HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-12-13 Planning Commission Agenda PacketTable of Contents
Agenda 3
May 22, 2013
Draft Minutes 5
Application PDR13-0012; 14451 Fruitvale Avenue(397-17-007);
Paulson Lee - The applicant requests Design Review approval
to replace an existing 2,113 square foot one-story home with a
new 5,369 square foot two-story home and related site
improvements. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-
1235
Staff Report 7
Attachment 1 - Resolution 14
Attachment 2 - Arborist Report 19
Attachment 3 - Public Hearing Notice 30
Attachment 4 - Neighbor Correspondance 32
Attachment 5 - CALGreen Checklist 39
Attachment 6 - Permeable Paver Specifications 47
Attachment 7 - Development Plans 55
Application PDR13-0006; 14921 Sobey Road (397-04-127);
Brian Vajdic - The applicant requests Design Review approval
to construct a new 5,215 square foot two story single family
home with a 1,055 square foot basement and related site
improvements. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408)868-
1235
Staff Report 71
Attachment 1 - Resolution 78
Attachment 2 - Arborist Report 82
Attachment 3 - Public Hearing Notice 91
Attachment 4 - Neighbor Comment Letters 94
Attachment 5 - Geotechnical Clearance 102
Attachment 6 - CALGreen Checklist 106
Attachment 7 - Site Photos 113
Attachment 8 - Pervious Paver Specifications 116
Attachment 9 - Development Plans 124
Application ADR13-0009 / CUP13-0001; 15285 Sobey Road
(397-07-044) Murali Jammula - The applicant requests
Conditional Use Permit and Design Review approval to
construct a new detached 864 square foot garage within the
required rear setback. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-
1212
Staff Report - 15285 Sobey Road 135
Att. 1 - Resolution 141
Att. 2 - Arborist Report 145
Att. 3 - Noticing 150
Att. 4 - Letter from Neighbor 153
Att. 5 - Neighbor Notifications 155
Att. 6 - Plan Set 157
1
Application PDR13-0002; 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road
(ROW); Chris Coones - Forzatelecom - The applicant is
requesting Design Review approval to upgrade wireless
telecommunications equipment at an existing installation on
Saratoga-Los Gatos Road near Fruitvale Avenue. Staff Contact:
Cynthia McCormick (408) 868-1230.
staff report 159
Resolution 162
Notice 166
At&T sites 167
RF Analysis 169
Photo Simulations 191
Coverage Maps 193
Plans 196
2
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. – CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777
FRUITVALE AVENUE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 2013
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSION & PUBLIC
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. The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such
items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under
Planning Commission direction to Staff.
REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS
If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an “Appeal Application” with the City Clerk
within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision.
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 PDR13-0012; 14451 Fruitvale Avenue(397-17-007); Paulson Lee - The applicant requests
Design Review approval to replace an existing 2,113 square foot one-story home with a new 5,369 square
foot two-story home and related site improvements. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-1235
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 13-018 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
2. Application PDR13-0006; 14921 Sobey Road (397-04-127); Brian Vajdic - The applicant requests Design
Review approval to construct a new 5,215 square foot two story single family home with a 1,055 square
foot basement and related site improvements. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408)868-1235
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 13-024 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
3. Application ADR13-0009 / CUP13-0001; 15285 Sobey Road (397-07-044) Murali Jammula - The
applicant requests Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Administrative Design Review (ADR) approval to
construct a new detached 864 sq. ft. garage within the required rear setback. The maximum height of the
proposed accessory structure will be no higher than 10 ft. No protected trees are required for removal.
Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-1212
3
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 13-021 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
4. Application PDR13-0002; 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road (ROW); Chris Coones - Forzatelecom - The
applicant is requesting Design Review approval to upgrade wireless telecommunications equipment at an
existing installation on Saratoga-Los Gatos Road near Fruitvale Avenue. Staff Contact: Cynthia
McCormick (408) 868-1230.
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 13-023 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
NEW BUSINESS
DIRECTOR/COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
ADJOURNMENT
In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the Planning
Commission by City Staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Community
Development at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the
Planning Commission concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of agenda are available for public review
at the Community Development Department at the time they are distributed to the Planning Commission.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to
the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR
35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF AGENDA
I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist 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 June 6, 2013
at the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., 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
4
ACTION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. – CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777
FRUITVALE AVENUE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
ABSENT
Commissioner Zhao
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of May 8, 2013 (4:0:2(Grover and Hlava))
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSION & PUBLIC
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. The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such
items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under
Planning Commission direction to Staff.
REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS
If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an “Appeal Application” with the City Clerk
within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision.
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 PDR10-0022/CUP10-0011/SUB12-0005/VAR13-0003; 12250 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. (386-
30-036,037,038); TimeSpace InvestDev. LLC. - The applicant is requesting Design Review approval to
replace 13,700 square feet of single story office and light industrial buildings with a new 25,081 square foot
two-story commercial building. A Variance is being requested to exceed the height limit by approximately
four feet. Three existing parcels would be merged into one parcel and the applicant is requesting a
Tentative Subdivision Map to create twelve commercial condominium units within the building. The
applicant is also requested a Use Permit for both institutional and medical uses within the building.
Action:
Adopt Resolution No. 13-019 denying VAR13-0003 (4:2 (Almalech/Hlava)) and denying PDR10-
0022/CUP10-0011/SUB12-0005 and not adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration (6:0).
2. Application PDR13-0012 - 14451 Fruitvale Avenue (397-17-007); Paulson Lee - The applicant requests
Design Review approval to replace an existing 2,113 square foot one-story home with a new 5,369 square
foot two-story home and related site improvements. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408)868-1235
5
Action:
Continued to item to the June 12, 2013 meeting (6:0).
3. Application MOD13-0005 - Modification of PDR11-0020; 19120 Monte Vista Drive (397-09-010);
DiNapoli / Kohlsaat - The applicant is requesting design review approval for a new 900 square foot
secondary dwelling unit, pavilion, and 42 square foot pool bath in addition to minor modifications to an
approved design at 19120 Monte Vista Drive. Staff Contact: Cynthia McCormick (408) 868-1230.
Action:
Adopt Resolution Number 13-017 approving the project subject to conditions of approval (6:0).
4. Application PCTUP13-0002 - 14612 Big Basin Way (517-08-072) Suzanne Frontz/Cinnabar Winery - The
applicant is requesting approval to use the public way between the curb and sidewalk in front of their
establishment for outdoor seating and other sales activities.
Action:
Adopt Resolution No. 13-020 approving the project subject to conditions of approval (6:0).
NEW BUSINESS
Planning Commission Summer Recess
Action:
Canceled the July 10, 2013 meeting (6:0).
DIRECTOR/COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
ADJOURNMENT
In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the Planning
Commission by City Staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Community
Development at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the
Planning Commission concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of agenda are available for public review
at the Community Development Department at the time they are distributed to the Planning Commission.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to
the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR
35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF AGENDA
I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist 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 May 16, 2013 at the City of Saratoga,
13777 Fruitvale Ave., 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
6
REPORT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: June 12, 2013
Application: PDR13-0012
Location / APN: 14451 Fruitvale Avenue / 397-17-007
Owner/Applicant: Paulson Lee
Staff Planner: Christopher Riordan
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
7
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
Summary
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review approval to replace an existing
2,113 square foot one-story home with a new 5,369 square foot two-story home and related site
improvements located at 14451 Fruitvale Avenue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 13-018 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.
PROJECT DATA:
Net Site Area: 45,284 SF
Average Slope: 3.98%
General Plan Designation: RVLD (Residential Very Low Density)
Zoning: R-1-40,000
Proposed Allowed/Required
Proposed Site Coverage
Residential Footprint
Porches and Covered Patios
Concrete Pavers on Asphalt
Stamped Concrete
Pool/Spa/Pool Pavers
Permeable Pavers on Crushed Stone
Concrete Steps
Total Proposed Site Coverage
3,451.5 sq. ft.
1,173.5 sq. ft.
784 sq. ft.
5,352 sq. ft.
1,392 sq. ft.
2,850 sq. ft. (5,700/2)
219 sq. ft.
15,222 sq. ft. (33.61%)
Maximum Coverage allowed is
15,849 SF (35%)
Permeable Pavers on Crushed
Stone Count as 50%
Impervious Coverage
Floor Area
First Floor
Second Floor
Garage
Total Floor Area
2,739 sq. ft.
1,918 sq. ft. .
712 sq. ft.
5,369.5 sq. ft.
6,120 sq. ft.
Height (Residence)
Lowest Elevation Point:
Highest Elevation Point:
Average Elevation Point:
Proposed Topmost Point:
Total Proposed Height
438.50
451.50
445.00
470.75
(25.75 Ft.)
Maximum Building Height is
(26 Feet)
Setbacks
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
1st Story
119’-4”
26’-5”
20’-0”
113’-11”
2nd Story
127’-0
30’-11”
53’-9”
113’-11”
1st Story
30’
20’
20’
50’
2nd Story
30
30
30
60
Page 2 of 7
8
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Background:
The Planning Commission reviewed the project at their meeting of May 22, 2013. The Commission
continued the project to the meeting of June 12, 2013 with the following recommendations:
• Simplify the front elevation and choose a single building form;
• Review the existing drainage and the effects on the adjacent property to the north;
• Clarify the amount of impervious coverage;
The applicant has submitted revised plans which include the following modifications:
• Architecture - the rounded architectural projection to the left of the front entrance has been
redesigned so that both architectural projections on opposite sides of the entrance have a
similar form and symmetry.
• Site Drainage - an 8-inch wall has been added at the rear northwestern corner of the property
that will collect site drainage before it enters the adjacent property. Drainage will be
directed towards the front of the subject property where it will be collected in a submerged
detention basin. The drainage flow lines on the Grading and Drainage Plan (Sheet C2 of the
Development Plans) have been darkened so they are more discernible. The adjacent
neighbor has reviewed the drainage plan and is satisfied with the modifications.
• Pervious Coverage - all references to a sport court have been removed from the plans. The
decomposed granite play area in the rear yard has been removed and replaced with grass.
The specificity of the impervious paving totals as listed in the Project Data table on the
Cover Sheet of the Development Plan has increased – the 5,700 square foot auto court and
circular driveway will be composed of pervious pavers on a crushed stone base which
counts as 50 percent lot coverage or 2,850 square feet. The applicant has submitted
manufacturer’s specifications for the proposed pervious pavers (Attachment 6) which
indicates that the initial infiltration rate of the permeable pavers is approximately 30 inches
per hour.
Site Description: The project site is located at 14451 Fruitvale Avenue near its intersection with
San Marcos Road. The site was formerly occupied by the Saratoga Dog School. All the dog
kennels previously located in the rear yard have been removed. Existing on the site is a 2,113
square foot one-story single-family ranch style home. Site access is provided by an existing
asphalt and gravel circular driveway. A white picket fence separates the site from Fruitvale
Avenue. Numerous protected trees are located on the property including a grove of Coast live
oaks and Valley oaks near the front property line between the driveway entrances. A row of
Coast redwoods and Camphor trees are located along the entire length of the southern property
line. Trees located at the rear of the property include a combination of birch and pine trees as
well as numerous fruit trees.
Page 3 of 7
9
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
A storm drain outlet is located adjacent to the southerly driveway entrance. The adjacent
properties located to the south are the source of the storm water that flows from this concrete
outlet into an earthen drainage swale located between the front property line and Fruitvale
Avenue. The drainage swale extends past the property and continues towards the north.
The average slope of the site is 3.9 percent with a 12 foot reduction in elevation from the
southwestern corner of the lot to its northeastern corner.
Project Description and Architectural Style: The project would include the removal of the
existing house and driveway. Trees to be removed are discussed later in this report.
The new 5,369 square foot, 26’ tall residence would be located in the middle of the site in the
approximate location as the existing house. The proposed home would have a Mediterranean
design and include a wide asymmetrical building footprint, a hipped roof with over hanging
eaves, barrel roof tiles, a front porch supported by large square columns that is arched above,
arched windows, an elaborated chimney top, and smooth stucco.
After the project was submitted the applicant met with planning staff to consider modifications to
the project to reduce the visual mass of the building prior to scheduling the project for a public
hearing. The applicant and their architect were receptive to staff’s suggestions and made the
following modifications to the design:
• Reduced the height of the entrance feature by eight feet;
• Removed the second story porch that was included in the entrance feature and shifted this
element back so that it is incorporated into the second story and no longer projects above the
first story;
• Reduced the height of the circular architectural feature to the left of the entrance by 1.5 feet
and added two windows in the wall above to break up the mass of this particular blank wall;
• Reduced the height of the architectural feature to the right of the entrance by two feet and
added windows in the wall above to break up the mass;
• Reduce the height of the chimney by 3.5 feet;
• Added stone to the exterior of the porte-cochere and the stairway tower so as to reduce their
visual mass and to improve the integration of these two features with the remainder of the
building.
The proposed landscape plan illustrates that the project will predominantly feature drought native
landscaping including native wild flowers, palms, and olive trees. The circular driveway will be
composed of concrete pavers on a crushed stone base. The rear yard would include a concrete
patio, swimming pool, and planter boxes. The project meets all City Code requirements
including floor area, height, setbacks, and lot coverage.
Page 4 of 7
10
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
Materials and Colors:
Detail Colors and Materials
Exterior Tan Colored Smooth Stucco
Stone Veneer
Windows Brown colored fiberglass windows
Garage Door Brown colored fiberglass
Entry Door Metal and Glass with decorate iron scroll work
Roof A blend of brown colored Concrete barrel tiles.
Trees: The City Arborist inventoried 54 protected trees on the project site and concluded that the
findings could be made for the removal of three trees. These include an evergreen pear, plum,
and a camphor tree that are in conflict with the location of the project. The project was designed
to preserve 95 percent of the protected trees including all the Oak and Redwood trees on the site
that visually screen the site from Fruitvale Avenue and adjacent properties.
Details of the arborist findings and descriptions of the trees to be removed are included in the
Arborist report which is included as Attachment #2.
Residential Calgreen Measures: The project meets the minimum CalGreen standards for a new
home. The Residential Calgreen Measures Checklist is included as Attachment #5.
Neighbor Notification and Correspondence: The applicant sent Neighbor Notification Forms to
all adjacent neighbors. Three neighbors signed the forms and forwarded them back to the
applicant and these are included as Attachment #4.
The adjacent neighbor located to the north at 14431 Fruitvale Avenue has had previous concerns
with drainage from the project site flowing onto her property and she noted this on the comment
form. She would like the applicant to construct a curb between the two properties to prevent site
drainage from flowing onto her site. This neighbor also sent and email reiterating this request
which included two photos. A copy of this email is included as Attachment #4. After the May
22, 2013 Commission meeting the applicant and their civil engineer met with the neighbor to
discuss a drainage solution. The civil engineer proposed the addition of an 8-inch wall at the rear
northwestern corner of the property that will collect site drainage before it enters the adjacent
property. Drainage will be directed towards the front of the subject property where it will be
collected in a submerged detention basin. The adjacent neighbor has reviewed the drainage plan
and is satisfied with the modifications.
A Public Notice was also sent to property owners within 500 feet of the site. No additional
concerns have been brought to the City’s attention as of the writing of this staff report.
Page 5 of 7
11
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
FINDINGS
Design Review Findings:
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review approval pursuant to City Code Article 15-
45 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those
required findings:
(a) The project avoids unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The project meets this
finding in that the number and size of second story windows on the side elevations have been
reduced and existing trees would block views from these windows toward adjacent properties.
The privacy impacts of the second story master bedroom balcony on adjacent properties is
reduced by the 80 feet distance from the balcony to the side property lines and the 120 feet
distance from the rear property line. Mature trees are located on all sides of the property and
screen offsite views of project. The existing fence would also help preserve the existing privacy
for adjacent neighbors.
(b) The project preserves the natural landscape. The project meets this finding in that the site
contains 54 protected trees and only three trees are proposed for removal. The project was
designed to preserve 95 percent of the protected trees including all the Oak and Redwood
trees. The proposed project includes a landscape plan which illustrates that the majority of the
site (67%) outside the building footprint will be landscaped.
(c) The project preserves protected, native and heritage trees. The project meets this finding in that
no native or heritage trees are proposed for removal. The City Arborist inventoried 54
protected trees on the project site and made the findings to approve the removal of three of
these trees. These include an evergreen pear, plum, and a camphor tree that are in conflict
with the location of the project. All protected trees will be fenced to reduce the chances that
these trees will be damaged during construction.
(d) The project minimizes the perception of excessive bulk. The project meets this find in that the
project is setback from the front property line by 120 feet thereby reducing the visual
appearance of mass and bulk as viewed from Fruitvale Avenue. The impression of building
height is reduced as the building has wide horizontal proportions that take up the majority of the
site width, there are consistent roof forms with sufficient architectural articulation to reduce the
impression of bulk, and blank building walls are avoided by the use of windows. Natural stone
veneer would be included on some of the larger architectural projections to integrate these
features with the remainder of the building. The neutral color pallet and natural materials would
aid in blending the home with the proposed landscaping. Mature Oak and Redwood trees help
screen the building as viewed from offsite.
(e) The project is of compatible bulk and height. The project meets this finding in that proposed
two story home is compatible in bulk and height with the nearby two-story homes in the
neighborhood. The adjacent house to the north is a one-story home but the difference in bulk
Page 6 of 7
12
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
Page 7 of 7
and height as compared to the proposed home is mitigated by front and side setbacks that are
excess of the minimum setbacks and existing landscaping that separates the two properties. The
horizontal lines and subtractive massing of the proposed home would be compatible in bulk
with neighboring homes.
(f) The project uses current grading and erosion control methods. The project meets this finding
in that it is conditioned to meet required grading and erosion control standards.
(g) The project follows appropriate design policies and techniques. Policy 1: Minimize Perception
of Bulk – increasing the front setback from Fruitvale Avenue, building width of greater
proportion than height to reduce impression of height, the use of consistent roof forms, the use
of material and colors to reduce bulk, minimizing building height and designing structure to fit
with existing neighborhood. Policy 2: Integrate Structures with Environment – the use of
natural materials and colors, using landscaping to blend with the environment and blending roof
and parking surfaces with the environment. Policy 3: Avoid Interference with Privacy -
controlling views to adjacent properties, locating buildings to minimize privacy impact, and
using landscaping to enhance privacy. Policy 4: Preserve Views and Access to Views – locating
structure to minimize view blockage and locating structure to reduce height impact. Policy 5:
Design for Energy Efficiency – designing for maximum benefit of sun and wind as well as
allowing light, air and solar access to adjacent homes, and incorporating energy-saving
measures into the design.
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 and no exception to
that exemption applies.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 13-018 approving the project, subject to
conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval for Design Review
2. Arborist Report
3. Public Hearing Notice, Mailing Addresses for Project Notification
4. Neighbor Correspondence and Notification Forms
5. Cal Green Checklist
6. Permeable Pavers Manufacturers Specifications
7. Development Plans (Exhibit "A")
13
RESOLUTION NO: 13-018
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A NEW TWO STORY, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOCATED AT 14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2012, an application was submitted by Paulson Lee
requesting Design Review approval to construct a new two story Mediterranean designed home
located at 14451 Fruitvale Avenue. The project has a total floor area of 5,370 square feet. The
height of the proposed residence is approximately 26 feet. The site is located within the R-1-40,000
Zoning District (APN 397-17-007).
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 May 22, 2013, 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 and continued the application to the meeting of June 12, 2013.
WHEREAS, on June 12, 2013, 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 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 and no exception to that exemption applies.
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; Land Use Element Goal 10 which minimizes the impact of
development proposals in hillside areas by requiring visual analyses and imposition of conditions to
prevent or reduce significant visual impacts; and 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.
14
Resolution No. 13-018
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 avoids unreasonable
interference with views and privacy; preserves the natural landscape; native and heritage trees;
minimizes the perception of excessive bulk and is of compatible bulk and height; uses current
grading and erosion methods; and follows appropriate design polices and techniques.
Section 5: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the removal of three
protected trees meets the criteria established in Section 15-50.080(a).
Section 6: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR13-0012
located at 14451 Fruitvale Avenue 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 12th day of
June 2013 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Joyce Hlava
Chair, Planning Commission
15
Resolution No. 13-018
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR13-0012
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
(APN 397-17-007)
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this
project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting
all applicable permanent 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 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 City Code 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.
16
Resolution No. 13-018
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. Site Drainage. The owner/applicant shall comply with all City requirements regarding
drainage, including but not limited to complying with the city approved stormwater
management plan. The project shall retain and/or detain any increase in design flow from the
site, that is created by the proposed construction and grading project, such that adjacent down
slope properties will not be negatively impacted by any increase in flow. Design must follow
the 2007 Santa Clara County Drainage Manual method criteria, as required by the building
department. Retention/detention element design must follow the Drainage Manual guidelines, as
required by the building department. Additionally, the site development plan must not restrict,
obstruct or alter the existing natural drainage swale along the rear property in any way that
would cause or increase erosion.
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 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 City Code.
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.
b. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, notes, and/or materials required by the
Building Division.
c. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages.
d. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: “Prior to foundation
inspection by the City, the Licensed Land Surveyor of record shall provide a written
certification that all building setbacks comply with the Approved Plans,” which note shall
represent a condition which must be satisfied to remain in compliance with this Design
Review Approval.
8. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Saratoga Building Department.
9. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the City Engineer, as applicable.
10. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the City Arborist, as applicable,
prior to issuance of building permits.
11. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Santa Clara County Fire
Department, as applicable.
17
Resolution No. 13-018
12. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Sewer District, as applicable,
prior to issuance of building permits.
18
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
ARBORIST REPORT
It is the responsibility of the owner, architect and contractor to be familiar with the
information in this report and implement the required conditions.
Application #: ARB13-0001
Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Site: 14451 Fruitvale Avenue
Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owner: Paulsen Lee
Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN: 397-17-007
Email: plee20315@gmail.com
Report History:
#1
Date:
Plans received February 21, 2013
Report completed March 26, 2013
#2 – this report revises and replaces report #1
Revised plans received April 5, 2013
Report completed April 23, 2013
PROJECT SCOPE
The applicant has submitted plans to the City to demolish the existing house and build a new two
story house with attached three car garage, a sport court and a swimming pool.
Two trees (evergreen pear #53 and camphor #54) protected by City Code are requested for removal
to construct the project. Another tree (plum #50) is in conflict with the project as well. All three trees
meet the criteria allowing their removal as part of the project once all permits have been obtained.
CLEARANCE – with conditions
This project has clearance from the arborist to proceed, with the conditions noted below in the
Conditions of Approval section.
PLAN REVIEW
Plans Reviewed:
Architectural plans were prepared by L. H. C. Construction, Inc. and dated January 26, 2013. Plan
sheets reviewed for this report include Sheet A-0, Tiitle Sheet; Sheet A1, Site Plan; Sheet A2.1, First
Floor Plan; Sheet A2.3, Second Story Floor Plan; Sheet A3.1 and A3.2, Elevations; and Sheet A3.3,
Sections.
Civil plans were prepared by LE Engineering and dated February 1, 2013. Plan sheets reviewed for
this report include Sheet C1, Site Plan; Sheet C2, Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan; and
Sheet C3, Sections and Details.
Landscape plans were prepared by Greencraft Studio (no date). Plans reviewed for this report
include Sheet L-1, Landscape Plan and Sheet L-2, Irrigation Plan.
Page 1 of 7
19
14451 Fruitvale Avenue
The revised plans have deleted a sport court in the back yard by trees #36 – 38. The three ash trees
can be adequately protected with this design.
The water line and a line from the drainage dissipater to a storm drain outlet have been relocated and
are sufficiently far from trees 6 and 12 to provide adequate protection.
TREE INFORMATION
Tree Inventory:
A total of 36 trees protected by City Code were inventoried for this report. An additional 18 trees
identified on the landscape plans are not protected by City Code, and may be removed at any time
without a permit. Unprotected trees include trees #20, 23, 27 – 35, and 39 – 45.
Trees protected by City Code included fifteen coast redwoods (#1 – 4, 14 – 19, 21, 22 and 24 – 26),
eight valley oaks (#5, 6, 8, 10 – 13 and 46), five coast live oaks (#7, 9, 47, 49 and 51), three
Evergreen ash (#36 – 38), one Monterey pine (#48), one flowering plum (#50), one English walnut
(#52), one Evergreen pear (#53), and one camphor (#54). Data for each tree can be found in the Tree
Inventory Table attached to the end of this report. Some of the appraised values in the prior Tree
Inventory Table did not correspond to the correct tree, and this has been corrected in this report.
Locations of trees and protective fencing can be seen on the attached copy of the site plan.
Tree Removals:
Three trees have been requested for removal to construct the project. They include one plum (#50),
one evergreen pear tree (#53) and one camphor tree (#54). All three trees meet the criteria allowing
their removal. See the Findings section below for a detailed discussion.
Tree Protection:
Chain link fencing is required around individual trees or groups of trees for protection during
construction, and work is not permitted within these fenced areas. Fenced areas are shown on the
attached site map. See the Conditions of Approval for tree protection fence specifications.
Redwoods #1 – 4 and 14, and oaks #5, 7, 9 and 11:
Construction of the new driveway has the potential to have a significant impact on these trees. To
best protect them, no excavation for the new driveway should occur under their canopies. I
recommend retaining the existing asphalt driveway during construction, and overlaying the new
driveway pavers on top of it. They can be contained with a concrete curb on top of grade. This
eliminates the need for excavation and soil compaction under these trees and minimizes construction
impacts to their root systems.
The driveway should remain at least 4 feet from the trunks of redwoods #1 – 4 and valley oaks #5
and 11. It should also be constructed entirely on top of grade where it is under the canopy of a
protected tree.
Installation of a property line fence is acceptable. Hand digging for four inch fence posts to install
the fence is acceptable.
Placement of river rock against the trunks of these oaks is not advised. A distance of one foot or
more between the rock and the tree trunk is preferable. A better landscape under the trees would be a
mulch of wood chips which will gradually decompose and provide nutrients to them.
Page 2 of 7
20
14451 Fruitvale Avenue
Valley oaks #6, 12 and 13:
Oak tree #6 grows right next to a drainage swale in the front of the property. To best protect this tree,
no excavation for utilities, and no installation of fill soil should occur within 20 feet of its trunk.
Valley oak #12 is one of the several excellent trees on this property and the young oak near it is also
in good condition. The steps to the entrance of the house and the walkway have been relocated so
they are 8 feet from tree #12. This is acceptable as long as the walkway and steps are installed on top
of grade, with no need for excavation within 15 feet of the tree. Flagstones or stepping stones are
acceptable, as are gravel or pavers contained with a curb on top of grade.
Redwoods #14 – 26:
The proposed storm drain line along this row of trees must be installed so that no roots measuring
two inches or more are cut. The Project Arborist should supervise this part of the work.
Security Deposit for the Projection of Trees:
Pursuant to City Code section 15-50.080(d), a tree protection security deposit is required for this
project. Projects with multiple structures require a deposit equal to 100% of the total appraised value
of potentially impacted trees. A tree protection security equal to 100% of the appraised value of trees
#1 – 14, 47 – 49, 51, and 52 is $96,730.
Owner shall obtain, and file with the Community Development Department, the required security
deposit prior to receiving building permits. The security deposit may be in the form of a savings
account, a certificate of deposit account or a bond. This deposit will be held until completion of the
project and acceptance by the City.
Appraisals:
Appraised values were calculated using the Trunk Formula Method and according to the Guide for
Plant Appraisal, 9th Edition, published by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), 2000.
This was used in conjunction with the Species Classification and Group Assignment, published by
the Western Chapter of the ISA, 2004.
FINDINGS
Tree Removal
Whenever a tree is requested for removal as part of a project, certain findings must be made and
specific tree removal criteria met. Three trees are in conflict with this project. They include and one
plum (#50) in conflict with a retaining wall in the back yard, and one evergreen pear (53) and one
camphor (#54) in conflict with the house,. All three trees meet the criteria allowing them to be
removed and replaced as part of the project, once building division permits have been obtained.
Tree #50 is an aging fruit tree with multiple trunks that will not survive construction of the walls
around the vegetable beds (criterion #1). Trees #53 and 54 are in the footprint of the proposed new
home and requested for removal to construct the project (criterion #1). These trees are not in good
enough condition to require modifying the design to protect them, and there are other, more valuable
and trees on the property that are more suitable for preservation (criteria #4, 6 and 7). The property
has numerous trees in good condition (criterion #4), and the site would be better served by planting
replacement trees after the house has been built (criteria #7 and 9).
Page 3 of 7
21
14451 Fruitvale Avenue
The table below summarizes which of the tree removal criteria are met for each tree, allowing its
removal. All three trees meet the criteria for removal, overall, and may be removed and replaced as
part of the project. The tree removal criteria are attached to the end of this report for reference.
Summary of Tree Removal Criteria that are met
Tree # Criteria met Criteria not met
50 1, 4, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 6, 8
53 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 8
54 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 8
Replacement Trees:
The total appraised value of trees #50, 53 and 54 is $9,480. New trees equal to this appraised value
will be required as a condition of the project. Replacement trees may be planted anywhere on the
property. Replacement values for new trees are listed at the bottom of the Tree Inventory Table
attached to the end of this report.
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.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. This entire arborist report, including the Tree Inventory Table and attached map showing
locations for tree protection fencing shall be copied on to a plan sheet, titled “Tree
Preservation” and included in the final job copy set of plans.
2. The designated Project Arborist shall be Richard Gessner of Monarch Consulting LLC.
3. The Project Arborist shall monitor the activities listed below and provide a letter to the City
documenting the work and including photos.
a. Installation of the drain line along redwoods #14 – 26.
b. Installation of the driveway by redwoods #1 – 4, and 14 – 17, and oaks #5, 7, 9, 11,
12 and 13.
c. Installation of the front walkways by oak trees #12 and 13.
d. Digging for the drain line and water line between oak trees #7 and 46.
4. Trenching to install new utilities or connect existing utilities to new shall not be permitted
inside tree protection fencing, unless authorized by the City Arborist prior to submitting to
the Building Division for review.
5. The proposed location for the water line and a drain line (one trench) is approved. This
trench shall be dug by hand for the first two feet.
6. Where excavation under trees has been approved, all roots measuring two inches or more in
diameter shall be retained and worked around. Utility lines (or other components of the
Replacement Tree Values:
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
Page 4 of 7
22
14451 Fruitvale Avenue
project) shall be placed under retained roots or farther away from the roots. Roots measuring
less than two inches in diameter may be cut using a sharp pruning tool.
7. Tree Protection Security Deposit - $96,730
a. Shall be equal to 100% of the total appraised value of potentially impacted trees if the
project includes multiple structures.
b. Shall be for trees #1 – 14, 47 – 49, 51 and 52.
c. Shall be obtained by the owner and filed with the Community Development Department
before obtaining Building Division permits.
d. Shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project.
e. May be released once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the
City.
8. Tree Protection Fencing:
a. Shall be installed as shown on the attached map.
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”.
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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. The driveway shall remain at least 4 feet from trees #1 – 5, 7, 9, 11 and 14; and at least 15
feet from tree #12.
13. The front walkway shall remain at least 8 feet from the outside of the trunk of tree #12.
14. Excavation shall remain at least 15 feet from trees #1 – 5, 7, 9, 11, 12 and 13 – 16.
Page 5 of 7
23
14451 Fruitvale Avenue
15. Excavation shall remain at least 20 feet from tree #6 for any part of the project.
16. Where under the canopy of a protected tree, the driveway, walkways or other parts of the
project shall remain entirely on top of the existing grade and constructed of pervious
materials. It is acceptable to contain pavers or other materials with a concrete curb on top of
grade.
17. 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.
18. Trees #50, 53 and 54 meet the criteria for removal and may be removed and replaced once
Building Division permits have been obtained.
19. New trees equal to $9,480 shall be planted as part of the project before final inspection and
occupancy of the new home. New trees from an assortment of sizes and a variety of species may
be planted to satisfy the replacement tree requirement.
20. 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
21. Replacement trees may be planted anywhere on the property as long as they do not encroach
on retained trees, and may be of any species. If there is insufficient room to plant new trees,
some or all of the replacement value for trees may be paid into the City’s Tree Fund.
22. Only drought tolerant plants that are compatible with oaks are permitted under the outer half
of the canopy of oak trees on site.
23. Water loving plants and lawns are not permitted under oak tree canopies.
24. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited under
tree canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage to areas under tree canopies.
Herbicides shall not be applied under tree canopies.
25. 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.
ATTACHMENTS:
Tree Removal Criteria
Tree Inventory Table
Map showing locations of trees and protective fencing around trees
Page 6 of 7
24
14451 Fruitvale Avenue
TREE REMOVAL CRITERIA
Criteria that permit the removal of a protected tree are listed below. This information is from Article
15-50.080 of the City Code and is applied to any tree requested for removal as part of the project. If
findings are made that meet the criteria listed below, the tree(s) may be approved for removal and
replacement during construction.
(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;
(2) The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to
improvements or impervious surfaces on the property;
(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;
(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;
(5) The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry
practices;
(6) Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on
the protected tree;
(7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose
and intent of this Article;
(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; and
(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.
Page 7 of 7
25
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
14451 Fruitvale Avenue April 23, 2013
TREE
NO.TREE NAME Trunk Diameter (in,) - per Guide for Plant AppraisalEstimated Canopy Spread (ft.)Health Condition (100% = best, 0% = worst)Structural Integrity (100% = best, 0% = worst)Overall ConditionSuitability for Preservation (High/Moderate/Low)Intensity of Impacts (1 = Highest, 5 = Lowest)In Conflict with Proposed DesignNot Shown on PlansOn Adjacent ProprtyAppraised ValueCoast redwood
1 Sequoia sempervirens 18 15 70 80 Good High 1 X $4,030
Coast redwood
2 Sequoia sempervirens 15 15 70 80 Good High 1 X $2,820
Coast redwood
3 Sequoia sempervirens 14 15 70 80 Good High 1 X $2,470
Coast redwood
4 Sequoia sempervirens 15 15 70 80 Good High 2 $2,820
Valley oak
5 Quercus lobata 12 25 80 60 Good High 2 $3,360
Valley oak
6 Quercus lobata 29 45 80 50 Good High 2 $19,900
Coast live oak
7 Quercus agrifolia 12, 10 35 70 60 Fair High 4 $5,300
Valley oak
8 Quercus lobata 10.5, 8 25 70 60 Fair High 4 $5,000
Coast live oak
9 Quercus agrifolia 16, 10 35 70 60 Fair High 4 $10,100
Valley oak
10 Quercus lobata 12.5, 12 45 70 70 Good High 2 $9,600
Valley oak
11 Quercus lobata 13.5 25 80 80 Good High 1 X $5,100
Valley oak
12 Quercus lobata 16.5 40 80 80 Good High 2 $9,600
Valley oak
13 Quercus lobata 11 25 80 70 Good High 2 $4,050
Coast redwood
14 Sequoia sempervirens 11 25 90 90 Good High 2 $2,160
Coast redwood
15 Sequoia sempervirens 9 20 80 90 Good High 2 $1,400
26
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
14451 Fruitvale Avenue April 23, 2013
TREE
NO.TREE NAME Trunk Diameter (in,) - per Guide for Plant AppraisalEstimated Canopy Spread (ft.)Health Condition (100% = best, 0% = worst)Structural Integrity (100% = best, 0% = worst)Overall ConditionSuitability for Preservation (High/Moderate/Low)Intensity of Impacts (1 = Highest, 5 = Lowest)In Conflict with Proposed DesignNot Shown on PlansOn Adjacent ProprtyAppraised ValueCoast redwood
16 Sequoia sempervirens 14 25 80 90 Good High 2 $2,940
Coast redwood
17 Sequoia sempervirens 19 25 80 90 Good High 2 $5,350
Coast redwood
18 Sequoia sempervirens 14 20 80 90 Good High 2 $2,650
Coast redwood
19 Sequoia sempervirens 12 25 80 90 Good High 2 $2,190
Coast redwood
20 Sequoia sempervirens not protected by City Code $0
Coast redwood
21 Sequoia sempervirens 10 15 70 80 Good High 2 $1,370
Coast redwood
22 Sequoia sempervirens 16 25 70 80 Good High 2 $3,370
Coast redwood
23 Sequoia sempervirens not protected by City Code $0
Coast redwood
24 Sequoia sempervirens 7 15 70 80 Good High 3 $640
Coast redwood
25 Sequoia sempervirens 6 15 70 80 Good High 3 $490
Coast redwood
26 Sequoia sempervirens 8 15 80 80 Good High 3 $1,010
Camphor
27 Cinnamomum camphora not protected by City Code $0
Camphor
28 Cinnamomum camphora not protected by City Code $0
Camphor
29 Cinnamomum camphora not protected by City Code $0
Camphor
30 Cinnamomum camphora not protected by City Code $0
Camphor
31 Cinnamomum camphora not protected by City Code $0
Camphor
32 Cinnamomum camphora not protected by City Code $0
Camphor
33 Cinnamomum camphora not protected by City Code $0
Camphor
34 Cinnamomum camphora not protected by City Code $0
Camphor
35 Cinnamomum camphora not protected by City Code $0
27
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
14451 Fruitvale Avenue April 23, 2013
TREE
NO.TREE NAME Trunk Diameter (in,) - per Guide for Plant AppraisalEstimated Canopy Spread (ft.)Health Condition (100% = best, 0% = worst)Structural Integrity (100% = best, 0% = worst)Overall ConditionSuitability for Preservation (High/Moderate/Low)Intensity of Impacts (1 = Highest, 5 = Lowest)In Conflict with Proposed DesignNot Shown on PlansOn Adjacent ProprtyAppraised ValueEvergreen ash
36 Fraxinus uhdei 10 20 80 60 Fair Moderate 2 $380
Evergreen ash 8.5, 6, 4,
37 Fraxinus uhdei 3, 3 20 60 30 Poor Low 2 $470
Evergreen ash
38 Fraxinus uhdei 15 30 80 60 Good Moderate 2 $1,110
Italian cypress
39 Cupressus sempervirens not protected by City Code $0
Italian cypress
40 Cupressus sempervirens not protected by City Code $0
Mayten
41 Matenus boaria not protected by City Code $0
European white birch
42 Betula pendula not protected by City Code $0
Fern pine
43 Podocarpus gracilior not protected by City Code $0
Fern pine
44 Podocarpus gracilior not protected by City Code $0
European olive
45 Olea europaea not protected by City Code $0
Valley oak
46 Quercus lobata 10 20 80 80 Good High 4 $3,140
Coast live oak
47 Quercus agrifolia 12.5 15 90 90 Good High 3 X $3,260
Monterey pine
48 Pinus radiata 24 35 80 60 Good High 2 $2,440
Coast live oak
49 Quercus agrifolia 11 15 80 70 Good High 2 $2,130
Flowering plum 8.5, 8,
50 Prunus sp.6, 4.5 25 80 50 Fair Moderate 2 $4,050
Coast live oak 5, 5,
51 Quercus agrifolia 5, 5, 5 20 70 70 Good High 2 X $2,180
English walnut
52 Juglans regia 11 20 50 50 Fair High 2 X $410
Evergreen pear
53 Pyrus kawakamii 11 15 60 60 Fair Moderate 1 X $1,450
Camphor
54 Cinnamomum camphora 12 20 90 70 Good Low 1 X $3,980
Total appraised value $108,100
Should any tree listed above be removed owner will be required to replace that tree with trees equal to its appraised value.
28
Legend
Tree Canopy
Tree Protective Fence
53
54
50
47
48
51
49
55
14451 Fruitvale Avenue
29
CITY OF SARATOGA
Community Development Department
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 868-1222
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The City of Saratoga’s Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on:
Wednesday, the 22nd of May, 2013, at 7:00 p.m.
The public hearing will be held in the City Hall Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. A
site visit will also be held by the Planning Commission at the subject property. Please contact the
Planning Department for the date and time of the site visit. The public hearing agenda item is
stated below. Details of this item are available at the Saratoga Community Development
Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Please consult the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures.
APPLICATION/ADDRESS: PDR13-0012 / 14451 Fruitvale Avenue
APPLICANT/OWNER: Paulson Lee
APN: 397-17-007
DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review approval to replace an existing 2,113
square foot home with a new 5,370 square foot, 26 feet tall, two-story home. The gross lot size is
approximately 45,284 square feet and the site is zoned R-1-40,000.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. In order for information
to be included in the Planning Commission’s information packets, written communications should
be filed on or before Tuesday, May 13 , 2013.
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject
of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor’s office annually, in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a
project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this
notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone
in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
Christopher Alan Riordan, AICP
Senior Planner
(408) 868-1235
30
ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
MARIO L & ROSE R BELOTTI 19401 SAN MARCOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070
VIRGINIA F MC CUE 19411 SAN MARCOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070
ANDREW R BANO 19421 SAN MARCOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070
KATHERINE JEN 19431 SAN MARCOS RD SARATOGA CA 95070
RENYU & QIAN SHELLY CAO 14450 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
MCDOWELL J & MARILYN J 16909 TERMINOUS RD ISLETON CA 95641
THOMAS J & OLSEN-LAWRENCE JEANNE LAWRENCE 14470 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
WEST VALLEY JT COMMUNITY COLLEGE 14000 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
MICHAEL J ARNOLD 19521 DOUGLASS LN SARATOGA CA 95070
RALPH J & SANDRA L MULLINS 19573 DOUGLASS LN SARATOGA CA 95070
BONNIE K YAMAOKA 19625 DOUGLASS LN SARATOGA CA 95070
JERRY & JOYCE LAHANN 19516 DOUGLASS LN SARATOGA CA 95070
ABDY MIRZADEGAN 14431 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
PAULSON LEE 14451 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
MICHELYNN SOUVANNAVONG 14535 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
JOHN P & CHERYL B COLMAN 14566 EL PUENTE WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
ALLEN G & GLADYS J FONG PO BOX 3058 SARATOGA CA 95070
SIKANDAR R & MAHNAZ NAQVI 19611 VERSAILLES WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
DAVID W & GRACE S YEN 19653 VERSAILLES WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
ROBIN S & JIN KIM HAN 14403 BLACK WALNUT CT SARATOGA CA 95070
ROBERT G & DIANNE L GARGUS 14455 BLACK WALNUT CT SARATOGA CA 95070
ANGELIKI & KENNETH FRANGADAKIS 14487 BLACK WALNUT CT SARATOGA CA 95070
MARY F OBERHAUSER 14462 BLACK WALNUT CT SARATOGA CA 95070
MILTON J & JOANNE PAGONIS 14450 BLACK WALNUT CT SARATOGA CA 95070
ELISA A & GARY E PAGONIS 14448 BLACK WALNUT CT SARATOGA CA 95070
IAIN D & ROSALIND E ALLAN 14426 BLACK WALNUT CT SARATOGA CA 95070
TIMOTHY J & MARGERY F WALSH 19550 DOUGLASS LN SARATOGA CA 95070
HENRY R & RANDIE L NOTHHAFT 14563 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
DENNIS SHING-DER & YI-PING CHU CHEN 14551 FRUITVALE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
HIEU NGOC DANG 4703 MOUNTAIRE CT SAN JOSE CA 95138
JOSEPH & CELIA M MAGLIONE 19459 BURGUNDY WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
SEONG H & INHWA L KANG 19471 BURGUNDY WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
SHAHID K & SALMA SIDDIQUIQ 19493 BURGUNDY WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Permeable Interlocking
Concrete Pavements (PICP’s)
• CBC Title 24/ADA Compliant
• LEED Functional
• Optimum balance of surface
infiltration and joint interlock
• Available in a 6 x 9 Quarry Stone
that provides a natural look
• Available in a 4 x 8 that’s perfect
for architectural applications
• Easily integrated with our
standard paving stone lines
calstone.com
Permeable Pavers
47
THE PROBLEM
Urbanization has increased excess storm
water runoff from impervious surfaces.
Impervious surfaces prevent ground
water from being recharged and decrease
the availability of drinking water in many
communities. Increased runoff causes
stream bank erosion and results in additional
pollutants being transported to reservoirs,
lakes, and oceans.
Why PICP is right for our environment...
THE SOLUTION
Permeable interlocking concrete pavements
are typically built on an open-graded,
crushed stone base. The base offers infiltration
and partial treatment of stormwater pollution
and therefore, can be categorized as a structural
BMP (Best Management Practice). Infiltration
of rainfall helps maintain the balance of water
in the soil, groundwater, and streams, thus
supporting the water cycle. Besides reducing
runoff, a certain degree of treatment occurs
to the various pollutants in the water.
If the infiltration capacity of the soil is
exceeded, or there are particularly high
levels of pollutants, the pavement base can
be designed to filter, partially treat, cool,
and slowly release water into a storm sewer
or water course. When conditions allow,
channeling rainfall to the natural aquifer
through infiltration is possible.
Typical cross (PICP) cross section
Permeable interlocking concrete pavement
(PICP) with open-graded base and subbase
for infiltration and storage.
3 1/8 in. (80 mm) thick
Calstone Permeable Pavers
Open-graded
bedding course
Open-graded
base course (OGB)
Open-graded subbase on
non-compacted soil subgrade
Water Flow Calstone Concrete Permeable Pavers
Permeable Joint Material
Open-graded
Bedding Course
Open-graded
Base Reservoir
Open-graded
Sub-base Reservoir
Under Drain
(as required)
Optional Geotextile
Under Sub-base
Non-compacted
Sub-grade Soil
48
BENEFITS OF PERMEABLE
PAVING STONES
• Improved water quality
• Reduced construction
costs of drainage system
• Reduces storm water
runoff and flooding
• Preserves our stream
beds and river banks
• Can sustain heavy loading
• Increases storm water storage
• Promotes groundwater recharge
• Can be mechanically installed
• Allows water infiltration to tree roots
• Increased lot usage
APPLICATIONS
• Commercial & residential driveways
• Public parking lots
• Emergency vehicles access lanes
• Pedestrian paths
• Commercial entrances
• Plazas
The unique design of the pavers include a
spacing gap that is filled with crushed stone
joint material that provides very high
infiltration rates to handle severe weather.
49
6 x 9 Quarry Stone Specifications
• 76 square feet per pallet
• 210 stones per pallet
• 5.91” x 8.86” Coverage Area
• 80 millimeter height
• 2.75 stones per square foot
• 6.0% open area
• Joint material should be stone size
# 89 or # 9 and conform to ASTM D448
• 30 inches per hour initial infiltration rate
50
4 x 8 Product Specifications
• 88 square feet per pallet
• 400 full stones / 24 half stones per pallet
• 3.94” x 7.87” Coverage Area
• 80 millimeter height
• 4.7 stones per square foot
• 5.8% open area
• Joint material should be stone size
#89 or #9 and conform to ASTM D448
• 30 inches per hour initial infiltration rate
Antiqued
Standard
The 4x8 permeable paving stone can be
manufactured in any of our Quarry Stone
colors, (as shown on the next page), or our
Classic Cobble colors, which can be viewed at
calstone.com in the Paving Stone section.
51
Color Selection Guide From a natural stone origin, using up to six
blended colors, we created nine distinctively
blended choices. Permeable Pavers come in
all the Quarry Stone colors shown on this page.
Tuscan Gold
Connecticut Green
Sierra Granite
Calico Ridge
Chaco Canyon
Sequoia Sandstone
Sunset Terra Cotta
Rustic Yellowstone
52
Where Calstone Concrete Pavers Can
Help Your Project Achieve LEED Credits:
LEED Credit
Sustainable Sites (SS)
6.1 - Storm Water Design
Quantity Control
1 Point
Sustainable Sites (SS)
6.2 - Storm Water Design
Quantity Control
1 Point
Sustainable Sites (SS)
7.1 - Heat Island Effect
1 Point 50%
2 Points 100% (ID)
Materials and Resources (MR)
2.1 and 2.2 - Construction
Waste Management
1 Point 50%
2 Points 75%
3 Points 95% (ID)
Materials and Resources (MR)
3.1 and 3.2 - Materials Reuse
1 Point 5%
2 Points 10%
3 Points 15% (ID)
Materials and Resources (MR)
4.1 and 4.2 - Recycled Content
1 Point 10%
2 Points 20%
3 Points 30% (ID)
Materials and Resources (MR)
5.1 and 5.2 - Regional Materials
1 Point 10%
2 Points 20%
3 Points 40% (ID)
Innovation in Design (ID)
1.1 - 1.4
LEED Intent
Limit disruption of natural water
hydrology by reducing impervious
cover, increasing on-site infiltration,
and managing stormwater runoff.
Reduce or eliminate water
pollution by reducing impervious
cover, increasing on-site infiltration,
eliminating sources of contaminants,
and removing pollutants from
stormwater runoff.
Reduce heat islands (thermal
gradient differences between
developed and undeveloped areas)
to minimize impact on microclimate
and human and wildlife habitat.
Divert construction and demolition
debris from disposal in landfills.
Redirect recyclable recovered
resources back to the
manufacturing process.
Reuse building materials in order to
reduce demand for virgin materials
and to reduce waste, thereby
reducing impacts associated with
the extraction and processing of
virgin resources.
Increase demand for building
products that incorporate recycled
content materials, thereby reducing
impacts resulting from extraction
and processing of virgin materials.
Increase demand for building
materials and products that are
extracted and manufactured within
the region, thereby supporting the
use of indigenous resources and
reducing the environmental impacts
resulting from transportation.
To provide design teams and
projects the opportunity to be
awarded points for exceptional
performance.
How Calstone Pavers Contributes
Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavement
(PICP) captures and treats stormwater beneath
the pavement Captured stormwater can be
infiltrated to ground water, released at a
controlled rate to a storm drain, or harvested
for use in any of 5 water efficiency credits
PICP systems can be designed to infiltrate all
stormwater on site. Water that is infiltrated on
site is considered 100% treated. All PICP’s
reduce the Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in
captured water.
Calstone offers high albedo colors that reduce
heat absorption. Lighter colored pavements aid
in improving night time visibility and reduce site
lighting requirements.
100% of the materials used in a PICP
system are recyclable, and 100% of Calstone
packaging materials are recyclable. All shipping
pallets, excess paving stones, cut & scrap
stones, and base & bedding materials, can be
returned directly to Calstone for on-site recycling.
Paving stones, and most of the components
in a PICP system, are completely reusable.
A PICP can be removed and replaced in the
original or new layout with little to no additional
material required.
Calstone is constantly active in research and
development of mix designs using recycled
materials. Special high recycled content custom
mix designs are available. Many of these designs
offer additional performance advantages.
All Calstone manufacturing facilities service
the same area within a 500 mile radius. Over
99% of the materials used in our paving stones
are sourced within a 500 mile radius.
Additional points as noted above for
exemplary performance SS 7.1,
MR 2.2, 3.2, 4.2, and 5.2
53
Manufacturing Service Centers:
Galt - phone (209) 745-2981
421 Crystal Way, Galt, CA 95632
Tracy - phone (209) 833-7366
426 East Grant Line Road, Tracy, CA 95376
calstone.com
San Martin - phone (408) 686-9627
13775 Llagas Ave. San Martin, CA 95046
Sunnyvale - phone (408) 984-8800
1155 Aster Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94086
INSTALLATION
For Design, Construction, and Maintenance
please refer to: ICPI - Permeable Interlocking
Concrete Pavements by David R. Smith.
Installation drawings are available at
www.icpi.org in the publications section.
For a complete set of specifications go to
www.calstone.com under specifications
in the paving stone section.
Technical Guidelines
• Pavers conform to ASTM C936
• Construction aggregates must
conform to ASTM D448
• Joint filling stone gradation:
ASTM # 89 or 9
• Base gradation: ASTM # 57
• Subbase gradation: ASTM # 2, 3 or 4
(railroad ballast)
• Soil subgrade: classified per ASTM D2487;
tested for permeability per ASTM D3385
• Structural design: ICPI design chart
determines minimum base thickness to
support pedestrian and vehicular traffic
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
REPORT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: June 12, 2013
Application: PDR13-0006
Location / APN: 14921 Sobey Road / 397-04-127
Owner/Applicant: Brian Vajdic
Staff Planner: Christopher Riordan
14921 SOBEY ROAD
71
14921 SOBEY ROAD
Summary
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review approval to construct a new 5,215
square foot two story single family home with a 1,055 square foot basement and related site
improvements on a vacant site located at 14921 Sobey Road.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 13-024 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.
PROJECT DATA:
Net Site Area: 39,030 SF
Average Slope: 17%
General Plan Designation: RVLD (Residential Very Low Density)
Zoning: R-1-40,000
Proposed Allowed/Required
Proposed Site Coverage
Residential Footprint
Pool & Patio
Wood Pool Deck (50%)
DG Paths & Fire Pit (50%)
Parking and Driveway
Permeable Pavers (50%)
Total Proposed Site Coverage
4,715 sq. ft.
1,764 sq. ft.
313 sq. ft.
307 sq. ft.
1,612 sq. ft.
577 sq. ft.
9,288 sq. ft. (23.8%)
Maximum Coverage allowed is
15,849 SF (35%)
Floor Area
Main Level
Lower Level
Garage
Total Floor Area
3,501 sq. ft.
979 sq. ft. .
735 sq. ft.
5,215 sq. ft.
5,220 sq. ft.
Height (Residence)
Lowest Elevation Point:
Highest Elevation Point:
Average Elevation Point:
Proposed Topmost Point:
Total Proposed Height
375.00
390.00
382.50
408.50
(26.00 Ft.)
Maximum Building Height is
(26 Feet)
Setbacks
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
1st Story
30’
20’
30’-5”
116’-0”
2nd Story
30’
NA
35’-5”
116’-0”
1st Story
30’
20’
20’
50’
2nd Story
30
30
30
60
Grading Cut
900 CY
Fill
100 CY
Total
1,000 CY
No grading limit in the R-1-
40,000 zoning district
Page 2 of 7
72
14921 SOBEY ROAD
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Site Description: The vacant project site is located at 14921 Sobey Road. A private driveway
provides vehicular access to a total of seven parcels. Numerous protected trees are located on
the property including Coast live and Valley oaks and Eucalyptus.
The average slope of the site is 17 percent with a 35 foot reduction in elevation from the southern
corner of the lot to its northern corner. Existing one and two story homes are located on adjacent
properties as well as across the street.
Project Description and Architectural Style: The new 5,215 square foot, 26’ tall single-family
residence would be located towards the front of the site and so situated to minimize tree related
impacts. The south front facing façade is a combination of one and two story architectural
elements that follow the contours of the site. The eastern façade facing the driveway court and
the northern façade facing the rear of the site would be two stories. The western facing side
façade would be one story. The proposed home would have a Mediterranean design to include a
wide asymmetrical building footprint, a hipped roof with over hanging eaves, canvas window
awnings, barrel style mission roof tiles, decorative corbels, front porch supported by large square
columns, a combination of arched and square windows, wrought iron railings, elaborated
chimney tops, and a combination of stone and stucco for the exterior.
The proposed landscape plan illustrates that the project will predominantly feature drought native
landscaping including native wild flowers and shrubs and 24” box trees that include Italian
cypress, Crape Myrtle, and Olives. A concrete circular driveway would provide vehicular access
to the residence. Other site improvements would include an auto court composed of permeable
pavers; a swimming pool surrounded by a wood deck, and decomposed granite pedestrian
pathways.
Sheet A1 of the Development Plans (Attachment 9) includes a site coverage data table. The total
amount of allowable site coverage is 15,849 sq. ft. or 35 percent. The total amount of proposed
site coverage is 10,484 square feet or 23.8 percent. City Code Section 15-12.080 states that solid
surface decks and compacted surfaces made of porous materials are counted as 50 percent site
coverage and these areas of the project include:
625 sq. ft. wood deck surrounding the pool – counted as 313 sq. ft. of coverage
614 sq. ft. of decomposed granite pathways – counted as 307 sq. ft. of coverage
1,154 sq. ft. of permeable pavers adjacent to the garage – counted as 577 sq. ft. of coverage
The applicant has submitted product specifications for the proposed permeable pavers
(Attachment 8) which indicates that the initial infiltration rate of the pavers is 30 inches per hour.
The project meets all City Code requirements including floor area, height, setbacks, and lot
coverage.
Page 3 of 7
73
14921 SOBEY ROAD
After the project was submitted the applicant met with planning staff to consider modifications to
the project to reduce the visual mass of the building prior to scheduling the project for a public
hearing. The applicant and their architect were receptive to staff’s suggestions and made the
following modifications to the design:
• Reduced the height of the chimneys;
• Removed the stone veneer from the tower element on the front elevation and moved it back
to line up with the front of the building so as to improve its integration with the structure and
to reduce its visual prominence;
• Reduced the size and scale of the front entry;
• Selected a brown colored roof tile to reduce the visual prominence of the roof.
Materials and Colors:
Detail Colors and Materials
Exterior Tan Colored Stucco
Stone Veneer
Windows Brown Colored Wood Windows
Garage Door Brown Stained Wood
Entry Door Brown Stained Wood
Roof A blend of brown colored concrete barrel tiles.
Trees: The Project Arborist inventoried 41 trees on the project site. The City Arborist believes
the findings can be made for the removal of four trees that are in conflict with the proposed
design of the project. These include one Blue oak and three Coast Live oaks. All four trees were
determined to be in either fair or poor health and would not survive construction related impacts.
Non-protected trees proposed for removal include three Italian cypress, and two Palms.
Details of the arborist findings and descriptions of the trees to be removed are included in the
Arborist report which is included as Attachment #2.
Geotechnical Clearance: Wayne Ting and Associates prepared a Geotechnical Investigation report
for the proposed project, dated March 3, 2013. On May 3, 2013, the project received geotechnical
clearance to proceed with conditions from Cotton Shires and Associates (the City’s Geotechnical
Consultant) and the Saratoga Public Works Department. A copy of the geotechnical clearance is
included as Attachment 5.
Residential Calgreen Measures: The project will meet the minimum CalGreen standards for a
new home. The Residential Calgreen Measures Checklist is included as Attachment 6.
Neighbor Notification and Correspondence: The applicant received project related comments
from seven adjacent neighbors. These included five Neighbor Notification forms and two typed
letters. Four of the neighbors noted their concerns with the design of the proposed project as
follows:
• The proposed square footage is too large for the site and the house is out of scale with
adjacent residences;
Page 4 of 7
74
14921 SOBEY ROAD
• Possibility that the road could be damaged and/or blocked during construction;
• The front setback should be increased to reduce the project’s visual prominence;
• Blocking of valley views.
Copies of the neighbor correspondence are included as Attachment 4.
A Public Notice was also sent to property owners within 500 feet of the site. No additional
concerns have been brought to the City’s attention as of the writing of this staff report.
FINDINGS
Design Review Findings:
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review approval pursuant to City Code Article 15-
45 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those
required findings:
(a) The project avoids unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The project meets this
finding in that the number and size of second story windows on the side elevations have been
reduced and existing trees, vegetation, and distance between structures would screen and reduce
views from these windows toward adjacent properties. The privacy impacts of the second story
balcony located on the north elevation on adjacent properties to the rear is reduced by the
greater than 130 setback from the rear property line as well as the existing dense vegetation.
Mature trees are located on the sides and rear of the property which helps to screen offsite views
of project.
(b) The project preserves the natural landscape. The project meets this finding in that only four
protected trees are proposed for removal and formal landscaping would be kept close to the
developed area of the site the site thereby leaving approximately over half of the site in its
current natural state.
(c) The project preserves protected, native and heritage trees. The project meets this finding in that
only four protected trees which include one Blue oak and three Coast Live oaks are being
removed primarily because these trees are in poor condition and would not survive construction
related impacts. The project architect and landscape designer coordinated their efforts with the
City Arborist to preserve the remaining protected and native trees on the site. The site does not
contain any heritage trees. The project is conditioned so that replacement trees will be planted
on site to replace the trees proposed for removal. All protected trees will be fenced to reduce
the chances that these trees will be damaged during construction.
(d) The project minimizes the perception of excessive bulk. The project meets this finding in that
the south facing façade facing the street is primarily a one story mass. The tallest portions of the
structure face the rear of the site which is not visible from the street or from the rear adjacent
properties due to topography and dense vegetation. The impression of building height as
viewed from the street is reduced as the building has wide horizontal proportions that take up
the majority of the site width, there are consistent hipped roof forms with sufficient architectural
Page 5 of 7
75
14921 SOBEY ROAD
articulation and projections to reduce the impression of bulk, and blank building walls are
avoided by the use of windows and architectural detailing. Natural stone veneer would be
included on some of the larger architectural projections to integrate these features with the
remainder of the building. The neutral color pallet and natural materials would aid in blending
the home with the proposed landscaping. Mature Oak trees help screen the building as viewed
from offsite.
(e) The project is of compatible bulk and height. The project meets this finding in that proposed
two story home is compatible in bulk and height with the nearby two-story homes in the
neighborhood. The adjacent house to the north is a one-story home but the difference in bulk
and height as compared to the proposed home is mitigated by the distance between structures
and existing landscaping that separates the two properties.
(f) The project uses current grading and erosion control methods. The project meets this finding
in that it is conditioned to meet required grading and erosion control standards.
(g) The project follows appropriate design policies and techniques. Policy 1: Minimize Perception
of Bulk – maintaining a primarily single story façade facing the street, building width of greater
proportion than height to reduce impression of height, the use of consistent roof forms, the use
of material and colors to reduce bulk and break up the massing, minimizing building height and
designing structure to fit with the site and the existing neighborhood. Policy 2: Integrate
Structures with Environment – the use of natural materials and colors, using landscaping to
blend with the environment and blending roof and parking surfaces with the environment.
Policy 3: Avoid Interference with Privacy - controlling views to adjacent properties, locating
buildings to minimize privacy impact, and using landscaping to enhance privacy. Policy 4:
Preserve Views and Access to Views – locating structure to minimize view blockage and
locating structure to reduce height impact. Policy 5: Design for Energy Efficiency – designing
for maximum benefit of sun and wind as well as allowing light, air and solar access to adjacent
homes, and incorporating energy-saving measures into the design.
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 and no exception to
that exemption applies.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 13-024 approving the project, subject to
conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval for Design Review
2. Arborist Report
3. Public Hearing Notice, Mailing Addresses for Project Notification
4. Neighbor Correspondence and Notification Forms
5. Geotechnical Clearance
6. Cal Green Checklist
Page 6 of 7
76
14921 SOBEY ROAD
Page 7 of 7
7. Site Photos
8. Permeable Pavers Manufacture Specifications
9. Development Plans (Exhibit "A")
77
RESOLUTION NO: 13-024
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A NEW TWO STORY, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOCATED AT 14921 SOBEY ROAD
WHEREAS, on March 26, 2013, an application was submitted by Cherine Bassal on
behalf of Branislav Vajdic requesting Design Review approval to construct a new two story single
family home located at 14921 Sobey Road. The project has a total floor area of 5,215 square feet.
The height of the proposed residence is approximately 26 feet. The site is located within the R-1-
40,000 Zoning District (APN 397-04-127).
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 June 12, 2013, 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 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 and no exception to that exemption applies.
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; Land Use Element Goal 10 which minimizes the impact of
development proposals in hillside areas by requiring visual analyses and imposition of conditions to
prevent or reduce significant visual impacts; and 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 avoids unreasonable
interference with views and privacy; preserves the natural landscape; native and heritage trees;
minimizes the perception of excessive bulk and is of compatible bulk and height; uses current
grading and erosion methods; and follows appropriate design polices and techniques.
78
Resolution No. 13-024
Section 5: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the removal of four
protected trees meets the criteria established in Section 15-50.080(a).
Section 6: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR13-0006
located at 14921 Sobey Road Avenue 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 12th day of
June 2013 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Joyce Hlava
Chair, Planning Commission
79
Resolution No. 13-024
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR13-0006
14921 SOBEY ROAD
(APN 397-04-127)
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this
project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting
all applicable permanent 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 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 City Code 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.
80
Resolution No. 13-024
5. Site Drainage. The owner/applicant shall comply with all City requirements regarding
drainage, including but not limited to complying with the city approved stormwater
management plan. The project shall retain and/or detain any increase in design flow from the
site, that is created by the proposed construction and grading project, such that adjacent down
slope properties will not be negatively impacted by any increase in flow. Design must follow
the 2007 Santa Clara County Drainage Manual method criteria, as required by the building
department. Retention/detention element design must follow the Drainage Manual guidelines, as
required by the building department. Additionally, the site development plan must not restrict,
obstruct or alter the existing natural drainage swale along the rear property in any way that
would cause or increase erosion.
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 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 City Code.
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.
b. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, notes, and/or materials required by the
Building Division.
c. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages.
d. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: “Prior to foundation
inspection by the City, the Licensed Land Surveyor of record shall provide a written
certification that all building setbacks comply with the Approved Plans,” which note shall
represent a condition which must be satisfied to remain in compliance with this Design
Review Approval.
8. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Saratoga Building Department.
9. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the City Engineer, as applicable.
10. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the City Arborist, as applicable,
prior to issuance of building permits.
11. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Santa Clara County Fire
Department, as applicable.
12. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Sewer District, as applicable,
prior to issuance of building permits.
81
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
ARBORIST REPORT
It is the responsibility of the owner, architect and contractor to be familiar with the
information in this report and implement the conditions of approval.
Application #: ARB13-0020
Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Site: 14921 Sobey Road
Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owner: Branislav Vajdic
Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN: 397-04-127
Email: vajdic@yahoo.com
Report History:
#1
Date:
Plans received April 15, 2013
Report completed May 2, 2013
#2 – This report revises and replaces report #1.
Revised grading plan received May 16, 2013
Report completed June 3, 2013
PROJECT SCOPE
The applicant has submitted revised plans to the City to build a new two story house with a
basement, attached garage and swimming pool on a vacant lot. The new plans do not require as
much grading, and therefore provide adequate protection for a number of the trees on site which
could not be preserved with the previous plans.
Two trees protected by City Code are requested for removal to construct the project. They are blue
oak #7 and coast live oak #39. Two additional coast live oaks (#15 and 40) are in conflict with the
project as designed. All four trees meet the criteria for removal and replacement as part of the
project.
CLEARANCE – with conditions
This project has clearance from the arborist to proceed, with the conditions noted below in the
Conditions of Approval.
PLAN REVIEW
Plans Reviewed:
Architectural plans were prepared by CB Bassal Architecture and not dated (date not readable). Plan
sheets reviewed for this report include Sheet A1, Cover Sheet and Project Summary; Sheet A2, Site
Plan; Sheet A3, Upper Floor Plan; Sheet A4, Lower Floor Plan; Sheets A5 and A6, Exterior
Elevations; Sheet A8, Sections.
A Landscape Plan (Sheet L1.0) prepared by Blanzscape and dated March 25, 2013 was also
provided for review.
Page 1 of 7
82
14921 Sobey Road
A Grading and Drainage Plan (Sheet C1) was prepared by JAD Engineering, Inc. and dated March
26, 2013.
A Topographic and Boundary Survey was not provided.
Trees are shown on the plans, but are not numbered, and should be numbered on the Site Plan and
Grading and Drainage Plan for ease of reference.
TREE INFORMATION
An arborist report prepared by Deborah Ellis and dated February 8, 2013, was submitted to the City
for this project. Her report is based on a review of a preliminary site sketch, provided appraised
values for trees, and recommendations for tree protection during construction. The designated
Project Arborist for this project will be Deborah Ellis.
Tree Inventory:
The submitted arborist report included an inventory of 41 trees on site. The inventory included all
trees on site plus two on the property to the south. Twenty seven of the inventoried trees are
protected by City Code.
Tree Removals:
Whenever trees are requested for removal as part of a project, specific tree removal criteria must be
met and certain findings made. If trees are approved for removal as part of the project, they may be
removed after the building permit for the project has been issued. New trees become a condition of
approval for the project if trees are approved for removal.
Trees #7 and 39 are requested for removal to construct the project and indicated for removal on the
plans. Two additional coast live oaks (#15 and 40) protected by City Code are in conflict with the
project. These four trees meet the criteria allowing their removal to construct the project. See the
Findings section below for a detailed discussion.
The submitted arborist report recommends the removal of tree #13 because it crowds better oaks on
either side. This tree also meets the criteria for removal and replacement.
Grading:
The original project required extensive grading for the house, basement, driveway and patio. The
revised plans have deleted the need for fill soil around trees in the location where the swimming pool
will be built.
Oak trees #7, 13, 15, 39 and 40 meet the criteria allowing their removal. They may be removed and
replaced as part of the project once building permits have been obtained.
Driveway:
The driveway has been modified to retain and preserve trees #9 - 12. These trees are in reasonable
condition and grow in a grove which provides screening between properties.
Installation of utilities:
Revised plans show utility locations. They are acceptable and allow for the protection of the most
trees.
Page 2 of 7
83
14921 Sobey Road
Tree Protection:
Chain link fencing is required around individual trees or groups of trees for protection during
construction, and work is not permitted within these fenced areas. Fences are to be posted with signs
indicating that they are for the protection of trees and may not be taken down or moved without prior
approval from the City Arborist. See the Conditions of Approval for details. Areas that require
fencing are shown on the map attached to the end of this report. No equipment is permitted on site
until after the City Arborist inspects and approves tree protection fencing.
Required tree protection setbacks:
Tree # Required setback for construction (measure from the outside
of the trunk)
9, 10, 12 4 ft
16, 17, 18, 22, 34 12 ft
35, 36, 37, 38 15 ft
25 33 ft
All other retained trees 5 x DBH as listed in February 8, 2013 arborist report
It is acceptable to install decking around the pool up to the trunks of trees #36, 37 and 38. Holes for
piers to support the deck shall be dug by hand for the first two feet. Any roots measuring two inches
or more in diameter shall be retained and worked around, with the pier relocated to support the deck.
No holes for deck piers should be any closer than five feet from the trunks of these trees.
Security Deposit for the Projection of Trees:
Per City Ordinance 15-50.080, a Tree Protection security deposit is required. Owner shall obtain,
and file with the Community Development Director, the required security deposit prior to the receipt
of building permits. The security deposit may be in the form of a savings account, a certificate of
deposit account or a bond. The required security deposit for this project will be $21,040 for the
protection of trees #9, 10, 12, 16, 17, 36, 37, 38 and 41. This deposit will be held until completion of
the project and acceptance by the City.
Appraisals:
Trees were appraised by Deborah Ellis and values included in the February 8, 2013 arborist report
submitted for this project. Submitted values will be used to determine the tree protection security
deposit requirement and tree replacement requirement.
FINDINGS
Tree Removals:
The plans show trees #7 and 39 in conflict with the project and requested for removal to construct
the house. Trees #13, 15 and 40 are also in conflict with the project and meet the criteria, overall, for
removal and replacement as part of the project.
The table below summarizes the findings for each tree. The trees listed below meet the criteria,
overall, allowing their removal and replacement as part of the project.
Page 3 of 7
84
14921 Sobey Road
Summary of Tree Removal Criteria that are met
Tree # Species Criteria met Criteria not met
7 Blue oak 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 8
13 Coast live oak 1, 4, 5, 7, 9 2, 3, 6, 8
15 Coast live oak 1, 4, 5, 7, 9 2, 3, 6, 8
39 Coast live oak 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 8
40 Coast live oak 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 8
Blue oak #7 is in conflict with the house and driveway (criterion #1). In addition, tree #7 has only
fair structure, tree #15 has a pronounced lean, tree #39 has fungal conks at the base of its trunk and
tree #40 is comprised of sprouts from a stump (criterion #1), all indications of less than acceptable
health or structure. The lot is currently vacant, so trees do not threaten damage to any structures and
do not meet criterion #2. The property is on a hill and all of the trees help to control erosion so
criterion #3 is not met. There are a lot of trees on this property and the project has been modified to
retain the ones specified in the earlier report, so criterion #4 is met. Tree #13 is too close to other
trees for good forestry practices, and criterion #5 is met. Tree #39 should be removed due to the
decay fungus growing at its base, and tree #40 has the sewer line routed through it so criterion #6 is
met. Removing these trees and replacing them with new trees after construction is consistent with
the tree regulations, so their removal meets criterion #7. Because public health and safety are not
affected criterion #8 is not met. Criterion #9 is met in that removal and replacement of these trees
provides economic and aesthetic enjoyment to the owners of the property.
Replacement Trees:
The total appraised value of trees #7, 13, 15, 39 and 40 is $30,220. New trees equal to this total
value are required as a condition of the project. Replacement trees may be planted anywhere on the
property. Replacement values for new trees are listed below.
Tree replacement values:
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
New Construction
This project complies with the requirement that new construction be set far enough from existing
trees to adequately protect them (Section 15-50.120 of the City Code). The design has been modified
to adequately retain, protect and preserve most of the trees on site.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Once the project has clearance, the entire arborist report from the City shall be copied on to a
plan sheet, titled “Tree Preservation”, and included in the final set of job copy plans.
2. The submitted arborist report from Deborah Ellis, shall be incorporated into the final job
copy set of plans as well. Tree numbers, the tree inventory table, and the recommendations
shall all be included in the plans.
3. The designated Project Arborist shall be Deborah Ellis, Consulting Arborist.
Page 4 of 7
85
14921 Sobey Road
4. All recommendations of the February 8, 2013 arborist report by Deborah Ellis shall be
conditions of approval for this project.
5. Tree Protection Security Deposit – $21,040
a. Owner shall obtain, and file with the Community Development Director, a Tree
Protection security deposit for trees #9, 10, 12, 16, 17, 36, 37, 38 and 41, which are
potentially impacted by the project.
b. The deposit shall be put in place prior to obtaining Building Division permits.
c. The deposit shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project to ensure
the protection of the trees.
d. Once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City, the bond will
be released.
6. Tree Protection Fencing:
a. Shall be installed as shown on the attached map.
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 REMOVE
WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST”.
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. If contractor feels that work must be done inside the fenced area, call City
Arborist to arrange a field meeting.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. All protected trees shall be numbered on the site plan.
10. Trees requested for removal shall be clearly indicated on the plans.
11. Decking shall be installed between the pool and trees #36, 37 and 38. Holes for deck piers
shall be hand dug for the first two feet. Holes for deck piers shall not come closer than five
feet from the trees’ trunks.
12. When installing deck piers, roots measuring two inches or more shall be retained and
preserved, and the pier relocated to miss the root. Roots less than two inches in diameter may
be cut using a sharp pruning tool.
Page 5 of 7
86
14921 Sobey Road
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. Roots of protected trees measuring two inches in diameter or more shall not be cut without
prior approval of the City Arborist.
15. Trees #7, 13, 15, 39 and 40 are approved for removal once Building Division permits have
been received.
16. New trees equal to $30,220 shall be planted as part of the project to replace trees #7, 13, 15,
39 and 40.
17. Replacement values for new trees are listed below.
a. 15 gallon = $150 b. 24 inch box = $500 c. 36 inch box = $1,500
d. 48 inch box = $5,000 e. 60 inch box = 7,000 f. 72 inch box = $15,000
18. Replacement trees may be planted anywhere on the property as long as they do not encroach
on retained trees, and may be of any species.
19. The following setbacks shall be maintained for the protection of trees. No work may be done
within these distances without prior approval from the City Arborist.
a. 4 feet – trees #9, 10 and 12
b. 12 feet – trees #16, 17, 18, 22 and 34
c. 15 feet – trees #35, 36, 37 and 38
d. 33 feet – tree #25
e. 5 x DBH (trunk diameter) – all other protected trees on site
20. 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
may be paid into the City’s Tree Fund.
21. 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. Once done, the Project
Arborist shall provide a letter to the City, including photos, discussing how the work was
done and documenting conditions.
22. Landscaping under oak trees:
a. Only drought tolerant plants that are compatible with oaks are permitted under the outer half of
the canopy.
b. Only mulch is permitted under area within the 10 feet of the trunk of an oak.
c. Lawns and water loving plants are not permitted under oaks.
d. Design irrigation so that spray heads are not used under oaks.
e. Design irrigation so that lateral lines, valve boxes and controllers remain outside the canopy of
protected trees.
Page 6 of 7
87
14921 Sobey Road
23. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited under
tree canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage to areas under tree canopies.
Herbicides shall not be applied under tree canopies.
24. 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.
TREE REMOVAL CRITERIA
Criteria that permit the removal of a protected tree are listed below. This information is from Article
15-50.080 of the City Code and is applied to any tree requested for removal as part of the project. If
findings are made that meet the criteria listed below, the tree(s) may be approved for removal and
replacement during construction.
(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;
(2) The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to
improvements or impervious surfaces on the property;
(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;
(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;
(5) The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry
practices;
(6) Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on
the protected tree;
(7) Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose
and intent of this Article;
(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; and
(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.
ATTACHMENTS:
Map showing locations for tree protection fencing from 5-2-13 report
Grading plan showing trees and fencing
Page 7 of 7
88
14921 Sobey Road
Legend
Tree Canopy
Tree Protective Fencing
41
40
39
7 4 5 63 2
1
8
11 10 9
12
13
14
15
17
16
38
36
37
33
35
89
Legend
Tree Canopy
Tree Protective Fencing
41
40 39
7 4 5
63
2 1
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
16
38
36
37
33
35
14921 Sobey Road
90
CITY OF SARATOGA
Community Development Department
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 868-1222
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The City of Saratoga’s Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on:
Wednesday, the 12th of June, 2013, at 7:00 p.m.
The public hearing will be held in the City Hall Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. A
site visit will also be held by the Planning Commission at the subject property. Please contact the
Planning Department for the date and time of the site visit. The public hearing agenda item is
stated below. Details of this item are available at the Saratoga Community Development
Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Please consult the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures.
APPLICATION/ADDRESS: PDR13-0006 / 14921 Sobey Road
APPLICANT/OWNER: Brian Vajdic
APN: 397-04-127
DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Design Review approval to construct a new 5,215
square foot, approximately 26 feet tall, two-story home and related site improvements. The net
lot size is approximately 39,030 square feet and the site is zoned R-1-40,000.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. In order for information
to be included in the Planning Commission’s information packets, written communications should
be filed on or before Tuesday, June 4 , 2013.
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject
of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor’s office annually, in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a
project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this
notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone
in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
Christopher Alan Riordan, AICP
Senior Planner
(408) 868-1235
91
O
N
Parcel Number Owner Name Owner Address
#5542 OWNERSHIP LISTING Prepared for: 1
address
397-04-034 DENIS J & JENNIFER M MATHIAS 14961 SOBEY RD
397-04-035 DENIS J & JENNIFER M MATHIAS 14961 SOBEY RD
397-04-049 JASON W & KATHY C NOLET 14925 SOBEY RD
397-04-050 ARDALAN TRUST 15002 SPERRY LN
397-04-051 SOPHIE P GILES 14949 SOBEY RD
397-04-052 RICHARD BUNCH 1330 N BASCOM AVE #71
397-04-063 COLE FAMILY TR 14982 SOBEY RD
397-04-065 ANOOSHIRAVAN & NADER TARA M 14851 SOBEY RD
397-04-070 MARTIN FINKBEINER 14880 SOBEY RD
397-04-071 PENNY L RIGSBEE 14920 SOBEY RD
397-04-074 IBRAHIM & SANDRA L KORGAV 14853 SOBEY RD
397-04-075 FRANKIE J & DORIS D YOUNGBLOO 14897 SOBEY RD
397-04-078 CAMILLE N & GENEVIEVE E DION 2550 E DESERT INN RD #325
397-04-079 FRANK & PATRICIA ALBERT 19016 SPRING BROOK LN
397-04-080 GEORGE M & JOY A HAYASHIDA PO BOX 2328
397-04-083 DER YANG & FENNAH C GUAN 14952 SOBEY RD
397-04-093 JAGDISH G & SHAKUNTALA J BELA 14960 SOBEY RD
397-04-107 CHIH-CHANG & CHANG I-HSIN LIN 14825 GYPSY HILL RD
397-04-108 JASON SAI YAN KO 14883 GYPSY HILL RD
397-04-109 KEVIN R & GAYLA J COMPTON 14950 GYPSY HILL RD
397-04-110 RAMESH & SREENIVASAN SUDHA S 14904 GYPSY HILL RD
397-04-111 XINPING HE 14858 GYPSY HILL RD
397-04-112 HEMANT & MONISHA BHEDA 14812 GYPSY HILL RD
397-04-126 HOOSHANG ANSARI 14923 SOBEY RD
397-04-127 BRANISLAV VAJDIC 14921 SOBEY RD
397-07-031 QUAT TRAN 15020 SOBEY RD
397-07-086 GREGORY L & KATHRYN J WEINER 14965 SOBEY RD
397-07-092 PARVIZ & AZITA E GHAFFARIPOUR 14435C BIG BASIN WAY #408
397-07-098 RICHARD M COHEN 15012 SPERRY LN
397-07-099 MEILI & HORNG JYH-CHAU LIN 15024 SPERRY LN
397-11-038 I-CHUN & CHANG CHUN-CHIEH LU 15042 EL CAMINO SENDA
397-40-020 HRAYR H & VERA Y MOROYAN 14961 VIA DE MARCOS
397-40-021 ALICE & VAROUZHAN BALUNI 14983 GYPSY HILL RD
397-40-022 NABIL R & SAMIA F BOTROS 15015 GYPSY HILL RD
397-40-026 SINAN DOLUCA 15052 GYPSY HILL RD
397-40-027 CHIH LIANG CHEN 15020 GYPSY HILL RD
397-40-028 MORSHEDI MOJGAN TR 14980 GYPSY HILL RD
397-40-029 SARATOGA CITY OF
92
E
A
G
Owner City, State Zip
city state zip
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SAN JOS CA 95128
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
LAS VEG NV 89121
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATO CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
SARATOG CA 95070
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
Permeable Interlocking
Concrete Pavements (PICP’s)
• CBC Title 24/ADA Compliant
• LEED Functional
• Optimum balance of surface
infiltration and joint interlock
• Available in a 6 x 9 Quarry Stone
that provides a natural look
• Available in a 4 x 8 that’s perfect
for architectural applications
• Easily integrated with our
standard paving stone lines
calstone.com
Permeable Pavers
116
THE PROBLEM
Urbanization has increased excess storm
water runoff from impervious surfaces.
Impervious surfaces prevent ground
water from being recharged and decrease
the availability of drinking water in many
communities. Increased runoff causes
stream bank erosion and results in additional
pollutants being transported to reservoirs,
lakes, and oceans.
Why PICP is right for our environment...
THE SOLUTION
Permeable interlocking concrete pavements
are typically built on an open-graded,
crushed stone base. The base offers infiltration
and partial treatment of stormwater pollution
and therefore, can be categorized as a structural
BMP (Best Management Practice). Infiltration
of rainfall helps maintain the balance of water
in the soil, groundwater, and streams, thus
supporting the water cycle. Besides reducing
runoff, a certain degree of treatment occurs
to the various pollutants in the water.
If the infiltration capacity of the soil is
exceeded, or there are particularly high
levels of pollutants, the pavement base can
be designed to filter, partially treat, cool,
and slowly release water into a storm sewer
or water course. When conditions allow,
channeling rainfall to the natural aquifer
through infiltration is possible.
Typical cross (PICP) cross section
Permeable interlocking concrete pavement
(PICP) with open-graded base and subbase
for infiltration and storage.
3 1/8 in. (80 mm) thick
Calstone Permeable Pavers
Open-graded
bedding course
Open-graded
base course (OGB)
Open-graded subbase on
non-compacted soil subgrade
Water Flow Calstone Concrete Permeable Pavers
Permeable Joint Material
Open-graded
Bedding Course
Open-graded
Base Reservoir
Open-graded
Sub-base Reservoir
Under Drain
(as required)
Optional Geotextile
Under Sub-base
Non-compacted
Sub-grade Soil
117
BENEFITS OF PERMEABLE
PAVING STONES
• Improved water quality
• Reduced construction
costs of drainage system
• Reduces storm water
runoff and flooding
• Preserves our stream
beds and river banks
• Can sustain heavy loading
• Increases storm water storage
• Promotes groundwater recharge
• Can be mechanically installed
• Allows water infiltration to tree roots
• Increased lot usage
APPLICATIONS
• Commercial & residential driveways
• Public parking lots
• Emergency vehicles access lanes
• Pedestrian paths
• Commercial entrances
• Plazas
The unique design of the pavers include a
spacing gap that is filled with crushed stone
joint material that provides very high
infiltration rates to handle severe weather.
118
6 x 9 Quarry Stone Specifications
• 76 square feet per pallet
• 210 stones per pallet
• 5.91” x 8.86” Coverage Area
• 80 millimeter height
• 2.75 stones per square foot
• 6.0% open area
• Joint material should be stone size
# 89 or # 9 and conform to ASTM D448
• 30 inches per hour initial infiltration rate
119
4 x 8 Product Specifications
• 88 square feet per pallet
• 400 full stones / 24 half stones per pallet
• 3.94” x 7.87” Coverage Area
• 80 millimeter height
• 4.7 stones per square foot
• 5.8% open area
• Joint material should be stone size
#89 or #9 and conform to ASTM D448
• 30 inches per hour initial infiltration rate
Antiqued
Standard
The 4x8 permeable paving stone can be
manufactured in any of our Quarry Stone
colors, (as shown on the next page), or our
Classic Cobble colors, which can be viewed at
calstone.com in the Paving Stone section.
120
Color Selection Guide From a natural stone origin, using up to six
blended colors, we created nine distinctively
blended choices. Permeable Pavers come in
all the Quarry Stone colors shown on this page.
Tuscan Gold
Connecticut Green
Sierra Granite
Calico Ridge
Chaco Canyon
Sequoia Sandstone
Sunset Terra Cotta
Rustic Yellowstone
121
Where Calstone Concrete Pavers Can
Help Your Project Achieve LEED Credits:
LEED Credit
Sustainable Sites (SS)
6.1 - Storm Water Design
Quantity Control
1 Point
Sustainable Sites (SS)
6.2 - Storm Water Design
Quantity Control
1 Point
Sustainable Sites (SS)
7.1 - Heat Island Effect
1 Point 50%
2 Points 100% (ID)
Materials and Resources (MR)
2.1 and 2.2 - Construction
Waste Management
1 Point 50%
2 Points 75%
3 Points 95% (ID)
Materials and Resources (MR)
3.1 and 3.2 - Materials Reuse
1 Point 5%
2 Points 10%
3 Points 15% (ID)
Materials and Resources (MR)
4.1 and 4.2 - Recycled Content
1 Point 10%
2 Points 20%
3 Points 30% (ID)
Materials and Resources (MR)
5.1 and 5.2 - Regional Materials
1 Point 10%
2 Points 20%
3 Points 40% (ID)
Innovation in Design (ID)
1.1 - 1.4
LEED Intent
Limit disruption of natural water
hydrology by reducing impervious
cover, increasing on-site infiltration,
and managing stormwater runoff.
Reduce or eliminate water
pollution by reducing impervious
cover, increasing on-site infiltration,
eliminating sources of contaminants,
and removing pollutants from
stormwater runoff.
Reduce heat islands (thermal
gradient differences between
developed and undeveloped areas)
to minimize impact on microclimate
and human and wildlife habitat.
Divert construction and demolition
debris from disposal in landfills.
Redirect recyclable recovered
resources back to the
manufacturing process.
Reuse building materials in order to
reduce demand for virgin materials
and to reduce waste, thereby
reducing impacts associated with
the extraction and processing of
virgin resources.
Increase demand for building
products that incorporate recycled
content materials, thereby reducing
impacts resulting from extraction
and processing of virgin materials.
Increase demand for building
materials and products that are
extracted and manufactured within
the region, thereby supporting the
use of indigenous resources and
reducing the environmental impacts
resulting from transportation.
To provide design teams and
projects the opportunity to be
awarded points for exceptional
performance.
How Calstone Pavers Contributes
Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavement
(PICP) captures and treats stormwater beneath
the pavement Captured stormwater can be
infiltrated to ground water, released at a
controlled rate to a storm drain, or harvested
for use in any of 5 water efficiency credits
PICP systems can be designed to infiltrate all
stormwater on site. Water that is infiltrated on
site is considered 100% treated. All PICP’s
reduce the Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in
captured water.
Calstone offers high albedo colors that reduce
heat absorption. Lighter colored pavements aid
in improving night time visibility and reduce site
lighting requirements.
100% of the materials used in a PICP
system are recyclable, and 100% of Calstone
packaging materials are recyclable. All shipping
pallets, excess paving stones, cut & scrap
stones, and base & bedding materials, can be
returned directly to Calstone for on-site recycling.
Paving stones, and most of the components
in a PICP system, are completely reusable.
A PICP can be removed and replaced in the
original or new layout with little to no additional
material required.
Calstone is constantly active in research and
development of mix designs using recycled
materials. Special high recycled content custom
mix designs are available. Many of these designs
offer additional performance advantages.
All Calstone manufacturing facilities service
the same area within a 500 mile radius. Over
99% of the materials used in our paving stones
are sourced within a 500 mile radius.
Additional points as noted above for
exemplary performance SS 7.1,
MR 2.2, 3.2, 4.2, and 5.2
122
Manufacturing Service Centers:
Galt - phone (209) 745-2981
421 Crystal Way, Galt, CA 95632
Tracy - phone (209) 833-7366
426 East Grant Line Road, Tracy, CA 95376
calstone.com
San Martin - phone (408) 686-9627
13775 Llagas Ave. San Martin, CA 95046
Sunnyvale - phone (408) 984-8800
1155 Aster Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94086
INSTALLATION
For Design, Construction, and Maintenance
please refer to: ICPI - Permeable Interlocking
Concrete Pavements by David R. Smith.
Installation drawings are available at
www.icpi.org in the publications section.
For a complete set of specifications go to
www.calstone.com under specifications
in the paving stone section.
Technical Guidelines
• Pavers conform to ASTM C936
• Construction aggregates must
conform to ASTM D448
• Joint filling stone gradation:
ASTM # 89 or 9
• Base gradation: ASTM # 57
• Subbase gradation: ASTM # 2, 3 or 4
(railroad ballast)
• Soil subgrade: classified per ASTM D2487;
tested for permeability per ASTM D3385
• Structural design: ICPI design chart
determines minimum base thickness to
support pedestrian and vehicular traffic
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: June 12, 2013
Application: Design Review ADR13-0009 / Use Permit
CUP13-0001
Location / APN: 15285 Sobey Road / 397-07-044
Owner / Applicant: Jammula
Staff Planner: Michael Fossati
15285 Sobey Rd.
135
SUMMARY
ZONING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
R-1-40,000 Very Low Density Residential
PARCEL SIZE AVERAGE SLOPE
1.125 acres (net lot size) 9.55%
GRADING REQUIRED
Limited
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant requests Conditional Use Permit and Design Review approval to construct a
new detached 864 square foot garage within the required rear setback.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 13-021 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
PROJECT DATA
Net Site Area: 45,489 acres
Average Slope: 9.55%
General Plan Designation: RVLD (Residential Very Low Density)
Zoning: R1-40,000
Proposed Allowed
Proposed Site Coverage
Residence
New Detached Garage
Driveway
Patios & Sidewalk
Total Proposed Site Coverage
4,219 sq. ft.
864 sq. ft.
6,850 sq. ft.
3,021 sq. ft.
14,954 sq. ft.
Maximum Coverage
allowed is 15,921 sq. ft.
(35%)
Floor Area
Residence:
New Detached Garage:
Total
4,219 sq. ft.
864 sq. ft.
5,083 sq. ft.
Maximum Floor Area
allowed is 6,120 sq. ft.
Grading
Cut
15 c.y.
Fill
15 c.y.
Total
30 c.y.
No Grading quantity limits
in R-1 zoning districts.
2
136
Setbacks
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
217’
38’
131’
13.5’
30’
20’
20’
12’ with Conditional Use
Permit approval
Height
Lowest Elevation Point:
Highest Elevation Point:
Average Elevation Point:
Proposed Topmost Point:
128.2’
128.4’
128.3’
138.3’ (10’)
Maximum Building
Height is 138.3’
(10 ft), with Conditional
Use Permit approval
PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS
This project includes applications for the following entitlements:
Design Review
Pursuant to City Code Section 15-45.065(a)(1), any new single-story residences and
accessory structures greater than two hundred fifty square feet in floor area requires
design review.
Conditional Use Permit
Pursuant to City Code Section 15-80.030(d)(1) upon the granting of a use permit by the
Planning Commission, cabanas, garages, carports, recreation rooms, hobby shops and
other similar structures may be located no closer than six feet from a side property line
and rear property line of the rear setback area and shall not exceed eight feet in height,
plus one additional foot in height for each three feet of setback from the rear property line
in excess of six feet, up to a maximum height of ten feet if the structure is still located
within the required rear setback area.
SITE AND PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Project Description
The applicant is proposing a new detached three-car garage within the rear setback of
their lot. The height of the garage would be 10 feet and it would be located
approximately 13.5 feet from the rear property line. The applicant has received clearance
from the City Arborist, as no trees are requested for removal in order to construct the
proposed garage (Attachment 2).
Building Design
In order to maintain consistency with the main residence, the applicant has proposed a beige
stucco exterior and dark gray composition shingle roof. Architecturally, there is a difference
in that the proposed garage has a shed roof, in order to accommodate the 10 foot height limit
required by the City.
3
137
Detail Colors and Materials
Building Ext. Beige ‘Sand Finish’ Stucco
Roofing Dark Gray Composition Shingle Roof
Building Height & Setbacks
The allowable height for detached garages in rear setbacks is 10 feet, as long as the structure
is at least 12 feet away from the rear property line. The applicant has proposed the detached
garage to be at least 13.5 feet away from the close point of the rear property line. Due to the
shape of the lot and associated property lines, the setback of the garage increases to 17.5 feet
from the rear property line.
Neighbor Correspondence
Staff sent a “Notice of Public Hearing” to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject
property (Attachment 3). The public hearing notice and description of the project was
published in the Saratoga News. Staff has not received any comments opposing the project,
but rather a letter from the property owner at 15285 Sobey Road to replace the existing fence
with a new six foot fence with two feet of lattice (Attachment 4). The concern was raised to
the applicant. The applicant has proposed to construct two feet of lattice onto the existing
fence. The other neighbors around the property signed the neighbor notification forms
(Attachment 5)
Staff reviewed the request and believes that the higher fence is reasonable, as the location of
the new structure in the rear yard of the project site is adjacent to the side yard of 15285
Sobey Road, and the applicant is requesting a setback exception.
DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code
Section 15-45.080 are set forth below and the applicant has met the burden of proof to
support making all of those required findings:
(a) The project avoids unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The project
meets this finding because the detached garage will exceed the setback requirement
allowed per the City Code and remain low profile with a shed roof. Furthermore,
there are no windows facing the rear property, which will assist privacy concerns.
This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(b) The project preserves the natural landscape. The project meets this finding because
the garage is being proposed on an existing concrete slab, where limited grading and
landscape removal will be required to construct.
(c) The project preserves native and heritage trees. The project meets this finding in
because there are not trees proposed to be removed.
4
138
(d) The project minimizes the perception of excessive bulk. The project meets this
finding because the detached garage will follow the general appearance, color pallet
and materials used for the main residence, while providing a low profile design.
(e) The project is of compatible bulk and height. The project meets this finding
because the detached garage is compatible in bulk and height with other accessory
structures in the neighborhood in that it will be lower than most structures around the
subject property. The detached garage will be out of site of the public right-of way,
and screened by the main residence.
(f) The project uses current grading and erosion control methods. The project meets
this finding because the structure would be properly engineered with limited grading
required for construction. Erosion would not be an issue because the site is not on an
hillside with properties below. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(g) The project follows appropriate design policies and techniques. The project meets
this finding because it has incorporated design techniques such as:
a. Minimizes areas of maximum height. (Policy 1, Technique #4)
b. Designed not to attract attention or stand out. (Policy 1, Technique #5)
c. Utilizes a limited number of materials and colors on a single elevation.
(Policy 2, Technique #1)
d. Located the structure in an area that will allow the preservation of existing
vegetation (Policy 2, Technique #3)
As discussed above, the finding can be made in the affirmative.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
The findings required for issuance of a Conditional Use Permit Approval pursuant to City
Code Section 15-55.070 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to
support making all of those required findings:
(a) That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located.
This finding can be met because a detached garage is typically a principally
permitted use within a residential zoning district. A Conditional Use Permit allows a
property owner to locate an accessory structure closer to the rear property line. Staff
believes the height and placement of the use will still ensure adequate light, air,
privacy and open space for the main residence and adjacent properties near the
project site. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(b) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which
it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
5
139
6
vicinity. This finding can be met because appropriate conditions have been placed
on the use permit to ensure compliance with all applicable health and safety
codes.
(c) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable
provisions of this Chapter. The proposed use will comply with each of the
applicable provisions of the Saratoga Municipal Code as staff reviewed the
project, conditioned it accordingly, and has recommended approval. This finding
can be made in the affirmative.
(d) That the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated
uses in the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding
properties or the occupants thereof. This finding can be made because the detached
garage would not adversely affect surrounding properties. Along with setbacks that
exceed the minimum requirements, ten foot height maximum, and minimal roof
pitch, the proposed accessory structure should not distress neighboring and adjacent
property owners.
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 or conversion of up to three single-family residences.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 13-021 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval – 15285 Sobey Road
2. Arborist Report – 15285 Sobey Road
3. Public hearing notice, mailing addresses, and map for project notification
4. Letter from neighbor
5. Neighbor Notification Forms
6. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A.”
140
RESOLUTION NO. 13-021
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING APPLICATION NO. ADR13-0009 AND CUP13-0001 FOR A NEW
DETACHED GARAGE LOCATED IN THE REAR YARD AT
15285 SOBEY ROAD / 397-07-044
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2013 an application was submitted by Murali Jammula
requesting Design Review and Conditional Use Permit approval for a new detached garage in the
rear yard. The height of the proposed garage would be no taller than ten feet, as measured from
average grade. The property is located within the R1-40,000 Zoning District.
WHEREAS, on June 12, 2013, 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 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 and no exception to that exemption applies.
Section 3: The project is consistent with the Saratoga General Plan Policies LU 1.1 in
that the City shall continue to be predominately a community of single-family residences and LU
1.2 to continue to review all residential development proposals to ensure consistency with Land
Use Element goals and Policies.
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 avoids
unreasonable interference with views and privacy; preserves the natural landscape, native and
heritage trees; minimizes the perception of excessive bulk and is of compatible bulk and height;
uses current grading and erosion control methods; and follows appropriate design policies and
techniques.
Section 5: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code 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, in that the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under
which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, in that the proposed
conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the zoning chapter, and in
141
Resolution No. 13‐021 Page 2
that the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the
immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants
thereof.
Section 6: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves ADR13-0009
and CUP13-0001, located at 15285 Sobey Road, subject to the above Findings, and Conditions
of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 12th day of
June 2013 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Joyce Hlava
Chair, Planning Commission
142
Resolution No. 13‐021 Page 3
EXHIBIT 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
ADR13-0009 / CUP13-0001
15285 SOBEY ROAD / 397-07-044
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for
this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval
documenting all applicable permanent 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
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 City Code 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.
143
Resolution No. 13‐021 Page 4
5. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans denominated Exhibit "A"
and as conditioned below. 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 City Code.
6. Fencing. All fencing shall be in compliance with City Code Article 15-29.
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.
b. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, notes, and/or materials required by the
Building Division.
c. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages.
d. The Arborist Report printed onto separate construction plan pages.
e. The site plan shall contain the following notes:
i. “Disposition and treatment of stormwater will comply with the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Standards and implementation standards
established by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program”
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.
CITY ARBORIST
10. Arborist Report. All recommendations of the Arborist Report dated October 15, 2012, and
incorporated herein by this reference shall be followed and incorporated (in its entirety) into
the plans.
PUBLIC WORKS
11. Encroachment Permit. 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.
144
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
ARBORIST REPORT
It is the responsibility of the owner, architect and contractor to be familiar with the
information in this report and implement the required conditions.
Application #: ARB13-0015
Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Site: 15285 Sobey Road
Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owner: Murali Jammula
Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN: 397-07-044
Email: m_jammula@yahoo.com
Report History: #1
Plans received March 14, 2013
Report completed April 17, 2013
PROJECT SCOPE
The applicant has submitted plans to the City build a new three car garage on a paved area used for
parking vehicles. No trees are requested for removal to construct the new garage.
CLEARANCE – with conditions
This project has clearance from the arborist to proceed, with the conditions noted below in the
Conditions of Approval section.
PLAN REVIEW
Plans Reviewed:
Architectural plans were prepared by Steve Benzing, Architect and dated March 11, 2013. Plan
sheets reviewed for this report include Sheet A-1, Site Plan and Sheet A-2 Floor Plan and Elevations.
TREE INFORMATION
Tree Inventory:
Three Monterey pines (#1 – 3) protected by City Coded were inventoried for this report. Data for
each tree can be found in the Tree Inventory Table attached to the end of this report. Locations of
trees can be seen on the attached copy of the site plan.
Tree Protection:
There is an existing fence that bounds the proposed construction area. It is sufficiently sturdy to
protect the trees whose canopies extend into the work area.
The three Monterey pine trees grow under PG&E power lines, and have been pruned away from the
lines in the past. The trees are susceptible to attack several species of beetle that fly during the
spring, summer and fall. To best protect these trees during construction, they should not be pruned,
or their health will be jeopardized. If at all possible, pull limbs away from the work area and wait till
winter to prune them. If it becomes necessary to prune the trees, make as few cuts as possible. There
is no protective measure that can be taken to compensate for pruning.
Page 1 of 3
145
15285 Sobey Road
Security Deposit for the Projection of Trees:
Per City Ordinance 15-50.080, a Tree Protection security deposit in the amount of $3,820, which is
equal to 100% of the appraised value of trees #1 – 3 is required. Owner shall obtain, and file with the
Community Development Director, the required security deposit prior to the receipt of building
permits. The security deposit may be in the form of a savings account, a certificate of deposit
account or a bond. This deposit will be held until completion of the project and acceptance by the
City.
Appraisals:
Appraised values were calculated using the Trunk Formula Method and according to the Guide for
Plant Appraisal, 9th Edition, published by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), 2000.
This was used in conjunction with the Species Classification and Group Assignment, published by
the Western Chapter of the ISA, 2004.
FINDINGS
Tree Removal
No trees are requested for removal to construct the 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.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. This entire arborist report, including the Tree Inventory Table and attached map showing
locations of trees shall be copied on to a plan sheet, titled “Tree Preservation” and included
in the final job copy set of plans.
2. Tree Protection Security Deposit - $3,820
a. Owner shall obtain, and file with the Community Development Director, a Tree
Protection security deposit prior to obtaining Building Division permits.
b. The deposit shall be for trees #1 – 3.
c. The tree protection security deposit shall remain in place for the duration of construction
of the project to ensure the protection of the trees.
d. Once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City, the bond will
be released.
3. Tree Protection Fencing is not required. There is an existing fence at the edge of the
proposed construction that is sufficiently sturdy to act as a tree protection fence.
4. No protected tree authorized for encroachment pursuant to this project may be encroached
upon until the issuance of the applicable permit from the building division for the approved
project.
5. 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.
6. All construction activities shall be conducted outside tree protection fencing. These activities
include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: demolition, grading, trenching,
Page 2 of 3
146
15285 Sobey Road
equipment cleaning, stockpiling and dumping materials (including soil fill), and
equipment/vehicle operation and parking.
7. Rather than prune trees #1 – 3 to accommodate the new garage, tie them out of the way in
order to protect them from attacks by several species of beetle. If they must be pruned, make
the fewest number of pruning cuts possible and know that the trees may die as a result.
8. Any permitted pruning or root pruning of trees on site shall be performed under the
supervision of an ISA-certified arborist and according to ISA standards.
9. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited under
tree canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage to areas under tree canopies.
Herbicides shall not be applied under tree canopies.
10. 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.
ATTACHMENTS:
Tree Inventory Table
Map showing locations of trees
Page 3 of 3
147
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
TREE
NO.TREE NAME Trunk Diameter (in,) - per Guide for Plant AppraisalEstimated Canopy Spread (ft.)Health Condition (100% = best, 0% = worst)Structural Integrity (100% = best, 0% = worst)Overall ConditionSuitability for Preservation (High/Moderate/Low)Intensity of Impacts (1 = Highest, 5 = Lowest)In Conflict with Proposed DesignNot Shown on PlansOn Adjacent ProprtyAppraised ValueMonterey pine
1 Pinus radiata 20 30 70 50 Fair High 4 No $1,320
Monterey pine
2 Pinus radiata 26 30 40 40 Fair High 4 No X $1,170
Monterey pine
3 Pinus radiata 24 30 60 40 Fair High 4 No X $1,330
Total appraised value $3,820
Should any tree listed above be removed or damaged beyond repair, owner will be required to replace that tree
with trees equal to its appraised value.
Replacement Tree Values 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
15285 Sobey Road April 17, 2013
148
15285 Sobey Road
Legend
Tree Canopy
Tree Protective
(existing fence is adequate for tree protection)
1
2
3
149
CITY OF SARATOGA
Community Development Department
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 868-1222
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The City of Saratoga’s Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on:
Wednesday, the 12th day of June, 2013, at 7:00 p.m.
The public hearing will be held in the City Hall Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. The
public hearing agenda item is stated below. Details of this item are available at the Saratoga
Community Development Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Please
consult the City website at www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures.
APPLICATION/ADDRESS: ADR13-0009 & CUP13-0001 / 15285 Sobey Rd.
APPLICANT/OWNER: Jammula
APN: 397-07-044
DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Administrative
Design Review (ADR) approval to construct a new detached 864 sq. ft. garage within the
required rear setback. The maximum height of the proposed accessory structure will be no
higher than 10 ft. No protected trees are required for removal.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a
decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order for information
to be included in the Planning Commission’s information packets, written communications should
be filed on or before Tuesday, June 4, 2013
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject
of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor’s office annually, in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a
project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this
notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone
in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
Michael Fossati
Planner
(408) 868-1212
150
Parcel Number Owner Name Owner Address Owner City, State Zip
#5479 500' OWNERSHIP LISTING Prepared for: 15285 SOBEY RD
397-07-015 VINCENT J & MARGARET J PHILBRICK 15200 ORIOLE WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-022 NILESH J & BINA N SHAH 15270 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-043 SUSHEEL & MALINI CHANDRA 15295 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-044 MURALIDHAR R & GEETHA R JAMMULA 15285 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-045 RULE TRUST 15317 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-054 SANFORD A BERLINER 15237 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-055 BARBARA A STOCK 15249 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-061 LEWIS & DIANNA CHEW 15261 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-062 JONATHAN HAN IL & SOON RAN KIM 15277 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-072 STEVEN D & ALISA A LEWIS 15279 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-073 VERA H BRAND 15283 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-074 CHI HYON & NICHOLAS J TORNOW 15275 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-076 CLARK BECK 15300 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-081 SHIRISH S & ARCHANA SATHAYE 15315 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-083 SHIRISH S & ARCHANA SATHAYE 15315 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-105 FENG-MING WANG 15250 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-108 MICHELLE X & YOSHIMI BILLIBON ZHOU 15227 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-113 ROY ERNEST & DAISY M FOLK 15314 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-114 XUDONG & WANG SHU SHENG 15229 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-115 NADINE E GRAVEN PO BOX 321299 LOS GATOS CA 95032
397-08-041 SAFFARIAN JALIL TR/TR 18635 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA
397-08-042 STEPHEN A & SUSAN L LAPINSKI 18667 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070
397-08-043 DONALD B & MARILYN D RICHARDSON 18695 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070
397-08-044 JOSEPH OBOT 18721 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070
397-08-045 JEROME J LOHR 2021 THE ALAMEDA STE #145 SAN JOSE CA 95126
397-08-046 WEI-JEN & MEI-LIEN LO 19753 EDINA LN SARATOGA CA 95070
397-08-047 MAYO FAMILY TR 18801 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070
397-08-061 SUSAN ROBERT 18736 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070
397-08-062 ROBERT J & CAROLE A WILLIAMS 1138 BENT DR CAMPBELL CA 95008
397-08-063 KULDIP & SUSHMA MALHOTRA 18692 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070
397-08-064 PATRICIA L MALLOY 18666 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070
397-08-065 CHARLES N & DORIS D ODINEAL 18634 MONTEWOOD DR SARATOGA CA 95070
410-36-003 KATHLEEN A FOX 18511 OAK DR MONTE SERENO CA 95030
410-36-004 HEIDARI ALI TR/FAM TR 18531 OAK DR MONTE SERENO CA 95030
410-36-009 KO WANG 15470 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
410-36-010 SUSAN R STRAUB 738 TEMPLE ST SAN DIEGO CA 92106
410-37-001 OMID SHAKERI 12280 SARATOGA-SUNNYVLE STE #109 SARATOGA CA 95070
410-37-002 MICAHEL E & PATRICIA M JAMISON 15390 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
410-37-005 TERRY M & ZENG NANJI MCCARTHY 18598 TWIN CREEKS RD MONTE SERENO CA 95030
410-37-006 JOSEPH T & ROSARIO FITZGERALD 18576 TWIN CREEKS RD MONTE SERENO CA 95030
410-37-007 ROBERT J & PATRICIA A KELLY 18560 TWIN CREEKS RD MONTE SERENO CA 95030
410-37-009 DANIEL J & CHARMAINE A WARMENHOV 18500 TWIN CREEKS RD MONTE SERENO CA 95030
410-37-016 AUDREY J & KENNETH W GILBEAU 1520 PARKMOOR SAN JOSE CA 95128
410-37-017 AUDREY J & KENNETH W GILBEAU 1520 PARKMOOR SAN JOSE CA 95128
410-39-014 ADRIANA GARZON & SANJEEV GUPTA 18601 TWIN CREEKS RD SARATOGA CA 95070
410-39-015 BOBERG FAMILY TR 18657 TWIN CREEKS RD SARATOGA CA 95070
410-39-016 ROBERT W LLOYD 15310 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
151
Advanced Listing Services Inc.
Ownership Listings & Radius Maps
P.O. Box 2593 •Dana Point, CA •92624
Office: (949) 361-3921 •Fax: (949) 361-3923
www.Advancedlisting.com
Subject APN: 397-07-044 Address: 15285 SOBEY RD
500’ Radius SARATOGA CA 95070
152
1
Michael Fossati
Subject: Fence Photos
Attachments:IMG_0002.JPG
Hello Michael,
I really appreciate all of your support. Here are some photos of my fence. If we could get one put up at Vera’s that is the
same it would really make the project next door easier to live with. As we spoke, we are not going to oppose the garage,
but if the fence is left as is, the structure will be seen from all windows in the front of the house including the master
bedroom and formal dining room.
I hope the neighbors understand our position and how it will affect the aesthetics of our property in a negative way.
They have every right to their garage, but I really do not want to have to look at that structure every time I look out the
window or am in the front yard. Thanks again for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Stefanie Brand
153
154
155
156
157
158
REPORT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: June 12, 2013
Application: Design Review PDR13-0002
Location / APN: 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road
Owner: Chris Coones - Forzatelecom
Staff Planner: Cynthia McCormick, Planner, AICP
19491 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS ROAD
Page 1 of 3
159
Summary
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Design Review approval to upgrade wireless
telecommunications equipment at an existing installation on Saratoga-Los Gatos Road near
Fruitvale Avenue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 13-023 approving the project subject to
conditions of approval.
PROJECT DATA:
General Plan Designation: RVLD (Very Low Density Residential)
Zoning: R1-40,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Design Review approval is required pursuant to City Code Article 15-44.
Site Description: The site is located in the public right-of-way near the corner of Highway 9
(Saratoga-Los Gatos Road) and Fruitvale Avenue. The applicant has an encroachment permit from
Caltrans.
Project Description: The project will replace two (2) obsolete antennas with two (2) new
antennas, replace two (2) GSM microcell cabinets with two (2) new RRU-11 units, and replace
two (2) RRU-22 units with four (4) new RRUW units. The project also includes the installation of
a surge protector inside an existing equipment cabinet and a new LTE GPS antenna on the H-frame
of the equipment space.
Radio Frequency (RF) Analysis: The applicant has provided a Radio Frequency (RF) Analysis
which concludes that the proposed telecommunications facility will comply with the FCC’s current
prevailing standard for limiting human exposure to RF energy, and no significant impact on the
general public is expected.
FCC Requirements: Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) has exclusive jurisdiction over RF emissions from personal wireless antenna
facilities. The City can evaluate and regulate only the aesthetic aspects of wireless installations. Any
concerns regarding health or safety aspects of the wireless sites are not within the purview of the
Planning Commission. Pursuant to its authority under federal law, the FCC has established rules to
regulate the safety of emissions from these facilities.
Neighbor Notification and Correspondence: The applicant notified adjacent property owners
about the project. Notice was also sent to property owners within 500 feet of the site. One neighbor
contacted City staff about health concerns (see FCC requirements above). No other comments have
been received by staff as of the writing of this staff report.
Application No. PDR 13-0002; 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road Page 2 of 3
160
Application No. PDR 13-0002; 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road Page 3 of 3
FINDINGS
Design Review Findings:
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review approval pursuant to City Code Article 15-
44.025 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of
those required findings:
(a) That the wireless telecommunications facility is or can be co-located with another wireless
telecommunications facility located on a structure or an existing utility pole/tower in the
public right of way unless the applicant has demonstrated that such location is not technically
or operationally feasible. This finding can be made in the affirmative because the wireless
telecommunication facility will be located on an existing pole in the public right of way.
(b) That the wireless telecommunication facility and related structures incorporate
architectural treatments and screening to substantially include (1) appropriate and innovative
stealth design solutions; (2) techniques to blend with the surrounding environment and
predominant background; (3) colors and materials that are non-reflective; (4) exterior
textures to match the existing support structure or building; and (5) reasonably compatible
height with the existing surrounding environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
The wireless telecommunication facility will be located on an existing pole, thus eliminating the
need for a new separate facility and reducing the visual impact on surrounding properties. The
existing pole will not increase in height. The proposed antennas are similar in design to existing
antennas. The colors and materials of the proposed communication facility have a non-reflective
finish to match the existing facility. The proposed equipment will be placed in a cabinet on the
ground in an existing fenced area.
(c) That landscaping and fencing provide visual screening of the wireless communication
facility’s ground mounted equipment, related structures, and that fencing material is
compatible with the image and aesthetics of the surrounding area. This finding can be made
in the affirmative. The proposed equipment will be placed in a cabinet on the ground in an
existing fenced area screened by landscaping. The owner is responsible for the maintenance of
existing landscaping.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 13-023 approving the project, subject to
conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval for Design Review
2. Public Hearing Notice
3. AT&T Sites
4. Radio-Frequency Report
5. Photo Simulations
6. Coverage Maps
7. Development Plans (Exhibit "A")
161
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 13-023
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING APPLICATION NO. PDR 13-0002 FOR UPGRADE OF AN EXISTING
WIRELESS INSTALLATION LOCATED AT
WHEREAS, an application was submitted by Forzatelecom requesting Design Review
approval to upgrade equipment and technology on an existing wireless facility (a wooden
telephone pole). The project will replace two (2) obsolete antennas with two (2) new antennas,
replace two (2) GSM microcell cabinets with two (2) new RRU-11 units, and replace two (2)
RRU-22 units with four (4) new RRUW units. The project also includes the installation of a
surge protector inside an existing equipment cabinet and a new LTE GPS antenna on the H-
frame of the equipment space.
WHEREAS, on June 12, 2013, 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 California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. Section 15303). Class 3
exemptions include installation of equipment and facilities, such as wireless facilities.
Section 3: The project is consistent with the Saratoga General Plan Land Use Policy LU
13.1 by utilizing the design review process to review non-residential projects to promote high
quality design, to ensure compliance with applicable regulations, to ensure compatibility with
surrounding properties and use, and to minimize environmental impacts.
Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the wireless
telecommunication installation will located on an existing wireless facility, thus eliminating the
need for a new separate facility and reducing the visual impact on surrounding properties. The
existing pole will not increase in height and the proposed antennas are situated at the same level
as existing antennas. The antennas are proposed with a similar layout and design to existing
antennas, thus minimizing bulk that might be perceived with a much larger design. The colors
and materials of the proposed communication facility have a non-reflective finish to match the
existing installation.
Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves Application No.
PDR13-0002 subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
162
Resolution No. 13‐023 Page 2
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 12th day of
June 2013 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Joyce Hlava
Chair, Planning Commission
163
Resolution No. 13‐023 Page 3
EXHIBIT 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR 13-0002 / 19491 SARATOGA-LOS GATOS ROAD
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for
this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval
documenting all applicable permanent 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
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 City Code 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.
164
Resolution No. 13‐023 Page 4
5. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans denominated Exhibit "A"
and “B” and as conditioned below. 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 City
Code.
6. 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.
b. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, notes, and/or materials required by the
Building Division.
c. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages.
7. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Verification. The owner and/or Applicant
shall include a note on the plans, verifying compliance with the FCC prior to issuance of
Zoning Clearance for the project. The owner and/or Applicant for this Project shall contact
the FCC and verify whether there are any required permits from said Commission.
8. Radio Frequency Testing. Radio Frequency levels shall be tested approximately 12 months
from the date of final building permit approval. The results of this test shall be submitted to
the Community Development Department and be available for review by the FCC.
9. Decommission. If the subject site is decommissioned in the future, all cellular antennas and
related equipment shall be removed within 30 days of cessation of operation.
9. Governmental entities. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other
Governmental entities, including the California Public Utilities Commission, must be met.
165
CITY OF SARATOGA
Community Development Department
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 868-1222
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The City of Saratoga’s Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on:
Wednesday, June 12 2013 at 7:00 p.m.
The public hearing will be held in the City Hall Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. A
site visit will also be held by the Planning Commission at the subject property. Please contact the
Planning Department for the date and time of the site visit. The public hearing agenda item is
stated below. Details of this item are available at the Saratoga Community Development
Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Please consult the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures.
APPLICATION: PDR 13-0002
APPLICANT: Chris Coones - Forzatelecom
ADDRESS: 19491 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road; Saratoga, CA 95070
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Design Review approval to upgrade
equipment and technology on an existing wireless facility (a wooden telephone pole). The
project will replace two (2) obsolete antennas with two (2) new antennas, replace two (2) GSM
microcell cabinets with two (2) new RRU-11 units, and replace two (2) RRU-22 units with four
(4) new RRUW units. The project also includes the installation of a surge protector inside an
existing equipment cabinet and a new LTE GPS antenna on the H-frame of the equipment space.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a
decision of the Planning Commission, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the Public Hearing.
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject
of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor’s office annually, in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a
project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this
notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone
in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
Cynthia McCormick, Planner, AICP
(408) 868-1230
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202