HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-26-15 Planning Commission Agenda PacketTable of Contents
Agenda 3
August 12, 2015
Draft Minutes 5
Applications ENV15-0003/PDR15-0008/ZOA15-0004; 13716 &
13718 Saratoga Avenue; Rockwood Design Associates on
behalf of Sacred Heart Parish –The project includes a Zoning
Amendment to add a Planned-Combined Overlay Zoning
District (P-C) to a 11.4 acre parcel (APN 397-30-047) and a
Design Review application to remodel the existing Parish Center
by adding 2,425 square feet and increasing the roof height from
23.7 feet to 26 feet. An existing kindergarten classroom within
the school building will be relocated to an area that is currently
used as an office. The site is zoned R1-10,000. Staff Contact:
Erwin Ordonez (408)868-1231.
Staff Report 7
Att. 1 - Resolution 14
Att. 2 - Ordinance 18
Att. 3 - Public Benefit List 23
Att. 4 - Sacred Heart Milestone 24
Att. 5 - Initial Study 27
Att. 6 - Neighbor Notification Form 51
Att. 7 - Public Hearing 52
Att. 8 - Plans 53
Application MOD15-0004; 12260 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road
(386-30-035) Summer Hill Homes - The applicant is requesting
approval to modify building elevations, including exterior
finishes, and landscaping, for a 12 unit townhouse development
that had previous design review approval. Staff Contact: Sandy
Bailey (408) 868-1222.
Staff Report 60
Att. 1 - Approved Resolution 64
Att. 2 - New Resolution 72
Att. 3 - Applicant's Letter 80
Att. 4 - Neighbor Letters 83
Att. 5 - Public Notice 88
Att. 6 - Excerpt Approved Plans 95
Att. 7 - Plans 100
Application PDR14-0017; 14825 Fruitvale Avenue (397-18-028)
Yong – The applicant has requested to demolish an existing one
-story residence and construct a new one-story residence with
basement. The total floor area of the project is 6,007 sq. ft. (not
including certain portions of the lower floor considered
“basement” by definition). Per City Code, portions of the lower
floor are considered either “basement” or “one-story”. The
height of the proposed residence will be no taller than 23 ft.
Four trees in conflict with the project are being approved for
removal by the City Arborist. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati
(408) 868-1212.
Staff Report - 14825 Fruitvale Ave.117
1
Att 1 Resolution 123
Att 2 Arborist Report 129
Att 3 Neighbor Notification 141
Att 4 Reduced Plan Set Exhibit A 145
Application PDR15-0003; 19341 Monte Vista Dr. (397-10-026)
D&Z Design Assoc. – The applicant has requested to demolish
an existing one-story residence and construct a new one-story
residence with basement. The total floor area of the project is
6,685 sq. ft. (not including the basement). The height of the
proposed residence will be no taller than 22 feet. Nine trees in
conflict with the project are being approved for removal by the
City Arborist. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-1212.
Staff Report - 19341 Monte Vista Dr.156
Att 1 Resolution 162
Att 2 Arborist Report 168
Att 3 Neighbor Notification 177
Att 4 Reduced Plan Set Exhibit A 179
2014 General Plan Annual Progress Report
Staff Report 197
Att. 1 200
2
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, August 26, 2015
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 August 12, 2015
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. Applications ENV15-0003/PDR15-0008/ZOA15-0004; 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue; Rockwood
Design Associates on behalf of Sacred Heart Parish –The project includes a Zoning Amendment to add a
Planned-Combined Overlay Zoning District (P-C) to a 11.4 acre parcel (APN 397-30-047) and a Design
Review application to remodel the existing Parish Center by adding 2,425 square feet and increasing the
roof height from 23.7 feet to 26 feet. An existing kindergarten classroom within the school building will be
relocated to an area that is currently used as an office. The site is zoned R1-10,000. Staff Contact: Erwin
Ordonez (408)868-1231.
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 15-036 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
2. Application MOD15-0004; 12260 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road (386-30-035) Summer Hill Homes - The
applicant is requesting approval to modify building elevations, including exterior finishes, and landscaping,
for a 12 unit townhouse development that had previous design review approval. Staff Contact: Sandy
Bailey (408) 868-1222.
Recommended action:
Approve Resolution No. 15-039 approving the modifications subject to conditions of approval.
3
3. Application PDR14-0017; 14825 Fruitvale Avenue (397-18-028) Yong – The applicant has requested to
demolish an existing one-story residence and construct a new one-story residence with basement. The total
floor area of the project is 6,007 sq. ft. (not including certain portions of the lower floor considered
“basement” by definition). Per City Code, portions of the lower floor are considered either “basement” or
“one-story”. The height of the proposed residence will be no taller than 23 ft. Four trees in conflict with
the project are being approved for removal by the City Arborist. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-
1212.
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 15-038 approving Design Review PDR14-0017 subject to conditions of approval.
4. Application PDR15-0003; 19341 Monte Vista Dr. (397-10-026) D&Z Design Assoc. – The applicant has
requested to demolish an existing one-story residence and construct a new one-story residence with
basement. The total floor area of the project is 6,685 sq. ft. (not including the basement). The height of the
proposed residence will be no taller than 22 feet. Nine trees in conflict with the project are being approved
for removal by the City Arborist. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-1212.
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 15-040 approving Design Review PDR15-0003 subject to conditions of approval.
OTHER BUSINESS
1. 2014 General Plan Annual Progress Report
DIRECTOR ITEMS
COMMISSION ITEMS
ADJOURNMENT
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 20, 2015 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, August 12, 2015
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. – CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777
FRUITVALE AVENUE
ROLL CALL
PRESENT Commissioners Sunil Ahuja (arrived 7:05 pm), Wendy Chang, Kookie,
Fitzsimmons, Joyce Hlava, Dede Smullen, Tina Walia, Chair Leonard Almalech
ABSENT None
ALSO PRESENT Erwin Ordoñez, Community Development Director
Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner
Liz Ruess, Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting on July 8, 2015
Action:
WALIA/FITZSIMMONS MOVED TO APPROVE THE JULY 8, 2015 MINUTES AS AMENDED. MOTION
PASSED. AYES: ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: AHUJA.
ABSTAIN: HLAVA, SMULLEN.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 14-020 APPROVING THE PROJECT WITH CHANGES
TO THE CONDITIONS:
1. APPLICATION PDR15-0016; 20700 Verde Vista Ln. (503-58-003); Jiang – The applicant is proposing to
demolish an existing house and construct a new 23 foot, 6 inch tall single-story 4,268 square foot home that
would include a two-car garage and deed-restricted second dwelling unit. Planning Commission design
review is required because the project consists of a new single-story residence over 18 feet in height. No
protected trees are proposed for removal. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408)868-1212
Action:
HLAVA/WALIA MOVIED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE SEPTEMBER 9, 2015
MEETING.
MOTION PASSED. AYES: ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN, WALIA.
NOES: NONE. ABSENT: AHUJA. ABSTAIN: NONE.
2. APPLICATION FER15-0001; 19521 Farwell Ave (397-17-012); Mischou - The applicant is requesting a
Fence Exception to install a 5’ tall wrought iron fence and pedestrian gate with 5’-6” veneer stone pilasters
within the side setback along Farwell Avenue. The wrought iron fence and pilasters would continue at the
corner of Farwell & Fruitvale Ave, connecting to the existing wood fence, within the front setback. No
native or protected trees would need to be removed in order to construct the gate or fence. Staff Contact:
Liz Ruess (408) 868-1230.
Action:
HLAVA/AHUJA MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 15-031 APPROVING THE PROJECT
SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
5
MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, HLAVA, SMULLEN. NOES:
FITZSIMMONS, WALIA. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE.
3. Applications PDR15-0008/ZOA15-0004/ENV15-0003; 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue, 397-30-047;
Sacred Heart Parish - The project includes a Zoning Amendment to add a Planned-Combined Zoning
District (P-C) overlay to a 11.4 acre parcel (APN 397-30-047) and a design review application to construct
a 2,425 square foot single-story addition to the existing 10,072 square feet two-story Parish Center of the
Sacred Heart Church complex located at 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue. Staff Contact: Chris Riordan
(408) 868-1235.
Action:
HLAVA/WALIA MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE AUGUST 26, 2015 MEETING.
MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN,
WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE.
4. Applications PDR15-0011 & ARB15-0024;15181 Hume Drive;510-01-015; Vanessa Stephens - The
applicant is requesting Design Review approval to demolish an existing one story single-family residence
and construct a new 5,862 square foot, 24.9 feet tall two story single-family residence. Four protected trees
are proposed for removal. The net site area is 44,007 square feet and is zoned R-1-20,000. Staff Contact:
Chris Riordan (408) 868-1235
Action:
HLAVA/SMULLEN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 15-035 APPROVING THE
PROJECT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN,
WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE.
5. Applications PDR14-0025,GRE15-0001,ARB14-0046;20888 Kittridge Road;517-14-087; Christopher Pan
The project applicant is requesting Design Review approval to construct a 6,410 square foot two story
single-family home on a vacant site. The project also includes a grading exception for 2,112 cubic yards of
grading. The net site area is 7.97 acres or 347,173 square feet and is zoned HR (Hillside Residential. Staff
Contact: Chris Riordan (408) 868-1235
Action:
HLAVA/SMULLEN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 15-036 APPROVING THE
PROJECT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
MOTION PASSED. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, FITZSIMMONS, HLAVA, SMULLEN, WALIA.
NOES: CHANG. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE.
DIRECTOR/COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
Director Ordoñez gave update on Commission delegated authority for previous Horsehoe Drive design
review approval. Noted applicant has revised roof to maintain slope as requested by the Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
WALIA MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 8:40 PM. AYES: AHUJA, ALMALECH, CHANG, FITZSIMMONS,
HLAVA SMULLEN, WALIA. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. ABSTAIN: NONE.
6
REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: August 12, 2015
Application: Design Review PDR15-0008 / Zoning Amendment
ZOA15-0004 / Negative Declaration ENV15-0003
Location / APN: 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue / 397-30-047
Owner / Applicant: Sacred Heart Parish
Staff Planner: Christopher Riordan
13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
SITE
7
SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The project includes a Zoning Amendment to add a Planned-Combined Zoning District (P-
C) overlay to a 11.4 acre parcel (APN 397-30-047) and a design review application to
construct a 2,425 square foot single-story addition to the existing 10,072 square feet two-
story Parish Center of the Sacred Heart Church complex located at 13716 & 13718 Saratoga
Avenue.
The zoning of the site is single-family residential (R-1-10,000). The floor area, building
height, and site coverage of the Sacred Heart Church complex exceed the development
standards of the residential zoning district. The placement of the Planned-Combined (P-
C) Overlay District onto the existing residential zoning district would modify the
standards of development of the zoning district from R-1-10,000 to P-C / R-1-10,000 to
allow the improvements proposed and would be specific to the project site. The zoning
action is not exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) – an Initial
Study/Negative Declaration was prepared.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 15-034 thereby adopting the Negative Declaration and recommend
City Council approve the project subject to conditions of approval.
PROJECT APPROVALS:
This project includes applications for the following:
Design Review
The City Code requires Design Review approval for all structures for conditional uses in
a planned combined district.
Zoning Amendment
A stated purpose of the P-C combined district is to provide greater flexibility of land use
and design for a development that provides a public benefit which would not otherwise
be attainable through strict application of the zoning regulations. A public benefit may
include, but is not limited to, buildings which exceed the City’s green building standards,
provision of community facilities that are open to the public, or examples of innovative
in-fill design. An application for a proposed P-C zoning district requires final approval
from the City Council.
PROJECT DATA:
Net Site Area: 11.4 acres
General Plan Designation: CFS (Community Facility)
Zoning: R-1-10,000
2
8
Proposed Allowed/Required
Existing Site Coverage
Church/School Buildings
Paving/Hardscape
New Site Coverage
Addition to Parish Center
Total Proposed Site Coverage
68,690 sq. ft.
294,532 sq. ft.
2,425 sq. ft.
365,647 sq. ft. (73.5%)
298,322 sq. ft. (60%)
Existing Floor Area
Parish Center
School
Church
Geary Hall
Clergy House (Rectory)
Clergy House Accessory Structure
New Floor Area
Addition to Parish Center
Total Proposed Floor Area
10,072 sq. ft.
26,907 sq. ft.
18,775 sq. ft.
13,439 sq. ft.
5,805 sq. ft.
1,256 sq. ft.
2,425 sq. ft.
78,679 sq. ft.
8,000 max allowed
Structure Heights
Parish Center
School
Church
Geary Hall
Clergy House
Clergy House Accessory Structure
Bell Tower
23.7 ft.
20.0 ft.
30.0 ft.
24.0 ft.
22.0 ft.
22.0 ft.
80.0 ft.
26 feet tall
Setbacks (Parish Center)
Front (north)
Left Side (east)
Right Side (west)
Rear (south.)
310 ft.
41 ft.
480’
360’
25 ft.
10 ft.
10 ft.
25 ft.
The development standards for height, floor area and site coverage noted above exceed the
limits allowed within the R-1-10,000 residential district.
The City Council has the ability to approve a P-C district overlay when a project will not
conform to the underlying development standards provided that the proposed P-C district is
consistent with the General Plan, and would provide greater flexibility of land use and
design for a development that provides a public benefit that would not otherwise be
attainable through strict application of the zoning regulations.
The applicant, Sacred Heart Church, provides a number of public benefits, such as hosting
weddings, religious and other community services, elementary and middle school education
(K-8), meeting rooms, public festivals, and social areas for the general public. A list of
public benefits has been included as Attachment 3.
3
9
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
History: Three years after the City of Saratoga incorporated in 1956, an Architectural and
Site Control Permit for Sacred Heart Parish was approved in July 1959 for the development
of a school building, rectory, faculty residence, and parish hall. In February 1969, a Design
Review application was approved for a new church building to replace the temporary church
building that was constructed onsite. The application for the new church building included a
variance to construct the 80 foot tall bell tower found on site. In later years the faculty
residence was converted to the Parish Center and is used for administrative purposes. In
November 2000, a Conditional Use Permit was approved in association with the expansion
of the Church’s school and administrative offices because the permit was not previously
required with the original approvals. The applicant has submitted a ‘milestone’ timeline
illustrating the history of Sacred Heart Parish which is included as Attachment 4.
Site Description: The 11.4 acre project site is bounded by Saratoga Avenue to north,
Saratoga’s Heritage Orchard to the east, Saratoga Creek to the south, and single-family
homes to the west. All vehicle access is from Saratoga Avenue. A 236 vehicle capacity
parking lot provides parking for the school and church. Grass playfields are located in the
southern corner of the site.
P-C DISTRICT ANALYSIS:
Project Summary
The project includes an interior remodel and 2,425 square foot single story addition to the
Parish Center. The addition to the Parish Center will include an enlarged reception area,
conference rooms, and storage areas with exterior access. The interior of the second floor
will be completely remodeled with new offices and meeting areas and the height of the roof
will be increased from 23.7 feet to 26 feet. New second story windows will be installed on
the south elevation and existing second story windows on the western elevation will be
relocated. An existing kindergarten classroom within the school building will be relocated to
an area that is currently used as an office. No exterior modifications to the school building
are proposed. All new exterior materials and colors will match the existing building which
includes tan colored stucco and composition shingle roofing. No changes are proposed for
any of the other buildings or parking areas.
Heritage Lane – Heritage Preservation Commission Review
Sacred Heart Parish is located on a portion of Saratoga Avenue designated as a Heritage
Lane. The City of Saratoga has two designated Heritage Lanes which include the portion of
Austin Way on the west side of Highway 9 and Saratoga Avenue between Fruitvale Avenue
to 14301 Saratoga Avenue. The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) is responsible for
reviewing and providing comments for all projects located on a Heritage Lane. On July 14,
2015, the HPC visited the project site. The HPC commented on the architectural
requirement to increase the overall building height to 26 feet as well as the minimal roof
slope of the first story addition and ultimately recommended approval of the project.
4
10
Neighbor Correspondence
The applicant reviewed the project plans with adjacent neighbors. Copies of the completed
Neighbor Notification Forms are included as Attachment 6. Staff has also sent out notices
for the public hearing to all neighbors within 500 feet and no public comments were
received prior to preparation of this report.
ZONING AMENDMENT FINDINGS
The findings required for the issuance of a Zoning Amendment Approval for a Planned-
Combined zoning district are pursuant to City Code Section 15-16.060(b) and are set forth
below. The Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of these required
findings:
1) That the proposed location of the planned combined district is in accord with the
objectives of the General Plan and the purposes of the zoning district in which the site
is located. The project meets this finding because the church is located on a site that has
a General Plan designation of Community Facilities which is intended for private
institutions, including, but not limited to, religious facilities. Furthermore, the site is
located in a residentially zoned district which permits community facilities and
institutional uses as conditional uses.
2) That standards for the development will result in an aesthetic asset to the community
and produce an environment of stable and desirable character consistent with the
overall objectives of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The project meets this
finding because the single-story addition to the Parish Center is consistent with the
architectural style and exterior materials of the existing building, and the addition is not
visible from Saratoga Avenue which is a Heritage Lane.
3) That the uses in the development will complement each other and will not adversely
affect existing and proposed land uses in the vicinity or the public health, safety and
welfare. The project meets this finding because the uses on site will complement each
other in that all buildings are used by the church and school; the existing uses have co-
existed with surrounding uses for over 56 years; the existing residential land uses in the
vicinity will not be adversely impacted by the project because nearest residential uses to
the west are located 480 feet from the project site and the project area is separated by
existing buildings and landscaping; the construction of the project will require review by
the building department and the issuance of a building permit to protect the public
health, safety and welfare.
4) The application of the combined district furthers two or more of the purposes
contained within Section 15-16.010. The project meets this finding because the
approval will allow the City to provide greater flexibility of land use and design for a
development that provides a public benefit that would not otherwise be attainable
through strict application of the zoning regulations, such as allowing the 30’ tall church
and 80 feet tall bell tower, additional floor area and site coverage for educational
purposes, and encouraging innovative design that achieves a specific goal and policy of
5
11
the General Plan, such as providing sufficient land area for public, quasi-public and
similar land uses in Saratoga (Goal LU 4).
DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code
Section 15-46.040 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to
support making all of those required findings:
(a) Where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural
features and landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include
height, elevations, roofs, material, color and appurtenances. The project meets
this finding because while the 26 feet tall Parish Center building will not be as tall as
the 30 feet tall church building, it will be more consistent in height as the 24’ tall
Geary Hall building and the 22 feet tall clergy house which are both one story. In
addition, the distance separating the remodeled Parish Center building from the other
buildings on site reduces the perception of any height differences. The parish center
building will be consistent in color and roofing materials as the existing buildings on
site.
(b) Where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site, the signs shall
have a common or compatible design and locational positions and shall be
harmonious in appearance. The project meets this finding because the site contains
an existing monument sign on the Saratoga Avenue frontage and no additional signs
are being proposed at this time.
(c) Landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be
preserved; it shall make use of water-conserving plants, materials and irrigation
systems to the maximum extent feasible; and, to the maximum extent feasible, it
shall be clustered in natural appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows
or regularly spaced. The project meets this finding because the project will not
remove protected trees and the addition is being constructed in an existing developed
area. No new landscaping is proposed.
(d) Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be
nonreflective. The project meets this finding because the colors of the exterior
materials will include tan colored stucco and composition tile roofing; these colors
are non-reflective and will blend with the existing landscape.
(e) Roofing materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, tile, or other materials
such as composition as approved by the Planning Commission. No mechanical
equipment shall be located upon a roof unless it is appropriately screened. The
project meets this finding because the roofing materials will be composed of dark
colored asphalt shingles and no mechanical equipment, including air conditioning
units, will be located on the roof.
6
12
(f) The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk and design
with other structures in the immediate area. The project meets this finding because
the Parish Center will be compatible in height, colors, and exterior materials as other
structures on site and the 26 foot tall building height will be consistent with the
maximum height of adjacent single-family homes.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Community Development Department
completed an Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project pursuant to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code
sections 21000-21177), CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations sections
15000-15387), and any other applicable requirements. The intent to adopt the Negative
Declaration (MND) were duly noticed and circulated for a 20-day public review period from
July 17, 2015 – August 6, 2015. All Interested Parties desiring to comment on the MND
were given the opportunity to submit written and oral comments on the adequacy of the
MND up to and including the close of the Public Hearing on Project before the Planning
Commission on August 12, 2015.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval
2. Ordinance
3. Public Benefit List
4. Milestones in Sacred Heart’s History (prepared by applicant)
5. Negative Declaration
6. Neighbor Notification Forms
7. Public Hearing Notice
8. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A.”
7
13
RESOLUTION NO. 15-034
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ENV15-0003), ZONING AMENDMENT
(ZOA15-0004) AND DESIGN REVIEW (PDR15-0008), LOCATED AT
13716 & 13718 SARATOGA ROAD PROSPECT ROAD FOR SACRED HEART PARISH
WHEREAS, an application was submitted by Sacred Heart Parish, for a Zoning
Amendment and Design Review approval, to add a Planned-Combined Zoning District (P-C) to a
11.4 acre parcel (APN 397-30-047) and a design review application for an interior remodel and
2,425 square foot single story addition to the Parish Center. The addition to the Parish Center will
include an enlarged reception area, conference rooms, and storage areas with exterior access. The
interior of the second floor will be completely remodeled with new offices and meeting areas and
the height of the roof will be increased from 23.7 feet to 26 feet. New second story windows will be
installed on the south elevation and existing second story windows on the western elevation will be
relocated. An existing kindergarten classroom within the school building will be relocated to a new
area that is currently used as an office. No exterior modifications to the school building are
proposed. All new exterior materials and colors will match the existing building which includes tan
colored stucco and composition shingle roofing. The zoning of the site is single-family residential
(R-1-10,000). The floor area, building height, and site coverage of the existing church and
school buildings exceed the development standards of the residential zoning district. Since the
site does not comply, the placement of the Planned-Combined (P-C) Overlay District onto the
existing residential zoning district would modify the standards of development of the underlying
zoning district from R-1-10,000 to P-C / R-1-10,000. By allowing the P-C district, the City will
further their objectives of providing a public benefit, such as exceeding the City’s providing
community facilities open to the public and providing a below market rate housing unit. The
foregoing work is described as the “Project” in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the project is located on the portion of Saratoga Avenue designated as a
Heritage Lane and therefore requires review by the Heritage Preservation Commission. On July 14,
2015, the Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed the project and recommended approval.
WHEREAS, on August 12, 2015, 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 Community Development Department completed an Initial Study and
Negative Declaration for the project pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code sections 21000-21177), CEQA Guidelines (14
California Code of Regulations sections 15000-15387), and any other applicable requirements. The
14
Resolution No. 15-034
intent to adopt the Negative Declaration (MND) were duly noticed and circulated for a 20-day
public review period from July 17, 2015 – August 6, 2015. All Interested Parties desiring to
comment on the MND were given the opportunity to submit written and oral comments on the
adequacy of the MND up to and including the close of the Public Hearing on Project before the
Planning Commission on August 12, 2015.
Section 3: The project is consistent with the Saratoga General Plan Policies LU 4 in that the
City shall continue to provide sufficient land area for public, quasi-public and similar land uses in
Saratoga.
Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code Section 15-46.040 in that
where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural features and
landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include height, elevations, roofing materials,
color, and landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be
preserved; it shall make use of water-conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems to the
maximum extent feasible; and, to the maximum extent feasible, it shall be clustered in natural
appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows or regularly spaced, and that colors of wall
and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be nonreflective, and the roofing
materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, tile, or other materials such as composition as
approved by the Planning Commission, and that no mechanical equipment shall be located upon a
roof unless it is appropriately screened, and that the proposed development shall be compatible in
terms of height, bulk and design with other structures in the immediate area.
Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City
Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration ENV15-0003 and approve application ZOA15-
0004 and PDR15-0008 for the project located at 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Road, subject to the
Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 12th day of
August 2015 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Leonard Almalech
Chair, Planning Commission
15
Resolution No. 15-034
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. GENERAL
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, or 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. 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 processing fees have been paid
in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained).
4. 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.
5. 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.
16
Resolution No. 15-034
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
6. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans denominated Exhibit "A".
All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing
the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be
subject to approval in accordance with Condition No. 4, above.
7. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted
to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City prior to
issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum include the
following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A”
on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition No. 6
above;
b. A note shall be included on the site plan stating that no construction equipment or private
vehicles shall be parked or stored within the root zone of any Ordinance-protected tree on
the site;
c. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages;
d. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building
Division.
8. Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public
right-of-way.
9. Maintenance of Construction Project Sites. Because this Design Review Approval
authorizes a project which requires a Building Permit, compliance with City Code Section 16-
75.050 governing maintenance of construction project sites is required.
10. Expiration of Design Review. Per City Code Section 15-46.050, Design Review approval shall
expire 24 months from the date on which the Design Review approval became effective.
17
ORDINANCE __________
AN ORDINANCE REZONING ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 397-30-047
FROM R-1-10,000 TO R-1-10,000 P-C (PLANNED COMBINED DISTRICT)
SACRED HEART PARISH
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Findings
1. Saratoga City Code Article 15-16 establishes the P-C (Planned Combined) District to
provide the City the authority to modify standards of development in an underlying zoning
district so as to achieve the following objectives:
(a) To provide a means of guiding development or redevelopment of properties in areas
of the City that are uniquely suited for a variety of design and development patterns
and standards.
(b) To provide greater flexibility of land use and design for a development that provides
a public benefit that would not otherwise be attainable through strict application of
the zoning regulations. A public benefit could include, but is not limited to, buildings
that exceed the City's green building standards, provides community facilities that are
open to the public, or allows for innovative in-fill design.
(c) To encourage innovative design in a development that achieves one or more specific
goals and policies of the General Plan that would otherwise not be attainable through
strict application of the zoning regulations.
2. A Planned Combined District may be combined with any zoning district upon the granting of a
change of zone in accord with the provisions of this Article. A Planned Combined district shall
be designated by the symbol "P-C" following the zoning district designation with which it is
combined.
3. The addition to the Parish Center will include an enlarged reception area, conference rooms,
and storage areas with exterior access. The interior of the second floor will be completely
remodeled with new offices and meeting areas and the height of the roof will be increased
from 23.7 feet to 26 feet. New second story windows will be installed on the south elevation
and existing second story windows on the western elevation will be relocated. An existing
kindergarten classroom within the school building will be relocated to a new area that is
currently used as an office. No exterior modifications to the school building are proposed.
All new exterior materials and colors will match the existing building which includes tan
colored stucco and composition shingle roofing. The zoning of the site is single-family
residential (R-1-10,000). The floor area, building height, and site coverage of the existing
church and school buildings exceed the development standards of the residential zoning
district. Since the site does not comply, the placement of the Planned-Combined (P-C)
Overlay District onto the existing residential zoning district would modify the standards of
development of the underlying zoning district from R-1-10,000 to P-C / R-1-10,000. By
1
18
allowing the P-C district, the City will further their objectives of providing a public benefit,
such as exceeding the City’s providing community facilities open to the public.
4. The City of Saratoga Planning Commission and City Council have each found that that the
change is required to achieve the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance set forth in Section 15-
05.020, and following additional findings required in support of the rezoning to R-1-10,000
P-C:
(a) That the proposed location of the planned combined district is in accord with the
objectives of the General Plan and the purposes of the zoning district in which the
site is located.
(b) That standards for the development will result in an aesthetic asset to the community
and produce an environment of stable and desirable character consistent with the
overall objectives of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
(c) That the uses in the development will complement each other and will not adversely
affect existing and proposed land uses in the vicinity or the public health, safety and
welfare.
(d) That the application of the combined district furthers two or more of the purposes
contained within Section 15-16.010 (as set forth above, particularly purposes (b) and
(c) under Finding 1 above).
5. The City Council may by ordinance adopt a change of zone to a planned combined district as
applied for or in modified and/or conditional reclassification. The conditions of this
rezoning are set forth in Attachment 1 hereto and include limitation of the exceptions to the
City’s floor area, site coverage and height regulations as specified in Finding 3 above.
6. The City Council of the City of Saratoga held a duly noticed public hearing on (insert date),
and after considering all testimony and written materials provided in connection with that
hearing introduced this ordinance and waived the reading thereof.
Therefore, the City Council hereby amends the City Code as follows:
Section 1. Adoption.
The Saratoga City Zoning Map is amended to conditionally rezone ASSESSOR’S PARCEL
NUMBERS 397-30-047 (owned by Sacred Heart Parish and also known as 13716 & 13718 Saratoga
Avenue, Saratoga, California from R-1-10,000 TO R-1-10,000 P-C (PLANNED COMBINED
DISTRICT) subject to the conditions specified in Attachment 1 hereto.
Section 2. Severance Clause.
The City Council declares that each section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause
and phrase of this ordinance is severable and independent of every other section, sub-section,
paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance. If any section, sub-section,
paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is held invalid, the City
2
19
Council declares that it would have adopted the remaining provisions of this ordinance irrespective
of the portion held invalid, and further declares its express intent that the remaining portions of this
ordinance should remain in effect after the invalid portion has been eliminated.
Section 3. California Environmental Quality Act
The Community Development Department completed an Initial Study and Negative Declaration
which included a review of the environmental impact of this Rezoning and the City Council hereby
adopts said Negative Declaration.
Section 4. Publication.
A summary of this ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of
Saratoga within fifteen days after its adoption.
Following a duly notice public hearing the foregoing ordinance was introduced at the regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on (insert date), and was adopted by the
following vote on (insert date).
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED: ATTEST:
_________________________________ _____________________________
HOWARD MILLER CRYSTAL BOTHELIO
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA CLERK OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
Saratoga, California Saratoga, California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________________________
RICHARD TAYLOR, CITY ATTORNEY
3
20
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
ORDINANCE _______
19550 PROSPECT ROAD (386-35-069)
CHURCH OF THE ASCENSION
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. This ordinance supersedes all previous use permit resolutions issued for an institutional use for
this site.
2. All permitted uses per City Code Sections 15-12.020 and 15-12.030 are allowed. Additional
permitted uses include a community facility, an institutional facility, a religious and charitable
institution (per UP-00-007). The conditions of approval from UP-00-007 are number below as
3-9.
3. Neighbors shall be able to call 867-3634 to reach a Church representative during special events
or activities to register concerns or complaints. The Church shall make a good faith effort to
respond to these complaints. The City shall be notified if this contact telephone number changes.
4. There shall be no more than 360 classroom students on-site an any one time.
5. Delivery trucks servicing the site shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Garbage
collection trucks are required to service the site after 6:00 a.m. or per the City’s contract. The
City shall be responsible for enforcing these hours. The Church shall maintain the garbage
dumpster in an interior location where its pick-up will not disturb neighbors.
6. Special events that require outdoor amplified sound shall end by 9:00 p.m., with the exception
that no more than three Friday or Saturday special events per year may go later. These three
exception special events shall cease by 11:00 p.m. Special events shall be defined as any large-
scale congregation of people, excluding typical school and church activities.
7. The applicant shall provide a schedule of upcoming special events to the City and to adjacent
neighbors at least 30 days prior to each event.
8. Not more than six temporary signs or banners may be erected per year. Each sign or banner may
be displayed for not more than one week.
9. Class scheduling shall be coordinated with Saint Andrews School and Redwood Middle School
to minimize overlapping peak school drop-off and pick-up times.
10. The maximum site coverage is 73.5 percent.
11. All required setbacks shall be per City Code Section 15-12.090 for the R-1-10,000 zoning
district.
4
21
12. Off-street parking and loading facilities shall be provided for each use on the site, in
accordance with the regulations set forth in Article 15-35 of the City Code.
13. Construction of any future structures shall comply with applicable design review regulations
set forth in Article 15-46 of the City Code.
14. The total allowable floor area for the site shall be no greater than 78,679 square feet.
15. The allowable building height shall be no taller than 30 feet, with the exception of the bell
tower which is 80 feet.
16. All uses permitted on site shall be open to the public.
5
22
Sacred Heart Parish
13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
List of Public Benefits
Education provider for classes K-8
Community meeting rooms
After school youth programs
Public Use of Gymnasium
Weddings
Funerals
Holiday Boutiques and Festivals
23
24
25
26
Initial Study
&
Negative Declaration
For:
Zoning Amendment and Design Review
Sacred Heart Parish
13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
Public Review Period:
July 17, 2015 to August 6, 2015
27
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
1. Project title: Parish Center Remodel and Addition
2. Lead agency name and address: City of Saratoga; Planning Division
13777 Fruitvale Avenue; Saratoga, CA 95070
3. Contact person and phone number: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner
(408) 868-1235
4. Project location/APN: 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue / 397-30-047
5. Project sponsor name and address: Sacred Heart Parish
13716 & 13718
San Jose, CA 95112
6. General plan designation: Community Facility (CFS)
7. Zoning: Single-Family Residential (R-1-10,000)
8. Description of project: The project includes a Zoning Amendment to add a Planned-Combined
Zoning District (P-C) to a 11.4 acre parcel (APN 397-30-047) and a design review application to
remodel and expand the floor area of the existing 10,072 square feet two-story Parish Center located
at the northeastern portion of the site and adjacent to the City of Saratoga Heritage Orchard.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: The project location is bounded by Saratoga Avenue to the north,
the City of Saratoga Heritage Orchard to the east, Saratoga Creek to the south, and single-family
homes to the west.
10. Other public agencies whose review is required
Santa Clara County Fire District
Page 2
28
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
Project Location
SITE
Page 3
29
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
Site Plan
Page 4
30
Building Elevations
31
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project. Please see the checklist
beginning on page 8 for additional information.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population/Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions
or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required
Christopher Riordan
Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner Date: July 7, 2015
City of Saratoga
Page 6
32
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project
falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based
on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant
with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially
Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"
to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures,
and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation
measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiring, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources
for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared
or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where
the statement is substantiated.
Page 7
33
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead
agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's
environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
I. AESTHETICS: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality
of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No scenic view or viewsheds exist in the vicinity of the project site. There are no scenic views or view
sheds explicitly identified in the City’s General Plan or other planning documents. The zoning
amendment and the remodel and first story addition of the existing two story parish center would be
consistent with the exiting architectural style of the building and will not have a substantial adverse
effect on neighborhood views.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings,
and historic buildings within a state scenic highway
The zoning amendment and remodel of the existing parish center would not damage scenic resources
and no trees are proposed for removal. The project is located on a portion of Saratoga Avenue
designated as a heritage lane and the project has been reviewed by the City’s Heritage Preservation
Commission as it was determined that the project would have a negative visual impact.
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
The parish center is an existing 10,072 square feet two-story building. Other than an interior remodel of
the existing building, the project also includes a 2,425 square feet first story addition that will be
architecturally compatible with the existing building. The area of building expansion will only be visible
from the rear of the site which is screened by vegetation along Saratoga Creek. The project will not be
Page 8
34
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
visible from Saratoga Avenue and existing buildings block views from adjacent residential properties.
The project will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council and all design review
findings will be met prior to project approval. There will be no negative degradation of the existing
visual character of the site and its surroundings.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
The project would include the remodel and 2,425 square foot addition to the existing Parish Center. The
project is limited to expanding the size of existing uses within the building and no new uses are
proposed that will modify the operations of the building that will affect day or nighttime views of the
area.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impact on
Aesthetics.
(Source: staff review of the project, Saratoga General Plan Land Use Element, and Saratoga City Code
§15-46).
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES: In determining whether
impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and
Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest
resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s
inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and the forest carbon
measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the
California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined
in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Page 9
35
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
DISCUSSION:
a-e) The project site is developed with buildings and asphalt parking area and located within a single-
family residential area and is not proposing any conversion of agricultural or forest land.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on
Agricultural and Forest Resources.
(Sources: staff review of the project, City of Saratoga General Plan and Municipal Code §15-12,
California Public Resource Code)
III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by
the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may
be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
DISCUSSION:
a-e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
The project would not have any substantial impact on air quality. All associated construction of the
proposed project would be required to follow Best Known Methods (BKM) and Best Management
Practices (BMP) from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on Air
Quality.
(Sources: BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines)
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Page 10
36
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or
by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
DISCUSSION:
(a-f) The project is located in a developed area surrounding by asphalt parking and adjacent buildings.
There would be no substantial adverse effect on existing trees, riparian habitat, sensitive natural
community or species, wetlands, or corridors for the movement of any native resident or migratory fish
or wildlife species.
(Sources: Staff review of the project)
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside
of formal cemeteries?
DISCUSSION:
a-d) The project site is a developed 11.4 acre parcel site that has been used as a church for more than 50
years and is not recognized as a historic structure on the Heritage Resource Inventory. The site is
located on a portion of Saratoga Avenue designated as a Heritage lane. The project has been reviewed
by the City’s Heritage Preservation Commission and it was determined that since the project will not be
visible from Saratoga Avenue that there would be no effect on the existing visual character of the
Page 11
37
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
Heritage Lane. The zoning amendment and design review would not substantially adversely modify any
historic resources, as there are no historic resources located on the property.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on
Cultural Resources.
(Sources: staff review and City of Saratoga Heritage Resource Inventory)
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
DISCUSSION:
a-e) The project includes a zoning amendment and design review for a first story addition to the existing
Parish Center building. No other construction onsite is proposed. Any proposed construction due to
entitlement approvals would be required to follow the most recent International Building Code (IBC)
which references proper construction methods regarding seismic issues, such as ground shaking, ground
failure, or landslides.
Based on the above discussion, No mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on
geology and soils.
(Sources: Staff’s review of the project, Seismic Hazard Zones Map)
Page 12
38
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
DISCUSSION:
a-b) The project includes a 2,425 square foot first story addition to the existing 10,072 square foot two
story Parish Center. CEQA categorically exempts additions to existing structures provided that the
addition does not result in an increase of 2,500 square feet. The project would generate greenhouse gas
emissions during project construction and these emissions are expected to be insignificant and limited to
the construction timeframe. The project will not generate new uses on site that would create a long term
source of greenhouse gas emissions. The project will not conflict with any policies for reducing
emissions of greenhouse gases.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts of
greenhouse gases.
(Sources: Staffs review of the project)
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the
project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project
area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Page 13
39
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent
to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
DISCUSSION:
a-h) The project includes a zoning amendment and design review of an expansion of an existing use and
structures that are not located on or near a hazardous waste and substance site. The project would not
create a significant hazard to the public regarding hazardous materials because the project would include
no exposure to hazardous materials. There are no airports or protected wild lands within the area of the
project and the project, as proposed, would not impair the implementation of an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts of
hazards or hazardous materials.
(Sources: California Environmental Protection Agency, 2014. DTSC’s Hazardous Waste and
Substances Site List. Website: www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Cortese_List.cfm (accessed May 19, 2014),
staff’s review of the project.)
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.,
the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other
flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
Page 14
40
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee
or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow
DISCUSSION:
a-j) The proposed project includes a zoning amendment and design review to construct a 2,425 square
foot addition to the existing Parish Center. The project would not violate water standards, deplete
groundwater supplies or significantly alter drainage patterns. The project is not located within a 100-
year flood hazard area or an area potentially affected by a levee, dam, or tsunami.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on
Hydrology and Water Quality Resources.
(Sources: FEMA Map Service Center FEMA Website:
https://msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/FemaWelcomeView?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001
&langId=-1/ (accessed May 19, 2014); Association of Bay Area Governments, 2014. Interactive ABAG
(GIS) Maps Showing Tsunami Planning Areas. Website: http://gis.abag.ca.gov/(accessed May 19,
2014.)
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community?
b)Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the
general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
DISCUSSION:
a-c) The proposed project includes a zoning amendment for a Planned Combined District and Design
Review for the construction of a 2,425 square foot first story addition to the existing Parish Center.
The existing site is currently used for religious service and a catholic school for grades K-8 and the
project would not physically divide an established community. The project, as proposed would not
be in conflict of any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction,
including any applicable habitat conservation plan.
No mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on Land Use and Planning.
(Sources: Review of the project, Saratoga Municipal Code, Saratoga General Plan Land Use Element)
Page 15
41
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general
plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
DISCUSSION:
a-b) The property is not categorized or referenced within the General Plan as having mineral deposits or
value to the region and has not been recognized as being a locally important mineral resource recovery
site. Based on the above discussion, the project does not present the potential for a significant adverse
effect on the environment related to mineral resources.
No mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on Mineral Resources.
(Sources: Review of the project, Saratoga General Plan Open Space Element)
XII. NOISE: Would the project result in: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Page 16
42
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
DISCUSSION:
a-f) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
The following table lists noise standards for
residential uses in the City of Saratoga Noise
Ordinance (Article 7-30 of the City Code).
Because the site is not located in close
proximity to high-traffic roadways, ambient
noise levels on the site are low, and are
expected to be in the range of 50 – 60 A-weighted decibels (dBA) or lower. Noise sources around the
project site include light traffic volumes, public and private functions held by both Sacred Heart School
and Church and landscaping activities.
Implementation of the proposed project could increase noise levels in the vicinity of the site during the
project construction period. Construction of the proposed project is scheduled to extend over a period of
3-6 months. Construction related short-term noise levels would be higher than existing ambient noise
levels in the project site vicinity but would end once construction is completed. Mitigation would not be
required, because the applicant is mandated to follow construction practices as stated per the City Code.
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise
levels?
Residents adjacent to the project site may be exposed to temporary increased levels of ground borne
vibration and ground borne noise during the construction period. These increases are expected to occur
infrequently, and for only short durations during the project construction period, which is expected to
extend over 3-6 months. As such, the exposure of such noise levels is considered less than a significant
impact.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
Long-term use of the project site will not substantially permanently increase ambient noise levels
because the existing and proposed uses are currently located within the project area. There is no impact
that would substantially increase ambient noise levels permanently within the project vicinity.
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
Construction-related short-term noise levels would be higher than existing ambient noise levels in the
project site vicinity but would cease once construction is completed. This increase in noise levels is
considered less than significant because the proposed construction is similar to other residential
construction which happens throughout the City of Saratoga.
Table 1: Residential Ambient Noise Standards (dBA)
Land Use
Daytime
Leq Lmax
Evening
Leq Lmax
Nighttime
Leq Lmax
Outdoor 55 65 45 55 40 50
Source: City of Saratoga, July 2014. City Code, Article 7-30.
Page 17
43
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of an airport.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose persons within the project site to
high levels of airport-related noise.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project would not expose site visitors to high levels of airstrip-related noise.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to noise impacts.
(Sources: Review of the project, Saratoga City Code)
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
DISCUSSION:
a-c) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
The project is an expansion of the existing Parish Office. No increase in onsite housing is proposed to
induce substantial population growth. The proposed project would not displace existing housing.
Implementation of the proposed project would not displace people or dwelling units.
No mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on Population and Housing.
(Sources: Review of the project, Saratoga General Plan Housing Element)
Page 18
44
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for
new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
DISCUSSION:
The following discussion addresses the potential impacts of the project on fire protection, police
protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities.
Fire protection. The Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD) provides firefighting services to the
project site. Since the project will be reviewed and conditioned by the SCCFD, the environmental
impacts relating to fire protection will be less than significant.
Police protection. The proposed project would receive crime enforcement services from the West
Valley Division of the Santa Clara County Office of the Sheriff. The proposed project is an expansion
of an existing use and would not increase demand for Sheriff services.
Schools. The project does not include housing which could increase demand for schools.
Parks. The project does not include housing which could increase demand for parks.
Other public facilities. The project does not include housing which could increase demand for public
services, including libraries, community centers, and public health care facilities.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on
Public Services.
(Sources: Review of the project, Saratoga General Plan. Saratoga Municipal Code. Developmental
Review Comments for Congregation Beth David, dated 12/11/13 – SCCFD )
Page 19
45
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
XV. RECREATION: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
DISCUSSION:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
The project does not include housing which could increase demand for parks.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
The project does not include formal recreational facilities; therefore, there would be no impact that
would adversely physically effect the environment.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on
Recreation.
(Source: Review of the project, Saratoga General Plan Open Space Element)
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures
of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized
travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and
bicycle paths, and mass transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including,
but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or
other standards established by the county congestion management agency
for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Page 20
46
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit,
bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or
safety of such facilities?
DISCUSSION:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially result in an increase in traffic because
the existing and proposed use (community facilities) would remain the same. The proposed construction
of the addition to the Parish Center is not expected to cause an increase in traffic and is not of a capacity
that would be in conflict with the circulation plan.
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of
service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
Implementation of the proposed project would not cause a designated roadway to exceed a level of
service standard established by the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency because the
project is not expected to substantially increase vehicle trips on any road or highway within the vicinity
of the project site.
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
The project site is not located near an airport and, if implemented, would have no effect on air traffic
patterns.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
The proposed project would not change public road access; therefore it would not increase hazards due
to design features.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Implementation of the proposed project would not cause inadequate emergency access because the
project, as conditioned, is required to construct (or maintain) adequate emergency access to the project
site. The project sponsor will utilize existing driveways to enter the site, which already satisfies the
requirements of the Santa Clara County Fire Department.
Page 21
47
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with adopted plans, policies, or programs
supporting alternative transportation because the City of Saratoga does not have such policies as part of
single-family residential development or a lot line adjustment application.
No mitigation is necessary or required in relation to transportation and traffic.
(Source: Review of the project, Saratoga General Plan Circulation Element, Developmental Review
Comments for Congregation Beth David, dated 12/11/13 – SCCFD )
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate
the project’s solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
DISCUSSION:
a - g) Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially increase the demand for
wastewater treatment because the project would not increase the existing number of dwelling units
currently established in the vicinity. Furthermore, the proposed addition is modest in size and does not
include the construction of additional restrooms.
Based on the above discussion, no mitigation is necessary or required in relation to impacts on
Utilities and Service Systems.
Page 22
48
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
(Source: Review of the project, phone conversation with Thanh Nguyen, Cupertino Sanitation District,
dated 6/24/14)
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
DISCUSSION:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
Implementation of the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the exiting
environment because the project site is already utilized for religious uses and surrounded by established
uses. The site does not contain riparian woodland where fish, wildlife, or endangered plants or animals
are located. Furthermore, there are no examples of structures that reflect major periods of California
history or prehistory.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects
of probable future projects)?
The proposed project would result in the continuation of community facilities that is consistent with the
City’s General Plan and zoning regulations. All environmental impacts that could occur as a result of
the proposed project is considered either less than significant or no impact within this Initial Study.
Page 23
49
City of Saratoga Environmental Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Sacred Heart Parish - 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
The project site has been historically developed for church and educational uses. Therefore, it is highly
unlikely the proposed project would result with contaminated soil or groundwater. The site is not
located in a high wildfire risk area. Therefore, the proposed project would not have substantial adverse
effects on human beings, directly or indirectly.
GENERAL SOURCE REFERENCES:
1. City of Saratoga General Plan (Land Use, Circulation , Open Space & Conservation, Noise, and
Safety Element)
2. City of Saratoga Zoning Ordinance and Map
3. City of Saratoga Housing Element
4. City of Saratoga Heritage Resource Inventory
5. City of Saratoga Seismic Hazard Zones Map, dated April 2013.
PROJECT RELATED SOURCES/REFERENCES:
6. Project Plans.
7. California Public Resource Code, 2014. Website: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-
bin/calawquery?codesection=prc (accessed April 2015)
8. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2014. Website:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/Files/Planning%20and%20Research/CEQA/BAAQMD%20CEQA
%20Guidelines_Final_May%202012.ashx?la=en (accessed April 2015)
9. California Environmental Protection Agency, 2014. DTSC’s Hazardous Waste and Substances Site
List. Website: www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Cortese_List.cfm (accessed April 2015).
10. FEMA Map Service Center, Website: http://gis.abag.ca.gov/(accessed April 2015.)
Page 24
50
51
CITY OF SARATOGA
Community Development Department
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 868-1222
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The City of Saratoga’s Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on:
Wednesday, the 12th day of August 2015, 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: ENV15-0003 / PDR15-0008 / ZOA15-0003
13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue
APPLICANT/OWNER: Rockwood Design Associates / Sacred Heart Parish
APN: 386-35-069
DESCRIPTION: The project includes a Zoning Amendment to add a Planned-Combined Zoning
District (P-C) overlay to a 11.4 acre parcel (APN 397-30-047) and a design review application to
construct a 2,425 square foot single-story addition to the existing 10,072 square feet two-story
Parish Center located at 13716 & 13718 Saratoga Avenue.
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 3, 2015.
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.
Chris Riordan
Senior Planner
(408) 868-1235
52
41'-2"
SCHOOL
CHURCH
GEARYHALL
PARISHCENTER
CLERGYHOUSE
SARATOGA AVE.
6
N
(E) STRUCTURE
ADDITION TOPARISH CENTER
LANDSCAPE_PERVIOUS
SCOPE OF WORK
A.Sacred Heart Church
13716 Saratoga Avenue, Saratoga, CA !
(408) 867-3634 !
ROCKWOOD DESIGN
DRAWN BY:
LORENA PEREZG1.1S A C R E D H E A R T P A R I S H1 3 7 1 6 & 1 3 7 1 8 S A R A T O G A A V E . S A R A T O G A , C A . 9 5 0 7 0DATE:03-19-2015
SCALE 1" = 40'-0"
3 HIGH SCHOOL COURT
LOS GATOS CA. 95030
408-354-2128
AROCKWOOD@ROCKWOODDESIGN.NET
SITE PLAN1
Zoning Analysis for Sacred Heart Parish
Project Location:
Sacred Heart Parish
13716 and 13718 Saratoga Ave.,
Saratoga, CA. 95070
Administrator for Project at Sacred Heart:
Janice Thornburg, Parish Administrator
408-867-3634 x502
Project APN:
397-30-047
Existing Zoning:
R-1-20,000
Existing Site Area:
497,203 Square Feet
Zoning Standards:
15-12.050 Site Area, Interior Lot
20,000 Square Feet
15-12.070 Frontage, Width and Depth
Frontage: 80’-0” required
Width: 110’-0” required
Depth: 140’-0” required
Allowable Site Coverage:
45%
15-12.085 Allowable Floor Area:
8,000 Square Feet for lots more than 200,000 square feet
15-12.090 Setbacks
Front: 30’-0”
Side Interior: 15’-0” First Floor Setback / 20’-0” Second Floor Setback
Rear: 35’-0” First Floor Setback / 45’-0” Second Floor Setback
15-12.100 Maximum Height (For single family dwellings)
26’-0”
Site Information:
Gross Site Area:
497,203 Square Feet
Structural Impervious coverage: 68,690 square feet (first floor all structures)
hardscape / other impervious coverage: 294,532 square feet
Total Site Coverage: 363,222 square feet
Existing Site Coverage Ratio: 363,222 / 497,203 = 73%
Proposed site coverage:
363,222 s.f. existing
2,425 s.f. proposed
Total Proposed Coverage: 365,647 square feet
Proposed Site Coverage Ratio: 365,647 / 497,203 = 73.5%
Floor Area Information:Structure 1 of 6: Parish Center-
Remodel and Additions
Existing First Floor: 6,305 Square Feet
Existing Second Floor: 3,767 Square Feet
Total Existing: 10,072 square feet
Proposed Addition to first floor:
2,425 square feet
Total Existing and Proposed Parish Center: 12,497 square feet
existing/ proposed Ht. NTE 26'-0"
Structure 2 of 6: School- Interior Remodel Only
existing / Proposed: 26,907 square feet
(E) HT. +/- 20'-0"
Structure 3 of 6: Church- No Scope of work
existing: 18,775 square feet
(E) HT. +/- 30'-0"
Structure 4 of 6: geary hall (gym and cafetaria)-
no scope of work
existing first floor: 12,407 square feet
existing second floor: 1,032 square feet
total geary hall: 13,439 square feet
(E) HT. +/- 24'-0"
Structure 5 of 6: Clergy house – no scope of work
existing first floor: 3,040 square feet
existing second floor: 2,765 square feet
total clergy house: 5,805 square feet
(E) HT. +/- 22'-0"
Structure 6 of 6: Clergy house accessory structure
– no scope of work
existing first floor: 1,256 square feet
total clergy house accessory structure: 1,256 square feet
(E) HT. +/- 22'-0"
Total Existing Square Footage all 6 structures:
1 of 6: Parish Center: 10,072 s.f.
2 of 6: School: 26,907 s.f.
3 of 6: church 18,775 s.f.
4 of 6: geary hall: 13,439 s.f.
5 of 6: Clergy House: 5,805 s.f.
6 of 6: Clergy House Accessory structure: 1,256 square feet
TOTAL Existing Square Footage: 76,254 square feet
Total site area: 497,203 Square Feet
Existing F.A.R.:
76,254 / 497,203 = .153 FAR.
Proposed F.A.R.:
TOTAL Existing Square Footage: 76,254 square feet
Total proposed additions to structure 1 of 6:
2,425 square feet
Total proposed square footage: 78,679 square feet
Total site area: 497,203 Square Feet
Proposed f.a.r.: 78,679 / 497,203 = .158 FAR.
LOCATION MAP:
ASSESSOR MAP:
INDEX:
G1.1 TITLE PAGE_SITE PLAN
A1.1 PROPOSED_EXISTING_PARISH CENTER FIRST FLOOR
A1.2 PROPOSED & EXISTING PARISH CENTER SECOND FLOOR
PROPOSED & EXISTING PARISH CENTER ROOF PLAN
A2.1 PROPOSED & EXISTING PARISH CENTER ELEVATION & SECTIONS
A2.2 PROPOSED & EXISTING PARISH CENTER ELEVATION & SECTIONS
A3.1 EXISTING SCHOOL FLOOR PLAN
A3.2 PROPOSED SCHOOL FLOOR PLAN
DESIGN FIRM:
ROCKWOOD DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC.
3 HIGH SCHOOL COURT
LOS GATOS CA. 95030
PROJECT MANAGER:
ADAM ROCKWOOD AIA ASSOC.
PROJECT DESIGNER:
LORENA PEREZ AIA ASSOC.
408-354-2128
AROCKWOOD@ROCKWOODDESIGN.NET
SCOPE OF WORK
1. REMODEL OF PARISH CENTER FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR
ALONG WITH GROUND FLOOR ADDITIONS IN THE AMOUNT
OF 2,425 SQUARE FEET. REFER TO SHEETS A1.1, A1.2 AND A2.1.
SCOPE INCLUDES NEW SECOND STORY ROOF.
2. REMODEL OF OFFICE SPACE LOCATED IN SCHOOL BUILDING
FOR RELOCATION OF KINDERGARTEN CLASSROOM. REFER TO
SHEETS A3.1 AND A3.2.
53
51'-8"24'-4"6'-4"21'-1"45'-4"
33'-91/2"26'-5"EXTERIOR COURTYARD
(E) EXTERIOR BLOCK WALLMECHANICAL
CHAPEL
OFFICE
SCRIP
UNIFORM
EXCHANGE
KITCHEN
OFFICE
HALL 3
HALL 1
RECEPTION
SACRISTY
PROPOSED ADDITION
PROPOSED ADDITION
SECOND FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
ADDITION FIRST FLOOR
B
A
STORAGE GARAGE
OFFICE
KITCHEN
UNFORM
EXCHANGE
SCRIP
OFFICE
RECEPTION
CHAPEL
SITTING
E6
WORK ROOM
ENTRY LOBBY
OFFICE RESTROOM
HALL 1
CLOSET
MECHANICAL
HALL 3
RESTROOM
RESTROOM
STORAGE
CONFERENCE CONF.CONFERENCE
CLOSET
MOP AND
STORAGE
HALL 4
OPERABLE
PARTITION WALL
ROCKWOOD DESIGN
DRAWN BY:
LORENA PEREZA1.1S A C R E D H E A R T P A R I S H1 3 7 1 6 & 1 3 7 1 8 S A R A T O G A A V E . S A R A T O G A , C A . 9 5 0 7 0DATE:03-19-2015
3 HIGH SCHOOL COURT
LOS GATOS CA. 95030
408-354-2128
AROCKWOOD@ROCKWOODDESIGN.NET
PARISH CENTER (E) FIRST FLOOR1 2 PARISH CENTER PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR
SCALE 1/8"=1'-0"
N
SCOPE OF WORK FIRST FLOOR:
ADDITIONS TO ALLOW FOR NEW
STORAGE, HALL AND CONFERENCE
ROOMS ALONG WITH NEW RECEPTION
AREA. MISC. FLOOR PLAN REVISIONS-
REFER TO DRAWINGS.
54
SECOND FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
ADDITION FIRST FLOOR
B
A
OFFICE
E206
MEN'S
CLUB
E220
OFFICE
E219
STORAGE
E218
OFFICE
E217
OFFICE
E214
OFFICE
E213
OFFICE
E210
STORAGE
E221
SHOWER
E222
OFFICE
E224
OFFICE
E226
OFFICE
E229
HALL E201
RESTROOM E207
RESTROOM E212
RESTROOM E216
OFFICE
E202 OFFICERESTROOM
OFFICE
OFFICE RECEPTION
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE
OFFICE
STORAGE
MENS CLUB
MEETING AREA
KITCHEN
HALL
RESTROOM
MECH
SLOPE 2:12
SLOPE 2:12
SLOPE 2:12
SLOPE 2:12
SLOPE 2:12
SLOPE 2:12
NEW ROOF
NEW ROOF AT 26'-0"
ROCKWOOD DESIGN
DRAWN BY:
LORENA PEREZA1.2S A C R E D H E A R T P A R I S H1 3 7 1 6 & 1 3 7 1 8 S A R A T O G A A V E . S A R A T O G A , C A . 9 5 0 7 0DATE:03-19-2015
3 HIGH SCHOOL COURT
LOS GATOS CA. 95030
408-354-2128
AROCKWOOD@ROCKWOODDESIGN.NET
PARISH CENTER (E) SECOND FLOOR1 2
SCALE 1/8"=1'-0"
N
PARISH CENTER PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR
3 PARISH CENTER PROPOSED ROOF PLAN
SCOPE OF WORK SECOND FLOOR:
RECONFIGURATION OF THE SECOND FLOOR
LAYOUT TO ALLOW FOR BETTER SPACE PLANNING
AND A MORE OPEN FLOOR PLAN.
SCOPE MAY REQUIRE NEW ROOF AT SECOND
FLOOR IF SO N.T.E. 26'-0"
55
SECOND FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
ADDITION FIRST FLOOR
B
A25'-0"16'-81/4"17'-51/4"13'-9"15'-9"A B 26'-0"AREA OF ADDITION
NEW STUCCO
TO MATCH EXISTING
STUCCO
CONCRETE BLOCK WALL
BRICK VENEER
WOOD FENCE
5'-8"24'-81/2"WOOD GATE
GARAGE DOOR
A B
OPEN
ROCKWOOD DESIGN
DRAWN BY:
LORENA PEREZA2.1S A C R E D H E A R T P A R I S H1 3 7 1 6 & 1 3 7 1 8 S A R A T O G A A V E . S A R A T O G A , C A . 9 5 0 7 0DATE:03-19-2015
3 HIGH SCHOOL COURT
LOS GATOS CA. 95030
408-354-2128
AROCKWOOD@ROCKWOODDESIGN.NET
5
SCALE 1/8"=1'-0"
N
4 PARISH CENTER SIDE WEST ELEVATION_PROPOSED
2 PARISH CENTER REAR SOUTH ELEVATION_PROPOSED1PARISH CENTER EXISTING FRONT NORTH ELEVATION_NO CHANGES
3 PARISH CENTER REAR SOUTH ELEVATION_EXISTING
PARISH CENTER SIDE WEST ELEVATION_EXISTING
56
SECOND FLOOR
FIRST FLOOR
ADDITION FIRST FLOOR
B
A26'-0"25'-0"OPEN 15'-9"26'-0"26'-0"AREA OF ADDITION
NEW STUCCO
TO MATCH EXISTING
STUCCO
CONCRETE BLOCK WALL
BRICK VENEER
WOOD FENCE
OPEN
ROCKWOOD DESIGN
DRAWN BY:
LORENA PEREZA2.2S A C R E D H E A R T P A R I S H1 3 7 1 6 & 1 3 7 1 8 S A R A T O G A A V E . S A R A T O G A , C A . 9 5 0 7 0DATE: 05-14-2015
3 HIGH SCHOOL COURT
LOS GATOS CA. 95030
408-354-2128
AROCKWOOD@ROCKWOODDESIGN.NET
4
SCALE 1/8"=1'-0"
N
3 PARISH CENTER SIDE EAST ELEVATION_PROPOSED
1 PARISH CENTER SECTION _A PROPOSED
PARISH CENTER SIDE EAST ELEVATION_EXISTING
2 PARISH CENTER SECTION _B PROPOSED
57
EXISTING
KINDERGARTEN ROOM
EXISTING
OFFICE
MAIN OFFICE
SCHOOL MAIN
ENTRANCE
ROCKWOOD DESIGN
DRAWN BY:
LORENA PEREZA3.1S A C R E D H E A R T P A R I S H1 3 7 1 6 & 1 3 7 1 8 S A R A T O G A A V E . S A R A T O G A , C A . 9 5 0 7 0DATE:03-19-2015
3 HIGH SCHOOL COURT
LOS GATOS CA. 95030
408-354-2128
AROCKWOOD@ROCKWOODDESIGN.NET
SCHOOL EXISTING & DEMO PLAN1
SCALE 3/32"=1'-0"
N
SCOPE OF WORK :
RELOCATE EXISTING KINDERGARTEN CLASSROOM
TO NEW LOCATION. REFER TO AREA OF WORK ON
THIS DRAWING ALONG WITH SHEET A3.1.
58
NEW
FAITH
FORMATION
NEW
KINDERGARTEN
LOCATION
MAIN OFFICE
SCHOOL MAIN
ENTRANCE
ROCKWOOD DESIGN
DRAWN BY:
LORENA PEREZA3.2S A C R E D H E A R T P A R I S H1 3 7 1 6 & 1 3 7 1 8 S A R A T O G A A V E . S A R A T O G A , C A . 9 5 0 7 0DATE:03-19-2015
3 HIGH SCHOOL COURT
LOS GATOS CA. 95030
408-354-2128
AROCKWOOD@ROCKWOODDESIGN.NET
SCHOOL PROPOSED PLAN1
SCALE 3/32"=1'-0"
N
59
REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: August 26, 2015
Application: Modification MOD15-0004
Location / APN: 12260 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
386-30-035
Owner / Applicant: SummerHill Homes
Staff Planner: Sandy L. Baily
SITE
12260 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd.
60
2
SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is requesting modification of the previous approved Design Review for the
proposed 12 townhouses. The modifications include the following:
Refinement and enhancement of the architectural style
Building materials
Roof design
Window fenestration
Elimination of the balconies
Upgrade of landscaping
Reduction in the number of bedrooms
BACKGROUND:
On February 11, 2015 application PDR14-0016 was approved by the Planning Commission
for the construction of a 2,297 square foot commercial/retail building and 12 attached
townhouses ranging in size from approximately 2,833 to 2,856 square feet. At that meeting
the Planning Commission also approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the mixed use
development and a Tentative Map for the subdivision.
Subsequent to the approvals, the property was sold to the applicant who intends to upgrade
the architectural design of project’s exteriors, floor plans, and landscaping. The applicant
currently has the ability to apply for a building permit to construct the originally approved
project but is requesting approval for an enhanced project.
A Planning Commission Study Session was held on August 11, 2015 to consider the current
owner’s proposed modifications to the townhouses. Although Planning Commissioners
generally agreed that the architectural modifications and project enhancements were an
improvement, the consensus of the Commission was that a noticed public hearing to allow
public input regarding the proposed modifications would be appropriate given prior
comments from adjacent neighbors. No changes are proposed to the CUP and tentative map
applications.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution No. 15-039 approving the modifications subject to conditions of approval.
PROJECT DATA:
The project data table below compares the proposed changes. The proposed modifications will
not exceed any parameters of the originally approved application. All proposed setbacks, lot
coverage, square footage and height meet City Code and are consistent or less intensive than the
originally approved application.
61
3
Approved Proposed
Architectural Style Modern Craftsman
Square Footages
First Floor
Second Floor
Garage
Total
11,386 sq. ft.
17,427 sq. ft.
5,327 sq. ft.
34,140 sq. ft.
11,268 sq. ft.
17,106 sq. ft.
5,136 sq. ft.
33,510 sq. ft.
Height 26’5” 25’10”
Exterior Building Materials
Siding
Roofing
Architectural Elements
Stone Wainscot
Horizontal Fiber Cement
Stucco
Terracotta barrel tiles
Balconies
Wood Lap
Shingle
Stucco
Composition Shingle
No Balconies
Roof Cross Gabled with peaks
cut - Refer to plans for
full changes
Cross Gabled - Refer to
plans for full changes
Windows at Rear Elevation for
Privacy
Partially obscure glass
and clerestory windows Partially obscure glass
Number of Bedrooms Five Four
Tree Sizes 15 gallon
24 inch box
24 inch box
36 inch box
NEIGHBOR NOTIFICATION:
Public notices for this project were sent to all property owners within 500 feet of the site for
the subject public hearing. The public hearing notice and description of the project was
published in the Saratoga News. Staff has received written public comments which have been
included as Attachment #4.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The project is Categorically Exempt from the
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15332 of the Public Resources
Code. Section 15332 exempts from environmental review “projects characterized as in-fill
development meeting conditions, such as, conformance with the applicable general plan
designation and all general plan policies, zoning designation, and regulations.” The project
is proposing new construction of one commercial building and twelve residential buildings
(a total of thirteen buildings) all within an urbanized area, consistent with t h e general
plan, zoning policies and regulations. The project applicant has not requested any
variances or exceptions for the proposed approvals.
62
4
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Approved Resolution of Approval – 12260 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
2. Resolution of Approval for Modifications – 12260 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
3. Applicant’s Letter of Justification
4. Public comments
5. Public hearing notice, mailing addresses, and map for project notification
6. Excerpts of Originally Approved Plans
7. Proposed Development Plans (Exhibit B of Attachment 2)
63
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 15-039
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
MODIFYING THE APPROVAL OF A DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION NO
MOD15-0004, LOCATED AT 12260 SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD
WHEREAS on February 11, 2015 application PDR14-0016 was approved by the
Planning Commission for the construction of a 2,297 square foot commercial/retail building and 12
attached townhouses ranging in size from approximately 2,833 to 2,856 square feet. A Conditional
Use Permit and Tentative Map were also approved in conjunction with the Design Review
application. Design Review approval is required pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15-
46.020; and
WHEREAS, on July 22, 2015, the new property owner/applicant submitted a new
application MOD15-0004, requesting modification of the previous approved Design Review. The
modifications include refinement and enhancement of the architectural style, building materials,
roof design, window fenestration, the elimination of the balconies and an upgrade to the landscape
plan. Per the direction of the Planning Commission at a Study Session, held on August 11, 2015,
the modifications shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission to allow for public input;
and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department completed an environmental
assessment for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
and recommends that the Planning Commission determine this project exempt; and
WHEREAS, on August 26, 2015, 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 15332 of the Public Resources Code. Section 15332 allows “projects
characterized as in-fill development meeting conditions, such as, conformance with the applicable
general plan designation and all general plan policies, zoning designation, and regulations”. The
project is modification of previously approved plans to construct twelve residential buildings, all
within an urbanized area, consistent with general plan, zoning policies and regulations. The project
applicant has not requested any variance or exception for the proposed entitlements.
Section 3: The project is consistent with Saratoga General Plan 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.
64
Resolution No. 15-039
Section 4: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves application
MOD15-0004, for the project located at 12260 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, subject to the Conditions
of Approval for the entire development (Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Tentative
Map) attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 26th day of
August 2015 by the following vote:
AYES:.
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Leonard Almalech
Chair, Planning Commission
65
Resolution No. 15-039
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
12260 SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE RD
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. GENERAL
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, or 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. 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 processing fees have been paid
in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained).
4. 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.
5. 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
66
Resolution No. 15-039
Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval
as to form and content by the City Attorney.
6. Construction for the townhouses must be commenced within 24 months of the date of this
approval (August 26, 2018), and the tentative map and commercial design review will expire on
February 11, 2018, or the resolution will expire.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
7. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans dated January 23, 2015
denominated Exhibit "A" for the commercial development and the Tentative Map and on the
Approved Plans dated August 18, 2015 denominated Exhibit “B” for the townhouse
development. All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in writing with
plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such
changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with Condition No. 4, above.
8. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted
to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City prior to
issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum include the
following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A”
on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition No. 6
above;
b. A note shall be included on the site plan stating that no construction equipment or private
vehicles shall be parked or stored within the root zone of any Ordinance-protected tree on
the site;
c. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages;
d. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building
Division.
9. Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public
right-of-way.
10. Maintenance of Construction Project Sites. Because this Design Review Approval
authorizes a project which requires a Building Permit, compliance with City Code Section 16-
75.050 governing maintenance of construction project sites is required.
11. Noise Levels. All noise levels will comply with Saratoga Municipal Code (SMC) Section 7-
30.040 regarding noise standards and SMC Section 7-30.060 regarding exceptions to special
activities.
12. Home Owner’s Association. Prior to Final Map approval, the owner/applicant shall be
required to create and establish an owner’s association or other entity which will be in charge of
operation and maintenance of the project, including the commercial and residential portion, in
perpetuity which would include both the commercial. Furthermore, the owner/applicant will be
67
Resolution No. 15-039
required to submit proof, acceptable to the City of Saratoga, that such entity has been
established.
13. Bike Racks. The project should include one Class 2 bicycle parking space (Class 2 parking
facilities include bicycle racks to which the frame and at least one wheel can be secured with
a user-provided lock).
14. Fencing. A concrete wall shall be installed along the rear property line which is consistent
with the existing concrete wall at 12280 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road.
15. Site Circulation: Stop signs are to be installed from the parking lot to the shared driveway.
A double yellow line shall be installed at the shared driveway from the sidewalk to the
parking lot entrances.
16. Landscaping: The applicant shall coordinate with the adjacent residential neighbors
regarding the specific selection of shrubs and trees to be planted adjacent to the rear (eastern)
property line for the purpose of enhancing privacy. The agreed upon list of shrubs and trees
shall be approved by the City Arborist and is to be included on the landscape plan submitted
for building permit. The landscaping adjacent the rear property line shall be planted at the
earliest possible time prior to project completion.
17. Utility Screening: All utilities including transformers, standpipes, and backflow preventers
shall be screened from off-site views prior to building permit final.
18. Trees: A minimum of two trees shall be planted in the driveway landscape islands located
adjacent to the residential garages.
19. Privacy Screening: Trees shall be planted along the southern property line and behind the
residential units to reduce privacy impacts to the commercial building located at 12280
Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road.
20. Fire Lanes: Fire lane markings shall be required for the driveway area per City of Saratoga
and Santa Clara County Fire Department specifications.
21. Retail Building Windows: All exterior windows of the retail building shall have a consistent
architectural style and are subject to review and approval by the Community Development
Director prior to building permit submittal.
22. Final Map: The final map shall be approved and recorded prior to building permit issuance.
CITY ARBORIST
23. Existing Trees. The applicant intends to maintain the existing Chinese Pistache street trees and
the pine trees along the rear (eastern) property line as part of the project. A tree protection plan
and arborist report for these trees shall be reviewed by the City Arborist prior to issuance of
building permits. Any conditions of the Arborist approval related to fees or deposits for tree
68
Resolution No. 15-039
protection or replacement shall be met prior to submittal of a building permit or during
construction, as required.
24. Tree Removals: The Planning Commission has approved the removal of the six pines along
the rear property line and replacement with new trees. The property owner is to set up an
arborist deposit account and a obtain tree removal permit prior to removing these trees. The
trees shall be replaced on site according to good forestry practices, and shall provide
equivalent value in terms of aesthetic and environmental quality, size, height, location,
appearance and other significant beneficial characteristics of the removed trees At least six
trees from 24 inch box containers shall be planted in this same general area to replace the
removed pines. They shall reach a height at maturity of 20 feet or more depending on their
distance from the power lines. In addition to replacement trees, shrubs that provide screening
for the neighbors shall be planted along the rear of the property behind the new trees. The
screening shrubs shall be from 15-gallon containers, shall be evergreen, and shall reach a
height of 12 feet when mature.
PUBLIC WORKS
25. Property Survey. Prior to submittal of the Final Map to the Public Works Department for
examination, the owner (applicant) shall cause the property to be surveyed by a Licensed
Land Surveyor or an authorized Civil Engineer. The submitted map shall show the existence
of a monument at all external property corner locations, either found or set. The submitted
map shall also show monuments set at each new corner location, angle point, or as directed
by the Public Works Department, all in conformity with the Subdivision Map Act and the
Professional Land Surveyors Act.
26. Submittal Requirements. The owner (applicant) shall submit four (4) copies of a Final Map
in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map, along with the additional
documents required by Section 14-40.020 of the Municipal Code, to the Public Works
Department for examination. The Final Map shall contain all of the information required in
Section 14-40.030 of the Municipal Code and shall be accompanied by the following items:
a. One copy of map checking calculations.
b. Preliminary Title Report for the property dated within ninety (90) days of the date of
submittal for the Final Map.
c. One copy of each map referenced on the Final Map.
d. One copy of each document/deed referenced on the Final Map.
e. One copy of any other map, document, deed, easement or other resource that will
facilitate the examination process as requested by the Public Works Department.
27. Map Checking Fees. The owner (applicant) shall pay a Map Checking fee, as determined
by the Public Works Director, at the time of submittal of the Final Map for examination.
28. Monuments. Interior monuments shall be set at each lot corner either prior to recordation of
the Final Map or some later date to be specified on the Final Map. If the owner (applicant)
chooses to defer the setting of interior monuments to a specified later date, then sufficient
security as determined by the Public Works Director shall be furnished prior to Final Map
69
Resolution No. 15-039
approval, to guarantee the setting of interior monuments.
29. Encroachment Permit Requirement. The owner (applicant) shall obtain an Encroachment
Permit from the City of Saratoga for any and all improvements in the City right-of-way or
City easement prior to commencement of the work. The owner (applicant) shall replace
sections of sidewalk and/or curb and gutter as determined during the Encroachment Permit
issuance.
30. Dedication. The owner (applicant) shall provide Irrevocable Offers of Dedication for all
required easements and/or rights-of-way on the Final Map, in substantial conformance with
the approved Tentative Map, prior to Final Map approval. Private Storm Drain Easement(s)
shall be shown on the Final Map for areas with proposed storm drain system(s). 10-foot wide
Public Service Easement shall be shown on the Final Map along Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
property frontage.
31. Utilities. Prior to Final Map approval, the owner (applicant) shall furnish the Public Works
Department with satisfactory written commitments from all public and private utility
providers serving the subdivision guaranteeing the completion of all required utility
improvements to serve the subdivision.
32. Permits. The owner (applicant) shall secure all necessary permits from the City and any
other public agencies, including public and private utility providers, prior to commencement
of subdivision improvement construction. Copies of permits other than those issued by the
City shall be provided to the Public Works Department.
33. Park and Recreation Fee. The owner (applicant) shall pay the applicable Park and
Recreation Development fees prior to Final Map approval.
34. Best Management Practices. All building and construction related activities shall adhere to
New Development and Construction - Best Management Practices as adopted by the City for
the purpose of preventing storm water pollution.
35. Engineered Improvement Plan. The owner (applicant) shall submit engineered
improvement plans to the City Engineer in conformance with the approved Tentative Map
and in accordance with the design and improvement requirements of Chapter 14 of the
Municipal Code. The improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer and the appropriate officials from other public agencies having jurisdictional
authority, including public and private utility providers, prior to approval of the Final Map.
36. Subdivision Improvement Plan Fee. The owner (applicant) shall pay a Subdivision
Improvement Plan Checking fee, as determined by the Public Works Director, at the time
Improvement Plans are submitted for review.
37. Improvement Agreement. The owner (applicant) shall enter into an Improvement
Agreement with the City in accordance with Section 14-60.010 of the Municipal Code prior
to Final Map approval.
70
Resolution No. 15-039
38. Improvement Securities. The owner (applicant) shall furnish Improvement Securities in
accordance with Section 14-60.020 of the Municipal Code in the manner and amounts
determined by the Public Works Director prior to Final Map approval.
39. Indemnification. The owner (applicant) shall furnish a written indemnity agreement and
proof of insurance coverage, in accordance with Section 14-05.050 of the Municipal Code,
prior to Final Map approval.
40. Stormwater Treatment. The owner/applicant shall provide the Director of Public Works
with a plan describing how owner/applicant will implement all Best Management Practices
(BMPs) and other measures required to reduce the stormwater runoff impacts of the project,
as described in and required by the City's NPDES Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit,
Order R2-2009-0074 (as amended by Order R2-2011-0083) (“NPDES Permit”). The
measures included in this plan shall include, but are not limited to, construction site control
measures, plans for storm drain stenciling, and landscaping measures. This plan must be
approved by the Director of Public Works prior to final map approval. The owner/applicant
shall enter into a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement, which shall contain all of the
provisions required by the NPDES Permit and provide a funding mechanism(s), satisfactory
in form and content to the Director of Public Works, to ensure permanent funding for the
maintenance of the stormwater treatment systems or hydro modification controls developed
on the property as well as inspection and reporting. Upon owner/applicant's request, the City
will initiate proceedings to create an assessment district, which, if approved, shall be a
satisfactory funding mechanism for this maintenance, inspection, and reporting.
41. Landscape/Lighting District. The Property is included in existing Landscape and Lighting
Assessment District No. 1. Landscape and Irrigation plans for the property frontage along
Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road shall be submitted as part of the Improvement Plans.
42. NPDES Permit. Prior to beginning of construction, the applicant shall file a Notice of Intent
(NOI) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, if required, to obtain coverage under
the State General Construction Activity NPDES Permit. Satisfactory evidence of the filing of
the NOI shall be furnished to the City. The applicant shall comply with all provisions and
conditions of the State Permit, including preparation and implementation of a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), if required. Copies of the SWPPP shall be submitted to
the City prior to beginning of construction and maintained on site at all times during
construction.
71
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 15-039
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
MODIFYING THE APPROVAL OF A DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION NO
MOD15-0004, LOCATED AT 12260 SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD
WHEREAS on February 11, 2015 application PDR14-0016 was approved by the
Planning Commission for the construction of a 2,297 square foot commercial/retail building and 12
attached townhouses ranging in size from approximately 2,833 to 2,856 square feet. A Conditional
Use Permit and Tentative Map were also approved in conjunction with the Design Review
application. Design Review approval is required pursuant to Saratoga Municipal Code Section 15-
46.020; and
WHEREAS, on July 22, 2015, the new property owner/applicant submitted a new
application MOD15-0004, requesting modification of the previous approved Design Review. The
modifications include refinement and enhancement of the architectural style, building materials,
roof design, window fenestration, the elimination of the balconies and an upgrade to the landscape
plan. Per the direction of the Planning Commission at a Study Session, held on August 11, 2015,
the modifications shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission to allow for public input;
and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department completed an environmental
assessment for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
and recommends that the Planning Commission determine this project exempt; and
WHEREAS, on August 26, 2015, 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 15332 of the Public Resources Code. Section 15332 allows “projects
characterized as in-fill development meeting conditions, such as, conformance with the applicable
general plan designation and all general plan policies, zoning designation, and regulations”. The
project is modification of previously approved plans to construct twelve residential buildings, all
within an urbanized area, consistent with general plan, zoning policies and regulations. The project
applicant has not requested any variance or exception for the proposed entitlements.
Section 3: The project is consistent with Saratoga General Plan 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.
72
Resolution No. 15-039
Section 4: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves application
MOD15-0004, for the project located at 12260 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, subject to the Conditions
of Approval for the entire development (Design Review, Conditional Use Permit and Tentative
Map) attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 26th day of
August 2015 by the following vote:
AYES:.
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Leonard Almalech
Chair, Planning Commission
73
Resolution No. 15-039
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
12260 SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE RD
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. GENERAL
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, or 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. 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 processing fees have been paid
in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained).
4. 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.
5. 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
74
Resolution No. 15-039
Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval
as to form and content by the City Attorney.
6. Construction for the townhouses must be commenced within 24 months of the date of this
approval (August 26, 2018), and the tentative map and commercial design review will expire on
February 11, 2018, or the resolution will expire.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
7. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans dated January 23, 2015
denominated Exhibit "A" for the commercial development and the Tentative Map and on the
Approved Plans dated August 18, 2015 denominated Exhibit “B” for the townhouse
development. All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in writing with
plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such
changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with Condition No. 4, above.
8. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted
to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City prior to
issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum include the
following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A”
on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition No. 6
above;
b. A note shall be included on the site plan stating that no construction equipment or private
vehicles shall be parked or stored within the root zone of any Ordinance-protected tree on
the site;
c. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages;
d. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building
Division.
9. Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public
right-of-way.
10. Maintenance of Construction Project Sites. Because this Design Review Approval
authorizes a project which requires a Building Permit, compliance with City Code Section 16-
75.050 governing maintenance of construction project sites is required.
11. Noise Levels. All noise levels will comply with Saratoga Municipal Code (SMC) Section 7-
30.040 regarding noise standards and SMC Section 7-30.060 regarding exceptions to special
activities.
12. Home Owner’s Association. Prior to Final Map approval, the owner/applicant shall be
required to create and establish an owner’s association or other entity which will be in charge of
operation and maintenance of the project, including the commercial and residential portion, in
perpetuity which would include both the commercial. Furthermore, the owner/applicant will be
75
Resolution No. 15-039
required to submit proof, acceptable to the City of Saratoga, that such entity has been
established.
13. Bike Racks. The project should include one Class 2 bicycle parking space (Class 2 parking
facilities include bicycle racks to which the frame and at least one wheel can be secured with
a user-provided lock).
14. Fencing. A concrete wall shall be installed along the rear property line which is consistent
with the existing concrete wall at 12280 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road.
15. Site Circulation: Stop signs are to be installed from the parking lot to the shared driveway.
A double yellow line shall be installed at the shared driveway from the sidewalk to the
parking lot entrances.
16. Landscaping: The applicant shall coordinate with the adjacent residential neighbors
regarding the specific selection of shrubs and trees to be planted adjacent to the rear (eastern)
property line for the purpose of enhancing privacy. The agreed upon list of shrubs and trees
shall be approved by the City Arborist and is to be included on the landscape plan submitted
for building permit. The landscaping adjacent the rear property line shall be planted at the
earliest possible time prior to project completion.
17. Utility Screening: All utilities including transformers, standpipes, and backflow preventers
shall be screened from off-site views prior to building permit final.
18. Trees: A minimum of two trees shall be planted in the driveway landscape islands located
adjacent to the residential garages.
19. Privacy Screening: Trees shall be planted along the southern property line and behind the
residential units to reduce privacy impacts to the commercial building located at 12280
Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road.
20. Fire Lanes: Fire lane markings shall be required for the driveway area per City of Saratoga
and Santa Clara County Fire Department specifications.
21. Retail Building Windows: All exterior windows of the retail building shall have a consistent
architectural style and are subject to review and approval by the Community Development
Director prior to building permit submittal.
22. Final Map: The final map shall be approved and recorded prior to building permit issuance.
CITY ARBORIST
23. Existing Trees. The applicant intends to maintain the existing Chinese Pistache street trees and
the pine trees along the rear (eastern) property line as part of the project. A tree protection plan
and arborist report for these trees shall be reviewed by the City Arborist prior to issuance of
building permits. Any conditions of the Arborist approval related to fees or deposits for tree
76
Resolution No. 15-039
protection or replacement shall be met prior to submittal of a building permit or during
construction, as required.
24. Tree Removals: The Planning Commission has approved the removal of the six pines along
the rear property line and replacement with new trees. The property owner is to set up an
arborist deposit account and a obtain tree removal permit prior to removing these trees. The
trees shall be replaced on site according to good forestry practices, and shall provide
equivalent value in terms of aesthetic and environmental quality, size, height, location,
appearance and other significant beneficial characteristics of the removed trees At least six
trees from 24 inch box containers shall be planted in this same general area to replace the
removed pines. They shall reach a height at maturity of 20 feet or more depending on their
distance from the power lines. In addition to replacement trees, shrubs that provide screening
for the neighbors shall be planted along the rear of the property behind the new trees. The
screening shrubs shall be from 15-gallon containers, shall be evergreen, and shall reach a
height of 12 feet when mature.
PUBLIC WORKS
25. Property Survey. Prior to submittal of the Final Map to the Public Works Department for
examination, the owner (applicant) shall cause the property to be surveyed by a Licensed
Land Surveyor or an authorized Civil Engineer. The submitted map shall show the existence
of a monument at all external property corner locations, either found or set. The submitted
map shall also show monuments set at each new corner location, angle point, or as directed
by the Public Works Department, all in conformity with the Subdivision Map Act and the
Professional Land Surveyors Act.
26. Submittal Requirements. The owner (applicant) shall submit four (4) copies of a Final Map
in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map, along with the additional
documents required by Section 14-40.020 of the Municipal Code, to the Public Works
Department for examination. The Final Map shall contain all of the information required in
Section 14-40.030 of the Municipal Code and shall be accompanied by the following items:
a. One copy of map checking calculations.
b. Preliminary Title Report for the property dated within ninety (90) days of the date of
submittal for the Final Map.
c. One copy of each map referenced on the Final Map.
d. One copy of each document/deed referenced on the Final Map.
e. One copy of any other map, document, deed, easement or other resource that will
facilitate the examination process as requested by the Public Works Department.
27. Map Checking Fees. The owner (applicant) shall pay a Map Checking fee, as determined
by the Public Works Director, at the time of submittal of the Final Map for examination.
28. Monuments. Interior monuments shall be set at each lot corner either prior to recordation of
the Final Map or some later date to be specified on the Final Map. If the owner (applicant)
chooses to defer the setting of interior monuments to a specified later date, then sufficient
security as determined by the Public Works Director shall be furnished prior to Final Map
77
Resolution No. 15-039
approval, to guarantee the setting of interior monuments.
29. Encroachment Permit Requirement. The owner (applicant) shall obtain an Encroachment
Permit from the City of Saratoga for any and all improvements in the City right-of-way or
City easement prior to commencement of the work. The owner (applicant) shall replace
sections of sidewalk and/or curb and gutter as determined during the Encroachment Permit
issuance.
30. Dedication. The owner (applicant) shall provide Irrevocable Offers of Dedication for all
required easements and/or rights-of-way on the Final Map, in substantial conformance with
the approved Tentative Map, prior to Final Map approval. Private Storm Drain Easement(s)
shall be shown on the Final Map for areas with proposed storm drain system(s). 10-foot wide
Public Service Easement shall be shown on the Final Map along Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
property frontage.
31. Utilities. Prior to Final Map approval, the owner (applicant) shall furnish the Public Works
Department with satisfactory written commitments from all public and private utility
providers serving the subdivision guaranteeing the completion of all required utility
improvements to serve the subdivision.
32. Permits. The owner (applicant) shall secure all necessary permits from the City and any
other public agencies, including public and private utility providers, prior to commencement
of subdivision improvement construction. Copies of permits other than those issued by the
City shall be provided to the Public Works Department.
33. Park and Recreation Fee. The owner (applicant) shall pay the applicable Park and
Recreation Development fees prior to Final Map approval.
34. Best Management Practices. All building and construction related activities shall adhere to
New Development and Construction - Best Management Practices as adopted by the City for
the purpose of preventing storm water pollution.
35. Engineered Improvement Plan. The owner (applicant) shall submit engineered
improvement plans to the City Engineer in conformance with the approved Tentative Map
and in accordance with the design and improvement requirements of Chapter 14 of the
Municipal Code. The improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer and the appropriate officials from other public agencies having jurisdictional
authority, including public and private utility providers, prior to approval of the Final Map.
36. Subdivision Improvement Plan Fee. The owner (applicant) shall pay a Subdivision
Improvement Plan Checking fee, as determined by the Public Works Director, at the time
Improvement Plans are submitted for review.
37. Improvement Agreement. The owner (applicant) shall enter into an Improvement
Agreement with the City in accordance with Section 14-60.010 of the Municipal Code prior
to Final Map approval.
78
Resolution No. 15-039
38. Improvement Securities. The owner (applicant) shall furnish Improvement Securities in
accordance with Section 14-60.020 of the Municipal Code in the manner and amounts
determined by the Public Works Director prior to Final Map approval.
39. Indemnification. The owner (applicant) shall furnish a written indemnity agreement and
proof of insurance coverage, in accordance with Section 14-05.050 of the Municipal Code,
prior to Final Map approval.
40. Stormwater Treatment. The owner/applicant shall provide the Director of Public Works
with a plan describing how owner/applicant will implement all Best Management Practices
(BMPs) and other measures required to reduce the stormwater runoff impacts of the project,
as described in and required by the City's NPDES Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit,
Order R2-2009-0074 (as amended by Order R2-2011-0083) (“NPDES Permit”). The
measures included in this plan shall include, but are not limited to, construction site control
measures, plans for storm drain stenciling, and landscaping measures. This plan must be
approved by the Director of Public Works prior to final map approval. The owner/applicant
shall enter into a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement, which shall contain all of the
provisions required by the NPDES Permit and provide a funding mechanism(s), satisfactory
in form and content to the Director of Public Works, to ensure permanent funding for the
maintenance of the stormwater treatment systems or hydro modification controls developed
on the property as well as inspection and reporting. Upon owner/applicant's request, the City
will initiate proceedings to create an assessment district, which, if approved, shall be a
satisfactory funding mechanism for this maintenance, inspection, and reporting.
41. Landscape/Lighting District. The Property is included in existing Landscape and Lighting
Assessment District No. 1. Landscape and Irrigation plans for the property frontage along
Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road shall be submitted as part of the Improvement Plans.
42. NPDES Permit. Prior to beginning of construction, the applicant shall file a Notice of Intent
(NOI) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, if required, to obtain coverage under
the State General Construction Activity NPDES Permit. Satisfactory evidence of the filing of
the NOI shall be furnished to the City. The applicant shall comply with all provisions and
conditions of the State Permit, including preparation and implementation of a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), if required. Copies of the SWPPP shall be submitted to
the City prior to beginning of construction and maintained on site at all times during
construction.
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
CIVIL
C1 Preliminary Site Map
ARCHITECTURE
S.S.1 Street Scene
S.S.2 Rear Street Scene
A1.1 First Floor Plans
A1.2 Second Floor Plans
A1.3 Building 1 Front & Rear Elevations
A1.4 Building 1 Side Elevations & Roof Plan
A1.5 Building 2 Front & Rear Elevations
Submittal Package August 17, 2015
Our Team
Developer:
Contact: Katia Kamangar
Business:(650) 857-0122
Civil Engineer:
Contact: Zeferino Jimenez
Business: (408) 487-2200
Architect:
Contact: Robert Lee
Business:(925) 463-1700
Landscape Architect:
Contact: Andrea Swanson
Business:(925) 933-2583
SUMMERHILL HOMES
3000 Executive Parkway, Suite 450
San Ramon, CA 94583
12260 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
Saratoga, CA 95070
APN 386-30-035
Zoning C-V
Gross Lot Size 52,278 sf
Net Lot Size 49,730 sf
Slope at Bld. Edge 5% on Soil
2% on Concrete
Average Slope 1%
Project Location
HMH
1570 Oakland Road
San Jose, CA 95131
WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS
5000 Executive Parkway, Suite 375
San Ramon, CA 94583
THOMAS BAAK AND ASSOCIATES LLP
1620 N. Main St. #4
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE TABLE
FLOOR AREA TABLE
HEIGHT INFORMATION TABLE
A1.6 Building 2 Side Elevations & Roof Plan
A1.7 Building 3 Front & Rear Elevations
A1.8 Building 3 Lot 12 Special Condition
Side Elevation
A1.9 Sections
A1.10 Sections & Area Diagrams
LANDSCAPE
L1 Preliminary Landscape Plan
L2 Landscape Notes & Details
Height Foot Elevation
Lowest Elevation Point 310.83
Highest Elevation Point 312.83
Average Elevation Point 311.83
Top Most Elevation Point 339.12
Impervious Surfaces Total SF
Footprint of Home/Garage 19,961 sf
Driveway / Drive Aisles 14,135 sf
Walkways / Decks / Patio 2,148 sf
Parking Stalls 1,570 sf
(a) SUBTOTAL IMPERVIOUS 37,814 sf
Site Coverage Total (a) +(b)37,814 sf
Pervious Surfaces Actual SF 50% Credit Total SF
Permeable Paver Driveway
Permeable Paver Walkways /
Patio
Permeable Artificial Turf /
Other
(b) SUBTOTAL PERVIOUS 0 sf
Site Coverage
Plan 1st Floor 2nd Floor Garage Total Living Total Area
Plan 1 (x 2)932 sf 1435 sf 427 sf 2,367 sf 2,794 sf
Plan 2 (x 2)946 sf 1416 sf 429 sf 2,362 sf 2,791 sf
Total Building 3,756 sf 5,702 sf 1,712 sf 9,458 sf 11,170 sf
Total Site 11,268 sf 17,106 sf 5,136 28,374 sf 33,510 sf
SARATOGA LANE
CITY OF SARATOGA, CA
100
Saratoga Lane C1
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
101
Lot 8
Color Scheme #1
Lot 4
Color Scheme #6
Lot 7
Color Scheme #5
Lot 3
Color Scheme #2
Lot 6
Color Scheme #3
Lot 2
Color Scheme #1
Building 1Building 2
Lot 5
Color Scheme #4
Lot 1
Color Scheme #5
Street Scene
S.S.1
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
102
Lot 8
Color Scheme #1
Lot 8
Color Scheme #1
Lot 4
Color Scheme #6
Lot 4
Color Scheme #6
Lot 7
Color Scheme #5
Lot 7
Color Scheme #5
Lot 3
Color Scheme #2
Lot 3
Color Scheme #2
Lot 6
Color Scheme #3
Lot 6
Color Scheme #3
Lot 2
Color Scheme #1
Lot 2
Color Scheme #1
Building 2
Building 2
Building 1
Building 1
Lot 5
Color Scheme #4
Lot 5
Color Scheme #4
Lot 1
Color Scheme #5
Lot 1
Color Scheme #5
Newly Planted Trees
Established Trees
S.S.2
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
Rear Street Scene
103
SCSCTEMP. GL. SLIDER FX SHSH
16'-0" x 7'-0" SECT. GAR. DOOR
OPT. 18080 FOLDING PANEL DOORS
2-CAR GARAGE
19'-2" X 20'-2"
ENTRY
9'-6" CLG.
H.S.
ENTERTAINMENT ROOM
10'-0" CLG.
H.S.
23'-7" X 17'-8"
KITCHEN
10'-0" CLG.
H.S.
GAS
PANTRY
10'-0" CLG.
H.S.
2-CAR GARAGE PANTRYENTERTAINMENT ROOM
10'-0" CLG.
H.S.
KITCHEN AND DINING
10'-0" CLG.
H.S.
19'-2" X 20'-2"
15'-3" X 21'-11"
23'-9" X 14'-4"
POWDER
PWDR. (ADA)
10'-0" CLG.
H.S.ELEC.OPT. D.O.
PANTRY/
OPT. D.O.ELEC.GASGASELEC.ELEC.GASSCSCFXSHSH
16'-0" x 7'-0" SECT. GAR. DOORSHSHSH SH
SHSHTEMP. GL. SLIDER
FX2015195
Saratoga Front
Saratoga, CA
2015195 - Saratoga Front TH - Saratoga, CASummerhill Homes
0 8 16 24
August 03, 2015
Four Plex
First Floor Plans
Plan 1Plan 2
946 SF First Floor
1,393 SF Second Floor
23 SF Area Over 15' Ht.
429 SF Garage
2,339 SF Livable Total
2,791 Massing Total
Plan 1
932 SF First Floor
1,397 SF Second Floor
38 SF Area Over 15' Ht.
427 SF Garage
2,329 SF Livable Total
2,794 SF Massing Total
Plan 2
932 SF First Floor
1,397 SF Second Floor
38 SF Area Over 15' Ht.
427 SF Garage
2,329 SF Livable Total
2,794 SF Massing Total
946 SF First Floor
1,393 SF Second Floor
23 SF Area Over 15' Ht.
429 SF Garage
2,339 SF Livable Total
2,791 Massing Total A1.1
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
104
SH SHSH
SH
SHSH
BI-PASS
SH
SH
BI-PASS
BATH 3
9'-0" CLG.
H.S.
BATH 2
9'-0" CLG.
H.S.
SERVICE
9'-0" CLG.
H.S.
LOFT / OPT.
FITNESS RM. / STUDY
9'-0" CLG.
H.S.
11'-10" X 14'-0"
OWNER BDRM.
9'-0" CLG.
CARPET
13'-4" X 15'-10"
OWNER BATH
9'-0" CLG.
H.S.
W.I.C.
9'-0" CLG.
CARPET
SERVICE
9'-0" CLG.
H.S.
BDRM. 2
9'-0" CLG.
CARPET
BDRM. 3
9'-0" CLG.
CARPET
11'-7" X 11'-4"
BATH 2
9'-0" CLG.
H.S.
11'-10" X 12'-6"
+3'-6" DEPTH BAY
30'-5" L.P.
W.I.C.
9'-0" CLG.
CARPET
24'-7" L.P.
OWNER BATH
9'-0" CLG.
H.S.DEVICESCOFFEECOMPONENTSLOW LINENLOW LINENBDRM. 4 / OPT.
LOFT / OPT.
FITNESS RM./STUDY
9'-0" CLG.
H.S.
12'-1" X 13'-8"
OWNER BDRM.
9'-0" CLG.
CARPET
14'-2" X 16'-0"
BDRM. 2
9'-0" CLG.
CARPET
BDRM. 3
9'-0" CLG.
CARPET
11'-7" X 12'-6"11'-10" X 11'-9"LINENSH
SHSHSHSH
SH
SHBI-PASS
SHSHSHSHBI-PASS
SH
SHSHSH
SHSH2015195
Saratoga Front
Saratoga, CA
2015195 - Saratoga Front TH - Saratoga, CASummerhill Homes
0 8 16 24
August 03, 2015
Four Plex Plan 2
Second Floor Plans
Plan 1Plan 1Plan 2
A1.2
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
105
A1.3
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
Building 1
Color Scheme #5
Color Scheme #5
Lot 1
See sheet A1.8 for height information
See sheet A1.4 for materials
Color Scheme #1
Color Scheme #1
Lot 2
Color Scheme #2
Color Scheme #2
Lot 3
Color Scheme #6
Color Scheme #6
Lot 4
106
Color Scheme #5
Lot 1
Color Scheme #6
Lot 4
Building 1
A1.4
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
107
Color Scheme #4
Color Scheme #4
Lot 5
Color Scheme #3
Color Scheme #3
Lot 6
Color Scheme #5
Color Scheme #5
Lot 7
Color Scheme #1
Color Scheme #1
Lot 8
See sheet A1.8 for height information
See sheet A1.6 for materials
Building 2
A1.5
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
108
Color Scheme #4
Lot 5
Color Scheme #1
Lot 8
Building 2
A1.6
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
109
Building 3
Color Scheme #2
Color Scheme #2
Lot 9
Color Scheme #6
Color Scheme #6
Lot 10
Color Scheme #4
Color Scheme #4
Lot 11
Color Scheme #3
Color Scheme #3
Lot 12
See sheet A1.8 for height information
See sheet A1.4 for materials
A1.7
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
110
Color Scheme #3
Lot 12
Hatched windows indicates frosted glass
Building 3
A1.8
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
111
T.O.P.
F.F./T.O.C.
T.O.P.T.O.P.
F.F.F.F.
T.O.P.
F.F./T.O.C.
HALLBDRM. 4
ENTERTAINMENT ROOM
HALL LOFT
KITCHEN
HALL BDRM. 4
ENTERTAINMENT ROOM
HALLLOFT
KITCHEN
T.G.T.G.
18' ABOVE GRADE
26' ABOVE GRADE
18' ABOVE GRADE
26' ABOVE GRADE
4:12HIPHIPVALLEYRIDGERIDGEVALLEY
VALLEYHI
PVALLEYRIDGE
VALLEYVALLEYHIPRIDGEVALLEYVALLEYRIDGEVALLEY4:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:12
4:124:12 4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12
1:12 1:12 1:124:124:124:124:124:12
4:12
RIDGE
RIDGE
RIDGE4:124:12HIPHIPHI
PVALLEYVALLEYRIDGE VALLEYRIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGE RIDGE
1:12 1:12
PITCH BREAKPITCH BREAK VALLEYVALLEYVALLEYVALLEY4:12 4:12VALLEYHIP HI
PHIPHIPHI
P
V VVALLEYVALLEYRR4:124:12VVPITCH BREAK
T.O.P.
F.F./T.O.C.
T.O.P.T.O.P.
F.F.F.F.
T.O.P.
F.F./T.O.C.
OWNER BDRM.
ENTERTAINMENT ROOM
BDRM. 3
STORAGE ENTRY
SERVICE
LOFT
18' ABOVE GRADE
26' ABOVE GRADE
18' ABOVE GRADE
26' ABOVE GRADE
2015195
Saratoga Front
Saratoga, CA
2015195 - Saratoga Front TH - Saratoga, CASummerhill Homes
0 8 16 24
August 03, 2015
Sections
Plan 2Plan 1Plan 1Plan 2 Section A
Building Section - Facing South
N
Section ASection BSection B
Plan 1 Cross Section - Facing West
Section CA1.9
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
112
4:12HIPHIPVALLEYRIDGERIDGEVALLEY
VALLEYHI
PVALLEYRIDGE
VALLEYVALLEYHIPRIDGEVALLEYVALLEYRIDGEVALLEY4:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:124:12
4:124:12 4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12
1:12 1:12 1:124:124:124:124:124:12
4:12
RIDGE
RIDGE
RIDGE4:124:12HIPHIPHI
PVALLEYVALLEYRIDGE VALLEYRIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGERIDGE RIDGE
1:12 1:12
PITCH BREAKPITCH BREAK VALLEYVALLEYVALLEYVALLEY4:12 4:12VALLEYHIP HI
PHIPHIPHI
P
V VVALLEYVALLEYRR4:124:12VVPITCH BREAK
T.O.P.
F.F./T.O.C.
T.O.P.T.O.P.
F.F.F.F.
T.O.P.
F.F./T.O.C.
OWNER BA.
KITCHEN
W.I.C.BDRM. 3
STORAGE GARAGE
BA. 2
18' ABOVE GRADE
26' ABOVE GRADE
18' ABOVE GRADE
26' ABOVE GRADE
2015195
Saratoga Front
Saratoga, CA
2015195 - Saratoga Front TH - Saratoga, CASummerhill Homes
0 8 16 24
August 03, 2015
Sections & Area Diagrams
N
Section ASection BSection C
Plan 2 Cross Section - Facing WestSection CPlan 2
Second Floor
Plan 2 Areas:
1.429 SF
2.57 SF
3.889 SF
4.18 SF
5.573 SF
6.24 SF
7.160 SF
8.17 SF
9.604 SF
10.20 SF
Total: 2791 SF
Plan 2
First Floor
1
2
3
4
5
8 7
9
10
6
Plan 1 Areas:
1.404 SF
2.42 SF
3.23 SF
4.889 SF
5.2 SF
6.20 SF
7.10 SF
8.589 SF
9.323 SF
10.35 SF
11.436 SF
12.21 SF
Total: 2794 SF
1
23
4
5 6
7
8
9 10
11
12
Plan 1
Second Floor
Plan 1
First Floor
A1.10
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
113
L1
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
114
L2
August 17, 2015Saratoga Lane
115
116
REPORT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: August 26, 2015
Application: PDR14-0017
Location/APN: 14825 Fruitvale Ave. / 397-18-028
Applicant/Owner: Sin Yong
Staff Planner: Michael Fossati
14825 Fruitvale Ave.
117
SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests to demolish an existing residence in
order to construct a new 6,007 sq. ft. single-story residence with a daylight basement, two
car garage, carport, and an attached 567 sq. ft. deed-restricted second dwelling unit. The
height of the new residence will not exceed 23 feet. Four trees are proposed to be
removed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 15-038 approving Design Review PDR14-0017 subject to conditions
of approval.
Design Review Approval by the Planning Commission is required per City Code Section
15-45.060(a)(3).
PROJECT DATA:
Site Area: 43,561 square feet
Average Site Slope: 13.3%
Grading: 160 cy (not including basement)
General Plan Designation: RVLD (Very Low Density Residential)
Zoning: R-1-40,000
Proposed Allowable/Required
Proposed Site Coverage
House & Garage:
Front Porch Area:
Carport:
Sidewalk:
Rear Balcony:
Stair:
Patio:
Paver Driveway (pervious):
Total Proposed Site Coverage
4,349 SF
115 SF
410 SF
140 SF
588 SF
173 SF
1,625 SF
1,785 SF
9,185 SF (21%)
16,770 SF (includes 10%
increase for Deed
Restricted 2nd Unit)
Floor Area
First Floor:
Basement (counted as FAR):
Attached 2nd Unit
Garage
Total Proposed Floor Area
Basement (not counted as FAR)
3,352 SF
1,658 SF
567 SF
430 SF
6,007 SF
894 SF
6,257 SF (includes 10%
increase for Deed
Restricted 2nd Unit)
Height (Residence)
Lowest Elevation Point
Highest Elevation Point
Average Elevation Point
Proposed Topmost Point
86.0 FT
97.5 FT
91.75 FT
114.5 (22.75 FT)
Maximum Height
= 117.75 (26 Feet)
118
Application No. PDR14-0017 / 14825 Fruitvale Ave.
Page 3 of 6
Setbacks
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
66’-0”
20’-0”
25’-0”
117’-0”
30’
20’
20’
50’
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
An existing one story single-family home is located approximately at the center of the
project site. A replacement residence is proposed to be built approximately within the
same building footprint of the existing residence. The closest homes in the immediate
vicinity are located to the north and south of the site which is a semi-rural area. Fruitvale
Avenue is located to the east and additional residences are located to the west.
The 6,007 square foot one story residence would be approximately 23 feet in height and
includes an attached garage, a daylight basement and second dwelling unit. A daylight
basement (or walk-out basement) is contained in a house situated on a slope, so that part of
the floor is above ground with a doorway to the outside grade while the majority of the floor
is below ground. The second dwelling unit would have a separate side entrance. No
additional structures are proposed. The residence would have an earth-tone stucco exterior,
precast stone moldings and trim, clay tile roof and decorative metal chimney cap and iron
entry door. A colors and materials board has been submitted to the Community
Development Department and will be present at the site visit and public hearing. The
following table lists the proposed exterior materials.
Detail Colors and Materials
Exterior “Aristocrat Ivory” beige colored stucco
Trim “Nevada Sand” off-white precast moldings, trim and corbels
Door Dark Brown iron entry door
Roof “Cascade Blend” grey-brown concrete tiles
Deed-Restricted Second Dwelling Unit
The applicant has proposed an attached second dwelling unit along the southern elevation of
the residence. The approximately 567 sq. ft. unit has a studio, kitchen, pantry and bathroom.
The project meets the development standards required per the City Code to allow the second
dwelling unit to be deed-restricted.
Trees
Four protected trees are being proposed for removal. They include one digger/gray pine,
two coast live oaks, and one boxelder. The City Code requires one of ten criteria must be
satisfied in order for a tree to be removed. The project arborist and City arborist have
both documented five of ten criteria to remove the referenced trees. The value of the
trees proposed for removal equals $6,930. The applicant is required to plant trees
equaling the value of the trees to be removed. New trees are proposed along the
southeastern portion of the property, per the landscape plan.
119
Application No. PDR14-0017 / 14825 Fruitvale Ave.
Page 4 of 6
Front Landscape
Due to the topography of the building footprint, its significant setback from the front
property line, and the semi-rural setting, minimal front yard landscaping and site paving
have been proposed. Three established coast live oaks are noted on the plans to remain. A
pervious paver driveway is also proposed to cover approximately 13% of the front yard
setback area with paving. The remaining 87% of front yard setback area will be existing
grounds, tree and new plants such as daylilies, azaleas, and Japanese anemone.
Neighbor Notification and Correspondence
The applicant submitted four (4) Neighbor Notification Forms signed by adjacent
property owners. No negative comments were received related to the project. Copies of
the neighbor notification forms are included as Attachment #3.
Staff mailed a “Notice of Public Hearing” to all property owners within 500 feet of the
subject property. The public hearing notice and description of the project was published in
the Saratoga News. No additional written comments, either positive or negative, were
received prior to the completion of this staff report.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, Class 3 (a) of the
Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction of three
single-family residence in a residential area.
FINDINGS
Design Review Findings
The Planning Commission shall not grant design review approval unless it is able to
make the following findings. These findings are in addition to and not a substitute for
compliance with all other Zoning Regulations.
(a) Site development follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is
appropriate given the property's natural constraints. This finding can be made
because the project has been designed to cut into the hilly portion of the site. The
front of the property is relatively level, but significantly drops in the middle. Rather
than disturbing the site even further, the applicant has proposed to build within the
majority of the existing footprint, which limits the amount of grading required.
(b) All protected trees shall be preserved, as provided in Article 15-50 (Tree
Regulations). If constraints exist on the property, the number of protected trees,
heritage trees, and native trees approved for removal shall be reduced to an absolute
minimum. Removal of any smaller oak trees deemed to be in good health by the City
Arborist shall be minimized using the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080. This
finding can be made because although four trees are being proposed for removal, 26
trees (including 12 protected and/or native) are remaining and being protected by tree
protection fencing. Each of the four trees proposed for removal met at least five of
the 10 criteria needed for removal, including tree condition, number, species, size and
120
Application No. PDR14-0017 / 14825 Fruitvale Ave.
Page 5 of 6
location of existing trees in the area, and the necessity to remove for enjoyment of the
property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal.
(c) The height of the structure, its location on the site, and its architectural elements are
designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to
community viewsheds. This finding can be made because the proposed one story
residence is proposed to be built within the center of the site, where a substantial drop
in elevation occurs. Due to the substantial setback from the front property line and
topography of the site, adjoining properties will not have viewsheds or privacy
impacted by the proposed structure.
(d) The overall mass and the height of the structure, and its architectural elements are in
scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood. This finding can be made in
the because the proposed mass is broken up by the recessed entry, side facing garage
and carport, and library area of the residence. The height will not impact privacy or
viewsheds of neighboring property owners due to its location in comparison to
neighboring structures and the topography of the site.
(e) The landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains
elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape. This finding can
be made because the hardscape in the front setback area is limited to the driveway.
The proposed landscape design would be complementary to the neighborhood
streetscape and includes exiting trees and grounds, shrubs and plants.
(f) Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining
properties to utilize solar energy. This finding can be made because the majority of
the residence will be built on the lowest portion of grade on the site. Furthermore, the
nearest residences located to north of the site (where solar access could potentially be
affected) is located approximately 30 feet from the front property line. The proposed
residence is located more than 65 feet from the property line, further decreasing the
impairment of solar access.
(g) The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the
Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding can be
made in the affirmative because the proposed project conforms to the applicable
design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook such as
minimizing the use of excessive colors and materials, significantly setting the
structure from the front property line, maintaining and exceeding the generally
established front yard setback along the street and proposing a height that will avoid
unreasonable impacts to the privacy and adjoining properties and to community
viewsheds.
(h) On hillside lots, the location and the design of the structure avoid unreasonable
impacts to ridgelines, significant hillside features, community viewsheds, and is in
compliance with Section 15-13.100. This finding can be made because although the
site is considered a hillside lot by definition, the project it is not located on a
121
Application No. PDR14-0017 / 14825 Fruitvale Ave.
Page 6 of 6
ridgeline, will not affect any significant hillside features or community viewsheds,
and is not regulated by City Code section 15-13.100.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
2. Arborist Report
3. Neighbor Notification Forms
6. Reduced Plans (Exhibit A)
122
RESOLUTION NO. 15-038
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR DESIGN REVIEW NO. PDR14-0017 APPROVING A NEW ONE-STORY
RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT LOCATED AT
14825 FRUITVALE AVENUE (APN 397-18-028)
WHEREAS, an application was submitted by Sin Yong, in order to demolish an existing
residence and build a new 6,008 sq. ft., 22.75 foot tall, one-story residence with a daylight
basement located at 14825 Fruitvale Avenue. Design Review approval is required because the
proposed project is new single-story structure over eighteen feet in height. The foregoing work
is described as the “Project” in this Resolution.
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 26, 2015, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing on the subject application, and after considering evidence presented by City staff, the
applicant, and other interested parties, requested the applicant to revise the project to address
height, mass, and parking concerns.
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds,
determines and resolves as follows:
Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by
reference.
Section 2: The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures” of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the
construction of up to three single-family residences and no exception to that exemption applies.
Section 3: The project is consistent with the following Saratoga General Plan Policies:
Land Use Goal 13 which provides that the City shall use the Design Review process to assure
that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the
adjacent surroundings; Safety Element Site and Drainage Policy 3 which provides that the City
shall require that landscaping and site drainage plans be submitted and approved during Design
Review for a residence prior to issuance of permits; Land Use Element Goal 10 which minimizes
the impact of development proposals in hillside areas by requiring visual analyses and
imposition of conditions to prevent or reduce significant visual impacts; and Conservation
Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall protect the existing rural atmosphere of
Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development.
123
Resolution No. 15-038 Page 2
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’s site
development follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given
the property's natural constraints; all protected trees shall be preserved, as provided in Article 15-
50 (Tree Regulations) and if constraints exist on the property, the number of protected trees,
heritage trees, and native trees approved for removal shall be reduced to an absolute minimum.
Removal of any smaller oak trees deemed to be in good health by the City Arborist shall be
minimized using the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080; and the height of the structure, its
location on the site, and its architectural elements are designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to
the privacy of adjoining properties and to community view sheds; and the overall mass and the
height of the structure, and its architectural elements are in scale with the structure itself and with
the neighborhood; and the landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and
contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape; and the development
of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy;
and the design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential
Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055; and that if the project is a hillside lot, that the
location and the design of the structure avoid unreasonable impacts to ridgelines, significant
hillside features, community view sheds, and is in compliance with Section 15-13.100 of the City
Code.
Section 5: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that four protected
trees that meet the criteria established in Section 15-50.080(a) are being removed, as determined
by the City Arborist.
Section 6: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR14-0017,
located at 14825 Fruitvale Avenue (APN 397-18-028), subject to the above Findings, and
Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 26th day of
August 2015 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Leonard Almalech
Chair, Planning Commission
124
Resolution No. 15-038 Page 3
EXHIBIT 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR14-0017
14825 FRUITVALE AVE. (APN: 397-18-028)
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, or grading
permit for this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of
approval documenting all applicable permanent or other term-specified conditions has been
recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. If a condition is not
“Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until the issuance by
the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent.
2. The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting
this approval is duly executed, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in
connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing
fees”). THIS APPROVAL OR PERMIT SHALL EXPIRE SIXTY (60) DAYS AFTER
THE DATE SAID NOTICE IS MAILED IF ALL PROCESSING FEES CONTAINED
IN THE NOTICE HAVE NOT BEEN PAID IN FULL. No Zoning Clearance or
Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the City certifies that all
processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is
maintained).
3. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County,
City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the
requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations incorporated herein by this reference.
4. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and
hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and
volunteers harmless from and against:
a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any
action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations
taken, done or made prior to said action; and
b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any
manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or
grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person
acting on their behalf.
In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate
agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold harmless and
Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the City Attorney.
125
Resolution No. 15-038 Page 4
5. Construction must be commenced within 36 months of the date of this approval (August 26,
2018), or the resolution will expire.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
6. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans dated April 2, 2015
denominated Exhibit "A". All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in
writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the
changes. Such changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with Condition 3, above.
7. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be
submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by
the City prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum
include the following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit
“A” on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition
No. 6 above;
b. A note shall be included on the site plan stating that no construction equipment or
private vehicles shall be parked or stored within the root zone of any Ordinance-
protected tree on the site;
c. This Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages;
d. A final utility plan that shows location of HVAC mechanical equipment outside of
required setback areas;
e. A final Drainage and Grading Plan stamped by a registered Civil Engineer combined
with the above-required Stormwater Detention Plan;
f. A final Landscape and Irrigation Plan; and
g. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building
Division.
8. Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or
public right-of-way.
9. Maintenance of Construction Project Sites. Because this Design Review Approval
authorizes a project which requires a Building Permit, compliance with City Code Section
16-75.050 governing maintenance of construction project sites is required.
10. Fences, Walls and Hedges. All fences, walls and hedges not in connection with the
proposed fence exception shall conform to height requirements provided in City Code
Section 15-29.
11. Final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan. The final landscaping and irrigation plan shall
take into account the following:
126
Resolution No. 15-038 Page 5
a. To the extent feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat storm water
runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff. In areas that
provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and
prolong exposure to water shall be specified.
b. To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the
landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area.
c. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil
type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall,
air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to
ensure successful establishment.
d. Pest resistant landscaping plants shall be considered for use throughout the
landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area.
e. Any proposed or required under grounding of utilities shall take into account potential
damage to roots of protected trees
12. Fire Department Requirements. Owner/applicant shall comply with all Fire Department
requirements.
13. Noise and Construction Hours. In order to comply with standards that minimize impacts to
the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with
City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours,
maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections.
14. Front yard landscaping. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection
or a bond satisfactory to the Community Development Department valued at 150% of the
estimated cost of the installation of such landscaping shall be provided to the City.
15. Second Dwelling Unit - Deed Restricted. The owner shall restrict the rental of the second
unit to only households that qualify as lower, very-low, or extremely-low income households
as those terms are defined in the move recent Santa Clara County Housing and Urban
Development Program Income Limits or, in the event that the most recent such report is more
than five years old, in accordance with the definitions set forth in Health and Safety Code
sections 50079.5,50105, and 50106 as those sections exist as of the effective date of this
restriction. "Rental" means any agreement whereby the occupant(s) of the second unit make
any payment in consideration of said occupancy. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT.
CITY ARBORIST
16. Arborist Report. All recommendations of the Arborist Report dated April 27, 2015 and all
other future updated reports, and incorporated herein by this reference shall be followed and
incorporated (in its entirety) into the plans.
PUBLIC WORKS
127
Resolution No. 15-038 Page 6
17. Encroachment Permit. The applicant (owner) shall obtain an encroachment permit for any
and all improvements in any City right-of-way or City easement prior to commencement of
the work to implement this Design Review.
128
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
ARBORIST REPORT
Application No. ARB14-0035
PDR14-0017
Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Site: 14825 Fruitvale Avenue
Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owner: Sin (Eric) Yong
Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN: 397-18-028
Email:ziz68@yahoo.com
Report History:
Report 1
Date:
Plans received November 12, 2014
Owner placed project on hold till February 9, 2015
Report completed March 3, 2015
Report 2 – This report replaces report 1 Revised plans received April 2, 2015
Revised arborist report received March 16, 2015
Report completed April 27, 2015
PROJECT SCOPE:
The applicant has submitted plans to the City to demolish the existing house and build a new one
story house with a basement and attached two-car garage.
STATUS: Approved by City Arborist with conditions.
PROJECT DATA IN BRIEF:
Tree bond – Required - $15,070
For trees 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 20 and 22
Tree fencing – Required – See Conditions of Approval and attached map.
Tree removals – Trees 1 – 3 and 12 are permitted for removal once building
permits have been issued.
Replacement trees – Required = $6,930.
1
129
14825 Fruitvale Avenue
FINDINGS:
Tree Removals
Whenever a tree is requested for removal as part of a project, certain findings must be made and
specific tree removal criteria met. Trees 1 – 3 and 12 are requested for removal to construct the
project. They include one digger/gray pine (tree 1), two coast live oaks (2 and 3), and one boxelder
(tree 12). These trees meet the City’s criteria allowing them to be removed and replaced as part of
the project, once building division permits have been obtained. Table 1 below summarizes which
criteria are met allowing their removal. Attachment 2 contains the tree removal criteria for reference.
Table 1: Summary of Tree Removal Criteria that are met
Tree No. Criteria met Criteria not met
1 – 3, 12 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 8, 10
Replacement Trees:
The total appraised value of trees 1 – 3 and 12 is $6,930. New trees equal to this value will be
required as a condition of the project. Replacement values for new trees are listed below.
New Construction
Based on the information provided, this project complies with the requirements for the setback of
new construction from existing trees under Section 15-50.120 of the City Code.
Tree Preservation Plan
The arborist report dated March 13, 2015 and prepared by Walter Levison, once included in the final
set of plans, satisfies the requirement for a Tree Preservation Plan under Section 15-50.140 of the
City Code.
This arborist report reviewing the project shall also be included in the final set of plans on the Tree
Preservation Plan sheet.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 – Plans Reviewed and Tree Data
2 – Tree Removal Criteria
3 – Conditions of Approval
4 – Map of Site showing tree locations, protective fencing, and locations for replacement trees
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
2
130
14825 Fruitvale Avenue Attachment 1
PLAN REVIEW:
Architectural Plans reviewed:
Preparer: TDH Design
Date of Plans: May 2014
Sheet S Site Plan
Sheet SC Streetscape
Sheet 1 Lower Level and Main Level Floor Plans
Sheets 2 and 3 Elevations
Sheet 4 Sections
Sheet L Landscape Plan
Civil Plans reviewed:
Preparer: WEC Associates
Date of Plans: May 17, 2014 and June 25, 2014
Sheet C.0 Topographic Survey
Sheet C.1 Grading and Drainage Plan
Sheet C.2 Notes and Details
TREE INFORMATION:
Arborist report reviewed:
Preparer: Walter Levison
Date of Plans: October 28, 2014, revised November 6, 2015 and March 13, 2015
The arborist report submitted for this project inventoried 31 trees protected by Saratoga
City Code, provided information on their condition, tree protection recommendations and
appraised values for each tree. The submitted report recommends the removal of five
protected trees (1, 2, 3, 9 and 12).
3
131
14825 Fruitvale Avenue Attachment 1
Table 2: Tree Data from November 6, 2014 Arborist Report.
4
132
14825 Fruitvale Avenue Attachment 1
Table 2 continued: Tree Data from November 6, 2014 Arborist Report.
5
133
14825 Fruitvale Avenue Attachment 1
Table 2 continued: Tree Data from November 6, 2014 Arborist Report.
6
134
14825 Fruitvale Avenue Attachment 1
Table 2 continued: Tree Data from November 6, 2014 Arborist Report.
Appraised values in the submitted report 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.
7
135
14825 Fruitvale Avenue Attachment 2
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, and whether the tree is a Dead tree or a
Fallen tree.
(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
(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.
(10) The necessity to remove the tree for installation and efficient operation of solar panels, subject to the
requirements that the tree(s) to be removed, shall not be removed until solar panels have been installed
and replacement trees planted in conformance with the City Arborist's recommendation.
8
136
14825 Fruitvale Avenue Attachment 3
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. It is the responsibility of the owner, architect and contractor to be familiar with the
information in this report and implement the required conditions.
2. The arborist report prepared by Walter Levison, dated March 13, 2015, shall be copied on to
a plan sheet, titled “Tree Preservation” and included in the final job copy set of plans.
3. This arborist report shall be copied on to the Tree Preservation Plan sheet and included in the
final set of plans.
4. All recommendations of the submitted arborist report dated March 13, 2015 shall become
conditions of approval for this project.
5. The designated Project Arborist for this project is Walter Levison unless otherwise approved
by the City Arborist.
6. Tree Protection Security Deposit
a. Is required per City Ordinance 15-50.080.
b. Shall be $15,070 for tree(s) 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 20 and 22.
c. Shall be obtained by the owner and filed with the Community Development Department
before obtaining Building Division permits.
d. May be in the form of cash, check, credit card payment or a bond.
e. Shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project.
f. May be released once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City
Arborist.
7. Tree Protection Fencing:
a. Shall be installed as shown on the attached 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, KATE BEAR (408)
868-1276”.
e. Call City Arborist, Kate Bear at (408) 868-1276 for an inspection of tree protection
fencing once it has been installed. This is required prior to obtaining building division
permits.
f. Tree protection fencing shall remain undisturbed throughout the construction until final
inspection.
g. If contractor feels that work must be done inside the fenced area, call City Arborist to
arrange a field meeting.
8. The Project Arborist shall visit the site every two weeks during grading activities and
monthly thereafter.
9
137
14825 Fruitvale Avenue Attachment 3
9. The Project Arborist shall provide the City with inspection reports for the project following
site visits. Reports shall include photos of work being done.
10. The Project Arborist shall be on site to monitor all work within:
a. 10 feet of trees 4 and 5.
b. 15 feet of trees 14, 20 and 21.
c. 25 feet of tree 16.
11. No protected tree authorized for removal or encroachment pursuant to this project may be
removed or encroached upon until the issuance of the applicable permit from the building
division for the approved project.
12. Receipt of a Planning or Building permit does not relieve applicant of his responsibilities for
protecting trees per City Code Article 15-50 on all construction work.
13. All construction activities shall be conducted outside tree protection fencing. These activities
include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: demolition, grading, trenching,
equipment cleaning, stockpiling and dumping materials (including soil fill), and
equipment/vehicle operation and parking.
14. 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.
15. Trees 1 – 3 and 12 meet the criteria for removal and may be removed and replaced once
Building Division permits have been obtained.
16. Trees permitted for removal shall be replaced on or off site according to good forestry practices,
and shall provide equivalent value in terms of aesthetic and environmental quality, size, height,
location, appearance and other significant beneficial characteristics of the removed trees. The
value of the removed trees shall be calculated in accordance with the ISA Guide for Plant
Appraisal.
17. New trees equal to $6,930 shall be planted as part of the project before final inspection and
occupancy of the new home.
18. Replacement values for new trees are listed below.
15 gallon = $150 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500
48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000
19. At least six trees shall be planted in the front yard. They shall reach a height at maturity of 35
feet or more. The rest of the replacement trees may be planted anywhere on the property as
long as they do not encroach on retained trees.
20. At least six trees shall be from the City’s list of native species. Native species include coast live
oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), blue oak (Quercus douglasii), black oak
(Quercus kelloggii), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), California buckeye (Aesculus
californica), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens).
10
138
14825 Fruitvale Avenue Attachment 3
21. Irrigation for new landscape shall be designed as follows:
a. Design irrigation so that it does not spray trunks of trees.
b. Locate valve boxes and controllers outside of tree canopies.
c. Locate lateral lines outside of tree canopies.
d. Any irrigation line that must extend under a tree canopy shall be radial to the trunk of the
tree and receive prior approval from the City Arborist.
e. Only drip irrigation is permitted under oak trees. It shall be placed on top of grade under
mulch and only in the outer half under the canopy of the tree.
22. Landscaping under oak trees:
a. Shall not be planted within the inner half of the area under the canopy.
b. Shall be mulch only under area within the inner half under the canopy.
c. Only drought tolerant plants that are compatible with oaks are permitted under the outer
half of the canopy.
d. Water loving plants are not permitted under oaks.
e. Lawns are not permitted under the canopy of oaks.
23. Trees shall be watered during the dry summer months as directed by the Project Arborist and
as necessary to ensure their continued good health.
24. Following completion of the work around trees, and before a final inspection of the project,
the applicant shall provide a letter to the City from the Project Arborist. That letter shall
document the work performed around trees, include photos of the work in progress, and
provide information on the condition of the trees.
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.
11
139
Attachment 4
14825 Fruitvale Avenue
From Walter Levison dated 3-13-15
12
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
REPORT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: August 26, 2015
Application: PDR15-0003
Location/APN: 19341 Monte Vista Dr. / 397-10-026
Applicant/Owner: D&Z Design Associates / Nick Gera
Staff Planner: Michael Fossati
19341 Monte Vista Dr.
156
SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests to demolish an existing residence in
order to construct a new 5,909 sq. ft. single-story residence with a basement, three car
garage and a 724 sq. ft. detached, deed-restricted second dwelling unit. The height of the
new residence will not exceed 22 feet. The height of the second dwelling unit will not
exceed 17 feet. Seven protected trees are proposed to be removed and two are proposed
to be relocated.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 15-040 approving Design Review PDR15-0003 subject to conditions
of approval.
Design Review Approval by the Planning Commission is required per City Code Section
15-45.060(a)(3).
PROJECT DATA:
Site Area: 43,645 square feet
Average Site Slope: 2.6%
Grading: 245 cy (not including basement)
General Plan Designation: RVLD (Very Low Density Residential)
Zoning: R-1-40,000
Proposed Allowable/Required
Proposed Site Coverage
House & Garage:
Overhangs:
Covered Loggia:
Covered Terrace:
Bocce Ball Court:
Trellis Porches:
Lightwells:
Pool & Spa
Paver Driveway (pervious):
Rear Yard Pavers (pervious):
Paver & Granite Pathways (pervious):
Pool Hardscape (pervious)
Total Proposed Site Coverage
6,686 SF
490 SF
755 SF
199 SF
300 SF
475 SF
240 SF
686 SF
2,724 SF
508 SF
1,117 SF
1,349 SF
15,529 SF (36%)
16,803 SF (includes 10%
increase for Deed
Restricted 2nd Unit)
Floor Area
Residence:
Garage:
Detached 2nd Unit
Enclosed Porch
Enclosed Side Porch
Total Proposed Floor Area
Basement (not counted as FAR)
5,062 SF
847 SF
724 SF
40 SF
13 SF
6,686 SF
1,230 SF
6,688 SF (includes 10%
increase for Deed
Restricted 2nd Unit)
157
Application No. PDR15-0003/ 19341 Monte Vista Dr.
Page 3 of 6
Height (Residence)
Lowest Elevation Point
Highest Elevation Point
Average Elevation Point
Proposed Topmost Point
Height (2nd Dwelling Unit)
Lowest Elevation Point
Highest Elevation Point
Average Elevation Point
Proposed Topmost Point
97.31 FT
99.21 FT
98.26 FT
119.67 (21 FT 5 IN)
94.75 FT
96.17 FT
95.46 FT
112.46 (17 FT)
Maximum Height
= 124.26 (26 Feet)
Maximum Height
= 124.26 (26 Feet)
Setbacks for Residence
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
Setbacks for 2nd Dwelling Unit
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
38.4’
46.6’
20.0’
97.3’
149.0’
20.0’
132.0’
50.0’
30’
20’
20’
50’
30’
20’
20’
50’
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
This project proposes demolition of an existing one story single-family home which is
located on a double frontage lot (i.e. a lot having frontage on two parallel streets). The
property fronts both Monte Vista and Valle Vista and is surrounded by larger one acre
residential lots.
The existing home will be replaced with a 5,909 square foot one story residence and a 724
square foot detached second dwelling. The height of the main residence is 21.4 feet. The
height of the second dwelling unit would be approximately 17 feet. Both structures will
have an “desert gray” exterior color, “chocolate chunk” trim color, “Mesa Verde”
Eldorado stone veneer wainscoting, “camel” precast concrete trim color, a clay mission
tile roof and iron entry doors. A colors and materials board is on file with the Community
Development Department and will be present at the site visit and public hearing. The
following table lists the proposed exterior materials.
Detail Colors and Materials
Exterior “Desert Gray” beige colored stucco
Trim “Chocolate Chunk” travertine trim
Stone Veneer “Mesa Verde” Eldorado stone
Window Frame “Dark Bronze” Anderson windows
Door “Dark Bronze” iron entry door
Roof “Newport Blend” and “Old World Blend” U.S. Clay Mission Tile
158
Application No. PDR15-0003/ 19341 Monte Vista Dr.
Page 4 of 6
Deed-Restricted Second Dwelling Unit
The applicant proposes an attached second dwelling unit along the southern elevation of the
residence. The 724 sq. ft. unit has a bedroom, shared dining room/kitchen and a bathroom.
The project meets the development standards required per the City Code to allow the second
dwelling unit to be deed-restricted.
Trees
The site currently has 45 existing trees. Seven protected trees are being proposed for
removal and two trees are being proposed for relocation. None of the trees identified for
removal are native and include five Monterey pines, one deodar cedar, and one black
acacia.
The City Code requires that, one of ten potential criteria must be satisfied in order for a
tree to be removed. The project arborist and City arborist concur that each tree proposed
for removal satisfies at least four of the ten criteria. The value of the trees proposed for
removal is $12,710 and an equivalent amount will be spent in replacement trees to be
planted on site. The applicant’s landscape plan notes over 21 trees in different varieties
to be installed around the perimeter of the property.
Front Landscape
The applicant proposes a wrought iron fence and circular driveway to be constructed of
pervious pavers in the front yard. The applicant is allowed by the City Code to install up to
2,700 sq. ft. of hardscape within the front setback area. The applicant proposes 2,260 sq. ft.
of hardscape. Trees, sod lawn, plants and shrubs make up the remainder of front
landscaping.
The City Code also allows up to a three foot tall fence within the required front yard
setback. The applicant proposes a two and a half foot tall in the front yard setback.
Neighbor Notification and Correspondence
The applicant submitted two Neighbor Notification Forms signed by adjacent property
owners. None of the forms included negative comments related to the project. Copies of
the neighbor notification forms are included as Attachment #3.
Staff mailed a “Notice of Public Hearing” to all property owners within 500 feet of the
subject property. The public hearing notice and description of the project was published in
the Saratoga News. No additional written comments, either positive or negative, were
received prior to the completion of this staff report.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, Class 3 (a) of the
Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction of three
single-family residence in a residential area.
159
Application No. PDR15-0003/ 19341 Monte Vista Dr.
Page 5 of 6
FINDINGS
Design Review Findings
The Planning Commission shall not grant design review approval unless it is able to
make the following findings. These findings are in addition to and not a substitute for
compliance with all other Zoning Regulations.
(a) Site development follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is
appropriate given the property's natural constraints. This finding can be made
because the project is a relatively flat lot (2.6% slope) with a minimal amount of
grading proposed.
(b) All protected trees shall be preserved, as provided in Article 15-50 (Tree
Regulations). If constraints exist on the property, the number of protected trees,
heritage trees, and native trees approved for removal shall be reduced to an absolute
minimum. Removal of any smaller oak trees deemed to be in good health by the City
Arborist shall be minimized using the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080. This
finding can because none of the seven trees proposed for removal are native. and all
of these trees satisfy at least four of the ten criteria required for removal, as
determined by both the project and City arborist. Lastly, only 16% of the existing
trees on the property are to be removed, and the trees being preserved include 20
coast live oaks and five coast redwoods, both native species.
(c) The height of the structure, its location on the site, and its architectural elements are
designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to
community viewsheds. This finding can be made because the proposed one story
residence is compatible with the predominant streetscape of the area, including the
generally established front yard setbacks. The structure exceeds the required setback
along the southern and western portions of the property, further assisting in limiting
impacts on privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds.
(d) The overall mass and the height of the structure, and its architectural elements are in
scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood. This finding can be made
because the proposed mass is broken up by the recessed front entry and side facing
garage. The floor to ceiling stone blends well along the proposed library and guest
bedroom due to the large width and breadth of the residence. The proposed entry,
albeit tall, is believed to be in scale with the rest of the residence, mainly due to its
recessed location, in comparison to the other portions of the front façade. Lastly, the
massing of the proposed residence is in scale with the residence adjacent to the
project property (19327 Monte Vista Drive), built in mid-2007.
(e) The landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains
elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape. This finding can
be made because the hardscape in the front setback area is limited to the circular
driveway, which is similar to the majority of driveways located near the project site.
In an effort to soften the look, the applicant has proposed seven trees as well as
numerous plants and shrubs within the front setback area.
160
Application No. PDR15-0003/ 19341 Monte Vista Dr.
Page 6 of 6
(f) Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining
properties to utilize solar energy. This finding can be made because the project either
meets or exceeds required setback and will remain one-story, under 22 feet in height.
The project will not impair adjoining properties to utilize solar energy.
(g) The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the
Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding can be
made in the affirmative because the proposed project conforms to the applicable
design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook such as
minimizing the use of excessive colors and materials, designed the structure with
simple and well-proportioned massing, deemphasizing the garage presence from the
street, and the use exterior materials that complement the streetscape.
(h) On hillside lots, the location and the design of the structure avoid unreasonable
impacts to ridgelines, significant hillside features, community viewsheds, and is in
compliance with Section 15-13.100. This finding is not applicable as this lot is not
located within the hillside residential zoning district and is not considered a hillside
lot.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
2. Arborist Report
3. Neighbor Notification Forms
6. Reduced Plans (Exhibit A)
161
RESOLUTION NO. 15-040
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR DESIGN REVIEW NO. PDR15-0003 APPROVING A NEW ONE-STORY
RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT LOCATED AT
19341 MONTE VISTA DR. (APN 397-10-026)
WHEREAS, an application was submitted by D&Z Design Associated, Inc. and Nick
Gera, in order to demolish an existing residence and build a new 5,909 sq. ft., 21.42 foot tall,
one-story main residence with a 1,230 sq. ft. basement and a 724 sq. ft., 17 foot tall, detached
second dwelling unit located at 19341 Monte Vista Drive. Design Review approval is required
because the proposed main residence is new single-story structure over eighteen feet in height
and the total square footage of all structures on the property equal to more than 6,000 sq. ft. The
foregoing work is described as the “Project” in this Resolution.
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 26, 2015, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing on the subject application, and after considering evidence presented by City staff, the
applicant, and other interested parties, requested the applicant to revise the project to address
height, mass, and parking concerns.
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds,
determines and resolves as follows:
Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by
reference.
Section 2: The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures” of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the
construction of up to three single-family residences and no exception to that exemption applies.
Section 3: The project is consistent with the following Saratoga General Plan Policies:
Land Use Goal 13 which provides that the City shall use the Design Review process to assure
that the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the
adjacent surroundings; Safety Element Site and Drainage Policy 3 which provides that the City
shall require that landscaping and site drainage plans be submitted and approved during Design
Review for a residence prior to issuance of permits; Land Use Element Goal 10 which minimizes
the impact of development proposals in hillside areas by requiring visual analyses and
imposition of conditions to prevent or reduce significant visual impacts; and Conservation
Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall protect the existing rural atmosphere of
Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development.
162
Resolution No. 15-040 Page 2
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’s site
development follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given
the property's natural constraints; all protected trees shall be preserved, as provided in Article 15-
50 (Tree Regulations) and if constraints exist on the property, the number of protected trees,
heritage trees, and native trees approved for removal shall be reduced to an absolute minimum.
Removal of any smaller oak trees deemed to be in good health by the City Arborist shall be
minimized using the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080; and the height of the structure, its
location on the site, and its architectural elements are designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to
the privacy of adjoining properties and to community view sheds; and the overall mass and the
height of the structure, and its architectural elements are in scale with the structure itself and with
the neighborhood; and the landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and
contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape; and the development
of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy;
and the design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential
Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055; and that if the project is a hillside lot, that the
location and the design of the structure avoid unreasonable impacts to ridgelines, significant
hillside features, community view sheds, and is in compliance with Section 15-13.100 of the City
Code.
Section 5: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that seven protected
trees that meet the criteria established in Section 15-50.080(a) are being removed, as determined
by the City Arborist.
Section 6: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR15-0003,
located at 19341 Monte Vista Dr. (APN 397-10-026), subject to the above Findings, and
Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 26th day of
August 2015 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Leonard Almalech
Chair, Planning Commission
163
Resolution No. 15-040 Page 3
EXHIBIT 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR15-0003
19341 MONTE VISTA DR. (APN: 397-10-026)
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, or grading
permit for this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of
approval documenting all applicable permanent or other term-specified conditions has been
recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. If a condition is not
“Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until the issuance by
the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent.
2. The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting
this approval is duly executed, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in
connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing
fees”). THIS APPROVAL OR PERMIT SHALL EXPIRE SIXTY (60) DAYS AFTER
THE DATE SAID NOTICE IS MAILED IF ALL PROCESSING FEES CONTAINED
IN THE NOTICE HAVE NOT BEEN PAID IN FULL. No Zoning Clearance or
Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the City certifies that all
processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is
maintained).
3. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County,
City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the
requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations incorporated herein by this reference.
4. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and
hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and
volunteers harmless from and against:
a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any
action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations
taken, done or made prior to said action; and
b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any
manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or
grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person
acting on their behalf.
In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate
agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold harmless and
Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the City Attorney.
164
Resolution No. 15-040 Page 4
5. Construction must be commenced within 36 months from the date of this approval (August 26,
2018), or the resolution will expire.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
6. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans dated June 22, 2015, with
reference to Grading Plan and Drainage Plan, dated July 1, 2015, denominated Exhibit "A".
All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in writing with plans
showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such
changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with Condition 3, above.
7. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be
submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by
the City prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum
include the following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit
“A” on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition
No. 6 above;
b. A note shall be included on the site plan stating that no construction equipment or
private vehicles shall be parked or stored within the root zone of any Ordinance-
protected tree on the site;
c. This Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages;
d. A final utility plan that shows location of HVAC mechanical equipment outside of
required setback areas;
e. A final Drainage and Grading Plan stamped by a registered Civil Engineer combined
with the above-required Stormwater Detention Plan;
f. A final Landscape and Irrigation Plan; and
g. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building
Division.
8. Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or
public right-of-way.
9. Maintenance of Construction Project Sites. Because this Design Review Approval
authorizes a project which requires a Building Permit, compliance with City Code Section
16-75.050 governing maintenance of construction project sites is required.
10. Fences, Walls and Hedges. All fences, walls and hedges not in connection with the
proposed fence exception shall conform to height requirements provided in City Code
Section 15-29.
11. Final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan. The final landscaping and irrigation plan shall
take into account the following:
165
Resolution No. 15-040 Page 5
a. To the extent feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat storm water
runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff. In areas that
provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and
prolong exposure to water shall be specified.
b. To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the
landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area.
c. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil
type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall,
air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to
ensure successful establishment.
d. Pest resistant landscaping plants shall be considered for use throughout the
landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area.
e. Any proposed or required under grounding of utilities shall take into account potential
damage to roots of protected trees
12. Fire Department Requirements. Owner/applicant shall comply with all Fire Department
requirements.
13. Noise and Construction Hours. In order to comply with standards that minimize impacts to
the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with
City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours,
maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections.
14. Front yard landscaping. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection
or a bond satisfactory to the Community Development Department valued at 150% of the
estimated cost of the installation of such landscaping shall be provided to the City.
15. Second Dwelling Unit - Deed Restricted. The owner shall restrict the rental of the second
unit to only households that qualify as lower, very-low, or extremely-low income households
as those terms are defined in the move recent Santa Clara County Housing and Urban
Development Program Income Limits or, in the event that the most recent such report is more
than five years old, in accordance with the definitions set forth in Health and Safety Code
sections 50079.5,50105, and 50106 as those sections exist as of the effective date of this
restriction. "Rental" means any agreement whereby the occupant(s) of the second unit make
any payment in consideration of said occupancy. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT.
CITY ARBORIST
16. Arborist Report. All recommendations of the Arborist Report dated June 26, 2015 and all
other future updated reports, and incorporated herein by this reference shall be followed and
incorporated (in its entirety) into the plans.
PUBLIC WORKS
17. Encroachment Permit. The applicant shall replace the asphalt swale along the property
frontage prior to building final. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit for any
166
Resolution No. 15-040 Page 6
and all improvements in any City right-of-way or City easement prior to commencement of
the work to implement this Design Review.
167
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
ARBORIST REPORT
Application No. ARB15-0007
Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist Site: 19341 Monte Vista Drive
Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owner: Nick Gera
Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN: 397-10-026
Email: ngera@comcast.net
Report History:
Report 1
Date:
Plans received February 17, 2015
Report completed March 19, 2015
Report 2 Revised plans received May 7, 2015
Report completed June 10, 2015
Report 3 – This report replaces previous reports Revised plans received June 22, 2015
Report completed June 26, 2015
PROJECT SCOPE:
The applicant has submitted plans to the City to demolish the existing one story house and pool, and
build a new one story house with a basement, attached three car garage and a second unit.
Seven trees (5, 6, 26 and 32 – 35), are requested for removal to construct the project. They include 5
Monterey pines, 1 deodar cedar, and 1 black acacia. All meet the criteria allowing their removal and
replacement as part of the project.
STATUS: Approved by City Arborist with attached conditions.
PROJECT DATA IN BRIEF:
Tree security deposit –
Required - $79,220 for trees 7 – 9, 13, 15, 27 – 31, 40, 44, 46.
Because more than one structure will be built, 100% of the value
of trees potentially impacted will be required as a security deposit.
Tree fencing – Required – See attached map and Conditions of Approval.
Tree removals – Trees 5, 6, 26 and 32 – 35 are permitted for removal once Building
Permits have been issued.
Replacement trees – Required = $12,710
1
168
19341 Monte Vista Drive
FINDINGS:
Tree Removals
Whenever a tree is requested for removal as part of a project, certain findings must be made and
specific tree removal criteria met. A total of 7 trees are requested for removal to construct this
project. They include 5 Monterey pines (tree 5 and 32 – 35) in fair or poor condition (one is dead),
one deodar cedar (tree 6) in conflict with the driveway, and one black acacia (26) in poor condition.
Trees 5, 6, 26 and 32 – 35 meet the City’s criteria allowing them to be removed and replaced as part
of the project, once building division permits have been obtained. The table below summarizes the
tree removal criteria that have been met. Attachment 2 contains the tree removal criteria for
reference.
Table 1: Summary of Tree Removal Criteria that are met
Tree No. Species Criteria met Criteria not met
5, 32 – 35 Monterey pine 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 8
6 Deodar cedar 1, 4, 7, 9 2, 3, 6, 8
26 Black acacia 1, 4, 7, 9 2, 3, 5, 6, 8
Replacement Trees:
The total appraised value of trees 5, 6, 26 and 32 - 35 is $13,260. New trees equal to this appraised
value will be required as a condition of the project. Replacement values for new trees are listed
below.
Figure 1. Values for Replacement Trees
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.
Tree Preservation Plan
Section 15-50.140 of the City Code requires a Tree Preservation Plan for this project. The submitted
arborist report, once included in the final set of plans, can satisfy this requirement.
This report is also to be included in the final set of plans.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 – Plans Reviewed and Tree Information
2 – Tree Removal Criteria
3 – Conditions of Approval
4 – Map of Site showing tree locations and protective fencing
Replacement Tree Values:
15 gallon = $350 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500
48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000
2
169
19341 Monte Vista Drive Attachment 1
PLAN REVIEW:
Architectural Plans reviewed:
Preparer: DZ Design Associates, Inc.
Date of Plans: February 2015, revised June 10, 2015
Sheet T 1 Title Sheet
Sheet A 1 Proposed Site Plan
Sheet A 2 Proposed Floor Plan
Sheet A 3 Proposed Basement Plan
Sheets A 4 and A 5 Elevations
Sheet A 6 Sections
Sheet A 8 Guest House Floor Plan and Elevations
Sheet A 9 Guest House Sections
Sheet L 1 Landscape Plan
Civil Plans reviewed:
Preparer: NNR Engineering
Date of Plans: May 15, 2010 and January 29, 2015
Sheet 1 Boundary and Topographic Survey
Sheet C1 Cover Sheet
Sheet C2 Grading and Drainage Plan
Sheet C3 Sections and Details
TREE INFORMATION:
Preparer: David Hamilton of Mighty Tree Movers
Date of Plans: January 20, 2015, amended May 6, 2015
An arborist report prepared by David Hamilton of Mighty Tree Movers and dated January
20, 2015 was submitted for this project. It inventoried 46 trees protected by Saratoga City
Code and provided information on the condition of trees, suitability for preservation,
impacts from construction, appraised values and recommendations for protection during
construction. The tree inventory table from the submitted arborist report is included below.
Inventoried trees included 20 coast live oaks, 12 Monterey pines, 5 coast redwoods, 5
valley oaks, 2 Mexican fan palms, 1 deodar cedar, and 1 black acacia.
Seven trees (5, 6, 26 and 32 – 35) protected by Saratoga City Code are requested for
removal to construct this project. They include 5 Monterey pines, 1 deodar cedar and 1
black acacia.
3
170
19341 Monte Vista Drive Attachment 1
Table 2: Inventory of Trees from January 20, 2015 report by David Hamilton. Trees
highlighted in yellow will be removed. Trees highlighted in green are included in the tree
protection security deposit.
Tree # Tree Name Trunk Diameter Estimated Canopy Spread Overall Condition Suitability for Preservation (0-Low, 4-High) Impacts (1=High/removal 3=Low Impact) Removal required for Construction Tree on Adjacent property Appraised value 1 Coast Live Oak 11 20 Good 4 3
Yes $6,450
2 Monterey Pine 30 30 Fair 3 3
Yes $1,850
3 Coast Live Oak 11 22 Good 4 3
Yes $6,500
4 Monterey Pine 27 25 Fair 3 3
Yes $3,450
5 Monterey Pine 20 25 Dead 0 1 X
$0
6 Deodar Cedar 10 12 Fair 0 1 X
$900
7 Monterey Pine 30 30 Fair 3 3
$3,930
8 Coast Live Oak 7 12 Fair 2 3
$2,300
9 Monterey Pine 20 30 Fair 3 3
$5,600
10 Monterey Pine 30 30 Fair 3 3
$2,730
11 Coast Live Oak 11 18 Fair 3 3
$3,000
12 Monterey Pine 20 0 Stump 0 NA
$0
13 Coast Live Oak 11 15 Good 4 3
$4,300
14 Monterey Pine 20 30 Stump 0 NA
$0
15 Coast Live Oak 11 20 Good 4 3
$4,300
16 Coast Live Oak 15 20 Poor 1 3
$1,050
17 Coast Live Oak 9+11 20 Fair 3 3
$9,900
18 Valley Oak 14 25 Good 4 3
$8,800
19 Valley Oak 11 15 Good 3 3
$4,300
20 Valley Oak 10 15 Fair 3 3
$2,550
21 Valley Oak 9 15 Poor 3 3
$1,100
22 Coast Live Oak 14 22 Fair 3 3
$3,900
23 Coast Live Oak 8 15 Poor 3 3
$500
24 Coast Live Oak 12 20 Good 3 3
$4,800
25 Coast Live Oak 11 20 Poor 3 3
$1,450
26 Black Acacia 70 40 Poor 0 1 X
$2,000
27 Redwood 30 25 Good 4 2
$12,900
28 Redwood 42 30 Good 4 2
$28,500
4
171
19341 Monte Vista Drive Attachment 1
Table 2 continued: Inventory of Trees from January 20, 2015 report by David Hamilton.
Values In the table above were rounded to the nearest 10 dollars if they were under $5,000.
Values over $5,000 were rounded to the nearest 100 dollars according the Guide for Plant
Appraisal, 9th Edition. Tree # Tree Name Trunk Diameter Estimated Canopy Spread Overall Condition Suitability for Preservation (0-Low, 4-High) Impacts (1=High/removal 3=Low Impact) Removal required for Construction Tree on Adjacent property Appraised value 29 Redwood 30 25 Fair 4 2
$12,900
30
Mexican Fan
Palm 16 8 Good 0 1 X
$350
31
Mexican Fan
Palm 16 8 Good 0 1 X
$350
32 Monterey Pine 20 25 Fair 0 1 X
$2,650
33 Monterey Pine 22 25 Fair 0 1 X
$2,900
34 Monterey Pine 21 25 Fair 0 1 X
$2,780
35 Monterey Pine 29 30 Poor 0 1 X
$2,030
36 Coast Live Oak 13 20 Fair 3 3
$3,550
37 Coast Live Oak 11 15 Fair 3 3
$2,850
38 Coast Live Oak 6 12 Fair 2 2
$1,200
39 Coast Live Oak 10 15 Fair 2 2
$2,550
40 Coast Live Oak 8 12 Fair 2 2
$1,850
41 Coast Live Oak 9 12 Fair 2 2
$2,200
42 Coast Live Oak 12 12 Poor 1 2
$1,600
43 Coast Live Oak 10 15 Fair 2 2
$2,550
44 Redwood 6 10 Good 1 2
$1,580
45 Redwood 8 10 Good 1 2
$2,480
46 Valley oak 6 5 Fair 4 3 $360
5
172
19431 Monte Vista Drive Attachment 2
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, and whether the tree is a Dead tree or a
Fallen tree.
(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
(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.
(10) The necessity to remove the tree for installation and efficient operation of solar panels, subject to the
requirements that the tree(s) to be removed, shall not be removed until solar panels have been installed
and replacement trees planted in conformance with the City Arborist's recommendation.
6
173
19341 Monte Vista Drive Attachment 3
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. It is the responsibility of the owner, architect and contractor to be familiar with the
information in this report and implement the required conditions.
2. The arborist report prepared by David Hamilton of Mighty Tree Movers, Inc. and dated
January 20, 2015, shall be copied on to a plan sheet, titled “Tree Preservation” and included
in the final job copy set of plans.
3. All recommendations of the January 20, 2015 arborist report shall become conditions of
approval for the project.
4. This arborist report shall be copied on to a plan sheet and included in the final set of plans.
5. Tree Protection Security Deposit
a. Is required per City Ordinance 15-50.080.
b. Shall be $79,220 be for tree(s) 7 – 9, 13, 15, 27 – 31, 40, 44 and 46.
c. Shall be obtained by the owner and filed with the Community Development Department
before obtaining Building Division permits.
d. May be in the form of cash, check, credit card payment or a bond.
e. Shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project.
f. May be released once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City
Arborist.
6. Tree Protection Fencing:
a. Shall be installed as shown on the attached map.
b. Shall be established prior to the arrival of construction equipment or materials on site.
c. Shall be comprised of six-foot high chain link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, 2-inch
diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10
feet apart.
d. Shall be posted with signs saying “TREE PROTECTION FENCE - DO NOT MOVE OR
REMOVE WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST, KATE BEAR (408)
868-1276”.
e. Call City Arborist, Kate Bear at (408) 868-1276 for an inspection of tree protection
fencing once it has been installed. This is required prior to obtaining building division
permits.
f. Tree protection fencing shall remain undisturbed throughout the construction until final
inspection.
g. If contractor feels that work must be done inside the fenced area, call City Arborist to
arrange a field meeting before performing work.
7. The designated Project Arborist shall be David Hamilton of Mighty Tree Movers, Inc. unless
otherwise approved by the City Arborist.
8. The Project Arborist shall visit the site every two weeks during grading activities and
monthly thereafter.
9. The Project Arborist shall be on site to monitor all work within 17 feet of trees 27 – 29.
7
174
19341 Monte Vista Drive Attachment 3
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. Trees 5, 6, 26 and 32 – 35 meet the criteria for removal and may be removed and replaced
once Building Division permits have been obtained.
15. Trees permitted for removal shall be replaced on or off site according to good forestry practices,
and shall provide equivalent value in terms of aesthetic and environmental quality, size, height,
location, appearance and other significant beneficial characteristics of the removed trees. The
value of the removed trees shall be calculated in accordance with the ISA Guide for Plant
Appraisal.
16. New trees equal to $12,710 shall be planted as part of the project before final inspection and
occupancy of the new home. New trees may be of any species.
17. Replacement values for new trees are listed below.
15 gallon = $350 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500
48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000
18. Replacement trees may be planted anywhere on the property as long as they do not encroach
on retained trees.
19. Only drought tolerant plants that are compatible with oaks are permitted under the outer half
of the canopy of oak trees on site.
20. Following completion of the work around trees, and before a final inspection of the project,
the applicant shall provide a letter to the City from the Project Arborist. That letter shall
document the work performed around trees, include photos of the work in progress, and
provide information on the condition of the trees.
21. 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.
8
175
1
Attachment 4
Legend
Tree Protection Fencing
2
3
4
19341 Monte Vista Drive
44
5
6
7
8
9
10
27
28 29
11
13
16
15
14
30 31
32
17 18
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
45
46
43
42
38
40
33
35
34
37
36
12
39
41
9
176
177
178
179
4/27/15PLANS REVISIONSPER CITYCOMMENTS%Ä016+%'61%1064#%6145.')'0&&'5%4+26+10#$$4'8+#6+10SUMP PUMPS TO ASSURE THEIR OPERATION IN CASE OF POWER FAILURE.2. CONNECT SANITARY SEWER AND WATER LINE TO EXISTING STREET SERVICES.6. USE A COMBINATION OF BATTERY OPERATED/GENERATOR AND POWER OPERATEDWITH THE DESIGNATED UTILITY COMPANIES.SPECIFICATIONS. ALL UTILITY DISCONNECTIONS SHALL BE COORDINATEDLINES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY5. ALL ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE AND GAS EXTENSIONS INCLUDING SERVICEUTILITY SERVICES WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.4. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ANY DISRUPTIONS TO EXISTING PER PG&E STANDARDS.3. CONNECT GAS AND ELECTRIC LINES TO EXISTING GAS AND POWER SERVICES, 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.76+.+6;016'5 SOMETHING LIKE JUTE NETTING. WHICH WILL PROVIDE BETTER, LONGER-TERM EROSION CONTROL THAN EROSION." A PRODUCT SUCH AS NORTH AMERICAN GREEN SC150BN, ALONG THE FLOW PATH ALONG THE FILL SLOPE TO MITIGATE EXCESSIVE TO FILL SLOPES, EROSION CONTROL FABRIC SHOULD BE INSTALLED SPLASH BLOCKS. WHERE SPLASH BLOCKS ARE LOCATED ADJACENT11. ALL ROOF DOWN SPOUTS SHALL BE DISCHARGED ONTO CONCRETE OR IMPORTED FILL AND COMPACTEDTO AT LEAST90% RELATIVE COMPACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D1557-91WITH THE UPPER 12 INCHES OF UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL IN PAVEMENTAREAS COMPACTED TO 95% RELATIVECOMPACTION. BACKFILL SHOULD BE PLACED IN 6 TO 8 INCH LIFTS")'0'4#.016'5 DEBRIS AND FOUNDATION. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. INFORMATION. DIMENSIONS. LOCATED AND MARKED. OF PORCHES, RAMPS, ENTRANCE LOCATIONS AND PRECISE BUILDING 10. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONSOF THEIR DESIGN CONTAINED HEREIN.THEY ARE AUTHORIZE TO MAKE AN "AS-BUILT" SURVEY AFTER THE 13. NNR ENGINEERING, WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DRAINAGE UNLESS 12. NNR ENGINEERING ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY BEYOND THE ADEQUACY 1. DEMOLISH AND REMOVE EXISTING BUILDING, SLAB, FOUNDATION, ASSOCIATEDAND COMPACTED. JETTING OF TRENCH BACKFILL IS NOT RECOMMENDED. CONTACT 2. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY THAT ALL UTILITIES ARE DISCONNECTED AND TURNED OFF3. ALL ON-SITE UTILITY TRENCHES MUST BE BACKFILLED WITH NATIVE MATERIALSTART OF ANY UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILLING OPERATIONS. SOIL ENGINEERING, AT LEAST 48 HOURS BEFORE THE AT 800/642-2444, A TOLL-FREE NUMBER, 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF ANY EXCAVATION ACTIVITY SO ALL UNDERGROUND FACILITIES CAN BE THE PLANS ARE APPROXIMATE AND FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY. 9. CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL UNDERGROUND SERVICES ALERT "USA" CENTER 7. EXISTING UNDERGROUND LINES, APPURTENANCES AND FACILITIES WHICH ARE KNOWN TO THE ENGINEER ARE SHOWN FOR INFORMATION ONLY. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE ALL NECESSARY CAUTION TO AVOID DAMAGE TO ANY EXISTING FACILITIES WHICH ARE TO REMAIN IN PLACE, IS GIVEN AS TO THE COMPLETENESS AND ACCURACY OF SUCH FACILITIES LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES IN THE FIELD. LOCATIONS SHOWN ON 8. ALL CONTRACTORS WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFICATION OF THE BEAR FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGE THERETO. NO WARRANTY WHETHER OR NOT SUCH FACILITIES ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANS, AND SHALLBASEMENT, SOIL COMPACTION AND SOIL STABILITY OR OTHERS COMPONENTS.STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THE BUILDING, FOUNDATION, RETAINING WALLSAND DRAINAGE ONLY AND IN NO WAY IMPLIES APPROVAL OF THE 14. APPROVAL OF THESE PLANS BY NNR ENGINEERING, IS FOR GRADING LANDSCAPING IS COMPLETE AND BEFORE OCCUPANCY.6. THE PERMITTEE OR AGENT SHALL MAINTAIN THE STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND ALL OTHER PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN A CLEAN, SAFE, AND USABLE CONDITION. ALL SPILLS OF SOIL, ROCK, OR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE PUBLICLY OWNED PROPERTY DURING5. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PERMITTEE OR AGENT TO IDENTIFY, LOCATE, AND CONSTRUCTION AND UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY, PRIVATE PROTECT ALL UNDERGROUND FACILITIES. PUBLIC SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CLEAN, SAFE AND USABLE CONDITION.64''016' NO CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT OR PRIVATE VEHICLES SHALL BE PARKED OR STOREDWITHIN THE ROOT ZONE (FIVE FEET BEYOND THE DRILPLINE (THE AREA UNDER THECANOPY) OR A GREATER DISTANCE AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY ARBORIST) OF ANYORDINANCE-PROTECTED TREE ON THE SITE.)'0'4#.016' "PRIOR TO FOUNDATION INSPECTION BY THE CITY, THE LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR OFRECORD SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN CERTIFICATION THAT ALL BUILDING SETBACKSCOMPLY WITH THE APPROVED PLANS," WHICH NOTE SHALL REPRESENT A CONDITIONWHICH MUST BE SATISFIED TO REMAIN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THIS DESIGN REVIEWAPPROVAL.³ALL GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING SITEGRADING, BASEMENT MAT SLAB AND DRILLED PIER EXCAVATIONS, SITE RETAININGWALL FOOTING EXCAVATIONS, PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OF ENGINEERED FILL, ANDINSTALLATION OF SUBSURFACE AND SURFACE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PERFORMED INACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICALREPORT PREPARED BY MURRAY ENGINEERS, INC., DATED DECEMBER 13, 2011. MURRAYENGINEERS, INC. SHOULD BE PROVIDED AT LEAST 48 HOURS ADVANCE NOTIFICATION(650-5599980) OF ANY GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND SHOULDBE PRESENT TO OBSERVE AND TEST THE EARTHWORK, FOUNDATION, AND DRAINAGEINSTALLATION PHASES OF THE PROJECT.)4#&+0)016'5 REPLACED UNDER OBSERVATION OF THE PROJECT SOILS ENGINEER.11. GRADING ACTIVITIES ARE ONLY ALLOWED MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 7:30 AM TO 6:00 PM.10. ALL CONSTRUCTION SITES ARE TO BE WINTERIZED WITH APPROPRIATE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES INPLACE FROM OCTOBER 15TH TO APRIL 15TH OF EACH YEAR.OR THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OF OTHERS. APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE APPROVAL OFANY IMPROVEMENTS . ANY PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BYTHE RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITIES AND ALL OTHER PERMITS/APPROVALS SHALL BE OBTAINED.2. APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN APPLIES ONLY TO THE EXCAVATION, PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OFNATURAL EARTH. THIS APPROVAL DOES NOT CONFER ANY RIGHTS OF ENTRY TO EITHER PUBLIC PROPERTY3. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PERMITTEE TO IDENTIFY, LOCATE AND PROTECT ALL4. THE PERMITTEE SHALL MAINTAIN ALL STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND OTHER PUBLIC RIGHT-OF WAYS IN ACLEAN, SAFE AND USABLE CONDITION. ALL SPILLS OF SOIL, ROCK OR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS SHALL BEREMOVED FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY. ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY, BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, SHALL BE5. ALL GRADING AND EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO COMPLYWITH STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR AIRBORNE6. ALL KNOWN WATER WELL LOCATIONS ON SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED OR ABANDONED ACCORDING TOCURRENT REGULATIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT. CALL 408-265-2600 x2600 TO ARRANGE FOR DISTRICT OBSERVATION OF WELL ABANDONMENT.7. THIS PLAN DOES NOT APPROVE THE REMOVAL OF ANY TREES. APPROPRIATE TREE REMOVAL PERMITSSHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. ANY REQUIRED TREEPROTECTION MEASURES SHALL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.8. THE PROJECT CIVIL ENGINEER, NNR ENGINEERING, 535 WEYBRIDGE DRIVE, SAN JOSE, CA. HASDEIGNED THIS PROJECT TO COMPLY WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORTPREPARED BY BAY AREA GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, 950 INDUSTRIAL AVENUE, PALO ALTO, CA. 9. ALL GRADING AND EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPROVED PLANS ANDSPECIFICATIONS. ALL GRADING AND EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES SHALL BE OBSERVED AND APPROVED BYTHE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANYGRADING OR EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES. UNOBSERVED OR UNPROVED WORK SHALL BE REMOVED ANDMAINTAINED IN A CLEAN, SAFE AND USABLE CONDITION.UNDERGROUND FACILITIES.PARTICULATES. 1. PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY EARTHWORK/GRADING ACTIVITIES, THE PERMITTEE SHALLARRANGE A PRE-CONSTRUCTION ION MEETING. THE MEETING SHALL INCLUDE THE CITY OF SARATOGAGRADING INSPECTOR (408-868-1202), THE GRADING CONTRACTOR AND THE PROJECT SOILS ENGINEER.THE PERMITTEE OR REPRESENTATIVE SHALL ARRANGE THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING AT LEAST 48HOURS PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY EARTHWORK/GRADING ACTIVITIES.56#0&)4#&+0)2.#0016'5 5+6'8+%+0+6;/#2(47+68#.'#8'8#..'8+56#&48#
.
.
'
8
+
5
6
#
&
4/106'8+56#&48
+
#
%
1
.
+
0
#FOR PAYMENT TO THE CONTRACTOR . CONTRACTOR SARATOGA PUBLIC WORKS AND ARE NOT TO BE USED GRADING PERMIT APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF THE QUANTITIES ARE SHOWN FOR THE PURPOSE OFSHALL ESTABLISH HIS OWN QUANTITIES.016' /#:&'26*
(6 /#:&'26*
(6
%; %76'#46*914-37#06+6;
%; (+..616#.&4+8'9#;(170+105':%#8#6+105 1765+&'$7+.&+0)2'4+/'6'4
016+0%.7&+0)$#5'41%-
016+0%.7&+0)$#5'/'06#0&*175'#0&)7'56*175'.1%#6+10'415+10%10641.2.#0%Ä%Ä%Ä5*''6+0&':%Ä%41555'%6+105#0&/+5%&'6#+.5)4#&+0)#0&&4#+0#)'2.#0%18'45*''6'#46*914-%#.%7.#6+10%Ä6/26/157/29/15180
#20 ÄÄ/106'8+56#&4+8'5#4#61)#%#)4#&+0)#0&&4#+0#)'2.#0%Ä)4#&+0)#0&&4#+0#)'%105647%6+10016'5 NOT .')'0& 181
%Ä6;2+%#.(116+0)&'6#+.016' 2#&'.'8#6+10+5(14+0(14/#6+1010.;016'5 64''2416'%6+10&'6#+.411(&1905217652.#5*$.1%- GRASSY SWALE DETAIL4'6'06+10&'6'06+105;56'/%#6%*$#5+0&'6#+.$#5'/'064'6#+0+0)9#..&4#+0#)'&'$4+5$#5+0&'6#+.57/29+6*27/2#4'#&4#+0&'6#+.+0(+.64#6+10&'8+%'&'6#+.)4#0+6'(+0'9#.-9#;5&'6#+.2'4/'#$.'2#8'456;2+%#.&'6#+.016' DRIVEWAY SHALL BE ABLE TO SUPPORT WEIGHT OF EMERGENCY TRUCKS, UP TO 20 TONS. PROJECTSOILS ENGINEER TO INSPECT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE DRIVEWAY.182
%ÄSTRAW WATTLESSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE183
#20 ÄÄ/106'8+56#&4+8'5#4#61)#%#'#46*914-%#.%7.#6+10%Ä184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
1
REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: August 26, 2015
Application: Informational Only
Location / APN: City Wide
Owner / Applicant: City of Saratoga
Staff Planner: Erwin Ordonez
BACKGROUND:
State law requires that cities submit an annual report to their City Councils on the status of
carrying out the implementation of their General Plan. This includes progress made in
achieving the housing production goals established under the Housing Element. Annual
Progress Reports (APRs) provide local legislative bodies with information regarding the
implementation of the General Plan for the communities they represent. Upon acceptance of
the report, a copy of the report is filed with the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
(OPR) and the Housing and Community Development Department (HCD).
There is no standardized form or format for the General Plan APR. The APR is also not
required to incorporate all of the General Plan Elements and is not intended to be an elaborate
or time consuming endeavor. The APR meets the basic statutory requirements by law and
high lights just the key aspects of the City’s General Plan implementation during the calendar
year 2014.
This report and its attachments are intended satisfy the State’s reporting requirements. This
item is scheduled before the City Council for their acceptance at the September 2, 2015
meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The General Plan Annual Progress Report is provided to the Commission as an informational
item only. The Planning Commission has no official action required under State law. Staff
recommends the Commission accept the report.
197
2
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The review and acceptance of the General Plan Annual Progress Report is not a project under
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It is the type of activity that is
Categorically Exempt, Class 6 (Informational Collection) based on Section 15306 of the
CEQA Guidelines.
DISCUSSION:
The City is reporting the following General Plan related activity for 2014.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
The following General Plan Amendment revisions were adopted as part of the 2014
Housing Element Update process and were required by State HCD in order to certify the
document:
Land Use Element Revisions
Establishment of 30 dwelling units per acre minimum density for Prospect
Avenue/Lawrence Expressway commercial area
Establishment of three story height limit for Prospect Avenue/Lawrence Expressway
commercial area
Clarification that mixed use/commercial uses are permitted on all commercially
zoned lands with a maximum of 20 dwelling units per acre.
With the exception of these Housing Element related Amendments, no additional General
Plan amendments were approved in 2014.
ANNEXATIONS/REORGANIZATIONS
There were three annexations of land within the unincorporated area of the County and
within the Urban Service Boundary of the City of Saratoga.
Those annexations were:
The “Quarry” properties consisting of approximately 75 acres
STG01 properties off Mt Eden Road consisting of 31 acres
STG07 properties also of Mt Eden Road consisting of 106 acres
These areas will have a General Plan designation of Hillside Open Space. Part of the
Quarry properties will be planned for a City park.
ZONING AMENDMENTS
The following four Zoning Ordinance Amendments were adopted during 2014:
ZOA 13-0001
Approval of Planned Combining Overlay Zoning for Our Lady of Fatima to
facilitate its Master Plan and proposed parking lot improvements.
198
3
ZOA 14-0002
A Zoning Ordinance Amendment to update the City’s Water Efficiency Landscape
Ordinance (WELO) in conformance with State requirements.
ZOA 14-0003
A Zoning Ordinance Amendment to update the City’s Zoning Regulations to reflect
annual revisions recommended by the Planning Commission.
ZOA 14-0004
Zoning Ordinance Amendments to implement the State Certified Housing Element
-Commercial-Neighborhood Residential, High Density C-N (RHD) zoning standards
updated standards
-Updated affordable housing parking standards
-Updated second dwelling unit standards
-Updated Special Needs Housing regulations
ANNUAL HOUSING ACTIVITY
Attachment 1 of this report is the Housing Element Progress Report required by HCD. The
report requires the City to report the number of net new dwelling units issued a certificate of
occupancy during the 2014 calendar year. While there are several residential projects under
construction, the City had only one single family dwelling issued a certificate of occupancy
during 2014.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2014 HCD Housing Element Progress Report
P:\PLANNING COMMISSION\Staff Reports\2015\082615\Staff Report - 2014 General Plan Annual Progress Report.doc
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207