The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-10-2024 Planning Commission Agenda PacketSaratoga Planning Commission Agenda – Page 1 of 3 SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING APRIL 10, 2024 7:00 P.M. - PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING Civic Theater | 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 Public Participation Information In accordance with Saratoga’s Remote Public Participation Policy, members of the public may participate in this meeting in person at the location listed below or via remote attendance using the Zoom information below. 1. Accessing the meeting via Zoom • https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82652375945 (Webinar ID 826 5237 5945) • Calling 1.669.900.6833 or 1.408.638.0968; OR 2. Viewing the meeting on Saratoga Community Access Television Channel 15 (Comcast Channel 15, AT&T UVerse Channel 99) and calling the numbers listed above; OR 3. Viewing online at http://saratoga.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=2 and calling the numbers listed above. Written Communication Comments can be submitted in writing at www.saratoga.ca.us/pc. Written communications will be provided to the members of the Planning Commission and included in the Agenda Packet and/or in supplemental meeting materials. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL 1. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Action Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of March 13, 2024. Recommended Action: Approve Minutes of March 13, 2024 Regular Planning Commission Meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Any member of the public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. This law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications. REPORT ON APPEAL RIGHTS Saratoga Planning Commission Agenda – Page 2 of 3 Any interested person objecting to the whole, or any portion of decision on this Agenda, may file an Appeal Application with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision. The City Council conducts de novo review of appeals. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 (Continued from March 13, 2024) Application PDR23-0008/ARB23-0097: 18394 Montpere Way; (403-23-029) Gordon K. Wong (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 3,782 square foot two-story single-family residence, which includes a 743 square foot attached accessory dwelling unit, with a maximum overall height of 24’-11”. No protected trees are requested or approved for removal. Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-1235 or criordan@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-009 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. 3.2 Application PCUP24-0041: 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road; (386-01-025) Bridget Lynch, AoPS Academy (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit approval for a new after-school tutoring use to operate within 4,711 square feet of existing classroom facilities. The site is zoned CV with a General Plan Designation of Commercial Retail. Staff Contact: Kyle Rathbone (408) 868-1212 or krathbone@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-013 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. 4. NEW BUSINESS 4.1 Planning Commission Annual Work Plan 5. DIRECTOR ITEMS 6. COMMISSION ITEMS 7. ADJOURNMENT CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF THE AGENDA, DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET, COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT I, Frances Reed, Administrative Analyst for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission was posted and available for review on April 5, 2024 at the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California and on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Signed this 5th day of April 2024 at Saratoga, California. Frances Reed, Administrative Analyst. 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, copies of materials distributed to the Planning Commission concurrently with the posting of the agenda, and materials distributed to the Planning Commission by staff after the posting of the agenda are Saratoga Planning Commission Agenda – Page 3 of 3 available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us or available at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. In Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at bavrit@saratoga.ca.us or calling 408.868.1216 as soon as possible before the meeting. The City will use its best efforts to provide reasonable accommodations to provide as much accessibility as possible while also maintaining public safety [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA title II]. DRAFT MINUTES WEDNESDAY MARCH 13, 2024 SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING Chair Brownley called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Clinton Brownley, Vice Chair Jojo Choi, Commissioners Paul Germeraad, Razi Mohiuddin, and Herman Zheng ABSENT: Commissioner Ping Li (excused) ALSO PRESENT: Bryan T. Swanson, Community Development Director Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner Kyle Rathbone, Assistant Planner Frances Reed, Administrative Analyst 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of February 14, 2024. Recommended Action: Approve Minutes of Regular Planning Commission Meeting of February 14, 2024. GERMERAAD/ZHENG MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 14, 2024 MEETING. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BROWNLEY, CHOI, GERMERAAD, KAUSAR, MOHIUDDIN, ZHENG. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: LI. ABSTAIN: NONE. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS Bob Berglund spoke. Tony Vandersteen spoke. Tsing Bardin spoke. 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.1 Application PCUP23-0001: 12770 Saratoga Ave; (386-14-011) Manish Rastogi (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit approval for a new private preschool to operate within 2,465 square feet of existing classroom facilities at the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church. The site is zoned R-1- 10,000 with a General Plan Designation of Medium Density Residential (M-10). Staff Contact: Kyle Rathbone (408) 868-1212 or krathbone@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-012 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. KAUSAR/ZHENG MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 24-012 APPROVING PCUP23-0001 SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BROWNLEY, CHOI, GERMERAAD, KAUSAR, MOHIUDDIN, ZHENG. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: LI. ABSTAIN: NONE. 4 2.2 Application PDR23-0018/ARB23-0104: 14486 Oak Place; (397-22-005) Archana Jain (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 2,719 square foot two-story single-family residence with a 612 square foot attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) (maximum height 26’). Two protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-10,000 with a General Plan Designation of Medium Density Residential (M-10). Staff Contact: Kyle Rathbone (408) 868-1212 or krathbone@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-011 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. Ram Jagadeesan spoke. Andrejs Jaunrubenis spoke. Resident neighbor spoke. MOHIUDDIN/CHOI MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 24-011 APPROVING PDR23-0018 SUBJECT TO MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BROWNLEY, CHOI, KAUSAR, MOHIUDDIN. NOES: GERMERAAD, ZHENG. ABSENT: LI. ABSTAIN: NONE. 2.3 Application PDR23-0019/ARB23-0106: 18511 Vessing Road; (397-02-111) Chuck Bommarito (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 5,963 square foot one story single-family residence with a height of 25.11 feet. Eleven protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-40,000 with a General Plan Designation of Residential Very Low Density (RVLD). Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-1235 or criordan@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-008 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. KAUSAR/GERMERAAD MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 24-008 APPROVING PDR23- 0019 SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BROWNLEY, CHOI, GERMERAAD, KAUSAR, MOHIUDDIN, ZHENG. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: LI. ABSTAIN: NONE. Commissioner Kausar recused herself from Agenda item 2.4. 2.4 Application PDR23-0008/ARB23-0097: 18394 Montpere Way; (403-23-029) Gordon K. Wong (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 3,773 square foot two story single-family residence which includes an attached 734 square feet accessory dwelling unit with a total proposed height of 24.92 feet. No protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-10,000 with a General Plan Designation of Medium Density Residential (M-10). Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-1235 or criordan@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-009 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. CHOI/MOHIUDDIN MOVED TO CONTINUE THE ITEM TO APRIL 10, 2024 FOR THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE MORE COMPLETE INFORMATION ON SOLAR STUDY AND SCREENING OPTIONS FOR THE PROJECT. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BROWNLEY, CHOI, GERMERAAD, MOHIUDDIN, ZHENG. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: LI. ABSTAIN: NONE. RECUSED: KAUSAR. 5 Commissioner Kausar returned to the meeting at 9:10 p.m. 2.5 Application PDR22-0021/ARB22-0104: 19208 Panorama Drive; (403-23-029) Rajdeep and Prerna Jaiswal (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 6,754 square foot two story single-family residence with a height of 25.87 feet. The project will also include a 3,897 square foot basement and a 787 square foot detached accessory dwelling unit. Four protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-40,000 with a General Plan Designation of Residential Very Low Density (RVLD). Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-1235 or criordan@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-010 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. Rich Cohen spoke. Sharon Baab spoke. Constatine Polychronopoulos spoke. Kausar/Mohiuddin moved to Adopt Resolution No. 24-010 subject to conditions of approval. No vote was taken. GERMERAAD/CHOI MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 24-010 APPROVING PDR22-0021 SUBJECT TO REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BROWNLEY, CHOI, GERMERAAD, KAUSAR, MOHIUDDIN, ZHENG. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: LI. ABSTAIN: NONE. 4. DIRECTOR ITEMS: Director Swanson mentioned that the April 2024 meeting will include the election of new chair and vice-chair and discussion of the Annual Planning Commission Work Plan. In addition, on March 20th, the General Plan, Housing and other Elements will be presented to the City Council. He thanks the Commission and the public for their hard work and input. 5. COMMISSION ITEMS Chair Brownley announced that he will be out of the country for the June and July meetings. Vice -Chair Choi asked whether the Commission could get more clarification on what’s required with solar studies. Commissioner Germeraad commented that he would like to hear from a solar expert come before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Mohiuddin commented that he believed the role of the Commission should be to accept the studies as presented, as the architects are standing behind this work. Commissioner Germeraad questioned if staff could instruct the public as to what is under the Planning Commission’s purview and what is not. Commissioner Kausar stated that such instruction was part of the role of the Commission, to educate applicants and the public regarding the Commission’s role. 6. ADJOURNMENT MOHIUDDIN/KAUSAR moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:09 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted: Frances Reed, Administrative Analyst City of Saratoga 6 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 18394 Montpere Way Meeting Date: April 10, 2024 Application: PDR23-0008 /ARB23-0097 Address/APN: 18394 Montpere Way / 403-23-029 Applicant / Property Owner: Gordon K. Wong / Lawrence Wu Report Prepared By: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner 7 Report to the Planning Commission 18394 Montpere Way – Application #’s PDR23-0008 /ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 3,782 square foot two-story single- family residence, which includes a 743 square foot attached accessory dwelling unit, with a maximum overall height of 24’-11”. No protected trees are requested or approved for removal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 24-009 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment #1. Pursuant to City Code Section 15-45.060(a)(1), Design Review Approval by the Planning Commission is required as the project is a new two-story single-family residence. PROJECT DATA Gross/Net Site Area: 8,200 sq. ft. (.188 acres) Average Site Slope: 4.3% General Plan Designation: RVLD (Medium Density Residential) Zoning: R-1-10,000 Proposed Allowed/Required Site Coverage Residence/Garage/Roof Overhang Driveway Pool Walkways/Decks/Patios Total Proposed (structures) 2,819.78 sq. ft. 499.53 sq. ft. 402.16 sq. ft. 1,067.24 sq. ft. 4,788.71 sq. ft. (58%) 4,920 sq. ft. (60%) Floor Area (Main Residence) First Floor Second Floor Attached ADU Attached Garage Enclosed Porch Total Floor Area 1,296.62 sq. ft. 1,222.00 sq. ft. 734.13 sq. ft. 400.00 sq. ft. 121.00 sq. ft. 3,773.75 sq. ft. 3,840 sq. ft.* Height 24’-11” 26’ Setbacks Front: Left Side: Right Side Rear: 1st Floor 25.00’ 10.08’ 10.17’ 31.75’ 2nd Floor 25.00’ 14.92’ 15.00’ 39.17’ 1st Floor 25.00’ 7.14’ 7.14’ 25.00’ 2nd Floor 25.00’ 12.14’ 14.14’ 35.00’ Grading (Cubic Yards) Cut 130 Fill 58 Total 188 No grading limit in the R-1-10,000 zoning district *Includes 800 square feet allowance for an Accessory Dwelling Unit 8 Report to the Planning Commission 18394 Montpere Way – Application #’s PDR23-0008 /ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 3 SCOPE OF REVIEW/HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT The project, as a housing development proposing more than one residential unit, limits the City in its ability to “deny, reduce the density for, or render infeasible” the project under the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) (Government Code Section 65589.5) unless the project: (1) is found to be in violation of an objective general plan/zoning standard; or (2) will result in a specific adverse impact to public health and safety. While conditions and requirements may be applied to further applicable goals, policies, and strategies – any conditions and requirements not based on objective standards may not make the project infeasible or reduce the number of units. For example, the decision-making body may apply conditions related to window treatments or paint color but could not apply conditions resulting in aesthetic modifications that would render the project infeasible. Under the HAA an objective standard is one involves “no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and [is] uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official.” SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site Description The 8,200 net square foot project site is located at 18394 Montpere Way between Quito Road and Ravenwood Drive. The site contains an existing 1,650 square foot, one-story single-family residence and related site improvements including an existing swimming pool and concrete patios. One protected 25 inch Deodar cedar tree in good condition is located within the front setback area. Neighboring homes are all one-story structures with some examples of two story structures on Ravenwood Drive. Project History The Planning Commission (Commission) previously reviewed the project on March 13, 2024. During the meeting the Commission received comments from adjacent neighbors and discussed the project with staff and the applicant. The Commission provided the following project related comments to the applicant and moved to continue the application to their meeting date of April 10, 2024, to provide an opportunity for the applicant to modify the project plans. • Provide a revised and easily readable solar study which includes shadowing data with 9:00 a.m., noon, and 3:00 p.m. data for the Winter Solstice, Summer Solstices, and Equinoxes. • Provide information to illustrate privacy mitigation from left and right facing windows which is to include updated landscape plans and building elevations. Privacy mitigation for windows can include the removal or size reduction of windows and the use of frosted glass. • The landscape plan shall include proposed landscaping along the rear fence. • Dimension the second story sill heights. Project Modifications On March 21, 2024, the applicant submitted revised project plans which include: • Shadow study on page G006 for December 21 (Winter) and June 21 (Summer) at 9:00 a.m., Noon, and 3:00 p.m. The longest shadows cast by the project on these days would include 9 Report to the Planning Commission 18394 Montpere Way – Application #’s PDR23-0008 /ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 4 those on December 21, at 9:00 a.m. which shadow the front yard and the street and those at 3:00 p.m. which shadow the side yard of the neighbor to the left. • Shadow study on page G007 for the March 21 (Spring) and September 21 (Fall) Equinoxes at 9:00 a.m., Noon, and 3:00 p.m. The longest shadows cast by the project on these days would be on March 21 and September 21, at 9:00 which shadow the projects driveway and at 3:00 p.m. on March 21 and September 21 which shadow the side yard of the neighbor to the left. • Smaller and eliminated second story windows of the side elevations on page A200. For the left elevation these include one removed window for the primary bedroom and clerestory windows with sill heights of 6’-2” on the remaining three bedroom windows. For the right elevation the window located in the stairwell was reduced in size and the sill height was increased to 3’-10” and a sill height dimension of 6’-2” was added to the other two windows. • Sill heights were added to the second story windows on the front and side elevation on page A201. The second story windows on the front elevations have a sill height of 2’-10”. The bedroom windows on the rear elevation have a sill height of 2’-8” and the bathroom windows have a sill height of 5’8”. • The landscape plan on sheet L1 includes added landscaping along the rear fence which includes Italian cypress trees and existing landscaping that includes palm trees and existing shrubs. Project Description The proposed project will consist of a two-story residence with an overall height of 24’-11”. The project will include architectural projections with front facing hipped roof forms and covered porches to break up the appearance of mass. The project will include 2,639 square feet of living space with an attached 734 square foot accessory dwelling unit and a 400 square feet front loaded two car garage located on the left side of the building footprint. The applicant has provided a color and materials board (Attachment #4). Below is a list of the proposed exterior materials. Detail Colors and Materials Exterior Smooth Stucco (White) Windows Milgard Wood w/ Vinyl Exterior (black) Entry Door Wood Door (Dark Bronze) Roof Standing Seam Metal Roof (Grey) Garage Door Steel Carriage Style (White) Trees One protected tree exists on site which is a 25 inch Deodar cedar tree in good condition located in the front yard and adjacent to the street. This tree will not be removed. Tree fencing is required to be installed and inspected by the City Arborist to minimize impacts to the Deodar cedar tree prior to 10 Report to the Planning Commission 18394 Montpere Way – Application #’s PDR23-0008 /ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 5 project commencement and during its duration. Details of the arborist’s findings and description of the Deodar cedar tree are included in the Arborist Report (Attachment #2). Landscaping Landscaping within the front setback area will consist of turf, native and drought tolerant shrubs, new Cherry Blossom trees, and the existing Deodar cedar tree. Hardscape will include a new permeable paver driveway in approximately the same location as the existing driveway. More than 50% of the front setback area will include live plants. Landscaping in the rear and side yard will include new Italian cypress trees and existing shrubs and bushes. FINDINGS The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code Section Article 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. Site development follows the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given the property’s natural constraints. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the new residence will be in approximately the same location as the existing house to be removed which will minimize grading necessary to create a new building pad. The elevation of the site drops approximately five feet from the rear to the front and the project will not make changes to existing elevations outside of the building footprint. Grading will be limited to site contouring for drainage to direct water away from the foundation and towards proposed landscaping. b. All protected trees shall be preserved, as provided in Article 15-50 (Tree Regulations). If constraints exist on the property, the number of protected trees, heritage trees, and native trees approved for removal shall be reduced to an absolute minimum. Removal of any smaller oak trees deemed to be in good health by the City Arborist shall be minimized using the criteria set forth in Section 15-50.080. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the site has one protected tree which will not be removed. Tree protection fencing is required to be installed prior to issuance of building permits and shall remain in place for project duration. c. The height of the structure, its location on the site, and its architectural elements are designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed residence complies with the maximum height limitation of 26 feet allowable for residential structures; the building has varying architectural forms and exterior materials to break up the appearance of mass, the building setbacks comply with those required for the R-1-10,000 zoning district, side facing second story windows are all clerestory windows with sill heights of 6’-2” except for the stairwell window on the right elevation that has a sill height of 3’-10.” 11 Report to the Planning Commission 18394 Montpere Way – Application #’s PDR23-0008 /ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 6 d. The overall mass and height of the structure, and its architectural elements are in scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the new single-story residence is under the maximum building height limitation of 26 feet; the structure has a variety of symmetrical and cohesive architectural forms and exterior materials that are consonant in appearance to break up the appearance of mass; and the building setbacks exceed those required for sites with nonconforming site widths in the R-1-10,000 zoning district. e. The landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that landscaping within the front setback area will consist of turf, native and drought tolerant shrubs, new Cherry Blossom trees, and the existing Deodar cedar tree. Hardscape will include a new permeable paver driveway in approximately the same location as the existing driveway. More than 50% of the front setback area will include live plants. f. Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that development will not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy as the tallest elements of the structure are located towards the center of the site which will minimize shadowing, the project exceeds the required side and rear setbacks, and the orientation of the sun throughout the day with respect to the location of the site and position/height of the structure will not unreasonably cast shadows on adjoining properties. g. The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding can be made in the affirmative because the proposed project incorporates applicable design policies and techniques from the Residential Design Handbook. The overall mass and height of the structure are in scale with the neighborhood; the structure is set back in proportion to the size and shape of the lot; site development follows contours and is appropriate given the property’s natural constraints. In addition, the proposed materials, colors, and details enhance the architecture in a well- composed, understated manner. h. On hillside lots, the location and the design of the structure avoid unreasonable impacts to ridgelines, significant hillside features, community viewsheds, and is in compliance with Section 15-13.100. This finding is not applicable to the project as the site has a slope of less than 10% and is therefore not classified as a hillside lot. NEIGHBOR NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE The applicant submitted one notification form from a neighboring property owner at 18383 Montpere Way which contained no project specific written comments. Staff also received an email from a neighboring property owner with concerns that 1) a proposed two story residence is not in character with the neighborhood, 2) the Deodar Cedar tree in the front yard will be removed, and 3) that the existing house has been used as an Airbnb rental property. Several public comments were received after the completion of the staff report for the March 13, 2024, Planning Commission meeting and these have been added to the report. All public comments are included in Attachment #3. In addition, the public hearing notice and description of the project was published in the 12 Report to the Planning Commission 18394 Montpere Way – Application #’s PDR23-0008 /ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 7 Saratoga News. The project was continued by the Planning Commission to the meeting of April 10, 2024, so the Community Development Department did not mail public notices to property owners within 500 feet of the site. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction of three single-family residences in a residential area. The project, as proposed, is for the construction of a new residence in a suburban, residential area. ATTACHMENTS 1.Resolution No. 24-009 2.Arborist Report dated November 27, 2023 3.Neighbor Notices 4.Materials Board 5.Project Massing Diagram 13 RESOLUTION NO: 24-009 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW PDR23-0008 AND ARBORIST REPORT ARB23-0097 18394 MONTPERE WAY (APN 403-23-029) WHEREAS, on April 5, 2023, an application was submitted by Gordon K. Wong on behalf of Lawrence Wu (Applicant/Owner) requesting Design Review and City Arborist Report approval to construct a new 3,040 square foot two-story single-family residence with an overall height of 24’- 11”. No protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is located within the R-1-10,000 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 Categorically Exempt. WHEREAS, on March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, considered evidence presented by City Staff, the applicant, and other interested parties, and continued the project to their meeting of April 10, 2024. WHEREAS, on April 10, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, 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 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 of a single- family residence and small structures in a residential area. Section 3: The proposed residence 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; Safety Element Site and Drainage Policy 3 which provides that the City shall require that landscaping and site drainage plans be submitted and approved during Design Review for a residence prior to issuance of permits; and Conservation Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. Section 4: The proposed residence is consistent with the Saratoga City Code in that the design and improvements are consistent with the design review findings. The overall mass and height of the structure are in scale with the neighborhood; the structure is set back in proportion to 15 18394 MONTPERE WAY PDR23-0008 / ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 2 the size and shape of the lot; site development follows contours and is appropriate given the property’s natural constraints; the porch and entry are in scale with other structures in the neighborhood. In addition, the proposed materials, colors, and details enhance the architecture in a well-composed, understated manner. Section 5: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR23-0008, and ARB23-0097, 18394 Montpere Way (APN 403-23-029), 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 10th day of April 2024 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Clinton Brownley Chair, Planning Commission 16 18394 MONTPERE WAY PDR23-0008 / ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 3 Exhibit 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PDR23-008 / ARB23-0097 18394 MONTPERE WAY (APN 403-23-029) GENERAL 1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period 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. 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. 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. 17 18394 MONTPERE WAY PDR23-0008 / ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 5. 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 current 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. 6. The development shall be located and constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the plans approved by the Planning Commission on March 13, 2024. 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 the City Code. 7. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit for staff approval a Lighting Plan for the home’s exterior and landscaped areas. Proposed exterior lighting shall be limited to full cut off & shielded fixtures with downward directed illumination so as not to shine on adjacent properties or public right-of-way. All proposed exterior lighting shall be designed to limit illumination to the site and avoid creating glare impacts to surrounding properties. 8. To comply with standards that minimize impacts to the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours, maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections. 9. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall prepare for review and approval by City staff a Construction Management Plan for the project which includes but is not limited to the following: a. Proposed construction worker parking area. b. Proposed construction hours that are consistent with the City Code. c. Proposed construction/delivery vehicle staging or parking areas. d. Proposed traffic control plan with traffic control measures, any street closure, hours for delivery/earth moving or hauling, etc. To the extent possible, any deliveries, earth moving or hauling activities will be scheduled to avoid peak commute hours. e. Proposed construction material staging/storage areas. f. Location of project construction sign outlining permitted construction work hours, name of project contractor and the contact information for both homeowner and contractor. 10. All fences, walls and hedges shall conform to height requirements provided in the City Code Section 15-29. 18 18394 MONTPERE WAY PDR23-0008 / ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 5 11. The final landscaping and irrigation plan submitted for Building Permit approval shall demonstrate how the project complies with the State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and shall consider the following: a. To the extent feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat storm water runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain and infiltrate runoff. In areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolong exposure to water shall be specified. b. To the extent feasible, pest resistant landscaping plants shall be used throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. c. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency, and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. d. Pest resistant landscaping plants shall be considered for use throughout the landscaped area, especially along any hardscape area. e. Any proposed or required under grounding of utilities shall consider potential damage to roots of protected trees. 12. Front yard landscaping shall be installed prior to final inspection or a bond satisfactory to the Community Development Department valued at 150% of the estimated cost of the installation of such landscaping shall be provided to the City. 13. A locking mailbox approved for use by the U.S. Postal service shall be installed and in compliance with Saratoga Municipal Code section 6-25.030. The mailbox shall be installed prior to final inspection. 14. A Building Permit must be issued, and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or the Design Review Approval will expire unless extended in accordance with the City Code. 15. West Valley Collection & Recycling is the exclusive roll-off and debris box provider for the City of Saratoga. FIRE DEPARTMENT 16. The owner/applicant shall comply with all applicable Fire Department requirements. ARBORIST 17. All requirements in the City Arborist Report (ARB23-0097) dated November 27, 2023, are hereby adopted as conditions of approval, and shall be implemented as part of the approved plans. This approval includes the requirement to install tree protection fencing as detailed in the City Arborist Report to the satisfaction of the City Arborist and the payment of a tree protection security deposit prior to issuance of a demolition permit and/or building permit. 19 18394 MONTPERE WAY PDR23-0008 / ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 6 ENGINEERING 18. 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 current 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. 19. Applicant / Owner shall obtain an encroachment permit for all improvements in any City right- of-way or City easement including all new utilities prior to commencement of the work to implement this Design Review. 20. Applicant / Owner shall make the following improvements in the City right-of-way: a. Remove existing driveway approach and replace with new driveway approach per City Standard Detail 205 & 206. See City of Saratoga Standard Details for removal and new installation. New flow line shall conform to existing flow lines and grade. 21. Damages to driveway approach, curb and gutter, public streets, or other public improvements during construction shall be repaired prior to final inspection. 22. All new/upgraded utilities shall be installed underground. 23. Applicant / Owner shall maintain the streets, sidewalks and other right of way as well as adjacent properties, both public and private, in a clean, safe and usable condition. All spills of soil, rock or construction debris shall be removed immediately. 24. The Owner/Applicant shall incorporate adequate source control measures to limit pollutant generation, discharge, and runoff (e.g. landscaping that minimizes irrigation and runoff, promotes surface infiltration where possible, minimizes the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and incorporates appropriate sustainable landscaping practices and programs, such as Bay-Friendly Landscaping). 25. All building and construction related activities shall adhere to New Development and Construction – Best Management Practices as adopted by the City for the purpose of preventing storm water pollution: • Owner shall implement construction site inspection and control to prevent construction site discharges of pollutants into the storm drains per approved Erosion Control Plan. • The City requires the construction sites to maintain year-round effective erosion control, run-on and run-off control, sediment control, good site management, and non-storm water management through all phases of construction (including, but not limited to, site grading, 20 18394 MONTPERE WAY PDR23-0008 / ARB23-0097 April 10, 2024 Page | 7 building, and finishing of lots) until the site is fully stabilized by landscaping or the installation of permanent erosion control measures. • City will conduct inspections to determine compliance and determine the effectiveness of the BMPs in preventing the discharge of construction pollutants into the storm drain. Owner shall be required to timely correct all actual and potential discharges observed. 26. Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans. 27. Prior to the Building final, all Public Works conditions shall be completed per approved plans. BUILDING DEPARTMENT SUBMITTAL 28. 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. Arborist Report dated November 27, 2023. c. All additional drawings, plans, maps, reports, notes, and/or materials required by the Building Division. d. This signed and dated Resolution printed onto separate construction plan pages. ***End of Conditions *** 21 Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 www.saratoga.ca.us/171/trees 408.868.1276 CITY OF SARATOGA ARBORIST APPROVAL Conditions of Approval and Tree Protection Plan Prepared by Christina Fusco, City Arborist Application No. ARB23-0097 Phone: (408) 868-1276 Address: 18394 Montpere Way Email: cfusco@saratoga.ca.us Owner: Lawrence Wu APN: 403-23-029 Date: November 27, 2023 PROJECT SCOPE: The applicant has submitted plans to demolish the existing home and build a new two-story home. No trees are requested for removal to construct the project. PROJECT DATA IN BRIEF: Tree security deposit – Required - $6,100 Tree protection – Required – See Conditions of Approval and attached map. Tree removals – No trees have been requested or approved for removal. Replacement trees – Not Required ATTACHMENTS: 1 – Findings and Tree Information 2 – Conditions of Approval 3 – Map Showing Tree Protection 1 of 5 22 18394 Montpere Way Attachment 1 FINDINGS: Tree Removals According to Section 15-50.080 of the City Code, whenever a tree is requested for removal as part of a project, certain findings must be made and specific tree removal criteria met. No trees are requested or approved for removal. New Construction Based on the information provided, and as conditioned, this project complies with the requirements for the setback of new construction from existing trees under Section 15- 50.120 of the City Code. Tree Preservation Plan Section 15-50.140 of the City Code requires a Tree Preservation Plan for this project. To satisfy this requirement the following shall be copied onto a plan sheet and included in the final sets of plans: 1)The tree information and recommendations, and map from the submitted arborist report dated September 15, 2023; 2)The Project Data in Brief and the Conditions of Approval from this report dated November 27, 2023. TREE INFORMATION: Project Arborist: John Leffingwell Date of Report: September 15, 2023 Number of protected trees inventoried: 1 Number of protected trees requested for removal: 0 A table summarizing information about each tree is below. Table 2: Tree information from submitted arborist report dated September 15, 2023. Tree No. Species Trunk Diameter (inches) Condition Suitability for Preservation Appraised Value Deodar cedar 1 Cedrus deodara 25 Good Moderate $6,800 2 of 5 23 18394 Montpere Way Attachment 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1.Owner, Architect, Contractor: It is the responsibility of the owner, architect, and contractor to be familiar with the information in this report and implement the required conditions. 2.Permit: a.Receipt of a Planning or Building permit does not relieve applicant of his responsibilities for protecting trees per City Code Article 15-50 on all construction work. b.No protected tree authorized for removal or encroachment pursuant to this project may be removed or encroached upon until the issuance of the applicable permit from the building division for the approved project. 3.Final Plan Sets: a.Shall include the tree information, protection recommendations, and map showing tree protection from the arborist report by John Leffingwell dated September 15, 2023 copied onto a plan sheet. b.Shall include the Project Data in Brief and Conditions of Approval sections of the City Arborist report dated November 27, 2023. 4.Tree Protection Security Deposit: a.Is required per City Ordinance 15-50.080. b.Shall be $6,100 for tree #1. c.Shall be obtained by the owner and filed with the Community Development Department before obtaining Building Division permits. d.May be in the form of cash, check, or a bond. e.Shall remain in place for the duration of construction of the project. f.May be released once the project has been completed, inspected and approved by the City Arborist. 5.Tree Protection Fencing: a.Shall be installed as shown on the attached map. b.Shall be shown on the Site Plan. c.Shall be established prior to the arrival of construction equipment or materials on site. d.Shall be comprised of six-foot high chain link fencing mounted on 2-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. e.Shall be posted with signs saying, “TREE PROTECTION FENCE - DO NOT MOVE OR REMOVE WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST, CHRISTINA FUSCO (408) 868- 1276”. f.A letter/email shall be provided to the City from the project arborist confirming the correct installation of the tree protection fencing once it has been installed, including photos. This is required prior to obtaining building division permits. g.Tree protection fencing shall remain undisturbed throughout the construction until final inspection. 3 of 5 24 18394 Montpere Way Attachment 2 6.Construction: All construction activities shall be conducted outside tree protection fencing unless permitted as conditioned below. These activities include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: demolition, grading, trenching for utility installation, equipment cleaning, stockpiling and dumping materials (including soil fill), and equipment/vehicle operation and parking. 7.Work inside fenced areas: a. Requires a field meeting and approval from City Arborist before performing work. b.Requires Project Arborist on site to monitor work. 8.Project Arborist: a.Shall be John Leffingwell unless otherwise approved by the City Arborist. b.Shall visit the site every two weeks during grading, trenching or digging activities and every six weeks thereafter. A letter/email shall be provided to the City after each inspection which documents the work performed around trees, includes photos of the work in progress, and provides information on tree condition during construction. c.Shall supervise any permitted pruning or root pruning of trees on site. Roots of protected trees measuring two inches in diameter or more shall not be cut without prior approval of the Project Arborist. d.The Project Arborist shall be on site to monitor all work within 25 feet of tree #1. e.The recommendations from the submitted arborist report dated September 15, 2023 are conditions of approval for the project. 9.Tree removal: No trees protected by Saratoga municipal code are requested or approved for removal to construct the project. 10.Damage to protected trees that will be retained: a.Should any protected tree be damaged beyond repair, new trees shall be required to replace the tree. If there is insufficient room to plant the necessary number of new trees, some of the value for trees may be paid into the City’s Tree Fund. Replacement values for new trees are listed below. 11.Final inspection: At the end of the project, when the contractor wants to remove tree protection fencing and have the tree protection security deposit released by the city, call City Arborist for a final inspection. Before scheduling a final inspection from the City Arborist, have the project arborist do an inspection, prepare a letter with their findings, and provide that letter to the city for the project file. 4 of 5 25 Tree Preservation Plan 18394 Montpere Way Saratoga, CA August 2023 GKW Architects Campbell, CA ·ft" WOODREEVE CONSULTING�•�·- 5627 Telegraph Ave., Suite #385 Oakl a nd, CA 94609-(510) 387-5241 \ Notes: - - - - - •Dashed red line is approx. protec tive fenci ng locati on •Map is not to scale •Base map provided by Google Earth Attachment 3 5 of 5 26 From:Keith Szolusha To:Christopher Riordan Subject:18394 Montpere Way Saratoga planning questions Date:Monday, March 11, 2024 10:08:39 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Hello Christopher, My name is Keith Szolusha. I am the owner of 13811 Ravenwood Drive, Saratoga, Ca. Our property shares a backyard fence with 18394 Montpere Way. We see the tall, 2-story orange fencing put up as a proposal and we also see the Notice of the Hearing for March 13 at 7pm. I am not available at that time. I have a few simple questions. M-10 R-1-10,000 with General Plan Designation. Is my property at 13811 Ravenwood Drive the same designation? It seems for 8100 sq foot property, 3773 square feet is too big. If you exclude the attached 734 sqft accessory dwelling, it is still more than 3000 square feet, which still seems to be too much for the property size. There should be proper spacing on all property boarders. I'd like to learn more about what are the restrictions for such a property in terms of total size. I would also like to learn about how my property at 13811 Ravenwood Drive, Saratoga could be calculated out with the same formula and how big we could make our house. It seems that the total size of this new dwelling is too big, as proposed. Can you please return email and let me know that formulat there is? We seemed to have found a formula which shows this property could be maximum of less than 2900 square feet. I'm wondering where we went wrong in our calculations. I believe this property will block our sky and our antenna view of the towers, as proposed. Plus it will have a lot of direct view into our backyard. I have three little children. Thanks so much, Keith Szolusha 27 Frances Reed From:noreply@civicplus.com Sent:Wednesday, March 13, 2024 10:25 AM To:Clinton Brownley; Anjali Kausar; Razi Mohiuddin; Herman Zheng; Jonathan Choi; Ping Li; Paul Germaraad; Bryan Swanson; Britt Avrit; Frances Reed Subject:Online Form Submittal: Planning Commission Comments Form CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Planning Commission Comments Form Your Name Elizabeth Zimmermann Phone Number Email Address Comments Application PDR23-008/ARB23-0097: 18394 Montpere Way (403-23-029) Members of the Planning Commission: Thank you for your time, and that of City staff yesterday, to visit the above mentioned property and meet with our neighborhood to better understand this proposed project. I found it notable that the project applicant, who has never engaged with the neighborhood and only uses this property for rentals, also failed to show up to the site visit, a further sign of disrespect for yourselves, staff and their neighbors. Their absence made it very difficult to understand the scope of the project. Thankfully, the neighbors with adjoining fences whose properties will be significantly impacted by the magnitude of the proposed home invited us into their yards to see firsthand how detrimental this massive two-story monolith will be to their privacy, their sunlight, and the investments they've already made in their homes. I respect the rights of homeowners to work within City guidelines to build appropriate homes on their properties. I do not respect when homeowners fail to engage with their neighbors to understand and respond to how their actions affect others. Our neighborhood is generally one of small lots. Massive houses with minimum setbacks, while permissible, severely encroach on the ability of families to use their homes and yards as a place of respite. This proposed project needs be scaled to ensure that it does not interfere with the neighbors' rights to privacy. Thank you for your time, consideration, and commitment to the citizens of Saratoga. Respectfully, Elizabeth Zimmermann (18371 Montpere Way) 28 Frances Reed From:Christopher Riordan Sent:Wednesday, March 13, 2024 10:42 AM To:Frances Reed Subject:Fwd: 18394 Montpere Proposal Get Outlook for iOS From: Roberta Corson Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 9:23:38 AM To: Christopher Riordan <criordan@saratoga.ca.us> Subject: 18394 Montpere Proposal CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Mr. Riordan and Members of the Planning Commission, Yesterday, I attended the site-review on the property at 18394 Montpere and received some clarity about some of the questions I have as a neighbor. My remaining concern is the height of the proposed home. As I stood in the narrow back yard of the adjacent home on the East, I was struck by how the proposed second story windows would look right into their living space and also how it would cut all light in the evening. There is only a seven foot setback on that side, which makes a narrow distance from one home to the other. I feel sure that the same issue would arise for the neighboring homes on the West, and the South. I did not go into those yards. While the proposal may be within the code, this issue is ethical in nature. It is not just that a proposal should be granted if it intrudes on an established owner’s property. The family who lives at the corner of Montpere and Ravenwood have bought, renovated, and settled in good faith. This proposal disrupts their life-style and the value of their home. Is this how Saratoga would be known to treat its residents? My suggestion is to cut the ADU portion of the proposal and bring the home down to one story, as are all the other homes on Montpere and all but one on Ravenwood. This would still provide a large living area of over 3000 square feet, larger than most of the homes in the neighborhood. Our neighborhood is established, and the neighbors care about each other and the quality of our small community of homes. This proposal would severely impact many homes on Montpere and Ravenwood. Please reconsider the design. Cordially, Roberta B. Corson, Ph.D. 29 Frances Reed From:Christopher Riordan Sent:Wednesday, March 13, 2024 10:43 AM To:Frances Reed Subject:Fwd: New Construction at 18394 Montpere Way Saratoga Get Outlook for iOS From: Richard Corson Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 9:24:20 AM To: Christopher Riordan <criordan@saratoga.ca.us> Subject: Re: New Construction at 18394 Montpere Way Saratoga CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Mr. Riordan and Members of the Planning Commission: As a home owner on Ravenwood drive, I was notified of the site review at the Montpere location on March 12. Although I could not observe that review, I have studied the proposed new construction at the site and wish to express several concerns and objections. First, a two story structure is not consistent with the neighborhood. Granted, a two-story modification was allowed on Ravenwood Drive nearly two blocks away, but the Montpere context is clearly suitable for one story structures. I find it particularly objectionable given the impact on the neighboring home to the east. Viewing the proposal from that vantage point, I find it alarming that this relatively massive structure will dominate the landscape and push to within 7 feet of the shared fence line. This is clearly invasive. The impact is potentially less to the south and west but even those homes, their privacy, and security will be compromised. Second, given that Montpere is a relatively narrow street, I worry about parking. Should the home as well as the ADU be rented (as per information circulated in the neighborhood) is there no requirement for or consideration of on site parking? That has been an issue related to that property for a number of years during which it has been a rental. Renters have demonstrated little if any concern for the neighbors and neighborhood in general. I would think that the city would want to moderate such impacts on established communities such as this one by limiting the size of such new construction. I would appreciate your conveying my perspective to the members of the Planning Commission. Best regards Richard Corson 13831 Ravenwood Drive Saratoga, Ca. 30 Frances Reed From:Christopher Riordan Sent:Wednesday, March 13, 2024 12:19 PM To:Frances Reed Subject:FW: 18394 Montpere Proposal This was does not appear to have been forwarded to you. Christopher A. Riordan, AICP Senior Planner City of Saratoga (408) 868-1235 criordan@saratoga.ca.us From: Roberta Corson Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 9:31 AM To: Christopher Riordan <criordan@saratoga.ca.us> Subject: 18394 Montpere Proposal CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Mr. Riordan and Members of the Planning Commission, Yesterday, I attended the site-review on the property at 18394 Montpere and received some clarity about some of the questions I have as a neighbor. My remaining concern is the height of the proposed home. As I stood in the narrow back yard of the adjacent home on the East, I was struck by how the proposed second story windows would look right into their living space and also how it would cut all light in the evening. There is only a seven foot setback on that side, which makes a narrow distance from one home to the other. I feel sure that the same issue would arise for the neighboring homes on the West, and the South. I did not go into those yards. While the proposal may be within the code, this issue is ethical in nature. It is not just that a proposal should be granted if it intrudes on an established owner’s property. The family who lives at the corner of Montpere and Ravenwood have bought, renova ted, and settled in good faith. This proposal disrupts their life-style and the value of their home. Is this how Saratoga would be known to treat its residents? My suggestion is to cut the ADU portion of the proposal and bring the home down to one story, as are all the other homes on Montpere and all but one on Ravenwood. This would still provide a large living area of over 3000 square feet, larger than most of the homes in the neighborhood. 31 Our neighborhood is established, and the neighbors care about each other and the quality of our small community of homes. This proposal would severely impact many homes on Montpere and Ravenwood. Please reconsider the design. Cordially, Roberta B. Corson, Ph.D. 13831 Ravenwood Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 32 Frances Reed From:Christopher Riordan Sent:Wednesday, March 13, 2024 9:11 AM To:Frances Reed Cc:Bryan Swanson Subject:Fwd: 18394 Montpere Way Saratoga planning questions Hi Frances. Received this email regarding Montpere Drive for tonight’s meeting. Chris Get Outlook for iOS From: Keith Szolusha Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 9:28:08 PM To: Christopher Riordan <criordan@saratoga.ca.us> Subject: Re: 18394 Montpere Way Saratoga planning questions CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Hi Chris, Thanks for the time tonight. Okay, so my official feedback should be that the home seems intended for rental and the size seems too large. On that particular lot, the 2 story home is put together in a way that invades privacy in my backyard and in my neighbor's backyard. There would be direct view of my children's bedrooms and this is a major concern, especially for renters who are unknown. I am against the house the way it is put together. I would like to consider that new homes should not invade privacy of the neighborhood. If it was further from the fence and/or did not have a direct view into my children's bedrooms, I might think differently. Please consider a different home design which is not an invasion of privacy. It appears this is simply being put together with maximum size in mind. Windows looking directly into neighboring yards and homes is very awkward and not welcome by me. Keith Szolusha 13811 Ravenwood Drive Saratoga On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 3:29 PM Christopher Riordan <criordan@saratoga.ca.us> wrote: 33 Your allowable floor area is the same as the project on Montpere Way. Your site is 8600 square feet and theirs is 8100 square feet. For the purpose of calculating allowable floor arer the lot sizes round up to the next 1,000 or 9,000 square feet. Christopher A. Riordan, AICP Senior Planner City of Saratoga (408) 868-1235 criordan@saratoga.ca.us From: Keith Szolusha Sent: Monday, March 11, 2024 3:27 PM To: Christopher Riordan <criordan@saratoga.ca.us> Subject: Re: 18394 Montpere Way Saratoga planning questions CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. 13811 ravenwood drive is about 8600 sqft. What size can we do? On Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 3:10 PM Christopher Riordan <criordan@saratoga.ca.us> wrote: Keith, 34 35 Is my property at 13811 Ravenwood Drive the same designation? Yes. Your site and the project site are both zoned R-1-10,000 It seems for 8100 sq foot property, 3773 square feet is too big. If you exclude the attached 734 sqft accessory dwelling, it is still more than 3000 square feet, which still seems to be too much for the property size. There should be proper spacing on all property boarders. The size of the site is 8,200 square feet which allows 3,040 square feet for a development. Every lot, including yours, can also construct an ADU of 800 square feet more than the allowed 3,040 square feet. The project conforms to all setbacks. I'd like to learn more about what are the restrictions for such a property in terms of total size. I would also like to learn about how my property at 13811 Ravenwood Drive, Saratoga could be calculated out with the same formula and how big we could make our house. What is the size of your site, and I can assist you with what can be constructed on your site. It seems that the total size of this new dwelling is too big, as proposed. I will forward this email to the Planning Commission. Can you please return email and let me know that formulat there is? The link to the code section regarding allowable floor area is: https://library.municode.com/ca/saratoga/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CH15ZORE_ ART15-12SIMIREDI_15-12.085ALFLARHRROZODI We seemed to have found a formula which shows this property could be maximum of less than 2900 square feet. I'm wondering where we went wrong in our calculations. I believe this property will block our sky and our antenna view of the towers, as proposed. Plus it will have a lot of direct view into our backyard. I have three little children. I will forward this email to the Planning Commission. Thanks so much, Keith Szolusha 36 Project Address: 18394 Montpere Way, Saratoga, CA, 95070 A project is proposed at the above address. The City asks that you sign this form to indicate you have had an opportunity to review and comment on the proposal. Your signature is not an acceptance of the plans, only an acknowledgement that you have had an opportunity to comment. IMPORTANT NOTE FROM CITY: These plans are PRELIMINARY ONLY and may change as the project moves forward. Architectural Plans are protected under copyright law. The applicant should allow you to view the plans but is not required to give you a physical copy. Clty of Saratoga Nelghbor Notlflcatlon Form Once the application is submitted, you may review a full sized set of plans at City Hall during normal business hours. The applicant should inform you when the plans will be submitted. Please contact the Clty at 408-868-1222 If you have any questlons. Nelghbor Name: This notice is being provided to all of the adjoining property owners and the property owner(s) across the street from the project address. The City will send an additional notice to adjacent neighbors prior to a decision being made on the project. Nelghbor Address: 18383 Montpere Way, Saratoga, CA, 95070 Nelghbor Contact Info: (phone or email): This enables the City to contact you if they have any questions Please address any initial concerns below (attach additional sheets if necessary): Feel free to mail this form directly to the City: City of Saratoga Planning Department; 13777 Fruitvale Avenue; Saratoga CA 95070 My signature below certifies that I am aware of the proposal. NEIGHBOR SIGNATURE: Date: Revised February 2014 02/02/2023 37 From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2024 12:08 PM To: Clinton Brownley <cbrownley@gmail.com>; Anjali Kausar <aakausar@outlook.com>; Razi Mohiuddin <razi@mohiuddin.com>; Herman Zheng <zheng.herman@gmail.com>; Jonathan Choi <jojo.choi@gmail.com>; Ping Li <ping.li2@comcast.net>; Paul Germaraad <pgermeraad@gmail.com>; Bryan Swanson <bswanson@saratoga.ca.us>; Britt Avrit <bavrit@saratoga.ca.us>; Frances Reed <freed@saratoga.ca.us> Subject: Online Form Submittal: Planning Commission Comments Form CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Planning Commission Comments Form Your Name Rainer Zaechelein Phone Number Email Address Comments Regarding plans for 18394 Montpere Way. I am a direct neighbor and feel that the proposed two story extension is out of touch with the surrounding neighborhood. In fact there are no other two story houses in the immediate neighborhood. It would severely deter from the quaintness of the neighborhood and in fact be an eye sore. I believe the beautiful and healthy cedar tree in the front yard is also in question of being removed. Tragic. We need more trees, not fewer. Have spoken to a few neighbors and they feel the same way. I am strongly opposed to this expansion and tree removal and I would ask that you not let this go through. There are other ways to add square footage. It is also an AirBNB house with no permanent residents which makes this proposal even more ridiculous. Thank you for your time and consideration. Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. 38 From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 4:06 AM To: Clinton Brownley <cbrownley@gmail.com>; Anjali Kausar <aakausar@outlook.com>; Razi Mohiuddin <razi@mohiuddin.com>; Herman Zheng <zheng.herman@gmail.com>; Jonathan Choi <jojo.choi@gmail.com>; Ping Li <ping.li2@comcast.net>; Paul Germaraad <pgermeraad@gmail.com>; Bryan Swanson <bswanson@saratoga.ca.us>; Britt Avrit <bavrit@saratoga.ca.us>; Frances Reed <freed@saratoga.ca.us> Subject: Online Form Submittal: Planning Commission Comments Form CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Planning Commission Comments Form Your Name Cliff Huang Phone Number Email Address Comments Dear Planning Commission, I am writing on behalf of all residents residing at 18406 Monptere Way concerning Application PDR23-0008/ARB23-0097: 18394 Montpere Way; (403-23-029) Gordon K. Wong (Applicant). We, along with several of our neighbors, will be attending the meeting on March 13th in opposition to this application proposal, but I also wanted to send in something in writing. Since we are next door to this property, building a 2nd floor will directly affect us by invading our privacy through our kitchen bay 39 window. Not only so, the proposed application will completely block out this bay window altogether. Currently this window is the only source of natural light into the kitchen and is being used also to grow plants and organic herbs. In the morning, we have enjoyed the beautiful rays of sunshine into the kitchen and at night this window provides us with a view of the stars and the moon in the evening sky. Blocking this window will have detrimental effects on our mood and daily routine. Furthermore, it will diminish our property value for future sales. In fact, this proposal will damage the property value of all surrounding houses since this street only has single floor houses. My family has been living here for decades, so have many of our neighbors. We know the owner of 18394 is not a resident at this property and has not been for quite some time. I find it distressing that an outside owner is encroaching on our way of life and property value without even the courtesy of seeking our views or showing concern about how it would affect the people trying to live here in peace. Therefore, we ask this Planning Commission to deny the unethical proposal request and protect the rights and privacy of the Saratoga residents on Montpere Way. Thank you kindly. Sincerely, Cliff C. Huang Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. 40 A TTS LACEFOILICENSEDARCHITE C T FORNIAGORDKONWGNO RENEWAL 03/01/201340453-C18394 MONTPERE WAYSARATOGA, CA 95030RESIDENTIAL NEW CONSTRUCTIONSCALER E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT LIC# 34045710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408) 315-2125 GORDONKWONG@GKWARCHITECTS.COMSTEVEN RAMIREZ, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNER710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408) 796-1845STEVENRAMIREZ@GKWARCHITECTS.COMRENEWAL 08/31/ 2023 1/8" = 1'-0"11/1/2023 5:32:29 PMA401Material BoardMaterial Board1Revision Schedule12023.05.02Planning 141 A TTS LACEFOILICENSEDARCHITE C T FORNIAGORDKONWGNO RENEWAL 03/01/201340453-C18394 MONTPERE WAYSARATOGA, CA 95030RESIDENTIAL NEW CONSTRUCTIONSCALER E S I D E N T I A L / C O M M E R C I A L GORDON K WONG, ARCHITECT LIC# 34045710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408) 315-2125 GORDONKWONG@GKWARCHITECTS.COMSTEVEN RAMIREZ, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNER710E MCGLINCY LANE SUITE 109CAMPBELL, CA 95008 (408) 796-1845STEVENRAMIREZ@GKWARCHITECTS.COMRENEWAL 08/31/ 2025 1/8" = 1'-0"4/3/2024 10:58:06 AMA700Architectural,Massing DiagramArchitectural, Massing DiagramRevision Schedule67 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road Meeting Date: April 10, 2024 Application: PCUP24-0001 Address/APN: 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd / 386-01-025 Applicant: Bridget Lynch (AoPS Academy) Report Prepared By: Kyle Rathbone, Assistant Planner 68 Report to the Planning Commission 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd – Application # PCUP24-0001 April 10, 2024 Page | 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit approval for a new after-school tutoring center to operate within 4,711 square feet of an existing office space converted to classroom facilities at 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 24-013 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. Pursuant to City Code Section 15-55.060, the Planning Commission shall consider all applications for Conditional Use Permits except for those uses identified in Section 15-55.065. As the proposed project would be a conditional use exceeding 4,000 sq. ft., Planning Commission approval is required. PROJECT DATA Gross/Net Site Area: 27,878 sq. ft. (0.64 acres) General Plan Designation: CR (Commercial Retail) Zoning: CV (Commercial Visitor) SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site Description The project site is a corner lot located at 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Avenue at its intersection with Kirkmont Drive in the CV zoning district. The site is surrounded by a mix of multi-family residential and commercial uses. Existing improvements on site include the 4,711 sq ft, one-story office building and 30 total parking spaces. Project Description The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a new after-school enrichment tutoring center (AoPS Academy Saratoga) for students in grades 1-12 to operate within an existing 4,711 sq. ft. office building. Work would consist of a remodel of existing interior facilities, removing the existing office layout and adding interior partition walls and doors, new ceilings, new finishes, and mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work. Class sizes would be a maximum of 16 students per classroom with the average enrollment expected to be 13 students per session. There would be a maximum of seven sessions occurring at any one time giving a maximum student count of 112. The maximum number of employees on site would be 10. Hours of operation for the tutoring use would be 12:00 PM to 9:00 PM Monday through Friday and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Saturday through Sunday during the academic year and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Friday during the summer with no summer classes during the weekends. 69 Report to the Planning Commission 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd – Application # PCUP24-0001 April 10, 2024 Page | 3 Tutoring sessions would be staggered through the center’s operation time with no more than seven sessions occurring at one time. Sessions starts would be staggered on 15 minute intervals to limit the concentration of arrivals and departures. A full schedule is included in Attachment 3. The site contains 27 standard parking spaces and 3 accessible spaces. The adjacent parcel(s) with a connected, shared parking lot along Atrium Dr contains 156 standard parking spaces and 5 accessible spaces for a total of 191 shared parking spaces across the lots. The tutoring center would share these existing parking facilities with the commercial uses at Park Saratoga. Given the maximum class sizes and staggered start and end times, no more than 48 students should be arriving or departing in any given 15-minute window. Actual numbers of car traffic and parking use are anticipated to be lower than this maximum due to smaller average class sizes, carpooling, and alternative means of transportation. Pursuant to City Code, the required parking for institutional uses including tutoring centers is one space for each employee plus additional spaces as determined by the Planning Commission to be adequate for student/visitors. Previous permits for educational uses have used a maximum parking ratio of 0.28 spaces per student. Based on this rate, the proposed 112 student maximum would be estimated to require 32 parking spaces. Staff has concluded that the existing parking available would fully accommodate the proposed use. FINDINGS The findings required for issuance of a Conditional Use Permit Approval pursuant to City Code Section Article 15-55.070 are set forth below. Staff believes the applicant’s project has met the burden of proof to support the findings required for approval of a Use Permit under Article 15-55 of the City Code, as shown below: a. The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that institutional facilities, which include educational uses such as tutoring centers, are conditionally permitted in all commercial districts. Once purpose of the commercial district is to provide space for institutional facilities that serve the community. b. The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the Conditional Use Permit includes conditions of approval to ensure compliance with all applicable health and safety codes. The applicant will be required to obtain a building permit for the proposed improvements and will be required to comply with all applicable building and fire code standards. c. The proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Saratoga Municipal Code. 70 Report to the Planning Commission 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd – Application # PCUP24-0001 April 10, 2024 Page | 4 This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the Conditional Use permit includes conditions of approval to ensure compliance with zoning requirements. Any intensification of this use will require an amended Conditional Use Permit. The City shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Conditional Use Permit and may, at any time, modify, delete, or impose, any new conditions of the permit to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. d. The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the tutoring center will be able to utilize the existing office building and adjacent parking and road infrastructure to avoid adversely impacting surrounding properties through parking or traffic circulation. The staggered session times would further reduce transportation impacts to surrounding properties or uses. The use permit includes conditions of approval to regulate the number of students and hours of operation to protect adjacent uses. NEIGHBOR NOTIFICATION The applicant contacted adjacent neighboring businesses and property owners regarding the proposed project though mailing out neighbor notification forms but were unable to obtain returned signatures for the forms. The Community Development Department mailed public notices to property owners within 500 feet of the site. In addition, the public hearing notice and description of the project was published in the Saratoga News. To date, no comments have been received for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structure”. This exemption allows for the conversion of an existing small structure from one use to another where only minor modifications are made to the structure. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 24-013 2. Applicant’s Statement of Findings 3. Applicant’s Proposed Use and Operations Statement 4. Project Plans 71 RESOLUTION NO. 24-013 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCUP24-0001 12200 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE RD WHEREAS, on January 8, 2024 an application was submitted by Bridget Lynch requesting Conditional Use Permit approval for a new after-school tutoring center to operate within an existing office building at 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department completed an environmental assessment for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and recommends that the Planning Commission determine this project exempt; and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2024, 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 Class 3 Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15301. This exemption allows for the conversion of an existing small structure from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. Section 3: The findings required for issuance of a Use Permit are set forth below. The applicant’s project has met the burden of proof to support the findings required for approval of a Conditional Use Permit under Article 15-55 of the City Code, as set forth below: Finding #1: The Project meets the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which the site is located. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that institutional facilities, which includes educational uses such as tutoring centers, are conditionally permitted in all commercial districts. Once purpose of the residential district is to provide space for institutional facilities that serve the community. Finding #2: The Project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the Conditional Use Permit includes conditions of approval to ensure compliance with all applicable health and safety codes. The applicant will be required to obtain a building permit for the proposed improvements and will be required to comply with all applicable building and fire code standards. 72 Report to the Planning Commission 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd -PCUP24-0001 April 10, 2024 Resolution # 24-013 Page | 2 Finding #3: The proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the Conditional Use permit includes conditions of approval to ensure compliance with zoning requirements. Any intensification of this use will require an amended Conditional Use Permit. The City shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Conditional Use Permit and may, at any time, modify, delete, or impose, any new conditions of the permit to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. Finding #4: The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the tutoring center will be able to utilize the existing office building and adjacent parking and road infrastructure to avoid adversely impacting surrounding properties through parking or traffic circulation. The staggered session times would further reduce transportation impacts to surrounding properties or uses. The use permit includes conditions of approval to regulate the number of students and hours of operation to protect adjacent uses. Section 4: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves application PCUP24-0001, for the project located at 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit 1. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 10th day of April 2024 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Clinton Brownley Chair, Planning Commission 73 Report to the Planning Commission 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd -PCUP24-0001 April 10, 2024 Resolution # 24-013 Page | 3 Exhibit 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 12200 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE RD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. GENERAL 1. 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. 2. The Planning Commission shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Conditional Use Permit and may, at any time, modify, delete, or impose, any new conditions of the permit to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. 3. Any exterior modification or intensification of the uses approved under this Use Permit shall require an amended Conditional Use Permit approved by the Planning Commission. Examples of intensification of use include, but are not limited to, physical changes to the site or structures that result in ongoing increases in traffic, noise, or other physical effects. 4. The uses/structures/project shall maintain compliance with all applicable requirements of the City, including, without limitation, the requirements of the Saratoga Zoning Regulations. The uses/structures/project shall at all times operate in compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdictional authority over the use pertaining to, but not limited to, health, sanitation, safety, and water quality issues. B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 5. The allowed hours of operation shall be from 12:00 PM to 9:00 PM Monday through Friday and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Saturday through Sunday during the academic year and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Friday during the summer. 6. The maximum number of students on site at one time shall not exceed 112. 7. The maximum number of employees on site at one time shall not exceed 10. 8. All noise levels will comply with City Code Article 7-30. 9. No signage is proposed. Signage shall comply with City Code Article 15-30 and may require review and approval by the Community Development Department. 74 Report to the Planning Commission 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd -PCUP24-0001 April 10, 2024 Resolution # 24-013 Page | 4 10. The applicant shall comply with all building standards including any tenant improvements necessary to comply with the building code. 11. The applicant shall comply with all Fire Agency requirements. 12. Per Section 15-55.100 of the City Code, this application shall remain under the continuous jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. Any violation of the above code shall constitute grounds for consideration of use permit revocation. 13. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other governmental entities must be met. 14. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City’s defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court challenging the City’s action with respect to the applicant’s project. … End of Conditions … 75 December 21, 2023 City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 Attn.: Planning Department RE: 12200 Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road - Conditional Use Permit Use Permit Findings; 1. The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located because, it is a commercial district where compatible uses, such as retail stores and service businesses are already been located. There are Learning Centers, Studios, Academies, and other like uses in this area, which are complimentary and conveniently located near residential development. 2. The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity because, the proposed business is desirable near primarily residential areas for convenience, but areas that also promote the usage of adjacent retail and service oriented businesses, by parents during class-times, that coincide with nearby businesses in this district. 3. The proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of Chapter 15-55 of the Saratoga Municipal Code because, (1) it will not cause a variation from the current building standards, (2) it utilizes an existing vacant building that has ample parking, and (3) the CUP only becomes necessary because the proposed use exceeds the 4,000 s.f. area threshold for other similar permitted uses in this district by 711 s.f. 4. The proposed conditional use will not adversely affect existing or anticipated uses in the immediate neighborhood, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the occupants thereof because, it is being housed within an existing building, that is appropriate in size, and that has adequate vehicular parking and access. The scheduled class times are also compatible with other existing businesses near this location. Please do not hesitate to contact me for further information regarding our proposal. Sincerely, Dave Ayres, Architect 76 2-23-24 AoPS Academy Saratoga Proposed Use & Operations Statement Location 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd., Saratoga, CA 95070 Use: After-school enrichment tutoring for gifted students in grades 1-12. Subjects include math, language arts, and science. Number of classrooms ● 7 classrooms ● Typically only two-thirds of classrooms are in use at any given time Class sizes ● Maximum of 16 students per classroom. ● Average enrollment is 13 students per session. Operating Hours Hours include administrative hours. See schedule section below for tutoring hours. ● August-May (Academic Year) ○ Monday-Friday, 12 PM - 9 PM ○ Saturday-Sunday, 9 AM - 5 PM ● June-July (Summer) ○ Monday-Friday, 9 AM-5 PM ○ Saturday-Sunday, Closed Tutoring Schedule ● All session starts are staggered on 15 minute intervals so that no more than three rooms full of students are arriving or departing within any given 15 minute window. We have done this explicitly to address any local concerns about traffic impacts or parking. ● For each room in use, we leave 30 minute intervals between the end of one session and the beginning of the next to ensure that there is no overlap of students arriving and departing. Academic Year Sample Schedules (August-May) Monday-Friday Schedule Start Time No. of Sessions Maximum Students Arriving End Time 3:45 3 48 5:30 77 4:00 2 32 5:45 4:15 2 32 6:00 6:15 3 48 8:00 6:30 2 32 8:15 6:45 2 32 8:30 Sample Saturday-Sunday Start Time No. of Sessions Maximum Students Arriving End Time 9:00 3 48 10:45 9:15 2 32 11:00 9:30 2 32 11:15 11:45 3 48 1:30 12:00 2 32 1:45 12:15 2 32 2:00 2:30 3 48 4:15 2:45 2 32 4:30 3:00 2 32 4:45 Summer Sample Schedule (June-July) Monday-Friday Schedule Start Time No. of Sessions Maximum Students Arriving End Time 8:45 3 48 11:45 9:00 2 32 5:45 9:15 2 32 6:00 12:45 3 48 3:45 1:00 2 32 4:00 1:15 2 32 4:15 78 Closed Saturday and Sunday during our Summer season. Maximum number of employees on site at once: 10 ● Including instructors, campus directors, and support staff Anticipated Traffic Impacts Using a staggered class start schedule, there will be no more than 48 cars coming or going within any given 15 window. That will prevent substantial traffic impacts on the adjacent roads. There will be no queueing of vehicles within the lot or the street. Sufficient parking spaces exist for each parent to park their vehicles, escort their student into the building, and then depart. The same process will be used at the similarly-staggered end times so that traffic impacts on the two adjacent roads at any given time are minimal. Parking & Traffic Management For each classroom in use, we reserve at least 30 minutes between the end of one class and the beginning of the next so that there is no overlap between students being picked up and the students being dropped off. No more than 3 sessions start simultaneously, to prevent negative local traffic impacts. The above numbers represent maximum numbers of students possible, but operations at other campus locations have established the existence of several factors that reduce the actual number of trips generated: - Calculations are based on a 16 student maximum, but our average class size is 12 students during the Academic Year and 9 students during the Summer. - Parents are often bringing 2-3 of their children to our campus at the same time. - Some parents arrange to carpool with other families. - Some students stay for multiple sessions in one day. - Most of our existing students come from within 5 miles of a campus, with a significant number living within walking distance of our newer locations in California. Drop-off and pick-up There are 30 parking spaces on the parcel, with many additional spaces in the larger shared parking area. Parents drop the students off at the campus within 15 minutes of the class start time and pick them up within 15 minutes of class end. This, combined with our standard staggered schedule, ensures that we have the minimum possible number of students coming and going at the same time. 79 Parents are required to park their cars and walk their student(s) into the building for drop-off, and to escort their student(s) out at pick-up. Curbside drop-off and pick-up is not permitted. A small number of the oldest students may drive themselves to class. 80 12200 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga, CAAoPS Academy SaratogaConditional Use PermitN81 82 N83 N84 N85 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date: April 10, 2024 Subject: Planning Commission Work Plan Address/APN: Citywide Owner / Applicant: City of Saratoga From: Bryan T. Swanson, Community Development Director STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss its priority work plan items for the coming year, and forward it to the City Council for input and direction at the Joint City Council Planning Commission Work Plan Study Session on May 1, 2024. No formal action is requested or may be made at a study session, but straw polls may be appropriate to indicate priorities. BACKGROUND: Each year, the Planning Commission discusses its potential Work Plan items for the coming year. The Council then reviews the items suggested in a joint session with the Commission or in another format, and provides input and direction regarding where the Commission should focus its efforts. Attachment 1 is a copy of the Commission’s 2022/23 Work Plan for reference. DISCUSSION: The Commission’s FY 23/24 Work Plan will focus on the following core priorities: Housing Element Implementation 2024: 1.2-4: Lot Consolidation Program: The City has identified nine parcels within housing opportunity sites that could benefit from lot consolidation incentives. These parcels range in size from 0.28 to 0.46 acres. To facilitate lot consolidation, the City will implement a program that incentivizes lot consolidation through with the following incentives: • Transfer of Development Rights for housing • Waived fees and expedited processing • Develop a graduated density scale based on parcel size to encourage voluntary private actions to consolidate lots to be at least 0.75 to 1 acre in size to facilitate quality infill development. • Increased Floor Area • Increased Building Height • Reduced Setbacks 86 Planning Commission Work Plan April 12, 2023 Page | 2 • Parking Reduction: Required parking may be reduced subject to finding that due to lot consolidation adequate parking will be available to serve the subject project; • Signage Bonus: Area of permitted signs within mixed use zones may be increased, subject to finding that the increased size of signs on one consolidated parcel will not adversely affect the visibility of signs on adjacent parcels. The City will advertise the lot consolidation provisions to existing property owners and prospective mixed-use and affordable housing developers. Advertisement actions may include preparation and distribution of a brochure with information about program incentives and an invitation to attend a working session to discuss opportunities for lot consolidation and mixed- use residential development, including affordable housing development. By September 2024, implement lot consolidation incentives to facilitate mixed use development. Promote the program through dissemination of brochures at public counters and providing information on City website and contacting property owners and prospective mixed-use and affordable housing developers to highlight lot consolidation incentives available to support redevelopment of these parcels. Geographic target: Citywide with a focus on the housing opportunity sites with small parcels. Develop inventory of sites and post to the City’s website by July 2024; update annually throughout planning period. Outreach to rotating groups of property owners every 12 months. Implement program by July September 2024. Engage property owners and developers by December 2024 and Ppromote program throughout planning period. If by mid-way through the RHNA cycle (2027), trends indicate a potential shortfall in meeting the estimated units in for the Village East areaarea for all small sites in the inventory, modify the program to provide additional incentives to encourage lot consolidation and/or identify additional sites to expand site capacity to the extent necessary to accommodate the RHNA. 3.2-1: Amend Zoning Standards in Districts that allow Mixed-Use: Adopt the following amendments to development standards in Zoning OrdinanceDistricts that allow Mixed-Use with the followingto remove constraints and achieve the maximum density allowed: CH-1 District • Reduce required residential parking standard from 2.5 to 1.5 spaces/unit (1.0 covered). • Reduce required parking standard for office, service, retail, and financial institutions from 1/200 sf to 1/250 or 1/300 sf. CH-2 District • Increase building height limit to 35 feet/3 stories to allow 3-story buildings, or 2 stories of residential over shared parking. • Reduce required residential parking standard from 2.5 to 1.5 spaces/unit (1.0 covered). • Reduce required parking standard for office, service, retail, and financial institutions from 1/200 sf to 1/250 or 1/300 sf. • Edit design standard requiring 70 percent of ground-floor building frontage to be built within 10 feet of the front setback line to apply only to parcels where lot frontage conforms to the standard. 87 Planning Commission Work Plan April 12, 2023 Page | 3 P-A District • Increase building height limit to 35 feet/3 stories to allow 3-story buildings or 2 stories of residential units over shared parking. • Apply upper-story setback to only a portion of building length, such as 50 percent, instead of the whole building length. This would achieve the desired effect of reducing the building mass while also allowing greater flexibility in the design of the building’s upper stories. • Reduce 35-foot setback abutting R-1 or R-M zones to 25 feet. Non-residential uses, particularly any uses with impacts such as noise or outdoor lighting, could be subject to the existing 35-foot setback standard. • Increase maximum lot coverage from 30 to 40 percent. C-V and C-N Districts • Increase building height limit to 35 feet/3 stories to allow 3-story buildings, or 2 stories of residential units over shared parking. • Reduce required residential parking standard from 2.5 to 1.5 spaces/unit (1.0 covered). • Reduce required parking standard for office, service, retail, and financial institutions from 1/200 sf to 1/300 sf. • Simplify standards for setbacks in the C-N zone, which are difficult to interpret. • Reduce 30-foot interior side and rear setback abutting R-1 zones to 15 or 20 feet. Non- residential uses, particularly any uses with impacts such as noise or outdoor lighting, could be subject to the existing 30-foot setback standard. Standardize height limits in the CH‐1 and CH‐2 districts by increasing the height limit in CH‐2 from 26 feet to 35 feet and three stories. Review the height, coverage, and parking requirements in districts (CN, C-V, CH-1, CH-2, P-A ) that allow mixed-use to ensure there are no constraints to achieving the maximum density of 20 dwelling units per acre for mixed-use projects using those standards. A similar review of the R- M: Multi-Family Residential standards will also be conducted and standards will be amended as necessary to remove constraints to achieving the maximum allowed density in this district. Adopt code amendments that were identified as a constraint to achieving the maximum density allowed in Districts that allow mixed-use. Geographic target: Citywide: By September 2024 3.2-9: Modify Design Review Findings for Objectivity: The City will amend the Design Review findings for single-family and multi-family projects to ensure they promote certainty and objectivity. Adopt code amendments to facilitate construction of 1,253 units. Adopt updated findings by December 2024 3.2-10: Modify Single-Family Residential Design Review Handbook: The City will amend the Single-Family Residential Design Review Handbook to have objective design standards which would include duplexes and triplexes. Adopt updated Handbook Adopt updated Handbook by December 2024 88 Planning Commission Work Plan April 12, 2023 Page | 4 4.3-4: Religious Institutional Sites: Allow housing on all religious institutional sites by-right if at least 20 percent of the units are set aside for very low-, low-, or moderate-income units within the City. Conduct outreach to owners and operators of religious institutions to raise awareness and encourage housing proposals and offering technical assistance with religious institutions including assisting with partnerships with non-profit developers. Religious Institutional sites zoned R-1 will be allowed a minimum of 30 and maximum of 40 dwelling units per acre. Religious institutional sites in the R-1 zone will be limited to three stories with a maximum height of 36 feet. If no application for housing on a religious institution/faith-based site is received by December 2027, the City will expand outreach efforts to be conducted annually. This may include direct mailings to faith-based sites highlighting successful affordable housing units on other faith-based sites, as well as available City resources and programs to support such projects. Support the development of 100 housing units on religious institutional sites affordable to lower income households by January 2031. Geographic target: Citywide Establish program by June 2025 4.3-2: Housing for Persons Employed in Saratoga: The City shall explore opportunities to provide additional local housing options for the city’s workforce, including rental housing for families. As part of the proposed inclusionary housing ordinance (Program 5-1.1), the City will implement a local preference program that prioritizes Saratoga workers and persons with special needs. The City will also continue to look for opportunities to increase public awareness of the City’s housing assistance programs such as partnering with West Valley College to explore student and faculty housing development and other employers in Saratoga (churches, etc.). Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing. Adopted code amendment and engage with 5-7 employers each year. Geographic target: Citywide: Adopt code amendment by February 2025. 5.1-1: Inclusionary Housing Ordinance: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to require new multi‐family housing developments consisting of five or more units will be required to dedicate 15 percent of the units as affordable housing to moderate income households. Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable moderate-income housing.Construct 289 affordable units by 2031 to expand housing mobility opportunities for moderate-income households. Geographic target: Citywide Adopt code amendment by February 2025. Other Items If the Commission feels that other items deserve its priority attention in this coming year, they should bring those items up for discussion at the Study Session. ATTACHMENT 1. 2023/24 Work Plan 89 FISCAL YEAR 2023/2024 PLANNING COMMISSION WORK PLAN 1. Housing Element Update Every eight years, California municipalities must update their Housing Element, which is a required component of the General Plan that serves as a long-term blueprint for future housing development. The Housing Element project began in 2021 and the City submitted the initial draft Housing Element to the State Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) in August 2022. On March 17, 2023, HCD completed its review of the second Draft and provided comments to the City. Staff is working on responding to HCD comments and will present the final draft Housing Element for Planning Commission review in the coming weeks. 2. General Plan Update. In April 2018, the City began the process to refresh and make minor policy updates to three elements of the City’s General Plan (Land Use, Circulation, and Open Space & Conservation). The original timeline for Commission review of the draft documents was Winter 2020. Due to the substantial increase in the number of housing units that Saratoga will be required to plan for in the 6th cycle RHNA, the schedule of the General Plan 2040 update was revised so that it can be aligned with the Housing Element. In addition, Senate Bill 1035 requires the Safety Element to be reviewed and updated as necessary every eight years, at the same time as the Housing Element. The updated elements of the General Plan will be combined with the newly updated Housing Element and Safety Element and existing Noise Element to comprise the Saratoga 2040 General Plan. 3. Mixed Use District Regulations and Objective Design Standards The City will be creating new Mixed Use zoning districts as part of the Housing Element Update. The rezoning program will consist of three new zoning districts: Mixed Use” (MU), “Mixed Use High Density” (MU/HD), and “Mixed Use Very High Density” (MU/VHD). The City Code will be amended to include a new development standards for the MU zoning districts. In addition, Senate Bill 35 created a streamlined and ministerial approval process for qualifying housing projects and requires local jurisdictions to provide objective standards for the expedited review and approval of eligible projects. These objective standards include development regulations such as setback and height limitations and can include design standards if these standards are written to be objective rather than subjective. The intent of Objective Design Standards is to provide applicants and developers with a clear set of requirements for mixed-use and multi-family residential project design. 4. Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) Ordinance The State legislature recently amended laws (SB 897 and AB 2221) to reduce barriers and further promote the development of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADU). Staff will bring forth proposed amendments to the City Code to comply with state law. 90 5. Tree Regulations Ordinance At last year’s Joint Session with the City Council, the Planning Commission proposed a work plan item to further address fire related issues in the City by identifying problematic tree species (in addition to Monterey pines and blue gum eucalyptus) and expand the area beyond the WUI where removal of problematic tree species would be allowed. The City Council approved all other items on the proposed work plan and retained this as a placeholder. 6. Single-Family Residential Design Review Handbook The Single-Family Residential Design Review Handbook (“Handbook”) was first adopted in 1988 and last updated in 2014. The Handbook embodies and illustrates the intent of the Design Review Findings found in City Code Section 15-45.080 and serves as a guide to residents, architects, staff, Planning Commission and City Council in the design review process for new single-family residences. The Commission has expressed an interest in updating the Handbook, specifically on the issue of privacy and two-story homes to address the balance between neighbor concerns and rights of property owners. The Handbook update process will include a review of two-story homes previously approved by the Planning Commission and design techniques typically employed to minimize privacy impacts. 91