Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-13-16 Planning Commission Agenda PacketSaratoga Planning Commission Meeting Agenda – Page 1 of 3 SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 13, 2016 7:00 PM REGULAR MEETING Civic Theater Pledge Of Allegiance Roll Call Approval Of Minutes Action Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of December 9, 2015. December 9, 2015 Draft Minutes Oral Communications On Non-Agendized Items Any member of the public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. This 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. Report On 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. 1. Public Hearing Applicants and/or their representatives have a total of ten (10) minutes maximum for opening statements. All interested persons may appear and be heard during this meeting regarding the items on this agenda. If items on this agenda are challenged in court, members of the public may be limited to raising only issues raised at the Public Hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to the close of the Public Hearing. Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three (3) minutes. Applicants and/or their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. 1.1 Application APTR15-0004; 12990 Regan Lane (393-07-030); Leney – The appellant is appealing a tree removal permit application (TRP15-0380) to remove one Italian stone pine growing in the back yard of the property. Staff contact: Kate Bear (408) 868-1276. Staff Report Attachment 1 - Resolution 1 Saratoga Planning Commission Meeting Agenda – Page 2 of 3 Attachment 2 - Tree Removal Application Attachment 3 -Arborist Report Attachment 4 - Failure profile Italian stone pine.pdf 1.2 Application PDR15-0035; 13235 Glen Brae Drive (393-19-003); Tanner – The applicant is requesting to construct a new 3,315 sq. ft. (includes 451 sq. ft. attached garage) single-story, single family residence with a 2,758 sq. ft. basement. The height of the residence would be no taller than 25 feet. No protected trees are proposed for removal. Planning Commission design review is required because the height of the proposed residence exceeds 18 feet. The site area is 12,514 sq. ft. and the property is zoned R1-12,500. Staff Contact: Liz Ruess (408) 868-1230. Staff Report Att 1 - Resolution Att 2 - Arborist Report.pdf Att 3 - Photos of Existing House.pdf Att 4 - Neighborhood Context Photos.pdf Att 5 - Plans.pdf Att 6 - Colors and Materials.pdf 1.3 Application ADR15-0029; 15470 Belnap Way (517-14-021); Van den Hoek – The applicant is requesting to construct an 841.25 sq. ft. addition to an existing attached garage. The height of the addition to the garage would be no taller than 25 feet. No protected trees are proposed for removal. Planning Commission design review is required because the construction proposed is located within the “Md” ground movement potential category within a State mapped earthquake-induced landslide hazard zone. Geotechnical Clearance has been granted because the proposed project complies with requirements of Categorically permitted projects as described in Saratoga Municipal Code Section 16-65.060. The site area is 95,832 sq. ft. and the property is zoned HR. Staff Contact: Liz Ruess (408) 868-1230. Staff Report Att 1 - Resolution Att 2 - Arborist Clearance.pdf Att 3 - Geo Clearance.pdf Att 4 - Photos of Existing House.pdf Att 5 - Rendering.pdf Att 6 - Plans.pdf Att 7 - Story Pole Certification.pdf 2 Saratoga Planning Commission Meeting Agenda – Page 3 of 3 1.4 Application PDR15-0037; 12600 Saratoga Avenue (386-14-003); Abe Kaabipour – The applicant is requesting approval to modify an existing use permit to allow the refacing of existing gasoline signage from “Valero” to “Mobil”. Signs that would be affected include 18.5 sq. ft. price/identification gasoline sign and two 165 sq. ft. signs along the existing canopy. No additional signage has been proposed. The site is approximately 22,500 square feet and the property is zoned R-M-5,000. Staff contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-1212. Staff Report Att 1 Resolution Att 2 Freestanding Sign.pdf Att 3 Awning Sign 1.5 Application ZOA15-0009 (City-wide) - The City has drafted a revised Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (Article 15-47). The purpose of the Ordinance is to implement new State requirements to increase water efficiency standards for new and retrofitted landscapes through more efficient systems, greywater usage, onsite storm water capture and by limiting the portion of new or significantly modified landscapes that can be covered in turf. Staff Contact: Sandy Baily 408-868-1235. Director Items Adjournment Certificate Of Posting Of The Agenda I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist III for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission was posted and available for public review on January 7, 2016 at the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us. You can also sign up to receive email notifications when Commission agendas and minutes have been added to the City at website http://www.saratoga.ca.us/contact/email_subscriptions.asp. NOTE: To view previous Planning Commission meetings anytime, go the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us 3 ACTION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, December 9, 2015 REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. – CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE ROLL CALL PRESENT Commissioners Sunil Ahuja, Wendy Chang, Kookie Fitzsimmons, Joyce Hlava, Dede Smullen, Tina Walia, Chair Leonard Almalech ABSENT None ALSO PRESENT Erwin Ordoñez, Community Development Director Sandy Baily, Special Projects Manager Kate Bear, Arborist Michael Fossati, Planner COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSION & PUBLIC APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approve Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of October 28, 2015 Action: WALIA/FITZSIMMONS MOVED TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 28, 2015 MINUTES. MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN, WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. NEW BUSINESS 1. Application ELN15-0012; 18470 Ravenswood Dr. (397-43-050); Amer Ather - The applicant is proposing an addition of 700 sq. ft. to a legal non-conforming one story single-family residence located at 18740 Ravenswood Dr. The structure is classified as nonconforming because the existing interior and exterior side setbacks are located within the side yard(s). Action: HLAVA/SMULLEN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 15-050 APPROVING THE PROJECT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN, WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. PUBLIC HEARING All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants 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. Applicants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. 1. Application SUB10-10-0001 & ENV10-0001 – Mt. Eden Road (503-13-127, 128) Irany / Karr - The applicant currently owns a 13.8 acre parcel. They have submitted an application to subdivide the parcel into two parcels. Parcel 1 would be 3.85 acres and Parcel 2 would be 9.92 acres. An Initial Study / Negative Declaration was required because both proposed lots have average slopes greater than 20%. The 4 intent to adopt the Negative Declaration (ND) was duly noticed and circulated for a 20-day public review period from September 18, 2015 – October 7, 2015. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-1212. Action: HLAVA/AHUJA MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLTION NO. 13-025 SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN. NOES: CHANG, WALIA. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. 2. Application PDR14-0010; 18645 McFarland Avenue (389-14-015); Mahmoud Khorashadi - The applicant requests to demolish an existing single-story residence in order to construct a new 3,515 sq. ft. two-story residence with two car garage and attached second dwelling unit. The height of the new residence will not exceed 26 feet. Two trees not protected by City Code are proposed to be removed. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-1212. Action: HLAVA/AHUJA MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO FEBRUARY 9, 2016 STUDY SESSION. MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN, WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. 3. Application PDR15-0036; 19905 Sunset Drive (510-02-004); McCune/Beck The applicant is requesting to construct a 480 sq. ft. addition to an existing two-story residence and a 201 sq. ft. addition to an existing, detached secondary dwelling unit. The height of the addition to the main house would be no taller than 26 feet and the height of the second dwelling unit would be no taller than 18 feet. One protected tree is proposed for removal. Planning Commission design review is required because the cumulative floor area of the proposed project exceeds 6,000 sq. ft. The site area is 40,799 sq. ft. and the property is zoned R1- 40,000. Staff Contact: Liz Ruess 408-868-1230 Action: HLAVA/WALIA MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 15-053 APPROVING THE PROJECT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN, WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. 4. Application PDR15-0023; 14768 Montalvo Road (517-20-041); Wilson/Goodere - The applicant is requesting approval to demolish an existing residence and to construct a new 26 foot tall, 4,602 square foot two-story residence with a 281 square foot second dwelling unit. Planning Commission design review is required because the project consists of a new two-story residence over 18 feet in height. Staff Contact: Sandy Baily (408) 868-1235. Action: HLAVA/CHANG MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 15-052 APPROVING THE PROJECT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, HLAVA, SMULLEN. NOES: FITZSIMMONS, WALIA. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. 5. Application APTR15-0003; 20315 Orchard Rd (397-23-004); Greenleaf – The appellant is appealing a tree removal permit application (TRP15-0412) and specifically, the removal of one coast live oak growing in the back yard of the property. Staff contact: Kate Bear (408) 868-1276. Action: HLAVA/SMULLEN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 15-051 DENYING THE APPEAL. MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN, WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. 6. Application ZOA15-0009 (Citywide) - The City has drafted a revised Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (Article 15-47). The purpose of the Ordinance is to implement new State requirements to increase water efficiency standards for new and retrofitted landscapes through more efficient systems, greywater usage, onsite storm water capture and by limiting the portion of new or significantly modified landscapes that can be covered in turf. Staff Contact: Sandy Baily (408) 868-1235. 5 Action: HLAVA/WALIA MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO JANUARY 13, 2016 MEETING. MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN, WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. DIRECTOR/COMMISSION COMMUNICATION ADJOURNMENT HLAVA/WALIAMOVED TO ADJOURN AT 12:05 AM. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA SMULLEN, WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION MEMORANDUM Meeting Date:January 13, 2016 Application:APTR15-0004; TRP15-0380 Location / APN: 12990 Regan Leney/393-07-030 Appellant/Applicant:Leney/Abhyankar Staff:Kate Bear, City Arborist On September 30, 2015, the property owner at 12990 Regan Lane applied for a permit (TRP15- 0412) to remove an Italian stone pine growing in the back yard. The application included a report from International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) – Certified Arborist and Registered Consulting Arborist, Brian McGovern, recommending the removal of the tree. Staff reviewed the independent arborist report submitted along with the tree removal application, inspected the tree and confirmed the findings required by the City Code to allow for its removal subject to neighborhood notification and an applicable 15-day appeal period. On November 3, 2015 notices were sent to neighbors within 150 feet of the property informing them of the administrative decision and providing a deadline of November 18, 2015 to appeal the determination. Article 15-50.100 of the City Code states that anyone objecting to an administrative decision made pursuant to the provisions of the Tree Regulations may appeal the decision to the Planning Commission according to the procedure specified in Article 15-90. On November 16, 2015 Megan Laney, the neighbor next door, filed an appeal application with the Community Development Department saying that the tree is healthy and provides a gateway experience for the neighborhood. The appeal expressed concern that removing the tree would significantly change the character of the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached resolution affirming staff’s determination on the required findings in the City Code to approve the tree removal application for the removal of an Italian stone pine tree at 12990 Regan Lane, and to require a replacement tree. DESCRIPTION: The owner of the property applied for a permit (TRP15-0380) to remove one mature Italian stone pine (Pinus pinea). Along with the application they submitted a report from an independent arborist, Brian McGovern, supporting the removal of the pine. The report found the pine to be in good health, although its structure was determined to be poor. The tree has three main trunks which are co-dominant; they are each about equal in size and competing for dominance. The three trunks are in contact with each other for lengths of 50 – 75 inches and have “included bark”, a phenomenon where bark becomes imbedded in the union and creates a weak attachment. If a trunk failed the report found the likelihood of hitting the street or 7 21990 Regan Lane, APTR15-0004; TRP15-0380 the garage high and the consequences of impact to be significant. The report concluded that the tree posed a high risk of failure of a trunk within the next five years in normal weather. A failure profile for Italian stone pines was published in the Fall 2015 journal of Western Arborist and is attached (Attachment 4). The article notes that a key factor for trunk failures is the presence of codominant trunks. Data on 170 tree failures was analyzed, 75 of which were from the bay area. Of trunk failures, 44% occurred in trees with multiple codominant trunks. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS City Code Section 15-50.080 requires that each application to remove a tree shall be reviewed and that a determination be made on the basis of the following findings . A tree qualifies for removal if just one of the criteria listed below is met and there is no feasible alternative to removal. In making a determination on an application, staff determines all of the criteria that have been met in support of an application for tree removal. (1) The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures and interference with utility services, and whether the tree is a Dead tree or a Fallen tree. This finding can be made because this is a mature Italian stone pine that is growing close to the garage with a portion of the tree canopy over the structure. The owner provided an independent arborist report which includes a climbing and risk assessment of the tree supporting the requested removal. The arborist report notes that the tree would be susceptible to failure of one of the main trunks in normal weather as the trunks will continue to push against each other as they increase in girth. (2) The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. This finding can be made because the tree’s roots have broken a concrete pad that was used as an RV parking area by the previous owners. If a trunk failure occurs, it could cause additional damage by landing on the garage, a car parked in the driveway or in the street. (3) The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters, particularly on steep slopes. This finding is not applicable because the property is considered flat and no erosion has been observed. (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values, erosion control, and the general welfare of residents in the area. This finding cannot be made. This is the only tree of a significant size on the property and its removal will impact the amount of shade available on the property. There are no documented privacy issues, scenic view impacts, or erosion problems associated with the tree proposed to be removed. (5) The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. This finding can be made because there are no other trees near this one but this tree has outgrown its planting area and its root system is in a very limited soil volume. Additionally, there is adequate space on the property to accommodate additional replacement trees to mitigate the tree proposed to be removed. Page 2 of 4 8 21990 Regan Lane, APTR15-0004; TRP15-0380 (6) Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on the protected tree. This finding can be made because removal of the tree is the only means to assure that catastrophic failure of one or more of the codominant trunks will not occur. The locations where stems are in contact with each other contain “included bark”, or bark that becomes embedded between the trunks. As they increase in girth, they push against each other and one or more of the trunks may split out of the tree. This tree has two long sections of included bark, one measuring over four feet and another measuring over six feet. Typically defects such codominant stems with included bark are addressed when a tree is young and corrective pruning is undertaken. Pruning this mature tree will require large pruning cuts and the result will likely be unsightly. Sometimes codominant stems can be supported with cables, but the necessary symmetry doesn’t exist in this tree. Installing a support brace would require significant costs associated with engineering and installing the support and would disrupt the root system which supports the tree. Additionally, the required size of the supporting brace itself would have an aesthetic impact to the tree and property. (7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article. This finding can be made because removal of the tree and replacement with new trees on the property is entirely consistent with the City’s Tree Regulations of the City Code. The conditions of approval for TRP15-0380 require the owner to plant two replacement trees in the front yard. Each new tree shall be capable of reaching a height of 40 – 50 feet or more when mature, and shall be of 24-inch box container size. The replacement trees can also be planted on the property so they are farther from the house and can grow without the potential for property damage or personal injury. The replacement trees would also have the potential to contribute to the scenic beauty of the property and the neighborhood as they mature without the risks noted with the existing tree. (8) Any other information relevant to the public health, safety, or general welfare and the purposes of this ordinance as set forth in Section 15-50.010. This finding can be made because the trunk of the tree most likely to fail could fall into the street and hit a car, causing damage or possibly injure a pedestrian. (9) The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. This finding can be because the risk of failure cannot be reduced through any other standard remedies. In addition this species is noted for the fact that when healthy and growing vigorously such as this specimen is, the tree can cause significant damage to structures from roots. (10) The necessity to remove the tree for installation and efficient operation of solar panels, subject to the requirements that the tree(s) to be removed, shall not be removed until solar panels have been installed and replacement trees planted in conformance with the City Arborist's recommendation. This finding is not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Resolution 15-055 denying the appeal 2.Tree removal permit application TRP15-0380 Page 3 of 4 9 21990 Regan Lane, APTR15-0004; TRP15-0380 3.Arborist report by Brian McGovern 4.Structural failure profile: Italian Stone Pine (Picea pinea), Fall 2015, Western Arborist Page 4 of 4 10 Attachment 1 RESOLUTION NO: 15-055 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING APPEAL APTR15-0003 AND APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICATION TRP15-0412 AT 20315 ORCHARD ROAD WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an appeal of an Administrative Decision permitting a request to remove one Italian stone pine at 12990 Regan Lane; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and WHEREAS, the goal of the City is to balance the rights and privileges of property owners for the use of their land with criteria for establishing and sustaining an urban forest, including the establishment of basic standards and criteria for the removal and replacement of trees; and WHEREAS, after considering all of the criteria for the application of a Tree Removal Permit set forth in Section 15-50.080, the Planning Commission finds that overall the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for the Tree Removal Permit for one coast live oak. NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: The administrative decision is consistent with the General Plan, including the Conservation Element Policy, OSC12: To further protect and enhance the City’s arbor resources built on the City’s Tree Regulations, the City should continue its support of tree protection programs. The Italian stone pine was requested for removal through the City’s process to remove protected trees as set forth in the Tree Regulations. The Planning Commission has reviewed the application for tree removal and the appeal and found that the request to remove the pine does meet the criteria in the City Code, overall. Section 3: The administrative decision is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that criteria 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 are met, allowing the removal of the tree, as set forth in Section 15- 50.080. Criterion 4 is not met. Criteria 3 and 10 do not apply. 11 Resolution No. 15-055 (1) The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures and interference with utility services, and whether the tree is a Dead tree or a Fallen tree. This finding can be made because this is a mature Italian stone pine that is growing close to the garage with a portion of the tree canopy over the structure. The owner provided an independent arborist report which includes a climbing and risk assessment of the tree supporting the requested removal. The arborist report notes that the tree would be susceptible to failure of one of the main trunks in normal weather as the trunks will continue to push against each other as they increase in girth. (2) The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. This finding can be made because the tree’s roots have broken a concrete pad that was used as an RV parking area by the previous owners. If a trunk failure occurs, it could cause additional damage by landing on the garage, a car parked in the driveway or in the street. (3) The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters, particularly on steep slopes. This finding is not applicable because the property is considered flat and no erosion has been observed. (4) The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values, erosion control, and the general welfare of residents in the area. This finding cannot be made. This is the only tree of a significant size on the property and its removal will impact the amount of shade available on the property. There are no documented privacy issues, scenic view impacts, or erosion problems associated with the tree proposed to be removed. (5) The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. This finding can be made because there are no other trees near this one but this tree has outgrown its planting area and its root system is in a very limited soil volume. Additionally, there is adequate space on the property to accommodate additional replacement trees to mitigate the tree proposed to be removed. (6) Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on the protected tree. This finding can be made because removal of the tree is the only means to assure that catastrophic failure of one or more of the codominant trunks will not occur. The locations where stems are in contact with each other contain “included bark”, or bark that becomes embedded between the trunks. As they increase in girth, they push against each other and one or more of the trunks may split out of the tree. This tree has two long sections of included bark, one measuring over four feet and another measuring over six feet. Typically defects such codominant stems with included bark are addressed when a tree is young and corrective pruning is undertaken. Pruning this mature tree will require large pruning cuts and the result will likely be unsightly. Sometimes codominant stems can be supported with cables, but the necessary symmetry doesn’t exist in this tree. Installing a support brace would require significant costs associated with engineering and installing the support and would disrupt the root system which supports the tree cables. Additionally, the required size of the supporting brace itself would have an aesthetic impact to the tree and property.12 Resolution No. 15-055 (7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article. This finding can be made because removal of the tree and replacement with new trees on the property is entirely consistent with the City’s Tree Regulations of the City Code. The conditions of approval for TRP15-0380 require the owner to plant two replacement trees in the front yard. Each new tree shall be capable of reaching a height of 40 – 50 feet or more when mature, and shall be of 24-inch box container size. The replacement trees can also be planted on the property so they are farther from the house and can grow without the potential for property damage or personal injury. The replacement trees would also have the potential to contribute to the scenic beauty of the property and the neighborhood as they mature without the risks noted with the existing tree. (8) Any other information relevant to the public health, safety, or general welfare and the purposes of this ordinance as set forth in Section 15-50.010. This finding can be made because the trunk of the tree most likely to fail could fall into the street and hit a car, causing damage or possibly injure a pedestrian. (9) The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. This finding can be because the risk of failure cannot be reduced through any other standard remedies. In addition this species is noted for the fact that when healthy and growing vigorously such as this specimen is, the tree can cause significant damage to structures from roots. (10) The necessity to remove the tree for installation and efficient operation of solar panels, subject to the requirements that the tree(s) to be removed shall not be removed until solar panels have been installed and replacement trees planted in conformance with the City Arborist's recommendation. This finding is not applicable. Section 4: Unless appealed to the City Council pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby denies APTR15-0004, approving TRP15-0380 for the removal and replacement of one Italian stone pine, located at 12990 Regan Lane, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval of TRP15-0380. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 13 th day of January 2016 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 13 Resolution No. 15-055 ____________________________ Leonard Almalech Chair, Planning Commission 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date:January 13, 2016 Application:PDR15-0035; ARB15-0073 Location / APN: 13235 Glen Brae Drive / 393-19-003 Owner/Applicant:Kim & Kevin Tanner Staff Planner:Liz Ruess 13235 Glen Brae Drive 45 Summary PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting to construct a new 3,315 sq. ft. single-story, single family residence with a 2,758 sq. ft. basement and 451 sq. ft. attached garage. The height of the residence will not exceed 25 feet. No protected trees are proposed for removal. Planning Commission design review is required because the proposed residence exceeds 18 feet in height. No protected trees are proposed for removal. The net site area is 12,514 square feet and is zoned R-1-12,500. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 16-001 approving the project subject to conditions of approval. Design Review Approval by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to City Code Section 15-45.060(a)(3). PROJECT DATA: Gross Site Area:12,514 SF / 0.28 acres Net Site Area: 12,514 SF / 0.28 acres Average Site Slope:3% Grading: 622 CY General Plan Designation:M-12.5 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning:R-1-12,500 (Single-Family Residential) Proposed Allowed/Required Proposed Site Coverage Residential Footprint/Main Residence Permeable Driveway (50% counted) Patios/Walkways/Pool Permeable Patio/Walks (50% counted) Total Proposed Site Coverage 4,103 SF 395 SF 1,907 SF 475 SF 6,880 SF (54.9%) 6,882 SF (55%) Floor Area Main House First Floor Garage Basement (excluded) Total Floor Area 2,864 SF 451 SF (2,758 SF) 3,315 SF 3,710 SF Height Lowest Elevation Point: Highest Elevation Point: Average Elevation Point: Proposed Topmost Point: Total Proposed Height 345 FT 345.8 FT 345.4 FT 370.4 FT 25 FT Maximum Height = 371.4 (26 Feet) Proposed Allowed/Required Setbacks for Residence Front: Left Side: Right Side: Rear: 25’-4”+ 10’-1” 10’-6.5” 29’ 25’ 10’ 10’ 25’ Page 2 of 5 46 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS The project site is located on Glen Brae Drive, midway between Via Monte Drive and Via Grande Drive. The proposed building site at the center of the parcel is essentially level and the average slope of the site is 3 percent. This project proposes demolition of an existing 2,702 square foot, one story single-family home. The existing home will be replaced with a new 3,315 square foot one story, single-family residence that includes a 451 sq. ft. attached garage and a 2,758 square foot basement. Planning Commission review is required because the proposed height exceeds 18 feet which is the threshold for an Administrative Design Review that can be reviewed by City staff. The proposed height of the residence will not exceed 25 feet. The proposed home includes traditional design elements that are functional and simple, utilizing exterior colors and materials to compliment the design. The exterior color palette of the proposed residence is neutral and compliments the neighborhood. The exterior materials include; light beige exterior stucco, white trim, stone base veneer, slate roofing, and dark brown wood front door and garage doors. A color and material boards are on file with the Community Development Department and will be present at the site visit and public hearing. The following table lists the proposed exterior materials. Detail Colors and Materials Exterior Stucco Smooth Finish Stucco – Kelly Moore/Woodbridge Trail Trim Color Kelly Moore/Stocking White Front Door/Garage Doors Wood - Dark Brown Base Veneer California Gold Panel Roofing Pikes Point American Slate Mix Trees The site currently has two protected trees. No protected trees are proposed for removal. The project has received Arborist approval with conditions as outlined in the Arborist Report, Attachment #2. Front Landscape The applicant proposed to remove the existing front yard driveway and hardscaping and replace with a new permeable paver driveway (relocated to opposite side of front setback), a permeable paver walkway, and drought resistant landscaping. The front setback area is 2,977 sq. ft. The applicant is allowed by the City Code to install up to 1,488 sq. ft. (50%) of hardscape within the front setback area. The applicant proposes 830 sq. ft. (28%) of hardscape in the front yard. The City Code also allows up to a three foot tall fence within the required front yard setback. The applicant is not proposing a new fence at this time. Neighbor Notification and Correspondence The applicant did not submit Neighbor Notification Forms signed by adjacent property owners. Staff mailed a “Notice of Public Hearing” to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. The public hearing notice and description of the project was published in the Saratoga Page 3 of 5 47 News. No additional written comments, either positive or negative, were received prior to the completion of this staff report. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The project 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 of three single-family residences in a residential area. FINDINGS Design Review Findings The Planning Commission shall not grant design review approval unless it is able to make the following findings. These findings are in addition to and not a substitute for compliance with all other Zoning Regulations. (a)Site development follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given the property's natural constraints. This finding can be made because the majority of the proposed structure will remain in the same building footprint of the existing structure. The average slope of the site is 3%, so the building site is essentially level. (b)All protected trees shall be preserved, as provided in Article 15-50 (Tree Regulations). If constraints exist on the property, the number of protected trees, heritage trees, and native trees approved for removal shall be reduced to an absolute minimum. Removal of any smaller oak trees deemed to be in good health by the City Arborist shall be minimized using the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080. This finding can because neither of the two protected trees are proposed for removal. (c)The height of the structure, its location on the site, and its architectural elements are designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds. This finding can be made because the proposed one-story residence is compatible with the predominant streetscape of the area, including the generally established front yard setbacks. The proposed residence is located in the center of the site, where the existing house is located. There are numerous two-story homes in the neighborhood, including one immediately adjacent to the proposed project. The proposed residence is no taller than 25 feet, however it is a single story with no windows above 10 feet. T here would be no unreasonable impact to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds. (d)The overall mass and the height of the structure, and its architectural elements are in scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood. This finding can be made because the massing of the proposed roof is broken up by varying rooflines. The overall design, rooflines, materials, and location of building features will avoid the perception of excessive bulk. The proposed design utilizes color and material to compliment the design and break-up the sense of mass. The exterior colors and materials proposed are; stucco in a light beige color, contrasted by white trim, dark brown front entry door and garage doors, neutral stone base veneer, and neutral tone slate roofing. The proposed style is similar to that of several of the newer homes in the neighborhood and is complimentary to the older existing homes in the neighborhood. Page 4 of 5 48 (e)The landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape. This finding can be made because the hardscape in the front setback area is limited to just 28% which is well below the permitted 50%. The applicant proposes a driveway and front walkway constructed of pervious pavers. The remaining front yard setback area will be drought resistant landscaping. (f)Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. This finding can be made because the project meets all required setbacks and will remain under 26 feet in height. The project will not impair adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. (g)The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding can be made in the affirmative because the proposed project conforms to the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook such as minimizing the use of excessive colors and materials, designed the structure with simple and well-proportioned massing, and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views as detailed in the findings above. (h)On hillside lots, the location and the design of the structure avoid unreasonable impacts to ridgelines, significant hillside features, community viewsheds, and is in compliance with Section 15-13.100. This finding is not applicable as this lot is not located within the hillside residential zoning district and is not considered a hillside lot. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Resolution 2.Arborist Report 3.Photos of Existing House 4.Neighborhood Context Photos 5.Reduced Plans (Exhibit A) 6.Colors & Materials Board 7.Story Pole Certification Letter Page 5 of 5 49 RESOLUTION NO: 16-001 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW PDR15-0035 LOCATED AT 13235 GLEN BRAE DRIVE WHEREAS, on September 16, 2015, an application was submitted by Kevin Tanner requesting Design Review approval to demolish an existing one story home and to construct a new 3,315 square foot, one story single-family residence (includes 451 sq. ft. attached garage) with a 2,758 square foot basement. The height of the proposed residence is 25 feet. No protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is located within the R-1-12,500 Zoning District (APN 393-19-003). WHEREAS, the City Code requires a geologic hazards report to be prepared by a licensed geologist and for the City’s Geologic Consultant to review and approve the report. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department completed an environmental assessment for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and recommends that the Planning Commission determine this project exempt. WHEREAS, on January 13, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by City Staff, the applicant, and other interested parties. NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: The project 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 of one single-family residence in a residential area. Section 3: The project is consistent with the following Saratoga General Plan Policies: 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; 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; and 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. Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the design and improvements are consistent with the design review findings in that the project follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given the property’s natural constraints; preserves protected trees; is designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds; the mass and height of the structure and its architectural 50 elements are in scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood; landscaping minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape; does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy; and is consistent with the Residential Design Review Handbook. Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR15-0035 located at 13235 Glen Brae Drive, subject to the Findings, and Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 13th day of January 2016 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Leonard Almalech Chair, Planning Commission 51 EXHIBIT 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PDR15-0035 13235 GLEN BRAE DRIVE (APN: 393-19-003) 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, or grading 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 to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 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. 2.The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting this approval is duly executed, 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 City certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 3.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. 4.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, 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 City Attorney. 5.Construction must be commenced within 36 months from the date of this approval (September 9, 2018), or the resolution will expire. 52 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6.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 September 14, 2015, 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 3, above. 7.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 City 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. 6 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 of any Ordinance-protected tree on the site; c.This Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages; d.A final utility plan that shows location of HVAC mechanical equipment outside of required setback areas; e.A final Drainage and Grading Plan stamped by a registered Civil Engineer combined with the above-required Stormwater Detention Plan; f.A final Landscape and Irrigation Plan; and g.All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building Division. 8.Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public right-of-way. 9.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. 10.Fences, Walls and Hedges. All fences, walls and hedges not in connection with the proposed fence exception shall conform to height requirements provided in City Code Section 15-29. 11.Final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan. The final landscaping and irrigation plan shall take into account the following: a.To the extent feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat storm water runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff. In areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolong exposure to water shall be specified. b.To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area.53 c.Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. d.Pest resistant landscaping plants shall be considered for use throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. e.Any proposed or required under grounding of utilities shall take into account potential damage to roots of protected trees 12.Fire Department Requirements. Owner/applicant shall comply with all Fire Department requirements. 13.Noise and Construction Hours. In order to comply with standards that minimize impacts to the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours, maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections. 14.Front yard landscaping. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection or a bond satisfactory to the Community Development Department valued at 150% of the estimated cost of the installation of such landscaping shall be provided to the City. 15.Construction Management Plan. The applicant shall submit a construction management plan prior to obtaining a building permit. The plan shall address work hours and schedule, equipment/material staging and parking, estimated vehicular traffic, contaminated soil management, dust control measures, noise mitigation, and general health and safety. CITY ARBORIST 16.Arborist Report. All recommendations of the Arborist Report dated November 16, 2015 and all other future updated reports, and incorporated herein by this reference shall be followed and incorporated (in its entirety) into the plans. PUBLIC WORKS 17.Encroachment Permit. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit for any and all improvements in any City right-of-way or City easement prior to commencement of the work to implement this Design Review. 18.Driveway Approach. Applicant (Owner) shall remove existing driveway approach and replace with vertical curb, sidewalk and landscaped strip per City standard specifications to match existing. Applicant (owner) shall install a new driveway approach per City standard specifications. Applicant (owner) shall obtain an encroachment permit for any and all improvements in any City right-of-way or City easement prior to commencement of the work to implement this Design Review. 54 Community Development Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 ARBORIST REPORT Application No. ARB15-0073 Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Site: 13235 Glen Brae Drive Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owner: Kim and Kevin Turner Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN: 393-19-003 Email: kevin@saratogarim.com Report History: Report 1 Date: Plans received October 9, 2015 Arborist report received November 4, 2015 Revised plans received November 16, 2015 Report completed November 16, 2015 PROJECT SCOPE: The applicant has submitted plans to the City to demolish the existing house and build a new one story house with a basement and attached two-car garage. STATUS: Approved by City Arborist with attached conditions. PROJECT DATA IN BRIEF: Tree bond – Required - $10,620 For trees 1 and 2 Tree fencing – Required – See Conditions of Approval and attached map. Tree removals – None requested or permitted. Replacement trees – None required. FINDINGS: Tree Removals No trees are requested or approved for removal to construct this project. New Construction Based on the information provided, and as conditioned, this project complies with the requirements for the setback of new construction from existing trees under Section 15-50.120 of the City Code. 55 3235 Glen Brae Drive Tree Preservation Plan Section 15-50.140 of the City Code requires a Tree Preservation Plan for this project. The submitted arborist report, once included in the final set of plans, will satisfy this requirement. The Project Description in Brief and Conditions of Approval from this report are also to be included in the final set of plans. ATTACHMENTS: 1 – Plans Reviewed and Tree Information 2 – Conditions of Approval 3 – Maps of site showing tree locations and protective fencing 56 13235 Glen Brae Drive Attachment 1 PLAN REVIEW: Architectural Plans reviewed: Preparer: Scott Design Associates Date of Plans: September 14, 2015, revised November 16, 2015 Sheet A 0.1 Site Plan Sheet A – 1 Enlargement of Leased Area Sheet A – 2 Equipment Cabinets Layout Sheets A – 4 and A – 5 Existing and Proposed Elevations Civil Plans reviewed: Preparer: Westfall Engineers, Inc. Date of Plans: October 9, 2013, revised April 15, 2015 Sheet TOPO Boundary and Topographic Survey Sheet 1 of 2* Grading and Drainage Plan Sheet 1 of 2* Grading and Drainage Plan * Both sheets are numbered 1 of 2 and titled Grading and Drainage Plan – second sheet has details TREE INFORMATION: Arborist Report reviewed: Preparer: David Lazcko of Ian Geddes and Associates Date of Report: November 2, 2015 An arborist report was submitted to the City for this project that inventoried two trees protected by Saratoga City Code. Information on the condition of each tree, potential impacts from construction, appraised values and tree protection recommendations was provided. No trees are requested for removal to construct this project. A table summarizing information about each tree is below. Table 2: List of trees and appraised values Tree No. Species Trunk Diameter (inches) Condition Intensity of Construction Impacts Appraised Value On Adjacent Property? Deodar cedar 1 Cedrus deodara 35 Fair Moderate $14,250 No Beech Low/ 2 Fagus sylvatica 17.0 Good Moderate $12,300 Yes 57 13235 Glen Brae Drive Attachment 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. It is the responsibility of the owner, architect and contractor to be familiar with the information in this report and implement the required conditions. 2. All recommendations in the arborist report dated November 2, 2015 prepared by David Lazcko shall become conditions of approval. 3. The arborist report dated November 2, 2015 shall be copied on to a plan sheet, titled “Tree Preservation” and included in the final job copy set of plans. 4. The Project Data in Brief and Conditions of Approval from this report shall also be copied onto a plan sheet and included in the final set of plans as part of the Tree Preservation Plan. 5. The designated Project Arborist shall be David Lazcko, unless otherwise approved by the City Arborist. 6. Tree Protection Security Deposit a. Is required per City Ordinance 15-50.080. b. Shall $10,620 be for tree(s) 1 and 2. c. Shall be obtained by the owner and filed with the Community Development Department before obtaining Building Division permits. d. May be in the form of cash, check, credit card payment or a bond. e. Shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project. f. May be released once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City Arborist. 7. Tree Protection Fencing: a. Shall be installed as shown on the attached maps. b. Shall be established prior to the arrival of construction equipment or materials on site. c. Shall be comprised of six-foot high chain link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, 2-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. d. Shall be posted with signs saying “TREE PROTECTION FENCE - DO NOT MOVE OR REMOVE WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST, KATE BEAR (408) 868-1276”. e. Call City Arborist, Kate Bear at (408) 868-1276 for an inspection of tree protection fencing once it has been installed. This is required prior to obtaining building division permits. f. Tree protection fencing shall remain undisturbed throughout the construction until final inspection. g. If contractor feels that work must be done inside the fenced area, call City Arborist to arrange a field meeting before performing work. 8. The Project Arborist shall visit the site every week during grading activities and monthly thereafter. Following visits to the site, the Project Arborist shall provide the City with a report including photos documenting the progress of the project and noting any tree issues. 58 13235 Glen Brae Drive Attachment 3 9. The Project Arborist shall be on site to monitor all work within 15 feet of trees 1 and 2. 10. The Project Arborist shall supervise: a. Installation of the new driveway and walkway within 15 feet of tree 1. b. Installation of the storm drain where it is within 15 feet of tree 1. c. Work in the planter under the neighbor’s beech tree – hatched area on map 2. 11. No protected tree authorized for removal or encroachment pursuant to this project may be removed or encroached upon until the issuance of the applicable permit from the building division for the approved project. 12. Receipt of a Planning or Building permit does not relieve applicant of his responsibilities for protecting trees per City Code Article 15-50 on all construction work. 13. All construction activities shall be conducted outside tree protection fencing. 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. 14. Trenching to install utilities is not permitted inside tree protection fencing. 15. Roots of protected trees measuring two inches in diameter or more shall not be cut without prior approval of the Project Arborist. Roots measuring less than two inches in diameter may be cut using a sharp pruning tool. 16. Any permitted pruning or root pruning of trees on site shall be performed under the supervision of the Project Arborist and according to ISA standards. 17. No trees are requested or approved for removal to construct the project. 18. Should any tree be damaged beyond repair, new trees shall be required to replace the tree. If there is insufficient room to plant new trees, some or all of the replacement value for trees shall be paid into the City’s Tree Fund. Replacement values for new trees are listed below. 15 gallon = $150 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 19. Following completion of the work around trees, and before a final inspection of the project, the applicant shall provide a letter to the City from the Project Arborist. That letter shall document the work performed around trees, include photos of the work in progress, and provide information on the condition of the trees. 20. At the end of the project, when the contractor wants to remove tree protection fencing and have the tree protection security deposit released by the City, call City Arborist for a final inspection. 59 Attachment 3 13235 Glen Brae Drive 60 Attachment 3 13235 Glen Brae Drive 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 PLANNING COMMISSION MEMORANDUM Meeting Date:January 13, 2016 Application:ADR15-0029; ARB15-0050; GEO15-0013 Location / APN: 15470 Belnap Way (Bohlman) /517-14-021 Owner/Applicant:Van den Hoek Staff Planner:Liz Ruess The City Council approved amendments to the City’s Geologic Hazards Regulations of the City Code on Wednesday, August 19, 2015. These amendments allow Saratoga residents additional flexibility for modest additions or remodeling of an existing home in geologically sensitive area as long as the proposed construction resulted in increased safety of the structure. Prior to these City Code amendments becoming effective on September 19, 2015 some homeowners would not have the ability to make any improvements to their existing homes if the underlying geologic hazard conditions affecting their property could not be fully mitigated. In many instances, mitigation of the geologic hazards is not physically or economically feasible due to the scale or magnitude of the documented geologic conditions (e.g. a hazard spanning multiple parcels or a deep landslide). The intent of the approved amendments was to acknowledge that some level of remodeling or improvements of existing older homes is necessary in order for homeowners to be able to continue to utilize their properties and maintain the City’s housing stock. Additionally, the amendments recognized that modest additions and remodeling of existing older structures to current Building and Fire Code standards will result in increased overall safety for their occupants. The adopted amendments establish a new project classification, a Categorically Permitted Project, which conforms with this definition and would allow the homeowner to apply for a Planning Commission Design Review approval with City Geologic Consultant and City staff verification that a safer design is feasible. A Categorically Permitted Project is specifically defined in the amended Geologic Hazards Regulations as a remodel and/or addition to one existing structure on a legally existing parcel based on an Engineered Design and limited to a maximum remodel of fifty percent (50%), and an addition of 500 square feet or twenty-five percent (25%) of the square footage of the existing building or structure, whichever is greater. Categorically Permitted Projects in the Pmw, Pd, and Pdf Geologic Hazard areas are subject to Design Review approval by the Planning Commission in accordance City Code Sections 16-65.060. This project proposes an addition of 841.25 sq. ft. above an existing garage and is consistent with this definition. 86 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 16-002 approving the categorically permitted project subject to conditions of approval. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting to construct an 841.25 sq. ft. addition to an existing attached garage. The project is classified as a Categorically Permitted Project because the area of addition is within a “Pd” ground movement potential category within a State mapped earthquake-induced landslide hazard zone. Planning Commission Design Review Approval is required for all Categorically Permitted Projects. The existing home is 3,365 sq. ft. (including 688 sq. ft. attached garage). The total floor area including the 841.25 sq. ft. addition would be 4,206.25 sq. ft. The project includes replacing the garage doors on the existing garage. The height of the addition to the garage would be no taller than 25 feet. No protected trees are proposed for removal. Geotechnical Clearance has been granted because the proposed project complies with requirements of categorically permitted projects as described in Saratoga Municipal Code Section 16-65.060. PROJECT DATA: Net Site Area: 38,333 SF Zoning District: HR Proposed Allowed/Required Total Site Coverage 14,704 sq. ft. (15%) 25% Max. Total Floor Area 4,206.25 sq. ft. 5,922 sq. ft. Max. Height 24 ft. – 8 in. 26 ft. Max. Setbacks Front: Left Side: Left Side (2nd): Right Side: Right Side (2nd): Rear: Rear (2nd): 57’+ 54’ 536’+ 49’ 114’ 180’ 269’+ 30’ 20’ 20’ 20’ 20’ 60’ 60’ Neighbor Notification and Correspondence: Notices were sent to all property owners within 500 feet of the proposed project on December 23, 2015. No comments have been received, as of the writing of this report. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS A categorically permitted project may only be approved when it is clearly demonstrated to the City's Geotechnical Consultant that such categorically permitted project will improve the overall safety of existing buildings and will not unduly jeopardize human safety, property on the site, or adjoining public or private property. As stated in the Supplemental Geotechnical Peer Review (Attachment #3): Structural upgrades will be proposed to improve the overall safety of site structures and therefore Geotechnical Clearance was recommended and subsequently granted. Page 2 of 4 87 Design Review Findings The Planning Commission shall not grant design review approval unless it is able to make the following findings. These findings are in addition to and not a substitute for compliance with all other Zoning Regulations. (a)Site development follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given the property's natural constraints. This finding can be made because the proposed addition will be above an existing garage and will remain in the same building footprint of the existing structure, with no added foundation. (b)All protected trees shall be preserved, as provided in Article 15-50 (Tree Regulations). If constraints exist on the property, the number of protected trees, heritage trees, and native trees approved for removal shall be reduced to an absolute minimum. Removal of any smaller oak trees deemed to be in good health by the City Arborist shall be minimized using the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080. This finding can be made because no protected trees are proposed for removal. (c)The height of the structure, its location on the site, and its architectural elements are designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds. This finding can be made because the proposed addition is above an existing garage. The setbacks far exceed the required setbacks and due to the location of the property in the hillside district and heavy landscape screening, the area of addition will likely not be visible from adjacent properties. There would be no unreasonable impact to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds. (d)The overall mass and the height of the structure, and its architectural elements are in scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood. This finding can be made because the massing of the proposed roof is minimized by utilizing a sloped roof. The overall design, roofline, materials, and location of the addition will avoid the perception of excessive bulk. The design of the sloped roof and shape of the windows on the area of addition compliment the design of the entry element of the existing house. The exterior colors and materials will match the tasteful color palette of the existing house, including; light beige color stucco, contrasted by white trim, glass and dark wood front door, and dark grey composition shingle roofing. The proposed addition is consistent in style to the existing home. (e)The landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape. This finding can be made because no landscaping or hardscaping is proposed as part of this project. (f)Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. This finding can be made because the project far exceeds all required setbacks and will remain under 26 feet in height. The project will not impair adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. (g)The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding can be made because the proposed project conforms to the applicable design policies and techniques in the Page 3 of 4 88 Residential Design Handbook such as minimizing the use of excessive colors and materials, designed the structure with simple and well-proportioned massing, and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views as detailed in the findings above. (h)On hillside lots, the location and the design of the structure avoid unreasonable impacts to ridgelines, significant hillside features, community viewsheds, and is in compliance with Section 15-13.100. This finding can be made because the proposed project will not impact ridgelines, hillside features, or community viewsheds, and is in compliance with Section 15-13.100. The area of addition will not be visible from adjacent properties and the site has heavy landscaping and numerous mature trees which provide further screening. Environmental Determination: The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction of up to three single-family residences. ATTACHMENTS: 1.Resolution of Approval 2.Arborist Clearance 3.Geological Clearance Memo and Report 4.Photos of Existing House 5.Rendering of proposed addition 6.Development Plans (Exhibit "A") 7.Story Pole Certification Letter Page 4 of 4 89 RESOLUTION NO: 16-002 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW ADR15-0029 LOCATED AT 15470 BELNAP WAY (BOHLMAN) WHEREAS, on July 23, 2015 an application was submitted by Wilbert Van den Hoek requesting Design Review approval for an addition of 841.25 sq. ft. above an existing 688 sq. ft. garage attached to an existing 2,677 sq. ft. single-story, single-family residence located at 15470 Belnap Way (Bohlman). The height of the proposed addition would be 24 feet, 8 inches. No protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is located within the HR Zoning District (APN 517-14-021); and WHEREAS, the City Code requires a geologic hazards report to be prepared by a licensed geologist and for the City’s Geologic Consultant to review and approve the report; and WHEREAS, the City Code establishes a class of Categorically Permitted Projects which consists of small additions and/or remodeling work proposed for existing residential structures located in certain geologic hazard areas; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located in geologic area and the proposed scope of work qualifies as a Categorically Permitted Project; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department completed an environmental assessment for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and recommends that the Planning Commission determine this project exempt. WHEREAS, on January 13, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by City Staff, the applicant, and other interested parties. NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: The project 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 of one single-family residence in a residential area. Section 3: The project is consistent with the following Saratoga General Plan Policies: 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; 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 90 residence prior to issuance of permits; and 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. Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the design and improvements are consistent with the design review findings in that the project follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given the property’s natural constraints; preserves protected trees; is designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds; the mass and height of the structure and its architectural elements are in scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood; landscaping minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape; does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy; and is consistent with the Residential Design Review Handbook. Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves ADR15-0029 located at 15470 Belnap Way, subject to the Findings, and Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 13th day of January 2016 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Leonard Almalech Chair, Planning Commission 91 EXHIBIT 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ADR15-0029 15470 BELNAP WAY (APN: 517-14-021) 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, or grading 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 to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 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. 2.The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting this approval is duly executed, 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 City certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 3.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. 4.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, 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 City Attorney. 92 5.Construction must be commenced within 36 months from the date of this approval (January 13, 2019), or the resolution will expire. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6.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 July 14, 2015, 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 3, above. 7.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 City 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. 6 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 of any Ordinance-protected tree on the site; c.This Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages; d.A final utility plan that shows location of HVAC mechanical equipment outside of required setback areas; e.A final Drainage and Grading Plan stamped by a registered Civil Engineer combined with the above-required Stormwater Detention Plan; f.A final Landscape and Irrigation Plan; and g.All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building Division. 8.Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public right-of-way. 9.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. 10.Fences, Walls and Hedges. All fences, walls and hedges not in connection with the proposed fence exception shall conform to height requirements provided in City Code Section 15-29. 11.Final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan. The final landscaping and irrigation plan shall take into account the following: a.To the extent feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat storm water runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff. In areas that 93 provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolong exposure to water shall be specified. b.To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. c.Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. d.Pest resistant landscaping plants shall be considered for use throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. e.Any proposed or required under grounding of utilities shall take into account potential damage to roots of protected trees 12.Fire Department Requirements. Owner/applicant shall comply with all Fire Department requirements. 13.Noise and Construction Hours. In order to comply with standards that minimize impacts to the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours, maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections. 14.Front yard landscaping. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection or a bond satisfactory to the Community Development Department valued at 150% of the estimated cost of the installation of such landscaping shall be provided to the City. CITY ARBORIST 15.Arborist Report. All recommendations of the Arborist Memo dated November 3, 2015 and all other future updated memos or reports, and incorporated herein by this reference shall be followed and incorporated (in its entirety) into the plans. PUBLIC WORKS 16.Encroachment Permit. All recommendations of the Memorandum of Geotechnical Clearance Conditions dated October 26, 2015 and all other future updated reports, and incorporated herein by this reference shall be followed and incorporated (in its entirety) into the plans. 94 Community Development Department – Arborist Kate Bear, City Arborist Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us Ph: 408-868-1276 MEMO sent via email TO: Wilbert van den Hoek FROM: Kate Bear DATE: November 3, 2015 RE: 15470 Belnap Way; ARB15-0050; ADR15-0029 Here are arborist comments for the proposed addition above the garage. Currently the 38 inch oak tree does not have branches over the garage and does not appear to need pruning to clear the proposed addition. It appears far enough from the addition that an arborist report is not required. Based on an email from the owner, no changes to the retaining wall are needed in order to increase the garage foundation support for the second story. Because no work is needed on the retaining wall, the tree and its canopy are far enough from the proposed work to be exempt from tree protection requirements. If anything change so that work is required within five feet of the oak tree’s canopy, an arborist report, a tree preservation plan and a tree protection security deposit will be required. 95 October 28, 2015 Wilbert Van Den Hoek 15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, CA 95070 Via Email: wgm.vdh@gmail.com RE: Geotechnical Clearance for 15470 Belnap Way Application # GEO15-0013 Geotechnical Clearance with conditions has been granted for the above referenced project based on the review letter prepared by the City Geotechnical Consultant, dated October 26, 2015 Geotechnical conditions of approval and the Geologist’s review letter are attached. Please note that a ‘Hold Harmless Agreement’ will be sent to you for your signatures and return sometime in the next few weeks. Do not hesitate to contact me at (408) 868-1274 or via email at iharvancik@saratoga.ca.us if you have any questions regarding this review. Thank you. Sincerely, Iveta Harvancik Senior Engineer Public Works Department Cc (via email): Liz Ruess, CD Department David Giannella, Agent, via email: dg@acadia-architecture.com 96 Memorandum of Geotechnical Clearance Conditions MEMORANDUM TO: Liz Ruess, Project Planner, Community Development Department CC: Van Den Hoek, W. (Owner & Applicant) FROM: Iveta Harvancik, Senior Engineer SUBJECT: Geotechnical Clearance Conditions for GEO15-0013 at 15470 Belnap Way DATE: October 26, 2015 1. Geotechnical Clearance is granted for this project only if the project complies with requirements of Categorically permitted projects as described in Saratoga Municipal Code Section 16-65.060. 2. The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project building and grading plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations, retaining walls and driveway) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The results of the plan review shall be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 3. The 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 foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel and concrete. The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for review prior to final (granting of occupancy) project approval. 4. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the City Geotechnical Consultant’s review of the project prior to Zone Clearance. 5. The owner (applicant) shall enter into agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions. Page 1 of 1 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538A-3.2 Exterior PerspectiveRevisionRevisionRevisionENTRY PERSPECTIVE N.T.S.1 AREA OF ADDITION AT SECOND FLOOR CLERESTORY WINDOWS "FLYING" ROOF PORTION 109 PROJECT TEAM SCOPE OF WORK LOCATION MAPABBREVIATIONS (REFER TO CONSULTANT DRAWINGS FOR ADDITIONAL ABBREVIATIONS) AC. TILE ADJ. ALUM. A.B. APPROX. A.C. A.F.F. @ BLKG. BD. BOT. BLDG. CAB. C.I. C.B. CLG. CEM. C.C or O.C. CL CER. TILE C.O. C.O.T.G. CLR. RDW C.W. COL. CONC. C.P. CONST. C.H. C.J. CONT. CTR. CTSK. D.A. DTL. DIA. or Ø DIM. DW DISP. DO DR. D.S. DWG. D.F. EA. E.W. ELECT. E.W.C. EL. or ELEV. ENCL. EQ. EQUIP. (E) EX. E.J. EXP. EXT. F.O.C. F.O.M. F.O.S. FIN. F.E. F.E.C. F.H.C. F.H.M.S. F.H.W.S. FL. or FLR. F.D. FTG. FND. GALV. G.I. GA. GL. GLU-LAM GRD. GYP. BD. HDW. HT. H.C. H.M. HORIZ. H.B. HR. INSUL. INT. INV. JT ACOUSTIC TILE ADJUSTABLE ALUMINUM ANCHOR BOLT APPROXIMATELY ASPHALTIC CONCRETE ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR AT BLOCKING BOARD BOTTOM BUILDING CABINET CAST IRON CATCH BASIN CEILING CEMENT CENTER TO CENTER CENTERLINE CERAMIC TILE CLEANOUT CLEANOUT TO GRADE CLEAR REDWOOD COLD WATER COLUMN CONCRETE CONCRETE PIPE CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION HEART CONSTRUCTION JOINT CONTINUOUS COUNTER COUNTER SUNK DISABLED ACCESS DETAIL DIAMETER DIMENSION DISHWASHER DISPOSAL DITTO DOOR DOWNSPOUT DRAWING DRINKING FOUNTAIN and/or DOUGLAS FIR EACH EACH WAY ELECTRIC or ELECTRICAL ELECTRIC WATER COOLER ELEVATION ENCLOSE and/or ENCLOSURE EQUAL EQUIPMENT EXISTING EXPANSION EXPANSION JOINT EXPOSED EXTERIOR FACE OF CONCRETE FACE OF MASONRY FACE OF STUD FINISH FIRE EXTINGUISHER FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET FIRE HOSE CABINET FLAT HEAD METAL SCREW FLAT HEAD WOOD SCREW FLOOR FLOOR DRAIN FOOTING FOUNDATION GALVANIZED GALVANIZED IRON GAUGE GLASS GLUE-LAMINATED GRADE GYPSUM BOARD HARDWARE HEIGHT HOLLOW CORE HOLLOW METAL HORIZONTAL HOSE BIBB HOUR INSULATION INTERIOR INVERT JOINT LAV. LAM. M.B. M.H. MFG. M.O. MATL. MAX. MECH. MTL. MIN. MISC. MTD. (N) N.I.C. N.T.S. NO. or # OBS. O.C. OPNG. OPP. O.H. O.F.O.S. O.D. O.F.C.I. PART. P.A.F. PL PLAS. PW/PLYWD. PR. P.L. d P.V.C. Q R. or RAD. R.W.L. RWD./R.W. R.C.P. REINF. REQ'D R.D. RM. R.O. RND. or Ø R.H.M.S. R.H.W.S. S.T.S.M.S. SHEATH. SHT. S.M.S. S.O.V. SIM. S.C. SPEC. SQ. or Ø S.S. STD. STL. STRUCT. TEL. T.T.B. TERR. T.&G. T.J. T.O.B. T.O.C. T.O.S. T.O.W. TYP. U.O.N. V.T.R. VERT. V.G. V.C.T. V.C.P. V.W.C. W.C. W.H. WP. W/ W/O WD. W.W.M.. LAVATORY LAMINATE MACHINE BOLT MANHOLE MANUFACTURER MASONRY OPENING MATERIAL MAXIMUM MECHANICAL METAL MINIMUM MISCELLANEOUS MOUNTED NEW NOT IN CONTRACT NOT TO SCALE NUMBER OBSCURE ON CENTER OPENING OPPOSITE OPPOSITE HAND OUTSIDE FACE OF STUD OVERFLOW DRAIN and/or OUTSIDE DIAMETER OWNER FURNISHED and CONTRACTOR INSTALLED PARTITION POWDER ACTUATED FASTENER PLATE PLASTER PLYWOOD PAIR PROPERTY LINE PENNY (NAILS) POLY VINYL CHLORIDE RADIUS RAIN WATER LEADER REDWOOD REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE REINFORCING REQUIRED ROOF DRAIN ROOM ROUGH OPENING ROUND ROUND HEAD METAL SCREW ROUND HEAD WOOD SCREW SELF TAPPING SHEET METAL SCREW SHEATHING SHEET SHEET METAL SCREW SHUT OFF VALVE SIMILAR SOLID CORE SPECIFICATIONS SQUARE STAINLESS STEEL STANDARD STEEL STRUCTURAL TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TERMINAL BOARD TERRAZZO TONGUE & GROOVE TOOLED JOINT TOP OF BEAM TOP OF CURB or CONCRETE TOP OF STEEL or SHEATHING TOP OF WALK TYPICAL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED VENT THROUGH ROOF VERTICAL VERTICAL GRAIN VINYL COMPOSITION TILE VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE VINYL WALL COVERING WATER CLOSET WATER HEATER WATERPROOF WITH WITHOUT WOOD WELDED WIRE MESH ADDITION OF 1 BEDROOM LIVING UNIT ABOVE (E) GARAGE. NO CHANGES TO SINGLE STORY EXISTING HOUSE. THIS PROJECT COMPRISES STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, AND ELECTRICAL WORK. FACE OF OBJECT CENTERLINE OF OBJECT SECTION NUMBER SHEET WHERE APPEARS EARTH GRAVEL / ROCK CONCRETE CONCRETE BLOCK SAND, GROUT OR PLASTER STEEL WOOD, FINISH GRADE PLY-WOOD WOOD, CONTINUOUS MEMBER WOOD, BLOCKING PLAN REF. GRID DOOR ID WINDOW ID REVISION MARKER PLAN KEY NOTES SYMBOLS REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL FLOOR PLAN SHEETS AND CONSULTANT DRAWINGS FOR ADDITIONAL SYMBOLS AND REFERENCE DESIGNATIONS DIMENSION REFERENCE SECTION REFERENCE 01 A9.1 DETAIL NUMBER SHEET WHERE APPEARS DETAIL REFERENCE 01 A9.1 SCHEDULE REFERENCE A 1 D-0 W-0 01 MATERIALS REFERENCE APPLICABLE CODES OWNER DRAWINGS INDEX ARCHITECTURAL A-1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION TP-1 SURVEY TP-2 SURVEY A-1.1 SITE PLAN A-1.2 AERIAL VIEW A-2.0 MAIN LEVEL- DEMO PLAN A-2.1 (E) LOWER LEVEL PLAN A-2.2 MAIN LEVEL- PROPOSED PLAN A-2.3 UPPER LEVEL PROPOSED PLAN A-2.3.1 AREA DIAGRAMS A-2.4 ROOF PLAN A-3.0 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A-3.1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A-3.2 EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE A-4.0 BUILDING SECTIONS A-5.0 OPENING SCHEDULES STRUCTURAL ENGINEER ENERGY COMPLIANCE SURVEYOR YARMILA VERA KENNETT15231 PERRY LANEMORGAN HILL, CA 95037T: (408) 621-3740 DEFERRED APPROVAL ITEMS CIVIL ENGINEER 2013 California Building Code 2013 California Residential Building Code 2013 California Mechanical Code 2013 California Plumbing Code 2013 California Electrical Code 2010 California Energy Code Chapter 4 of the 2013 California Green Building Standards Code WILBERT VAN DEN HOEK 15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070 T: (408) 621-3740 BOWMAN & WILLIAMS 1011 Cedar St, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 T: (831) 426-3560 CALGREEN NOTE: ALL ADHESIVES, SEALANTS, CAULKS, PAINTS, COATINGS AND AEROSOL PAINT CONTAINERS MUST REMAIN ON THE SITE FOR FIELD VERIFICATION BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. CGBSC SECT. 4.504.2.4 A RESIDENTIAL FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM IS REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 13D AND STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS. INTERIOR STAIRS AND GUARDRAILS ARE DEFERRED SYSTEMS TO BE DETAILED AND SUBMITTED BY STAIR MANUFACTURER Van den Hoek Residence Second Floor Addition ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-1.0 Project InformationRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a APN 517 141 021 COUNTY Santa Clara ZONING DISTRICT HR FLOOD ZONE No HISTORIC DISTRICT No OCCUPANCY R-3 + U-1 BUILDING TYPE V-B AVERAGE SLOPE >30%; 2~3% at Building Site LOT SIZE 2.2 Acres (95,832 Sq.Ft.) NET LOT SIZE 95,832 * .4=38,333 Sq.Ft. SETBACKS F: 30'; S: 30'; R 30' MAXIMUM PROPOSED HEIGHT +- 24'-8" ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA 4,050+24(78)= 5,922 Sq.Ft. MAX FIRST FLOOR AREA (Sq.Ft.) (Existing)2,677 GARAGE (Sq.Ft.) (Existing)688 GARAGE (Sq.Ft.) (Modified)No Changes (N) UPPER LEVEL LIVING UNIT FLOOR AREA (Sq.Ft.)841.25 TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (Sq.Ft.)4,206.25 PROJECT INFORMATION 12-31-2015 SECOND FLOOR ADDITION EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING GARAGE WITH NEW DOORS HEIGHT INFORMATION TABLE Lowest Elevation Point (at the buildings edge from natural grade)0.01' Highest Elevation Point (at the buildings edge from natural grade)11" Average Elevation Point (based on highest and lowest points above)0.45' of the roof. Top most elevation point (measured from average point above) to the top most point 24'8" Based on lowest adjancent grade elevation of 152.04 and highest of 153.02 SETBACKS TABLE Required Proposed Front 30'0"+- 57'2" Left Side First Floor 20'0"+- 54'1" Left Side Second Floor 20'0"+- 536'6" Right Side First Floor 20'0"+- 49' Right Side Second Floor 20'0"+-114' Rear First Floor 60'0"+-180' Rear Second Floor 60'0"+- 269'7" 2,677 0 2,677 0 841.25 841.25 688 0 688 no change 0 no change 0 4,206.25 0 0 4,709 4,379 4,820 456 (pool) 14,364 0 0 680 340 0 0 340 340 680 340 14,704 110 111 112 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-1.1 Site PlanRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-201510BAY 38" OAK 7" BAYN78°18'00"W115.27'S21°21'20"E 147.88'N 71°23'00" E 126.13' (125.52')S57°17'00"W150.00'WVDYH BOHLMAN ROAD (60')140'130'120'110'100'GARAGE FOYER LIVING ROOM KITCHEN DINING ROOM MASTER BEDROOM W.I.C. MASTER BATH BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 2 BATH 1 LAUNDRY HALL SITE PLAN-DRAINAGE-LANDSCAPE PLAN Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 DRAINAGE NOTES 1- ALL DOWNSPOUTS AND FOUNDATION PERIMETER DRAINS TO BE CONNECTED TO SPLASH BLOCKS AWAY FROM BUILDING 2- SURFACE DRAINAGE TO FLOW THROUGH GRASS SWALES 3-NO TREES TO BE REMOVED 4-SLOPE GRADE AWAY FROM BUILDING 5% FOR A DISTANCE OF 5' AWAY FROM BUILDING. PROVIDE 2% SLOPE ON IMPERVIOUS SURFACES 5- ENSURE PROPER LOT DRAINAGE PER CHAPTER 11 CPC 2010 FOR LOCATION OF CATCH BASINS TO THE PROPERTY LINES. 6-THE RUNOFF SHOULD REMAIN ON THE PROPERTY NOT BE TAKEN TO A PUBLIC WAY. DIMENSIONS NOTE 1-CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS IN FIELD AND NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCY BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION 2- CONTRACTOR TO STAKE PROPERTY LINES WITH SURVEYOR AND USE SETBACKS FOR ADDITION LAY-OUTF.F. 153.03' NO TREES TO BE REMOVED (E) 4" WIDE SLOT DRAIN (E) 3" WIDE SLOT DRAIN (E) SOLAR PANELS CONTOL PANEL AND MAIN SWITCH (E) ELECTRICAL PANEL (E) ELECTRICAL METER W.M. W.M. W.M. SEPTIC. SEPTIC. CATCH BASIN (E) PAVERS NO CHANGES TO EXISTING HOUSE TREE DRIPLINE TO BE TRIMMED 5' BACK FROM ROOF LINE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION EXISTING PORCH 00 10 20 30 40 FT NEW PERVIOUS PAVERS W.M. EXISTING LANDSCAPE STRIP, NO CHANGES DIRECTION OF SURFACE WATER FLOW DIRECTION OF SURFACE WATER FLOW DIRECTION OF SURFACE WATER FLOW EXISTING RETAINING WALL EXISTING RETAINING WALL EXISTING RETAINING WALL (E) 3" WIDE SLOT DRAIN (E) LANDSCAPE, NO CHANGES (E) LANDSCAPE, NO CHANGES PROTECT DURING CONSTRUCTION PER CITY STANDARDS (E) LANDSCAPE, NO CHANGES DOWNSPOUT, TYP. EXISTING LANDSCAPE STRIP, NO CHANGES DOWNSPOUT, TYP. (E) FLAGSTONE PAVERS, NO CHANGES LINE OF FLOOR ABOVE, TYP. LINE OF FLOOR ABOVE, TYP. 152.98' 152.15' 152.44' 153' 152.7' 152.61' 152.41' 152.04' 153.14' 152.8' EXISTING RETAINING WALL, NO CHANGES NEW METAL STAIR TO SECOND FLOOR UNIT 113 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-1.2 Aerial ViewRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 AREA OF ADDITION AT SECOND FLOOR NO CHANGES TO EXISTING HOUSE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE DOWNHILL NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE UPHILL AERIAL VIEW, N.T.S. DOWNWARD VIEW BLOCKED BY TREES 114 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-1.3 Septic Plan (Existing)RevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 W W W W JOIN T UTI L I T Y POL E 12 OA K WM TB/H O S E B I B 10BAY 38" OAKN7 8 ° 1 8 ' 0 0 " W 11 5 . 2 7 'S21°21'20"E147.88'N 71°23'00" E 126.13' (125.52')N63°15'30"E 127.23' 150.00' .6 Q U A D E U C A 18 O A K 18 O A K 12 D B L O A K 18 O A K 18 O A K 16 O A K 12" OA K W W W W W 140' 130' 120'GARAGEFOYERLIVING ROOMKITCHENDINING ROOMMASTER BEDROOMW.I.C.MASTER BATHBEDROOM 1BEDROOM 2BATH 1LAUNDRYHALLEXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEM PLAN Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 00 10 20 30 40 FT 50' 10'40' 8' 8' 8' 53' 53' 65' 5' 5' 8' 8' 1500 GAL. SEPTIC TANK W/ ZABEL FILTER 4" TL 6' 5' REPAIRED DRAINFIELD A/C DRIVEWAY 115 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-2.0 Main Level - Demo PlanRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 GARAGE FOYER LIVING ROOM KITCHEN DINING ROOM MASTER BEDROOM W.I.C. MASTER BATH BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 2 BATH 1 LAUNDRY HALL MAIN LEVEL DEMO PLAN Scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 0 4 128 16 INDICATES EXISTING WALLS TO REMAIN INDICATES EXISTING WALLS TO BE REMOVED INDICATES EXISTING ITEMS TO BE REMOVED WALL LEGEND GENERAL DEMOLITION NOTES: 01 SECURELY SHORE IN PLACE ALL OVERHEAD STRUCTURES PRIOR TO REMOVAL OF ANY EXISTING SUPPORTING STRUCTURES 02 REMOVE ALL APPLIANCES, CABINETRY AND PLUMBING FIXTURES CAP OFF OR RE-ROUTE PLUMBING AND GAS LINES AS NECESSARY FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION 116 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-2.1 (E) Lower Level PlanRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-201526-E27-E25-E 24-E UP LOWER LEVEL EXISTING LOWER LEVEL PLAN- NO CHANGES FOR REFERENCE ONLY Scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 0 4 128 16 LINE OF (E) MAIN FLOOR ABOVE LINE OF (E) MAIN FLOOR ABOVE 117 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-2.2 Main Level- Proposed PlanRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 12-E 1609-E 13141516-E17-E06-E07-E18-E08-E05-E14-E15-E 04-E 06-E03-E10-E 08-E 07-E 09-E 31-E32-E 30-E 33-E29-E28-E27-E13-E11-E23-E22-E24-E22-E19-E25-E 23-E20-E 26-E21-E18-E 03-E01-E01-E02-E04-E05-E GARAGE FOYER LIVING ROOM KITCHEN DINING ROOM MASTER BEDROOM W.I.C. MASTER BATH BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 2 BATH 1 LAUNDRY HALL 21 MAIN LEVEL PROPOSED PLAN Scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 0 4 128 16 GENERAL SHEET NOTES: 1. REFER TO MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR EXTENT OF MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND STRUCTURAL WORK. 2. ALL EXTERIOR STUD WALLS SHALL HAVE MIN. R-15 FOIL BACKED INSULATION. 3. REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ALL FRAMING AND STRUCTURAL MEMBER SIZES. 4. PROVIDE FULLY TEMPERED GLAZING, LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS OR APPROVED PLASTIC IN SHOWERS OR BATHTUB ADJACENT WALL OPENINGS WITHIN 60 INCHES ABOVE A STANDING SURFACE AND DRAIN INLET. 5. DOORS AND PANELS OF SHOWER AND BATHTUB ENCLOSURES SHALL BE FULLY TEMPERED, LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS OR APPROVED PLASTIC. 6. PROVIDE TEMPERED GLAZING AT HAZARDOUS LOCATIONS, SUCH AS IN DOORS. 7. TUB-SHOWER COMBINATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH INDIVIDUAL CONTROL VALVES OF THE PRESSURE BALANCE OR THE THERMOSTATIC MIXING VALVE TYPE. PROVIDE MIXING VALVE FOR ALL TUB/SHOWERS 8. PROVIDE PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE WITH DRAIN TO OUTSIDE AT WATER HEATER. 9. INSTALL WINDOWS PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 10. DIMENSIONS ARE TO FINISH OF WALLS U.O.N. 11. MIN. JAMB AT DOORS TO BE 4" GRAPHIC KEY: EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN NEW FRAMED EXTERIOR / INTERIOR WALL S.S.D. FIRE RESISTIVE WALL CONSTRUCTION AT WALLS BETWEEN GARAGE AND LIVABLE SPACE: MIN. 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD TYPE X OVER STUDS FROM CURB TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATING APPLIED TO INTERIOR SIDE OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS DIMENSIONS NOTES 1-CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS IN FIELD AND NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCY BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION 2- CONTRACTOR TO STAKE PROPERTY LINES WITH SURVEYOR AND USE SETBACKS FOR ADDITION LAY-OUT EGRESS NOTES: • EVERY SLEEPING ROOM SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE OPERABLE EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE OPENING (R310.1) a) MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENABLE DIMENSION OF 24" IN HEIGHT (R310.1.2) b) MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENABLE DIMENSION OF 20" IN WIDTH (R310.1.3) c) MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENABLE DIMENSION OF 5.7 SQUARE FEET IN AREA. GRADE FLOOR OPENINGS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENING OF 5 SQUARE FEET (R310.1.1) d) OPENINGS SHALL HAVE A SILL HEIGHT OF NOT MORE THAN 44" MEASURED FROM THE FLOOR (R310.1) STAIRWAY REQUIREMENT A. STAIRWAYS SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 36 INCHES IN CLEAR WIDTH ABOVE THE HANDRAILS. HANDRAIL PROJECTIONS ARE LIMITED TO NOT MORE THAN 4.5 INCHES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE STAIRWAY. (CRC Sec.R311.7.1) B. HEADROOM SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 6 FEET 8 INCHES MEASURED FROM THE SLOPED LINE ADJOINING THE TREAD NOSING. (CRC R311.7.2) C. RISER HEIGHT SHALL NOT EXCEED 7 3/4 INCHES. THE GREATEST RISER HEIGHT WITHIN ANY FLIGHT OF STAIRS SHALL NOT EXCEED THE SMALLEST BY MORE THAN 3/8". (CRC Sec.R311.7.4.1). D. TREAD DEPTH (MEASURED BETWEEN THE NOSING) SHALL BE AT LEAST 10 INCES. THE LARGEST TREAD DEPTH WIITHIN ANY FLIGHT OF STAIRS SHALL NOT EXCEED THE SMALLEST BY MORE THAN 3/8" (CRC Sec.R311.7.4.2) E. NOSING NOT LESS THAN 0.75" BUT NOT MORE THAN 1.25" SHALL BE PROVIDED ON STAIRWAYS WITH SOLID RISERS IF THE TREAD DEPTH IS LESS THAN 11". THE RADIUS OF CURVATURE AT THE NOSING SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN 9/16 INCH. (CRC Sec.R311.7.4.3). F. OPEN RISERS ARE PERMITTED, PROVIDED THAT THE OPENING BETWEEN TREADS DOES NOT PERMIT THE PASSAGE OF A 4- INCH DIAMETER SPHERE. THE OPENING BETWEEN ADJACENT TREADS IS NOT LIMITED ON STAIRS WITH A TOTAL RISE OF 30 INCHES OF LESS. (CRC Sec. R311.7.4.3) GENERAL CONTRACTOR MUST OBTAIN A STREET WORK PERMIT FROM PUBLIC WORKS PRIOR TO DISCHARGE INTO THE CITY STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. THE DEWATERING SYSTEM SHALL BE DESIGNED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN SHOWN ON SHEET C.3 WITHIN THE BUILDING PERMIT PLANSET. MECHANICAL VENTILATION: PROVIDE WHOLE-BUILDING VENTILATION PER ASHRAE 62.2 The required flow rate for whole-building ventilation can be calculated using the following formula from ASHRAE Standard 62.2: whole-building continuous ventilation rate in cfm = floor area / 100 + (number of bedrooms + 1) x 7.5. kitchen ventilation: range hood vented to the outside with min. flow of 100 cfm; use airking esval30s (or similar) energy star with cfm of 300/200/90 and less than 3 sones hvi certified CALGREEN PLUMBING PLAN NOTES: CGBSC Section 4.303. Fixture Flow Rate Requirements: A.Water closets – 1.28 gallons per flush. CGBSC Section 4.303.1.1 B.Single showerhead – 2.0 gpm at 80 psi. CGBSC Section 4.303.1.3.1 C. Multiple Showerheads serving one shower-Combined flow rate of all showerheads and / or other shower outlets controlled by a single valve-2.0 Gpm At 80 Psi. CGBSC Section 4..303.1.3.2 D.Lavatory faucets – 1.5 gpm at 60 psi (minimum shall not be less than 0.8 gpm at 20 psi). CGBSC Section 4.303.1.4.1 E. Faucets In Kitchens - 1.8 gpm at 60 psi. CGBSC Section 4.303.1.4.4 WATER HEATER NOTES: WATER HEATERS REQUIRE TWO SEISMIC STRAPS; ONE LOCATED WITHIN THE TOP 1/3 OF THE WATER HEATER AND ONE AT THE BOTTOM 1/3. THE BOTTOM STRAP SHALL BE LOCATED AT LEAST 4" AWAY FROM THE HEATER CONTROLS. CPC 508.2 33'-9"9'-11 1/2"9'-11 1/2" 4'-0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 A-4.0 2A-4.04'-11"7 8 KEY NOTES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. STEP: 7 3/4" MAX RISER, 10" MIN TREAD. FOR TREADS LESS THAN 11", A NOSING OF NOT LESS THAN 0.75", BUT NOT MORE THAN 1.25" SHALL BE PROVIDED. SEE STAIR CRC CODE NOTES ON THIS SHEET. NOTE: THE GREATEST RISER HEIGHT SHALL NOT EXCEED THE SMALLEST BY MORE THAN 3/8" INCH. CRC SEC. R311.7.5.1 HANDRAIL, SEE DET. 01 AND 03 SHEET A8.5 34" H RAILING AT STAIR RAMP, 42" H AT LANDINGS. SEE 03 AND 02-A 8.5 ALL FRENCH AND GLASS DOORS TO BE TEMPERED GLAZING, TYP. 1" MAX THRESHOLD HEIGHT LINE OF SECOND FLOOR BALCONY ABOVE LINE OF SECOND FLOOR ABOVE 118 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-2.3 Upper Level - Proposed PlanRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-201530 31 383635323334292834 LIVING ROOM 2 KITCHEN 2 CLOSET BEDROOM 3 37 BATH 2 W/D 39 38 20'-11 1/2"23'-7"14'-1"11'-10"11'-4 3/4" DECK UPPER LEVEL PROPOSED PLAN Scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 0 4 128 16 23'-7" 5'-7 1/2"12'-0 3/4"9'-6"4'-6"2'-0"15'-1"8'-6"2'-5"12'-3"10'-10"10'-7"16'-7"8'-3"3'-6"3'-6"3'-4"11'-4 1/2"3'-8 1/2"5'-7"3'-2"2'-11 1/2"GENERAL SHEET NOTES: 1. REFER TO MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR EXTENT OF MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND STRUCTURAL WORK. 2. ALL EXTERIOR STUD WALLS SHALL HAVE MIN. R-15 FOIL BACKED INSULATION. 3. REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ALL FRAMING AND STRUCTURAL MEMBER SIZES. 4. PROVIDE FULLY TEMPERED GLAZING, LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS OR APPROVED PLASTIC IN SHOWERS OR BATHTUB ADJACENT WALL OPENINGS WITHIN 60 INCHES ABOVE A STANDING SURFACE AND DRAIN INLET. 5. DOORS AND PANELS OF SHOWER AND BATHTUB ENCLOSURES SHALL BE FULLY TEMPERED, LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS OR APPROVED PLASTIC. 6. PROVIDE TEMPERED GLAZING AT HAZARDOUS LOCATIONS, SUCH AS IN DOORS. 7. TUB-SHOWER COMBINATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH INDIVIDUAL CONTROL VALVES OF THE PRESSURE BALANCE OR THE THERMOSTATIC MIXING VALVE TYPE. PROVIDE MIXING VALVE FOR ALL TUB/SHOWERS 8. PROVIDE PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE WITH DRAIN TO OUTSIDE AT WATER HEATER. 9. INSTALL WINDOWS PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 10. DIMENSIONS ARE TO FINISH OF WALLS U.O.N. 11. MIN. JAMB AT DOORS TO BE 4" GRAPHIC KEY: EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN NEW FRAMED EXTERIOR / INTERIOR WALL S.S.D. FIRE RESISTIVE WALL CONSTRUCTION AT WALLS BETWEEN GARAGE AND LIVABLE SPACE: MIN. 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD TYPE X OVER STUDS FROM CURB TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATING APPLIED TO INTERIOR SIDE OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS DIMENSIONS NOTES 1-CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS IN FIELD AND NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCY BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION 2- CONTRACTOR TO STAKE PROPERTY LINES WITH SURVEYOR AND USE SETBACKS FOR ADDITION LAY-OUT EGRESS NOTES: • EVERY SLEEPING ROOM SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE OPERABLE EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE OPENING (R310.1) a) MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENABLE DIMENSION OF 24" IN HEIGHT (R310.1.2) b) MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENABLE DIMENSION OF 20" IN WIDTH (R310.1.3) c) MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENABLE DIMENSION OF 5.7 SQUARE FEET IN AREA. GRADE FLOOR OPENINGS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENING OF 5 SQUARE FEET (R310.1.1) d) OPENINGS SHALL HAVE A SILL HEIGHT OF NOT MORE THAN 44" MEASURED FROM THE FLOOR (R310.1) STAIRWAY REQUIREMENT A. STAIRWAYS SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 36 INCHES IN CLEAR WIDTH ABOVE THE HANDRAILS. HANDRAIL PROJECTIONS ARE LIMITED TO NOT MORE THAN 4.5 INCHES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE STAIRWAY. (CRC Sec.R311.7.1) B. HEADROOM SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 6 FEET 8 INCHES MEASURED FROM THE SLOPED LINE ADJOINING THE TREAD NOSING. (CRC R311.7.2) C. RISER HEIGHT SHALL NOT EXCEED 7 3/4 INCHES. THE GREATEST RISER HEIGHT WITHIN ANY FLIGHT OF STAIRS SHALL NOT EXCEED THE SMALLEST BY MORE THAN 3/8". (CRC Sec.R311.7.4.1). D. TREAD DEPTH (MEASURED BETWEEN THE NOSING) SHALL BE AT LEAST 10 INCES. THE LARGEST TREAD DEPTH WIITHIN ANY FLIGHT OF STAIRS SHALL NOT EXCEED THE SMALLEST BY MORE THAN 3/8" (CRC Sec.R311.7.4.2) E. NOSING NOT LESS THAN 0.75" BUT NOT MORE THAN 1.25" SHALL BE PROVIDED ON STAIRWAYS WITH SOLID RISERS IF THE TREAD DEPTH IS LESS THAN 11". THE RADIUS OF CURVATURE AT THE NOSING SHALL BE NO GREATER THAN 9/16 INCH. (CRC Sec.R311.7.4.3). F. OPEN RISERS ARE PERMITTED, PROVIDED THAT THE OPENING BETWEEN TREADS DOES NOT PERMIT THE PASSAGE OF A 4- INCH DIAMETER SPHERE. THE OPENING BETWEEN ADJACENT TREADS IS NOT LIMITED ON STAIRS WITH A TOTAL RISE OF 30 INCHES OF LESS. (CRC Sec. R311.7.4.3) GENERAL CONTRACTOR MUST OBTAIN A STREET WORK PERMIT FROM PUBLIC WORKS PRIOR TO DISCHARGE INTO THE CITY STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. THE DEWATERING SYSTEM SHALL BE DESIGNED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN SHOWN ON SHEET C.3 WITHIN THE BUILDING PERMIT PLANSET. MECHANICAL VENTILATION: PROVIDE WHOLE-BUILDING VENTILATION PER ASHRAE 62.2 The required flow rate for whole-building ventilation can be calculated using the following formula from ASHRAE Standard 62.2: whole-building continuous ventilation rate in cfm = floor area / 100 + (number of bedrooms + 1) x 7.5. kitchen ventilation: range hood vented to the outside with min. flow of 100 cfm; use airking esval30s (or similar) energy star with cfm of 300/200/90 and less than 3 sones hvi certified CALGREEN PLUMBING PLAN NOTES: CGBSC Section 4.303. Fixture Flow Rate Requirements: A.Water closets – 1.28 gallons per flush. CGBSC Section 4.303.1.1 B.Single showerhead – 2.0 gpm at 80 psi. CGBSC Section 4.303.1.3.1 C. Multiple Showerheads serving one shower-Combined flow rate of all showerheads and / or other shower outlets controlled by a single valve-2.0 Gpm At 80 Psi. CGBSC Section 4..303.1.3.2 D.Lavatory faucets – 1.5 gpm at 60 psi (minimum shall not be less than 0.8 gpm at 20 psi). CGBSC Section 4.303.1.4.1 E. Faucets In Kitchens - 1.8 gpm at 60 psi. CGBSC Section 4.303.1.4.4 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 2'-0"4 3'-0"3'-0" 9 1 A-4.0 2A-4.02'-6" 14'-0"8'-0"10 KEY NOTES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. EXTERIOR WOOD DECK WITH FINISH FLOOR 1" LOWER THAN HOUSE FINISH FLOOR TOILET DUAL FLUSH, 1.28 GPM MAX., TYP. TEMPERED SHOWER GLASS ENCLOSURE AND DOOR. DOOR MIN. 22" CLEAR OPENING MIN. 30" D. AT SHOWERS-1022 SQ.IN. AREA SHOWER SHALL BE SMOOTH NON-ABSORBENT MATERIALS OVER A MOYSTURE RESISTANT UNDERLAYMENT TO A HEIGHT OF 72 INCHES ABOVE THE FLOOR DRAIN TEMPERED GLASS SHELF, POLE AND ORGANIZERS, TYP. ALL FRENCH AND GLASS DOORS TO BE TEMPERED GLAZING, TYP. LINE OF EXISTING HOUSE BELOW METAL STAIR TO FIRST FLOOR 119 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-2.3.1 Area DiagramsRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 LIVING ROOM 2 KITCHEN 2 CLOSET BEDROOM 3 BATH 2 W/D20'-11 1/2"23'-7"14'-1"11'-10"11'-4 3/4" DECK UPPER LEVEL PROPOSED PLAN Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 0 4 128 1632'-3"24'-5"10'-10"2'-4 1/2" 815.25 Sq.Ft. 26 Sq.Ft. Total Area: 841.25 Sq.Ft. GARAGE FOYER LIVING ROOM KITCHEN DINING ROOM MASTER BEDROOM W.I.C. MASTER BATH BEDROOM 1 BEDROOM 2 BATH 1 LAUNDRY HALL LOWER LEVEL PROPOSED PLAN Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 0 4 128 16 Total Area: +- 3.368 Sq.Ft. 21'-1"63'-7"51'-8" 20'-0"4'-11"21'-5"13'-0"9'-1" 688 Sq.Ft. 1339 Sq.Ft. 1105 Sq.Ft. 20 Sq.Ft.6'-2"6'-3" 96 Sq.Ft. 117 Sq.Ft. 120 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-2.4 Roof PlanRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 DECK 373536ROOF PLAN Scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 0 4 128 16 ROOF DRAINAGE NOTES: 1) Roof drains shall be equipped with strainers extending at 4" above the roof deck surface and be at least 1-1/2 times larger than the drainpipe. (CPC 1105.2) 2)Where roof surfaces are not designed to drain over roof edges, overflow drains or scuppers three times the size of required roof drains shall be provided. Said drains to be located 2" above the low point of the roof. Overflow drains to be independent of and in addition to surface drains. CBC 1506.3 3)Roof drainage water shall not be allowed to flow over public property CBC 1506.5 4) Provide splashblocks at each downspout VAPOR BARRIER NOTE PROVIDE CLASS 1 OR CLASS 2 VAPOR BARRIER INSTALLED ON THE WARM-IN-WINTER SIDE OF THE CEILING GRAPHIC KEY: 3" DIA. 26 GA DOWNSPOUT 5" .032 inch THICK ALUMINUM GUTTER WITH LEAF GUARDS 4" D OVERFLOW DRAIN OF DR 2" D DRAIN SC THROUGH-WALL SCUPPER ROOF VENTILATOR/ INTAKE VENT CLASS "A" STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING ASSEMBLY FLAT EYEBROW ROOF VENT DS STONE OR CERAMIC TILE OVER THIN-SET MORTAR OVER LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE (SLOPED TO EDGE) OVER WATERPROOF MEMBRANE OVER SHEATHING. USE NON-COMBUSTIBLE DECKING MATERIAL (E) (E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E)(E) LINE OF GUTTER TYP. LINE OF GUTTER TYP. EXISTING TERRACE BALCONY BELOW CLERESTORY WALL AND WINDOWS BELOW OPEN SLOTS BETWEEN RAFTERS 1 A-4.0 2A-4.05.5 / 12 5.5 / 12 5.5 / 125.5 / 12 5.5 / 12 5.5 / 12 5.5 / 12 5.5 / 125.5 / 125.5 / 125.5 / 12CLASS B ASPHALT SHINGLES ROOFING, MATCH EXISTING ROOFING. 121 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-3.0 Exterior ElevationsRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 ELEVATION Scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING GRADE 152.15 GARAGE FINISHED FLOOR 153.0324'-8"MATCH EXISTING SHINGLES COLOR AND STYLE. SAME ROOF PITCH MATCH EXISTING STUCCO COLOR AND FINISH STEEL COLUMNS ADDITION EXISTING AVERAGE GRADE 152.58' AVERAGE GRADE 152.58'18'-0"26'-0"ELEVATION Scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 MATCH EXISTING SHINGLES COLOR AND STYLE MATCH EXISTING STUCCO COLOR AND FINISH 3'-6"NEW STEEL STAIR S.S. CABLE RAILS FOR GUARDRAIL ADDITIONEXISTING NEW WINDOWS COLORS, TRIMS AND CASINGS TO MATCH EXISTING ONES EXISTING GRADE 152.15 GARAGE FINISHED FLOOR 153.03 24'-8"AVERAGE GRADE 152.58'18'-0"26'-0"DECK 01-ROOF PLAN 02 - 122 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-3.1 Exterior ElevationsRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 ELEVATION Scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"3 EXISTING GRADE 152.15 GARAGE FINISHED FLOOR 153.0324'-8"ADDITIONEXISTING NEW ALUMINUM AND GLASS GARAGE DOORS OPENINGS BETWEEN RAFTERS AT PORCH AREA AVERAGE GRADE 152.58'18'-0"26'-0"MATCH EXISTING STUCCO COLOR AND FINISH NEW WINDOWS COLORS, TRIMS AND CASINGS TO MATCH EXISTING ONES MATCH EXISTING SHINGLES COLOR AND STYLE DECK ROOF PLAN 03 - 123 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-3.2 Exterior PerspectiveRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 ENTRY PERSPECTIVE N.T.S.1 AREA OF ADDITION AT SECOND FLOOR CLERESTORY WINDOWS "FLYING" ROOF PORTION 124 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-4.0 Building SectionsRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a 12-31-2015 Section 1 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 12 5.5 12 5.5 EXISTING GRADE 152.04GARAGE FINISHED FLOOR 153.03 SECOND FLOOR FINISH FLOOR EXISTING TOP OF PLATE8'-2"7'-1"TOP OF PLATE 8'-2" A.F.F. TOP OF PLATE 7'-1" A.F.F. TOP OF PLATE 14'-3" A.F.F. Section 2 Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING GRADE 152.15 GARAGE FINISHED FLOOR 153.03 AVERAGE GRADE 152.58'24'-8"SECOND FLOOR FINISH FLOOR EXISTING TOP OF PLATE3'-6"125 ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED All DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL APPEARING HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL, UNPUBLISHED WORK OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED, OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF ACADIA-ARCHITECTURE Davide Giannella A.I.A.Sheet Scale : AS NOTEDDrawn By DG7/14/2015Reviewed By DGVAN DEN HOEK RESIDENCE15470 Belnap Way Saratoga, Ca 95070Proj. # 78538644 N. Santa Cruz Ave. Suite 6 Los Gatos, California 95030 T. 408-219-0601 dg@acadia-architecture.com 12-31-15 A-5.0 Opening SchedulesRevisionRevisionRevisiona acadiaarchitecture a DOOR SCHEDULE Nominal Size Mark Location WidthHeightThicknessDoor Operation Slab Style Comments 01-E FOYER 3'6"8'0"1 3/4"Swing Simple Glass 03-E MASTER BEDROOM 6'0"6'8"1 3/4"Slider Panel 04-E DINING ROOM 6'0"6'8"1 3/4"Slider Panel 05-E LIVING ROOM 6'0"6'8"1 3/4"Slider Panel 06-E LIVING ROOM 6'0"6'8"1 3/4"Slider Panel 07-E BEDROOM 1 6'0"6'8"1 3/4"Slider Glass 08-E BEDROOM 2 6'0"6'8"1 3/4"Slider Glass 09-E GARAGE 5'4"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Bi-part Panel 13 GARAGE 2'8"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 14 GARAGE 16'0"6'8"1 3/4"Overhead Glass 15 GARAGE 9'0"6'8"1 3/4"Overhead Glass 16 LAUNDRY 2'8"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Glass 18-E LAUNDRY 2'8"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 19-E BEDROOM 2 2'8"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 20-E BEDROOM 2 6'0"6'8"1 3/4"Slider Panel 21-E HALL 4'0"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Bi-part Panel 22-E BATH 1 2'6"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 23-E BATH 1 2'6"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 24-E BEDROOM 1 2'8"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 25-E BEDROOM 1 6'0"6'8"1 3/4"Slider Panel 26-E HALL 5'0"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Bi-part Panel 27-E KITCHEN 2'8"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 28-E PANTRY 2'6"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 29-E MASTER BEDROOM 2'8"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 30-E W.I.C.2'6"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 31-E MASTER BATH 2'6"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 32-E MASTER BATH 2'6"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 33-E MASTER BATH 2'0"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 34 LIVING ROOM 2 11'0"7'0"1 3/4"Slider Glass TEMPERED GLAZING 35 BATH 2 2'8"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 36 LAUNDRY 2 2'0"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 37 BEDROOM 3 2'8"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 38 CLOSET 2'6"6'8"1 3/4"Swing Simple Panel 39 COAT CLOSET 9'0"6'8"1 3/4"Slider Panel NOTE: #-E INDICATES EXISTING DOOR NOTE: ALL DOORS SOLID CORE, PAINT GRADE U.O.N. with stiles and rails shall not be less than 1 3/8 inches thick. All glass doors to receive tempered glazing. 12-31-2015 WINDOWS SCHEDULE Nominal Size Mark Location O.A. Width O.A. HeightSash Operation Comments 01-E FOYER 6'0"7'0"Fixed Glass 02-E FOYER 1'0"8'0"Fixed Glass 03-E FOYER 1'0"8'0"Fixed Glass 04-E DINING ROOM 6'0"5'0"Fixed Glass 05-E W.I.C.4'0"2'0"Fixed Glass 06-E MASTER BATHROOM 3'0"4'0"Bi-parting Casement TEMPERED GLAZING 07-E MASTER BEDROOM 5'0"6'0"Bi-parting Casement 08-E MASTER BEDROOM 5'0"6'0"Bi-parting Casement 09-E MASTER BEDROOM 6'0"3'0"Fixed Glass 10-E MASTER BEDROOM 5'0"6'0"Bi-parting Casement 11-E KITCHEN 1'10"3'6"Fixed Glass 12-E KITCHEN 1'10"3'6"Fixed Glass 13-E KITCHEN 1'10"3'6"Fixed Glass 14-E LIVING ROOM 4'0"6'0"Fixed Glass 15-E LIVING ROOM 6'0"6'0"Fixed Glass 16-E LIVING ROOM 6'0"6'0"Fixed Glass 17-E LIVING ROOM 4'0"6'0"Fixed Glass 18-E BATH 1 3'0"2'0"Awning TEMPERED GLAZING 21 GARAGE 6'0"3'6"Horizontal Slider 22-E HALL 5'0"4'0"Bi-parting Casement 23-E HALL 5'0"4'0"Bi-parting Casement 24-E LOWER LEVEL 4'0"4'0"Fixed Glass 25-E LOWER LEVEL 6'0"4'0"Fixed Glass 26-E LOWER LEVEL 6'0"4'0"Fixed Glass 27-E LOWER LEVEL 4'0"4'0"Fixed Glass 28 LIVING ROOM 2 10'0"4'0"Picture Window Slider TEMPERED GLAZING 29 KITCHEN 2 8'0"4'0"Picture Window Slider 30 BEDROOM 3 8'0"4'0"Picture Window Slider EGRESS COMPLIANT 31 BEDROOM 3 6'0"8'0"Fixed Glass 32 CLOSET 2'0"2'0"Bi-parting Casement 33 BATH 2 2'0"2'0"Bi-parting Casement TEMPERED GLAZING 34 LIVING ROOM 2 8'0"4'0"Picture Window Slider 35 CLERESTORY 6'0"1'6"Awning 36 CLERESTORY 6'0"1'6"Awning 37 CLERESTORY 6'0"1'6"Awning 38 KITCHEN 2 1'6"4'0"Fixed Glass NOTE 0: #-E INDICATES EXISTING WINDOW NOTE 1: ALL WINDOWS AND PATIO DOORS TO BE WOOD-ALUMINUM CLAD U.O.N. NOTE 2: GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECT FOR ADJUSTMENT OF WINDOWS' SIZES THAT ARE CLOSE TO STANDARD SIZES WHENEVER POSSIBLE FOR FINAL SIZE SELECTION NOTE 3: ALL NEW OR REPLACED WINDOWS AND SKYLIGHTS SHALL HAVE A MAX. U-FACTOR AND A MAX. SOLAR HEAT GAIN COEFFICIENT MATCHING THE T-24 CALCULATIONS (CA TITLE 24 ENERGY EFFICIENCY) NOTE: ALL DOORS SOLID CORE, PAINT GRADE U.O.N. with stiles and rails shall not be less than 1 3/8 inches thick. All glass doors to receive tempered glazing. 126 RO&TRT S. CftSTS LICtrhIsTD LAND SUNVTYOR 966 Elsie ildae Drive, Boulder Creek, CA 95006 {831} 359-1750 (408) 884-3791 E{dArL : q*bsrtisgn*$Er,el s.€qq I, gq m Story Pole Certification Date: December 11,2015 File: C-15161 Wilbert van den Hoek 15470 Bohlman Road Saratoga, CA 95070 R.e: 15470 Bohlman Rd., Saratoga APN 517-14-021 To whom it may concern: I, Robert J. Craig, PLS 5418, hereby attest that I am a Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of California. I certify that my crew performed a field inspection of the story poles in place for the second story additi on at 15470 Bohlman Road in Saratoga on Decemb er 4,2015. The heights and locations of the story pole for the addition, as placed, substantially conform with the Roof Plan on Page A-2.4 of the architectural plans. Please call or email if you have any questions. Thank you, xoa"{ t.craig, emdtt ffip-'% (MS 127 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date:January 13, 2016 Application:Design Review PDR15-0037 Location / APN:12600 Saratoga Avenue / 386-14-003 Owner / Applicant:Abe Kaabipour Staff Planner:Michael Fossati 12600 Saratoga Avenue 128 SUMMARY ZONING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION MULTI-FAMILY RES. (R-M-5,000) RES. MULTI-FAMILY (RMF) PARCEL SIZE 22,500 SQUARE FEET PROJECT DESCRIPTION An existing Valero gasoline service station is located at 12600 Saratoga Avenue. A gasoline service station has existed at this site and pre-dates the City’s incorporation in 1956. The service station is located in a multi-family residential area, yet it has been authorized to operate by a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) since 1993. In June 2015, the Planning Commission reviewed a requested modification to the CUP and allowed the addition of a hydrogen fueling facility and upgraded structures and site landscaping. The applicant/property owner is currently requesting a modification of the existing Design Review approval to replace the existing signage because the owner has entered into a new business arrangement which shifts his fuel supplier from “Valero” into “Mobil” gasoline services. As part of the new business arrangement, the applicant is required to “rebrand” the signs related to his business to reflect his current supplier. The existing CUP Condition of Approval requires any sign changes to be reviewed by the Planning Commission as a Design Review. As part of the Commission’s review, the applicant has also requested that this Condition of Approval be modified to remove the requirement that requires the re- facing of signage to be approved via a Design Review by the Planning Commission. The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15301, Class 1 “Existing Facilities”- this exemption allows for minor alterations of existing private structures; and 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”- this exemption allows for the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities, or structures, which includes signage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the application to modify the existing Conditional Use Permit Conditions of Approval and approve the Design Review application for the proposed signs by adopting the attached resolution with a determination that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA. Staff is recommending the conditions of approval included in the prepared resolution. 129 PROJECT DESCRIPTON AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS Background: The subject site is occupied by a commercial use (gasoline service station) within a multi- family residential zoning district. Uses on the site include a 1,176 square foot sales office, a gasoline service island with eight gasoline pumps under an overhead canopy, and a freestanding price/identification sign. Surrounding land uses include single-family residences to the north and west and multi- family residences to the south and east. The site is a corner lot that has frontage on Saratoga Avenue, one of the City’s primary arterial roadways, and Bucknall Road, a residential street. Site History A gasoline service station has existed on the subject site before the City’s incorporation in 1956. Between 1956 and 1983, the site was zoned commercial, which allowed gasoline service stations as a conditional use. In September 1983 the site’s zoning designation was changed from Commercial Neighborhood (C-N) to Residential Multi-Family (R-M-5,000) in order to conform to a previous General Plan Amendment. The rezoning of the property caused the service station to become a non-conforming use. The operation of the service station has continued to date. In October 2015, the service station had been approved to allow to sale and dispense hydrogen fuel to hydrogen vehicles. Project Description: The applicant has submitted a request to replace the existing “Valero” signage with “Mobil” signage. Within the past 60 years, fuel suppliers and business signage for the service station has been change multiple times. Below is a summary of those changes. ·Freestanding sign approved for Gasco (1984) ·Signage changed from Gasco to Arco (1991) ·Signage changes from Arco to Saratoga Gas Co. (1994) ·Signage changes from Saratoga Gas Co. to Texaco (1996) ·Signage changes from Texaco to Saratoga Gas Co. (2000) ·Signage changes from Saratoga Gas Co. to Valero (2005) No expansion of sign area is proposed with this application, as the dimensions for the “Mobil” name and logo would replace the existing “Valero” freestanding sign and overhead canopy signage. Furthermore, the proposed signage would not be affected by the new Hydrogen fueling system currently approved for installation. Freestanding / Identification Sign The applicant is proposing to reface an existing 18.5 sq. ft. freestanding / identification sign that currently states “Valero Self Serve Gasoline” into a 18.5 freestanding / identification sign that would state “Mobil”. The letter size for the type of fuel and prices would remain the same. The cabinet and structural elements would be repainted into “eggshell white”. The existing sign is illuminated. The proposed sign would also be illuminated. Staff has 130 determined that the proposed signage is consistent with state law that governs price sign advertising, per Article 12 of the California Business and Professions Code. A photo of the existing and proposed freestanding sign has been included as Attachment 2. Canopy Sign The applicant has requested to reface the existing canopy sign that currently states “Valero” along with the raised company logo and green and yellow emblem and colors that are painted onto the parapet. The sign area is approximately 330 sq. ft. in total, which is 165 sq. ft. on each side of the canopy (55 ft. by 3 ft.). The existing canopy sign is internally illuminated and was approved in May 2005. The proposed new sign would not increase the size of the existing canopy sign. If approved, the new sign would state “Mobil” in raised channel letters. The portion of the words “Mobil” would encompass approximately 18 sq. ft. of sign area, with the remainder of square footage taken up by a blue (24” wide and 55’ long) and white (12” side and 55’ long) fascia line along the remaining length of the canopy. As previously stated, the existing canopy sign is internally illuminated. The proposed canopy sign would not be internally illuminated in order to better blend in with the residential character of the surrounding uses. A photo of the existing and proposed canopy sign has been included as at Attachment 3. Modification of Condition of Approval Resolution 15-011 is the document that governs the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review approvals for the existing service station use on this site. Condition #15 of the resolution states the following: 15.Design Review approval is required for any price or identification sign for the stations use. Staff is recommending that this Condition of Approval be amended to foster a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship with existing and future business owners that offer goods and services to the residents within the City of Saratoga, and to better reflect current practices for processing signs applications that propose a reface and not an expansion. Specifically, staff recommends modifying Condition #15 to state the following: 15.A Design Review approval from the Planning Commission is required for any expansion or intensification of the existing price, business identification or canopy sign for the existing gas station use. The Community Development Director is authorized to review for approval any application to reface the existing price, business identification or canopy signs, or to install new replacement signs as long as the proposed signs do not exceed the original sign area of each individual sign to be replaced or refaced. The applicant has also agreed to remove the existing electrical wiring that currently allows for the internal illumination of the canopy signage. Staff recommends adding an additional condition to the resolution related to the removal of the existing illumination of the canopy sign. The condition to be added would read as follows: 25. No internally illuminated signs are permitted on the canopy structure. 131 Neighbor Notification and Correspondence: A Public Notice was mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the project site. Staff has not received any comments regarding the proposed application to date. FINDINGS Design Review Findings The findings required for issuance of a modification of Design Review pursuant to City Code Section 15-46.040 as set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of the required findings: (a)Where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural features and landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include height, elevations, roof material, color and appurtenances. The project meets this finding because no additional uses, buildings or structures have been proposed. The proposed application is to reface the existing signs to reflect a new business name, colors and logo of the establishment and its current gas supplier. (b)Where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on site, the signs shall have a common or compatible design and locational positions and shall be harmonious in appearance. The project meets this finding because the new freestanding and canopy sign are consistent in design, color, and logo of the “Mobil” brand which is the business owner’s new gas supplier. (c)Landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be preserved; it shall make use of water-conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems for the maximum extent feasible, it shall be clustered in natural appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows or regularly spaced. The project meets this finding as no landscaping will be affected or removed due to the proposed sign modification. (d)Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be non-reflective. This finding is not applicable because the colors of the existing walls and/or roofing materials will not be affected by the sign modification. (e)Roofing materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, other materials such a composition as approved by the Planning Commission. No mechanical equipment shall be located upon a roof unless it is appropriately screened. The finding is not applicable because the sign modification will not affect the existing roof materials or mechanical equipment located on the roof. The only change proposed to the existing canopy is to reface the canopy fascia signs. The size and shape of the signs will be consistent with the existing signs. (f)The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. The project meets this finding because the 132 proposed signage will not increase the height or bulk of the existing freestanding price sign or canopy. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The State of California recognizes hydrogen fueling stations as posing no significant to the environment. The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15301, Class 1 “Existing Facilities”- this exemption allows for minor alterations of existing private structures; and 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”- this exemption allows for the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities, or structures. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the modification of the Design Review application with the required findings and conditions by adopting the attached Resolution. ATTACHMENTS 1.Resolution 2.Photo of existing and proposed freestanding/identification sign. 3. Photo of existing and proposed canopy sign 133 RESOLUTION NO. 16-003 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW (PDR15-0037) FOR A GASOLINE SERVICE STATION LOCATED AT 12600 SARATOGA AVENUE (APN 386-14-003) WHEREAS, an application submitted by Abe Kaabipour requesting modification of an existing use permit and design review application to install new signage at an existing gasoline service station. The existing signage is for “Valero” gasoline station and the proposed signage is “Mobil” gasoline station. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15301, Class 1 “Existing Facilities”- this exemption allows for minor alterations of existing private structures; and 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”- this exemption allows for the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities, or structures. WHEREAS, on January 13, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by City Staff, the applicant, and other interested parties. NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: The project is consistent with the following Saratoga General Plan Policies: Land Use Element Goal LU.1 which is to maintain the predominantly small town residential character of Saratoga; Land Use Element Goal LU.2 which is to encourage the economic viability of Saratoga’s existing commercial areas; and Land Use Element Goal LU 13 to use the design review process to assure that new construction is compatible with the site and adjacent surroundings. Section 3: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the improvements are consistent with the Conditional Use Permit findings in that the project is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, or will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof; will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Saratoga City Code; 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. 134 Resolution No. 16-003 Page 2 Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the improvements are consistent with the Design Review findings in that where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural features and landscaping thereof shall be harmonious; where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on site, the signs shall have a common or compatible design and locational positions and shall be harmonious in appearance; landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be preserved; it shall make use of water-conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems for the maximum extent feasible, it shall be clustered in natural appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows or regularly spaced; colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be non- reflective; roofing materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, other materials such a composition as approved by the Planning Commission. No mechanical equipment shall be located upon a roof unless it is appropriately screened, and that proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area. Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves application PDR15-0037 for the modification of a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review for a gasoline service station located at 12600 Saratoga Avenue as described in the staff report, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 13th day of January 2016 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Leonard Almalech, Chair, Planning Commission 135 Resolution No. 16-003 Page 3 Exhibit 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PDR15-0037 12600 SARATOGA AVENUE 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 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 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. 5.Any intensification of the uses approved under this Use Permit shall require an amended Conditional Use Permit. Examples of intensification of use include, but are not limited to, physical changes to the site or structures that result in ongoing increases in traffic, noise, or other physical effects. 6.The uses/structures/project shall maintain compliance with all applicable requirements of the City, including, without limitation, the requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations. The uses/structures/project shall at all times operate in compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdictional authority over the use pertaining to, but not limited to, health, sanitation, safety, and water quality issues. 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, 136 Resolution No. 16-003 Page 4 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, the 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.This resolution supersedes all previous use permit and design review resolutions issued for a gasoline service station at this site. 9.The gasoline service station and hydrogen fueling facility shall be open and operated only between the hours of: Monday – Thursday: 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Friday: 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Saturday: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Sunday: 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. 10.Landscaping shall be maintained by the property owner in a good and orderly condition for the life of this use permit. All future landscaping shall emphasize native and drought tolerant species. 11.The single driveway access onto Saratoga Avenue shall be designated and used as an “entrance only” driveway. Directional signs shall be consistent with Section 15-30 of the City Code. If marking is not deemed to be effective, alternative measures shall be considered. If the driveway markings are determined not be effective, additional measures are to be considered. 12.The driveways shall be chained (with reflectors) after closing to prevent vehicular access to the site. 13.All gasoline and hydrogen pumps including storage tanks shall comply with the regulations of the San Francisco Bay Area Pollution Control District and with the City of Saratoga’s Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance. 14.Any office exterior lighting visible from outside of the structure shall be turned off at the time of closing specified in condition #9. 137 Resolution No. 16-003 Page 5 15.A Design Review approval from the Planning Commission is required for any expansion or intensification of the existing price, business identification or canopy sign for the existing gas station use. The Community Development Director is authorized to review for approval any application to reface the existing price, business identification or canopy signs, or to install new replacement signs as long as the proposed signs do not exceed the original sign area of each individual sign to be replaced or refaced. 16.Any other exterior modification to the gasoline service station or use intensification will require approval by the Planning Commission. 17.The station shall be kept in good repair and free of dilapidated autos or other eyesores. 18.Per Section 15-55.100 of the City Code, this application shall remain under the continuous jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. Any violation of the above code shall constitute grounds for consideration of use permit revocation. 19.The Community Development Director shall provide to the Planning Commission a status report of the operation or any issues related to the hydrogen fueling facility after the facility has been operating for a period of two years.’ 20.Existing pump islands and pumps shall be maintained and no more than eight gasoline pumps and one hydrogen fueling cell and dispenser shall be allowed. 21.The markings for a hydrogen lane are to extend to a point at least adjacent to the south side of the building or beyond so they are visible to hydrogen customers entering the site. 22.A convenience market is not permitted at this location. To be considered incidental to the primary use of the site as a gasoline service station, no more than 25% of the sales office floor area area shall be dedicated to retail, food and/or beverage display or sales for off-site human consumption. 23.The station shall be operated in accordance with the most current Best Management Practices for Gasoline Stations promulgated by the Santa Clara Valley Non-Point Source Program and/or City to control Non-Point Source Pollution. 24.All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other governmental entities must be met. 25. Any existing of future awning signs shall not be illuminated. 138 139 140 ExistingEastElevationProposedEastElevationExistingWestElevationProposedWestElevationAttachment 3 141 142 143 144