Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-17-2008 Supplemental Council AgendaJuly 16, 2008 SECRET GARDENS DISTINCTIVE GARDENS 1698 HANCHETT AVE SAN JOSE CA 95128 408.292 9595 Fax: 408 292 •91.66 kmathewson@secretgardens.com www.secretgardens.com Mayor and Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 RE: Moving Oak tree from City's Apricot Orchard which surrounds City Library TO: Saratoga Mayor and Council As a botanist, ecologist, environmental planner, and landscape architect who has my own garden design business and whose family has had orchards in Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties all my life, 1 would like to voice my concern regarding your desire to move one or more of the large native oak trees (Quercus agrifolia) from the City's apricot orchard. I do not think taking oak trees out of this orchard is a wise idea for the following reasons: 1. Our Valley of Heart's Delight had native oak trees and grasses on the Valley floor long before it had fruit trees. The oaks have always created shade for people and been a home for beneficial insects. Because of this, when the fruit trees matured they helped the fruit grow healthier and gave a place for a cool resting place for those who worked in the orchard. Oaks and orchards work in harmony and benefit each other. 2. Has the City done an inventory of the available oaks in Saratoga public spaces? Are there other oaks which may not be needed where they are living? I have not but yesterday I happened to notice at least three large native evergreen oaks (Quercus agrifolia) on the north east site of Fruitvale Avenue between Saratoga and City Hall which were planted too closely together. Each of them would be healthier if they stood alone so they would not be in competition with each other and so we could see their wonderful forms by themselves. This is how they look best. Kathryn Mathewson Page 1 7/1612008 3 Wouldn't it cost the city more money and more city employee time to move an existing oak out of the orchard? At the same time the oak is moved many of the apricot trees would need to be dug up to create a road to get the oak out? It would take a few years and much labor to re- establish these apricot trees. If the transplanted apricot trees did not live, who would pay for new ones? Keep in mind that apricot trees the sizes that are in your orchard are not on the market. 4. Wouldn't it be easier to move one to three oak trees from along the road on which they would be planted? Planting a tree which has become adjusted to the environment of the road rather than an oak which has grown up in an orchard will also ensure that the oak tree thrives with less worry and care about its survival. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me. Kathryn Mathewson Secret Gardens 1698 Hanchett Avenue San Jose, CA 95128 408 292 -9595 kmathewson@secretgardens.com www.secretgardens.com Kathryn Mathewson Page 2 7/16/2008 aL ,e/& ed9a4 zLzz/tJ /274i Is+ 2z-ece 1-2/1 tf Lz)-d /-°4272eq) sirgsi .;:t1 I4 :,r,is ,47-1d xes1 •••••L•4:, -kiadr2-45L-1}‘-et-41- a' 4 a&- `Ir-12-4.z/14.5 /sta.calz eziae .1: 1 Memo To: Mayor and City Councilmembers From: Aim Sullivan, Acting City Clerk Date: September 17, 2008 Re: Agenda Item #11— Relocation of Coast Live Oak From City's Heritage Orchard to WVC Attached are emails staff has received regarding agenda item #11. City Clerk From: City Council Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 12:31 PM To: Aileen Kao; Ann Waltonsmith; Chuck Page; Jill Hunter; Kathleen King; Dave Anderson; Cathleen Boyer Subject: FW: Transplanting of Oak to West Valley entrance From: Denise Dickson[SMTP:LAGALIOTE @MAC.COM] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 12:30:39 PM To: City Council Cc: jhunter95070 @yahoo.com Subject: Transplanting of Oak to West Valley entrance Auto forwarded by a Rule I'm sure that the council are listening to well qualified arborists on this matter. With my own aging fig tree I have found Kevin Rafferty [650 428 TREE] to be an excellent arborist extremely well qualified informed about all trees native to the area. As to the transplanting of a mature oak, I would think given the stress all of our trees are under due to the extreme heat of the past few weeks, is not a wise decision at this moment in time. I note that even the young trees newly planted in the median by the college entrance appear to be dead or dying. Yours sincerely, Denise Dickson 1 9 -17 -08 From Ann Waltonsmith, Mayor Historical information on tree removal from Orchard 2000 Library expansion. The bigger building and the bigger parking lot required the loss of 2 Redwoods, 4 Sycamores and 40 plus fruit trees. We saved 9 Redwoods, and 4 Sycamores which continue near the Library entrance and north side. In addition, there are small ornamental trees in parking lot medians 3 -20 -2002 Clean up of the Orchard and replanting of fruit trees and enhance the watering system City Council voted to: 1. Transplant 5 smaller oaks to Fruitvale Ave medians (these oaks came from along Saratoga Ave (where the wavy sidewalk is now). Trees are doing fine and none died. 2. Cut down 1 dead small oak tree near Saratoga Ave area 3. Cut down 1 big oak tree embedded in the Orchard and near another big oak tree 4. Transplant 1 big oak tree near Fruitvale Ave, to be used at the Gateway Entrance project. 5. Leave 8 big oak trees embedded in the Orchard but keep them trimmed to save fruit trees around them. 6. Leave two big Acacia Trees near well pump. Keep them trimmed r v CK -err> y C::>.e c� SC k 14 r� a rG o b r•- •CV/c -01. l( c crs+ l d'JC�k 4A r 9' o Y C At, r pVj-q� �u:r'a f` y "'e�"s��'`� r 4 ,ij ere* -7- sag ea-1. 7.4 Aw 3. c3.-f •••••i Ito Kindergarten Forum' Saturday, September 20, 2008 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. Young Children in the Garden: beveloping a Garden-Based Curriculum with Marianne Swan, Ed.b. This year's recipient of the Gold Leaf Award is Mary Roscoe, coordinator of the Children in Nature Collaborative: info@cincbayarea.ore,. The annual fall Gardening Forum will meet in the enchanted play garden of the Saratoga Community Preschool founded and directed by Marianne Swan. Situated behind the Saratoga City Hall and adjoining the Senior Day Care Center, this unique program with thriving garden-based curriculum, flourishes in a beautiful garden in which the childreii play and work. Activities follow the seasons; snacks made from scratch are supplemente by the fruits and vegetables of the garden; stories, songs and poems reflect the cycle of<, the year and lessons literally grow out of the garden. Come join us as Marianne explains..; the steps taken to start the garden, her curriculum and the many.ways it serves the children, their families and neighboring seniors. Marianne brings a love for nature and 40. years of teaching experience including high school, junior college, mentally handicapped,.: and early childhood. Saturday morning at nine o'clock we will meet in the garden of the Saratoga Community Preschool at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue in Saratoga for singing games with Anna Rainville and Marianne's presentation. A potluck lunch and garden crafts with Kindergarten teacher and artist, Njeri McGilicuddy, will follow at 11:30 at the nearby Peck Heritage Garden at 14275 Saratoga Avenue in Saratoga. The afternoon will conclude with the presentation of the Gold Leaf Award and our annual toast to the Fall Equinox With Margaret More at two o'clock. Please call Betty Peck for reservations at (408) 867 Voluntary donation: $40. There will be a book-signing for photographer Nancy Martin's new book, Hiding in the Green, newly published by Rudolf Steiner College Press. This book is an invitation to the young child to explore the s. garden through verse and photography. Each double-page spread offers images of how vegetables grow and children finding them in the garden. Verses give clues for the child to guess what they are. Betty Peck's A Kindergarten Teacher Looks at the Word GOD and Anna Rainville's Singing Games for Families, Schools and Conununities will also be available. Mark your calendars for the annual Storytelling Forum with Nancy Mellon on January 2nd with an additional workshop on January 3, 2009. Nancy is the author of The Ar Storytelling, Storytelling with Young Children and Body Eloquence (2008). SARATOGA COMMUNITY GARDEN NEWSLETTER Summer, 1957 Dear Members and Friends of the Saratoga Community Garden, The dreaded time has come that our fear of lasing the Garden's site has materialized. The lease with the Independent Order of Odd Fellows expired last January, and was not renewed since the property has been listed for sale. Since the Fall, many of yau_have. beer+ reading bits of this information in the newspapers.. For a longtime, I still felt that•the Garden had a.chance a potential buyer to let it stay, perhaps.or+ a smaller' scale or that Saratoga citizens would want to buy the land as an oper, space area for its residents. Also, I understood that it could take quite some time before a potential buyer could utilize the land, and would let the Garden stay or gradually phase out. None of the above has happened. Afraid that the Garden would be a deterrent to a possioi:_ buyer, the landlord asked it to leave by the end of the school program`: The. Odd Fellows will let the Garden Stair maintain the physical garde.rr until ready to transplant to a new site. I am very grateful to the Garden's landlord for letting it have the use of this beautiful, serene piece of property for the past 15 years. I am thankful to all the people wrc have been actively involved in making the. Garden experience happen far sO marry of us and especial .ly tc+ Susan•DuVal1 and David F ierstei -r. When the future started to look bleak, they did not bail out, but instead kept such a positive attitude that they kept me going. There is a strong interest in the community. for the Garden to continue. I am spread very thin with the 1 irnited amount of people an staff the Garden has, and need all the help I can get in locating an appropriate site. For the past year and a half I have been talking to the Youth Science Institute to see. if •the two organizations can merge. We went to the County Office of Parks and Recreation to discuss the Sanborn site. The county fears water•shortage at that location and has not approved anything yet, and the Y. S. I.' s Board has •nat made a decision. This has left me to look further, and am •currently talking to the Saratoga Parks and Recreation Comrn i ss i on T h i s Memorial Day weekend several of us were walking around town with a would be "Witches stick". to find the power of a new site,... who knows? ManThile Swan, Acting Manager Chai°tfiwcrnan of the Beard .cif Director Saratoga Community Garden Newsletter--Summer, 1 987 Page Dave Packer the Garden's .Head Gardener several years ago wrote the following about the Garden. He read this to the staff on January 15, 1985, during his good -bye dinner. T could not find it for this newsletter. Fortunately, Dave was prompt in sending me his copy: There is... The Saratoga Cornrnunity .Garden. A dream and a vision of away in which people can find their inner relationship to the kingdoms of nature which nourish the body, soul and spirit. A place where we are reminded that we now stand on the verge of a new age. There is... THERE IS... A reason why we all have come together to learn from each other, to work together, to get frustrated together, to share our lessons from the past.- our visions of the future, to eat together, to laugh together to see what qualities the new age calls for in ourselves to see ourselves thr yet another mirror. There is... A living memory for me of the ways I've grown at tnis garden especially from the children: laughing, playing, asking the most genuine questions, saying things which take me out of myself. And always reaching out for love in the ways that their parents and teachers have shown them. And we have the privilege to share our love for mature with them we are indeed the lucky owes. I've learned from them to discover the childness in myself to enjoy life and to be playful, and to perceive the world around me with a childlike curiosity. There is... The thankfulness for.all I've learned at this garden. Of haw to accept people for who they are. Of how to enjoy the moment in my work without becoming attached to the results. Of haw to go with. .the flow- for it feels so much better when I let dawn my resistance. Of the great jay that can be found .when responding to the needs of the community, and responding to the needs of the garden. Of how it's not So important what I do in life, but rather how I feel about what I do. Of the opportunity to use and share some of the things I have learned in a way that can meet the needs of the individual, rather than the needs of my ego. Of the fact that true happiness for me comes through complete openness to every experience. Saratoga Community Garden Newsletter—Summer, 1987 Page There is... What we all experience in our own way of just being in the garden. Watching the hummingbirds dance from flower to flower and rejoice with their song. Standing in amazement before a rainbow. Listening to the sounds of animals, the goats and chickens, the California thrasher, the golden crowned sparrow and the owl. Those special experiences.'when you see an occurrence in the garden most people never see in a lifetime in a quick little episode that leaves you somehow transformed and curious and excited. Or the simple experience of going out to gather fresh flowers or a fresh meal. Watching the glistening array of dew drops which cling to the leaves, reflect sparkles of sunlight. Catching a swarm of bees while in that mysterious daze of their presence. Running my fingers through the cool freshly sifted leaf mold. Gazing at Silicon Valley while eating a fig at the top of the fig tree. Feeling that sensuous lightness after smelling a rose or the jasmine. Experiencing the cuteness of a newly born goat or litter of rabbits. Watching the energy of life changing form through the seasons, decomposing, growing into a myriad of shapes and gestures, feeling the sunset glow inside me after a hare: day's work. There is... and always will be a garden. It is all around us arnd yet inside of us at the same t irne. It has no 1 irnits, no boundaries, no rules, and no lease it is where we live, it is where we work, where we play hard and where we grow. It is the substance of our life, and yet the essence too. We all cultivate our own garden. We plant ideas and visions, we water there with faith and trust, and good work, we .fertilize them with lova and understanding, we prune out old concepts so the new may grow and become fruitful, and we all rejoice in the sharing of the harvest. The Saratoga Community Garden has meant a tremendous amount to many people. Many people grew physically as well as mentally from their Garden experience. It•also had nostalgic or historical values for those who grew up in Saratoga in its days of prune and apricot orchards and different sets of values than today. I passed by the miniature rose border, full of pinks, rases, magentas and whites and full of weeds already. This winter. I'd dug up half the plants, separating there from tne timothy grass with its invasive roots and planted theca back again. It took. days. One day this spring, the day of tne May Saratoga Gan. ity Garden Newsletter Summer, 1987 Gage 4 Festival in fact, with the irises, rose- carnpian, roses and snow ire summer blooming, the effort seemed to have paid off finally. Betty Peck, always reliable for a compliment, said: "Oh David, it worked!" It was beautiful for one oay and then the blooms faded and the weeds carne back in full strength. I walked by it this afternoon and decided, what the h I'll weed it and make it look goad for one more day. I so enjcryed.putting back into shape this border, which was designed so beautifully by whoever designed it. What a shame that the Garden must be shut down. This won't really happen same -arse will save the Garden it's. too sad to be true maybe I' spend all my time ors it anyway this surnrner and put it its tap shape .despite the odds it reminded me of a fairy taleI'd.read Once there was a beautiful city ringed by mountains the people were very proud of it and became attached to the beauty they had created. Despite warming from a prophet, they refused to leave. The hidden city was found by its enemies and few escaped. 26 Years old and I still think its terms. of fairy tales. You roust .adroit that it is more pleasant than thinking of the many instances of modern history wh i ch are far worse, tragedies beyond comparison to having to lose, a garden site with 15 years of work, history, myths and fairy tales in it. Of course I hope it can be saved, as its design, its seclusion, and the old farm buildings give it that feeling of being a sheltered peaceful place, an enclosed whole, distinct in the world an .ideal spat for a pastoral retreat. -Well, so what? Who said life shouldn't be a struggle today I stop moaning and groaning about .losing our beautiful garden. With the gophers, snails, slugs, biros, and deer, it's been a struggle from the beginning anyway. So let's struggle some more! It's true that not every one sees tne need for a project such as ours, but marry tic., and there definitely is a need. There has been so much enthusiasm and willingness to support and aid the Garden in the past year, that I am sure that if we are determined we can create from the pieces something worthwhile probably touch different, as our site here is so unique. .I refuse to regret the past year's work, though it seems to have •been wasted. Already there is excitement and enthusiasm for the move and building of a new Garden. In the meantime,...I will be maintaining the garden and assisting Marie with the surnrner day camp. Also, we have a selections of plants, especially perennial flowers, for sale. Please come by and check. Perhaps•you have a home for an aspiring shrub, vine, or flower. David Fierstein, Head Gardener Saratoga Community Garden Newsletter—Summer, 1 96 KUDOS Page Greg Cantonese donated use of a weed -eater and a load of sand for soil mixes; Archie Brolly gave us 100 raspberry plants; the fruit trees thank Betty Peck for their yearly fertilizer.. Seeds were donated by Shepherd's Garden Seeds of nearby Felton,. and Johnny'.s Selected Seeds The backs of the garden workers. thank Smith Hawken for one of their fine quality spades with an extra long handle, and also a hula hoe:. Thank you to. the Weekend Work Program and participants who repainted our tables, rebuilt the Garden Way Cart, built trellises and a screen doom for the greenhouse, weeded and rechipped the paths and did all other kinds cf work in all parts of the Garden. Thank you to Adam 1essrnan who acted as relief supervisor for the WWP crew, and the many ctnerr•rs who have volunteered in the Garden the past months. And last but not least, thank you to Jackie and Ellsworth Welch wno are providing me a place, to 1i.ve in their guest cabin. Summer Day=_. When the warm earth meets the warm summer days, Everything expands with .joy. Today's golden light of surnrner helps us to see more than ever before But yesterday's dark days help us to bring feeling to all that we're seeing. David Fierstein We find our slowest steps on warm summer bay= As we carry the sun on our backs Searching for shaded places to be near the earth, For we are heavy -with sun. I stand between the earth. and the sky Knowing its mine all mine. What shall I do and haw snail I stand Knowing its mine all mine Saratoga Ccornrrur,.ity Garden Newsletter Summer, 19 There's a bridge in the garden Where an old troll lives. "Coyne, said the troll and walk can my bridge." A Seed in the Green House You can look thru my glass window You can look thru my glass roof. You can look thru my glass' walls and my back door I'm busy stretching my feet :into the earth For I'm about to burst into the sunlight. Then I'll be able to say hello I've been a seed s00000 long. Carrots Here in the garden everything is painted bright with sun. Where is the dark that crowds together? Where no one needs their glasses Because no one needs their eyes. In the garden darkness there are Treasures hoping for you to carne. Compost The soil is made of butterfly wings, dinosaur teeth, pumpkin seed, lizard skins and fallen leaves. Put your hand in the soil and touch yesterday And all that will be left•of tomorrow Shall return so that new life can celebrate the day. Page 6; Find green lace leaves And feel the golden circle top And pull.straight up And in your hand you'll have a special treasure from the dark! Summer Days. Pollen fills the summer air When flowers party only with the breeze... While Dees are busy gathering gold dust and nectar at the other flower. parties. Each seed is perfecting itself In its own beautiful treasure house... Stuffing itself with summer And dreaming of living forever. Saratoga Community Gander, Newsletter Summer, 1967 ti Gage The lady bug says, Of Course you know this is my garden. So I welcome you... I' rn ,glad ycou' ve come." The butterfly says, "This is my gardenn We l carne... I' rn glad you've come." Well. how shall I walk And how shall. I talk? And what shall I, dc' When I visit the dwelling place of so many friends? They all have arrived on earth before me and being here for so long Have learned that working together Charges all that they do into beauty. That's why I stand an earth in a different way When I realize how long they have guarded the garden And kept it in all it's beautiful ways. And to think they are glad to welccdne me Knowing that they can help me find a way To live in their garden. And at the very moment this happens Peace will walk Our paths, And into the lives of all we meet. Directing the school program has been challenging, exhilarating, exhausting and very rewarding. Although a docent at the Garden for several years, I didn't nave a ciuc what was really involved in co- ordinating the whale snow! 4,000 children and 154 field trips Later, I now have an understanding That cold saying, No pair,, no gain" has new meaning! I have gained a great deal through this experience. Sc.rne of my greatest rewards have been the feedback received from teachers, children and their parents who have participated in our school program. It comes in the form of letters, individual pictures and large murals for our wails as well as spoken words to the tune of "This is the best field trip we have been an Responses such as these let us know that our efforts to produce a quality education program are worthwhile and appreciated. A one rear, (woman) show I am not. David, our Head gardener, has created and nurtured the Garden with an impressive amount of knowledge and tireless energy. You only need to see the Garden to appreciate his efforts. You can imagine the amount of wear and tear more than two hundred ano f i f t y Saratoga Cc'nunur,. Gander, New1 et. ter Sunimer, 19,97 page l children can put on the Garden weekly. David's good nature- reveals an enormous amount of tolerance. He has been a pleasure to work with. Volunteers are the backbone of our school program. Without their support, and dedication the success of our school program could not be realized. Many of our volunteers are students earring college credit and/or job experience in our school program. Others are parents and /or board members like myself. All have a strong desire to help children become more aware of the world around them and learn about the wonders of nature through hands -on activities. I am most appreciative of those who have giver, their time to our school program: Shannon Baker, Chris Blaxsarn, Lc'retta Chance, Mary Anne C l aus.an, Parn Dcrya l Marie Fontana, Lydia Fox, Debbie Houston, Nathan Irvine, Suzanne Rartcher, Rusti Lee, Mil Milutin, Nancy Payne, Vicky Schmidt, Carol Shaver, Doris Watson, and Barbara Kopel. In addition to the Garden support group I have mentioned, you must know Marianne Swan is truly the life blood of the Saratoga Community Garden. Without her volunteer efforts, the Garden simply would not be. She is tireless in her efforts to support the Garden, its staff and all the related problems in addition to nurturing her on family always with a smile. Few directors /chairman of the board would be willing to wc'r^k for 'are occasional bag of veggies or a bouquet of flowers .just to make ends meet' Since the gates to the Garden will be closed to all this summer, we have arranged to move our surnrner day camp to Sanborn Park. It will be sad to walk away from the Garden it'.s locking so beautiful now and it offers such are ideal setting for our "Indian and Pioneer" surnrner day camp. I'd like to thirsk• it is only a summer move. Fortunately 'i 1 is being very hospitable and we have a wonderful, capable energetic, experienced lady' who is looking forward to teaching all four sessions of our day camp there. Marie Fontana, mother of four, grandmother of one has been a volunteer in our school program this year. She will be a great addition to our staff. Saratoga Community Garden Newsletter—Summer, 19.97 Page My plans for the Fall are as indefinite as those of the Saratoga Community Garden at the moment. As a credentiaied teacher, rn_y choices are many but few offer the stimulation I have found at the Garden. My greatest joy is helping awaken children to a sense of wander and respect for our earth and all it provides. Perhaps we will be again part of the same team. Dear Susan, Dear Loretta, Dear Susan and Susanne, The fallowing letters were three of many mailed to Susar, ano the docents I enjoyed everything. My favorite thing was tr,e cabbage. 1 liked all the plants and especially the wheat crackers. Going to the Saratoga- Community Gardens is my favorite field trip so far. I put the plant that fleas -hate the smell of. I put it on my dog and it works too. All the_ plants smelled good qood. Thanks for every thing! I had a great t irne at the Saratoga Ccrnrnunity Gardens. I liked all of the butiful flowers and all the plants also 1 liked You said Indians used it for grinding stuff. Thank you for the great class. I really. liked making a candle. I also liked all the plants. you have. It was fun making a dinosaur whistle and cook like a•pioneer. I think I would have liked to be a pioneer. Thank you for teaching us all those interesting things. I had a really great time too! Susan DuVall From Jason Sincerely yours, Nicole Mc:.tr,er Saratoga Community Garder, Newsletter Summer, 1987. Fay_ 0 SUMMER SCHOOL PROGRAM Friday, a week ago, the Staff of the Saratoga Community Garden rnet with the staff of Youth Science Institute at Sanborn to discuss the program site and possibilities. It happened to be on a day that Y.S.I. was holding its Insect Faire. There was a lot of commotion about the various creatures an display and the staff was anticipating a delivery of "Hissing Cockroaches" while we were touring the site. When we met with Linda Wagner, Y. S. I' s manager, I asked her if she had any objections. having a little summer vegetable garden at the back of the building. Linda was ecstatic, it was just what she needed, and hadn't had the time for. Well, that was just the answer to David's fear. He did not want to have to put a Garden irijust for the surnrner. He was looking for a continuation in use. You should have seen his face when it became clear that Linda's reason for a vegetable garden was totally different from David's and the Garden's needs. Sanborn has a permanent insect display and the insects need to be fed. Sc instead of going to the store to buy tomato plants for the Tomato Horn Worm, Linda can just step outside and get what she needs as well as beams and lettuce and worms for her other pet-friends. We visited Sarnborn's collection, with David-trying to control himself by not showing any emotions. But then it became hilarious! We all ended up in Linda'.s office tc' 10oik for needed space and the package from Smithsonian arrived with the "Hissing Cockroaches The excitement from Y.S.I. s staff, who were petting these giant insects from Madagascar and trying to find out which sex they were, was topped by this man who just walked in off the street. He was followed by this old woman, who was really a young man dressed up that way. The latter mentioned asked if he could borrow a cigar or cigarette. I just cracked up seeing David's face and then looked over to the Insect Faire visitor. What a sight. Having recognized the young roan, dressed as an alder lacy on my way in, I knew that the Valley Institute of Theater Arts had to be doing publicity shots and that that roan was Bill Peck, a character out of Charley's Punt. VITA opens its season with Ps You Like It at Sanborn Pari-c on June 4. Sanborn will definitely add another dimension to your child's as well as the Garden's Staff Summer Program experience. Eviariar:rnE Swan Saratoga Community Garden Newsletter Summer, 1987 Page 11 HANDS -ON PRUNING WORKSHOP .BARRY COATE, Horticultural Specialist, consulting Arborist. author of three books on drought- tolerant plants and California natives, including "Water Conservation Plants and Landscapes for the Bay Area is teaching a two day class on pruning techniques. The first Saturday (June 20), the class will meet at the Saratoga Community Garden for a lecture and slide show of plant physiology and pruning techniques. The second saturday (June 27) the class will meet for hands -on pruning at a site announced during first session. Class limited to 25 participants, members 20% discount. This week Barry left for South Africa to speak at the. Soutn African Nursery Convention on drought tolerant plants. We are very fortunate to have Barry Coate as a member of the Saratoga Community Garden's Board of Directors. SUPPORT YOUR COMMUNITY GARDEN April 21 was the date that we had to renew our insurance policy. The rates had gone up more than five times and a= there was no money in the Garden's budget, 1 had to knack on people's door or close the school program. I did the former and five generous people in the •communit_y, who probably would like to stay anonyrnous, sent the Garden 5 z of the premium. Thank you so much! Your support showed the Board as well as. the Staff of the S. C. G. that you value what the Garden stands for. Whether there is a school program irr the Fall dspcncs can a site but the Garden plans to keep David on to continue to take care of the plants. More than half of the Gortem' s income is. from the school program. •Witn this instability, you all help by sending a donation.to support Davit. Some of you have not yet renewed your 'membership to the Garden. Our dues are as follows-: Single $20.- Family $35.- Sustaining $60.- Marianne Swan Lydia Fox, who managed the Garden in the Fall of 1966, left the Garden irr February. to join as a part -t irne teacher. Good Luck Lydia, you will be an asset to their organization. Saratoga Community Garder, Newsletter-- Su Mr. Kenneth Pea ke, dairy .farmer i r, Monte Serer,o, and one of the Garden's moral supporters shared the following poem with me. It was writter, a couple of years ago by someone who had worked for him. I added this poem to our newsletter as it describes the marvelous polarities the Garden possesses. MERRY, MERRY I was with you while.you suffered through the labor and pain of bringing new life ,into the world. I watched you clean the birth fluids from trembling bodies, your calm voice soothing their eyes wide with wonder and surprise. I watched them learn muscle and bane struggling against gravity for the first time. I helped them find the teat and found satisfaction mysel f in their closed -eyed Contentment tasting the life- giving milk. I was with you in the cold mornings, your body next to mine, warming rne, my hands drawing the gift of your motherly love into the bucket, into the cup, into my body. Our lives are joined. I was with you in the hot afternoons your tail swishing the flies but even then you stayed still for the children who had •come to learn with their hands the meaning of milk. You were their teacher and they carne to understand, through your endless patience, that all life is connected. I was with you in the dewy pastures and felt you stretching your neck with pleasure as I caressed your throat. You ran with joy through those greer, fields and I found joy myself in the sight of you grazing there, shining with health. I sweated in early spring sunlight making hay and grew tired stacking stover"-in harvest moon shocks. Tossing the earth's bounty into the manger I listened to your feast, My labor r beccorn i ng your nourishment. Our lives are ,joined. 196. Page Saratoga Community Garden Newsletter Summer, 1.987 BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS Lave thou the day and the night; Be glad of the dark and the light. Bacchae, Euripides Two friends were spinning an a wintery afternoon. Pale sunlight streamed through the South- facing window. The strands of yarn softly glowed as they wound onto the bobbins. Undulating murmurs of conversation blended- with the steady rhythm of the treadles. As the.sunli_ght moved westward, so the talk moved. Page 1J Vanessa:* When I was a child, I had an absolute dread of the dark, especially in Summer. We had no screens, and the moths fluttered in all pale they flutter so queerly, not at all like butterflies! Even now I shudder at the memory how sometimes their wings would brush against me and I feel a coldness glide through my bones like a full Moan shadow gliding across the lawn. Plusia: Hcrw do you feel about bats? O000h, when .I think of bats I can barely—do you know what. they do? They pick the moths off their flowers and sort of curl around them before feasting. Vanessa:* I never had much to do with bats. I used to laugh when the other women screamed and held onto their hair. But let me tell you something really awful. One Spring my mother opened the windows especially early. I was not in my room when the first moth floated in. She was huge I saw her later when I opened my door.. There she was, the center of attention of what seemed to be hundreds of suitors. My roam was full of amorous moths! I learned later that the females send out a scent from their abdomen which can be detected for miles around so that any number of foolish males come flecking. Far as I know, all female maths behave.-: like that. Butterflies are different. The beautiful, wonderful smelling male butterflies have special scented scales which they scatter over the lady of their choice a=_- she is delicately feeding on nectar. Plusia: The male moths have scent scales too. They are not so vulgar as to drop there on a female until she has first indicated her interest. Nor are moths so lacking in taste as to mate in full sunlight... Vanessa: (interrupting) What could be more fitting, than that this butterfly -being of .joy and light, who is made of light and colour, should celebrate its nuptials before Great Saratoga Goruiruni Garden Newsletter Summer 1987 Page 14 Lord Sun? Best of dear friends, I fail completely to understand your negative attitude toward bats. Many birds eat butterflies, yet when I consider birds, I am filled with a warm... Plusia: (interrupting) Bats have the hard mechanical four cornered consciousness of beings heavily fettered to the earth. Love is nothing to them; they... Vanessa: (interrupting) are like thoughts -.you know, all air and going by quickly. butterflies are more like memories. Now- let us consider bats. To me a bat is rather like a bad dream (you must realize. that I'm not in the least bit put off by bad dreams). What is a moth like? A moth, one could say, is l i k e a Moon- memory. I remember a perfectly white moth (except for the huge black eyes), it was dead and its wings angled back in a way such that it closely resembled a stern white -robed priest utterly without pity. What happens when a bad dream eats a Moon- merncmy? It's getting darker so I can hear you more clearly... Plusia: (interrupting) Was I speaking? Vanessa: Since I can hear you more clearly, I am wondering Why it is that although very many moths have tyrnpanal organs,, called. "high frequency ears," and can hear within the range of the bats' sonar, why is it, my dear, that moths by myriads are crunched by bats? Plusia: Truly, it is a wander. Also, I heard somewhere that light is absolute abomination to bats. Marry moths who fly by night and .are eaten by bats, have can their hind winds a brilliant colcour, sometimes with a metallic sheen (they show these wings only by night) or even a glare that roust be quite shacking to a bat -if there's any moon at all. Perhaps, like bad dreams, bats are able to persist for quite same time even under adverse conditions. Shall we have some light or are you able to continue spinning without? Vanessa: That rerninds.me of another question, maybe you cannot answer it either.' I definitely have the impression that in addition to the superb compound eyes which bath butterflies and moths possess, the moths have simple eyes above the compound ones- .Nobody I know says why this is so; but since the simple eyes of caterpillars can detect light and shade, perhaps they are helpful to the moths in the dark. Alsa,they are positioned such that the moth could perceive the Enemy From Above. Plusia: The bats sneak up from behind and grab the moths by the wings. Did you say you wanted some light? Vanessa: I'm fine, but sometimes if one speaks only of predators and prey. Let me tell you some nice things about Saratoga Community Garden Newsletter—Summer, 1987 Page 15 ants. Ants love sweet things Caterpillars from the Gossamer Wing farni ly have honeydew glands that are milked Dy the ants, who in turn protect them. A Metalrnark tney are cousin to Gossamer Wings has recently been discovered in Mexico, who has a similar kind of. friendship with ants.• A certain species of woad ants digs a little.trench all around the host crotar, plant, and carries the resident Metalrnark caterpillar there to stay all day covered over by a little earthen roof, with a few arts peacefully its honeydew. At night the ants carry the caterpillar up the stalk of the plant, and it feeds all night long. This way it is protected from the cruel predatory red arts. And when the Metalrnark grub wishes to become a chrysalis, the ants allow it to do so in the trench. It fastens the silken •thread to the exposed crotan roots, and hangs there unmolested. Two •days before the adult butterfly will emerge, the ants depart,. leaving the trench open. Would you like a little light now? Vanessa: I'm fine. See haw brilliantly the stands of fleece shine in the twilight? Once I saw a moth larva weaving a cocoon as though rays of Sun in palpable fcirrn around itself. How marvelous are the workings of World Spirit! Think, dear friend, of the moths as they migrate vast distances during the might, honoring their Lord the Moon! And the mighty congregation of stars, .these torn the motns honour. Plusia: their Lady the Noon... And consider, best of dear ones, how the butterfly larva bursts as a chrysalis througr, its last molt; how it hangs by a silken thread, open to the sky and Lady Sun, shining toward Her the little flecks of old -gl irnrnering... 0 dear, sorry, this style is rather strange for me. Vanessa: Lord Sun... please continue, you're acquiring a lovely purple aura! Plusia: Imagine then, the gleaming company of butterflies as they stream over the lands and the seas by day, honouring the glorious Sun as... Suddenly, the two friends realized 'it had become completely dark, for that very moment Hespera entered the Weavery and switched on the light. They gave their full bobbins to her, and she plied them together. by Ruth Liberatore *Vanessa, a genus of butterfly (family Nymphalidae) which, includes Fainted Lady; Plusia, a genus of tooth (family Noctuidae) which includes Silver -Y. European. Painted Lady and Silver -Y are both famous travellers, their migratory flights extending betweer, Northern Europe and North Africa. Saratoga Community Garden, Newsletter _.:.•..rmer, 1987 Page 16 Blue shadows fall with leathern wings On the hollyhocks grasshoppers sit. The furrowed brow of the ridge still Catches the last of the gold. Through the eucalyptus grove; The forgotten farm cries the Tears of Ruth; A GARDEN TO GROW Bill Peck Six year ago our family moved to Saratoga, California. it was late August, rn_y then four year old daughter and I had just returned from Europe. We had spent the summer with relatives and friends while my husband was starting a new company here in the Valley. Every where we went in Europe we were adopted into the families and became part of their routines. We walked ta•the baker, the butcher and the green grocer to get our daily needs. We bike rode to the market on tuesdays and fridays or for picnics and visits to 424 friends and relatives. We had a chat with whomever stopped in for coffee in the morning or tea in the afternoon. And pretty soon I was totally informed with every one's l i f e again. In France my daughter and I stayed at a very old farm, its house hewn out of the native rock. It was so primitive at first, but soon Vanessa was getting water at the well and I was doing every one's laundry by hand. At night we sat outside and philosophized about life and I thought this is what my daughter should experience enough in her life to learn to appreciate nature and its wonders. In our sophisticated lifestyles children tale mucn to much for granted, besides they become passive learners. You can imagine haw thrilled we were to find the Saratoga Community Garden, when Vanessa was enrolled in Betty Peck' s Kindergarten. Not only did we find the simplicity in lifestyle but also people who worked there who would take the time to interact with a child. We felt at home, Vanessa would go over with me to feed the animals, to gather the eggs, to help plant and to buy cur vegetables and flowers. We became part of the Garden farni ly. When a mother carries her babe in the womb, a bond gets created that continues to grow after birth. An infant needs significant attachments for a healthy emotional development, before they can have a sense of self. My two year old goes around saying: "Al legra do it...". Guiding this development with positive reinforcement the child's next step is to feel a sense of belonging, first to the family unit or nowadays Saratoga Community Garden, /Newsletter-- Sommer, 198 Page 1 the extended family unit. A child needs consistency and inner discipline. A kindergartners. need. is that of belonging to the community, first the school and then the larger Community. That's what the Saratoga Community Garder, meant for my family. Through my involvement first with Vanessa' s Kindergarten, class, where I extended our family band into her first community experience., then the Gardens. Our entire family feels we are part of this community. There is a sense of belonging, a taking care of the community spirit. For me it is going back hcane a little. We all knew one another in our town and each ether's families. The Garden itself is such a whale organism. Susan, the school program director can not do a dynamite program without a good looking garden, site. She is dependent on David not only to provide a beautiful garden but also to keep her informed about the happenings in the Garden. Kics love to see spider webs, blue -corn that looks like jewels, -peas in a pod that they can taste right from the vine, cucumbers that look l i k e lemons. To demonstrate man's relationship with the earth and with nature, one has to demonstrate his relationship with one another. The staff and volunteers share a kitchen, which content also gets snared by the school program. Man's relationship at the Garner, is so intense that if there is bad communication you can smell it right away. I have felt very much at home, which means David, Susan,, Adam, Marie, Rusti and all the other people who have worked there this semester have worked very nard at communicating in a very positive way. There is another balance 1 want you to know about. A Garden is seasonal,1ike all life is. Each season with its awry strength and beauty. One fall I was gathering seed from the flowers with several kindergarten children and a rnotner was helping. her son. She told hire to look for all the very aid and dead flowers and he would find the seed pad. "Morn he said with a very indignant voice," these flowers are not dead, they are full of new life Too bad we condition our cnildrer, to tni our way. Children are often so much closer to the truth. The Garden lets them experience the natural world through their senses. This helps them understand their own cycles in life later an. If we let this Garden go, a place of self, a place of belonging in this community will be gone. So let us continue to build and rebuild when 'there is still positive energy in the air. Marianne Swan ,S _itoga Community Gander, Newsl etter Summer. 1967 The following items are an the Garden's wish list: International. Order of Odd Fellows 14500 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 International Order of Odd Fellows: 22701 Mt. Eden Road Saratoga, CA 95070 May 8, 1987 Page 16 paintbrushes (1",2" and 3" sizes) paint roller latex paint, preferably color brown (used cams okay) or white, red and blue. light bulbs (60-70 watt) linseed oil (boiled) for tools and benches hose repair materials for 3/4" and 1/2" garden -hoses oil can for holding lubrication coil The following letter is from Jennifer Taylor, a plea to the Odd Fellows for continuation. This is a plea to save our beloved Saratoga Community Garden! I am aghast and mortified to learn that you are considering closing this jewel of our community! If you would consider how greatly valued our Garden is, by loyal friends, by school children, by their teachers who recognize the immense value a garden has for the education of youngsters, by visitors and gardeners who come to study and enjoy it, perhaps you would then sense the community love and support for the Garden. I first moved to Saratoga as an 8- year -old in 1952 and lived on 11 acres of prune orchard nearby the I.O.O.F. Home, until our ranch was condemned to build the West Valley College in 1965. From those early years on, I rode my horse every day over orchards and hay fields to visit the thriving farm behind your Home. I watched the dairy cows come in from the graveyard down the road, watched them drink at the beautiful cement and circular trough, watched the dairyman milk them and process the milk, watched the calves being born and then weaned, watched the chickens feeding and laying, peered into the little brooding house which is now the kitchen for the Garden, and most of all enjoyed the great huge sows and their tiny piglets, and the roisterous "teen -age" pigs, all in the beautiful old, cool barn. I used to ride or hike back to the old graveyard and read and muse over the pioneer headstones. All those vivid and happy memories of the lovely farm days are with me still, forever a part of my growing up, of my love and respect for self- sufficiency and of the wisdom of the aged residents whom I would wave to, passing by the old wings of the Home. Later, when I was grown, and the farm was abandoned I was part of the effort to start a Community Garden. We planned thousands of dollars of multi- media: film strips, cassettes, film loops, learning kits, movies, and books to coordinate the Mendelsohn Memorial Media Center at old Saratoga School with the programs to be conducted at the Garden. Soon I was a volunteer docent, and almost immediately a paid teacher and guide for year found school tours as well as four summer sessions. This love of learning has continued now for 16 years, with thousands of visitors, school tours, summer school, adult and children's classes, workshops, May Day Festivals, Harvests, seasonal celebra- tions, and so much more! I cannot stress to you strongly enough how much we all use our Garden, and how much a part of our Community, aesthetic and educa- tional lives it has become. In the past seven years alone, I have traveled every Monday with Betty Peck's Kindergarten from Saratoga School to enjoy a morning of singing, baking and gardening, all sheer delight. The involvement of parents, community leaders, and youngsters has been more than gratifying. It is a moving force in the life of Saratoga! At a time when other communities are struggling to retain the flavor and spirit, if not the fact, of "village," Saratoga continues to thrive. At a time when other communities attempt to found cohesive institutions and tradi- tions to perpetuate the values of our society, Saratoga remains calm and self assured: our village already has Hakone Gardens, Montalvo, Sanborn Park and historical Youth Hostel, the Saratoga Community Garden, the I.O.O.F. Home, the Rotary Art Show, the Museum and McWilliam's home, the designated Historical homes and buildings of old Saratoga, the Foothill Club, the Historical Park at the corner orchard and Library, the old Federated Church, Our Lady of Fatima, Notre Dame, Madronia Cemetery and Sarah Brown's grave, the Old Saratoga Library, VITA, old Oak Street School, the lovely but tiny remnants of once flourishing orchards, Paul Masson's old mountain Winery and now Music in the Vineyards, Saratoga Springs, Congress Springs Winery, Garrod Farms Stables, all our community parades and festivals, all our very unique and binding opportunities that hold this little City together in today's spirit and yesterday's historical perspective! If you insist on subtracting the Saratoga Community Garden from this list of valued and cherished traditions, you will have wantonly reduced Saratoga's vigor, and you may have willingly helped to begin the depreciation of the very traditions and values our new citizens have come here for. We used to come for the orchards, to live and work in the countryside. Now they count among the aesthetic qualities of our village the active sense of community that thrives here. Prevent, somehow, this abominable error! Do not cut yourselves off from the past and from your community! Do not cut your Fellows and Rebeccas off from their own old cemetery! Do not cut to the quick our Community Spirit by selling off one of our first traditions! Very sincerely yours and with deep concern, Jennifer Young Taylor 4th Generation Native of Calif. and the Santa Clara Valley Mother and Teacher 22701 Mt. Eden Road Saratoga, CA 95070 867 -1125 a rr Cocrt'e. Rt.)ra I 57)QLca Console n V ir bo riS�" anci ctu ho iDookS on d ou Iran+ and Ca L� prn.a na-HVL F 5 i /-Iaqdoq Proqn Wot-kshop et., a-fr Sara -f'o a Cornmonr -1' (tea -dstr y on ,J una_ 2 o Jun-e_ 27' Prowl 9: A. (r). -fc 1 00 Pin. E ac.l, ?a r-t-; p arr}- n e.Q-ols +o b r-; n N lon1- handy 'rur; ('Qnci Shextr5 Small p rJni n¢ Scut) JrLS-I"rUG -ti On -f t& o-P LOVW 4D sQ-si on s sara-koSa Cmmo nrt"y U c rdex) rn mbc.rs 2o% as Won' C as5 ZS upct (4o8) 0- ..ncl ante b y Tre_ u d r-escr ✓oz on only i- 6 i 6e-rMiseAL) 15 -SEP -2008 16:12 From:E A MARS 0467595560 To:0014088671397 P.1 /2 ,,b/d/5" 0 <Y adi3KG 6 g 0 n oet4 ezaidwai 4.4 Transcription from the June 25th, 2008 Public Hearing of the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, at approximately 9:00 p.m., regarding Application #03 259 (397 01 014) Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church, 18870 Allendale Ave Presentation of Mr. Lazio Sipos 18873 Allendale Avenue "Good evening. My name is Lazio Sipos. Thank you very much to the council to hear my comment on it. I happen to live on Allendale right across the street from the project and through many years since I'm a resident of Allendale in the last forty -five years I've had many experiences of the church across. I had some experience that I have to say and they are years ago but that was not very pleasant. However I have to say that the last several years, I would say the last decade, there's been a tremendous amount of change took place in the church. And that behavior was completely changed. They've been listening to the neighborhood and they trying to make up whatever the neighborhood wishes and my experience now that in the last couple of years since they planning to put in the new building, they have done just about everything that was humanly possible to please everybody around. I personally objected to the height originally, which I'm very glad to see that they have listened to us and lowered the maximum height and, by viewing their new plans, as they are, I had to come to the conclusion that we should be able to allow them to pursue their own happiness. They, like everybody else, they own the property, they have the right to build whatever they want to build on it. And they've done everything that was humanly possible to listen to the neighborhood wishes and done everything that could almost to the point that they are going to construct something which is less than the Church that they really require. So as much as I can say, I'm probably the one most affected by the view. Because the building going to be constructed directly in front of my front yard and I can say that due to the fact that they really been doing the best that they could, I have no objection and I hope the Council going to listen and let them go ahead to pursue their happiness. Thank you very much." Memo City of Saratoga City Clerk's Office To: Mayor and City Councilmembers From: Aim Sullivan, Acting City Clerk Date: September 17, 2008 Re: Agenda Item #9— APC08 -0003 Appeal of a Decision by the Planning Commission St. Michael's Church Attached are emails staff has received regarding agenda item #9. Please support the Planning Commission's decision regarding St. Archangel Michael Serb... Page 1 of 1 City Clerk From: debs rawlings [debsr @morganroyce.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 9:25 AM To: City Clerk Subject: Please support the Planning Commission's decision regarding St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Dear City Council Members We are unable to show voice our support in person at this evening's meeting due to a previously planned memorial service dinner for my father, whom we lost 3 years ago today. We are extremely disappointed by the efforts of the Neighborhood Task Force to overturn the Planning Commission's unanimous June 25th decision regarding St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church, resulting in yet more building delays. We are long time Saratoga residents, moving to this beautiful city months before my younger brother Johnny was born. Both he my mother, Ann Worobey, still reside at 20895 Canyon View Dr., the same house that I also lived in as a child. I bought my home at 20619 Oak Creek Lane back in 1982. We strongly urge you to uphold the Planning Commission's June 25th decision regarding 5t. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church! Thank you for your time. Best Regards, Debs Worobey Rawlings, Ann Worobey, Johnny Worobey (I am writing this on behalf of all 3 of us as neither my mother nor brother have access to email.) 9/17/2008 City Clerk From: SLKURASCH @aol.com Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 8:58 PM To: Aileen Kao; Ann Waltonsmith; Chuck Page; Kathleen King; Jill Hunter Cc: Dave Anderson; City Clerk; City Council Subject: Saratoga City Council Public Hearing APC08 -0003 Sept. 17, 2008 To: Saratoga City Council Members Public Hearing APC08 -0003 Sept. 17, 2008 Appeal of Planning Commisssion Approval of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Sent by email 15 Sept. 2008 As a community resident and neighbor of St. Michael's church, I want to express my support for the church project approved by the Saratoga Planning Commission. As a former planning commissioner, I want to express my objection to the appeal of that approval. The appellants assert that the church project violates city municipal code and regulations, and creates "significant" impacts. In this appeal, variations from strictly residential zoning standards are considered "special privileges" (pg.6, Appeal of Application No. 03 -259), and will "clearly impair public health, safety, and welfare "(pg. 5). This is the basis of the egregious appeal, since, clearly, the church property's inclusion in the Quasi Public Facility designation gives the city latitude in approving such variations, for which many precedents have been set and embraced by the community and its neighborhoods. In approving St. Andrew's expansion plans in 2003, the Planning Commission granted almost all of that church's requested exceptions to the residential zoning standards, with some mitigations and modifications to their facilities. St. Andrew's 72,000 sf building expansion required a Traffic Management Plan due to school attendance traffic for close to 450 students, as well as many special events for the large congregation, located next to an already congested intersection, but only required 203 parking spaces (Application ED 01 -002, DR -01 -035, UP -01 -013, approved March 12, 2003). According to the St. Michael's Traffic Analysis (Higgins Associates 5/21/07), with the exception of the annual special events at Christmas and Easter, "Parking demand for all existing Sunday and non Sunday events and activities can be satisfied by the parking area provided on the existing site "(pg. 11). Even though the Mitigated NNegative Declaration recognizes that the project provides "less parking capacity than required "(pg. 25) by Zoning Ordinance 15 -55, it reasonably concludes that "the Zoning Ordinance parking requirement exceeds the actual parking demand that would be experienced on site" (pg. 25) since potential activities in all buildings would not occur at the same time. It is also reasonable to conclude that the church would work out an overflow parking plan for the few special events that will require it. St. Michael's has exercised immense patience and willingness to take neighbors' views and the city's considerations into account, and this is reflected in the quality of the current church design. The fact that the church design has also received LEED certification for green building sets a standard for environmental stewardship that should be commended. I urge the City Council to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission approval of St. Archangel Michael's church building as presented. Respectfully, Lisa J. Kurasch 18665 Ravenwood Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 (408) 374- 9472 9/17/2008 Page 1 of 1 Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncickaolsty00050000000014) Christopher Riordan From: Rhonda Huff [rhonda.huff @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 6:06 PM To: John Livingstone; jonathan@wittwerparkin.com Cc: Christopher Riordan; 'Diane Drewke'; 'Steve Schwartzkopf; 'Bob and Karie Barr'; 'Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'D Bentek'; 'Ying and Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'Daryl Huff; saraewilson @juno.com; swong @swongdirect.net;'Aparjot Dehal'; 'Rhonda Huff Subject: RE: Your Email to John Livingstone and me dated 6 -30 -08 Hi Jonathan: Thank you for your message. Since you did not copy the original recipient list with your reply indicating you would take a several days to reply, I'm re- forwarding the thread yet again so we'll all be on the same page with the proper context with my question and your answer. We will all look forward to your reply please cc the original distribution list copied again on this message for your convenience along with the included thread so there is no confusion. Thank you, Rhonda Huff From: Jonathan Wittwer mailto :jonathan@wittwerparkin.com] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 11:15 AM To: 'Rhonda Huff' Cc: 'John Livingstone' Subject: Your Email to John Livingstone and me dated 6 -30 -08 I have been requested by the City to respond to the above email. I will get back to you as soon as possible, but it may take several days. Jonathan Wittwer Original Message From: Rhonda Huff mailto:rhonda.huff @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 2:33 PM To: 'John Livingstone'; 'jonathan@wittwerparkin.com' Cc: 'Christopher Riordan'; 'Diane Drewke'; 'Steve Schwartzkopf'; 'Bob and Karie Barr'; 'Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'D Bentek'; 'Ying and Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'Daryl Huff'; 'saraewilson@juno.com'; 'swong@swongdirect.net'; 'Aparjot Dehal' Subject: RE: FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD 6 -25 -08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING John: My second message (containing exactly the same content) sent also on Wednesday at 10:53 AM did NOT bounce and was delivered on Wednesday to the individual planning commissioner e-mails as well as to you and Jonathan Wittwer and members of the Neighborhood taskforce. Thus, I am curious why you did not read the e-mail until today. Especially given that the words are all the same as they were last week, this begs the logical question: Why would the spam filter block the message on the day of the hearing and yet allow the very same text through on Saturday AFTER the hearing was concluded? What type of SPAM filter are you using that allows or blocks content based on the day of the week? 1 Since you have received the message in its entirety, have you included it in the public record on this matter and have you distributed it to the Commissioners including Susie V. Nagpal who does not list an individual e-mail on your website (http: /www.saratoga.ca. us/ boards commissions /planning /index.html) per my request? Please include a copy of this full e-mail for the record as well because it seems it would be important to build a full record for future reference as well as be reviewed by whomever manages your e-mail spam filtering software. The bounce message received from the planning commission alias last Wednesday is forwarded at the end of this message per your request as well. Thank you, Rhonda Huff Original Message From: John Livingstone [mailto:johnl @saratoga.ca.us] Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 1:44 PM To: Rhonda Huff; jonathan@wittwerparkin.com Cc: Christopher Riordan; lsalindong @saratoga.ca.us Subject: RE: FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD 6 -25 -08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Dear Daryl and Rhonda Huff, This is the first time that I have seen this e-mail. For some reason it did not go through. Our IT person feels that one of the words triggered our spam block. If you could forward the bounce back message you received our IT person will look into it. Thanks John L Original Message From: Rhonda Huff mailto:rhonda.huff @comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 7 :27 AM To: John Livingstone; jonathan@wittwerparkin.com Subject: FW: FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD 6 -25 -08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING John Jonathan: May we please have an explanation as to why our letter was not read into the record at last Wednesday's Planning Commission meeting? We have not received a response regarding if this was added to the Public Record on this matter and if all of the commission members received a copy of same. Since your all planning- commission e-mail alias was not working last week, there are one or two commissioners who do not list individual e-mails so we wanted to ensure all received our input Sincerely, Daryl Rhonda Huff Original Message From: Rhonda Huff mailto:rhonda.huff @comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:53 AM To: 'johnl @saratoga.ca.us'; 'jonathan@wittwerparkin.com' 2 Cc: 'manny.cappello@att.net'; 'rkumar@saratoga.ca.us'; 'robert kundtz@yahoo.com'; 'lrodgers@saratoga.ca.us'; 'jhlavaogden @Comcast.net'; 'yanniezhao@yahoo.com' Subject: FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD 6 -25 -08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Hi John Johathan: We tried to forward the following letter to the Planning Commission e-mail address this AM and just received a bounce message. Please ensure that all Planning Commissioners receive a copy of our letter today and that it is read into the Public Record at tonight's meeting. Thank you, The Huffs From: Daryl Rhonda Huff Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:32 AM To: 'planning @saratoga.ca.us' Cc: 'jonathan@wittwerparkin.com'; 'saraewilson @juno.com'; 'Aparjot Dehal'; 'Bernie Mills'; 'Bob and Karie Barr'; 'Kariebarr @yahoo.com'; 'Cheriel Jensen'; 'D Bentek'; 'Daryl Huff'; 'Kariebarr@yahoo.com'; 'Sam L. Nguyen'; 'Stephanie Macauley'; 'Steve Schwartzkopf'; 'swong@swongdirect.net'; 'Ted Macauley'; 'Trish Schist'; 'Virginia King'; 'Vivian Mills'; 'Ying and Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'shiuhwuu.lee@gmail.com'; 'Diane Drewke' Subject: FOR PUBLIC RECORD Planning Commission Public Hearing Comments St. Archangel Michael Church Building Plan Please include and read into the PUBLIC RECORD AT TONIGHT'S PLANNING COMMISION MEETING. Thank you, Daryl and Rhonda Huff Dear Planning Commissioners: We regret that we will be unable to attend tonight's meeting regarding the proposed building plan for ST. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church. As neighbors who live nearby we would first like to reiterate our desire and support for the common goal of the building of a new sanctuary that both the church members and the neighborhood can be proud of. The property in question has not been maintained for decades so we believe everyone agrees the property is in desperate need of improvement and we hope that will occur. However, we have concerns that remain and that have not yet been addressed. The major concerns that the we have are: A. The building as currently proposed is far too massive to be located in such close proximity to Allendale it is much taller than building codes allow, it will impair our view corridors that are of concern to all citizens but especially we who live and commute on Allendale. This is even called out as an important issue to be protected per our own City of Saratoga General Plan. B. The examples of other nearby churches to which the proposed structure is compared are not proper comparisons and here is why: 1. The Latter Day Saints Church which is the closest comparison is a) on a significantly larger parcel of continuous land; 3 b) the longest portion of the building is the farthest away from Allendale and the Nave portion is the narrowest portion that is closest to the street; and c) The architectural style of that building is much more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood; and d) It was built in a different era under LESS restrictive codes that we have even today. 2. The churches on Saratoga Avenue which are certainly larger are also on commensurately MUCH larger parcels of land and Saratoga Avenue is a much busier thoroughfare than Allendale. (A reference back to your most recent traffic studies of both streets will confirm that fact for you.) 3. We would direct you to review your own height, noise, setback requirements that you placed for the recent further expansion of the St. Andrews property and ask why you are not requiring exactly the same sorts of restrictions on the St. Archangel Michael project? C. The lack of operational "bells" does not ensure that chimes or some other amplified sound will not emanate outside the boundaries of the property this remains of great concern to the surrounding neighbors especially when enforcement remains non existent on this issue of noise from the City. D. The completely inadequate amount of parking spaces allotted will have a negative impact on our neighborhoods. This is a safety and visibility issue and it is unacceptable that this portion of our Code is being ignored. The church has not complied with even the minimal requirements placed on them by the new CUP and thus we do not have any confidence that they intend to do anything other than park on Allendale and our surrounding neighborhood streets as well as use both buildings simultaneously. Their parking lot has been completely full on numerous occasions including WHERE THE NEW STRUCTURE IF APPROVED WILL BE. The ratio or seats to required parking spaces is in our code for a reason please do not ignore it. Here are our proposed solutions to the foregoing issues: A. Reduce the height and scale of the structure to be no taller than 30 feet; B. Reduce number of seats to conform with the amount of available on -site parking; C. Require noise ordinances to be complied with and no amplified sound of any kind should be allowed (bells, chimes, music, chants, etc.) beyond allowable decibel levels specified in the General Plan and with defined enforcement; D. Locate new smaller sanctuary structure behind the current social hall so as not to impose on the view corridors and block a large portion of frontage on Allendale; E. Require landscaping, minimal down lighting only (within curfew hours and off after hours) to be installed AND maintained; F. Require compliance with existing CUP requirements; and G. The new architectural design style is an improvement over the former proposal and if it was scaled down, we would have no objection to the materials and finishes of the proposed structure. We hope you will consider these issues carefully and balance the needs of all so that an acceptable solution is reached. We wholeheartedly believe the foregoing list of proposed solutions does just that. Thank you for your attention to this matter, 4 Daryl and Rhonda Huff Harleigh Drive Saratoga, CA Bounce Message Original Message From: Mail Delivery System [mailto:mail- daemon @comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:32 AM To: rhonda.huff @comcast.net Subject: Delivery status notification This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification. Delivery to the following recipients failed permanently: planning@saratoga.ca.us Reporting -MTA: dns; QMTA06 .emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.56] Received -From -MTA: dns; OMTA06 .emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.51] Arrival -Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:31 :39 +0000 Final- recipient: rfc822; planning@saratoga.ca.us Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Diagnostic -Code: smtp; 550 5.0.0 <planning @saratoga.ca.us>... Mailbox targetted for abuse.Rejecting... Last attempt -Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17 :31:46 +0000 5 Debbie Bretschneider From: John Ivancovich [jivancovich ©trical.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 2:24 PM To: Ann Waltonsmith; Chuck Page; Kathleen King; Jill Hunter; Aileen Kao Cc: Debbie Bretschneider; Dave Anderson Subject: APC08 -0003, Appeal of a Decision of the Planning Commission Regarding St. Archangel Michael Church Attachments: 09- 17- 2008.pdf; 09- 17- 2008.pdf Page 1 of 2 Mayor Waltonsmith and Members of the City Council: My name is John Ivancovich and I am the vice president, and, immediate Past President of the Board of Directors of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church. I submit this document to you tonight to bring to your attention the true nature of our project. We are bringing to our neighborhood and to the whole town of Saratoga a full expression of Orthodox Christianity, as we work diligently to do as God commands us to do to love our neighbor and even our enemies. In the process of planning for the construction of our temple, we have had the opportunity to meet a number of our immediate, as well or not -so- immediate neighbors. This has been, overall, a very positive experience. A few of our neighbors have been somewhat challenging to deal with, but, their input has been helpful, when considered int the proper perspective. They have acted in a manner that has brought attention to who we are and what we are doing that being the building of a House of God. In this process we are, most importantly, building more than a physical structure, we are building "community This is very important to understand, because God Himself is a "community of being" we know Him as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This "community of being" is understood by us to be a loving relationship one which we are called to emulate. In fact, it is one that we are commanded to express. So, we hold no animosity towards those who have expressed opposition to our proposed project. Their efforts have been an important tool to help bring Orthodox Christianity to this community. For that, we are most grateful. For the record, I ask that the attached article from the Spring 2008 issue of "Again" magazine be considered. It provides a critical explanation of why our project must not be corrupted by reducing it's height, size, design or placement on the property. We have gone to great expense in time, as well as money, to listen to those few neighbors who criticized our project, and, then, to make all of the modifications that we could make, while not damaging our Church's function that being to bring forth the "beauty" that God wants us to produce and experience. This article, titled "Beauty and Apologetics" explains, at least in part, why we need the structure to be as our architect has designed it. I have underlined those sections of the article that apply most importantly in this regard. Within the article, there is a description of how the Russian people became Orthodox Christians. Prince Vladimir of Kiev sent envoys to various parts of the known world to search for a single religion for his people. They traveled as ordered, and, after doing so, reported what they experienced. Specifically, here is what they said about what they had found in the great church of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople: "We knew not whether we were in Heaven or on earth, for on earth there is no such splendor or beauty, and we are at a loss to describe it. We only know that God dwells there among humans and their worship is 9/17/2008 Page 2 of 2 fairer than the ceremonies of other nations. And, we can not forget that beauty. Every man who has partaken of sweetness will not afterwards accept bitterness, and, so we can no longer remain apart from it This is what our Church will be, although on a much smaller scale. Please help us to build it. Thank you very much. Sincerely, (signed) John T. Ivancovich 9/17/2008 September 17, 2008 VCOMMIE 1 SEP 17 2008 Mayor Waltonsmith and Members of the City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 RE: APC08 -0003, Appeal of a Decision of the Planning Commission Regarding St. Archangel Michael Church Mayor Waltonsmith and Members of the City Council: My name is John Ivancovich and I am the vice- president, and, immediate Past President of the Board of Directors of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church. I submit this document to you tonight to bring to your attention the true nature of our project. We are bringing to our neighborhood and to the whole town of Saratoga a full expression of Orthodox Christianity, as we work diligently to do as God commands us to do to love our neighbor and even our enemies. In the process of planning for the construction of our temple, we have had the opportunity to meet a number of our immediate, as well or not -so- immediate neighbors. This has been, overall, a very positive experience. A few of our neighbors have been somewhat challenging to deal with, but, their input has been helpful, when considered int the proper perspective. They have acted in a manner that has brought attention to who we are and what we are doing that being the building of a House of God. In this process we are, most importantly, building more than a physical structure, we are building "community This is very important to understand, because God Himself is a "community of being" we know Him as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This "community of being" is understood by us to be a loving relationship one which we are called to emulate. In fact, it is one that we are commanded to express. So, we hold no animosity towards those who have expressed opposition to our proposed project. Their efforts have been an important tool to help bring Orthodox Christianity to this community. For that, we are most grateful. For the record, I ask that the attached article from the Spring 2008 issue of "Again" magazine be considered. It provides a critical explanation of why our project must not be corrupted by reducing it's height, size, design or placement on the property. We have gone to great expense in time, as well as money, to listen to those few neighbors who criticized our project, and, then, to make all of the modifications that we could make, while not damaging our Church's function that being to bring forth the "beauty" that God wants us to produce and experience. This article, titled "Beauty and Apologetics" explains, at least in part, why we need the structure to be as our 0 architect has designed it. I have underlined those sections of the article that apply most importantly in this regard. Within the article, there is a description of how the Russian people became Orthodox Christians. Prince Vladimir of Kiev sent envoys to various parts of the known world to search for a single religion for his people. They traveled as ordered, and, after doing so, reported what they experienced. Specifically, here is what they said about what they had found in the great church of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople: "We knew not whether we were in Heaven or on earth, for on earth there is no such splendor or beauty, and we are at a loss to describe it. We only know that God dwells there among humans and their worship is fairer than the ceremonies of other nations. And, we can not forget that beauty. Every man who has partaken of sweetness will not afterwards accept bitterness, and, so we can no longer remain apart from it This is what our Church will be, although on a much smaller scale. Please help us to build it. Thank you very much. Sincerely, 1. 1� John T. Ivancovich By Frederica Mathezves -Green B ACK WHEN I WAS ATTENDING SEMINARY —this was an Episcopal seminary, in Virginia —every time I went to chapel I'd see this Scripture painted on the back wall around the window: "Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel." I had plenty of time to study those words (especially when the sermon was boring). As I read and reread that saying of Jesus, I thought about what it takes to spread the Gospel. What tools do you need? First, obviously, you need to know what you're talking about. You must be thoroughly familiar with your faith, with its teachings and practices, with the Scriptures. You need information, knowledge stored up in your head. As St. Peter says, "Always be ready to give 26 a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15). You need something else, too: you need love. St. Matthew tells us that when Jesus saw the crowds, "He was moved with compassion for them, because they were weary and scattered, like sheep having no shepherd" (Mat- thew 9 :36). A missionary—whether it's one who travels to another continent or one who talks to a neighbor over a back fence —must have love and compassion for those who need the Gospel. It's no good to approach it as an argument you're determined to win. I knew an evangelical Protestant once who believed that it was his job to tell every person he met about Christ. After that, it was up to them to act on it. If they didn't, he said, they'd go to hell, but it wouldn't be his fault, because he told them. Well, he may have been conveying some information clearly (it might not be accurate information, but it sure was clear), but he didn't frame it with love. It didn't come from the heart, so it didn't have much chance of getting into someone else's heart. Without love, as St. Paul says, we are nothing but "sounding brass or a clanging cym- bal" (1 Corinthians 13:1). What does it take to be a mission- ary? You need to know your stuff, and you need to have a tender heart toward the people you are trying to reach. But there is one more thing that Orthodox Christianity would contribute to the ministry of evangelism: beauty. "We Cannot Forget That Beauty" You've heard of St. Vladimir, Prince of Kiev. It was under his reign that Russia became a Christian nation, in AD 988. He would have been a challenging guy to evangelize. Vladimir was his father's youngest son and born of a concubine, so he had to fight for the throne, and killed his brother in the process. He wanted to marry a princess but she rejected him because of his mother's low birth. So Vladimir killed her father and took her by force. Like many Asian iAV-A 1 -N vu L. 3o, No.r. princes, he had a vast harem —seven wives and eight hundred concubines and built temples to his pagan gods, where he offered human sacrifice, including Christians. Now, picture yourself ringing his doorbell, armed with a few tracts and the Orthodox Study Bible. But Vladimir eventually decided that his people should adopt a single religion, and representatives of Juda- ism, Islam, Western and Eastern Chris- tianity came to the court and presented their arguments. After that he sent envoys out to visit their countries and observe each religion firsthand. When these delegates returned, they told Vladimir first what they saw among the Muslims in Bulgaria. The eleventh- century Primary Chronicle reports that they said, "There is no joy among them, only sorrow and a great stench; their religion is not a good one." The envoys said of the Western Christian churches they'd seen in Germany, "We saw many ceremonies in their temples, but of beauty we saw none." Then they said what they had seen at the great church of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople: *k We knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth, for on earth there is no such splendor or beauty, and we are at a loss to describe it. We only know that God dwells there among humans, and their worship is fairer than the ceremonies of other nations. And we cannot foret that beauty. Every man who has partaken of sweetness will not afterwards accept bitterness, and so we can no longer remain apart from it. That convinced Prince Vladimir. He was baptized in the Dniepr, and or- dered that the pagan idols be dragged from their temples and thrown into the river. The Orthodox Christian faith that spread through Russia grew deep and strong. It sustained the Russian people so well that, when communists persecuted them with torture and im- prisonment, some 20 million Orthodox believers died for their faith. A Rich Sensory Experience Our Orthodox worship's strong on beauty. We fill the walls and even the ceilings of our churches with icons, the stories and heroes of Christian history. We illuminate these images with candles and oil lamps, and die light shimmers from the _glossy paint and gold bd ackgrounds. Our clergy and altar servers wear vestments of different colors of brocade, highlighted with gold and embroidered. People who visit an Orthodox service are immediately struck by the visual beauty, but that's not the only OCF is spearheading an eff ort reverse,this danger :ou `trend: for our youth. T hrough innovative pro- grams on both the local and national levels, OCF is work ing with ;students to ignite their passion for Christ and H is Church. )C is Orthodox Christiani r action ';on hundreds o ampuses across Nort A merica A student move- W ent; devoted to fellowship an spiritual growth in the oughest and most tempting r ears of their lives dbr *was life- changin ,rational, an sense affected. The whole service is sung and chanted, so the words of our prayers are framed with music. Fra- grant smoke rises from golden pots of incense. We taste the eucharistic bread and wine, venerate icons, touch the hem of the priest's vestment, and greet each other with a holy kiss. This is a very rich sensory experience, touch- ing every one of the five senses. It's very similar to what Prince Vladimir's envoys saw at Hagia Sophia, because we are members of that very same world wi e, timeless Church. Although beauty can help bring someone like Prince Vladimir to Or- thodoxy, in our current culture some people mistrust it. They think it might lead to idolatry, and we might worship these beautiful things instead of look- ing through them to God. (I got an email once from a Baptist who had vis- ited a Divine Liturgy, and noticed when the priest went by during the Great Entrance that some people bowed to venerate the hem of his garment. He asked me, "Why are they worshipping the priest A few years ago I was being inter- viewed on an NPR program, and the host asked me, "All this fancy stuff you do in church, the icons and candles and incense, doesn't it get in the way? Doesn't it distract you from worship- ping God I said, "Imagine that it's your an- niversary, and your husband has taken you to a nice restaurant. There's a white cloth on the table, roses and can- dies, a glass of wine, and violin music is playing in the background. Does that distract you from feeling romantic Now, it's true, you can have all this beauty and just take it for granted. You can go to church every Sunday and just yawn your way through it. But that's not the fault of the church. A married couple could plow through a fancy meal without once looking each other in the eye. But that wouldn't be the fault of the restaurant. They did every- thing they could. Beauty is not enough, all by itself. It's not the goal, just a way toward the goal, which is life in Christ. 28 The Commandment of Beauty Yet beauty in worship is not optional; it is somethin God commands. After the srae rtes crosse e e Sea, as they were wandering in the wilderness, God told Moses ow to furnish a tent to be their place of worship. He told him, for example, that there needed to be a box to hold the two stone tablets of the Ten Commandments. Now, today we'd say, "Oh, sure," and run out to the mall and buy a clear plastic storage unit with a snap -on Iid. But God did not ask for something merely functional. He told Moses to make this box, the ark of the Covenant, from acacia wood, and to overlay it with gold —not only on the outside, but on the inside as well. Even though the inside of the ark would not be seen, it should be beautiful and cosily, because it was being made for God. The Lord gave Moses further instructions: He said that the rings and poles for carrying the ark should be golden as well, and that a mere seat should be placed on top of the ark. Two cherubim, also made of ham- mered gold, would face each other above it. And that's just the ark and mercy seat; there are also the table, the lam stand, the tabernacle, the veil, the altar, priestly vestments. All of these were likewise adorned with gold, silver, embroidery, and precious stones. The Lord is specific even about small details: He says that around the hem of the priestssannents there are to be embroidered pomegranates of purple, blue, and red, interspersed with golden bells: "a golden bell and a pomegran- ate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, upon the hem of the robe all around" (Exodus 28:34). Think about it: even though the children of Israel were refugees, wandering in the desert and living in tents, God still commanded Moses to use extravagant resources in making worship beautiful. Beauty matters. As you picture this lavish worship space taking shape, you can identify with Prince Vladimir's envoys: 'We knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth." Once that beauty had been tasted, they said, they could never be satisfied with anything less. As missionaries, at home or abroad, we must prepare ourselves to do the work God gives us. We must know the Scriptures well and have a good understanding of our faith, so that we can present it clearly. And we must have love for those we speak to, so they will feel welcomed and invited into God's household. But when a visitor comes to loin us for worship, the focus is no longer on us, on our knowledge or our loving character. In worship, it's about God, and all signs mustyoint in His direc- tion. An atmosphere of beauty teaches wordlessly about the nature of God. It teaches that He is not just a concept to be endlessly discussed; that at some point our capacit�to grasp Him intel- lectually fails, and we fall before Him AGA-IN VO 3o, No. in worship. Beyond all we know and ca nnot know about God, He reigns in beauty. Beauty opens our hearts and stirs us to hunger for more, to hunger for the piercing sweetness of the res- ence of God. A visitor may not at first see what we're seeing, but he can see that we see something. When I was a child I was nearsighted, but no one realized this, and a number of years passed before I got glasses. Till then I kept having the frustrating experience that my parents would want to show me something, but I couldn't see it. They would point, for example, at a bird in a treetop, and say, "There it is, do you see it And I would squint and try to follow the line of the pointing finger, and just see a greenish blob that was probably a tree. Some- times I would say, "No, I don't see it sometimes I would pretend I had, just to get it over with. But you know what? I never said, "There is no bird." 414 Then a visitor comes into our worship ,he might not see what w 're looking at —in this case, not a bird in a treetop, but God in His heaven. But the visitor can see us. He sees us worshipping with awe and gratitude, hears us singing ancient and scriptural hymns that Christians around the world have offered for millennia. He sees candlelight flickering o n thegold of icons and hears t e ells on the censer. He tastes the antidoron, smells the incense, andand tsgreeted by other worshippers with the kiss of peace. Ev- ery one of his senses is affected. Maybe he doesn't yet see the Lord we worship, but he sees us, and sees that we see somethin that we are being held rapt by the presence o something awe- some, terrible, beautiful. He can tell that something is going on. And that mysterious beauty is a hook that pulls people further in. Any missionaQneeds theological O rthodox s s tude nt across North Chri Am tian e ric a a s ta nding up for each h f ortheir future, and ot th r f of urch s Please st the with u an support our move F or more information o OCF, it programs, givin vision, and tojoin our movement visit us at www.ocf.net on the, w el education, as well as love for hose in the mission field. But we Orthodox know of one further element of mis- sions: beauty. We worship in beauty because it is what_ God commanded. He instructed Moses to provide elabo- rate beauty in worship —gold, incense, embroidery, carved wood vestmen_ ts,La golden bell and a pomegranate." But not because God needs these things as the psalmist says, He already owns the cattle on a thousand hills. No it is we humans who need such things, and their use in worship empowers mission in ways that, literally, can't be conveyed in words. Beauty sets the heart aright, and opens it to God. F Frederica Mathewes- Green is the author of Facing East, Gender, and other hooks. She is khouria of Holy Cross Anliochian Orthodox Church near Baltimore., MD. City Clerk From: Daniel Pressman [pressman @beth david.org] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 2:19 PM To: Aileen Kao; Ann Waltonsmith; Chuck Page; Kathleen King; Jill Hunter Cc: Debbie Bretschneider; Dave Anderson; City Clerk Subject: RE: Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church To the City Council of Saratoga: Dear Friends, I am writing to support St. Michael's Church, the decision of the Planning Commission and the recommendation of the staff. I urge you to deny the appeal and allow St. Michael's to proceed with their long- delayed project. I have been very impressed by the fair mindedness and seriousness with which the Planing Commission has proceeded in this matter. They have been responsive to reasonable concerns and equitable in their decisions. The church has also worked hard to be sensitive to their environment and to create a lovely building which will serve their religious needs. There would be no reasonable purpose or public interest served by further prolonging this well- conducted and exhaustive approval process. In fairness to St. Michael's, with respect for the Planning Commission and the city staff, and as recognition of the essential work that all the houses of worship in Saratoga do t� enhance our sense of community, please deny the appeal and approve the church building. Thank you, Rabbi Daniel Pressman 1 Debbie Bretschneider From: Daniel Pressman [pressman @beth david.org] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 2:19 PM To: Aileen Kao; Ann Waltonsmith; Chuck Page; Kathleen King; Jill Hunter Cc: Debbie Bretschneider; Dave Anderson; City Clerk Subject: RE: Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church To the City Council of Saratoga: Dear Friends, I am writing to support St. Michael's Church, the decision of the Planning Commission and the recommendation of the staff. I urge you to deny the appeal and allow St. Michael's to proceed with their long- delayed project. I have been very impressed by the fair- mindedness and seriousness with which the Planing Commission has proceeded in this matter. They have been responsive to reasonable concerns and equitable in their decisions. The church has also worked hard to be sensitive to their environment and to create a lovely building which will serve their religious needs. There would be no reasonable purpose or public interest served by further prolonging this well- conducted and exhaustive approval process. In fairness to St. Michael's, with respect for the Planning Commission and the city staff, and as recognition of the essential work that all the houses of worship in Saratoga do to enhance our sense of community, please deny the appeal and approve the church building. Thank you, Rabbi Daniel Pressman 1 City Clerk Page 1 of 1 From: Christopher Riordan Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 12:24 PM To: DL Council Cc: 'kpowell @loganpowell.com'; 'squigley @loganpowell.com 'Houston, Jolie'; 'rtaylor @smwlaw.com City Clerk; Dave Anderson; John Livingstone; 'Jonathan Wittwer; 'jskopf @aol.com'; 'Rhonda Huff Subject: Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Attachments: Email from Rhonda Huff.pdf; City Council Resolution Approving App 03 -259 -Final Revised Version- 91708.doc Council Members, Attached is a revised resolution for tonight's City Council meeting regarding the appeal of the Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church (Attachment #2 of the Staff Report). Also attached is a five page email from Rhonda Huff, dated June 30, 2008 (Attachment #3 of the Staff Report). Pages 3 -5 of this email were inadvertently omitted from the packet. Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions. Very Respectfully, Chris Riordan 9/17/2008 APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DENYING AN APPEAL AND APPROVING APPLICATION #03 -259 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW CHURCH BUILDING FOR SAINT ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church 18870 Allendale Avenue WHEREAS, on June 25, 2008, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission approved application #03 -259 for Design Review, modification of a Conditional Use Permit, and a request for Variation from Standards (increased structure height, increased site coverage, and a reduction in the required number of off street parking spaces) for the construction of a new Church building for Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church in the R -1- 40,000 zone district. The square footage of the new construction is approximately 3,994 square feet and the maximum height of the building will not exceed approximately 50 feet (referred to hereinafter as the "Project and WHEREAS, on July 9, 2008, an appeal was filed of the Planning Commission's approval of application 03 -259; and WHEREAS, on September 17, 2008 the City Council duly held a public hearing to consider application #03 -259 at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered application #03 -259 de novo and duly considered all testimony and other evidence submitted in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, An Initial Study and a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for this project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration). The Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for a 30 -day public comment period from March 25 April 25, 2008. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been duly adopted for the Project by the City Council on September 17, 2008; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 15- 55.030 states that a conditional use may be permitted by a use permit to have a different site area, density, structure height, distance between structures, site coverage, setback minimums, and off street parking and loading requirements, other than those listed under the specific regulations for unconditional permitted uses in the zoning district in which it lies. The Project will have increased structure height, increased site coverage, and a reduction in the required number of off street parking spaces in comparison with standards normally applied in the R -1- 40,000 zone district; and WHEREAS, application #03 -259 is consistent with the General Plan, including the following policies: Land Use Element Policy LU 5.2 Development proposals shall be evaluated against City standards and guidelines to assure that the related traffic, noise, light, appearance, and Page 1 of 11 intensity of the proposed use have limited adverse impact on the area and can be fully mitigated. The Project included the preparation of an Initial Study and MND that evaluated the Project's impacts on traffic, noise, light, appearance, and intensity and includes recommendations and conditions of approval to reduce Project related impacts to a level which is less than significant. The Project has also been reviewed by the Planning Commission and the Commission has found that the Project is compatible with the design criteria contained in Saratoga City Code Section 15- 46.040. By Resolution No. 07 -067, on September 19, 2007 the City Council reviewed the impacts of the Church's use of the site and combined all prior Use Permits (Use Permits 29 and 147) into one superseding modified Use Permit and imposed new conditions including a condition that any intensification of the Church's use beyond that in existence on September 19, 2007 shall require an amended Conditional Use Permit. Resolution No. 07 -067 also imposed a condition requiring that the Church comply with Article 7 -30 of the City Code governing Noise Control and imposed conditions limiting the hours during which activities and events may be conducted. Land Use Element Policy 5.4 Through the development review process; ensure that adjoining neighborhoods are protected from noise, light, glare and other impacts resulting from new or expanded non residential development. The Project has been subject to the development review process. Conditions of approval have been added to the Project to ensure that adjoining neighborhoods are adequately protected. Land Use Element Policy LU 6.2 Development proposals shall incorporate stormwater quality features, including but not limited to grassy bio- swales, to protect surface and subsurface water quality. The Project will include stormwater quality features such as bio- swales, permeable paving, drywells, detention/retention ponds, as well as directing stormwater towards landscaped areas. Land Use Element Goal 13 The City shall use the design review process to assure that new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings. The Project is subject to the Design Review Approval process before the Planning Commission and a Staff Report has been prepared recommending conditions of approval to assure the Project's compatibility with the site and the adjacent surroundings. Land Use Element Background Report Page 14 No structures in Saratoga shall be over two stories in height. The Project is designed to contain no more than two stories and the City Council hereby determines that this Project complies with the limitation on the number of stories contained in this Land Use Element provision, and further, that height limitations defined in terms of feet above grade are a different matter which may be the subject of a variation from standards under the City Zoning Ordinance Use Permit procedure. Land Use Element Policy LU 2.5 The City shall monitor Zoning Ordinance standards to ensure that non- residential parking standards are adequate to minimize spill -over of parking into adjacent neighborhoods. This provision is intended to apply to commercial and office uses and not to community facility uses such as a Church which the Zoning Ordinance allows in residential neighborhoods. This can be seen from the overall Goal LU 2 which Policy LU 2.5 is intended to serve. That Goal is to "[e]ncourage the economic viability of Saratoga's commercial and office areas and their accessibility by residents, taking into account the impact on surrounding residential areas." The City Council hereby determines that this Project is not inconsistent with Policy LU 2.5. Page 2of11 WHEREAS, application #03 -259 has met the burden of proof as to findings required to support approval of said application for Design Review Approval: Design Review Findings The proposed project is consistent with all of the following Design Review findings stated in City Code Section 15- 46.040: (a) Where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural features and landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include height, elevations, roofs, material, color, and appurtenances. This Project does not involve the construction of more than one building or structure. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the new Church building would possess design elements that would be compatible and harmonious with the other existing buildings on the Project site, including the chapel /classroom and the Fellowship Hall. Both of these existing buildings feature stucco and stone exterior finishes and accents which are included in the new building. The hipped and articulated roof style of the new Church would more closely reflect the roofing styles of the residential neighborhood. (b) Where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site, the sign shall have a common or compatible design theme and locational positions and shall be harmonious in appearance. No more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that a single sign is proposed for the Project at the driveway entrance to the site. The conceptual design for this sign would be compatible with the style and design of the new building. (c) Landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be preserved; it shall make use of water conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems to the maximum extent feasible; and, to the maximum extent feasible, it shall be clustered in natural appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows or regularly spaced. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that all healthy mature landscaping on the site would be maintained as part of the Project. No healthy protected trees are proposed for removal. None of the new landscaping will be placed in rows nor regularly spaced and instead will be planted in natural, organic patterns. The applicant will be adding thirty new 24 -inch box trees to the site. The Project will make use of water conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems to the maximum extent feasible. (d) Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be nonreflective This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the walls and roofing materials are nonreflective and natural in color which will enable it to blend with the natural landscape and environment. The building's size and height precludes the screening of the building by landscaping. Page 3 of 11 (e) Roofing materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, tile, or other materials such as composition as approved by the Planning Commission. No mechanical equipment shall be located upon a roof unless it is appropriately screened. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the roofing material is proposed to be reddish -brown colored slate roof tiles and no mechanical equipment is proposed to be installed on the roof. (j9 The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk, and design with other structures in the immediate area. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the height and style of the proposed Church would be in keeping with other similar developments in the area. Bulk would be reduced by the use of varying roof lines, pitches, natural colors and materials, and a mix of both horizontal and vertical features. To increase the project's architectural compatibility with structures in the immediate area, the proposed bulk, size, height, site orientation, and exterior finishes would be in keeping with other developments including other nearby churches and the buildings on the West Valley Junior College campus. The classic design elements of the proposed new Church building also complement other types of buildings in the City. WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support the findings required for said application to be issued approval for modification to a Conditional Use Permit, including variation from standards pursuant to City Code Section 15- 55.030 by approval of a use permit to have different structure height, site coverage, and number of off street parking spaces, other than as listed under the specific regulations for unconditional permitted uses in the zoning district in which it lies (in this case increased structure height, increased site coverage, and a reduction in the required number of off street parking spaces) as set forth following: (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 may be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the construction of a new Church building on the site will not adversely affect or intensify the existing use of the site as a religious institution and that the Project is both consistent with the purposes of the R -1- 40,000 zone district and the zoning ordinance in that the Project, as conditioned, is in accord with the objectives of the zoning ordinance as a specified conditional use in the zone district and provides adequate light, air, and privacy for surrounding single family dwellings and provides space for religious facilities needed to complement residential areas and for religious institutions, which are most appropriate in a residential environment. (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 staff finds that an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the Project which evaluated the Project's impacts on the environment and that adequate mitigations have been incorporated into the Project and the conditions of approval that will assure that there are no impacts Page 4 of 11 which rise to a level of significant and that Project has been designed to reduce mass and bulk, minimize noise, protect views and privacy of adjacent single family residences, and otherwise prevent detriment to the public health, safety and welfare and avoid consequences materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. (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 City has given careful consideration to the Project's effects on surrounding properties and has imposed reasonable conditions of approval to assure compliance with Chapter 15 Zoning Regulations. (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 may be made in the affirmative in that the Project site has been used as a church since the late 1950's, and the new building will not result in additional or intensified uses on the site. Furthermore, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared for the Project. This document evaluated the Project's aesthetic, privacy, traffic, and noise impacts on the surrounding properties and has been determined that the Project would not have an adverse effect on existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood or surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council 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 and materials submitted in connection with this matter and the Mitigated Negative Declaration as adopted, the required findings are hereby made for the applications for Design Review Approval and modification to the Conditional Use Permit as well as a use permit for the Variations from Standards and the same are hereby determined to be in compliance with City regulations and/or approved for variations therefrom so as to have an increased structure height, increased site coverage, and a reduction in the required number of off street parking spaces normally allowed in the R -1- 40,000 zone district. The Design Review Approval, modification to Conditional Use Permit, and use permit for Variations from Standards are hereby granted subject to the following conditions, and said conditions hereby modify the Conditional Use Permit approved for the Project site by City Council Resolution 07 -067, and these conditions are hereby combined and incorporated by reference and made a part thereof: PERMANENT CONDITONS OF APPROVAL 1. Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall develop a traffic and parking management plan for Christmas Eve, Easter, and other special events subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. The plan shall describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. These methods shall meet the following standard: the traffic and parking impact shall not exceed the impact which would occur if there were completely filled Church parking by use attendees and all other attendees made use an off -site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the Church. "Completely Page 5 of 11 filled Church parking" shall be deemed to allow use attendances during special events up to 277 people (based on an average of 2.2 persons per vehicle x 126 parking spaces). Other measures meeting this standard and approved by the City's Community Development Director shall also be allowed in the plan. The plan shall also be subject to review and approval by the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office prior to building permit issuance. 2. The Church buildings, including the existing and new Church building, shall not include exterior operable bells of any kind or any other type of mechanical, electrical or other device that emits a ringing sound to the exterior. OTHER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 3. The development and use shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" date stamped May 29, 2008 (hereby incorporated by reference). All changes to said approved plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes and are subject to the Community Development Director's and/or Planning Commission's prior approval as determined appropriate under City regulations. 4. The parking and driveway area shall be constructed of pervious paving. 5. All activities on the site shall be those that are incidental to the use of the site as a religious facility and shall comply with all conditions in Resolution 07 -067. 6. The Project shall utilize materials illustrated on a materials board dated June 12, 2008 and on file with the City. Prior to the new Church building's occupancy, the Fellowship Hall and current chapel shall be painted a color similar to the new Church building subject to the prior approval of the Community Development Director. 7. The following notes shall be incorporated on the grading and building plans prior to issuance of grading or building permits, and the measures shall be implemented during construction activities: a) Water all active construction and disturbed areas at least twice daily during dry periods b) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. c) Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply nontoxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction site. d) Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at constructions sites. Dust, sediment, or debris shall not be washed into the storm drain system. e) Excavation and grading activities shall be suspended and dust control measures shall be implemented when winds exceed 25 mph. 8. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall incorporate via a note on the first page of the construction plans, a requirement that should cultural resources be encountered during site grading or other site work, such work shall immediately be halted in the area of discovery and the applicant shall immediately notify the Community Development Director of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to promptly retain the services of a Page 6 of 11 qualified archeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting, analyzing, and curating the discovery as determined by the archaeologist and Community Development Director to be appropriate and adequate mitigation. The cost of the qualified archaeologist and of any recording, protecting, or curating shall be borne solely by the applicant. The archaeologist shall be required to submit a Cultural Resources Management Plan, per City Requirements, to the Community Development Director and subject to his /her review and approval that outlines the findings and mitigation methods of curation and/or protection of the resources. No further grading or site work within the area of discovery shall be allowed until the preceding has occurred. Disposition of Native American remains shall comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). The note on the plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. 9. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit plans subject to review and approval by the Building Department. These plans shall demonstrate to the City Building Official that the Project will comply with all City Building regulations as set forth or adopted by reference in Chapter 16 of the City Code. 10. During all phases of construction, the applicant shall install and maintain temporary safety fencing to restrict or prevent public access to active on -site construction activities, materials, or chemicals. 11. The following construction noise control measures shall be implemented by the applicant in order to limit the amount of noise generated during the construction period. a) Limit construction to the daytime hours between 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday, and 9:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturday, with no construction activities allowed on Sundays or holidays per Section 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. b) Construction activities or equipment shall not generate noise levels exceeding 83 dBA at any point 25 feet from the source of noise per Section 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. c) Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such technology is reasonably available as determined by the Community Development Director. d) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. e) Equip all internal combustion engine equipment with intake an exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. f) Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as possible from noise sensitive receptors. g) Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The applicant's designated noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, or other cause) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the noise disturbance coordinator at the construction site. 12. All building interior lighting shall be on a timer or motion detector to ensure that the lights do not remain on during the evening when the building is not in use. 13. A soils report for the Project site shall be prepared prior to the application for a building permit. This report shall be submitted to the Building Official and the City's Geotechnical Engineer Consultant at the time of building permit application. All new construction shall comply with the provisions of the geotechnical report (which shall be subject to prior review Page 7 of 11 and approval by the City's Geotechnical Engineer Consultant) and with the provisions of the most current City Building regulations, including (without limitation) the portions of which are directed at minimizing seismic risk and preventing loss of life and property in the event of an earthquake. 14. So as to limit short term soil erosion and increased sediment, all conditions of the City approved grading and drainage permit shall be implemented. 15. All conditions of the grading and drainage permit as required by the Public Works Department shall be met. 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 to the maximum extent reasonably feasible, and incorporating the New Development and Construction Best Management Practices. 16. The applicant shall adhere to all provisions of the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. 17. 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 and the approved Mitigation Monitoring Plan as separate plan pages. b. 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 in compliance with approved plans." 18. Staff shall not approve downgrading to the exterior appearance of the approved Project. Downgrades may include, but are not limited to 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. 19. The 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. 20. 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. 21. To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape areas. 22. 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, Page 8 of 11 patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. 23. Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover, if applicable, shall be retained and incorporated into the landscape plan to the maximum extent possible. 24. 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. 25. The provisions of this Resolution shall be incorporated into Resolution No. 07 -067 so as to place all conditions of approval in one document. 26. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit a final exterior lighting plan that complies with Section 15- 35.040(i) of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the plan shall indicate that no exterior lighting fixtures shall allow direct light rays to leave the project site, or allow direct light sources (incandescent, fluorescent, or other forms' of electric illumination) to be directly visible from off -site locations. The plan shall also show that light levels will not exceed 100 foot lamberts anywhere on the property. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance. CITY ARBORIST 27. All recommendations contained in the City Arborist Reports dated March 9, 2006 and May 25, 2006, shall be followed. 28. Tree protective measures, as specified by the City Arborist, shall be installed and inspected by the City Arborist prior to issuance of City Permits. 29. Prior to issuance of any City Permits authorized by this Resolution, the applicant shall submit to the City, in a form acceptable to the Community Development Director, security equivalent to $95,150 to guarantee the maintenance and preservation of trees. 30. The City Arborist shall inspect the site to verify compliance with required tree protective measures. The security shall be released after the planting of any required replacement trees, a favorable site inspection by the City Arborist, and payment of any outstanding City Arborist fees. 31. Prior to removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of six inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal or pruning permit from the City of Saratoga and comply with any conditions imposed by the tree removal or pruning permit. Such conditions shall include replacement of such tree(s) with replacement tree(s) of equal value to the trees to be removed. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations in the City Arborist's Report that was prepared for the Project. Page 9of11 FIRE DISTRICT 32. Applicant shall comply with all Saratoga Fire District requirements and conditions. PUBLIC WORKS 33. The owner /applicant shall install concrete sidewalk along the property frontage. Sidewalk design and setback from the roadway shall match existing sidewalk along Allendale Avenue at Camino Barco. Plans and specifications for the sidewalk and driveway approach shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for prior approval. 34. The owner shall landscape area between the sidewalk and Allendale Avenue. An Irrigation system shall be installed if determined necessary by the Public Works Director. The landscaped area shall be maintained in perpetuity by the applicant or its successor(s). 35. A Landscape Maintenance Agreement satisfactory to the Public Works Director for the maintenance of the landscaped area per the condition above shall be recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 36. An Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department is required for the new sidewalk, new driveway approach, landscaping, and other improvements in any portion of the public right -of -way or of a public easement. The Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of the improvements. 37. The applicant shall comply with requirements of Provision C.3 of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit. The applicant shall use and maintain Best Management Practices (BMP's) for site design and storm water treatment. Certification of engineered stormwater treatment by a qualified person shall be required to confirm that the plan meets the criteria established in Provision C.3 prior to issuance of building permits. Post construction operation and maintenance of storm water treatment BMP's shall be the responsibility of the owner. A Maintenance Agreement between the City and the applicant satisfactory to the Public Works Director shall be recorded prior to final occupancy approval. 38. Prior to beginning of construction, the applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board to obtain coverage under and be subject to the State General Construction Activity NPDES Permit. Satisfactory evidence of the filing of the NOI shall be furnished to the City. The applicant shall comply with all provisions and conditions of the State Permit, including preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Copies of the SWPPP shall be submitted to the City prior to beginning of construction and maintained on site at all times during construction. CITY ATTORNEY 39. The Church shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its employees, agents, independent contractors and volunteers (collectively "City) from any and all costs and expenses, including but not limited to attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense in any proceeding brought in State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to this Permit or contesting any action or inaction in the City's processing and/or approval of this Permit. Page 10 of 11 Section 2. A Building Permit shall be obtained and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or the approval granted thereby will expire. Section 3. The uses by the Church shall maintain compliance with all applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities having jurisdiction. Section 4. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met with regard to the construction authorized by this Resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga City Council, State of California, on the 17 day of September 2008 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Aim Sullivan Acting City Clerk Ann Waltonsmith Mayor 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. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date Page 11 of 11 St Michaels Page 1 of 1 City Clerk From: Christopher Riordan Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 9:09 AM To: DL Council Cc: Dave Anderson; John Livingstone; 'Houston, Jolie'; 'info @loganpowell.com'; City Clerk Subject: FW: St Michaels Attachments: 12.pdf Council Members, Page 12 of the Development Plans for Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church that were included in your packet for tomorrow's meeting contains the Electrical /Lighting Plan. When I was reviewing the plans yesterday I noticed that this plan was incomplete as it did show the location of the light fixtures but was missing the underlying site plan. I contacted the project applicant and they emailed me a corrected copy which I have attached to this email. 1 apologize for any confusion. Please contact me if you have any questions. Respectfully, Christopher Riordan From: Gerry De Young mailto :gdeyoung ©ruthandgoing.com] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 12:03 PM To: Christopher Riordan Subject: St Michaels Chris as requested attached is Sheet 12 with the background turned on so the site plans is visible. Gerry «12.pdf» 9/17/2008 a n 1 3 06 08:30a C7 not TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Canon Law governing the Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States and Canada defines, among the rest, the following requirements for its church edifices, as sacred buildings destined for divine public worship: Overall size. The church building as a permanent structure must fundamentally meet the congregation's need for the total experience of a living temple for joint prayer receiving the Eucharist, partaking in the other sacramental Holy Mysteries and the regular celebration of the Orthodox Christian Liturgy. It must also fundamentally be able to accommodate occasional and special parish needs, including weddings, funerals, Christmas and Easter observance, major and minor patron saint day celebrations and other Church holidays. Orthodox churches are not mere gathering places but signify and make visible the Church living in this place, the dwelling of God with men reconciled and united in Christ. Basic architecture. Mandatory elements of the building included as separate areas are the Altar, Nave, and Narthex. Conditions permitting, the church building should have four cupolas and a bell tower; at a minimum it must include one cupola of appropriate height and a bell tower, each surmounted by a Cross. Church bells are to mark the beginning of each Divine Liturgy. Verticality. The building's vertical architectural elements are to dominate the horizontal, as they must reinforce a heavenward aspiration of bringing the heavenly Jerusalem down to the faithful in this sacred space. Accordingly, to achieve this effect, the ceiling and cupola are to be of height strictly proportional to the base footprint of length and width. if there are more questions about our Church, this office is at your service to address them. Respectfully, Serbian Orthodox Church in USA and Canada Western American Diocese 2541 Crestline Terrace, Alhambra, California 91803 His Grace Bishop t ONG!N Phone: 626/289 -9061; Episcopal Residence 626/284 -6825; Fax 626/284 -1484 E-mail westdiocese@earthlink.net Fr. Slabodan B. Jovic 408- 867 -0421 p.I aGrnlvtn TIME —.IAN 11 R.9 AM 08 867 0421 Longin, Bishop of Western America January 10, 2006 Attachment B Serbian Orthodox Church, Diocese ^f Western America I St Sava Serbian Orthodox Church Page .1 of 2 [home] Diocesan Radio Program The Department of Christian Education christian life parishes lives of the saints bookstore Serbian Orthodox Church church history church in kosovo holy fathers holy new martyrs chilandar prayer liturgical petitions People serbla and recent war Subscribe to mailing list 'Enter your email Subscribe Appeal for Chilandar Monaste The Prologue of Ohrld St Sava Serbian Orthodox Chur St Sava Serbian Orthodox Church 4436 East KcKlnley Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85008 tel (602)275 -7360 fax (602) 275 -4112 V. Rev. Danko Trbovic 1631 N. Sunset Drive, Tempe, AZ, tel (480) 949 -9475 Contact Us l,rf /Mrur twPCt crhd in,orE /info /showarticie.nhn ?article church. phoenix 1 /19 0f16fi Serbian Orthodox Church, Diocese Western America I St Steven's Serbian Orthodox C... 'Page 1 of 2 [home] Diocesan Radio Program The Department of Christian Education christian life parishes lives of the saints bookstore Serbian Orthodox Church church history church In kosovo holy fathers holy new martyrs chllandar prayer liturgical`petltions" People serbia and recent war Subscribe to mailing list Enter your email Subsc Appeal for Chilandar Monaste The Prologue of Ohrld St Steven's Serbian Orthodox Cath St. Steven's Serbian Orthodox Cathedral 1621 West Garvey Ave Alhambra, CA 91803 Tel. 626 284 -9100 Fax 626 -281 -5045 V. Rev. Nikola Ceko e-mail; Katedralni @aol.com Rev. Norman Kosanovich e-mail: FrNormanK @aol.com Web: http://www.saintstevens.org/homepage.htm Contact Us ht+„• /bruru, Ixrpcterhrlin nra /info /chnwartirlp nhn9artir.lR= r.hiirr..h alhamhra /1 Q/1(N16 Serbian Orthodox Church, Diocese -f Western America St. Basil of Ostrorbian Orth... Page 1 of 2 [home] Diocesan Radio Program The Department of Christian Education christian life parishes lives of the saints bookstore Serbian Orthodox Church church history church In kosovo holy fathers holy new martyrs chllandar prayer liturgical petitions People serbia and recent war Subscribe to mailing list Enter your email Subscribe 1 Appeal for Chilandar Monaste The Prologue of Ohrid St. Basil of Ostrog Serbian Orthodox Church 930 N. Main Street, Angels Camp, CA 95222 Contact Us St. Basil of Ostrog Serbian Orthodox Mailing address P.O. Box 673, Altaville, CA 95521, tel.(209)736 -2340 V. Rev. Stavrofor Miladin Garich, Administrator 6723 Will Rogers Dr. Fair Oaks, CA 95628 (916)966 -1999 /Al mni „s,Po- orl,rlin nro /infn /chmx,artic1 nhr19artirla =rhitrrh anaalc 1 /1 Q/MAA Serbian Orthodox Church, Diocese `Western America I Holy Assumption r- the Mother... Page 1 of 2 [home] Diocesan Radio Program The Department of Christian Education christian life parishes lives of the saints bookstore Serbian Orthodox Church church history church in kosovo holy fathers holy new martyrs chllandar prayer liturgical petitions People serbta and recent war Subscribe to mailing list Enter your email Subscr e:.i Appeal for Chilandar Monaste The Prologue of Ohrid Holy Assumption of the Mother of Serbian Orthodox Church Holy Assumption of the Mother of God Serbian Orthodox Church 7777 Sunset Avenue, Fair Oaks, California 95628, tel (916) 966 -5438 fax(916)966 -5235 Very Rev. Dane Popovic, e-mail: Father_Dane @Yahoo.com (church address) tel. (916) 966 -6276 Protodeacon William Weir 2911 Morse Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95821 tel. (916) 488 -0827 Contact Us 111n hnnt Diane Drewke's Remarks to City Council September 17, 2008 Where in the City Code does it allow for overflow parking? Where in the City Code does it allow for unmarked parking to be counted toward the totals? Where is the planting strip that must be adjacent to an A or R1 and must be landscaped less than 5 feet? The R -1 property next to the Church is not landscaped, it is irrelevant if the Church owns it as a rental property. Likewise there is no landscaping five feet in depth next to the agricultural.15- 35.040j Are we going to set a precedent to no longer require landscaping next to parking lots? Where is the sidewalk in the impervious coverage numbers? Where is the arborist report on the damage for the sidewalk? Where is the total in the parking number for the social club which is required? Where does it allow the City to ignore additional buildings How can the City state increasing from a church building capacity to an additional building with a seating of 254 is not an increase in intensity? Is the City willing to also say that if second dwelling units say they will not use the buildings at the same time they no longer are required for extra spaces? Can other properties if they promise not to use the buildings at the same time can they get reduce their parking requirements? Where is the parking agreements? Why would the LDS Church rent its property out on Sunday which is its peak demand time for its own parishioners? Would the LDS Church rent its property knowing people having been drinking hard liquor at lunch considering they are against the use of alcohol? Especially on Sunday when their own parishioners are going to church? How does the current parking plan fit in with 15- 35.020a which states that the alteration or enlargement shall mean a change of use or an addition to the number of parking spaces? How does the plan for shuttles comply with 15- 35.020 h which state parking spaces shall be located on the same site or and adjacent site only separated by an alley? Are we going to allow all businesses to use shuttles to get around the parking requirements? How does it comply 15- 35.030 state that you shall not reduce capacity with out sufficient additional capacity provided to comply with these articles? How can you impose these parking conditions when it will adversely affect the immediate neighborhood and the surrounding properties? How can you say that having overcrowding and asking people to park far away and walk will not encourage people parking on the side streets? How can you say with all the bikers, runners, walkers, children and dogs this will not adversely affect the neighborhood? C par-Vi2 par-t 8 an }lei W All *Fel C `1' c -00 i n m. cl od t d f r :1 N IGIL11,47 PRBJMINARY ELECTRICAL ME PLAN 1 nNs oar nc-ro.,- MAR =TEN BC A architecture p Ian fling i n t eriors Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont. California 94539 IT I 510445.1000 [Ft 510.445.1005 Anew.BCAIncOnlIne.com IP &NT MOINW ROAM SUIT. 40•430.1:113 WA JOSE. 06‘11.11•01•11/4 00112 11,%•1214430-1011 011iCIBI•lr 1•111.14711B AMIN. Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California PRELIMINARY ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN Ste Drawing Number 10500901 26 2008 scek AS NOTED Proles Number 05003 12 OF 12 Christopher Riordan From: Rhonda Huff [rhonda.huff @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 6:06 PM To: John Livingstone; jonathan©wittwerparkin.com Cc: Christopher Riordan; 'Diane Drewke'; 'Steve Schwartzkopf; 'Bob and Karie Barr; 'Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'D Bentek'; 'Ying and Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'Daryl Huff'; saraewilson @juno.com; swong @swongdirect.net; 'Aparjot Dehal'; 'Rhonda Huff Subject: RE: Your Email to John Livingstone and me dated 6 -30 -08 Hi Jonathan: Thank you for your message. Since you did not copy the original recipient list with your reply indicating you would take a several days to reply, I'm re- forwarding the thread yet again so we'll all be on the same page with the proper context with my question and your answer. We will all look forward to your reply please cc the original distribution list copied again on this message for your convenience along with the included thread so there is no confusion. Thank you, Rhonda Huff From: Jonathan Wittwer [mailto :jonathan @wittwerparkin.com] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 11:15 AM To: 'Rhonda Huff' Cc: 'John Livingstone' Subject: Your Email to John Livingstone and me dated 6 -30 -08 I have been requested by the City to respond to the above email. I will get back to you as soon as possible, but it may take several days. Jonathan Wittwer Original Message From: Rhonda Huff mailto:rhonda.huff@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 2:33 PM To: 'John Livingstone'; 'jonathan @wittwerparkin.com' Cc: 'Christopher Riordan'; 'Diane Drewke'; 'Steve Schwartzkopf'; 'Bob and Karie Barr'; 'Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'D Bentek'; 'Ying and Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'Daryl Huff'; 'saraewilson @juno.com'; 'swong @swongdirect.net'; 'Aparjot Dehal' Subject: RE: FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD 6 -25 -08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING John: My second message (containing exactly the same content) sent also on Wednesday at 10:53 AM did NOT bounce and was delivered on Wednesday to the individual planning commissioner e-mails as well as to you and Jonathan Wittwer and members of the Neighborhood taskforce. Thus, I am curious why you did not read the e-mail until today. Especially given that the words are all the same as they were last week, this begs the logical question: Why would the spam filter block the message on the day of the hearing and yet allow the very same text through on Saturday AFTER the hearing was concluded? What type of SPAM filter are you using that allows or blocks content based on the day of the week? 1 Since you have received the message in its entirety, have you included it in the public record on this matter and have you distributed it to the Commissioners including Susie V. Nagpal who does not list an individual e-mail on your website (http: /www.saratoga.ca.us/ boards commissions /planning /index.html) per my request? Please include a copy of this full e -mail for the record as well because it seems it would be important to build a full record for future reference as well as be reviewed by whomever manages your e-mail spam filtering software. The bounce message received from the planning commission alias last Wednesday is forwarded at the end of this message per your request as well. Thank you, Rhonda Huff Original Message From: John Livingstone [mailto:johnl @saratoga.ca.us] Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 1:44 PM To: Rhonda Huff; jonathan@wittwerparkin.com Cc: Christopher Riordan; lsalindong@saratoga.ca.us Subject: RE: FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD 6 -25 -08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Dear Daryl and Rhonda Huff, This is the first time that I have seen this e -mail. For some reason it did not go through. Our IT person feels that one of the words triggered our spam block. If you could forward the bounce back message you received our IT person will look into it. Thanks John L Original Message From: Rhonda Huff [mailto:rhonda.huff @comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 7:27 AM To: John Livingstone; jonathan@wittwerparkin.com Subject: FW: FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD 6 -25 -08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING John Jonathan: May we please have an explanation as to why our letter was not read into the record at last Wednesday's Planning Commission meeting? We have not received a response regarding if this was added to the Public Record on this matter and if all of the commission members received a copy of same. Since your all planning- commission e-mail alias was not working last week, there are one or two commissioners who do not list individual e-mails so we wanted to ensure all received our input. Sincerely, Daryl Rhonda Huff Original Message From: Rhonda Huff mailto:rhonda.huff comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:53 AM To: 'johnl @saratoga.ca.us'; jonathan@wittwerparkin.com' 2 Cc: 'manny.cappello @att.net'; 'rkumar @saratoga.ca.us'; 'robert kundtz @yahoo.com'; 'lrodgers @saratoga.ca.us'; 'jhlavaogden@Comcast.net'; 'yanniezhao @yahoo.com' Subject: FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD 6 -25 -08 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Hi John Johathan: We tried to forward the following letter to the Planning Commission e-mail address this AM and just received a bounce message. Please ensure that all Planning Commissioners receive a copy of our letter today and that it is read into the Public Record at tonight's meeting. Thank you, The Huffs From: Daryl Rhonda Huff Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:32 AM To: 'planning @saratoga.ca.us' Cc: 'jonathan@wittwerparkin.com'; 'saraewilson @juno.com'; 'Aparjot Dehal'; 'Bernie Mills'; 'Bob and Karie Barr'; 'Kariebarr@yahoo.com'; 'Cheriel Jensen'; 'D Bentek'; 'Daryl Huff'; 'Kariebarr @yahoo.com'; 'Sam L. Nguyen'; 'Stephanie Macauley'; 'Steve Schwartzkopf'; 'swong@swongdirect.net'; 'Ted Macauley'; 'Trish Schist'; 'Virginia King'; 'Vivian Mills'; 'Ying and Shiuh -Wuu Lee'; 'shiuhwuu.lee@gmail.com'; 'Diane Drewke' Subject: FOR PUBLIC RECORD Planning Commission Public Hearing Comments St. Archangel Michael Church Building Plan Please include and read into the PUBLIC RECORD AT TONIGHT'S PLANNING COMMISION MEETING. Thank you, Daryl and Rhonda Huff Dear Planning Commissioners: We regret that we will be unable to attend tonight's meeting regarding the proposed building plan for ST. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church. As neighbors who live nearby we would first like to reiterate our desire and support for the common goal of the building of a new sanctuary that both the church members and the neighborhood can be proud of. The property in question has not been maintained for decades so we believe everyone agrees the property is in desperate need of improvement and we hope that will occur. However, we have concerns that remain and that have not yet been addressed. The major concerns that the we have are: A. The building as currently proposed is far too massive to be located in such close proximity to Allendale it is much taller than building codes allow, it will impair our view corridors that are of concern to all citizens but especially we who live and commute on Allendale. This is even called out as an important issue to be protected per our own City of Saratoga General Plan. B. The examples of other nearby churches to which the proposed structure is compared are not proper comparisons and here is why: 1. The Latter Day Saints Church which is the closest comparison is a) on a significantly larger parcel of continuous land; 3 b) the longest portion of the building is the farthest away from Allendale and the Nave portion is the narrowest portion that is closest to the street; and c) The architectural style of that building is much more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood; and d) It was built in a different era under LESS restrictive codes that we have even today. 2. The churches on Saratoga Avenue which are certainly larger are also on commensurately MUCH larger parcels of land and Saratoga Avenue is a much busier thoroughfare than Allendale. (A reference back to your most recent traffic studies of both streets will confirm that fact for you.) 3. We would direct you to review your own height, noise, setback requirements that you placed for the recent further expansion of the St. Andrews property and ask why you are not requiring exactly the same sorts of restrictions on the St. Archangel Michael project? C. The lack of operational "bells" does not ensure that chimes or some other amplified sound will not emanate outside the boundaries of the property this remains of great concern to the surrounding neighbors especially when enforcement remains non-existent on this issue of noise from the City. D. The completely inadequate amount of parking spaces allotted will have a negative impact on our neighborhoods. This is a safety and visibility issue and it is unacceptable that this portion of our Code is being ignored. The church has not complied with even the minimal requirements placed on them by the new CUP and thus we do not have any confidence that they intend to do anything other than park on Allendale and our surrounding neighborhood streets as well as use both buildings simultaneously. Their parking lot has been completely full on numerous occasions including WHERE THE NEW STRUCTURE IF APPROVED WILL BE. The ratio or seats to required parking spaces is in our code for a reason please do not ignore it. Here are our proposed solutions to the foregoing issues: A. Reduce the height and scale of the structure to be no taller than 30 feet; B. Reduce number of seats to conform with the amount of available on-site parking; C. Require noise ordinances to be complied with and no amplified sound of any kind should be allowed (bells, chimes, music, chants, etc.) beyond allowable decibel levels specified in the General Plan and with defined enforcement; D. Locate new smaller sanctuary structure behind the current social hall so as not to impose on the view corridors and block a large portion of frontage on Allendale; E. Require landscaping, minimal down lighting only (within curfew hours and off after hours) to be installed AND maintained; F. Require compliance with existing CUP requirements; and G. The new architectural design style is an improvement over the former proposal and if it was scaled down, we would have no objection to the materials and finishes of the proposed structure. We hope you will consider these issues carefully and balance the needs of all so that an acceptable solution is reached. We wholeheartedly believe the foregoing list of proposed solutions does just that. Thank you for your attention to this matter, 4 Daryl and Rhonda Huff Hatleigh Drive Saratoga, CA Bounce Message Original Message From: Mail Delivery System [mailto:mail- daemon @comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:32 AM To: rhonda.huff @comcast.net Subject: Delivery status notification This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification. Delivery to the following recipients failed permanently: planning @saratoga.ca.us Reporting -MTA: dns; QMTA06 .eneryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.56] Received- From -MTA: dns; OMTA06 .emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.51] Arrival -Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:31:39 +0000 Final- recipient: rfc822; planning @saratoga.ca.us Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Diagnostic -Code: smtp; 550 5.0.0 <planning @saratoga.ca.us Mailbox targetted for abuse.Rejecting... Last attempt -Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17 :31:46 +0000 5 LOGAN POWELL LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW Robert J. Logan, of Counsel 61 East Main Street, Suite C Los Gatos, California 95030 Telephone (408) 395 -1350 Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church 18870 Allendale Avenue Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: Barr /Corr /Barr CC- appeal -Itr 09 12.08 sq FC/EgT.TC` SEP 12 2008 BY: oa no0T Fax (408) 395 -1354 E -mail: info @loganpowell.com Hand Delivered September 12, 2008 This letter is submitted on behalf of the Saratoga Neighborhood Task Force (the "Neighbors in support of their appeal of the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration "Neg Dec Design Review and Conditional Use Permit (collectively the "Project for the St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church (the "Church As expressed in their appeal letter, the Neighbors are extremely concerned over the impacts the Project will have on them and the surrounding neighborhood. The Neighbors are not opposed to the Church; however, they want the construction and operation of the Church to be consistent with the City's rules and regulations. In addition, they want the Church to respect the residential neighborhood in which it is located. As proposed, the Project is not consistent with the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance or with State law. I. An Environmental Impact Report "EIR Should be Prepared for the Project. The California Environmental Quality Act "CEQA requires the preparation of an EIR whenever a project will have a significant effect on the environment. (See Public Resources Code 21002.1 and 21080(d).) The foremost principal under CEQA is that the legislature intended the Act to be interpreted in such a manner as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the scope of the statutory language. (See Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Ca1.3d 376, 390.) A public agency must prepare an EIR whenever substantial evidence supports a fair argument that a proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment. Significant effect on the environment means a substantial or potentially The Neighbors previously submitted detailed comments and exhibits on the Neg Dec which are hereby incorporated by reference. Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church September 12, 2008 Page 2 substantial adverse change in the environment. (See Laurel Heights at 1123 1126.) Therefore, a public agency's decision not to require an EIR can only be upheld when there is no credible evidence to the contrary. (See Laurel Heights at 1318.) The City must prepare an EIR if it "is presented with a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environment even where it is also presented with other substantial evidence that the project will not have a significant effect. (See CEQA Guidelines 15064(F)(1); Lighthouse Field Beach Rescue v. City of Santa Cruz (2005) 131 Cal.App.4 1170, 1181.) All doubts should be resolved in favor of preparing an EIR particularly in close cases. (See Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group v. City of San Jose (2003) 114 Cal.App.4 689, 703.) Consequently, there is a low threshold requirement for the preparation of an EIR. (See Oro Fino Gold Mining Corp. v. County of El Dorado (1990) 225 Cal.App.3d 872, 881.) Under these standards, the City must prepare an EIR for the Project because it will have significant effects on the environment. The purpose of CEQA is not to generate paper, but to compel government at all levels to make decisions with environmental consequences in mind. (See Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Com. (1975) 13 Ca1.3d 263, 274, 118 Cal.Rptr. 249.) Additional studies must be done on this project to determine whether or not it will have significant environmental consequences. An EIR must be prepared for this project. A. There Will be a Significant Impact Caused by Lack of Parking Pursuant to the City's parking regulations, 228 spaces are required for the property. However, the Church is only proposing to have 126 spaces on site. The only mitigation measure imposed in the Neg Dec to address this deficiency is improper and contrary to the requirements of CEQA. The Church has failed to mitigate the negative impact of overflow parking on the neighborhood. Based on an assumption that not all buildings will be used at the same time, the traffic consultants hired by the Church, determined that only 126 spaces were needed. (See May 21, 2007, letter from Daniel Takacs to Rasha Bozinovic, Church Board President, attached as Exhibit A.) However, there is nothing that specifically prohibits the use of all buildings at the same time throughout the year. The traffic consultants assumed that additional spaces would only be needed on Easter and Christmas. This assumption is flawed. In addition, to mitigate the impact, the Neg Dec only provides: /1 Barr /Corr/Bart CC- appeal -ltr 09.12.08.sq Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church September 12, 2008 Page 3 "Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall develop a traffic and parking management plan for Christmas Eve and Easter events subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. The plan shall describe methods for parking of vehicles generated by the special events. These methods could include the use of an off -site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the church, limiting the attendance at these two events to 277 people or other measures approved by the City." (See Neg Dec pg. 26.) "A lead agency cannot base a negative declaration on the presumed success of mitigation measures that have not been formulated at the time of project approval." (See Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296.) The CEQA process demands that mitigation measures timely be set forth, that environmental information be complete and relevant and that environmental decisions be made in an accountable arena. (See Oro Fino Gold Mining Corporation v. County of El Dorado (1990) 225 Cal,App.3d 872, 884.) The decision of the Community Development Director that the traffic and parking management plan is acceptable would not be made in an accountable arena. A plan formulated sometime in the future is clearly inadequate to protect the neighborhood from the Church's inevitable overflow parking needs year round. In Quail Botanical Gardens Foundation, Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1605, fn. 4, the court admonished the City not to rely on post approval mitigation measures that might be imposed through the design review process. This is precisely what the City is attempting to do in this case. A mitigation measure to address the highly deficient parking situation must be presented and considered prior to project approval. The traffic study simply fails to acknowledge the fact that by building a new church that will seat 254 people additional people will be attending the church. As recently noted in the Saratoga News, this church will be a "tourist attraction." (Please see article attached as Exhibit B.) If this new facility is built, the people will come. Despite this increase in capacity, the traffic study utilizes attendance numbers from 2007 with no provision for the increase. If the existing church seats 80 and 65 vehicles were on site at the peak time of 11:45 a.m. on April 29, 2007, as noted in the traffic study, it is reasonable to assume that the new church building will attract approximately three (3) times the number of cars. Similarly, if 180 vehicles were on site at 11:45 a.m. on Easter Sunday, it is reasonable to assume that three (3) times that number of vehicles, 540 vehicles, would be on site if the new church is built. However, there is absolutely no discussion of this substantial increase in attendance. There is a fair argument that the increased capacity of the new church will triple the vehicles on site and thereby further exacerbate the parking deficiencies. Barr /Corr /Barr CC- appeal -Itr 09.12.08.sq Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church September 12, 2008 Page 4 B. There Will be a Significant Impact Caused by the Incompatibility of the Project With the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Regarding Building Height The General Plan provides that no buildings will exceed two (2) stories in height. Although there is an exception for quasi public uses discussed in the Land Use Element, that exception only applies if the "slope underneath the three -story area is 10% or more and a stepped pad is used." Land Use Element, Background Report and Guidelines for Area Development, pg. 14. In addition, the Zoning Ordinance provides that the height may not exceed 30 feet. (See Saratoga Municipal Code "SMC §15.12.100(a).) Here, the proposed Church will exceed 50 feet in height. This inconsistency with the rules and regulations of the City creates a fair argument that there will be a significant impact on the environment. The Neg Dec attempts to justify this by pointing to other churches located in the City. However, those churches were built under different regulations, including a different General Plan, and were permitted at that time. This project is clearly inconsistent with the rules and regulations that are in place today. C. There is Inadequate Information to Determine if There Will be a Significant Noise Impact Caused by the Project Despite the requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance and Noise Element of the General Plan, the noise associated with the operation of the Church was not even considered in the Neg Dec. The only noise impacts studied were the noise levels associated with construction of the Church. "If the local agency has failed to study an area of possible environmental impact, a fair argument may be based on the limited facts in the record. Deficiencies in the record may actually enlarge the scope of fair argument by lending a logical plausibility to a wider range of inference." (See Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, 311.) The agencies "should not be allowed to hide behind their own failure to gather relevant data (See Sundstrom at 311.) SMC 7- 30.050 provides that "no person shall cause, produce, or allow to be produced, in any residential zoning district, any single event noise more than six (6) dBA above the ambient noise level at the location where the single event noise source is measured." In order to determine whether or not the Project will cause significant noise impacts, studies must be conducted. However, the Neg Dec dismisses this requirement because the Project does not constitute a change in use. Although it is true the property is currently operated as a church and will continue to be so operated, the use will intensify. If approved, this project will add an additional 6,609 square foot sanctuary that will seat 254 people. Currently, the existing church building seats 80. The existing church will continue to be used. In addition, there is also a 9,731 square foot meeting hall that will continue to operate on this site. This intensification of use can Barr /Corr /Barr CC- appeal -Itr 09.12.08.sq Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church September 12, 2008 Page 5 reasonably be expected to increase the noise level on the property. A fair argument exists that the intensification will result in a significant impact from noise. Thus, additional studies and an EIR are required. D. There Will be a Significant Impact to Aesthetics The Neg Dec completely fails to consider the impact the proposed structure will have on neighborhood aesthetics. The Neg Dec concludes that the Project will have a Tess than significant impact on the environment because "the design of the proposed project largely follows the design criteria outlined in City Code Section 15.46.040." (See Neg Dec, pg. 16.) It completely fails to address the fact that the building exceeds the City's height limit by 20 feet and bears little resemblance to the surrounding area. The only architectural features that the on -site buildings will share are stucco facades, some stone and a new paint color. The mitigation measures are clearly inadequate. The Neg Dec attempts to compare the proposed Church to the similar style of the Fire Station which is over two (2) miles away. Pursuant to SMC 15.46.040(f), the proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. The immediate area does not include the Fire Station which is located approximately two (2) miles away. The immediate area is the surrounding neighborhood. As shown in the photographs attached as Exhibit C, the proposed church dwarfs the homes in the surrounding area in terms of height and bulk. In addition, the height, design and bulk of the proposed church are not compatible with the Mormon Church located 1 /4 of a mile from the Project. Thus, the mitigation measures imposed to address this incompatibility are wholly inadequate. There is a fair argument that the Church will have a significant impact on aesthetics. II. Variations for Building Height and Parking Cannot be Granted for the Project. Pursuant to SMC 15.55.030, "a conditional use may be permitted by a use permit to have different site area, density, structure height, distances between structures, site coverage, front, side and rear setback area minimums and off street parking and loading requirements, other than as listed under the specific regulations for unconditional permitted uses in the zoning district in which it lies." The Project is seeking variations from building height, parking and site coverage requirements. However, in order to grant a variation, the findings for a conditional use permit must still be made and the variations cannot be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity and they must comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. (See SMC 15.55.070.) Here, the proposed variations for building heights and parking will clearly impair the public health, safety and welfare. In addition, the height variance is contrary to the General Plan and therefore cannot be granted. Barr /Corr /Barr CC- appeal -Itr 09.12.08.sq Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church September 12, 2008 Page 6 A. The Height Variation is Inconsistent With the General Plan The General Plan is the guiding document for all development within the City. "A general plan...may not be trifled on Iightly...The keystone of regional planning is consistency between the general plan, its internal elements, subordinate ordinances, and all derivative land use decisions." (See Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Ca1.3d 553, 572.) A zoning ordinance cannot conflict with the general plan. Therefore, although the Zoning Ordinance permits variations for height limitations, no project can be approved that is inconsistent with any height limitations contained in the General Plan. As detailed in Section I.B. above, the height variation requested by the Church is inconsistent with the General Plan and therefore, cannot be granted. As stated in the Neg Dec, the height of the building is "stylistic in nature" and only provides "two stories of usable space." However, the building is 50 feet tall, far in excess of the height limits imposed in the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant claims that the height of the building is dictated by the "Golden Mean proportions." However, there is no evidence that a building in compliance with the City's height restrictions could not also meet the Golden Mean proportions. In fact, when presented with pictures of numerous Serbian Orthodox churches in the United States and abroad (copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit D), Church representatives admitted at the Planning Commission meeting that the Golden Means proportion is not a requirement but rather a recommendation or guideline. There is no reasonable basis to grant the Church special privileges which are prohibited under the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Contrary to the Church's erroneous arguments, by following the City's rules and regulations, you are not preventing anyone from practicing their religion. Pursuant to the Protection of Religious Exercise in Land Use and by Institutionalized Persons Act (42 U.S.C. 2000cc et. seq.), "No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government demonstrated that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly or institution (A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (B) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest." (See 42 U.S.C. 2000cc(1).) The requirement that the Church lower the height of its proposed building is not a substantial burden on its religious exercise. In fact, the bases on which the Church claims to need the proposed height and architecture are merely recommendations or guidelines, not a tenet of their religion. But even if it was, the requirement to comply with the City's General Plan height limitation is a compelling governmental interest that protects the health and welfare of its citizens. Barr /Corr /Bart CC- appeal -Itr 09.12.08. sq 1/ Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church September 12, 2008 Page 7 B. The Parking Variation Will Cause Detrimental Impacts on the Neighborhood and Should Not Be Granted The parking proposed for this property is completely inadequate for the myriad of uses on site. As stated in the Neg Dec, 228 parking spaces are required for all uses on the site. Despite the clear language of the SMC, the Project is only providing 126 spaces, almost half of what is actually needed. To compound the problem, 41 of those spaces do not meet the City standards for parking spaces and therefore should not be counted toward the parking requirement. The dearth of parking should not be permitted because it will result in significant impacts on the neighborhood when Church attendees are forced to park throughout the neighborhood due to lack of space on the property. As stated in the traffic report, over 400 people attended the Church on Easter Sunday despite the fact that the existing church only seats 80 people. On April 29, 2007, 109 people attended the Church. The proposed church will seat 254 people. By using the same formula, we can assume that on any given Sunday, over 300 people will attend the new church. In addition, the social club which also operates on the site has events for over 200 people. There is nothing in the approvals that would limit the use of these buildings simultaneously which would result in scores of attendees having nowhere to park on the property. The grass crete parking spaces do not qualify as parking spaces under the SMC and therefore, should not be counted toward the parking requirements for the Project. Pursuant to SMC section 15.35.040(a): "each standard parking space shall be not less than eighteen feet in length and nine feet, six inches in width, exclusive of aisles and access drives. The spaces shall be marked by double strips two feet apart and the width of each space shall be measured from center to center of the double strips. Each parallel standard parking space shall be not Tess than twenty three feet in length and eight feet in width." In addition, those parking areas that are adjacent to the R -1 district must provide a landscaped strip not less than five (5) feet in depth shall be planted and permanently maintained along the property line with plant materials not less than five (5) feet in height as required by SMC 15.35.040(j). No such landscaping has been provided. Barr /Corr /Barr CC- appeal -Itr 09.12.08. sq Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church September 12, 2008 Page 8 This project is also specifically inconsistent with Land Use Policy 2.5 which provides: "The City shall monitor Zoning Ordinance standards to ensure that nonresidential parking standards are adequate to minimize spill -over parking into adjacent neighborhoods." The Church is a non residential use located in a residential zoning district. By granting a variation to parking standards which is so contrary to the demands of the use, there will be spill over into the neighborhoods. This cannot be ignored. The parking, as proposed, is already highly deficient. To compound the problem, 41 of the spaces do not meet City regulations and should not be counted toward the parking requirement. Therefore, only 85 spaces are provided on site for a sanctuary with 254 seats, a meeting hall of 9,731 square feet, a classroom of 1,224 square feet, and a single family residence. There is no plan to address this parking deficiency. This will result in a significant impact on the neighborhood as those surrounding streets will serve as the parking lot for the Church. This cannot be permitted. Because the proposed parking does not comply with the applicable provisions of the City's Zoning Ordinance Code (See SMC Chapter 15.) and is inconsistent with the City's Land Use Element, this variation cannot be granted. III. The Project is Inconsistent With the City's Design Guidelines. Pursuant to SMC 15.46.020(a)(6), a Design Review permit is required for any structure, except a single family dwelling or accessory structure, having a floor area of one thousand square feet or greater, located in an A, R -1, HR or R -OS district. Pursuant to SMC 15.46.040, when considering a project where more than one (1) building or structure will be constructed, "the architectural features and landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include height, elevations, roofs, material, color and appurtenances." (See SMC 15.46.040(a).) In addition, the proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. (See SMC 15.46.040(0.) The Project is inconsistent with these requirements. The Church if approved as proposed will include a 6,609 square foot church, an existing church building of 1,224 square feet which is proposed to be used as a classroom facility, a meeting hall of approximately 9,731 square feet and a 2,521 square foot single family residence. The existing buildings on the property feature stone and stucco and flat roofs. (See photographs of those structures attached as Exhibit E.) As stated in the Neg Dec, "the proposed church could be considered incompatible with the existing structures on the site if these buildings did not share a similar color palette." However, the SMC requires height, elevations, roofs, material, color and appurtenances to be harmonious. Although the structures may use a "similar color palette the other architectural features (i.e. height, elevations, and roofs) are not harmonious. Barr /Corr /Bart CC- appeal -Itr 09.12.08. sq Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church September 12, 2008 Page 9 Specifically, as stated in the Neg Dec, the roof of the proposed church "would not match the roofing style possessed by the two existing buildings on site." (See Neg Dec pg. 16.) The proposed church is not compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. (See photographs attached as Exhibit C.) Contrary to the implication in the Neg Dec, the fire house is not in the immediate area of the proposed church. Therefore, the fact that the design of the proposed church and the fire house may be compatible is completely irrelevant. The immediate area consists of the surrounding neighborhood. As shown in the attached photographs, the proposed church is not compatible in terms of height, bulk and design of these homes. IV. As Proposed, the Findings for the Use Permit Cannot be Made. A church is a conditional use in the R -1 -40 zoning district. "Because of their unusual characteristics, conditional uses require special consideration so that they may be located properly with respect to the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties." (See SMC 15.55.010.) In order to grant a use permit, the following findings must be made: (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; (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; and (c) that the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this Chapter. As detailed above, the Project, as proposed, will be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare to the surrounding area. In addition, the Project will not comply with the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 15 of the SMC. V. Conclusion. The Project, as proposed, is not consistent with the City's General Plan or Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the Neg Dec fails to consider significant impacts caused by the Project. Until the Project can be revised to comply with the City's rules and regulations and a complete environmental analysis of the Project is conducted, the Project cannot be approved. The rules and regulations that the City has worked so diligently to protect should not be disregarded merely because of a desire or recommendation of the Church. /1 Barr /Corr /Barr CC- appeal -Itr 09.12.08.sq Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Re: Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church September 12, 2008 Page 10 In the event you decide to approve the Project, please forward a copy of a Notice of Determination to me. Thank you for your consideration of these issues. KMP:sq cc: clients enclosures Barr /Corr /Barr CC- appeal -Itr 09 12 08 sq Very truly yours, Kirsten M. Powell EXHIBIT A U HIGGINS ASSOCIATES 1 CIVIL f, TRAFFIC ENGINEERS May 21, 2007 Mr. Rasha Bozinovic, Board President St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, Ca 95070 RE: St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Traffic Analysis Dear Mr. Bozinovic: This letter documents additional traffic impact analyses for the St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church located on Allendale Avenue in Saratoga. The church is proposing to construct a new sanctuary on the existing church property. A traffic study of the proposed project was documented in a February 20, 2007. That analysis was based on traffic counts collected in 2004. This letter documents analyses based upon traffic counts collected in April of this year, including counts and observations collected on Easter Sunday. In addition, information regarding existing uses on the church site was provided by church officials. A discussion of potential impacts associated with various church activities are described in this letter. Exhibit 1 shows the location of the church with respect to the local street network. Exhibit 2 shows the existing church site plan. The church consists of a hall, a classroom (temporarily used as a chapel) and a single family residence. For purposes of this report, when the term "church" is used, it refers to the entirety of the project site and all of the buildings and facilities on the site. The project site currently contains the following: 1. Sunday School (temporary chapel): 1,224 square feet; 2. Hall: 9,731 square feet; and 3. Single Family House: 2,521 square feet. Exhibit 3 shows the proposed site plan. The proposed new sanctuary will consist of 3,994 square feet of floor space with a seating capacity of 254 people. The existing church has an estimated seating capacity of 80 people. The traffic analysis consists of a traffic impact analysis and a parking analysis. The traffic impact analysis evaluates the impact of the traffic generated by the church to the local street network. The parking analysis evaluates the parking needs of the church and the ability of the church to meet existing and future parking demand. I ;uil -Ii first Surt-t (iilrut. California 9i021)--rig ∎uu r/ iI1R B tR- t I 21 nx IOS li• fi -.1112 Itiro- kbhigl;ins.rum Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Church Activities Church officials provided a listing of current church activities, which is shown on Exhibit 4. Weekly events include Sunday services and events, social events for children and adults and religious related services held during the week and on Saturday. Excluding the Sunday events, most of the weekly social and religious activities are low attendance events, with the International Folklore Dance on Thursday evening generating the highest attendance at 60 people. Otherwise, the attendance at the weekly non Sunday events is 15 people or less. Besides the Sunday service that begins at 10:00 AM, there are several other events and activities that occur at the church on Sunday. Events last throughout the day, generally ending between 3:00 and 4:00 PM. As shown on Exhibit 4, attendance levels vary at each event and as a result, the number of people on the church site fluctuates throughout the day on Sunday. The peak number of people on the church site peaks after the morning service. At the current time, the church estimates that attendance for the Sunday morning service is 80 people, which is the seating capacity of the church. Other church attendees arrive after 10:00 for Sunday School and lunch with 60 people attending Sunday School and 120 people attending lunch. Afternoon activities on Sunday include Serbian language for children (60 attendees), Serbian language for adults (20 people), Kolo dance practice for teens and Tambura practice for children (8 people). Baptisms are conducted on an irregular basis, usually after the Sunday service. In 2006, there were 16 baptisms and in 2007 there have been 7 baptisms. Church Board and Sunday School related meetings are held once per month. These meetings are attended by 20 people. As shown on Exhibit 4, there are several religious and social events that are once per year. Attendances at these events vary, with the highest attendance events associated with Christmas Eve and Easter activities. In addition to the church social and religious events, the church hosts funerals and weddings on an irregular basis throughout the year. In 2006, there were 8 funerals and 3 weddings and in 2007 there has been one funeral and no weddings at the church. There is no Sunday School from about mid -May to mid September. Three times per year, there are no Sunday services or activities at the church. The church does not have an office on the site. Mail is delivered to a curb site box. The church does not currently provide weekday daycare, school or after school care. These types of uses are not proposed in conjunction with development of the proposed project. 7-055 Ltr 5 -21 -07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 3 Existing Street Network The church is accessed via a single driveway to Allendale Avenue. Allendale Avenue is a 2 -lane collector street that extends between Quito Road and Fruitvale Avenue. Allendale provides access to the Saratoga Civic Center, Post Office and Redwood Middle School. Allendale Avenue is a key access route to West Valley College. Existing Traffic Volumes Allendale Avenue A machine tube counter was installed to count traffic on Allendale Avenue near the church between Sunday, April 8, 2007 and Saturday April 21, 2007. Exhibit 5 summarizes the traffic volume counts collected on Allendale Avenue between April 8, 2007 and April 21, 2007. Section A on Exhibit 5 contains a summary of the daily traffic volume counted on Allendale Avenue. The week of April 8 is a holiday week for some schools and traffic on Allendale Avenue was lower during the week of April 8th compared to the week of April 15 During the week of April 8 Allendale carried an average of 5,614 vehicles per weekday and during the week of April 15 Allendale Avenue carried 6,475 vehicles per weekday. The highest daily count of 6,971 vehicles was observed on Wednesday Aprill 19. On Saturday April 21', Allendale Avenue carried about 4,200 vehicles and on Sunday April 15 Allendale Avenue carried about 3,400 vehicles. Sections B and C of Exhibit 5 provide a summary of the highest one -hour volumes that were counted on Allendale Avenue during the week of April 15 Counts from the week of April 15 are presented because traffic during this week was higher on Allendale Avenue compared to the week of April 8th. Section B summarizes data for the peak commute hour, which is the highest one -hour volume during the 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM commute periods. During the morning commute period, Allendale Avenue carried about 615 vehicles on average during the busiest hour, excluding the Friday data. During the afternoon commute period, Allendale Avenue carried about 506 vehicles during the busiest hour, excluding the Friday data. Section C provides volume data for the highest one -hour of traffic during the morning and during the afternoon. The highest one -hour volume typically occurred during the morning commute period. The one exception occurred on Wednesday, when the peak volume during the morning occurred between 8:30 and 9:30 AM. For the week, the street peak volume for Allendale Avenue was about 620 vehicles, excluding the Friday data. During the afternoon and evening period, the street peak occurred at different hours of the day during the week, ranging from as early as 2:45 PM on Friday to 5:30 PM on Wednesday. The afternoon street peak volume averaged 542 vehicles excluding the Friday data. 7 -055 Ltr 5 -21 -07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 4 The weekend peak hour volumes are presented in Section D of Exhibit 5. The highest hourly volume on Allendale Avenue on Saturday was observed between 11:15 AM and 12:15 PM when the street carried 436 vehicles near the church site. The highest hourly volume on Allendale Avenue on Sunday was observed between 12:15 PM and 1:15 PM when the street carried 337 vehicles near the church site. The peak Saturday hourly volume is about 70% to 75% the average peak hour volume on a weekday and the peak Sunday hourly volume is about 55% of the average peak hour volume on a weekday. Exhibit 6 shows a graphic display of the hourly variation in traffic throughout the week. Hourly traffic volumes on Allendale Avenue Monday through Thursday are consistent. The hourly variation shows the impact of college traffic, which creates the highest peak in traffic in the morning and several lower peaks throughout the day. In the afternoon, the highest peak is at 3:00 PM. Volumes on Allendale Avenue are lower during the evening peak commute period than during the afternoon peak. Traffic volumes on Allendale Avenue are lower on Friday than on the other weekdays. Saturday and Sunday volumes are lower than weekday volumes with traffic volumes on Sunday being the lowest of the week. Allendale Avenue /Church Driveway Manual counts were performed at the Allendale Avenue intersection with the church driveway on Sunday, April 8, 2007 (Easter Sunday) and Sunday April 22, 2007. Through traffic and vehicles turning between the church driveway and Allendale Avenue were counted. The Easter Sunday count began at 9:00 AM and ended at 3:30 PM. The April 22 count began at 9:45 AM and ended at 3:00 PM. Besides the Sunday service, other activities occur at the church throughout Sunday. These events include baptisms, lunch, Sunday School, Serbian Language class and Tambura and Kolo dance practice. Because of the limited seating currently in the church and because some attendees do not attend the 10:00 AM service, but may attend another event at the church on Sunday, the existing church generates inbound and outbound traffic throughout the period between approximately 9:30 in the morning to about 3:00 in the afternoon. Exhibit 7a shows the 15- minute driveway volumes for Easter Sunday. The highest inbound volume prior to the beginning of the 10:00 AM service was at 9:45 AM (24 vehicles). There was another inbound peak at 10:45 AM (39 vehicles). On Easter Sunday, the peak 15- minute outbound volume occurred at 2:15 PM (29 vehicles). Exhibit 7b shows the 15- minute driveway volumes for April 29 While the volume of traffic generated by the church on Sunday April 29 do not approach the volumes generated on Easter Sunday, the inbound/outbound flows show similar characteristics as Easter Sunday. There was an inbound peak prior to 10:00 AM, another inbound peak near 11:00 AM and an outbound peak near 2:00 PM. 7 -055 l.tr 5 -21-07 Kasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 5 Because of the numerous peaks that occur on Sunday, Sunday driveway volumes are shown on Exhibit 8 for the following conditions: 1. Peak inbound volume; 2. Peak outbound volume; 3. Peak inbound and outbound volume; 4. Peak intersection volume. On Easter Sunday, the peak number of people on the site occurred at 11:45 AM when 416 people were on the site. The highest one -hour volume at the Allendale Avenue /Church driveway intersection occurred between 12:00 Noon and 1:00 PM. During that hour, a total of 366 vehicles were counted at the intersection, with 32 vehicles turning into the site and 6l vehicles exiting the site. The highest one -hour of vehicles entering the church site occurred between 10:45 AM and 11:45 AM when 98 vehicles turned into the site. The highest volume of traffic exiting the site occurred between 2 :15 PM and 3:15 PM when 85 vehicles exited the site. The peak trip generation for the site occurred between 11:30 AM and 12:30 PM when 124 vehicle trips were generated by the site (56 inbound and 68 outbound). The peak attendance on April 29 also occurred at 11:45 when there were 112 people on the church site. According to church officials, church attendance on April 29 was typical of recent attendance levels at the church. The highest one -hour volume at the Allendale Avenue /Church driveway intersection on April 29 occurred between 12:15 PM and 1:15 PM. During that hour, a total of 447 vehicles were counted at the intersection, with 15 vehicles turning into the site and 17 vehicles exiting the site. The highest one -hour of vehicles entering the church site occurred between 9:45 AM and 10:45 AM when 38 vehicles turned into the site. The highest volume of traffic exiting the site occurred between 1:45 PM and 2:45 PM when 39 vehicles exited the site. The peak trip generation for the site occurred between 1:45 PM and 2:45 PM when 43 vehicle trips were generated by the site (4 inbound and 39 outbound). Existing Sunday Traffic Operations Traffic operations are evaluated based on the Level of Service (LOS) concept. LOS is a qualitative description of an intersection and roadway's operation, ranging from LOS A to LOS F. Level of service "A" represents free flow un- congested traffic conditions. Level of service "F" represents highly congested traffic conditions with what is commonly considered unacceptable delay to vehicles on the road segments and at intersections. The intermediate levels of service represent incremental levels of congestion and delay between these two extremes 7-055 Ltr 5 -21 -07 Kasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 6 Based upon the planning level LOS thresholds shown in Appendix A, Allendale Avenue currently operates at LOS 13 on weekdays, excluding Friday, which operates at LOS A. This operating condition primarily occurs during the AM peak commute period when the road carries over 600 vehicles in one hour. During the remainder of the day, Allendale Avenue operates at LOS A. On Saturdays and Sundays, Allendale Avenue currently operates at LOS A. The minimum acceptable operating level for the City of Saratoga is LOS D. Allendale Avenue currently operates better than LOS D. Traffic operations at the church driveway intersection with Allendale Avenue were observed throughout the day on April 8 Easter Sunday. Easter Sunday was a full attendance event at the church. No significant congestion was observed at the church driveway on this day. Intersection levels of service were calculated for the April 8 Easter Sunday volumes at the Allendale Avenue /Church Driveway intersection. The level of service results are shown on Exhibit 8. For each of the critical time periods, the intersection operates at LOS A overall. The northbound driveway operates at LOS B during the critical analysis periods. These are acceptable operating conditions during what is essentially a peak Sunday event at the church. Note that a "peak hour factor" was incorporated into the level of service calculations summarized on Exhibit 8. The peak hour factor adjusts to hourly volume to reflect peak 15- minute conditions. Thus, the level of service results reflects the traffic conditions during the most congested portion of the peak one -hour of traffic demand. Existing Sunday Parking The existing parking area on the church site consists mainly of gravel and dirt surfaces and parking spaces are not marked. In conjunction with the construction of the new church, the on -site parking areas and circulation aisles will be paved and striped. The proposed project will establish 85 parking stalls and an overtlow parking area for 41 vehicles. On Easter Sunday, the peak parking demand occurred at 11:45 AM at the same time the peak attendance was observed. At 11:45 AM, there were 180 vehicles on the church site. One person attending the church parked on Allendale Avenue. Therefore, there were 181 church related vehicles parked at the site and 416 people on the site. The average occupancy of the vehicles parked at the church at 11:45 was 2.30 persons per vehicle. At the beginning of the Easter Sunday service, there were 83 people on site and 53 vehicles parked on -site or on Allendale Avenue. The average vehicle occupancy for the vehicles arriving before 10:00 AM was 1.57 persons per vehicle (83/53). The parking demand for Easter Sunday 2007 was handled on -site, except for one vehicle that was parked on Allendale Avenue by choice, not by lack of parking availability on the church site. 7-055 l.tr 5 -21-07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 7 On Sunday April 29, the peak attendance and parking occurred at 11:45 AM when there were 65 vehicles and 109 people on the church site. (There were two additional vehicles on the church grounds at that time that carried three people. However, these people were not attending the church, but parked at the church and visited a nearby home.) The average vehicle occupancy at the time of peak attendance on April 29 was 1.68 persons per vehicle (109 people /65). Traffic and Parking Impacts Associated with Non Sunday Activities As shown on Exhibit 4, the church generates traffic during the week and on Saturday for various religious, social and other church related functions. Whether a particular activity creates a significant impact to the road network depends on the volume of traffic generated by the event and the amount of available capacity on the road at the time the traffic is generated by the activity. The amount of traffic generated by each activity is related to the vehicle occupancy of each vehicle driving to the church. Vehicle occupancy is the number of persons per vehicle. Exhibit 9 provides vehicle occupancy rates at various times of the day for Easter Sunday, Sunday April 29, 2007 and Sunday September 12, 2007. The vehicle occupancy on these days was determined by observing and recording the number of people in each vehicle as it entered and exited the church grounds. The vehicle occupancy rate shown for any one particular time during the day (pre- service and peak attendance) is based upon the number of attendees at the time and the number of vehicles parked on the church grounds (and in the case of Easter Sunday, the total includes the one parked vehicle on Allendale Avenue). The vehicle occupancy for the "Daily Total" is calculated using the total number of vehicles that entered the church grounds and the total number of people that arrived at the church that day. Church staff provided attendance and parking counts for several activities that were conducted at the church this past spring. The vehicle occupancy for these events is also shown on Exhibit 9. Vehicle occupancy is generally lowest for religious service and religious related activities, which tend to be primarily attended by adults. Services and activities involving children have a higher vehicle occupancy rate. This was evident on Easter Sunday when the vehicle occupancy rate at the time of peak church attendance was 2.30 persons per vehicle. The vehicle occupancy rate at the time that the Easter service began was 1.57 persons per vehicle. September 12, 2004 was the first day of Sunday School for the 2004 school year. The overall vehicle occupancy for vehicles entering the church that day was 2.19, which reflects the high attendance that day of children. The Easter Egg coloring event in 2007 also had a vehicle occupancy rate of 2.19 persons per vehicle. 7 -055 I.0 5 -21 -07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 8 Based on the data contained on Exhibit 9, the following vehicle occupancy rates were assigned to various types of church related activities: 1-ligh attendance events (Family Oriented): 2.2 persons per vehicle Church services: 1.5 persons per vehicle Mid -Range attendance religious and social events: 1.7 persons per vehicle Low attendance events and meetings: 1.0 person per vehicle Using the vehicle occupancy ratios listed above, the number of vehicles generated by each church activity was estimated. The number of vehicles generated on a weekly basis during Sunday activities has not been estimated because the trip generation and parking conditions with those activities were described in the previous sections. In terms of traffic generation, weekly non Sunday activities generate a relatively low volume of traffic. The Kolo dance practices for children and Akathist to St. Michael prayer vigil, which are conducted on weekdays, generate less than 15 inbound trips prior to the activity and 15 outbound trips after the activity. The International Folklore Dance, which begins on Thursday at 7:30 PM, generates an estimated 35 trips before the activity and 35 trips after the activity. The monthly board and church meetings generate an estimated 10 trips prior to the event and 10 trips after the event. These are low volumes of vehicle trips. In addition, these activities begin after 6:30 PM; outside of the peak PM commute period. Therefore, the impacts of these events to existing traffic operations on Allendale Avenue are not significant. The church conducts several additional services on an annual basis prior or just after Easter. Some of these events are conducted on weekdays. These events, which include Holy Thursday, Great Vigil, Good Friday, First Day of Easter and Second Day of Easter, generate a low volume of trips and these trips begin and end outside of the peak commute periods. Traffic generated by these events do not impact traffic operations on Allendale Avenue. Christmas Eve Service and Christmas Eve Dinner are held on January 6 of each year. These events are large family events with an attendance of 250 people for the service and 300 people for the dinner. In the past, the Christmas Eve service began at 6:00 PM. In the future, the event will be scheduled to occur between 6:30 PM and 10:30 PM. The event can occur on a non holiday weeknight depending on the calendar. It is estimated that 114 vehicles would arrive prior to the service assuming a vehicle occupancy rate of 2.2 persons per vehicle and a 250 person attendance level. These trips would be added to Allendale Avenue after the weekday PM peak commute period when January 6 falls on a weeknight. Most of the attendees arrive in the 15 minute period prior to the event. Therefore, the traffic added by the event would not contribute a significant volume of traffic to traffic volumes during the PM peak commute period. volumes. Based on the counts collected on Allendale Avenue between April 16 and April 20 of this year, the hourly volume of traffic on Allendale Avenue between 5:30 and 6:30 PM averages about 500 vehicles per hour. The traffic added by the Christmas Eve event prior to 6:30 PM would arrive from both the west and the east on Allendale Avenue. Not all of the traffic 7 -055 Ltr 5 -21 .07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 9 would arrive from one direction. Therefore, the additional traffic added by the Christmas Eve event would not increase the volume of traffic on Allendale. Avenue east and west of the church driveway to more than 600 vehicles per hour. Allendale Avenue operations would remain at LOS A with this event. The parking demand for the Christmas Eve Dinner will exceed the parking spaces available on the church site. The church should develop a traffic and parking plan for the Christmas Eve Dinner that describes the procedures that will be used to serve the estimated parking demand for the event. This may include parking at an off-site location and using buses to shuttle attendees to the event. If the attendees were to park at an off site location, the trip generation at the church site would be reduced. All other weekly and annual social and religious events are conducted on Saturday or Sunday. Traffic volumes on Saturday and Sunday are the lowest volumes of the week, not only on Allendale Avenue, but on the local street network near the church as well. The traffic generated by the Saturday and Sunday events will not impact traffic operations on the local road network. As shown on Exhibit 6, there is a peak in traffic on Allendale Avenue on Saturday between 9:00 AM and 10:00 AM that is related to the farmers market. However, the church has one Saturday event that begins at 9:00 AM once a year, the annual church clean up day. The traffic generated by the clean up event are not at levels that would create significant impacts given the low volume of traffic on Saturday morning. The Pan Orthodox Friendship Lunch is also conducted once a year on Saturday between 12:00 Noon and 4:00 PM. This event generates an estimated 88 trips before and after the event. This volume of trips is not at a level that would create significant impacts to the local road network. The parking demand for all events and activities conducted at the church can be satisfied on the existing site as demonstrated by the parking demand created on Easter of this year when 180 vehicles were parked on site. However, a portion of this parking occurs on the adjacent residential property owned by the church. PROJECT CONDITIONS The church proposes to construct a new chapel with a seating capacity of 254 seats. The additional seating provided by the new chapel will allow more church members to attend the Sunday 10:00 AM service. However, full utilization of the chapel is not expected except for special occasions such as Easter. Church officials anticipate that the staggered arrival pattern will continue as some church members will arrive later in the morning for other activities. The parking supply provided by the new church parking plan is the limiting factor for large events conducted at the church on Sunday. Any increase in the attendance level of the 10:00 AM church service as a result of the church expansion will not significantly impact the local road network. 7 -055 Lir 5 -21 -07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 10 Project Condition Sunday Traffic Operations Based on the traffic counts collected on Allendale Avenue, there is more than enough capacity on Allendale Avenue to handle a full attendance event on Sunday morning at the church. Roadway capacity is not an issue for Sunday services and events. This was demonstrated this past Easter, which was a full- attendance event at the church. In fact, the maximum number of people observed on the site on Easter Sunday (416 people) exceeded the peak attendance levels that church officials anticipated for Easter Sunday. No serious congestion was observed at the intersection of the church driveway and Allendale Avenue throughout the day. All vehicles generated by the church were parked on the site. One attendee parked on Allendale Avenue on Easter Sunday by choice. Between 9:00 and 10:00 AM on Sunday April 15 Allendale Avenue carried 222 vehicles at the church driveway. To achieve LOS B operations on Allendale Avenue during the 9:00 to 10:00 AM hour on Sunday morning would require traffic to increase on Allendale Avenue to increase to 600 vehicles, an increase of 378 vehicles from existing levels. To achieve LOS D operations on Allendale Avenue during the 9:00 to 10:00 AM hour on Sunday morning would require traffic to increase on Allendale Avenue to increase to 900 vehicles, an increase of 678 vehicles from existing levels. There is no possibility of the church generating these volumes of traffic for a Sunday morning service. The additional traffic added to the street network as a result of expanding the church will not significantly impact traffic operations on Allendale Avenue, the Allendale Avenue /church driveway intersection, the Allendale Avenue /Fruitvale Avenue intersection or the Allendale Avenue /Quito Road intersection. Adequate capacity is available at these intersections on Sunday mornings to serve the trips generated by the church project. Project Condition Sunday Parking The City of Saratoga zoning regulations requires that one parking space be provided for every four seats. On the basis of the zoning regulations, the church would require 64 spaces. The church will provide 126 parking spaces on site, configured as 85 permanent parking stalls and 41 overflow spaces located on a grass surface south of the existing hall. With the planned improvements to the site, the parking demand for the Christmas Eve Dinner and the Easter Banquet and Program will not be satisfied by the 126 parking spaces that will be provided on site. The parking demand for all other activities and events will be served by the proposed parking plan, including Sunday service and special events conducted at the church on Sunday. 7-055 fir 5-21-07 Rasha l3ozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 11 Project Condition Traffic and Parking Impacts Associated with Non Sunday Activities The traffic impacts related to traffic generated by the non Sunday events and activities are described in the Existing Conditions section. The traffic impacts associated with these events will not change as a result of the construction of the new chapel and construction of a parking lot for the church. The proposed project will reduce the area available for parking on the site. As stated above, the parking demand for the Christmas Eve Dinner and the Easter Banquet and Program will not be satisfied by the 126 parking spaces that will be provided on site. It is recommended that the church develop a traffic and parking management plan for special events. The plan should describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. This could include the use of an off -site parking location with 'a bus to shuttle attendees to the church. Limiting the attendance to 277 people would also mitigate the parking shortage impact (2.2 persons per vehicle x 126 spaces 277 persons). SUMMARY The St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church located on Allendale Avenue in Saratoga is proposing site improvements that include the development of a new sanctuary with a seating capacity of 254 people. The project site plan indicates that 85 parking stalls will be provided on -site with an overflow parking area of 41 spaces for a total of 126 spaces. The volume of traffic generated by current Sunday activities does not create significant impacts to the local street network. With the exception of the Christmas Eve Service, all other church activities and events do not create significant impacts to the local road network given the volume of traffic generated by the other church activities that are held weekly, monthly and annually, and given the time period in which the events are conducted. In the future, attendance levels at the events and activities shown on Exhibit 4 are not expected to increase. Therefore, future traffic impacts will not be significant as well. The starting time of the Christmas Eve Service has been adjusted to 6:30 PM when January 6 falls on a weeknight, which ensures that the traffic generated by the church will not significantly add to traffic during the PM peak commute period. It is recommended that the church develop a traffic and parking management plan for the Christmas Eve Dinner event that describes the procedures that will be used to handle the parking demand for the event. This may include parking at an off -site location and using buses to shuttle attendees to the event. 7 -055 Ltr 5 -21 -07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 12 Parking demand for all existing Sunday and non Sunday events and activities can be satisfied by the parking area provided on the existing site. The proposed project will construct a parking lot consisting of 85 spaces with an overflow area for an additional 41 spaces. Parking demand for the Christmas Eve Dinner and the Easter Banquet and Program will not be satisfied by the 126 parking spaces that will be provided on site. It is recommended that the church develop a traffic and parking management plan for the Christmas Eve and Easter events. The plan should describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. This could include the use of an off-site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the church. Limiting the attendance to 277 people would also mitigate the parking shortage impact (2.2 persons per vehicle x 126 spaces 277 persons). Please contact me you have any questions regarding this information. Sincerely, J. Daniel Daniel Takacs, TE Principal Associate 7-055 Lir 5 -21 -07 Months/ ity Maximum No. of People DAY OF THE YVEEK Tima Fragtrrcy Facility Vehicle Occupancy (peons per vehicle) Ages Mon Timis Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun A, M. WD Chapel Classroom Social Hal Jan Jan Jan Fee Feb Mar r Mar Apr Mr1 Apr Mar Apr Mrl Apr M at mar Apr: Mar Apr Mr Apr Mar /Apr Mr Apr Apr May Jun Sep Sap Od Nov Dec S und a nuka) Lunt( Serbia chi,. bron. Serbian (auks lCOb[ Teen 22RSFiRmoVS RR MS;2R22253MeRR A i8 .588. All C I T All C T S A T C T C Ali S I A T Al All S A S/A All All S A An Ali AU An AS An Alt ,An Alt Alt A C Alt Ai S A All A T Alt A T SA T AU A X X X X x .X .x XX. X X X x X:X :X x X•X X' x:X X X x X•x X X RR 8R8:88i8 S^•8R: 'n8,R88 '8.818 n �n mKOm o o. ,4 w m o. o, v.. °n°8 O 88 0.84,g .0. 00ReRR88r8 .m 1 I i a a a a;< a< a. <:4 a 4;4 a a cca a a a x X 0 •x x:x x x x x' 'X x avelwrel 5 X X X X X. X X 'X X X x X X X X X X X X X 00 '00000';oo80o1W0000000a'o1,41,4 88 888 O 9 9 .2 g2 7 2 n V N N'N.rv :n N R m 0 m C1 6 m eD 6'iD Chldn Ractice Nob Donee fJ+tldron Akath N Proyar Vptl international Dance EVani r ice COnfeseenk Beard lmlhbe Meetings Kobe Sunday Scbool Meeengs Chnotreas Eve Services dirristnies Eva Dinner St. 1 di.ViiitY ttfili Char 'Sieve Connor Pan f Ir river Clear Holy Gros :mix Good Friday Laze. tqy Resurrection Matins Pat hat (Easur) L urgy_ EasW Banquet A Program Eater Egg Cokor Fnt0a of Easter 1 Second De of Easter Parish Talent Program Adulis Parish Talent Program Children Inler•Parian Sooner Dinner VdOvan Celebration Dinner KOb (VWmr's Club) 61ava Your Prase 6 Fdkbra Dana Pan-0Nbdos FrferMStnp luntr St AZ hangel Michael Slave Annual Membership Meiling Noes' 1. Ags, SeSWrier A =Adult TcTeen C=Child 2. Because of mi sanctity of the Chapel/Church. n rs not used for other purposes 3. Funerals. Weddings and Baptisms also occur during the year. 4. dung the four Weep periods (Groat Lent. Sts Petar Paul, Dominion and Norway) emre are no weddings or other similar celebrations. See Liturgical Calendar 5. Frpwncy: WVlhaky, M- Mouthy, A- Annusl Higgins Assouatos 5, 4vqu MA,W [son Cry�.cG a)w.Ilht nMrt,ny Gw EXHIBIT 4- CHURCH ACTIVITY SCHEDULE EXHIBIT B Planners OK Serbian church after four -year effort to build in Saratoga San Jose Mercury News Page 1 of 2 ,tK~ a !Y7 a 5 Prins Services: Subscribe e- Edilion Horne Delivery MercuryNews.com Most Viewed Most Emailed (From the last 12 hours) d,'i t !r(d1E NEWS rt:i !.'2ESS 71-CH SPORTS El1TEPT%+.i''!r.lErj' LIFE F. STYLE ,C•PIr i f:0 NE:) Top Classifieds N[nL 11n000 Retail Space tar Lease now mower si wiph -.rs WILLOW GLLN Arno.% T405.000 300/200 A RANCHO ALL LISTINGS San Jose, CA Now:61•F I High'79•F I Low:56•F SS day lorerast 1. Kawakami: Helpless situation for Raiders' two Planners OK Serbian church after four -year effort to promising players 2. Police. 82-year-old build in Saratoga newlyweds dead in murder suicide By Brian Babcock 3. Body found near Saratoga News campsite of missing UFC fighter Four years of deliberation and mediation between the St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church and Saratoga 4. Opener is a bad residents has brought hard feelings that may take time to forget. sign for Raiders 5. Car slams into San The process needs to begin, said planning commissioners before unanimously approving the plan to build a new Jose library after church on the Allendale Avenue properly. police chase: suspects arrested "The time has come for some movement forward and for some healing," said Susie Nagpal, planning commissioner. 6. Fannie Mae. Freddie Mac About 70 people attended the planning commission meeting on June 25 in city council chambers. A handful of takeover causes residents pleaded with the commission to deny development of the 3,994- square -foot church. mortgage rates to tumble Saratoga resident Diane Drewke expressed her concern with the church's bell tower, which is 40 feet tall, 10 feet higher than city regulations allow. Although the church has promised that the bell is inoperative, Drewke said she has heard such "wordsmithing" before and wondered if there will be any repercussions if they don't follow the rules. "Come on guys, we know (the city of Saratoga doesn't) enforce their codes, and they're not going to revoke a church's permit no matter what you say," Drewke said. The residents who opposed the church construction expressed concern with losing their view of the mountains and said the church wasn't building enough parking spaces to accommodate all its parishioners. The new structure would allow for only 126 vehicles even though the church will have seating for 254 people. Advertisement How do I become a? Nurse L- Only1 FormAway 61 44 Psychologist Project Medical Biting Manager Specialist Social Worker Pharmacy Technician on ZtI)c,flcrcuri News The Ne:apap;r of Silicon Valley Criminal livestigeter Graphic, Designer Accountant HR Officer Counselor Teacher Reprint BOOKMARK .1• Print :Email r A Font Resize 1 think this could become a tourist attraction,' said Commissioner Rishi Kulmar. Comments BOOKMARK Print 'Email P! Font Resize Return to Top Site Web Searcn powered by 'r0000 _r Get weather tor: city or zip O The Rev. Slobodan Jovic said that during Christmas and Easter the church attracts about 400 parishioners throughout the day. "Outside of these two events, we will never have that many people,” he said. "I wish, but it will not happen." Not all neighbors objected to the church's plan. Sipos Laszlo, a Saratoga resident for 45 years, said he originally opposed the height of the proposed church but changed his mind after seeing the modifications the architects made. "By viewing the new plans as they are, I have come to the conclusion that we should allow them to pursue their own happiness," Laszlo said "Like everybody else, they own their property and have the right to build whatever they want to build' The church was originally planned to have a roofline of 33 feet and a central dome built at a height of 52 feet. After speaking to neighbors, the church decided to lower the roofline to 26 feet and the dome to 50. The new church will also have a roof and color scheme that will let the building fit in with the rest of the neighborhood, said Paul Bunton of BCA Architects, the firm that created the plans for the building. All planning commissioners agreed that the church did what it could to respond to the community's concerns. They also agreed the church looks as it it will be a special addition to the city. We are pleased to Iet readers post comments about an article. Please increase the credibility of your post by including your hill name and city in the body of your comment. FAO: Article commenting how.los anti lips Web: Sign in Register Mobile Edition yj Find a used Cd http: /www.mercurynews.com /ci 9757116 ?IADID Search- www .mercurynews.com- www.mercury... 9/9/2008 EXHIBIT C igSr73 Aileocic le- Ave- tsiv3 p ►►enci le. Ave-- A 3' •a4n.• i x'45 5 A &odc: le Ave, 3970 k4 Av-e- -IA.Q.5 r i?S A 11e-ix-late Aie 13cr1C Cr )1 C- t) D 18FS30 �l(enda A vg ac.:�, reJ' CC1 1 Alle, Ave- v w __s�.. L3 0�` Sr n'c r.�� EXHIBIT D Holy Trinity Serbian Orthodox Church, Moraga, CA 61 Page June 24, 2008 [PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING JUNE 25, 2008 MYTH VS FACTS) ;,r'` 1 ",ri PO 1 11111111 ;lit,... St Simeon Mirotocivi Serbian Orthodox Church, Las Vegas, NV 7IPage [PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING JUNE 25, 2008 MYTH VS Serbian Orthodox Church inSrn|Uan,Uka, Croatia Serbian Orthodox church of St. John the Baptist in Pec 8|Page [PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING JUNE 25, 2008 MYTH VS FACTS] St. Sava Serbian Orthodox Church of Issaquah, Washington .June 24;200 mrii ;t:t 10JPage EXHIBIT E 1.6 Drewke Huff 7 "113'01 74 N 12200'00 74' W Wong (rents this house to others) SANFORD A. BERLINER* ANDREW L. FABER RALPH J. SWANSON PEGGY L SPRINGGAY JOSEPH E. DWORAK SAMUEL L. FARB ALAN J. PINNER FRANK R. UBHAUS LINDA A. CALLON JAMES P. CASHMAN STEVEN J. CASAD NANCY J. JOHNSON JEROLD A. REITON 'A Professional Corporation RETIRED SAMUEL J. COHEN ROBERT W. HUMPHREYS Branch Office Merced, CA 1JH1772654.3 091708 12822001 ROBERT L CHORTEK JONATHAN D. WOLF KATHLEEN K SIPLE KEVIN F. KELLEY MARK MAKIEWICZ ROBERTA S. HAYASHI JEFFREY S. KAUFMAN JOLIE HOUSTON BRIAN L. SHETLER JOHN F. DOMINGUE HARRY A. LOPEZ CHARLES W. VOLPE MICHAEL VIOLANTI Via Email and Hand Delivery BERLINER COHEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS TEN ALMADEN BOULEVARD ELEVENTH FLOOR SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113-2233 TELEPHONE: (408) 286 -5800 FACSIMILE: (408) 998 -5388 www.berliner.com IN ASSOCIATION WITH MCGRANE GREENFIELD LLP SAN JOSE SAN FRANCISCO September 17, 2008 Mayor Waltonsmith and Members of the City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 Dear Mayor Waltonsmith and Members of the City Council: THOMAS P. MURPHY VICTOR A. PAPPALARDO MILES J. DOLINGER CHRISTIAN E. PICONE THOMAS D. MORELL BRADLEY G. HEBERT SETH J. COHEN CHRISTINE H. LONG THOMAS E. EBERSOLE LAURA PALAZZOLO SHANNON N. COGAN AARON M. VALENTI KARA L ERDODI ANDREW J. GIORGIANNI MATTHEW A. TAYLOR HEATHER H. MUNOZ FORREST W. HANSEN ALAN D. NIEBEL SANDRA G.SEPULVEDA MARCO M. CAMPAGNA ERIC J. BERQUIST DEBBIE Y. BAE MARY KATHARINE WILSON NICHOLAS RABY STEPHANIE B. WEASEL OF COUNSEL HUGH L. ISOLA STEVEN L. HALLGRIMSON ERIC WONG LINDA J. LEZOTTE PHILIP GOLDEN NANCY L. BRANDT This letter is written on behalf of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church "St. Archangel Michael concerning the appeal of a decision by the Planning Commission granting approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Design Review Application, and a modification to a Conditional Use Permit with a Variation from Standards for the proposed construction of a new 3,994 square foot Church building on approximately 3.1 acre project site located at 18870 Allendale Avenue "Project This letter also serves as St. Archangel Michael's response to the letter dated September 12, 2008, from Logan Powell, the attorney for the Saratoga Neighborhood Task Force "Letter This Letter contains many objections to the Project. However, many of these objections have been addressed in St. Archangel Michael's Reponses to Comments previously provided to the Planning Commission on June 25, 2008. In addition, review of the Letter has Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 been done by a professional planner, who is a qualified expert in land use and planning and her comments will be submitted separately. St. Archangel Michael generally objects to the Letter in that it contains numerous assumptions and/or conclusions made by the attorney, which are argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion, inaccurate information, unreasonable, lack proper foundation and thus, do not constitute substantial evidence. St. Archangel Michael will identify these particular assumptions and/or conclusions contained in the Letter and specifically address them below. UH1772654.3 091708 12822001 "An Environmental Impact Report "EIR') Should be Prepared for the Project." Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act "CEQA the City of Saratoga "City as a lead agency must consider comments received during the circulation period, but is not required to prepare responses to such comments. Pub.Resources Code 21091(d), (f); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). There were numerous comments submitted by the Saratoga Neighborhood Task Force "Task Force regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration "MND Responses to comments on the MND are not legally required by CEQA, but the Task Force's comments were reviewed and it was determined that the comments were generalized complaints, speculation and/or unsupported conclusions and did not constitute substantial evidence of a fair argument that significant effect on the environment may occur. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b); see "Responses to Comments" submitted to the City on June 25, 2008. CEQA defines "substantial evidence" as including "facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert opinion supported by facts." Argument, speculation, inaccurate information, unsubstantiated opinion, and social or economic impacts unrelated to environmental impacts are not substantial evidence. Pub. Resources Code 21080(e)(1),(2). Generalized complaints, speculation, and/or unsupported conclusions do not constitute substantial evidence. Pala Band of Mission Indians v. County of San Diego (1998) 68 Cal.App.4 556. In determining whether a project will have a significant effect on the environment, mere uncorroborated opinion or rumor does not constitute substantial evidence. CEQA Guidelines 15384; Assoc. for Protection of Environmental Values and Ukiah v. City of Ukiah (1991) 2 Cal.App.4 720, 735. If a factual dispute arises based on credibility of evidence, the City as the lead agency has discretion to determine whether the information has adequate foundation. Citizens Committee to Save Our Village v. City of Claremont (1995) -2- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 37 Ca1.App.4 1157, 117 -71; Citizens for Responsible Development v. City of West Hollywood (1995) 39 Cal.App. 4` 490. The issue is not whether the project will adversely affect particular persons, but whether the project will adversely affect the environment of persons in general. Pub.Resources Code 21083(c); Association for Protection of Environmental Values and Ukiah, supra, 2 Cal.App.4 at 734. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "Pursuant to the City's parking regulations, 228 spaces are required for the property. However, the Church is only proposing to have 126 spaces on site. The only mitigation measure imposed in the Neg Dec to address this deficiency is improper and contrary to the requirements of CEQA. The Church has failed to mitigate the negative impact of overflow parking on the neighborhood. Based on an assumption that not all buildings will be used at the same time, the traffic consultants hired by the Church, determined that only 126 spaces were needed. (See May 21, 2007 letter from Daniel Takacs to Rasha Bozinovic, Church Board President, attached as Exhibit A.) However, there is nothing that specifically prohibits the use of all buildings at the same time throughout the year. The traffic consultants assumed that additional spaces would only be needed on Easter and Christmas. This assumption is flawed. In addition, to mitigate the impact, the Neg Dec only provides:" St. Archangel Michael respectfully requests that the City reject this evidence as not credible. These assumptions and/or conclusions made by the attorney for the Task Force are argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion, inaccurate information, unreasonable, lack adequate foundation and thus, do not constitute substantial evidence because the attorney is not a professional traffic engineer with the expertise to render technical conclusions concerning traffic and parking impacts. The attorney also does not possess the expertise to challenge traffic and parking reports and conclusions. The Project had two traffic studies performed by Higgins Associates, dated July 14, 2006 and May 21, 2007, which were peer- reviewed by the City's consultant Fehr Peers on September 19, 2007. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environmental. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). UH1772654.3 -3- 091708- 12822001 Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 "A lead agency cannot base a negative declaration on the presumed success of mitigation measures that have not been formulated at the time of project approval." The Project had two traffic studies performed by Higgins Associates, dated July 14, 2006 and May 21, 2007, which were peer- reviewed by the City's consultant Fehr Peers on September 19, 2007. A city may approve of a "menu of options" for reducing the parking effects, such as possible components of a program that would be designed to meet a performance standard for parking usage. A city may commit itself to eventually devising measures that will satisfy specific performance criteria articulated at the time of project approval. Sacramento Old City Ass 'n v. City Council (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 1011, 1029; Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Ca1.3d 376, 418 (transportation systems management plan, including promotion of mass transit, car pooling, van pooling and related activities, was appropriate mitigation). Mitigation Measure 15 -1 has not been deferred and it expressly contains specific performance criteria and/or standards that must be achieved by building permit. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "The traffic study simply fails to acknowledge the fact that by building a new church that will seat 254 people additional people will be attending the church. As recently noted in the Saratoga News, this church will be a "tourist attraction." (Please see article attached as Exhibit B.) If this new facility is built, the people will come. Despite this increase in capacity, the traffic study utilizes attendance numbers from 2007 with no provision for the increase. If the existing church seats 80 and 65 vehicles were on site at the peak time of 11:45 a.m. on April 29, 2007, as noted in the traffic study, it is reasonable to assume that the new church building will attract approximately three (3) times the number of cars. Similarly, if 180 vehicles were on site at 11:45 a.m. on Easter Sunday, it is reasonable to assume that three (3) times that number of vehicles, 540 vehicles, would be on site if the new church is built. However, there is absolutely no discussion of this substantial increase in attendance. There is a fair argument that the increased capacity of the new church will triple the vehicles on site and thereby further exacerbate the parking deficiencies." St. Archangel Michael respectfully requests that the City reject this evidence as not credible. These assumptions and/or conclusions made by the attorney for the Task Force are argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion, inaccurate information, unreasonable, lack adequate foundation and thus, do not constitute substantial evidence because the attorney is not a professional traffic engineer with the expertise to render technical conclusions concerning traffic and parking impacts. uH1772654.3 -4- 091708- 12822001 Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 UH1772654.3 091708 12822001 The attorney also does not possess the expertise to challenge traffic and parking reports and conclusions. The Project had two traffic studies performed by Higgins Associates, dated July 14, 2006 and May 21, 2007, which were peer- reviewed by the City's consultant Fehr Peers on September 19, 2007. The Letter also incorrectly assumes that there will be an increase in capacity and intensity of uses at the Project site. These assumptions are unreasonable and unsubstantiated. This Project (Design Review Application for the Church building) does not consider any "substantial increase in attendance" because the Church's permitted activities (intensity of uses) were considered and approved in the Conditional Use Permit "CUP Resolution 07 -067, approved September 19, 2007, and any intensification of uses beyond those in existence on September 19, 2007, will require a CUP amendment and further environmental review. See CUP Condition No. 3. Any claim of "increase in capacity" is not reasonably foreseeable. The CUP approved all of the activities which may be held at the Church site. This Project (Design Review Application for the Church building) does not seek permission or request an increase in capacity. The statement made by the Planning Commissioner about the Church becoming a "tourist attraction" is not substantial evidence that future expansion of the Project is reasonably foreseeable. The statements of Father V. Rev. Slobodan Jovic that he would be very happy if the Church attendance were to go over 277 attendance, or even that he is hopeful for more growth does not constitute substantial evidence that future expansion of the Project is reasonably foreseeable. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "The General Plan provides that no buildings will exceed two (2) stories in height. Although there is an exception for quasi public uses discussed in the Land Use Element, that exception only applies if the `slope underneath the three -story area is 10% or more and a stepped pad is used. Land Use Element, Background Report and Guidelines for Area Development, pg. 14. In addition, the Zoning Ordinance provides that the height may not exceed 30 feet. (See Saratoga Municipal Code "SMC 15.12.100(a). Here, the proposed Church will exceed 50 feet in height. This inconsistency with the rules and regulations of the City creates a fair argument that there will be a significant impact on the environment. The Neg Dec attempts to justify this by pointing to other churches located in the City. However, those churches were built under different regulations, including a different General Plan, and were -5- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 permitted at that time. This project is clearly inconsistent with the rules and regulations that are in place today." These statements are not accurate and there is no credible or substantial evidence to support these findings and conclusions. The Project is only two stories and the 50 foot height is allowed by the City's Zoning Ordinance. See "Responses to Comments" submitted to the City on June 25, 2008. The City Zoning Code Section 15- 05.660 defines a `Story' as: "that portion of any floor and the surface of any floor next above, or if there is no floor above, the space between the floor and the ceiling or roof next above. Basements are excluded from being considered a story." Based on this definition, the main body or spine of the Church building, including the nave and cupola, are single -story. The only area of the building that is two -story is in the front entrance of the building (balcony and bell tower). The proposed maximum height of the spine of the Church building is 26 feet where the maximum allowed is 30. The Church building elements that project above the roof line of the main building are the base of the cupola at a height of 31 feet, the cupola or dome at a height of 50 feet and the bell tower at a height of 40 feet. Quasi public buildings, such as churches, are generally allowed in residential districts as conditional uses and are permitted through the conditional permit/design review process. The use permit provides for approval of deviations and height. See City Zoning Code 15- 55.030 Variations from Standards. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "Despite the requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance and Noise Element of the General Plan, the noise associated with the operation of the Church was not even considered in the Neg Dec." "In order to determine whether or not the Project will cause significant noise impacts, studies must be conducted. However, the Neg Dec dismisses this requirement because the Project does not constitute a change in use. Although it is true the property is currently operated as a church and will continue to be so operated, the use will intensify. If approved, this project will add an additional 6,609 square foot sanctuary that will seat 254 people. Currently, the existing church building seats 80. The existing church will continue to be used. In addition, there is also a 9,731 square foot meeting hall that will continue to operate on this site. This intensification of use can reasonably be expected to increase the noise level on the property. A fair argument exists that the intensification will result in a significant impact from noise. Thus, additional studies and an EIR are required." 1JH1772654.3 -6- 091708- 12822001 Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 1JH1772654.3 091708 12822001 The Letter also incorrectly assumes that "the noise associated with the operation of the Church was not even considered in the Neg Dec." This assumption is unreasonable and unsubstantiated and assumes that there will be an intensity of uses and/or capacity. As discussed above, there is no change in the intensity of uses and/or capacity. The Church's permitted activities (intensity of uses) were previously considered and approved in the CUP, dated September 19, 2007, and any intensification of uses beyond those in existence on September 19, 2007, will require a CUP amendment and further environmental review. See Resolution 07 -067, approved September 19, 2007. See CUP Condition No. 11, which requires that the Church comply with Article 7 -30 of the City Code governing Noise Control. The CUP, as approved, has very specific limitations on hours of operation which further serve to control any noise created by the operation and use of the Church. See CUP Condition No. 8. The Letter also incorrectly assumes that "this project will add an additional 6,609 square foot sanctuary." Although the MND describes the Project as a 6,609 square -foot building, the actual square footage of the building (as shown in the plans submitted) is only a total area of 3,994 square feet. The Project is a 3,994 square -foot building as follows: Ground floor: 3,477 square feet and second floor (balcony) 517 square feet. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "The Neg Dec completely fails to consider the impact the proposed structure will have on neighborhood aesthetics." "Pursuant to SMC 15.55.030, "a conditional use may be permitted by a use permit to have different site area, density, structure height, distances between structures, site coverage, front, side and rear setback area minimums and off street parking and loading requirements, other than as listed under the specific regulations for unconditional permitted uses in the zoning district in which it lies." The Project is seeking variations from building height, parking and site coverage requirements. However, in order to grant a variation, the findings for a conditional use permit must still be made and the variations cannot be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity and they must comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. (See SMC 15.55.070.) Here, the proposed variations for building heights and parking will clearly impair the public health, safety and welfare. In addition, the height variance is contrary to the General Plan and therefore cannot be granted." -7- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 1..1111772654.3 091708 12822001 These statements are not accurate and there is no credible or substantial evidence to support these findings and conclusions. The Project is only two stories and the 50 foot height is allowed by the City's Zoning Ordinance. See "Responses to Comments" submitted to the City on June 25, 2008. There is no substantial evidence as to how or why the Project's proposed variations for building heights and parking will "clearly impair the public health, safety and welfare," or why the "height variance is contrary to the General Plan." Quasi public buildings, such as churches, are generally allowed in residential districts as conditional uses and are permitted through the conditional permit/design review process. The use permit provides for approval of deviations and height. See City Zoning Code 15- 55.030 Variations from Standards. As describe in the Purpose of Article in Section 15- 45.010 (Design Review for Single Family Dwelling) and Section 15 -46.10 (Design Review: Multi- Family Dwelling and Commercial Structures) of the City Zoning Code, these sections specifically apply to the design of single family home, accessory structures, and multi family homes and commercial buildings, respectively. Similarly, the City's Residential Design Review Handbook specifically applies to the design of single family homes. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "A zoning ordinance cannot conflict with the general plan. Therefore, although the Zoning Ordinance permits variations for height limitations, no project can be approved that is inconsistent with any height limitations contained in the General Plan. As detailed in Section I.B above, the height variation requested by the Church is inconsistent with the General Plan and therefore, cannot be granted." "As stated in the Neg Dec, the height of the building is "stylistic in nature" and only provides "two stories of usable space." However, the building is 50 feet tall, far in excess of the height limits imposed in the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance." These statements are not accurate and there is no credible or substantial evidence to support these conclusions. The Project is only two stories and the 50 foot height is allowed by the City's Zoning Ordinance. See "Responses to Comments" submitted to the City on June 25, 2008. Quasi public buildings, such as churches, are generally allowed in residential districts as conditional uses and are permitted through the conditional permit/design review process. The use permit provides for approval of deviations and height. See City Zoning Code 15- 55.030 Variations from Standards. -8- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "There is no reasonable basis to grant the Church special privileges which are prohibited under the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance." "The requirement that the Church lower the height of its proposed building is not a substantial burden on its religious exercise. In fact, the bases on which the Church claims to need the proposed height and architecture are merely recommendations or guidelines, not a tenet of their religion. But even if it was, the requirement to comply with the City's General Plan height limitation is a compelling governmental interest that protects the health and welfare of its citizens." St. Archangel Michael respectfully requests that the City reject this evidence as not credible. These assumptions and/or conclusions made by the attorney for the Task Force are argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion, inaccurate information, unreasonable, lack adequate foundation and thus, do not constitute substantial evidence because the attorney is not a professional architect with the expertise to render technical conclusions concerning the Orthodox faith as expressed through architecture. Father Ilija Balach, Orthodox Priest and architect, offered expert evidence at the Planning Commission meeting. He explained the purpose of a temple is to worship God, and that the worship of God integrates with the Church building. He stated that the dome overhead represents the heavens and that the style of the architecture reinforces the expression of the Church that "God is with us." There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environmental. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "The parking proposed for this property is completely inadequate for the myriad of uses on site. As stated in the Neg Dec, 228 parking spaces are required for all uses on the site. Despite the clear language of the SMC, the Project is only providing 126 spaces, almost half of what is actually needed. To compound the problem, 41 of those spaces do not meet the City standards for parking spaces and therefore should not be counted toward the parking requirement. The dearth of parking should not be permitted because it will result in significant impacts on the neighborhood when Church attendees are forced to park throughout the neighborhood due to lack of space on the property." "As stated in the traffic report, over 400 people attended the Church on Easter Sunday despite the fact that the existing church only seats 80 people. On April 29, 2007, 109 people attended the Church. The proposed church will seat 254 people. By using the same formula, we UH1772654.3 -9- 091708- 12822001 Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 can assume that on any given Sunday, over 300 people will attend the new church. In addition, the social club which also operates on the site has events for over 200 people. There is nothing in the approvals that would limit the use of these buildings simultaneously which would result in scores of attendees having nowhere to park on the property." 1JH1772654.3 091708 12822001 St. Archangel Michael respectfully requests that the City reject this evidence as not credible. These assumptions and/or conclusions made by the attorney for the Task Force are argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion, inaccurate information, unreasonable, lack adequate foundation and thus, do not constitute substantial evidence because the attorney is not a professional traffic engineer with the expertise to render technical conclusions concerning traffic and parking impacts. The attorney also does not possess the expertise to challenge traffic and parking reports and conclusions. The Project had two traffic studies performed by Higgins Associates, dated July 14, 2006 and May 21, 2007, which were peer- reviewed by the City's consultant Fehr Peers on September 19, 2007. The Letter also incorrectly assumes that there will be an increase in capacity and intensity of uses at the Project site. These assumptions are unsubstantiated. The Church's permitted activities (intensity of uses) were considered and approved in the CUP, dated September 19, 2007, and any intensification of uses beyond those in existence on September 19, 2007, will require a CUP amendment and further environmental review. See CUP Condition No. 3. Further, there is no credible evidence that the Church operates as a "social club." The Church is allowed to have church related activities, which were all previously considered and approved in the CUP. See Resolution No. 07 -067, approved September 19, 2008. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "The grass crete parking spaces do not qualify as parking spaces under the SMC and therefore, should not be counted toward the parking requirements for the Project. Pursuant to SMC section 15.35.040(a): "The parking, as proposed, is already highly deficient. To compound the problem, 41 of the spaces do not meet City regulations and should not be counted toward the parking requirement. Therefore, only 85 spaces are provided on site for a sanctuary with 254 seats, a meeting hall of 9,731 square feet, a classroom of 1,224 square feet, and a single family residence. There is no plan to address this parking deficiency. This will result in a significant impact on the neighborhood as those surrounding streets will serve as the parking lot for the -10- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 Church. This cannot be permitted. Because the proposed parking does not comply with the applicable provisions of the City's Zoning Ordinance Code (See SMC Chapter 15) and is inconsistent with the City's Land Use Element, this variation cannot be granted." UH1772654.3 091708 12822001 St. Archangel Michael respectfully requests that the City reject this evidence as not credible. These assumptions and/or conclusions made by the attorney for the Task Force are argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion, inaccurate information, unreasonable, lack adequate foundation and thus, do not constitute substantial evidence because the attorney is not a professional traffic engineer with the expertise to render technical conclusions concerning traffic and parking impacts. The attorney also does not possess the expertise to challenge traffic and parking reports and conclusions. The Project had two traffic studies performed by Higgins Associates, dated July 14, 2006 and May 21, 2007, which were peer- reviewed by the City's consultant Fehr Peers on September 19, 2007. The Letter also incorrectly assumes that the "grass crete" parking spaces do not meet the City's Zoning Code and the parking is "already highly deficient." These assumptions are unsubstantiated by any evidence. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environmental. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "The proposed church is not compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. (See photographs attached as Exhibit C.) Contrary to the implication in the Neg Dec, the fire house is not in the immediate area of the proposed church. Therefore, the fact that the design of the proposed church and the fire house may be compatible is completely irrelevant. The immediate area consists of the surrounding neighborhood. As shown in the attached photographs, the proposed church is not compatible in terms of height, bulk and design of these homes." These statements are not accurate and there is no credible or substantial evidence to support these conclusions. The Project is only two stories and the 50 foot height is allowed by the City's Zoning Ordinance. See "Responses to Comments" submitted to the City on June 25, 2008. Quasi public buildings, such as churches, are generally allowed in residential districts as conditional uses and are permitted through the conditional permit/design review process. The use permit provides for approval of deviations and height. See City Zoning Code 15- 55.030 Variations from Standards. Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 UH1772654.3 091708 12822001 As describe in the Purpose of Article in Section 15- 45.010 (Design Review for Single Family Dwelling) and Section 15 -46.10 (Design Review: Multi Family Dwelling and Commercial Structures) of the City Zoning Code, these sections specifically apply to the design of single family home, accessory structures, and multi family homes and commercial buildings, respectively. Similarly, the City's Residential Design Review Handbook specifically applies to the design of single family homes. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). "A church is a conditional use in the R -1 -40 zoning district. "Because of their unusual characteristics, conditional uses require special consideration so that they may be located properly with respect to the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties." (See SMC 15.55.010.) In order to grant a use permit, the following findings must be made: (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; (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; and (c) that the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this Chapter. As detailed above, the Project as proposed will be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare to the surrounding area. In addition, the Project will not comply with the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 15, of the SMC." These statements are not accurate and there is no credible or substantial evidence to support these conclusions. The Project is only two stories and the 50 foot height is allowed by the City's Zoning Ordinance. See "Responses to Comments" submitted to the City on June 25, 2008. There is no substantial evidence as to how or why the Project will be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare to the surrounding area, or not comply with the applicable provisions of the "Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 15, of the SMC." Quasi public buildings, such as churches, are generally allowed in residential districts as conditional uses and are permitted through the conditional permit/design review process. The use permit provides for approval of deviations and height. See City Zoning Code 15- 55.030 Variations from Standards. There is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. Pub.Resources Code 21080(c); CEQA Guidelines 15074(b). -12- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 The Project is consistent with the City's Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and does not violate CEQA, and there is no substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project, as revised to include mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment. We respectfully request that the appeal of the Project (Application No. 03 -259) be denied. Thank you for time and consideration of St. Archangel Michael's Project. 1JH1772654.3 -13- 091708- 12822001 Very truly yours, BERLINER COHEN HOUSTON E -Mail: jolie.houston @berliner.com cc: St. Archangel Michael Richard Taylor, City Attorney John Livingstone, Community Development Director Fine Photography June 25, 2008 City of Saratoga. 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: St Michael's Photos of the Santa Cruz Mountains View JUN 2 c ?OM JUN 2 5 ?OAR CITY OF SARATOGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I have been a professional photographer for over 25 years. I hold a Masters Degree from the Professional Photographers of America and a 2nd Level Accolade of Mastery from Wedding and Portrait Photographers Intemational and I currently teach photography to professional photographers through the Fuji Film Talent Team Program. On June 25, 2008, I reviewed the photos submitted by the Saratoga Neighbor Task Force (SNTF) at Saratoga City Hall (Drewke Vol. 2, photos l,m,n,o, p), and I also visited the church site and observed the view shed and surrounding views from the site. The images I viewed did not accurately show the impact that the proposed building would have on the view of the hills. The image of the sign with the hills behind it was taken zoomed in (with a telephoto lens) which compressed the foreground subject (the sign) and the background subject (the hills) creating the impression that the hills are closer to the site than in reality. My images were photographed from street level with a lens set to show the angle of view that the unaided human eye would see. Photo #1 shows the building site and the current sign and how little of the hills show in the background. Image #2 is to the right of the existing sign and what hill can be seen. It is my opinion from my site check and the photos that I took that the proposed building would have little to no impact on the view of the hills because the only viewable hill is to the right of the sign and proposed building markers. spectfully, Je Enclosures Master Photographer 14567 Big Basin Way, Suite A3 Saratoga, CA 95070 Phone: 408/872 -0358 Visit us on the web at www.venzfinephoto.com A.•-• v: 1i. (1 t .....i,f, •,0; v". t r r3 if 41** •.,1 /kb; a 4. it i 4 :SI, :k.P ..f. .t.'" A 10 1.4* 1,(: 3. .1. 4. 4i .'i 4. s N 4 ti Pi' z 4 i i .t.., 01 .i 414. l i t irt r4.11 s' lilt' '4 M1 W''../.-'s it, k■ Per 1 If p .....f. 4 iis‘ 41 4 4 ,-:Y 1 t I if r lot• i K P 1 ,4. k. t I V ijli if:.. I e' t i V V 1, 1.34' AS' ....0 4- ,-;:r... ihre tok .•,4 kit '54 kii" 4 l'..."f.. :■`,A.*„:',. 1 t At*: :.,•K• .4.,,,„101.0",... (c) 2008 VFP eit Fine Photography Jerry W Venz 14567 Big Basin Way, A-3 Saratoga, CA 95070 408/872-0358 Image 1 File #31 Fine Photography Jerry W Venz 14567 Big Basin Way, A-3 Saratoga, CA 95070 408/872-0358 Image #2 File #$0 Fine Photography .....'1 11AL :le• 4' l 'alia ...Alf.' X 4 k....._ i .i.,4 7n- A 4 ,,:7 4,■ 4 tb. ...'il. IA 9 1. N..... l et. ii t c. •ii.. 4-; iti.. It' 7%. 1- 1 5/, l m PI* .t. 1.'".. s zi•- II. 1.• 7 .ift.,1: .t. .1 4",k c,, p K 4 I''' 41i,' 4 r 1 4 1.-Y 4:4 4 14 ''i tk '44 r 4' '4. le .4. a ,i4 b s t i ir- *4 -1 thit f 1 '4 .4 it; 9 .4 )100 111111 0, 1 1 4 4 1"'" 4 M e" 1 'Y 4 t i ef• A, f• 4, 4 4 e"' Jerry W Venz 14567 Big Basin Way, A-3 Saratoga, CA 95070 408/872-0358 Image 3 Perspective Change File #O6 SANFORD A. BERLINER' ANDREW L. FABER RALPH 1 SWANSON PEGGY L. SPRINGGAY JOSEPH E. DWORAK SAMUEL L. FARB ALAN J. PINNER FRANK R. UBHAUS LINDA A. CALLON JAMES P. CASHMAN STEVEN J. CASAD NANCY J. JOHNSON JEROLD A. REITON •A Professional Corporation RETIRED SAMUEL J. COHEN ROBERT W. HUMPHREYS Branch Office Merced, CA ROBERT L. CHORTEK JONATHAN D. WOLF KATHLEEN K. SIPLE KEVIN F. KELLEY MARX MAKIEWICZ ROBERTA S. HAYASHI JEFFREY S. KAUFMAN JOLIE HOUSTON BRIAN L. SHELLER JOHN F. DOMINGUE HARRY A. LOPEZ CHARLES W. VOLPE MICHAEL VIOLANTI VIA HAND DELIVERY Chair Cappello and Planning Commissioners Saratoga City Hall 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 UH1765058.1 062508 12822001 BERLINER COHEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS TEN ALMADEN BOULEVARD ELEVENTH FLOOR SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113 -2233 TELEPHONE: (408) 286 -5800 FACSIMILE: (408) 998 -5388 www.berliner.com IN ASSOCIATION WITH MCGRANE GREENFIELD LLP SAN JOSE SAN FRANCISCO June 25, 2008 Re: St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Application No. 03 -259 THOMAS P. MURPHY H. ANN LIROFF VICTOR A. PAPPALARDO FILES J. DOLINGER CHRISTIAN E. PICONE THOMAS D. MORELL BRADLEY G. HEBERT SETH J. COHEN CHRISTINE H. LONG THOMAS E. EBERSOLE LAURA PALAZZOLO SHANNON N. COGAN AARON M. VALENTI U IL E CCC LL V I_�: KARA L. ERDODI ANDREW 1. GIORGIANNI MATTHEW A. TAYLOR HEATHER H. MUNOZ FORREST W. HANSEN MELINDA B. BARKER SANDRA G. SEPULVEDA MARCO M. CAMPAGNA ERIC J. BERQUIST DEBBIE Y. BAE MARY KATHARINE WILSON NICHOLAS RABY STEPHANIE B. WERSEL OF COUNSEL HUGH L ISOLA STEVEN L HALLGRIMSON ERIC WONG LINDA J. LEZOTTE PHILIP GOLDEN NANCY L. BRANDT JUN 2 5 2008 i CITY OF 5 ;fA i UGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Dear Chair Cappello and Planning Commissioners: This letter is written on behalf of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church "St. Archangel Michael concerning the Planning Commission hearing scheduled for June 25, 2008. Dedication and Consecration Planting of Cross As mentioned at the site visit on June 24, 2008, enclosed please photographs of the Dedication and Consecration ceremonies held in May 1962 and November 1987. The photographs and accompanying signatures from parishioners demonstrate that the front portion of the site has always been intended to be location of the future sanctuary. Please note that the photograph of the 1987 ceremony clearly shows the existing church hall in the background. These ceremonies serve to give a Blessing to the grounds of the future sanctuary and consecrating it for sacred purposes. These procedures follow a special ritual and service prescribed in the Liturgical service book of the Serbian Orthodox faith. LI City of Saratoga Planning Commission .June 25, 2008 Further evidence of the future sanctuary being located in the front portion of the site is contained in Use Permit No. 147 "UP- 147 UP -147 was recently modified and superseded by Resolution No. 07 -067, September 19, 2007. The March 25, 1968 staff report for UP -147 states: "The applicant requests a Use Permit in order to develop a Parish residence, classroom addition, and future sanctuary on 3.12 acres facing onto Allendale." The minutes of the March 11, 1968, Planning Commission meeting state: "...the Master Plan shows the future sanctuary facing Allendale Avenue with the soon -to -be constructed classrooms and the exiting meeting hall to the rear of the sanctuary... Thank you for time and consideration of St. Archangel Michael's Project. UH1765058.1 -2- 062508- 12822001 Very truly yours, BERLINER COHEN J E -Mail: jolie.houston @berliner.com cc: St. Archangel Michael William Parkin, Assistant City Attorney John Livingstone, Community Development Director I This meeting was continued to the March 25, 1968 in order for the applicant to meet with the subdivision committee. ;Z'#°: ;�:oo1': (1 a:� .11 vrat. u. p:`? 2;. y,, t. ti: :a rc,: Eb4d rS.t,l: a rc o Michct4 fl Eastern Orthod Chumh C' a &AY /9 v ao 96� 7\� °k •t n is 10/29/2002 13:09 8672389 BOGDANOVICH PFR-06 -1398 10:55 CITY UF- bI* itiwolu'1 L n. USE PERMIT and /or MUMS 3E OLVIIO i No. Ur City of Rarataar ?basing COmfxtsaiDD State of Califoraia PAGE 12 File $o. UZ 14? V!1l1EAS, the City of Saratoga Manning tvco1bsiQn has received the oyplice- ST. =HAM= =COIL MAIM tim% oP �i. L��lfL,a for a use&y* wt't YUL_A PAMIR RESUME. 011 sad KOSAB, the 4pplioant {bas) °wlew) net the burden of proof required to support his Bald application: 1W, THIRBYORB BB IT RESOLVED that alter careful oonaiderattan of saps, 1a4te, uskibdte and other evidence subcitttd in this cotter, the application for the r ba, and the snot ie hereby (granted) (wow eablect to fiaa following conditions: 1. Design Ravicw. 2. ?Maximum aWing capacity of web sanctuary eha11 be 150 Bents. B8 IT VORtiEri atICLV8D that the Repeat of 71edinge attacked harciao be ap- proved and adapted, and that the Secretary he, astd is hereby directed to notify the pertl,atp afloat d by this decijIao PASSSD AID AMMO by the City of Saratoga 7Ictnion Commission, State of California, tbia 2521 day of 11onen by the following roll Ball vote: AYeSf cemadisionera Norton, Crisp, Utah, Lively, NcPall and dohn.on SOU; Mow AESYRl: Cemlaalener Itaaasfe 7( '1realrnaa, Semi ga 1anaios Comi a aloe 10/29/2002 13:09 8672389 BOGDANOVICH MAR—Orr/99U 4.11 Y Lk" bMKMILLa-'HW'IAW. PAGE 13 CIT! CI SARA'00CA 25= 1968 7e -147 St. Arcbaegel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church, Allendale Avenue Reguest for Cat Tamp far Qnncb buildloge (Sanctuary. elasrtgama, the applicant ?acetate a use Permit in order to davalop a Parish roes- dance, claasrnce addition, and future saoctaary on 3.12 acr4+e facing onto Allendale Avenue. Ibis parcel prescetly has a meeting hall general purpose building which a Vie !.Snit, 11p -2S, wt granted by the Saxatnga Planning commission on 10 July 1961. After careful T$v3aw of this matter, it is the Staff recommendation with concurrence of the Subdivision Committee sad Planning Director, t u the subject Use Pernit be granted on the baste that ;be findings required by Section 16.6 of Zoning Ordinance 16 -3 eau be made and subjece co ;be following coaditionst 1) Design Review 2) *salmon meeting capacity of new sanctuary shall he ISO scats. Gary l onfttlio Assistant Planner TOTAL P.i0 1 O' L" znnt 1i: by 8672389 BOGDANOVICH MR-06-1993 10:55 CITY OF 41 uLwiwuu N. 3 aSt 112POi1? tW y pile lto. I,jr- 1447 x /ha application for a Doc Permit on behtlf of S1. A.RCl1 $UZIt J �.142k_�ditL ab ove: 1. That the proposed location of the oon0iticnel use is in accord with the obicciives of the losing Otdiaance and the purposes of the didtrict in which the site is located. 2. ?hat the proponad location of the conditional use and the cpndl- lino. under which It would be operated or naintrtihdd will not be detrioeatai to the public health, safety, or eollare, or entertain injurious to properties or t pravements is the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional nae will complf with tacb of the applicable provieians of the Zoning Otdiaanee. PAGE 15 Planning Commission Minutes 11 March 1968 Continued II. A. V -314 Continued Mr. James Ellmore, applicant's architect, was present and stated that 1) it was necessary to submit new plans since the original survey on the property was inaccurate; therefore, a new survey had to be made and 2) he discussed the proposed Variance with the adjacent neighbors and they offered no opposition .to same. Commissioner Crisp stated that because of the grading problems involved with this application, the Variance Committee would like the City Engineer to accompany them for an on -site inspection at 9:30 A.M., Monday, 18 March 1968. After discussion, Chairman Norton (7:44 P.M.) closed the hearing for the evening, directed V -314 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to the Variance Committee for study and a report. B. UP -146 Finnegan Construction Co., Manor Drive Request for Use Permit to Allow a Model Home Sales Office Chairman Norton opened the public hearing for UP -146 at 7:45 P.M. The Secretary 1) stated that the Notices of Hearing were mailed 2) briefly reviewed the subject request and 3) recommended that this application be referred to the Subdivision Committee for study. There was no one present to represent the applicant and no one in the audience wished to comment. At 7:46 P.M., Chairman Norton directed UP -146 continued to the next regular meeting and referred same to Subdivision Committee for study and a report. C. UP -147 St. Archangel Michael (Serbian Orthodox Church), Allendale Avenue Request for Use Permit for Sanctuary, Classrooms, and a Parish House The public hearing for UP -147 was opened at 7 :47 P.M. The Secretary stated that the Notices of Hearing were mailed and then explained that the applicant has sub- mitted a Master Plan for the entire project. No one was present to represent the applicant. Chairman Norton, in answer to an inquiry from a member of the audience, stated that the Master Plan shows the future.sanctuary facing Allendale Avenue with the soon- to -be- constructed classrooms and existing meeting hall immediately to the rear of the sanctuary and the proposed parish residence on the south-westerly portion of the property. Chairman Norton at 7:49 P.M. closed the hearing for•the evening and directed UP -147 continued until the meeting of 25 March 1968 and referred same to the Subdivision Committee for study. He than directed the Secretary to contact the applicant relative to setting up an appointment with the Subdivision Committee. D. QUITO PARK BUSINESS CENTER, Cox Avenue Informal'Hearing Request that Veternarian Office be Added to the List of Conditional Uses in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District' Chairman Norton opened the discussion on this informal hearing. The Secretary.: read the letter submitted by the applicant requesting that Veternarian Office be added to the List of Conditional Uses in the "C -N" Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District. -2 V. Rev. V.M. Mrvichin V. Rev. Pavlovich The following Parishioners witnessed the 1962 Dedication Ceremony: w Pfjo ✓`dseda,101/1 no tz -e v� 5,eedez_novic'h e/14- FO6, m Parishioners of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church of Santa Clara Valley May 19 -20, 1962 Dedication. and Consecration Planting of Cross His Grace, Bishop Dionisije November 29, 1987 Consecration of Church Site and Re- Planting of Cross V. Rev Dushan Shoukletovich Kum Mr. Mijo Miljevich Arn7e VICIACOVICh V. Rev. V.M. Mrvichin V. Rev Dushan Shoukletovich Kum Mr. Mijo Miljevich Parishioners of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church of Santa Clara Valley �•s �•rs��s�.is• w s�•�� -,s �►-is�i►is• w`'s�.i��•�s �s�w The following Parishioners witnessed the I962 Dedication Ceremony: V. Rev. Pavlovich 9 May 19 -20, 1962 Dedication and Consecration Planting of Cross His Grace, Bishop Dionisije November 29, 1987 Consecration of Church Site and Re- Planting of Cross (second planting of cross in same location) V. Rev. V.M. Mrvichin V. Rev. Pavlovich May 19 -20, 1962 Dedication and Consecration Planting of Cross His Grace, Bishop Dionisije V. Rev Dushan Shoukletovich Kum Mr. Mijo Miljevich Parishioners of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church of Santa Clara Valley c.'i�.r• �•is�•i��•i��•iio is�•s�•is�•� w. s.•�4 The following Parishioners witnessed the 1962 Dedication Ceremony: d ;t c- La- nze :4 /eksr. 7 2 7— J L�� .4 -/ekpr, c ;7 c- P 4 7 ,.../y i .Xf r /lie c (4.-:-- veh C) November 29, 1987 Consecration of Church Site and Re Planting of Cross (second planting of cross in same location) SANFORD A. BERLINER' ANDREW L. FABER RALPH J. SWANSON PEGGY L. SPRINGGAY JOSEPH E. DWORAK SAMUEL L. FARB ALAN J. PINNER FRANK R. UBHAUS LINDA A. CALLON JAMES P. CASHMAN STEVEN J. CASAD NANCY J. JOHNSON JEROLD A. REITON 'A Professional Corporation RETIRED SAMUEL J. COHEN ROBERT W. HUMPHREYS Branch Office Merced, CA ROBERT L CHORTEK JONATHAN D. WOLF KATHLEEN K SIPLE KEVIN F. KELLEY MARK MAKIE WICZ ROBERTA S. HAYASHI JEFFREY S. KAUFMAN JOLIE HOUSTON BRIAN L.SHETLER JOHN F. DOMINGUE HARRY A. LOPEZ CHARLES W. VOLPE MICHAEL VIOLANTI Mayor Waltonsmith and City Council Members City of Saratoga 13777 Saratoga Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 My expertise/credentials: 1DUNG01772729.1 091708 12822001 BERLINER COHEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS TEN ALMADEN BOULEVARD ELEVENTH FLOOR SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113 -2233 TELEPHONE: (408) 286 -5800 FACSIMILE: (408) 998 -5388 www.berliner.com IN ASSOCIATION WITH MCGRANE GREENFIELD LLP SAN JOSE SAN FRANCISCO September 17, 2008 Re: St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church. Dear Mayor Waltonsmith and City Council Members: THOMAS P. MURPHY VICTOR A. PAPPALARDO MILES 1. DOLINGER CHRISTIAN E. PICONE THOMAS D. MORELL BRADLEY G. HEBERT SETH 3: COHEN CHRISTINE H. LONG THOMAS E. EBERSOLE LAURA PALAZZOLO SHANNON N. COGAN AARON M. VALENTI KARA L. ERDODI ANDREW J. GIORGIANNI MATTHEW A. TAYLOR HEATHER H. MUNOZ FORREST W. HANSEN ALAN D. NIEBEL SANDRA G. SEPULVEDA MARCO M. CAMPAGNA ERIC J. BERQUIST DEBBIE Y. BAE MARY KATHARINE WILSON NICHOLAS RABY STEPHANIE B. WERSEL OF COUNSEL HUGH L. ISOLA STEVEN L. HALLGRIMSON ERIC WONG LINDA J. LEZOTTE PHILIP GOLDEN NANCY L. BRANDT I have been asked by a representative of the Serbian Orthodox Church "the Church to provide an opinion on the issue of bulk, mass and compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood with regard to the proposed new sanctuary building "Church building for St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church, 18870 Allendale Avenue in Saratoga, CA. In particular, I was asked to address comments regarding incompatibility of the project as stated in the letter to the City Council from Ms. Kirsten Powell, Logan Powell LLP, dated September 12, 2008. I have been a practicing professional planner in California for over 26 years. I earned a Bachelor of Science in Urban and Regional Planning from California State Polytechnic University, Pomona in December 1980. I have also been a member in good standing of the American Planning Association since 1979 and I am a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners. For the first 10 years of my professional planning career, I worked in public planning agencies as a staff planner, including the cities of Norwalk, LaVerne and Livermore, CA. In that capacity, I was responsible for the writing and implementation of numerous zoning ordinance Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 text amendments and the design review of development applications. In the City of Livermore, I served as the Secretary of the Design Review Committee (DRC), which required oversight on all development review projects going before the DRC for design review approval. Over the last 15 years, I have worked as a private sector planning consultant and have provided consulting and contract planning and planning consultation services to over 10 public planning agencies in the Bay Area, including the City of Saratoga (2005 2007) and the neighboring communities of Los Gatos, Los Altos Hills and Cupertino. In this capacity I have reviewed many development applications which have required the interpretation of general plans, zoning ordinances, design guidelines and other planning tools, as required. I also co- authored the City of Saratoga 2007 General Plan Land Use and Open Space /Conservation Element Updates. I currently work as land use planner for Berliner Cohen, Attorneys at Law, in San Jose. In my over 26 years as a professional planner, I have been involved in the writing, implementation and interpretation of general plans and municipal codes as they relate to the processing of development applications. also have been involved in the processing of several applications for new, and expansions of existing, religious facilities. Review of St. Archangel Michael Church building documents: In preparing this document, I have reviewed city documents, including the General Plan, City Zoning Code, and the Residential Design Handbook; application materials submitted by the applicant and it representatives including the color booklet entitled "City of Saratoga Planning Commission Public Hearing St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church "Color Booklet dated June 25, 2008; documents and comments provided by the Neighborhood Task Force; and, and Staff Reports to the Planning Commission for File No. 03 -259 (Design Review and Conditional Use Permit), which are found in the City of Saratoga Planning Department. I assisted in the preparation of the document entitled "Responses To Comments From The Saratoga Neighborhood Task Force Regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration" "Response Letter that was provided to the Planning Commission by Jolie Houston, Berliner Cohen, at the June 25, 2008, public hearing. While not required by CEQA, the responses to comments are included as part of the record for the design review, conditional use permit and environmental review approval of the church sanctuary project. In reviewing City files for this project, I found that a copy of this document was in the project file for File No. 03 -259. I have also reviewed the staff report to City Council regarding the Appeal of Application No. 03 -259 issued on September 12, 2008 (dated September 17, 2008) and a letter submitted by Kirsten M. Powell of Logan Powell, LLP dated September 12, 2009. I visited the church facilities within the vicinity of the proposed St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church, as listed in the Color Booklet, and their immediate surroundings on September 12, 2008. 1DUNG01772729.1 091708- 12822001 -2- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 Regarding compatibility review for churches (general): In my experience as a professional planner, religious facilities (churches, synagogues, temples, etc.), are considered private institutions of worship that are traditionally found in residential neighborhoods, and are typically permitted in residential districts by conditional use permit. The conditional use permit process allows local jurisdictions to provide for special uses which may be considered essential or desirable to a particular community, but which are not allowed as a matter of right within a zoning district. A conditional use permit can provide flexibility within a zoning ordinance to address the special nature of a use and control the use to ensure compatibility with its environs. Churches fall under this category because, while they are considered appropriate in residential areas, the nature of their activities can potentially cause conflicts with residents in their immediate vicinity. It is through the use permit process that local jurisdictions can develop flexibility in standards, as well as specific conditions that can specifically address the special nature of these uses and potential project related neighborhood conflicts. The issues that are typically found to cause potential areas of conflict are related to traffic, parking and noise from church related activities. These are typically regulated through conditions of approval of the project, by placing limitations on hours of operation and seating capacity. The City of Saratoga allows churches in all residential districts by conditional use permit. It further emphasizes this policy by designating specific sites for churches in the Land Use Map, as Community Facility Sites (CFS) of which most sites are zoned primarily as residential districts. The General Plan Land Use Element lists churches as "private institutional uses" and states that "These are institutional uses that provide a public service but are not controlled by a publicly elected governing board." This statement was included in the 1983 General Plan Land Use Element and was further incorporated in the 2007 Land Use Element Update. The Church building consists of the construction of a 3,994 square foot building. It includes a Variation from Standards to exceed the maximum allowable site coverage, exceed the maximum allowable building height and reduce the number of required parking spaces. The net lot area is approximately 3.1 acres and the site is located in the R -1- 40,000 zoning district. Regarding comments raised by Ms. Powell's letter to City Council related to incompatibility issues of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church "St. Archangel Michael"). In addressing Ms. Powell's letter to the City Council regarding incompatibility issues of the Church building, please note that I am often also making reference to the Response Letter of June 25, 2008 (attached hereto as Exhibit A), since many of these comments were raised in previous comments submitted by the Neighborhood Task Force regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and addressed in said Response Letter. 1 Formerly Quasi Public Facilities (QPF) 1983 Saratoga General Plan IDUNG01772729.1 -3- 091708- 12822001 Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 Regarding the claim that the project is incompatible the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Regarding Building Height which will cause a significant impact. (Statement B, Page 4) The statement regarding the two (2) stories in height limitation of the General Plan is correct. Further, the City Zoning Code Section 15- 05.660 Definitions, defines a story is as "that portion of any floor and surface of any floor next above, or if there is no floor above, the space between the floor and the ceiling or roof next above." Based on this definition, the main body or spine of the Church building, including the nave and cupola, are considered a single story. The only area of the building that is two -story is in the front of the entrance to the building (balcony and tower). (Please refer to Response 9, paragraph 2 of the Response Letter for a more detailed response to this comment). In my experience as a contract planner in Saratoga for over two years, this is consistent with the interpretation of story as applied to other projects in Saratoga. Thus, the Church building does meet the General Plan height limitation. Regarding the maximum height allowed in the zoning district, the City Zoning Code provides for deviations from the 30 ft. limit through approval of a conditional use permit. Section 15- 12.100 states that: "No single-family dwelling shall exceed twenty-six feet in height and no other type of main structure shall exceed thirty feet in height. Exceptions to these limitations may be approved pursuant to a Use Permit and Design Review issued in accordance with Article 15 -55 of this Code if the additional height is necessary in order to adhere to a specific architectural style. The additional height may only be granted on residentially zoned parcels exceeding twenty thousand square feet." Section 15055.010 and 15055.030 of the City Zoning Code grants the Planning Commission the authority to approve deviations by a use permit to site area, density, structure height, distances between structures, site coverage, front, side and rear setback area minimums and off street parking requirements of the zoning district in which it lies. (Please refer to Response #17 of the Response Letter). This section of the City Zoning Code is not a new section and has been historically used to allow said deviations on other projects in the City, including some of the churches listed in the Negative Declaration. The language in the 1983 General Plan which refers to religious institutions did not changed as part of the 2007 General Plan Update. The new CFS designation is essentially a merger of the former Public Facilities and Public /Quasi Public designations, and the language included in those designations was merged. The text stating that "a three -story facility may be allowed for an institutional facility located upon a site designated for Quasi Public Facilities (QPF) in the General Plan, where the average slope underneath the structure is ten percent or greater and a stepped pad is used" was incorporated in the new text because it been adopted by the City Resolutions 2285 (adopted 11/7/85). It should be noted that his language was adopted primarily to deal with the facilities at the Odd Fellows site. Regardless, this section does not apply to the Church building as it is not a three -story building. IDUNG01772729.1 -4- 091708- 12822001 Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 It is my opinion as a professional planner that the project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and that the revised Church building will not result in a significant effect on the environment regarding building height. Regarding the claim that there will be a significant impact to aesthetics (Page 5) Ms. Powell states that the proposed Church building bears little resemblance to the surrounding area. In my professional experience, religious institutions are not typically expected to be designed to look like a residential building. Religious institutions or places of worship are designed to reflect the Church's mission, as well as the needs and character of each congregation. Architecturally, they are typically designed to look very distinctive from most residential buildings in a neighborhood, in fact; to look like a church. A catholic church will not look like a synagogue or a Buddhist temple, as each have specific design criteria that they follow based on their canon laws. In this case, the proposed sanctuary building is designed to meet the criteria as established by the Serbian Orthodox Church (see attached letter from Longin, Bishop of Western America, herein referred to as Attachment B). Similarly, the Latter Day Saints "the Mormon Church that is referred to in Ms Powell's letter was design to meet the canon law of the Mormon Church, and thus would not be required to be designed as a catholic church or a Serbian Orthodox church. It should also be noted that the design of this church bears no resemblance to any of the homes in the immediate area, but it is not generally expected to do so. The color booklet includes photographs of several churches in Saratoga, which illustrate how no one church looks like another, or the residential homes in the immediate area. Many sanctuary buildings, in particular, are designed with strong vertical elements which, as stated in the Bishop's letter, "reinforce the heavenward aspiration of bringing the heavenly Jerusalem down to the faithful in this sacred space." As with many residential neighborhoods in Saratoga, the residences in this area are of many different architectural styles with the use of different materials and color pallets. Saratoga encourages creative design solutions in the design of homes, as stated in the Residential Design Handbook Preface Section. This is reflected in different styles that are found in the Camino Barco neighborhood, that are not necessarily consistent with the styles in the Serra Oaks neighborhood, or even the Chester Avenue area (not in the immediate vicinity of the project). The photographs included in the Color Booklet include other samples of homes in theses neighborhood which illustrate the different types of homes. In addition, please refer to Attachment C of this letter, which includes samples of photographs of the area that illustrate this point. In the revised design of the Church building, the church designers have indeed taken careful measures to address the bulk and design to make it more compatible with the immediate neighborhood, beyond just including building materials (stucco, tile roof, stone) that are found in many residences in the immediate vicinity of the site. Therefore, I disagree with Ms. Powell's statement that the proposed church "dwarfs the homes in the surrounding area in terms of height and bulk." As previously noted, the revised Church building setbacks far exceed the minimum required in the district and the building has been designed with significant articulation to mitigate issues of bulk. Further, the height of the building is overstated by Ms. Powell in that the main IDUNG01772729.1 091708 12822001 -5- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 body or spine (26') of the building does meet the maximum 30 ft. height limit It is only the dome (50') and the bell tower (40) exceeds the 30 ft. height limit (Response #3 of the Color Booklet the reduction in height of the Church dome and bell tower, and significant reduction in height of the main roof). Regarding the Mitigation Measure #1 -1 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration dated March 2008, which requires that the other site buildings be painted to match the new Church building, it is not unusual to have religious facilities built out in phases. The construction of these buildings is typically dependent on the fundraising activities of the congregation. Similarly, it is typical that until the time when all the church buildings can be built out, a condition will be placed on the project to paint existing buildings in a compatible and sometimes complementary manner to make them harmonious with the new building. This is a standard practice in development review and an adequate mitigation measure to address this issue. It is my opinion as a professional planner that the design features included in the Church building adequately addresses potential significant impacts regarding aesthetics and neighborhood compatibility. Therefore, the Church building will not result in a significant effect on the environment regarding aesthetics. Regarding the claim that the height variation is inconsistent with the General Plan. (Page 6) As previously noted, the Zoning Ordinance or City Zoning Code is not inconsistent with the General Plan. The General Plan does limit the height of buildings to two stories. However, the Church building, as designed, meets the definition of two stories and thus is consistent with the General Plan. The City Zoning Code authorizes the Planning Commission to approve variation in height standards through the conditional use permit process. The City of Saratoga has historically and consistently used this process in their review of religious institutions. As noted in the "Color Booklet," all churches listed have elements that exceed the 30 ft height requirements of the zoning district in which they are located. It is my opinion as a professional planner that height variation for the Church building is consistent with the General Plan and that the revised Church building will not result in a significant effect on the environment regarding building height. Regarding the claim that the project is inconsistent with the City's Design Guidelines. (Page 8) As stated in the previous comments, the Church building has been re- designed to address the issues of bulk and mass in relationship with surrounding residences. While not subject to the Residential Design Handbook guidelines, as it is not a residential building, the church designers have attempted to address many of the requirements of the Residential Design Handbook related to site layout, bulk and mass, compatibility of colors and materials, articulation, etc. In addition, the requested deviation in height only applies to less than 40% of the building (62% of the Church is less than 30 feet in height). (Please refer to Responses 12, 13 and 16 of the Response Letter). 1DUNG01772729.1 091708 12822001 -6- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 The use of a similar color palette for the other buildings is a standard practice in the making existing buildings "harmonious" with a new structure on a larger site. I disagree with Ms. Powell's statement that this does not meet the test for making them harmonious. The concept of harmonious in design review does not mean that all building should look the same, rather to tie them together through available, reasonable methods such as painting them to match the color of the new Church building. As previously stated in response to Comment D, the Church building is not required to be designed to look like a home, nor required to conform to the Residential Design Handbook because it is not a residential use. Yet, the design of the Church building follows many of its listed guidelines to address the issues of bulk, mass and height. It is also worth referring to this statement in the Preface of the Residential Design Handbook: "The design policies and implementation techniques set forth in the Handbook are not meant to discourage unique and inventive design solutions. Rather they embody the intent of the findings that must be made for design review applications, and serve as basis on which decision making bodies make their design related decision." The use of unique and inventive design solutions allows the decision making bodies flexibility in interpretation of the guidelines set forth in the Residential Design Handbook. This is reflective in some of the newer homes found in the immediate vicinity, which illustrate that unique and inventive design solutions are encouraged in the City of Saratoga. Cases in point are three two -story homes on Camino Barco which are included in the Color Booklet. Each of these homes is of a different architectural style, yet they enrich the fabric of the community while meeting the intent of the Residential Design Guidelines and the definition of "harmonious" development as applied to the design review of structure in this residential neighborhood. It is my opinion as a professional planner that the Church building, while not required to be as it is not a residential project, has been designed in a manner that meets the intent of the Residential Design Guidelines. Therefore, the revised Church building will not result in a significant effect on the environment regarding aesthetics, as it relates to conformity with the City's design guidelines. Conclusion: The project, as proposed, is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance) as supported in this letter and the Response Letter. While not a residential building, the Church building has been revised and designed in a manner that addresses the potential issues related to aesthetics, mass, bulk and compatibility and has used the Residential Design Handbook as a guide in addressing these issues. The mitigation included which requires that existing buildings are painted to match the color palette of the Church building is a reasonable and standard practice used in design review to help existing buildings "tie in" to new buildings so that they "harmonize" with each other. Therefore, it is my professional opinion that the Church building as designed has adequately addressed the issues related to bulk, mass and compatibility with the surrounding 1DUNG01772729.1 091708 12822001 -7- Mayor Waltonsmith and Saratoga City Council September 17, 2008 neighborhood. Therefore, the revised Church building will not result in a significant effect on the environment regarding aesthetics as it relates to conformity with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, building height, bulk and mass, or neighborhood compatibility. DU IDUNG01772729.1 -8- 091708- 12822001 Very truly yours, EBO' 1► g MC CORMICK, AICP Land Use Planner SANFORD A. BERLINER' ANDREW L. FABER RALPH J. SWANSON PEGGY L. SPRINGGAY JOSEPH E. DWORAK SAMUEL L. FARB ALAN J. PINNER FRANK R UBHAUS LINDA A. CALLON JAMES P. CASHMAN STEVEN J. CASAD NANCY J. JOHNSON JEROLD A. REITON •A Professional Corporation RETIRED SAMUEL J. COHEN ROBERT W. HUMPHREYS Branch Office Merced, CA VIA HAND DELIVERY Chair Cappello and Planning Commissioners Saratoga City Hall 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 UH1765057.1 062508- 12822001 ROBERT L. CHORTEK JONATHAN D. WOLF KATHLEEN IL SIPLE KEVIN F. KELLEY MARK MAKIEWICZ ROBERTA S. HAYASHI JEFFREY S. KAUFMAN JOLIE HOUSTON BRIAN L. SHETLER JOHN F. DOMJNGUE HARRY A. LOPEZ CHARLES W. VOLPE MICHAEL VIOLANTI BERLINER COHEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS TEN ALMADEN BOULEVARD ELEVENTH FLOOR SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113 -2233 TELEPHONE: (408) 286 -5800 FACSIMILE: (408) 998 -5388 www.berliner.com IN ASSOCIATION WITH MCGRANE GREENFIELD LLP SAN JOSE SAN FRANCISCO June 25, 2008 THOMAS P. MURPHY H. ANN LIROFF VICTOR A. PAPPALARDO MILES J. DOUNGER CHRISTIAN E. PICONE THOMAS D. MORELL BRADLEY G. HEBERT SETH J.COHEN CHRISTINE H. LONG THOMAS E. EBERSOLE LAURA PALAZZOLO SHANNON N. COGAN AARON M. VALENTI KARA L. ERDODI ANDREW J. GIORGIANNI MATTHEW A TAYLOR HEATHER H. MUNOZ FORREST W. HANSEN MELINDA B. BARKER SANDRA G. SEPULVEDA MARCO M. CAMPAGNA ERIC J. BERQUIST DEBBIE Y. BAE MARY KATHARINE WILSON NICHOLAS RABY STEPHANIE B. WEASEL OF COUNSEL HUGH L. ISOLA STEVEN L. HALLGRIMSON ERIC WONG LINDA J. LEZOTTE PHILIP GOLDEN NANCY L BRANDT Re: St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Application No. 03 -259 Dear Chair Cappello and Planning Commissioners: This letter is written on behalf of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church "St. Archangel Michael concerning the Planning Commission hearing scheduled for June 25, 2008. There is No Substantial Evidence that the Project will have a Significant Effect on the Environment Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act "CEQA the City as a lead agency must consider comments received during the circulation period, but is not required to prepare responses to such comments. We are aware that there were numerous comments submitted by Saratoga Neighborhood Task Force regarding the MND. Although "responses" to comments on the MND are not legally required by CEQA, we have reviewed them and have determined that they are not substantiated I Cal. Pub. Res. Code 21091(d), (f); 14 Cal. Code Regs 15074(b). Attachment A 4 City of Saratoga Planning Commission June 25, 2008 and do not constitute substantial evidence of a significant effect on the environment. Enclosed are our written responses to the comments submitted by the Saratoga Neighborhood Task Force. In determining whether the project will have a significant effect on the environment, mere uncorroborated opinion or rumor does not constitute substantial evidence. Furthermore, the issue is not whether the project will adversely affect particular persons, but whether the project will adversely affect the environment of persons in general. \JH\765057.1 062508- 12822001 Thank you for time and consideration of St. Archangel Michael's Project. Very truly yours, BERLINER COHEN JOL opJ E -Mail: jolie.houston @berliner.com cc: St. Archangel Michael William Parkin, Assistant City Attorney John Livingstone, Community Development Director 2 Cal. Pub. Res. Code 21080(c); 14 Cal. Code Regs 15074(b). 14 Cal. Code Regs 15384; Assoc. for the Protection of Environmental Values in Ukiah v. City of Ukiah (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 720, 735. a Cal. Pub. Res. Code 21083(c); Assoc. for the Protection of Environmental Values in Ukiah, supra, 2 Cal.App.4th at 734. -2- RESPONSES TO COMMENTS FROM THE SARATOGA NEIGHBORHOOD TASK FORCE REGARDING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ARTICLE VII. COMMENTS ON STUDY A large portion of the earlier comments have bearing on the specific items in the draft. However due to the time constraints and the length of the document, most of the objections will not be repeated. They have the most bearing on the loss of views aesthetics, parking, traffic, noise and level of intensity with a residential neighborhood. It is beyond our understanding if a good faith effort in preparing the study had been made within the context of the City's General Plan, different conclusion would have been reached. Therefore, in a desire to make sure an honest effort is made to understand the problems there may be some repetition. Within the brief, amount of time, given it is impossible to take on the analysis word for word. The previous sections of comments have already illustrated that the study was totally inadequate and incorrect in its conclusions. This section will attempt to track the Environmental Study's numbering and lettering for comparison purposes. Also a significant number of personnel changes have been made in MHA. People who are cited are no longer with the firm. The Staff qualifications and personnel requirements have also changed on this project than originally proposed. There was to be a Environmental Planner/Historian, Document Manger, Quality Control Manager, in addition to the Project Manager, who had a great deal of experience, Dain Anderson. (Attachment 15) The Church was allowed to negotiate down the price of the contract and meet with the consultants and the City. The neighbors were not included nor informed of this meeting. The quality of the report has certainly suffered due to the negotiations. (Attachment 36). This meeting was a meeting with City staff, the City's consultant and the applicant to review the consultant's invoices due to the personnel changes, as noted above. Section 7.01 (1) Aesthetics IJH1761821.5 062508 12822001 1 a -b "Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista." Comment #1: Study erroneously stated building will have no impact on scenic resources. The photos show mountains clearly seen (Attachment 4 k -q). Response 1: The City of Saratoga "City") General Plan Circulation Element lists the designated scenic corridors in Saratoga, and the St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church "Church site is not located along a designated scenic corridor. The Santa Cruz Mountain ridgeline provides a distant scenic backdrop for those traveling along sections of Allendale Avenue, where the existing street trees and other mature vegetation are not currently blocking this view. This is a condition that is found along most roadways within the Santa Clara County the valley floor. Please note, however, that the technique used in taking the photographs in Attachments 1, n, o and p results in a misrepresentation of the closeness of the mountain range to the Church site. Please refer to Photo Simulations #1 and #2 (attached) which show a realistic view of the ridgeline for the existing and proposed condition from the property located directly across the street from the Church site. These photo simulations illustrate how the current view corridor from Allendale Avenue will remain essentially unchanged, with a de minimis view impact (existing view blockage is currently 81% to 98.5% and Church building adding approximately 2.4% and 1.5 where the Church bell tower is proposed. Comment #2: Allendale Avenue has beautiful vistas of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Response #2: Comment noted. See Response #1. Comment #3: This is a road that gets a tremendous amount of traffic during the week (Attachment 5 -7). So, many city residents and visitors enjoy breathtaking views including beautiful sunsets. Response #3: Comment noted. See Response #1. Comment #4: It has one of the last remaining long term vineyards. Response 4: Comment noted. The vineyard is located two properties to the east of the Church property, and is not affected by the proposed new Church building. Comment #5: St. Archangel Michael's property also allows access views of the mountains. Response #5: Comment noted. See Response #1. Comment #6: The current buildings are only one story and do not obstruct the ability to see the large portion of the mountain tops. They also are built low and are unobtrusive with set backs that do not impede the views of the mountains behind them. Response #6: The Church building has been designed with setbacks that exceed the minimum required setbacks in the R -1- 40,000 District and will not obstruct large portions of the mountain tops for most properties in the vicinity of the Church site. As noted in Response #1, the existing mature vegetation along Allendale Avenue in fact obstructs the ability to see large portions of the Santa Cruz Mountain ridgeline. Further, the properties immediately adjacent to the easterly and westerly side of the Church property have trees in the foreground which serve to block portions of the view of the hillsides and will also screen a majority of the new Church building. Comment #7: (City Council Meeting June 6, 2007 1 hour 24 -29 minutes confirms one use of design review is to protect view corridors) (See Attachment 14). Response #7: Comment noted. The Planning Commission will address the issue of design review for the Church building through the City's use permit/design review process. Comment #8: The proposed building is 100 feet across out of the 190 feet frontage. 1JH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -2- Response #8: The Church building is only 52% of the frontage of the Church site. It should be noted that, in the City, new residential developments in the R1- 40,000 Districts typically maximize lot coverage and are to closer to a 70 72% of lot frontage. The proposed side setbacks for the Church building are significantly in excess of minimum required by the City's R -1 Zoning District standards. Comment #9: This building is in conflict with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance which allows only 26 feet unless the project site is a 10% slope. Response #9: This statement is not accurate. The maximum allowable height in Saratoga is 30 ft. The City's General Plan Land Use Element states that "On sites used for quasi public uses, a three -story structure will be allowed provided the slope underneath the three -story area is 10% or more and a stepped pad is used (Resolution 2285 adopted 11/7/85)." The City Zoning Code Section 15- 12.100 (c) further states that "No structure shall exceed two stories, except that, pursuant to a use permit issued under Article 15 -55 of the Chapter, a three -story structure may be allowed for an institutional facility located upon a site designated for Quasi Public Facilities (QPF) in the General Plan, where the average sloped underneath the structure is ten percent or greater and a stepped building pad is used The City Zoning Code Section 15- 05.660 defines a `Story' as: "that portion of any floor and the surface of any floor next above, or if there is no floor above, the space between the floor and the ceiling or roof next above. Basements are excluded from being considered a story." Based on this definition, the main body or spine of the Church building, including the nave and cupola, are single story. The only area of the building that is two -story is in the front entrance of the building (balcony and bell tower). Comment #10: The project will rise 50 feet in height. Response #10: The proposed maximum height of the spine of the Church building is 26 ft. where the maximum allowed is 30 ft. The Church elements that project above the roofline of the main building are the base of the cupola at a height of 31 ft., the cupola or dome at a height of 50 ft., and the bell tower at a height of 40 ft. Comment 11: There will be a significant mass above the allowed 26 feet. The 6,609 square feet understates the actual mass because the City does not count anything over 26 feet because the code does not account for such bulk in the calculation. Response #11: Please note that the floor area of the Church building is 3,994 sq. ft. and not 6,609 sq. ft. as stated in the Project Description of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. However, the "massing" of the Church building is related to how the square footage is designed, not just the total building square foot calculation. The Church building design incorporates architectural features to break up potential massing and incorporates the following design techniques: Includes varied rooflines through changes in height and form; Punctuates large wall expanses with bay windows, arches and other architectural features; 1JH1761821.5 062508- 12822001 -3- Uses a combination of vertical and horizontal elevations Comment #12: The residential design review specifically states ways to protect views. Response #12: The Church building design and site layout incorporate design features to maximize views of hillsides which may be seen in the distant background for most valley floor properties. This includes use of varied rooflines that provide breaks in the building plane; placing the Church building at an angle from the street serves to foreshorten the view from Allendale Avenue; and, greater than minimum required setbacks to maintain view corridors. Though not specifically applicable to the design of quasi public uses, these design measures are consistent with design measures listed in the City's Residential Design Review Handbook "Handbook Comment #13: 15- 12.150 says requires consistency of main and accessory structure in 15 -45. Response #13: The sections referred to in Comment #12 relate specifically to design review for single family structures. Even though this is not a residential structure, the Church building has been planned and designed to be compatible with these residential requirements. The proposed Church makes use of earthtone building materials and colors that are consistent with existing structures and which are found in the vicinity of the Church. Comment #14: Structure is in conflict with 15- 12.100. Response #14: As previously noted in Response #9, this statement is not accurate. In addition, Section 15- 12.100 of the City Zoning Code provides for exceptions to the 30 ft. height limit for "other type of main structure" in the R -1 District by a Use Permit and Design Review issued in accordance with Section 15 -55 of the City Zoning Code. Comment #15: R1-40,000 districts must conform to 15- 45.080 Design review findings which will be analyzed in detail below. (See earlier discussion on 15 -45 validity.). Response #15: See Response #13 and #14. Comment #16: 15- 46.040 (a) calls far similar features such as height, elevations roofs, materials and appurtenances. A building with a bell tower, cupola and rising 50 feet. Clearly does not conform with single story law buildings with flat roofs and an American style ranch. Even if this was the least restrictive City district 15 -46 this would not be allowed. Response #16: As describe in the Purpose of Article in Section 15- 45.010 (Design Review for Single Family Dwelling) and Section 15 -46.10 (Design Review: Multi Family Dwelling and Commercial Structures) of the City Zoning Code, these sections specifically apply to the design of single family home, accessory structures, and multi family homes and commercial buildings, respectively. Similarly, the Handbook specifically applies to the design of single family homes. Quasi public buildings are generally allowed in residential districts as conditional uses and are permitted through the conditional permit/design review process. The use permit provides for approval of deviations in height. (See City Zoning Code Section 15- 55.030 Variation from standards). Refer to Response #10 UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -4- regarding height of the Church building elements. The Church has been resdesigned to incorporate varied rooflines, architectural features and building materials that are keeping with the many "non -flat roof /American style ranch" homes found in the vicinity of the Church. Comment 17: Planning Commission has no authority to grant a variation of standard for an unharmonious structure. Please see 15- 55.030 states, height, distances, site coverage, front, side and rear setbacks area minimums and off street parking and loading requirements "other than as listed under the specific regulation far conditional permitted uses in the zoning district in which it lies." Response #17: Please refer to Section 15- 55.010 Purpose of Article of the City Zoning Code. This section provides the Planning Commission authority to grant conditional uses permits for projects, which because of their unusual characteristics require special consideration; and, that it may impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of use permits. Further, the full text of Section 15- 55.030 states that "A conditional use may be permitted by a use permit to have a site area, density, structure height, distances between structures, site coverage, front, side and rear set back area minimums and off street parking requirements, other than as listed under the specific regulations for unconditional permitted uses in the zoning district in which it lies." This section provides the Planning Commission the authority to grant a deviation in height, site coverage and off street parking in a conditional use permit, as requested for the Church. Comment #18: The district is R1- 40,000 therefore all zoning applies except for the ones specifically stated ie 15 -12, 15 -45. Response #18: The Church has been designed to conform to most development regulations of the R1- 40,000 District. As described in Responses #16 and #17 above, a conditional use permit is required to vary from the maximum allowable height of 30 ft., site coverage and off street parking, as provided in Section 15- 55.030 of the City Zoning Code. Comment #19: Noise ordinances the neighborhood is declared noise sensitive and so is the church property itself (see Noise Element General Plan) so variations should be more restrictive Note: Initial Study analysis is inadequate for determining what additional restrictive variations are appropriate for parking, noise, height, and traffic. Response #19: Comment noted. Please refer to the Responses to comments that follow the Aesthetic Section regarding specific parking, noise, and traffic comments. Comment #20: Planning Commission has no authority to grant incompatible designs which the MND concluded there were. IS erroneously asserted that an outmoded design invalidates the requirement for compatible design on the site and in the neighborhood. This is MHA's opinion. There is no supporting documentation for assertion above. It is irrelevant if the designs are old fashioned in the consultant 's opinion both 15 -45 and 15 -46 state the buildings must be compatible to the existing parcel. (more detailed discussion earlier in report). Response #20: See Response #13, #16 and #17. UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -5- Comment #21: 15- 12.100 States that Quasi public facilities may rise past the 26 feet to 3 stories if there is a 10 percent slope. St Andrews in their recent resolution was on a 10 slope. There is no slope on this property. No basis for any height at 30 feet or above. (See discussion above) Response #21: See Response #9, #14, #16 and #17. Comment 22: 15- 55.020 Planning Commission may impose conditions if it finds the proposed conditions use will adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood or will adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof There is no factual analysis to support that the idea that the project will not adversely affect the neighborhood. Inadequate mitigation and EIR required Response #22: The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration includes a detailed description of potential environmental impacts within acceptable thresholds. However, the Planning Commission may impose reasonable conditions to minimize reasonable perceived effects to the neighborhood from the Church building, as part of its power to approve a condition use permit. Comment 23: The general welfare standard (Attachment 23) states The United States Supreme Court has cited several times to aesthetics in supporting land use regulations. In upholding a local ordinance prohibiting the posting of signs on public property, the Court stated that aesthetic concerns are substantial government interest properly addressed under a city's police power. See City Council v. Taxpayers for Vincent, 466 U.S. 789, 805(1984 Similarly in upholding New York City's Landmark Preservation Law, the Court approved of the City's use of its police powers to enhance the quality of preserving `desirable aesthetic features of a city. Penn. Cent. Transp. Co. v. City of New York, 438 U.S. 104, 129 (1978). Curtin's California Land Use and Planning Law 2006 Twenty-Sixth Edition, Page 3. Response #23: Comment Noted. The City, though the conditional use permit and design review process, reviews and regulates aesthetics for all projects as part of its police powers. Further, Article 15 -46 of the City Zoning Code outlines design criteria that the Planning Commission uses as a guide when reviewing new development. Comment #24: `Protection of a city 's `character, `stability, and `soul has served to justify invocation of police power. "Curtin 's California Land Use and Planning Law 2006 Twenty- Sixth Edition, Page 3. Response #24: Comment noted. See Response #23. Comment #25: In Ewing v. City of Carmel -by- the -Sea 234 Cal. App 3d 1579 (1991). "In ruling for the city, the court held that the ordinance was a proper exercise of the city's land use authority under its police power `to enhance and maintain the residential character of the city. Id. At 1590. The court stated that this is a wholly proper purpose of zoning: Response #25: Comment noted. The City exercises this power through its General Plan, Zoning Code, Design Review Ordinance and Handbook. 1.1H1761821.5 062508- 12822001 -6- Comment #26: Short -term tenants have little interest in public agencies or in the welfare of the citizenry. They do not participate in local government, coach little league, or join hospital guild. They do not lead Scout troop, volunteer at the library or keep an eye on an elderly neighbor. Literally, they are here today and gone tomorrow with out engaging in the sort of activities that weld and strengthen a community. Id. At 1591. Response #26: Comment noted. However, this does not apply to churches, synagogues and other quasi public as they are not short term tenants, but are permanent, participatory land owners and are active members of the community. Comment #27: In holding that the ordinance was related to a legitimate governmental goal, the court continued: Blessed with unparalleled geography, climate, beauty, and charm, Carmel attracts numerous short -term visitors. Again, it stands to reason that Carmel would wish to preserve an enclave of single family homes as the heart and soul of the city. "Curtin's California Land Use and Planning Law 2006 Twenty-Sixth Edition page 4. Response #27: Comment noted. Comment 28: MHA admitted that the proposed design does not match the other structures on the site. Under General Welfare and the above cases this will result in negatively impacting the general welfare of the neighboring property owners. Inadequate and erroneous analysis has been reported. An EIR needs to be completed to address the issues. Response #28: The comment above erroneously summarizes the discussion by MHA under Aesthetics regarding compatibility with other uses on the Church site. MHA states that "The proposed church could be considered incompatible with the existing structures on the site if the buildings did not share a similar color palette." Therefore, in order to make the Church more compatible with the other buildings on the property, Mitigation Measure 1 -1 is proposed which requires submittal of a color board with at compatible color scheme for the proposed Church and existing structures on the site. This mitigation measure shall be submitted to the Planning Development prior to building permit issuance Comment #29: (Attachment 28) Open Space Element page 3 scenic roadways are protected and scenic viewshed including "orchards and roadway, scenery. Response #29: See Response 1 and #6. Comment #30: Project in direct violation to the residential design review which states see below (required see 15-12.150 referring to 15 -45. And 15.05.060(a). Residential is the more restrictive review and as such is used for this project. Response #30: Please refer to Section 15-12.030 of the City Zoning Code which states that religious and charitable institutions may be approved in the R -1- Districts upon granting of a use permit pursuant to Article 15 -55 of the City Zoning Code. Also refer to Response #17. Comment #31: Project contradicts Residential Hand book UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -7- Policy 1 Minimize the perception of bulk the exact opposite has occurred the placement of the building maximizes the bulk and blocks the view corridor. For almost 50 years current church has faced north /south. Building needs to change orientation. Technique #4 Minimize building height. Nothing has been done to minimize the height of the building in addition cupolas and bell towers have been added to do add height. Higher portions of the structure are not set back. A "don't" was to avoid large attic spaces. These are just blocked up space. The building is massive and above all zoning ordinances allowances. Technique #5 Design structure to fit with existing neighborhood. There is no Pseudo byzantium in the neighborhood. There is no Pseudo byzantium with cupolas and bell towers on the property now. It is incompatible with structure and size. "Do not. design to attract attention to stand out. This structure is designed specifically to attract attention. (Attachment 21 January 2003) "Not only are we building a Church for our community but, we are also providing a piece of Serbian history with the building. Just the presence of the significantly style building will have a number of people asking. "Who are these Serbian people? In effect, the new church building will present us with the opportunity in the future to create a cultural center...." This project will create an intensity of use as they create not a church but cultural center in violation of the zoning and general plan. This illustrates that the original de novo (Attachment 2) requirements were correct and the current analysis has been inadequate. Technique #6 Use architectural features to break up mass. Avoid vertical features that add to the perception of height Avoid large wall expanses without windows. The proposed building is not in conformity with this technique. Technique #3 Use landscaping to blend structure with environment Don't: use vegetation to correct design, privacy or bulk mistakes. The proposed project is not in conformity with this technique Technique #4 Integrate all structures on a single site. Priest's house is not same style as two structures and new structure is not in conformity this other residences or structures on site. Do's: unite all structures by using a single architectural theme or design. The style of the existing chapel and meeting hall do not match. No buildings on site match the style of this pseudo byzantium proposal. No bell towers, cupolas, buildings are one story. This structure is out of proportion and against 15- 12.100 and Land Use Element page 14. Do: Interrelate multiple structures to create a complete form on the site. This has not been done. Do: Use similar materials colors and roof pitch on structures. They do not have same roof materials and colors are different on the site. Don't: Avoid a large number of detached structures. The site would have 4 detached structures that each do not match in style, form or texture or in any other way. Technique #5: Blend roof and parking structures with environment Parking lot is not broken up as specified and large expanses of black top will be seen accompanied by the glare of automobiles unshaded for the most part. Policy OSC 11.3 (Attachment 28) Technique 6: Integrate fences and wall with structures and setting 1JH1761821.5 062508- 12822001 -8- Minimize fence and wall heights. Break 1 on, continuous sound walls by changes in height, set back and vegetation. Set sound walls back from property line to allow space for landscaping. Use horizontal lines with proportions to reduce perception of height and bulk. Sound wall analysis is absent from IS /MND and is required. Policy 3: Avoid Interference with privacy "Residential privacy is a key ingredient in the quality of life in Saratoga. Privacy problems and impacts should be resolved and addressed in the initial design stage, not with mitigation measures proposed as an afterthought. Technique #2: Locate buildings to minimize privacy impact Do: Locate structure to increase visual distance between buildings. Don't: Avoid siting structures in direct line of sight to neighboring residences. This building conflicts with policy #3. Technique #4: Reduce noise impacts on adjacent dwellings Do's: Screen and control noise such as parking and outdoor activities Noise: They held outside dancing (Attachment 4) Do's: Increase setbacks for noise sources from adjacent dwellings Don't. Remove fences wall or landscaping that serve as noise buffers. Control exterior light sources Do's: Limit number and intensity of light sources an entire lighting scheme to "light up the night" is proposed in violation of this policy. Do's: Screen light sources from neighboring properties Do's: Locate light sources at ground level There has been insufficient analysis and evaluation of Policy #3 and has not conformed with do 's. Do's: Avoid light sources that maybe seen at a distance Policy #4: Preserve views and access to views (Please refer to City Council Meeting for the General Plan adoption 1 hour 24 minutes to 29 minutes) `Views will be protected through the design review process' The City of Saratoga has had a long- standing commitment to the protection of views, both from the hillsides to the Bay Area and from the Santa Clara Valley to the hillsides. Structures should be designed to blend in with the hillsides, not project above ridgelines and hilltops, and to respect the view from neighboring or higher residences." This structure blocks not just the neighbors' views but will block views for all who travel through this part of Saratoga. We will probably not have the Vineyard forever and all views of our gorgeous hillsides need to be carefully guarded and preserved. This MND has done nothing to investigate or mitigate this unwarranted interference in our view corridor. Do's: Protect high quality views Don'ts: Do not block view with structures or tall landscaping The building is 50 feet tall. It blocks the views(See Cover Page). IS erroneously concluded it does not. (Attachment 4 k -q) Don't Avoid using site plans that will create visual problems By attempting to keep all structures this impacts the views in the worst possible way. There is almost no placement that could do a worse job. 1.1H1761821.5 062508 12822001 -9- There is also no requirement for the City to grant a permit because the owner does not want to tear down any existing structures. 15- 55.020 no right to a permit. Technique #2: Maximize view but avoid conflict with privacy Do's: protect neighbor 's privacy by proper site planning and appropriate landscaping Trees will be too small A large number of homes will have to look at this structure Don'ts: Do not sacrifice neighbor's privacy by insisting on complete view. Height of structure is too large for the size of the property and the placement. Technique #3: Locate structure to reduce height impact Do's: Reduce height to minimize view blockage. The structure is maximizing view blockage by going sideways at an odd angle and having significant mass above 50 feet. Don't: Do not block view by excessively high and bulky structure. Church has repeatedly refused to consider changing location or orientation of structure. Don't: Avoid roofforms and ridgelines that impact views Structure violates this rule. Policy 5: Design for Energy Efficiency Technique #1: Design for maximum benefit of sun and wind Do's: Fit structure into the grade to reduce wall exposure and provide wind protection. Project is 50 feet tall with large airy open spaces. How is that deemed energy efficient? Do's: Provide shade to openings by the use of trellises or roof overhangs. It is 50 feet tall and there is no trellises or roof overhangs. Locate majority of windows on the South elevations Project has not complied with this rule. Landscape to control exposure to sun and wind Building out by itself fully exposed and up 50 feet in uninterrupted wind Technique #3: Allow light, air and solar access to adjacent homes. Offset structures to increase exposure to sun and allow for ventilation. It is 50 feet high. The current home on western side is small on one acre. Eventually this will most likely be replaced. A 50 foot structure could impact new homes ability to use solar. Relate the height of a structure to its distance from adjacent structures. Setbacks are insufficient to mitigate excess height. Technique 4: Incorporate energy- saving devices into the design. Use earth berms to shade walls and to provide shelter This structure does not comply an cannot because owners have chosen a lot too small to provide berms or adequate setbacks. Use roof mounted solar collectors if possible This structure does not comply. Response #31: See Response #16 regarding applicability of the Handbook to design review of quasi public uses. In addition, as stated in the Preface of the Handbook, the purpose of the Handbook is to "guide the homeowner, architect, developer and building in design new single- family dwellings, or remodeling existing ones, that will be harmonious with the existing fabric of Saratoga." However, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration contains a complete description of how the Church has been designed to address the policies and techniques included in the Handbook to the greatest extent possible. This includes a redesign of the new building from a traditional Byzantine Architecture style to a UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -10- more western architecture style that is compatible with many of the homes in the vicinity of the Church site. The Church has been designed with many features to break up mass and the impact of the potential bulk is reduced by the use of varied roofline pitches, setbacks in excess of the minimum setbacks, and a mix of horizontal and vertical features. In addition, natural earthtone colors are proposed for the Church and will be incorporated in the other existing buildings on the site. The only elements that exceed 30 feet at their highest points are the base of the cupola (31 ft.), the cupola (50 ft.) and the bell tower (40 ft), which are separated from each other to provide breaks in the roofline of the building. Comment #32: 1 c Aesthetics substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. The "less than significant impact" needs to be changed to potentially "significant impact". See facts below. Response #32: See Response 31. The Church design has incorporated measures that serve to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. No substantial evidence is provided by the commenter to substantiate that the Church will result in a significant impact. Comment #33: From IS /MND "height and size will partially block views... Therefore the new church would have a minimal impact on surrounding views" It is 100 feet long on a 190 foot frontage up to 54 feet high with views of the mountains behind it on heavily traveled minor connector road. It will have significant impact on the view corridor. The view shed encompasses miles to the mountains ridges. This is not a view of 5 feet or even 100 feet. Response #33: Allendale Avenue is a designated Minor Arterial that is not identified a scenic corridor in the City's General Plan. The view of the hillsides in the background is an important visual resource to the City and viewed from most roadways in the City. However, properties throughout Saratoga are developed along roadways and scenic corridors. These roadways and corridors, are landscaped with mature trees that serve to visually screen the properties from the roadways, and also serve to screen the scenic view along the roadways. Most new single family homes in Saratoga are designed to maximize allowable footprint, setbacks and FAR, which typically will results in the building of structures at up to 70 -72% of street frontage. The Church will cover 52% of frontage and is located at an angle to the street to improve the visual corridor from the street to the hillside backdrop in the rear of the site. In fact, only the property directly across the street will be affected. All others have a view obscured by the significant, existing mature vegetation along Allendale Avenue. Comment #34: Study author admits 15- 46.040 (a) (9 it is in violation of the code. Even if it well commercial zoning. 15- 55.030 does not give Planning Commission the power to create a variation of standard on a and f. Response #34: This is an inaccurate representation of author's discussion of impacts. MHA lists City Zoning Code Section 15- 46.040 as the section of City Zoning Code that "outlines a series of design criteria that the Planning Commission uses as a guideline when reviewing 1MH1761821.5 062508 12822001 new development." MHA then describes how the Church's design and proposed bulk, size, height, site orientation and exterior finishes are in keeping with other development in the City of Saratoga, including other nearby churches and the buildings in the West Valley College Campus (in accordance with Section 15- 46.040 of the City Zoning Code). The conclusion is that the proposed Church would be considered incompatible with the existing buildings on the site only if they do not share a similar color palette. A Mitigation Measure (Mitigation Measure 1 -1) is included to address this issue (Section 15- 46.040 (a) of the City Zoning Code). Comment #35: St. Andrews had to comply with this Resolution 03 -029 states it is "the project is consistent with R -1 zone district" not commercial or multifamily 15- 46.010? (Attachment 31). Response #35: Comment noted. St. Andrews was required to obtain a conditional use permit for the expansion of use and to address the variation to the height limit for the sanctuary building. Comment #36: The City informed St. Andrews in their initial study that it would have to have an EIR if it did not change its project specifications on height, impervious coverage, lighting and bell tower. (Attachment 38). This is a conflict of opinions since the City Planner and consultant now determine these facts do not require an EIR. (15064 (a1)(d) (d1)(e) social effects on people i.e. overcrowding) (f1) "if a lead agency is presented with a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency shall prepare an EIR, even though presented with other substantial evidence that the project will not have a significant effect [No Oil, Inc v. City of Los Angles (1974) 13 Ca1.3d 68])] Response #36: Comment noted. Comment #37: The assertion is Incorrect that it will have minimal impact. The views of mountains can be easily seen. This is also in conflict with more restrictive General Plan (See General Plan Open Space Element and earlier discussion). Response #37: See Responses #1, #6 and #33 above. Comment #38: The IS erroneous asserts height and style is in keeping with neighborhood. No structures are above 29 feet in immediate neighborhood. The Mormon Church (see earlier arguments) is not in immediate vicinity of the Church and abuts West Valley College it is also on more than double the acreage and frontage. Mormon Church is not in Pseudo byzantium Style and instead is uniform style with its extra height from one single spire. It was built in the late 1960 's under NS -3 (the old zoning ordinances) not the current zoning ordinance or General Plan. Height measurements quoted are not accurate. Our calculation shows the proposed spire to be 55 feet. The code NS -3 allowed for 30 feet and 10 percent of Church's height to be up to 25 feet above the 30 foot allowable height. Plus, in the Church's height calculation they include steeple which is not included in current zoning ordinances. Repeated requests to the City for exact calculations to compare structure to NS -3 have not been forthcoming. (Attachment 29) Response #38: The Church has been redesigned from a traditional Byzantine Architecture style to a more western style with architectural elements, colors and materials found in residential buildings in the vicinity of the Church, while meeting the necessary design UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -12- requirements for the Serbian Orthodox Church Cannon Law for design of churches. See Response #31 regarding elements included consistent with the Handbook. It should be noted the use of a single spire on the Mormon Church (58 ft.) results in a bulkier design, more massive looking building on a single plane which presents itself as a more massive building from the street. It does not have the varied roof pitches or different horizontal and vertical plan elements that proposed for the Church. Regarding the height of the Church, the story poles accurately depict the proposed height of 26 feet for the main spine of the structure, 31 feet for the central portion of the structure that supports the cupola, 50 feet for the cupola and 40 ft for the bell tower,. The story poles were installed in accordance with City required by a licensed surveyor. Comment #39: Study confuses cosmetic color and roofing with architectural styles. This project is Morava Byzantine (see architects comments to City letter to John Livingstone). These can be changed at will and after the fact repainted or roofing tiles changed. Response #39: The City's conditional use permit and design review conditions of approval require that minor exterior changes to a project must be reviewed by the Community Development Director. A major change may require that it be sent back to the Planning Commission. The conditions of approval cannot be changed "at will and after the fact." See City Zoning Code Section 15- 80.120. Comment #40: What is the email with Mr. Wittwer about when the Church's lawyer is discussing modification of design plans when no design plans are yet approved? (Attachment 44) is there a possibility that once the project is approved there are already planning modifications to get around the Planning Commission process? Response #40: See Response #39. Comment noted. Comment #41: The codes have changed and the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance for height is quite clear. It is 26 feet or 3 stories on a 10 percent slope for a QPF. Since there is no slope it should not be going to the maximum of even 3 stories. St. Andrews had to adhere to this. Response #41: This is an inaccurate interpretation of the 3 story allowance for quasi public use. See Response #8. This condition did not apply to St. Andrews; rather the new sanctuary was approved by conditional use permit (variation of height). Comment #42: In RLUIPA if the City were to make an exception for bell tower, impervious coverage and go against its ordinances for height restriction this would set a dangerous precedence that all religious institutions would be allowed to then demand. Response #42: Comment noted. This is an inaccurate interpretation of RLUIPA. Comment #43: The City required St. Andrews in their IS report to change the same specifications that the Church is demanding. Why is St. Andrews allowed less leeway than the Church? Comparison between two Height: St. Andrews was told to reduce from 3 to 2 stories, they were building on a slope and were exempt under the General Plan for a school, the Church has a flat lot, they are not a school and they are impeding a view corridor. UH1761821.5 062508- 12822001 -13- Response #43: Comment noted. Comment #44: Frontage: St. Andrews has 880.07 the Church 190 Acreage: St. Andrews has 9.667 the Church 3.14 Roads: St Andrews is on major connector, on a corner lot with 2 large community facilities across the street and across the street from them a major intersection. The Church is on a minor connector or minor arterial in the middle of a residential street surrounded by 6 residential properties. Response #44: The City has designated all quasi public sites in the General Plan as Communities Facilities Sites (CFS), one of which is the Church property. As with many other churches, the property dimensions and frontages will vary and not all are located on major streets. Comment #45: Views: St. Andrew no viewshed. The Church macro scale viewshed. Response #45: See Responses #1, #6 and #33. Comment #45: The City stated that St. Andrews must either change conditions or a EIR would be required. Response #45: Comment noted. Comment #46: Noise mitigation measures were required (Attachment 38) Response #46: Comment noted. Comment #47: Why with less height variance, on a smaller property, no school, less frontage, less acreage, was the City requiring an EIR for St. Andrews and the Church? Response #47: The City is requiring the same conditional use process for the Church as was required for St. Andrews. Comment #48: Outdated style is an aesthetic determination that the neighbors who surround the Church do not agree with. The consultant offered an opinion with no supporting documentation. Zoning ordinance states there must be a compatible style within property and neighborhood. The new proposed structure is incompatible. A structure is not architecturally compatible by changing paint color and roof tiles. Roofing materials and paint colors do not need to go before council or the planning commission when the buildings are to be repainted or reroofed. These are cosmetics not architectural compatibilities. Response #48: Compatibility in design does not necessarily mean that all structures in the area should look exactly the same. The commenter has consistently made references to the Handbook for application to this Church. Please refer to the Purpose of the Handbook which states that "The design policies and implementation techniques set forth in the handbook are not meant to discourage unique and inventive design solutions. Rather, they embody the intent of the findings that must be made for design review applications, and serve as a basis on which decision making bodies make their decision." The Church has been designed to address the policies and techniques included in the Handbook. It is at the UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -14- discretion of the Planning Commission upon issuing a conditional use permit on whether or not changes in colors and materials need to go before them. Comment #49: 15- 06.062 Architectural feature. "Architectural feature" means a prominent or significant part or element of a building, structure, or site. (Ord. 223 2 (part), 2003) Response 49: Comment noted. Comment #50: 15- 06.063 Architectural style. "Architectural style" means the characteristic form and detail of buildings of a particular historic architectural context or period. (Ord. 223 2 (part), 2003) This does not mean the color of paint or the color of roofing. The style of the Church is Morava Byzantine there is none around. It does not follow 15- 46.040 because the underlying zoning is 15.45 see above arguments. However, it does not even comply with 15- 46.040. If the City and. consultant to continue to assert that is the zoning chapter that applies. Response #50: See Responses 13 and #16. Comment #51: "The design of the proposed project largely follows the design criteria out lined in City Code 15- 46.040. "Per IS /MND Draft" It is in violation of 15- 46.040 (a) and (fl the study contradicts itself. It even admits it does not fit in. The Mormon church does not have bell towers and cupolas and it was built over 40 years ago. 15- 46.040 a) states it must be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design. The and clause means all the conditions must be true. It does not fit under 15- 46.040 or 15- 45.080(d)(e). Erroneous conclusion there is sufficient evidence that the study has not mitigated the environmental impact and EIR is required. There are no facts to collaborate the decision. Response #51: Regarding reference to Articles 15 -46 and 15 -45 of the City Zoning Code, see Responses #13 and #16. As further supported by responses included in this document, the Church described and analyzed by the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been designed to mitigate potential impacts related to height and bulk, and includes elements of design (including architectural style and selection of colors and materials) that are compatible with other buildings and residences in the general vicinity of the Church. Comment #52: 1 d Lighting plan The current plan has potentially significant impact to the neighbors. Current lighting has not mitigated environmental impacts. UH1761821.5 062508- 12822001 -15- Previous lighting plan showed lighting of building with upward lights on cross this will have a huge visual impact to the neighborhood. Inadequate analysis has been done on lighting an EIR is required The current design is against lighting code which states that 15- 335.040(i) If the parking area is illuminated, lighting shall not exceed one hundred foot lamberts and shall be deflected away from adjoining residential sites so as to cause no annoying glare. Response #52: The comment refers to an old lighting plan and incorrectly states that the current plan is against the lighting code. As described in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, the current lighting plan for the parking lot shows a maximum of 25.8 foot lamberts where Section 15- 35.040(i) of the City Zoning Code states that the maximum allowed is 100 ft. lamberts. In addition, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration includes a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure 1 -2) to insure compliance with Section 15- 35.040(i) to reduce potential lighting impacts to a less than significant level. Comment #53: 15- 12.010(1) To protect residential properties from fire, explosion, noxious fumes, noise, excessive light or glare and other hazards. Response #53: Not a complete comment. Comment #54: Story poles were inadequate for public to get a realistic idea of the size and mass. Material for the poles was steel which blends in with scenery this is in contrast to more common story poles which are made of wood. Almost all structures use wood story poles. What is the percentage of structures that use steel poles? This use of materials allows for an inadequate analysis. Orange netting was placed to mislead the eye by being put up as little flags. More common story poles wrap the orange netting so the public without training may get a clearer idea of mass. The story pole construction was misleading. See pictures of story poles versus the common wood story poles with netting wrapped around to illustrate. Response #54: As state in the City's "Requirements for Design Review Applications," story poles may be requested by staff prior to the Planning Commission public hearing to show the highest point of the proposed structure. If required, the guidelines for installation are that 1) sturdy wood or similar materials may be uses; 2) that they should include paint on the top 2 feet of pole in a bright color, preferably florescent or topped with a bright colored flag; 3) that a minimum of two poles be provided to indicate the two highest end points (large structures with varied roof -lines may require a series of poles); and, that the building footprint staking shall be performed by a Registered Civil Engineer (RCE) or a Licensed Land Surveyor (LLS). The story poles at the Church site were installed in accordance with these guidelines and in meeting the objectives of the requirement. UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -16- Section 7.02 (3) Air Quality Comment #1: 3c BBQ's are done at Christmas and Easter this may violate air quality standards. author states that no analysis has been done on traffic air quality and increase in usage of the property. Response: #1: For most types of development projects, motor vehicles traveling to and from the project represent the primary source of air pollutant emission associated with the project. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District "District has established thresholds of significance for these indirect impacts from projects on the local and regional air quality. The District has also identified sizes or activity levels of various types of land uses that would exceed the thresholds of significance. For most developments, the threshold of significant 2,000 vehicle trips per day. The Church would generate significantly fewer than 2,000 trips per day. In addition, the two church events where BBQ's are planned, are limited to only a few times in the course of the year. Therefore, neither activity would have a significant long term impact on local or regional air quality impact, and an air quality analysis is not required. Mitigation 3 -1 is included to reduce air quality impacts from construction activities to a less than significant level. Section 7.03 (4) Biological Resources Comment #1: 4.a Where is the analysis to determine that the burrowing owl is not on the property? Response #1: The Church and parking lot areas of the site that have been disked/graded or paved and are not considered suitable habitat areas for burrowing owls. Comment #2: 4c. Wetlands Comments in this paragraph generally relate to the incorrect impervious numbers and concerns over increases in impervious surfaces on the site. Response #2: The construction of the Church and parking lot will result in a net decrease in the amount of impervious surfaces on the Church property, which will reduce the amount of stormwater runoff leaving the site. There are no federally protected or otherwise protected wetland conditions on the site. Thus, the construction of the Church site improvements will not result a "substantial effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clear Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means." It should also be noted that the nearest waterway is Vasona Creek that is located over 250 ft. from the southern boundary of the Church property, at its closest point (See attached Assessor's Map Book 397, Page 010 and aerial photograph of area). Further, there are two properties that are found between the creek and the Church site boundaries. The closest one to the creek is adjacent along the southwest boundary of the Church, next to the Church parking lot (Lands of Previte /APN 397 -01 -066). It is developed with a single family home, a detached garage, a tennis court and swimming in the rear portion of the lot. The second property contains a vineyard. (See attached APN Map) UH1761821.5 062508- 12822001 -17- Section 7.04 (5) Cultural Resources Comment #1: City has stated that this Church and Site is historical significance as one of the Serbian Churches in area and part of a large Serbian heritage. Response #1: Both buildings were constructed less than 50 years ago and have not been placed on any list for consideration as a historic structures or site. However, the Church is designed in the tradition of Serbian Orthodox Churches which will further strengthen its role in the Serbian church community. Section 7.05: (6) Geology Comment #1: The size of the building is 50 feet with a cross at 54 feet this would present additional problems in an earthquake if cupola and bell tower would fall over. Also per abag this location would exhibit very strong shaking. Shouldn't larger buildings over 50 ft. have additional protections; especially when they are so close to a well traveled road? Response #1: As explained in the discussion related to items a -b, the Church site is in a region near three major fault zones and the site is likely to be subject to ground shaking with rupture of one of these faults. This is a condition that is prevalent in the fault zone regions. Thus, construction of Church is required to conform to State building codes that address this condition. Further, the specific recommendations for construction of the Church are included in the Geotechnical Report for the Church and have been included in Mitigation Measure 6 -1. Section 7.05 (7) Hazardous Materials Comment #1: The comment is primarily concerning the use of paint to strip the parking lot and whether this will impact local streams if washed off. Response 1: The project will conform with NPDES Permit requirements, as required for all new development on parcels of 1 acre in size or greater. Section 7.07 (8) Hydrology and Water Quality Comment 1: 8 a) Inadequate study of investigation of site hookups to waste. Complaints were to Health and Safety have not been determined whether there is any merit and if the issues has been corrected? Further analysis is required. See complaints to Santa Clara health inspector. They have commercial kitchen in which they are catering. Has analysis been done to see if up to code. Response #1: The conditions of approval will require that the Church adhere to all local, state and federal water quality and waste discharge requirements. The other comments related to use of kitchen facility are not related to water quality or waste discharge. Comment #2: 8b Inadequate study to determine if catering operation has impacted groundwater. UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 See 4.c. comments for further information. Further study needed on -18- Response #2: There is no evidence to support that food services in an enclosed structure would in anyway have impacts on groundwater. Comment #3: 8d: Erroneous information on impervious coverage parking lots are not currently paved and have porous material. Back parking dirt lot with weed growing through not 100% impervious (Attachment 4 t,u) Response #3: Comment noted. The proposed impervious calculations are more relevant for determination of impacts. The construction of the Church building and related site improvements will result in a 4.7% reduction in site coverage (impervious surfaces). The existing site coverage is 55.2% or 1.7 acres, and the proposed site coverage is 50.5% or 1.55 acres. This reduction results from removing the existing asphalt parking lot (impervious surface) in the southwest corner of the property and replacing it with permeable paving. In addition, the basketball court and grassy area in the southeast corner of the lot will be replaced with grass with a honeycomb shaped reinforcement system to support vehicles and to serve an additional parking area. In addition, the staff is recommending that as a condition of approval of the project, the entire driveway be paved with permeable paving. The incorporation of all these improvements would result in significant reduction in the impervious area (21.8 over the existing condition of the site. In addition, the Church project will improve on -site water retention through the use of dry wells and retention ponds. Comment #4: 8c Erroneous information reported on 8 d. Swale was moved, see original plans 1962 -1964. Where did it move and why? Further study is required. A stream is within one lot this is a very important stream and impervious coverage is essential for health ecosystems. Inadequate study of impervious coverage and the streams in the immediate vicinity. Analysis on the impact to Vasona Creek is required. Mitigation is required. Response #4: See Responses #3 above and Responses #1 and 2 under Biological Resources. Section 7.08 (9) Land Use and Planning Comment #1: Error in 9 Land Use and planning existing facility 55.2% prior impervious coverage of property grossly overstated there is no continues paved parking lot in front or back. Sidewalks are required from Public Works February 1, 2006 where are they on the plans (See Exhibit 3). This will change the impervious coverage numbers. Response #1: See Response #3 (Hydrology and Water). The required sidewalks are in public right -of -way and therefore not included in the site's impervious surface calculations. Impervious surface calculations for private development are for on -site conditions only. Comment #2: 9b This project has potentially significant impacts. The commentor refers to several issues under this comment, including: uH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -19- Property as being designated as a Commercial facility in the General Plan; inconsistent with many sections of the zoning ordinance previously referred to in Aesthetics Section; also refers to Section 15 -58 as a "mixed- use Response #2: Refer to responses #9, #10, #13 through #18, #21, #34, #39 and #41, in Aesthetics Section regarding Articles 15- 12,15- 35,15- 45,15 -55 of the City Zoning Code. Regarding Article 15 -58, refer to Section 15- 06.445 of the City Zoning Code, where the definition of mixed -use development is: "The development of a lot or building with two or more different land uses, such as residential, commercial, office or public. (Ord. 223 2 (part), 2003) The Church does not fall within the definition of any of those uses. It is a single quasi public use (church), not a mixed -use. Churches were classified as Quasi Public Facilities (QPF) (not commercial uses) in the Land Use Element of the 1983 General Plan and all existing churches sites are shown in the Land Use Map. The City has recently updated the General Plan Land Use Element whereby public and quasi public uses are now designated in the Land Use Map as Community Facilities Sites (CFS). Churches, like schools, are traditionally found in residential neighborhoods and considered community serving uses. The City Zoning Code does not include a Quasi Public District; rather, most church sites are located in residential zones, and are subject to approval by a conditional use permit. Pursuant to approved conditional use permits (UP 29 and UP 147), the existing church use has been on the site since 1961. The church is currently operating under a CUP (Resolution 07 -067). As indicated in Response #16 (Aesthetics Section), Section 15- 55.010 of the City Zoning Code, states that the Planning Commission is empowered to grant conditional uses permits for projects, which because of their unusual characteristics require special consideration and may impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of use permits. Floor area requirement falls under Article 15 -45 of the City Zoning Code and why it is not listed. Response: The floor area maximum listed under Article 15-45 of the City Zoning Code apply to single family and accessory building, only. Church not in compliance with subsections a, c, d, g, h, j, k, 1, m, n, o of Section 15- 05.020 (General Provisions) of the City Zoning Code. Response: The City Zoning Code establishes procedures for approval of quasi public buildings through the use permit process (Article 15 -55 of the City Zoning Code) which is in keeping with subsection (i) of Section 15- 05.020 of the City Zoning Code: "To facilitate the appropriate location of community facilities and institutions." In addition, the project has been designed in a matter that satisfies the findings required for approval of a use permit/design review permit. UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -20- Non compliance with subsections (a) (b) (e) and (n) of Section 15- 12.010 of the City Zoning Code. Response: Subsections (a) (b) (e) of Section 15 -12 -010 of the City Zoning Code refer to the purpose of including the Single Family District in the City Zoning Code. However, subsection (d) of Section 15- 12.010, specifically states is that one of the purposes is "to provide space for community facilities needed to complement residential areas and for institutions, which require a residential environment There is no subsection (n) in Section 15- 12.010 of the City Zoning Code. Section 15- 55.020 of the City Zoning Code does not give right to permit, rather the Planning Commission may impose conditions if it finds that the conditional use will adversely affect surrounding uses or the occupants thereof. Response: Comment noted. Impervious coverage is incorrectly stated, and that variation from standards are not in compliance and would have a potentially significant impact. Response: As stated in Biological Resources and Hydrology and Water Quality Section responses, the proposed impervious calculations are more relevant to the discussion of impacts. Further, the project will result in a net decrease of impervious surfaces over total impervious surfaces that currently exist on the site. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration includes a discussion of impacts related to proposed impervious coverage and found that this will not result in a potentially significant impact. Section 7.09 (11) Noise Comment: Comment included in this section generally refer to the following: The Noise Element is inadequate because it was last updated in 1988 and then refers to policies of the Noise Element related to enforcement of noise standards and activities or land uses that create excessive noise. Complaints from neighbors regarding excessive noise during Church activities, such as dances. Noise must be analyzed to conform with Section 15- 12.010 (b) (e) (f) of the City Zoning Code and that additional mitigation must occur to protect neighborhood from noise from activities at the Church. Response: The Noise Ordinance serves to regulate the noise environment in the City of Saratoga. The church use is operating under an approved CUP (Resolution 07 -067) which stipulates that the Church shall comply with Article 7 -30 of the City Code governing Noise Control. The proposed use permit is for an amendment to address the design review of the new Church sanctuary building only. The proposed Church building location exceeds minimum setback requirements of the R -1- 40,000 Zoning UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 -21- District. Church activities take place indoors and no new uses or activities are proposed by this application over those that have already been approved for the Church use under the CUP (Resolution 07 -067). No additional mitigation is required. Section 7.10 (13) Public Services Comment: The Author generally questions whether project design conforms to requirements for egress and public safety, and whether sufficient analysis was done to determine impact to cost in services to Fire District, Sheriff's Department, City staff, Planning Commission and City Council due to Church project and related code enforcement complaints. Response: As part of the development review process, the Fire District reviews applications for conformance to fire safety egress requirements. The Church has been design to meet these requirements. As referred to in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, MHA contacted the two fire districts that provide fire protection to the City and the Santa Clara Sheriff's Department and determined that existing services are sufficient to accommodate the service need generated by the project. The application fees generated by the project cover staff and Planning Commission and /or City Council costs associated with processing of the Church permit. Section 7.11 (1 S) Traffic and Transportation Comment: The Author generally states that the traffic study is erroneous, incomplete, misleading and inadequate; therefore it must be redone for the following reasons: 1JH1761821.5 062508- 12822001 The study did not mention that the counting tube was unattached for a part of the study; that this was not mention in the study; and, that this puts in question the validity of the study. Peer review by Fehr and Peers found errors and omissions in the traffic study and were only asked to review a small amount of the information collected. The three documents that were prepared by Higgins Associates in 2004 and 2006 were difficult to follow and were not revised as stated, only dates and names changed. The 2007 traffic impact analysis by Higgins Associates inaccurately stated that there would be no growth and that the Easter Sunday event has grown from 300 to 417 people in one year. There are a greater number of social club members and guests drinking liquor at lunch and parties and that these are better attended than church service, and therefore should be included in analysis: Response: The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration refers to the traffic impact analysis prepared by Higgins Associates in 2006 based on 2004 traffic counts, and a subsequent traffic impacts analysis prepared in May 2007 based on counts collected in -22- April 2007. The traffic counts were taken over a two week period in April 2007. The results are based on a summary of daily traffic volume counted on Allendale Avenue during that period. A single event where the counting tube may have been unattached does not invalidate the validity of the study. The traffic analysis concluded that the construction of the new Church and traffic generated by current weekday and Sunday activities will result in a slight increase in traffic volumes, but that this increase woule not result in a significant change to the level of service (LOS) of local streets. Allendale Avenue currently operates at LOS A, and would continue to operate at LOS A even on days with large events, including Easter and Christmas Eve. The analysis concluded that the Church project would have a less than significant impact on traffic load and capacity, and not mitigation is required. The May 2007 traffic analysis also included a parking impact analysis based on all activities and events conducted on the site to determine the actual demand for parking. The parking analysis concluded that, based on actual parking demand for these activities which include weekday activities, Sunday services and special events conducted at the church on Sunday will be served by the proposed parking plan (126 spaces). The only times when the on -site parking will not satisfy actual demand will be for the Easter Banquet and the Christmas Eve Dinner. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration includes Mitigation Measure 15 -1 which requires that a traffic and parking management plan be provided for these events, prior to issuance of a building permit. The parking management plan could include methods for meeting the parking demand generate by these events, including any one of the following methods: use of off -site parking with a bus shuttle service for attendees, limiting attendance to 277 people per event (2.2 persons per vehicle x 126 spaces 277 persons), or other measures approved by the City. With this mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure 15- 1) included in the project, the Church parking impacts will be less than significant. It should also be noted that the use of off -site parking arrangements to meet parking demands related to overflow parking during special events has been utilized by the City of Saratoga for other church properties. For example, St. Andrews is permitted to use the City library parking lot. Section 7.12 (16) Utilities UH1761821.5 062508 12822001 Comment: The author states that the analysis done is inadequate because it is not sufficient to call the agencies to determine if there will be an impact. The author also refers to Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Checklist sections related to construction of new storm water drainage facilities and project waste's disposal needs. Response: During the application review process, the Church project plans were forwarded to local and regional agencies for review. Said agencies utilized these plans when responding to inquiring from staff or the environmental consultant to determine if the project will generate an additional demand for services. This is the standard method of determining whether or not there will be impacts to utilities and service systems from a development project. -23- Section 7.13 (17) Mandatory Findings of Significance Comment: The author generally refers to or restates previous comments that the project does not conform to the City Zoning Code Sections related to Single Family District regulations, Single Family Design Review, height limitations, Conditional Use Permit process, etc. Response: Comments not substantiated and do not constitute substantial evidence of a significant effect on the environment from the Church project. As describe in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Responses to the comments included in this document, the project has been designed in conformance with applicable Sections of the City Zoning Code; will not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts in the area; and, with the adoption of the mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Church project will not result a significant negative effect on the environment. UH1761821.5 062508- 12822001 -24- BC A orchlincitore plunnong N ransn i h a Date: June 0, 2008 Sent Via: OU.S. Mall (]UPS I.JOvernight IJCourior 161Hand To: Chris Riordan Project 05003 Finn/Agency: City of Saratoga Planning Department Project Name: St. Archangel Michael Church Address: 13777 Fruitvale Avenue File No.: 03 -259 City, State, Zip Saratoga, CA 95070 CC: Frurn: Samar Kawar Phone: (510) 353-4109 We are sending you: Drawings 0 Addenda 0 Supplemental Instructions Pay Application Specifications Copy of letter Req. for Information El Photos El Samples Forms Clarification Drawings El Colorboard Co -Ise Date No, Description 1 set 818108 4 pages Photaaimulatlou #1 8.8 x 11 with backup information on calculation 1 set t 818/08 3 pages Photosimulation #2 -11 x 17 with backu p information on calculation 1 sot 818108 8 photos Existing Site Photos from Allendale showing Views Signed: 1 set 618108 1 board Coiorboard with Samples Items transmitted: PI For Your Use Submittal Status: Reviewed For Review and Approval Rejected For Review and Comment 0 Furnish as Corrected Remarks: Hello Please find attached two (2) photosonulations for the St. Archangel Michael project. along with existing site photos of the view procession down Allendale showing existing view corridors, and the colorboard for the project. Regarding the photosimulations calculations for view blockage are as follows. PhotoatmulatIOn 81 (CU x 11 shoats). u Current view blockage percentage resulting from existing trees: 911.5% blocked o Additional view blockage resulting from addition of Church: 1.5% blocked o Total percentage of view blockage: 100% blocked Pllotosimulatlorl 82 (11 x 17 sheets) o Current view blockage percentage resulting from existing trees: 81% blocked n Additional view blockage resulting front addition of Church: 2.4% blocked u Total percentage of view blockage: 113.4% blocked If there are any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact Samor Kawar, Associate, a1510- 353 -4109. Associate Lead Design Architect 11CA rkchileGC 21011a0unornl Avenue 111 510.445.1000 Fremont, C41441 94539 11:1510.445.1005 WON incOnhno.ccim c nxi.+rcw,ras v ws,tumaa 4mm,.d ,:trowcnrn,xx a f n Cxtont Cr Wm. bluelged by church I.5X ANAIA lob Extent of vlat. analyzed 100% r Extant of view blocked by dsting trees 90.5) M Extent of Wee Mocked by church 2.4P% 'All 01 PI1V itt Extent or view ommyzed 100Z Extant of Wee Mocked by eWsting tree:, f. 0 6: /":9*•Or '‘.„,,r.,Y Lt i• -tie .01. A ,__,i ,1 1 13•••■•.. tt4. R.O.S. 208 -M -48 SARAH E. COYE TRAC OFFICE O F 1. 0 4 4 4 64 168 13974- 2 9.54 118 3 6.10 94.31 13917- 176 59 0.2 L 236642 7 1.469 AC. NET 0.975 AC. NET CAMINO 24 PCL. A 239.42 1.019 AC. 12 294.21 168 5 6.3 13926- 1 60 2 168.50 CHESTER 539.02 w.a TRACT NO. 5954 C O U N T Y A S S E S S O R 6 4.828 AC. 539.33 25 PCL. B 300.01 14 235.57 193.78 6 0 0 62 13948 �y9 188 1 106.27 BARCO 188.50 11125 73929- 73947- 7.m 178.92 22.55 PCL. C P.M. 434 -M -24 AVENUE r al 1 al P.M. 465 -M -39 267.30 265.17 66 P.M. 4 190 14007 27256 PCL 1 A w.ec. 7 8.049 AC. 671 9 4 1. 3 1 140.96 P.M. 455-M- 34 15 b S A N T A C L A R A C vita ESM7 1 19gp� 3 166 .36 �.O 273.53 39 2 40 10a 15 T 164 40.82 0 26Y .73 4 3 m, 1 TRACT NO. 5161 APRICOT HILL 1x5 2 0,.9 5 1 ,RC 175 9,011 11'%10 29 �1 01 27132___ 6 27 28 11,9 QJ 43 PCL. B 1.48 AC. 42 .0 41 A w `t 14022- 1 V, 4` Y 34 -M -24 �6 8 44 2 4 y 1 42 04 6 ry n3G /PCL C 3171- -°o 4 voz r ;91 1 .6 0'... -42 ,bn.9,3 49 70 �1 b 46 a ,.4 I's, 1 12 g 1 7'J9 b h' 0 5 ^1 1 1 1 8 1. j2 33.04 2.83 254.02 1 1 v 11 1 1 S 186 1 67 g 2A 0`-- t o ioi PCL. B h 1 PCL. 47 1 5°: 2 6 n 58 68 74024- 9 30 11 6 �9� y 12 4' 31 AO?. ...5z nc X0 39 'O 50 r1, 1415x" I .x9)9' 7 32 ;,19' ,1A I 4 7., 33 3 .J f 6 1 's1 4 n d 34 N I °B 6i 5 1 8 J 61 BJ 1 355.38 53 s 69 N n 79050 50 s O 132.92 _CHI 0- 9 O 10 2 J 205.60 100. J3 181 n 233.75 C O U N T Y C A L I F O R N I A 174.10 TRACT NO. 4090 ARCADIA PALMS 14079 14171- 9 CHESTER- AVENUE- 0 1.35 AC. 57 -0 7 125 339.34 TRACT NO. 4193 14 37 1 1.161 Ac.Plon. 9 J3 '1`x 60 36 2 35 390.61 52 1.142 A +o- 7!fe 80 8 2 1)1 5 1.392 AC. 8 7 6 sd�, 6B 25'1 A' 4 ApF 4s 5 b 7 J. 4;5! SSSS ti q O,� X 6 7 J 4 '7 9 56 0 3 BOOK 397 PAGE 1 0 0 N LAWRENCE E. STONE ASSESSOR Cadmtrd map la assessment purposes only Comp7ed under R. T. Code, Sec. 327. Effective Roll Yea 2007 -2008 Yan 13 '06 08:30a e e E Fr. S1obodan B. Jovic 408 -867 -0421 p.1 08 867 0421 Serbian Orthodox Church in USA and Canada Western American Diocese 2541 Crestline Terrace, Alhambra, California 91803 His Grace Bishop L ONG1N Phone: 626/289-9061; Episcopal Residence 626/284 -6825; Fax 626/284 -1484 E -mail westdiocese@earthlink.net TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: January 10, 2006 The Canon Law governing the Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States and Canada defines, among the rest, the following requirements for its church edifices, as sacred buildings destined for divine public worship: Overall size. The church building as a permanent structure must fundamentally meet the congregation's need for the total experience of a living temple for joint prayer receiving the Eucharist, partaking in the other sacramental Holy Mysteries and the regular celebration of the Orthodox Christian Liturgy. It must also fundamentally be able to accommodate occasional and special parish needs, including weddings, funerals, Christmas and Easter observance, major and minor patron saint day celebrations and other Church holidays. Orthodox churches are not mere gathering places but signify and make visible the Church living in this place, the dwelling of God with men reconciled and united in Christ. Basic architecture. Mandatory elements of the building included as separate areas are the Altar, Nave, acrd Narthex. Conditions permitting, the church building should have four cupolas and a bell tower; at a minimum it must include one cupola of appropriate height and a bell tower, each surmounted by a Cross. Church bells are to mark the beginning of each Divine Liturgy. Verticality. The building's vertical architectural elements are to dominate the horizontal, as they must reinforce a heavenward aspiration of bringing the heavenly Jerusalem down to the faithful in this sacred space. Accordingly, to achieve this effect, the ceiling and cupola are to be of height strictly proportional to the base footprint of length and width. If there are more questions about our Church, this office is at your service to address them. Respectfully. Longin, Bishop of Western America arrrivrn TIMF —.IAN 11 P.91AM Attachment B I Serbian Orthodox Church, Diocese ^f Western America 1 St Sava Serbian Orthodox Church Page 1 of 2 [home] Diocesan Radio Program The Department of Christian Education christlan life parishes lives of the saints bookstore Serbian Orthodox Church church history church in kosovo holy fathers holy new martyrs chilandar prayer .liturgical petitions People serbia and recent war Subscribe to mailing Iist !Enter your email Subscribe 1 Appeal for Chilandar Monaste The Prologue of Ohrid Contact Us St Sava Serbian Orthodox Chur St Sava Serbian Orthodox Church 4436 East KcKinley Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85008 tel (602)275 -7360 fax (602) 275 -4112 V. Rev. Janko Trbovic 1631 N. Sunset Drive, Tempe, AZ, tel (480) 949 -9475 .r� �,y �•�.�K C ".S4�w':i +�yy� \r 111 /I it r xr wP.ctcrl,rlin. /info /showarticle.nhn ?articl church ahoenix 1/14/91106 1 4 Serbian Orthodox Church, Diocese Western America 1 St Steven's Serbian Orthodox C... Page 1 of 2 [home] Diocesan Radio Program The Department of Christian Education christian life parishes lives of the saints bookstore Serbian Orthodox Church church history church In kosovo holy fathers holy new martyrs chllandar prayer •Iitu rgIca l`petItions` People serbia and recent war Subscribe to mailing list Enter your email Subscribe I Appeal for Chilandar Monaste The Prologue of Ohrld St Steven's Serbian Orthodox Catt St. Steven's Serbian Orthodox Cathedral 1621 West Garvey Ave Alhambra, CA 91803 Tel. 626 284 -9100 Fax 626 -281 -5045 V. Rev. Nikola Ceko e-mail; Katedralni @aol.com Rev. Norman Kosanovich e-mail: FrNormanK @aol.com Web; http:// www .saintstevens.org /homepage.htm ht+„• /txrurur urpcterhrlin nra /infn /chnwartir.le. nhn9artirle= rhurrh alliamhra Contact Us 1/1Q/1fl/16 Serbian Orthodox Church, Diocese ^f Western America 1 St. Basil of Ostrog Orth... Page 1 of 2 [home] Diocesan Radio Program The Department of Christian Education christian life parishes lives of the saints bookstore Serbian Orthodox Church church history church in kosovo holy fathers holy new martyrs chllandar prayer l iturgical petitions People serbia and recent war Subscribe to mailing list Enter your email Subscribe Appeal for Chilandar Monaste The Prologue of Ohrid St. Basil of Ostrog Serbian Orthodox St. Basil of Ostrog Serbian Orthodox Church 930 N. Main Street, Angels Camp, CA 95222 Mailing address P.O. Box 673, Altaville, CA 95521, tel.(209)736-2340 11TAeierhiliH nro /info /chrnxmrtirlP nhn%artirle= rhnrrh anesale Contact Us V. Rev. Stavrofor Miladin Garich, Administrator 6723 Will Rogers Dr. Fair Oaks, CA 95628 (916)966 -1999 1/1 Q /')r1AA Serbian Orthodox Church, Diocese `Western America J Holy Assumption r *he Mother... Page 1 of 2 [home] Diocesan Radio Program The Department of Christian Education christian life parishes lives of the saints bookstore Serbian Orthodox Church church history church in kosovo holy fathers holy new martyrs chllandar prayer liturgical petitions People serbla and recent war Subscribe to mailing list Enter your email Subscribe .i Appeal for Chilandar Monaste The Prologue of Ohrid Holy Assumption of the Mother of Serbian Orthodox Church Holy Assumption of the Mother of God Serbian Orthodox Church 7777 Sunset Avenue, Fair Oaks, California 95628, tel (916) 966 -5438 fax(916)966 -5235 Very Rev. Dane Popovic, e-mail: Father_Dane @Yahoo.com (church address) tel. (916) 966 -6276 Protodeacon William Weir 2911 Morse Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95821 tel. (916) 488 -0827 .7_ -1: mot 1. L Contact Us 1./1 CI /'1,11/14 Serbian Orthodox Church, Diocese Western America 1 St Peter the Apostk gerbian Ort... Page 1 of 2 [home] Diocesan Radio Program The Department of Christian Education christian life parishes lives of the saints bookstore Serbian Orthodox Church church history church In kosovo holy fathers holy new martyrs chilandar prayer liturgical petitions People serbia and recent war Subscribe to mailing list 'Enter your email Subscribe Appeal for Chilandar Monaste The Prologue of Ohrld St Peter the Apostle Serbian Orth Church St Peter the Apostle Serbian Orthodox Church 3502 North First Street, Fresno, California 93726 209 227 5565 tel. (559) 227 -5565 fax (559) 227 -0501 Very Rev. George Gligich e-mail: stpeter2937 @sbcglobal.net 2343 E. Birch, Fresno, CA 93720 tel. (559) 325 -8528 Rev. Protodeacon Brad Matthews e-mail: bwmatth @sierratel.com 1101 6th Ave. Dr., Kingsburg, CA 93631 tel (559)897 -7319 Rev. Deacon Norman Shultz 4082 N. First Street, Fresno, CA 93726 tel (559) 227 -1145 Contact Us Attachment C Photographs September 2008 Saratoga churches Samples of different architecture styles Saratoga Presbyterian Church 20455 Herriman Avenue Sacred Heart Church 13716 Saratoga Avenue Latter Day Saints Church 19100 Saratoga Avenue Prince of Peace Lutheran Church 12770 Saratoga Avenue St. Andrew's Episcopal Church 13601 Saratoga Avenue St. Andrew's Episcopal Church Viewed from Fruitvale Avenue Single family homes in the vicinity of the Church project Samples of different architecture styles Single- family home Corner of Allendale and Camino Barco Single-family Home Camino Barco Avenue Single-family home Camino Barco Avenue Single-Family homes Camino Barco Avenue Single-family Home Serra Oaks Proiect Summary Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Requirements ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN The proposed St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church project includes Design Review, modification of a Conditional Use Permit, and a request for Variation from Standards (increased structure height, increased site coverage, and a reduction in the required number of off street parking spaces) for the construction of a new church building for Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church in the R- 1- 40,000 zone district. The square footage of the new construction is approximately 3,994 square feet and the maximum height of the buildings will not exceed approximately 50 feet (referred to hereinafter as the "Project The project site is an L- shaped parcel on Allendale Avenue, located less than half a mile south of Highway 85. It is currently occupied by a 1,224- square -foot chapel, a 9,731- square -foot fellowship hall, and a 2,521- square -foot Pastor's Residence. The site is located within a residential neighborhood with a small vineyard located to the rear of the property. The neighborhood also contains West Valley College and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints within half a mile of the proposed project. The City of Saratoga has prepared an Initial Study (IS) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to identify and evaluate potential environmental impacts associated with the St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Project. Mitigation measures are defined in the IS and established in the MND to reduce potentially significant impacts of project construction and operation. All measures designated as mitigation measures reduce potential impacts to the associated resource to less than significant levels. Approval of the project would require implementation and monitoring of all of the mitigation measures identified in the IS and MND. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15097(a) requires that: "...In order to ensure that the mitigation measures and project revisions identified in the EIR or negative declaration are implemented, the public agency shall adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it has required in the project and the measures it has imposed to St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP MHAIRMT 1 June 2008 ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORNING PLAN mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects. A public agency may delegate reporting or monitoring responsibilities to another public agency or to a private entity which accepts the delegation; however, until mitigation measures have been completed the lead agency remains responsible for ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures occurs in accordance with the program." CEQA Section 15097(c) defines monitoring and reporting responsibilities of the lead agency. "(c) The public agency may choose whether its program will monitor mitigation, report on mitigation, or both. "Reporting" generally consists of a written compliance review that is presented to the decision making body or authorized staff person. A report may be required at various stages during project implementation or upon completion of the mitigation measure. "Monitoring" is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight. There is often no clear distinction between monitoring and reporting and the program best suited to ensuring compliance in any given instance will usually involve elements of both. The choice of program may be guided by the following: (1) Reporting is suited to projects which have readily measurable or quantitative mitigation measures or which already involve regular review. For example, a report may be required upon issuance of final occupancy to a project whose mitigation measures were confirmed by building inspection. (2) Monitoring is suited to projects with complex mitigation measures, such as wetlands restoration or archeological protection, which may exceed the expertise of the local agency to oversee, are expected to be implemented over a period of time, or require careful implementation to assure compliance. (3) Reporting and monitoring are suited to all but the most simple projects. Monitoring ensures that project compliance is checked on a regular basis during and, if necessary after, implementation. Reporting ensures that the approving agency is informed of compliance with mitigation requirements." This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) is meant to facilitate implementation and monitoring of the mitigation measures to ensure that measures are executed. This process protects against the risks of non compliance. The purpose of the MMP is to: Summarize the mitigation required for the project Comply with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines Clearly define parties responsible for implementing and monitoring the mitigation measures Provide a plan for how to organize the measures into a format that can be readily implemented by the City and monitored 2 MHAIRMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP June 2008 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Project MMP Table Attachment 1 Mitigation Monitoring Plan Mitigation Measure 1 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit a color board for the project that shows a compatible color scheme for the proposed church and the existing structures on the site. This color board shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance. Mitigation Measure 1 -2: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit a final exterior lighting plan that complies with Section 15- 35.040(i) of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the plan shall indicate that no exterior lighting fixtures shall allow direct light rays to leave the project site, or allow direct light sources (incandescent, fluorescent, or other forms of electric illumination) to be directly visible from off -site locations. The plan shall also show that light levels will not exceed 100 foot lamberts anywhere on the property. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance. Mitigation Measure 3 -1: The following notes shall be incorporated on the grading and building plans prior to issuance of grading or building permits, and the measures shall be implemented during construction activities: 1) Water all active construction and disturbed areas at least twice daily during dry periods. 2) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. 3) Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply nontoxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. 4) Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. Dust, sediment, or debris shall not be washed into the storm drain system. 5) Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. Dust, sediment, or debris shall not be washed into the storm drain system. 6) Excavation and grading activities shall be suspended and dust control measures shall be implemented when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. 1) Applicant shall submit color board for review 1) Applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan for review 1) Applicant shall ensure the notes included in the measure are included on grading and .building plans by the contractor 2) Saratoga Community Development Director shall confirm that the notes are present on the plans Saratoga Community Development Director Saratoga Community Development Director Saratoga Community Development Director 1) Prior to building permit issuance 1) Prior to building permit issuance 1) Prior to grading and building permits St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP June 2008 ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN MHAIRMT 3 ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORNING PLAN Table Attachment 1 -1: Mitigation Monitoring Plan Mitigation Measure 4 -1: Prior to removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal or pruning permit from the City of Saratoga and comply with any conditions imposed by the tree removal or pruning permit. Such conditions shall include replacement of such trees with replacement trees of equal value to the trees to be removed. 1) Applicant shall apply for a tree removal and /or pruning permit Mitigation Measure 4 -2: Prior to removal or pruning 1) Applicant shall comply of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 with these inches or greater measured at breast height, or for requirements any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall comply with all recommendations in the Arborist Report that was prepared for this project. Mitigation Measure 5 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall incorporate via a note on the first page of the construction plans, that should cultural resources be encountered during site grading or other site work, such work shall immediately be halted in the area of discovery and the applicant shall immediately notify the Community Development Director of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to retain the services of a qualified archeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting, analyzing, and curating the discovery as determined by the archaeologist and Community Development Director to be appropriate and adequate mitigation. The cost of the qualified archaeologist and of any recording, protecting, or curating shall be borne solely by the applicant. The archaeologist shall be required to submit a Cultural Resources Management Plan, per City Requirements, to the Community Development Director subject to his /her review and approval that outlines the findings and mitigation methods of curation and /or protection of the resources. No further grading or site work within the area of discovery shall be allowed until the preceding has occurred. Disposition of Native American remains shall comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). The note on the plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department. Applicant shall ensure that the note is included on the plans by the contractor 2) Applicant shall retain a qualified archeologist in the event of a discovery Applicant shall ensure that the archeologist prepares the Cultural Resources Management Plan for the City in the event of a discovery Saratoga Community Development Director Saratoga Community Development Director Saratoga Community Development Director 1) Prior to the removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height 1) Prior to the removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height 1) Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall ensure the note is on the project plans In the event of a discovery, all work shall cease until the City okays continuation of ground disturbance 4 MHAIRMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP June 2008 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP June 2008 ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN Table Attachment 1 Mitigation Monitoring Plan Mitigation Measure 6 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit plans subject to review and approval by the Building Department. These plans shall demonstrate to the City Building Official that the project will comply with all City Building regulations (as set forth or adopted by reference in Chapter 16 of the City Code) as well as with all recommendations in the Geotechnical Report prepared for this project and approved by the City's Geotechnical Engineer Consultant. Mitigation Measure 7 -1: During all phases of construction, the applicant shall install and maintain temporary safety fencing to restrict or prevent public access to active on -site construction activities, materials or chemicals. Mitigation Measure 11 -1: The following construction noise control measures shall be implemented by the applicant in order to limit the amount of noise generated during the construction period: 1) Limit construction to the daytime hours between 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday, and 9:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturday, with no construction activities allowed on Sundays or holidays per Section 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. 2) Construction activities or equipment shall not generate noise levels exceeding 83 dBA at any point 25 feet from the source of noise per Sec. 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. 3) Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such technology is reasonably available as determined by the Community Development Director. 4) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. 5) Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. 6) Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as possible from noise sensitive receptors. 7) Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The applicant's designated noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, or other cause.) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the noise disturbance coordinator at the construction site. 1) Applicant shall submit plans for review 1) Applicant shall ensure that safety fencing is installed and maintained 1) Applicant shall heed all noise control measures as stated Saratoga Community Development Director Saratoga Community Development Director Saratoga Community Development Director 1) Prior to building permit issuance 1) During all phases of construction 1) During all phases of construction MHAIRMT 5 ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORNING PLAN Table Attachment 1 Mitigation Monitoring Plan Mitigation Measure 15 -1: Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall develop a traffic and parking management plan for Christmas Eve, Easter, and other special events subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. The plan shall describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. These methods shall meet the following standard: the traffic and parking impact shall not exceed the impact which would occur if there were completely filled Church parking by use attendees and all other attendees made use an off -site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the Church. "Completely filled Church parking" shall be deemed to allow use attendances during special events up to 277 people (based on an average of 2.2 persons per vehicle x 126 parking spaces). Other measures meeting this standard and approved by the City's Community Development Director shall also be allowed in the plan. The plan shall also be subject to review and approval by the Santa Clara County Sheriffs Office prior to building permit issuance. 1) Applicant shall develop and submit the plan as described to the City for review and approval Saratoga Community Development Director 1) Prior to building permit issuance 6 MHAIRMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP June 2008 APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DENYING AN APPEAL AND APPROVING APPLICATION #03 -259 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW CHURCH BUILDING FOR SAINT ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church 18870 Allendale Avenue WHEREAS, on June 25, 2008, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission approved application #03 -259 for Design Review, modification of a Conditional Use Permit, and a request for Variation from Standards (increased structure height, increased site coverage, and a reduction in the required number of off street parking spaces) for the construction of a new Church building for Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church in the R -1- 40,000 zone district. The square footage of the new construction is approximately 3,994 square feet and the maximum height of the building will not exceed approximately 50 feet (referred to hereinafter as the "Project and WHEREAS, on July 9, 2008, an appeal was filed of the Planning Commission's approval of application 03 -259; and WHEREAS, on September 17, 2008 the City Council duly held a public hearing to consider application #03 -259 at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered application #03 -259 de novo and duly considered all testimony and other evidence submitted in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, An Initial Study and a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for this project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration). The Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for a 30 -day public comment period from March 25 April 25, 2008. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been duly adopted for the Project by the City Council on September 17, 2008; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 15- 55.030 states that a conditional use may be permitted by a use permit to have a different site area, density, structure height, distance between structures, site coverage, setback minimums, and off street parking and loading requirements, other than those listed under the specific regulations for unconditional permitted uses in the zoning district in which it lies. The Project will have increased structure height, increased site coverage, and a reduction in the required number of off street parking spaces in comparison with standards normally applied in the R -1- 40,000 zone district; and WHEREAS, application #03 -259 is consistent with the General Plan, including the following policies: Land Use Element Policy LU 5.2 Development proposals shall be evaluated against City standards and guidelines to assure that the related traffic, noise, light, appearance, and Page 1 of 11 intensity of the proposed use have limited adverse impact on the area and can be fully mitigated. The Project included the preparation of an Initial Study and MND that evaluated the Project's impacts on traffic, noise, light, appearance, and intensity and includes recommendations and conditions of approval to reduce Project related impacts to a level which is less than significant. The Project has also been reviewed by the Planning Commission and the Commission has found that the Project is compatible with the design criteria contained in Saratoga City Code Section 15- 46.040. By Resolution No. 07 -067, on September 19, 2007 the City Council reviewed the impacts of the Church's use of the site and combined all prior Use Permits (Use Permits 29 and 147) into one superseding modified Use Permit and imposed new conditions including a condition that any intensification of the Church's use beyond that in existence on September 19, 2007 shall require an amended Conditional Use Permit. Resolution No. 07 -067 also imposed a condition requiring that the Church comply with Article 7 -30 of the City Code governing Noise Control and imposed conditions limiting the hours during which activities and events may be conducted. Land Use Element Policy 5.4 Through the development review process; ensure that adjoining neighborhoods are protected from noise, light, glare and other impacts resulting from new or expanded non- residential development The Project has been subject to the development review process. Conditions of approval have been added to the Project to ensure that adjoining neighborhoods are adequately protected. Land Use Element Policy LU 6.2 Development proposals shall incorporate stormwater quality features, including but not limited to grassy bio- swales, to protect surface and subsurface water quality. The Project will include stormwater quality features such as bio- swales, permeable paving, drywells, detention/retention ponds, as well as directing stormwater towards landscaped areas. Land Use Element Goal 13 The City shall use the design review process to assure that new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings. The Project is subject to the Design Review Approval process before the Planning Commission and a Staff Report has been prepared recommending conditions of approval to assure the Project's compatibility with the site and the adjacent surroundings. Land Use Element Background Report Page 14 No structures in Saratoga shall be over two stories in height. The Project is designed to contain no more than two stories and the City Council hereby determines that this Project complies with the limitation on the number of stories contained in this Land Use Element provision, and further, that height limitations defined in terms of feet above grade are a different matter which may be the subject of a variation from standards under the City Zoning Ordinance Use Permit procedure. Land Use Element Policy LU 2.5 The City shall monitor Zoning Ordinance standards to ensure that non residential parking standards are adequate to minimize spill -over of parking into adjacent neighborhoods. This provision is intended to apply to commercial and office uses and not to community facility uses such as a Church which the Zoning Ordinance allows in residential neighborhoods. This can be seen from the overall Goal LU 2 which Policy LU 2.5 is intended to serve. That Goal is to "[e]ncourage the economic viability of Saratoga's commercial and office areas and their accessibility by residents, taking into account the impact on surrounding residential areas." The City Council hereby determines that this Project is not inconsistent with Policy LU 2.5. Page 2of11 WHEREAS, application #03 -259 has met the burden of proof as to findings required to support approval of said application for Design Review Approval: Design Review Findings The proposed project is consistent with all of the following Design Review findings stated in City Code Section 15- 46.040: (a) Where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural features and landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include height, elevations, roofs, material, color, and appurtenances. This Project does not involve the construction of more than one building or structure. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the new Church building would possess design elements that would be compatible and harmonious with the other existing buildings on the Project site, including the chapel /classroom and the Fellowship Hall. Both of these existing buildings feature stucco and stone exterior finishes and accents which are included in the new building. The hipped and articulated roof style of the new Church would more closely reflect the roofing styles of the residential neighborhood. (b) Where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site, the sign shall have a common or compatible design theme and locational positions and shall be harmonious in appearance. No more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that a single sign is proposed for the Project at the driveway entrance to the site. The conceptual design for this sign would be compatible with the style and design of the new building. (c) Landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be preserved; it shall make use of water conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems to the maximum extent feasible; and, to the maximum extent feasible, it shall be clustered in natural appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows or regularly spaced. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that all healthy mature landscaping on the site would be maintained as part of the Project. No healthy protected trees are proposed for removal. None of the new landscaping will be placed in rows nor regularly spaced and instead will be planted in natural, organic patterns. The applicant will be adding thirty new 24 -inch box trees to the site. The Project will make use of water conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems to the maximum extent feasible. (d) Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be nonreflective This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the walls and roofing materials are nonreflective and natural in color which will enable it to blend with the natural landscape and environment. The building's size and height precludes the screening of the building by landscaping. Page 3of11 (e) Roofing materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, tile, or other materials such as composition as approved by the Planning Commission. No mechanical equipment shall be located upon a roof unless it is appropriately screened. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the roofing material is proposed to be reddish -brown colored slate roof tiles and no mechanical equipment is proposed to be installed on the roof. (f) The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk, and design with other structures in the immediate area. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the height and style of the proposed Church would be in keeping with other similar developments in the area. Bulk would be reduced by the use of varying roof lines, pitches, natural colors and materials, and a mix of both horizontal and vertical features. To increase the project's architectural compatibility with structures in the immediate area, the proposed bulk, size, height, site orientation, and exterior finishes would be in keeping with other developments including other nearby churches and the buildings on the West Valley Junior College campus. The classic design elements of the proposed new Church building also complement other types of buildings in the City. WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support the findings required for said application to be issued approval for modification to a Conditional Use Permit, including variation from standards pursuant to City Code Section 15- 55.030 by approval of a use permit to have different structure height, site coverage, and number of off street parking spaces, other than as listed under the specific regulations for unconditional permitted uses in the zoning district in which it lies (in this case increased structure height, increased site coverage, and a reduction in the required number of off street parking spaces) as set forth following: (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 may be made in the affirmative in that staff finds that the construction of a new Church building on the site will not adversely affect or intensify the existing use of the site as a religious institution and that the Project is both consistent with the purposes of the R -1- 40,000 zone district and the zoning ordinance in that the Project, as conditioned, is in accord with the objectives of the zoning ordinance as a specified conditional use in the zone district and provides adequate light, air, and privacy for surrounding single family dwellings and provides space for religious facilities needed to complement residential areas and for religious institutions, which are most appropriate in a residential environment. (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 staff finds that an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the Project which evaluated the Project's impacts on the environment and that adequate mitigations have been incorporated into the Project and the conditions of approval that will assure that there are no impacts Page 4 of 11 which rise to a level of significant and that Project has been designed to reduce mass and bulk, minimize noise, protect views and privacy of adjacent single family residences, and otherwise prevent detriment to the public health, safety and welfare and avoid consequences materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. (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 City has given careful consideration to the Project's effects on surrounding properties and has imposed reasonable conditions of approval to assure compliance with Chapter 15 Zoning Regulations. (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 may be made in the affirmative in that the Project site has been used as a church since the late 1950's, and the new building will not result in additional or intensified uses on the site. Furthermore, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared for the Project. This document evaluated the Project's aesthetic, privacy, traffic, and noise impacts on the surrounding properties and has been determined that the Project would not have an adverse effect on existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood or surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council 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 and materials submitted in connection with this matter and the Mitigated Negative Declaration as adopted, the required findings are hereby made for the applications for Design Review Approval and modification to the Conditional Use Permit as well as a use permit for the Variations from Standards and the same are hereby determined to be in compliance with City regulations and /or approved for variations therefrom so as to have an increased structure height, increased site coverage, and a reduction in the required number of off street parking spaces normally allowed in the R -1- 40,000 zone district. The Design Review Approval, modification to Conditional Use Permit, and use permit for Variations from Standards are hereby granted subject to the following conditions, and said conditions hereby modify the Conditional Use Permit approved for the Project site by City Council Resolution 07 -067, and these conditions are hereby combined and incorporated by reference and made a part thereof: PERMANENT CONDITONS OF APPROVAL 1. Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall develop a traffic and parking management plan for Christmas Eve, Easter, and other special events subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. The plan shall describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. These methods shall meet the following standard: the traffic and parking impact shall not exceed the impact which would occur if there were completely filled Church parking by use attendees and all other attendees made use an off -site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the Church. "Completely Page 5 of 11 filled Church parking" shall be deemed to allow use attendances during special events up to 277 people (based on an average of 2.2 persons per vehicle x 126 parking spaces). Other measures meeting this standard and approved by the City's Community Development Director shall also be allowed in the plan. The plan shall also be subject to review and approval by the Santa Clara County Sheriffs Office prior to building permit issuance. 2. The Church buildings, including the existing and new Church building, shall not include exterior operable bells of any kind or any other type of mechanical, electrical or other device that emits a ringing sound to the exterior. OTHER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 3. The development and use shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A" date stamped May 29, 2008 (hereby incorporated by reference). All changes to said approved plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes and are subject to the Community Development Director's and /or Planning Commission's prior approval as determined appropriate under City regulations. 4. The parking and driveway area shall be constructed of pervious paving. 5. All activities on the site shall be those that are incidental to the use of the site as a religious facility and shall comply with all conditions in Resolution 07 -067. 6. The Project shall utilize materials illustrated on a materials board dated June 12, 2008 and on file with the City. Prior to the new Church building's occupancy, the Fellowship Hall and current chapel shall be painted a color similar to the new Church building subject to the prior approval of the Community Development Director. 7. The following notes shall be incorporated on the grading and building plans prior to issuance of grading or building permits, and the measures shall be implemented during construction activities: a) Water all active construction and disturbed areas at least twice daily during dry periods b) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. c) Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply nontoxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction site. d) Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at constructions sites. Dust, sediment, or debris shall not be washed into the storm drain system. e) Excavation and grading activities shall be suspended and dust control measures shall be implemented when winds exceed 25 mph. 8. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall incorporate via a note on the first page of the construction plans, a requirement that should cultural resources be encountered during site grading or other site work, such work shall immediately be halted in the area of discovery and the applicant shall immediately notify the Community Development Director of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to promptly retain the services of a Page 6of11 qualified archeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting, analyzing, and curating the discovery as determined by the archaeologist and Community Development Director to be appropriate and adequate mitigation. The cost of the qualified archaeologist and of any recording, protecting, or curating shall be borne solely by the applicant. The archaeologist shall be required to submit a Cultural Resources Management Plan, per City Requirements, to the Community Development Director and subject to his/her review and approval that outlines the findings and mitigation methods of curation and /or protection of the resources. No further grading or site work within the area of discovery shall be allowed until the preceding has occurred. Disposition of Native American remains shall comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). The note on the plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. 9. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit plans subject to review and approval by the Building Department. These plans shall demonstrate to the City Building Official that the Project will comply with all City Building regulations as set forth or adopted by reference in Chapter 16 of the City Code. 10. During all phases of construction, the applicant shall install and maintain temporary safety fencing to restrict or prevent public access to active on -site construction activities, materials, or chemicals. 11. The following construction noise control measures shall be implemented by the applicant in order to limit the amount of noise generated during the construction period. a) Limit construction to the daytime hours between 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday, and 9:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturday, with no construction activities allowed on Sundays or holidays per Section 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. b) Construction activities or equipment shall not generate noise levels exceeding 83 dBA at any point 25 feet from the source of noise per Section 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. c) Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such technology is reasonably available as determined by the Community Development Director. d) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. e) Equip all internal combustion engine equipment with intake an exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. f) Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as possible from noise sensitive receptors. g) Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The applicant's designated noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, or other cause) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the noise disturbance coordinator at the construction site. 12. All building interior lighting shall be on a timer or motion detector to ensure that the lights do not remain on during the evening when the building is not in use. 13. A soils report for the Project site shall be prepared prior to the application for a building permit. This report shall be submitted to the Building Official and the City's Geotechnical Engineer Consultant at the time of building permit application. All new construction shall comply with the provisions of the geotechnical report (which shall be subject to prior review Page 7of11 and approval by the City's Geotechnical Engineer Consultant) and with the provisions of the most current City Building regulations, including (without limitation) the portions of which are directed at minimizing seismic risk and preventing loss of life and property in the event of an earthquake. 14. So as to limit short term soil erosion and increased sediment, all conditions of the City approved grading and drainage permit shall be implemented. 15. All conditions of the grading and drainage permit as required by the Public Works Department shall be met. 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 to the maximum extent reasonably feasible, and incorporating the New Development and Construction Best Management Practices. 16. The applicant shall adhere to all provisions of the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. 17. 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 and the approved Mitigation Monitoring Plan as separate plan pages. b. 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 in compliance with approved plans." 18. Staff shall not approve downgrading to the exterior appearance of the approved Project. Downgrades may include, but are not limited to 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. 19. The 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. 20. 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. 21. To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape areas. 22. 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, Page 8 of 11 patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. 23. Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover, if applicable, shall be retained and incorporated into the landscape plan to the maximum extent possible. 24. 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. 25. The provisions of this Resolution shall be incorporated into Resolution No. 07 -067 so as to place all conditions of approval in one document. 26. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit a final exterior lighting plan that complies with Section 15- 35.040(i) of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the plan shall indicate that no exterior lighting fixtures shall allow direct light rays to leave the project site, or allow direct light sources (incandescent, fluorescent, or other forms of electric illumination) to be directly visible from off -site locations. The plan shall also show that light levels will not exceed 100 foot lamberts anywhere on the property. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance. CITY ARBORIST 27. All recommendations contained in the City Arborist Reports dated March 9, 2006 and May 25, 2006, shall be followed. 28. Tree protective measures, as specified by the City Arborist, shall be installed and inspected by the City Arborist prior to issuance of City Permits. 29. Prior to issuance of any City Permits authorized by this Resolution, the applicant shall submit to the City, in a form acceptable to the Community Development Director, security equivalent to $95,150 to guarantee the maintenance and preservation of trees. 30. The City Arborist shall inspect the site to verify compliance with required tree protective measures. The security shall be released after the planting of any required replacement trees, a favorable site inspection by the City Arborist, and payment of any outstanding City Arborist fees. 31. Prior to removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of six inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal or pruning permit from the City of Saratoga and comply with any conditions imposed by the tree removal or pruning permit. Such conditions shall include replacement of such tree(s) with replacement tree(s) of equal value to the trees to be removed. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations in the City Arborist's Report that was prepared for the Project. Page 9of11 FIRE DISTRICT 32. Applicant shall comply with all Saratoga Fire District requirements and conditions. PUBLIC WORKS 33. The owner /applicant shall install concrete sidewalk along the property frontage. Sidewalk design and setback from the roadway shall match existing sidewalk along Allendale Avenue at Camino Barco. Plans and specifications for the sidewalk and driveway approach shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for prior approval. 34. The owner shall landscape area between the sidewalk and Allendale Avenue. An Irrigation system shall be installed if determined necessary by the Public Works Director. The landscaped area shall be maintained in perpetuity by the applicant or its successor(s). 35. A Landscape Maintenance Agreement satisfactory to the Public Works Director for the maintenance of the landscaped area per the condition above shall be recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 36. An Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department is required for the new sidewalk, new driveway approach, landscaping, and other improvements in any portion of the public right -of -way or of a public easement. The Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of the improvements. 37. The applicant shall comply with requirements of Provision C.3 of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit. The applicant shall use and maintain Best Management Practices (BMP's) for site design and storm water treatment. Certification of engineered stormwater treatment by a qualified person shall be required to confirm that the plan meets the criteria established in Provision C.3 prior to issuance of building permits. Post construction operation and maintenance of storm water treatment BMP's shall be the responsibility of the owner. A Maintenance Agreement between the City and the applicant satisfactory to the Public Works Director shall be recorded prior to final occupancy approval. 38. Prior to beginning of construction, the applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board to obtain coverage under and be subject to the State General Construction Activity NPDES Permit. Satisfactory evidence of the filing of the NOI shall be furnished to the City. The applicant shall comply with all provisions and conditions of the State Permit, including preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Copies of the SWPPP shall be submitted to the City prior to beginning of construction and maintained on site at all times during construction. CITY ATTORNEY 39. The Church shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its employees, agents, independent contractors and volunteers (collectively "City) from any and all costs and expenses, including but not limited to attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense in any proceeding brought in State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to this Permit or contesting any action or inaction in the City's processing and /or approval of this Permit. Page 10 of 11 Section 2. A Building Permit shall be obtained and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or the approval granted thereby will expire. Section 3. The uses by the Church shall maintain compliance with all applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities having jurisdiction. Section 4. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met with regard to the construction authorized by this Resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga City Council, State of California, on the 17 day of September 2008 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Ann Sullivan Acting City Clerk Ann Waltonsmith Mayor 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. Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date Page 11 of 11 r w r City of Saratoga Planning Commission Public Hearing St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church BCA architecture p 1 a n n n p i n t e r i o r s 1 CC 4 r a En OM N M MI N r E all MS NM ER884 O Nv R 0 G 4 CM. it Relevant Aspects of the Orthodox Christian Faith Presentation of Proposed Design Review of Statistical Data Comparison of surrounding Churches Context and Visual Corridor Closing comments St. Archangel Michae S RBBt• ORrHUDU\ (!11 Rt If Public Hearing June 25, 2008 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox T C Serbian Orthodox Church Canon St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodo According to the Canon Law, an Orthodox Church edifice must fulfill the following requirements: turicroistott Footprint to follow the form of the Cross. Mandatory inclusion of separate areas for the Altar, Nave, and Narthex. At a minimum, must include one cupola and a bell tower Architecturally to adhere to the general Byzantine Style To be oriented from west (main entrance) to east (altar area). Observe appropriate proportions between length and height. The overall size must meet the regular parish needs as well as occasional and special needs, such as weddings, funerals, Christmas, Easter, etc. Must be internally decorated with frescoes and an icon screen. 9) Bells must be included to mark the beginning of each Divine Liturgy. 10) Both cupola and bell tower must have a Cross on top of them. A ow A G c A Serbian Orthodox Church C n St. Archangel Michael Serbian 0 "The church building as a permanent structure must fundamentally meet the congregation's need for the total experience of a living temple for joint prayer receiving the Eucharist, partaking in the other sacramental Holy Mysteries and the regular celebration of the Orthodox Christian Liturgy Orthodox churches are not mere gathering places but signify and make visible the Church living in this place, the dwelling of God with men reconciled and united in Christ "The buil vertical architectural elements are to dominate the horizontal, as they must reinforce a heavenward aspiration of bringing the heavenly Jerusalem down to the faithful in this sacred space. Accordingly, to achieve this effect, the ceiling and cupola are to be of height strictly proportional to the base footprint of length and width His Grace Bishop Longin, Bishop of Western America b A GA CM.% MN NM NM N MI MI MN MI OM MI O is Site Plan (Proposed Design) St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho c BCIA M r i■■II I MI s MN Golden Mean Floor Plan (Proposed Design) St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Total area 3994 square feet Seating capacity 254 people BCA d�Et SER8,4& r M I NM MI MN INN ON Belltower Balcony Narthex Building Section (Proposed Desig St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodo Dome Nave 1 Apse 1 Rte irk A OM MO MMI 1.11 an ME M E MO MO SERN Original Design (view from Al St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho H11 I 1 A I •••10 Nip 13 C A li.rr; i fJ MN NM OM NM MO NM OM MO IIIIIII NMI mil 5ER8,A,v New Design (view from Allen St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthod B C A OM MI OM IMO OM E 4)' Entry View St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho OM NM WM ME IMO 111111 EMI MN 0t_ SERB/4 o 4 V 4 s r 44 GA CALF Overall View of Church St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho ow um Ns me ow rm ow m MO MA ap tt SE 0 ION sacred heart church Neighboring Churches St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodo immanuel lutheran saratoga presbyterian church of Jesus christ of I.d.s. prince of peace lutheran saint andrew`s episcopal a A 4 4 z 2 Z fl a Q `a Map of Neighboring Churches St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthod a 4 1 st. archangel michael serbian orthodox church 2. sacred heart church 3. immanuel lutheran church 4. saratoga presbyterian church 5. church of jesus christ of latter day saints 6. prince of peace lutheran church 7. st. andrew's episcopal church scan 4 6 `SE st. archangel michael 18870 Allendale Avenue sacred heart church 13716 Saratoga Avenue immanuel lutheran 14103 Saratoga Avenue saratoga presbyterian 20455 Herrman Avenue Ids church 19100 Allendale Avenue prince of peace lutheran 12770 Saratoga Avenue st. andrew's episcopal 13601 Saratoga Avenue MI II. NO N NM Statistical Comparisons to other St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodo zone district site area building floor area existing or existing or allowable propsed propsed area existing or existing or propsed propsed R- 1-- 40,000 134,165 sf 20,085 sf 7,200 sf 67,783 sf 50.5% R- 1-- 20,000 272,844 sf 47,268 sf impervious, sf impervious surface, parking allowable existing or area propsed 3 126 required top of spline top of highest highest pt. max. max. occ. parking main mass roof top of cross height sanctuary 26' -0" 50' -0" 56' -0" 30° 254 R -1 20,000 448,088 sf 64,337 sf 6,000 sf 336,363 sf 75.1% 45.0% 243 22' -5" 33' -6" 75' -5" 30' 900 R- 1-- 20,000 136,064 sf 19,163 sf 6,000 st 104,000 sf 76.4% 45.0% 129 302 30' -5" 42' -10" 51' -10" 30' 350 R- 1-- 12,500 187,309 sf 15,052 sf 4,830 sf 98,580 sf 52.6% 55.0% 132 470 42' -0" 42' -0" 47' -0" 30' 320 R- 1-- 40,000 299,506 sf 45,407 sf 7,200 sf 174,315 sf 58.2% 35.0% 218 252 40' -9" 40' -9" 58' -9" 30' 400 Agricultural 123,300 sf 16,469 sf 8,000 sf 69,844 sf 56.3% 25%** 117 39' -0" 39' -0" 39' -0" 30' 300 130,204 sf 47.7% 45.0% 202 38' -0" 38' -0" 64' -0" 30' 750 height capacity BCA r r MI MI NM II p E SER8r Statistical Comparisons to othe St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox 94 4 Ids church GA C AI� f Building Height st. archangel michael 18870 Allendale Avenue sacred heart church 13716 Saratoga Avenue immanuel lutheran 14103 Saratoga Avenue saratoga presbyterian 20455 Herriman Avenue 19100 Allendale Avenue prince of peace lutheran 12770 Saratoga Avenue st. andrevws episcopal 13601 Saratoga Avenue zone district site area building floor area impervious, sf impervious surface, parking existing or existing or propsed propsed allowable existing or existing or allowable existing or area propsed propsed area propsed R- 1-- 40,000 134,165 sf 20,085 sf 7,200 sf 67,783 sf 50.5% 35.0°'4 126 R -1 20,000 448,088 sf 64,337 sf 6,000 sf 336,363 sf 75.1% 45.0% 243 380 R- 1-- 20,000 136,064 sf 19,163 sf 6,000 sf 104,000 sf 76.4% 45.0% 129 302 R -1 12,500 187,309 sf 15,052 sf 4,830 sf 98,580 sf 52.6% ii`:. 132 R- 1-- 40,000 299,506 sf 45,407 sf 7,200 sf 174,315 sf 58.2% 35.0% Agricultural 123,300 sf 16,469 sf 8,000 sf 69,844 sf 56.3% required parking 228 117 24? R -1 20,000 272,844 sf 47,268 sf 6,000 sf 130,204 sf 47.7% 4E 202 929 height top of spline I top of highest highest pt. max. /main mass roof top of cross height 26' -0" 50' -0" 56' -0" 30' 22' -5" 33' -6" 75' -5" 30' 30' -5" 42' -10" 51' -10" 30' 42' -0" 42' -0" 47' -0" 30' 38' -0" 38' -0" 64' -0" 30' capacity max. occ. sanctuary 254 900 35 750 4 a Et EfiB qN R4 G A CALIF 80 ft 70 ft 60 ft, 50 ft. 40 ft. MI O- MN r UM MI MI Scale Comparison St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Saint Andrew's Episcopal Church BCIA cc r -EL SE I&. Wy 4 Rq GA CAU 80 ft 70 ft 60 ft 50 ft Scale Comparison St. Archangel Michael Serbian 0 Prince of Peace Lutheran Church 39 ft. BCIA cc 4 r r AM It MI r MO OM MI MI 'E SE R,T G6A CAA 80 ft 70 ft 60 ft 50 ft 40 ft. 74 in c A n Scale Comparison St. Archangel Michael Serbian 0 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 58 ft. BCA IIIIII1 MN MI O)1. St A rc h an el Michael Serbian Ortho g R ,T OG4 •\FO 80 ft 70 ft 60 ft 50 ft 40 ft 30 ft. INS Scale Comparison Saratoga Presbyterian Church BC A Context St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orth h I1" ki 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 t .t. sERN, 0 View Corridor from Allendale St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho NM NM Et. SERBIA* V 4 k GA C AL MO I MO OM M INII Project Timeline St. Archangel Michael Serbian 0 Initial Neighborhood Meeting at the Church (notice to immediate neighbors) CUP application filed 2 Neighborhood Meeting at the City Library; (notice to property owners to within 500 feet of the church) Revised CUP application submitted y Serra Oaks Task Force meeting at Father Jovic's house 1St Planning Commission Study Session Transitioned Architects from CJK Design Group to BCA Architects. Neighborhood Meetings to present new Church design and obtain feedback BCA April 30th, 2003 November 20th, 2003 March 30th, 2004 May 20th, 2004 August 18th, 2004 September 8th, 2004 January 17th, 2005 July 19th, 2005 August 9th, 2005 October 4th, 2005 mimillE Are 0 y i Project Timeline (cont.) 4 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho Filed CUP Application (amended) Revised CUP submittal Revised CUP submittal Revised CUP submittal 2 Planning Commission Study Session er Mediation Meeting County of Santa Clara Task Force challenges Church's existing Use Permit Scheduled Mediation Meeting (cancelled) Planning Commission Site Visit Planning Commission Public Hearing Story Pole Sign at Church Vandalized October 18th, 2005 January 27th, 2006 March 23 2006 April 21st, 2006 June 14th, 2006 February 10th, 2007 March 14th, 2007 March 17th, 2007 June 12th, 2007 June 13th, 2007 June 20th, 2007 I MI I M MI OM Project Timeline (cont.) St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho Task Force Appeals PC Decision to City Council City Council Site Visit City Council Meeting Appeal denied Mediation Meetings County of Santa Clara Planning Commission Public Hearing BCA June 28th, 2007 September 17th, 2007 September 19th, 2007 October 29th, 2007 November 5th, 2007 November 12th, 2007 November 19th, 2007 March 27th, 2008 April 28th 2008 June 25th, 2008 cc EL SERA q 4 Summary Closing Commen s St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthod St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church agrees with the Staff recommendation and conditions of approval and requests your support of our new Church building. i f _I Lis' t ta 1 ct kP A H 0 Computer Animation St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho AMP B C A MI NM MI I 1111111 MO MO I NM tt SERB(q,,, D u� Shadow Studies St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodo Summer 9:OOam, June 23rd CC 4 Shadow Studies 2 C St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Summer 12:OOpm, June 23 i M i t t. SERA q a c Shadow Studies St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthod 2 �I r V MN MI 111111 r NM OM I Shadow Studies St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho Winter 12:OOpm, Decem -LSER8 Shadow Studies St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthod 1:Ti Nk tv SERB/AA D 4 A GA CAIIf OP Shadow Studies St. Archangel Michael Serbian Ortho E SITE DESCRIPTION EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT: EXISTING GP LAND USE: EXISTING USE: APN: SITE SIZE: GROSS ACRES: NET ACRES: FLOOR AREA: EXISTING: FLOOR AREA: PROPOSED: FLOOR AREA: TOTAL AGE OF EXISTING STRUCTURES: CHURCH HALL RESIDENCE BUILDING SETBACKS: FRONT SIDE (SOUTH) SIDE (NORTH) REAR IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE: EXISTING PROPOSED MAX. ALLOWED PROJECT DESCRIPTION THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS TO: I) R1-40 CFS CHURCH 397 -1 -14 PROPOSED 45 FT (MIN.) 30 FT (MIN.) 55 FT (MIN.) 420 FT (MIN.) 3.1 ACRES 3.1 ACRES 13,476 SQUARE FEET (SEE SHEET 3 FOR DETAIL) 3,994 SQUARE FEET (SEE SHEET 3 FOR DETAIL) 17,470 SQUARE FEET 1968 1963 1968 REQUIRED 30 FT 2ND FLOOR 20 FT 2ND FLOOR -25 FT 20 FT 2ND FLOOR 50 FT 1.70 AC (55.2%) (SEE SHEET 3 FOR DETAIL) 1.55 AC (50.5 (SEE SHEET 3 FOR DETAIL) 1.08 AC (35 IF RESIDENTIAL USE PROVIDE FOR A NEW CHURCH WITH A CAPACITY OF 254 SEATS, AND TO RECONFIGURE EXISTING ON -SITE PARKING TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 64 PARKING SPACES TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF 1 SPACE FOR EVERY 4 SEATS IN THE CHURCH. 2) APPROVE A VARIATION FROM THE RI -40 STANDARDS REGARDING IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, HEIGHT, AND PARKING SUPPLY INCLUDING USE OF GRASS AREA TO ACCOMMODATE OVERFLOW PARKING. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 ALLENDALE AVE, SARATOGA, CA. 95070 LOCATION MAP N.T.S. PLAN SET REVISIONS No. Date Description 1 11-19-2003 2 5-20-2004 3 10- 18.2005 4 1-27-2006 5 3-23-2006 6 4-21-2006 7 6 -05 -2006 8 3 -05 -2008 Initial Submittal Revised Submittal Revised Submittal Revised Submittal Revised Submittal Revised Submittal Revised Submittal Revised Submittal FILE NUMBER: 03 -259 CONSULTANTS PLANNING: ENGINEERING: ARCHITECTURE: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT: TABLE OF CONTENTS SHEET DESCRIPTION 1 COVER SHEET 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN 3 SITE PLAN 4 CHURCH FLOOR PLAN 5 CHURCH ROOF PLAN 6 CHURCH ELEVATIONS 7 ENTRY SIGN ELEVATIONS 8 CHURCH SECTIONS 9 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN 10 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE DEMOLITION PLAN 11 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 12 PRELIMINARY SITE ELECTRICAL PLAN 13 DEMOLITION PLAN RUTH GOING, INC. 2216 THE ALAMEDA SANTA CLARA, CA. 95050 RUTH GOING, INC. 2216 THE ALAMEDA SANTA CLARA, CA. 95050 BUNTON CLIFFORD ASSOCIATES, INC. 210 HAMMOND AVENUE FREMONT, CA 94539 GSBS 375 WEST 200 SOUTH SUITE 100 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84101 ALFA TECH 97 EAST BROKAW ROAD, SUITE 300 SAN JOSE, CA 95112 EXHIBIT l4 SHEET 1 OF 13 ,HOUSE -FF1'. 10557 OR 0EPUOLIC RICHT STREET RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF ACCEPTANCE 90 7e370 OR 111 LANDS OF PREVITE LANDS OF BELLIGITTI 18" REDWOOD 12" PEPPER TOPD BY SAN BENITO ENGINEERING& SURVEYING. INC HOLLISTER, CA MARCH 2001 6" 10E0 12" PINE EXISTING NG 12" PINE 12" PINE 12" PINE 6" TREE 6" TREE 6" TREE TREE 3" GRAPEFRUIT 3 TREE 4" TREE 6" TREE e" LEMON J /j 18" PALM LANDS OF WON& 4" TREE 8' OAK 6' OAK 5" TREE 1 N 01'0 }'55" W 6" OAK 529 14" OAK 12' OAK 8' OAK 14" OAK 14" OAK LANDS OF BELDIN6 8' OAK 8" OAK e' OAK 18" PINE 24' PINE 12" PINE 1 18" PINE 18" PINE 18' PINE 15" PINE LANDS OF BARR 20' OAK 20" OAK 15" OAK 1Y OAK 24" OAK 1.1 1 1 I I 30' w -4 w J -1 Z SCALE: 1' =30' LEGEND t.yt EXISTING SANITARY SEWER A EXISTING OVERHEAD TELEPHONE p EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING FENCE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING CONCRETE Seel) AS NOTED BCA architecture p l a n n i n g i nt e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, Califomia 94539 T] 510.445.1000 I F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, Califomia EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN Date JAN 08, 2008 Project Number 05003 RUTH AND GOING, INC. Civil Engineering Planning 2216 THE 010005A, SANTA CLARA CA. 95050 (406) 236_2400 Drawing Number 2 OF 13 ITEM E IS11NG SF PROPOSED SF DOSS NG CHURCH PROPOSED SF PASTOR'S RESIDENCE 2521 58.33).0) 2521 FALL 9731 BASKEYBAl L COURT 9,731 D8S1114G CHAPEL 1,224 9,731.00 1.224 NEW CHLROI r 5,235.00 GR UPD FLOOR 3,477 SECOFD FLOOR l I 517 1113N DOSING SF PROPOSED SF PARKING &67IVEWAY 47,630.00 58.33).0) EXISTING HOUSE 2521.00 2521.00 BASKEYBAl L COURT 3177.00 0.02 HALL 9,731.00 9,731.00 CHURCH 1.22450 5,235.00 WALKIPATlO 9. E03.03 11,987.00 1113N EXISTING SF PROPOSED SF LANDSCAPE 55640.00 5255200 PLAY GROUND 5436.00 0.00 OVERFLOW PARKING 0.00 13564.03 1113N RATIO O.W4T1TY PANONG RBOUIRED PARKING PRONGED I rear CHURCH 1/4 SEATS 1 254 SEAT 64 HALL QOJNH CLASS 1/40 SF 1 5414 135 HALL (SPPORT SPACI 7 asF 1 3 333 0 IDOSTINGCHAPEL 1/413 SF 1.074 27 I PRIESTS HOUSE 2/ UNIT 1 1 2 2 STANDARDS STALLS A�SIBLESTALLS I 118 5 VAN ACCESSIBLE STALLS 1 1 r PROPOSED LOCATION OF TRASH ENCLOSURE (SEE SHT 7 FOR DETAIL GRASS OVERFLO PARKING (41 SPACES) Y P. in a- Q; r 24.0 j80 TYP. TYP. N 2 (D FIRE DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS NOTE: 1) Required Fire Flow; The fire flow for this project is 2250 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure. As an automatic fire sprinkler system will be installed, the fire flow has been reduced by 500 establishing a required Ddiusten fre flow of 1500 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure. The adjusted fire flow is available from area water mains and fire hydrant(s) which are spaced at the required spacing. 2) Automatic Fire Sprinkler System Required: Buildings requiring a fire flow in excess of 2.000 GPM or, is three (3) or more stories in height or, n excess of 10.000 square feet or new homes located within the harardous lire area sholl be protected throughout by an automatic fire sprinkler system, hydraulically designed per National Fire Protection Association (NEPA) Stondord #13. A Stole of Colifornia licensed fire protection contractor sholl submit plans, calculotions, a completed permit applicotion and oppropriote fees to this department for review and approval prior to beginning thjeir work. 3) Private On Site Firs Hydrant(,) Required: Provide 1 private on -site lire hydrant(s) installed per NEPA Std. #24, at locotion(s) to be determined by the Fire Deportment. Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 250 feet, with a minimum acceptable flow of 1500 GPM at 2DOpsi residual pressure. Prior to design, the project civil engineer shall meet with the fire department woter supply officer to jointly spot the required fire hydrant locations. 4) Fire Lona Marking Required: Marking for oil roadways within the project shall be provided. Markings shall be per fire department specifications. Installations shall also conform to Local Government Standards and Fire Department Stondord Details and Specifications sheet A -6. EXISTING HOUSE TO REMAIN 126 TOTAL PARKIN 5 Dw 1\\\\\\\,\\ STALLS (85 PERMANENT/ 41 OVERFLOW SPACES) EXISTING HALL TO REMAIN T l GENERAL NOTE: (0 EXISTING CHURCH BUILDING TO REMAIN CONDENSING UNITS (4) ON CONCRETE PLATFORM WITH FENCE ENCLOSU CRESS AN FASEMEM JETTY r a ELRLSS SAWA 0 COUNTY Ro. 4 or sung cwu courm 1) ALL HVAC EOUIPMENT TO BE LOCATED INSIDE THE BUILDING, OR BELOW GRADE. EXCEPT FOR THE FOUR CONDENSING UNITS, SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN. !it ROPOSED CHURCH os EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF RAY FOP PUBLIC PTY STREET RESOLUTION OF ACCEPTANCE eR 28370 OR 412 l \71 \r PARKING COUNT LEGEND Z SCALE: 1 =30' TOTAL PARKING DUU4SION 9-0" X 1sd COVERAGE AREAS IMPERVIOUS TOTAL IMPERVIOUS %INPERRVIOUS PERVIOUS TOTAL PERVIOUS PERVIOUS FLOOR AREA TOTAL EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING OVERHEAD TELEPHONE EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING FENCE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING CONCRETE GRASS AREA OVERFLOW PARKING 74,089.00 67,784.00 5&22 50.52% 60,076.00 13,476.00 66,3I2.0D 44.78% 49.48% 17,470.00 228 126 Scale AS NOTED BC Date JAN 08, 2008 Project Number 05003 A architecture p l a n n i n g i nt e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, Califomia 94539 T 510.445.1000 1F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com RUTH AND GOING, INC. Civil Engineering Planning 2216 115 AlAMEOA SANTA MARA, CA. 95050 (4081 236 -2400 Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California SITE PLAN Drawing Number 3 OF 13 SCALE 3116' T-0' AREA CALCULATIONS 1 1 PRIEST'S SACRISTY 81 SO.FT. APSE 230 SO.FT. BOYS' SACRISTY 81 50.FT. 3 3 6 6 700 SOFT. i 7 1 1‘1111 111111■ 0 9 NAVE 2385 SO.FT. 99' -6" 7 7 5 5 AREA CALCULATION (includes double— height spaces): 460 SO.FT 81 SQ.FT. 81 SO.FT. 4770 SO.FT. 700 SQ.FT. 517 SO.F. 6609 SQ.Ff. ACTUAL FLOOR AREA: 230 SQ.F7 81 SO.FT. 81 SQ.Ft. 2385 SQ.FT. 700 SQ.FT. 517 SQ.FT. 3994 SQ.FT. 5 5 El 5 5 5 5 5 NARTHEX 525 SO.FT BRIDAL ROOM 76 SOFT. BAPTISTERY 76 SOFT. NOTE: ALL HVAC EQUIPMENT TO BE LOCATED INSIDE THE BUILDING OR BELOW GRADE, EXCEPT FOR THE 4 CONDENSING UNITS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN BALCONY 400 SO.FT. III =11 ui 7 El 7 4 AIM II FLOOR PLAN BC A architecture p l a n n i n g i nt e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont. California 94539 T 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com REVISED PER CITY COMMENTS 2/5/08 Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California FLOOR PLAN Date FEBURARY 26, 2008 Scale AS NOTED Project Number 05003 Drawing Number 4 of 12 SCALE 3/16' r-0' SLOPE 6:12 SLOPE 6:12 SLOPE 4.5:12 SLOPE 3.7:12 SLOPE 3.7:12 SLOPE 4.5:12 _J I SLOPE 2.12'. SLOPE 6:'12 SLOPE 2:12 T SLOPE 612 SLOPE 2:12 SLOPE 4:12 T SLOPE 4.5:12 SLOPE 3.7:12 SLOPE 3.7:12 SLOPE 4.5:12 11 iSLOPE 6:12 I l l ROOF PLAN BC A architecture p l a n n i n g i nt e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates. Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, California 94539 T 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California ROOF PLAN Date FEBURARY 26, 2008 Scale AS NOTED Project Number 05003 Drawing Number 5of12 111 n I Ji 4 TOP OF ROOF 50'-0" 4 TOP OF POOF 26'-0" _4_10LI OF ROOF 50'-0" TOP OF 0000 40-0' 1 3. F 0T-6" D t 11- Li N SCALE lir 0-0' I ll 8005 SCALE 1/8 T-T 9 0 GLAZING TIP GLAZING OP. 0 0 0 0 RED SLATE ROOF OP 0 90 D 0 0 0 0 1.4 :_111L„L..1 SLOPE 35:10 GLAZING TYP. D LEFT— NORTH ELEVATION PED SLATE ROOF TW 0 0 0 0 RIGHT— SOUTH ELEVATION RED SLATE ROOF TYP. SIACION POLISHED TRAVERTINE DP. GLAZING OP POUCH TRAVERTINE WAINSCOT M. GLAZING TIP. OFT-WHITE SMOOTH POLISHED TRAVERTINE 111 GLAZING ILIR. GPEY ROUGH TRAVERTINE 60166000 N N SCALE 118' SCALE: 1/8 E-0' 4 TOP OF ROOF 50t-ET +TOP OF 0.000 40-0' 4 LOP OF ROOF SCE-CG I Il= 7 I 1 FF 0-6 I 1 T-1 0 uf,-- '1(1 11_1 SLOPE 6:12 ==7.711,-, RED SLATE 0000 TYP TOP OF ROOF 26-0" SLOPE 3312 11 RED SLATE ROOF TYP. RED SLATE ROOF PGP GLAZING TT OFF WHITE SMOOTH POLISHED TRAVERTINE np GLAZING TYP. GLAZING TYR OFF-WHITE GREY ROUGH TRAVERTINE VINNKOT OP. FRONT WEST ELEVATION GLAZING OP RED SLATE ROOF TYP. GLAZING TIP SMOOTH POLISHED TRAVERTINE TYP ww- GREY ROUGH TRAVERTINE WAINSCOT PEP. REAR EAST ELEVATION Scale AS NOTED BC Date FEBURARY 26, 2008 Project Number 05003 A architecture p I a n n i n g i n t e r i ors Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, California 94539 T 510.445.1000 (F] 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com NOTE: GRADE ELEVATION AT ALL POINTS OF THE LOT AT BUILDING EDGE IS 105.50 Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California ELEVATIONS Drawing Number 6of 12 111111,II.'lIllli 111ll!Ili1ii11 1 1 1 II SCALE 3/8 SCALE 318• T -0' SCALE 318' 1-0' A b )OZ 01 LO \ps \s6Mp \ya)ny0 Iaoypini ta.ix T -6 SIDE EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS A I 17 A A r I I I rT II 'I T I 1 1 1 I i l i l l l l I I I I St l Archangel Michael I X TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN ;-N SCALE 114' -T -0• BOLLARD TYR BOLLARD TYR T -0 4' THK CONC. PAD VERIFY SIZE SEE SEE ELEC. DKGS I I I I Ilulilljl�f I I Ser iari thx Church I 1 I l A PO Y T 0. BLOCK c SCALE 1W T •O' 19' -0 19' -0 9•00 DROP P W/ LOCKA8 E LATCH. SE INTO CONC, AT CLOSED AND OPEN POSITION CORRUGATED METAL PDOF STEEL TUBE SELF CLOSING STEEL GATES SPUT FACE CONC. BLOCK MIL GATE PULL, LATCH B AND HARDWAPE TIP. CORRUGATED METAL ROOF TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONS II I. II D II II IIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIII FRONT NORTH ELEVATION S �j 6 -D T. 0 BLOCK II II REAR SOUTH ELEVATION 6 60. T O.BLOCK Ir I :4 araraffi Project Number Dale FEBURARY 26, 2008 Scale AS NOTED 05003 BC A architecture p l a n n i n g i n t e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, California 94539 T 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com NOTE: GRADE ELEVATION AT ALL POINTS OF THE LOT AT BUILDING EDGE IS 105.50 Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California ENTRY SIGN ELEVATIONS Drawing Numfier 7of12 I I I DUMPSTER\ ,I J;., RE BINS DUMPSTER I HOSE BIB 1� 1 I1_I L JI o 111111,II.'lIllli 111ll!Ili1ii11 1 1 1 II SCALE 3/8 SCALE 318• T -0' SCALE 318' 1-0' A b )OZ 01 LO \ps \s6Mp \ya)ny0 Iaoypini ta.ix T -6 SIDE EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS A I 17 A A r I I I rT II 'I T I 1 1 1 I i l i l l l l I I I I St l Archangel Michael I X TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN ;-N SCALE 114' -T -0• BOLLARD TYR BOLLARD TYR T -0 4' THK CONC. PAD VERIFY SIZE SEE SEE ELEC. DKGS I I I I Ilulilljl�f I I Ser iari thx Church I 1 I l A PO Y T 0. BLOCK c SCALE 1W T •O' 19' -0 19' -0 9•00 DROP P W/ LOCKA8 E LATCH. SE INTO CONC, AT CLOSED AND OPEN POSITION CORRUGATED METAL PDOF STEEL TUBE SELF CLOSING STEEL GATES SPUT FACE CONC. BLOCK MIL GATE PULL, LATCH B AND HARDWAPE TIP. CORRUGATED METAL ROOF TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONS II I. II D II II IIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIII FRONT NORTH ELEVATION S �j 6 -D T. 0 BLOCK II II REAR SOUTH ELEVATION 6 60. T O.BLOCK Ir I :4 araraffi Project Number Dale FEBURARY 26, 2008 Scale AS NOTED 05003 BC A architecture p l a n n i n g i n t e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, California 94539 T 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com NOTE: GRADE ELEVATION AT ALL POINTS OF THE LOT AT BUILDING EDGE IS 105.50 Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California ENTRY SIGN ELEVATIONS Drawing Numfier 7of12 HEIGHT TABLE STRUCTURE HEIGHT of TOTAL HEIGHT 711 ;A.LLEFIL -0' I. N P SCALE 1 /8' 7 TOP OF CEILING 30' -0 1 TOP OF CEILING 23' -10 TOP OF CEILING 19 -7 FF 0 -0 N scALE 1 8 1 0 7 OF ROOF 50 -0" BOTTOM OF ROOF 4T -0 TOP OF ROOF 40 -0 BOTTOM OF ROOF 38' -6' 4 TOP OF CEILINC 30 -0' TOP OF CEILING 23 -10 TOP OF CEILING 19' -6' TOP OF CEILING 9' 1 TOP OF ROOF 50-0 +BOTTOM OF ROOF 47' -6' TRANSVERSE SECTION (NAVE) TOP OF ROOF 40 -0 BOTTOM OF ROOF 38' -0 4 TOP OF CEILING 23'- 10 4 TOP OF CELING 21 -0 TOP OF CEILING 18' -0 TOP OF CEILING 9 -5 SCALE 1/8' 1' -0' FF 0' -6' TOP OF CEILING 25' -1" i P OF CEILING 19' -6' LONGITUDINAL SECTION TRANSVERSE SECTION (NARTHEX) BC A architecture p Ian n i n g i n t e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont. California 94539 T 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California SECTIONS Date FERURARY 26, 2008 Scale AS NOTED Project Number 05003 Drawing Number 8of 12 3' Dry Well Perforated pipe elev 98.60 4' diameter pipe Bubbler del 98.45 Existing 10' diameter PVC pipe POOL Pervious AC Pavement PROPOSED LOCATION OF TRASH ENCLOSURE Pervious AC Pavement EXISTING HOUSE TO REMAIN %Sr AC Pavement 126 TOTAL PARKING STALLS (85 PERMANENT/ 41 OVERFLOW SPACES) ILI EXISTING CHURCH BUILDING TO REMAIN NEW ENTRY WA115 HOUSE FE 105.5 11 01'03'55' W 529.e0' 1ENN5 COJRI CONDENSING UNITS (4) ON CONCRETE PLATFORM WITH FENCE ENCLOSUR Au [0RfS5EA5fYFM 1 5 a1A CO t NO w a SANTA CLAM muNn 1.5 5 ground e l l .vex j C elev 98.29 ITCSe* 96.21 4' diameter pipe i EASEMENT MAO FAG.' OF WA, 6LR Cm' STREET RESOLLRION MCE RX 263Ta OR 112 Detention /retention pond 3' Dry Well Perforated pipe .leer 9820 Bubbler behind curb acv 97.90 z- SCALE: 1"=30' PERCENT OF IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE EXISTING 55.2% (1.70 ACRES) PROPOSED 50.5% (1.55 ACRES) Perforated pip. elev 98.20 3' Dry WeII LEGEND Existing fence SECTION B —B NTS E.etEng ground vole 2'x4' umber header Asphalt canna. Bubbler behind cum .bv 97.90 diameter SECTION A —A NTS pip. DIRECTION OE FLOW EXISTING 5AN114RY SEWER EXISTING OVERHEAD TELEPHONE I XI5TNG OVERHEAD ELECTRIC Ex1sTNG FENCE 101144ING EDGE CF PAVEMENT EXISTING CONCRETE CRASS AREA OVER-LOW PARKING Scale AS NOTED BC A architecture p l a n n i n g i n t e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, California 94539 T 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www. BCAi ncOnl ine.com RUTH AND GOING, INC. Civil Engineering Planning 2216 141E ALAMEDA SANTA C ARA, CA 95050 (106) 136 -2400 Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN Date JAN 08. 2008 Project Number 05003 Drawing Number 9 OF 13 LANDS OF BELLICITTI 6" OAK I 18" REDWOO 12" IPEPPE 8" TREE 12" PINE] 12" PIN C EXI TING PLAY EA 12" THE /12" PINE LANDS OF MAAS 6" TREE 3" GRAPEFRUIT LANDS OF WONG ji 3" TP.EE" T E 0 6'�RE�` 8" LEM0N- 18" PAL TREE 4" TREE 6" TREE 4" TREE EXISTING HOUSE 18' PINE 18" PINE" 15" PINE SITE BOUNDARY D 6" OAK 8" OAK 5" TREE 3" TREE .4" TREE 6" TREE O 23 EXISTING HALL d 2 LANDS OF SABOKPEY VAN ACCESSIBLE 1 1 0 14" OAK 14" OAK B" OAK 12" OAK 14" OAK 6" OAK\ 6" TREE LEGEND /23 TREE 10 e_ REMOVED (1• =.1 TF =E 10 REMAIN 1', P) SEE AF:B0PIS1 0 REPORT FOR TREE PP0TE- il0E! LOCATION 23 AND i :PE A-'BORIET TREE REFERENCE NUMBER 8" TREE 5 EX ISTING PATIO EXIS1INC CHURCH 12" —18" PINES 6'± O.C. 3 LANDSCAPE TIMEER TIRE STOP 18" PINE 8" OAK 8 AK 8" OAK O C 8" TREE 12" PINE LANDS OF BELDING 18" PINE x '5" TREE 5" TREE TREE LANDS OF BARR 30" REDWOO 48" 0At 18" PINE 18" PIN 36" OAK 36" OAK 21 20 1 10 16 10 14 15" PINE 8" TREE 6" TREE 5" TREE 6" TREE 9" TREE 8" TREE 0" OAK 20" OAK 15 AK Key Plan BC A architecture p l a n n i n g i n t e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, Califomia 94539 I T 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com SCALE: 1 2a GILLIs STRAND?! BIRD &IITH ARCHITE CTURE I LW CSCAPE ARCHITECTU RE I RANIYNG I .rEoOV COIGN NORTH 0 20 40 60 fe ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California LANDSCAPE DEMOLITION PLAN Date FEBURARY 26, 2008 Scale AS NOTED Project Number 05003 Drawing Number 10 of 12 TRA 1A2 VIN MIN VIN MIN RHA SHP. RHA SHR VIN MIN CAM ALB LAWN OSM FRA NEW DECORATIVE ENTRY WALL ENTRY PAVING LANDS OF BELLICITTI OLE AGR LANDS OF MAAS PHO FRA LANDS OF WONG SITE BOUNDARY 24 PLANT SCHEDULE TREES 0 I� 0 SHRUBS 0 ED O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 SP1 VAN Spiraea x vanhouttel Bridal Wreath 5 gal GROUND COVERS BOTANICAL /COMMON CONT COP NIB CoprOSma kirkii Creeping Mirror Plant GAZ YE2 Gazania 'Yellow' Trailing Gazania TRA JA2 Trarhelospermum jasminoides Star Jasmine e0TANICAUC00u40! CONT CUP 1TA Cupressus seni>ervirens '61auca' Italian Cypress 24'0ox GLE SHA Glepitsta tntacaotho5 'Sha0emaster' Shaoemaster Locust 24'box LAG CHE Lagerstroemia inOlen 'Cherokee' Indian Trlle Crap. Myrtle 24"OUx PRU VES Prunus celasifera 'Krautdr Vesuvius' Purple Leal Plum 24'box P50 BRA Pyrus callerVana 'Bradford' Bradford Flowering Pear 24 OUE AGR Ouercus agrifoli: Coast Live 064 24'box 0OTANICAL /COMMON CONT ARC DEN ArstostapIylos densiflora Manzanita 5 gal CNA ALB Camellia japonica 'Alba Plena' Camellia 5 gal ESC COY Escallonia 'Compacts' Compact Escallonia 5 gal EDP. VIR Euryops pectinatus 'Viridis Green leafed Euryops 5 gal LAN PUP Lantana nuoreuid0nsio Purple Trailing Lantana 1 gal NER WH1 Nerium Oleander 'y/hite White Oleander 5 gal 00/,' FRA Osmant'dus tragrans Sweet Olive, Tea Olive 5 gal PHO FRA Photinia fraseri P50tinia 5 gal POD SHR Podearpus mac ophyl lus moki Shrubby Yew 5 gal RHA SHP Rhaphiolepis in0ica Clara' Clara Indian Hawthorne Snrub 5 gal flat P 18' 0_ flat P 12' Oc 1 9410 30' Oc VIN MTN Vinca manor I Dwarf Periwinkle flat P 12' oc LANDS OF BELDING 21 20 29 LANDS OF BARR 30" REDWOO 48" 0 I 36" OAK 24" REDWOO 18 1 7 16 15 14 12 11 10 9 3• 18" OAK LANDSCAPE TIMBER WHEEL STOPS ••••••A ORNAMENTAL FENCE DECORATIVE ENTRY WALL SPI VAN P 111 36" OAK":***4102, 4111 eeeeaeeeee eeeeeeseeeeeee 5'X6'X eeeeeeeeee _es ,use ►Tom' �a112ACI o oo�oao i xr .:.:r..:r.:r..�. a.� l S .-:i %i!i• %•:'i' %iiiii iiiii�4 FRA GAZ YE2 B' GAZ VE2 ❖i••�� �A •�•Q ARC DEN PYR BRA i �s Z LiJ Key Plan Scale AS NOTED Project Number 05003 BC A architecture p l a n n i n g i nt e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, California 94539 T 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com GILLS STRANIKY BREMS SMITH ARCHITECIMRE I IANCS000E ARCHTECmRE I PIINIIWGI YI/ERICR DESIGN NORTH 20 40 60 feel Iii 1 SCALE: 1' 20 REVISED PER CITY COMMENT 2/5/08 ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California LANDSCAPE PLAN Date FEBURARY 26, 2008 Drawing Number 11 of 12 O ®g S 0 0 pap O fl o O o00 0 PRELIMINARY ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN u \n TTME• 1.—mg n4._nfl 1 nrlKI cce O 0 0 0 0 0 O a 8 ALFA TECH RR«AVA. BC A architecture p Ian n i n g i nt e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, California 94539 T 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com A EAST MOKAW ROAD. IOUTTE 700 •00 EMi JOSE. CALIFORNIA 011112 PAX 400•10 -1011 WiOSAE NCISC0 1!1VA1OST SNOOPY! AllOIIMGM Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California PRELIMINARY ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN Date FEBURARY 26, 2008 Scale AS NOTED Project Number 05003 Drawing Number 120F 12 LANDS OF PREVITE LANDS OF BELLICITTI 18" REDWOOD 12' PEPPER REMOVE 18' PALM ii; ►�A�A�A�A��A��AA :4 O AAAAAAA� v ♦v A�A A A �A A O A A -v 7' ,.r TO BE REMOV .1 A A! A! A!AA!A! 4 4 '��AA A AAA AV A 7�V T O 5' T R._._.._ 7REE I •1\ �F:s A i. 10" 6" TREE I �I. WnTC• TREE 1T B yT9 EFT.'TER 5' TR(,E EASEMENT MO Blurt Or MAC CONCRETE J TO BE REMOVED y 1. A 6" TREE r... I I 4' TREE CL .EYRIE BOX l 6' TREE 6' TREE e' TREE it 12' TREE CHURCH MOVED HOUSE FE Y. 103.57 RK 6OW11 O ON O Of •ACCEPTANCE TDPD BY: SAN BENITO ENGINEERING& SURVEYING, INC HOLLISTER, CA MARCH 2001 8" TREE 12" PINE SURFACE TO BE REMOVE EXISTING IN AREA EMOVE 12' PIN6 12' PINE 12" PINE POOL LAN OF 6" TREE 6' TREE 6" TREE 4. EE -44.3" GRAPEFRUIT 3' TREE 4' TREE 6' TREE 8' LEMON LANDS OF WON& 4" TREE 3' 1REE S 010'55" E 8' OAK 6' OAK r TREE 6', TREE J 1 18' PINE 15' PINE TENNIS COUF7 LANDS OF SABOKPEY 529.80' CRESS 64MRA0ON Oi TR C1 4 OF SWTA CW4 COUNTY 12' OAK J 8' OAK 8' OAK 8' OAK 14 OM 14' OAK B' OAK 14' OAK 18' PINE 24" PINE 12' P1 18' PINE LANDS OF BELDING 18' PINE 18" PINE 15' PINE LANDS OF BARR 20' OAK 20' OAK 15' OAK 12' OAK 24• OAK 11 It I I I I I 1 11 '1 11 2 w —J 0 w J J z SCALE: 1" =30' LEGEND EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING OVERHEAC 1E1 FPHO1IE p EXISTING OVERHEAD El ECTR10 EXISTING FENCE EXISTING EDGE or PAVLIAEN1 EXISTING CONCRETE BC A architecture p l a n n i n g i nt e r i o r s Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. 210 Hammond Ave. Fremont, Califomia 94539 [T] 510.445.1000 F 510.445.1005 www.BCAincOnline.com RUTH AND INC. GOING, Civil Engineering Plonning 2210 114 MANED: SANTA CLARA, CA. 95050 (4DE) 236 -2400 Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California DEMOLITION FLAN Date JAN 08, 2008 Scale AS NOTED Drawing Number 13 OF 13 Rojed Number 05003 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church CITY OF SARATOGA Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2008 Prepared for: City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Prepared by: MHA Environmental Consulting, An RMT Business 4 West Fourth Avenue, Suite 303 San Mateo, California 94402 RMT MHA Environmental Consulting Project Summary ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN The proposed St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church project includes a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review for the construction of a 6,609- square -foot church with a seating capacity of 254 people and a proposed height of 50 -feet. The proposal includes an associated request to vary from the City's standards for maximum impervious site coverage, maximum building height, and a reduction in the number of required parking spaces from 223 to 126. The project site is an L- shaped parcel on Allendale Avenue, located less than half a mile south of Highway 85. It is currently occupied by a 1,224- square -foot chapel, a 9,731 square -foot fellowship hall, and a 2,521- square -foot Pastor's Residence. The site is located within a residential neighborhood with a small vineyard located to the rear of the property. The neighborhood also contains West Valley College and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints within half a mile of the proposed project. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Requirements The City of Saratoga has prepared an Initial Study (IS) (with the assistance of MHA Environmental Consulting, an RMT Business) to identify and evaluate potential environmental impacts associated with the St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Project. Mitigation measures are defined in the IS to reduce potentially significant impacts of project construction and operation. All measures designated as mitigation measures reduce potential impacts to the associated resource to less than significant levels. Approval of the project would require implementation and monitoring of all of the mitigation measures identified in the IS. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15097(a) requires that: `...In order to ensure that the mitigation measures and project revisions identified in the EIR or negative declaration are implemented, the public agency shall adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it has required in the project and the St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP MHAIRMT 1 June 2008 ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORNING PLAN measures it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects. A public agency may delegate reporting or monitoring responsibilities to another public agency or to a private entity which accepts the delegation; however, until mitigation measures have been completed the lead agency remains responsible for ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures occurs in accordance with the program." CEQA Section 15097(c) defines monitoring and reporting responsibilities of the lead agency. "(c) The public agency may choose whether its program will monitor mitigation, report on mitigation, or both. "Reporting" generally consists of a written compliance review that is presented to the decision making body or authorized staff person. A report may be required at various stages during project implementation or upon completion of the mitigation measure. "Monitoring" is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight. There is often no clear distinction between monitoring and reporting and the program best suited to ensuring compliance in any given instance will usually involve elements of both. The choice of program may be guided by the following: (1) Reporting is suited to projects which have readily measurable or quantitative mitigation measures or which already involve regular review. For example, a report may be required upon issuance of final occupancy to a project whose mitigation measures were confirmed by building inspection. (2) Monitoring is suited to projects with complex mitigation measures, such as wetlands restoration or archeological protection, which may exceed the expertise of the local agency to oversee, are expected to be implemented over a period of time, or require careful implementation to assure compliance. (3) Reporting and monitoring are suited to all but the most simple projects. Monitoring ensures that project compliance is checked on a regular basis during and, if necessary after, implementation. Reporting ensures that the approving agency is informed of compliance with mitigation requirements." This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) is meant to facilitate implementation and monitoring of the mitigation measures to ensure that measures are executed. This process protects against the risks of non compliance. The purpose of the MMP is to: Summarize the mitigation required for the project Comply with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines Clearly define parties responsible for implementing and monitoring the mitigation measures Provide a plan for how to organize the measures into a format that can be readily implemented by the Town and monitored 2 MHAIRMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP June 2008 Table Attachment 1 -1: Mitigation Monitoring Plan �NCn_ J AV lai. -o o1 F aTVn ,t. f ail 0l0 25 miles per hour. Mitigation Measure 4 -1: Prior to removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal or pruning permit from the City of Saratoga and comply with any conditions imposed by the tree removal or pruning permit. Such conditions shall include replacement of such trees with replacement trees of equal value to the trees to be removed. 1) Applicant shall apply for a tree removal and /or pruning permit Saratoga Planning Manager 1) Prior to the removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height Mitigation Measure 4 -2: Prior to removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall comply with all recommendations in the Arborist Report that was prepared for this project. 1) Applicant shall comply with these requirements Saratoga Planning Manager 1) Prior to the removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height Mitigation Measure 5 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall incorporate via a note on the first page of the construction plans, that should cultural resources be encountered during site grading or other site work, such work shall immediately be halted in the area of discovery and the applicant shall immediately notify the Community Development Director of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to retain the services of a qualified archeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting, analyzing, and curating the discovery as determined by the archaeologist and Community Development Director to be appropriate. The cost of the qualified archaeologist and of any recording, protecting, or curating shall be borne solely by the applicant. The archaeologist shall be required to submit a 1) 2) 3) Applicant shall ensure that the note is included on the plans by the contractor Applicant shall retain a qualified archeologist in the event of a discovery Applicant shall ensure that the archeologist prepares the Cultural Resources Management Plan for the City in the Saratoga Planning Manager 1) 2) Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall ensure the note is on the project plans In the event of a discovery, all work shall cease until the City okays continuation of ground disturbance ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORNING PLAN 4 MHAIRMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP June 2008 Table Attachment 1 Mitigation Monitoring Plan 17 Ii _n. °13,27. [I e 2 1 c gl_ ri -RYf 5rT l Nlfs a o 1eeLt/ Cultural Resources Management Plan, per City event of a discovery Requirements, to the Community Development Director for review and approval that outlines the findings and mitigation methods of curation and /or protection of the resources. No further grading or site work within the area of discovery shall be allowed until the preceding has occurred. Disposition of Native American remains shall comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). The note on the plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Department. Mitigation Measure 6 -1: Prior to building 1) Applicant shall Saratoga Planning 1) Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit plans for the review and approval of the submit plans for review Manager permit issuance Building Department. These plans shall indicate that the project will comply with all State building codes, as well as with all recommendations in the Geotechnical Report prepared for this project. Mitigation. Measure 7 -1: During all phases of 1) Applicant shall Saratoga Planning 1) During all construction, the applicant shall install and maintain temporary safety fencing to restrict or prevent public access to active on -site construction activities, materials or chemicals. ensure that safety fencing is installed and maintained Manager phases of construction Mitigation Measure 11 -1: The following 1) Applicant shall heed Saratoga Planning 1) During all construction noise control measures shall be implemented by the applicant in order to limit the amount of noise generated during the construction period: all noise control measures as stated Manager phases of construction 1) Limit construction to the daytime hours between 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday, and 9:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturday, with no construction activities allowed on Sundays or holidays per Sec. 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. 2) Construction activities or equipment shall not generate noise levels exceeding 83 dBA at any point 25 feet from the source of noise per Sec. 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. 3) Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such technology is reasonably available as determined by the Community Development Director. 4) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. 5) Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. 6) Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as possible from noise sensitive receptors. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP June 2008 ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN MHAIRMT 5 ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORNING PLAN Table Attachment 1 Mitigation Monitoring Plan IY®: n 161@l-i o 0 7) Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The applicant's disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. Mitigation Measure 15 -1: Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall develop a traffic and parking management plan for Christmas Eve and Easter events subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. The plan shall describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. These methods could include the use of an off -site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the church, limiting attendance at these two events to 277 people (based on 2.2 persons per vehicle), or other measures approved by the City. 1) Applicant shall develop and submit the plan as described to the City for review and approval (ti o o fl 7'�Lti"i Saratoga Planning Manager 1) Prior to building permit issuance 6 MHAIRMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church MMP June 2008 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church CITY OF SARATOGA Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration March 2008 Prepared for: City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Tel: (408) 868 -1230 Prepared by: MHA Environmental Consulting, An RMT Business 4 West Fourth Avenue, Suite 303 San Mateo, California 94402 Tel: (650) 373 -1200 www.mha inc.com www.rmtinc.com RMT MHA Environmental Consulting TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Project Description 1 1. Applicant 1 2. Proposed Location 1 3. Proposed Action 1 Negative Declaration Mitigation Measures 1 Aesthetics 1 Air Quality 1 Biological Resources 2 Cultural Resources 2 Geology 2 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2 Noise 2 Traffic and Transportation 3 Review Period 3 Contact Person(s) 3 Environmental Checklist Form 4 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 5 Determination 5 Environmental Impacts 6 Environmental Analysis 15 1. Aesthetics 15 2. Agricultural Resources 17 3. Air Quality 17 4. Biological Resources 18 5. Cultural Resources 19 6. Geology 20 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 21 8. Hydrology and Water Quality 21 9. Land Use and Planning 22 10. Mineral Resources 23 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT TOC -i March 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS 11. Noise 23 12. Population and Housing 24 13. Public Services 24 14. Recreation 25 15. Traffic and Transportation 25 16. Utilities and Service Systems 26 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance 26 Sources 27 List of Preparers 28 Preparers 28 Saratoga Staff 28 Persons Contacted 28 Attachment 1: Attachment 2: Attachment 3: Attachment 4: Attachment 5: Attachment 6: TOC -ii MHA/RMT List of Attachments Area Map Project Plans Tree Inventory, Dated November 8, 2005 and Prepared by Arbor Resources Geotechnical Report, Dated May 8, 2007 and Prepared by Murray Engineers Traffic Report, Dated July 14, 2006 and Prepared by Higgins Associates Traffic Report, Dated May 21, 2007 and Prepared by Higgins Associates LIST OF TABLE Table 1: Zoning Regulations 22 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review for the construction of a 6,609- square -foot church with a seating capacity of 254 people, with an associated request to vary from the City's standards for maximum impervious site coverage, maximum height, and a reduction in the number of required parking spaces from 223 spaces to 126 spaces. 1. Applicant: St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 2. Proposed Location: 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070 (see Attachment 1) 3. Proposed Action: CITY OF SARATOGA DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION MEASURES Approval of Conditional Use Permit and Design Review for construction of the proposed church project. The request also includes approval of a variation from standards for impervious site coverage, building height, and on site parking. Aesthetics Mitigation Measure 1 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit a color board for the project that shows a compatible color scheme for the proposed church and the existing structures on the site. This color board shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance. Mitigation Measure 1 -2: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan that complies with Section 15- 35.040(i) of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the plan shall indicate that no exterior lighting fixtures shall allow direct light rays to leave the project site, or allow direct light sources (incandescent, fluorescent, or other forms of electric illumination) to be directly visible from off -site locations. The plan shall also show that light levels will not exceed 100 foot lamberts anywhere on the property. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance. Air Quality Mitigation Measure 3 -1: The following notes shall be incorporated on the grading and building plans prior to issuance of grading or building permits, and the measures shall be implemented during construction activities: a) Water all active construction and disturbed areas at least twice daily during dry periods. b) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. c) Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply nontoxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 1 March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA d) Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. Dust, sediment, or debris shall not be washed into the storm drain system. e) Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. Dust, sediment, or debris shall not be washed into the storm drain system. f) Excavation and grading activities shall be suspended and dust control measures shall be implemented when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 4 -1: Prior to removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal or pruning permit from the City of Saratoga and comply with any conditions imposed by the tree removal or pruning permit. Such conditions shall include replacement of such trees with replacement trees of equal value to the trees to be removed. Mitigation Measure 4 -2: Prior to removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall comply with all recommendations in the Arborist Report that was prepared for this project. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 5 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall incorporate via a note on the first page of the construction plans, that should cultural resources be encountered during site grading or other site work, such work shall immediately be halted in the area of discovery and the applicant shall immediately notify the Community Development Director of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to retain the services of a qualified archeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting, analyzing, and curating the discovery as determined by the archaeologist and Community Development Director to be appropriate. The cost of the qualified archaeologist and of any recording, protecting, or curating shall be borne solely by the applicant. The archaeologist shall be required to submit a Cultural Resources Management Plan, per City Requirements, to the Community Development Director for review and approval that outlines the findings and mitigation methods of curation and /or protection of the resources. No further grading or site work within the area of discovery shall be allowed until the preceding has occurred. Disposition of Native American remains shall comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). The note on the plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Department. Geology Mitigation Measure 6 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit plans for the review and approval of the Building Department. These plans shall indicate that the project will comply with all State building codes, as well as with all recommendations in the Geotechnical Report prepared for this project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measure 7 -1: During all phases of construction, the applicant shall install and maintain temporary safety fencing to restrict or prevent public access to active on -site construction activities, materials or chemicals. 2 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 Noise g) CONTACT PERSON(S) Jeffrey Smith Senior Planner MHA Environmental Consulting, An RMT Business 4 W. Fourth Avenue, Suite 303 San Mateo, California 94402 Tel: (650) 373 -1200 Fax: (650) 373 -1211 jeff.smith @rmtinc.com Chris Riordan Senior Planner City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Tel: (408) 868 -1230 Fax: (408) 867 -8555 criordan @saratoga.ca.us CITY OF SARATOGA Mitigation Measure 11 1: The following construction noise control measures shall be implemented by the applicant in order to limit the amount of noise generated during the construction period: a) Limit construction to the daytime hours between 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday, and 9:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturday, with no construction activities allowed on Sundays or holidays per Sec. 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. b) Construction activities or equipment shall not generate noise levels exceeding 83 dBA at any point 25 feet from the source of noise per Sec. 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. c) Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such technology is reasonably available as determined by the Community Development Director. d) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. e) Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. f) Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as possible from noise sensitive receptors. Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The applicant's disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. Traffic and Transportation Mitigation Measure 15 -1: Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall develop a traffic and parking management plan for Christmas Eve and Easter events subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. The plan shall describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. These methods could include the use of an off -site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the church, limiting attendance at these two events to 277 people (based on 2.2 persons per vehicle), or other measures approved by the City. REVIEW PERIOD All comments regarding the correctness, completeness, or adequacy of this Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration must be received by the Saratoga Planning Department, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, no later than 5:00 PM on April 25, 2008. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 3 March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Saint Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jeffrey Smith, Senior Planner, (650) 373 -1200 or Chris Riordan, Senior Planner, (408) 868 -1235 4. Project Location: 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga, California (Attachment 1) 5. Applicant's Name and Address: St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church, 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 6. General Plan Designation: CF (Community Facilities) 7. Zoning: R -1- 40,000 (Single Family Residential) 8. Description of Project: The proposed project includes a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review for the construction of a 6,609- square -foot church with a seating capacity of 254 people and a proposed height of 50 -feet. The proposal includes an associated request to vary from the City's standards for a maximum impervious site coverage, maximum building height, and a reduction in the number of required parking spaces from 223 to 126. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is an L- shaped parcel on Allendale Avenue, located less than half a mile south of Highway 85. It is currently occupied by a 1,224- square -foot chapel, a 9,731- square -foot fellowship hall, and a 2,521- square -foot Pastor's Residence. The site is located within a residential neighborhood with a small vineyard located to the rear of the property. The neighborhood also contains West Valley College and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints within half a mile of the proposed project. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) would need to issue a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit for the project. 4 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Aesthetics and Visual 1 :find that although the proposed project: could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case: because: revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. is required. Air Quality find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze.only the effects that remain to be addressed. Biological Resources I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect -on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Cultural Resources Aesthetics and Visual Agricultural Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology /Soils Hazards Hazardous Materials Hydrology/ Water Quality Land Use/ Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population /Housing Public Services Recreation Traffic/Transportation Utilities /Service Systems Ni Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF SARATOGA ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving several impacts that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: Signature Chris Riordan Printed name Senior Planner Title St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 5 March 2008 ENVIRONMENTALJIMPACTS v 'C 1 AESTHETICS Vitoull the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? C b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? V A, C c) Substantially degrade the existing visual. character or quality of the site and its surroundings? J A, C, F d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? V A ,F, J J S a C J S r O 2' 1AGRICULTUREIRESOURCESInidetermini €�mpactsltoagncultura S ,"'ff 'r Nf1'1^w. `k DCk +k,,eW, ,q, N' s b X'" n Y• I' Resources' aresignificantlenvi lead agenciesimayirefer<tcAthe California Agricultural'LandEvaluation and°SitesAssessment Model (1997 4preparediby the h tCalifornia',Department of ConservationGas anhoptional model to in assessing 'mpacts .on.agriculture and farmland: Would the, ro ect: p,J a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? A, K b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? v A, E, L c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non agricultural use? A, C, D, E '3.: AIR -QUALITY: %Wherelavailable, the'si ,griificance by the :app icable air: quality" managementtor airlpollutionkcontrokdistrIct may be relied upon4totmake following, determinations. %Woulththeproject a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? A, G b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute town existing or projected air quality violation? J A, C, D, G CITY OF SARATOGA 6 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ;ENVIRONMENTALIIMPACT c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d A, D, G d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? V A, C, D, G e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? J A, G "4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Wouldithe project y z a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or NOAA Fisheries? f A, C, M b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? V A, C c) Have a substantial'adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? A, C d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? f A, C e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? V A, C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA MHA/RMT 7 u �4W NVIRONMENT /AL IMPAC y' f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? A, C g) Adversely affect previously established mitigation site(s) for other project(s)? A, C 5..CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: p a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? d A, C, D b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? A, C, D c) Directly or indirectly destroy a.unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? A, C, D d) Disturb any human remains, including: those interred outside of formal cemeteries? A, C, D OGYND' SOILS. Wouldxthelproject #exposeipeople structuresito potential F"6. GEO L A zsubstantial adversefeffects,iincluding the risk %of. loss, injury Vor�deathiinvolvin a) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. V A, H, Q b) Strong seismic ground shaking? V A, H, Q c) Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? A, H, I, Q d) Landslides? d A, C, Q e) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? A, C, Q CITY OF SARATOGA 8 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporatetl An OWd iiOPl I ,0It ;4V ia41 �ENVIRONMENTAL;IMPA lii f) Would the project be located on a. geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? V A, C, Q g) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? A, C, Q h) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? A k7.HAZARDS!AND HA ARDOUS MAT ERIALS. Would €thefproject a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? A b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? A c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within '/a mile of an existing or proposed school? V A, C, D d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? �f A, C, N e) Fora project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people: residing or working in the project area? v A, C, D 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF SARATOGA St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 MHA/RMT 9 -ENVI'RONMENTAIA Pontialiy Signifcant.-Impact Potentially Significant Impact x UWless-Miti Incorporated ation Less Tlan Significant Impac No Impact Sources f) Fora project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project: result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? v A, C, D g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? V A, D h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, :injury :or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? v A, C, D B YAN WA TERQUAITYWould4tie p roject *'i �4xi a) Violate any: water: quality standards or waste discharge requirements? V A b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level (for example, the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? d A, C c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? ,f A, C d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off-site. V A, C e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? A, C f) Otherwise substantially degrade water. quality? A, C CITY OF SARATOGA 10 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF SARATOGA St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 MHA/RMT 11 \Pt na' 'i. dd: y :P 9htiay \gi mpa J %s: 1 o 'nop$d $uI isa ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS f �oƒ wi 04 n g): Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? v A, C, I h) Place within a 100 -year flood- hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? v A, C, I i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? v A, C, I j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? V A, C, 9: LAND IJSE ANDIPLANNING3Wouldittieproje M t n s T T k a) Physically divide an established community? V A, C, D, E b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? V A, C, D, E c) Conflict with any applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan? J A, C, D, E 40 MINERAL RESOURC "Wo`uldtheproject a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? v A, C, D b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? V A, C, D 1i, N01$E W ould the p rojeCtlresult m 0 a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable. standards of other agencies? V A, E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF SARATOGA St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 MHA/RMT 11 CITY OF SARATOGA 12 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Potentially ,Significant Impact Potentially Significantampact ,Unless °Mitigation 4 Incor'po`rated Less Than, Significant Impact ,ENVIRONMENTxAi i1VIPA`CT�S l x ao °nog; 4174 J 1 q c> b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? A c) Substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing Without the project? V A, C d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in :the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? V A, E e) For a project located .within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has. not been adopted, within two miles of.a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? A f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? v A, C, D POPULATION' AN HO U SING Wouidtfi e r ,poj ect N A a v 081:' ,�4 1 i'� a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly. (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, :through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? J A b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? V A c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? V A 13 PUBUC SERVICES WoLiId4he projectresult in substantial adverse phsicaI associated with!theprovision of inew or :physically altered(governmentaEfac 4forneworphysicalaltered1gouernmental facties „theconstructio�ofwhich ica useestgnificantxenvironmentalimpacts }inorder to maintarn acceptable s&vice. tresponse�times,mor other p efformance objectives #for.any ;of'theipub Impietts Iities;or x ratios, a) Fire protection? v A, C, 0 b) Police protection? V A, P CITY OF SARATOGA 12 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF SARATOGA St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 MHA/RMT 13 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT c) Schools? A d) Parks? A, C, D e) Other public facilities? d A, C 14 RECRE °ATIONAWouldxfihe prod t a w a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional :parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? V A, C, D b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? V A, C, D 1'5 TRANSPORTATIO T R AFFIWo u C ldhtheproject: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (for example, result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? J A B b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? A B c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, that results in substantial safety risks? v A, B, D d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (for example, sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (for example, farm equipment)? d A B e) Result in inadequate emergency access? V A, B f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? V A, B, E g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (for example, bus turnouts, bicycle racks? V A, B 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF SARATOGA St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 MHA/RMT 13 .i ENVIRONMENTAL IMJ A CTS tr t3 \P kn ay Significant pact: fig(\ c rd aar» St §$f and p c No mat )o r 16 UTILITIES.AND:SERVICE SYSTEMS.,Wouldithe project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? A, C b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? A, C, R c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? A, C d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from .existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? A, C, R e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? V A, C f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? V A, C, S g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? V A, C, S 17. 1MANDATORY ,EINDINGSIOPSIGNIFICANCE Does.the project a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, ;substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? d A, C, M b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? "Cumulatively V A, C CITY OF SARATOGA 14 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF SARATOGA ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The following analysis is intended to explain responses outlined in the Environmental Checklist (above), pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 1. Aesthetics a -b) The proposed project is not in the vicinity of a scenic vista, state scenic highway, or other scenic resource, and will therefore have no impact on scenic resources. No mitigation is required. c) The proposed project is located within a residential district and is surrounded by single family residential development. Section 15- 46.040 of the City Code outlines a series of design criteria that the Planning Commission uses as a guideline when reviewing new development. These design criteria include the following guidelines: Where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural features and landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include height, elevations, roofs, material, color and appurtenances. Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be non reflective. Roofing materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, tile, or other materials such as composition as approved by the Planning Commission. No mechanical equipment shall be located upon a roof unless it is appropriately screened. The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. Where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site, the signs shall have a common or compatible design and locational positions and shall be harmonious in appearance. Landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be preserved; it shall make use of water conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems to the maximum extent feasible; and, to the maximum extent feasible, it shall be clustered in natural appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows or regularly spaced. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 15 March 2008 E NV1RONMENTALIMPACTS considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? •1 A, C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF SARATOGA ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The following analysis is intended to explain responses outlined in the Environmental Checklist (above), pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 1. Aesthetics a -b) The proposed project is not in the vicinity of a scenic vista, state scenic highway, or other scenic resource, and will therefore have no impact on scenic resources. No mitigation is required. c) The proposed project is located within a residential district and is surrounded by single family residential development. Section 15- 46.040 of the City Code outlines a series of design criteria that the Planning Commission uses as a guideline when reviewing new development. These design criteria include the following guidelines: Where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural features and landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include height, elevations, roofs, material, color and appurtenances. Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be non reflective. Roofing materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, tile, or other materials such as composition as approved by the Planning Commission. No mechanical equipment shall be located upon a roof unless it is appropriately screened. The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. Where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site, the signs shall have a common or compatible design and locational positions and shall be harmonious in appearance. Landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be preserved; it shall make use of water conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems to the maximum extent feasible; and, to the maximum extent feasible, it shall be clustered in natural appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows or regularly spaced. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 15 March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA The proposed project is a 6,609- square -foot building that is designed with architectural features to break up its mass. The impact of the bulk of the proposed design is reduced by the use of varying roof lines pitches, natural colors, setbacks for taller portions of the building, and a mix of horizontal and vertical features. The proposed project is a natural tan color with an earthtone tile roof, and no mechanical equipment would be visible on top of the roof. The natural colors proposed for the new structure would help the building to blend with the environment. The building's size and height precludes the screening of the building by landscaping. The proposed project's height is stylistic in nature and only provides two stories of usable space. Side yard setbacks and the proposed building's angle will reduce views of adjacent properties and help maintain privacy. The site of the proposed project is located between residential buildings and views of the Santa Cruz mountain range. The height and size of the proposed project would partially block those views for some neighbors located across Allendale Avenue, but the existing buildings and trees on the project site already partially screen these mountains from view. Therefore, the new church would_ have a minimal impact on surrounding views. The height and style of the proposed church would be in keeping with other similar developments in the area. The proposed bulk, size, height, site orientation, and exterior finishes would be in keeping with other developments in the City of Saratoga, including other nearby churches and the buildings on the West Valley College campus. For example, the proposed 50 -foot building height would be lower than the 58 -foot building height of the nearby Mormon Church, a structure that is much larger than the proposed building at approximately 45,000 square feet in floor area. The classic design elements of the proposed new church also compliment other types of buildings in the City, including the fire house. The proposed new church would also possess design elements that would be compatible with the other existing buildings on the project site, including the chapel and the fellowship hall. Both of these existing buildings feature stucco and stone exterior finishes and accents, and these design elements would be included in the new building as well. The hipped and articulated roof style of the new church would more closely reflect the roofing styles of the residential neighborhood, and would not match the flat roofing style possessed by the two existing buildings on the site. However, the flat roofing style of these two buildings is considered outdated, and is not a design element worth emulating. The proposed church could be considered incompatible with the existing structures on the site if these buildings did not share a similar color palette. Therefore, in order to make the proposed church more compatible with the other buildings on the property, the following mitigation measure has been included: Mitigation Measure 1 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit a color board for the project that shows a compatible color scheme for the proposed church and the existing structures on the site. This color board shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance. A single sign is proposed for the project at the driveway entrance to the site. The conceptual design for this sign would be compatible with the style and design of the new building. With the exception of the removal of one large pine tree and three small ornamental trees, the existing mature landscaping on the site would be maintained as part of the project. Additional landscaping would be installed that would be compatible with the existing vegetation, and would be planted in natural, organic patterns rather than in structured rows. The design of the proposed project largely follows the design criteria outlined in City Code Section 15- 46.040. No mitigation is required. 16 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 d) The proposed project is expected to include a number of exterior light sources. The Conceptual Lighting Plan provided by the applicant shows maximum lighting levels of 2.2 foot lamberts at the property line, and a maximum of approximately 25.8 foot lamberts in the parking lot. As a reference, a single candle generates 1 foot lambert of light, while a full moon creates about 0.5 foot lamberts of light. Section 15- 35.040(i) of the Zoning Ordinance states that parking lot lighting shall not exceed 100 foot lamberts and shall be deflected away from adjoining residential sites so as to cause no annoying glare. The use of downward facing and shielded fixtures for exterior building illumination would prevent any potential negative impact of exterior lighting by reducing the amount of spill light that would be emitted. The following mitigation will reduce potential light and glare impacts to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measure 1 -2: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan that complies with Section 15- 35.040(i) of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, the plan shall indicate that no exterior lighting fixtures shall allow direct Tight rays to leave the project site, or allow direct light sources (incandescent, fluorescent, or other forms of electric illumination) to be directly visible from off -site locations. The plan shall also show that light levels will not exceed 100 foot lamberts anywhere on the property. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to building permit issuance. 2. Agricultural Resources CITY OF SARATOGA The proposed project will be located on a currently developed site in a developed residential area. There are no agricultural resources on the project site. Two properties, one adjacent to the south of the project site, and one approximately 200 feet to the east, are currently developed as vineyards. a) The adjacent agricultural properties are not identified as important farmland by the California Department of Conservation's Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. The project will therefore have no impact on Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Significance. No mitigation is required. b) The adjacent agricultural properties are covered under the Williamson Act and are labeled on the 2005 Agricultural Preserves Map as Prime Agricultural Land and Non -Prime Agricultural Land. The project would not conflict with these existing agricultural uses. No mitigation is required. c) The proposed project would have no impact on the nearby agricultural lands. No mitigation is required. 3. Air Quality a -d) There are potential air quality impacts from the construction of the proposed building. The project site is generally level, and the proposed construction would therefore require only minimal excavation of earth material for foundations. Excavation and fine grading of the balance of the project site would involve soil disturbance and could result in dust emissions (particulates Tess than 10 microns [PM that could significantly impact air quality. Sensitive receptors, in the form of residential uses, surround the project site and could be negatively affected by dust and particulate emissions. Construction related dust emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the type and level of activity, silt content of the soil, and weather. The project site is situated within the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The BAAQMD's approach to CEQA analyses of construction impacts is St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 17 March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA to emphasize implementation of effective and comprehensive control measures, rather than detailed quantification of emissions. The BAAQMD has identified a set of feasible PM control measures for construction activities. The BAAQMD's "Basic Measures" should be implemented at all construction sites, regardless of size. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce air quality impacts from construction activities to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 3 -1: The following notes shall be incorporated on the grading and building plans prior to issuance of grading or building permits, and the measures shall be implemented during construction activities: a) Water all active construction and disturbed areas at least twice daily during dry periods. b) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. c) Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply nontoxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. d) Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. Dust, sediment, or debris shall not be washed into the storm drain system. e) Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. Dust, sediment, or debris shall not be washed into the storm drain system. f) Excavation and grading activities shall be suspended and dust control measures shall be implemented when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. The proposed project would produce minimal emissions during operation. Daily emissions sources for criteria air pollutants include emissions from vehicles traveling to and from the site. These indirect emissions would be minor and would not exceed established BAAQMD thresholds. The Bay Area is considered a non attainment area for State and federal ozone standards (BAAQMD 2007). The BAAQMD has established thresholds of significance for ozone precursor pollutants (volatile organic compounds [VOCs] and nitrogen oxides [NO,d) and particulate matter (PM Both project construction and operation emission levels would be below the BAAQMD thresholds for ozone precursors and PM Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors), and the project would result in impacts that would be less than significant. The proposed project would have a less than significant impact in regard to air quality with the appropriate mitigation above, and the project would not conflict with implementation of any air quality plans. e) The construction and operation of the proposed project would not create objectionable odors and would therefore not have any odor impacts. No mitigation is required. 4. Biological Resources a) The project is located on a developed site with a chapel, fellowship hall, and pastor's residence within a residential area. A search of the California Natural Diversity Database was conducted, and only one special status species was found to occur within five miles of the project area. In 1997, four California redlegged frogs were reported at a location west of Cupertino, and at least three miles from the site. Due to lack of appropriate habitat, no special status species are expected to exist on the project site. The proposed project would 18 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA have no impact on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special- status species. No mitigation is required. b) There is no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community within the vicinity of the project site. The project would have no impact on such natural communities. No mitigation is required. No wetlands are located on the project site, nor would any wetlands be affected by the proposed project. No mitigation is required. d) The proposed project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites due to the previously developed state of the site. No mitigation is required. e) The project is located on a developed site with a chapel, fellowship hall, and pastor's residence within a residential area. The landscape demolition plan designates four trees for removal, including one 18 -inch diameter pine tree and three 5 -inch ornamental trees. According to an arborist report that was prepared for this project, the 18 -inch pine tree is in decline and in poor condition. City of Saratoga regulations state that for any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater at breast height, a tree removal or pruning permit is required (Sections 15- 50.020(n) and 15- 50.070(c)). With the following mitigation measures requiring obtaining a tree removal permit for the 18 -inch pine tree and adherence to the Arborist Report prepared for this project, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the local policies protecting biological resources: Mitigation Measure 4 -1: Prior to removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal or pruning permit from the City of Saratoga and comply with any conditions imposed by the tree removal or pruning permit. Such conditions shall include replacement of such trees with replacement trees of equal value to the trees to be removed. Mitigation Measure 4 -2: Prior to removal or pruning of any native tree species with a diameter of 6 inches or greater measured at breast height, or for any tree species with a diameter of 10 inches or greater measured at breast height, the applicant shall comply with all recommendations in the Arborist Report that was prepared for this project. f) The project location is near the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Conservation Plan area, but not within the plan area's bounds. No mitigation is required. There are no previously established mitigation sites for other projects on or near the project site. No mitigation is required. g) 5. Cultural Resources a) There are no known historical resources on the project site or in the project vicinity that would be impacted by the proposed project. The project site is currently developed with 13,476 square feet of buildings including a church, fellowship hall, and pastor's residence, all of which were built between 1962 and 1968. Generally, properties eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places are at least 50 years old. Properties Tess than 50 years of age must be exceptionally important to be considered eligible for listing. No mitigation is required. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 19 March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA b -d) There are no known archaeological or paleontological resources on or near the site. However, the proposed project would require site excavation with the potential to unearth undiscovered cultural, archaeological or paleontological resources, or human remains, which could represent a potentially significant impact. The following mitigation measure would reduce impacts to any unidentified historical or archaeological resources to Tess than significant levels. Mitigation Measure 5 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall incorporate via a note on the first page of the construction plans, that should cultural resources be encountered during site grading or other site work, such work shall immediately be halted in the area of discovery and the applicant shall immediately notify the Community Development Director of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to retain the services of a qualified archeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting, analyzing, and curating the discovery as determined by the archaeologist and Community Development Director to be appropriate. The cost of the qualified archaeologist and of any recording, protecting, or curating shall be borne solely by the applicant. The archaeologist shall be required to submit a Cultural Resources Management Plan, per City Requirements, to the Community Development Director for review and approval that outlines the findings and mitigation methods of curation and /or protection of the resources. No further grading or site work within the area of discovery shall be allowed until the preceding has occurred. Disposition of Native American remains shall comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). The note on the plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Department. 6. Geology a -b) The project site is an L- shaped parcel approximately 3.1 acres in size. It is located in a region of three major fault zones: the Hayward Fault Zone, approximately 13 miles east of the site, the San Andreas Fault Zone, approximately 4 miles west of the site, and the Calaveras Fault Zone, located approximately 16 miles east of the site. The project could be subject to ground shaking with a rupture in one of these faults. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce these potential seismic impacts to a Tess than significant level. Mitigation Measure 6 -1: Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit plans for the review and approval of the Building Department. These plans shall indicate that the project will comply with all State building codes, as well as with all recommendations in the Geotechnical Report prepared for this project. c -e) The Association of Bay Area Governments identifies the site as having a low susceptibility to liquefaction, and the relatively flat nature of the site and its surroundings reduces the risk of landslides, erosion, or loss of topsoil. No mitigation is required. f) The subject property is a nearly flat parcel that would not be subject to landslides, lateral spreading, or subsidence. The underlying geology consists of stable alluvial soils that would not be subject to any unusual risk of liquefaction or collapse. No mitigation is required. The underlying soils at the site have a relatively high clay content, making them potentially expansive soils. Impacts on the proposed project from these potentially expansive soils would be less than significant with compliance with State building codes. No mitigation is required. h) The proposed project would be served by the existing sewer system. No mitigation is required. g) 20 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials a -b) The proposed project will not involve hazardous materials beyond those routinely used in construction. Construction employee safety would be maintained through providing personal safety equipment on an as- needed basis, and holding periodic safety meetings to discuss issues dealing with site operations and existing construction activity safety plans. There would be no increased likelihood of injury or harm to employees involved in development activities. This safety impact to project- associated construction personnel would be Tess than significant. Public access to the construction site would be prohibited and considered trespassing. Public access to the site could create a significant threat to humans by exposure to the construction site and any hazards inherent in construction work including hazardous materials, large machinery, and unstable structures. The following mitigation measure will reduce these potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 7 -1: During all phases of construction, the applicant shall install and maintain temporary safety fencing to restrict or prevent public access to active on- site construction activities, materials or chemicals. c) The proposed project is located approximately one quarter of a mile from West Valley College, but no hazardous materials will be used beyond the normal construction materials and equipment. Impacts due to the proximity to West Valley College would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. d) The California Department of Toxic Substance Control's EnviroStor Database contains only one hazardous materials site within the City of Saratoga. This site is located over a mile south of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on any hazardous materials sites. No mitigation is required. e -h) There are no airports or airstrips within 2 miles of the project site, nor are there wildlands in the area. Due to the proposed project's relatively small size and development on an already improved property, the project would not impair or interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans. No mitigation is required. 8. Hydrology and Water Quality a) The project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The amount of permeable surface on the site would increase under the proposed project, reducing the amount of stormwater runoff leaving the site. The project would adhere to all water quality and waste discharge requirements. No mitigation is required. b) The project would be served by the City's existing water supply system. No groundwater would be accessed or utilized by the project, and thus the project would have no impact on groundwater supplies or aquifer volumes. No mitigation is required. c -d) No streams or rivers are located near the project vicinity, and the modifications to the project site would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site in a way that would result in substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or off -site. The project would result in a net increase in the amount of permeable surface on the site, reducing the amount of stormwater runoff leaving the site. No mitigation is required. e) The project would result in a net decrease in the amount of impermeable surface on the site, reducing the amount of stormwater runoff leaving the site. No mitigation is required. f) Due to the proposed increase in permeable surfaces on the project site, the proposal would not substantially degrade water quality. No mitigation is required. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 21 March 2008 Table 1: Zoning XR egulation: Regulations 5; ExistingFacility proposed Churchtesult Site Coverage 35 Maximum (approx 47,263 sq. ft.) 55.2% 50.5% 50.5% _Setbacks s yy Front Yard 30 ft 129 ft. 47 ft. 47 ft. Side Yard (East) 20 ft or 25 ft for second story 20 ft. 31 ft. 20 ft. Side Yard (West) 20 ft or 25 ft for second story 35 ft. 56 ft. 35 ft. Rear Yard 50 ft or 60 ft for second story 139 ft. 400 ft. 139 ft. Height 30 ft, two stories 18 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft. Parking 2 per residential building (2 spaces) 1 for every 4 fixed seats (64 spaces) 1 for every 40 sq. ft. (157 spaces) 1 for every 2 employees (0 spaces) Total Parking (223 spaces required) 2 0 19 0 0 64 41(unpaved) 0 2 64 60 0 126 CITY OF SARATOGA g -j) The proposed project is not within the 100 -year flood zone and is not located within three miles of any large body of water. Therefore, the project does not pose a hazard due to flooding, seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No mitigation is required. 9. Land Use and Planning a) The proposed project will not physically divide an established community as it is located on one lot in a fully developed residential neighborhood. No mitigation is required. The proposed project is designated Community Facilities (CF), and is within the R- 1- 40,000 zoning district. Compliance with the R -1- 40,000 zoning regulations is discussed in Table 1, below. The proposed project does not meet all the requirements of this zoning district. However, the Planning Commission's review and approval of a Variation from Standards for impervious site coverage, building height, and onsite parking would make these elements compliant with the Zoning Ordinance (Section 15- 55.030 of Zoning Ordinance). Section 15- 46.020(6) of the City Code applies to this project. Therefore, there are no Floor Area Ratio (FAR) requirements for this project. The proposal involves both the construction of a new church and the removal of a significant portion of paving from the site, resulting in a net 4.7% reduction in the impervious site coverage. This reduction in the amount of impervious site coverage would increase the amount of permeable surfaces on the site, and would be an environmental benefit of the project. However, the proposed project would still exceed the maximum allowable impervious site coverage by 15.5 The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission approve a Variation from Standards (Section 15- 55.030 of the City's Zoning Ordinance) in order to allow the project to exceed the 35% maximum allowable impervious site coverage. A Variation from Standards allows a conditional use to have different site area, density, structure height, distances between structures, impervious site coverage, front, side and rear setback area minimums and off street parking and loading requirements, other than as listed under the specific regulations for unconditional permitted uses in the zoning district in which it lies. A Variation from Standards is reviewed and approved through the Use Permit process. The proposed project would comply with the required building setbacks. 22 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF SARATOGA The proposed project would exceed the maximum allowable building height of 30 feet, with a proposed maximum height of 50 feet. As with impervious site coverage, the applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission approve a Variation from Standards in order to allow the project to exceed the 30 -foot maximum allowable building height. The zoning regulations for this district require that the applicant supply 223 on site parking spaces, but the proposal only includes 126 parking spaces. Of these 126 parking spaces, 85 spaces would be paved, while 41 spaces would be "grass Crete Grass crete involves the use of concrete pavers covered by grass or lawn on top. The concrete pavers are strong enough to support the weight of parking vehicles, but porous enough to allow for grass to grow above, allowing the area to serve the dual purposes of parking and lawn area. As with impervious site coverage and building height, the applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission approve a Variation from Standards in order to allow the project to provide 126 parking spaces. where 223 are required. Parking is discussed in greater detail under Section 15, Traffic and Transportation, below. The Variations from Standards from the impervious site coverage, building height limitations, and on site parking are permitted by Section 15- 55.030 of the City Code and will be reviewed by the Planning Commission through the Conditional Use Permit process provided for by Article 15 -55. Therefore, no mitigation is required. The proposed project is located near the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Conservation Plan area, but is not within the plan area's bounds. The project would have no effect on the plan. No mitigation is required. 10. Mineral Resources a -b) The City of Saratoga General Plan Land Use Element states that mineral resources in the Saratoga vicinity are limited primarily to sandstone and shale. Currently, there are no mines or quarries known to be operating in Saratoga or its Sphere of Influence. There are no known mineral resources on the project site. No mitigation is required. 11. Noise a, d) The construction of the proposed project has the potential to create noise levels in excess of City's standards. Anticipated construction noise levels are not expected to be above construction noise levels for typical residential construction and are considered temporary in nature. The following measures would mitigate the impact of construction noise to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 11 -1: The following construction noise control measures shall be implemented in order to limit the amount of noise generated during the construction period: a) Limit construction to the daytime hours between 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday, and 9:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturday, with no construction activities allowed on Sundays or holidays per Sec. 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. b) Construction activities or equipment shall not generate noise levels exceeding 83 dBA at any point 25 feet from the source of noise per Sec. 7- 30.060 of the Saratoga City Code. c) Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such technology is reasonably available as determined by the Community Development Director. d) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. e) Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 23 March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA f) Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as possible from noise sensitive receptors. g) Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. b) The proposed project would only include minor ground borne vibrations during construction. The temporary vibration would be dissipated to imperceptible levels within a few feet of the activity. This impact would be Tess than significant. No mitigation is required. c) The proposed project does not include any change in use and only an enlargement of the existing church facilities to include a new 6,609- square -foot church. The church's hours of operations, as stipulated in Resolution 07 -067, would be as follows: Monday Thursday: 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Friday Saturday: 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Sunday: 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Additional restrictions regarding hours of operation for catered and non catered events, as well as deliveries to the church, are also included in Resolution 07 -067, which was approved by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on June 13, 2007. The church's hours of operation, and noise generation during these hours, would be compatible with the surrounding residential uses. The proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. No mitigation is required. e -f) The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or in the vicinity of a private airstrip. No mitigation is required. 12. Population and Housing a -c) The proposed development of 6,609- square -foot church on the project site would not induce substantial population growth. The proposed project would not include any new housing nor displace any people or housing. No mitigation is required. 13. Public Services a -e) Fire protection is provided by two fire districts, both independent of the city the Saratoga Fire District and the Santa Clara County Fire Department. The County Fire Department has jurisdiction over the proposed project site. Police services are provided on a contract basis by the Santa Clara County Sheriffs Department. Existing fire, police, and other governmental services are sufficient to accommodate the service needs of this project. The project would not necessitate the expansion of the equipment, facilities, or manpower of responsible fire, police, health, or school services to more than existing resources in order to maintain current service ratios and response times. The project also would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or altered fire, police, health, or school facilities. There would be no need for new or physically altered governmental facilities. No mitigation is required. Saratoga Fire District Joe Parker, Battalion Chief 14380 Saratoga Avenue 24 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 Saratoga, CA 95070 (408) 867 -9001, Emergency 911 Santa Clara County Fire Department Ken Waldvogel, Chief (408) 378 -4010, Emergency 911. Sheriff Department, West Valley Patrol Division Terry Calderone, Captain 1601 S. De Anza Boulevard Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 868 -6600 CITY OF SARATOGA 14. Recreation a -b) The proposed project will not increase the use of existing parks nor require the construction of recreational facilities. The proposed project will have no impact on recreational facilities. No mitigation is required. 15. Traffic and Transportation Higgins Associates prepared a traffic impact analysis for the project in July 2006 based on traffic counts performed in 2004, and performed a subsequent traffic impacts analysis based on counts collected in April 2007. The traffic analysis is attached to this document. The proposed project would use the existing driveway access to the site via Allendale Avenue. a -b) The proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in traffic or a significant change to the level of service (LOS) of local streets. The Higgins Associates traffic study determined that Allendale Avenue currently operated at LOS A, and would continue to operate at LOS A even on days with large events, including Easter and Christmas Eve. The project would have a Tess than significant impact on traffic load and capacity. No mitigation is required. c -e) The proposed project would result in a slight increase in traffic volumes, but neither this traffic increase nor the proposed project design would result in an alteration of air traffic patterns, safety hazards, or inadequate emergency access. No mitigation is required. f) The proposed project would provide less parking capacity than is required by Article 15 -55 of the Zoning Ordinance. The parking requirement is based not just on seating for the new church, but also on the assembly and classroom areas of the existing chapel and fellowship hall. Since all three buildings would not be in active use at the same time, it is reasonable to conclude that the Zoning Ordinance parking requirement exceeds the actual parking demand that would be experienced on site, and that the parking requirement should be based on the actual usage patterns of this facility. The Higgins Associates traffic impact analysis determined that the 126 proposed parking spaces would be sufficient parking for the proposed project for all days except Easter and Christmas Eve. These two days are the busiest days of the year for the church, and even with the applicant's proposal to limit attendance at these two events to no more than 277 people, the proposed parking would be insufficient to accommodate all of the attendees of church events on these two days. With the approval of a Variation from Standards (Section 15- 55.030 of the City's Zoning Ordinance), and implementation of the following mitigation measure, however, the project would not result in inadequate parking capacity, and related potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 25 March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA g) Mitigation Measure 15 -1: Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall develop a traffic and parking management plan for Christmas Eve and Easter events subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. The plan shall describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. These methods could include the use of an off -site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the church, limiting attendance at these two events to 277 people, or other measures approved by the City. The proposed project does not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. No mitigation is required. 16. Utilities and Service Systems a, e) The project site is served by West Valley Sanitation for waste water collection and treatment. The proposal would not add a significant amount to the wastewater stream that is processed by West Valley Sanitation. The project would result in a Tess than significant impact in terms of sanitary waste treatment and disposal. No mitigation is required. b -d) Both the San Jose Water Company, the agency that supplies water to the project site, and West Valley Sanitation have sufficient facilities and resources to meet the water, waste water, and storm water drainage needs of the proposed project. The proposed project is not anticipated to generate a substantial impact on existing water supplies. Nevertheless, as standard conditions of approval, the project will be required to comply with all applicable state and local codes that mandate the use of water conserving equipment, plumbing fixtures, and drought tolerant landscaping. The project would have a less than significant impact on water, waste water, and stormwater collection and treatment facilities. No mitigation is required. f -g) West Valley Collection and Recycling provides the solid waste collection and disposal needs of the project site, and has adequate capacity to serve both the construction and operation of the proposed project. Given the fact that site preparation and construction is an isolated occurrence, the amount of waste to be generated from the construction of the project is not considered to be a significant impact. Moreover, with the ability to recycle a large portion of the construction debris, the overall amount of solid waste that would be hauled directly to a landfill can be substantially reduced. Operation of the proposed project is not anticipated to generate substantial amounts of solid waste, and the project would comply with all applicable City codes and regulations pertaining to solid waste management. Impacts to solid waste collection and disposal are therefore considered less than significant. No mitigation is required. 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) The proposal is on a previously developed site and has no known protected species or habitats on site. The proposal would result in the removal of one mature tree and three smaller ornamental trees from the site, which would be replaced according to the requirements of the City of Saratoga and the Arborist Report prepared for this project. The proposal would also be required to implement certain mitigation measures in the event that cultural resources are unearthed on the site in the process of project construction. With adherence to these measures, the project does not have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 26 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 The proposal would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts in the area. The proposal would have minimal cumulative impacts on air quality, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, and utilities, and would not have significant cumulative impacts on traffic and transportation. c) With the adoption of the mitigation measures identified in this report, the proposal would not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. SOURCES The following information sources were used in the preparation of this document and referenced throughout the Initial Study Checklist: A. Project Plans, Bunton Clifford Associates, June 5, 2006. B. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Traffic Analysis, Higgins Associates, July 14, 2006. Additional Traffic Impact Analysis, Higgins Associates, May 21, 2007. C. Field Inspection, MHA, December 22, 2006. D. City of Saratoga General Plan, 2007, and Land Use Map. E. City of Saratoga Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map. F. City of Saratoga Residential Design Handbook, adopted November 2, 1988. G. Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Guidelines. 1999. Assessing the Air Quality Impacts of Projects and Plans. H. Association of Bay Area Governments, Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones, July 2006. I. Flood Hazard Map, Association of Bay Area Governments, http: /www.abag.ca.gov /bayarea /eqmaps /eqfloods /floods.html, January 2007 J. Conceptual Lighting Plan, Bunton Clifford Associates, October 4, 2005 K. Important Farmland In California Map, California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, 2004. L. Agricultural Preserves Map, California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, 2005. M. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), California Department of Fish and Game, 2006. N. California Department of Toxic Substance Control EnviroStor Database, http /www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov /public accessed February 2007. O. Santa Clara County Fire Department, conversation on February 14, 2007. CITY OF SARATOGA P. Deputy Brad Davis, Santa Clara County Sheriffs Department, conversation on February 14, 2007. Q. Engineering, Geologic, and Geotechnical Reconnaissance, St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church, Murray Engineers Inc., May 8, 2007. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND MHA/RMT 27 March 2008 CITY OF SARATOGA R. Bill Tuttle, Engineering Division, San Jose Water Company, personal communication, June 21, 2007. S. Todd Hansen, Operations Manager, West Valley Collection and Recycling, personal communication, June 26, 2007. LIST OF PREPARERS Preparers Dain Anderson, Director of Environmental Services, Project Manager Jeffrey Smith, Senior Planner Jennifer Cutler, Environmental Planner MHA Environmental Consulting, Inc. 4 W Fourth Avenue, Suite 303 San Mateo, CA 94402 Saratoga Staff Chris Riordan, Senior Planner Persons Contacted Lieutenant Mark Eastus, Sheriff Department, West Valley Patrol Division, June 26, 2007. Cheryl Roth, Operations Support Services Division, Santa Clara County Fire Department, June 28, 2007. Attachments 1. Area Map 2. Project Plans 3. Tree Inventory, dated November 8, 2005 and prepared by Arbor Resources 4. Geotechnical Report, dated May 8, 2007 and prepared by Murray Engineers, Inc. 5. Traffic Report, dated July 14, 2006 and prepared by Higgins Associates 6. Traffic Report, dated May 21, 2007 and prepared by Higgins Associates 28 MHA/RMT St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Draft IS /MND March 2008 ATTACHMENT 1: AREA MAP Saratoga Church Project Location 18870 Allendale Ave. Saratoga, California 95070 SOURCE: City of Saratoga 2007, Google Earth Pro 2007, ESRI 2006, and MHA Environmental Consulting 2007 ATTACHMENT 2: PROJECT PLANS N MI O MI NM MN EN NE P NE S MI OM UN I MI MB NM SITE DESCRIPTION EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT: EXI.STLNO GP LAND USE: BXISIING USE APN: SITE SIZE: GROSS ACRES: 3.1 ACRES NET ACRES: 3.1 ACRES MOOR AREA: EXISTING: FLOOR AREA: PROPOSED: FLOOR AREA: TOTAI. ALLOWED TN R1- 40700E AGE OF EXISTING SIRUCRIRP_S: CHURCH TIME RESIDENCE BUILDING SETBACKS: 141000 SIDE (500114) SIDE (NORTH) REAR IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE: EXISTING PROPOSE() PROJECT DESCRIPTION 91-40 QPF CHURCH 397 -1 -14 PROPOSED 38 Fr (MIN1 30 PT (MIN.) 55 FT (MIN.) 42011' (MIN.) THE Pt.IRPOSt) OF 11115 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11 TO: 13,476 SQUARE PEET (8131: SHEET 3 FOR 0 TTAIL) 6,609 SQUARE FRET (SEE STIELT 3 FOR DETAIL) 20,085 SQUARE FEET 7,200 SQUARE FTLT 1968 1963 1968 REQUIRED 30 Fr 2ND FLOOR 20 FT /2ND FLOOR 251+1 20 FT 210111.00R 50 FT 1.70 AC (55.2%) (SEE SHEET. 3 0011 DETAIL) L55 AC (50.5 (SEE SHEET 3 FOR DIi PAIL) MAX. ALLO54TD 1.08 AC (35 II' RL1SI0199 TIAL USE PROVIDE TOR A NEW CI 1l1RCH WITH A CAPACITY 00 754 SEALS, AND TT) RECONEIOITRO: EXISTING ON -Sm: PARKING TO PROVIDE MINIMUM 00 04 PARKING SPACES TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF 1 SPACE FOR EVERY 4 SEALS IN 171E CSR1ECF2. 2) APPROVE A VARIATION PROM THE 91-10 STANDARDS RFAIARDINO IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, ALLOWABLE. FLOOR AREA, 1111501015 AND PARKI,NO SUPPLY INC(1701NO (1513 OF GRASS AREA TO ACCOMMODATE OVERFLOW PARKIN°. 1) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 ALLENDALE AVE, SARATOGA, CA. 95070 LOCATION MAP PLAN SET REVISIONS .a WOO 1.7416.3. Sri1411 k,A.4 L+r.M e� .....l l47-$036 1.4.11cdailal suso% Mo... iY1 H+.% .1.1.1.1•0 FILE NUMBER: B 03 -259 CONSULTANTS PLANNING: ENGINEERING: ARCIflTEf'0.1911; LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: ELECTRICAL EN(TNEPJUN0 CONSULTANT TABLE OF CONTENTS 011)30T DESCRIPTION I COVER SHEET 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN 3 SITE PLAN 4 CHURCH HFLOOR PI..AN 3 CIIURC0 ROOF I7.AN 6 011(3110 1 ELEVATIONS 7 ENTRY SION 1)LEVA1EINS 9 C11t33lCH SECTIONS 9 GRADING AND DRAINAGE TI AN 10 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE DEMOLITION PLAN 11 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 12 PRELIMINARY SITE EI,FC 11'1CA). PLAN RUTH GOING, INC. 2216 TILE AI.AMEDA SANTA CLARA, C.A. 95050 RUTH (10100. INC. 2216 THE ALAMEDA SANTA CLARA, CA. 90050 BIINTON C LITI'ORD ASSOCIATES, INC. 210 IIAMMONI) AVEN1. FREMONT, CA 94539 03135 375 WEST 200 SOUTH 00(13: )00 SALT 3.AhT CITY, UT 84101 ALFA TECH 97 GIST BROKAW ROM), SURE 300 SAN JOSE, CA 95112 0)111F:T IDP 12 IIIIII IIIIII 1111111 IIIIII IIIIII NMI MI iMMENZEMINMESIMIONNOI COMO 31- AO 3 awe. TV NM 'SO MY N4/1..1 SNOIIIGN07 9Nu.sixa spopie3 'e6opes anuaAv oppugn OL:4I. H011111-10 XOCID-111:10 NVIMES 'WHOM 1301■NHaIV iS ueid Aax 1%. 'La D 3A1 '01.110D or* runa lawoutuomyosph. SOOVSWOiS bil l'SWOIC n tsra ay.hku 01Z e o ..161U1 Buluuel d 13.1114:104,40.113 ON303 111 I li ri 91 1`. A 1" -4;4=7." I c 1 r •'R 1 TIVH ir Wog .eo rl Is. As .30 GOIY1 mw .°14e no J. WO A hi -1.V Ja i n rii \I 71. ....010BY5 ScIN•et cucu CONY" 101. Int A A 411.1.A. A A MY 5NIISIX .3 laarrA, 0.1: Nei 0.101 Oil A 1111111X1 *10 SONV1 21LA:Tad 4, Gam 5 !FAWNS t mug D151114355 PflOPI1RL9 M124933.172YEVIAT 4'.P.O21 Tarim e51515429U[C 2 .52)X%! 241.0) B151ET&lltiJlid ],1710P CD aLLl 2.73 6131.@ CHUFCH 1.29400 0222.W 5.613U21970 9,91516 71107.1X1 !FAWNS t mug PKi1610 PANIO20 lTg1 PM aar9421 r P221022 zcWm IEY4CMR}I 944 SAT3 2,3610 Ed Ira Fux,!U 'FP.IC' O`6 -2,110 2211 ay 6 .11 prIMI I ..9 ErsNNi,14Pe. 11405F 2J Leif 1071 1 7I 7 Plffi tl l'S/.15E IS 517450415Stkts 1 A y TO LLwe�ue$0.1 TIry16 >m OM MI r NM MI r r i ow I 1124 TM. 94A1,55: MIA (5 5 NI21JOYK:J 41 1!1!761 0 121`16) IIIII ee y to omo i 1 i FIRE DFPARWE RED,QL91EI1FNTS N0 1 Il 943.1,1 r!n Nov: a H e r r,, Mb 5 2250 dt gel r. ^/.I:e, p.•YUa. os 5 I 4 Ihw ad by ofiJ. I .d .3ivt9 foe Se0 00 ^'M 21 26 P:'6: r I• .a.e01. w.o ..In �M=. 044 166 I7- 621 *l!a) elde5, m. •rw.A Ire .R. peM:g. 2) MA2nvls t5. 2 6 210 R'04M. POW,. YM2e•d R fro 11os M e. 2 Tt m. b I (.1) we t e n..-s SoWeel ea u. petwt: durv!2!r.l woo aw �i e1 F :�.n sole, hy l kat otmM^(e .ica P r,5 .xs.4.n n waeged O2^' +7 Sa ro K m /13. A It. s! 741067. Iee^.N !uo efelw2o:.elrette5 Oaf I..^-1! ,01 e 4*. 21.1.4 2!^11 ery ors In, le !F., el, s a pr.' to 4fle,. 1 e1=n�we e PAM 0.1I!. 21. 1 02^1 6 PmH• Mc!.. 0 h W.I. NITA RIP /(h 6a. (ter e�q to i. n.2erce.,m: w:a: -MP 1x gae owo be no t5.) 521 -X.461. Pow M Aq G. et 6e. ievre Tmnoh. P, to N.yn. Ies <l e'M nepneor !.)s meat or. 1`t 1 depel.ms. .utm,ovTT.fy e!.bo f. ..Y P. a n Meg=+ bwCwv. Yw far woo, uM: UM to M rep.wro rT .In Ire e.U•e1 •I. M tm!dM Y ego Y.sa be 2.r 112 ob. ose e 1ee^ trI en. nn Do0mtno!1 beam my: Somatoolfa hat 0257,4 CHURCH l j 1 2 l'M41GOw@riCN 210 516.4 SCALE; I FOFNO r EXISTING SANITARY 5E2E2 EXISTING OVERHEAD TELEPHONE EXI511010 OVERHEAD 12.6 EX1S11NC) FENCE EXISTING FOOL OF !A1r,'.4.ENT E)LSTINr, CONCRETE GRASS AREA OVERFLOW PARKINS 'C ARFA Stowilia4e T(rin.lsr4La016 0 W 92212 :0160001016 Q6126 tA% 005602 Cr Pri7POG ®4 07,5906. i 'rr9s!� MY 44212 02 o1lH F33: lii i nnoLF RY1016 R 6 141 41721 41.Ui FLOOR AREA 2104 1 005111051' rrwasED IlVH02H52I2I PAST'M. RNI ®LL 2.571 2,521 FALL 51. C�71 hA CH I,ZA 1.702 MACH CRWDFIWR 75)1 L thR4drtirfore IPA 49462 23)73210 0 R Lb JUNE 01, 7005 0212 !m,1*I!TI.;1* 05061 BcIa architecture p l a n n I n g I n t e r l o r s 2■0106 C22331100211OIPISI, Inc. 210 Hammond Mu. Framdt4. Cs15e2^.n 94579 [0) 516.445 (0) 510.4451005 .0� .ONI]Y0.ou+ SITE PLAN G RUM AND GOING, INC. 9 0 P IY2 .aw Key plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California f1e•f1 Vrtt. 3 OF 12 4)4 C I' 11'7 k f-0 05.6 1.11 7467. 1 1 4- .J IIIIII -ma 76 110.14. mit SA•051., PI Ran. 1 AREA CALCULATIONS 1.70 I> 477611117. J 1 1 1 4114 4-441111154 r541 4,41441 tp4ce0: 413 5011 11 SIFT. 4 41 55.41. 1 4747 53.10. 754 54.41 517 SOIT. eas 544.41. /111+4 FLOOR 1+11 2.9.111111 t 51 51140. 1- 91 11717. I. 1345 91.11. 4 71 SUIT -1 417 40.11. 3991 9711. FLOOR PLAN B CI A architecture p leaning 1 nt aria re BurAoo COgo5Assccit4,, Inc 211114..4M*. Frosant. Cdionia SIM (TI S2444.1004 IF/ 510.415.1009 ....13CA14,041144.4.99 Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California FLOOR PLAN 11. 1015 49 )099 4 of 12 P 7 1 1 47,- CM) 11011111•1111111111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NM I I NO II Ell 1 I I I I I I I II I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I III II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ROOF PLAN B c�a architecture p l a n n i n g 1 n t e r l o r a ewoxi, clma A,wzOa.. nm. 210 FINTIMC04 Aw. FreoloA CaRaNa D11a9 (Ti 510.145.1000 IFI 510.145.1uc5 13C,timcOrAne.torn Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18810 A9endale Avenue Saratoga, California ROOF PLAN tom +.o.amar 4i- 21, tid'o NOT 5of12 05003 NMI MO INN MN =I OM ill IIIII 1 111 111 '1AtTi IT EligaINKOMEMEMEIM Mg) Z Jo 9 03101 SI I= 'IC •so epollea 'et/omits enuaAv 9 1EPuniN °Lee I 1-08111-10 X0C101-1.1210 NVIE1213S 13VHDIVI 139NVH3lV 'IS OS'CO SI 3003 °MCI I tral 101 3H1 30 SiNIOLI 11V IV NOILVA313 30V85 3101 en* SOOt'St? OlS I A 1 Doo■ svt ass ILI 6‘9011 014 9101101U Ouluuel d 01049011112JB v SNOLLVAgla ugid la)1 11•1111E11111111110111111 NOIIVA313 1SVB HV31:1 NOLIVA313 1.33/4 Maid /Ad= NOLLVA313 I-11110S -JJ-011:1 NOLLVA313 1-MON -1.4a1 4.:3 Win) -4101f911 7o -memo ii 1 1 1 Pl4iitAINx if TAIEW MarlIJS .70 I•11 I= MN all MI MI SICA.11vr 7 0' SADO' •I.,7 KALB IT .44 r4 Iiiffiilibnin I ni ffILFIEtrrr 1 11 SIDE EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS 1 171ASH ENCLOSURE PLAN axe tr•ti „-4 loin! !I:' 111 Tr IM ir -11 NM II TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONS VI•f-ft TIFF1111111111 1 FRONT NORTH ELEVATION REAR SOUTH ELEVATION BOA nrc/1111. ct11 re p !alining nt eriors &non Pmodan. 210 Pnorro. Rumor*, CeAtnit 94539 T1 510.445.170) iri 717 .15.10D7 BC.AnArnas NOTE: GRADE ELEVATION AT ALL POINTS OF THE LOT AT 91)11OING EDGE IS 195.50 Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18B70 Allendale nue Saratoga, California ENTRY SIGN ELEVATIONS Nateten. 01 71, 211% AS WPM 7 of 12 IntOdIkftir 0500.1 11111111111•111=111111111011111•1111111M MI IIIIII MI =I I= MI I= MN =11/1131/KOMMEEMISMINIEM (IPSC Z1.1 xar.11714 d31C14 St SOU '3 7el41 SNOLLO9S Eltuomoo 'dopes onuaAV elePuoiN °Lail XOCIORWO NVI9J3S 13VHOIVI 139NVHMI 18 ueld 413N LIAO w*.K.O. 001511 03 i I °oat snots ill .0.121•J 0 pa Px100‘..).41 910119 ;LI Ousuuei d eJnipaytypie v311 Nal Bata 1.13 (X31-Wit NOLLO 3SWASNVIIL .131,111 A-3[1. 1-41 .11 .11-351 J33.3t el ,ew• F.. Nataas 1V141431110N01 .133. 3.3 iaaa, 333.33. 30a3333 la: aaal (3AVN) NOLLO3S aStElASNVEll 0-1• UST% ZM .11-11 PI ailme.c9 11•11 NMI I= MEI Mil MN NMI MN I= I= /all. le Ot7tOw 1.00 170St, 04:4_051.», (SEE 3 7 OUnn 919CILIEPL HOUSE f I t!7.."1, woo., op,•-■ 1 1 Olt 4144..*.V.- jvacfrOA %spy 1 .7r in» 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 z :11 LEGEND SCALE: PERCFNT 01j1=110U,S COTRAf EXISTING 55.234 (1.70 ACRES) PROPOSED 50.5% (1.55 ACRES) SaCrioN 11—B 1,0.141 WO. en.1.0 nip BCIA. srphltecture p lannIng Int priors punter; Ciflod 7007600(00. 066. Hamr.lord Ave. Fremont. Cofifornin 0.1S39 111 810.441 10 IF I 510448 1005 l007 ..13CARN0000A.00•0 RUTH AND 00050. R_I_G Mond saw LI/Ix Le NM ism as-saa ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California 6RADINE AND DRAINAGE FLAN oo Jule 05, E05 000 45 11019 1 Number 04073 tr»Te 11:ni0 9 OF 12 3� YREE LANDS OP 9ABOKPEY VAN ACCE5491.E 7a 7 Li W 9' 1REE TREE It REVAJN TIM) SCE ARQOR•51 RTf +1YiT TOR TREE l•ROTEfO0• LOCA70N R1 AND T'R`C. `AP00RI<t 1RCE RErtRE'4C,; MJNOtf 1T —1a PIIES 6'f O.G LANDS OF BARR •w' REo le O M> 12 it 113E R• TREE e TREE LANDS OF BELLIGITTI tE ZID e• 12' P. l 0.16662 LANDS OF MAAS la' P 6' TREE 6'1EE RA 1.0 3 OPESr` TRASH ENC3091RE 13' 6• 1A FE LANDS OF WON6 PIRLO SITE BON PART A ',vim ',ve 1r la 1? LANDS OF BELDINS 1r ME 1$' PRIe 1e Pert BC A architecture p l a n nt p r i o r s almlo0 RRtt] AS 41110s. 6q. 710 Herermd Ave. FcrrorR, CM66••0 04539 IT 000.015.1000 I F i 510.641.0000 WRw.6CAhcOr Ine.cm G61P SI1".."' BPHa NORTH TG.• -q Key Plan 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California t.1NDSCARt t)PMOIri10N PLAN PveNebe OSCJ3 Neil *ET* ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH l0ofl2 E MN I= r MI MI MI INN MN MS 111111 11•11 1M1 NMI MS MI NM NM NM 11111 NEI In MI me yr. MI.,. MMeenr MM.. eteemem me. Me OM Imam Melfset• es Merl le. me 'IM. I 0 Ca MC CM MeMeeMpleo IIMPITIere teererreett OM lal ter•Me IMMMT 'Mee Plrel I Mans VA MN IMIM MelmOmmie Meeele MIMIN gem.. MeMelaMer•KIN MC 071 Mealleel• ...MM Me,. Irme/mer Me IM my, Mem. 'MM.. *me, Merl. e eee me MI Mel O MO IL Mame.. ereemee• I eereet !am. Teat ellm me OM PI•lalm mmeel 1 rem1.1* 6 MI RI 1 I O IVOR MIR An* 01.e I WI. Mem.. me :4$ M me KM teeemee %PM, 1 remtle•Mre•r r,,,, TIM 0 le M iot, O RV MI reMemmo omemeeel). MO 0 Mronee me pal J i 1 V lir O Mt NO Meeedeferle Mlle. V., I Mem Mem f•nre•wrreet ler. 0 me .5.1 0 1 o gal gxet 12 statILsrm7 •:•m 5. Ste WI Me Wee*. I ...Met Imam: heck MI LeSN ....t ImMelmeomm MMeMele I In, Mrelr. rereelure. 1 I W 0 I tf in me Ite ORM Mere TeMier• Me.. tert 11 IM be ir (my t k42 10 MI .1. MR" Mew 1 lemet ,,i I McO 0 }MI MM me ARtfilso.e.o.frolitiefere %IWO 6.4 AikWe .001A0.0 I, .00.o .**.00t.... rateele 114rierMeTIMI77■Mrtt gr0.4 0..‘.._-----.----.-g e L_ PLANT SCHEDULE nun 0 le WM reeler, eneemeMer •MMPOmer• I amfoomVer !rem, EURNI.B. LANP5 OF BARR 30. us- OW 4 REIMNX, LA1'05 OF BELLIG1TTI 1.4 OF MAAS let LANDS OF WON/9 rAto 1, 1. 4 1 01114 a BOUNDARY SITE C LANDS O3 FiCLPINI5 BC1A architecture p 'tinning int °riot's StrInn Mord knothilyn, 213HanwroneAve. Fremont 15515orrin 9455P 510.445 1000 I F I 513441.1005 vrow.841514044155.4445 mi ANN I V I4 te 9uffsTRIalcrA 44/411.1.- Key Plan NORTH ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California I-ANC/SCAT PLAN woe 3. 21. :am 11 of 12 mos inigillaMMOINIMMIIIN111•11111! Pail r fglEMI ILUI ua WO. 21. 2019 kat K+ WO BC A architecture p l a n n i n g 1 nt e r I o r e 1300i on CJmad Associates, Vt. 21G tlarmvd Ave. pow{ C. k 2 94539 (Tj 610445.1000 1 2 1 510.445.1005 wont SCAInvOrtinexorn 111.1171. R,AYHWBMfllll 4I 4fl 1{Ne 4-4Y4•1s 5500.20055.655.052105n15015.5 s wrvr0a 0•31 s•aucr■ AVnMa 4aM. Key Plan ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18816 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California PRELIMINARY ELECTRICAL SffE PLAN ua..cxae 12OF12 MI I= MI MI N r MI MI NM M r• MO I MI I— MI M M• MO M MI O A 13 e H K L M N P T EXISTING HALL AN CHAPEL AEA D I A6RAM AND TABLE FOYER MEETING ROOM CLASSROOM HALLWAY WOMEN'S RESTROOM MEN'S RESTROOM STORAGE UTILITY KITCHEN WALK -IN COOLER STORAGE STORAGE EXIT HALL STAGE STORAGE MAIN HALL STORAGE CLASSROOM CHAPEL ALTAR 452 of 18'1 sf 152 sf 231 sP 212 sP 231 of 886 sf 184 sP 45 sf 45 of 158 sP 550 of 158 of 4211 sP 81 sf 410 sf 8'SO sP 224 of HALL CHAPEL HEIGHT TABLE STRUCTURE HEIGHT of TOTAL HEIGHT EXISTING HALL 18' -0" 100% EXISTING CHAPEL 1 1 6" 100% NEW CHURCH (range sloped roof) -TOP OF DOME 45' -3" to 50' -0" 11.7% BELL T OWER 37'..._8" •to 40' -0" 3.9% —BOTTOM OF DOME 30' -4 to 31' -7" 21.7% —SPINE (NAVE) 21'..... -8" to 26' -0" 21.5% NA.RTI IEX 1 6' -1 0" to 24' 5" 13.9% GALLEIES 15'' -4" to 20' -8" 10.8% -LOWER NAVE 1 3'--3" to 16'— 10" 16.5% MN NM NM SW r MS MN NM MI NM N NM r MI EN OM M ATTACHMENT 3: TREE INVENTORY, DATED NOVEMBER 8, 2005 AND PREPARED BY ARBOR RESOURCES ARBOR RESOURCES Professional Arboricultural Consulting Tree Care A TREE INVENTORY AND REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED CHURCH AND PARKING LOT AT ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 ALLENDALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA OWNER'S NAME: SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH APPLICATION 03 -259 APN: 391 -01 -014 Submitted to: Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitval.e Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Prepared by: David L. Babby, RCA Registered Consulting Arborist #399 Certified Arborist #WE -4001A November 8, 2005 P.O. Box 25295. San Mateo California 94402 Email: arborresources(aicomcast.net Phone: 650.654.3351 Fax: 650.240.0777 Licensed Contractor 4796763 David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist November 8, 2005 INTRODUCTION The City of Saratoga Community Development Department has requested I review the potential tree impacts associated with constructing a new Church and parking lot at 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga. This report presents my findings and recommendations and serves as a revision to my previous report, dated 11/30/03, submitted in relation to an earlier design of the proposed project. Plans reviewed for this report include Sheets 3, 6 and 8 -10 (dated 10/18/05) by Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. The trees' locations, numbers and approximate canopy dimensions are shown on an attached copy of Sheet 8 (Grading and Drainage Plan). For identification purposes, round, metallic tags were attached to the trees' trunks and contain engraved numbers that correspond to the inventoried trees. FINDINGS The proposed project exposes 27 trees' regulated by City Ordinance to varying degrees of potential impacts. They include ten Coast Live Oaks #1, 2, 8 -13, 16, 21); three Coast Redwoods (#4, 26, 27); one Douglas -Fir #23); nine Italian Stone Pines #7, 14, 15, 17 -20, 24, 25); one dead Olive Tree #22); and three Scarlet Oaks #3, 5, 6). Specific data compiled for each is presented on the attached table. Trees #4, 7, 8 and 15 are not presented on the project plans and should be added. Their approximate locations are presented on the attached map and should not be construed as being surveyed. Tree #22 is dead and should be removed regardless of the proposed project. Tree #25 has progressively declined since last observed a few years ago and its demise appears imminent; as such, .I recommend its removal is permitted if requested by the applicant. Based on its condition and zero monetary value of both trees, mitigation is not suggested. The removal of trees #3, 5 and 6 is proposed on the plans. Based on their overall good condition and location outside the proposed building area, I find their retention would better conform to the City's Ordinance and plan revisions are recommended. I also recommend plan revisions occur to protect trees #4 and 7. Tree #8, a multi -stem Coast Live Oak situated immediately adjacent to a utility pole, would be an appropriate removal for site improvement purposes if requested by the applicant. The inventoried trees along the eastern property boundary (specifically #9 thru 21) are situated beneath high voltage electrical lines. Consequently, they require frequent and The previous report identifies 24 trees of Ordinance size. The three trees added for this report are a result of the Ordinance being revised in 2004. Please note the numbering system used for the previous report has been revised to establish a sequential numbering system that includes all 27 trees. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church; 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga Page 1 of 5 City of Saratoga Community Development Department David L. Bobby, Registered Consulting Arborist November 8, 2005 severe pruning to achieve adequate clearance from the lines and would typically be assigned a low suitability for retention. However, these particular trees provide an effective and relatively irreplaceable screening element between the subject site and eastern neighboring property. For this reason, they appear worthy of retention as proposed and have been assigned a moderate suitability for retention. The current design encroaches beneath the canopies of inventoried along the front and eastern boundaries at significantly greater levels than the previous design. To achieve a more reasonable distance from these trees for the purpose of avoiding significant root damage and the severance of major limbs, I suggest the following: [1] the walkway shown on Sheet 3 and 8 should be shifted or adjusted to be five feet west from its proposed location; [2] the circle portion of the walk within this area as proposed on Sheets 9 and 10 (landscape plans) should be removed from the design; and [3] the proposed detention/retention pond and drain pipe should be established at least ten feet from trees #3 and 5, thirteen feet from tree #6, seventeen feet from tree #7, and eight feet from tree #8. There is a row of 43 Italian Stone Pines located along the existing western property boundary that have trunk diameters ranging from an estimated 8 to 24 inches. They were not individually inventoried as they appear to be an adequate distance from the construction project. However, protection fencing is suggested to restrict access from construction related activities (e.g. dumping, equipment cleaning, storing materials, etc.). Per the current City Ordinance, a bond equal to 100% of the appraised value of trees planned for retention is required. If all trees with a monetary were retained, this amount would equal $87.450. A more precise amount can be provided upon review of the revised plans. RECOMMENDATIONS All recommendations presented below. are intended to serve as measures to mitigate the foreseeable impacts to the inventoried trees. They should be carefully followed and incorporated into the project plans. Design Guidelines 1. Plans should be revised to show trees #3 thru 7 being retained and adequately protected (the retention of tree #8 should be optional., but is presumed for retention within this report). In doing so, the proposed detention/retention pond and associated drain pipe should be revised to be at least I0 feet from trees #3 and 5, 13 feet from tree #6, 17 feet from tree #7, and 8 feet from tree #8; 2. The proposed walkway should be shifted five feet west from the eastern property boundary. Additionally, the proposed circle portion of the walk nearest the boundary should be removed from the landscape design.. 2 This amount is calculated in accordance with the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9` Edition (published by the ISA, 2000). St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church; 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga Page 2 of 5 City of Saratoga Community Development Department David L. Bobby, Registered Consulting Arborist November 8, 2005 3. The section of walkway, including any curb or edging, proposed beneath the canopies of trees along the eastern boundary should be installed on top of existing grade without causing soil cuts. 4. Plans should indicate the removal of tree #22 as it is dead. The removal of tree #25 is also offered as an option as its continual decline is imminent. Mitigation for the loss of either tree is not necessary. 5. The swale proposed beneath the canopies trees #1 and 2 must be established within one -foot of the future pavement edge. 6. The location of all trees inventoried for this report must be shown on the site, grading and drainage, and landscaping plans. This includes adding #4, 7, 8 and 15, as well as incorporating trees along the eastern boundary into the landscape plans. Furthermore, the numbers assigned to trees within this report should be shown on the aforementioned plans. 7. In the event a tree other than #22 and 25 is approved for removal, new trees equivalent to the combined value of the tree or trees removed shall be installed on site as mitigation. Replacement tree values are presented on the bottom of the attached table. Acceptable replacement species include Quercus agrifolia, Quercus lobata, Quercus kelloggii, Quercus douglasii, Quercus durnosa, Acer macrophyllum, Aesculus californica, Pseudotsuga menziesii and Sequoia sempervirens. The future location, size and amounts should be identified on the landscape plan(s). They must be planted prior to final inspection and, as necessary for support, be double- staked with rubber tree ties. Irrigation should include a drip or soaker hose system placed on the soil surface and not in a sleeve. The trees should be established outside from beneath the canopies of retained trees and spaced at least 15 to 20 feet apart from another. 8. Any new underground utilities and services must be designed outside from beneath the canopies of retained trees. I should be consulted in the event this is not possible. 9. The Site Plan should specify that all existing, unused underground pipes and irrigation lines within the designated fenced areas of retained trees should remain buried and be cut off at existing soil grade. 10. The drainage design for the project, including downspouts, must not require water being discharged beneath the canopies or towards the 'trunks of retained trees. 11. In addition to the future revisions of the plans reviewed, the irrigation and entire underground utility design should be reviewed for tree impacts prior to issuing development permits. 12. This entire report should be incorporated into the set of final building plans and be titled Sheet T -1 (Tree Protection Instructions). Additionally, the Site Plan should show the location of protective fencing as identified on the attached map. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church; 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga Page 3 of 5 City of Saratoga Community Development Department David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist November 8, 2005 13. The following additional recommendations must also be incorporated into the landscape design: a. Plant material proposed within seven times the diameter of the trees' trunks shall be drought- tolerant and compatible for planting beneath Oaks. Additionally, the plants should comprise no more than 15- to 20- percent of the canopy areas. b. Irrigation shall not spray beneath the canopies of the Coast Live Oaks or within five feet from the trunks of all other trees. c. Any trenching for irrigation, lighting, plumbing lines or drainage should be designed beyond the trees' canopies. If irrigation or electrical lines for lighting are designed inside this distance, the trenches should be in a radial direction to the trunks and established no closer than three to five times the diameter of the nearest trunk; if this not be possible, the lines can be placed on top of existing soil grade and covered with wood chips or other mulch. d. Stones, mulch or other landscape features should be at least one -foot from the trunks of retained trees and not be in contact with the trunks of new trees. e. Tilling beneath the canopies must be avoided, including for weed control: f. Bender board or other edging material proposed beneath the trees' canopies should be established on top of existing soil grade by utilizing stakes. Protection Measures during Demolition and Construction 14. Tree protective fencing shall be installed precisely as shown on the attached map and established prior to demolition, grading, surface scraping, construction or heavy equipment arriving on site. It shall be comprised of five -foot high chain link 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 be maintained throughout the construction process until final inspection. 15. Unless otherwise approved, all grading and construction activities must be conducted outside the fenced areas (even after fencing is removed) and outside from beneath the canopies of Ordinance -sized trees not inventoried for this report. These activities include, but are not limited to, the following: demolition, grading, surface scraping, trenching, storage and dumping of materials (including soil fill), and equipment/vehicle operation and parking. 16. Fencing beneath the canopies of trees #1 and 2 is required in two phases, demolition and construction. The demolition phase (shown on the attached map) involves placing the fencing within one -foot from the existing pavement. The construction phase involves expanding the fencing to the canopy perimeters within one -foot from the future pavement edge. 17. Fencing for the area in front of the Italian Stone Pines along the western property boundary could be comprised of orange plastic fencing or chain link (whichever is preferred by the contractor or property owner). 18. Great care must be taken during the removal of asphalt from beneath the canopies of trees #1 and 2. During the process, only the asphalt itself shall be lifted off the soil and no soil should,be excavated or scraped during the process. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church; 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga Page 4 of5 City of Saratoga Community Development Department David L. Babby, Registered Consulting Arborist November 8, 2005 19. Additional recommendations presented within the `Design Guidelines' section should be followed. 20. The removal of any plants, shrubs or small trees beneath the trees' canopies shall be manually performed. Great care should be taken to avoid excavating soil during the process. Any stumps being removed that are adjacent to or beneath the trees' canopies should be ground below grade rather than being pulled up using an excavator. 21. All approved grading and trenching beneath a tree's canopy shall be manually performed using shovels. Roots encountered during the process shall be cleanly severed on the tree side of where the cut occurs; roots with diameters of two inches and greater shall be wrapped in a plastic sandwich bag that is sealed with a rubber band. hi the case of any approved trenching, roots two inches and greater in diameter should be retained and tunneled beneath; upon exposure, the roots should be immediately wrapped in moistened burlap and remain covered until the trench is backflled. 22. The root collars (defined by a distinct swelling at the base of trunks) of trees #1 and 2 should be cleared to minimize the risk of infection by various root rotting diseases, The procedure must be performed by either a tree company or landscape contractor familiar with the process. Damage to the trunk must not occur during digging and the use of a pneumatic air device "Airspade is preferred. 23. Throughout construction during the dry months of May thru October, supplemental water should be provided to each tree every three to four weeks. In doing so, I suggest 10 gallons of water per inch of trunk diameter is evenly distributed beneath the trees' entire canopies using soaker hoses placed on the soil surface beneath the trees' mid- to outer canopies. 24. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited beneath canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage beneath canopies. In addition, fuel should not be stored nor shall any refueling or maintenance of equipment occur within 100 feet of the trees' trunks. 25. Herbicides should not be applied beneath the canopies of retained trees. Where used on site, they must be labeled for safe use near trees. 26. The removal and pruning of trees must be performed under the supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist and according to ISA standards. Information regarding Certified Arborists in the area can be obtained by referring to the following website: http://www.isa-arbor.com/arborists/arbsearch.html. Attachments: Tree Inventory Table Site Map (copy of Sheet 8) St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church; 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga Page 5 of 5 City ofSaratoga Community Development Department 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TREE NO. 2 8 12 TREE NAME Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) TREE INVENTORY TABLE 33 7, 6, 5 15.5 Site: 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga Prepared for: City of Saratoga Community Develop. Dept. Prepared by: David L Bobby, RCA pA d 50 30 30 8 65 100% 50% .0 •0 U 0. 1 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) 31 50 70 75% 25% Fair Moderate 4 $11,200 Good u o 4 U High 4 a 0 $20,900 3 Scarlet Oak (Quercus coccinea) 10.5 30 35 100% 75% I Good Moderate 3 $1,670 4 Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) 1 9.5 I 40 15 100% 100% Grad High 3 $1,590 5 Scarlet Oak (Quercus coccinea) 10 30 30 100% 75% Good Moderate 3 $1,560 6 Scarlet Oak (Quercus coccinea) 13.5 35 40 100% 50% Good Moderate 3 $2,160 7 Scotch Pine (Pinus sylvestris 17.5 40 35 100% 50% Good Moderate 1 $3,670 35 75% 25% Fair Low 1 $940 9 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia) 23 35 60 75% 25% Fair to Poor Moderate 2 I $4,300 10 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia) 11.5 I 25 25 75% 25% Fair to Poor Moderate 4 $1,320 11 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia) I j 11 j 15 j 35 100% 50% Fair Moderate 2 $1,890 45 75% 25% REPLACEMENT TREE VALUES 1 of 2 Fair to Poor Moderate 3 $2,130 13 Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) 17 20 50 75% Fair to 25% Poor Moderate 2 $2,500 14 Italian Stone Pine (Pinus pinea 13.5 20 45 50% 1 25% Fair to Poor Moderate 2 $560 15 Italian Stone Pine (Pinus pinea) 15 20 30 75% I 25% Fair to Poor Moderate 3 $950 I 15- gallon $120 24 -inch box —$420 36 -inch box $1,320 48-inch box $5,000 52 -inch box 57,000 72 -inch box =515,000 11/8/OS Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) TREE NO. TREE NAME CC L il c CIO V.. W 0 t. 16 TREE INVENTORY TABLE 18 25 40 17 Italian Stone Pine (Pines pinea 19 25 50 75% 25% Fair to Poor Moderate 3 $1,400 18 Italian Stone Pine (Pinus pinea 12 25 40 75% 25% Fair to Poor Moderate 4 5680 19 25 26 Italian Stone Pine (Pinus pinea) Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) 23 22 Site: 18870 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga Prepared for: City of Saratoga Community Develop. Dept. Prepared by: David L Babby, RCA 25 40 60 50 2 of 2 75% 75% 20 Italian Stone Pine (Pinus pinea) 16 25 40 75% 2.5% Fair to Poor Moderate 4 $1,050 21 Coast Live Oak Quercu.s agrifolia 13 25 30 75 25% Fair Moderate 4 $1,590 22 Olive Tree (Oleo europaea) 11 25 20 0% 0% Dead Low 5 50 23 Douglas -Fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) 16 35 25 75% 75% Good Moderate 3 52,140 24 Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata 21 35 40 50% 100% Fair Moderate 5 $1,270 25% 25% 25% 75% Fair to Poor Fair to Poor Dying Moderate Moderate Low 3 4 5 $2,760 51,970 $0 Coast Redwood (Sequoia ,sempervirens 17 35 20 50% 100% Good Moderate 2 $3,550 27 Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens 31.5 50 30 75% 100% Good High 3 $13,700 -2.0 REPLACEMENT TREE VALUES 15- gallon 5120 24-inch box 5420 36 -inch box 51,320 48 -inch box 55,000 52 -inch box $7,000 72 -inch box 515,000 11/8/05 r r NM M MI ON MI r h IX AC **tie P:'�+x•a Fe Yo.crnv~t N Not to Scale `,N. AC Pnvemwn N..7i)7.0.G. 1( 18870 ALLENDALE AVENUE, SARATOGA M-,. q .O- -MQ+91�on- F.yO._PSPB_1a:.SV_ 1 AC Pavement I7 1� rrM r L:xIG'Ir!.i PAT PROTECTIVE FENCING 1 t_d_ F'\, MALL p.- r..rurnrr- +e ..K�r L5 x n►:•nA.�n� yarn �m.r•.re n .:.1 S a... CX15'TiN!i GHURGH �b�M IYM. NIMIeen�PPtF.i z iilriir•1, LANDS OFF DITi& r lhiAtr pctentkt,reetc 11.7 es y9.24 Qry Hcn ererea rrt Gabd c.rt 06 ev 98 71 ATTACHMENT 4: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, DATED MAY 8, 2007 AND PREPARED BY MURRAY ENGINEERS, INC St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church c/o Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. Attn: Mr. Samer Kawar 210 Hammond Avenue Fremont, California 94539 Ladies and Gentlemen: GEOTECONICAL SERVICES 2951 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, California 94306 Phone: 650.326.0440 Fax: 650.326.0540 May 8, 2007 Project No. 648 -1L1 RE: ENGINEERING GEOLOGIC GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE, ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH, 18870 ALLENDALE AVENUE, SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA In accordance with your request, we are pleased to present the results of our engineering geologic and geotechnical reconnaissance of the St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church property .located at 18870 Allendale Avenue in Saratoga. The site location is depicted on Figure 1, Vicinity Map. The purpose of our reconnaissance investigation was to review the engineering geologic and geotechnical conditions at the site in order to evaluate the feasibility of constructing a new church. and associated improvements on the property. As currently proposed, the project will include the construction of a new, approximately 6,600 square -foot church with a capacity of 254 seats. The new church will be located in the front half of the property to the north of an existing hall and relatively small church. Existing on -site parking will be reconfigured to accommodate enough parking spaces to meet the new church capacity requirements. In addition, new entry walls are planned along Allendale Avenue. As the basis for our evaluation, we have reviewed geologic maps of the area and the proposed improvement plans. In addition, we have discussed the project with Mr. Sarver Kawar of Bunton Clifford Associates, Inc. On March 15, 2007, our principal engineering geologist performed an engineering geologic reconnaissance of the property to observe the surficial conditions. A more detailed geotechnical investigation that would normally include subsurface exploration and testing, laboratory testing, and design -level engineering analyses of the collected data was beyond the scope of this limited investigation. GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY Geologic Overview The subject property is located along the west side of the Santa Clara Valley near the base of the Santa Cruz Mountains, a northwest trending range within the California Coast Ranges St. Archangel Michael Church Engineering Geologic Geotecbnical Reconnaissance geomorphic province. The site is situated on relatively level ground to the north of Vasona Creek at an approximate elevation of 325 feet above mean sea level (see Figure 1). According to the Geologic Map of the Palo Alto 30 x 60- Minute Quadrangle (Brabb and others, 2000), the site is located in an area underlain by Pleistocene age (approximately 11,000 to 1.8 million years old) alluvial fan deposits (Qpaf). The alluvial fan deposits, which are composed of sediments derived from the foothills to the southwest of the site, are generally described as variable mixtures of dense, gravelly and clayey sand or clayey gravel that fine upward to stiff sandy clay. The site is located along the eastern boundary of the Palo Alto 30 x 60- minute quadrangle.. The relevant portion of the Geologic Map of the Palo Alto 30 x 60- Minute Quadrangle and the adjacent. Preluninary Geologic Map of the San Jose 30 x 60- Minute Quadrangle (Wentworth and others, 1999) are included as Figure 2, Vicinity Geologic Map. This mapping is consistent with the City of Saratoga's geologic map (Terratech, 1985), which maps the underlying soil as older alluvium (Qoal). The older alluvium is described as unconsolidated to moderately consolidated stream deposits consisting of orange brown poorly sorted sands, silts, and gravels. According to the City's map, a dormant landslide is located along north bank of Vasona Creek, approximately 100 feet southwest of the southwestern property corner. This landslide is queried indicating a level of uncertainty as to whether or not it actually is a landslide. The relevant portion of the City's geologic map is included as Figure 3, Saratoga Geologic Map. According to the State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Maps for the Cupertino and San Jose West Quadrang]e.(CGS, 2002 and CDMG, 2002, respectively), the site is not located in an area considered susceptible to earthquake induced Liquefaction or l.andsliding (see Figure 4, State Seismic Hazard Zones Map). Seismicity Geologists and seismologists recognize the San Francisco Bay Area as one of the most active seismic regions in the United States. There are three major faults that trend in a northwest direction through the Bay .Area, which have generated about 12 earthquakes per century large enough to cause significant structural damage. The faults along which these earthquakes occur are part of the San Andreas fault system.that extends for at least 700 miles along the California Coast, and includes the San Andreas, Hayward, and Calaveras faults. The San Andreas fault is located approximately 6.9 kilometer southwest of the site. The Hayward and Calaveras faults are located approximately 21 and 26 kilometers northeast of the site, respectively. In addition to the known active faults, several potentially active fault traces are mapped in the vicinity of the property. These fault traces are part of the southwest dipping Monte MURRAY ENGINEERS INC Page 2 Of 6 St, Archangel Michael Church Engineering Geologic Geotechnical Reconnaissance Vista- Shannon fault zone, a broad zone of faulting that extends from southeast of Los Gatos up through Los Altos Hills. According to Brabb and others (2000), an inferred, southwest dipping fault trace is located immediately southwest of the site. Wentworth and others (1999) depict the traces of the Monte Vista- Shannon fault zone as truncating to the southeast of the site (see Figure 2). According to the City's geologic map, the nearest trace of the Shannon fault, mapped by Rogers and Williams (1974), is located approximately 1,200 feet northeast of the property (see Figure 3). The City's map also depicts an inferred, northwest- trending fault trace approximately 120 feet northeast of the property. According to the map explanation, this trace was mapped by the California Department of Water Resources on the basis of displacements of buried stream channels. In addition to this inferred fault trace, Terratech identified a photo lineament along Vasona Creek to the southwest of the site that could potentially be related to faulting. This photo lineament is in the approximate area of the fault trace mapped by Brabb and others (2000) (see Figures 2 and 3). Although these fault traces are not zoned as active faults by the State of California, they are generally considered to be potentially active due to their likely connection at depth with the nearby San Andreas Fault. Based on this affiliation, the trace shown on the City's map and a 400 -foot wide zone around it (200 feet on either side) are described on the City's Ground Movement Potential Map (Terratech, 1985) as having a potential for surface ground rupture. Santa Clara County has also included the Monte Vista Shannon fault zone on their fault hazard map and has delineated a broad fault rupture hazard zone through the area. Although the site is located outside of the City's surface fault rupture hazard zone, it is located within the County's broader fault rupture hazard zone (see Figure 5, Santa Clara County Fault Hazard Map). According to the report entitled "Geomorphic Investigations of Deformations along the Northeastern Margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains" (Hitchcock and others, 1994), a broad zone of earthquake .induced ground deformation exists along the northeastern margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains between Los Gatos and Los Altos I- Tills. The deformations tend to occur in relatively discrete zones, which are coincident with the trend and locations of the Berrocal, Monte Vista, and Shannon faults. Hitchcock and others mapped these zones 'primarily by aerial photographic interpretation of linear features or lineaments. According to Plate 1 of the report, the church property is not located within a zone of lineaments; however zones of lineaments are located approximately 500 feet to the southwest and approximately 1,400 feet to the northeast in the areas of previously mapped fault traces (see Figure 6, Local Lineament Zone Map). MURRAY ENGINEERS INC Page 3of6 St. Archangel Michael Church Engineering Geologic Geotechnical Reconnaissance Seismologic and geologic experts convened by th.e U. S. Geological Survey concluded that there is ,a 62 percent probability for at least one "large" earthquake of magnitude 6.7 or larger in the Bay Area, before 2032. They also maintain that there could be more than one earthquakc this magnitude, and that numerous "moderate" earthquakes of about magnitude 6 are probable before 2032. The San Andreas fault is estimated to have a 21 percent probability of producing a magnitude 6.7 or larger earthquake by the year 2032. The Hayward fault is estimated to have a 27 percent probability of producing a similar size earthquake during the same time period (NVGCEP, 2003). The potential for activity along traces of the Monte 'Vista-Shannon fault zone is unknown. These traces could experience movement as a result of a large earthquake on the nearby San Andreas fault. If the Shannon fault is considered an independent seismogenic source (that is, it is sufficiently active and capable of producing an earthquak due to its length, it is assumed that it would only be capable of producing a magnitude 5 to 6.5 earthquake (CDMG, 1998). SITE DESCRIPTION The "L" shaped property is located. on the south side of Allendale Avenue in a residential neighborhood of Saratoga. The site is bounded by Allendale Avenue to the north, developed residential property to the east, west and southwest, and by vineyards to the southeast. The site measures approximately 530 feet deep and is 340 feet wide at the rear and 190 feet long along Allendale Avenue. A.n existing church hall is located in the central portion of the property. 'the church, a much smaller building than the hall, is located immediately to the northeast of the hall. In addition, an existing residence, which serves as a rectory, is located in the western portion of the property. A broad asphalt driveway extends along the west side of the property and leads to a gravel parking area at the rear of the site. A broad dirt parking area measuring approximately 120 feet by 120 feet is located in the front of the property between the hall and Allendale Avenue. This area is the proposed location of the new church (see Figure 7, Site Plan). CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our reconnaissance investigation, .it is our opinion that construction of the new church and associated improvements 00 the referenced property is feasible from a geotechnical and engineering geologic perspective. In our opinion, the primary constraint to the proposed improvements is the potential for strong ground shaking during a moderate to large earthquake on one of the nearby active faults. MURRAY ENGINEERS INC II Page 4 of 6 St. Archangel Michael Church Engineering Geologic Geotechnical Reconnaissance We briefly reviewed the potential for geologic hazards to impact the site, considering the geologic setting and our observations during our site reconnaissance. The results of our review are presented below: o Fault Rupture Based on our site reconnaissance and our review of published maps, it is our opinion that no active faults cross the property. Therefore, in our opinion the potential for fault rupture to occur at the site is low. However, the site is located within a broad zone of deformation associated with southwest dipping traces of the Monte Vista Shannon fault zone. Traces of the Shannon fault are mapped to the northeast and southwest of the site. Zones of subtle ground deformation have been mapped around these traces; however, the site is located outside of these deformation zones. Although the site is located outside of this mapped deformation zones, in our opinion, there exists a slight potential for broad, regional deformation in the general site vicinity during a large earthquake on the San Andreas fault, which could lead to coseismic or triggered slip along traces within the Monte Vista Shannon fault zone. In our opinion, the risk of significant structural damage to the proposed church as a result of this regional deformation is low. o Ground Shaking As noted in the Seismicity section above, moderate to large earthquakes are probable along several active faults M. the greater Bay Area over a 30 to 50 year design -life. Therefore, strong ground shaking should be expected several times during the design -life of the proposed church. To mitigate the effects of strong ground shaking, we recommend that the church be designed in accordance with current earthquake resistance standards, including the 1997 UBC guidelines. o Liquefaction As noted above, the site is not. located in an area considered susceptible to earthquake- induced liquefaction. The typical subsurface condition susceptible to liquefaction is a geologically recent deposit of loose or very loose, uniformly graded sand or silty sand saturated by groundwater. Earthquake induced ground shaking causes the loose sand to contract, resulting in increased pore water pressures and an upward Movement of ground water that may result in a liquefied condition. Structures situated above such temporarily liquefied soils may sink or tilt, causing significant structural damage. In our opinion, the potential for liquefaction to occur at the site and impact the proposed improvements is low. We recommend that the proposed site improvements be preceded by a detailed geotechnical investigation to evaluate the site specific subsurface conditions in the area of the proposed church and to provide geotechnical reconunendations for the design and construction of the proposed church and associated improvements. M RR AY ENGINEERS INC Page 5 of 6 St. Archangel Michael Church Engineering Geologic Geotechnical Reconnaissance LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the sole use of St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church specifically for evaluating the geotechnical and engineering geologic feasibility of the construction of a new church and associated improvements on the property located at 18870 Allendale Avenue in Saratoga, California. The opinions presented in this letter are based upon information obtained from reviewing published geologic maps, an engineering geologic reconnaissance of the site, and upon local experience and geotechnical and engineering geologic judgment. Our opinions have been formulated in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical and engineering geologic principals and practices that exist in the San Francisco Bay Area at the time this letter was prepared. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made or should be inferred. If you have any questions concerning our investigation or the content of this letter, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, MURRAY ENGINEERS Ronald A. Karpowi.cz Staff Geologist di14,042L, John Stillman, G.E, C.E.G. Principal Geotechnical Engineer Copies: Addressee (5) Attachments: Figure 1, Vicinity Map Figure 2, Vicinity Geologic Map Figure 3, Saratoga Geologic Map Figure 4, State Seismic hazard Zones Map Figure 5, Santa Clara County Fault Hazard Map Figure 6, Local Lineament Zone Map Figure 7, Site Plan MURRAY ENGINEERS INC Mark F. Baumann, C.E.G. 1787 Principal Engineering Geologist 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 6 of 6 Base: USGS Topographic Maps, Cupertino and San Jose West 7.5 Minute Quadrangles, 1980 and 1997' Approximate Scale: 1 inch 2,000 feet 1 ENGINEERS INC ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL CHURCH SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 648 -1R1 MAY 2007 VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 .'LEOTE[HNI.Rf 1.3E8.VICF3: PROJECT NO. 648 -1R1 Base: Preliminary Geologic Map of the San Jose and Palo Alto 30 x 60- Minute Quadrangles, compiled by Carl M. Wentworth, M. Clark Blake, Robert J. McLaughlin, and Russell W Graymer, 1999 Approximate Scale: 1 inch 4,000 feet ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL CHURCH SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA MAY 2007 VICINITY GEOLOGIC MAP FIGURE 2 Qhc Qhc: Stream Channel Deposits Qhf2:.Older Alluvial Fan Deposits (Holocene) Qpf: Alluvial Fan Deposits (Upper Pleistocene) Legend Selected Map Symbols Q1 c Fault Trace 4 Lt 114 X 3 QTsc: Santa Clara Formation g:t MI OM I= MN I= =I =I I= IMO =I OM I= MI Groricumtrm. SIR.VICE zkt. .71 I, 3, LEGEND SARATOGA GEOLOGIC MAP FIGURE 3 Qoal Older Alluvium Dst? Dormant Landslide Queried where uncertain QTsc QTsc: Santa Clara Formation. 00 00 Fault Mapped By California Department of Water Photc.).1ineament; Aligned Topographic and Color Anomalies Possibly Related to Faulting Landslide Deposit; Boundary Dashed Where .Approximate, Dotted Where Concealed by Younger Deposit, Queried Where Location Uncertain. Arrows Show Direction of Downslope Movement. Hachured Lines Indicate Top of Head Scarp. Question Mark Indicates Existence of Deposit is Uncertain Base: Geologic Maps of the Lower Saratoga Hillside Area, Saratoga, California, Terratech, 1985 Approximate Scale: 1 inch 400 feet 1 GrorfCJ NI.CAL:SFR ft- S rr i'''2,....,.• f i" T 7 r^. F w om A ith 4 1 .....4 �r t. �_a+, L Legend Areas where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local, geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined in. Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required. (Cupertino Quadrangle, 2002) D Areas where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local, geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined in j Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required. (San Jose West, 2001) Areas where previous occurence of landslide movement, or local topographic, geological, geotechnical and subsurface water conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required. Base: State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Map, Los Gatos Quadrangle, CGS, 2002 Scale: 1 inch 2,000 feet Base: State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Official Map, City of San Jose \Vest, 2001 and Cupertino Quadrangle, 2002. Scale: 1 inch 2,000 feet. ENGINEERS INC ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL CHURCH SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 648-1R1 1 MAY 2007 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 STATE SEISMIC I HAZARD ZONES MAP FIGURE 4 1 1 3,- 1 1.S E131 k13Cd FR !ENGINEERS INC ST ARCHANGEL MICHAEL CHURCH SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO 648-1R1 MAY 2007 SANTA CLARA COUNTY FAULT HAZARD MAP FIGURE 5 llll EilliErarg: .7• :;;;;;;;;MVP,:1■111:111: •,.1.1.1....., r.L. P im p r ll l lll ll ll 111 1' 1..m.. i e 1,:111 1 E7 EE EE lllll 7. 1:VEV:3711: .411Miliiii: .,r lllllll imi: z, lll ""v i mi ...itioda.11a1 0111.••11:1111•,,,,M.," Illi trfl- II 7: .101 S ...I....." Z11111t117.111115/ 1111111111 E.:11 ,MLA .:;;1■:1111;11,11`. .1111•11:11 lllll 17:1:1:;g1„, one; Elks pita- 11711■;ii's1::!N!i lll •motm !Atte f,P,E!!!!!!1!! qui mg -•111111• MI11111.11 '1 1111. :1,1731; VI '6111111. =mom; :111111111■11.. PliTer 1 II1111.11 CIVIC:1r •ihi.hiuI P11: Base: Santa Clara County Geologic Hazard Map, Sheet 27, adopted by the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors on February 26, 2002. _Approximate Scale 1 inch 2,000 feet. Note: Shaded areas denote fault rupture hazard zones. Legend Selected Map Symbols 4 F—,T O Rogers and Williams (19 74) 4— 4— Herd (1980) in CDMG, (1980) .A -A— -A Wesling and Helley (1989) Base: Geomorphic Investigations of Deformation Along the Northeastern Margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains, Plate 1, Hitchcock and others, Inc., 1994. Scale: 1.inch 2,000 feet. MURRAY ENGINEERS INC ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL CHURCH SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 648 -1R1 1 MAY 2007 Zone of lineaments LOCAL LINEAMENT ZONE MAP FIGURE 6 j2' 73 V /410 25 O11 pN r '-:1 G SIIi Development PbII by 1ntrn CIilToid J -1ocJatl/. inc.. 3uue 20(K S29 EHINEERS INCj \ppIoi1Tct7 Sc 1 inch. 40 feet SITE PLAN ST ARCHANGEL MICHAEL CHURCF! SARP1TOC, CALT.FORNIA PROJECT NO. 648 APR1L2007 1 FIGIJRE7 ATTACHMENT 5: TRAFFIC REPORT, DATED JULY 14, 2006 AND PREPARED BY HIGGINS ASSOCIATES l ASSOCIATES 11111111 CIVIL TRAFFIC ENGINEERS July 14, 2006 Jan Ivancovich, Board President St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, Ca 95070 RE: St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Traffic Analysis Dear Ms. Ivancovich: The St. Archangel. Michael Serbian Orthodox Church located on Allendale Avenue in Saratoga is proposing site improvements that include the development of a new sanctuary. This letter has been prepared to describe potential traffic related impacts associated with the project. Exhibit 1 shows the location of the church with respect to the local street network. Exhibit 2 shows the existing church site plan. The project site currently contains the following: 1. Church: 1,224 square feet; 2. Hall: 9,731 square feet; and 3. Single Family House: 2,521 square feet. Exhibit 3 shows proposed site plan. The proposed new sanctuary will consist of 3,994 square feet of floor space with a seating capacity of 254 people. The existing church has an estimated seating capacity of 120 people. The church does not currently provide daycare, school or after school care. These types of uses are not proposed in conjunction with development of the proposed project. Therefore, the church generates a very small volume of traffic during the weekday. Sunday service begins at 10:00 AM and ends around 11:30 AM. EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Street Network The church is accessed via a single driveway to Allendale Avenue. Allendale Avenue is a 2 -lane street that extends between Quito Road and Fruitvale Avenue, Allendale provides access to the Saratoga Civic Center, Post Office and Redwood Middle School. Allendale Avenue is a key access route to West Valley College. 1.300 -B St 6 C roy, California 95020 -4738 voicII408 848 -3122 Fax/408 848 -2202 www.khhiggins.com Jan Ivancovich July 14, 2006 Page 2 Existing Traffic Volumes To ascertain the volume of traffic entering and exiting the church property, a machine tube counter was used to count traffic on the church driveway between Saturday August 28, 2004 and Monday September 27, 2004. A machine tube counter was also used to count traffic on Allendale Avenue near the church between Wednesday November 3, 2004 and Tuesday November 9, 2004. In addition to the machine counts, the traffic entering and exiting the church was observed on Sunday, September 12, 2004 between 9:30 AM and 2:30 PM. Traffic entering and exiting the church was also observed on other Sundays between August and November 2004. Exhibit 4 summarizes the traffic volume counts collected on Allendale Avenue between November 3, 2004 and November 9, 2004. Section A on Exhibit 4 contains a summary of the daily traffic volume counted on Allendale Avenue. During the survey period, Allendale Avenue carried an average of about 7,100 vehicle per day on weekdays with the highest count of 7,600 vehicle observed on Tuesday. The lowest volume of traffic on a weekday occurred on Friday when about 5,500 vehicles were counted on Allendale Avenue. On Saturday, about 3,900 vehicles were counted and on Sunday about 3,600 vehicles were counted on Allendale Avenue. Sections B and C of Exhibit 4 provide a summary of the highest one -hour volumes on Allendale Avenue. Section B summarizes data for the peak commute hour, which is the highest one -hour volume during the 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM commute periods. Section C provides volume data for the highest one -hour of traffic during the morning and during the afternoon. During the morning commute period, Allendale Avenue carried about 640 vehicles on average during the busiest hour and about 510 vehicles during the busiest hour during the afternoon commute period. As shown in Section C, the highest one -hour volume typically occurred in the morning between 8:30 and 9:30 AM and averaged about 700 vehicles. The highest one -hour volume in the afternoon occurred at 12:00 Noon or at 3:15 PM and averaged about 610 vehicles. The weekend peak hour volumes are presented in Section D of Exhibit 4. The highest hourly volume on Allendale Avenue on Saturday and Sunday was observed on Sunday between 12:00 Noon and 1:00 PM when 356 vehicles were counted on Allendale Avenue near the church site. The peak hourly volume on Sunday is about one -half the average peak one -hour volume on a weekday. The results of manual counts conducted at the Allendale Avenue /Church Driveway intersection on Sunday, September 12, 2004 are shown on Exhibit 5. The Sunday driveway volume has been summarized to show intersection volumes during the hour when the following occurred: 5 -200 Ltr 7 -14-06 Jan Ivancovich July 14, 2006 Page 3 1. Peak inbound volume; 2. Peak outbound volume; 3. Peak inbound and outbound volume; 4. Peak intersection volume. On Sunday, September 12 the highest one -hour volume occurred at the intersection between 12:00 Noon and 1:00 PM. During that hour, a total of 378 vehicles were counted at the intersection, with 10 vehicles turning into the site and 10 vehicles exiting the site. The highest one -hour of vehicles entering the church site occurred between 9:30 AM and 10:30 AM when 36 vehicles turned into the site. The total volume of traffic entering and exiting the driveway during the 9:30 to 10 :30 AM hour was 38, which was the highest one -hour volume of entering and exiting vehicles during the survey period. The highest volume of traffic exiting the site occurred between 1:00 PM and 2:00 PM when 30 vehicles exited the site. On September 12 the attendance at the church service was 80 people. The church generated vehicle trips during the 9:30 AM to 10:30 AM hour, which was the hour that the church generated the highest number of trips, at the rate of 0.48 trips per attendee. This compares with trip generation rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) for the church land use category of 0.63 trips per seat during the peak hour of the generator. Traffic operations at the Allendale Avenue/Fruitvale Avenue and Allendale Avenue /Quito Road intersections were observed throughout the morning of Sunday November 7, 2004. These intersections operated very well during the observation periods and no significant congestion was observed at these intersections on Sunday morning. On weekdays, the church, including the house located on the site, generate a low volume of traffic. Exhibit 6 summarizes existing traffic volumes generated between November 3 and November 9 by the existing uses on the project site. The existing uses generated an average of 32 trips per day during the survey period. The existing uses generated an average of 2 vehicle trips during the weekday AM peak commute hour and 4 vehicle trips during the weekday PM peak commute hour. Existing Parking The existing parking area on the church site consists mainly of gravel and dirt surfaces and parking spaces are not marked. In conjunction with the construction of the new church, the on -site parking areas and circulation aisles will be paved. The proposed project will establish 85 parking stalls and an overflow parking area for 41 vehicles. On Sunday September 12, 2004, the peak parking demand during the morning service was 53 vehicles, which was observed at 11:30 AM. However, after the regular service was completed, vehicles continued to arrive at the church site in greater numbers than 5 -200 Ltr 7 -14 -06 Jan Ivancovich July 14, 2006 Page 4 vehicles left the site. The peak accumulation of vehicles on the project site occurred at 12.30 PM when 56 vehicles were observed on -site. At 11:30 AM there were 110 people on the church site and 51 vehicles in the parking lot. The 110 people on the church site had arrived in 51 vehicles resulting in an average of 2.16 people per vehicle. PROJECT CONDITIONS Over time, the existing membership of the church is expected to increase. The project will expand the seating provided in the church to 254 seats. The increased membership will result in higher volumes of vehicle trips to the church on Sundays. This section describes traffic and parking conditions with 100% occupancy of the 254 seat church. The trip generation rates shown on Exhibit 5 were used to forecast the volume of trips that will be generated by the expanded church with 100% occupancy (254 people). The existing Sunday arrival/departure distribution was assumed. The existing driveway volumes shown on Exhibit 5 were increased by a factor of 3.2 (254 80) to reflect the 254 person occupancy condition. The Sunday driveway forecasts for the proposed condition are shown on Exhibit 7. With a full occupancy service, the peak one -hour of trips generated by the church will be an estimated 121 vehicles between 9:30 AM and 10:30 AM. The highest hourly inbound volume will also occur between 9:30 AM and 10:30 AM when the estimated inbound volume will be 114 vehicles. During the peak hour of the Allendale Avenue /Church. Driveway intersection, an estimated 32 vehicles will enter the church property and 32 vehicles will leave the church property. Based on the traffic volume projections shown on Exhibit 7, the Allendale Avenue /Church Driveway intersection would operate at LOS A throughout the Sunday morning with the project developed. Traffic operations are rated on an "A" to "F" scale with LOS A representing excellent, free flow conditions and LOS F representing congested, gridlock conditions. The church driveway approach to Allendale Avenue would operate in the LOS B range during periods of high outbound traffic flows from the church based on the traffic projections shown on Exhibit 7. The level of service calculation worksheets are attached. The additional traffic added to the street network as a result expanding the church will not significantly impact traffic operations on Allendale Avenue, the Allendale Avenue /church driveway intersection, the Allendale Avenue/Fruitvale Avenue intersection or the Allendale Avenue /Quito Road intersection. Adequate capacity is available at these intersections on Sunday mornings to serve the trips generated by the church project. 5 -200 Ltr 7 -14-06 e_ Jan Ivancovich July 14, 2006 Page 5 The City of Saratoga zoning regulations requires that one parking space be provided for every four seats. On the basis of the zoning regulations, the church would require 64 spaces. The church will provide 126 parking spaces on site, configured as 85 permanent parking stalls and 41 overflow spaces located on a grass surface south of the existing hall, Based on the observed vehicle occupancy ratio of 2.16 persons per vehicle observed on September 12, 2004, 118 parking spaces (254 2.16) would be required to serve an event with an attendance of 254 people. An allowance of 5% is recommended as a safety factor for the church parking lot. It is recommended that 123 parking spaces be provided for a full capacity event at the church. With 126 spaces provided on -site, the parking spaces provided on -site will be adequate to serve a full occupancy event of 254 people. SUMMARY The St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church located on Allendale Avenue in Saratoga is proposing site improvements that include the development of a new sanctuary with a seating capacity of 254 people. The project site plan indicates that 85 parking stalls will be provided on -site with an overflow parking area of 41 spaces for a total of 126 spaces. Existing traffic operations on Allendale Avenue and at the Allendale Avenue/Fruitvale Avenue and Allendale Avenue /Quito Road intersections are very good on Sunday mornings. Traffic volumes on Allendale Avenue during Sunday morning are about one- half of existing weekday peak hour volumes. The proposed project in conjunction with expanded membership at the church will increase the volume of trips generated by the church on Sundays. However, the anticipated additional trips will not significantly impact traffic operations on the local road network. The church proposes no weekday activities at the church. Therefore, the weekday trip generation of the church should not significantly change. The 126 on -site parking spaces, which will be provided as permanent spaces and overflow spaces, will be adequate to serve the estimated parking demand of 123 vehicles for a full- occupancy (254 people) event. Please contact me you have any questions regarding this information. Sincerely, J. Daniel Takacs, TE Principal Associate 5 -200 Ltr 7 -14 -06 A 30 O VIA CHARTERS CHq rE ANGU bR. TEN OAR .,,7 DR. 8 Li AV. MILLER CT. 1 NORTHAMPI4 PALERMO VISDL AC L P GRANDE DR. N 6= s s v W 0 CT. BRAEMAR OLD N+s ROSLf CR. 4fO 'C 0 0 9 FALM� cr DR. SP oQ FARWELL 0. TH EE OAKS WY, 9 E UNO LLW GUNTHER CT. LN. 4 L 0 MM... .1 r .rs. P\HOP 7 j t IFNOA� III WEST VALLEY COW. L SESSION COW. LOLL L UST. OFL II COLLEGE l I DR. sy Oq 4 �r L t• W C. TWAIN t ALCprr P MARTHA% N 1 CC a 0 A, ASEOTIERRA4 it S EL OUITO PARK L m SEO PUEBLO 1 PASEO LADD a•aAVaaa. a McCOY AV. AV. McFARLAND AV. NORTHLA PASEO OLNOS COU Z IE 1NYLOR AV. PURDUE DR. HALF PROJECT LOCATION a Q O' 9FS RD. GS/ RAVENSW00D DR. N Z 7. MARSHq<' dp G SOBEY LN. R0. SINGE., C y LN. 00 OLD 6' ELMW000 4 w LC m OR. CT. BUCKNALL SHAUN BETLO CT. VANDERBILT CLEMSON AV. SWARTHMORE DR. �Y.M.CA McCOY Y0R o MONTREAL Q Q 6 W cc S do TISDALE WY. O W o nBEas. =y RNONY PASEO DLLVOS •lr' i W •DLNSE •T. C 0 ALtE I N WY. FARWELL �o- r f Tn V. 5 BAR 3 CTS .p a RD. WELLIN Cc, DR. o BLYTHE cr. O cr- \LATER_ E c :o Q SF, DR. DR AV. o„ GOLETA �a a 08.0 '.A. WV I J+ P 5 rr m W 3 0 /STA CT. LSOHN RENIN MORAN PARR U =MAMA TAEA CT. DR. LLISA a cu VERSAILLES 9 OMER5Y -n COMM. LIB. Pa) STTY HA= coML- cc-m'. a CON' YARD 0 •N 1 Nc PO. DR. 8 AV. ,s DORCHESTER AT c h EDINA a NM0UCRF W ET' C NaLYDIa: o j REARM LR: t m YUSA c? LN. Rime o r PRE STA. cox o.. GLEN BR AE 0- 4 SHUREAT R JVNfPE cOMGR5 il SPRINGS $4 BROOKVIE TIT VENDURA SAN MARCOS 5 NDY o ARIBA PINMACL f 4k COON Ifn 0 I RD O i` R 1P t•0:- DR 10, DE 6N REENBROOX Ch,4BL; HOME h e y e wr 'CASA BLAN O• 15. ASPESI BROOK 09 4 Tttl1 DR. 0 it i Mpp'C� s VESSING RD. AVON 5 S ilt WY. WY. WY. I z 0 ML, MASSY 3 gr 'r,•.rr s O BE t9 n aL�° q w •Yo 4llE� LICKIEULNO °EL Tom DIS'F OFC. C ALEX C itroe 7A F�� �A e O q t IgW G 2.- A N 1 DR CORONA t' us i S CT. S 3 QUITO !1 S. LAC XMAS LT. gL 4, LAS PIEDRAS CT. rt ;L o S LOS ENCAMOS LTA O a p PO4L 0 V s 9 PR Y. WA EL NSA EL µ03S1 9 4Ro a2 .y rf .(31 9q JRGH DR. CHATEAU A N S LAL AND IE BRAE LIDERA CI' Qua iEi WOODBANKI e. MAUDE AV. RE EXHIBIT 1- PROJECT LOCATION H IG GINS ASSOCIATES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 g g HIGGINS ASSOCIATES .z 7:2 1 4' b zriNz.\\7 L 1 N 41 44 Aft. IKEINE. gi.= AL 116" 0: gea. VLPF EXHIBIT 2- EXISTING CHURCH SITE MAW 0104 ROD 411100 MaDm 01100030 H F 0co z rn 0 1 1r TV?. TYP. •E IN 1000...4.119 TOUT (l0 11010100/ 11 1 t0* IrCer TO01000R0DID 34.01100 SIAM i1Np!lNlds 81126 P$tMOLIS E00711e: PRTCTST t 11 I r FIRE DFPARTMQIT RFIkTRfAFNTS NOTE. Pr ro. Ow Oro row Ny wfpm ANr.lbr .o..A...Mr n1w*I10 1 qr., .Mt s. M On M ..oro1,or 01 000100. 'Pf 0 90^!. mMM e/3000 M b t l9m OOr. n 10 M Tilt. moo Tr Mrt.e n. M Y ..AM .n.t Goo ok. torn M Cr bTtotrt3 .Mr on Pore M Po...w.m 01003 q A.M.10 M Mor t® Or .n h p�µ .04., ny M nor.. a... a t73700 00 naa... OTA01�000 00..1.0 On for. n.er >t.t «I o. .I e,i r Mm)i' j4'1... A OM. C1n..e. IT* fw rob.. err* WI roans e.rt ero.Ar1... loo M. hot to M ea r0O.. Or ..1... a 0) 0.0 10-110 R. 0 00el4 100r<M ...1w 'Arm torn ti .0.030 WOW or KM Ste. 11•. A xrt0.io) 1 0 PAw..'+ tro100 .yb.1 .rwM MM T. .0 ook -y s.orart ore .11 OW Coro EM.Uw ttArro 011. w O 0, r.1 warm 0.e root MA Po R. fro.. r' tOlso Tw T. 4.. 0010 b...t 9^roo for M n.d..P. ea. D. tr00 w Its 100110. M I.1 r A 9. 311S.0.11 llontotorr ram Wet or error.. ellegt Ern. EXISTING SANITARY SERER EXISTING DVERIIEAG TELEPHONE EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING FENCE EXISTINC EDGE 6 PAVEtITTFT CRASS AREA 0M31FLOW PARI000 c04e't1GE mEee TD00. K6001d h Psalms F RAMA *Mr UMad A 4e 2101433.01d 440. Fm00OL COSIF nh.9OSir III 510.145.1000 I I 510.440.1005 DCAIncCra cton R +G sc'A architecture p l a n n i n g I nt erlors ST. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, California SITE PLAN J1 0iCONCO 1.1. A ICED Trot Moro 05)05 RUTH AND CMG. INC. malt us. tort &At 6 Mil 1.1 Trott R.0100. 3 OF 12 OM UM M IIIII MI MI MI MI Date AM Peak Commute Hour PM Peak Commute Hour Time Begin I Westbound Eastbound Total Time Begin Westbound 1 Eastbound Total 11/3/2004 Wednesday 7:30 AM 1 547 132 679 5:00 PM 235 286 521 11/4/2004 Thursday 7:30 AM j 531 135 666 5:00 PM 226 1 266 492 11/5/2004 Friday 7:30 AM 1 402 156 558 4:00 PM 195 253 448 11/8/2004 Monday 7:15 AM 535 130 665 4:45 PM 217 303 520 11/9/2004 Tuesday 7:15 AM 402 147 627 4:00 PM 217 337 554 Average 499 140 639 218 289 507 Date AM Peak Hour 11/3/2004 Wednesday AM Peak Hour 11/4/2004 Thursday Time Begin i Westbound PM Peak Hour Total I Time Begin !Westbound Eastbound 11:30 AM 1 173 11:45 AM 141 Total Time Begin 1 Westbound Eastbound 1 Total 11/3/2004 Wednesday 8:30 AM 568 201 1 769 12:00 Noon! 267 344 i 611 11/4/2004 Thursday 8:30 AM 559 202 i 761 12:00 Noon 229 403 632 11/5/2004 Friday 7:30 AM 1 402 156 558 3:15 PM 215 287 502 11/8/2004 Monday 8:30 AM 500 221 721 12:00 Noon! 299 374 673 11/9/2004 Tuesday 8:30 AM 1 515 183 698 3:15 PM 229 408 I 637 Average j 509 193 1 701 1 248 1 363 i 611 Date AM Peak Hour 11/3/2004 Wednesday PM Peak Hour 11/4/2004 Thursday Time Begin i Westbound Eastbound 1 Total Time Begin! Westbound Eastbound Total 11/6/2004 Saturday 11/7/2004 Sunday 11:30 AM 1 173 11:45 AM 141 156 I 171 1 329 312 2:15 PM 168 j 181 12:00 Noon' 174 i 182 1 349 356 Date Daily Volume 11/3/2004 Wednesday 7,494 11/4/2004 Thursday 7,508 11/5/2004 Friday 5,460 11/8/2004 Monday 7,327 11/9/2004 Tuesday 7,616 Weekday Average 7,081 11/6/2004 Saturday 3,885 11/7/2004 Sunday 3,568 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A. ALLENDALE AVENUE DAILY VOLUMES B. ALLENDALE AVENUE WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES COMMUTE PEAK C. ALLENDALE AVENUE WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES STREET PEAK D. ALLENDALE AVENUE WEEKEND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES Higgins Associates AllendaleVolsAliendaleVois EXHIBIT 4 EXISTING ALLENDALE AVENUE TRAFFIC VOLUMES 9:30 -10:30 AM Higgins Associates privewav Volume In= 36 Out 2 Total= 38 0.48 trips per attendee) Total Intersection Volume= 273 1:00 -2:00 PM Driveway Volume In 6 Out= 30 Total 36 0.45 trips per attendee) Total Intersection Volume= 304 9:30 -10:30 AM privewav Volume In= 36 Out= 2 Total= 38 0.48 trips per attendee) Total Intersection Volume= 273 12:00 -1:00 PM Driveway Volume In= 10 Out= 1Q Total= 20 0.25 trips per attendee) Total Intersection Volume= 378 Source: Manual Counts, September, 12, 2004 ALLENDALE AVE /CHURCH DRIVEWAY SUNDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUME Peak Inbound Volume Allendale Ave 110 23 e 6 125 sc 13 A Peak Outbound Volume Allendale Ave 134 4 r 134 2 Peak Driveway Volume Allendale Ave 110 23 6 E-- 125 f 13 Peak Intersection Volume Allendale Ave 201 6 .4— 157 4 ro A 5400 votimea7- 144w 'wing EXHIBIT 5- EXISTING ALLENDALE AVEICHURCH DRIVEWAY SUNDAY TRAFFIC VOLUMES Date Daily Volume AM Peak Hour Volume PM Peak Hour Volume 11/3/2004 Wednesday 28 4 6 11/4/2004 Thursday 24 4 3 11/5/2004 Friday 32 1 3 11/8/2004 Monday 24 0 5 11/9/2004 Tuesday 52 2 2 Weekday Average 32 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CHURCH DRIVEWAY VOLUMES Notes: 1. Church event on Tuesday November 9, 2004 generated 30 vehicle trips between 7:00 PM and 9:00 PM. EXHIBIT 6- EXISTING WEEKDAY CHURCH DRIVEWAY Higgins Associates WeekdayVolsWeekdayDrvwyVols TRAFFIC VOLUMES 9:30 -10:30 AM privewav Volume In= 114 Out= Total= 121 Total Intersection Volume= 356 1:00 -2:00 PM privewav Volume In= 19 Out= 95 Total= 114 12:00 -1:00 PM Higgins Associates Total Intersection Volume= 382 9:30 -10:30 AM privewav Volume In= 114 Out Total= 121 Total Intersection Volume= 356 privewav Volume In= 32 Out Total= 85 Total Intersection Volume= 422 PROJECT CONDITION ALLENDALE AVE/CHURCH DRIVEWAY SUNDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUME Peak Inbound Volume Allendale Ave 125 f 41 o co Peak Outbound Volume Allendale Ave 134 13 134 vC-- 0 Peak Onveway Volume Allendale Ave 110 73 1 125 41 A Peak Intersection Volume Allendale Ave 201 19 U 157 13 5 -20o Volomct7 -I4 6- ProjectUadlfea EXHIBIT 7- PROJECT CONDITION ALLENDALE AVE /CHURCH DRIVEWAY SUNDAY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ATTACHMENTS LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS EwSN Ex Inbound Peak Thu Jul 23, 2006 13:36:47 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Allendale /Church Dvwy Average Delay (sec /veh): 0.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 8.9] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L- T R L T R L T R 1 11 11 11 I Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 it 11 11 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 110 23 13 125 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 110 23 13 125 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 110 23 13 125 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 110 23 13 125 0 1 11 11 it 1 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx I 11 11 11 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx 122 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 133 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx 935 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1464 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx 935 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1464 xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx 1 11 11 11 I Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx 0.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx 8.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A A Movement: LT LTR RT LT LTR RT LT LTR RT LT LTR RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: A ApproachDel: 8.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A Traffix 7.7.0315 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS ASSOC., GILROY Ex Outbound Peak Level Of. Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Allendale /Church Dvwy Average Delay (sec /veh): 1.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: At 9.7] North Bound South Bound East Bound L T R L T R L- T- R 1 11 11 Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 11 11 Volume Module: Base Vol: 17 0 13 0 0 0 0 134 4 2 134 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 17 0 13 0 0 0 0 134 4 2 134 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 17 0 13 0 0 0 0 134 4 2 134 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 17 0 13 0 0 0 0 134 4 2 134 0 I 11 11 11 Critical Gap Module: xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx it Approach: Movement: Critical Gp: 6.4 FollowUpTim: 3.5 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 274 xxxx Potent Cap.: 720 xxxx Move Cap.: 719 xxxx Volume /Cap: 0.02 xxxx 1 Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx LOS by Move: Movement: LT LTR Shared Cap.: xxxx 794 SharedQueue:xxxxx 0.1 Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 9.7 Shared LOS: A ApproachDel: 9.7 ApproachLOS: A Thu Jul 13, 2006 13:36:47 Page 3 -1 136 918 918 0.01 11 West Bound L T R II Uncontrolled Include 0 1 0 0 0 11 1 XXXX XXXXX XXXXx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 11 11 1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 138 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1458 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1458 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx 11 11 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx A LT LTR RT LT LTR RT LT LTR RT xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx A xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx Traffix 7.7.0315 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS Assoc., GILROY i0 Ex Peak Intersection Thu Jul 13, 2006 13:36:49 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Allendale /Church Dvwy Average Delay (sec /veh): 0.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 9. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L -T R. L T R L- T R L T R I II 11 II I Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 11 11 11 I Volume Module: Base Vol: 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 201 6 4 157 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 201 6 4 157 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 201 6 4. 157 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 201 6 4 157 0 1 1 II 11 1 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 1 11 11 11 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 369 xxxx 204 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 207 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 635 xxxx 842 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1376 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 634 xxxx 842 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1376 xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: 0.01 xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx 1 11 11 I 1 Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A Movement: LT LTR RT LT LTR RT LT LTR RT LT LTR RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 744 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 9.9 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: A A ApproachDel: 9.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: A Traffix 7.7.0315 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS ASSOC., GILROY Pnojec+ Csxmi.* PC Inbound Peak Thu Jul 13; 2006 13:36:48 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Allendale /Church Dvwy Average Delay (sec /veh): 1.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: A[ 9.0] Approach: Movement: L 1 North Bound South Bound T R L T R 11 Control: Stop Sign Rights: Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 1 0 I 11 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 6 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 6 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 Final Vol.: 0 0 1 1.00 1.00 6 0 6 1 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx Move Cap.: xxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx 147 xxxx 906 xxxx 906 xxxx 0.01 Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx LOS by Move: Movement: LT LTR Shared Cap.: xxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx Shared LOS: ApproachDel: ApproachLOS: 0 0 0 0 110 73 41 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 110 73 41 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 110 73 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 73 41 11 11 II Stop Sign Uncontrolled Include Include 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 11 11 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx XXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXXX xxxx XXXXX XXXXX xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LT LTR RT LT LTR RT LT LTR RT XXXX xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxxx XXXXX XXXXX xxxxx XXXX xxxx 11 East Bound L T R XXXX XXXX xxxx XXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX xxxxx West Bound L T R 11 Uncontrolled Include 0 1 0 0 0 183 1404 1404 xxxx 0.03 11 125 1.00 125 1.00 1.00 125 0 125 Traffix 7.7.0315 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS ASSOC., GILROY 1 0 1.00 0 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx A xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx A xxxxxx 1 Tbzjecec C w dckw" PC Outbound Peak Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Allendale /Church Dvwy Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.7 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 10.2] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement L T R L T R. L T R L T R 11 11 11 Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Include Include Include 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 11 1 Control: Rights: Lanes: 0 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 54 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 54 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 54 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 Final Vol.: 54 0 1 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 287 Potent Cap.: 708 Move Cap.: 706 Volume /Cap: 0.08 1 Stop sign Include 0 1! 0 0 11 Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx LOS by Move: Movement: LT LTR Shared Cap.: xxxx 782 SharedQueue:xxxxx 0.4 Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 10.2 Shared LOS: B ApproachDel: 10.2 ApproachLOS: B Thu Jul 13, 2006 13:36:48 Page 3 -1 41 0 0 0 0 134 13 6 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 41 0 0 0 0 134 13 6 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 41 0 0 0 0 134 13 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 134 13 6 11 11 11 6.2 xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx II 141 913 913 0.04 xxxx xxxx XXXX xxxx XXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 11 XXXXXX XXXXX xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx RT LT LTR RT xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx 1 XXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXXX xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx XXXX XXXX xxxx xxxx XXXX xxxx LT LTR xxxxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxxx 2.2 11 147 1447 1447 0.00 134 1.00 134 1.00 1.00 134 0 134 XXXX XXXXX xxxx xxxxx 1 0.0 XXXX xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx A LT LTR RT 0 1.00 0 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 Traffix 7.7.0315 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS ASSOC., GILROY XXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXX xxxx xxxxx XXXX xxxx 'eo le.c.“..consN 4:o+% PC Peak Intersection Thu Jul 13, 2006 13:36:49 Level. Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 Allendale /Church Dvwy Average Delay (sec /veh): 1.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: Approach: North, Bound South Bound East Bound Movement: L T R L- T R L T R 1 11 11 Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 i1 11 Volume Module: Base Vol: 13 0 19 0 0 0 0 201 19 13 157 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 13 0 19 0 0 0 0 201 19 13 157 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 13 0 19 0 0 0 0 201 19 13 157 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 13 0 19 0 0 0 0 201 19 13 157 0 1 11 11 11 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 394 xxxx 211 Potent Cap.: 615 xxxx 835 Move Cap.: 610 xxxx Volume /Cap: 0.02 xxxx 1 Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx LOS by Move: Movement: LT LTR Shared Cap.: xxxx 726 SharedQueue:xxxxx 0.1 Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 10.2 Shared LOS: B ApproachDel: 10.2 ApproachLOS: B 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 11 11 xxxx XXXX 835 xxxx 0.02 xxxx 11 xxxx XXXX XXXX xxxxx XXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx XXXX xxxxx LT LTR RT xxxx xxxx xxxxx XXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXXX xxxx xxxxx XXXX xxxx XXXX xxxx 1 XXXXX xxxxx 11 xxxxx 220 xxxxx 1361 xxxxx 1361 xxxx 0.01 II Page 3 -1 B[ 10.2] West Bound L T R Il Uncontrolled Include 0 1 0 0 0 II 1 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx XXXX XXXXX xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1 Traffix 7.7.0315 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS ASSOC., GILROY ATTACHMENT 6: TRAFFIC REPORT, DATED MAY 21, 2007 AND PREPARED BY HIGGINS ASSOCIATES May 21, 2007 ASSOCIATES ciV1 TRAFFIC ENGINEERS Mr. Rasha. Bozinovic, Board President St. Archangel Michael. Serbian Orthodox Church 18870 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, Ca 95070 RE: St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church Traffic Analysis Dear Mr. Bozinovic: This letter documents additional traffic impact analyses for the. St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church located on Allendale Avenue in Saratoga. The church is proposing to construct a. new sanctuary on the existing church property. A traffic study of the proposed project was documented in a February 20, 2007. That analysis was based on traffic counts collected in 2004. This letter documents analyses based upon traffic counts collected in April of this year including counts and observations collected on Easter Sundayf. In addition, information regarding existing uses on the church site was provided by church. officials: A. discussion. of potential impacts associated with various church activities are described in this letter. Exhibit 1 shows the location of the church with respect to the local street network. Exhibit 2 shows the existing church. site plan. The church consists of a hall, a classroom (temporarily used as a chapel) and a single family residence. For purposes of this report, when the term "church" is used, it refers to the entirety of the project site and all of the. buildings and facilities on the site. The project site currently contains the following:. 1. Sunday School (temporary chapel): 1.224 square feet; 2. Hall: 9,731 square feet; and 3. Single Family House: 2,521 square feet. Exhibit 3 shows the proposed site plan. The proposed. new sanctuary will consist of 3.994 square feet of floor space with a seating capacity of 254 people. The existing church. has an estimated seating capacity of 80 people. The traffic analysis consists of a traffic impact analysis and a parking analysis. The traffic impact analysis evaluates the impact. of the traffic generated by the church to the local. street network. The parking analysis evaluates the parking needs of the church and the ability of the church to meet existing and future parking demand. 30(i -!4 E`lr+t:Suv Gilroy: California 95O20-473t w,xii4()8 $4i -3I2! t zit 1(004$-2202 KBE ,kbhig ins.ti t (kasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Church Activities Church officials provided a listing of current church activities, which is shown on Exhibit 4. Weekly events include Sunday services and events, social events for children and adults and religious related services held during the week and on Saturday. Excluding the Sunday events, most of the, weekly social and religious activities are low attendance events, with the International Folklore Dance on. Thursday evening generating the highest attendance at 60 people. Otherwise, the attendance at the weekly non- Sunday events is 15 people or less. Besides the Sunday service that begins at 10:00 AM; there are several other events and activities that occur at the church on Sunday. Events last throughout the day, generally ending between 3:00 and 4:00 PM. As shown on Exhibit 4, attendance levels vary at each event and as a result, the number of people on the church site fluctuates throughout the day on Sunday. The peak number of people on the church site peaks after the morning service. At the current time, the church estimates that attendance for the Sunday morning service is 80 people, which is the seating capacity of the church. Other church attendees arrive after 10:00 for Sunday School and Iunch with 60 people attending Sunday School. and 120 people attending lunch. Afternoon activities on. Sunday include Serbian language for children (60 attendees), Serbian Language for adults (20 people), Kolo dance practice for teens and Tarbura practice for children (8 people): Baptisms are conducted on an irregular basis, usually after the Sunday service. In 2006, there were 16 baptisms and in 2007 there have been 7 baptisms. Church Board and Sunday School related meetings are held once per month. These meetings are attended by 20 people. As shown on Exhibit 4, there are several religious and social events that are once per year. Attendances at these events vary, with the highest attendance events associated with Christmas Eve and Easter activities. In addition to the church social and religious events, the church hosts funerals and weddings on an irregular basis throughout the year. In 2006, there were 8 funerals and 3 weddings and in 2007 there has been one funeral and no weddings at the church. There is no Sunday School from about mid -May to mid- September. Three times per year, there are no Sunday services or activities at the church. The church does not have an office on the site. Mail is delivered to a curb site box. The church does not currently provide weekday daycare, school or after school care: These types of uses are not proposed in conjunction with development of the proposed project. 7-055 Ltr 5 -21-07 pasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 3 Existing Street Network The church is accessed via a single driveway to Allendale Avenue. Allendale Avenue is a 2 -Sane collector street that extends between Quito Road and Fruitvale Avenue. Allendale provides access to the Saratoga Civic Center, Post Office and Redwood Middle School. Allendale Avenue is a key access route to West Valley College. Existing Traffic Volumes Allendale Avenue A machine tube counter was installed to count traffic on Allendale Avenue near the church between Sunday, April 8; 2007 and Saturday April. 21, 2007. Exhibit 5 summarizes the traffic volume counts collected on Allendale Avenue between April. 8, 2007 and April 21, 2007. Section A on Exhibit 5 contains a summary of the daily traffic volume counted. on Allendale Avenue. The week of. April 8 th is a holiday week for some schools and traffic. on. Allendale Avenue was lower during the week of April. 8 compared to the week of April 15 During the week of April 8th, Allendale carried an. average of 5,614 vehicles per weekday and during th.e week of April 15 Allendale Avenue carried 6,475 vehicles per weekday. The highest. daily count of 6,971 vehicles was observed on Wednesday Aprill 19. On Saturday April 21', Allendale Avenue carried about 4,200 vehicles and on Sunday April 15 Allendale Avenue carried about 3,400 vehicles. Sections B and C of Exhibit 5 provide a summary of the highest one -hour volumes that were counted on Allendale Avenue during the week of April 15 Counts from the week of April 15 are presented because traffic during this week was higher on Allendale Avenue compared to the week of April 8th. Section B summarizes data for the peak commute hour, which is the highest one -hour volume during the 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM commute periods. During the morning commute period, Allendale Avenue carried about 615 vehicles on average during the busiest hour, excluding the Friday data. During the afternoon commute period, Allendale Avenue carried about 506 vehicles during the busiest hour, excluding the Friday data. Section C provides volume data for the highest one -hour of traffic during the morning and during the afternoon. The highest one -hour volume typically occurred during the morning commute period. The one exception occurred on Wednesday, when the peak volume during the morning occurred between 8:30 and 9:30 AM. For the week, the street peak volume for Allendale Avenue was about 620 vehicles, excluding the Friday data. During the afternoon and evening period, the street peak occurred at different hours of the day during the week, ranging from: as .early as 2:45 PM on. Friday to 5 :30 PM on Wednesday. The afternoon street peak volume averaged 542 vehicles excluding the Friday data. 7-055 Ltr 5-21-07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 4 The weekend peak hour volumes are presented in Section D of Exhibit 5. The highest hourly volume on Allendale Avenue on Saturday was observed between. 11:15 AM. and 12:15 PM when the street carried 436 vehicles near the church site. The highest hourly volume on Allendale Avenue on Sunday was observed between 12:15 PM and 1:15 PM when the street carried 337 vehicles near the church site. The peak Saturday hourly volume is about 70% to 75% the average peak. hour volume on a weekday and the peak Sunday hourly volume is about 55% of the average peak hour volume on a weekday. Exhibit 6 shows a graphic display of the hourly variation in traffic throughout the week. Hourly traffic volumes on Allendale Avenue Monday through Thursday are consistent. The hourly variation shows the impact of college traffic, which creates the highest peak in traffic in the morning and several lower peaks throughout the day. In. the afternoon, the highest peak is at 3:00 PM. Volumes on Allendale Avenue are lower during the evening peak commute period than during the afternoon peak. Traffic volumes on Allendale Avenue are lower on Friday than on the other weekdays. Saturday and Sunday volumes are lower than weekday volumes with traffic volumes on Sunday being the lowest of the week. Allendale Avenue /Church Driveway Manual counts were performed at the Allendale Avenue intersection with the church driveway on Sunday, April 8, 2007 (Easter Sunday) and Sunday April 22, 2007. Through traffic and vehicles turning between the church. driveway and Allendale Avenue were counted. The Easter Sunday count began at 9:00 AM and ended at 3:30 PM. The April 22" count began at 9:45 AM and ended at 3:00 PM. Besides the Sunday service, other activities occur at the church throughout Sunday. These events include baptisms, lunch, Sunday School, Serbian Language class and Tambora and Kolo dance practice. Because of the limited seating currently in the church and because some attendees do not attend the 10:00 AM service, but may attend another event at the church on Sunday, the existing church generates inbound and outbound traffic throughout the period between. approximately 9:30 in the morning to about 3:00 in the afternoon. Exhibit 7a shows the 15- minute driveway volumes for Easter Sunday. The highest inbound volume prior to the beginning of the 10:00 AM service was at 9:45 AM (24 vehicles). There was ariother inbound peak at 10 :45 AM (39 vehicles). On. Easter Sunday, the peak 15- minute outbound volume occurred at 2:15 PM (29 vehicles). Exhibit 7b shows the 15- minute driveway volumes for April 29` While the volume of traffic generated by the church on Sunday April. 29 do not approach the volumes generated on Easter Sunday, the inbound/outbound flows show similar characteristics as Easter Sunday. There was an inbound peak prior to 10:00 AM, another inbound peak near 11:00 AM and an outbound peak near 2:00 PM. 7-055 Ltr 5- 21.117 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 5 Because of the numerous peaks that occur on Sunday. Sunday driveway volumes are shown on Exhibit 8 for the following conditions: 1. Peak inbound volume; 2. Peak outbound volume; 3. Peak inbound and outbound volume; 4. Peak intersection volume. On Easter Sunday; the peak number of people on the site occurred at 11:45 AM when 416 people were on the site. The highest one -hour volume at the Allendale Avenue/Chtirch driveway intersection occurred between 12:00 Noon and 1 :00 PM. During that hour, a total of 366 vehicles were counted at the intersection, with 32 vehicles turning into the site and 6lvehicles exiting the site. The highest one -hour of vehicles entering the church. site occurred between 10:45 AM and 11:45 AM when 98 vehicles turned into the site. The highest volume of traffic exiting the site occurred between 2 :15 PM and 3:15 PM when 85 vehicles exited the site. The peak trip generation for the site occurred between 11:30 AM and 12:30 PM when 124 vehicle trips were generated by the site (56 inbound and 68 outbound). The peak attendance on April 29 also occurred at 11 :45 when there were 112 people on the church site. According to church officials, church attendance on April 29` was typical of recent attendance. levels at the church. The highest one -hour volume at the Allendale Avenue /Church driveway intersection on April 29 occurred between. 12:15 PM and 1:15 PM. During that hour, a total of 447 vehicles were counted at the intersection, with 15 vehicles turning into the site and 17 vehicles exiting the site. The highest one -hour of vehicles entering the church site occurred between 9:45 AM and 10:45 AM when 38 vehicles turned into the site. The highest volume of traffic exiting the site occurred between 1:45 PM and 2:45 PM when 39 vehicles exited the site. The peak trip generation for the site occurred between 1:45 PM and 2:45 PM when 43 vehicle trips were generated by the site (4 inbound and 39 outbound). Existing Sunday Traffic Operations Traffic operations are evaluated based on the Level of Service (LOS) concept. LOS is a qualitative description of an intersection and roadway's operation, ranging from LOS A to LOS F. Level of service "A" represents free flow un- congested traffic conditions. Level of service "F" represents highly congested traffic conditions with what is commonly considered unacceptable delay to vehicles on the road segments and at intersections. The intermediate levels of service represent incremental levels of congestion and delay between these two extremes 7 -055 Lir 5.21 -07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21.2007 Page 6 Based upon the planning level LOS thresholds shown in Appendix A, Allendale Avenue currently operates at LOS B on weekdays, excluding Friday, which operates at LOS A. This operating condition primarily occurs during. the AM peak commute period when the road carries over 600 vehicles in one hour. During the remainder of the day, Allendale Avenue operates at LOS A. On. Saturdays and Sundays, Allendale 'Avenue currently operates at LOS A. The minimum acceptable operating level for the City of Saratoga is LOS D. Allendale Avenue currently operates better than LOS D. Traffic operations at the church driveway intersection with Allendale Avenue were observed throughout the day on. April 8 Easter Sunday. Easter Sunday was a full attendance event at the church. No significant congestion was observed at the church driveway on this day. Intersection levels of service were calculated for the April. 8 Easter Sunday volumes at the Allendale Avenue/Church Driveway intersection. The level of service results are shown on Exhibit 8. For each of the critical time periods, the intersection operates at LOS A overall. The northbound driveway operates at. LOS 13 during the critical analysis periods. These are acceptable operating conditions during what is essentially a peak Sunday event at the church. Note that a "peak hour factor" was incorporated into the level of service calculations summarized on. Exhibit 8. The peak hour factor adjusts to hourly volume to reflect peak 1.5- minute conditions. Thus, the level of service results reflects the traffic conditions during the most congested portion of the peak one -hour of traffic demand. Existing Sunday Parking The existing parking area on the church site consists mainly of gravel and dirt surfaces and parking spaces are not marked. In conjunction with the construction of the new church, the on -site parking areas and circulation aisles will be paved and striped. The proposed project will establish 85 parking stalls and an overflow parking area for 41 vehicles. On Easter Sunday, the peak parking demand occurred at 11:45 AM. at the same time the peak attendance was observed. At 11:45 AM, there were 180 vehicles on the church site. One person attending the church parked on Allendale Avenue. Therefore, there were 181 church related vehicles parked at the site and 416 people on the site The average occupancy of the vehicles parked at the church at 11:45 was 2.30 persons per vehicle. At the beginning of the Easter Sunday service, there were 83 people on site and 53 vehicles parked on -site or on Allendale Avenue. The average vehicle occupancy for the vehicles arriving before 10 :00 AM was 1.57 persons per vehicle (83/53). The parking demand for Easter Sunday 2007 was handled on -site, except for one vehicle that was parked on Allendale Avenue by choice, not by lack of parking availability on the church site. 7 -055 l.tr 5 -21 -07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 7 On Sunday April 29, the peak attendance and parking occurred at 11:45 AM when there were 65 vehicles and 109 people on the church site. (There were two additional vehicles on the church grounds at that time that carried three people. However, these people were not attending the church, but parked at the church and visited a nearby home.) The average vehicle occupancy at the time of peak attendance on April 29 was 1.68 persons per vehicle (109 people /65). Traffic and Parking Impacts Associated with Non- Sunday Activities As shown on Exhibit 4, the church generates traffic during the week and on Saturday for various religious, social and other church related functions. Whether a particular activity creates a significant impact to the road network depends on the volume- of traffic generated by the event and the amount of available capacity on the road at the time the traffic is generated by the activity. The amount of traffic generated by each activity is related to the vehicle occupancy of each vehicle driving to the church. Vehicle occupancy is the number of persons per vehicle. Exhibit 9 provides vehicle occupancy rates at various times of the day for Easter Sunday, Sunday April 29, 2007 and Sunday September. 12, 2007. The vehicle occupancy on these days was determined by observing and recording the number of people in each vehicle as it entered and exited the church grounds. The vehicle, occupancy rate shown for any one particular time during the day (pre- service and peak attendance) is based upon the number of attendees at the time and the number of vehicles parked on the church grounds (and in the case of Easter Sunday, the total includes the one parked vehicle on Allendale Avenue). The vehicle occupancy for the "Daily Total" is calculated using the total number of vehicles that entered the church grounds and the total number of people that arrived at the church that day. Church staff provided attendance and parking counts for several activities that were conducted at the church this past spring. The vehicle occupancy for these events is also shown on Exhibit 9. Vehicle occupancy is generally lowest for religious service and religious related activities, which tend to be primarily attended by adults. Services and activities involving children have a: higher vehicle occupancy rate. This was evident on Easter Sunday when the vehicle occupancy rate at the time of peak church attendance was 2.30 persons per vehicle. The vehicle occupancy rate at the time that the Easter service began was 1.57 persons per vehicle. September 12, 2004 was the first day of Sunday School for the 2004 school year. The overall vehicle occupancy for vehicles entering the church that day was 2.19, which reflects the high attendance that day of children. The Easter Egg coloring event in 2007 also had a vehicle occupancy rate of 2.19 persons per vehicle. 7 -055 Ur 5 -21. -07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 8 Based on the data contained on Exhibit 9, the following vehicle occupancy rates were assigned to various types of church related activities; High attendance events (Family Oriented): 2.2 persons per vehicle Church services: 1.5 persons per vehicle Mid -Range attendance religious and social events: 1.7 persons per vehicle Low attendance events and meetings: 1.0 person per vehicle Using the vehicle occupancy ratios tisted above, the number of vehicles generated by each church activity was estimated. The number of vehicles generated on a weekly basis during Sunday activities has not been estimated because the trip generation and parking conditions with those activities were described in the previous sections. In terns of traffic generation, weekly non- Sunday activities generate a relatively low volume of traffic. The Kolo dance practices for children and Akathi.st to St. Michael prayer vigil, which are conducted. on weekdays, generate less than 15 inbound trips prior to the activity and 15 outbound trips after the activity. The International Folklore Dance, which begins On Thursday at 7:30 PM, generates an estimated 35 trips before the activity and 35 trips after the activity. The monthly board and church meetings generate an. estimated 10 trips prior to the event and 10 trips after the event These are low volumes of vehicle trips. In addition, these activities begin after. 6:30 PM; outside of the peak PM commute period. Therefore, the impacts of these events to existing traffic operations on Allendale Avenue are not significant. The church conducts several additional services on an annual basis prior or just after Easter. Some of these events are conducted on weekdays. These events, which include Holy Thursday, Great Vigil, Good Friday, First Day of Easter and Second Day of Easter; generate a low volume of trips and these trips begin and end outside of the peak commute periods. Traffic generated by these events do not impact traffic operations on Allendale Avenue: Christmas Eve Service and Christmas Eve Dinner are. held on January 6th of each year. These events are large family events with an attendance of 250 people for the service and 300 people for the dinner. In the past, the Christmas Eve service began at 6:00 PM. In the future, the event will be scheduled to occur between 630 PM and. 10 :30 PM. The event can occur on a non holiday weeknight depending on the calendar. it is estimated that 114 vehicles would arrive prior to the service assuming a vehicle occupancy rate of 2.2 persons per vehicle and a 250 person attendance level. These trips would be added to Allendale Avenue after the weekday PM peak commute period when January 6th falls on a weeknight. Most of the attendees arrive in the 15 minute period prior to the event. Therefore, the traffic added by the event would not contribute a significant volume of traffic to traffic volumes during the PM peak commute period. volumes. Based on the counts collected on Allendale Avenue between April 16 and April. 20 of this year, the hourly volume of traffic on Allendale Avenue between 5:30 and 6:30 PM averages about 500 vehicles per hour. The traffic added by the Christmas Eve event prior to 6:30 PM would arrive from both the west and. the east on Allendale Avenue. Not all of the traffic 7 -055 Lir 5 -21-07 pasha 13ozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 9 would arrive from one direction. Therefore, the additional traffic added by the Christmas Eve event would not increase the volume of traffic on Allendale Avenue east and west of the church driveway to more than 600 vehicles per hour. Al.len.dale Avenue operations wou.ld remain at LOS A with this event. The parking demand for the Christmas Eve Dinner will exceed the parking spaces available on the church site. The church should develop a traffic and parking plan for the Christmas Eve Dinner that describes the procedures that will be used to serve the estimated parking demand for the event. This may include parking at an off -site location and, using buses to shuttle atten.dees to the event. If the attendees were to park at an off site location, the trip generation at the church site would be reduced. All other weekly and annual social and religious events are conducted on Saturday or Sunday. Traffic volumes on Saturday and Sunday are the lowest volumes of the week, not only on Allendale Avenue, but on the local street network near the church as well. The traffic generated by the Saturday and. Sunday events will not impact traffic operations on the local road network. As shown on Exhibit 6, there is a peak in. traffic on Allendale Avenue on Saturday between 9:00 AM and 10:00 AM that is related to the farmers market. However, the church has one Saturday event that begins at 9:00 AM once a year, the annual church clean up day. The traffic generated by the clean up event are not at levels that would create significant impacts given the low volume, of traffic on Saturday morning.. The Pan Orthodox Friendship Lunch is also conducted once a year on Saturday between 12:00 Noon and 4:00 PM. This event generates an estimated 88 trips before and after the event. This volume of trips is not at a level that would create significant impacts to the local road network. The parking. demand for all events and activities conducted at the church can be satisfied on the existing site as demonstrated by the parking demand created on Easter of this year. when 180 vehicles were parked•on site. However, a portion of this parking occurs on the adjacent residential property owned by the church. PROJECT CONDITIONS The church proposes to construct a new chapel with a seating capacity of 254 seats. The additional seating provided by the new chapel will allow more church members to attend the Sunday 10:00 AM service. However, full utilization of the chapel is not expected except for special occasions such as Easter. Church officials anticipate that the staggered arrival pattern will continue as some church members will arrive later in the morning for other activities. The parking supply provided by the new church parking plan is the limiting factor for large events conducted at the church on Sunday. Any increase in the attendance level of the 10:00 AM church. service as a result of the church. expansion will. not significantly impact the l.oca.t road network. 7 -055 Ur 5 -21 -07 kasha I3ozi.novic May 21, 2007. Page 10 Project Condition Sunday Traffic Operations Based on the traffic counts collected on Allendale Avenue, there is more than. enough capacity on Allendale Avenue to handle a full attendance event on Sunday morning at the church. Roadway capacity is not an issue for Sunday services and events. This was demonstrated this past Easter, which was a full attendance event at the church. In fact, the maximum number of people observed on. the site on Easter Sunday (416 people) exceeded the peak attendance levels that church officials anticipated for Easter Sunday. No serious congestion was observed at the intersection of the church. driveway and Allendale Avenue throughout the day. All vehicles generated by the church were parked on the site. One attendee parked on Allendale Avenue on Easter Sunday by choice. Between. 9:00 and 10:00 AM. on Sunday April 15` Allendale Avenue carried 222 vehicles at the church driveway. To achieve LOS B operations. on Allendale Avenue during the 9:00 to 10 :00 AM hour on Sunday morning would require traffic to increase on Allendale Avenue to increase to 600 vehicles, an increase of 378 vehicles from existing levels. To achieve LOS D operations on Allendale Avenue during the 9:00 to 10 :00 AM hour on Sunday morning would require traffic to increase on Allendale Avenue to increase to 900 vehicles, an increase of 678 vehicles from. existing levels. There is no possibility of the church generating these volumes of traffic for a Sunday morning service. The additional traffic added to the street network as a result of expanding the church will not significantly impact traffic operations on Allendale Avenue, the Allendale Avenue/church driveway intersection, the Allendale Avenue/Fruitvale Avenue intersection or the Allendale Avenue/Quito Road intersection. Adequate capacity is available at these. intersections on Sunday mornings to serve the trips generated by the church project. Project Condition Sunday Parking The City of Saratoga zoning regulations requires that one parking space be provided for every four seats. On the basis of the zoning regulations, the church would require 64 spaces. The church will provide 1.26 parking spaces on site, configured as 85 permanent parking stalls and 41 overflow spaces located on a grass surface south of the existing hall. With. the planned improvements to the site the parking demand for the Christmas Eve Dinner and the Easter Banquet and. Program will not be satisfied by the 126 parking spaces that will be provided on site. The parking demand for all other activities and events will be served by the proposed parking plan, including Sunday service and special events conducted at the church on Sunday. 7-055 Ur 5 -21 -07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Pagel 1 Project Condition Traffic and Parking Impacts Associated with Non- Sunday A.ctivities The traffic impacts related to traffic generated by the non- Sunday events and activities are described in the Existing Conditions section. The traffic impacts associated with these events will not change as a result of the construction of the new chapel and construction of a parking lot for the church. The proposed project will reduce the area available for parking on the site. As stated above, the parking demand for the Christmas Eve Dinner and the Easter Banquet and Program will not be satisfied by the 126 parking spaces that will be provided on site. It is recommended that the church develop a traffic and parking management plan for special events. The plan should describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. This could include the use of an off -site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the church. Limiting the attendance to 277 people would also mitigate the parking shortage impact (2.2 persons per vehicle x. 126 spaces 277 persons). SUMMARY The St. Archangel Michael Serbian Orthodox Church located on Allendale Avenue in Saratoga is proposing site improvements that. include the development of a new sanctuary with a seating capacity of 254 people. The project site plan. indicates that 85 parking stalls will be provided on -site with an overflow parking area of 41 spaces for a total of 126 spaces. The volume of traffic generated by current Sunday activities does not create significant impacts to the local street network. With the exception of the Christmas Eve Service all other church activities and events. do not create significant impacts to the local road network given the volume of traffic generated by the other church activities that are held weekly, monthly and annually, and given the time period in which the events are conducted. :In the future, attendance .levels at the events and activities shown on Exhibit 4 are not expected to increase. Therefore, future traffic impacts will not be significant as well. The starting time of the Christmas Eve Service has been adjusted to 6:30 PM when January 6th fails on a weeknight, which ensures that the traffic generated by the church will not significantly add to traffic during the PM peak commute period. It is recommended that the church develop a traffic and parking management plan for the Christmas Eve Dinner event that describes the procedures that will be used to handle the parking demand for the event. This may include parking at an off -site location and using buses to shuttle attendees to the event. 7-055 Ltr 5 -21-07 Rasha Bozinovic May 21, 2007 Page 12 Parking demand for all existing Sunday and non Sunday events and activities can be satisfied by the parking area provided. on the existing site. The proposed project will. construct a parking lot consisting of 85 spaces with an overflow area for an additional 41 spaces. Parking demand for the Christmas Eve Dinner and the Easter Banquet and Program will not be satisfied by th.e 126 parking spaces that will be provided on site. It is recommended that the church develop a traffic and parking management plan for the Christmas Eve and Easter events. The plan should describe methods for parking the vehicles generated by the special events. This could include the use of an off -site parking location with a bus to shuttle attendees to the church. Limiting the attendance to 277 people would also mitigate the parking shortage impact (22 persons per vehicle x 126 spaces 277 persons). Please contact me you have any questions regarding this information. Sincerely, J. Daniel Takacs, TE Principal Associate 7 -055 LIT 5-21-07 d;, C, VIA ii i D "n, 4, OF.cj er� ,‘.1:-•.47..47: a k F 9. evR;;� Jr f YRSAI SS o o ARVr_LL Av. y Ns1A CT. J R4 nwe_: AHk N. THREE OAKS SAN MARCOS Asp 1 R5. .1 •r>_. =•i M cl `i$•.�J' l` I Li G•\ q, OR, i A .FD`nf i i 'c! a =t'=I ;V DR. tiR$!CH N1m rV 1 :..t'v CT. i �iyd'7✓' C G Z. ?PARK OR. HIGGINS ASSOCIATES FTb f I AV .l NAM CIO a1 1 'p l �f`.. cyo •IC:Y�A:: �j .:1 Y� M rtje a, JRGH DR. 1 t j i f �s E o t l d 4.-'44._. j� Yid v j DI, 4 V '��3 r G y 1 4' i 0Q%' .9 9 C.ASA BLANCA L`i. ...1 ant P l a'�Y 6 i t�� .c4a cJl i i l 4 j c�F .i .�i ^eo t5� a.I a e g r i •trios t' a' �J AF O o fI ?d C:rxvi >ust.:DALE: w SI t r SA u 'CI�� y: ,,r sI r J AAV T:SYPtt3D D? L. DP x n..�� r WEST VALLEY ../.1 K `11 ti ,c c i :N 1' 1 y COLLEGE e PROJECT 5::\=5.- 3 a a LOCATION f I P SDB'"? RD. `qF o 6 \Y RD, f ft N:' q'. AN I OLD a. MESSING Yri.I r ALEX tCLEMSON Kd. "?i SWA7PIADRE DR.: .11 =i °I 'I LA AiPjX3:DR. C '"ter: ..4--, 71 1 .--c*4'k;.'..'':.;:::'':1;.:r.''':"-l-f_',"\A,:z..lhwT;'.''":U\'S::,V,'"I'-'s,s,,,„°' S 0 0 6. •.o I ...::,aa u 1 !I� iTi�: y1� .1 i c, V.7,74-•:`,' c eL f s I C[. i. 'rte w 1G ✓^iLV-I`RD v 014 n 11£ ri •c r. Wit 1 :.rte; .t. c e-- V !a ;Y -7t '(mac c l' I tl d r;fA J l lG 1 ��aW.i s RD As, r y 0: EXHIBIT 1 PROJECT LOCATION 1 7.7.1.::,. i ti:"... 4...._ '1, '•••••---,••.,:lt•''''' 0::: ..tt.t/V ii• r l'!' ';'---1'.--'LH3 I I i -.."..3.-- 4' :.-71-:';:r"----------- ,:t, i t g1 --4.-7.:,,, LZ -...--t ZZ-;:''' t, i't •xt ':::.4 i'4 ii 4 ---3 r e.' I' C V -e rt -rI P- W'r. R. rA--,• C t. •,-:-,1 1- 95 1 ,-•-•t ..,_,--••fr-r"......,-......c- Z .47,0 4:•- "-,Lt,g-t'.4'......... -4 0., .t....-,• 4. L. ,,--____t:t.r Ei lb i ,,,,P •,7 gi".." Le- i 1/ ,---ty•..: -1 f•-+. .17"-F.-----:.:;::,,1A'-'---,'-t.'• 4,402, t S., =1 4d,-- 4„. ..t It t t 1•45; "p. .4 4 v., E. 4 c.- et, gs,: ,1 'Is rl* *•'',..4 Y--.. I L ri, 6.. 'a:4' 1•':1714, k 6 E• i tt. 4. -I f 1 .1 1 1" g I: i r 6 I 41 Is i. t' 4 4', A, .f: y.--..., 6 N I I 1, \I a k t --------------7—____L t. t:. k,......- t 7 E" :Y• i i i 7 I- .,,,r,2,3,,.. rs 6 i „,...V r .i;-•: 7 (I- 's..:” j i 1 .L.......,..- F-.--_!: if. r i F• iit I Ci r i 1 1 y 6 t t. k) Vi. i 1 .r. ti .e i i •i E te i 1 0 K:1-..---.-.. r ....4 1 1 i 1 F i..., 1.• 2.1." 0 N. ts. :i l 73 'te• f• 1 1 rtii 1 J 1 if i -I i cn .--•-.1---2 I, ;.i k. 1 -7-' I -1 I g ci j In I N L ;oak 1 i 2. i i :s" 1 i s g j i i4. 1 i I k HIG.G1NS ASSOCATES 7 Z X 14 2. I t Lti tr.o. r 2 q' 1.• EXHIBIT 2- EXISTING CHURCH SITE FLAN MI 1 '4 UN INN NMI 1111111 1111111 MI INN IIIII MI OM MI •1111 MINI MI I i. ------,';'f-Y, -J._ `-ra- 1 L.1 V.6" V IMP, pr.rduar, ts istvsnx RAMO j UM I.!1■M Ai ILI LI MIMS 1 --I 7 1 ,r, r A) I ;I: n i k.e.{1".tip rovvic; .5A10 ;701.11,g! •;Th 1.),.c./111E7,;!{. rtr,c1: r r.ronierv. Ever Pjr,TIVI) tr iJitb rr.Inn.crS ceee r ,7 'OAK/76 *f.51‘ e ,911 :7: 3 7;:i1: 1 "1. 11: 1 1-' :::7 :71:1 .c.if. 11::: !1174 I_ 3,11O 154.'...1::' :3 t 11"r„,.'-ro...1'7'71i.thl:',.. ._,I;,Ti_ R RAKING. 00 tate fa firm,. UJYt11, trruir I gygomp t I ttitiCraiS1•17:-17-------1--T---f-.. I 4 I 1.7k;,,,..v.if.:•;f4t04:i I C 1 (TritkamtlikiirZWi firW 111111111PRINagenallaleal BCIA arch Itertluto p 1 a 3 1 n I erleFR Tri 1.11 PO. ST..% 1 11 '0310 R G CtIJr r Inc. ,7#,`• Key Fiar ST, ARCHANGEL MICHAEL SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH 10370 Allaadala Mum: Sank% Carib:nig IT PLAIN a. 3VA nrII 3 OF 12 EinglffigiaNNSAWNSONOSIga 1 Aclivily taalimum No. Months of Poop lo Arra ao All ..iturgy 60 C 1 T Lunen 120 All Sorbian Lori girats Children 60 011 Scpplan language AtItilts 20 SIA Vole DanCa PreCtico Toon. 10 T Childron's Tambora Proctica 8 C IT Oslo Dance Practice Dpilaron 10 C Altallist te Si. Michaol Playor \,/44 1 AK InternatYmal Folkloro Donal GO 5 I A/ T Evening Vopa.r_parstto 10 All Confaisions 10 A11 Board I BuarlIng Crimmitteo M 100t Sunday School moottrgs Jon Christmas Eva SurviceS jin Chrisonas Eva Dinner Jan St Sava 0(100(7 fD Chow Slava Dinnor Pen °Outfox Vaspar Dinnor Mar Cloan Up Day Ma./Apr iolyThursdal Mir 1 Apr Greet Vo3li• 12 Gospels Mar Am Gaed Friday Mar7Apc Lazarus ilay Sahackay Resurrection Matins Pachel ((1asha) Littagy mar inp! Earri Banquet 3. pramarn Mar Easter Egg ColOring Mar t 1.pr FOS" Cay of Easter Mar Apr_ 30C Day of PanstiTotant Program Achats API PaniPTalerst Program Children Ma lnlar•Parish SocCor Dinner Youth PichIc Foridoro Dant° Pan-Orlhodo.s inandstv Luhch SI.A lthan9 Michael Sava ?P! P.Ittglna Associatas, 20 61.0 31.0 250 All 300 150 5/A 100 All 125 AA 20 All so All 50 50 AP 50 AU 50 Ail 250 Alt 300 60 Al 20 All 20 150 51.0 200 AO Vidovari Colobratinn Dienor 200 200 T_ A 200 200 A T 150 5/A/T 200 A; 100 5!..; Mon X Tiros DAY OF THE WEEK Wed Thurs x X *v.* Frt Sot X Sun X X X X X X x 0 X r X Jor Sop 10.00 ((7501010 CatbiStava Dinner X X N Solar 1. Ages: 5 AcAdult •frToen 00 01,11411 2. flocuusa cl the sanctity af tha ChopoliChkerch, il is 001 05011 for 110001 (01(10101. 3. Funorals, Weddings and Illopltuns also occur during the year. 4 Ourfng the taut !ailing parlor's (Great Lent, SO Polar 0 Paul, Dormiliert and Nalivrty) Moro ate nu weddings er ethor slacks, celebrations Sea lairgicat Calendar 5. rloOiretW=WpolOy. facMonOly. AcAnnuel iv t,oull .11141, Cm, Frarptency limo 4.m, 0/.0 10,130 -11:45 All W 1116 1210 141 W 12-00 1 00 PL W 12:30- 2.0(01' W 12 30 -1:30 PA W 130 3 00 Pb w 1-00. 4 (x) PM W 700 5 Ott Pt. W 0.30- 7 00 PM W 7:30 10 01 P0 W 600.8-40(156 W 0:45 .1300 PM W 700 0.32 M 6 7 06 P811 7:00 10 30 PI-4 6:30 1110 PI. 1:30 4.00 PM 010 9.00 P1A 910 11.,s3 pr/i 6 ad •.•0 ON 16.o0 10 ii:.1 030 715 PA. A 130 7 00 P■1 A 11.30 PM 1130 AM A 10:00 1145 r A VI 12,00 400 PA A 4,00 6 00 PM A 1Q0 15 Ali, A 1000 1115 A A 8.00 In 30 Pl: A 110 400 PM A 6:30 1030 PM A 130 4 00 P1:23 A 1 4 00 i'-'/ A 610 10 39 Pt A 1200 410 P! 110 4 00 PM, A 130 400 PM" A Fectlily Char' X X X X X Classroom Sactal X X X X x X Cat Valve:a Occupancy Ipersons per vehicle) 1.00 170 1.00 6.00 Ealirnalad 01 0001 10 15 35 16 20 220 114 220 136 1,70 88 1.70 50 1.70 74 1.70 170 29 1.70 1.70 29 1.70 20 2.20 114 22 izi 1.70 35 105 20 1.00 20 X 170 DO X 2,20 01 X 1 70 118 X 2 20 01 X 2.20 01 X 1.70 118 X 170 se x 2.20 Ai EXHIBIT 4- CHURC ACTIVITY SCHEDULE IND MEI MI MI WS MI MI MI NIB IIIIII MI Cate AM Peak Commute Hour PM Peak Commute Hour PM Peak Hour Time Begin Westbound Eastbound Total Time Begin Westbound i Eastbound Total 4116/2007 Monday 7:30 AM 460 145 605 4 :15 PM 243 272 515 4/17/2007 Tuesday 7:30 AM 453 175 628 5:00 PM 211 282. 493 4118/2007 Wednesday 7 :30 AM 485 133 618 4 :00 PM 213 293 506 4119/2007 Thursday 7:30 AM 466 144 610 4:00 PM 230 278 508 4/2012007 Friday 7:30 AM 328 143 471 4:45 PM 164 245 409 Average M-F 438 148 586 212 274 486 Average M -Th 466 149 615 224 281 506 Date AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Time Begin i Westbound Eastbound Total Time Begin Westbound Eastbound i Total 4/21/2007 Saturday 4/15/2007 Sunday 11:15 AM 11;30 AM 208 228 123 171 436 294 12:00 Noon 12:15 PM 171 178 227 159 398 337 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A. ALLENDALE AVENUE DAILY VOLUMES Day of Week of Week of Week April 8, 2007 April 15, 2007 Sunday 3,373 3,439 Monday 5,823 6,610 Tuesday 5,974 6,916 Wednesday 6,053 6,971 Thursday 6,025 6,944 Friday 4,197 4,936 Saturday 3,735 4,205 Weekday Average 5,614 6,475 B. ALLENDALE AVENUE WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES COMMUTE PEAK C. ALLENDALE AVENUE WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES STREET PEAK Date 4/1512007 Wednesday 41/712007 Thursday 411812007 Friday 4419/2007 Monday 4/2012007 Tuesday Average M -F Average M -Th AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Time Begin Westbound Eastbound Total 7:30 AM 460 145 605 7:30 AM 453 175 628 8:30 AM 500 135 635 7:30 AM 466 144 610 7:30 AM 328 143 471 441 148 590 470 150 620 Time Begin Westbound Eastbound Total 4 :15 PM I 243 272 515 3:00 PM 217 356 573 5:30 PM 258 261 519 3:15 PM 198 '363 561 2 :45 PM 21.1 238 449 225 298 523 229 313 542 D. ALLENDALE AVENUE WEEKEND PEAK HOUR VOLUMES Higgins Asseclates AtlendaleVolsNlend ateVOls EXHIBIT 5- EXISTING ALLENDALE AVENUE TRAFFIC VOLUMES 700 600 500 400 300 200 Higgins Associates ALLENDALE AVENUE HOURLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES (April 15, 2007 to April 21, 2007) Q Q <C Q Q< Q Q <C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0, d 0 0 0 C7 Q U 9 9 0 0 0 C� o t� x 0 0 0 0 0 0 C", 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ALLENDALEOirection 1 Chart 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co ai 6 s_ O C7 r— r -4-- Sunday 0-.. Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday EXHEIIT 6- ALLENDALE AVENUE HOURLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES MI Ilia MI III i SW MI MI Bill I• I I.11 IM MI MI ME MI MO I= MI MI IMP IIIIIII NMI 1111111 111•1 MI NIS 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Higgins Associates o c. 9. 9 ce) r- c c6 ALLENOALEDirection 1 Chart 2 Inbound Vehicles Outbound Vehicles 1, EXHIBIT 7a CHURCH DRIVEWAY 15-MINUTE VOLUMES SUNDAY APRIL 8, 2007 Higgins Associates April 29 Count April 29 Chart 1 4— Inbound Vehicles tc}- Outbound Vehicles EXH1311T CHURCH DRIVEWAY 18-MINUTE VOLUMES SUNDAY APRIL 29, 2007 MI NIB 11111 MI MB MI NIB MI MI MI 10:45 AM 11.45 Nd prlvawav Volume 98 Out. s Total= 107 "rotI Intersection Volume= 342 Inierc8 seon.Leyel of Service 1,05 Delay Overall A 1.6 Northbound Approach= 9 11.0 215 PM -3.'00 PM priuewa Volume. In= 1 Out= 85 6 Total= 86 Total Intersection Volume= 290 frg.erseciiPP.L..oyel,PiSeryire LQS Rey Overall A 3.0 Northbound Approach= B 10,1 11:3 AM 12:30 PM priveway Volume In= 56 Out= 68 Total= 124 Total kntcectian Volume= 352 l.Q telay Northbound Approach= B 10.3 12:00 Noon 1:00 PM piivewav Volume In= 32 Out= 61. Teal= 93 Total Intersection Volume= 366 htterson LOvel-otlePrir LOS petag Overall A 2.2 Northbound Approach B 102 Source. Manuel Cotmts. l-8g9lns Associates LOS: Level of Service; Delay. Control delay, seconds per vehicle. Higgins Associates Apri18 2007 Easter Sunda ALLENDALE AVE./CHURCH DR}VEWAY Peak Inbound Vanane 121 58 Maednte Ave 114 --s 40 k A Q Peak Oulbaund Volume Mende* Ave 105 4— 99 1 Peek Driveway Volume ANrndaH Ave 130 —a 1G 4— 98 40 Peak Intersection Volume ACee8 la Ave 157 --a 9 V 116 23 9:451J4 10:45 Am Driveway Vo4.rrna trF 38 e�1= Total= 39 Total Intersection Volume= 26G 1:45 PM 2;45 PM 1:45 PM -2:45 PM Driveway Volume In= 4 Out 39 TotaP 43 1215 PM- 1:15 PM Driveway Volume. Ina 15 Orr<= 17 Total= 32 1.453 rnr...:<n yarn..- Evi.4.1. Driveway Volume In= 4 Out= 39 Total= 43 Total Intersection Volume. 333 Total kntersedion Volume= 333 Total Intersection Volume= 447 April 29, 2007 Alletedaie Ave 86 ----i 25 Peak Inbound Volume 141 13 Abele rte Ave 142 —a 2 Peak Outbound Volume E-- 148 2 Peak Driveway Volume Allendale Ave 142 --9' 2 148 2 f V( Peak. Intersection Volume Mendes Ave 199 --i 1 1 4 216 4 EXHIBIT 8- EXISTING ALLENDALE AVE/CHURCH DRIVEWAY SUNDAY TRAFFIC VOLUMES Higgins Assocates Vehicle occupancySheett EXHIBIT 9- VEHICLE OCCUPANCY RATES FOR VARIOUS CHURCH ACTIVITIES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Date Day of Week Time Activity Attendance Parked Vehicles Attendees Per Vehicle Spring Clean Up 2007 Saturday,. AM -1 :0 PM............_24 ...1.7 Vigil (12 Gospels)............ April 5, 2007 Thursday 10.00 PM 11,.... -._1 :18..... Good Priday Apnl 6 2007 Friday 6.00 PM_ 7 30 PM 60 34 1.76 Colonng_Easter Eggs April 7 2007 Saturday 4:00 PM 6.00 PM 57 26 2 19 Ressurection Matins April 7 2007 Saturday /Sunday 11:30 PM_ 12.30 PM 40 16 2.50 Easter Sunda Service Apnt 8 2007 Sunday 1000 AM 83 53 1 57 _Pre- Easter Sunday Peak Attendance April 8, 2007 Sunday 11:45 AM 416 181 2.30 Easter Sunday Daily Total Apnl 8 2007 Sunday 9 :00 AM 3:30 PM 528 229 2.31 .Regular Sunday P2- Service April 29, 2007 Sunday+ 10:00 AM 42 28 1.50 Regular Sunda Peak Attendance April 29, 2007 Sunday 1 2 _117 70 1.67 Regutar Sunday Daily Total April 29, 2007 Sunday 9.30 AM 3:O0 PM 164 95 .1 Regula Sunday Pre-Service September 12, 2004 Sunday 10 00 AM 28 18 t.56 Regular Sunday Dady Total September 12, 2004 Sunday 9 30 AM 2 1 5 2.19 Higgins Assocates Vehicle occupancySheett EXHIBIT 9- VEHICLE OCCUPANCY RATES FOR VARIOUS CHURCH ACTIVITIES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2-Lane Collector 2 6,000 7,500 9,000 10,500 12,000 2 -Lane Local /b/ 1 2L 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800. 2,000 1 -Lane Freeway Ramp /d 1 5,000 7,500 10,500 13,000 15,000 2 -Lane Freeway Ramp ic/ 1 10,000 15,000 21,000 26,000 28,000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX A LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLD VOLUMES FOR VARIOUS ROADWAY TYPES TOTAL DAILY VOLUMES IN BOTH DIRECTIONS ADT lal ROADWAY TYPE 10 -Lane Freeway 8 -Lane Freeway 6-Lane Freeway 8-Lane Expressway 6 -Lane Expressway 4 -Lane Freeway 8-Lane Divided Arterial (wl left -turn lane) 9 6 -Lane Divided Arterial (wi left-tum lane) 4 -Lane Expressway 4 -Lane Divided Arterial (w/ left -tum lane) 4 -Lane Undivided Arterial (no left -tum lane) 2 -Lane Rural Highway ne Arterial (wl left -tum lane CODE 1OF 8F 1 51,000 6F 39,000 59,000 8E 6E 4F 2R LOS A 64,000 LOS B 99,000 79,000 35,000 54,000 28,000 26,000 40,000 42.000 1 32 38,000 4E I 18,0001 27,000 5 22,0001 25,000 40,0001 57,000 47,000 1 54,000 16,000 19,000 4,000 8,000 LOS c LOS LOS D E 139,000 160,000 112,000 i 136,000 85,000 75,000 56,000 43,000 49,000 36,000 45,000 29,000 22,000 12,000 102,000 90,000 67,000 61,000 32,500 24,000 17,000 182,000 146.000 110,000 98,000 74,000 69,0001 74,000 68,000 54,000 50,000 36,000 27,000 25,000 3 1 11,000 12,500 14,500 16,000 18,000 Note: /a/ Non- directional peak hour traffic volume is assumed to be 10 percent of the daily traffic volume. Directional split is assumed 60/40_ All volumes are approximate and assume ideal roadway characteristics. Actual threshold volumes for each level of service listed above may vary depending on a number of factors including curvature and grade, intersection or interchange spacing, percentage of trucks and other heavy vehicles, lane widths, signal timing, on- street parking, amount of cross traffic and pedestrians, driveway spacing, etc. /bi The capacity limitation is related to neighborhood quality -of -life rather than the physical capacity of the road. This assumes a standard suburban neighborhood, 40 foot roadway width and 25 mile per hour speed limit with normal speed violation rates. /d Capacities given for each service level assume the same level of service for the adjoining merging roadway as well as level of service being determined by volume -to- capacity ratio, not attainable vehicle speed. Level of service will be controlled by freeway level of service if worse than ramp. Based on Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) DESCRIPTION UNSICNALIZED INTERSECTIONS WITH TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL (TWSC) TWSC intersections are widely used and stop signs are used to control vehicle movements. at such intersections. At TWSC intersections, the stop controlled approaches are referred to as the minor street approaches; they can be either public streets or private driveways. The intersection approaches that are not controlled by stop signs are referred to as the major street approaches. A three -leg intersection is considered to be a standard type of TWSC intersection if the single minor street. approach (i.e. the stern of the T configuration) is controlled by a stop sign. Three -leg intersections where two of the three approaches are controlled by stop signs are a special form of unsignalized intersection control. At TWSC intersections, drivers on the controlled approaches. are required to select gaps in the major street flow through which to execute crossing or turning maneuvers on the basis of judgement_ In the presence of a. queue, each driver on the controlled approach must use some time to move into the front -of -queue position and prepare to evaluate gaps in the major street flow. Capacity analysis at TWSC intersections depends on a clear description. and understanding of the interaction of drivers on the minor or stop- controlled approach with drivers on the major street. Both gap acceptance and empirical. models have been developed to describe this interaction. Thus, the capacity of the controlled legs is based on three factors: the distribution of gaps in the major street traffic stream,; driver judgement in selecting gaps through. which to execute the desired maneuvers; and the follow -up time required by each.driver in a queue. The delay experienced by a motorist is made up of a number of. factors that relate to control, geometries, traffic and incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time actually experienced and the reference travel time that would result during base conditions, in the absence of incident, control, traffic or geometric delay. Average control delay for any particular minor movement is a function of the capacity of the approach and the degree of saturation and referred to as level. of service. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) CRITERIA FOR TWSC INTERSECTIONS (Reference Highway Capacity Manual 2000) Level of Service Control Delay (seconds vehicle) A B C D E E APPENDIX B >35 -50 >50 >25 35 APPENDIX C INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS Ex Inbound Peak 4*** ***4 *4** *R *•L..*** Intersection 411 Allendale/ Y 4***** *4 *4 *4 Average Delay (sec /veh): 1.6 *4 *4 South L T Approach: Movement: Control: Rights: Lanes: -1 Volume Module: Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse: User Adj PHF Adj PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: Final. Vol.: Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) North Bound L T R Stop Sign Include 0 0 1! 0 0 Count 5 0 1.00 1.00 5 0 1.00 1.00 0.72 0.72 7 0 0 0 7 0 Mon May 7, 2007 13:23:04 Church Dvw II Date: 4 1.00 4 1 -00 0.72 b 0 6 II Page 2-1 *4 *14 *4 4*** 4*** Worst Case Level Of Service: B['11.01 4 *4* Bound East Bound Zest Bound -R L T R L T R 11 11 Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Include Include Include O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 11 it 8 Apr 2007 Peak Inbound O 0 0 0 114 40 58 121 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 O 0 0 0 114 40 5.8 121 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.72 0.72 0.72' 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0 0 0 0 158 56 31 163 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 159 56 81 168 11 11 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx F ollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 515 xxxx Potent Cap.: 523 xxxx Move Cap.: 499 xxxx Volume /Cap: 0.01 xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx XXXX Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: 4 Movement: LT LTR RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 613 xxxxx ShasedQueue:xxxXx 0.1 xxxxx Surd ConDel:xxXxx 11.0 xxxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: B ApproachDel: 11.0 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B *4 4* Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ****t *4 0 1.00 0 1.00 0.72 0 0 0 1 6.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx II II II 186 xxxx 861 xxxx 861 xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx XXXX XXXX XXXX xxxxx X'xxX xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 214 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1368 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1368 xxxx xxxxx. xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx. 0.06 xxxx xxxx 11 11 1 xxxxx XXXX xxxxx xxxxx LT LTR RT xxxx xxxx xxxxx XxxX xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Y.Xx.x. xxxxx LT LTR RT xxxx XXXXX XXXX xxxxx XXXx.xXXXX xxxxxx *4 4 *4 Traffix 7.8.0715 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS ASSOC., GILROY Ex Outbound Peak Mon May 7, 2007 13:23:04 Page 2 -1 Level Of Service Computation_ Report 2000 MGM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) t b- 3-433-3-********** 3****** 3 *t *3* **3 *r.* Intersection 41 Allendale /Church Dvwy 4 *i 3-x *;c r********* i:*************** *iirt #E4** Average Delay {sec /veh): 3.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: 31 10.1] rxx x*********+ f:***:*4- i* *t *t *k *t *tW +f 3fk *a+ *3-;ek =*t3 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound L 1 R West Bound Movement: L R L T R. L T 1 -II H 11 I Control: Stop 'Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 II 11 11 1. Volume Nodule: Count Date: 8 Apr 200? Peak Outbound Volume Base Vol: 57 0 28 0 0 0 0 105 0 1 99 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 J Initial Bse: 57 0 28 0 0 0 0 105 0 1 99 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PH? Adj: 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.97 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 PHF Volume: 66 0 32 0 0 0 0 121 0 1 114 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol..: 66 0 32 0 0 0 0 121 0 1 114 0 I .11 II 11 I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx Fol.iowUpTim: 3.5' xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 1 1 1 1 11 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol:. 237 xxxx 121 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 121 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 756 xxxx 936 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1479 xxxx xxxxx. Move Cap.: 755 xxxx 9.36 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1479 xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: 0.09 xxxx 0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx 1 11 11 11 -I Level O€ Service Module: 2Way95thg: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx, xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxr, xxx xxxx xxxxx 7.4 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: t A Movement: LT LTR RT LT LTR RT LT LTR RT LT LTA RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 807 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx. 0.4 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Shrd. ConDei:xxxxx 10.1, xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx:: 7.4 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: B .e n •AoproachDei: 10.1 xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: 3 3 *r* *t* tine **4. *33-* i3- *i3-# ***+i *+xx Note: Queue reported is the number of.cars per lane. 3* Ye *irk **i *.r* Traffix 7.9.0715 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS ASSOC., GILROY Ex Driveway Peak Mon Ma.p 7, 2007 13:23:05 Page 2-1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 RCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) t* k *+*,kdF *t,t *k +k *4* 4.4 k******.i****** *R' **4 Intersection 01 Allendale /Church Dvwy t**** t**•* t*******+*#****** i-* *.k #k #3' *k Average Delay (seclveh): 2.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: B( 10.3) x* *x *xxxx tkt****** i*** *xx,exx***.k•2.rxx +xx +xxxi,k xxxx Ft**** Bound South Bound East Bound North �aund und Nest.Bound R L T R Movement: L T R L T R 11 L 11 -L 1 11 Control: Stop Sign Stop- Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1- 11 11 11 1 Volume Module: Count Date: 8 Apr 2007 Existing Driveway Peak J3 116 0 Base Vol: 28 0 33 0 0 0 0 157 9 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 157 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 Initial S9e: 28 0 33 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 user r Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHI' Adj: 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92. 0.92 0. 92 0.96 0.92 PHI V 30 0 36 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol.: 30 0 36 0 0 0 0 171 10 25 126 0 11 11 1 Critical Gap Module: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx, xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx t1 11 11 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 352 xxxx 176 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 180 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 650 xxxx 873 xxxx xxxx. xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1407 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 641 xxxx 873 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1407 xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: 0.05 xxxx 0.04 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 1f 0.02 xxxx xxxx 1 11 11 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx, xxxxx xxxx. xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx. xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx. xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xx *x *x LOS by Move: A Movement.: IT LTR.- RT LT LTR RT LT LTR RT LT LTR RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 749 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared0ueue:xxxxx 0.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx. xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel :xxxxx 10.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xx Shared L05: B ApproachDel: 10.3 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxx }x ApproacbL0S S xxxx** *xxxx tic** *x *xxxxx**** +t* *r.+kp x qtr *4 *k*** *xxxx **i Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. k r*+*****# *k *x* *x* *x -k* *x rxx x**4-**** **4:x** *4,xxx Traffix 7.8.0715 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS ASSOC., GI�TROY Ex Peak Intersection Mon May 7, 2007 13:23:05 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 RCM Un.signalized Method (Base. Volume Alternative) s ***aka44:•***4:# 4****.*****.****** i***********+******* ***i** *3*# **k*:4 intersection 41 Allendale /Church Dv y 4**** 4* 4***** 4*•**444 4 4********* 4* *4* *4 *44*** rt very e vela sec /veh): 2.2 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 10.2} X 4ie *e **444+4 Approach: North Bound. Movement: L T R -1 11 Control: Stop Sign Rights: Include Lanes: 0 0 11 0 0 11 Volume Module: Count Base Vol: 28 0 Growth. Adj: 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 28 0 User Ad.j: 1.00 1.00 PEE Adj: 0.95 0.95 PHF Volume: 29 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 Final Vol.: 29 0 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx. 6.2 FoliowUpTTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 1 capacity Module: Cnflict Vol.: 341 xxxx kRt#*#' k' k*'' k* 4* tbkk4+*- ic* xr k'!' R *kY: *+:x*+.b4•l: **vk *1r *k'k4 **k+-k w *+4 South. Bound East Bound L T R L T R -1.1 1 Stop Sign. uncontrolled Include Include 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 11 11 Peak. Intersection Volumes 0 0 157 9 23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 0 0 157 9 23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0 0 165 9 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 165 9 24 11 11 Potent Cap.: Move Cap.: Volume /Cap: 560 xxxx 651 xxxx 0.05 xxxx 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx Control Del:xxxxX xxxx LOS by Move: Movement: LT LTR Shared Cep.: xxxx 757 SharedQueue :X.XXXX 0.3 Shrd ConDel:xxxxX 10.2 Shared LOS: B ApproachDel: 10.2 ApprozchLOS• 170 879 879 0.04 1 1 Level Of service Module: Date: 8 Apr. 2007 33 0 0 1..00 1.00 1.00 33 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 35. 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 11 XXXXX XXXX XXXXX. XXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXX 1 E XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX xxxx XXXX XXXX XXXX 11 XXXX XXXX. XXXXX XXXX•xXXX XXXXX xx: {X XXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXX. L`1' LTR RT LT LTR RT xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx XXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXX xxxxx XXXXX. XXXX. XXXXX XXXXX XXXX. XXXXX Page 2 -1 West Bound L T R 116 1.00 116 1..00 0.95 122 0 122 XXXX xxxx XXXX XXXX XXXXXX. XXXXX XxXXXX k x Traffix 7.8.0715 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to HIGGINS ASSOC., GILROY 1 Uncontrolled Include 0 1 0 0 0 0 1.00 0 1.00 0. 0 0• 0 1 xxxxx 4.1. xxxx XXXXX XXXXX 2.2 XXXX XXXXX 11 1 XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXX. 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx A LT LTR RT xxxx xxxx. xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxX XXXXX A Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.