HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-14-13 Planning Commission Agenda PacketTable of Contents
Agenda 3
July 24, 2013
Draft Minutes 5
Application PDR13-0012; 14451 Fruitvale Avenue (397-17-
007)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
Att. 1 Resolution 14
Att. 2 Arborist Report 18
Att. 3 Notice and Address List 29
Att. 4 Neighbor Correspondence 31
Att. 5 Cal Green Checklist 38
Att. 6 Permeable Paving Specification 46
Att. 7 Plans from June 12, 2013 meeting 54
Att. 8 Current Development Plans 70
Application VAR13-0001; 20951 Canyon View Drive (503-28-
008) Hashemieh/Sarnevesht - The applicant requests Variance
approval to exceed the three foot maximum height for retaining
walls located within the front yard setback and to exceed the
maximum five foot height for retaining walls located outside the
front yard setback. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408)868-
1235
Staff Report 86
Att. 1 Resolution 91
Att. 2 Public Hearing Notice and Mailing list 95
Att. 3 Neighbor Correspondence 100
Att. 4 Site Photos 106
Att. 5 Plans 110
Application VAR13-0004; 15200 Norton Road (517-14-048); Jon
Snell - The applicant is requesting a Variance to allow a new
swimming pool to encroach seven feet into the required twenty
foot side yard setback.
Staff Report - 15200 Norton Rd.114
Att. 1 - Resolution 119
Att. 2 - Expired Resolution 123
Att. 3 - Geotechnical Clearance 127
Att. 4 - Neighbor Notification 132
Att. 5 - Public Notice 133
Att. 6 - Plan Set, Exhibit 'A'136
Application PDR13-0013; 12970 Glen Brae Dr. (389-03-002);
City of Saratoga / Crown Castle on behalf of Sprint - The
applicant is requesting to replace a radome housing three panel
antennas on an existing monopole with a new larger radome,
also housing three antennas within Congress Springs Park.
1
Staff Report - Congress Springs Park 138
Att. 1 - Resolution 142
Att. 2 - Antenna Locations 147
Att. 3 - Coverage Maps 148
Att. 4 - Photo Simulations 150
Att. 5 - RF Analysis 157
Att. 6 - Neighbor Notifications 173
Att. 7 - Public Notice 180
Att. 8 - Plan Set, Exhibit 'A'185
2
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, August 14, 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 July 24, 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)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 VAR13-0001; 20951 Canyon View Drive (503-28-008) Hashemieh/Sarnevesht - The applicant
requests Variance approval from the regulations contained in City Code Section 15-29.010(l) [Retaining
Walls] to exceed the three foot maximum height for retaining walls located within the front yard setback
and to exceed the maximum five foot height for retaining walls located outside the front yard setback. The
net lot size is approximately 32,670 square feet and the site is zoned R-1-40,000. Staff Contact:
Christopher Riordan (408)868-1235
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 13-030 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
3
3. Application VAR13-0004; 15200 Norton Road (517-14-048); Jon Snell - The applicant is requesting a
Variance to allow a new swimming pool to encroach seven feet into the required twenty foot side yard
setback.
Recommended action:
Approve Resolution No. 13-029 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
4. Application PDR13-0013; 12970 Glen Brae Dr. (389-03-002); City of Saratoga / Crown Castle on behalf of
Sprint - The applicant is requesting to replace a radome housing three panel antennas on an existing
monopole with a new larger radome, also housing three antennas within Congress Springs Park. The total
combined height of the radome and monopole would be approximately 50 feet.
Recommended action:
Approve Resolution No. 13-028 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
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 August 8, 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, July 24, 2013
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. – CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777
FRUITVALE AVENUE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Almalech, Bernald, Smullen, Walia and Zhao
ABSENT
Grover and Hlava
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of June 26, 2013
COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSION & PUBLIC
Direct staff to present information on SB1 at a future meeting.
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 PDR13-0010; 19502 Via Monte Drive (393-24-025); Majid Mohazzab - The applicant has
requested to demolish the existing one-story, 2,975 sq. ft. single-family residence damaged by fire, in order
to construct a new one-story, 4,438 sq. ft. single-family residence. The height of the proposed residence
will not exceed 21 feet. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-1212.
Action:
Adopted Resolution No. 13-027 approving the project subject to conditions of approval. (5:0)
2. Application SUB10-0001 & ENV10-0001 – Mt. Eden Road (503-13-127, 128) Irany / Karr - The applicant
currently owns a 13.8 acre parcel. They have submitted an application to subdivide the parcel into two
parcels. Parcel 1 would be 3.85 acres and Parcel 2 would be 9.92 acres. An Initial Study / Negative
Declaration was required because both proposed lots have average slopes greater than 20%. The intent to
adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was duly noticed and circulated for a 20-day public
5
review period from May 1, 2013 – May 21, 2013. All Interested Parties desiring to comment on the ND
were given the opportunity to submit written and oral comments on the adequacy of the ND up to the May
21, 2013 date. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-1212
Action:
Tabled the item. (5:0)
3. 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
Action:
Continue the project to the meeting of August 14, 2013. (5:0)
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 July 18, 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: August 14, 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 Deck & Steps
Permeable Pavers on Crushed Stone
Decomposed Granite
Total Proposed Site Coverage
3,432.5 sq. ft.
1,173.5 sq. ft.
784 sq. ft.
3,050 sq. ft.
1,402 sq. ft.
3,420 sq. ft. (6,840/2)
950 sq. ft.
14,212 sq. ft. (31.38%)
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 meetings of May 22, 2013 and June 12,
2013. At the June 12, 2013 meeting the Planning Commission provided additional project related
recommendations to the applicant and continued the project to the meeting of July 24, 2013. Prior to
the July 24 meeting the applicant requested a continuance to the meeting of August 14, 2013.
The Commission’s comments from the June 12, 2013 included the following:
• The building is out of scale;
• The design of the roof and building are overcomplicated;
• Amount of hardscape should be reduced;
• Carport design is not compatible with the style of the building;
• Competing elements on the front façade;
• Windows styles do not match;
• Landscape plan should have less wildflowers and more “permanent” landscaping
The applicant has submitted revised plans which include the following modifications:
• Architecture
- The carport has been removed from the plans;
- The variety of window styles has been reduced;
- Wrought iron details have been added to windows above the entry and at the back
balcony;
- The hipped roofs of two of the second story architectural features have been changed to
gable roofs;
- Rectangular windows below the second story roof on the front elevation have been
removed;
- Exposed rafter tails have been added to the second story and the garage;
- Stone has been added to the base of the building and on the front entry
• Landscape Plan
- The detail of the landscape plan has been improved;
- Wildflowers have been removed from the plan;
- The variety and number of flowers and shrubs has increased to include cactus, lavender,
and ceanothus;
- The number and type of trees has increased to include a variety of fruit trees, specimen
size magnolias, olive trees, and Red bud;
- The lawn in the backyard was removed and replaced with fruit and olive trees and an
open arbor covered with vines;
- Concrete decking has decreased by 2,302 square feet.
Page 3 of 7
9
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
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. 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.
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, exposed rafter tails, barrel roof tiles, a front porch supported by large square columns,
arched windows, an elaborated chimney top, and smooth stucco.
After the project was initially 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;
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
Page 4 of 7
10
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
patio, swimming pool, and planter boxes. The project meets all City Code requirements
including floor area, height, setbacks, and lot coverage.
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 the base 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
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
Page 6 of 7
12
14451 FRUITVALE AVENUE
Page 7 of 7
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. Plans reviewed during the June 12, 2013 meeting (for reference only)
8. Development Plans (Exhibit "A") dated July 30, 2013
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 and continued the application to the meeting of July 21 2013.
WHEREAS, prior to the July 21, 2013 Planning Commission meeting the applicant
requested a continuance to the meeting of August 14, 2013.
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; 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 including native and heritage
trees; minimizes the perception of excessive bulk; 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 14th day of
August 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.
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.
16
Resolution No. 13-018
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.
17
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
18
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
19
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
20
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
21
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
22
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
23
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
24
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
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
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
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 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.
27
Legend
Tree Canopy
Tree Protective Fence
53
54
50
47
48
51
49
55
14451 Fruitvale Avenue
28
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
29
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
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
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
46
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
47
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.
48
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
49
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.
50
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
51
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
52
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
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
REPORT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: August 14, 2013
Application: VAR13-0001
Location / APN: 20951 Canyon View / 503-28-008
Owner/Applicant: Nader Sarnevesht
Staff Planner: Christopher Riordan
SITE
20951 Canyon View
86
20951 Canyon View – VAR13-0001
Summary
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests Variance approval for recently constructed
retaining walls with heights greater than three feet within the front setback area and greater than five
feet in height elsewhere on the site. The retaining walls were erected during the construction of a
two story house located at 20951 Canyon View which received Planning Commission approval in
October 2007. The applicant is also requesting review of minor architectural modifications to the
exterior of the structure.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 13-030 approving the project subject to
conditions of approval.
Variance approval by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to City Code Section 15-
29.010(l).
PROJECT DATA:
Net Site Area: 32,670 SF
Average Site Slope: 39.7%
General Plan Designation: RVLD (Residential Very Low Density)
Zoning: R-1-40,000
Proposed Allowed/Required
Retaining Wall Height
Within Front Setback Area 3.00 FT - 11.62 FT
3 FT
Outside Front Setback Area 5.00 FT – 8.14 FT 5 FT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Site Description and Project History: The site consists of a recently constructed 3,635 square
foot, 25-foot tall, Craftsman style two-story single-family home which received Planning
Commission approval on October 24, 2007. A circular driveway provides access to the site. The
project included a variance to construct the residence because the average slope beneath the
building footprint was 39.7 percent and pursuant to City Code Section 15-19.020(d), the average
slope beneath a structure is not to exceed 30 percent. The applicant had also requested a
variance to construct a pool on a slope exceeding 30 percent however; that variance request was
not approved by the Commission. The approved plans included a series of “stepped” retaining
walls where no individual wall was in excess of three feet.
Project Description:
Variance: Project construction was completed in February 2013. During staff’s final review of
the project it was determined that the design of the retaining walls as originally approved had
been modified and that the retaining walls as constructed were taller than allowed per City Code.
Retaining walls within the 30 foot front setback area are limited to a maximum height of three
feet and retaining walls outside the front setback are limited to a maximum height of five feet.
Page 2 of 5
87
20951 Canyon View – VAR13-0001
The applicant is requesting a Variance for retaining walls located in the following areas of the
site:
Location Height Range Variance
The wall east of the
driveway and parallel to the
street
1.25 feet – 4.08 feet
• Exceeds three feet height in
front setback for a length of
approximately thirty-five feet.
The wall south of the
driveway and parallel to the
southern lot line adjoining
the adjacent property
(structural)
1.34 feet – 11.62 feet
• Exceeds three foot height limit
in front setback for length of
approximately thirty-one feet.
• Exceeds five foot height limit
for a length of approximately
twenty-five feet.
Two walls behind the
residence that are supporting
the steep slope (structural)
7.48 feet – 7.5 feet • Both walls exceed the five foot
maximum height for a
combined length of 260 feet.
Modifying or removing some of the non-compliant walls could affect the structural integrity of
the home and reduce the slope stability of the site, including the slope stability of the adjacent
property to the south. Those walls are identified above with the (structural) notation.
A Variance is not requested for the retaining walls west of the driveway and near the exterior
stairs. These walls have a combined length of 63 feet and are in excess of the three foot height
limit for retaining walls located within a front setback area. These walls range in height from 4
feet to 6.79 feet. To eliminate the need for a variance the applicant has proposed constructing an
additional wall/planter in front of each existing wall so that no section of the wall would exceed
a height of three feet. The applicant would plant bushes in the wall/planters that would help
screen the appearance of the walls as viewed from the street.
Architectural Modifications: The applicant has also made some minor architectural
modifications to the plans that were approved by the Planning Commission. The following
architectural details were not incorporated into the completed project:
• The columns on opposite sides of the garage, on the balcony above the garage, and on the
first story porch to the right of the entrance.
• Craftsman “stickwork” detailing above the garage and front entrance and above the
architectural projections that are located on opposite sides of the second story balcony.
The Development Plans included as Attachment #5 include both the original plans approved on
October 24, 2007 and the as-built plans that were actually constructed.
Neighbor Notification and Correspondence: The applicant received signed neighbor
notification forms from six adjacent neighbors. These included the neighbors on both sides of the
property as well as those across the street on Canyon View and Fourth Street. Each neighbor
signed the form with no additional project related comments. Copies of the neighbor notification
forms are included as Attachment #3.
Page 3 of 5
88
20951 Canyon View – VAR13-0001
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. A copy of
this notice is included as Attachment #2.
FINDINGS
Variance: The findings required for issuance of a Variance approval pursuant to City Code
Section 15-70.020 (Authority to grant Variances) are set forth below and the Applicant has met the
burden of proof to support making all of those required findings:
(a) That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulations
enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning
district.
Due to the steep slope of the site, and the goal of the applicant to reduce the visual presence
of the residence by merging the building into the hillside and to construct a driveway with
minimum slope so as to be accessible by emergency vehicles, it was necessary to construct
retaining walls in excess of the maximum allowable height. This finding can be made in the
affirmative.
(b) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the
same zoning district.
In October 2007 the Planning Commission approved the project and the associated
Variance to construct the project on a steep slope. The Commission did find that the
granting of the Variance would not be a grant of special privilege in that many of the homes
in the neighborhood would have been built or were constructed on properties of similar
slope and would have been granted a variance or were built at a time that predates City
Zoning regulations for variances. Similar reasoning can be applied to the current Variance
application for retaining wall heights. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(c) That the grant of the variance would not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare
or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
The retaining walls would be required to meet California Building Code Standards and
Geotechnical Clearance conditions would be met. The granting of the variance will be in
harmony with the purpose and intent of the regulations and will have no negative impact to
the public health, safety, or welfare. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
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.
Page 4 of 5
89
20951 Canyon View – VAR13-0001
Page 5 of 5
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 13-030 approving the project, subject to
conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval for Variance
2. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing Address List for Project Notification
3. Neighbor Correspondence and Notification Forms
4. Site Photos
5. Development Plans (Exhibit "A")
90
RESOLUTION NO: 13-030
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR RETAINNIG WALLS WITH HEIGHTS EXCEEDING
THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED PER CITY CODE LOCATED AT
20951 CANYON VIEW DRIVE
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2013, an application was submitted by Nader Sarnevesht,
requesting Variance approval to construct retaining walls with heights in excess of those allowed
per City Code for a recently constructed single-family home located at 20951 Canyon View Drive.
The heights of the walls exceed the three foot maximum for retaining walls within a front setback
area and are taller than the five meet maximum for walls outside the front setback area. The site is
located within the R-1-40,000 Zoning District (APN 503-28-008).
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 August 14, 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;
Conservation Element Goal 2 and Land Use Element Goad 1 which states that the City shall
preserve the City’s existing character which includes small town residential, rural/semi-rural areas
and open spaces areas; 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; and Land Use Element Policy 1.1 that the city shall continue to be predominantly a
community of single-family detached residences.
Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that because of special
circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulations would deprive the applicant of
privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning
district; the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with
the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district; and that
91
Resolution No. 13-030
the granting of the variance would not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare or
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity
Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves VAR13-
0001 located at 20951 Canyon View Drive subject to the Findings, and Conditions of Approval
attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 14th day of
August 2013 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Joyce Hlava
Chair, Planning Commission
92
Resolution No. 13-030
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VAR13-0001
20951 CANYON VIEW DRIVE
(APN 503-28-008)
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.
93
Resolution No. 13-030
5. 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.
6. The newly constructed walls/planter constructed to the north of the front entrance and adjacent
to the driveway shall be installed prior to building permit final.
7. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Saratoga Building Department.
8. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the City Engineer, as applicable.
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
Site Photos
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: July 24, 2013
Application: Variance VAR13-0004
Location / APN: 15200 Norton Rd. /
517-14-048
Owner / Applicant: Jon Snell
Staff Planner: Michael Fossati
15200 Norton Road
114
SUMMARY
ZONING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
Single-Family Res. (R1-40,000) Residential Very Low-Den. (RVLD)
PARCEL SIZE AVERAGE SLOPE
1.64 acres. (net lot size) ±29%
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is requesting a Variance to allow a new swimming pool to encroach seven
feet into the required twenty foot side yard setback.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution No. 13-029 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
PROJECT DATA
Net Lot Size: 1.64 acres
Proposed Allowed
Site Coverage
Building Footprint
Driveway
Dog Run
East Patio
North Patio
Front Patio Entry
Stairway
Pool and Pool Deck
Total
4,049 sq. ft.
2,442 sq. ft.
550 sq. ft.
1,115 sq. ft.
580 sq. ft.
995 sq. ft.
750 sq. ft.
1,790 sq. ft.
12,271 sq. ft. (17%)
25,008 sq. ft. (35%)
Setbacks
Front:
Side (Left):
Side (Right):
Rear
Existing
30’
20’
20’
50’
Proposed
209’
13’
131’
175’
Pursuant to City Code Section 15-80.030(b), no swimming pool or accessory mechanical
equipment shall be located in a required front, side or rear setback area. The applicant
has applied for a variance to the required setback due to the configuration and topography
of the site as well as the location of protected trees within the rear setback.
SITE AND PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Site Description
115
The heavily sloped site is located southwest of Highway 9 and east of Norton Road. The
area is comprised of acre-sized, hillside lots with large, stately residences.
Background
The City approved a variance in April 2000 allowing a swimming pool to encroach 13
feet into the required side yard setback on the subject property. Due to financial
constraints, the project was never complete and the approval expired. The applicant
resubmitted the application and has reduced the size of the pool thereby reducing the side
encroachment from 13 feet to 7 feet.
Proposed Location
The applicant has chosen the proposed location because it is the flattest and least vegetated
area on the site. Per the City Code, a swimming pool can be located within the rear yard,
but the rear yard of the subject property is heavily vegetated with lush, healthy protected and
native trees. Furthermore, the majority of rear yard lays on topography with slopes that
range from 30 – 60%, in comparison to the proposed location of the pool, which have 4 –
6% slopes.
Finding #1 for a variance requires “that because of special circumstances applicable to the
property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of
the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of
other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district.” Staff believes this
finding can be made due to the special circumstances specific to 15200 Norton Road.
Geotechnical Clearance
The City Engineer required Geotechnical Clearance for the project, as the site is located near
potential landslide areas. Extensive review was required, as there was a belief that the
proposed pool location was under an inactive fault traces. As stated in the Geotechnical
Clearance Memorandum, “new data obtained during an investigation of 15200 Norton Road
indicates that the fault trace trends more to the east after crossing Sigal Drive than depicted
on the current City Map.” The collected data gave the City Geologist the ability to grant the
project a Geotechnical Clearance.
Finding #3 for a variance requires “that the granting of the variance will not be detrimental
to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements
in the vicinity. With the review completed by the City Geologist, staff can recommend the
project will not negatively affect public health and safety.
Neighbor Correspondence
The applicant submitted one neighbor notification form from the property owner at 1600
Cuvilly Way, which is the neighbor that shares the property line with 15200 Norton Road.
Staff also sent a “Notice of Public Hearing” to all property owners within 500 feet of the
subject property. The public hearing notice and description of the project was published in
the Saratoga News. Staff has not received any comments on the project.
3
116
VARIANCE FINDINGS
The findings required for issuance of a Variance Approval pursuant to City Code Section
15-70.060 are set forth below and the applicant has met the burden of proof to support
making all of those required findings:
(a) That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified
regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other
properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. The project
meets this finding because the steep topography and abundant trees within the rear
yard create special circumstances that limit the land area where a pool can be
constructed. The proposed location is relatively flat, free from native and heritage
tree, and in an area that would not impact privacy or safety of the adjacent
neighbors. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(b) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in
the same zoning district. The project meets this finding because four of the six
properties in the neighborhood have swimming pool facilities. The applicant
possesses similarly sized parcel, yet, due to the steep topography and abundant tree
cover, does not possess a land area where a pool can be constructed without the
approval of a variance. If the pool were to be proposed in the rear yard, the applicant
could potentially affect numerous protected trees while applying for an additional
variance due to the slope of the rear yard. The proposed area within the side setback
is the most appropriate area to construct the pool, as the area is the least impactful to
the site. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(c) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity. The project meets this finding because the site has been investigated by the
City Geologist with the determination that the proposed location of the pool (and
main residence) is outside the traces of the Berrocal fault. In turn, approval of the
project would not be detrimental to health, safety or welfare of properties or
improvements in the vicinity as long as conditions and recommendations from the
City Geologist are incorporated into the final building plan. Staff has conditioned
that the conclusions and recommendations of the City Geologist be followed within
the resolution. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project, which includes the
construction of a swimming pool, is categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 of the Guidelines for
Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to new construction of limited
small new facilities; installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 13-029 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
4
117
5
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval – 15200 Norton Rd.
2. Previous Resolution – V-99-007
3. Geotechnical Clearance GEO13-0005, dated 7/22/13
4. Neighbor Notifications
5. Public hearing notice, mailing addresses, and map for project notification
6. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A.”
118
RESOLUTION NO: 13-029
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING VARIANCE VAR13-0004 ALLOWING A SWIMMING POOL WITHIN A
SIDE YARD LOCATED AT 15200 NORTON ROAD
WHEREAS, an application was submitted by Jon Snell requesting Variance approval to
construct a swimming pool within the side yard setback, located at 15200 Norton Road (APN 517-
14-048). The site is located within the R-1-40,000 zoning district.
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 August 14, 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 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 applies to new construction and
installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures.
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
new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent
surroundings; Land Use Element Policy 5.2 which states that Development proposals shall be
evaluated against City standards and guidelines to assure that the related traffic, noise, light,
appearance, and intensity of the proposed use have limited adverse impact on the area and can be
fully mitigated; 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 Planning
Commission is empowered to grant variances in order to prevent or to lessen such practical
difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of the City Code as
would result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of certain zoning regulations.
119
Resolution No. 13-029
Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves VAR13-0004
located at 15200 Norton Road, 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 14th day of
August 2013 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Joyce Hlava
Chair, Planning Commission
120
Resolution No. 13-029
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VAR13-0004
15200 NORTON RD.
(APN 517-14-048)
A. GENERAL
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this
project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting
all applicable permanent 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.
2. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until
the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent.
3. Conditions may be modified only by the Planning Commission unless modification is expressly
otherwise allowed by the City Code including but not limited to Sections 15-80.120 and/or 16-
05.035, as applicable.
4. The City shall mail to the Owner and Applicant a notice in writing, on or 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 Community
Development Director certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit
accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained).
5. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 24 months from the date
of adoption of this Resolution or the Variance Approval will expire unless extended in
accordance with the City Code.
6. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City
and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the
requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations incorporated herein by this reference.
7. Prior to issuance of any Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit to implement this Variance
Approval the Owner or Applicant shall obtain a “Zoning Clearance” from the Community
Development Director by submitting final plans for the requested permit to the Community
Development Department for review to ascertain compliance with the requirements of this
Resolution.
121
Resolution No. 13-029
8. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and
hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and
volunteers harmless from and against:
a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any
action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations
taken, done or made prior to said action; and
b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any
manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or
grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person
acting on their behalf.
In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance from the Community Development Director, Owner
and Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required
Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval
as to form and content by the City Attorney.
B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
9. Compliance with Plans and Description of Use. The development shall be located and
constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans
and Description of Use, denominated Exhibit "A", dated May 29, 2013. All proposed changes
to the Approved Plans and Description of Use must be submitted in writing with plans showing
the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be
subject to approval in accordance with Condition A.3, above.
10. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted
to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Community
Development Department Director or designee prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The
construction plans shall, at a minimum include the following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A”
on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition No. B.9
above;
b. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages;
c. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building
Division
11. Fences. No fence or wall shall exceed six feet in height and no fence or wall located within any
required front yard shall exceed three feet in height. No retaining wall shall exceed five feet in
height and no retaining wall within any required front yard shall exceed three feet in height.
12. Stormwater. A stormwater retention plan indicating how all stormwater (to the extent feasible)
will be retained on-site, and incorporating the New Development and Construction – Best
Management Practices.
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
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 14th day of August 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: VAR13-0004 / 15200 Norton Drive
APPLICANT/OWNER: Jon Snell
APN: 517-14-048
DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested a variance to construct a swimming pool
approximately 13 feet from the side property line.
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 Monday, August 5th 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
133
Subject APN: 517-14-048 Address: 15200 NORTON RD
500’ Radius SARATOGA CA 95070
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
134
Parcel Number Owner Name Owner Address Owner City, State Zip
#5663 500' OWNERSHIP LISTING Prepared for: 15200 Norton Rd
517-13-020 BONNIE & GREGORY T FOX 15175 NORTON AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
517-13-026 JUDGE KENNEDY SINGH & NESBET15088 NORTON DR SARATOGA CA 95070
517-13-037 STORMIN NORMAN LLC 16000 CUVILLY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-031 SMITH JENNI TR 15210 BOHLMAN RD SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-032 TANZEER & SHAMEEM AHMED 15201 NORTON RD SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-033 THOMAS RUNALDUE 15231 NORTON RD SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-042 CHETIA FAMILY TR 15330 NORTON RD SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-043 PETER B & LINDA M PHIPPS 15270 NORTON RD SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-044 HAMMOND HAN CHIN KU 20642 SIGAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-045 OLIVIA V GARCIA 3376 SHADY SPRING LN MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94040
517-14-046 NOREEN T YAMAOKA P.O. BOX 2879 SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-047 DAVID W DOLLOFF 20685 SIGAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-048 JONATHAN H SNELL 15200 NORTON RD SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-070 EDWARD M & MICHELLE FARRELL 20877 KITTRIDGE RD SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-071 CLEO P & JOHN C CONSTANTIN 6132 FRANCISCAN CT SAN JOSE CA 95120
517-14-081 CLEO P & JOHN C CONSTANTIN 6132 FRANCISCAN CT SAN JOSE CA 95120
517-14-082 DAVID D ARNOLD 15291 NORTON RD SARATOGA CA 95070
517-14-094 SRINIVASAN & SUDHA RAJAGOPAL20620 SIGAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
517-18-011 KENNETH E & DEBORAH A FOLLMA15400 WINCHESTER BLVD #34 LOS GATOS CA 95030
517-18-045 SUDIN & RAMA VITTAL 15265 MONTALVO HEIGHTS CT SARATOGA CA 95070
517-18-046 GARY & JANICE VALENZUELA 15244 MONTALVO HEIGHTS DR SARATOGA CA 95070
517-18-064 VALONIA LAU OEI KADOORIE HILL GARDEN BRAGA CIRCUIT HO
135
136
Scale 1" = 20'Site PlanSnell/Tuers R esidence15200 N orton R d, Saratoga, C a 95070Site Plan1 of 3R O YAL PO O LS137
REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: August 14, 2013
Application: Design Review PDR13-0013
Location / APN: 12970 Glen Brae Dr. /
389-03-002
Owner / Applicant: City of Saratoga / Crown Castle on behalf of Sprint
Staff Planner: Michael Fossati
12970 Glen Brae Dr. – Congress Springs Park
138
SUMMARY
ZONING
Single-Family Residential
(R1-12,500)
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
Open Space – Managed Resources
(OS-MR)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is requesting to replace a radome housing three panel antennas on an existing
monopole with a new larger radome, also housing three antennas within Congress Springs
Park. The total combined height of the radome and monopole would be approximately 50
feet.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution No. 13-028 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
PROJECT DATA
Pursuant to City Code Section 15-44.020(a), no building permit shall be issued for the
construction of a Wireless Telecommunications Facility, or the modification of an
existing Wireless Telecommunications Facility, within any zoning district until such
structure has received design review approval by the Planning Commission. The
application includes the replacement and installation of new panel antennas and
associated equipment.
SITE AND PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Site Description
The project site is located in the southeast corner of Congress Springs Park. The park is
approximately a 10 acre site containing baseball, softball, soccer, and recreational fields.
The area where the monopole is located is bordered by the park itself, Highway 85, and
Saratoga Creek.
Project Description
The application was received by the City in May 2013. The applicant is proposing to
replace an existing personal wireless antenna facility, which includes a six foot tall
radome on a 44 ft. tall base pole, with a new eight foot tall radome on a 42 ft. tall base
pole. The existing radome is 16 inches in diameter. The proposed radome would be 32
inch in diameter and painted to match the existing base pole.
Additional equipment would be added to the site, which includes six new Radio Remote
Units (RRU’s) on a new H-frame and two new cabinets to replace the three existing
cabinets. The RRU’s and cabinets would be installed at ground level and within the area
leased to Sprint. Additional fiber and supporting equipment and an upgrade to the
existing power supply is also proposed.
2
139
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Requirements
Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC has exclusive jurisdiction over Radio
Frequency (RF) emissions from personal wireless antenna facilities. The City can evaluate
and regulate only the aesthetic aspects of wireless installations. Any concerns regarding
health and 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.
Radio Frequency (RF) Analysis
The applicant has provided a Radio Frequency (RF) Analysis which concludes the proposed
telecommunication facility would comply with the FCC’s current standards for limiting
human exposure to RF energy, and no significant impact on the general public is expected.
As proposed, the new antennas would operate at no more than 3.346% of the maximum
power density in any accessible area on the ground.
Neighbor Correspondence
Of the 24 certified letters sent out to the public, the applicant received and submitted seven
neighbor notification forms from neighboring property owners. Staff also sent a “Notice of
Public Hearing” to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. The public
hearing notice and description of the project was published in the Saratoga News.
Of those seven neighbor notification forms, staff has received one comment in opposition of
the project. The neighboring property owner states that there is Electromagnetic Fields
(EMF) levels considerably in excess of levels considered safe. Staff contacted the property
owner asking if he had proof that the proposed project would add to these unsafe levels.
The owner said he had no written proof and just wanted his comments to be heard into the
record.
DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code
Section 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.
The project meets this finding because the antenna is replacing an existing antenna,
while not increasing the height of the existing base pole structure. This finding can be
made in the affirmative.
(b) That the Wireless Telecommunications Facility and related structures incorporate
architectural treatments and screening to substantially include:
(1) Appropriate and innovative stealth design solutions;
3
140
4
(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.
The project meets this finding because the proposed antenna replacement would be
located significantly far away from sight lines of neighboring property owners as it
would be constructed at the southeast end of Congress Springs Park, adjacent to
Highway 9, within an existing equipment storage facility. The color, exterior textures
and height of the proposed wireless equipment are consistent with the gray, industrial
color of the nearby existing wireless radome and PG&E utility tower located to the
south of the proposed equipment. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(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.
The project meets this finding because the equipment area is shielded by recreational
storage and maintenance equipment and within a fenced area, non-accessible to patrons
of the park, trail and other recreational facilities. Additional shrubs and bushes within
the fenced area provide an additional scenic buffer regarding the ground-mounted
equipment. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project, which includes installation and
replacement of new cellular equipment, is categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 of the Guidelines for
Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to new construction of limited
small new facilities; installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 13-028 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval – 12970 Glen Brae Dr.
2. Antenna Locations – Sprint PCS
3. Coverage Maps – Sprint PCS
4. Photo Simulations
5. RF Analysis
6. Neighbor Notifications
7. Public hearing notice, mailing addresses, and map for project notification
8. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A.”
141
RESOLUTION NO: 13-028
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW PDR13-0013 REGARDING WIRELESS ANTENNAS
LOCATED AT 12970 GLEN BRAE DR (CONGRESS SPRINGS PARK)
WHEREAS, an application was submitted by Crown Castle on behalf of Sprint requesting
Design Review approval to replace three existing 3G cellular panel antennas, six foot tall, 16 inch
diameter radome and associated ground-mounted equipment with three new 4G panel antennas,
eight foot tall, 32 inch diameter radome, and associated ground-mounted equipment within a leased
area located at the southeast end of 12970 Glen Brae Drive (APN 389-03-002), also known as
Congress Springs Park. The site is located within the R-1-12,500 zoning district.
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 August 14, 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 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 applies to new construction and
installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures.
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
new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent
surroundings; Land Use Element Policy 5.2 which states that Development proposals shall be
evaluated against City standards and guidelines to assure that the related traffic, noise, light,
appearance, and intensity of the proposed use have limited adverse impact on the area and can be
fully mitigated; 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 is co-located with
another wireless telecommunications facility, blends in with the surrounding environment and
predominant background, and is appropriately screened visually.
142
Resolution No. 13-028
Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR13-0013
located at 12970 Glen Brae Drive, subject to the Findings, and Conditions of Approval attached
hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 14th day of
August 2013 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Joyce Hlava
Chair, Planning Commission
143
Resolution No. 13-028
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR13-0013
12970 Glen Brae Dr.
(APN 389-03-002)
A. GENERAL
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this
project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting
all applicable permanent 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.
2. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until
the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent.
3. Conditions may be modified only by the Planning Commission unless modification is expressly
otherwise allowed by the City Code including but not limited to Sections 15-80.120 and/or 16-
05.035, as applicable.
4. The City shall mail to the Owner and Applicant a notice in writing, on or 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 Community
Development Director certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit
accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained).
5. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 36 months from the date
of adoption of this Resolution or the Design Review Approval will expire unless extended in
accordance with the City Code.
6. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City
and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the
requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations incorporated herein by this reference.
7. Prior to issuance of any Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit to implement this Design
Review Approval the Owner or Applicant shall obtain a “Zoning Clearance” from the
Community Development Director by submitting final plans for the requested permit to the
144
Resolution No. 13-028
Community Development Department for review to ascertain compliance with the requirements
of this Resolution.
8. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and
hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and
volunteers harmless from and against:
a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any
action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations
taken, done or made prior to said action; and
b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any
manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or
grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person
acting on their behalf.
In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance from the Community Development Director, Owner
and Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required
Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval
as to form and content by the City Attorney.
B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
9. Compliance with Plans and Description of Use. The development shall be located and
constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans
and Description of Use, denominated Exhibit "A", and the Photo Simulations, denominated
Exhibit “B, both received and dated July 1, 2013. All proposed changes to the Approved Plans
and Description of Use must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes, including
a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be subject to approval in
accordance with Condition A.3, above.
10. Harmonizing with Existing Structures. Prior to the installation of the proposed radome and
accessory equipment, the radome and equipment shall be painted a color similar to the structure
it’s being attached to.
11. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted
to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Community
Development Department Director or designee prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The
construction plans shall, at a minimum include the following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A”
on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition No. B.9
above;
b. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages;
c. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building
Division
145
Resolution No. 13-028
C. REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER AGENCIES OR UTILITIES
12. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Verification. The applicant for this Project
shall contact the FCC and verify whether there are any required permits from said Commission.
If required by the FCC, prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance for any proposed equipment
installations (or if none, prior to commencement of the approved use), the Owner and/or
Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department documentation from the
FCC showing proof of compliance of the proposed use and/or development with the FCC's
requirements.
13. 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.
14. Governmental entities. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other
Governmental entities, including the California Public Utilities Commission, must be met.
15. Emergency Access. The applicant shall provide a 24-hour phone number to which interference
problems may be reported, and will resolve all interference complaints within 24 hours from the
time the interference was reported.
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
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 14th day of August 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: PDR13-0013 / 12970 Glen Brae Drive
APPLICANT/OWNER: Crown Castle on behalf of Sprint PCS
APN: 389-03-002
DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested to replace a six foot tall, 16 inch diameter radome
housing three panel antennas on a 44 foot monopole with an eight foot tall, 32 inch diameter
radome, housing three proposed panel antennas on a 42 foot monopole. The height of the
proposed monopole (including the radome) will not exceed 50 feet.
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 Monday, August 5th 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
180
Subject APN: 389-03-002 Address: 12970 Glen Brae Dr
500’ Radius Saratoga, CA 95070
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
181
Parcel Number Owner Name Owner Address Owner City, State Zip
#5647 500' OWNERSHIP LISTING Prepared for: 12970 Glen Brae Dr
389-01-017 MICHAEL M & KATHERINE J GILBERT 12927 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-01-018 GEORGE A & CARMEL J THORN 12939 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-01-019 DANIEL M & MARGARET N CHAN 12949 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-01-020 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO
389-01-022
SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION
CO
389-02-001 SARATOGA CITY OF
389-02-002 CALIFORNIA STATE OF P.O.BOX 23440 OAKLAND CA 94623
389-02-006 ARTHUR S HOPKINS 19431 DE HAVILLAND CT SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-012 SANDRA W & CLYDE W CHUN 19436 DEHAVILLAND CT SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-013 EUGENE C LEE 19434 DEHAVILLAND CT SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-014 PATRICIA A SALSMAN 19432 DEHAVILLAND CT SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-015 LAN T DUONG 19430 DEHAVILLAND CT SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-016 HONG-LEONG & LI LING HONG 19428 DEHAVILLAND CT SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-017 PALLAVI BELKALE 19426 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-018 ROSEMARIE JORGENSEN 19424 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-019 SYED H & DEEBA YOUSUF 19412 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-020
ASHOK KUMAR & SUNDARAMURTHY L
GUNASEKARAN 19400 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-021 SI WHAN & OH WON CHOI 19396 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-022 CHUN T PAN 19378 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-023 CHIACHEN & ZHU MINGJUAN CHANG 19356 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-024 CHRISTINE K & FRANK T NGUYEN 19334 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-025 EARL S & MARY E THYGESON 19312 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-02-026 LANCE J & OLGA M AGEE 19294 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-03-001
SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION
CO P.O.BOX 23440 OAKLAND CA 94623
389-03-002 SARATOGA CITY OF
389-03-003 CALIFORNIA STATE OF P.O.BOX 23440 OAKLAND CA 94623
389-04-023 RAYMOND K & DENISE K HUIE 5121 LE MICCINE TER SAN JOSE CA 95129
389-04-024 PAUL Y TSAI 19379 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-04-025 CHENG FAMILY TR 19393 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-04-026 ERNEST W & KARIN DUEMMLEIN 19411 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-04-027 HSIAO-ING & LI-PENG CHOU 19422 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-04-028 ANIL & SMEETA GUPTA 19444 DEHAVILLAND DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-04-031 NORMAN L JOHNSON 19388 SHUBERT CT SARATOGA CA 95070
389-04-032 UDAYPAL & NUTAKKI LAVANYA AARKOTI 19376 SHUBERT CT SARATOGA CA 95070
389-05-001 STEVEN G & SINMEI DEGRANGE 13001 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-05-002 BEVERLY J KORBAY 13148 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-05-003 MEIR & LYNN A LEVI 13126 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-05-004 LAWRENCE R & ELIZABETH S BURGESS 13102 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-05-005 MINGTANG YIN 13527 TONI ANN PL SARATOGA CA 95070
389-05-006 JANG PING CHEN 13068 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-05-007 ZACCONE TRUST 13046 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-05-008 VIC & MALIKA KAUL 17541 CORBETTA LN LOS ALTOS CA 94022
389-05-009 KARLAK FAMILY REV INTV TRT 8/10/92 13000 ANZA DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-05-023 S C V W D 5750 ALMADEN EXPY SAN JOSE CA 95118
389-10-007 S C V W D 5750 ALMADEN EXPY SAN JOSE CA 95118
389-10-008 CALIFORNIA STATE OF P.O.BOX 23440 OAKLAND CA 94623
389-10-010 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 13125 SARATOGA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
389-10-011 STATE OF CALIFORNIA P.O.BOX 23440 OAKLAND CA 94623
389-10-012
SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION
CO P.O.BOX 23440 OAKLAND CA 94623
393-17-006 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO
393-18-011 RALPH H WOOD 19661 JUNIPERO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
393-18-012 PETER & DORIS J VUTZ 19640 JUNIPERO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
393-18-013 REED A PARKER 19660 JUNIPERO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-008 BILL N WONG 13076 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-009 JOHN J KORANDA 19522 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-010 SRINIVASAN FAMILY TR 19500 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-011 DAN S & JUN W CHENG 19486 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-012 GREGORY R CRONIN 19474 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-013 YUHENG & YANG BAIZHENG ZHANG 19452 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
182
393-20-014 JING-MEI & HUNG KWEI HU 19430 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-015 SHYH-SHYONG & HUEY-CHING BAIR 19445 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-016 ADRIANO D & FRANCINE L ROSSI 19447 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-017 JOANN T MOW 19449 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-018 CATHERINE PRENTICE 19451 VIA MADRONAS CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-034 UTIT & SUPAWAN PIMSAKUL 174 CASTRO ST MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94041
393-20-035 SELVI AL TR 13120 VIA MADRONAS DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-036 MARGARET D MCCARTNEY 19381 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-037 STEPHEN Y & SARAH S HUNG 19403 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-038 SUBRAM & AKILA S NARASIMHAN 19425 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-039 ALFREDO A & SUSAN B BISMONTE 19437 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-040 LOIS M MCPHERSON 19449 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-041 FUJIO & HELEN YAMAUCHI 19471 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-042 JEN-TUNG & MARIA CHEN 19483 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-043 KUMAR VENKATRAMANI 19495 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-044 MICHAEL F CHRISTIAN 19517 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-045 KOTHANDAPANI RANGANATHAN 19529 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-046 SUKI J & JAHANGIR MOHAMMED 13010 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-20-048 CITY OF SARATOGA 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESS WAY SAN JOSE CA 95118
393-20-049 S C V W D 5750 ALMADEN EXPY SAN JOSE CA 95118
393-21-005 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO
393-21-006 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO
393-21-007 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO
393-21-011 S C V W D 5750 ALMADEN EXPY SAN JOSE CA 95118
393-21-013 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO P.O.BOX 23440 OAKLAND CA 94623
393-21-014 CITY OF SARATOGA 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESS WAY SAN JOSE CA 95118
393-21-015 S C V W D 5750 ALMADEN EXPY SAN JOSE CA 95118
393-21-016 CALIFORNIA STATE OF P.O.BOX 23440 OAKLAND CA 94623
393-21-017 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. P.O.BOX 23440 OAKLAND CA 94623
393-22-023 THOMAS H & LOREN J COOK 19329 VIA CRECENTE CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-024 TODD PU-TSE & HSU I-WEN WANG 19331 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-025 JY KUANG LIN 19343 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-026 KATHLEEN WILHOIT 19355 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-027 WALTER J & JEANETTE B SIMMONS 19367 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-028 WILLIAM C & JOAN C ELHOFF 19379 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-029 OMID & ZAHRA GAINI 13124 VIA RANCHERO DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-030 CHESTER T & LOUISE YU 19346 VIA REAL DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-051 FRANK P & ANNA M CRIMI 13146 VIA RANCHERO DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-052 MICHAEL D & EDITH M GIANSIRACUSA 13121 VIA RANCHERO DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-22-053 CHIIMING & AILEEN C KAO 13143 VIA RANCHERO DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-001 JOHN M & ROSE P SIMMONS 19568 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-002 ANDY PENG-PUI & JOAN FRANCIS CHAN 19546 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-003 STEPHEN S & NANCY C CHENG 19538 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-004 ERIC A & VIVIAN M BRACHER 19542 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-005 ANDREA BARON 19548 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-006 REED W LARSEN 19560 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-010 MUKTA & MUKHIJIA GULNEESH MUKHIJA 19569 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-011 SUNIL P & SHAILA S JOSHI 19551 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-012 HOREN & JENNY CHEN 19567 CHARDONNAY CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-013 BYOUNG EUN & SANGMI AN 13049 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-014 WILLIAM G & BARBARA F GROTZINGER 13073 GLEN BRAE DR SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-022 ALEXANDER & LING RU WANG 13034 VIA ESCUELA CT SARATOGA CA 95070
393-46-023 DAVID A LEE 13012 VIA ESCUELA CT SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-001 DANIEL G BAXTER 19313 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-002 SANDRA C HULL 19314 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-003 KATHRYN A JONES 19416 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-004 KATE B & MICHAEL G ATKINSON 16 MADISON ST CONCORD NH 3301
389-08-005 KATHLEEN & PATEL ANISH HEVLAND 19421 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-006 CAROLE J LUNNY 19422 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-007 GALINA NAM 19424 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-008 NATHERA & KHALID A MAWLA 16167 GREENWOOD RD MONTE SERENO CA 95030
389-08-009 SHAWAREB FAMILY TR 19431 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-010 BARBARA J STURGES 19432 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-011 ELI J & MARY E BOGDANOVICH 20391 BLAUER DR SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-012 JOHN L JENKINS 12450 BROOK GLEN DR SARATOGA CA 95070
183
389-08-013 KATHLEEN R SIUDZINSKI P O BOX 4002 LOS ALTOS CA 94024
389-08-014 ESPERANZA A CHIN 19419 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-015 ANTHONY P FLEMING 319 NORTH ST #6 HEALDSBURG CA 95448
389-08-016 JAVAD & DIANA GHASSEMI 19304 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-017 DEBORAH A MATHESON 19306 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-018 LINDA MENON 19309 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-019 FLEUR C KETTMANN 19406 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-020 SYLVIA G PHILLIPS 19408 VINE YARD SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-021 LESLIE O MAGSALAYZELLER 19412 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA
389-08-022 MARGARET F GOKA 1360 HOLLENBECK AVE SUNNYVALE CA 94087
389-08-023 SAMI & AWATEF SHARAIHA 1033 SHELL BLVD #4 FOSTER CITY CA 94404
389-08-024 TAI-MING & HUEI TZENG 19311 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-025 JOHN N & MARGARET C POHLERS 19312 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-026 SUNIL & ARADHANA KAR 19413 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-027 CAROLE DIFILIPPI 19414 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-028 SUSAN & TAVELLA DOMINGO CHIU 329 SANTA ANA AVE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94127
389-08-029 ANTHONY R FISHER 19420 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-030 MARLEN WIGHTMAN 19423 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-031 MARY E MCCARRICK 5482 VENTENA PL CITRUS HEIGHTS CA 95610
389-08-032 BREVARD WILLIAMS 19429 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-033 GERARDO A & NILDA RETAMOSO 19430 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-034 ERGANG & LI BEI LIU 19307 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-035 JUDITH KLOCK 19401 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-036 JOAN C FREDERICK 19402 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-037 DANIEL N HOFFMAN 19403 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-038 MICHAEL B & JOSIE G GARCIA 19404 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-039 WILLIAM W & MARIKO T SULLIVAN 19409 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-040 JANINE T GARDNER 182 WEDGEWOOD AVE LOS GATOS CA 95032
389-08-041 NEYRAM HEMATI 20790 REID LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-042 RANJINI S & SURESH VOBBILISETTY 19305 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-043 JOHN & KRISTINE L CORONEL 135 PAN TEMPO WAY HOLLISTER CA 95023
389-08-044 PARMINDER K MOROAK 19407 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-045 MONICA Y KAUHINI 7861 DICKENS WAY GILROY CA 95020
389-08-046 ROBERT A ENGLAND 19411 VINEYARD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
389-08-047 NORMAN E & PAMELA E MATTEONI PO BOX 3468 SARATOGA CA 95070
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194