Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout103-Attachment 3: Planning Commission Staff Report from May 23, 2007.pdf REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No. & Location: 07/028; 14639 Big Basin Way, Type of Application: Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Variance Applicant/Owner: Zambetti Family Trust (owner) Tom Sloan (Applicant) Staff Planner: Heather Bradley, Contract Planner Meeting Date: May 23, 2007 APN: 503-25-013 Department Head:_____________ John F. Livingstone, AICP 14639 Big Basin Way EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY Application filed: 07/20/06 Application complete: 04/23/07 Notice published: 05/09/07 Mailing completed: 05/04/07 Posting completed: 05/17/07 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant requests Design Review, Use Permit and Variance approval to construct a mixed-use development consisting of two residential apartment units in one building at the rear of the site and a separate two–story commercial building at the front of the site. Each apartment is a 1,250 square foot two-bedroom unit; the commercial building is 2,348 square feet (with a 974 square foot basement). The maximum building coverage is 28.8% of the site. The maximum height of the proposed buildings is 26 feet. The gross lot gross size is 17,187 square feet, and the site is zoned CH-2. The Variance application is necessary to allow an exception to the required 20% of net lot area dedicated to pedestrian open space coverage. PERMANENT CONDITIONS No permanent conditions of approval are required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Design Review, and Conditional Use Permit applications and deny the Variance application by adopting the attached Resolutions. PROJECT DATA ZONING: CH-2 District. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: CR - Retail Commercial/Village MEASURE G: Not applicable. PARCEL SIZE: 17,187 gross square feet, 12,412 net square feet (subtracting all land within the high water line) SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL SPACE: 2,348 square feet (+ 572 square foot carport) SQUARE FOOTAGE OF RESIDENTIAL SPACE: 2,499 square feet AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 17.6%. GRADING REQUIRED: 743 cubic yards of cut ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The proposal is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 (c) New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures: “A store, motel, office, restaurant or similar structure not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances, and not exceeding 2,500 square feet in floor area. In urbanized areas, the exemption also applies to up to four such commercial buildings not exceeding 10,000 square feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use, if not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary public services and facilities are available and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive.” PROPOSED EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND COLORS Colors include off-white walls, window and doors with wood divided lites and beige window and door trim. Railings and handrails will be painted black. Materials include a standing seam metal roof with a “galvalum” matte finish, exterior walls will be wood sided “hardieplank”, windows will be aluminum framed with divided lites, doors will also be wood framed with divided lites, railings will be 36” high painted black. Brick planters will decorate the front setback area, and the driveway will be interlocking pavers. A color and material board will be available at the public hearing. PROJECT DATA Proposal Code Requirements Building Site Coverage Impervious Floor Area For all structures Parking and driveway areas/porches/patios and decks TOTAL Commercial Building: First Floor Second Floor Basement Carport Apartment Unit 1: First Floor Second Floor Apartment Unit 2: First Floor Second Floor TOTAL Proposed: 28.8% 3,078.98.0 sq. ft. Proposed: 4891.96 sq. ft. 7,970.94 sq. ft. (64.21%) 2,348.38 sq. ft. 1,160.36 sq. ft. 1,188.02 sq. ft. (974.22) sq. ft. 572 sq. ft. 1,249.96 sq. ft. 590.70 sq. ft. 659.26 sq. ft. 1,249.96 sq. ft. 590.70 sq. ft. 659.26 sq. ft. 5,420.08 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable: 60% = 7,447.00 sq. ft. max. Maximum Allowable: N/A In commercial zones the site coverage includes structures only and places no limitation on impervious coverage. 7,447.20 sq. ft. (the commercial building could take up to 60% of the total net lot size, with a mixed use development it can take up any combination with the residential up to 60%) N/A 1,250.00 sq. ft. – per mixed use development standards. 1,250.00 sq. ft. – per mixed use development standards. 7,447.20 sq. ft. Setbacks Minimum Proposed Minimum Requirement For all structures Front yard Rear Yard Right Side Left Side 15.0 ft. 152.3 ft. 5.0 ft. 5.0 ft. 15 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. Height in feet Office/retail building Apartment building Maximum Allowable I. Lowest elevation pt. II. Highest elevation pt. III. Average IV. At the topmost point of the structure V. Maximum height I. 516.4 II. 517.6 III. 517.0 IV. 543.0 V. 26.0 I. 506.6 II. 515.4 III. 511.0 IV. 537.0 V. 26.0 26 ft. Pedestrian Open Space Decks: Porches: Creek access**: TOTAL: 700 sq. ft. 408 sq. ft. 1,500 sq. ft. 2,608 sq. ft. 20% = 2,482 sq. ft. Mixed Use Development Density 1 unit per 6,206 sq. ft. 1 unit per 2,178 sq. ft. (20 units per acre) Location of units To the rear of the commercial building Second floor or rear of parcel Floor area 1,250 s.f. per two bedroom unit (50% of total square footage on site) 850 s.f. per one bedroom unit or 1,250 s.f. per two-bedroom unit (50% of total square footage on site) ** The creek access area will only be developed with a path and two benches, but staff is giving credit for an area of 25 feet from the top of bank for the entire 60 foot length of the property because this space will be left in its natural state and the views will be enjoyed beyond the limits of the proposed seating area. PROJECT DISCUSSION The applicant is proposing to construct a new commercial building at the front of the lot facing Big Basin Way and two apartments at the rear of the lot. The commercial building will consist of 1,160 square feet of retail space on the first floor and 1,188 square feet of office space on the second floor with a bay window projecting into the roof of the front porch. The commercial building also has a 974 square foot basement. At the rear of the commercial building is a three-car carport and behind that is the apartment building. The apartment building consists of two units, each with a first floor level of 591 square feet and a second floor level of 659 square feet. The residential units each have rear patios built over decorative brick walls. History The applicant initially filed an application for The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) and Arborist review before submitting the Use Permit and Design Review application. This allowed them to get preliminary feedback and focus their plans before submitting for full review. The HPC reviewed the proposed demolition of the existing house and an historic evaluation prepared by Archives and Architecture at their meeting of February 14, 2006. The analysis from Archives and Architecture concluded that the structure meets one criterion of the California Register of Historic Resources as “a rare example of worker housing from when Saratoga evolved as a lumbering community.” However, it was not eligible under the second criterion that the occupants had made a recognized contribution to the history of Saratoga. The Commission did not consider the structure to be historically significant and voted to approve the demolition. The Commission discussed the deteriorated condition of the residence and asked the applicant to salvage what they could of the windows and hardware and incorporate them into the design of the new structures. The applicant has said that they plan to use some of the windows as part of partition walls within the commercial structure and staff has added this as a condition of project approval. Correspondence and Neighbor Review Staff has not received any written comments from the public as of the writing of this report. The applicant did attempt to get letters from the neighbors, but only one was submitted in time for distribution of this report. If staff receives more before the Public Hearing they will be copied and distributed. Parking and Circulation The City of Saratoga has adopted a zoning text amendment, which relaxes all parking requirements in the Village. This ordinance was adopted on January 18, 2006, and became effective February 18, 2006. The new ordinance specifies that no off-street parking shall be required for applications that are deemed complete between March 1, 2006, and February 28, 2009. However the project does propose a three-car carport with one space dedicated as van accessible. The applicant intends to utilized these spaces for residential parking in the evening and early morning hours and as parking for the retail and office uses during normal business hours. They have asked that no restrictions or required dedications be placed on the proposed parking. The property will not be subdivided and will remain under one ownership. Fencing A six foot staggered board fence is proposed on the right and left property lines. The fence will end at the rear of the apartments and will not continue down the hill toward the creek. Trash Enclosures A trash enclosure is proposed at the rear of the commercial building and is recessed into the building with a shed roof covering it. It will be screened from the view of the proposed apartments by the proposed carport. Staff has included a condition in the Resolution of Approval that the proposed design of the enclosure will be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. Geotechnical/Grading The project has obtained geotechnical clearance with conditions that have been added to the conditions of approval for this project. The project proposes a total cut of 743 cubic yards, which includes; 180 cubic yards for the driveway and carport, 433 cubic yards for the commercial building and 130 cubic yards for the apartments. The total proposed fill is 46 cubic yards, which is solely for the apartment building. Arborist Review The City Arborist identified eight ordinance protected trees on the property that could potentially be impacted by the proposed construction. Of these, six are coast live oak trees and two are California bay trees. Two coast live oak trees, identified as Trees #3 and #4 are proposed for removal. Tree #3 is a stump valued at $0. There are two oak trees at the front of the property that will be incorporated into the public seating area and deck. These are identified as trees #1 and #2. All other trees are located at the rear of the property. The City Arborist has reviewed all of the plans including the current proposal and has recommended that replacement trees equal $5,700 be incorporated into a landscape plan subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director and the City Arborist. Landscaping Proposed landscaping consists of several brick planters located within the front yard setback of the commercial building and landscape in planting strips along the left and right side property lines. Staff has added a condition to the Design Review Resolution requiring the applicant to submit a full landscape plan subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director and the City Arborist. Open Space Development applications in the CH-2 zoning district are required to provide 20% of the net lot size in dedicated public open space coverage pursuant to section 15-19.050. The applicant has provided approximately 1,108 square feet within the front yard setback area through use of benches, decks and porch areas. They had also attempted to use the driveway area as part of the required 20%. However staff did not support this approach and asked that the applicant file a variance request for an exception to the pedestrian open space requirement. Please refer to the discussion of the variance below. The applicant has since provided a further updated plan, Exhibit “A” to provide a seating area within the 100-year flood plain of Saratoga Creek. This is the same type of public open space area that was provided on the adjacent property to the west at 14645 Big Basin Way several years ago when that property was developed with two townhomes. The applicant does not wish to add additional signage on the street or a pedestrian access pathway, but would like to utilize the existing signage and pathway on the property next door. Staff has included a condition in the Resolution of Approval that the applicant must provide the identical pedestrian open space and access thereto or establish to the satisfaction of the City that the public does have legal rights to use the existing pedestrian access pathway at 14645 Big Basin Way. Staff has checked this latest plan revision including the benches and pathway with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) and with the City Arborist. The SCVWD had no comments or conditions and the Arborists conditions have been incorporated into the attached Resolution of Approval. Saratoga Creek The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) reviewed the proposed project. However, because the development would be located farther than 50 feet from the top of bank of Saratoga Creek, no permit is required from their agency. The construction recommendations from SCVWD have been incorporated into the attached Resolution. Green Building Techniques The applicant has submitted a list of materials, systems, and design strategies that will be utilized in the construction of these buildings. They include but are not limited to the following: insulated concrete (no waste to landfills), engineered wood, recycled decking, bamboo flooring, recycled glass; tile, counter tops and shower stalls, zero-VOC paint, and adhesive, salvaged pervious driveway pavers, cellulose insulation, photosensitive and LED exterior lighting, double-pane low–E windows and doors, cool roof, energy star appliances. The project design takes advantage of the east-west orientation along its length, the apartment units are small and will use less, the lower floors of the residences are set into the hillside and will take advantage of passive insulation, and native and drought tolerant landscaping will be used. GENERAL PLAN FINDINGS The approval of the proposed project would be consistent with the following General Plan Goals and Policies as discussed below: • Land Use Policy LU 7.1: The City shall consider the economic impacts of all land use decisions on the City. The project proposes to locate a new retail and office building at the front of the site with 1,160 square feet of retail on the ground floor and 1,188 square feet of office space on the upper floor. This will help attract shoppers to this far western end of the Village area, and with the addition of residential at the rear of the property, will help energize the Village in the evening and weekend hours with tenants going out for shopping, a meal or a walk through the Village. The project will further offer an economic benefit by creating a retail space on a property where currently a there is only a single family house. • Housing Goal 2: Encourage the construction of housing affordable to lower-and moderate-income households and increase affordable housing options. This proposal would provide two apartments of 1,250 square feet each. Due to their limited size they will most likely be rented to moderate income households, possibly “empty nesters” or young couples without children. • Area Plan J - The Village - Guideline # 7: Encourage development of types of establishments with structures designated to maintain a ‘country’ atmosphere. All new structures in the Village should be designed to promote an historic area of the City. The architectural form of the structures, especially the commercial structure at the front of the lot is comparable to those built at the turn of the century. The metal roof, wide front porch with sturdy columns, and curved bay window are details that lend to this historic feel. • Area Plan J - The Village - Guideline # 16: Portions of the Village south and west of Fifth Street on Big Basin Way should be of a density no greater than other condominium projects in the Village area and should include high quality condominiums and apartments along with small commercial shops. Existing commercial developments should be allowed to remain. This project proposes a small residential component of two apartments, which are consistent with the City’s Residential Design Review Handbook in terms of bulk, mass and height and could be considered “high quality” apartments. The retail component of the project makes the overall proposal consistent with this guideline. MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Pursuant to the conditional uses allowed in the CH-2 zoning district mixed use developments may be allowed if they conform to the Mixed Use Development standards of City Code Article 15-58.020. This project conforms to all the applicable standards in that: • The proposed density does not exceed 20 dwelling units per net acre. • The dwelling units are located at the rear of the site. • The dwelling units do not comprise more than fifty percent of the total floor area of all buildings on the site. • The project meets the parking requirements as discussed in further detail below. • Proposed fencing complies with the maximum height standards. • Each dwelling units has a private outdoor patio. • The maximum height of the structures is 26 feet. • The design of the residential structure is consistent with the policies and techniques of the Residential Design Handbook. • The project does not exceed maximum coverage requirements. • The proposed development does not abut single-family residential land uses. • The residential component will be rental and will not exceed 1,250 square feet or three bedrooms. • The proposed project does not pose substantial privacy impacts. • The applicant will pay an in lieu fee for park construction. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS The proposed project supports the findings for Conditional Use Permit approval subject to City Code 15-55.070: • 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. Findings can be made in the affirmative in that a mixed-use development may be a conditionally permitted use in the designated zoning district (CH-2). The City Code encourages “Preservation and enhancement of the small-scale pedestrian character of the Village to make the area more inviting to potential shoppers and diners”, “Preservation and enhancement of the architectural and landscape quality of the Village” and “ Encouragement of a town center mix of specialty shops, restaurants, convenience shops, services and residences.” The proposed development will preserve and enhance the pedestrian environment by maintaining the oak trees at the front of the site and adding a seating area around them, making the area inviting to shoppers. The architectural style of the buildings is also in keeping with Saratoga’s history and the mix of retail office and residential uses on this site provides a good transition from the more retail east end of the Village to the more residential west end. • 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. Findings can be made in the affirmative in that appropriate conditions have been placed on the use permit to ensure compliance with all applicable health and safety codes. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, as it has been conditioned to meet all applicable Building Codes. • That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter. Findings can be made in the affirmative in that appropriate conditions have been placed on the use permit to ensure compliance with code requirements. Any intensification of this use will require an amended Conditional Use permit. • 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. Findings can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed development will attract customers from the Village and may bring additional customers for other businesses in the vicinity. Additionally the residential use at the rear will provide potential customers to businesses throughout the Village. Although there are residential uses located to the west and across the street the impact should be minimal as the applicant is proposing parking spaces on site, which will be used by the residential tenants during non- retail shopping hours. Further, employee access and deliveries will be made through the front door, facing Big Basin Way. DESIGN REVIEW The proposed structures are designed in an architectural style reminiscent of an American farmhouse with out buildings such as the proposed carport. The commercial structure at the front of the lot is designed with a porch that wraps around the front of the building and a portion of the sides, with sturdy columns and a port-cochere overhanging the driveway. The roofs of all buildings are designed in a simple and uncomplicated manner. The use of a standing seam metal roof is somewhat novel for the Village. The Sam Cloud Hay and Feed warehouse, is of a similar architectural style and also had a metal roof. Windows are of a double-hung style and will have a simple wood trim around them. Siding will be a composite material designed to look like horizontal ship-lap siding and decorative brick planters and a wood deck will highlight the front façade. The residential building at the rear is also designed with a metal roof and horizontal ship-lap siding, with some fixed windows and others double hung. Planter boxes hang from the usable windows and front doors face the neighboring properties to the east and west rather than the front of the property. Porches and balconies enhance the rear elevations and offer the future residents views of the lush natural vegetation surrounding Saratoga Creek. DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS FOR MULTI-FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES The proposed project supports the findings for Design Review approval subject to City Code 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. The mixed-use development is located in the Village commercial district and is designed to minimize interference with views and privacy to adjacent properties. To the north of the property the neighbors will be separated by over 150 feet of setback and Saratoga Creek which provides a natural buffer, to the south is Big Basin Way and the intersection with Sixth Street, to the east is an attorney’s office and to the west is a two-story townhome development separated by a fence. The setbacks meet the requirement of the City Code. The Project proposes maintaining existing vegetation to help screen the project along the rear adjacent property line. The structures are designed in a similar style and with similar materials as other historic structure in the Village, especially resembling the Sam Cloud Hay and Feed Warehouse currently under renovation on Third Street, with horizontal shiplap siding and metal roof. Therefore, staff is able to make this finding in the affirmative. (b) 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. The proposal does not include any signage. Future signage will be required to meet the City sign code requirements and Village Design Guidelines. Therefore, staff is able to make this finding in the affirmative. (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. The applicant intends to leave most of the vegetation at the rear of the site untouched. At the front of the site the applicant will leave the existing oak trees and will provide flower boxes and shrubs along the east and west property line. Therefore, staff is able to make this finding in the affirmative. (d) Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be non-reflective. The proposed colors and materials will blend with the natural landscape and be non-reflective. Further, the use of colors, materials and detailing add interest and articulation to the buildings. Therefore, staff is able to make this finding in the affirmative. (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. The proposed structures will use metal roofs similar to those found on structures built at the turn of the century when Saratoga was a logging town rather than a residential suburb. However, the applicant will propose a non-reflective treatment. No mechanical equipment is proposed on the roof. Therefore, staff is able to make this finding in the affirmative. (f) The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. The proposed project will be compatible with other developments in the Village. The area is mostly comprised of two-story structures of approximately the same height and bulk. While the architectural styles vary this proposal will be compatible. It will provide a good transition from the eastern end of the Village to the more residential uses at this eastern end. An attorney’s office is located in an old home to the east of the subject property. The property to the west is developed with townhomes of similar height, bulk and a contemporary craftsman design. Sixth Street makes a T intersection directly in front of this property. The properties across the street are developed to the west with a large condominium complex and to the east with an architect’s office in an historic residence. Staff has determined that the proposed project is compatible in height, bulk, and design with other structures in the immediate area and therefore, staff is able to make this finding in the affirmative. VARIANCE The Variance application is necessary to allow an exception to the required 20% of net lot area to be dedicated to pedestrian open space coverage. The applicant initially proposed to provide the 20% required open space as a combination of front deck around the two existing oak trees, a covered porch around the commercial building and the driveway and paved parking areas. Staff discussed this with the applicant and determined that the City would support the use of the deck and covered porch area, but not the driveway. At that time the applicant did not want to provide access to the creek and staff gave them the option of filing a Variance application to the requirement that 20% of the net site be dedicated as pedestrian open space. After the notices were published the applicant presented staff with an alternative that did offer an area adjacent to the creek in the 100 year flood plain as a public seating area, Plans Exhibit “A”. Staff determined that the space provided along the creek plus the proposed deck and covered porch would meet the 20% pedestrian open space requirement. However the applicant wanted to utilize the existing pathway on the neighboring townhome property directly to the west at 14645 Big Basin Way, where there is already signage directing pedestrians to the public open space that was required for that development. Staff has discussed this with the City Attorney who has determined that the applicant would first have to establish to the satisfaction of the City that the public has the legal right to utilize the path on the 14645 Big Basin Way property to access the Open Space Easement on adjoining property. Since they have not done that to date, Staff included a condition within the Design Review Resolution that the applicant must either establish the necessary access rights or provide a pedestrian access pathway and appropriate signage for the proposed open space on their property. VARIANCE FINDINGS The proposed project does not support the findings for Variance approval subject to City Code 15-70.060: • That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulations would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. Staff is unable make this finding in the affirmative. There is nothing specifically unique about the property that makes the addition of pedestrian open space an undue hardship. Public open space was required for the development to the west of this property. • That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the imitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. Staff is unable to make this finding in the affirmative. Granting of this variance request would be a grant of special privilege in that this is a City Code requirement that is applicable to all developments within the CH-2 zoning district. • That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Staff is able to make this finding in the affirmative. The granting of this variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safely or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. CONCLUSION Staff finds that all of the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review findings can be made in the affirmative and the proposal is consistent with the General Plan. However, staff cannot make the findings necessary for granting of the Variance and recommends that the applicant provide proposed open space area adjacent to Saratoga Creek. Applicant will also need to provide a pedestrian access easement to said open space or get a determination from the City Attorney enabling the use of the existing pedestrian access easement at 14645 Big Basin Way. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission find that this Application is not subject to CEQA review and approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review, while denying the request for a Variance by adopting the attached Resolutions. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Planning Commission determines that the findings can be made to support the Variance and approves the plans, Exhibit “A” as submitted. Staff would then prepare a Variance Resolution for approval. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution of Approval – Conditional Use Permit/Design Review 2. Resolution of Denial – Variance 3. Arborist Reports dated May 8, 2007, August 22, 2006, and May 9, 2006 4. Minutes from Heritage Preservation Commission meeting of February 14, 2006 5. Correspondence from Santa Clara Valley Water District dated November 16, 2006 and May 14, 2007 6. Neighbor Notification form 7. Tollgate Buildings- Green Building Strategies 8. City of Saratoga Notice, Noticing Affidavit, and Noticing Labels 9. Applicant’s Plans, Exhibit "A"