HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-12-2012 Planning Commission PacketTable of Contents
Agenda 3
August 22, 2012
Draft Minutes 5
APPLICATION PDR 12-0012; 14562 Horseshoe Drive(397-20-
030); JD & Harpreet Buttar / Seema Mittal - The applicant
requests approval to replace a 1,807 square foot home with a
new 5,583 square foot two-story home. Staff Contact: Cynthia
McCormick (408) 868-1230.
staff report 7
resolution 12
Noticing 16
Neighbor Forms 20
Drainage calculations 26
plans 36
APPLICATION PDR12-0014 & VAR12-0002; 20760 Wildwood
Way (503-26-051); Mark Mikl - The applicant requests approval
to replace a non-conforming structure with a new 1,867 square
foot two-story home (not including the basement). The applicant
is also requesting a variance for a reduced front setback,
reduced rear first story setback, and a reduced left side second
story setback. Staff Contact: Cynthia McCormick (408) 868-
1230.
staff report 56
resolution 64
Noticing 68
Neighbor Forms 77
Greenpoints 79
Plans 87
APPLICATION PDR12-0010 – 14966 Sobey Road (397-18-039)
Jean / Kohlsaat - The applicant is requesting Design Review
approval to replace an existing one-story residence with a new
two-story 5,750 sq. ft. residence and attached garage. The
height of the proposed residence would be no taller than 22 feet
above average grade. The 1.11 acre lot is located in the R-1-
40,000 zoning district. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-
1212.
Staff Report - 14966 Sobey Road 111
Att. 1 - Reso - 14966 Sobey Road 118
Att. 2 - Arborist Report 123
Att. 3 - Neighbor Notifications 129
Att. 4 - Build-it-Green Checklist 137
Att. 5 - Noticing 142
Att. 6 - Plans - Exhibit 'A'145
1
APPLICATION PDR12-0013; 12383 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
(386-53-019); Sprint - The applicant is requesting approval to
replace three new panel antennas and install six remote radio
units on an approximately 146 foot tall PG&E lattice tower. Two
new equipment cabinets would be installed beneath the tower
within an existing 468 square foot fenced enclosure. Staff
Contact: Christopher Riordan (408)868-1235
Staff Report 154
Attachment 1 - Resolution 159
Attachment 2 - Applicants Project Description and
Neighbor Outreach 164
Attachment 3 - Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List 167
Attachment 4 - Photographic Simulations 173
Attachment 5 - Wireless Coverage Exhibit 175
Attachment 6 - Radio Frequency Report 177
Attachment 7 - Project Plans 191
2
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
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 22, 2012
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.
Oral Communications – 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, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b).
PUBLIC HEARING
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants and their representatives
have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the Public may comment on any item for
up to three minutes. Applicants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing
statements.
1. APPLICATION PDR 12-0012; 14562 Horseshoe Drive(397-20-030); JD & Harpreet Buttar / Seema Mittal
- The applicant requests approval to replace a 1,807 square foot home with a new 5,583 square foot two-
story home. Staff Contact: Cynthia McCormick (408) 868-1230.
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 12-039 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
2. APPLICATION PDR12-0014 & VAR12-0002; 20760 Wildwood Way (503-26-051); Mark Mikl - The
applicant requests approval to replace a non-conforming structure with a new 1,867 square foot two-story
home (not including the basement). The applicant is also requesting a variance for a reduced front setback,
reduced rear first story setback, and a reduced left side second story setback. Staff Contact: Cynthia
McCormick (408) 868-1230.
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 12-040 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
3
3. APPLICATION PDR12-0010 – 14966 Sobey Road (397-18-039) Jean / Kohlsaat - The applicant is
requesting Design Review approval to replace an existing one-story residence with a new two-story 5,750
sq. ft. residence and attached garage. The height of the proposed residence would be no taller than 22 feet
above average grade. The 1.11 acre lot is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. Staff Contact: Michael
Fossati (408) 868-1212.
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 12-041 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
4. APPLICATION PDR12-0013; 12383 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (386-53-019); Sprint - The applicant is
requesting approval to replace three new panel antennas and install six remote radio units on an
approximately 146 foot tall PG&E lattice tower. Two new equipment cabinets would be installed beneath
the tower within an existing 468 square foot fenced enclosure. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan
(408)868-1235
Recommended action:
Adopt Resolution No. 12-042 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
NEW BUSINESS
DIRECTOR/COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
ADJOURNMENT TO THE NEXT MEETING
- Wednesday, September 26, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater
13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the Planning
Commission by City Staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Community
Development at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the
Planning Commission concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of agenda are available for public review
at the Community Development Department at the time they are distributed to the Planning Commission.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to
the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR
35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF AGENDA
I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist III for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of
the Planning Commission was posted and available for public review on September 6, 2012 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 22, 2012
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. – CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777
FRUITVALE AVENUE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
ABSENT
Commissioner Zhao
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of July 25, 2012
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.
Oral Communications – 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, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b).
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 PDR11-0029 & VAR11-0006 / 20601 Lomita Ave. (517-08-036) Tom Clerkin – The
applicant is requesting design review approval and a variance to remodel an existing single story residence
by adding 484 square feet to the first story and constructing a 1,232 square foot second story addition. The
existing 864 square foot two story secondary dwelling unit would also be modified to a single story 408
square foot secondary dwelling unit. The variance request is for a one car garage and to maintain a non-
conforming side setback. Staff Contact: James Lindsay (408)868-1231.
Action:
Adopted Resolution 12-037 approving the project with the following modifications to the conditions of
approval: (5:1(Reis-nay):1(Zhao-absent)):
12. Front yard landscaping. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection or a bond
satisfactory to the Community Development Department 150% of the estimated cost of the installation of
5
such landscaping shall be provided to the City. The driveway and parking space in the front yard shall be
constructed of concrete pavers.
13. Landscaping. Landscape installation and replacement for screening or ornamentation. A landscaped
area required as a condition of any Design Review Approval shall be planted with materials suitable for
screening or ornamenting the site, whichever is appropriate, and plant materials shall be replaced as needed to
screen or ornament the site. A new six foot high fence with two feet of lattice shall be installed along the
southern side property line. Additional side yard landscaping shall be installed to help obstruct views from
the second story windows into the adjacent yard to the approval of the Community Development Director.
29. Privacy. Translucent windows shall be installed on the side bay windows located on the second story
rear elevation to obscure views from the second story bedrooms into the adjacent properties.
2. APPLICATION MOD12-0005 / 19915 Mallory Ct. (393-16-026) Nalwa / Lazari Designs – The applicant
is requesting design review approval to replace an existing 3,762 sq. ft. one-story fire damaged residence
with a new 4,044 sq. ft. one-story residence. Staff Contact: Michael Fossati (408) 868-1212.
Action:
Continued to September 26, 2012 meeting (5:1(Zhao-absent))
NEW BUSINESS
DIRECTOR/COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
ADJOURNMENT TO THE NEXT MEETING-ADJOURNED 10:00 PM
- Wednesday, September 12, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater
13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the Planning
Commission by City Staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Community
Development at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the
Planning Commission concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of agenda are available for public review
at the Community Development Department at the time they are distributed to the Planning Commission.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to
the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR
35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF AGENDA
I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist III for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of
the Planning Commission was posted and available for public review on August 16, 2012 at the City of Saratoga,
13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070 and on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us.
You can also sign up to receive email notifications when Commission agendas and minutes have been added
to the City at website http://www.saratoga.ca.us/contact/email_subscriptions.asp.
NOTE: To view previous Planning Commission meetings anytime, go the City Video Archives at
www.saratoga.ca.us
6
REPORT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: September 12, 2012
Application: Design Review PDR12-0012
Location / APN: 14562 Horseshoe Drive / 397-20-030
Owner/Applicant: JD & Harpreet Buttar / Seema Mittal
Staff Planner: Cynthia McCormick, Planner, AICP
14562 Horseshoe Drive
Page 1 of 5
7
Summary
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests approval to replace a 1,807 square foot home with
a new 5,583 square foot two-story home.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 12-039 approving the project subject to
conditions of approval.
Design review approval by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to City Code Section 15-
45.060
PROJECT DATA:
Net Site Area: 44,256 SF
Average Slope: 12.73%
General Plan Designation: Residential Low Density (RLD)
Zoning: R-1 20,000
Proposed Allowed/Required
Proposed Site Coverage
Residence
Driveway
Patio, Decks, Walkways
Accessory Structures
Total Proposed Site Coverage
5,042 sq. ft.
4,214 sq. ft.
4,959 sq. ft.
216 sq. ft.
14,431 sq. ft. (32.6%)
Maximum Coverage allowed
is 19,915 SF (45%)
Floor Area
First Floor
Second Floor
Garage:
Shed:
Total
4,317 sq. ft.
541 sq. ft.
725 sq. ft.
180 sq. ft.
5,763 sq. ft.
Maximum Floor Area
allowed is 5,844 sq. ft.
Grading
Cut
527 c.y.
Fill
764 c.y.
Total
1,291 c.y.
No Grading Limit
in the R-1 Zoning District
Height (Residence)
Lowest Elevation Point:
Highest Elevation Point:
Average Elevation Point:
Proposed Topmost Point:
85.6’
91.8’
88.7’
109.08’ (20.38’)
Maximum Building Height is
(26 Feet)
Setbacks
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
1st Story
30’ 11.5”
29’ 3”
48’ 2.5”
75’ 4.5”
2nd Story
47' 6"
36' 1.5"
134’ 1.5”
104’ 7”
1st Story
30’
15’
15’
35’
2nd Story
30’
20’
20’
45’
Application No. PDR 12-0012; 14562 Horseshoe Drive Page 2 of 5
8
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Site Description: The project is located on Horseshoe Drive, on the corner of Horseshoe Court.
The one acre property is located in the R1-20,000 zoning district and currently includes 7,365
square feet of lot coverage (e.g., structures, driveway, walkways). The lot slopes down towards
the eastern corner of the property.
Project Description and Architectural Style: The new 5,583 square foot two-story home will be
designed in a Tuscan style with clay roof tiles, smooth stucco finish, stone accents, and wood
trim. The proposed lot coverage area is 13,839 square feet which includes replacement of the
existing home and hardscape with a larger home, driveway, and flagstone recreational area on
the southern portion of the lot. The project meets all City Code requirements including floor
area, height, setbacks, and lot coverage.
Site Drainage: The project scope of work includes a detention pond and drainage inlets to
control the flow of stormwater runoff. The project has been conditioned to retain and/or detain
any increase in flow (from current conditions) such that adjacent down slope properties will not
be negatively impacted by any increase in flow. Additionally, the site development plan must not
restrict, obstruct or alter the existing natural drainage swale along the rear property in any way
that would cause or increase erosion.
Materials and Colors:
Detail Colors and Materials
Exterior Graystone integrated smooth stucco
Window Trim Light Graystone Precast Stone
Wood Trim Wood Moss
Garage Door Ultra Grain medium Finish short elegant panel
Roof Ashwood Blend Old World Slate tile
Stone Cladding Colonial Tan Mosiac Natural stone veneer
Trees: The Arborist has made the findings to remove six protected trees. Several smaller trees not
protected by City Code will also be removed.
Green Points: The Greenpoints checklist shows a total value of 89 points (see page GB-1 of the
plans). Green features include a rooftop photovoltaic system (not shown on plans) and energy
star appliances.
Neighbor Notification and Correspondence: Six neighbor notification forms were received by
staff. A Public Notice was also sent to property owners within 500 feet of the site. No concerns
have been brought to the City’s attention as of the writing of this staff report.
Application No. PDR 12-0012; 14562 Horseshoe Drive Page 3 of 5
9
FINDINGS
Design Review Findings:
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review approval pursuant to City Code Article 15-
45 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those
required findings:
(a) The project avoids unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The project meets this
finding. The new home will be surrounded by existing mature trees and new trees and
landscaping minimizing privacy impacts to adjacent neighbors. The home will be situated to
provide a large rear setback, thus minimizing privacy and view impacts to the closest neighbors.
The relative size of second story has been curtailed and adequately screened by trees to further
minimize privacy and view impacts.
(b) The project preserves the natural landscape. The project meets this finding. While six
protected trees meet the findings for removal, the project preserves and protects several dozen
trees thus preserving much of the natural landscape in as much as possible to build the home.
The property includes a large rear yard, retaining much of the property’s abundant greenery.
(c) The project preserves native and heritage trees. The project meets this finding. No Heritage
trees are proposed for removal. Two young native Oak trees meet the findings for removal.
These two trees grow close together which has a negative impact on their individual health. One
of the Oak trees will be negatively impacted by grading for the project. The other Oak tree is
closer to the footprint of the proposed home and will be negatively impacted by construction.
(d) The project minimizes the perception of excessive bulk. The project meets this finding. The
home is setback further from the sides of the property than required by code and is setback over
100 feet from the rear property line. The design includes varying roof heights and wall expanses
to minimize massing, while the neutral color pallet helps blend the home with the surrounding
landscape. The placement of the home exceeds required setbacks while the proposed height is
well below the maximum allowed by code.
(e) The project is of compatible bulk and height. The project meets this finding. The new home is
primarily single-story with a relatively small portion of living space on a second story. The
maximum height is less than 21 feet from average grade while 26 feet is permitted by code. The
home has been primarily designed with hip roofs similar to the shape of the roofs of adjacent
neighbors. Three gables along the front of the home help break up the façade and contribute to
the home’s architectural style.
(f) The project uses current grading and erosion control methods. The project meets this finding
in that it is conditioned to meet required grading and erosion control standards.
(g) The project follows appropriate design policies and techniques. The project meets this finding.
The proposed design minimizes the perception of bulk by minimizing the areas of maximum
height (Policy 1, Technique 4), integrates the home with the environment by using natural
Application No. PDR 12-0012; 14562 Horseshoe Drive Page 4 of 5
10
Application No. PDR 12-0012; 14562 Horseshoe Drive Page 5 of 5
materials and colors (Policy 2, Technique 1), avoids interference with privacy by locating the
home with large setbacks to adjacent homes (Policy 3, Technique 2), preserves views and access
to views by locating the home to minimize view blockage (Policy 3, Technique 1), and is
designed for energy efficiency by planning for energy saving devices such as solar panels
(Policy 5, Technique 4).
Environmental Determination: The project is categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15303, Class 3 “New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This
exemption allows for the construction of up to three single-family residences and no exception to
that exemption applies.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 12-039 approving the project, subject to
conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval for Design Review
2. Public Hearing Notice, Mailing Addresses for Project Notification
3. Neighbor Notification Forms
4. Drainage Calculations
5. Development Plans and Color Board (Exhibit "A")
11
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 12-039
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING APPLICATION NO. PDR 12-0012 FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME
LOCATED AT 14562 HORSESHOE DRIVE / 397-20-030
WHEREAS, on May 22, 2012 an application was submitted by Seema Mittal requesting
Design Review approval for a new single-family residence. The existing 1,807 square foot home
will be demolished. The total floor area of the proposed residence, garage, and shed would be
5,763 square feet. The height of the proposed residence would be less than 21 feet, as measured
from average grade. The property is located within the R1-20,000 Zoning District.
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2012, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed
public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by City staff, the
applicant, and other interested parties.
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds,
determines and resolves as follows:
Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by
reference.
Section 2: The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures”, of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the
construction of up to three single-family residences and no exception to that exemption applies.
Section 3: The project is consistent with the Saratoga General Plan Policies LU 1.1 in
that the City shall continue to be predominately a community of single-family detached
residences and LU 1.2 to continue to review all residential development proposals to ensure
consistency with Land Use Element goals and Policies.
Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the design and
improvements are consistent with the design review findings in that the project avoids
unreasonable interference with views and privacy; preserves the natural landscape, native and
heritage trees; minimizes the perception of excessive bulk and is of compatible bulk and height;
uses current grading and erosion control methods; and follows appropriate design policies and
techniques.
Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves Application No.
PDR12-0012 subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
12
Resolution No. 12‐039 Page 2
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 12th day of
September 2012 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Tina K. Walia
Chair, Planning Commission
13
Resolution No. 12‐039 Page 3
EXHIBIT 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR 12-0012
14562 HORSESHOE DRIVE / 397-20-030
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for
this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval
documenting all applicable permanent or other term-specified conditions has been recorded
by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content to the
Community Development Director. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a
term specified, it shall remain in effect until the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a
Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent.
2. The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting
this approval is duly executed, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in
connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing
fees”). This approval or permit shall expire sixty (60) days after the date said notice is
mailed if all processing fees contained in the notice have not been paid in full. No Zoning
Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the City certifies
that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of
$500 is maintained).
3. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County,
City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the
requirements of the Saratoga City Code incorporated herein by this reference.
4. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and
hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and
volunteers harmless from and against:
a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any
action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations
taken, done or made prior to said action; and
b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any
manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or
grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person
acting on their behalf.
In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate
agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold harmless and
Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the City Attorney.
14
Resolution No. 12‐039 Page 4
5. Site Drainage. The owner/applicant shall comply with all City requirements regarding
drainage, including but not limited to complying with the city approved stormwater
management plan. The project shall retain and/or detain any increase in design flow from the
site, that is created by the proposed construction and grading project, such that adjacent down
slope properties will not be negatively impacted by any increase in flow. Design must follow
the 2007 Santa Clara County Drainage Manual method criteria, as required by the building
department. Retention/detention element design must follow the Drainage Manual
guidelines, as required by the building department. Additionally, the site development plan
must not restrict, obstruct or alter the existing natural drainage swale along the rear property
in any way that would cause or increase erosion.
6. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans denominated Exhibit "A".
All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in writing with plans
showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such
changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with City Code.
7. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be
submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by
the City prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum
include the following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit
“A” on file with the Community Development Department.
b. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, notes, and/or materials required by the
Building Division.
c. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages.
d. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: “Prior to foundation
inspection by the City, the Licensed Land Surveyor of record shall provide a written
certification that all building setbacks comply with the Approved Plans,” which note
shall represent a condition which must be satisfied to remain in compliance with this
Design Review Approval.
8. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Saratoga Building
Department.
9. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the City Engineer, as
applicable.
10. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the City Arborist, as applicable,
prior to issuance of building permits.
11. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Santa Clara County Fire
Department, as applicable.
12. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Sewer District, as
applicable, prior to issuance of building permits.
15
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, September 12 2012 at 7:00 p.m.
The public hearing will be held in the City Hall Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. A
site visit will also be held by the Planning Commission at the subject property. Please contact the
Planning Department for the date and time of the site visit. The public hearing agenda item is
stated below. Details of this item are available at the Saratoga Community Development
Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Please consult the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures.
APPLICATION: PDR12-0012
OWNER/APPLICANT: Seema Mittal
ADDRESS/APN: 14562 Horseshoe Drive; Saratoga, CA 95070 / 397-20-030
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new
two-story single-family dwelling. The new home would be 5,583 square feet in area and 20 feet,
5 inches in height. The 44,256 square foot lot is located in the R-1-20,000 zoning district.
Three trees are requested for removal to construct the project.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a
decision of the Planning Commission, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the Public Hearing.
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject
of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor’s office annually, in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a
project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this
notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone
in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
Cynthia McCormick, Planner, AICP
(408) 868-1230
16
Parcel Number Owner Name
#5188 500' OWNERSHIP LISTING
397-17-062 JOSEPH H SCHAUF
397-17-063 WILLIAM P & LINDA L SULLIVAN
397-17-067 MELINDA C MAXFIELD
397-20-001 FRANCES E FLANAGAN
397-20-002 HARRIET Q JOHNSON
397-20-003 JAMES A & CHERYL BAILEY
397-20-027 DAVID P & DONNA C PITMAN
397-20-028 PAUL B & SUSAN E GERMERAAD
397-20-029 KEVIN E & SUZANNE C HUESBY
397-20-030 JAGDEEP S & HARPREET BUTTAR
397-20-032 JOHN S STUART
397-20-034 FRANK R & LUCIA GRENGO
397-20-035 CRAIG D & JACQUELINE S BERLIN
397-20-036 TERRENCE & MARYLOU SNOWDE
397-20-037 DALE N STARK
397-20-044 YING WU
397-20-045 YUAN H & KIN-LAN W TSAI
397-20-046 YISHAO MAX HUANG
397-20-047 UDAY K & JERINA KAPOOR
397-20-048 MICHAEL B & JOELLE M LAMBERT
397-20-049 AMIR MASOUD & NILOOFAR ZARK
397-20-050 LILI ZHENG
397-20-051 KENNETH & MONICA NG
397-20-052 KENNETH L KAUFMAN
397-20-074 SWIMMING CLUB SARATOGA
397-20-075 ALICE M CHAN
397-20-078 JOHN K & SUSAN KRAFT
397-20-079 WILLIAM G & ELIZABETH CLARK
397-20-082 LEONARD J & SHIRLEY J MARTIRE
397-20-083 DAVID J & MARISA R RIPARBELLI
397-20-090 HOMAYOUN & LUZ V TALIEH
397-20-091 JOHN K & SUSAN KRAFT
397-20-093 ROBERT O & DOROTHY M BILLNER
397-20-095 TOR R & CATHLEEN M BRAHAM
397-20-101 BRIAN & LORILEE DEXHEIMER
397-20-102 BRIAN S & LORILEE C DEXHEIMER
397-37-016 GEORGE D WELLS
397-37-018 BOWMAN A & KRISTIN W BLAINE
397-37-019 ALCARIO & CARMEN CASTELLANO
397-37-020 NAYMARK ANDREW J TR/TR
397-20-005 GUY W L & VIRGINIA K DIETRICH
397-20-004 JERRY W & JUDITH L OBERTHIER
17
Owner Address
Prepared for: 14562 HORSESHOE DR
111 VASONA OAKS DR
19964 DOUGLASS LN
14445 DONNA LN
14553 WILD OAK WAY
19781 WILD OAK WAY
14601 WILD OAK WAY
14628 HORSESHOE DR
14606 HORSESHOE DR
14584 HORSESHOE DR
13179 SHADOW MOUNTAIN DR
22 CRANE AVE
14551 HORSESHOE DR
14571 HORSESHOE DR
14591 HORSESHOE DR
14611 HORSESHOE DR
14630 HORSESHOE DR
14610 HORSESHOE DR
14590 HORSESHOE DR
14570 HORSESHOE DR
14555 HORSESHOE DR
14575 HORSESHOE DR
225 W SANTA CLARA ST #600
14605 HORSESHOE DR
14635 HORSESHOE DR
P O BOX 133
PO BOX 2331
20021 BELLA VISTA
14582 HORSESHOE DR
14535 WILD OAK WAY
14521 WILD OAK WAY
19908 BELLA VISTA
20021 BELLA VISTA
14578 HORSESHOE CT
14568 HORSESHOE CT
14574 HORSESHOE CT
14574 HORSESHOE CT
14580 CARNELIAN CIR
14545 CARNELIAN CIR
14547 CARNELIAN CIR
14550 CARNELIAN CIR
14681 FARWELL AVE
14651 FARWELL AVE
18
Owner City, State Zip
LOS GATOS CA 95032
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
ST HELENA CA 94574
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SAN JOSE CA 95113
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95071
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
SARATOGA CA 95070
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Civil and Structural Engineer/ Planner
1291 Oakland Road, San Jose, CA 95112 TEL: (408) 806-7187 / FAX: (408) 583-4006
Project:BUTTAR
Address:14562 HORSESHOE DRIVE , SARATOGA, CA
APN:397-20-030
City File No.:
Calculated By:Quang Bui
Date:7/26/2012
HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS FOR LANDS OF BUTTAR
REFERENCES & REQUIREMENTS:
1. County of Santa Clara Drainage Manual (SCDM) 2007, Adopted August 14, 2007.
2. Provide the pre-developed time of concentration, intensity, and peak runoff rate for 10 year storm.
3. Provide the post-developed time of concentration, intensity, and peak runoff rate for 10 year storm.
4. Design a retention/detention system to accommodate additional flow due to development.
5. ASCE for calculation the volume required for detention.
DATA:
1. Storm interval of a 10 year return period
2. Minimum time of concentration of 10 minutes.
3. Lot area =0.989 ac
4. Developed area ( Impervious area )
5. Design a retention system to maintain peak flow discharge of predeveloped land
6. From Figure A-2 : Mean Annual Precipitation Map Santa Clara County
Mean Annual Precipitation (M.A.P) = 24 in/hr
CALCULATIONS:
A) FOR PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION
Atotal = Impacted area 0.99 ac =43094 sf
A1 = developed area =0.17 ac =7365 sf
A2 = undeveloped area =0.82 ac =35729 sf
C = coefficient of runoff
Cdeveloped =0.85
Cundeveloped =0.35
Caverage = ((A1xC1)+(A2XC2))/(A1+A2)
Caverage = 0.44
From Table B-1 for the 10-year return period.
LC Engineering
26
Tc = 10 minutes ==>A TD = 0.258682
B TD = 0.003569
Depth X TD = A TD + ( B TD ) x ( M.A.P )
= 0.258682 + 0.003569 x 24 =0.3443 in
Rainfall intensity:
X TD 0.3443 in
Tc 0.166667 hr
Qundeveloped = C x I x Atotal
T(minutes)A TD B TD I (in/hr)
10 0.258682 0.003569 2.07
20 0.319159 0.005766 1.37
30 0.367861 0.007879 1.11
40 0.387815 0.010187 0.95
50 0.407769 0.012494 0.85
60 0.427723 0.014802 0.78
B) FOR POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION
Atotal = Impacted area 0.99 ac =43094 sf
A1 = developed area =0.32 ac =13844 sf
A2 = undeveloped area =0.67 ac =29219 sf
C = coefficient of runoff
Cdeveloped =0.85
Cundeveloped =0.35
Caverage = ((A1xC1)+(A2XC2))/(A1+A2)
Caverage = 0.51
From Table B-1 for the 10-year return period.
Tc = 10 minutes ==>A TD = 0.258682
B TD = 0.003569
Depth X TD = A TD + ( B TD ) x ( M.A.P )
= 0.258682 + 0.003569 x 24 =0.3443 in
0.41
=2.07 in
0.37
0.34
=I =
Qpredevelopment
(cfs)
0.89
0.59
0.48
27
Rainfall intensity:
X TD 0.3443 in
Tc 0.166667 hr
Qundeveloped = C x I x Atotal
T(minutes)A TD B TD I (in/hr)
10 0.258682 0.003569 2.07
20 0.319159 0.005766 1.37
30 0.367861 0.007879 1.11
40 0.387815 0.010187 0.95
50 0.407769 0.012494 0.85
60 0.427723 0.014802 0.78
C) SUMMARY
T(minutes)Qpre-development
(cfs)
Qdifference
(Qpost - Qpre)
(cfs)
10 0.89 0.15
20 0.59 0.10
30 0.48 0.08
40 0.41 0.07
50 0.37 0.06
60 0.34 0.06
- Since run offs are more in post-development condition than
pre-development condition, retention/detention system
is required
1.04
Qpost-development
(cfs)
0.69
0.56
0.48
0.43
0.40
0.43
0.48
0.56
0.69
0.40
1.04
Qpredevelopment
(cfs)
I ===2.07 in
28
29
30
31
32
Drainage Manual 2007
County of Santa Clara, California
B‐11 8/14/2007
Table B‐1: Parameters AT,D and BT,D for TDS Equation
2‐YR RETURN PERIOD
5‐min
10‐min
15‐min
30‐min
1‐hr
2‐hr
3‐hr
6‐hr
12‐hr
24‐hr
48‐hr
72‐hr
5‐YR RETURN PERIOD
5‐min
10‐min
15‐min
30‐min
1‐hr
2‐hr
3‐hr
6‐hr
12‐hr
24‐hr
48‐hr
72‐hr
10‐YR RETURN PERIOD
5‐min
10‐min
15‐min
30‐min
1‐hr
2‐hr
3‐hr
6‐hr
12‐hr
24‐hr
48‐hr
72‐hr
0.120194
0.166507
0.176618
0.212497
0.253885
0.330848
0.374053
0.425178
0.409397
0.314185
0.444080
0.447104
0.170347
0.228482
0.250029
0.307588
0.357109
0.451840
0.512583
0.554937
0.562227
0.474528
0.692427
0.673277
0.201876
0.258682
0.294808
0.367861
0.427723
0.522608
0.591660
0.625054
0.641638
0.567017
0.832445
0.810509
0.001385
0.001956
0.003181
0.005950
0.010792
0.019418
0.027327
0.045735
0.069267
0.096343
0.134537
0.159461
0.001857
0.002758
0.004036
0.007082
0.013400
0.024242
0.034359
0.060859
0.094871
0.136056
0.187173
0.224003
0.002063
0.003569
0.004710
0.007879
0.014802
0.027457
0.038944
0.070715
0.111660
0.162550
0.221820
0.265469
33
Drainage Manual 2007
County of Santa Clara, California
8/14/2007 B‐12
Table B‐2: Parameters AT,D and BT,D for TDS Equation
Return Period/Duration
AT,D
BT,D
25‐YR RETURN PERIOD
5‐min
10‐min
15‐min
30‐min
1‐hr
2‐hr
3‐hr
6‐hr
12‐hr
24‐hr
48‐hr
72‐hr
50‐YR RETURN PERIOD
5‐min
10‐min
15‐min
30‐min
1‐hr
2‐hr
3‐hr
6‐hr
12‐hr
24‐hr
48‐hr
72‐hr
100‐YR RETURN PERIOD
5‐min
10‐min
15‐min
30‐min
1‐hr
2‐hr
3‐hr
6‐hr
12‐hr
24‐hr
48‐hr
72‐hr
0.230641
0.287566
0.348021
0.443761
0.508791
0.612629
0.689252
0.693566
0.725892
0.675008
0.989588
0.967854
0.249324
0.300971
0.384016
0.496301
0.568345
0.672662
0.754661
0.740666
0.779967
0.747121
1.108358
1.075643
0.269993
0.315263
0.421360
0.553934
0.626608
0.732944
0.816471
0.776677
0.821859
0.814046
1.210895
1.175000
0.002691
0.004930
0.005594
0.008719
0.016680
0.031025
0.044264
0.083195
0.132326
0.195496
0.264703
0.316424
0.003241
0.006161
0.006315
0.009417
0.017953
0.033694
0.048157
0.092105
0.147303
0.219673
0.295510
0.353143
0.003580
0.007312
0.006957
0.009857
0.019201
0.036193
0.051981
0.101053
0.162184
0.243391
0.325943
0.389038
34
Drainage Manual 2007
County of Santa Clara, California
19 8/14/2007
In Table 3‐1 Soil Types B, C and D are based on the SCS classification of HSG. This
designation is a standard designation used by the SCS and has been defined for Santa
Clara County in existing SCS publications. D‐type soils are less permeable than are C‐
type soils, which are, in turn, less permeable than B‐type soils.
Table 3‐1: Runoff Coefficients for Rational Formula
C for Soil Type
Land Use
B C D
Low Density Residential 0.30 0.40 0.45
Medium Density Residential 0.50 0.55 0.60
High Density Residential 0.70 0.70 0.75
Commercial 0.80 0.80 0.80
Industrial 0.70 0.75 0.75
Parks 0.20 0.30 0.35
Agricultural 0.15 0.35 0.40
Urban Open Space 0.10 0.35 0.45
Shrub Land 0.10 0.20 0.30
Paved / Impervious Surface 0.85 0.85 0.85
The Rational Method implies that this ratio is fixed for a given drainage basin. Studies
have shown, however, that the coefficient may vary with respect to prior wetting and
seasonal conditions (antecedent moisture). It has also been observed that as rainfall
intensity increases, soil permeability decreases. One may sense that runoff coefficients
should increase with rainfall intensity.
Applying such non‐linearities over relatively small urbanized drainage basins does not
necessarily improve hydrologic precision enough to offset the more difficult
computations, so using a constant runoff coefficient is standard in Santa Clara County.
For watersheds with significant variation in antecedent moisture conditions, soil types,
or other complexities, however; the hydrograph method described in Chapter 4 should
be employed regardless of basin size.
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Tree # Tree Name Botanical Name2White Birch (multi trunk) Betula pendula5Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia6Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia7Fruitless Mulberry Morus alba 'Stribling'36Arbutus Unedo Strawberry Tree38Modesto Ash Fraxinus velatina39Japanese Privet PrivetQty Label Size Botanical Name Common Name2A,C 36" Box Arbutus Marina Strawberry Tree2E,F 36" Box Acer rubrum 'October Glory' Red Maple1D 36" Box Prunus serrulata 'Kwanzan' Weeping Cherry1G 36" Box Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak1H 36" Box Quercus rubra Red Oak8Not Labeled 15 gal. Fruit Trees2Not Labeled 15 gal. Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak2Not Labeled 15 gal. Acer palmatum Japanese Maple2Not Labeled 15 gal. Luma apiculata Luma Qty Tree Name1Orange Tree1Walnut Tree1Plum1Persimmon4 Fruit Trees1London Plane1Oleander1Modesto Ash1Coast Live OakLABELED TREES TO BE REMOVEDTREES TO BE REMOVED (NOT LABELED)REPLACEMENT TREES50
51
52
Qty Size Botanical Name Common NameSHRUBS, VINES & HERBACEOUS205 gal. Cistus 'Sunset' Magenta Rockrose155 gal. Diosma 'Golden Sunset'615 gal. Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon101 gal. Heuchera sanguinea Coral Bells155 gal. Loropetalum chinense 'Razzleberry' Fringe Flower815 gal. Pittosporum tenuifolium Pittosporum815 gal. Prunus caroliniana compacta Carolina Laurel Cherry75 gal. Prunus ilicifolia Holly-leaf Cherry305 gal. Rosa prostrata 'Red ' Red Carpet Rose75 gal. Rosmarinus 'Tuscan Blue' RosemaryTREES215 gal. Acer palmatum 'Bloodgood' Red Japanese Maple115 gal. Lagerstroemia x fauriei hybrids Tuscarora (red) (Crape Myrtle)GROUNDCOVERS441 gal Cerastium tomentosum Snow-In-Summer251 gal. Cotoneaster 'Lowfast' Cotoneaster601 gal Gazania 'Sunburst' Gazania421 gal. Trachelospermum jasminoides Star Jasmine771 gal. Verbena tapien Purple VerbenaPERENNIALS01 gal. Geranium cantabrigiense 'Biokovo' Geranium 'Biokovo'135 gal. Salvia greggii 'Flame' Autumn Sage (salmon pink)GRASSES55 gal. Phormium tenax 'Maori Queen' Dwarf New Zealand Flax (mixed colors)PLANT LEGEND53
54
55
REPORT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: September 12, 2012
Application: Design Review & Variance PDR12-0014 / VAR 12-0002
Location / APN: 20760 Wildwood Way / 503-26-051
Owner/Applicant: Mark Mikl
Staff Planner: Cynthia McCormick, Planner, AICP
20760 Wildwood Way
Page 1 of 8
56
Summary
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests approval to replace a non-conforming dilapidated
structure with a new 1,867 square foot two-story home (not including the basement). The applicant
is also requesting a variance for a reduced front setback, reduced rear first story setback, reduced
left side second story setback, and a reduced rear setback for the lightwell.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 12-040 approving the project subject to
conditions of approval.
Design review approval by the Planning Commission is required pursuant to City Code Section 15-
45.060
PROJECT DATA:
Net Site Area: 3,573 SF
Average Slope: 12.96%
General Plan Designation: Medium Density (M-10)
Zoning: R-1 10,000
Proposed Allowed/Required
Proposed Site Coverage
Residence
Porch & Deck
Permeable Driveway/Walkway
Permeable Stairs / Lightwell
Total Proposed Site Coverage
1,512 sq. ft.
4,214 sq. ft.
156.5 sq. ft.
45 sq. ft.
1,800.5 sq. ft. (50.4%)
50% credit
50% credit
Maximum Coverage allowed
is 2,143 SF (60%)
Floor Area
First Floor
Second Floor
Garage:
Total Floor Area
1,080 sq. ft.
371 sq. ft.
416 sq. ft.
1,867 sq. ft.
Maximum Floor Area
allowed is determined by
Planning Commission
on lots less than 5,000 SF
per 15-45.030(d)
Grading
(not including basement)
Cut
182 c.y.
Fill
74 c.y.
Total
256 c.y.
No Grading Limit
in the R-1 Zoning District
Height (Residence)
Lowest Elevation Point:
Highest Elevation Point:
Average Elevation Point:
Proposed Topmost Point:
519.5’
529.41’
524.45’
545.03’ (20’7”)
Maximum Building Height is
(26 Feet)
Setbacks
See Table 4 below
Application No. PDR 12-0014; 20760 Wildwood Way / 503-26-051 Page 2 of 8
57
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Site Description: The project is located on a 3,573 square foot substandard lot on Wildwood Way.
The double frontage lot also bounds 4th Street to the rear. A non-conforming dilapidated structure
currently exists on the lot and is situated against the left side and rear property line. Surrounding
properties are primarily substandard lots with non-conforming setbacks. The applicant has prepared
an inventory of 6 lots surrounding the subject property (see plan page A-1) that shows existing
setbacks (Table 4) and approximate floor areas (Table 2) for each lot.
Table 1: Existing and Standard Lot Dimensions
Existing Standard
Lot Size 3,573 SF 10,000
Average Lot Width 45’ 85’
Average Lot Depth 79.48’ 115’
Table 2: *Lot Size and **Floor Area of Adjacent Lots
Address Lot Size Floor Area / (FAR)
14400 Springer Avenue (corner) 3,130 SF 891 SF (.28)
20758 Wildwood Way 3,560 SF 1,846 SF (.51)
20750 Wildwood Way 3,783 SF 1,405 SF (.37)
14346 Wildwood Way 5,189 SF 832 SF (.16)
14395 Wildwood Way (corner) 4,212 SF 1,381 SF (.33)
14005 Wildwood Way (corner) 4,489 SF 1,659 SF (.37)
20760 Wildwood Way (proposed) 3,573 SF 1,451 SF (.41)
* Lot sizes, floor areas, and setbacks were provided by applicant and are approximate
** Floor areas do not include the garage
VARIANCE DISCUSSION
City Code requires a 25 front setback for the first and second story. On nonconforming lots 1 , the
side and rear setbacks are based on a percentage or no less than 6 feet on the side and 20 feet in the
rear. The percentage based calculation for this lot is less than the minimum 2 &3 . Thus, the required
first and second story rear setbacks are 20 feet and 25 feet and the required first and second story
side setbacks are 6 feet and 11 feet respectively (Table 4).
1 City Code section 15-65.040 regulates side and rear setbacks on non-conforming lots.
2 20% of the lot depth is 15.9’ which is less than the minimum 20 feet
3 10% of the lot width is 4.5’ which is less than the minimum 6 feet
Application No. PDR 12-0014; 20760 Wildwood Way / 503-26-051 Page 3 of 8
58
Table 3: Required and Proposed Setbacks
Proposed Allowed/Required
Setbacks
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
Lightwell:
1st Story
15’1”
6’
6’
15’4’
13’4’
2nd Story
15’1”
6’
11’8”
42’3”
1st Story
25’
6’
6’
20’
20’
2nd Story
25’
11’
11’
25’
Table 4: *Setbacks of Adjacent Lots
Address Front Left Right Rear
14400 Springer Avenue (corner) 13’3” 6’8” 5’6” 8’10”
20758 Wildwood Way 18’ 7’1” 4’7” 13’4”
20750 Wildwood Way 8’7” 4’5” 10’6” 18’11”
14346 Wildwood Way 13’ 8’2” 12’ 34’10”
14395 Wildwood Way (corner a) 20’11 11’6” 5’ 10’6”
14005 Wildwood Way (corner b) 24’2” 5’6” 11’ 8’10”
20760 Wildwood Way
(proposed)
15’1” 6’ 6’ 13’4”
a frontage on Springer Ave
b frontage on Wildwood Way (perpendicular street)
As proposed, the project meets the required right side first and second story setbacks, the
required left side first story setback, and the required rear second story setback. However, the
project would require a variance for a reduced front setback from 25 feet to 15 feet, one inch; a
reduced left side second story setback from 11 feet to 6 feet; and a reduced rear first story
setback from 20 feet to 15 feet, four inches. The proposal also includes a basement with a
lightwell at the rear of the home. The lightwell is proposed to be located in the rear setback and
would also require a variance from 20 feet to 13 feet, four inches.
The proposed setbacks are an improvement over what currently exists, and with the exception of the
second story setback, the requested setbacks are consistent with adjacent properties. Staff
recommends the Planning Commission approve the requested variances for the front and rear
setbacks. However staff recommends the second story be setback an additional 2 feet on the left side
to be consistent with the second story setback of the adjoining property to the left. Staff’s
recommendations are provided in Table 5. The findings for approval are provided at the end of this
staff report.
Application No. PDR 12-0014; 20760 Wildwood Way / 503-26-051 Page 4 of 8
59
Table 5: Recommended Setbacks
Setbacks Proposed Staff Recommendation
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
Lightwell:
1st Story
15’1”
6’
6’
15’4’
13’4’
2nd Story
15’1”
6’
11’8”
42’3”
1st Story
15’1”
6’
6’
15’4’
13’4’
2nd Story
15’1”
8’
11’8”
42’3”
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Description and Architectural Style: The new 1,867 square foot two-story home will be
designed in an eclectic bungalow/craftsman style with comp shingle roofing, earthtone colored
siding, shingles, and trim, and a craftsman style garage door.
Materials and Colors:
Detail Colors and Materials
Exterior Bungalow Beige Hardieboard lap siding (bottom)
Bungalow Beige Hardieboard shingles (top)
Window Trim Westhighland White Hardieboard
Gable Trim Crabby Apple
Front Door Chateau Brown craftsman style
Garage Door Bungalow Beige craftsman style
Roof Shadow Grey Comp Shingles
Geotechnical Clearance: Geotechnical Clearance with conditions was granted on June 27, 2012 for
the project based on review by the City Geotechnical Consultant.
Trees: No trees are requested for removal to construct the project. Arborist Clearance with
conditions has been granted for the project per the Arborist Report dated July 5, 2012.
Green Points: The Greenpoints checklist shows a total value of 50 points (attachment 4).
However, the applicant has stated that the project exceeds Title 24 building energy performance
by 15%. Furthermore, the project includes pervious concrete and pre-plumbing for solar hot
water and solar electric panels to be installed in the future.
Neighbor Notification and Correspondence: The property owner distributed notification forms
to adjacent neighbors. One neighbor notification form was received by staff. A Public Notice was
also sent to property owners within 500 feet of the site. No concerns have been brought to the
City’s attention as of the writing of this staff report.
Application No. PDR 12-0014; 20760 Wildwood Way / 503-26-051 Page 5 of 8
60
FINDINGS
Design Review Findings:
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review approval pursuant to City Code Article 15-
45 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those
required findings:
(a) The project avoids unreasonable interference with views and privacy. For the following
reasons, the height, elevations and placement on the site of the proposed main and/or accessory
structure, when considered with reference to: (1) the nature and location of residential
structures on adjacent lots and within the neighborhoods; and (2) community view sheds, will
avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The home is primarily single story
with a 371 square foot second story over the garage. The second story has been placed near the
front left portion of the home where it is likely to have the least impact given the footprint of the
adjacent home. Only one second-story window faces the property to the right and that window
will be obscure. Given the proposed height, size, and location of the home and its relation to
existing structures on adjacent properties, the proposed setbacks would avoid unreasonable
interference with views and privacy.
(b) The project preserves the natural landscape. The natural landscape will be preserved insofar
as practicable by designing structures to follow the natural contours of the site and minimizing
tree and soil removal; grade changes will be minimized and will be in keeping with the general
appearance of neighboring developed areas and undeveloped areas. No protected trees are
proposed for removal. Two ordinance-protected trees could potentially be affected by the
Project; however, as conditioned the project complies with the requirements for the setback of
new construction from the protected tree.
(c) The project preserves native and heritage trees. No Heritage trees (as defined in Section 15-
50.020(l)) exist on the property. The proposed Project is not requesting removal of native trees.
In addition, the Project, as conditioned, would protect native trees.
(d) The project minimizes the perception of excessive bulk. The proposed main or accessory
structure in relation to structures on adjacent lots, and to the surrounding region, will minimize
the perception of excessive bulk and will be integrated into the natural environment in that the
applicant is proposing a neutral color pallet for the exterior building, window trim and roofing
materials to integrate with the natural environment. Varying rooflines help minimize the
perception of excessive bulk. A cohesive blend of exterior materials in earthtone colors on the
upper and lower portions of the home help break up the massing.
(e) The project is of compatible bulk and height. The proposed main or accessory structure will
be compatible in terms of bulk and height with (1) existing two-story residential structures on
adjacent lots and those within the immediate neighborhood and within the same zoning district;
and (2) the natural environment; and shall not (1) unreasonably impair the light and air of
adjacent properties nor (2) unreasonably impair the ability of adjacent properties to utilize
solar energy. The maximum height of the proposed two-story dwelling, as measured from
Application No. PDR 12-0014; 20760 Wildwood Way / 503-26-051 Page 6 of 8
61
average grade, is 20 feet 7 inches, where 26 feet is allowed by City Code. Given the slope of the
property, the height of the proposed home will not exceed the homes to the left and right. Two
of six homes on the street are two-story. The two-story home on the left side of the property has
a relatively larger front left side setback allowing access to light and air along this portion of the
property. The single story home on the right side of the property is located on a corner lot,
allowing access to light and air from the west. Proposed setbacks are similar on average to
nearby homes with similar sized lots as shown on the plans and described in the staff report.
(f) The project uses current grading and erosion control methods. The proposed site development
or grading plan incorporates current grading and erosion control standards used by the City. The
Project is conditioned to conform to the City’s current grading and erosion control standards and
comply with applicable NPDES Standards.
(g) The project follows appropriate design policies and techniques. The project meets this finding.
The proposed design minimizes the perception of bulk by minimizing the areas of maximum
height (Policy 1, Technique 4), integrates the home with the environment by using natural
materials and colors (Policy 2, Technique 1), avoids interference with privacy by controlling
view to adjacent properties (Policy 3, Technique 1), preserves views and access to views by
locating the structure to reduce height impact (Policy 3, Technique 3), and is designed for
energy efficiency by planning for energy saving devices such as solar panels (Policy 5,
Technique 4).
Variance Findings:
Pursuant to City Code Section 15-70.060, the Planning Commission is empowered to grant
variances in order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical
hardships that would result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of certain zoning
regulations. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape
or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon. The Applicant has met the
burden of proof required to support the application for a variance as set forth below.
(a) That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would
deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity
and classified in the same zoning district. The property is located in a neighborhood that
pre-dates the City’s incorporation and subsequent zoning ordinance. Many of the lots in the
vicinity are below the minimum standard for the zoning district in terms of lot size, width,
and depth, as described in subsection (b), below. Accordingly, many of the homes fronting
Wildwood Way have substandard setbacks, as illustrated in the plans and the staff report.
Furthermore, the proposed project is an improvement over what currently exists because non-
conforming existing home straddles the rear and left side property lines. Given these special
circumstances, strict enforcement of the setback requirements would deprive the applicant of
privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and the R-1-10,000
zoning district.
Application No. PDR 12-0014; 20760 Wildwood Way / 503-26-051 Page 7 of 8
62
Application No. PDR 12-0014; 20760 Wildwood Way / 503-26-051 Page 8 of 8
(b) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the
same zoning district. The standard dimensions for a lot in the R-1-10,000 zoning district are
a minimum 85 feet wide by 115 feet deep and a minimum 10,000 square feet in area. The
subject lot is approximately 45 feet wide by 80 feet deep and 3,573 square feet in area. The
subject lot is smaller than some other lots in the immediate vicinity and much smaller than
standard lots in the R-1-10,000 zoning district. Several of the adjacent properties have
reduced setbacks. Thus, the granting of a variance for reduced setbacks would not constitute
a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity
and classified in the R-1-10,000 zoning district.
(c) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed
home meets the required right side setback for the first and second floors and the required left
side setback for the first floor. The reduced front and rear setbacks are separated from
neighboring homes by a street. As proposed, the second story is located where it will have
the least impact on the home to the left, given the footprint of this home as illustrated on the
plans. As conditioned, an eight-foot second story left side setback would provide fewer
impacts to the adjacent property and be more consistent with the adjoining property. The
property to the right of the subject property is adequately screened from the subject property
by mature landscaping. Given these circumstances, the requested reduced setbacks would not
have detrimental impacts to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to
properties or improvements in the vicinity.
Environmental Determination: The project is categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15303, Class 3 “New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This
exemption allows for the construction of up to three single-family residences and no exception to
that exemption applies.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 12-040 approving the project, subject to
conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval
2. Public Hearing Notice, Mailing Addresses for Project Notification
3. Neighbor Notification Forms
4. Greenpoints Checklist
5. Development Plans and Color Board (Exhibit "A")
63
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 12-040
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING APPLICATION NOs. PDR12-0014 & VAR 12-0002 FOR A NEW SINGLE
FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 20760 WILDWOOD WAY/ 503-26-051
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2012 an application was submitted by Mark Mikl requesting
Design Review approval for a new single-family residence. The existing non-habitable structure
will be demolished. The total floor area of the proposed residence and garage would be 1,867
square feet not including the basement. The height of the proposed residence would be less than
21 feet, as measured from average grade. The applicant is also requesting a variance for reduced
setbacks in the front, rear, and side. No trees are requested for removal to construct the project.
The property is located within the R1-10,000 Zoning District.
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2012, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed
public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by City staff, the
applicant, and other interested parties.
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds,
determines and resolves as follows:
Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by
reference.
Section 2: The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures”, of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the
construction of up to three single-family residences and no exception to that exemption applies.
Section 3: The project is consistent with the Saratoga General Plan Policies LU 1.1 in
that the City shall continue to be predominately a community of single-family detached
residences and LU 1.2 to continue to review all residential development proposals to ensure
consistency with Land Use Element goals and Policies.
Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the design and
improvements are consistent with the design review findings in that the project avoids
unreasonable interference with views and privacy; preserves the natural landscape, native and
heritage trees; minimizes the perception of excessive bulk and is of compatible bulk and height;
uses current grading and erosion control methods; and follows appropriate design policies and
techniques.
Section 5: The project meets the burden of proof required to support the variance due to
special circumstances applicable to the property that would deprive the applicant of privileges
enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity. The granting of the variance will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
64
Resolution No. 12‐040 Page 2
improvements in the vicinity and will not result in a significant impact on traffic volume or
traffic circulation on the site, or interfere with the free flow of traffic on the streets.
Section 6: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves Application No. PDR12-
0014 subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 12th day of
September 2012 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Tina K. Walia
Chair, Planning Commission
65
Resolution No. 12‐040 Page 3
EXHIBIT 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR 12-0014
20760 WILDWOOD WAY/ 503-26-051
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for
this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval
documenting all applicable permanent or other term-specified conditions has been recorded
by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content to the
Community Development Director. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a
term specified, it shall remain in effect until the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a
Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent.
2. The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting
this approval is duly executed, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in
connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing
fees”). This approval or permit shall expire sixty (60) days after the date said notice is
mailed if all processing fees contained in the notice have not been paid in full. No Zoning
Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the City certifies
that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of
$500 is maintained).
3. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County,
City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the
requirements of the Saratoga City Code incorporated herein by this reference.
4. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and
hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and
volunteers harmless from and against:
a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any
action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations
taken, done or made prior to said action; and
b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any
manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or
grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person
acting on their behalf.
In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance, Owner and Applicant shall execute a separate
agreement containing the details of this required Agreement to Indemnify, Hold harmless and
Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the City Attorney.
66
Resolution No. 12‐040 Page 4
5. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans denominated Exhibit "A"
and as conditioned below. All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted in
writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the
changes. Such changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with City Code.
6. Second-Story Setback. The second story shall be setback eight feet (8’) from the left side.
7. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be
submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by
the City prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum
include the following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit
“A” on file with the Community Development Department.
b. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, notes, and/or materials required by the
Building Division.
c. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages.
d. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: “Prior to foundation
inspection by the City, the Licensed Land Surveyor of record shall provide a written
certification that all building setbacks comply with the Approved Plans,” which note
shall represent a condition which must be satisfied to remain in compliance with this
Design Review Approval.
8. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Saratoga Building
Department.
9. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the City Engineer, as
applicable.
10. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the City Arborist, as applicable,
prior to issuance of building permits.
11. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Santa Clara County Fire
Department, as applicable.
12. The owner/applicant shall agree to all conditions required by the Sewer District, as
applicable, prior to issuance of building permits.
67
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, September 12 2012 at 7:00 p.m.
The public hearing will be held in the City Hall Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. A
site visit will also be held by the Planning Commission at the subject property. Please contact the
Planning Department for the date and time of the site visit. The public hearing agenda item is
stated below. Details of this item are available at the Saratoga Community Development
Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Please consult the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures.
APPLICATION: PDR12-0014 / VAR 12-0002
OWNER/APPLICANT: Mark Mikl
ADDRESS/APN: 20760 Wildwood Way; Saratoga, CA 95070 / 503-26-051
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new
two-story single-family dwelling. The applicant is requesting a variance for reduced setbacks in
the front, rear, and side. The new home would be 1,867 square feet in area and 20 feet, 7 inches
in height. The 3,573 square foot sub-standard lot is located in the R-1-10,000 zoning district.
No trees are requested for removal to construct the project.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a
decision of the Planning Commission, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the Public Hearing.
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject
of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor’s office annually, in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a
project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this
notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone
in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
Cynthia McCormick, Planner, AICP
(408) 868-1230
68
Parcel Number Owner Name
#5190 500' OWNERSHIP LISTING
503-23-025 EVELYN A JOHNSTON
503-23-030 MICHAEL J MEYER
503-23-049 SCOTT D & JENNIFER L ECKERMAN
503-24-016 SARATOGA CITY OF
503-24-026 SARATOGA CITY OF
503-25-021 S C V W D
503-25-022 THOMAS E PARKER
503-25-026 NERN PROPERTIES LLC
503-25-031 SARATOGA CITY OF
503-26-006 PAUL D KASS
503-26-007 MASOUD JAFARI
503-26-008 ERIC O KRAULE
503-26-009 JOHN W & ANN ISON
503-26-010 PAUL T & FLORENCE T SCHROEDER
503-26-011 ERNEST O & PAULA A KRAULE
503-26-013 ERNEST O KRAULE
503-26-014 TODD A & LISA M BEATTY
503-26-015 ANN D BARBER
503-26-018 S C V W D
503-26-020 HAMID MOSHTAGHI
503-26-021 DAVID R REED
503-26-022 TYLER D HEERWAGEN
503-26-026 CLAUDETTE L FORD
503-26-027 CLAUDETTE L FORD
503-26-028 KAYWAN J MANSUBI
503-26-029 EVERET D & LUCIE M KILLIAN
503-26-030 CLAUDETTE R FORD
503-26-031 RUANO GLORIA TR/TR
503-26-032 AMIT BAHL
503-26-035 MICHAEL W & ROSALIA C WARREN
503-26-043 MICHAEL J OHEARN
503-26-044 SARATOGA CITY OF
503-26-046 KENNETH P & CAROL A SCHULZ
503-26-050 JANE Y GOMEZ MARY
503-26-051 MARK J & RACHEL MIKL
503-26-052 JANE-MIN NEE
503-26-054 CLINTON M ROSENTHAL
503-26-057 ERNEST O KRAULE
503-26-058 ERNEST O KRAULE
503-27-016 MARIA E GARCIA
503-27-017 TERRANCE BROWN
503-27-018 MICHAEL G & SHEILA K PENUEN
503-27-020 LLOYD G STEPHENS
503-27-021 PRISCILLA F & DONALD E POOLE
503-27-044 CANCELLIERI FAMILY LP
503-27-045 BRUCE & ROBERTA MARSHALL
503-27-047 TAE HOON & KUMMI KIM
503-27-048 ROSS & SUSAN HANNIBAL
503-27-050 GUO MUZHI & ZHAOQING MA
69
503-27-051 NANDA & VRINDA D GOPAL
503-27-052 MICHAEL & TAUGLICH INNA LUBYANITSK
503-27-053 GARY M NISHIMOTO
503-27-054 TIBOR & MACESIC NADA SZALAY
503-27-055 EDWARD Y & TEHCHI H CHIEN
503-27-056 MARYANNE NOLA
503-27-071 VERNON L SHUPER
503-27-073 DENNIS P & MARY A RYAN
503-27-074 MALLADI PADMAJA TR
503-27-075 DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COM
503-27-076 ROBERT L WEINMANN
503-27-077 SCOTT K & NOLA ANN SCHNEIDER
503-27-091 DAVID A & YVONNE M FORCIER
503-27-093 SAMUEL U & SUSAN S KIM
503-27-094 JUDITH E POUTRE
503-27-096 JAMES D & JUDITH W HILLMAN
503-27-097 YOUSSEF & MALIHEH D AMIRKIAI
503-27-100 HUJUN & LIN XIAOTONG YIN
503-27-108 BEVERLY A SLAVIN
503-27-109 NAZANIN & PIROOZ TOOYSERKANI
503-27-110 JONATHAN & SUNNY CHO
503-27-111 RAJASEKAR & RAJASEKAR CHITRA VENK
503-63-001 GATEHOUSE CONDOMINUM HOMEOWNE
503-63-002 ANTHONY & YAU LOUISA YUNG
503-63-003 ANN F MCGRATH
503-63-004 SANDRA KAMIAK
503-63-005 JUNE & MANTELLI DAVID ESPINOSA
503-63-006 KATHRYN B WARREN
503-63-007 CATHRINE STEINBORN
503-63-008 MARCELLINE E HOUDE
503-63-009 JAMES B & CATHERINE COCHRANE
503-63-010 STANLEY A & MIRIAM L DEMARTINIS
503-63-011 WAI-MAN & CHI-LAN WONG
503-63-012 BRIAN R & ANITALYNN M TIGHE
503-63-013 ROBERT M JAKOB
503-63-014 BRIAN R & ANITALYNN M TIGHE
503-63-015 EDWARD FLIPPER JENG
503-63-016 BRIAN B & LOUISE L TIGHE
503-63-017 MEHRDAD AGHAEBRAHIM
503-63-018 OLGA N LVOV
503-63-019 COURTNEY CRASE
503-63-020 TUNG-SHENG & YU LI-MEI LI
503-63-021 GARY L & DIANE ZARECKY
503-63-022 GUANGHUI & ZENG XINYANG QIAN
503-63-023 KOICHI & LINDA YAMAGUCHI
503-63-024 LORRAINE A WHEELER
503-63-025 THOMAS M & PAULA A BRENNOCK
503-63-026 PAUL C TONG
503-63-027 PATRICK & HYUN KUGLER
503-63-028 CHRISTOPHER G & XU LIN BOSSOLINA
503-63-029 THOMAS E & SASCHA M LALE
503-63-030 JUNE YOUN JIN & SOO YEON KWON
70
503-63-031 LAURA E BRASH
503-63-032 VINCENT & SU LI-WEN SY
503-63-033 VIKTOR SCHRANZ
503-63-034 RONALD A ANDERSON
503-63-035 CHAN SIU MEI TR/TR
503-63-036 JANARDHANAN S & RAMESH SUNITHA AJ
503-63-037 YOSHIHISA & TOKIKO OGINO
503-63-038 KENNETH J CZWORNIAK
503-63-039 CYNTHIA L BAUER
503-63-040 HOSSEIN & AZITA SOBHANI
503-63-041 TOM T CHEN
503-63-042 STEPHEN & ANNE BOBORICKEN
503-63-043 ALAIN J DEFRENNE
503-63-044 ANDREA LEE
503-63-045 ANDREY A KHARISOV
503-63-046 DAVID M FRADIN
503-63-047 JAY M STEARNS
503-63-048 ROSE S KOOT
503-63-049 ALBERT & LANCY WONG
503-63-050 VICTOR & REGINA VELTON
503-63-051 JULIA & ROGET UYS
503-63-052 TSUNG TSEE CLAIRE CHAO
503-63-053 HIROSHI & TAKAKO FUJIGAMI
503-63-054 JOHN P & CHRISTINA D BLACK
503-63-055 BAKTYGUL ZHUMABAYEVA
503-63-056 KATHLEEN C SODERSTROM
503-63-057 JIN W & MIN K PARK
503-63-058 SALVADOR BORJA
503-63-059 JANICE R GAUTHIER
503-63-060 HSUEH H & HUNG WEI TAI
503-63-061 SHELLIE S WILLIAMS
503-63-062 GEORGE E & NANCY G KIRK
503-63-063 MEHRAN & AVIDEH Y SAMARDAR
503-63-064 KELLY A WALSH
503-63-065 DEBRA D JACKSON
503-63-066 RICHARD E & BARBARA L STRAW
503-63-067 HAN JU BANG
503-63-068 FORTE KATHY A TR
503-63-069 LINDA A BARCOMB
503-63-070 LESLIE DAVIS
503-63-071 NOVELLE V KELLY
503-63-072 NATALIE J WEISKAL
503-63-073 WAYNE C & SU TI CHANG
503-63-074 MICHAEL E & GAYLE L ARCHER
503-63-075 DENNIS C & GRACE LEUNG
503-63-076 MARK C LIANIDES
503-63-077 SYLVAN E LEPIANE
503-63-078 JOAN C GOLDMAN
503-63-079 NILESH V & DESHMUKH MADHAVI KULKA
503-63-080 ROBERT FU LEE CHENG
503-63-081 JOHN K & SUE KANG TANAKA
503-63-082 MABEL KAO
71
503-63-083 CFS INVESTMENTS
503-63-084 KIT CHU LAM
503-63-085 SATORU & KIMIKO MIYOSHI
503-63-086 ROBERT A & YVONNE L DUNCANSON
503-63-087 POONACHA KONGETIRA
503-63-088 JOSEPH A & MILDRED I PLICKA
503-63-089 JOSEPH P & SUSAN D LONG
503-63-090 MIN HUEI HU
503-63-091 FRED L & DORINE ALVORD
503-63-092 CHIH-PING A & CINDY L FAN
503-63-093 JULIE A FERGUSON
503-63-094 MICHAEL E & GAYLE L ARCHER
503-63-095 STEVEN AH-FUNG SIT
503-63-096 MICHAEL E & GAYLE L ARCHER
503-63-097 JENNIFER L PAOLI
503-63-098 MEHRAN & AVIDEH Y SAMARDAR
503-63-099 SHAO YING YE
503-63-100 DONALD S & KATHLEEN M MANZAGOL
503-63-101 ELIE G & CRISPINA J YOUNES
503-63-102 MICHELE S CASTILLO
503-63-103 KELLY & ANN ALBERTS
503-63-104 ALAN KORGAV
503-63-105 CHRISTINE M ZAK
503-63-106 JULIET A STANTON
503-63-107 ERIKA R JOHNSON
503-63-108 WILLIAM T & DORENE G MALANCZUK
503-63-109 RICHARD F & PATRICIA J BADER
503-63-110 NATALIA JIMENEZ
503-63-111 STEPHEN H BURGER
503-63-112 KATHRYN B WARREN
72
Owner Address Owner City, State Zip
Prepared for: 20760 WILDWOOD WAY
PO BOX 53 SARATOGA CA 95071
14320 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
20626 BROOKWOOD LN SARATOGA CA 95070
4 TH ST SARATOGA CA 95070
4 TH ST SARATOGA CA 95070
5750 ALMADEN EXPY SAN JOSE CA 95118
559 SHEFFIELD AVE CARDIFF CA 92007
676 CAMELLIA WAY LOS ALTOS CA 94024
13777 Fruitvale Avenue SARATOGA CA 95070
20870 4TH ST SARATOGA CA 95070
20860 4TH ST SARATOGA CA 95070
20850 4TH ST SARATOGA CA 95070
20840 4TH ST SARATOGA CA 95070
14425 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14433 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14433 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14461 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14471 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
5750 ALMADEN EXPY SAN JOSE CA 95118
14662 BIG BASIN WAY #C SARATOGA CA 95070
20750 WILDWOOD WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
14346 WILDWOOD WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
524 AVE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94121
524 AVE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94121
14005 WILDWOOD WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
14395 WILDWOOD WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
524 AVE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94121
14370 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14645 BIG BASIN WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
14481 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
PO BOX 526 SANTA CRUZ CA 95061
13777 Fruitvale Avenue SARATOGA CA 95070
15001 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14400 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
12694 LARCHMONT AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14352 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14433 WILDWOOD WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
14433 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14433 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
20845 4TH ST SARATOGA CA 95070
14390 ELVA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14380 ELVA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14350 ELVA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14340 ELVA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14860 CODY LN SARATOGA CA 95070
14341 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14365 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14375 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14360 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
73
14350 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14340 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14330 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14328 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14314 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14300 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14305 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14325 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14345 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
7255 BAYMEADOWS WAY JACKSONVILLE FL 32256
14371 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14510 BIG BASIN WAY #226 SARATOGA CA 95070
14401 ELVA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14370 ELVA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14360 ELVA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14387 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14399 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14315 SPRINGER AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14305 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14315 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
14361 PAUL AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
21225 COMER DR SARATOGA CA 95070
2542 BASCOM AVE #170 CAMPBELL CA 95008
6446 MERLIN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011
20810 4TH ST #3 SARATOGA CA 95070
20810 4TH ST #4 SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #1 SARATOGA CA 95070
501 CLIFFSIDE CT PT RICHMOND CA 94801
20812 4TH ST #3 SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #4 SARATOGA CA 95070
13615 VAQUERO CT SARATOGA CA 95070
2737 WOODBRIDGE RD ACAMPO CA 95220
20812 4TH ST #7 SARATOGA CA 95070
6374 CANDLEWOOD CT CUPERTINO CA 95014
640275 P O BOX SAN FRANCISCO CA 94164
6374 CANDLEWOOD CT CUPERTINO CA 95014
20812 4TH ST #11 SARATOGA CA 95070
6374 CANDLEWOOD CT CUPERTINO CA 95014
20812 4TH ST #15 SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #14 SARATOGA CA 95070
20061 CHATEAU DR SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #16 SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #19 SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #18 SARATOGA CA 95070
13761 HOWEN DR SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #20 SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #23 SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #22 SARATOGA CA 95070
18481 MONTPERE WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
20812 4TH ST #24 SARATOGA CA 95070
20760 4TH ST #11 SARATOGA CA 95070
20760 4TH ST #12 SARATOGA CA 95070
74
4022 KINGRIDGE DR SAN MATEO CA 94403
20760 4TH ST #10 SARATOGA CA 95070
20760 4TH ST #7 SARATOGA CA 95070
20760 4TH ST #8 SARATOGA CA 95070
20760 4TH ST 5 SARATOGA CA 95070
13 WILLIAMS WAY DURHAM NH 3824
20760 4TH ST #3 SARATOGA CA 95070
20760 4TH ST #4 SARATOGA CA 95070
20760 4TH ST #1 SARATOGA CA 95070
20760 4TH ST #2 SARATOGA CA 95070
20740 4TH ST #11 SARATOGA CA 95070
11870 FRANCEMONT DR LOS ALTOS HILLS CA 94022
16265 GREENWOOD LN MONTE SERENO CA 95030
20740 4TH ST #10 SARATOGA CA 95070
20740 4TH ST #7 SARATOGA CA 95070
20740 4TH ST #8 SARATOGA CA 95070
14686 FIELDSTONE DR SARATOGA CA 95070
220 WEDGEWOOD AVE LOS GATOS CA 95032
20740 4TH ST #3 SARATOGA CA 95070
4662 BLUERIDGE DR SAN JOSE CA 95129
20740 4TH ST 1 SARATOGA CA
20740 4TH ST 2 SARATOGA CA 95070
20720 4TH ST #17 SARATOGA CA 95070
20720 4TH ST #16 SARATOGA CA 95070
20720 4TH ST #15 SARATOGA CA 95070
12896 PIERCE RD SARATOGA CA 95070
20720 4TH ST #11 SARATOGA CA 95070
230 LILLE LN #214 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663
20720 4TH ST #9 SARATOGA CA 95070
21315 LUMBERTOWN LN SARATOGA CA 95070
1270 WINCHESTER BLVD #127 SAN JOSE CA 95128
20270 LA PALOMA AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
6555 LITTLE FALLS DR SAN JOSE CA 95120
10230 SCENIC BLVD CUPERTINO CA 95014
20720 4TH ST #3 SARATOGA CA 95070
24179 SUMMIT WOODS DR LOS GATOS CA 95033
20720 4TH ST #1 SARATOGA CA 95070
20720 4TH ST 2 SARATOGA CA
20700 4TH ST #11 SARATOGA CA 95070
20700 4TH ST #12 SARATOGA CA 95070
20700 4TH ST #9 SARATOGA CA 95070
1153 COPPER VERDE LN MODESTO CA 95355
P O BOX 3791 LOS ALTOS CA 94024
956 FAIRWAY PARK DR INCLINE VILLAGE NV 89451
4685 TORREY PINES CIR SAN JOSE CA 95124
220 WEDGEWOOD AVE LOS GATOS CA 95032
15890 SHANNON RD LOS GATOS CA 95032
1624 LYLE DR SAN JOSE CA 95129
20700 4TH ST #1 SARATOGA CA 95070
20700 4TH ST #2 SARATOGA CA 95070
20800 4TH ST #11 SARATOGA CA 95070
20800 4TH ST #12 SARATOGA CA 95070
75
105 CRIDER CT LOS GATOS CA 95032
20800 4TH ST #10 SARATOGA CA 95070
20800 4TH ST #7 SARATOGA CA 95070
20800 4TH ST #8 SARATOGA CA 95070
20800 4TH ST #5 SARATOGA CA 95070
9267 DOVE CT GILROY CA 95020
14215 DOUGLASS LN SARATOGA CA 95070
20800 4TH ST #4 SARATOGA CA 95070
13782 CALLE TACUBA SARATOGA CA 95070
20800 4TH ST #2 SARATOGA CA 95070
20790 4TH ST 7 SARATOGA CA 95070
956 FAIRWAY PARK DR INCLINE VILLAGE NV 89451
6321 WISTERIA WAY SAN JOSE CA 95129
956 FAIRWAY PARK DR INCLINE VILLAGE NV 89451
16280 LOS SERENOS ROBLES MONTE SERENO CA 95030
6555 LITTLE FALLS DR SAN JOSE CA 95120
164 KNIGHTSHAVEN WAY SAN JOSE CA 95111
12815 CORTE CORDILLERA SALINAS CA 93908
1582 CALCO CREEK DR SAN JOSE CA 95127
1636 VILLARITA DR CAMPBELL CA 95008
2252 CORTE CICUTA CARLSBAD CA 92009
20780 4TH ST #10 SARATOGA CA 95070
20780 4TH ST #7 SARATOGA CA 95070
20780 4TH ST #8 SARATOGA CA 95070
20780 4TH ST #5 SARATOGA CA 95070
20780 4TH ST #6 SARATOGA CA 95070
21120 MICHAELS DR SARATOGA CA 95070
20780 4TH ST #4 SARATOGA CA 95070
20780 4TH ST #1 SARATOGA CA 95070
501 CLIFFSIDE CT PT RICHMOND CA 94801
76
1
Cynthia McCormick
From:Mark Mikl [MiklM@essexpropertytrust.com]
Sent:Monday, August 13, 2012 9:02 PM
To:Cynthia McCormick
Cc:rgriffin rgriffin
Subject:20760 Wildwood Way - Neighbor Notification
Dear Ms. McCormick
I am sorry to inform you but I have not been able to obtain any Neighbor Notification forms.
It has not been due to a lack of trying.
Cross the street neighbor, 14395 Wildwood Way, Everet and Lucie Killian.
They have been very friendly and supportive. I asked if he could sign
the form and he said he would and would put it in my mailbox. To date he hasn't return it to
me. He did say this weekend he "loves the design" and would if it worked out in his schedule
come down to the planning committee meeting to support the project. He said "people would be
crazy to not support this", "the design is perfect" to paraphrase.
Adjacent neighbor to the south, 20758 Wildwood Way, Heidi (last name
unknown) is a renter. The owner is in Dubai. She gave the copy of the design to the owner's
property management company. She said she loves the design but is not in a position to sign
the form as a renter. When I say her recently I mentioned that I hadn't heard from the
property management company and she said she would email them to remind them. To date I
still have not heard anything from the property management company.
Adjacent neighbor to the north, 14400 Springer. I have not met or seen the owner since I
have owned the property from December 2011. I did leave a copy of the plan/elevation in her
mailbox with a note and asked her to call me. To date I have not been able to make contact
with her.
No backyard neighbor, 4th Street.
Just as a side note, other Wildwood neighbors I have met have all been very nice and
supportive of the "Empty Nester Carriage House" concept.
Again, I am sorry to have not been able to obtain any of the Neighbor Notification forms.
Hopefully this will not delay the processing of our plans with your department.
Please let me know if there is anything else I can do in this regard.
Sincerely, Mark Mikl
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: September 12, 2012
Application: Design Review PDR12-0010
Location / APN: 14966 Sobey Road / 397-11-049
Owner / Applicant: Jean / Kohlsaat
Staff Planner: Michael Fossati
14966 Sobey Road
111
.
SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is requesting approval to replace an existing 3,952 sq. ft. one-story house with
a 5,750 sq. ft. two-story residence. The new residence will be approximately 22 feet in
height.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 12-041 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
PROJECT DATA
Net Site Area: 1.03 acres (45,760 square feet)
Average Slope: 13.9%
General Plan Designation: RVLD (Very Low Density Residential)
Zoning: R-1-40,000
Proposed Allowed
Proposed Site Coverage
Residence
Covered Porches & Patios
Terraces & Patios
Pool & Spa
Bocce Court
Asphalt Driveway
Paver Driveway (Permeable)
Total Proposed Site Coverage
4,801 sq. ft.
1,019 sq. ft.
3,763 sq. ft.
991 sq. ft.
988 sq. ft.
920 sq. ft.
1,335 sq. ft.
13,817 sq. ft.
(30.1%)
Maximum Coverage
allowed is 16,016 sq. ft.
(35%)
Floor Area
1st Floor:
2nd Floor:
Garage:
Total
Basement/Cellar
3,993 sq. ft.
949 sq. ft.
808 sq. ft.
5,750 SF
585 sq. ft.
Maximum Floor Area
allowed is 5,844 sq. ft.
Grading
Cut
2,079 c.y.
Fill
2,466 c.y.
Total
4,545
c.y.
No Grading Limit in the
R-1 Zoning District
Height
Lowest Elevation Point:
Highest Elevation Point:
Average Elevation Point:
Proposed Topmost Point:
388.1’
391.8’
390.0’
412’ (22’)
Maximum Building
Height is 416’
(26’)
112
.
Setbacks
Front:
Left Side:
Right Side:
Rear:
1st Story
222’4”
21’6”
28’5”
50’3”
2nd Story
222’4’
21’6”
28’5”
60”1”
1st Story
30’
20’
20’
50’
2nd Story
30’
20’
20’
60’
PROJECT DISCUSSION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
This project is subject to Design Review pursuant to City Code Section 15-45.060(a)(1), any
new multi-story main or accessory structure.
Background
The site had a previously approved new two-story residence. The previous proposal
included 5,754 sq. ft. of floor area and a 1,724 sq. ft. daylight basement. The height of the
previous project was 26 feet. The project was approved by Planning Commission in January
2009. The approval was later appealed, due to the potential view impacts and perceived bulk
of the house. City Council upheld Planning Commissions approval in April 2009. The
design review expired in April 2012.
The applicant redesigned the proposed residence, with the significant alterations being a
change of colors (“Willow Bark” brown to standard white), exterior finishes (horizontal
wood siding to shingle siding), reduction of the basement area (1,724 sq. ft. daylight
basement to 585 sq. ft. cellar with no exterior access), a reduction of the second level floor
area (1,555 sq. ft. to 949 sq. ft.) and overall height (26 ft. to 22 ft.).
Site Description
The 1.11 acre flag lot is setback approximately 485 feet from Sobey Road. The access
easement heads east past six single-family residences. The lot slopes up to the existing
residence. The majority of the lot is rural, vacant, undisturbed land.
Architectural Style
The proposed architecture is a formal country style with white painted shingle exterior,
shaped rafter tails, and wood trim and details. A circular covered porch leads to the gabled
front entry at the right side of the property where the existing driveway accesses the
residence. The entry is topped with an eyebrow dormer and copper roof, which is flanked
with two smaller gabled dormers on each side. Additional materials include a gray slate
roofing and stone veneer wainscoting, which will carry through into the landscaping and
retaining walls.
Detail Colors and Materials Mfg. & Specification
Windows White – Aluminum Clad Eagle Windows or
Equivalent
113
.
Garage Door White – Wood ‘Carriage’ Style
Carriage House Door
Company or
Equivalent
Roofing Gray - Slate Custom / Authentic
Slate
Gutters Copper Custom
Wainscot Brownish-Gray – Stone Fieldstone Veneer or
Equivalent
Trees
The project received arborist clearance in November 2008. The current project will be
removing the same trees that received clearance from the arborist in 2008. All other
protected trees will be fenced, as demonstrated on page 6 of the arborist report and sheet A2
of the plans.
Geotechnical Clearance
The project received Geotechnical Clearance from the City Geologist on November 18,
2008. Conditions provided by the City Geologist have been added to the Resolution.
Landscaping
The project is proposing to build a bocce court, plant a vineyard, and construct two dirt-
gravel walking path and a drainage swale within the front yard. New trees will eventually be
planted along the access easement to create privacy between the vineyard and other
neighboring property owners.
Energy Efficiency
The project (as shown) has scored 159 points on the Build-it-Green checklist. The energy
efficient features proposed include the use of numerous windows to take advantage of
natural ventilation, energy-efficient HVAC system with environmentally friendly
refrigerants, dual glazed windows, and high performance insulation.
Neighbor Correspondence
The applicant submitted neighbor notification forms from five neighboring property owners.
There were numerous comments expressed by those property owners via the forms. In order
to provide clarity, staff has summarized the comments and provided responses to address the
issues.
Comment #1 – “The water lines run from Sobey Road to the residences from the main street
under the private access drive. We request that before any trucks use the access drive to
place a metal plate on Sobey Road / Access Drive intersection to prevent the pipes from
breaking.”
• Staff has added a condition that the applicant is responsible for all damages to the
private access road that may result from project construction and construction
114
.
vehicles. The existing conditions of the access road will be video recorded prior to
commencement of construction.
Comment #2 – Traffic on the private road and trucks parked on the private road.
• Increased parking and traffic impacts are standard issues during construction. The
site is quite large and there will be opportunities for the construction workers to park
their cars onsite instead of on the access road.
Comment #3 – Workers turning around in neighboring driveway and parking pad.
• Although the City understands that others using someone else’s driveway is an
inconvenience, we are limited into controlling that type of activity.
Comment #4 – Noise. What length of time to complete the project
• As with all construction projects, the applicant must 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.
Comment #5 & 6 – Condition that any proposed trees have a “not to exceed” height limit in
order to preserve views of the rear neighbors.
• A condition has been carried over from the previous approval in 2009 in order to
address this concern. The Property Owner shall not plant any trees that reach 15 feet
in height, at full maturity, within any required rear yard. Furthermore, the applicant
hasn’t proposed to plant any trees in the rear yard.
Staff sent a “Notice of Public Hearing” to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject
property. The public hearing notice and description of the project was published in the
Saratoga News. Staff hasn’t received any other additional comments regarding the project,
other than the neighbor notification forms previously discussed.
DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code
Section 15-45.080 are set forth below and the applicant has met the burden of proof to
support making all of those required findings:
(a) The project avoids unreasonable interference with views and privacy. The project
has been designed in a manner that minimizes interference with neighboring views
and privacy by proposing the following:
a. Locating the second-story structure out of the direct line-of-sight of
neighboring properties.
115
.
b. Removal of second-story windows facing the eastern properties, in order to
protect neighboring privacy.
c. Situating the proposed home on a lower portion of the lot in order to follow
the contours of the site slope while protect the views, to the extent feasible, of
elevated properties located to the east.
d. The new construction is located toward the rear of the lot, providing an
increased front setback greater than the minimum required by the Municipal
Code.
e. To the east of the proposed building, the site slopes upward to dense
landscaping. The parcel to the north and south are well screened with
existing mature landscaping.
As discussed above, the finding can be made in the affirmative.
(b) The project preserves the natural landscape. Five protected trees will be removed.
The proposed building has been located in an effort to minimize its impacts on all
other existing trees, as the new building footprint is within the existing building
footprint. The existing landscape in the front yard will be replaced by a private
vineyard, in order to continue and preserve the natural landscape already established.
This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(c) The project preserves native and heritage trees. The project meets this finding in
that no native or heritage trees are being proposed for removal. This finding can be
made in the affirmative.
(d) The project minimizes the perception of excessive bulk. The project meets this
finding in that proposed design has a narrow front façade, an inset second story
element hidden within the gable roof, and use of varying gable shapes and elements
that assist in breaking up the mass the structure. The eyebrow dormer and copper
roof pushed out along the second story creates a focal point for the eye, which
alleviates the perception of bulk. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(e) The project is of compatible bulk and height. The proposed home is compatible in
terms of bulk and width of existing residential structures on nearby lots. The varying
rooflines, architectural detailing, and combination of high-quality exterior materials
will minimize the perception of bulk. The height of the project is lower than
adjacent residences. Although the size of the residence is compatible with nearby
residences, the massiveness will be alleviated by the large setbacks and existing
landscape screening.
(f) The project uses current grading and erosion control methods. Stormwater will
flow west of the project site. The applicant has proposed a drainage swale near the
western property line. The applicant has also submitted a grading and drainage plan,
116
.
which incorporates additional grading and erosion control methods. The project is
conditioned to require retention of stormwater on site, to the maximum extent
reasonably feasible. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(g) The project follows appropriate design policies and techniques. The project meets
this finding in incorporating the following design techniques:
a. The proposed residence, patios and landscaping are terraced and follow the
existing contours and sloped lot to minimize grading and excessive soil
removal. (Policy 1, Technique #2)
b. The project utilizes architectural features to break up the massing such as
varying the height and project of several of the walls along the exterior
elevation. This technique creates an effect that minimizes bulk. (Policy 1,
Technique #6)
c. The proposed slate roof has a neutral tone, along with the driveway, pavers,
wainscoting and retaining walls. Collectively, the natural materials and
colors assist the project to blend in with the natural environment. (Policy 2,
Technique #1 & #6)
d. By locating certain structural elements (i.e. second story) within the gable
roof will increase visual distance between buildings and limit view angles to
long rather than short distance views. (Policy 3, Technique #2)
As discussed above, the finding can be made in the affirmative.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The project is Categorically Exempt from the
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, “New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures”, Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This
exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 12-041 approving the project subject to conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Approval – 14966 Sobey Road
2. Arborist Report – Dated 11/17/2008
3. Neighbor Notification Forms – 14966 Sobey Road
4. Build-it-Green Checklist – 14966 Sobey Road
5. Public hearing notice, mailing addresses, and map for project notification
6. Reduced Plans, Exhibit "A.”
117
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 12-041
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW NO. PDR12-0010 FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF AN
EXISTING SINGLE-STORY RESIDENCE WITH A NEW TWO-STORY RESIDENCE
LOCATED AT 14966 SOBEY ROAD
WHEREAS, an application was submitted by Kohlsaat & Associates, requesting Design
Review approval to replace an existing 3,932 sq. ft. single-story residence with a new 5,750 sq.
ft. two-story residence. Design Review approval is required pursuant to Saratoga Municipal
Code Section 15-45.060. The net site is approximately 45,760 sq. ft. and is located within the R-
1-40,000 zoning district.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department completed an environmental
assessment for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
and recommends that the Planning Commission determine this project exempt.
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2012, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed
public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by City staff, the
applicant, and other interested parties.
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds,
determines and resolves as follows:
Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by
reference.
Section 2: The project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 C.C.R. Section 15303, Class 3 “New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures”, of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the
construction of up to three single-family residences and no exception to that exemption applies.
Section 3: The project is consistent with the Saratoga General Plan Policies LU 1.1 in
that the City shall continue to be predominately a community of single-family detached
residences and LU 1.2 to continue to review all residential development proposals to ensure
consistency with Land Use Element goals and Policies.
Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the design and
improvements are consistent with the design review findings in that the project avoids
unreasonable interference with views and privacy; preserves the natural landscape, native and
heritage trees; minimizes the perception of excessive bulk and is of compatible bulk and height;
uses current grading and erosion control methods; and follows appropriate design policies and
techniques.
118
Resolution No. 12‐041 Page 2
Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR12-0010,
located at 14966 Sobey Road, subject to the above Findings, and Conditions of Approval
attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 12th day of
September 2012 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Tina K. Walia
Chair, Planning Commission
119
Resolution No. 12‐041 Page 3
EXHIBIT 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR12-0010
14966 Sobey Road (APN: 397-11-049)
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.
120
Resolution No. 12‐041 Page 4
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.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
5. Compliance with Plans. The development shall be located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans dated August 2, 2012
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.
6. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be
submitted to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by
the City prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The construction plans shall, at a minimum
include the following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit
“A” on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition
No. 5 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. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: “Prior to foundation
inspection by the City, the Licensed Land Surveyor of record shall provide a written
certification that all building setbacks comply with the Approved Plans,” which note
shall represent a condition which must be satisfied to remain in compliance with this
Design Review Approval;
d. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages;
e. City Arborist Reports dated November 17, 2008 onto separate construction plan pages;
f. A final utility plan that shows location of HVAC mechanical equipment outside of
required setback areas;
g. A final Drainage and Grading Plan stamped by a registered Civil Engineer combined
with the above‐required Stormwater Detention Plan;
h. A final Landscape and Irrigation Plan; and
i. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building
Division.
7. Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties or
public right-of-way.
8. 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.
121
Resolution No. 12‐041 Page 5
9. Tree Planting. The Property Owner shall not plant any trees that reach 15 feet in height, at full
maturity, within any required rear yard. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT.
10. Private Road Condition. The applicant will be required to provide the City a videotape
record of existing conditions of the access road prior to zone clearance. The applicant will be
required to repair the access road to the existing condition prior to planning final and
building occupancy.
CITY ARBORIST
11. Arborist Report. All recommendations of the Arborist Report dated November 17, 2008,
and incorporated herein by this reference shall be followed and incorporated (in its entirety)
into the plans.
PUBLIC WORKS
12. Final Improvement. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall review and approve all
geotechnical aspects of the final improvement plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site
drainage improvements and design parameters for building foundations and swimming pool)
to ensure that the plans, specifications and details accurately reflect the consultant’s
recommendations. The results of the plan review shall be summarized by the Project
Geotechnical Consultant in a letter and submitted to the City Engineer for review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits.
13. Project Construction. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall inspect, test (as needed),
and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections shall
include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and
subsurface drainage improvements, pier excavations, and retaining walls prior to the
placement of fill, steel and concrete. The results of these inspections and the as-built
conditions of the project shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter(s) and
submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to Final (as-built) Project
Approval.
14. Outstanding Fees. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the
City Geotechnical Consultant’s review of the project prior to Zone Clearance.
15. Hold Harmless agreement. The owner (applicant) shall enter into agreement holding the
City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or
slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions.
16. Encroachment Permit. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public
Works Department for construction within the public right-of-way.
122
Page 1 of 4
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
ARBORIST REVIEW
Application #:ARB 08-0073
By Kate Bear, City Arborist 14966 Sobey Road
Phone: (408) 869-1276 Owner: Jim and Tina Jean
Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN 397-04-061
Report History: #1 Date: November 17, 2008
INTRODUCTION
The applicant wishes to demolish the existing house and garage and build a two story house with a
basement, new patio areas and a new pool.
Five trees protected by City Code were inventoried for this report. All are requested for removal to
construct the project. In addition, a Canary Island date palm was removed without a permit prior to
submitting for design review. It would not have been in conflict with the proposed design.
This project is cleared by the arborist to proceed with the conditions noted below.
SITE VISIT, PLAN REVIEW AND TECHNICAL DISCUSSION
Plans reviewed for this report include Sheet A, a Boundary and Topographic Survey; Sheets B and C,
Grading and Drainage; and Sheet D, Sections and Details, by Westfall Engineers, Inc. dated February
2008. Architectural plans reviewed include Sheet 1, Conceptual Landscape Plan; Sheets 2 and 3, Floor
Plans; Sheets 4 and 5, Elevations; and Sheets 6 and 7, Sections, by Oakley and Associates Planning and
Design, dated September 2008.
Five trees protected by City ordinance and potentially impacted by construction were inventoried for this
report. Data for each tree is included in a Tree Inventory Table at the end of this report. Tree locations are
marked on the attached copy of the Site Plan. Inventoried trees include four mulberries (#1 – 3 and 5),
and one Canary Island date palm (#4). The property has many other trees which will be retained
throughout construction and can be adequately protected during construction.
Trees # 1 – 3 are fruitless mulberries in fair condition which are indicated on the plans to be removed.
Trees #1 and 2 will likely be impacted by excavation for the basement, and tree #3 is in conflict with the
stairs and retaining wall that is proposed. It is acceptable to remove trees #1 – 3 to construct the house,
and to replace them with new trees following construction. The replacement trees should be equal to
123
14966 Sobey Road
Page 2 of 4
$2,940, which is the total appraised value of these three trees. Replacement values can be found at the
bottom of the Tree Inventory Table attached to the end of this report.
Canary Island date palm #4 was removed without a permit. It could have been left in place and the house
built without removing it. This species of palm typically sells for about $600 per linear foot of brown
trunk (below the fronds) plus the cost to install it. A conservative estimate of the value of this tree is about
$5,000. The owners need to apply for an After-the-Fact tree removal permit, and to replace this tree with
new trees on the property equal to its appraised value as part of the project. Replacement values for new
trees can be found at the bottom of the Tree Inventory Table attached to the end of this report.
Tree #5 is a mulberry in the back yard near to an existing retaining wall and a proposed bocce court. It is
not shown to be removed on the plans, but appears to be in conflict with the proposed patio and bocce
court and isn’t shown to be retained on the landscape plan. It has an appraised value of $390, and it is
acceptable to remove and replace this tree with new trees following construction.
Per City Ordinance 15-50.080, a security deposit equal to 100% of the appraised value of all trees
potentially impacted by the project is required. At this time, no trees protected by City Ordinance are
potentially impacted by the project and no security deposit is required. This condition may change if
additional information indicates that work will occur within five feet of the edge of the canopy of a
protected tree. The security deposit may be in the form of a savings account, a certificate of deposit
account or a bond. Appraisal values are calculated using the Trunk Formula Method and according to the
Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th Edition, published by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA),
2000, in conjunction with the Species Classification and Group Assignment published by the Western
Chapter of the ISA, 2004.
REQUIREMENTS
1. This entire report, including the Tree Inventory Table and map showing locations of trees and
protective fencing, shall be incorporated into the final set of building plans.
2. Trees shall be numbered on the plans for ease of reference.
3. Plans shall clarify whether tree #5 will be removed or retained. If it will be removed, it shall be
indicated for removal. If it will be retained, it shall be clearly shown on the landscape plans.
4. Tree protective fencing shall be installed as shown on the attached map and established prior to the
arrival of construction equipment or materials on site. It shall be comprised of six-foot high chain
link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, two-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into
the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. Once established, the fencing must remain
undisturbed and be maintained throughout the construction process until final inspection.
Tree protective fencing shall be inspected and approved by the City Arborist prior to obtaining
building division permits.
5. No Tree Protection Security Deposit is required for this project. This may change if additional
information indicates that work will be performed within five feet of the edge of the canopy of a
protected tree. If required, it shall be obtained prior to receipt of building division permits and
124
14966 Sobey Road
Page 3 of 4
shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project. Once the project has been
completed, inspected and approved by the City Arborist, the bond can be released.
6. It is acceptable to remove trees #1 – 3 and #5 to construct the project. They shall not be removed
until receipt of a building division permit for the project.
7. New trees to replace trees #1 – 3 and #5 shall be required following completion of construction.
They shall have a replacement value equal to $3,330. Replacement values for trees can be found at
the bottom of the Tree Inventory Table attached at the end of this report. The new trees can be of
any species and planted anywhere on the property.
8. Owner shall obtain an After-the-Fact Tree Removal permit for the Canary Island date palm (tree
#4) that was removed. An application has been included with this report.
9. Owner shall plant new trees on the property equal to $5,000 to replace tree #4.
10. Excavation for utilities is not permitted under tree canopies. Utilities include electrical, drainage,
water, sewer, gas and irrigation for landscaping.
11. The City Arborist shall approve any grading, trenching or excavation under a tree’s canopy prior
to performing work. If approved, it shall be done manually using shovels or an air spade.
Any roots measuring two inches or larger shall be retained and tunneled under or otherwise
worked around; roots measuring less than two inches may be cut with a sharp pruning instrument.
12. Unless otherwise approved, all construction activities must be conducted outside the designated
fenced area (even after fencing is removed). 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 pruning or root pruning of trees on site must be performed by a state licensed tree contractor
under the supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist and according to ISA standards. No more than
25% of the canopy may be removed during pruning.
14. Trees shall be watered during construction in a manner to ensure their good health. Established
trees may need water only once a month, but younger trees or trees that are not drought tolerant
may need to be watered once a week. Trees can be watered using a soaker or drip hose at a point
about midway between the trunk and the edge of the tree’s canopy.
15. Design landscape as follows:
a. Design irrigation so that valve boxes, controllers and main and lateral lines remain outside
of tree canopies.
b. Select plants with similar water requirements to the trees under which they will be placed.
c. Trenching for irrigation lines shall remain outside of tree canopies. Only drip irrigation on
top of grade (underneath mulch) shall be used under trees.
d. Place only mulch under oak trees.
e. Lawns shall remain outside of the canopies of trees.
f. Design topdressings so that stones or mulch remain at least one foot from the trunks of
retained trees.
125
14966 Sobey Road
Page 4 of 4
g. Do not allow tilling or stripping of the topsoil under trees.
h. Establish edging material proposed under trees on top of existing soil grade using stakes.
Attachments:
Tree Security Deposit form
Tree Inventory Table
Map showing tree locations and tree protective fencing
After-the-Fact Tree Removal Permit application
126
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
TREE
NO. TREE NAME Trunk Diameter (in,) - per Guide for Plant AppraisalEstimated Canopy Spread (ft.)Health Condition (100% = best, 0% = worst)Structural Integrity (100% = best, 0% = worst)Overall ConditionSuitability for Preservation (High/Moderate/Low)Intensity of Impacts (1 = Highest, 5 = Lowest)In Conflict with Proposed DesignNot Shown on PlansOn Adjacent ProprtyAppraised ValueMulberry
1 Morus alba 10.5 25 50 70 Fair Low 1 X $590
Mulberry
2 Morus alba 10.1 25 50 50 Fair Low 1 X $400
Mulberry
3 Morus alba 17.9 35 70 70 Fair Moderate 1 X $1,950
Canary Island date palm
4 Phoenix canariensis 30 NA NA NA NA NA 4 $5,000
Mulberry
5 Morus alba 10 25 50 50 Fair Moderate 1 X $390
Replacement Tree Values
15 gallon = $150 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500
48 inch box = $5,000 52 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000
Should any tree listed above become damaged owner will be required to repair the damage.
Should any tree listed above be removed owner will be required to replace that tree with trees
equal in value to its assessed value.
14966 Sobey Road November 17, 2008
127
Legend
Tree Protective
Fencing
Tree Canopy
14966 Sobey Road
1 2 3
4
5
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
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 September, 2012, 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: PDR12-0010 – 14966 Sobey Road
APPLICANT/OWNER: Kohlsaat / Jean
APN: 397-18-039
DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Design Review approval to replace an existing
one-story residence with a new two-story 5,783 sq. ft. residence and attached garage. The height
of the proposed residence would be no taller than 22 feet above average grade. The 1.11 acre lot
is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a
decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a Public Hearing in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing. In order for information
to be included in the Planning Commission’s information packets, written communications should
be filed on or before Tuesday, September 4, 2012.
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject
of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor’s office annually, in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a
project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this
notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone
in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
Michael Fossati
Planner
(408) 868-1212
142
Parcel Number Owner Name Owner Address Owner City, State Zip
#5064 500' OWNERSHIP LISTING Prepared for: 14966 SOBEY
397-04-013 BRIAN R FELIX 4107 WOODBRIAR CT SUGAR LAND TX 77479
397-04-014 JAMES HONG 14904 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-015 CHADHA H FAM TR 14900 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-034 DENIS J & JENNIFER M MATHIAS 14961 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-035 DENIS J & JENNIFER M MATHIAS 14961 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-052 RICHARD BUNCH 1330 N BASCOM AVE #71 SAN JOSE CA 95128
397-04-061 JAMES & TINA JEAN 14906 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-063 MICHAEL & KIM SINGLETARY 14982 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-070 MARTIN FINKBEINER 14880 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-071 PENNY L RIGSBEE 14920 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-082 JAVAD & MITTA ASHJAY 14403 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-083 DER YANG & FENNAH C GUAN 14952 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-089 RICHARD L & COLLEEN M POULIOT 14976 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-090 ANDREA RIIS SKOV 14970 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-093 JAGDISH G & SHAKUNTALA J BELANI 14960 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-094 SUBHASH & UMA CHOWDARY 14964 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-118 DORIS DIANE & FRANKIE J YOUNGBLOOD 14820 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-119 STEPHEN J LUCZO P O BOX 67249 SCOTTS VALLEY CA 95067
397-04-124 ANAFLOR Q & PAUL L GRAHAM 14910 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-04-125 JAMES & BETTINA JEAN 14906 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-022 ALLAN AN NGOC TO 14975 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-023 ANDERSON TRUST 14971 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-051 NADINE B MCCULLOUGH 14985 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-085 NADINE B MCCULLOUGH 14985 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-090 WISSICK FAMILY TR 18561 ARBOLADO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-091 ROTH W & VIVIANE L RICHARD 18593 ARBOLADO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-092 NARAIN KAAJAL TR/TR 18596 ARBOLADO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-093 ROBERT J & DIANE M GROSSO 18564 ARBOLADO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-094 BARBARA K FOX 18585 RANCHO LAS CIMAS WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-095 RICHARD A & FRANCES L PAPAPIETRO 18601 RANCHO LAS CIMAS WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-096 DENNIS L MCFARLANE 18600 RANCHO LAS CIMAS WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-097 HACKWORTH JOAN D TR/TR 18586 RANCHO LAS CIMAS WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-06-098 SUSAN B & R KEVIN MCCABE 18564 RANCHO LAS CIMAS WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-001 ELIZABETH A PESCHKE 15020 EL QUITO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-002 TING P YEN 15040 EL QUITO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-007 LENKA & MICHAEL HEVERY 18671 MAUDE AVE SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-009 HONG INSIK AND KYUNGSOO 15010 EL QUITO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-029 RAJIV V & KALA R LIMAYE 15050 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-030 CARINE TRUST 15040 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-031 QUAT TRAN 15020 SOBEY RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-064 DAVID D & CHRISTINE D KENNEDY 15055 QUITO RD SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-088 RAO FAMILY TR 15115 EL QUITO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-089 RAYMOND W B & ELLEN O L CHOW 15129 EL QUITO WAY SARATOGA CA 95070
397-07-104 LLOYD H & KAREN F LUND 18665 MAUDE SARATOGA CA 95070
44
143
Subject APN: 397-04-061 Address: 14966 SOBEY
500’ Radius SARATOGA CA 95070
Advanced Listing Services
Ownership Listings & Radius Maps
P.O. Box 2593 •Dana Point, CA •92624
Office: (949) 361-3921 •Fax: (949) 361-3923
www.Advancedlisting.com
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Application No./Location: PDR12-0013 - 12383 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
Type of Application: Design Review to Replace Existing Cellular Antennas
Applicant/Owner: Sprint
Staff Planner: Christopher Riordan, AICP, Senior Planner
Meeting Date: September 12, 2012
APN: 386-53-019
SITE
12383 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE ROAD
154
SUMMARY
ZONING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
R-1-12,500 M-12.5 (Medium Density Residential)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is requesting Design Review approval to install three new panel antennas
and six Remote Radio Units (RRU) 75’ above grade on an approximately 146’ tall PG&E
lattice tower. Two new equipment cabinets would be installed beneath the tower within
an existing 468 square foot fenced enclosure. The purpose of the project is to upgrade
the project site from the current 3G technology to 4G so as to provide increased capacity
and data speeds. The three existing panel antennas and the three existing equipment
cabinets would be removed. There is no proposed increase in height to the existing tower
or increase in size of the fenced enclosure to accommodate this project.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 12-042 approving
Design Review PDR12-0013 subject to conditions of approval.
Page 2 of 5
155
Application No. PDR12-0013
PROJECT DISCUSSION
Site Characteristics and Background
The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for the installation of three cellular
communications antennas and associated equipment to an existing Pacific Gas and Electric
(PG&E) lattice tower. The utility tower is located within a railroad right-of-way and is
adjacent to Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road to the west, commercial buildings and the Union
Pacific railroad tracks to the north, and both Joe’s Trail and single family residential homes
to the south. The tower also carries antennas from Verizon Wireless and these antennas are
located at the topmost portion of the tower.
The existing three Sprint antennas would be relocated to one end of a “crossbar” that would
be attached to the tower in the same location as the existing antennas. Located on the
opposite end of each “crossbar” would be the new Sprint antennas and two RRU’s. The
dimensions of the new antennas would be 72.0” x 12” x 5.9” and the dimensions of the
RRU’s would be 18.5” x 19.2”. The applicant could not provide the exact dimensions of the
existing antennas but did state that the new antennas are approximately 24” longer. The
relocated existing antennas would be removed once the new antennas are installed and
operational. The new antennas and support equipment would be painted to match the color
of the tower. Photo-simulations have been included as Attachment #4 to illustrate the
appearance of the new antennas.
Located at the base of the tower is an existing approximately 468 square foot area that is
enclosed by an eight feet tall wooden fence. The three existing equipment cabinets located
within the enclosure will be removed and replaced with two new equipment cabinets. The
Sprint Telco cabinet and electric meters will remain. No other modifications are proposed.
The applicant is proposing to replace the antennas so as to upgrade the existing 3G
technology to 4G. A wireless coverage exhibit demonstrating the range of the new antennas
is included as Attachment #5. The applicant has stated that the coverage area does not
change with the new 4G technology but the capacity and data speeds would increase
significantly.
FCC Requirements
Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) has exclusive jurisdiction over RF emissions from personal cellular antenna facilities.
Any concerns regarding health or safety aspects of the wireless sites are not within the
purview of the Planning Commission. Pursuant to its authority under federal law, the FCC
has established rules to regulate the safety of emissions from these facilities. The applicant
has provided a Radio Frequency (RF) Analysis (Attachment #6) which concludes that the
proposed telecommunications facility would comply with the FCC’s current prevailing
standard. Due to the applicants mounting locations, the antennas would not be accessible to
the general public and in compliance with FCC public exposure guidelines. A condition has
been added to the attached resolution that the applicant must meet all requirements
established by the FCC.
Page 3 of 5
156
Application No. PDR12-0013
Neighbor Correspondence
Correspondence and Neighbor Review
The applicant sent out project description letters directly to property owners nearby the
proposed site. A copy of the letter and the address list is included as Attachment #2. The
applicant did not receive any neighbor comments.
The “Notice of Public Hearing” was mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the
subject property (Attachment #3). The public hearing notice and description of the project
was also published in the Saratoga News. No comments have been received.
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 proposed structure will be
harmonious in appearance and design with the existing utility tower. The proposed
antennas will be installed on an existing tower, located 75 feet above ground and outside
of the public’s typical public view. The proposed antennas and accessory equipment
will be painted to match the color of the existing PG&E lattice tower. This finding can
be made in the affirmative.
(b) Where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site, the sign shall have
a common or compatible design theme and locational positions and shall be
harmonious in appearance. There is no proposed signage for the above application.
The project includes the installation of three new cellular antennas and associated
equipment. It is the intent of the applicant to place the antennas in the same location as
the existing antennas to be removed, not substantially modifying the existing appearance
of the antennas and the lattice tower, and minimizing the visual focus of the new
antennas. The finding can be made in the affirmative.
(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 appearance of the existing equipment enclosure is currently
screened by landscaping. The applicant (as required) will continue to maintain the
existing landscape buffer to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
This finding can be made in the affirmative.
(d) Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be
nonreflective. This project does not propose a wall or roofing materials. The colors of
the materials of the associated equipment will match the existing utility tower, as
conditioned. This finding can be made in the affirmative.
Page 4 of 5
157
Application No. PDR12-0013
Page 5 of 5
(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. This project does not
propose a roof or roof structure. The existing fenced enclosure will screen the
mechanical equipment from public view. The panel antennas and related mechanical
equipment will be painted in a color similar to the existing tower. This finding is can be
made in the affirmative.
(f) The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk, and design
with other structures in the immediate area. This project meets this finding in that the
proposal will not substantially add any additional mass to the existing utility tower. The
height will not be increased and the installation of the proposed new antennas is virtually
identical to the existing antennas. The antennas will be installed approximately 75 feet
above ground, detracting visual focus from the public right-of-way. This finding can be
made in the affirmative.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project, which includes installation of
new cellular equipment to an existing utility tower, is categorically exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 of the Guidelines
for Implementation of CEQA. This Class 3 exemption applies to new construction and
installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
2. Applicants written project description and neighbor outreach
3. Public hearing notice and copy of mailing labels for project notification
4. Photo Simulations (submitted by applicant)
5. Wireless Coverage Exhibit (submitted by applicant)
6. Radio Frequency Analysis (submitted by applicant)
7. Reduced Plans (Exhibit A)
158
RESOLUTION NO: 12-042
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW PDR12-0013
LOCATED AT 12383 SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD
WHEREAS, on June 7, 2012, an application was submitted by Sprint requesting Design
Review approval to remove three existing 3G cellular panel antennas and install three new 4G panel
antennas, six Remote Radio Units, and associated equipment on an existing PG&E lattice tower
located at 12383 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. The site is located within the R-1-12,500 Zoning
District (APN 386-53-019).
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 September 12, 2012, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by City Staff, the applicant,
and other interested parties.
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga hereby finds,
determines and resolves as follows:
Section 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein by
reference.
Section 2: The project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, Class 3
(a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption applies to new construction and
installation of small, new equipment and facilities in small structures.
Section 3: The project is consistent with the following Saratoga General Plan Policies:
Land Use Goal 13 which provides that the City shall use the Design Review process to assure that
new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent
surroundings; Land Use Element Policy 5.2 which states that Development proposals shall be
evaluated against City standards and guidelines to assure that the related traffic, noise, light,
appearance, and intensity of the proposed use have limited adverse impact on the area and can be
fully mitigated; and Conservation Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall protect the
existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new
development.
Section 4: The project is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the design and
improvements are consistent with the design review findings in that the project avoids unreasonable
interference with views and privacy; preserves the natural landscape including native and heritage
trees; and follows appropriate design polices and techniques.
159
Resolution No. 12-042
Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR12-0013
located at 12383 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, subject to the Findings, and Conditions of Approval
attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 12th day of
September 2012 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
Tina K. Walia
Chair, Planning Commission
160
Resolution No. 12-042
Exhibit 1
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PDR12-0013
12383 SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD
(APN 383-53-019)
A. GENERAL
1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of
time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s
successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this
project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting
all applicable permanent or other term-specified conditions has been recorded by the applicant
with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content to the Community
Development Director.
2. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until
the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent.
3. Conditions may be modified only by the Planning Commission unless modification is expressly
otherwise allowed by the City Code including but not limited to Sections 15-80.120 and/or 16-
05.035, as applicable.
4. The City shall mail to the Owner and Applicant a notice in writing, on or after the time the
Resolution granting this Approval is duly executed containing a statement of all amounts due to
the City in connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively
“processing fees”). THIS APPROVAL OR PERMIT SHALL EXPIRE SIXTY (60) DAYS
AFTER THE DATE SAID NOTICE IS MAILED IF ALL PROCESSING FEES
CONTAINED IN THE NOTICE HAVE NOT BEEN PAID IN FULL. No Zoning
Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the Community
Development Director certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit
accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained).
5. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 24 months from the date
of adoption of this Resolution or the Design Review Approval will expire unless extended in
accordance with the City Code.
6. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City
and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the
requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations incorporated herein by this reference.
7. Prior to issuance of any Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit to implement this Design
Review Approval the Owner or Applicant shall obtain a “Zoning Clearance” from the
Community Development Director by submitting final plans for the requested permit to the
Community Development Department for review to ascertain compliance with the requirements
of this Resolution.
161
Resolution No. 12-042
8. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and
hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and
volunteers harmless from and against:
a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any action on the
subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made
prior to said action; and
b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner
relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by
the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person acting on their behalf.
In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance from the Community Development Director, Owner
and Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required
Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval
as to form and content by the City Attorney.
B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
9. Compliance with Plans and Description of Use. The development shall be located and
constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans
and Description of Use dated April 23, 2012 denominated Exhibit "A" and the Photo
Simulations received June 7, 2012, denominated Exhibit “B. All proposed changes to the
Approved Plans and Description of Use must be submitted in writing with plans showing the
changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be
subject to approval in accordance with Condition A.3, above.
10. Harmonizing with Existing Structures. Prior to the installation of the proposed panel antennas
and accessory equipment, the antennas and equipment shall be painted a color similar to the
utility tower.
11. Building Division Submittal. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans shall be submitted
to the Building Division. These plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Community
Development Department Director or designee prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance. The
construction plans shall, at a minimum include the following:
a. Architectural drawings and other plan sheets consistent with those identified as Exhibit “A”
on file with the Community Development Department and referenced in Condition No. B.1
above;
b. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages;
c. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, and/or materials required by the Building
Division
C. REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER AGENCIES OR UTILITIES
12. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Verification. The owner and/or Applicant for
this Project shall contact the FCC and verify whether there are any required permits from said
162
Resolution No. 12-042
Commission. If required by the FCC, prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance for any proposed
equipment installations (or if none, prior to commencement of the approved use), the Owner
and/or Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department documentation from
the FCC showing proof of compliance of the proposed use and/or development with the FCC's
requirements.
13. Decommission. If the subject site is decommissioned in the future, all cellular antennas and
related equipment shall be removed within 30 days of cessation of operation.
14. Governmental entities. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other
Governmental entities, including the California Public Utilities Commission, must be met.
15. Emergency Access. The owner / applicant shall provide a 24-hour phone number to which
interference problems may be reported, and will resolve all interference complaints within 24
hours from the time the interference was reported.
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196