The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-27-2010 Planning Commission PacketTable of Contents Agenda 2 January 13, 2010 Action Minutes 4 APPLICATIONS APPC09-0003 (Monteverde), CUP10-0001, ADR10-0001(Hedley-McCormack) (386-28-003) - 12255 Titus Avenue Staff Report 6 Attachment 1 13 Attachment 2 17 Attachment 3 27 Attachment 4 28 Attachment 5 33 Attachment 6 41 Attachment 7 44 Attachment 8 49 Attachment 9 53 Attachment 10 54 Attachment 11 56 APPLICATION 07-299 (366-57-003) Dan and Nancy Cheadle, 20865 Wardell Road Lot C Staff Report 58 Resolution of Approval for Design Review 66 GreenPoint Rated Checklist for Single Family Homes 79 Neighbor Notices 85 Public Hearing Notice 91 1 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL Commissioners - Chair Yan Zhao, Vice-Chair Mary-Lynne Bernald, Manny Cappello, Joyce Hlava, David Reis, Douglas Robertson and Linda Rodgers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of January 13, 2010 ORAL COMMUNICATION Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staff. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS- PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTION TO STAFF REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on January 21, 2010 REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an “Appeal Application” with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b). All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the Public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. PUBLIC HEARING 1. APPLICATIONS APPC09-0003 (Monteverde), CUP10-0001, ADR10-0001(Hedley-McCormack) (386-28-003) - 12255 Titus Avenue - Appeal of the Over the Counter (OTC) Application No. OTC09- 0107 to remodel an existing accessory structure located in the rear yard of 12255 Titus Avenue. Total proposed floor area, including the 250 square foot accessory structure, would be 3,588 square feet. The maximum height of the proposed structure would not exceed ten feet. The maximum impervious coverage would not exceed the allowable 60% of the net site area. The lot size is 22,000 square feet and the property is located in the R-10,000 zoning district. (Michael Fossati) 2. APPLICATION 07-299 (366-57-003) Dan and Nancy Cheadle, 20865 Wardell Road Lot C - The applicant is requesting approval of a Design Review application and a Grading Exception to construct a 6,186 square foot two-story Meditation designed single-family home on a vacant lot. The project would include 2,476 square feet of grading. The project includes a request for a Grading Exception to exceed the maximum 1,000 cubic yards of allowable grading in the HR zoning district. (Christopher A. Riordan, AICP, Senior Planner) 2 DIRECTORS ITEM COMMISSION ITEMS COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING - Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II). POSTING Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted on January 21, 2010 , at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us If you would like to receive the Agenda’s via e-mail, please send your e-mail address to planning@saratoga.ca.us NOTE: To view previous Planning Commission meetings anytime, go the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us 3 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL Commissioners - Chair Yan Zhao, Vice-Chair Mary-Lynne Bernald, Manny Cappello, Joyce Hlava, David Reis, Douglas Robertson and Linda Rodgers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of December 12, 2009 (Approved 5:0(Bernald and Robertson-abstain)) ORAL COMMUNICATION Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staff. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS- PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTION TO STAFF REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on January 7, 2010 REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an “Appeal Application” with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b). All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the Public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. PUBLIC HEARING 1. APPLICATION APPC09-0003 (386-28-003) Monteverde, 12255 Titus Avenue - The appellant is appealing the approval of an Over the Counter (OTC) permit to relocate a shed within the rear yard. The permit approved the placement of a 249 sq. ft. shed into the rear yard. The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit to relocate the shed into the rear yard and side yard. Per City Code 15-55.030, a conditional use may be permitted by a use permit to have different front, side, and rear setback area minimums. The lot is approximately 22,000 square feet and the site is zoned R-1-10,000. (Michael Fossati) (Approved to be continued to the January 27, 2010 meeting, 7:0) 2. APPLICATION PDR09-0028 (386-10-049) Crown Castle on behalf of Verizon Wireless, 17777 Saratoga Avenue - The applicant is requesting Design Review approval to install three new antennas to an existing monopole. The project also includes the installation of 12 new coaxial cables. The lot is approximately 11,000 square feet and the site is zoned Professional-Administrative. (Michael Fossati) (Approved 7:0) 4 DIRECTORS ITEM COMMISSION ITEMS COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING – ADJOURNED 7:30 PM - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II). POSTING Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted on January 7, 2010, at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us If you would like to receive the Agenda’s via e-mail, please send your e-mail address to planning@saratoga.ca.us NOTE: To view previous Planning Commission meetings anytime, go the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us 5 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No. & Location: APPC09-0003 – 12255 Titus Avenue CUP10-0001 – 12255 Titus Avenue ADR10-0001 – 12255 Titus Avenue Type of Application: Appeal of Over the Counter (OTC) permit OTC09-0107 - Appeal #APPC07-0001 Appellant: Monteverde Owner: Hedley-McCormack Staff Planner: Michael Fossati, Assistant Planner Meeting Date: January 27, 2010 (continued from January 13, 2010) APN: 386-28-003 Department Head:_____________ John F. Livingstone, AICP 12255 Titus Avenue 6 Application No. APPC09-0003; 12255 Titus Avenue 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY Over the Counter Application filed: 12/10/09 Appeal Application filed: 12/21/09 Notice published: 12/29/09 Mailing completed: 12/22/09 Posting completed: 01/07/10 Request for continuance 01/13/10 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Appeal of Over the Counter (OTC) Application No. OTC09-0107 to remodel an existing accessory structure located in the rear yard of 12255 Titus Avenue. Total proposed floor area, including the 250 square foot accessory structure, would be 3,588 square feet. The maximum height of the proposed structure would not exceed ten feet. The maximum impervious coverage would not exceed the allowable 60% of the net site area. The lot size is 22,000 square feet and the property is located in the R-10,000 zoning district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION • Deny the appeal, thus affirming the Community Development Department’s OTC approval for a 250 sq. ft. accessory structure, issued on December 10, 2009. The decision on this appeal is final and not subject to further appeal to the City Council. Staff has also prepared the following option for the Planning Commission which has been agreed upon by both the appellant and the applicant: • Direct Staff to issue a Conditional Use Permit / Design Review for a 346 sq. ft. accessory structure to be located in the rear and side yard at 12255 Titus Avenue. Per City Code 15-80.030(d)(1), a Conditional Use Permit is required for accessory structures (over 250 sq. ft.) to be located in the rear setback. Per City Code 15-45.065, Design Review is required for new accessory structures greater than 250 sq. ft. in floor area. The decision on this project is subject to appeal to the City Council. 7 Application No. APPC09-0003; 12255 Titus Avenue 3 PROJECT DATA ZONING: R-1-10,000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: M-10 (Medium Density Residential) MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: Approximately 22,000 net square feet AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: Approximately 1% GRADING REQUIRED: None ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The proposed accessory structure is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 (e) Accessory Structures. This exemption allows for the construction of small appurtenant structures including garages, carports, and sheds. PROPOSED EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND COLORS The proposed colors include sage walls with off-white trim. Materials include vertical siding and a composite shingle roof. A color and material board will be available at the public hearing. Detail Colors and Material Mfg. & Specification Windows Reclaimed / Recycled Wood Frame, White Whole House Salvage Siding T1-11 Exterior Plywood, Silver Clouds ECC-35-11 Behr Paint Roof Composition Shingle – 30 yr – Grey Armstrong French Door Reclaimed / Recycled Wood Frame, White Whole House Salvage Entry Door Steel Door / White Armstrong 8 Application No. APPC09-0003; 12255 Titus Avenue 4 PROJECT DATA Proposal Code Requirements Site Coverage Residence Garage Playhouse Tool Shed Driveway/Porch Walkways/Paths Front Sidewalk Outdoor Room Accessory Structure Concrete Slab TOTAL 2,564 sq. ft. 462 sq. ft. 46 sq. ft. 101 sq. ft. 4,105 sq. ft 896 sq. ft. 448 sq. ft. 312 sq. ft. 346 sq. ft. 182 sq. ft. 9,462 sq. ft. (41%) Maximum Allowable: 60% = 13,181 sq. ft. Floor Area Main Residence Garage Outdoor Room Accessory Structure TOTAL 2,565 sq. ft. 461 sq. ft. 312 sq. ft. 346 sq. ft. 3,684 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable: 4,400 sq. ft. Setbacks (Accessory Structure) Front yard Rear Yard Right (north) Side Left (south) Side 25 ft. 12 ft. 110 ft. 7 ft. 25 ft. 12 ft.1 10 ft. 10 ft.2 Height in feet (Accessory Structure) Average Elevation Topmost elevation Maximum height 299 ft. 309 ft. 10 ft. Maximum height = 309 ft. elevation (10 ft.) PROJECT DISCUSSION The appellant is appealing the administrative approval of an Over the Counter (OTC) permit to convert an existing 346 square foot accessory structure into a 250 sq. ft. accessory structure located within the rear setback. This application, originally scheduled for the Public Hearing of January 13, 2010, was continued to a date certain at the request of the applicant. 1 Per City Code 15-80.030(d)(1) Upon the granting of a use permit, ten foot tall accessory structures (within the rear yard) can be located no closer than 12 feet from the rear property line. 2 Per City Code 15-55.030 and 15-80.030(j) Variations and exceptions to size, height, and required setbacks of accessory structures may be granted through the use permit process. 9 Application No. APPC09-0003; 12255 Titus Avenue 5 Background The applicant originally began repair work on an existing shed at 12255 Titus Avenue in October 2009 without building permits. The existing shed is 11’-6” tall and 346 square feet in size. The shed is located approximately one foot from the rear property line and three feet from the left side property line. The City issued a “stop work order” after being informed of the possible illegal work. The applicant visited the Community Development Department on the same day the stop work order was issued. A Building Permit was issued because the applicant stated that the shed was legal nonconforming3. The Building Permit was rescinded when the applicant was unable to demonstrate proof the existing shed was legally constructed. The applicant later returned to the City with an application for Over the Counter review. In order to conform to the City Code, the shed was to be lowered to 10 feet in height, reduced in size to 250 sq. ft., and relocated 10 feet from the rear property line. Per City Code, garden sheds, structures for housing swimming pool equipment and other enclosed structures of a similar nature, not exceeding two hundred and fifty square feet in floor area, may be located no closer than six feet from the rear property line and shall not exceed six feet in height, plus one additional foot in height for each additional foot of setback from the rear property line in excess of six feet if the structure is still located within the required rear setback area. The shed’s distance from the side property remained unchanged (approximately three feet away from the side property line). There are no restrictions on placing structures near side property lines, when the structure is completely in the rear yard. Appeal The appellant submitted an appeal on December 21, 2009. The appellant is concerned that the proposed accessory structure would be located close to her side property line that is shared with the applicant. The appellant is also concerned about the potential uses to take place in the proposed accessory structure with a primary concern that these uses could include an art school or a secondary dwelling unit. The applicant has informed both the appellant and Staff that they have no intention of converting the accessory structure into habitable space. Standard policy for Staff is to meet with the concerned parties prior to the public meeting for an appeal. Staff listens to both sides and tries to establish an agreement beneficial to both parties. Staff met with both parties on two occasions to discuss possible project alternatives. Alternative Project The appellant informed Staff that they might positively consider a modification to the proposed project. The applicant was receptive to working together with the appellant on a project that would meet both of their needs. After two meetings, the applicant and appellant agreed to the following changes to the project: • The entrance of the accessory structure would be turned 90 degrees to the left, to face the applicant’s interior rear yard. The rear of the structure would face the side property line. • The accessory structure would be moved seven feet from the side property line and 12 feet from the rear property line. 3 Please note, this statement was made in error of City Staff. The applicant never stated that the building was legally non-conforming. The applicant was unaware of the legality of the structure. 10 Application No. APPC09-0003; 12255 Titus Avenue 6 • The accessory structure would have restrictions on the use. The restrictions include: o Not to be used as a livable unit (guest house, dwelling unit, bedroom). o Not to be used as a place of business (for-profit or non-profit). o Not to be used as a school or meeting place (classroom, public meetings, art school). o Not to be used to shelter automobile(s), boat(s), or recreational vehicles. • Restrict any future remodeling of the accessory structure that could include a bathroom or kitchen facility. • Plant privacy shrubbery (Toyon) along the side property line to block any privacy impacts. • Share the costs of adding two additional feet of lattice to the existing fence. • Add sheetrock within the accessory structure to provide greater noise insulation. The above changes have been added as permanent conditions listed in the Design Review / Conditional Use Permit Resolution as conditions #14 - #21. Due to the placement of the alternative project, the applicant would require the Planning Commission (Commission) to approve a Conditional Use Permit / Design Review. The proposed rotation would require the accessory structure to encroach into the side yard setback. Per City Code 15-80.030, an accessory structure cannot encroach into a side yard setback, unless the Commission approved a use permit with an exception to standards. The applicant was open to the restrictions as long as the accessory structure can maintain its current size (346 sq. ft.). Trees The City Arborist reviewed three (3) protected Redwood trees that could possibly be impacted by the relocation of the accessory structure. Per the report by the City Arborist, the accessory building can be moved into the proposed location. The applicant is strongly in favor of saving all of their existing trees and none are proposed for removal. Recommendations of the City Arborist have been added as conditions listed in the Design Review / Conditional Use Permit Resolution as conditions #24 - #34. Fireplaces No fireplaces are proposed for the accessory structure. Air-Conditioning / HVAC Units No air-conditioner units are proposed for the accessory structure. Neighbor Correspondence Staff has received letters in support of the OTC or CUP/ADR application. These letters are included as an attachment. A neighbor expressed support of the OTC or CUP/ADR application at the January 13th, 2010 Planning Commission meeting. The meeting was continued to a date certain of January 27, 2010, but was opened (and closed) for the neighbor’s public comment. 11 Application No. APPC09-0003; 12255 Titus Avenue 7 Staff has also received correspondence from the appellant. This letter has been added as an attachment. In summary, the letter requests that restrictions be added to the use permit that control the use of the structure. The applicant has reviewed the letter and given a verbal approval. Those restrictions have been added as conditions to the Resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution denying the appeal. 2. Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review. 3. Appeal application. 4. Arborist Report, dated Oct. 29, 2009, Jan. 14, 2010, and Jan. 19, 2010. 5. Correspondence from applicant and appellant 6. Letters in support of applicant 7. Letter from “Melinda Circle Neighbors” 8. City of Saratoga Notice, Noticing Affidavit, and Noticing Labels 9. Parcel Map 10. Applicant’s Plans, Exhibit "A" for OTC Permit 11. Applicant’s Plans, Exhibit “A” for Conditional Use Permit / Design Review Approval 12 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.10-001 FOR DENIAL OF APPEAL Application # APPC09-0003 Monteverde / 12255 Titus Avenue The City of Saratoga Planning Commission finds and determines as follows with respect to the above-described application: I. Project Summary The City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for an Over the Counter (OTC) permit for the project to remodel an existing shed into a legal accessory structure, as shown in Exhibit “A”. The foregoing use and/or development will be described as the “project” in this Resolution. II. Right to Appeal City Code Sections 15-90.010 allows an appeal may be taken to the Planning Commission by the applicant or any interested person from the whole or any portion of an administrative determination or decision made by the Planning Commission pursuant to any of the provisions of the City Code. III. Planning Commission Review On January 13, 2010 and January 27, 2010, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearings on the project at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and argument. The Planning Commission considered the project, the staff report on the project, CEQA documentation correspondence, presentations from the applicant and the public, and all testimony and other evidence presented at the Public Hearing. IV. Environmental Review The Project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guideline (14 C.C.R. Section 15270(a)) which provides that CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves. V. Project Determination Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans, CEQA documentation, and other exhibits and evidence submitted in connection with this matter, the statutory exemption from CEQA is approved and the appeal (APPC09-0003) is denied. 13 2 Application No. APPC09-0003; 12255Titus Avenue, Monteverde Section 2. The Planning Commission affirms the decision of the Community Development Department approval of the Over the Counter (OTC) permit to remodel an existing shed into a legal accessory structure is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. GENERAL 1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting all applicable permanent of other term-specified conditions has been recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content to the Community Development Director. 2. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent. 3. Conditions may be modified only by the Planning Commission unless modification is expressly otherwise allowed by the City Code including but not limited to Sections 15- 80.120 and/or 16-05.035, as applicable. 4. The Community Development Director shall mail to the Owner and Applicant a notice in writing, on or after the time the Resolution granting this Approval is duly executed by the City, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing fees”). THIS APPROVAL OR PERMIT SHALL EXPIRE SIXTY (60) DAYS AFTER THE DATE SAID NOTICE IS MAILED IF ALL PROCESSING FEES CONTAINED IN THE NOTICE HAVE NOT BEEN PAID IN FULL. No Zoning Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the Community Development Director certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 5. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or the Design Review Approval will expire unless extended in accordance with the City Code. 6. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without 14 3 Application No. APPC09-0003; 12255Titus Avenue, Monteverde limitation, the requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations incorporated herein by this reference. 7. Prior to issuance of any Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit to implement this Design Review Approval the Owner or Applicant shall obtain a “Zoning Clearance” from the Community Development Director by submitting final plans for the requested permit to the Community Development Department for review to ascertain compliance with the requirements of this Resolution. 8. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against: a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to said action; and b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person acting on their behalf. In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance from the Community Development Director, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the Community Development Director. B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 9. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans dated December 10, 2009, denominated Exhibit "A". All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with Condition A.3, above. 15 4 Application No. APPC09-0003; 12255Titus Avenue, Monteverde PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 27th day of January 2010 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: _______________________________ Yan Zhao Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: ___________________________________ John F. Livingstone, AICP Secretary to the Planning Commission 16 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 10-001 FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW Application # CUP10-0001 / ADR10-0001 McCormick and Hedley / 12255 Titus Avenue The City of Saratoga Planning Commission finds and determines as follows with respect to the above-described application: I. Project Summary The City of Saratoga Planning Commission has directed Staff to approve an application for Conditional Use Permit Approval for the Project shown in Exhibit "A" date stamped January 19, 2010, incorporated by this reference. The proposed project is the construction and placement of an 346 sq. ft. accessory structure in the side and rear yard at 12255 Titus Avenue. The foregoing use will be described as the “Project” in this Resolution. II. Design Review Requirement City Code Section 15-45.060 (a) (6), (a)(1), any new multi-story main structure requires Planning Commission approval. This Design Review Approval requirement implements the Saratoga General Plan, including, but not limited to: (1) Land Use Goal 13 which provides that the City shall use the Design Review process to assure that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings; (2) Open Space Element Policy 11.a which provides that the City shall ensure that projects are designed in a manner that minimizes disruption to important wildlife, riparian and plant habitats; and (3) Safety Element Site and Drainage Policy 3 which provides that the City shall require that landscaping and site drainage plans be submitted and approved during Design Review for a residence prior to issuance of permits. III. Use Permit Requirement City Code Sections 15-55.010 and 15-80.030(d)(1) require a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission for any cabana, hobby shop, recreation room, and other similar structure located within a required rear setback. City Code Section 15-55.030 and 15-80.030(j) allow variations and exceptions to standards pertaining to the size, height or required setback of an accessory structure in a side or rear setback area. IV. Planning Commission Review On January 13, 2010 and January 27, 2010, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing on the Project at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and argument. The Planning Commission considered the Project, the staff report on the Project, CEQA documentation, correspondence, presentation from the Applicant and the public, and all testimony and other evidence presented at the Public Hearing. 17 2 Application No. CUP09-0001; 12255 Titus Avenue V. Environmental Review The Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. Section 15301), “Existing Facilities”. This exemption allows for minor modifications involving negligible expansion of use and no exception to that exemption applies. VI. Design Review Findings The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code Section Article 15-45.080 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those required findings: (a) The project avoids unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The project meets this finding in that it incorporates a low profile design that is smaller than many of the surrounding properties. The proposed ten foot height and distance from the side and rear property lines increase access to light, air, and privacy for the adjacent properties near the project site. Additionally, privacy impacts would also be avoided with proposed landscape screening along the side property line, an increase in the fence height with the addition of two feet of lattice, and the absence of windows facing the side or rear neighbor properties. This finding can be made in the affirmative. (b) The project preserves the natural landscape. The project meets this finding in that it will be situated in a location that will not require the removal of existing vegetation. The proposed structure would incorporate earthtone colors to match the natural surroundings. Privacy landscaping screening will be planted along the southern boundary line to assist in controlling privacy while increasing vegetation within the property. This finding can be made in the affirmative. (c) The project preserves native and heritage trees. The project meets this finding in that all native trees on the site will be preserved through the use of tree protection measures, including tree protective fencing and a tree protection bond. The project is not requesting removal of Native and/or Heritage Trees. This finding can be made in the affirmative. (d) The project minimizes the perception of excessive bulk. This project meets this finding in that the proposed accessory structure is substantially smaller than the main residence and surrounding properties nearby. The mass is further broken up with the incorporation of a low pitch shed roof, reaching its highest point of 10 feet. The applicant is proposing an earth tone color pallet and gray roofing material to provide consistency with the natural vegetation on the lot. The earth tone color pallet will further minimize the perception of bulk. This finding can be made in the affirmative. (e) The project is of compatible bulk and height. This project meets this finding in that the accessory structure is consistent with single-story residences that are predominate in the 18 3 Application No. CUP09-0001; 12255 Titus Avenue area. The proposal is compatible in bulk and height with the neighborhood in that it will be lower than most structures around the subject property. The accessory structure will only be two-feet taller than the proposed fence at its peak. Approximately half of the accessory structure will be under or at the same level of the proposed fence and lattice. The accessory structure will be out of site of the public right-of way, screened by the main residence and existing landscaping. This finding can be found in the affirmative. (f) The project uses current grading and erosion control methods. This project meets this finding in that the building site is relatively flat and the proposed accessory structure is in the general area of the existing residence. No grading is proposed. In addition, the project is conditioned to conform to the City’s current grading and erosion control standards. The project is also conditioned to require detention of stormwater on site, to the maximum extent reasonably feasible. This finding can be made in the affirmative. (g) The project follows appropriate design policies and techniques. The project meets this finding in that it will incorporate natural, earth-tone colors in its design, maintain residential privacy by constructing a relatively small structure with proposed landscape screening and appropriate window placement, preserve views by maintaining an elevation substantially less than single-family residences near the project, and preserve existing trees that will provide shade for the proposed use. This finding may be made in the affirmative. VII. Conditional Use Permit Findings The findings required for issuance of a Conditional Use Permit Approval pursuant to City Code Section 15-55.070 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those required findings: (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. The location of the project is appropriate, in that the proposed accessory structure will be placed in a manner that will provide adequate space between nearby property owners and existing protected trees. The height of the accessory structure will be lowered and landscape screening will be provided to further reduce impacts on privacy. The proposed use is consistent with the requirements of the City Code, in regards to height and placement from the rear property line. This finding can be made in the affirmative. (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. The location for the project is appropriate, in that the proposed accessory structure will be situated in a manner to ensure adequate light, air, and privacy for the main residence and adjacent properties, while remaining sufficiently spaced from nearby protected trees. The accessory structure shall be in strict conformance of the building requirements, as determined by the City Code, in order to further maintain the safety of the structure and surrounding environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative. 19 4 Application No. CUP09-0001; 12255 Titus Avenue (c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this Chapter. The project meets this finding in that it has been designed to meet the requirements and provisions of the City Code. This includes an exception to standards which gives the Planning Commission authority to grant exceptions to allow accessory structures in side and rear setback areas. This finding can be made in the affirmative. (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 project meets this finding in that the accessory structure will not be used as a habitable unit or location for a home occupation. The accessory structure will be inconspicuously located by utilizing colors that blend with the natural environment. The accessory structure will be adequately spaced from surrounding properties by maintaining a seven foot distance from the side property line and a twelve foot distance from the rear property line. Proposed landscaping and the addition of lattice to an existing fence will further reduce adverse affects to surrounding properties. This finding can be made in the affirmative. VIII. Project Approval After careful consideration of the application, site plan, architectural drawings, and other materials and exhibits and evidence submitted to the City in connection with this matter, Application No. CUP10-0001 (Planning Commission Conditional Use Permit Review) and ADR10-0001 (Administrative Design Review) for an accessory structure in the rear and side setback is approved subject to the conditions set forth below. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. GENERAL 1. The Planning Commission shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Conditional Use Permit and may, at any time, modify, delete, or impose any new conditions of the permit to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. 2. Conditions may be modified only by the Planning Commission unless modification is expressly otherwise allowed by the City Code including but not limited to section 16-05.035, as applicable. 3. The Community Development Director shall mail to the Owner/Applicant a notice in writing, on or after the time this Resolution of Approval is duly executed by the City, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing fees”). This approval or permit shall expire sixty (60) days after the date said notice is mailed if all processing fees contained in the notice have not been paid in full. No Zoning Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the Community Development Director certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 20 5 Application No. CUP09-0001; 12255 Titus Avenue 4. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution and the Conditional Use Permit will expire unless extended in accordance with the City Code. 5. The facility shall at all times operate in compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdictional authority over the facility pertaining to, but not limited to, health, sanitation, safety, and water quality issues. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other governmental entities having jurisdiction. 6. Prior to issuance of any demolition, grading, or building permit to implement this Design Review approval the Applicant shall obtain a “Zoning Clearance” from the Community Development Director by submitting final plans for the requested permit to the Community Development Department for review to ascertain compliance with the requirements of this Resolution. 7. Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend City as to Action Challenging Approval of Application and as to Damage from Performance of Work Authorized by Design Review Approval. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against: a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to said action; and b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person acting on their behalf. In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance from the Community Development Director, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the Community Development Director. B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 8. Compliance with Plans. The facility shall be operated, located and constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans denominated Exhibit "A" date stamped January 19, 2010, incorporated by this reference. All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be subject to the requisite prior City approval. 21 6 Application No. CUP09-0001; 12255 Titus Avenue 9. Proposed Changes. Any proposed changes – including, but not limited to façade design and materials – to the approved set of plans shall be submitted in writing with a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. No downgrading in the exterior appearance of the approved structure will be approved by Staff. Downgrades may include, but not limited to garage doors, architectural detailing, stonework, driveway materials, etc. Proposed changes to the approved plans are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director (CDD), or his designated representative. Any and all changes may require review by the Planning Commission. 10. Color Board. The project shall incorporate colors and materials as illustrated on the Finish Material Board date stamped January 19, 2010. 11. Setback requirement. The accessory structure shall not exceed a maximum height of 10 feet and shall maintain a minimum 12 foot setback from the rear property line and a seven foot setback from the side property line, as approved by the Planning Commission, at the January 27, 2010 public hearing and Planning Commission Meeting. 12. Downgrading of Materials. No downgrading in the exterior appearance of the proposed residence will be approved by Staff. Downgrades may include, but are not limited to garage doors, architectural detailing, stonework, columns, shutters, driveway materials, etc. Any exterior changes to approved plans may require filing an additional application and fees for approval of modification by the Planning Commission. 13. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department Director or designee prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum include the following: a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A” on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition No. B.1 above; b. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages; and c. City Arborist Reports dated January 19, 2010 onto separate construction plan pages; and d. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building Division. 14. Landscape Screening. Landscape screening shall be planted (in a manner which does not require the existing shrubs screening to be removed) on the south property line, starting from the southwest corner of the property and expanding east approximately 34 feet. This will be accomplished by installing a three gallon Toyon shrub every three feet, for a total of eleven shrubs. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT. 15. Use of Accessory Structure. Prior to issuance of a Building permit, the applicant shall sign a separate agreement, in the form of a Deed Restriction, prohibiting the use of the accessory 22 7 Application No. CUP09-0001; 12255 Titus Avenue structure as a second living unit, as defined per Section 15-06.240 (d) of the City Code. The applicant shall be responsible for paying all document preparation fees associated with the agreement. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT. 16. Privacy Fence. The height of the fencing along the southern property line shall be increased with two feet of lattice. The lattice will be added to 34 feet of fence along the southern property line. This requirement shall be waived if the property owner of 12228 Melinda Circle is unable to demonstrate proof to the City that the cost of the lattice has been shared between the property owners of 12255 Titus Avenue and 12228 Melinda Circle. Proof includes a quote documenting the cost of the lattice and a form of payment to the company installing the lattice or the property owner of 12255 Titus Avenue. Fences and walls shall comply with City Code Chapter 15-29. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT. 17. Home Occupation. A home occupation shall not be conducted in the proposed accessory structure. Occupations include conducting business meetings, classes, or similar activities in conjunction with a for-profit or non-profit business. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT. 18. Vehicular Storage. The proposed accessory structure shall not be used to store automobiles, boats, or other motorized recreational vehicles. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT. 19. Bathroom Facilities. The proposed accessory structure shall not include bathroom facilities. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT. 20. Traffic Impact. The proposed accessory structure shall not create pedestrian, automobile or truck traffic significantly in excess of the normal amount in the district. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT. 21. Sheetrock Installation. The proposed accessory structure shall have sheetrock and/or another insulating material installed within the interior of the proposed accessory structure in order to provide greater noise insulation. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT. 22. Greywater System. Any greywater system installed in conjunction with this project shall follow the requirements of the California Plumbing Code (CPC), to the satisfaction of the Building Official. 23. Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public right-of-way. City Arborist 24. This entire Arborist Report, dated January 19, 2010 including the Tree Inventory Table and map 2 showing locations of trees and protective fencing, shall be incorporated into the final set of plans and titled “Tree Preservation”. The arborist report dated October 29, 2009, does not need to be included in the plans. 23 8 Application No. CUP09-0001; 12255 Titus Avenue 25. No protected tree authorized for removal, pruning or encroachment pursuant to this project may be removed, pruned or encroached upon, until the issuance of the applicable permit from the building division for the approved project. If no building permit is required for this project, applicant shall obtain a no-fee tree removal/pruning/encroachment for the project. 26. Tree protective fencing shall be installed as shown on the attached map and established prior to the arrival of construction equipment or materials on site. It shall be comprised of six-foot high chain link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, 1 7/8-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. Once established, the fencing must remain undisturbed and be maintained throughout the construction process until final inspection. Call City Arborist, Kate Bear at (408) 868-1276 for an inspection after the fence has been installed. This is required prior to obtaining building division permits. 27. Owner shall obtain, and file with the Community Development Director, a Tree Protection security deposit in the amount of $9,770 (for trees #1 – 3), prior to obtaining building division permits. The security deposit shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project to ensure the protection of the trees. Once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City Arborist, the bond will be released. 28. Trees shall be watered as necessary to ensure good health through the warm dry months. Watering may be done with a hose or soaker hose and should occur for a long enough period of time that the soil is moistened to a depth of at least 8 inches. Intervals of watering should be at least monthly and as often as weekly, as determined by the species and maturity of tree. 29. Excavation for new electrical and water from the storage unit to the house shall be done entirely by hand. Both utilities shall share one trench. Any roots measuring 2 inches or greater shall be retained and worked around. Roots measuring less than 2 inches may be cut with a sharp pruning tool. 30. Except for electrical and water, and as specified above in Requirement #6, excavation for utilities is not permitted as part of this project. Utilities include plumbing, gas, sewer, and irrigation. 31. Any grading, trenching or excavation under a tree’s canopy is subject to approval by the City Arborist before performing work. If approved, it shall be done manually using shovels or an air spade. 32. Unless otherwise approved, all construction activities must be conducted outside tree canopies. These activities include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: demolition, grading, trenching, equipment cleaning, stockpiling and dumping materials (including soil fill), and equipment/vehicle operation and parking. 33. Any permitted pruning or root pruning of trees on site must be performed by a state licensed tree contractor under the supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist and according to ISA standards. 24 9 Application No. CUP09-0001; 12255 Titus Avenue 34. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited under tree canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage to areas under tree canopies. Herbicides shall not be applied under tree canopies. 25 10 Application No. CUP09-0001; 12255 Titus Avenue PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 27th day of January 2010 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ___________________________________ Yan Zhao Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: ___________________________________ John F. Livingstone, AICP Secretary to the Planning Commission ACCEPTANCE BY APPLICANT AND OWNER This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the time required in this Resolution by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission. __________________________________ ____________________________ Applicant Date __________________________________ ____________________________ Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date 26 27 Page 1 of 3 Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 ARBORIST REPORT Application #:ARB 09-0049 Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist 12255 Titus Avenue Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owner: Janet Hedley Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN 386-28-003 Report History: #1 Date:October 29, 2009 #2 January 14, 2010 #3 – revises Requirement #7, no other changes from 1-14-10 January 19, 2010 This report is corrected and revises the report dated January 14, 1020. INTRODUCTION The applicant has submitted revised plans to relocate an accessory structure behind the house. The submitted plans were appealed by a neighbor, and the applicant has moving the structure farther away from the side property line and rotating the structure 90 degrees to accommodate the neighbor’s wishes. Rotating the accessory structure allows the applicant to keep the structure its current size, but requires that it encroach on a redwood tree (#1). No trees are requested for removal for this project. Three trees were inventoried for this report. This project has clearance from the arborist to proceed, with the conditions noted below. SITE VISIT, PLAN REVIEW AND TECHNICAL DISCUSSION Plans submitted were prepared by Innerhouse Design and dated January 13, 2010. They include Sheet A-1, a Site Plan and Sheet A-2, Elevations and Floor Plan for Accessory Building. Three coast redwood trees (#1 – 3) protected by City Code and potentially impacted by construction were inventoried for this report. Data for each tree is included in a Tree Inventory Table at the end of this report. Locations of trees are marked on the attached copy of the survey. The applicant and neighbor have agreed upon the approximate location for the accessory structure that meets City Planning requirements. This will necessitate the construction of a new slab foundation for the structure and rotation of 90 degrees. The new location places the structure just a few feet from redwood tree #1. The applicant has excavated down to the required depth of the new foundation and found only small roots from redwood #1. The proposed placement of the structure in this location is acceptable. 28 12255 Titus Avenue Page 2 of 3 Per City Ordinance 15-50.080, a Tree Protection security deposit in the amount of $9,770, which is equal to 100% of the appraised value of trees #1 – 3, is required. Owner shall obtain, and file with the Community Development Director, the required security deposit prior to the receipt of building permits. The security deposit may be in the form of a savings account, a certificate of deposit account or a bond. Appraisal values are calculated using the Trunk Formula Method and according to the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th Edition, published by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), 2000, in conjunction with the Species Classification and Group Assignment published by the Western Chapter of the ISA, 2004. FINDINGS Based on a review of information provided, and as conditioned, the project will comply with the requirements for the setback of new construction from existing trees under Section 15-50.120. REQUIREMENTS 1. This entire report, including the Tree Inventory Table and map 2 showing locations of trees and protective fencing, shall be incorporated into the final set of plans and titled “Tree Preservation”. The arborist report dated October 29, 2009, does not need to be included in the plans. 2. No protected tree authorized for removal, pruning or encroachment pursuant to this project may be removed, pruned or encroached upon, until the issuance of the applicable permit from the building division for the approved project. If no building permit is required for this project, applicant shall obtain a no-fee tree removal/pruning/encroachment for the project. 3. Tree protective fencing shall be installed as shown on the attached map and established prior to the arrival of construction equipment or materials on site. It shall be comprised of six-foot high chain link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, 1 7/8-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart.Once established, the fencing must remain undisturbed and be maintained throughout the construction process until final inspection. Call City Arborist, Kate Bear at (408) 868-1276 for an inspection after the fence has been installed. This is required prior to obtaining building division permits. 4. Owner shall obtain, and file with the Community Development Director, a Tree Protection security deposit in the amount of $9,770 (for trees #1 – 3), prior to obtaining building division permits. The security deposit shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project to ensure the protection of the trees. Once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City Arborist, the bond will be released. 5. Trees shall be watered as necessary to ensure good health through the warm dry months. Watering may be done with a hose or soaker hose and should occur for a long enough period of time that the soil is moistened to a depth of at least 8 inches. Intervals of watering should be at least monthly and as often as weekly, as determined by the species and maturity of tree. 29 12255 Titus Avenue Page 3 of 3 6. Excavation for new electrical and water from the storage unit to the house shall be done entirely by hand. Both utilities shall share one trench. Any roots measuring 2 inches or greater shall be retained and worked around. Roots measuring less than 2 inches may be cut with a sharp pruning tool. 7. Except for electrical and water, and as specified above in Requirement #6, excavation for utilities is not permitted as part of this project. Utilities include plumbing, gas, sewer, and irrigation. 8. Any grading, trenching or excavation under a tree’s canopy is subject to approval by the City Arborist before performing work. If approved, it shall be done manually using shovels or an air spade. 9. Unless otherwise approved, all construction activities must be conducted outside tree canopies. These activities include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: demolition, grading, trenching, equipment cleaning, stockpiling and dumping materials (including soil fill), and equipment/vehicle operation and parking. 10. Any permitted pruning or root pruning of trees on site must be performed by a state licensed tree contractor under the supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist and according to ISA standards. 11. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited under tree canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage to areas under tree canopies. Herbicides shall not be applied under tree canopies. Attachments: Tree Inventory Table Map #2 showing new structure location, tree locations and tree protective fencing 30 TREE INVENTORY TABLE TREE NO. TREE NAME Tr u n k D i a m e t e r ( i n , ) - p e r Gu i d e f o r P l a n t A p p r a i s a l Es t i m a t e d C a n o p y S p r e a d (f t . ) He a l t h C o n d i t i o n ( 1 0 0 % = be s t , 0 % = w o r s t ) St r u c t u r a l I n t e g r i t y ( 1 0 0 % = be s t , 0 % = w o r s t ) Ov e r a l l C o n d i t i o n Su i t a b i l i t y f o r P r e s e r v a t i o n (H i g h / M o d e r a t e / L o w ) In t e n s i t y o f I m p a c t s (1 = H i g h e s t , 5 = L o w e s t ) In C o n f l i c t w i t h P r o p o s e d De s i g n No t S h o w n o n P l a n s On A d j a c e n t P r o p r t y Ap p r a i s e d V a l u e Redwood 1 Sequoia sempervirens 15 35 80 80 Good High 2 $2,690 Redwood 2 Sequoia sempervirens 17.7 35 80 80 Good High 2 $3,720 Redwood 3 Sequoia sempervirens 16.8 35 80 80 Good High 3 $3,360 Total appraised value $9,770 Replacement Tree Values 15 gallon = $150 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 52 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 Should any tree listed above become damaged owner will be required to repair the damage. Should any tree listed above be removed owner will be required to replace that tree with trees equal in value to its assessed value. 12255 Titus Ave.October 29, 2009 31 Legend Tree Protective Fencing Tree Canopy 12255 Titus Avenue Revised map 1-14-10 Old Garage 1 2 3 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 1 Michael Fossati From:John Drexler Sent:Wednesday, January 20, 2010 2:59 PM To:Michael Fossati Cc: Subject:APPC-09-0003/ 12255 Titus Avenue. Support of neighbors' plan to upgrade/ rehabilitate small structure on their property -- YES. TO: Michael Fossati, Assistant Planner, City of Saratoga FROM: John Drexler, 12239 Titus Avenue, Saratoga SUBJECT: Support of neighbors' plan to upgrade/ rehabilitate small structure on their property -- YES. REFERENCE: APPC-09-0003/ 12255 Titus Avenue Michael: Good afternoon! My name is John Drexler, and I reside in Saratoga at 12239 Titus Avenue. I have lived there since June 2004. I met the McCormack's when they moved in, around May 2006, as I recall. As next door neighbors for the past almost-four years, we have had many interactions. They have all been positive, pleasant and cordial. I would definitely call Richard and Janet "good neighbors." I have received the city's notice of the Planning Commission's meeting regarding the McCormack's property. As a directly abutting neighbor, I would like to state for the record that I have no problem with the McCormack's plan to upgrade/ rehabilitate a small structure on their property. I believe that their plans add to the value of their property, and therefore benefit the neighborhood, and therefore increase the value of my property. And that's a good thing! I further believe that residents of Saratoga should be free to upgrade/ rehabilitate their property as they see fit, without restriction or interference. As long as they comply with the city's laws and zoning requirements, of course. Michael, thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. I hope that it can be resolved without additional unpleasantness or expense to all concerned. Please advise if you have any additional questions. Best regards. John Drexler 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application Number / Location: 07-299/20865 Wardell Road Lot C Type of Application: Design Review & Grading over 1,000 CY in HR District Applicant/Owner: Dan and Nancy Cheadle (Owner/Applicant) Staff Planner: Christopher A. Riordan, AICP, Senior Planner______ Date: January 27, 2010 APN: 366-57-003 Department Head:____________ John Livingstone, AICP, Director 20875 Wardell Road Lot C 58 Application No. 07-299/20865 Wardell Road Lot C EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY: Application filed: 03/21/07 Application complete: 12/22/09 Notice published: 01/12/10 Mailing completed: 01/07/10 Posting completed: 01/21/10 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review Approval to construct a new two-story Tuscan style single-family residence with an attached garage on a 1.4 net acre vacant lot in the Hillside Residential (HR) zone district. The maximum height of the proposed residence would not be taller than 26-feet. The project would include 2,476 cubic yards of total grading (1,238 cubic yards of fill and 1,238 cubic yards of cut). The applicant is requesting Grading Findings to exceed 1,000 cubic yards of grading in the HR zoning district. The project would not remove any Ordinance sized trees. Several existing non-ordinance orchard trees in poor condition, as confirmed by the City Arborist, would be removed. Zoning Code Section 15-45.060 states that for any new multi-story main structure, or whenever, as a result of proposed construction, reconstruction or expansion, the gross floor area of all structures on a site will exceed 6,000 square feet, Design Review approval is required by the Planning Commission. The proposal consists of a new two story, 25’-9” tall single-family home with a proposed floor area of 6,186 square feet; therefore, Planning Commission review is required. Planning Commission approval is also required for Grading Findings to exceed 1,000 cubic yards of grading. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve both the Design Review and Grading Findings with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached resolution. Staff is not recommending any permanent conditions of approval. 2 59 Application No. 07-299/20865 Wardell Road Lot C STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: HR – Hillside Residential GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RVLD (Residential Very Low Density) MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 63,869 square feet (gross) and 60,679 square feet (net) AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 14% GRADING REQUIRED: 1,238 cubic yards of cut and 1,238 cubic yards of fill (total of 2,476 cubic yards) for construction of the proposed house, driveway, and pool. This calculation does not include 814 cubic yards of cut for construction of the basement. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposal is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. MATERIALS AND COLORS: The exterior materials would include smooth trowel stucco with stone veneer accents. The dark tan colored stucco would have a Light Reflectivity Value of 39. The wood clad windows would be dark brown in color. The “carriage style” garage door would be painted to match the color of the windows. The custom made front entrance door would have a dark wood colored stain. The tri-color mission tile roof would consist of brown, beige, and tan colored tiles. Painted black wrought iron railings would be used for the second story balcony and light wells. A colors and material board is available on file with the Community Development Department and will be present at the site visit and public hearing. Detail Colors and Materials Mfg. & Specification Windows Dark brown wood clad Marvin or equivalent Front Door Custom wood - dark wood stain Custom Design Garage Door Wood, carriage style – dark wood stain Carriage House Door Building Exterior Stucco smooth trowel Stone veneer Kelly Moore color (Charro) LRV 39 Natural Stone Veneers – Kiamichi or equivalent Roof Mission style clay tile Three tone – tan, brown, beige PROJECT DATA 3 60 Application No. 07-299/20865 Wardell Road Lot C HR Zoning Net Site Area: 66,472 sq. ft. Proposed Allowable/ Required Proposed Site Coverage House and Garage: Light wells: Pavilion: Front Porch: Dining Room Porch: Driveway/Walkways: Pool and Deck: Patio: Total Proposed Site Coverage 4,906 SF 92 SF 257 SF 108 SF 167 SF 4,557 SF 1,885 SF 790 SF 12,762 SF (21.03%) 15,000 SF Conforms Floor Area First Floor: Second Floor: Entry: Garage: Total Proposed Floor Area 4,030 SF 1,086 SF 194 SF 876 SF 6,186 SF 6,200 SF Conforms Basement Floor Area 2,040 SF Not included in total floor area Code Section 15-06.090 Conforms Grading Building and Site: Driveway: Garage: Pool: Decks: Raised Planters: Shrinkage: Total Grading Cut 838 CY 225 CY 75 CY 100 CY 0 CY 0 CY 0 CY 1,238 CY Fill 658 CY 10 CY 0 CY 0 CY 441 CY 18 CY 111 CY 1,238 CY Total 1,496 CY 235 CY 75 CY 100 CY 441 CY 18 CY 111 CY 2,476 CY 1,000 Cubic Yards Grading Findings Required Height (Main Residence) Lowest Elevation Point: Highest Elevation Point: Average Elevation Point: Proposed Topmost Point: 419.00 FT 422.50 FT 421.25 FT 447.00 FT Maximum Height = 447.25 (26 Feet) Conforms Setbacks Front: Rear: Left Side: Right Side: First Floor 157.6 FT 95.3 FT 34.8 FT 51.9 FT Second Floor 157.6 FT 95.3 FT 34.8 FT 51.9 FT First Floor 76.2 FT 95.3 FT 20.0 FT 20.0 FT Second Floor 76.2 FT 95.3 FT 20.0 FT 20.0 FT Conforms PROJECT DISCUSSION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS Existing Site Characteristics 4 61 Application No. 07-299/20865 Wardell Road Lot C The approximately 60,679 (net) square foot vacant parcel with an average slope of 14% is located near the terminus of Wardell Road. This private street crosses the southern portion of the site and provides access to the vacant adjacent site to the west. The project site increases in slope from east to west with a rise of approximately 30 feet. Access to the building pad would be provided by a six percent slope driveway. The site does not include existing formal landscaping and is covered by native grasses and several orchard trees in poor condition. Proposed Project and Architectural Style The proposed project would consist of a new 6,186 square foot approximately 25.8 feet tall one-story single-family dwelling with an attached garage and a 2,040 square foot basement not included in its gross floor area. No accessory buildings are proposed. The maximum allowable floor area is 6,280 square feet. The applicant has identified the architectural style of the proposed residence as “Tuscon” as the design would contain specific architectural elements indicative of historic homes found in the rural Italian countryside. The construction materials of these homes would have reflected their surroundings in terms of what materials were available locally, such as stone, slate, and clay and would include minimal superfluous ornamentation and decoration. The proposed materials to support the “Tuscon” style include a smooth trowel stucco and stone exterior finish, a covered rear porch flanked by stone covered columns, both arched and square shaped windows, wood shutters, wrought iron railings, recessed front entry, a lower level loggia (a gallery or corridor at ground level on the facade of a building, supported by columns, and open to the air on one side), exposed rafter tails, and a hipped “barrel tile” roof. The majority of project landscaping would include drought tolerant native ground covers on both the western and eastern sides of the project site wherever grading would occur. Three 24” box sized Olive trees are proposed near the eastern side of the driveway and a proposed vineyard in the northern corner of the site would support the Tuscan architectural style of the residence. A turf area would be located near the back patio. No fencing is currently proposed. The project would be allowed to enclose 15 percent of the gross site area or 9,580 square feet. This fencing limitation has been added as a condition of project approval. Fireplaces Saratoga City Code Section 15-48.030 establishes a limit of one wood burning fireplace per structure. The project would have two gas fire places including one in the family room and an outdoor fireplace located in the pavilion. No wood burning fireplaces are proposed. Air Conditioning / HVAC The plans do not indicate the location of air conditioning condensers. City Code requires air conditioning condensers to be located outside required setbacks. The proposed project exceeds minimum setbacks on all four sides. There is ample room to install air 5 62 Application No. 07-299/20865 Wardell Road Lot C conditioning condensers so they would not be located within setbacks. The project includes a condition of approval that the plans submitted for building permit include the location of all proposed air conditioning condensers with a requirement that they cannot be located within setbacks. Geotechnical Clearance Terrasearch Inc. prepared a Geotechnical Investigation for the proposed project, dated December 15, 2009. Terrasearch, Inc. and RMA Group, prepared supplemental geotechnical reports dated October 16, 2009 and November 2, 2009, respectively, which were reviewed by the City’s Geotechnical Consultant. As conditioned, the project has received geotechnical clearance to proceed. Grading over one thousand cubic yards City Code section 15-13.050 limits the combined cut and fill of any grading for a project in the HR zone district to one thousand (1,000) cubic yards, including any excavation for a swimming pool, unless a larger quantity is approved by the Planning Commission. The project includes a request for Grading Findings for a combined cut and fill of 2,476 cubic yards (1,238 cut and 1,238 fill). The 814 cubic yards of cut for the basement is not included in the grading quantity per City Code and would be exported off the site. The project would be constructed on the most level portion of the site and 479 cubic yards of cut would be required to contour the building pad. The 359 cubic yards of grading for the westerly slope of the site would reduce the height of the residence in this location by eight feet to preserve the offsite views for the future home to be constructed on the westerly adjacent vacant site. The fire department required the project to construct a turnaround area, requiring 225 cubic yards of grading, so a fire truck could turnaround and exit the project site in a forward direction. The swimming pool would require 100 cubic yards of cut. The grading for the project has been designed to be “balanced” where the amount of cut equals the amount of fill thereby reducing the amount of grading to be exported off site. The fill material would be used to create a level area for the pool and deck. The eastern slope would be the recipient of 658 cubic yards of fill with the primary purpose of integrating the building site into the existing topography and reducing the perception of the bulk of the easterly elevation as viewed from Wardell Road and offsite. This 658 cubic yards of grading could be trucked off the site and would reduce the sites overall grading amount. The additional truck trips would increase the traffic, noise, and dust impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. To avoid the above impacts, the applicant has proposed retaining the dirt on site as discussed above. Grading in excess of 1,000 cubic yards is allowed under City Code Section 15-13.050(f) upon making the following findings: (1) The additional grading is necessary in order to allow reasonable development of the property or to achieve a reasonable means of access to the building site; and (2) The natural land forms and vegetation are being preserved and protected; and 6 63 Application No. 07-299/20865 Wardell Road Lot C (3) The increased grading is necessary to promote the compatibility of the construction with the natural terrain; and (4) The increased grading is necessary to integrate an architectural design into the natural topography; and (5) The increased grading is necessary to reduce the prominence of the construction as viewed from surrounding views or from distant community views. (6) No building site shall be graded so as to create a flat visible pad surrounding the main residential structure. Staff has concluded that all of the above findings can be made and recommends approval of the grading as proposed, even though it exceeds 1,000 cubic yards. Grading specific findings are detailed on page five of the attached Resolution. Trees The project would not remove any trees protected by Ordinance. The only trees on the site include several orchard trees in poor condition as confirmed by the City Arborist. These trees would be removed. An arborist report was not required for this project. Energy Efficiency The applicant submitted a GreenPoint Rated Checklist (Attachment #2). Article 16-47 (Green Building Regulations) Section 16.47.040 of the City Code requires all new residential projects to meet the minimum GreenPoint Rated requirements of 50 points. The “green features” proposed for the project would earn a score of 88 points and would exceed the minimum in each category to be considered GreenPoint Rated. Proposed green features would include double pane windows and the use of fly ash in the concrete. Fly ash is a fine, glass-like powder recovered from gases created by coal-fired electric power generation. U.S. power plants produce millions of tons of fly ash annually, which is usually dumped in landfills. Fly ash is an inexpensive replacement for portland cement used in concrete and actually improves its strength. Other “green features” include minimizing the amount of turf on site to reduce water usage, installation of efficient ductwork and appliances to minimize energy waste, the installation of wire conduit for future rooftop photovoltaic panels, drip irrigation, exceeding Title 24 energy requirements by 15%, the use of low VOC (volatile organic compound) adhesives and paint, and energy star appliances. Neighbor Correspondence The applicant has shown the proposed plans to neighbors as indicated in the attached letters. No negative comments have been received at the time of the writing of this Staff Report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 7 64 Application No. 07-299/20865 Wardell Road Lot C 8 Staffs recommends the Planning Commission find this Application exempt from CEQA and approve the application for Design Review and Grading Findings for grading in excess of 1,000 cubic yards with required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of Approval for Design Review. 2. GreenPoint Rated Checklist for Single Family Homes 3. Neighbor review letters. 4. Affidavit of mailing notices, public hearing notice, and copy of mailing labels for project notification. 5. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A." 65 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO: 10-002 FOR APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW Application Numbers: 07-299 Dan and Nancy Cheadle: 20865 Wardell Road Lot C The City of Saratoga Planning Commission finds and determines as follows with respect to the above-described application: I. Project Summary The City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Review Approval for the Project shown in Exhibit "A" including the Color Board denominated Exhibit “B” date stamped respectively December 20, 2009, incorporated by this reference. The proposed project would consist of a new 6,186 square foot approximately 25.8 feet tall two-story single-family dwelling with an attached garage and a 2,040 square foot basement not included in its gross floor area. No accessory buildings are proposed. The maximum allowable floor area is 6,280 square feet. The applicant has identified the architectural style of the proposed residence as “Tuscon” as the design would contain specific architectural elements indicative of historic homes found in the rural Italian countryside. The construction materials of these homes would have reflected their surroundings in terms of what materials were available locally, such as stone, slate, and clay and would include minimal superfluous ornamentation and decoration. The proposed materials to support the “Tuscon” style include a smooth trowel stucco and stone exterior finish, a covered rear porch flanked by stone covered columns, both arched and square shaped windows, wood shutters, wrought iron railings, recessed front entry, a lower level loggia (a gallery or corridor at ground level on the facade of a building, supported by columns, and open to the air on one side), exposed rafter tails, and a hipped “barrel tile” roof. The project would not remove any trees protected by Ordinance. The only trees on the site include several orchard trees in poor condition as confirmed by the City Arborist. These trees would be removed. The majority of project landscaping would include drought tolerant native ground covers on both the western and eastern slopes wherever grading had occurred. Three 24”- box sized Olive trees are proposed near the eastern side of the driveway and a proposed vineyard in the northern corner of the site would support the Tuscan architectural style of the residence. A turf area would be located near the back patio. No fencing is currently proposed. The project would be allowed to enclose 15 percent of the gross site area or 9,580 square feet. This fencing limitation has been added as a condition of project approval. The project would include 2,476 cubic yards of grading. The project includes a request for Grading Findings to exceed 1,000 cubic yards of grading in the HR zoning district. The net lot size is 60,679 square-feet (1.4 acres) and the site is zoned Hillside Residential. The foregoing work is described as the “Project” in this Resolution. II. Design Review Requirement City Code Section 15-45.060(a)(2) requires Design Review Approval for a single-family main structure project by the Planning Commission for any new single-story structure over 66 eighteen feet in height or whenever, as a result of proposed construction, reconstruction or expansion, the gross floor area of all structures on a site will exceed 6,000 square-feet. This Design Review Approval requirement implements the Saratoga General Plan, including, but not limited to: (1) Land Use Goal 13 which provides that the City shall use the Design Review process to assure that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings; (2) Open Space Element Policy 11.a which provides that the City shall ensure that projects are designed in a manner that minimizes disruption to important wildlife, riparian and plant habitats; (3) Safety Element Site and Drainage Policy 3 which provides that the City shall require that landscaping and site drainage plans be submitted and approved during Design Review for a residence prior to issuance of permits; (4) Land Use Element Goal 10 which minimizes the impact of development proposals in hillside areas by requiring visual analyses and imposition of conditions to prevent or reduce significant visual impacts; and (5) Conservation Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. III. Hillside Specific Plan The project would be in substantial conformance with the following Hillside Specific Plan policies: (1) Site Grading Policy which requires site grading to be contoured wherever possible even though this practice can increase grading quantities; (2) Site Grading Policy which prohibits homes from being built by creating a flat building pad; (3) Energy policies to promote both passive and solar energy systems and to promote energy conservation through building design; and (4) Aesthetic/Scenic Qualities by requiring all structures to be approved by Design Review prior to issuance of building permits. IV. Planning Commission Review On January 27, 2010 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing on the Project at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and argument. The Planning Commission considered the Project, the Staff Report on the Project, CEQA documentation, correspondence, presentations from the Applicant and the public, and all testimony and other evidence presented at the Public Hearing. V. Environmental Review The Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines - 14 C.C.R. Section 15303- “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. This exemption allows for the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures and no exception to that exemption applies. 2 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 67 VI. Design Review Findings The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code Section Article 15-45.080 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those required findings: (a) The project avoids unreasonable interference with views and privacy. For the following reasons, the height, elevations and placement on the site of the proposed main structure, when considered with reference to: (1) the nature and location of residential structures on adjacent lots and within the neighborhoods; and (2) community view sheds, will avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The maximum height of the proposed two-story dwelling is approximately 25.75 feet. The structure will be setback approximately 157.6’ from the south (front) property line, 34.8’ from the west (left side) property line, 34.8’ from the east (right side) property line, and 95.3’ north (rear) property line and constructed on an approximately 1.5 acre site with surrounding parcels in excess of an acre. The left side of the house is being constructed at a lower elevation than the existing site to preserve the offsite views of the adjacent site to the west. The proposed house will be located on an area of the site with the least amount of slope. Since the project would be constructed at a lower elevation then the vacant site to the west and is not in the view shed of adjacent homes, the project will not interfere with existing view sheds or interfere with privacy of abutting properties. (b) The project preserves the natural landscape. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that there is minimal natural landscaping to preserve on the site. The applicant will include drought tolerant native landscaping and 24” box sized Olive trees that would help to reestablish the natural landscape of the barren site. (c) The project preserves native and heritage trees. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the project would not remove any Native and/or Heritage trees. (d) The project minimizes the perception of excessive bulk. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the design of the main structure in relation to structures on adjacent lots, and to the surrounding region, will minimize the perception of excessive bulk and will be integrated into the natural environment in that the building has been designed to conform to the natural contours of the site. The perception of excessive bulk is minimized by the use of varying architectural forms and rooflines that break up the massing and reduce the perception of height and mass. The use of a basement will add additional living space that will not be visible from the outside. The applicant’s choice of a neutral color palette for the exterior of the building will help to integrate the project with the natural environment of the site and its surroundings. The project would be located a sufficient distance from the future homes on the vacant adjacent lot and this distance will help minimize the appearance of mass when compared with future structures on adjacent lots. 3 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 68 (e) The project is of compatible bulk and height. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed main structure will be compatible in terms of bulk and height with (1) existing residential structures on adjacent lots and those within the immediate neighborhood and within the same zoning district; and (2) the natural environment; and shall not (1) unreasonably impair the light and air of adjacent properties nor (2) unreasonably impair the ability of adjacent properties to utilize solar energy in that the proposed setbacks for the two story structure will exceed the minimum for the HR zoning district. Residences in the area are spread out given the minimum lot size requirements; the proposed structure is compatible in bulk and height with other homes located in the hillside area especially the homes on the ridge to the west of the project; the four homes located on Wardell Road below the project to the east are traditional ranch style homes smaller in size and scale than the proposed home, however this difference in size is mitigated by their physical distance that separates them from the proposed project; and additionally, the bulk will be minimized since the majority of the building will be single story and the home has been designed to follow the hillside topography of the site. The nearest most adjacent properties are both one and three story structures. The residences on neighboring lots are all on sites in excess of one acre and are similar in terms of bulk and predominately one and two-story. The proposal is compatible with the natural environment as to bulk and height and does not unreasonably impair access to light and air or the solar potential of adjacent properties. (f) The project uses current grading and erosion control methods. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed grading plan incorporates current grading and erosion control standards used by the City. The proposed locations of the residence and the pool have been selected on flatter areas of the site to minimize grading. Drainage from parking and driveway hardscape areas will be minimized by the use of permeable pavers. In addition, the Project is conditioned to conform to the City’s current grading and erosion control standards and comply with applicable NPDES Standards. The Project is also conditioned to require detention of storm water on site where feasible. If not all storm water is to be retained on site, the grading plan is required to provide an explanation of the reason and how the stormwater which will flow offsite will be in compliance with City and NPDES Standards. The offsite stormwater flow shown on the grading plan shall be subject to prior review and approval by the Community Development Director to assure compliance. (g) The project follows appropriate design policies and techniques. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed residence will conform to each of the applicable design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Handbook as required by Section 15-45.055. The proposed Project has been reviewed by staff and determined to conform to all of the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook, including for example 4 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 69 minimizing the perception of bulk, integrating the residential buildings with the environment, and designing for energy efficiency. VIII. Grading over one thousand cubic yards Zoning Code section 15-13.050(f) states that the combined cut and fill of any grading for a project in the Hillside Residential zone district shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) cubic yards, including any excavation for a swimming pool, unless a larger quantity is approved by the Planning Commission based upon making all of the below listed findings. The project includes a request for a grading exception for a combined cut and fill of 2,476 cubic yards (1,238 cut and 1,238 fill). 1. The additional grading is necessary in order to allow reasonable development of the property or to achieve a reasonable means of access to the building site. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed building site has a gradual slope that falls from left to right with at a rate of 14%. To assist in the integration of the structure into the existing natural terrain and to reduce the perception of the structures bulk as viewed from Wardell Road and offsite, the applicant is proposing a terraced building pad that would reduce the height of the existing grade along the left side of the building and auto court by a maximum of eight feet. The amount of grading required to reduce the height of the existing grade would be 359 cubic yards. To also help minimize the perception of bulk, the proposed structure would be located near the center of the lot and setback 157 feet from Wardell Road thereby requiring a grading cut of 225 cubic yards to construct the driveway and the required fire department vehicle turnaround. To integrate and soften the effect of the cut for the building pad along the right side of the structure the project would deposit 658 cubic yards of fill which would then be seeded with native grasses. This amount of grading is more than would be required if the proposed structure was sited closer to the road. The total amount of cut to construct the proposed residence and driveway would be 2,476 cubic yards. 2. The natural land forms and vegetation are being preserved and protected. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the use of garden walls located close to the building will permit a reasonable amount of level area around the structure for access, drainage, and recreational areas; terracing of the site on the opposite site of the garden walls will assist in the preservation of the natural topography and background of the hillside with slopes above and below the residence; the site is covered in native grasses and there is minimal existing vegetation to preserve and protect; the cut and fill will be used to create a “balanced site” with 100% of the graded material of the project being retained on site; and only the material that is removed to construct the proposed basement (814 cubic yards) will be removed from the site. 5 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 70 3. The increased grading is necessary to promote the compatibility of the construction with the natural terrain. The project meets this finding in that the increased grading quantity would assist in the integration of the structure into the existing natural terrain and to reduce the perception of the structures bulk; and the terraced building pad would minimize the perception of excessive bulk as viewed from off site. Grading for terraced walls form the buildings base and would help to reduce the prominence of the structure. 4. The increased grading is necessary to integrate an architectural design into the natural topography. The project meets this finding in that the increased grading would integrate the proposed architectural design into the natural topography; the construction of a terraced building pad would reduce the height of the existing grade thereby reducing the height of the proposed building and decreasing its bulk and visibility as viewed from off site; integration of the architectural design with the natural surrounding would be increased by project landscaping that includes both native and non-native trees, vines, and groundcovers. 5. The increased grading is necessary to reduce the prominence of the construction as viewed from surrounding views or from distant community views. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the grading of the site will reduce the prominence of the construction as viewed from off site or from distinct community views by integrating the graded contours of the project site with the natural contours near the edges of the property and the increased grading would lower the height of the building pad by a maximum of eight feet therefore decreasing the height and visibility of the project. 6. No building site shall be graded so as to create a flat visible pad surrounding the main residential structure. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the building site is graded to provide a reasonable amount of level areas for outside recreational activities; the site is not excessively graded thereby resulting in a flat visible building pad; landscaping and natural open space will cover approximately 81% of the site thereby decreasing the appearance of a graded site. 6 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 71 IX. Project Approval After careful consideration of the application, site plan, architectural drawings, plans, CEQA documentation, and other materials, exhibits and evidence submitted to the City in connection with this matter, the exemption from CEQA is approved, the required findings are made, and Application No. PDR 07-299 for Design Review and Grading Findings are approved subject to the conditions set forth below. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. GENERAL 1. ALL CONDITIONS BELOW WHICH ARE IDENTIFIED AS PERMANENT OR FOR WHICH AN ALTERNATIVE PERIOD OF TIME FOR APPLICABILITY IS SPECIFIED SHALL RUN WITH THE LAND AND APPLY TO THE LANDOWNER’S SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST FOR SUCH TIME PERIOD. NO ZONING CLEARANCE, OR DEMOLITION, GRADING, OR BUILDING PERMIT FOR THIS PROJECT SHALL BE ISSUED UNTIL PROOF IS FILED WITH THE CITY THAT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL DOCUMENTING ALL APPLICABLE PERMANENT OR OTHER TERM-SPECIFIED CONDITIONS HAS BEEN RECORDED BY THE APPLICANT WITH THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDER’S OFFICE IN FORM AND CONTENT ACCEPTABLE TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR. 2. IF A CONDITION IS NOT “PERMANENT” OR DOES NOT HAVE A TERM SPECIFIED, IT SHALL REMAIN IN EFFECT UNTIL THE ISSUANCE BY THE CITY OF SARATOGA OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY OR IT’S EQUIVALENT. 3. CONDITIONS MAY BE MODIFIED ONLY BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNLESS MODIFICATION IS EXPRESSLY OTHERWISE ALLOWED BY THE CITY CODE INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SECTIONS 15-80.120 AND/OR 16-05.035, AS APPLICABLE. 4. The Community Development Director shall mail to the Owner and Applicant a notice in writing, on or after the time the Resolution granting this Approval is duly executed by the City, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing fees”). THIS APPROVAL OR PERMIT SHALL EXPIRE SIXTY (60) DAYS AFTER THE DATE SAID NOTICE IS MAILED IF ALL PROCESSING FEES CONTAINED IN THE NOTICE HAVE NOT BEEN PAID IN FULL. No Zoning Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the Community Development Director certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 7 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 72 5. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or the Design Review Approval will expire unless extended in accordance with the City Code. 6. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations incorporated herein by this reference. 7. Prior to issuance of any Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit to implement this Design Review Approval the Owner or Applicant shall obtain a “Zoning Clearance” from the Community Development Director by submitting final plans for the requested permit to the Community Development Department for review to ascertain compliance with the requirements of this Resolution. 8. Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend City as to Action Challenging Approval of Application and as to Damage from Performance of Work Authorized by Design Review Approval. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against: a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to said action; and b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person acting on their behalf. In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance from the Community Development Director, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the Community Development Director. B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 9. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans dated January 12, 2010 denominated Exhibit "A" and the Color Board dated December 22, 2009 denominated Exhibit “B. All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with Condition A.3, above. 8 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 73 10. A maximum of one wood-burning fireplace is permitted per habitable structure (e.g., main house or guest house). All other fireplaces shall be gas burning. 11. Fences. Fences and walls shall comply with City Code Chapter 15-29. 12. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment shall comply with City Code Section 15-80.030(l). 13. All building exterior 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. 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 of the Community Development Department prior to building permit issuance 14. Front yard landscaping. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection or a bond satisfactory to the Community Development Director for 150% of the estimated cost of the installation of such landscaping shall be provided to the City. 15. Landscape installation and replacement for screening or ornamentation. A landscaped area required as a condition of any Design Review Approval shall be planted with materials suitable for screening or ornamenting the site, whichever is appropriate, and plant materials shall be replaced as needed to screen or ornament the site, all to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 16. Landscape maintenance. Landscaped areas shall be watered, weeded, pruned, fertilized, sprayed or otherwise maintained by the Owner as may be prescribed by the Community Development Director; 17. Plumbing. All plumbing fixtures or irrigation systems shall be water conserving and otherwise comply with City Code Section 16-75.030. 18. Construction truck routes. Construction trucks shall only use designated truck routes. 19 Noise limitations during construction. The noise level at any point twenty-five feet from the source of noise shall not exceed 83 dBA during residential construction, and residential construction, alteration or repair activities which are authorized by a valid City permit, or do not require the issuance of a City permit, may be conducted only between the hours of 7:30 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. Monday through Friday and between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. on Saturday. Residential construction shall be 9 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 74 prohibited on Sunday and weekday holidays, with the exception of that construction, alteration or repair activities which are authorized by a valid City permit and which do not exceed fifty percent of the existing main or accessory structure may be conducted between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. on Sunday and weekday holidays. A notice of applicable construction hour restrictions shall be posted conspicuously on site at all times for all exterior residential construction activity requiring a City permit. 20. Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Plan. Because this Design Review Approval authorizes a construction, remodeling, or demolition project affecting more than two thousand five hundred square feet of floor space the Applicant is required to provide to the Building Official a construction and demolition debris recycling plan prior to the issuance of any Demolition, Grading or Building Permit. 21. Maintenance of Construction Project Sites. Because this Design Review Approval authorizes a project which requires a Building Permit, compliance with City Code Section 16-75.050 governing maintenance of construction project sites is required. 22. Stormwater. Disposition and treatment of stormwater shall comply with the applicable requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit issued to the City of Saratoga and the implementation standards established by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (collectively the “NPDES Permit Standards”). Prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance for a Demolition, Grading or Building Permit for this Project, a Stormwater Detention Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval demonstrating how all storm water will be detained on-site and in compliance with the NPDES Permit Standards. If not all stormwater can be detained on-site due to topographic, soils or other constraints, and if complete detention is not otherwise required by the NPDES Permit Standards, the Project shall be designed to detain on-site the maximum reasonably feasible amount of stormwater and to direct all excess stormwater away from adjoining property and toward stormwater drains, drainageways, streets or road right-of- ways and otherwise comply with the NPDES Permit Standards and applicable City Codes. 23. Landscape and Irrigation Plan. The Landscape and Irrigation Plan required by City Code Section 15-45.070(a)(9) shall be designed to the maximum extent reasonably feasible to: a. utilize efficient irrigation (where irrigation is necessary), to eliminate or reduce runoff, to promote surface infiltration, and to minimize use of fertilizers and pesticides that have the potential to contribute to water pollution; b. treat stormwater and irrigation 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 prolonged exposure to water shall be specified in the Plan, installed and maintained; 10 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 75 c. be comprised of pest resistant landscaping plants throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area; d. be comprised of plant materials selected to be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment; e. protect the roots of Ordinance-protected trees from any proposed or required undergrounding of utilities; f. retain and incorporate existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover into the Plan; and g. comply with Section 16-75.030 of the City Code to the extent applicable. 24. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department Director or designee prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum include the following: a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A” on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition No. B.1 above; b. A note shall be included on the site plan stating that no construction equipment or private vehicles shall be parked or stored within the root zone (five feet beyond the dripline (the area under the canopy) or a greater distance as determined by the City Arborist) of any Ordinance-protected tree on the site; c. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: “Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the Licensed Land Surveyor of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks comply with the Approved Plans,” which note shall represent a condition which must be satisfied to remain in compliance with this Design Review Approval; d. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages; e. A boundary survey, wet-stamped and wet-signed by a Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying. The stamp shall reflect a current license for the land surveyor/engineer, the document shall be labeled “Boundary Survey,” and the document shall not contain any disclaimers; f. City Arborist Reports dated 05/14/09 printed collectively onto separate construction plan pages; g. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building Division. 25. Staff shall not approve downgrading to the exterior appearance of the approved residence. Downgrades may include, but are not limited to, garage doors, architectural detailing, stonework, columns, shutters, driveway materials, or similar items. Any exterior changes to approved plans resulting in a downgrade shall require filing an additional application and fees for review by the Planning Commission as a modification to approved plans. Any other exterior changes to the approved plans, 11 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 76 which are not deemed a downgrade by staff, shall require approval in compliance with condition A.3 above. 26. Project shall comply with the State of California “Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance” pursuant to State Law AB 1881. D. PUBLIC WORKS 27. Geotechnical Clearance. a. All geotechnical aspects of the Approved Plans (including but not limited to the site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for the building foundation and driveway) shall be reviewed and approved by the Project Geotechnical Consultant to ensure that the plans, specifications and details accurately reflect the Project Geotechnical Consultants’ recommendations. b. The results of the review of the Approved Plans shall be summarized by the Project Geotechnical Consultant in a letter(s) and submitted to and subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any Building Permit or Grading Permit related to this Design Review Approval. In carrying out the aforementioned City Engineer review, the City Engineer may obtain the advice of experts such as Geotechnical (or Soils) Engineers and/or Engineering Geologists, at the expense of the Applicant. c. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the Project construction. The inspections shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for fill keyways, and foundation construction prior to placement of fill, steel and concrete. d. The results of the Project Geotechnical Consultant’s inspections and the as-built conditions of the Project shall be described by the Project Geotechnical Consultant in a letter(s) and submitted to and subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the City’s final Building Permit inspection for the completed Project. e. Prior to the City’s inspection for final approval of the completed Project, the property owner shall enter into an agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions. Such Agreement shall be substantially in the form approved by the Public Works Director. E. FIRE SAFETY OR FIRE AGENCY REQUIREMENTS 28. Fire Agency Conditions. Applicant shall comply with all Fire Agency conditions as specified in Exhibit “C” attached. 12 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 77 13 Application Numbers: 07-299 / 20865 Wardell Road Lot C 29. Fire Hydrants and Water for Fire Flow. Installation of fire hydrants and/or improvements to water delivery systems to ensure adequate fire flow shall be provided as required by the Fire Agency, whether on-site or off-site. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 27th day of January 2010 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ___________________________________ Yan Zhao Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: ___________________________________ John F. Livingstone, AICP Secretary to the Planning Commission ACCEPTANCE BY APPLICANT AND OWNER This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the time required in this Resolution by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission. __________________________________ ____________________________ Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94