 0 a a L •O C) L 0 en C N O N 4) E N 6) 3 E 0 0 O 3 O v Q, O a "o L v 3 0 L ro 3 a) 00 o To o "0 v o v ro a L N c c IL' LL e 713 c o a+ O C1 °i 0 N c F 013 c e LL o c ro E c 0. O a T G) E Ol O G) a c E 0 c 0 U O a W O O C O c c ro 0 0 C c ro 7 re( M c CU O of 0 0 O V MI v 4- wcaocla Q 0 :fl to to L C a) C 4 b 0 L (C Q ny O �a 0 C .a C a) o coo to 0 i C L E a a) C O v O fo i Q. E 4 4„ 00 0 (O to '•O 3 V) a) co c O O c c 3-c a, O fn i i 0. L 0 CT) 0)N H•- O 'Li) 13 0 -C 4' t0 L. N0 d 0 L% n• to Q1 E a) 0 F- 0 4 to O O 0 a _CY y 0 -0 O'L v) 0 0 y O CCO 4, 0 C .0 101 '0 0 F i co co -C 0) O L L 0- (o co D O 0) .0 C C 1.4. 0 a) to U) 0 C N S H O CU a) m 0 -Q O aa 0 0) 0 j •�O 0 1- U (O CO E 0 (v 0) 0) O c co 0. H a) 0). a+ ai O 0) C a co y y .--S- i U G) y 0...) i CJ r y y y O V y n r 2 0 T '7 C a) G A y br, r r v CO p y C b y r--- p u y p 3 o C f u b J r y 7 1.• y b 4- c,) ra y r C f' n. O 1 y p l a., L E h •v J w O v r O y O i. v; 0 0 J J h 1.) 0 d 0 hr ad V y r a) y y v 1 O O CO O 0) y.— O L 0 0) (O-0 C C t9 t 3 aa� 4- ..c O to O U C 0 L-b-c 2 0 to a) O a) C C (o •N E C •t/f (0 O 0. d -Q L E to a) O E 0 0 C N C 0) 0 c -1 a .4,m a a) 0 co co b v) to 0 0 0 "I"' L. c30 V) O U d- 0 0 0) v0) O E 0 -Y 0 (p N y S R a) a) U N CO b (C N U 0 L y 0 Q. C L (O O L 0 to C 4, L 4 C V) O Ott l0 Q >J c c c _a m a O 3 y H C.3 O-C C o 0 1 0) 0) 3 0 4- CO L C 'D 0) CO C 0) 4 -cE d> 3+, 0 v)4- (o v) 0 0) CO R 0 m to j C yto 05 L N o N U O Y co >-YL V O L 0 0 L N 0 0 4 03 0.) Ecov) 'L 0. C C U V 3 (o C a.( 0+ a) N D m 0 0 0 C -C CO 0 to CU (o 0 E (0 C 0 0 C 0 0 CO b 0 a) 3 T oa� a) 3 N 0) o) 0) O L 0 x CO 10 0 0 Q 0 4 N Q V L Q Q L. 4�' 4- C O X 0) C QQ 4., N 7 CD r� a) v y N -0 C C E E m C C 0) m -C 0 0 N CO 0+ to C a) h FL) N L O Q 0 ro CO 0 L fl. co LL 0%0 i H vS y 0 U 0 0) 0 0 L oz 2 0 S IL J 2 0 0 O ill t m N0 O r r U 0 f O CZ d J U=N r K u. N 2° Zd W K u. k k c .k 2§ f 2 3 s j f 0 77f ›2.g 2 u u 2 Ls §.w d 2 1 4.) a) A 2 2 E A# 4 Q<� 2 k j k 3 U 2 5 u "Cu w a A b o 4" Ca T a 3 E 0) 2 t c e m o u n o 2 w j) o k /7 0 g b as fj.\a f ca k w S 7 G G E e c x o= 1-, 2 a) k k k