The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-13-2024 Planning Commission Agenda PacketSaratoga Planning Commission Agenda – Page 1 of 3 SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 13, 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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Action Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of September 11, 2024. Recommended Action: Approve Minutes of September 11, 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. 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.1 Application PDR23-0016/ARB23-0094: 19106 Panorama Drive; (397-09-021) Terry J. Martin Associates (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 5,429 square foot two story single-family residence with a 1,134 square foot basement. The project includes a request for a height exception to increase the allowable 26’ tall building height by an additional 3.48” for a total building height of 29’-4.0”. One protected California Pepper tree is proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-40,000 with a General Plan Designation of Very Low Density Residential (RLD). Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-1235 or criordan@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-030 denying the project as staff cannot make all the required findings for design review and for granting a height exception for a single-family dwelling to exceed a height of 26 feet. 2.2 Application PDR24-0009/ARB24-0068/FER24-0001: 14768 Vickery Ave; (517-27-011) Andison Residential Design (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 4,593 square foot one-story single-family residence over 18 feet tall with a 652 square foot attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and a Fence Exception for a fence of 6-feet of solid material plus an additional 2-feet of lattice material within the exterior side setback where 3 feet is allowed. 5 protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-15,000 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. 24-031 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. 2.3 Application PDR23-0023/VAR23-0004/ARB24-0060: 14771 Montalvo Rd; (517-19-040) Joseph W. Beyers (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 4,563 square foot two-story single-family residence with a 790 square foot detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and a Variance for SB 9 Lot Split parcel map width and area requirements, encroachment of the main residence into the front setback, and allowable floor area limits for the main home. 11 protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-20,000 with a General Plan Designation of Low Density Residential (M-10). Staff Contact: Kyle Rathbone (408) 868-1212 or krathbone@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-032 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. 3. DIRECTOR ITEMS 4. COMMISSION ITEMS Saratoga Planning Commission Agenda – Page 3 of 3 5. 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 November 7, 2024 at the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California and on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Signed this 7th day of November 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 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 SEPTEMBER 11, 2024 SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING Vice Chair Kausar called the Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and requested to observe a moment of silence in honor of September 11 th. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Vice Chair Anjali Kausar, Commissioners Clinton Brownley, Paul Germeraad, Ping Li, Razi Mohiuddin and Herman Zheng ABSENT: Chair Jojo Choi (excused) ALSO PRESENT: Bryan T. Swanson, Community Development Director Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner Kyle Rathbone, Assistant Planner Frances Reed, Administrative Analyst ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS: NONE 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Action Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of August 14, 2024 Recommended Action: Approve Minutes of August 14, 2024 Regular Planning Commission Meetings. GERMERAAD/ZHENG MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 14, 2024 MEETING. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BROWNLEY, GERMERAAD, KAUSAR, LI, MOHIUDDIN, ZHENG. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: CHOI. ABSTAIN: NONE. 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.1 Application PDR23-0024/ARB23-0089: 13325 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd; (503-19-077) Richard Liu (Applicant): The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 3,710 square foot one-story single-family residence over 18 feet tall with an 800 square foot detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU). No protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-12,500 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. 24-029 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. BROWNLEY/GERMERAAD MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 24-029, APPROVING APPLICATION PDR23-0024 SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BROWNLEY, GERMERAAD, KAUSAR, LI, MOHIUDDIN, ZHENG. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: CHOI. ABSTAIN: NONE. 2.2 Application ZOA24-0003: City Wide. Amend Zoning Standards for Urban Lot Splits and Districts that allow Mixed-Use and Multi Family Development: Amendment of Saratoga Municipal Code sections 15- 18.070 (allowable site coverage in the P-A Zoning District), 15-18.080 (front side and rear setback areas of the P-A Zoning District), 15-19.030 (side and rear setbacks when abutting an A, R-1, or HR district), 15- 35.030 (parking requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units, Retail Establishments, Professional and 4 Administrative Offices, Medical Offices and Clinics, Service Establishments and Financial Institutions), 15-56.035 (accessory dwelling unit occupancy requirements), and 15-57.050 (remove provisions against allowing accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units on lots resulting from an Urban Lot Split). Staff Contact: Christopher Riordan (408) 868-1235 or criordan@saratoga.ca.us. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 24-028 recommending the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 15 (Zoning Regulations) of the Saratoga City Code to implement programs of the 2023-2031 Housing Element. LI/MOHIUDDIN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 24-028 RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF ZONING REGULATION AMENDMENTS. MOTION PASSED. AYES: BROWNLEY, GERMERAAD, KAUSAR, LI, MOHIUDDIN, ZHENG. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: CHOI. ABSTAIN: NONE. 3. DIRECTOR ITEMS Director Swanson shared some of the specifics of he received from a Planning Commissioner. How can the city be involved in notifications to neighbors for projects that are ministerial? Director Swanson is working with the City’s Legal Department to find out what is allow under state law regarding this topic. Also, whether signage can be added to properties going through the design process. The Objective Design Standards will be coming to a Study Session for the commission in October or November. Director Swanson noted that there are 19 builder’s remedy projects being processed so far. 4. COMMISSION ITEMS None 5. ADJOURNMENT KAUSAR moved for adjournment at 7:29 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted: Frances Reed, Administrative Analyst City of Saratoga 5 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 19106 Panorama Drive Meeting Date: November 13, 2024 Application: PDR23-0016 / ARB23-0094 Address/APN: 19106 Panorama Drive / 397-09-021 Applicant / Property Owner: Terry J. Martin Associates / Ajit R. Mayya & Sonali Desai Report Prepared By: Christopher Riordan, Senior Planner 6 Report to the Planning Commission 19106 Panorama Drive November 13, 2024 Page | 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 5,429 square foot two story single- family residence with a 1,134 square foot basement. The project includes a request for a height exception to increase the allowable 26’ tall building height by an additional 3.48’ for a total building height of 29.48’ (29’-4”). One protected California pepper tree is proposed for removal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 24-030 denying the project as staff cannot make all the required findings for design review and for granting a height exception for a single-family dwelling to exceed a height of 26 feet. Pursuant to City Code Section 15-45.060(a)(1) and 15-12.100(a), Design Review Approval by the Planning Commission is required as the project is a new two-story single-family residence, and the applicant is requesting to increase the height of the dwelling above 26 feet. PROJECT DATA Gross/Net Site Area: 60,984 sq. ft. (1.40 acres) / 52,708 sq. ft. (1.21 acres) Average Site Slope: 15.4% General Plan Designation: RVLD (Residential Low Density) Zoning: R-1-40,000 Proposed Allowed/Required Site Coverage Residence/Garage Decks / Patios Pool Sport Court Trash Enclosure Permeable Driveway / Pathways Total Proposed (structures) 4,021 sq. ft. 2,045 sq. ft. 634 sq. ft. 1,171 sq. ft. 140 sq. ft. 3,428 sq. ft. 11,439 sq. ft. (21.7%) 18,448 sq. ft. (35%)* Floor Area (Main Residence) First Floor Second Floor Attached Garage Porch Basement (Floor Area) Total Floor Area 2,854 sq. ft. 1,513 sq. ft. 818 sq. ft. 36 sq. ft. 208 sq. ft. 5,429 sq. ft. 6,060 sq. ft. Height 29’-4” 26’ Setbacks Front: Left Side: Right Side Rear: 1st Floor 81’-90’’ 84’-8.0” 31’-2.0” 46’-4.0” 2nd Floor 81’-90’’ 89’-7.0” 54’-5.0” 46’-4.0” 1st Floor 30’ 20’ 20’ 20’ 2nd Floor 30’ 25’ 25’ 20’ Grading Cut 1,500 C.Y. Fill 180 C.Y. Total 1,680 C.Y. No grading limit in the R-1-40,000 zoning district 7 Report to the Planning Commission 19106 Panorama Drive November 13, 2024 Page | 3 SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site Description The 52,708 net square foot project site is a corner lot located at the intersection of Panorama Drive and El Camino Grande at 19106 Panorama Drive. The site contains an existing two-story single-family residence and related site improvements. A total of 35 protected trees are located on site which include Coast Live Oak, Redwood, Monterey Pine, and Pepper. Nearby homes are located on similarly sized parcels and are a combination of both one and two story structures. Project Description The existing two-story single-family residence and all improvements including hardscape will be removed. The project will consist of a two-story residence with a basement. The architectural style of the project is defined by the applicant as “Modern Farmhouse” and will include a 1,134 square foot basement, a 2,890 square foot first story with an attached 818 square feet front facing garage and a 1,513 second story. The proposed height is 29’-4”. The Modern Farmhouse architectural style is a contemporary interpretation of traditional farmhouse design. While it draws inspiration from the classic farmhouses of the past, it incorporates modern elements and aesthetics that set it apart and is typically characterized by a distinctive blend of traditional agricultural elements—such as gabled roofs, expansive porches, and the use of natural materials—with modern design principles. Exterior materials often include a combination of wood, metal, and stone to create a textured yet cohesive appearance. The exterior of modern farmhouses typically incorporates a neutral color scheme with whites, grays, and muted tones accented by darker shades of natural wood. The proposed project will include a primarily square building footprint with minimal architectural projections. In keeping with the Modern Farmhouse style, the symmetrical façade will include square windows, vertical board and batten siding, a stucco front entryway element, and a standing seam metal roof. The three garage doors will have a carriage style. The left elevation will include a walkout basement. Height Exception The Saratoga City Code limits the height of a residential structure to 26 feet. However, the Planning Commission may grant a height exception up to 30 feet when findings for additional height can be made pursuant to City Code Section 15-12.100. These findings are detailed in the findings section of this report. The applicant is requesting a height exception to allow a maximum overall building height for the primary dwelling unit of 29’-4.0”. To approve a request for a height exception it must be found that the additional height is a necessary component of an identifiable and well documented architectural style and that the design of the structure will be similar in scale with structures in the surrounding neighborhood. The applicant submitted a written project description and letter of justification for the height exception which is included as Attachment #3. The applicants’ justifications for the height exception include: • Additional building height is necessary to maintain key aspects and feel of a Modern Farmhouse residence which includes comfortable ceiling heights, bright and airy interior spaces, large windows, and a pitched gable and hipped roof. 8 Report to the Planning Commission 19106 Panorama Drive November 13, 2024 Page | 4 As mentioned in a preceding paragraph, to grant a height exception the Planning Commission must find that additional building height is a necessary component of the of the architectural style defined by the applicant as “Modern Farmhouse.” The height of the proposed project could be reduced by designing the project to conform to the sites contours which include repositioning the location of the building on the site, designing the floor plan to follow the existing grades, reducing the size of the building footprint or decreasing the pitch of the roof while maintaining the current architectural style as defined by the applicant. Colors and Materials The applicant has provided a color and materials board (Attachment #6). Below is a list of the proposed exterior materials. Detail Colors and Materials Exterior Off White Colored Cementitious Board and Batten Siding Off White Colored Stucco Windows Black Colored Windows w/ Metal Frames and Grids Doors Metal and Glass Front Entrance Door Grey Colored Garage Door Roof Grey Colored Standing Seam Metal Roof Trees The project arborist inventoried a total of 35 protected trees on the project site which include Sequoia, Coast Live Oak, and California Pepper. One California Pepper tree is located on the opposite side of the street and is proposed for removal because of required street widening required by the Fire Department. This tree is in poor condition with decay and was previously topped to clear space for overhead utility lines. Tree fencing is required to be installed to minimize impacts to remaining protected trees prior to project commencement and during its duration. The payment of a tree protection security deposit is required prior to building permit issuance. Details of the arborist’s findings and description of the trees on site is included in the Arborist Report (Attachment #2). Landscaping The proposed landscaping for the project site – Sheet L2 of the Project Plans (Attachment #6) – illustrates the project site will be completely landscaped. Landscaping for the front yard and side yards will include turf and flowering groundcovers, new shrubs, and new trees. Permeable pavers will be used for a new driveway. Hardscape will include a new swimming pool, sport court, and patios. FINDINGS Height Exception The Planning Commission may approve a structure up to thirty feet in height pursuant to City Code Section 15-12-100, if the Planning Commission finds and determines that: (a) The additional height is a necessary component of an identifiable and well documented architectural style. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative as the 9 Report to the Planning Commission 19106 Panorama Drive November 13, 2024 Page | 5 proposed architectural design of the project is not an identifiable and well-documented architectural style. While a traditional farmhouse may have historical architectural details, such as classic gables, dormer windows, and porches with railings, a Modern Farmhouse design is a contemporary interpretation of traditional farmhouse design which has grown in popularity to include open floor plans, large windows and doors to maximize natural light. The applicant’s assertion that additional building height is necessary to maintain key aspects of a Modern Farmhouse that is not a traditional design does not warrant an increase in building height in excess of 26 feet since the building could be reduced in height while still maintaining the architectural style. (b) The design of the structure will be similar in scale with structures in the surrounding neighborhood. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative in that the proposed project with an overall building height of 29’-4” will be much taller and out of scale with immediately adjacent homes on Panorama Drive and those located behind on Monte Vista Drive which are all one story structures. In addition, the proposed building site is located on the highest point of the site which will accentuate the appearance of scale when viewed from the street. (c) The net lot size used for determining floor area exceeds twenty-thousand square feet. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the net lot size is 52,708 square feet and exceeds the minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet. Design Review The findings required for Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code Section Article 15-45.080 are set forth below and the Applicant has not 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 located in approximately the same location as the existing house to be removed which will minimize the grading that would be necessary to create a new building pad. Grading outside the footprint of the building will be limited to site contouring for drainage, proposed landscaping, patios, driveway, and the construction of a swimming pool. 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 of the 35 protected trees located on the site only one California Pepper tree located on the opposite side Panorama Drive is in conflict with required fire department street widening – this tree is in poor condition will be removed. Tree protection fencing is required to be installed prior to the issuance of building permits and shall remain in place for project duration. 10 Report to the Planning Commission 19106 Panorama Drive November 13, 2024 Page | 6 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 cannot be made in the affirmative in that the height of the proposed residence is 29’-4” where the maximum height of a single-family residential structure is 26 feet. This additional building height, and that the residence will be located on the highest point of the site, will increase the height of second story windows which could have the potential of impacting the privacy by increasing views into the windows and yards of the adjacent lots to the side and the rear. 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 cannot be made in the affirmative in that the mass and height of the structure, and its architectural elements may be in scale with the structure but are not in scale with the neighborhood which are predominantly made up on one story single family homes. 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 the proposed landscaping for the front yard will include flowering groundcovers, shrubs, fruit trees, native trees, and a minimal amount of hardscape to include a portion of the permeable paver driveway 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 the site and adjacent sites are large with ample distances from one residence to the next. Do the size of the lots and the distances between nearby residences there will be no shadowing caused by the project that could pose an unreasonable impact on adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. g. The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding cannot be made in the affirmative because the proposed project does not incorporate applicable design policies and techniques from the Residential Design Handbook. The overall mass and height of the structure is not 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 applicable to the project because the average slope exceeds 10% therefore classifying the site as a hillside lot however there are no ridgelines in the vicinity of the project, no significant hillside feature, community viewsheds, and that Section 15-13.100 (Hillside Residential (HR) Zoning District Development Standards) are not applicable. 11 Report to the Planning Commission 19106 Panorama Drive November 13, 2024 Page | 7 NEIGHBOR NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE The applicant contacted adjacent neighbors regarding the project and was able to obtain neighbor notification forms from eight adjacent neighbors. None of the notices included project related comments. 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. 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. 24-030 2. City Arborist Report dated July 29, 2024 3. Applicant Project Justification Letter 4. Public Comments 5. Materials Board 6. Project Plans 12 RESOLUTION NO: 24-030 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND A REQUEST FOR A HEIGHT EXCEPTION – PDR23-0016 - FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 19106 PANORAMA DRIVE (397-09-021) WHEREAS, on September 21, 2023, a Design Review application was submitted to the City of Saratoga by Terry J. Martin Associates, AIA on behalf of Ajit R. Mayya and Sonali Desai for Design Review approval and City Arborist Clearance for a 5,429 square foot two-story single-family residence with a 926 square foot basement. The project includes a request for a height exception for a 29.48’ residential structure whereas the maximum height is 26 feet. One protected California pepper tree is proposed for removal. WHEREAS, upon reviewing the project plans and visiting the project site, staff made the determination that the design of the project as proposed was not consistent with 1) the Design Review Findings, 2) the findings for a height exception for a residential structure to exceed a height of 26 feet, and 3) the Single-Family Residential Design Review Handbook. WHEREAS, staff reviewed the project plans with the applicant and discussed how staff could not make the findings to support the project as the request for additional building height was not a necessary component of an identifiable and well documented architectural style which could warrant a structure greater than 26 feet. WHEREAS, the applicant did not modify the design of the project to lower the height so staff could make the required Design Review and Height Exception findings to recommend approval. WHEREAS, the City Code as provided in Section 15-45.055 requires that all structures requiring design review shall be consistent with the design techniques described in the Single-Family Residential Design Review Handbook. WHEREAS, the City Code as provided in Section 15-45.080 requires that the Planning Commission shall not grant design review approval unless it is able to make the required design review findings. WHEREAS, the City Code as provided in Section 15-12.100(a) requires the Planning Commission shall not approve a residential structure in excess of 26 feet unless it is able to make the required findings for additional height. WHEREAS, on November 13, 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. 13 19100 Panorama Drive November 13, 2024 Page | 2 Section 2: After careful consideration of the architectural drawings and other exhibits and evidence submitted in connection with this matter, the findings for denial of a design review application and a request for a height exception for a residential structure to exceed 26 feet as set forth below are hereby made, Application No. PDR23-0016 for Design Review approval was voted on and is hereby denied by the Planning Commission. Section 3: The Planning Commission finds that the application for design review (PDR23- 0016) for the construction of a 4,750 two story single-family residence is inconsistent with all the design review findings contained in City Code Section 15-45.080, specifically finding #s c, d and g, in that: a) Site development does follow the natural contours of the site, minimizes grading, and is appropriate given the property’s natural constraints; b) all protected trees are being preserved, as provided in Article 15-50 (Tree Regulations); c) the height of the structure, its location on the site, and its architectural elements are not designed to avoid unreasonable impacts to the privacy of adjoining properties and to community viewsheds; d) the overall mass and height of the structure, and its architectural elements are not in scale with the structure itself and with the neighborhood; e) the landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape; f) development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy; and g) the design of the structure and the site development plan are not consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. Section 4: The Planning Commission finds that the application for a height exception for a residential structure to exceed 26 feet is inconsistent with the required findings contained in City Code Section 15-12.100(a), specifically finding #s 1 and 2, in that: 1) the project did not demonstrate that the request for additional height is a necessary component of an identifiable and well documented style; 2) the design of the structure will not be similar in scale with structures in the surrounding neighborhood; and 3) the net lot size for determining floor area exceeds 20,000 square feet. Section 5: Per City Code Section 15-45.080, the Planning Commission has the power to grant design review approval and a request for a height exception for a residential structure to exceed a maximum height of 26 feet if the Planning Commission can make all the required findings. The Planning Commission did not make all the required findings to approve the design review application and request for a height exception for additional residential structure height and application No. PDR23- 016 is hereby denied. Section 5: Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission on this 13th day of November 2024 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Jonathan “JoJo” Choi Chair, Planning Commission 14 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. ARB23-0094 Phone: (408) 868-1276 Address: 19106 Panorama Drive Email: cfusco@saratoga.ca.us Owner: Ajit R. Mayya & Sonali Desai APN: 397-09-021 Date: July 29, 2024 PROJECT SCOPE: The applicant has submitted plans to demolish the existing house and construct a new home and pool. One tree is requested for removal to construct the project. PROJECT DATA IN BRIEF: Tree security deposit – Required - $82,890 Tree protection – Required – See Conditions of Approval and attached map. Tree removals – Five trees were removed and permitted on after-the-fact tree permit number ATFTR22-0024. Tree #35 is approved for removal once building permits have been issued. Replacement trees – Required = $38,500 ATTACHMENTS: 1 – Findings and Tree Information 2 – Tree Removal Criteria 3 – Conditions of Approval 4 – Map Showing Tree Protection 1 of 11 15 19106 Panorama Drive 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. Five trees were removed and permitted on after-the-fact tree permit number ATFTR22- 0024. One California pepper tree #35 is in conflict with the road improvements and meets the City’s criteria allowing it to be removed and replaced as part of the project, once building division permits have been obtained. Attachment 2 contains the tree removal criteria for reference. Table 1: Summary of Trees Removed without Permits Issued Table 2: Summary of Trees Requested for Removal Tree No. Species Criteria met Comments 35 Shinus molle California Pepper 1, 6, 7, 8, 9 In conflict with road improvements for fire access 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, recommendations and maps from the submitted arborist report dated June 12, 2024; 2)The Project Data in Brief and Conditions of Approval from this report dated July 29, 2024. TREE INFORMATION: Project Arborist: David Beckham Date of Report: June 12,2024 Number of protected trees inventoried: 19 Number of protected trees requested for removal: 1 2 of 11 16 Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SPComments 1P Valley Oak 48.6 60 55/55 Fair vigor, fair form, limbs headed in past, (Quercus lobata)cabled limbs, surrounded by hardscapes. Appraised Value=$31,300 2*P Coast Live Oak 21.4 70 30/45 Good vigor, fair form. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$6,500 3* Redwood 5.1 65 15/10 Fair vigor, good form, minor drought stress. (Sequoia sempervirens) 4 Redwood 5.7 0 20/10 DEAD. (Sequoia sempervirens) 5 Coast Live Oak 4.5 45 15/12 Fair vigor, poor form, topped in past. (Quercus agrifolia) 6 Privet 4.3 20 20/12 Poor vigor, poor form, in decline. (Ligustrum japonicum) 7 Green Ash 5.5-2.8 50 30/15 Fair vigor, fair form, poor location. (Fraxinus uhdei) 8* Black Acacia 8est 10 30/15 Nearly dead. (Acacia melanoxylon) 9 Black Acacia 6-4 10 30/15 Poor vigor, poor form, excessive decay on (Acacia melanoxylon)trunk. 10 Pittosporum 4.8-4.8 45 20/15 Fair vigor, poor form, suppressed. (Pittosporum tenuifolium) 11P Coast Live Oak 7.8 60 30/20 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$930 12P Coast Live Oak 7.8 60 30/20 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$930 13 Black Acacia 5.4 45 25/15 Fair vigor, poor form, suppressed, invasive. (Acacia melanoxylon) 19106 Panorama Dr, Saratoga, CA 95070 3 Table 3: Tree information from submitted arborist report dated June 12, 2024. Attachment 1 3 of 11 17 Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SPComments 14*P Valley Oak 15est 70 40/40 Good vigor, good form, 6’ from property (Quercus lobata)line. Appraised Value=$6,100 15 Toyon 5.4 50 20/12 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed by (Heteromeles arbutifolia)oleanders. 16R Italian Cypress 4.7 60 30/2 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed by oak. (Cupressus sempervirens) 17R Italian Cypress 4.6 60 30/2 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed by oak. (Cupressus sempervirens) 18R Italian Cypress 4.4 60 30/2 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed by oak. (Cupressus sempervirens) 19P Coast Live Oak 17.0 70 30/40 Fair vigor, fair form, buried root crown. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$4,630 20 Loquat 5.4-3-2.5 50 15/12 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed by oaks. (Eriobotrya japonica) 21P Valley Oak 20-12.2-9.4-6.4 60 40/45 Good vigor, poor form, multi leader at (Quercus lobata)grade. Appraised Value=$23,200 22P Loquat 11.2 50 15/12 Fair vigor, fair form, suppressed by oaks. (Eriobotrya japonica) Appraised Value=$340 23*P Monterey Pine 28est 50 40/45 Good vigor, poor form, pine pitch canker. (Pinus radiata) Appraised Value=$1,600 24*P Coast Live Oak 12-12-12 65 30/35 Fair vigor, poor form, multi-leader at grade. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$8,500 25P Coast Live Oak 10.6-3.5 65 30/20 Fair vigor, fair form, at property line. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$2,180 19106 Panorama Dr, Saratoga, CA 95070 4 Attachment 1 4 of 11 18 Survey: Tree# Species DBH CON HT/SPComments 26P Coast Live Oak 8-7 65 30/20 Fair vigor fair form, at property line, (Quercus agrifolia)codominant at grade. Appraised Value=$2,180 27P Coast Live Oak 15.8-11.4 30 30/35 Poor vigor, poor form, suppressed, leans, (Quercus agrifolia)large dead wood areas codominant at grade. Appraised Value=$2,360 28 Pittosporum 9.5 0 25/20 Dead, covered in ivy. (Pittosporum eugenioides) 29 Pittosporum 6.6-4 20 15/15 Poor vigor, poor form, in decline, (Pittosporum eugenioides)suppressed. 30P Coast Live Oak 6.8 45 20/15 Fair vigor, poor form, leans at 45 degrees, (Quercus agrifolia)suppressed. Appraised Value=$390 31*P Redwood 30est 60 70/25 Fair vigor, fair form, drought stressed. (Sequoia sempervirens) Appraised Value=$9,800 32*P Redwood 30est 60 70/25 Fair vigor, fair form, drought stressed. (Sequoia sempervirens) Appraised Value=$9,800 33*P Redwood 12”x3 55 60/20 Fair vigor, poor form, multi leader at grade, (Sequoia sempervirens)drought stressed. Appraised Value=$5,800 34*P Magnolia 12est 70 35/25 Good vigor, good form, 5’ from property (Magnolia grandiflora)line. Appraised Value=$2,340 35*P/R Pepper 7.7-8.2-12(19.9”) 30 15/18 Fair vigor, poor form, poor structure, (Shinus molle)codominant at grade with three stems, heartwood decay on all 3 leaders, topped in the past for utility line clearance, underneath Appraised Value=$1,500 high voltage utility lines. 19106 Panorama Dr, Saratoga, CA 95070 5 Attachment 1 5 of 11 19 19106 Panorama Drive Attachment 2 TREE REMOVAL CRITERIA Criteria that permit the removal of a protected tree are listed below. This information is from Article 15- 50.080 of the City Code and is applied to any tree requested for removal as part of the project. If findings are made that meet the criteria listed below, the tree(s) may be approved for removal and replacement during construction. (1)The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures and interference with utility services, and whether the tree is a Dead tree or a Fallen tree. (2)The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. (3)The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters, particularly on steep slopes. (4)The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values, erosion control, and the general welfare of residents in the area. (5)The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. (6)Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on the protected tree. (7)Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article. (8)Any other information relevant to the public health, safety, or general welfare and the purposes of this ordinance as set forth in Section 15-50.010 (9)The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. (10)The necessity to remove the tree for installation and efficient operation of solar panels, subject to the requirements that the tree(s) to be removed, shall not be removed until solar panels have been installed and replacement trees planted in conformance with the City Arborist's recommendation. (11)The necessity to remove a tree following the creation of defensible space within 100 feet of a structure located within the Wildland Urban Interface, in accordance with defensible space standards established by CAL FIRE or as determined by Santa Clara County Fire Department, and that risk of increased wildfire cannot reasonably be addressed through maintenance or without tree removal. (12)Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) or blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) located within the Wildland Urban Interface Area as defined in section 16-20.150 of this Code. 6 of 11 20 19106 Panorama Drive Attachment 4 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 David Beckham dated April 5, 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 July 29, 2024. 4.Tree Protection Security Deposit: a.Is required per City Ordinance 15-50.080. b.Shall be $82,890 for trees 1, 2, 11, 12, 14, 19, 21-23, 25-27, 30, and 34. 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. 7 of 11 21 19106 Panorama Drive Attachment 4 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 David Beckham 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 recommendations from the submitted arborist report dated April 5, 2023 shall be conditions of approval for the project. e.The Project Arborist shall be on site to monitor: i.all work within 25 feet of tree #1 including the installation of the water line. ii.all digging within 12 feet of tree #2. iii.removal of soil at trees #19 and 21 so that the root collar is above grade. 9.Tree removal: Five trees were removed and permitted on after-the-fact tree permit number ATFTR22-0024. Tree #35 is approved for removal once building permits have been issued. 10.New trees: a.New trees equal to $38,500 shall be planted as part of the project before final inspection and occupancy of the new home. New trees may be planted anywhere on the property as long as they do not encroach on retained trees. Replacement values for new trees are listed below. 15 gallon = $350 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 b.Trees shall be replaced on or off site according to good forestry practices and shall provide equivalent value in terms of aesthetic and environmental quality, size, height, location, appearance and other significant beneficial characteristics of the removed trees. c.At least three trees shall be selected from the City’s List of Natives. 8 of 11 22 19106 Panorama Drive Attachment 4 11.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. b.Water loving plants and lawns are not permitted under oak tree canopies. Only drought tolerant plants that are compatible with oaks are permitted under the outer half of the canopy of oak trees on site. 12.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. 9 of 11 23 AƩachment 4 19106 Panorama Drive 10 of 1124 AƩachment 4 19106 Panorama Drive 11 of 1125 Mayya-Desai Residence Design Review Resubmittal Custom Estate Request for Height Exception – Updated 19106 Panorama Dr Saratoga, CA 95070 PDR23-0016 / ARB23-0094 July 10, 2024 Page 1 of 4 Terry J. Martin Associates, A.I.A. 1615 Westwood Drive, San Jose, California 95125 terry@tma-arch.com (408) 209-5152 | rebecca@tma-arch.com (408) 679-2645 Christopher A. Riordan, AICP Senior Planner City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale Ave, Saratoga CA 95070 Re: Design Review Resubmittal: Request for Height Exception – Updated Note: Updated text is written in blue File Number: PDR23-0016 / ARB23-0094 Address: 19106 Panorama Dr Dear Mr. Riordan & Team: We would like to request a height exception for our new residence at 19106 Panorama Drive. Standard Saratoga guidelines limit single-family dwellings to maximum 26 feet in height. However, per Saratoga Code Section 15-12.100(a), the Planning Commission may approve a structure up to 30 feet in height if the Commission finds and determines that: (1) The additional height is a necessary component of an identifiable and well documented architectural style; and (2) The design of the structure will be similar in scale with structures in the surrounding neighborhood; and (3) The net lot size used for determining floor area exceeds twenty-thousand square feet. We believe that our proposed design (29.48 feet max height) meets the necessary requirements per the following points. (1) Documented Style Our proposed residence is best described as Modern Farmhouse. The Modern Farmhouse style is all about how the home makes you feel. Entering such a space should make you feel comfortable, welcomed, and relaxed. A Modern Farmhouse residence needs to be approachable; clean and uncluttered; and bright, light, and airy. It should be a warm, intimate blend of classic charm and modern practicality. Many Modern Farmhouse residences share common aesthetic features, such as the following: • A focus on simple materials such as traditional siding and metal roofing • Pitched gable or hip-and-gable roofs • A neutral palette of solid colors, primarily whites and greys • Many large windows for as much natural light as possible • Large porches and gathering spaces 26 Mayya-Desai Residence Design Review Resubmittal Custom Estate Request for Height Exception – Updated 19106 Panorama Dr Saratoga, CA 95070 PDR23-0016 / ARB23-0094 July 10, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Terry J. Martin Associates, A.I.A. 1615 Westwood Drive, San Jose, California 95125 terry@tma-arch.com (408) 209-5152 | rebecca@tma-arch.com (408) 679-2645 Modern Farmhouse Examples: Overview of exterior and interior aesthetics But Modern Farmhouse is an adaptable, human-scaled style. It can be grand or small, on a large spectrum from traditional barn to contemporary compound. Modern Farmhouse Variations: 3 different adaptations of a residence within the same style Unlike most Modern Farmhouse style houses, our residence is on a sloped property (average 15.4%). We have adapted to keep to the main requirements of the style – a welcoming, simple, and charming space – while stepping down into the hillside. We feel that lowering our overall height would sacrifice the following key aspects of a Modern Farmhouse residence: • Comfortable ceiling heights • Bright and airy interiors • Large windows for maximum natural light • Pitched gable and hip-and-gable roofs In summary, we request this height exception in order to remain as true to the Modern Farmhouse style as possible. (2) Neighborhood Similarity We have designed our residence with the surrounding neighborhood in mind. Of the nine properties within the immediate vicinity, 3 houses are at the maximum 26 feet, and 6 houses are 1.5 to 2 stories tall (ranging between 22 and 26 feet in height). Architectural styles are spread evenly among Modern Farmhouse, Craftsman, and Spanish Mission. As previously stated, in contrast to our neighbors’ flat properties, our site is sloped. We have attempted to utilize the slope efficiently while keeping the height low as viewed from the road. 27 Mayya-Desai Residence Design Review Resubmittal Custom Estate Request for Height Exception – Updated 19106 Panorama Dr Saratoga, CA 95070 PDR23-0016 / ARB23-0094 July 10, 2024 Page 3 of 4 Terry J. Martin Associates, A.I.A. 1615 Westwood Drive, San Jose, California 95125 terry@tma-arch.com (408) 209-5152 | rebecca@tma-arch.com (408) 679-2645 When seen from Panorama Drive, our residence will appear 25 feet at maximum; when viewed from El Camino Grande, a minimum setback of 60 feet, the existing road slope, and a proposed privacy fence leave only the main and upper level floors visible. See attached renderings showing the views of our property from the public right-of- way. Proposed Renderings: Approximate views from Panorama Drive and El Camino Grande, respectively Overall, we feel that while the site slope is irregular, our proposed height and style are well in keeping with the scale of the surrounding neighborhood. 28 Mayya-Desai Residence Design Review Resubmittal Custom Estate Request for Height Exception – Updated 19106 Panorama Dr Saratoga, CA 95070 PDR23-0016 / ARB23-0094 July 10, 2024 Page 4 of 4 Terry J. Martin Associates, A.I.A. 1615 Westwood Drive, San Jose, California 95125 terry@tma-arch.com (408) 209-5152 | rebecca@tma-arch.com (408) 679-2645 (3) Lot Size Our property exceeds 20,000 sf in area as required. Total lot area is 1.40 acres / 60,984 sf gross, and 1.21 Acres / 52,708 sf Net. We would like to note that our height exception request is almost exclusively due to our sloped lot and Saratoga’s flat-line method of measuring building height. By incorporating a daylit basement, we bring down our average elevation far lower than a flat lot would require. Instead, we have kept with the spirit of the rule as best as we can: No singular point of our design exceeds 26 feet in height from the grade below. See attached elevation below. Proposed Elevation: Front elevation showing natural grade and sloped line 26’ above natural grade As stated, we believe that our proposed maximum height of 29.48 feet meets the necessary requirements per Saratoga Municipal Code. Respectfully, we urge you to recommend approval of our height exception to the Planning Commission. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call or email. Best Regards, Terry J. Martin, A.I.A. 26' from Natural Grade Natural Grade 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 City of Saratoga Neighbor Notification Form Project Address: ______________________________________________ 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. 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 City at 408-868-1222 if you have any questions. 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. Neighbor Name: ________________________________________________ Date: ____________ Neighbor Address: _________________________________________________________________ Neighbor 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: ____________________________________________________________ Revised February 2014 37 38 Frances Reed From:noreply@civicplus.com Sent:Thursday, October 31, 2024 7:54 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 Sharon Lesko Phone Number Email Address Comments Regarding 19106 Panorama Drive /PDR23-0016/ARB23-0094. Two comments: the planning commission is allowing more mature protected trees to be removed in Saratoga. I am against removing the Pepper tree. 2-Lot is on a ridge so adding 3.48" to a HUGE two story home will be feel overwelming to the neighborhood. Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. 39 40 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-1 Sheet Title: COVER SHEET Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/202412ARCHITECT Terry J. Martin Associates, AIATerry J. Martin, AIA1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125(408) 209-5152terry@tma-arch.com OWNER Ajit R. Mayya & Sonali Desai13575 Lomond CtSaratoga, CA 95070(408) 348-7052ajitmayya@gmail.comsonali.desai.100@gmail.com GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER ROMIG EngineersDarren Donlon1390 El Camino Real, 2nd FloorSan Carlos, CA 94070(650) 591-5224Darren@romigengineers.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT Thomas Scherer AssociatesThomas SchererP.O. Box 68Aptos, CA 95001(831) 688-8913zeketsa@gmail.com ARBORIST Kielty Arborist Services LLCDavid BeckhamP.O. Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403(650) 532-4418davidkieltyarborist@gmail.com CIVIL ENGINEER Precision Engineering & Construction, Inc.Travis Lutz, P.E., QSD/QSP1331B Old County RoadBelmont, CA 94002(650) 226-8640Darren@romigengineers.com N/A TJ, RTP Mayya-Desai Residence Custom Estate 19106 Panorama Dr Saratoga, CA 95070 ABBREVIATIONS & And㲃 "OHMF @ At ° Degree (Angle, Bearing, Temperature) Ø Diameter ∆ Delta, Revision / Divide, Divided By, Sequence=, ≠ Equal (To), Not Equal (To) ' Foot/Feet, Minutes (Bearing) " Inch(es), Seconds (Bearing) >, ≥ Greater Than, or Equal To <, ≤ Less Than, or Equal To- Minus, Subtract(ed) # Number, Pound(s) % Percent + Plus, Add(ed) ± Plus/Minus (Approximately) AB Anchor Bolt ABV Above AC Asphaltic Conditioning A/C Air Conditioning ACOUST Acoustic(al) AD Area DrainADDL Additional ADJ Adjust(able) AEJ All Edge Joints AFF Above Finish Floor AHJ Authority Having JurisdictionAIA American Institute of Architects ALT Alternate, Alternative ALUM Aluminum AMP Ampere ARCH Architect(ural) ASPH AsphaltASSOC Association AWN Awning BD Board BEL BelowBLDG BuildingBLK, BLKG Block, Blocking BM Beam BN Boundary Nail BOT Bottom BS Both SidesBTU British Thermal Unit BTWN Between CAB Cabinet CB Column Base CBC California Building CodeCEC California Electrical Code CEM Cement(itious) CER Ceramic CF Cubic Feet CFC California Fire CodeCFM, CFS Cubic Feet Per Minute, Second CI Cast Iron CIR Circle, Circular CIRC Circulation CJ Control Joint CL Center LineCLG Ceiling CLO Closet CLR Clear CMC California Mechanical Code CNTR Counter CO Clean Out, CompanyCOL Column COMP Composite CONC Concrete CONN Connect(ion) CONST ConstructionCONT Contin ue/ual/uous COR Corner CORR Corridor CPC California Plumbing Code CPR Copper CPT CarpetCRC California Residential Code CSMT Casement CW Cold Water CU Cubic DBL DoubleDEG Degree DEPT Department DET Detail DF Douglas Fir, Drinking Fountain DIA DiameterDIAG Diagonal DIM Dimensions DISP Dispenser, Disposal DIST Distance DIV Divide, Division DN DownDOUG Douglas (Fir) DR Drain, Door DWG Drawing DTL Detail DW DiswasherDWR Drawer (E) Existing E East EA Each EL ElevationELEC Electrical ELEV Elevation, Elevator EMER Emergency EN Edge Nail(ing) ENCL Enclose(d), Enclosure ENGR EngineerEQ Equal EQUIP Equipment AREA CALCULATIONS PARCEL MAP VICINITY MAP PROJECT DATACONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION REQUIRED SHEET INDEX PROJECT SCOPE ETC Et Cetera, "And Other Things" EW Each WayEXT Exterior EW Each Way EXH Exhaust EXP Expansion, Expanding EXT Exterior FAB Fabricate(d), Fabrication FD Floor Drain FDN Foundation FE, FEC Fire Extinguisher, FE Cabinet FF Finish FloorFG Fiberglass FH Fire Hydrant FIN Finish FLR Floor FOC Face of Concrete FOS Face of StudFRP Fiberglass Reinforced Panel FS Far Side FT Foot, Feet FTG Footing FURR Furring, FurredFUT Future FV Field Verify GA Gauge GAL Gallon GALV GalvanizedGB Grab Bar GC General Contractor GD Garbage Disposal GL Glass GND GroundGSM Galvanized Sheet MetalGYP Gypsum HB Hose Bibb HD Holdown HDR HeaderHDWD Hardwood HDWR Hardware HE High Efﬁcacy HGR Hanger HM Hollow Metal HORIZ HorizontalHT Height HVAC Heating Ventilation & Air Conditioning ID Inside Diameter IN InchINCL Include(s), Including INFO Information INSUL Insulation INV Inverted INT Interior JAN Janitor JBOX Junction Box JCT Junction JH Joint Hanger JT Joint KIT Kitchen KW Kilowatt LAB Laboratory LAV LavatoryLAT Lateral LB Pound LF Lineal Feet, Linear Feet LIN Lineal, Linear LT Light LVR Louver M, m Meter MATL Material MAX Maximum MB Machine Bolts MECH MechanicalMEMB Membrane MFR, MNF Manufacturer MIN Minimum, Minute MIR Mirror MISC MiscellaneousMTD Mounted MTL Metal MUL Mullion (N) New N NorthNEC National Electrical Code NIC Not in Contract NO Number NOM Nominal NS Near Side NTS Not to Scale O/ Over (Order of Installation) OAI Outside Air Intake OC On Center OD Outside DiameterOFCI Owner Furnished Contractor Installed OFOI Owner Furnished Owner Installed OPNG Opening OL Occupant Load OPG Opening OPP OppositeORIG Original P, | |, // Parallel PA Public Address PC PiecePERP, 㲄 Perpendicular PH Panic Hardware PL Plate PLAM Plastic LaminatePLAS Plaster PLMBG Plumbing PLYWD Plywood PNL Panel POL PolishedPR Pair PREFAB Prefabricated PSF Pounds Per Square Foot PSI Pounds Per Square Inch PT Point, Pressure Treated PTN Partition (R) Replaced, Relocated R Riser RAD Radial, Radius RCP Reﬂected Ceiling Plan RD Roof DrainRECPT Receptacle REF Reference REINF Reinforce(ment) REQD Required REQMTS RequirementsRESIL Resilient REV Revision RM Room RPM Revolutions Per Minute RV Roof Vent RWL Rain Water Leader S South SAD See Architectural Drawings SAN Sanitary SASM Self Adhered Sheet MembraneSC Solid CoreSCD Seat Cover Dispenser SCHED Schedule SEC, SECT Section SF Square Foot / Feet SHT SheetSHWR Shower SIM Similar (To) SJ Seismic Joint SLD See Landscape Drawings SM Sheet Metal SMS Sheet Metal ScrewSND Sanitary Napkin Dispenser SNR Sanitary Napkin Receptacle SPEC(S) Speciﬁcation(s) SPN Sole Plate Nailing SQ SquareSQ FT Square Foot / FeetSS, SSTL Stainless Steel ST Strap Tie, Street STA, STN Station STE Suite STL SteelSUSP Suspended SY, SQ YD Square Yard(s) SYM Symmetrical SW Shear Wall T, TRD TreadTB Towel Bar T&B Top and Bottom TBC To Be Conﬁrmed TBS To Be Selected TD Tie DownTEL Telephone TEMP Temporary, Temperature TMPD Tempered TER Terazzo THRESH Threshold T&G Tongue and GrooveTHK Thick(ness) THRU Through TOC Top of Concrete TOS, TS Top of Slab TP Top Plate TRANS TransformerTSTAT Thermostat TV Television TYP Typical UC, U/C Under-CounterUF, U/F Under-Floor UNF Unﬁnised UNO Unless Noted Otherwise UON Unless Otherwise Noted UR Urinal V Volt VB Vapor Barrier VCT Vinyl Composition Tile VEN Veneer VERT VerticalVEST VestibuleVIF Verify In Field VOL Volume W West W/ WithW/O Without WC Water Closet WD Wood WDW Window WH Water Heater WO Where OccursWP Waterproof(ing) WT Weight YD Yard General Contractor is required to schedule & coordinate the following mandatory construction observation site visits with Architect present. Provide notice to Architect at least 48 hours prior to such visits. Prior to beginning work, provide Architect & Owner with a critical path schedule showing the following construction milestones: Additionally, Contractor shall schedule a mandatory walkthru with Architect & Owner present at Substantial Completion. INITIALS REQD SITE VISIT MILESTONE Rough Framing Window Selection, Prior to Ordering Windows Rough Electrical, Mounted Boxes Prior to Pulling Wire Substantial Completion Prior to Granting Occupancy Pre-Construction Site Meeting Framing & Insulation, Prior to Covering Framing w/ Finishes After Finish Removal, Prior to Structural Demolition Architect's initials are required to the left of each site visit listed prior to proceeding with subsequent work & indicate only that Architect was present & provided with the opportunity to observe construction at that phase. Please Note: Orientation of other plans within the set may vary from this Vicinity Map.Please Note: Orientation of other plans within the set may vary from this Parcel Map. • Demolish (E) 2-story Single Family Residence, driveway, & associated site improvements. Provide (N) 2-story Single Family Residence w/ daylit basement. Provide site improvements such as driveway, pool w/ patio, sports court, and detached trash enclosure. Three (3) non-protected trees to be removed. Scope of work includes request for height exemption. PROJECT ADDRESS: 19106 Panorama Dr Saratoga CA 95070 OWNER: Ajit R. Mayya & Sonali Desai APN: 397-09-021 ZONING: R-1-40,000 LOT AREA: 1.40 Acres/60,984 Sq Ft ± Gross, 1.21 Acres/52,708 Sq Ft ± Net BUILDING AREA: See Area Calculations on this sheet STORIES: 2-Story Residence w/ Attached Garage & Basement CONSTRUCTION TYPE: Type VB FIRE SPRINKLERS: YES per NFPA 13D & Saratoga Amendments (Deferred Submittal) Note: Site is Not Within Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Area OCCUPANCY: Group R-3 Single Family Residence, Group U Private Garage APPLICABLE CODES: Saratoga Municipal Code 2022 CA RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CODE 2022 CA Bldg Code, 2022 CA Res Bldg Code, 2022 CA Elec Code2022 CA Mech Code, 2022 CA Plmbg Code, 2022 CA Energy Code 2022 CA Fire Code, 2022 CalGreen Code, 2022 CA Ref Stds Code All as amended by The State Of California and Local Jurisdiction(s). GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION / SOIL REPORT Report entitled "Geotechnical Investigation, New Residence, 19106 Panorama Dr,"dated 12/13/2022, project #5810-1, prepared by ROMIG Engineers, is part of theConstruction Documents. All work must comply with Soil Report Requirements &Recommendations, the California Building Code, and all other applicable codes &ordinances as adopted, amended, & enforced by Local Jurisdiction (AHJ). TITLE 24 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE COMPLIANCE "Mayya-Desai Residence Energy Calculations", #TBD, dated TBD, prepared by FRI EnergyConsultants, LLC, Project Title 24 Energy Consultant, is part of the ConstructionDocuments. All work must comply with Energy Report Requirements & Recommendations,California Energy Code, & all other applicable codes & ordinances as adopted, amended, &enforced by Local Jurisdiction (AHJ). ARBORIST Report entitled 19106 Panorama Drive Arborist Report, dated 04/05/2023, prepared byKielty Arborist Services, LLC, is part of the Construction Documents. All work must complywith Arborist Report Requirements & Recommendations, the California Building Code, and allother applicable codes & ordinances as adopted, amended, & enforced by Local Jurisdiction(AHJ). COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECT See Construction Observation Note on this sheet. Provide Architect with minimum 48 hournotice of milestone requiring construction observation. Copy Architect on allcorrespondence with all Project Consultants. COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECT & INSTALLER TITLE 24 ENERGY CODE INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS Architect, General Contractor, & Installers must be present for site meeting prior tocompletion & signing of Energy Code Compliance Forms & Installation Certiﬁcates by theInstallers. Provide Architect with minimum 48 hour prior notice. Required forms are listed inthe Title 24 Energy Report. COORDINATE WITH STRUCTURAL ENGINEER Coordinate with Architect & Structural Engineer to provide required notice & to schedulemandatory construction observation. Provide Architect with minimum 48 hours advancenotice and the opportunity to be present for any & all site visits & construction observationattended by the structural engineer. Submit all Requests for Information to Architect. CopyArchitect on all correspondence with Project Structural Engineer, Energy Consultant, and allother Professional Consultants. SPECIAL INSPECTIONS Special Inspections required for the following as applicable by Architect or Engineer ofRecord: • Wood shearwalls, shear panels & diaphragms w/ edge nailing at 4" or less • Installation of Simpson Strongwalls & Hardy Frames • Any other special inspection found necessary by AHJ ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS & REQUIREMENTS Lower / Basement Level 208 Sq Ft Main Level 2,854 Sq Ft Upper Level 1,513 Sq Ft Total Living Area 4,575 Sq Ft Including Open Stairways + Garage 818 Sq Ft + Enclosed Front Porch 36 Sq Ft Total Floor Area 5,429 Sq Ft Allowable Floor Area 6,060 Sq Ft See Sheet A-2.1 for Calculations Allowable Lot Coverage 18,448 Sq Ft See Sheet A-2.1 for Calculations Site Average Slope 15.4% See Sheet C-0 for Calculations + Uncounted Basement 926 Sq Ft Not Included in Floor Area A-1 Cover Sheet & Project Info C-0 Civil: Title Sheet C-1 Civil: Topographic Survey C-2 Civil: Grading Plan C-2.1 Civil: Grading Plan C-3 Civil: Utility Plan C-4 Civil: Erosion & Sediment Control Plan C-4.1 Civil: Best Management Practices A-2.1 Schematic Demolition Site Plan A-2.2 Schematic Proposed Site Plan A-2.3 Neighborhood Context Map, Study, & Schematic Streetscape Elevations L.1 Irrigation Plan & WELO Calcs L.2 Planting Plan L.3 Irrigation & Planting Details L.4 Hydrozone Map L.5.1 Arborist Report L.5.2 Arborist Report A-3.1 Lower Level Floor Plan A-3.2 Main Level Floor Plan A-3.3 Upper Level Floor Plan A-4 Upper Roof Plan A-5.1 Exterior Elevations A-5.2 Exterior Elevations A-6.1 Building Cross Sections A-A, B-B A-6.2 Building Cross Section C-C & Trash Enclosure Elevations PROJECT TEAM LR N TOTAL FLOOR AREA:*6,355 sf AREA DESIGNATION C D E F G H (Porch) J K L (Garage) MAIN LEVEL DIMENSIONS 40 x 225.5 180 x 470 1611 x 100 296.5 x 80 90 x 430 90 x 40 130 x 470 240 x 220 350 x 230 M.L. TOTAL: AREA 90 sf 846 sf 169 sf 236 sf 387 sf 36 sf 611 sf 528 sf 805 sf 3,708 sf MA B E F J C D G K H AREA DESIGNATION A B LOWER LEVEL DIMENSIONS 232 x 334 178 x 205.5 L.L. TOTAL:* AREA 772 sf 362 sf 1,134 sf *NOTE: Total Floor Area shown includes Uncounted Basement (926 sf). See Area Calculations for full breakdown. *NOTE: L.L. Total shown includes Uncounted Basement (926 sf). See Area Calculations for full breakdown. P AREA DESIGNATION M N P R DIMENSIONS 95.5 x 410 70 x 245.5 240 x 265.5 130 x 246.5 U.L. TOTAL: AREA 388 sf 171 sf 635 sf 319 sf 1,513 sf UPPER LEVEL SARATOGA FLOOR AREA DIAGRAMS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 41 42 C-1 43 44 45 46 47 48 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-2.1 Sheet Title: SCHEMATIC DEMOLITION SITE PLAN Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/20241220'-0"Right of Way Demo (E) HVAC Demo (E)ConcSteps Demo (E) Brick Planter S72°14'47"E 8.00' FF=572.92'@ Carport (E) Electric Meterto be Removed (E) Gas Meterto be Removed Footprint of (E) House &Carport to be RemovedShown Dashed(FF 580.91') Footprint of (E) Shedto be RemovedShown Dashed (E) Fence to Remain 20.52' (E) Block RetainingWall to beReplaced w/Concrete (Veneer TBD) Demo (E) ConcreteRetaining WallMin 5' Past Tree Dripline56056056056 0 5705705705805 8 0 5 8 0 580 580580N75°19'00"W 311.63'EL CAMINO GRANDEN4°27 '30"W 134 .03 ' Joint Pole Joint Pole SSMH Joint Pole 21.93'R=710'D=10°02 '32 " L=124 .44 ' WV (E) AsphaltDrivewayto beRemoved R= 3 2 5 ' D= 5 2 ° 4 1 ' 4 6 " L= 2 9 8 . 9 1 ' Edg e o f R i g h t o f W a y Joint Pole SSCO Edge o f R i g h t o f W a yToe of Slope580 (E) Asphaltto beRemoved Demo (E)Carport Demo (E)Residence FF=580.91' (E)Asphaltto beRemoved WM (E) Brick Ringto beRemoved (E) Concreteto beRemoved (R)MailboxDemo(E) ShedN30°43'40"E 108.48'Fire Hydrant (E) NbrMailbox:19101558.86578.35580.7034 31 32 33 24 23 2 1 14 27 11 25 26 30 12 19 21 22 E L C A M I N O G R A N D E 35PANORAMA DR IVE (E) Concrete Retaining Wallto be Remain UON,Demolish Brick Wall Above SCHEMATIC DEMOLITION SITE PLAN 16'32'0' Scale:1/16"=1'-0" As Noted TJ, RTP NORTHPrep Site for Construction of Addition. Verify All Dimensions & Site Conditions in Field. Notify Architect of Discrepancies Immediately in Writing. Acalc = Anet - Anet(10% + 2% per 1% of slope o/10%) Where Slope is 10.01-20% Anet = 1.21 Acres/52,708 Sq Ft (See Sheet C-0) Slope = 15.4% (See Sheet C-0) Rounded to 15% Acalc = 52,708 Sq Ft - 52,708 Sq Ft [10% + (5% x 2)] = 52,708 Sq Ft - 52,708 Sq Ft (20%) = 52,708 Sq Ft - 10,542 Sq Ft Acalc = 42,166 Sq Ft Rounded to 43,000 Sq Ft Floor Area Allowance (FAA): 6,000 Sq Ft + (20 per 1,000 o/ 40,000 Sq Ft) Where Acalc is 40,001-80,000 Sq Ft FAA = 6,000 Sq Ft + (20 Sq Ft x 3) = 6,000 Sq Ft + 60 Sq Ft FAA = 6,060 Sq Ft Lot Coverage Max (LC): 35% of Anet = 35% x 52,708 Sq Ft = 18,448 Sq Ft APN: 397-09-021 Gross Lot Size: 1.40 Acres / 60,984 Sq Ft ± Net Lot Size: 1.21 Acres / 52,708 Sq Ft ± Average Overall Slope: 15.4%, See Sheet C-0 Zoning: R-1-40,000 Existing Single Story Residence: 2,739 Sq Ft (Not Including Carport), Built in 1936 Max Site Coverage Allowed: 18,448 Sq Ft (35% of Net Site Area) AHJ FLOOR AREA ALLOWANCE CALCS TREE PROTECTION NOTES 1. These notes supplement other portions of construction documents. See Cover Sheet, General Notes & Arborist Report for additional reqmts. 2. Provide & erect tree protection fencing prior to commencing any demolition, grading, and/or construction activity. No equipment or materials areallowed on site until tree protection is in place. Tree protection shall remain in place at all times until ﬁnal completion / ﬁnal landscaping. ContactProject Arborist, AHJ, & Architect prior to performing work within fenced area. Obtain approval of project arborist & AHJ prior to removing treeprotection. 3. Existing trees to remain that are near proposed construction shall be fenced off from such construction to greatest extent possible. Place fencingas far from tree trunks as possible while still allowing site work to take place. Tree dripline shall not be altered in any way so as to increaseencroachment of construction. Use caution to avoid damaging any bark or branches. See Tree Protection detail this sheet. 4. Provide fencing to enclose: Type I: Entire dripline area or tree protection zone (TPZ) Type II: Entire planter strip to outer branches Type III: Trunk from ground to ﬁrst branch 5. Size & materials:Type I & II: 6' high chain link fencing, mounted on 2"Ø galv steel posts driven into ground to min 2' depth at 10-foot max spacingType III: Orange plastic fencing wrapped around trunk from ground to ﬁrst branch with 2-inch wooden boards bound securely on outside 6. At each tree fence, provide prominent 8.5x11-inch warning sign stating: "WARNING - TREE PROTECTION ZONE, THIS FENCE SHALL NOT BE REMOVED. REMOVAL IS SUBJECT TO PENALTY PER SARATOGA MUNICIPAL CODE" 7. When construction is to take place beneath a tree canopy on one side, the fence should be sited 2 to 3' beyond that construction, but betweenconstruction & tree trunk. 8. If construction or paving is to take place throughout area beneath tree canopy when approved by AHJ, and drip line fencing is not practical,provide Type III fencing to protect trunk from damage. 9. The following activities are prohibited:A. Storage of construction materials, other materials, or vehicles within tree dripline / tree protection fenceB. Excavation, grading, & drainage within dripline unless approved by AHJC. Disposal or depositing of oil, gasoline, chemicals or other harmful materials within tree dripline or in drainage channels, swales or areasthat may lead to dripline of a protected treeD. Attachment of wires, signs or ropes to any protected tree 10. Pruning & maintenance: All pruning of protected trees shall be consistent with current edition of Best Management Practices: tree pruning, established by ISA(International Society of Arboriculture) & any special conditions as determined by AHJ. TREE PROTECTION NOT TO SCALE FENCE PLACED ATEDGE OF DRIPLINE PAVING 3 LAYERS OF WIRE &LATH SNOW FENCINGTO 8' ABOVE GROUNDON TREES WHERECONSTRUCTION WILLTAKE PLACE BENEATHCANOPY TREE PROTECTIONFENCE LOCATION 1 Tree#* Diameter (in) Common Name Notes 1 48.6" Valley Oak Protected 2 21.4" Coast Live Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 11 7.8" Coast Live Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 12 7.8" Coast Live Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 14 15"± Valley Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 19 17.0" Coast Live Oak Protected 21 Multi-Trunk Valley Oak Protected 22 11.2" Loquat Protected 23 28"± Monterey Pine On Neighboring Property, Protected 24 Multi-Trunk Coast Live Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 25 Multi-Trunk Coast Live Oak Protected 26 Multi-Trunk Coast Live Oak Protected 27 Multi-Trunk Coast Live Oak Protected 30 6.8" Coast Live Oak Protected 31 30"± Redwood On Neighboring Property, Protected 32 30"± Redwood On Neighboring Property, Protected 33 Multi-Trunk Redwood On Neighboring Property, Protected 34 12"± Magnolia On Neighboring Property, Protected 35 Multi-Trunk Pepper Tree On Neighboring Property, To Be Removed TREE SCHEDULE NOTE: Tree Schedule shows protected trees only. For full tree list (including non-protected trees), see Arborist Report. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 49 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-2.2 Sheet Title: SCHEMATIC PROPOSED SITE PLAN Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/202412o. Impervious Coverage Table with breakdown of site coverage. SITE COVERAGE Impervious Surfaces Total SF Footprint of Home/Garage (including roof overhang) Driveway Walkways / Decks /Patio Other (e.g. Cabana / Shed / Pool / Tennis Court) (a) SUBTOTAL IMPERVIOUS = _________ sf Impervious Pervious Surfaces Actual S.F. 50% credit Total SF Permeable paver driveway (-) Permeable walkways/patio (-) Other (b) SUBTOTAL PERVIOUS = ______ sf = ____ sf = _________ sf Pervious SITE COVERAGE TOTAL (a) + (b) = ________ sf Total Coverage * Please call out ‘other’ line items (e.g., garden shed, gazebo, trellis, arbor, ADU, etc.) ** Must provide documentation showing permeability to qualify for 50% credit p. Height Information Table that includes the following. HEIGHT Foot Elevation Lowest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Highest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Average elevation point (based on highest and lowest points above) Top most elevation point - measured from average point (above) to the top most point of the roof. Include separate calculation for chimney, etc. q. Setback table of required and proposed setbacks. SETBACKS Required Proposed Front Left Side First Floor Left Side Second Floor Right Side First Floor Right Side Second Floor Rear First Floor Rear Second Floor 2. DEMOLITION SITE PLAN – The demolition plan shall include all of the following information: a. Please show all structures, fences, hardscape, etc. to be removed. b. Include a block diagram of the existing footprint of the home (dashed line). o. Impervious Coverage Table with breakdown of site coverage. SITE COVERAGE Impervious Surfaces Total SF Footprint of Home/Garage (including roof overhang) Driveway Walkways / Decks /Patio Other (e.g. Cabana / Shed / Pool / Tennis Court) (a) SUBTOTAL IMPERVIOUS = _________ sf Impervious Pervious Surfaces Actual S.F. 50% credit Total SF Permeable paver driveway (-) Permeable walkways/patio (-) Other (b) SUBTOTAL PERVIOUS = ______ sf = ____ sf = _________ sf Pervious SITE COVERAGE TOTAL (a) + (b) = ________ sf Total Coverage * Please call out ‘other’ line items (e.g., garden shed, gazebo, trellis, arbor, ADU, etc.) ** Must provide documentation showing permeability to qualify for 50% credit p. Height Information Table that includes the following. HEIGHT Foot Elevation Lowest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Highest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Average elevation point (based on highest and lowest points above) Top most elevation point - measured from average point (above) to the top most point of the roof. Include separate calculation for chimney, etc. q. Setback table of required and proposed setbacks. SETBACKS Required Proposed Front Left Side First Floor Left Side Second Floor Right Side First Floor Right Side Second Floor Rear First Floor Rear Second Floor 2. DEMOLITION SITE PLAN – The demolition plan shall include all of the following information: a. Please show all structures, fences, hardscape, etc. to be removed. b. Include a block diagram of the existing footprint of the home (dashed line). o. Impervious Coverage Table with breakdown of site coverage. SITE COVERAGE Impervious Surfaces Total SF Footprint of Home/Garage (including roof overhang) Driveway Walkways / Decks /Patio Other (e.g. Cabana / Shed / Pool / Tennis Court) (a) SUBTOTAL IMPERVIOUS = _________ sf Impervious Pervious Surfaces Actual S.F. 50% credit Total SF Permeable paver driveway (-) Permeable walkways/patio (-) Other (b) SUBTOTAL PERVIOUS = ______ sf = ____ sf = _________ sf Pervious SITE COVERAGE TOTAL (a) + (b) = ________ sf Total Coverage * Please call out ‘other’ line items (e.g., garden shed, gazebo, trellis, arbor, ADU, etc.) ** Must provide documentation showing permeability to qualify for 50% credit p. Height Information Table that includes the following. HEIGHT Foot Elevation Lowest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Highest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Average elevation point (based on highest and lowest points above) Top most elevation point - measured from average point (above) to the top most point of the roof. Include separate calculation for chimney, etc. q. Setback table of required and proposed setbacks. SETBACKS Required Proposed Front Left Side First Floor Left Side Second Floor Right Side First Floor Right Side Second Floor Rear First Floor Rear Second Floor 2. DEMOLITION SITE PLAN – The demolition plan shall include all of the following information: a. Please show all structures, fences, hardscape, etc. to be removed. b. Include a block diagram of the existing footprint of the home (dashed line). o. Impervious Coverage Table with breakdown of site coverage. SITE COVERAGE Impervious Surfaces Total SF Footprint of Home/Garage (including roof overhang) Driveway Walkways / Decks /Patio Other (e.g. Cabana / Shed / Pool / Tennis Court) (a) SUBTOTAL IMPERVIOUS = _________ sf Impervious Pervious Surfaces Actual S.F. 50% credit Total SF Permeable paver driveway (-) Permeable walkways/patio (-) Other (b) SUBTOTAL PERVIOUS = ______ sf = ____ sf = _________ sf Pervious SITE COVERAGE TOTAL (a) + (b) = ________ sf Total Coverage * Please call out ‘other’ line items (e.g., garden shed, gazebo, trellis, arbor, ADU, etc.) ** Must provide documentation showing permeability to qualify for 50% credit p. Height Information Table that includes the following. HEIGHT Foot Elevation Lowest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Highest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Average elevation point (based on highest and lowest points above) Top most elevation point - measured from average point (above) to the top most point of the roof. Include separate calculation for chimney, etc. q. Setback table of required and proposed setbacks. SETBACKS Required Proposed Front Left Side First Floor Left Side Second Floor Right Side First Floor Right Side Second Floor Rear First Floor Rear Second Floor 2. DEMOLITION SITE PLAN – The demolition plan shall include all of the following information: a. Please show all structures, fences, hardscape, etc. to be removed. b. Include a block diagram of the existing footprint of the home (dashed line). 20'-0" Rear Set b a c k20'-0"Left Side Setback30'-0"Front Setback20'-0"Right of Way 81'-9"±To (N) Main LevelDemo (E) Brick Planter S72°14'47"E 8.00' Footprint of (E) Shedto be RemovedShown Dashed (E) Fence to Remain (N) Permeable PaverstoneDriveway, Color & TextureTBD (N) Planting Strip 20.52' (N) Raised Herb Gardenw/ 12" Ht Conc Curb (N) Pathways, DecomposedGranite UON (N) Concrete Access Pathwayw/ Security Gate (E) Block RetainingWall to beReplaced w/Concrete (Veneer TBD) (N) Trash Enclosure8'x12' CMU w/Veneer TBD,Roof & Access Doors;See Sht A-6.2 for Elevs Approx Location of (N)Air Conditioning Condensers,37.6'± From Property Line Expand Panorama Dr to Unobstructed Widthof 20' Min, Vertical Clr 13'-6" Min,Turn Radius 50' Max, & Slope 15% Max.Provide Paved All-Weather SurfaceCapable of Supporting 75K lbper Fire Department Std Details &Speciﬁcations on Sheet A-1 Expand El Camino Grande to Unobstructed Width of 20' Min,Vertical Clr 13'-6" Min, Turn Radius 50' Max, & Slope 15% Max.Provide Paved All-Weather Surface Capable of Supporting 75K lbper Fire Department Std Details & Speciﬁcations Sheet A-1 Provide Min Turning Radius of50' Outside, 30' Inside@ Driveway Apron Tree Protection Fence to beTemporarily Removed forInstallation of Pathway -Must Be Supervised byProject Arborist.Path May Be Adjusted toSite Conditions During Installation. Approx Location of(N) 4" SS Line, SeeC Sheets Approx Location of (N)Underground Electrical,See C Sheets Approx Location of (N)Storm DrainageSystem, See C Sheets Demo (E) ConcreteRetaining WallMin 5' Past Tree Dripline Extend (E) FenceAs Shown (N) 6' Sq ConcretePool Equipment Padw/ Enclosure Fence Approx Location of(N) Water Service Line,See C Sheets Approx Location of(N) Electric Meter,See C Sheets (N) Automatic Gate;Provide ApprovedKnox Key SwitchAccess Devicefor Fire DepartmentEmergency Access56056056056 0 5705705705805 8 0 5 8 0 N75°19'00"W 311.63'EL CAMINO GRANDEN4°27 '30"W 134 .03 ' Joint Pole Joint Pole SSMH Joint Pole 21.93'R=710'D=10°02 '32 " L=124 .44 ' WV (E) AsphaltDrivewayto beRemoved R= 3 2 5 ' D= 5 2 ° 4 1 ' 4 6 " L= 2 9 8 . 9 1 ' Edg e o f R i g h t o f W a y Joint Pole SSCO Edge o f R i g h t o f W a yToe of SlopeDemo (E)Residence FF=580.91' WM (E) Brick Ringto beRemoved (E) Concreteto beRemoved Demo(E) ShedN30°43'40"E 108.48'Fire Hydrant (E) NbrMailbox:19101558.86578.35580.70(N) Synthetic Turf 34 31 32 33 24 23 2 1 14 27 11 25 26 30 12 19 21 22 A/CA/CE L C A M I N O G R A N D E 3584'-8"±To (N) Main Level28'-10"± To (N) M ai n L vl 15'-2"± @ Narrowest Point 73'-0"±@ Panorama Dr (N) 3' Ht Metal Fencew/ Privacy Hedge (N) 6' Ht MetalPool Barrier Fence Approx Location of(N) Mailbox (TBD in Field)PANORAMA DR IVE 20'-0"Right S i d e S e t b a c k (E) Concrete Retaining Wallto be Remain UON,Demolish Brick Wall Above (N) Retaining Wall w/ Veneer TBD,Provide Built-In Sleeves for Future"Shade Sail" Post Options 24' x 45.5'Sports Court(570.4±) Rear MainLevel Deck(580.7±)LowerLevelPatio(570.4±) OutdoorKitchen(570.4±) Firepit Front MainLevel Deck(580.7±)89'-7"±To (N) Upper LevelLower Level Shown Dashed:FF 570.5± Upper Level Shown Dotted:FF 591.2± Main Level Shown Solid:FF 580.8± Footprint of(N) 5,429 Sq FtResidence 14' x 26'Pool & Spaw/VanishingEdge 30'-0"81'-9"± 84'-8± 31'-2"± 54'-5"± 20'-0"31'-10"± 20'-0"46'-4"± 89'-7"±Left Side Second Floor 20'-0" 25'-0" 20'-0" 25'-0" Prior to foundation inspection by the City, LLS of Record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans. 4,021 Sq Ft 1,761 Sq Ft3,522 Sq Ft 1,761 3,428 11,439 Decks / Patio 2,045 Sq Ft 634 Sq Ft Sports Court Trash Enclosure (including roof overhang) Swimming Pool (including equipment) 1,171 Sq Ft 140 Sq Ft 1,667 Sq Ft3,334 Sq Ft 1,667 8,011 N/AN/A N/A 6,856 3,428 SCHEMATIC PROPOSED SITE PLAN 16'32'0' Scale:1/16"=1'-0" 1/16" = 1' TJ, RTP NORTHPrep Site for Construction of Addition. Verify All Dimensions & Site Conditions in Field. Notify Architect of Discrepancies Immediately in Writing. NOTE: Disposition and treatment of storm water will comply with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards and implementation standards established by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program APN: 397-09-021 Gross Lot Size: 1.40 Acres / 60,984 Sq Ft ± Net Lot Size: 1.21 Acres / 52,708 Sq Ft ± Average Overall Slope: 15.4%, See Sheet C-0 Max Slope at (N) Building Edge: 22.5% Away From Bldg Zoning: R-1-40,000 Existing Single Story Residence: 2,739 Sq Ft (Not Including Carport), Built in 1936 Max Site Coverage Allowed: 18,448 Sq Ft (35% of Net Site Area) Tree#* Diameter (in) Common Name Notes 1 48.6" Valley Oak Protected 2 21.4" Coast Live Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 11 7.8" Coast Live Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 12 7.8" Coast Live Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 14 15"± Valley Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 19 17.0" Coast Live Oak Protected 21 Multi-Trunk Valley Oak Protected 22 11.2" Loquat Protected 23 28"± Monterey Pine On Neighboring Property, Protected 24 Multi-Trunk Coast Live Oak On Neighboring Property, Protected 25 Multi-Trunk Coast Live Oak Protected 26 Multi-Trunk Coast Live Oak Protected 27 Multi-Trunk Coast Live Oak Protected 30 6.8" Coast Live Oak Protected 31 30"± Redwood On Neighboring Property, Protected 32 30"± Redwood On Neighboring Property, Protected 33 Multi-Trunk Redwood On Neighboring Property, Protected 34 12"± Magnolia On Neighboring Property, Protected 35 Multi-Trunk Pepper Tree On Neighboring Property, To Be Removed TREE SCHEDULE TREE PROTECTION NOTES 1. These notes supplement other portions of construction documents. See Cover Sheet, General Notes & Arborist Report for additional reqmts. 2. Provide & erect tree protection fencing prior to commencing any demolition, grading, and/or construction activity. No equipment or materials areallowed on site until tree protection is in place. Tree protection shall remain in place at all times until ﬁnal completion / ﬁnal landscaping. ContactProject Arborist, AHJ, & Architect prior to performing work within fenced area. Obtain approval of project arborist & AHJ prior to removing treeprotection. 3. Existing trees to remain that are near proposed construction shall be fenced off from such construction to greatest extent possible. Place fencingas far from tree trunks as possible while still allowing site work to take place. Tree dripline shall not be altered in any way so as to increaseencroachment of construction. Use caution to avoid damaging any bark or branches. See Tree Protection detail this sheet. 4. Provide fencing to enclose: Type I: Entire dripline area or tree protection zone (TPZ) Type II: Entire planter strip to outer branches Type III: Trunk from ground to ﬁrst branch 5. Size & materials:Type I & II: 6' high chain link fencing, mounted on 2"Ø galv steel posts driven into ground to min 2' depth at 10-foot max spacingType III: Orange plastic fencing wrapped around trunk from ground to ﬁrst branch with 2-inch wooden boards bound securely on outside 6. At each tree fence, provide prominent 8.5x11-inch warning sign stating: "WARNING - TREE PROTECTION ZONE, THIS FENCE SHALL NOT BE REMOVED. REMOVAL IS SUBJECT TO PENALTY PER SARATOGA MUNICIPAL CODE" 7. When construction is to take place beneath a tree canopy on one side, the fence should be sited 2 to 3' beyond that construction, but betweenconstruction & tree trunk. 8. If construction or paving is to take place throughout area beneath tree canopy when approved by AHJ, and drip line fencing is not practical,provide Type III fencing to protect trunk from damage. 9. The following activities are prohibited:A. Storage of construction materials, other materials, or vehicles within tree dripline / tree protection fenceB. Excavation, grading, & drainage within dripline unless approved by AHJC. Disposal or depositing of oil, gasoline, chemicals or other harmful materials within tree dripline or in drainage channels, swales or areasthat may lead to dripline of a protected treeD. Attachment of wires, signs or ropes to any protected tree 10. Pruning & maintenance: All pruning of protected trees shall be consistent with current edition of Best Management Practices: tree pruning, established by ISA(International Society of Arboriculture) & any special conditions as determined by AHJ. TREE PROTECTION NOT TO SCALE FENCE PLACED ATEDGE OF DRIPLINE PAVING 3 LAYERS OF WIRE &LATH SNOW FENCINGTO 8' ABOVE GROUNDON TREES WHERECONSTRUCTION WILLTAKE PLACE BENEATHCANOPY TREE PROTECTIONFENCE LOCATION 1 NOTE: Tree Schedule shows protected trees only. For full tree list (including non-protected trees), see Arborist Report. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 50 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-2.3 Sheet Title: NEIGHBORHOO D CONTEXT MAP, STUDY, & SCHEMATIC STREETSCAPE ELEVATIONS Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/202412PANO R AM A D R IV E MO N T E V I S T A D R I V E BLUE GUM CT CAMINOSITE ELGRANDE1 19140 Panorama Dr 2 19141 Panorama Dr 3 19101 Panorama Dr 4 15280 El Camino Grande 5 15300 El Camino Grande 6 15350 El Camino Grande 7 15351 El Camino Grande 8 19135 Monte Vista Dr 9 19174 Panorama Dr 7 SITE Left Side Elevation EL CAMINO GRANDE MONTE VISTA DRIVE MONTE VISTA DRIVE 7 8 EL CAMINO GRANDE 1 PANORAMA DRIVE SITE Front Elevation EL CAMINO GRANDE 3 PANORAMA DR2 5 BLUE GUM CT 4 EL CAMINO GRANDE 6 MONTE VISTA DRIVE 9 PANORAMA DRIVE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT MAP STREETSCAPE - EL CAMINO GRANDE (SAME SIDE) STREETSCAPE - MONTE VISTA DRIVE STREETSCAPE - PANORAMA DRIVE (SAME SIDE) STREETSCAPE - PANORAMA DRIVE (OPPOSITE SIDE) STREETSCAPE - EL CAMINO GRANDE (OPPOSITE SIDE) STREETSCAPE - EL CAMINO GRANDE (OPPOSITE SIDE), CONTINUED STREETSCAPE - PANORAMA DRIVE (SAME SIDE), CONTINUED 100'200'0' Scale:1"=100' As Noted TJ, RTPNORTH20'40'0' Scale:1"=20' 20'40'0' Scale:1"=20' 20'40'0' Scale:1"=20' 20'40'0' Scale:1"=20' 20'40'0' Scale:1"=20' 20'40'0' Scale:1"=20' 20'40'0' Scale:1"=20' NEIGHBORHOOD STUDY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT MAP, STUDY, & SCHEMATIC STREETSCAPE ELEVATIONS Address 19140 Panorama Dr 19141 Panorama Dr 19101 Panorama Dr 15280 El Camino Grande* 15300 El Camino Grande 15350 El Camino Grande 15351 El Camino Grande 19135 Monte Vista Dr 19174 Panorama Dr 19106 Panorama Dr 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 SITE Building Ht 1.5 Stories (26'±) 1 Story (18'±) 1 Story (16'±) Unknown* 2 Stories (26'±) 1.5 Stories (22'±) 1.5 Stories (24'±) 1.5 Stories (22'±) 2 Stories (26'±) 2 Stories & Daylit Basement Style Spanish / Mission Modern Farmhouse Craftsman Unknown* Spanish / Mission Craftsman Craftsman Spanish / Mission Modern Farmhouse Modern Farmhouse Primary Wall Matls Stucco Stucco Wood Shingles Unknown* (Stucco?) Stucco Brick Stucco Stucco Stucco Vertical Siding Roof Type Mixed Hip / Gable Gable Gable Mixed Hip / Gable* Gable Hipped / Dutch Gable Hipped Hipped Gable Mixed Hip / Gable Roof Materials Clay Tile Asphaltic Shingle Wood Shake Unknown* (Slate?) Clay Tile Asphaltic Shingles Asphaltic Shingles Clay Tile Asphaltic Shingles Standing Seam Metal Roof Pitch Moderate (5:12 ±) Low (4:12 ±) Moderate (5:12 ±) Moderate* (7:12 ±?) Moderate (5:12 ±) Steep (7:12 ±) Steep (10:12 ±) Low (2:12 ±) Steep (9:12 ±) Low (4:12) Accent Materials Stone Painted Wood Painted Wood, River Rock Stone* N/A Wood Stone Stone Stone Stucco, Painted Steel Window / Door Style Vertical, White Frames, Gridded Vertical, White Frames, Gridded, Wood Trim Vertical, White Frames, Gridded, Wood Trim Unknown* (Vertical?) Vertical, Black Frames, Gridded, No Trim Vertical, White Frames, Gridded, Wood Trim, Brick Sills Vertical, White Frames, Gridded, Wood Trim Vertical, Black Frames, Cast Stone Trim Vertical, Black Frames, Gridded, No Trim Vertical, White Frames, Gridded, Wood Trim Prominent Features Arches, Columns, Symmetry, Accented Entryway Accented Entryway, Arches, Privacy Walls Accented Eaves & Entryway, Columns Ornate Gate w/ Stone Columns* Ornate Gate w/ Brick Columns Ornate Gate w/ Brick Columns, Accented Entry Corner Accents, Heavy Landscaping Arches, Columns, Symmetry, Accented Entryway Complex Rooﬂines, Wooden Gates, Brick Chimneys Columns, Accented Entryway * NOTE: Main residence of 15280 El Camino Grande cannot be seen from public ROW; building info is taken from slightly-visible detached garage and online aerial views. 1 51 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comL.1 Sheet Title: IRRIGATION PLAN WELO CALCS Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/2024121/16" = 1' TS 1 1 2 52 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comL.2 Sheet Title: PLANTING PLAN Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/2024121/16" = 1' TSPLANTING PLAN NEW RETAINING WALL, SEE C SHTS & A2.2 1 1 1 53 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comL.3 Sheet Title: IRRIGATION & PLANTING DETAILS Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/202412N/A TS 54 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comL.4 Sheet Title: HYDROZONE MAP Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/20241207/10/2024RevDescriptionDate:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/20241255 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comL.5.1 Sheet Title: ARBORIST REPORT Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/20241219106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 1KieltyArboristServicesLLC P.O.Box 6187 San Mateo,CA 94403 650-532-4418 WE#10724A TRAQ Qualified April 5th,2023 Revised Jun 12,2024 Sonali Desali &Ajit Mayya Site:19106 Panorama Drive.Saratoga CA Dear Sonali Desali &Ajit Mayya As requested on Wednesday,January 20th,2020,and again on February 14th,2024,Kielty Arborists Services LLC visited the above site to inspect and comment on the trees.A new home, landscape,and pool are proposed for this property,and as required by the City of Saratoga,a survey of the significant trees and a tree protection plan is required.Site plan A-2.2 dated 4/6/23 and L.1.0 dated 12/26/22 were reviewed for writing this report.This report will also go over potential impacts and any needed mitigations/recommendations per the proposed plans. Method: The significant trees on this site were located on a topography map provided by you.34 trees were surveyed for this report.All of the protected trees by city ordinance were surveyed.Each tree was given an identification number.This number and tree location can be found on page 5 of this report.The trees were then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height).A condition rating of 1 –100 was assigned to each tree representing form and vitality using the following scale: 1 -29 Very Poor 30 -49 Poor 50 -69 Fair 70 -89 Good 90 -100 Excellent The height of each tree was estimated and the spread was paced off.Each tree was appraised by using the "Trunk Formula Method Work Sheet".In the survey,you will find the species and size of each tree followed by comments for each tree. Survey Key: DBH-Diameter at breast height (54 inches above grade) CON-Condition rating HT/SP-Tree height and canopy spread R-Indicates proposed tree removal P-Indicates protected tree by city ordinance 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 2Survey: Tree#Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 1P Valley Oak 48.6 60 55/55 Fair vigor,fair form,limbs headed in past, (Quercus lobata)cabled limbs,surrounded by hardscapes. Appraised Value=$31,300 2*P Coast Live Oak 21.4 70 30/45 Good vigor,fair form. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$6,500 3*Redwood 5.1 65 15/10 Fair vigor,good form,minor drought stress. (Sequoia sempervirens) 4 Redwood 5.7 0 20/10 DEAD. (Sequoia sempervirens) 5 Coast Live Oak 4.5 45 15/12 Fair vigor,poor form,topped in past. (Quercus agrifolia) 6 Privet 4.3 20 20/12 Poor vigor,poor form,in decline. (Ligustrum japonicum) 7 Green Ash 5.5-2.8 50 30/15 Fair vigor,fair form,poor location. (Fraxinus uhdei) 8*Black Acacia 8est 10 30/15 Nearly dead. (Acacia melanoxylon) 9 Black Acacia 6-4 10 30/15 Poor vigor,poor form,excessive decay on (Acacia melanoxylon)trunk. 10 Pittosporum 4.8-4.8 45 20/15 Fair vigor,poor form,suppressed. (Pittosporum tenuifolium) 11P Coast Live Oak 7.8 60 30/20 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$930 12P Coast Live Oak 7.8 60 30/20 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$930 13 Black Acacia 5.4 45 25/15 Fair vigor,poor form,suppressed,invasive. (Acacia melanoxylon) 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 3 Survey: Tree#Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 14*P Valley Oak 15est 70 40/40 Good vigor,good form,6’from property (Quercus lobata)line. Appraised Value=$6,100 15 Toyon 5.4 50 20/12 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed by (Heteromeles arbutifolia)oleanders. 16R Italian Cypress 4.7 60 30/2 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed by oak. (Cupressus sempervirens) 17R Italian Cypress 4.6 60 30/2 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed by oak. (Cupressus sempervirens) 18R Italian Cypress 4.4 60 30/2 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed by oak. (Cupressus sempervirens) 19P Coast Live Oak 17.0 70 30/40 Fair vigor,fair form,buried root crown. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$4,630 20 Loquat 5.4-3-2.5 50 15/12 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed by oaks. (Eriobotrya japonica) 21P Valley Oak 20-12.2-9.4-6.4 60 40/45 Good vigor,poor form,multi leader at (Quercus lobata)grade. Appraised Value=$23,200 22P Loquat 11.2 50 15/12 Fair vigor,fair form,suppressed by oaks. (Eriobotrya japonica) Appraised Value=$340 23*P Monterey Pine 28est 50 40/45 Good vigor,poor form,pine pitch canker. (Pinus radiata) Appraised Value=$1,600 24*P Coast Live Oak 12-12-12 65 30/35 Fair vigor,poor form,multi-leader at grade. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$8,500 25P Coast Live Oak 10.6-3.5 65 30/20 Fair vigor,fair form,at property line. (Quercus agrifolia) Appraised Value=$2,180 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 4Survey: Tree#Species DBH CON HT/SP Comments 26P Coast Live Oak 8-7 65 30/20 Fair vigor fair form,at property line, (Quercus agrifolia)codominant at grade. Appraised Value=$2,180 27P Coast Live Oak 15.8-11.4 30 30/35 Poor vigor,poor form,suppressed,leans, (Quercus agrifolia)large dead wood areas codominant at grade. Appraised Value=$2,360 28 Pittosporum 9.5 0 25/20 Dead,covered in ivy. (Pittosporum eugenioides) 29 Pittosporum 6.6-4 20 15/15 Poor vigor,poor form,in decline, (Pittosporum eugenioides)suppressed. 30P Coast Live Oak 6.8 45 20/15 Fair vigor,poor form,leans at 45 degrees, (Quercus agrifolia)suppressed. Appraised Value=$390 31*P Redwood 30est 60 70/25 Fair vigor,fair form,drought stressed. (Sequoia sempervirens) Appraised Value=$9,800 32*P Redwood 30est 60 70/25 Fair vigor,fair form,drought stressed. (Sequoia sempervirens) Appraised Value=$9,800 33*P Redwood 12”x3 55 60/20 Fair vigor,poor form,multi leader at grade, (Sequoia sempervirens)drought stressed. Appraised Value=$5,800 34*P Magnolia 12est 70 35/25 Good vigor,good form,5’from property (Magnolia grandiflora)line. Appraised Value=$2,340 35*P/R Pepper 7.7-8.2-12(19.9”)30 15/18 Fair vigor,poor form,poor structure, (Shinus molle)codominant at grade with three stems, heartwood decay on all 3 leaders,topped in the past for utility line clearance,underneath Appraised Value=$1,500 high voltage utility lines. 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 5 Showing tree locations 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 6 Summary: The trees surveyed are a mix of imported and native trees to this area of Saratoga.Most of the trees are on the perimeter of the property making for an ideal construction site for tree protection measures.Trees #1,2,11,12,14,19,21-28,and 31-35 are the only protected trees surveyed.The only protected trees with a poor condition rating are Oak tree #27,Pittosporum tree #28,ak tree #30 and pepper tree #35.These trees are poorly suited for preservation within the landscape. Showing site Valley Oak tree #1 to be retained is the largest tree on the property.The tree has been poorly pruned in the past using large heading cuts.These large cuts may lead to decay as many of the cuts made are too large for the tree to develop enough wound wood to heal the cuts.Many cables were observed in the canopy and offer extra support to the large codominant leaders.This tree is recommended to be annually inspected by a Certified Arborist to train any new sprout growth from the large pruning cuts made. Showing Oak tree #1 with hardscapes surrounding the tree 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 7Non-protected trees proposed for removal: Non-protected trees #16-18 are proposed for removal to facilitate the project.These trees are not of a protected size in the city of Saratoga and no permit is needed for removal. Protected tree proposed to be removed: Pepper tree (Schinus molle)#35 is proposed to be removed to allow the road to be widened for fire truck access.This tree is on the neighboring property and will need to be approved for removal by the neighbor.The tree was given a poor condition rating due to the poor structure and form of the tree observed.The tree is codominant at grade with 3 leaders.Each leader showed heartwood decay likely due to being topped in the past for utility line clearance pruning.Topping trees starves trees of their food source and weakens a tree.Topping cuts lead to decay as the wounds made are too large for the tree to compartmentalize the wound.This gives decay organisms a free path to move down through the branches often resulting in an unacceptable level of risk.This is likely why each of the codominant stems have heartwood decay.After a tree is topped,the tree’s survival mechanism causes a tree to produce multiple shoots below each topping cut often referred to as “water sprout growth.”The new shoots develop from latent buds hidden underneath the surface of old branches.These new shoots are not anchored into the tree like normal branches that develop in a socket of overlapping wood tissues.The new shoots are weakly attached as they are only anchored in the outermost layers of the parent branches.These sprouts grow very quickly as a survival mechanism and are prone to failure in normal weather conditions due to the limbs being weakly attached.Limb failure risk also increased as decay is likely to be found from the past topping cut.The risk of future limb failure is high with the pepper tree.Tree removal is recommended to alleviate all associated risks.The tree has a low suitability for preservation rating due to the tree’s poor condition.Tree removal is also necessary for fire truck access.The road as existing is wider once past the tree.Widening the road will allow for a safer access road.(Photos showing heartwood decay and topping cuts) 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 8 Showing the tree and the line of the existing road in red,see how when past the tree the road becomes wider 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 9 Replacement tree plan The city of Saratoga requires that new trees equal to the total appraised value of trees approved for removal be planted on-site,or that some or all of the value be placed in a fund for tree planting elsewhere in the City.Any tree on-site protected by City Code will require replacement according to its appraised value if it is damaged beyond repair as a result of construction. For ease of determining replacement trees,replacement values have been assigned to specific sizes of trees as follows: 15 gallon=$350 24 inch box=$500 36 inch box=$1,500 48 inch box=$5,000 60 inch box=$7,000 72 inch box=$15,000 The replacement tree species shall be approved by the city arborist.All replacement trees must be shown on the plans.The appraised value of the protected pepper tree #35 is $1,500.The appraised The replacement tree plan needs to show a planting value of $1,500.The replacement tree should be shown near the removed pepper tree in front of the neighboring property.Using the standard 24”box size,three 24”box trees are needed on-site to satisfy the replacement tree measures set forth by the city of Saratoga. Impacts on the retained trees/recommendations: The site plan shows a new driveway in the same general location as the existing driveway near Valley Oak tree #1.At the closest point,the driveway work will be taking place at 22’from the tree.The tree is currently surrounded by hardscapes on all sides of the tree.The proposed site plan will help to improve the rootable area for the tree as the hardscapes near the tree are to be removed.The existing driveway and hardscape around the oak tree are recommended to be retained during the construction of the home as a tree protection measure and are recommended to be removed and replaced during the landscaping phase of the project as an additional tree protection measure.This will also increase the available staging areas during the construction process as a smaller tree protection zone can be used.Roots are being protected by the existing driveway and hardscape surface.All hardscapes to be removed within the tree’s dripline are recommended/required to be done under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist.Removal of the hardscapes must be carefully done to ensure that roots are not damaged.A jackhammer can be used to break the material into small hand manageable-sized pieces when underneath the dripline of the tree.No heavy machinery shall be allowed to do this work when working within 5’of the tree canopies.Any exposed roots that are to be exposed for longer than 1 day are recommended to be wrapped/covered in 3 layers of wetted down burlap and kept moist by spraying down burlap multiple times a day.Areas,where hardscapes are to be removed and will become landscaped areas,are recommended to be immediately covered by a thin layer of native or imported soils and irrigated if roots are to be exposed.These measures will help to avoid root desiccation. The proposed finished grade of the driveway underneath the dripline of the tree is recommended to be at or slightly above the existing grades so that roots can be retained.Excavation for base 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 10rockmaterialisrecommended/required to be done under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist and be done by hand with the use of a pneumatic tool such as an air knife.It is recommended to keep excavation depth as minimal as possible for the driveway work.Root growth within the existing driveway/proposed driveway location is likely minimal as the existing compacted conditions of the driveway have likely discouraged root growth in this area.Roots encountered within the proposed base rock section of the driveway are recommended to be retained with new base rock material packed around tree roots.While roots are exposed,it is recommended to cover/wrap roots in layers of wetted-down burlap to help avoid root desiccation. Impacts from the proposed driveway work and removal of the hardscape around the tree are expected to be minor.Once the project is finished,it is recommended to have the tree's deep water fertilized using Nutriroot mixed with 300 gallons of clean water.Existing compaction around the tree due to the existing hardscapes is recommended to be mitigated through radial trenching or vertical mulching. A retaining wall exists to the north of valley oak tree #1.It is recommended to retain the portion of the wall within 6x the diameter of the tree or within 24.5’from the tree.Outside of this distance,the wall can be removed.The removal of the wall outside the 24.5’distance is not expected to impact the tree,however,the work is recommended to be done by hand under the project arborist's supervision when working within the dripline plus five feet. Two prefabricated Tuff Sheds are proposed on site within 5’of tree canopies #19-22,25,26,and 30.Minor grading for a small slab will likely be needed.Grading and any needed excavation for the installation of the sheds will require the project arborist supervision.Impacts are expected to be minor.Grading and excavation are recommended to be reduced as much as possible.Specific mitigation measures will be prescribed during the site visit to inspect the shed installation. A new decomposed granite pathway is proposed around the site and will pass within 5’of tree canopies #19-22 and #26-31.The DG pathway is recommended to be built up on top of the existing grade and only require rough surface grading not to exceed more than 6”into the grade when within 5’of the tree canopies.The rough surface grading will need to be done by hand when within 5’of the tree canopies.The entire pathway construction within 5’of the tree canopies will be required to be constructed by hand while under the supervision of the Project Arborist.Any roots encountered within the minor surface grading measuring 1.5”in diameter or larger are recommended to be retained by raising the grade of the pathway to keep the tree roots. Impacts from the dg pathway construction are expected to be minor to non-existent.The trees are recommended to be irrigated before the start of the pathway work using 30 gallons of water per tree.During the site inspection,additional mitigation measures will be prescribed if needed. Exploratory trenches: Exploratory Trench Analysis -Valley Oak #1 and Coast Live Oak#2 The exploratory trenching was undertaken to assess the potential impact of construction activities on valley oak #1 and coast live oak #2.The trenching,executed with hand tools,an air spade,and a rotary hammer with a clay spade attachment,recognizes the proximity to the tree's critical root zones at the dripline plus five feet of the trees.This methodical approach ensured minimal disturbance while allowing for an accurate assessment of root structures and utility lines within the area. 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 11 Findings and Recommendations Valley Oak (Tree #1): The exploratory trench revealed no roots at the proposed gate post/column location near the large Valley Oak.This absence of roots,coupled with the presence of concrete underneath the soil, likely has helped to discourage root growth in this area.The gate column's placement,22 feet from the tree at the outer edge of the drip line,poses no risk to the tree's health as no roots were encountered,substantiating the decision to proceed with the planned construction of the gate column in this vicinity.The post-hole excavation will still require hand excavation with pneumatic tools such as an air knife while under the supervision of the project arborist. Showing the post hole with concrete at the base of the hole near tree #1 Showing Retaining wall next to Tree #1 This retaining wall is recommended to be resurfaced when under the tree’s dripline plus 5’.Areas outside of this zone can be rebuilt if desired.By keeping this wall no impacts are expected.The resurfacing is recommended to be done at the end of the project during the landscaping phase. 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 12 N/A RTP 1 56 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comL.5.2 Sheet Title: ARBORIST REPORT Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/202412Exploratory Trench For Gate Post Near Coast Live Oak (Tree #2): For the gate past/column near Coast Live oak #2,exploratory trenching revealed a 1.5-inch diameter root 8 feet from the tree near the gate post location,alongside a water line and a possible gas line near the retaining wall,indicating previous trenching activities.This root can be cut to accommodate the gate column,as it will have a minor impact on the tree.The root should be cleanly cut with a hand saw and the cut area covered with wet burlap to protect the tree.It is recommended to deep water fertilize this tree during the growing season of 2024 as a mitigation measure for the minor impacts. Showing the gate column hole and one root with a diameter of 1.5” Exploratory trenching for retaining wall work near oak tree #2: An exploratory trench was done at 1.5’from the existing retaining wall near neighboring oak tree #2 to explore the possibility of expanding the retaining wall out closer to the tree to allow for a wider driveway.However,we immediately encountered three significant roots,necessitating a cautious approach to any construction activities in this area.Once these roots were encountered we immediately stopped the exploratory trench process as the expansion of the retaining wall is not feasible.The findings underscore the importance of retaining the existing retaining wall's location within the drip line plus five feet,as large roots running parallel to the retaining wall were identified.This precaution aligns with the Saratoga ordinance,emphasizing the need to mitigate potential impacts on the tree's root system. 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 13 Showing the 3 large roots running parallel to the retaining wall next to tree #2 Exploratory trench results: Root size (diameter)Root depth 1.5”8”under grade 1.5”8”under grade 1.9”8”under grade 2.9”5”under grade Recommendations for retaining wall work near oak tree #2: To enhance the protection of Tree #2,it is necessary to implement design modifications that prioritize the preservation of its root system.The retaining wall is recommended to be no closer to the tree than the existing retaining wall when within the canopy spread of the tree plus 5’. Outside of this zone,the retaining wall could be expanded.The rebuilding of the retaining wall will be required to be done by hand with pneumatic hand tools such as an air knife while under the direct supervision of the project arborist when working within the tree protection zone (dripline plus 5’). 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 14 All construction activities near the retained protected trees must be supervised by a qualified project arborist to ensure compliance with relevant city codes and to mitigate potential impacts. Specifically,for the Coast Live Oak #2,any root cutting should be performed cleanly with hand tools such as saws or loppers,and cut root ends should be protected with wetted-down burlap to prevent desiccation.The only approved root cutting is for oak tree #2 in the root found int the post hole dug during the exploratory trenching work for the gate column. Furthermore,to support tree health and compensate for minor impacts,it is recommended that the trees with work proposed within the tree protection zones be deep water fertilized in early spring 2024 with products like Nutriroot,accompanied by Agri-fos treatments.These measures are aimed at encouraging new root growth and maintaining tree vitality amidst the construction activities.This assessment underscores the criticality of precise,informed planning and execution in construction projects to safeguard tree health.By adhering to the recommendations based on the exploratory trench findings,the project can proceed with a reduced risk to the significant trees in question,thereby balancing development needs with environmental stewardship and sustainability. Tree protection security deposit: The tree protection security deposit will be set at 100%of the value of trees that have work proposed within the root zone because more than one structure will be built.The pool and home are both structures.The only trees with an existing canopy within 5’of any proposed work are trees #1,19,21,22,26,and #31-33.The appraised value for these trees is as follows: Valley Oak #1=$31,300 Coast Live Oak #2-$6,500 Coast Live Oak #19=$4,630 Valley Oak #21=$23,200 Loquat #22=$340 Coast Live Oak #25=$2,180 Coast Live Oak #26=$2,180 Coast Live Oak #27=$2,360 Coast Live Oak #30=$390 Redwood #31-$9,800 Total=$92,880 Bond 100%=$82,890 Tree Protection Plan: Tree Protection Zones Tree protection zones should be installed and maintained throughout the entire length of the project.Fencing for tree protection zones should be 6-foot high chain link fencing mounted on an eight-foot-tall,2-inch diameter galvanized post,driven 24 inches into the ground,and spaced no more than 10 feet apart.On the metal chain link fencing protecting the trees should be a sign saying-"TREE PROTECTION FENCE-DO NOT MOVE OR REMOVE WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST.The city requires that all tree protection fencing be installed before any equipment comes on-site and inspected by the City Arborist before issuance of permits.The location for the protection zone is the distance from the trunk to a point that is five feet beyond the canopy of a tree protected by city code.Tree protection fencing shall be located as close to this location as possible while allowing room for construction to occur.No equipment or materials shall be stored or cleaned inside the protection zones.Any tree on site that is protected by city code will require replacement according to its appraised value if it is 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 15 damaged beyond repair as a result of construction.At the end of the project,to take the tree protection down,the city requires a final inspection that is to be done by the city arborist.Below is a diagram showing the recommended tree protection fencing locations. Red lines indicate the recommended tree protection fencing locations. Landscape Buffer Where tree protection does not cover the entire root zone of the trees (5 feet beyond canopy spread),or when a smaller tree protection zone is needed for access,a landscape buffer consisting of wood chips spread to a depth of six inches with plywood or steel plates placed on top will be placed where foot traffic is expected to be heavy.The landscape buffer will help to reduce compaction to the unprotected root zone.If plywood is used the pieces of plywood shall be attached in a way that minimizes movement. Root Cutting and Grading Any roots to be cut shall be monitored and documented (not expected on this site).Large roots (over 2”diameter)or large masses of roots to be cut must be inspected by the site arborist.The site arborist,at this time,may recommend irrigation or fertilization of the root zone.All roots needing to be cut should be cut clean with a saw or lopper.Roots to be left exposed for a period of time should be covered with layers of burlap and kept moist. 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 16TrenchingandExcavation Trenching for irrigation,drainage,electrical or any other reason shall be done by hand when inside the dripline of a protected tree.Hand digging and the careful placement of pipes below or besides protected roots will significantly reduce root loss,thus reducing trauma to the tree.All trenches shall be backfilled with native materials and compacted to near its original level,as soon as possible.Trenches to be left open for a period of time,will require the covering of all exposed roots with burlap and be kept moist.The trenches will also need to be covered with plywood to help protect the exposed roots. Irrigation Normal irrigation shall be maintained on this site at all times.The imported trees will require normal irrigation.On a construction site,I recommend irrigation during winter months,1 time per month.Seasonal rainfall may reduce the need for additional irrigation.During the warm season,April –November,my recommendation is to use heavy irrigation,2 times per month. This type of irrigation should be started prior to any excavation.The irrigation will improve the vigor and water content of the trees.The on-site arborist may make adjustments to the irrigation recommendations as needed.The foliage of the trees may need cleaning if dust levels are extreme.Removing dust from the foliage will help to reduce mite and insect infestation. Inspections All proposed work underneath the dripline of a protected tree on site is required to be inspected by the Project Arborist. Tree maintenance pre-construction and post-construction To ensure the health and resilience of trees impacted by construction activities at 19106 Panorma, a meticulously planned approach that includes both pre-construction and post-construction care is essential.This comprehensive strategy is designed to mitigate stress,promote root and shoot growth,and ensure long-term tree vitality. Pre-Construction Care: In the pre-construction phase,it is critical to prepare the trees for the upcoming stress and disturbances.Implementing a deep watering schedule is foundational,ensuring trees receive adequate moisture deep within their root zones.To enhance soil moisture control and support new root growth,applying NutriRoot (2-2-3)is recommended.In conjunction with NutriRoot, ArborPlex (14-4-5)should be used to build stress tolerance and improve overall tree health. Adding Paclobutrazol (Cambistat)to this regimen can further slow tree growth,redirecting energy toward root development and enhancing drought resistance.It is also recommended to introduce microbial inoculants at this stage which is beneficial for improving soil health and facilitating nutrient uptake.The application of these treatments sets a robust foundation for the trees to withstand construction impacts. Post-Construction Care: Following the completion of construction activities,it's vital to continue supporting the trees' recovery and growth.Maintaining the deep watering schedule will ensure that trees remain adequately hydrated.A post-construction application of NutriRoot is advised to sustain soil moisture control and support ongoing root health.Reapplying ArborPlex will further aid in 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 17nutritionalsupport,promoting root and shoot growth as trees recover from construction stress. Continuing the use of Paclobutrazol can help maintain reduced growth rates,allowing trees to allocate more resources toward recovery and stress resistance.It is also pertinent to reintroduce microbial inoculants to restore beneficial microbial communities that may have been disrupted during construction.Additional applications of soil amendments like Biochar and HydraHume will continue to enhance soil structure,fertility,and water-holding capacity,supporting the trees' long-term health and resilience.Employing air spading techniques can also be advantageous to aerate the soil and gently introduce these amendments without causing root damage.By adopting this dual-phase approach,(Pre &Post Construction)leveraging a combination of deep watering, nutritional support,growth regulation,and soil health enhancement,the strategy aims to not only protect the trees during construction but also promote their recovery and thriving in the post-construction landscape.This holistic care plan underscores a commitment to sustainable tree management,ensuring that the trees at 19106 Panorma remain a valuable and vibrant part of the ecosystem for years to come. This report should be kept on site at all times.The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices.The owner,contractor and architect are all responsible for knowing the information included in this report and adhering to the conditions provided.This report is to be copied onto a plan sheet and become part of the final plan set. Sincerely, David Beckham,Certified Arborist WE#10724A TRAQ Qualified Kielty Arborist Services P.O.Box 6187 San Mateo,CA 94403 650-532-4418 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS ●Legal Descriptions and Titles:The consultant/arborist assumes the accuracy of any legal description and titles provided.No responsibility is assumed for any legal due diligence. The consultant/arborist shall not be held liable for any discrepancies or issues arising from incorrect legal descriptions or faulty titles. ●Compliance with Laws and Regulations:The property is assumed to be in compliance with all applicable codes,ordinances,statutes,or other government regulations.The consultant/arborist is not responsible for identifying or rectifying any non-compliance. ●Reliability of Information:Though diligent efforts have been made to obtain and verify information,the consultant/arborist is not responsible for inaccuracies or incomplete data provided by external sources.The client accepts full responsibility for any decisions or actions taken based on this data. 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 18 ●Testimony or Court Attendance:The consultant/arborist has no obligation to provide testimony or attend court regarding this report unless mutually agreed upon through separate written agreements,which may incur additional fees. ●Report Integrity:Unauthorized alteration,loss,or reproduction of this report renders it invalid.The consultant/arborist shall not be liable for any interpretations or conclusions made from altered reports. ●Restricted Publication and Use:This report is exclusively for the use of the original client.Any other use or dissemination,without prior written consent from the consultant/arborist,is strictly prohibited. ●Non-disclosure to Public Media:The client is prohibited from using any content of this report,including the consultant/arborist's identity,in any public communication without prior written consent. ●Opinion-based Report:The report represents the independent,professional judgment of the consultant/arborist.The fee is not contingent upon any predetermined outcomes, values,or events. ●Visual Aids Limitation:Visual aids are for illustrative purposes and should not be considered precise representations.They are not substitutes for formal engineering, architectural,or survey reports. ●Inspection Limitations:The consultant/arborist's inspection is limited to visible and accessible components.Non-invasive methods are used.There is no warranty or guarantee that problems will not develop in the future. ARBORIST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Arborists specialize in the assessment and care of trees using their education,knowledge,training, and experience. ●Limitations of Tree Assessment:Arborists cannot guarantee the detection of all conditions that could compromise a tree’s structure or health.The consultant/arborist makes no warranties regarding the future condition of trees and shall not be liable for any incidents or damages resulting from tree failures. ●Remedial Treatments Uncertainty:Remedial treatments for trees have variable outcomes and cannot be guaranteed. ●Considerations Beyond Scope:The consultant/arborist's services are confined to tree assessment and care.The client assumes responsibility for matters involving property boundaries,ownership,disputes,and other non-arboricultural considerations. ●Inherent Risks:Living near trees inherently involves risks.The consultant/arborist is not responsible for any incidents or damages arising from such risks. ●Client’s Responsibility:The client is responsible for considering the information and recommendations provided by the consultant/arborist and for any decisions made or actions taken. The client acknowledges and accepts these Assumptions and Limiting Conditions and Arborist Disclosure Statement,recognizing that reliance upon this report is at their own risk.The consultant/arborist disclaims all warranties,express or implied. 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 19 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that all the statements of fact in this report are true,complete,and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief,and are made in good faith. David Beckham Signature of Consultant David Beckham Certified Arborist WE#10724A TRAQ Qualified April 5th,2023 Revised Jun 12,2024 19106 Panorama Dr,Saratoga,CA 95070 20 N/A RTP 1 57 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-3.1 Sheet Title: LOWER LEVEL / BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/202412Face of Front Deck Above Face ofBldg AboveFace of Trellis Above 4x4 Skylt 12'-0"40'-10" 52'-10" 14'-4 1/2"7'-6"18'-11 1/2"6'-1 1/2"5'-2 1/2"7'-8"13'-4"1'-0"33'-4"12'-0"40'-10" 2'-0"6'-0"4'-0"23'-2"17'-8"11'-4"22'-0"33'-4"10'-0"12'-6 1/2"10'-7 1/2"4'-4 1/2"12'-3 1/2"1'-0" Elevator3080UP(18)R@ 6.7" Ea(16)T@ 12" Ea268016080 Sldg Gls Dr, Tmpd3080Mech Room17.5 x 4.759' Clg Dn7-3/4"Max Dn1"36" Wine RefSinkMulti-Purpose Room21.5 x 20.59' ClgEdge of Counted SFLower LevelPatio OutdoorKitchen Dn1"Vestibule9' Clg 3080 OptStorage 8080 Sldg Gls Dr, Tmpd3080Sauna Showerw/ Tmpd GlsEnclosure LavPool Bath&ChangingRm7 x 9.59' Clg3080Exercise Room14 x 9.59' Clg BenchBenchWall HooksFace of Rear Deck Above 8080 Sldg Gls Dr, Tmpd A A-6.1 A A-6.1 B A-6.1 B A-6.1 C A-6.2 C A-6.2 LOWER LEVEL / BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" 1/4" = 1' TJ, RTP WALL LEGEND Wood Stud WallExterior: Min 2x6 @ 16"OC MaxInterior: Min 2x4 @ 16"OC Max Field Verify All Dimensions & Conditions Prior to Commencing Work. Notify Architect of Discrepancies Immediately in Writing.All dimensions are to Face of Stud UON See General Notes, Sheet A-1.1, SN For Additional Reqmts NORTHConcrete Retaining Wall Lower Level / Basement Level 208 Sq Ft Main Level 2,854 Sq Ft Upper Level 1,513 Sq Ft Total Living Area 4,575 Sq Ft Including Open Stairways + Garage 818 Sq Ft + Enclosed Front Porch 36 Sq Ft Total Floor Area 5,429 Sq Ft Allowable Floor Area 6,060 Sq Ft Uncounted Basement 926 Sq Ft 1 2 58 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-3.2 Sheet Title: MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/202412Face of Roof Above 8'-8" Clg 9' Clg DW DW 4x4 Skylt 4'-0"18'-0"9'-0"13'-0"35'-0" 8'-0"79'-0" 38'-5 1/2"29'-6 1/2"11'-0"2'-0"23'-0"30'-0"4'-0"55'-0"2'-0"8'-0"79'-0"24'-6 1/2"22'-5 1/2"10'-0"4'-0"57'-0"15'-4"14'-8"21'-6 1/2"16'-11"12'-10 1/2"2'-8"14'-0" Bedroom #113 x 14.259' Clg 3-Car Garage 15"Min EQ 15"Min EQ Flush Showerw/ Tmpd GlsEnclosureLav Dryer Washer 9090 Carriage Style Garage Door30803080Pr3080Bedroom #213 x 14.259' Clg 3080Dn7-3/4"MaxFull-Ht Storage3080Mud Room23.5 x 7.59' Clg 3080Dn1"Lav 2880 Powder9.75 x 59' Clg Hallway9' Clg Pr3080 Ofﬁce12 x 138'-8" / 9'Wafﬂe Clg 3668 w/Dn1"CoveredEntryPorch 5016 AwningTmpd, FG12080 Sldg Glass Dr, Tmpd 8066Csmt/Fixed/Csmt4066 French Csmt Kitchen16 x 209' Clg ElevatorDN(18)R@ 6.7" Ea(16)T@ 12" EaUP(18)R@ 6.7" Ea(16)T@ 12" EaGreat Room21.5 x 21.59' Clg Rear Deck 3480 CasedOpening16080 Sldg Glass Dr, TmpdDn1"8080 Cased Opening3080FrontDeck 3080 PocketTmpd 20803080 Tmpd Dn7-3/4"Max3080Bench HallBath11 x 6.759' Clg Bench Sink Wall Hooks Full HtCab3480 CasedOpeningDining Room17 x 129' Clg Living Room17 x 129' / 9'-8" Clg 3050 Csmt1868Sidelites& 7618Transom,Tmpd9090 Carriage Style Garage Door 9090 Carriage Style Garage Door 6066 French CsmtEgress6066 French CsmtEgress 1866 CsmtPoojaAltar / Niche6080Dbl Pocket Dr Sinkw/Disposal 8046Csmt/Fixed/Csmt 1866 Csmt3050 Csmt4066 French Csmt5066 French Csmt5066 French Csmt48"Ref/FreezerStackedOvensor Cab36" Induction Cooktopw/Low Vent4x10 IslandFoyer8'-8" / 9' Clg DN Pr308030803080 Tmpd Dn1"Dn1" Trellis A A-6.1 A A-6.1 B A-6.1 B A-6.1 C A-6.2 C A-6.2 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" 1/4" = 1' TJ, RTP WALL LEGEND Wood Stud WallExterior: Min 2x6 @ 16"OC MaxInterior: Min 2x4 @ 16"OC Max Field Verify All Dimensions & Conditions Prior to Commencing Work. Notify Architect of Discrepancies Immediately in Writing.All dimensions are to Face of Stud UON See General Notes, Sheet A-1.1, SN For Additional Reqmts Lower Level / Basement Level 208 Sq Ft Main Level 2,854 Sq Ft Upper Level 1,513 Sq Ft Total Living Area 4,575 Sq Ft Including Open Stairways + Garage 818 Sq Ft + Enclosed Front Porch 36 Sq Ft Total Floor Area 5,429 Sq Ft Allowable Floor Area 6,060 Sq Ft Uncounted Basement 926 Sq Ft NORTH1 2 59 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-3.3 Sheet Title: UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/2024124x4 Skylt 16'-5 1/2"24'-0" 40'-5 1/2"29'-6"9'-6"2'-0"8'-0"41'-0"2'-0"51'-0"11'-5 1/2"2'-8"5'-8"4'-9"8'-7"17'-10 1/2"24'-6 1/2"26'-5 1/2"4'-0"55'-0"9'-5 1/2"13'-0"18'-0" 40'-5 1/2" 13'-9 1/2"2'-8"9'-0"15'-0" 4'-0"14'-0" 1'-0" OH Typ Schematic 3x5 Solar PanelsLayout TBD by Others36 Max Panels @ Lower Roof Standing Seam Metal Class 'A'Rooﬁng System, Typ @ Slopes.Owner to Approve Prior to Installation,Install per Mnf Instructions 5" Fascia Gutter O/ Min 2x6 FasciaBurnished Copper Color GutterPaint Fascia to Match Window & Door TrimDN (18)R@ 6.7" Ea(16)T@ 12" EaElevator Lav Upper Bath12 x 59' Clg Showerw/ Tmpd GlsEnclosureBedroom #312 x 10.59' Clg 2880 8050Csmt/Fixed/Csmt Egress30806050 French CsmtEgressBedroom #413 x 119' Clg 1850 Csmt 2880 Wet Room Lav3080PrimaryWalk-In Closet8.5 x 11.59' Clg 30803080 PrimaryBathroom17.5 x 7.59' Clg 1860 Csmt 1860 Csmt 2616 AwningTmpd, FGOpt Opaque3416 AwningTmpd, FGOpt Opaque Primary Suite14 x 17.59'/9'-8" Clg Sitting Area9 x 28.59' Clg 3080Lav 3080 Lav Linen 5050 French Csmt2036 CsmtOpt Opaque Linen 5060 French Csmt3050 Csmt5060 French CsmtEgress1850 Csmt 3080Pocket Pr30805050 French Csmt5050 French CsmtRWL RWLRWLRWLTrellis 2030 Awning 5050 French Csmt Pr30804:12 4:124:121.25:12± 4:124:124:124:12 Ridge HipHipHipHipValleyBastard V all e y Slope ChangeSlope ChangeSlope Change4:124:12 4:124:124:12HipHip Ridge Slope Change Flat Roof2% Max SlopeBuildup for Drainage HipValleyFlat Roof2% Max SlopeBuildup for Drainage ValleyHipA A-6.1 A A-6.1 B A-6.1 B A-6.1 C A-6.2 C A-6.2 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1/4" = 1' TJ, RTP WALL LEGEND Wood Stud WallExterior: Min 2x6 @ 16"OC MaxInterior: Min 2x4 @ 16"OC Max 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" Field Verify All Dimensions & Conditions Prior to Commencing Work. Notify Architect of Discrepancies Immediately in Writing.All dimensions are to Face of Stud UON See General Notes, Sheet A-1.1, SN For Additional Reqmts NORTHLower Level / Basement Level 208 Sq Ft Main Level 2,854 Sq Ft Upper Level 1,513 Sq Ft Total Living Area 4,575 Sq Ft Including Open Stairways + Garage 818 Sq Ft + Enclosed Front Porch 36 Sq Ft Total Floor Area 5,429 Sq Ft Allowable Floor Area 6,060 Sq Ft Uncounted Basement 926 Sq Ft 1 2 60 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-4 Sheet Title: UPPER ROOF PLAN Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/2024121'-0" OH Typ Schematic 3x5 Solar PanelsLayout TBD by Others38 Max Panels @ Upper Roof Standing Seam Metal Class 'A'Rooﬁng System, Typ @ Slopes.Owner to Approve Prior to Installation,Install per Mnf Instructions 5" Fascia Gutter O/ Min 2x6 FasciaBurnished Copper Color GutterPaint Fascia to Match Window & Door TrimRWLRWL RWL4:12Hip4x4 Skylt ValleyValleyRidgeRidgeRidge HipHipHipHipHipValleyRidge4:12 4:124:124:12 4:124:12 4:12Hip 2x2 Skylt Gable End A A-6.1 A A-6.1 B A-6.1 B A-6.1 C A-6.2 C A-6.2 UPPER ROOF PLAN 1/4" = 1' TJ, RTP4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0"NORTH61 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-5.1 Sheet Title: EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/202412o. Impervious Coverage Table with breakdown of site coverage. SITE COVERAGE Impervious Surfaces Total SF Footprint of Home/Garage (including roof overhang) Driveway Walkways / Decks /Patio Other (e.g. Cabana / Shed / Pool / Tennis Court) (a) SUBTOTAL IMPERVIOUS = _________ sf Impervious Pervious Surfaces Actual S.F. 50% credit Total SF Permeable paver driveway (-) Permeable walkways/patio (-) Other (b) SUBTOTAL PERVIOUS = ______ sf = ____ sf = _________ sf Pervious SITE COVERAGE TOTAL (a) + (b) = ________ sf Total Coverage * Please call out ‘other’ line items (e.g., garden shed, gazebo, trellis, arbor, ADU, etc.) ** Must provide documentation showing permeability to qualify for 50% credit p. Height Information Table that includes the following. HEIGHT Foot Elevation Lowest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Highest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Average elevation point (based on highest and lowest points above) Top most elevation point - measured from average point (above) to the top most point of the roof. Include separate calculation for chimney, etc. q. Setback table of required and proposed setbacks. SETBACKS Required Proposed Front Left Side First Floor Left Side Second Floor Right Side First Floor Right Side Second Floor Rear First Floor Rear Second Floor 2. DEMOLITION SITE PLAN – The demolition plan shall include all of the following information: a. Please show all structures, fences, hardscape, etc. to be removed. b. Include a block diagram of the existing footprint of the home (dashed line). 42" MinGuardrailStanding Seam Metal Rooﬁng:Slate Gray, Mfr TBD Cementitious Board & Batten Siding:Painted Off-White, (White Heron by Benjamin Moore OAE)HardiePanel Vertical Siding w/HardieTrim Boards Batten Stripsby James Hardie OAE Windows & Exterior Doors:Dark Metal Frame,HardieTrim Boards TrimPainted to Match Siding Stucco Accents:Portland Cement PlasterStucco SystemPainted to Match Siding Railings:Glass Panels w/Dark MetalSupport Posts Eaves & Gutters:Aluminum, Light Grayto Match Rooﬁng Metal Trellis:Dark Powder-CoatedMetal Mfr TBD 9090 Carriage Style Garage Door3668 w/1868 Sidelites& 7618 Transom, Tmpd 8066Csmt/Fixed/Csmt4066 French Csmt 9090 Carriage Style Garage Door 9090 Carriage Style Garage Door 4066 French Csmt 8050Csmt/Fixed/Csmt Egress 3416 AwningTmpd, FGOpt Opaque 2036 CsmtOpt Opaque 5050French Csmt FF 591.2'± FF 580.8'± 593.32' 601.32' 575.32' 18' o/ Avg Grade 26' o/ Avg Grade Avg Grade (N) Nat Grade(N) Finish Grade(N) Finish Grade(N) Finish Grade(N) Finish Grade(N) Finish Grade(N) Nat Grade575.54'±578.00'579.94'579.9'579.99'580.57' (@ Column)580.72'(@ Wall)29'-4"±Average Grade To Highest Point (Max 26'-0")Scope of Work Includes Request for Height Exception9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"16080 Sldg Gls Dr, Tmpd 8080 Sldg Gls Dr, Tmpd 16080 Sldg Glass Dr, Tmpd 5066French Csmt5066French Csmt 3080Tmpd 6050 French CsmtEgress 5050French Csmt 3050Csmt5050French Csmt5050French Csmt FF 580.8'± FF 591.2'± 604.8'± 575.32' 593.32' 601.32' FF 570.5'±Top of Slab Top Plate Avg Grade Ridge Top of Sub-Flr Top Plate Top of Sub-Flr Top Plate 18' o/ Avg Grade 26' o/ Avg Grade TW 575.42'BW 570.42'(N) Nat Grade(N) Finish Grade578.00'570.42'(N) Finish Grade570.42'(N) Finish Grade579.94'580.22' 570.42' 575.32' 604.8'± FRONT (NORTH) ELEVATION LEFT SIDE (EAST) ELEVATION 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" 1/4" = 1' TJ, RTP 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" N E S W N E S W 1 1 11 1 111 1 1 1 1 62 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-5.2 Sheet Title: EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/202412o. Impervious Coverage Table with breakdown of site coverage. SITE COVERAGE Impervious Surfaces Total SF Footprint of Home/Garage (including roof overhang) Driveway Walkways / Decks /Patio Other (e.g. Cabana / Shed / Pool / Tennis Court) (a) SUBTOTAL IMPERVIOUS = _________ sf Impervious Pervious Surfaces Actual S.F. 50% credit Total SF Permeable paver driveway (-) Permeable walkways/patio (-) Other (b) SUBTOTAL PERVIOUS = ______ sf = ____ sf = _________ sf Pervious SITE COVERAGE TOTAL (a) + (b) = ________ sf Total Coverage * Please call out ‘other’ line items (e.g., garden shed, gazebo, trellis, arbor, ADU, etc.) ** Must provide documentation showing permeability to qualify for 50% credit p. Height Information Table that includes the following. HEIGHT Foot Elevation Lowest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Highest elevation point at the buildings edge from natural grade Average elevation point (based on highest and lowest points above) Top most elevation point - measured from average point (above) to the top most point of the roof. Include separate calculation for chimney, etc. q. Setback table of required and proposed setbacks. SETBACKS Required Proposed Front Left Side First Floor Left Side Second Floor Right Side First Floor Right Side Second Floor Rear First Floor Rear Second Floor 2. DEMOLITION SITE PLAN – The demolition plan shall include all of the following information: a. Please show all structures, fences, hardscape, etc. to be removed. b. Include a block diagram of the existing footprint of the home (dashed line). 42" MinGuardrailStanding Seam Metal Rooﬁng:Slate Gray, Mfr TBD Cementitious Board & Batten Siding:Painted Off-White, (White Heron by Benjamin Moore OAE)HardiePanel Vertical Siding w/HardieTrim Boards Batten Stripsby James Hardie OAE Windows & Exterior Doors:Dark Metal Frame,HardieTrim Boards TrimPainted to Match Siding Stucco Accents:Portland Cement PlasterStucco SystemPainted to Match Siding Railings:Glass Panels w/ DarkMetal Support Posts Eaves & Gutters:Aluminum, Light Grayto Match Rooﬁng 8080 Sldg Gls Dr, Tmpd 3080 12080 Sldg Glass Dr, Tmpd 6066 French CsmtEgress 6066 French CsmtEgress 8046Csmt/Fixed/Csmt 1850Csmt1860Csmt1860Csmt 1850Csmt 2030 Awning FF 580.8'± 593.32' 601.32' 575.32' 18' o/ Avg Grade 26' o/ Avg Grade Avg Grade TW 574.92'BW 570.42'(N) Nat Grade(N) Finish Grade576.00'580.22'(N) Nat Grade576.00'(N) Finish Grade570.42'(N) Finish Grade570.42'29'-4"±Average Grade To Highest Point (Max 26'-0")Scope of Work Includes Request for Height Exception9'-0"5016 AwningTmpd, FG 3080 Tmpd3050 Csmt 1866Csmt 1866Csmt 3050 Csmt 2616 AwningTmpd, FGOpt Opaque 5060French Csmt 5060French CsmtEgress 9'-0"FF 580.8'± FF 591.2'± 604.8'± 593.32' 601.32' 575.32' Top of Sub-Flr Top Plate Driveway Grade Ridge Top of Sub-Flr Top Plate 18' o/ Avg Grade 26' o/ Avg Grade Avg Grade TW 574.92'BW 570.42'(N) Nat Grade(N) Finish Grade576.00'580.57'(N) Finish Grade579.94'(N) Finish Grade579.99'(N) Finish Grade580.22'(N) Finish Grade580.22'580.22' 570.42' 575.32' 604.8'± REAR (SOUTH) ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE (WEST) ELEVATION 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" 1/4" = 1' TJ, RTP 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" N E S W N E S W 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 63 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-6.1 Sheet Title: BUILDING CROSS SECTIONS A-A, B-B Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202407/10/2024Design Review Resubmittal07/10/2024124'-9"±Max 5'-0"Standing Seam Metal Rooﬁng:Slate Gray, Mfr TBD Cementitious Board & Batten Siding:Painted Off-White, (White Heron by Benjamin Moore OAE)HardiePanel Vertical Siding w/HardieTrim Boards Batten Stripsby James Hardie OAE Windows & Exterior Doors:Dark Metal Frame,HardieTrim Boards TrimPainted to Match Siding Stucco Accents:Portland CementPlaster StuccoSystem, Paintedto Match Siding Railings:Glass Panels w/Dark Metal Support Posts Eaves & Gutters:Aluminum, Light Grayto Match Rooﬁng Metal Trellis:Dark Powder-CoatedMetal, Mfr TBD Existing Natural GradeShown Dashed(For Reference Only) 18' AboveExisting Natural GradeShown Dashed(For Reference Only) 26' AboveExisting Natural GradeShown Dashed(For Reference Only) Uncounted Basement(Not Counted as SquareFootage) Shown Shaded,See Area Calcs on Sht A-19'-0"9'-0"Ofﬁce8'-8"/9' Wafﬂe Clg Mech Room9' Clg Vestibule9' Clg u/StairStorage Powder9' Clg Stairway Bedroom #49' ClgSitting Area9' ClgUpper Bath9' ClgBedroom #39' Clg FF 591.2'± FF 580.8'± FF 570.5'± Kitchen9' Clg Sports Court Crawlspace 593.32' 601.32' 575.32' 18' o/ Avg Grade 26' o/ Avg Grade Avg Grade TW 574.9'BW 570.4'604.8'±Highest Pt(N) Nat Grade576.0'(N) Finish Grade579.9'(E) Nat Grade580.0'±(N) Nat G r a d e 577.9 '±(N) Finish Grade579.9'(N) Finish Grade580.57'42" FromGradeto FF AboveExisting Natural GradeShown Dashed(For Reference Only) 18' AboveExisting Natural GradeShown Dashed(For Reference Only) 26' AboveExisting Natural GradeShown Dashed(For Reference Only) Uncounted Basement(Not Counted as SquareFootage) Shown Shaded,See Area Calcs on Sht A-1 FF 570.5'± Primary Bathroom9' Clg Mud Room9' Clg Great Room9' Clg FF 580.8'± FF 591.2'± u/StairStorage Stairway Sitting Area9' Clg Multi-Purpose Room9' Clg Basement(Uncounted)Lower Level(Counted) Crawlspace 593.32' 601.32' 575.32' 18' o/ Avg Grade 26' o/ Avg Grade Avg Grade(N) Finish Grade580.22'(N) Finish Grade580.22'(N) Finish Grade570.42'BUILDING CROSS SECTION A-A BUILDING CROSS SECTION B-B 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" 1/4" = 1' TJ, RTP 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 22 2 2 12 2 2 2 2 2 64 TERRY J. MARTIN ASSOCIATES, A.I.A.License # C23221RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE1615 Westwood DriveSan Jose, CA 95125Phone: 408-209-5152terry@tma-arch.comA-6.2 Sheet Title: BUILDING CROSS SECTION C-C & TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONS Drawn by: Project: Scale: Print Date: #22015Mayya-Desai ResidenceCustom Estate19106 Panorama DrSaratoga, CA 95070Project RevDescriptionDates & Revisions Date:Design Review Submittal09/21/2023Design Review Resubmittal04/26/202406/25/2024Design Review Resubmittal06/25/20241242" FromGradeto FF AboveStanding Seam Metal Rooﬁng:Slate Gray, Mfr TBD Cementitious Board & Batten Siding:Painted Off-White, (White Heron by Benjamin Moore OAE)HardiePanel Vertical Siding w/HardieTrim Boards Batten Stripsby James Hardie OAE Windows & Exterior Doors:Dark Metal Frame,HardieTrim Boards TrimPainted to Match Siding Stucco Accents:Portland CementPlaster Stucco System,Painted to Match Siding Eaves & Gutters:Aluminum, Light Grayto Match Rooﬁng Metal Trellis:Dark Powder-CoatedMetal, Mfr TBD Uncounted Basement(Not Counted as SquareFootage) Shown Shaded,See Area Calcs on Sht A-1 Existing Natural GradeShown Dashed(For Reference Only) 18' AboveExisting Natural GradeShown Dashed(For Reference Only) 26' AboveExisting Natural GradeShown Dashed(For Reference Only) Primary Suite9'/9'-8" ClgSitting Area9' Clg FF 580.8'± FF 570.5'± FF 591.2'± Hall Bath9' ClgKitchen9' ClgGreat Room9' Clg Hall Multi-Purpose Room9' Clg Basement(Uncounted)Lower Level(Counted) Crawlspace 593.32' 601.32' 575.32' 18' o/ Avg Grade 26' o/ Avg Grade Avg Grade (N) Finish Grade570.42'(N) Nat Grade579.7'±(N) Nat G r a d e 577.9 '±7'-4"3'-2"±10'-6"±Portland Cement PlasterStucco SystemPainted to Match Residence Dark Powder-CoatedMetal Frmg & Gateto Match ResidenceMetal Trellis Standing SeamMetal Rooﬁng:Slate Grayto Match Residence Eaves & Gutters:Aluminum, Light Grayto Match Residence BUILDING CROSS SECTION C-C TRASH ENCL FRONT (WEST) ELEVATION TRASH ENCL LEFT SIDE (NORTH) ELEVATION TRASH ENCL REAR (EAST) ELEVATION TRASH ENCL LEFT SIDE (NORTH) ELEVATION 4'8'0' Scale:1/4"=1'-0" 1/4" = 1' TJ, RTP Scale:1/4"=1'-0"Scale:1/4"=1'-0"Scale:1/4"=1'-0"Scale:1/4"=1'-0" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 65 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 14768 Vickery Ave Meeting Date: November 13, 2024 Application: PDR24-0009 / ARB24-0041 / FER24-0001 Address/APN: 14768 Vickery Ave / 517-27-011 Applicant / Property Owner: Andison Residential Design / Muni Anda Report Prepared By: Kyle Rathbone, Associate Planner 66 Report to the Planning Commission 14768 Vickery Ave – Application # PDR24-0009 / ARB24-0041 / FER24-0001 November 13, 2024 Page | 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a new 4,593 square foot one-story single- family residence over 18 feet tall with a 652 square foot attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and a Fence Exception for a fence of 6-feet of solid material plus an additional 2-feet of lattice material within the exterior side setback where 3 feet is allowed hereafter referred to as ‘the project’. Five protected trees are proposed for removal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 24-031 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. Pursuant to City Code Section 15-45.060(a) (3) approval by the Planning Commission is required as the project is a new structure over 18 feet in height. PROJECT DATA Gross/Net Site Area: 21,032 sq. ft. Average Site Slope: Less than 10% General Plan Designation: M-10 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning: R-1-15,000 (Single Family Residential) Proposed Allowed/Required Site Coverage Residence/Garage/ADU Driveway and Walkways, etc. Total Proposed (structures) 5,449 sq. ft. 3,389 sq. ft. 8,838 sq. ft. 11,316 sq. ft.* Floor Area First Floor Accessory Dwelling Unit Garage Total Floor Area 3,873 sq. ft. 652 sq. ft. 720 sq. ft. 5,245 sq. ft. 5,396 sq. ft.** Height 25’-7” 26’ Setbacks Front: Left Exterior Side: Right Side Rear: 1st Floor 29’-3” 31’-8 ½” 12’ 27’-10 ½” 2nd Floor NA 1st Floor 25’ 25’ 12’ 12’ 2nd Floor NA Grading Cut 440 C.Y. Fill 210 C.Y. Export 230 C.Y. No grading limit in the R-1-15,000 zoning district *Includes one-time bonus 800 square feet of site coverage allowance for an Accessory Dwelling Unit ** Includes one-time bonus 800 square foot floor area allowance for an Accessory Dwelling Unit SCOPE OF REVIEW 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 67 Report to the Planning Commission 14768 Vickery Ave – Application # PDR24-0009 / ARB24-0041 / FER24-0001 November 13, 2024 Page | 3 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 21,032 net sq. ft. project site is located at 14768 Vickery Ave in the R-15,000 (Single Family Residential) zoning district. The project site is effectively a corner lot with a curved frontage around Vickery Ave. The site contains an existing one-story single-family residence, a garage, and related site improvements. Surrounding uses include primarily single-story single-family homes on similar sized parcels. Project Description The existing single-family residence and site improvements will be removed. The new construction will consist of a one-story residence with attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU). The architectural style of the project can best be described as Modern. The project will include a 3,873 sq. ft. first story with a front facing, 720 sq. ft. two-car garage, foyer, laundry room, kitchen, dining room, family room, living room, office, four bedrooms, four and a half bathrooms, and a 652 sq. ft. attached ADU. The applicant is requesting a fence exception for a fence of six feet of solid material plus two feet of lattice material to be located partially within the 25-foot front setback area. The fence would be composed of durable redwood and would be similar in materials and aesthetics to other fences in the vicinity. The fence would be screened from the street with plantings. The applicant is seeking a fence exemption to better enclose their backyard for safety and privacy as the shape of the lot with its large, curved frontage reduces the backyard area. 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 Acrylic Stucco / Stone / Timber Siding / Timber Beam / Trim White / Chalkdust / Bandsawn Sioox / Walnut / Black Windows Color TBD Doors Fiberglass Entry Door Wood Stained Roof Metal Roofing Charcoal 68 Report to the Planning Commission 14768 Vickery Ave – Application # PDR24-0009 / ARB24-0041 / FER24-0001 November 13, 2024 Page | 4 Trees The project arborist inventoried a total of 14 protected trees on the project site. Five protected trees are proposed for removal with this project having met the criteria for removal. Tree fencing is required to be installed to minimize impacts to protected trees prior to project commencement and during its duration. The payment of a tree protection security deposit is required prior to building permit issuance. Details of the arborist’s findings and description of the trees on site are included in the Arborist Report. Landscaping The project proposes to retain existing cedar trees in the front of the property and to plant additional screening trees along the entire frontage along Vickery Ave. The installation of front yard landscaping is required prior to building permit final inspection. The project includes a condition of approval that landscaping is to be installed per City Code Section 15-12.095. Hardscape located within the front setback will be less than 50% of front setback area. FINDINGS Design Review 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 not 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 located in approximately the same location as the existing house to be removed which will minimize the grading that would be necessary to create a new building pad. The lot is relatively flat, and the new residence follows the natural contours of the site. The project will not make significant changes to the existing natural elevations. The development is appropriate to the site’s natural constraints with single family homes around it. 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 there are five protected trees proposed for removal out of the 14 protected trees inventoried for the project. The City Arborist has made the required findings for removal of the protected trees. Tree protection fencing is required to be installed prior to the 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 is one- 69 Report to the Planning Commission 14768 Vickery Ave – Application # PDR24-0009 / ARB24-0041 / FER24-0001 November 13, 2024 Page | 5 story and largely consistent with surrounding properties. The building setbacks comply with those required for the R-1-12,000 zoning district. The proposed residence is only one-story and will have a fence and vegetation for screening. No community view sheds are in the vicinity of the project. 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 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-1-12,000 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 may be made in the affirmative in that the project includes a condition of approval that front yard landscaping is to be installed prior to the building department final inspection. Staff will ensure that this landscaping is complimentary to the neighborhood and streetscape. The City Code requires that at least 50% of the front setback area be landscaped. f. Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the home is one-story, is similar in mass with the homes in the neighborhood, complies with the required setbacks, and will not cast shadows on the adjacent properties which could impair the adjacent property owner’s opportunity to utilize solar energy. g. The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the proposed project conforms to the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook in terms of compatible bulk and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views as detailed in the findings above. 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 is not considered a hillside lot as the average slope is less than 10% nor will it affect any significant hillside feature or community viewshed. Fence Exception The findings required for issuance of a Fence Exception pursuant to City Code Section 15-29.090 are set forth below. The Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those required findings: 70 Report to the Planning Commission 14768 Vickery Ave – Application # PDR24-0009 / ARB24-0041 / FER24-0001 November 13, 2024 Page | 6 1. The subject fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed fence is consistent in materials and aesthetics with other fences in the neighborhood. 2. The entirety of the subject fence will be constructed of materials that are of high quality, exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the fence would be constructed of high quality materials, redwood, and would be able to weather the outdoor environment. 3. The modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence is located. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed fence is consistent with the neighboring properties. The proposed fence would incorporate high-quality materials and would not detract from the character and integrity of the existing community. 4. The granting of the exception will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity and district in which the property is located. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed fence, as conditioned, will not be detrimental or injurious to the property or adjacent properties. The fence is not located within the vicinity of any street or driveway intersections. 5. The granting of the exception will not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from adjacent properties. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed fence is not located within the vicinity of any street or driveway intersections and thus would provide the required sight distances for adjacent to the subject site. The proposed fence would not interfere with visibility for pedestrian, bicyclist or vehicular traffic within the area. NEIGHBOR NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE 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. The applicant reached out to the adjacent neighbors during the review process and provided completed neighbor notification forms; no concerns were raised with the neighbor notification forms, and to date no additional public comments have been received. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 71 Report to the Planning Commission 14768 Vickery Ave – Application # PDR24-0009 / ARB24-0041 / FER24-0001 November 13, 2024 Page | 7 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. 24-031 2. Arborist Approval Dated September 12, 2023 3. Project Notification Forms 4. Project Plans with Color and Materials Board and applicant provided fence exception findings included 72 RESOLUTION NO: 24-031 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW PDR24-0009 AND FENCE EXCEPTION FER24-0001 14768 VICKERY AVE (517-27-011) WHEREAS, on July 17, 2023, an application was submitted by Andison Residential Design requesting Design Review approval for a new 4,593 square foot one-story single-family residence over 18 feet tall with a 652 square foot attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and a Fence Exception for a fence of 6-feet of solid material plus an additional 2-feet of lattice material within the exterior side setback where 3 feet is allowed hereafter referred to as ‘the project’. 5 protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-15,000 with a General Plan Designation of M-10 (Medium Density Residential). 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 November 13, 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 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 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 the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings; Safety Element Site and Drainage Policy 3 which provides that the City shall require that landscaping and site drainage plans be submitted and approved during Design Review for a residence prior to issuance of permits; and Conservation Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. 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 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 73 neighborhood. In addition, the proposed materials, colors, and details enhance the architecture in a well-composed, understated manner. Section 5: The Planning Commission finds that the application for a Fence Exception Permit to allow for a fence of 6-feet of solid material plus an additional 2-feet of lattice material within the exterior side setback where 3 feet is allowed is consistent with the required findings in that the subject fence is compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood; the entirety of the subject fence will be constructed of materials that are of high quality, exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable; the modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence is located; the granting of the exception will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity and district in which the property is located; and the granting of the exception will not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from adjacent properties. Section 6: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR24-0009 and FER24-0001 for 14768 Vickery Ave (517-27-011) 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 13th day of November 2024 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Jonathan “Jojo” Choi Chair, Planning Commission 74 Exhibit 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 14768 VICKERY AVE PDR24-0009 / VAR24-0001 (517-27-011) GENERAL 1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting all applicable permanent or other term-specified conditions has been recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content to the Community Development Director. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent. 2. The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting this approval is duly executed, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing fees”). This approval or permit shall expire sixty (60) days after the date said notice is mailed if all processing fees contained in the notice have not been paid in full. No Zoning Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the City certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 3. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the requirements of the Saratoga City Code incorporated herein by this reference. 4. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against: a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to said action; and b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person acting on their behalf. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 5. A Building Permit must be issued, and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or the Design Review Approval will expire unless extended in accordance with the City Code. 75 6. The development shall be located and constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Development Plans. All proposed changes to the approved plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with City Code. 7. 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. In order to comply with standards that minimize impacts to the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours, maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections. 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 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 City Code Section 15-29. 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 76 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. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. West Valley Collection & Recycling is the exclusive roll-off and debris box provider for the City of Saratoga. FIRE DEPARTMENT 14. The owner/applicant shall comply with all Fire Department requirements. ARBORIST 15. All requirements in the City Arborist Approval Letter dated September 12, 2024 are hereby adopted as conditions of approval and shall be implemented as part of the approved plans. PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING 16. The Project shall retain and/or detain any increase in design flow from the site created by their construction and grading, such that adjacent down slope properties will not be negatively impacted by an increase in stormwater runoff. Disposition and treatment of stormwater shall comply with the applicable requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit issued to the City of Saratoga and the implementation standards established by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (collectively the "NPDES Permit Standards"). 17. Prior to issuance of a Grading or Building Permit, a Stormwater Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval demonstrating how all storm water will be retained on-site and in compliance with the NPDES Permit Standards. If not all stormwater can be retained on- site due to topographic, soils or other constraints, and if complete retention is not otherwise required by the NPDES Permit Standards, the Project shall be designed to retain on-site the maximum reasonably feasible amount of stormwater and to direct all excess stormwater away from adjoining property and toward stormwater drains, drainageways, streets or road rights-of- way, and otherwise comply with the NPDES Permit Standards and applicable City Codes. 77 18. If the project creates and/or replaces between 2,500 SF and 10,000 SF of impervious surface, Owner / Applicant shall provide the Small Projects Worksheet and implement at least one the (1) Low Impact Development (LID) Site Design Measures listed on the form. If the project creates and/or replaces 10,000 SF or more of impervious surface, refer to the City’s C.3 Quick Reference Checklist, and provide the C.3 Data Form for review and approval prior to issuance of Grading or Building permits. Treatment measures and associated sizing calculations shall be shown on the Stormwater Management Plan. The Grading and Drainage Plan and Utility Plan shall indicate the total amount of impervious surface created and/or replaced and reflect the necessary grading required to implement the treatment measures. All worksheets are available on the City’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention webpage. 19. 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). 20. All building and construction related activities shall adhere to New Development and Construction – Best Management Practices (BMPs) as adopted by the City for the purpose of preventing storm water pollution. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, Owner / Applicant shall prepare an Erosion Control Plan implementing the following: i. Construction site inspection and control to prevent construction site discharges of pollutants into the storm drains. ii. 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, building, and site finishing) until the site is fully stabilized by landscaping or the installation of permanent erosion control measures is complete. iii. Details for all erosion control measures, including but not limited to the sedimentation basin. 21. 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. The owner shall be required to timely correct all actual and potential discharges observed. 22. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, Owner / Applicant shall prepare a Grading and Drainage Plan in conformance with Section 16-17.060 of the City’s Municipal Code. The Grading and Drainage Plans shall conform to the Approved Development Plans, as modified per these conditions of approval. The Grading and Drainage Plans shall clearly indicate and/or implement the following: i. On-site stormwater retention and pollution control, in compliance with the Low Impact Development (LID) Site Design Measures listed on the Small Project Worksheet. ii. Show all drainage facilities, locations of downspouts and area drains, path and direction of drainage swales and other surface or underground drainage feature iii. Maximum depth and volumes of cut and fill iv. All hardscape and landscape features (labeled and detailed as needed) 78 v. Detailed grading information, including but not limited to top and bottom of retaining walls, pad and finish floor elevations, spot elevations and slope and direction of flow away from structures in conformance with the current California Building Code and the City’s Municipal Code, trenching locations, accurate tree canopy/dripline, and any other necessary details. 23. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, Owner / Applicant shall prepare a Demolition Plan. The Demolition Plan shall conform to the Approved Development Plans, as modified per these conditions of approval. The Demolition Plan shall clearly indicate and/or implement the following: i. Note on the plans that West Valley Collection & Recycling shall be used during construction, as they are the exclusive roll-off and debris box provider for the City of Saratoga. 24. Applicant / Owner shall obtain an encroachment permit for any and 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. 25. Applicant / Owner shall make the following improvements in the City right-of-way: a. Remove and replace existing driveway approach, asphalt walkway/sidewalk and berm/curb and gutter for property’s full Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage. See note on sheet A-1.0. See City of Saratoga Standard Details for removal and new installation. New flow line shall conform to existing flow lines and grade. 26. Damages to driveway approach, curb and gutter, public streets, or other public improvements during construction shall be repaired prior to final inspection. 27. All new/upgraded utilities shall be installed underground. 28. 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. 29. 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, building, and finishing of lots) until the site is fully stabilized by landscaping or the installation of permanent erosion control measures. 79 • 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. The owner shall be required to timely correct all actual and potential discharges observed. 30. 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. 31. Prior to the Building final, all Public Works conditions shall be completed per approved plans. 32. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, Owner / Applicant shall prepare a Utility Plan showing utilities serving the residential structures. Show existing and proposed mains/pipelines and all connection points (sewer, water, power, etc.). If utilities are to remain, and will not be capped or replaced, please add a note to that effect on the plans. All new/upgraded utilities shall be installed underground. 33. Applicant / Owner shall secure all necessary permits from the City and any other public agency, including utility providers, prior to commencement of construction. Copies of permits other than those issued by the City shall be provided to the City Engineer. 34. 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. 35. Applicant / Owner shall provide two hard copies and an electronic copy Preliminary Title Report, dated within 90 days, to the City Engineer. The electronic copy shall include hyperlinks to all listed encumbrances. 36. Applicant / Owner shall enter into an Agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions prior to issuance of any City permits. 37. A soils report is required for review by the Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit for all new buildings, 2nd floor and basement additions, or for any project with an unconventional foundation design. BUILDING DEPARTMENT SUBMITTAL 38. 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 September 12, 2024. 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. 80 DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS 14768 VICKERY AVE PDR24-0009 (517-27-011) The findings required for issuance of Design Review approval pursuant to City Code Section 15- 45.080 are set forth below. 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 located in approximately the same location as the existing house to be removed which will minimize the grading that would be necessary to create a new building pad. The lot is relatively flat, and the new residence follows the natural contours of the site. The project will not make significant changes to the existing natural elevations. The development is appropriate to the site’s natural constraints with single family homes around it. 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 there are five protected trees proposed for removal out of the 14 protected trees inventoried for the project. The City Arborist has made the required findings for removal of the protected trees. Tree protection fencing is required to be installed prior to the 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 is one- story and largely consistent with surrounding properties. The building setbacks comply with those required for the R-1-12,000 zoning district. The proposed residence is only one-story and will have a fence and vegetation for screening. No community view sheds are in the vicinity of the project. 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 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-1-12,000 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 may be made in the affirmative in that the project includes a condition of approval that front yard landscaping is to be installed prior to the building department final 81 inspection. Staff will ensure that this landscaping is complimentary to the neighborhood and streetscape. The City Code requires that at least 50% of the front setback area be landscaped. f. Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the home is one-story, is similar in mass with the homes in the neighborhood, complies with the required setbacks, and will not cast shadows on the adjacent properties which could impair the adjacent property owner’s opportunity to utilize solar energy. g. The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the proposed project conforms to the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook in terms of compatible bulk and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views as detailed in the findings above. 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 is not considered a hillside lot as the average slope is less than 10% nor will it affect any significant hillside feature or community viewshed. FENCE EXCEPTION FINDINGS 14768 VICKERY AVE 82 FER24-0001 (517-27-011) The findings required for issuance of a Fence Exception pursuant to City Code Section 15-29.090 are set forth below. The Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of those required findings: 1. The subject fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed fence is consistent in materials and aesthetics with other fences in the neighborhood. 2. The entirety of the subject fence will be constructed of materials that are of high quality, exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the fence would be constructed of high quality materials, redwood, and would be able to weather the outdoor environment. 3. The modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence is located. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed fence is consistent with the neighboring properties. The proposed fence would incorporate high-quality materials and would not detract from the character and integrity of the existing community. 4. The granting of the exception will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity and district in which the property is located. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed fence, as conditioned, will not be detrimental or injurious to the property or adjacent properties. The fence is not located within the vicinity of any street or driveway intersections. 5. The granting of the exception will not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from adjacent properties. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed fence is not located within the vicinity of any street or driveway intersections and thus would provide the required sight distances for adjacent to the subject site. The proposed fence would not interfere with visibility for pedestrian, bicyclist or vehicular traffic within the area. 83 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. ARB24-0041 Phone: (408) 868-1276 Address: 14768 Vickery Avenue Email: cfusco@saratoga.ca.us Owner: Muni Anda APN: 517-27-011 Date: September 12, 2024 PROJECT SCOPE: The applicant has submitted plans to demolish the existing home and build a new home with attached ADU. Five trees are requested for removal to construct the project. PROJECT DATA IN BRIEF: Tree security deposit – Required - $28,820 Tree protection – Required – See Conditions of Approval and attached map. Tree removals – Trees #1-4 and 9 meet the criteria for removal and may be removed once building division permits have been issued. Replacement trees – Required = $84,900 ATTACHMENTS: 1 – Findings and Tree Information 2 – Tree Removal Criteria 3 – Conditions of Approval 4 – Map Showing Tree Protection 1 of 7 84 14768 Vickery Avenue 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. Four deodar cedar trees 1-4 and one locust are in conflict with the project, and meet the City’s criteria allowing them to be removed and replaced as part of the project, once building division permits have been obtained. Attachment 2 contains the tree removal criteria for reference. Table 1: Summary of Tree Removal Criteria that are met Tree No. Species Criteria met Comments 1 Deodar Cedar Cedrus deodara 4, 6, 7, 9 In conflict with home 2 Deodar Cedar Cedrus deodara 4, 6, 7, 9 In conflict with home 3 Deodar Cedar Cedrus deodara 4, 6, 7, 9 In footprint of driveway 4 Deodar Cedar Cedrus deodara 4, 6, 7, 9 In footprint of driveway 9 Black Locust Robinia pseudoacacia 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 Poor health. Not suitable for retention 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, recommendations, and the map showing tree protection from the submitted arborist report dated June 14, 2024; 2)The Project Data in Brief and the Conditions of Approval from this report dated September 12, 2024. TREE INFORMATION: Project Arborist: Kaitlyn Meyer Date of Report: June 14-2024 Number of protected trees inventoried: 14 Number of protected trees requested for removal: 5 A table summarizing information about each tree is below. 2 of 7 85 14768 Vickery Avenue Attachment 1 Table 2: Tree information from submitted arborist report dated June 14-2024. 3 of 7 86 14768 Vickery Avenue Attachment 2 TREE REMOVAL CRITERIA Criteria that permit the removal of a protected tree are listed below. This information is from Article 15- 50.080 of the City Code and is applied to any tree requested for removal as part of the project. If findings are made that meet the criteria listed below, the tree(s) may be approved for removal and replacement during construction. (1)The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures and interference with utility services, and whether the tree is a Dead tree or a Fallen tree. (2)The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. (3)The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters, particularly on steep slopes. (4)The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values, erosion control, and the general welfare of residents in the area. (5)The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. (6)Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on the protected tree. (7)Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article. (8)Any other information relevant to the public health, safety, or general welfare and the purposes of this ordinance as set forth in Section 15-50.010 (9)The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. (10)The necessity to remove the tree for installation and efficient operation of solar panels, subject to the requirements that the tree(s) to be removed, shall not be removed until solar panels have been installed and replacement trees planted in conformance with the City Arborist's recommendation. (11)The necessity to remove a tree following the creation of defensible space within 100 feet of a structure located within the Wildland Urban Interface, in accordance with defensible space standards established by CAL FIRE or as determined by Santa Clara County Fire Department, and that risk of increased wildfire cannot reasonably be addressed through maintenance or without tree removal. (12)Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) or blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) located within the Wildland Urban Interface Area as defined in section 16-20.150 of this Code. 4 of 7 87 14768 Vickery Avenue Attachment 3 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 the applicant of their 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 Kaitlyn Meyer dated June 14-2024 copied onto a plan sheet. b)Shall include the Project Data in Brief and Conditions of Approval sections of the City Arborist report dated September 12, 2024. 4)Tree Protection Security Deposit: a)Is required per City Ordinance 15-50.080. b)Shall be $28,820 for trees #5-8, and 10-14. 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. 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. 5 of 7 88 14768 Vickery Avenue Attachment 3 7)Work inside fenced areas: Requires a field meeting and approval from City Arborist before performing work and the Project Arborist on site to monitor work. 8)Project Arborist: a)Shall be Kaitlyn Meyer 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 excavtion and conpaction related to the driveway installation. e)The recommendations from the submitted arborist report dated June 14, 2024 are conditions of approval for the project. 9)Tree removal: Trees #1-4 and 9 meet the criteria for removal and may be removed once building division permits have been obtained. 10)New trees: a)New trees equal to $84,900 shall be planted as part of the project before final inspection and occupancy of the new home. New trees may be of any species and planted anywhere on the property as long as they do not encroach on retained trees. Replacement values for new trees are listed below. 15 gallon = $350 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 b)Trees shall be replaced on or off site according to good forestry practices and shall provide equivalent value in terms of aesthetic and environmental quality, size, height, location, appearance, and other significant beneficial characteristics of the removed trees. c)Damage to protected trees that will be retained: d)Should any protected tree be damaged beyond repair: i)New trees shall be required to replace the tree(s) equal to the assessed value of the damaged/removed tree(s). Replacement values for new trees are listed below. ii)A payment shall be made to the City Tree Fund equal to the assessed value of the damaged/removed trees. iii)Water loving plants and lawns are not permitted under oak tree canopies. Only drought tolerant plants that are compatible with oaks are permitted under the outer half of the canopy of oak trees on site. 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. 6 of 7 89 LEGAL ADDRESS:LOT: 35 TRACT: 2399PLAN: XXX XXXXMUNICIPAL ADDRESS:14768 VICKERY LANECITY OF SARATOGACOUNT OF SANTA CLARA, CALAND USE DESIGNATION: R1 COMMUNITY:(COMMUNITY) SITE INFORMATION SUBJECT PROPERTY LINES ADJACENT PROPERTY LINES EAVES / CANOPIES UTILITY LINES - POWER UTILITY LINES - OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES - WATER UTILITY LINES - GAS UTILITY LINES - SANITARY PRIVACY SCREEN/ FENCE LINE TYPE LEGEND EXISTING FENCE UPPER DOORS & WINDOWS MAIN DOORS & WINDOWS BASEMENT DOORS & WINDOWS WINDOW & DOOR LOCATIONS GROSS BUILDING AREA Area of Tree Protection Coniferous Tree Deciduous Tree All trees and shrubs will be of a species capable of healthy growth in Calgary and will conform to the standards of the Canadian Nursery Landscape Association. New matured trees to be planted after construction asrequired by Land Use Bylaw Shrub / Bush EXISTING BUILDING TO BE REMOVED UTILITY LINES - STORM EXTERIOR WALL SCONCES @ 2.74M FROM GROUND FLOOR, 100 WATT INCANDESCENT OR EQUIV. MAX (TYP) LIGHTING NOTE LANDSCAPING LEGEND ASPHALT CONCRETERETAINING WALLS BUILDING FOOTPRINT HARD / NON-PERMEABLE LANDSCAPING NON-LANDSCAPED AREAS GRASSXERISCAPED MATERIAL SOFT / PERMEABLE LANDSCAPING 1.5" LIMESTONE ROCK MULCH NEIGHBORING BUILDING FOOTPRINT MAIN FLOOR CANTILEVER DECKS PLANTING LEGEND PARCEL COVERAGE AREA COVERED ACTUAL PARCEL COVERAGE= XXXX% SECOND FLOOR CANTILEVER GRADE MARKER LEGEND 1079.38 1079.38 EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE 1079.38ASSUMED GRADE LOFT DOORS & WINDOWS PROPOSED ADDITION FOOTPRINT AREA OF ADUCOVERED PORCH4' - 6"18' - 0" 14 PR OP OSE D C O N CRETE W ALK W AY LINE OF EXISTING BUILDING FOOTPRINTTO BE REMOVED PROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVEWAY V I C K E R Y A V E R 10' - 0"R 4' - 6"R 5 ' - 6 "R 6' - 0"R 5' - 0"4 7 8 10 11 12 1 TREE #3 TO BE REMOVED TREE #9 TO BE REMOVED 2 PROPOSED FENCE MAX 6'-0" HT.12' - 0"12' - 0" PR O P O S ED FIRE PI T 6 5 TREE #4 TO BE REMOVED TREE #1 TO BE REMOVED TREE #2 TO BE REMOVED 3 S46° 29'46"W131.90'N43° 29'12"W154.33'R=100.00' L=213.75' D=122°28'16" 12' - 0" 9' - 5 7/8" 12' - 0 1/2" 6' - 0"38' - 6 1/2"COVERED ENTRYPROPOSEDPOND15' - 1 1/2"526.84 523.94 526.91 526.91 4' - 8"3.84%526.91 526.48 526.15 526.16 22' - 0"2' - 0"12' - 0"20' - 6"2' - 0"6' - 0"20' - 0"4' - 0"14' - 11"20' - 0"15' - 0"10' - 0"5' - 6"19' - 0"5' - 6"20' - 0"16' - 6"3' - 6"15' - 6"17' - 0"13' - 0"14' - 0"14' - 0"2' - 0"16' - 0"6' - 0"4' - 3"1' - 6"6' - 0"1' - 6"4' - 3"6' - 0"7' - 0"14' - 0"4' - 0"12' - 6"2' - 0"11' - 6"18' - 2"14' - 0"7' - 6"19' - 6"10' - 6"1' - 4"11' - 6 1/2"8' - 8"3' - 6" 13' - 11 1/2" 6 .6 4 % 2.27% 1 . 4 3 %0.32%526.15 9.13% 6 .5 8 % 525.154.60%12' - 0"27' - 1 1/2"16' - 0" 12' - 0" 524.45 526.06 526.09 525.00 12' - 0" 525.78 526.44 526.7744' - 1 1/2"PROPOSED CONCRETEWALKWAYPROPOSED DWELLING #5828ROOF PEAK ELEV. = 551.82'MAIN FLOOR ELEV. = 528.50'T.O. FOUNDATION WALL ELEV. = 52725'T.O. FOOTING ELEV. = XXXXEAVES = AS SHOWNA/C A/C SOLAR PANELSSOLAR PANELS6' - 2 1 / 2" ORANGE TREE 28" FIR TREE 32" FIR TREE 15" LO TREE 15" LO TREE 9" LO TREEN2 9 ° 2 9 ' 3 0 "W4 0 . 5 8 ' R=356.00' L=13.57' D=2°11'00" EXISTING DRIVEWAY TO BE REMOVED E X IST IN G C U R B C U T T O B E R E M O VE D AN D R E H AB IL IT AT E D PROPOSED CURB CUT P R OP OS E D CU R B CU T EXISTING SHED TO BE REMOVED 4.48%4.35%3.83% 4.07 % 0 .4 0 %4.55%6.05%4.11%8.4 1 % 526.27 525.82VICKERY AVEPROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVEWAYEXISTING FENCE TO REMAINPROPOSED CONCRETEWALKWAY525.11 526.91 9 24' - 0 1/4"526.08 1 .9 8 %2 . 3 3 %527.51 527.62 527.35 1.73 % 2 . 2 3 %2.23%1.85% 526.92 526.932.71%2.80%2.80%527.94 527.00EXISTING BUILDING FOOTPRINTEXISTING FENCE TO REMAINEXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN8" JP SITE PLAN NOTES -CITY OF SARATOGA 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 DISPOSITION AND TREATMENT OF STORM WATER WILL COMPLY WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY URBAN RUNOFF POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM 220 739 11 Ave SW, Calgary, Alberta,T2R 0E31.403.461.6481 | INFO@ANDISONDESIGN.COMANDISONDESIGN.COM GENERAL NOTES It is the responsibility of the Contractor to review the Architectural drawings prior to construction and report any discrepancies to Andison Residential Design Ltd. Andison Residential Design Ltd. will not be held responsible for any costs if the Contractor deviates from these Architectural and or Structural drawings. All Geodetic Elevations provided to Andison Residential Design Ltd. are assumed to be accurate and reflect actual site conditions. Andison Residential Design Ltd. will not be held responsible for any discrepancies between Site condition and the provided Survey These drawings supercede all previous versions and shall not be used for any construction purposes until approved and signed. ISSUED FOR TENDER CLIENT APPROVAL Date: ____________________________________________ Sign: _____________________________________________ FLOOR AREAS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LOCATION 2024-06-14 2:41:38 PMJUNE 7, 202414768 VICKERY LANEA0-02 SITE PLAN 14768 VICKERY LANE LOT 35, TRACT 2399, CITY OF SARATOGA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, CA NameImperial Metric ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT 629 ft² 629 ft² 629 ft² 629 ft² Above Grade MAIN FLOOR3880 ft² 3880 ft² Developed3880 ft² 3880 ft² COVERED PORCH512 ft² 512 ft² GARAGE720 ft² 720 ft² Undeveloped1232 ft² 1232 ft² NameImperial Metric Undeveloped ENTRY PORCH110 ft² 109.59 ft² COVERED PORCH573 ft² 573.25 ft² Footprint MAIN FLOOR PLAN3859 ft² 3859.21 ft² ATTACHED GARAGE720 ft² 719.73 ft² ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT 618 ft² 617.73 ft² SITE AREA21032 ft² 21032.40 ft² #SpeciesTypeCaliper Canopy Height Comments Qty Tree - Coniferous- Fir 1 DeciduousTree - Coniferous- Fir32 in 30.00' 40.00' Tree To Be Removed 1 2 DeciduousTree - Coniferous- Fir28 in 30.00' 40.00' Tree To Be Removed 1 3 DeciduousTree - Coniferous- Fir32 in 28.00' 40.00' Tree To Be Removed 1 4 DeciduousTree - Coniferous- Fir14 in 16.00' 15.00' Tree To Remain1 5 DeciduousTree - Coniferous- Fir14 in 20.00' 20.00' Tree To Remain1 6 DeciduousTree - Coniferous- Fir14 in 18.00' 18.00' Tree To Remain1 7 DeciduousTree - Coniferous- Fir16 in 20.00' 20.00' Tree To Remain1 8 DeciduousTree - Coniferous- Fir14 in 19.00' 20.00' Tree To Remain1 9 DeciduousTree - Coniferous- Fir10 in 17.00' 30.00' Tree To Be Removed 1 Tree - Deciduous Orange Tree 14 DeciduousTree - Deciduous Orange Tree 6 in 15.00' 15.00' Tree To Remain1 Tree - Shrub - Loquat 10 ShrubTree - Shrub - Loquat9 in 16.00' 16.00' Tree To Remain1 11 ShrubTree - Shrub - Loquat9 in 17.00' 16.00' Tree To Remain1 12 ShrubTree - Shrub - Loquat15 in 17.00' 16.00' Tree To Remain1 1 : 100 SITE PLAN1 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT 629 SF MAIN FLOOR 3880 SF TOTAL:4509 SF COVERED PORCH 512 SF GARAGE 720 SF Drawing IndexSHEET NUMBERSHEET NAMEA0-00COVER PAGEA0-01GENERAL NOTES & ANNOTATIONSA0-02SITE PLANA1-01FOUNDATION PLANA1-02MAIN FLOOR PLANA1-03ROOF PLANA2-01NORTH EAST & NORTH WEST ELEVATIONSA2-02SOUTHWEST & SOUTH EAST ELEVATIONS A3-01SECTIONS A4-01WINDOW & DOOR SCHEDULE A5-01TYPICAL DETAILS A5-02TYPICAL DETAILS A5-03OPTIONAL DETAILS A6-01ELECTRICAL PLANS REVISION SCHEDULE # REVISION DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION 1 05.31.2024 Design Review Submittal 2 06.07.2024 Design Review DATE: 06/14/24 TPZ ELEMENTS DRAWN: K. MEYER ISA-CERTIFIED ARBORIST #WE-14992A BASE MAP: SITE PLAN AO-02 by ANDISON RESIDENTIAL DESIGN (06/07/2024) ARBORIST REPORT pg. 20TREE PROTECTION ZONE MAP14768 VICKERY AVE, SARATOGA, CANOTE: TREE #13 WAS PLACED BY PROJECT ARBORIST AND LOCATION IS APPROXIMATE. Tree protection fencing requirements as required by the City of Saratoga: 1.Six-foot high chain link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, 2-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. 2.Fences must be posted with signs saying: “TREE PROTECTION FENCE – DO NOT MOVE OR REMOVE WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST, CHRISTINA FUSCO – 408 868-1276.” 3.The City requires that tree protection fencing be installed before any equipment comes on site and inspected by the City Arborist before issuance of permits. 4.Tree protection fencing is required to remain in place throughout construction. 5.The TREE PROTECTION ZONE is the distance from the trunk to a point that is five feet be- yond the canopy of a tree protected by City code. Tree protection fencing shall be located as close to this location as possible while still allowing room for construction to occur. TPZ MAP LEGEND: PROTECTED TREE TO REMAIN NEIGHBORING / CITY STREET TREE TREE PROTECTION FENCING (SEE SPEC.) n PROTECTED TREE TO REMOVE n n 14 11 9 3 4 6 12 13 10 8 7 5 2 1 7 of 7 90 91 92 93 PROJECT ADDRESS: 14768 VICKERY AVECITY OF SARATOGACOUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, CAAPN: 517-27-011ZONING DISTRICT: R-1-15LOT AREA: 21032 SF (NET)SLOPE:FLAT LOT (<10% SLOPE)WUI ZONE: YESAREA CALCULATIONLOT AREA 21032 SFALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA 4596 SF4050 SF + (7X78)FLOOR AREA SUMMARYNEW RESIDENCE 3873 SFGARAGE 720 SFTOTAL FLOOR AREA 4593 SFNEW ATTACHED ADU652 SFSITE INFORMATION SUBJECT PROPERTY LINESADJACENT PROPERTY LINESEAVES / CANOPIESUTILITY LINES - POWERUTILITY LINES - OVERHEADUTILITY LINES - WATERUTILITY LINES - GASUTILITY LINES - SANITARYPRIVACY SCREEN/ FENCELINE TYPE LEGEND EXISTING FENCEUPPER DOORS & WINDOWS MAIN DOORS & WINDOWS BASEMENT DOORS & WINDOWSWINDOW & DOOR LOCATIONS GROSS BUILDING AREA Area of Tree ProtectionConiferous TreeDeciduous TreeAll trees and shrubs will be of a species capable of healthy growth in Calgary and will conform to the standards of the Canadian Nursery Landscape Association.New matured trees to be planted after construction as required by Land Use BylawShrub / BushEXISTING BUILDING TO BE REMOVEDUTILITY LINES - STORMLANDSCAPING LEGEND ASPHALTCONCRETE RETAINING WALLSBUILDING FOOTPRINTHARD / NON-PERMEABLE LANDSCAPINGNON-LANDSCAPED AREASGRASSXERISCAPED MATERIALSOFT / PERMEABLE LANDSCAPING1.5" LIMESTONE ROCK MULCHNEIGHBORING BUILDING FOOTPRINTMAIN FLOOR CANTILEVER DECKSPLANTING LEGEND COVERED SECOND FLOOR CANTILEVERGRADE MARKER LEGEND 1079.381079.38EXISTING GRADEPROPOSED GRADE1079.38ASSUMED GRADELOFT DOORS & WINDOWS PROPOSED ADDITION FOOTPRINTPROPOSED TOTAL FLOOR AREAPROPOSED TOTAL FLOOR AREASETBACK VERIFICATION NOTEPRIOR TO FOUNDATION INSPECTION BY THE CITY, THE LLS OF RECORD SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN CERTIFICATION THAT ALL BUILDING SETBACKS ARE PER THE APPROVED PLANSSCOPE OF WORKTHE WORK REQUIRED TO BE PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTORCONSISTS OF CONSTRUCTING AND COMPLETING THE "PROJECT" AS DEFINED IN THE GENERAL CONDITIONS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND ALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. THE WORK INCLUDES FURNISHING ALL PLANT, LABOR, TOOLS, EQUIPMENT, APPLIANCES, MATERIALS, TRANSPORTATION, AND SERVICES AND IN PERFORMING ALL OPERATIONS NECESSARY FOR THE PROPERTY INCIDENTAL TO THE CONSTRUCTION AND PROPER COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT AS SHOWN AND NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS. ALL LAYOUTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO ANDISON RESIDENTIAL DESIGN FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OR INSTALLATION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF WITH THE SITE AND FULLY UNDERSTAND THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND THEIR INTENT TO THIS SPECIFIC SITE. ANY DISCREPANCIES, BETWEEN THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND PLANS PROVIDED BY CONSULTANTS ARE TO BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE USED IN THEIR ENTIRETY FOR ALL ASPECTS OF CONSTRUCTIONDEMOLITION NOTES1.THE CONTRACTOR IS TO REVIEW IN DETAIL THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND ALL FIXTURES, AND IS TO VERIFY ALL EXISTING AND NEW DIMENSIONS. IF THERE ARE ANY DISCREPANCIES, CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE PROPER CARE IN RETAINING ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE SITE. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO VERIFY WITH THE OWNER AND ANDISON RESIDENTIAL DESIGN ALL ELEMENTS AND MATERIALS TO BE SAVED, RE-USED, OR DEMOLISHED, AND PROVIDE A SCHEDULE OF PROPOSED DEMOLITION. SEE DRAWINGS AND NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATIONS.3. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CLEANING ALL DEMOLISHED ITEMS AND WASTE MATERIALS FROM THE SITE WEEKLY.4. IT IS THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY ANDISON RESIDENTIAL DESIGN IMMEDIATELY UPON ANY EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT MAY REFLECT IN CHANGES FROM THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS.5.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THE LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES, WHETHER OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS.6.THE CONTRACTOR AGREES THAT HE SHALL ASSUME SOLE AND COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOB SITE CONDITIONS DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY; THAT THIS REQUIREMENT SHALL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO THE NORMAL WORKING HOURS; AND THAT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY, AND HOLD HARMLESS FROM ANY LIABILITY, REAL OR ALLEGED, IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF WORK ON THIS PROJECT, EXCEPT FOR LIABILITY ARISING FROM THE SOLE NEGLIGENCE OF THE OWNER, ARCHITECT, OF THE ENGINEER.7. REFER TO SITE PLAN, FLOOR PLANS, ELEVATIONS, SECTIONS, DETAILS, AND SCHEDULES TO COORDINATE EXTENT OF DEMOLITION WORK.8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY WITH THE OWNER ALL SITE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PROJECT.9.PRIOR TO DEMOLITION, CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXISTENCE AND LOCATION OF ASBESTOS. IF ASBESTOS IS FOUND, LICENSED ASBESTOS CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE PRIOR TO DEMOLITION.TREE PROTECTION FENCING SPECIFICATION1.Six-foot high chain link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, 2-inch diameter galvanized posts, driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart.2.Fences must be posted with signs saying:“TREE PROTECTION FENCE –DO NOT MOVE OR REMOVE WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST, CHRISTINA FUSCO –408 868-1276.”3.The City requires that tree protection fencing be installed before any equipment comes on site and inspected by the City Arborist before issuance of permits.4.Tree protection fencing is required to remain in place throughout construction.5.The TREE PROTECTION ZONE is the distance from the trunk to a point that is five feet beyond the canopy of a tree protected by City code. Tree protection fencing shall be located as close to this location as possible while still allowing room for construction to occur.STORM WATER RETENTION NOTEDISPOSITION AND TREATMENT OF STORM WATER WILL COMPLY WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM ("NPDES") STANDARDS AND IMPLEMENTATION STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY URBAN RUNOFF POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAMBUILDING HEIGHT LOWEST ELEVATION POINT AT THE BUILDINGS EDGE FROM NATURAL GRADEHEIGHTFOOT ELEVATIONHIGHEST ELEVATION POINT AT THE BUILDINGS EDGE FROM NATURAL GRADEAVERAGE ELEVATION POINT (BASED ON HIGHEST AND LOWEST POINTS ABOVE)TOP MOST ELEVATION POINT -MEASURED FROM AVERAGE POINT (ABOVE) TO THE TOP MOST POINT OF THE ROOFTOP MOST ELEVATION POINT -MEASURED FROM AVERAGE POINT (ABOVE) TO THE TOP MOST POINT OF THE ROOF -CHIMNEY525.77'551.73'549.60'25'-7"30.00'551.73'555.83'SETBACKSFRONTREQUIREDLEFT SIDE RIGHT SIDEREAR25'25'12'12'PROPOSED29'-3"27'-10 1/2"31'-8 1/2"12'-0"SETBACK TABLE5449 SF1707 SF1604 SF8838 SFN/A 8838 SF N/A N/A N/A N/A 8838 / 21032 SF = 42.02% LOT COVERAGE78 SFAREA OF ADU14PROPOSED CONCRETEWALKWAYVIC KERY AVE4781011121TREE #3 TO BE REMOVEDTREE #9 TO BE REMOVED2PROPOSED FIRE PIT65TREE #4 TO BE REMOVEDTREE #1 TO BE REMOVEDTREE #2 TO BE REMOVED3S46° 29'46"W131.90'N43° 29'12"W154.33'R=100.00'L=213.75'D=122°28'16"9' - 5 7/8"COVERED ENTRY526.84523.94525.78526.45526.89SOLAR PANELSSOLAR PANELSORANGE TREE28" FIR TREE32" FIR TREE15" LO TREE15" LO TREE9" LO TREEN 29° 29'30"W40.58'R=356.00'L=13.57'D=2°11'00"EXISTING CURBCUT TO BE REMOVED AND REHABILITATEDPROPOSED CURB CUTPRO PO SED C URB C UTVICKERY AVE9527.948" JP14" FIR16" FIR15" FIR14" FIR10" TREECHIMNEYCHIMNEYLOCATION OF GARBAGE13TREE PROTECTION ZONEREFER TO PAGE 17 ON ARBORISTS REPORTTREE PROTECTION ZONEREFER TO PAGE 17 ON ARBORISTS REPORTTREE PROTECTION ZONEREFER TO PAGE 17 ON ARBORISTS REPORTTREE PROTECTION ZONEREFER TO PAGE 17 ON ARBORISTS REPORTMULCH12' - 0"PROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVEWAYPROPOSED CONCRETE DRIVEWAYPROPOSED CONCRETEWALKWAYCONCRETE STEPSLANDSCAPE WALLLANDSCAPE WALLPROPOSED DWELLING #5828ROOF PEAK ELEV. = 551.82'MAIN FLOOR ELEV. = 528.50'T.O. FOUNDATION WALL ELEV. = 52725'T.O. FOOTING ELEV. = XXXXEAVES = AS SHOWNSETBACK25'-0" SETBA C K25'-0" SETBACKOPTIONALOUTDOOR SHOWERMULCHMULCHPROPOSED NATIVE LANDSCAPING PROPOSED NATIVE LANDSCAPING REFER TO CLIENTPROPOSED NATIVE LANDSCAPING 5' - 0"R 11' - 0"R 10' - 0"R 5' - 6"R 6 ' - 0 "R 5' - 0"R 4' - 6"NATIVE GRASSNATIVE GRASSNATIVE GRASSNATIVE GRASSNATIVE GRASSNATIVE GRASSNATIVE GRASS1)Hardscaping (driveway, walkways) –Trees #5, #7, and #12: When excavating within 10 feet of Trees #5 and #7 and within 12 feet of Tree #12, use hand tools. Leave roots encountered undisturbed if possible. Excavation depth for installation of new landscape materials within the listed distances of trees should be no more than six inches (6”) into existing soil grade. Do not compact native soil under paving materials. If roots must be cut, please see section titled “Root Pruning.” No paving materials or any excavation or grading within three feet (3’) of trunks.2)Excavation guidelines for installation of new foundation –Tree #12: Use hand tools only when excavating within 12 feet of the trunk of this tree within the top 36 inches of soil depth. If roots of one-inch diameter or larger must be cut, they should be cut cleanly with a sharp, clean sawblade perpendicular to the direction of growth (a “square cut”). The cut should be made where the bark of the root is undamaged and intact. Root pruning should be supervised by the Project Arborist.527.11PROPOPSED LOCATION OF OUTDOOR KITCHENAREA OF ENCLOSED PORCH104 sq. ft.AREA OF ROOF OPENING78 sq. ft.78/104 sq ft. = 75% AREA OF ENCLOSED PORCH49 sq. ft.AREA OF ROOF OPENING37 sq. ft.37/49 sq ft. = 75.5% COVERED PORCHPROPOSED POND77 sq. ft.REFER TO CLIENTPROPOSED FENCE6'-0" SOLID MATERIAL W/ 2'-0" LATTICEPROPOSED FENCE6'-0" MAX HT. W/ 2'-0" LATTICE PROPOSED FENCE6'-0" SOLID MATERIAL W/ 2'-0" LATTICEPROPOSED FENCE6'-0" SOLID MATERIAL W/ 2'-0" LATTICEPROPOSED FENCE6'-0" SOLID MATERIAL W/ 2'-0" LATTICEPROPOSED FENCE6'-0" SOLID MATERIAL W/ 2'-0" LATTICEPLANTING AS PER CLIENTPLANTING AS PER CLIENTPLANTING AS PER CLIENTPLANTING AS PER CLIENTPLANTING AS PER CLIENTPLANTING AS PER CLIENTPLANTING AS PER CLIENTPLANTING AS PER CLIENTFENCE EXCEPTION NOTES 15-29.090 FENCE EXCEPTIONS(a) The owner(s) of a fence, or proposed fence, including any gates or pilasters attached thereto, may request that the Planning Commision grant and exception to the regulations regarding fences. The Planning Commission may grant this exception if all of the following findings are made: (1) The subject fence will be compatible with other similar structures in the neighborhood; THE PROPOSED FENCE AND GATES HEIGHTS ARE SIMILAR TO OTHER PROPERTIES ON VICKERY AVE.(2) The entirety of the subject fence will be constructed of materials that are of high quality, exhibit superior craftsmanship, and that are durable; THE PROPOSED FENCE AND GATES WILL USE HIGH QUALITY AND DURABLE SOLID REDWOOD W/ 2'-0" LATTICE.(3) The modification will not impair the integrity and character of the neighborhood in which the fence is located; THE PROPOSED FENCE AND GATES WILL HAVE SIMILAR MATERIALS/ DESIGN FOR DURABILITY AND AESTHETICS, WHICH WILL MAINTAIN THE ESTABLISHED CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOOD.(4) The granting of the exception will not be detrimental or injurious to the property, adjacent neighbors, or improvements in the general vicinity and district in which the property is located; THE PROPOSED FENCE AND GATES WILL PROVIDE NEEDED SAFETY FOR KIDS AND WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.(5) The granting of the exception will not create a safety hazard for vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic and does not obstruct the safe access to and from adjacent properties.THE PROPOSED FENCE AND GATES DO NOT CREATE ANY SAFETY HAZARDS AND THE REQUIRED CLEARANCE WILL BE MAINTAINED FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY220 739 11 Ave SW, Calgary, Alberta,T2R 0E31.403.461.6481 | INFO@ANDISONDESIGN.COMANDISONDESIGN.COMGENERAL NOTESIt is the responsibility of the Contractor to review the Architectural drawings prior to construction and report any discrepancies to Andison Residential Design Ltd. Andison Residential Design Ltd. will not be held responsible for any costs if the Contractor deviates from these Architectural and or Structural drawings.All Geodetic Elevations provided to Andison Residential Design Ltd. are assumed to be accurate and reflect actual site conditions. Andison Residential Design Ltd. will not be held responsible for any discrepancies between Site condition and the provided SurveyThese drawings supercede all previous versions and shall not be used for any construction purposes until approved and signed.ISSUED FORDEVELOPMENT PERMITCLIENT APPROVALDate: ____________________________________________Sign: _____________________________________________FLOOR AREASNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONPROJECT LOCATION2024-10-02 5:22:31 PMOCTOBER 2, 202414768 VICKERY AVEA0-04LANDSCAPE PLAN14768 VICKERY AVELOT 35, TRACT 2399,CITY OF SARATOGA,COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, CAAPN: 517-27-011# Species Type Caliper Canopy Height Comments QtyTree - ConiferousConiferous Tree - Coniferous 3 in 6.00' 4.00' 9Tree - Coniferous- Fir1 Deciduous Tree - Coniferous- Fir 32 in 30.00' 40.00' Tree To Be Removed 12 Deciduous Tree - Coniferous- Fir 28 in 30.00' 40.00' Tree To Be Removed 13 Deciduous Tree - Coniferous- Fir 32 in 28.00' 40.00' Tree To Be Removed 14 Deciduous Tree - Coniferous- Fir 14 in 16.00' 15.00' Tree To Be Removed 15 Deciduous Tree - Coniferous- Fir 14 in 20.00' 20.00' Tree To Remain 16 Deciduous Tree - Coniferous- Fir 14 in 18.00' 18.00' Tree To Remain 17 Deciduous Tree - Coniferous- Fir 16 in 20.00' 20.00' Tree To Remain 18 Deciduous Tree - Coniferous- Fir 14 in 19.00' 20.00' Tree To Remain 19 Deciduous Tree - Coniferous- Fir 10 in 17.00' 30.00' Tree To Be Removed 1Tree - Deciduous Orange TreeDeciduous Tree - Deciduous Orange Tree 6 in <varies> 15.00' 814 Deciduous Tree - Deciduous Orange Tree 6 in 15.00' 15.00' Tree To Remain 1Tree - Shrub - Loquat11 Deciduous Tree - Shrub - Loquat 9 in 17.00' 16.00' Tree To Remain 112 Deciduous Tree - Shrub - Loquat 15 in 17.00' 16.00' Tree To Remain 113 Deciduous Tree - Shrub - Loquat 9 in 16.00' 16.00' Tree To Remain 1GARAGE 720 SFMAIN FLOOR 3873 SFTOTAL: 4593 SFCOVERED ENTRY PORCH 112 SFCOVERED PORCH 597 SFACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT 652 SFDrawing IndexSHEET NUMBER SHEET NAMEA0-00 COVER PAGEA0-02 SITE PLANA0-03 SITE PLAN - DEMOLITIONA0-04 LANDSCAPE PLANA1-01 FOUNDATION PLANA1-02 MAIN FLOOR PLANA1-03 ROOF PLANA1-04 AREA PLANA2-01 NORTH EAST & NORTH WEST ELEVATIONSA2-02 SOUTHWEST & SOUTH EAST ELEVATIONSA2-03 NORTH EAST & NORTH WEST COLOURED ELEVATIONSA2-04 NORTH EAST & NORTH WEST COLOURED ELEVATIONSA3-01 SECTIONSA4-01 WINDOW & DOOR SCHEDULEA5-01 TYPICAL DETAILSA5-02 TYPICAL DETAILSA5-03 OPTIONAL DETAILSA6-01 ELECTRICAL PLANSAR-1 ARBORIST REPORTAR-2 ARBORIST REPORTBMP-1 CONSTRUCTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICESER-1 EROSION CONTROL PLANER-2 EROSION CONTROL DETAILSVICINITY MAP TREE SCHEDULE REVISION SCHEDULE#REVISIONDATEREVISIONDESCRIPTION1 05.31.2024 Design ReviewSubmittal2 06.07.2024 Design Review3 06.20.2024 Design ReviewSubmittal4 08.23.2024 Design ReviewReSubmittal5 09.05.2024 Design ReviewReSubmittal609.18.2024Fence Revision1 : 100PRELINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN1Name ImperialSoft Landscape SurfaceMULCH - PLANTING BED 104 SFNATIVE GRASS 15604 SFMULCH 50 SFMULCH 148 SFMULCH - PLANTING BED 441 SFMULCH 186 SFPOND 78 SF16611 SFHard Landscape SurfaceCONCRETE - LANDSCAPE WALL 21 SFCONCRETE - LANDSCAPE WALL 56 SFCONCRETE DRIVEWAY 1672 SFCONCRETE - LANDSCAPE WALL 49 SFCONCRETE PATHWAY 882 SFCONCRETE - LANDSCAPE WALL 17 SFCONCRETE - LANDSCAPE WALL 10 SF2707 SFLANDSCAPE AREA 15763 SF15763 SFLANDSCAPE AREA Above GradeACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT 652 ft²GARAGE 720 ft²MAIN FLOOR 3873 ft²5246 ft²COVERED ENTRY PORCH 112 SFCOVERED PORCH 597 SFACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT 652 SFGARAGE 720 SFMAIN FLOOR 3873 SFTOTAL: 4593 SF46 ADOBO- VULCAN TIMBER SIDING - BANDSAWN SIOOX (WEATHERED)https://www.abodowood.com/products/timbers/vulcan-cladding73 5/8" FULL BED BRICK, ELDORADO STONE, 'CHALKDUST TUNDRA BRICK'https://ixlbuild.com/products/chalk-dust-tundrabrick/FLOAT FINISHED ACRYLIC STUCCO OVER CEMENTITIOUS BASE, BENJAMIN MOORE - 'WHITE HERON'118" STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING - CHARCOAL2ALUMINUM SOFFIT & RAINWARE, CHARCOAL42" OVER 6" ALUMINUM FASCIA, BLACKMATERIAL LEGEND3HARDIE PANEL VERTICAL SIDING, BLACK8" OVER 18" ALUMINUM FASCIA, BLACK968TESLA SOLAR PANELS, SPECIFICATION T.B.D.106" STONE HEADER - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDSTONE114" STONE SILL - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDSTONE124" STONE CHIMNEY CAP - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDSTONE13STONE CHIMNEY CAP - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDTONE 146" CEDAR SOFFIT, COLOUR SELECTION T.B.D.56X12 D.F. TIMBER BEAM, WALNUT - ST - 202915EXTERIOR LIGHTING, AS PER CLIENTS SELECTIONS164X4 H.S.S. COLUMN W/ CUSTOM METAL TOP AND BOTTOM PLATES, POWDER COAT FINISH, BLACK174" HARDIE TRIM, MIDNIGHT SOOThttps://www.jameshardie.ca/products/hardietrim-boards?loc=refresh182" HARDIE TRIM, MIDNIGHT SOOThttps://www.jameshardie.ca/products/hardietrim-boards?loc=refresh19WINDOW & DOORS, AS PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS, COLOUR T.B.D.20FIBERGLASS ENTRY DOOR, WOOD STAINED21GALVANIZED METAL FLASHING, CHARCOAL22PROPOSED REDWOOD FENCE, 6'-0" SOLID MATERIAL W/ 2'-0" LATTICE23134611201129129122820224721918206:126:12181291161631715192149129121061120221312868"8"1' - 0"8"12916617PROPERTY LINE1' - 1 7/8"26' - 9 1/16"T.O. SUBFLOOR7' - 0"1' - 8"FLOAT FINISHED ACRYLIC STUCCO OVER CEMENTITIOUS BASE, BENJAMIN MOORE - 'WHITE HERON'4ADOBO- VULCAN TIMBER SIDING -BANDSAWN SIOOX (WEATHERED)76X12 D.F. TIMBER BEAM, WALNUT - ST - 2029154" STONE CHIMNEY CAP - CUT STONE - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDSTONE133 5/8" FULL BED BRICK, ELDORADO STONE, 'CHALKDUST TUNDRA BRICK'6METAL ROOFING, FASCIA, FLASHING, RAINWARE & TRIM - CHARCOAL62" HARDIE TRIM, MIDNIGHT SOOT19220 739 11 Ave SW, Calgary, Alberta,T2R 0E31.403.461.6481 | INFO@ANDISONDESIGN.COMANDISONDESIGN.COMGENERAL NOTESIt is the responsibility of the Contractor to review the Architectural drawings prior to construction and report any discrepancies to Andison Residential Design Ltd. Andison Residential Design Ltd. will not be held responsible for any costs if the Contractor deviates from these Architectural and or Structural drawings.All Geodetic Elevations provided to Andison Residential Design Ltd. are assumed to be accurate and reflect actual site conditions. Andison Residential Design Ltd. will not be held responsible for any discrepancies between Site condition and the provided SurveyThese drawings supercede all previous versions and shall not be used for any construction purposes until approved and signed.ISSUED FORDEVELOPMENT PERMITCLIENT APPROVALDate: ____________________________________________Sign: _____________________________________________FLOOR AREASNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONPROJECT LOCATION2024-10-02 5:23:22 PMOCTOBER 2, 202414768 VICKERY AVEA2-03NORTH EAST & NORTH WESTCOLOURED ELEVATIONS14768 VICKERY AVELOT 35, TRACT 2399,CITY OF SARATOGA,COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, CAAPN: 517-27-011GARAGE 720 SFMAIN FLOOR 3873 SFTOTAL: 4593 SFCOVERED ENTRY PORCH 112 SFCOVERED PORCH 597 SFACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT 652 SF1/4" = 1'-0"NORTHEAST ELEVATION11/4" = 1'-0"NORTHWEST ELEVATION2REVISION SCHEDULE#REVISIONDATEREVISIONDESCRIPTION1 05.31.2024 Design ReviewSubmittal2 06.07.2024 Design Review3 06.20.2024 Design ReviewSubmittal4 08.23.2024 Design ReviewReSubmittal5 09.05.2024 Design ReviewReSubmittal ADOBO- VULCAN TIMBER SIDING - BANDSAWN SIOOX (WEATHERED)https://www.abodowood.com/products/timbers/vulcan-cladding73 5/8" FULL BED BRICK, ELDORADO STONE, 'CHALKDUST TUNDRA BRICK'https://ixlbuild.com/products/chalk-dust-tundrabrick/FLOAT FINISHED ACRYLIC STUCCO OVER CEMENTITIOUS BASE, BENJAMIN MOORE - 'WHITE HERON'118" STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING - CHARCOAL2ALUMINUM SOFFIT & RAINWARE, CHARCOAL42" OVER 6" ALUMINUM FASCIA, BLACKMATERIAL LEGEND3HARDIE PANEL VERTICAL SIDING, BLACK8" OVER 18" ALUMINUM FASCIA, BLACK968TESLA SOLAR PANELS, SPECIFICATION T.B.D.106" STONE HEADER - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDSTONE114" STONE SILL - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDSTONE124" STONE CHIMNEY CAP - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDSTONE13STONE CHIMNEY CAP - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDTONE 146" CEDAR SOFFIT, COLOUR SELECTION T.B.D.56X12 D.F. TIMBER BEAM, WALNUT - ST - 202915EXTERIOR LIGHTING, AS PER CLIENTS SELECTIONS164X4 H.S.S. COLUMN W/ CUSTOM METAL TOP AND BOTTOM PLATES, POWDER COAT FINISH, BLACK174" HARDIE TRIM, MIDNIGHT SOOThttps://www.jameshardie.ca/products/hardietrim-boards?loc=refresh182" HARDIE TRIM, MIDNIGHT SOOThttps://www.jameshardie.ca/products/hardietrim-boards?loc=refresh19WINDOW & DOORS, AS PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS, COLOUR T.B.D.20FIBERGLASS ENTRY DOOR, WOOD STAINED21GALVANIZED METAL FLASHING, CHARCOAL22PROPOSED REDWOOD FENCE, 6'-0" SOLID MATERIAL W/ 2'-0" LATTICE23FLOAT FINISHED ACRYLIC STUCCO OVER CEMENTITIOUS BASE, BENJAMIN MOORE - 'WHITE HERON'4ADOBO- VULCAN TIMBER SIDING -BANDSAWN SIOOX (WEATHERED)76X12 D.F. TIMBER BEAM, WALNUT -ST -2029154" STONE CHIMNEY CAP - CUT STONE - VALDERS RIVER BLUFF - SANDSTONE133 5/8" FULL BED BRICK, ELDORADO STONE, 'CHALKDUST TUNDRA BRICK'6METAL ROOFING, FASCIA, FLASHING, RAINWARE & TRIM - CHARCOAL62" HARDIE TRIM, MIDNIGHT SOOT191' - 0"9129121' - 0"134820622041286912527.92138"3'-0" x 8'-0"2'-0" x 4'-0"9'-0" x 8'-0"15'-0" x 8'-0"15'-0" x 8'-0"12'-0" x 8'-0"12'-0" x 8'-0"6:126:129:129:122'-8" x 8'-0"1' - 0"1' - 0"1' - 0"1' - 0"1' - 6"8"8"1' - 8"132699201113:129:129129:129:129:122'-0" x 3'-6"3'-0" x 5'-0"3'-0" x 8'-0"910'-0" x 8'-0"14'-0"x2'-0"220 739 11 Ave SW, Calgary, Alberta,T2R 0E31.403.461.6481 | INFO@ANDISONDESIGN.COMANDISONDESIGN.COMGENERAL NOTESIt is the responsibility of the Contractor to review the Architectural drawings prior to construction and report any discrepancies to Andison Residential Design Ltd. Andison Residential Design Ltd. will not be held responsible for any costs if the Contractor deviates from these Architectural and or Structural drawings.All Geodetic Elevations provided to Andison Residential Design Ltd. are assumed to be accurate and reflect actual site conditions. Andison Residential Design Ltd. will not be held responsible for any discrepancies between Site condition and the provided SurveyThese drawings supercede all previous versions and shall not be used for any construction purposes until approved and signed.ISSUED FORDEVELOPMENT PERMITCLIENT APPROVALDate: ____________________________________________Sign: _____________________________________________FLOOR AREASNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONPROJECT LOCATION2024-10-02 5:23:34 PMOCTOBER 2, 202414768 VICKERY AVEA2-04NORTH EAST & NORTH WESTCOLOURED ELEVATIONS14768 VICKERY AVELOT 35, TRACT 2399,CITY OF SARATOGA,COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, CAAPN: 517-27-011GARAGE 720 SFMAIN FLOOR 3873 SFTOTAL: 4593 SFCOVERED ENTRY PORCH 112 SFCOVERED PORCH 597 SFACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT 652 SFREVISION SCHEDULE#REVISIONDATEREVISIONDESCRIPTION1 05.31.2024 Design ReviewSubmittal2 06.07.2024 Design Review3 06.20.2024 Design ReviewSubmittal4 08.23.2024 Design ReviewReSubmittal5 09.05.2024 Design ReviewReSubmittal1/4" = 1'-0"SOUTHWEST ELEVATION11/4" = 1'-0"SOUTHEAST ELEVATION2 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 14771 Montalvo Rd Meeting Date: November 13, 2024 Application: PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 Address/APN: 14771 Montalvo Rd / 517-19-040 Applicant / Property Owner: Joseph W. Beyers Report Prepared By: Kyle Rathbone, Associate Planner 124 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting the following items hereafter referred to as ‘the project’: • Design Review approval for a new 4,563 square foot two-story single-family residence with a 790 square foot deed restricted detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU). Eleven (11) protected trees are proposed for removal. • A variance for a Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) Urban Lot Split to include a new parcel with a site area that is less than 40% of the original parcel site area. • A variance for an SB 9 Urban Lot Split to include a new parcel with a site width that is less than 50% of the original parcel site width. • A variance for the main residence to exceed the maximum allowable floor area for the property. • A variance for the main residence to be located within the front setback. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 24-032 approving the project subject to conditions of approval included in Attachment 1. Pursuant to City Code Section 15-45.060(a) (3) approval by the Planning Commission is required as the project is a new structure over 18 feet in height. Pursuant to City Code Section 15-70.020(a) approval by the Planning Commission is required to grant variances from zoning code regulations with respect to site area, site width, setbacks, and allowable floor area. PROJECT DATA (LOT 2) Gross/Net Site Area: 16,588 sq. ft. Average Site Slope: 8.2% General Plan Designation: M-10 (Low Density Residential) Zoning: R-1-20,000 (Single Family Residential) Proposed Allowed/Required Site Coverage Residence/Garage/ADU Driveway and Walkways Total Proposed (structures) 3,845 sq. ft. 1353 sq. ft. (50%) 5,198 sq. ft. 8,265 sq. ft.* Floor Area First Floor Second Floor Accessory Dwelling Unit Garage Total Floor Area 1,949 sq. ft. 2,173 sq. ft. 790 sq. ft. 441 sq. ft. 5,353 sq. ft. 1,600 sq. ft.** Height 26’ 26’ Setbacks Front: Interior Side: Exterior Side Rear: 1st Floor 5’-8” 15’ 265’ 15’ 2nd Floor 5’-8” 20’ 265’ 15’ 1st Floor 30’ 15’ 25’ 15’ 2nd Floor 30’ 20’ 30’ 15’ 125 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 3 Grading Cut 0 C.Y. Fill 0 C.Y. Import 0 C.Y. No grading limit in the R-1-20,000 zoning district *Includes one-time bonus 800 square feet of site coverage allowance for an Accessory Dwelling Unit ** Uses 800 sq ft per dwelling unit standard of 15-57.040(a)(1). SCOPE OF REVIEW 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 42,967 net sq. ft. project site is located at 14771 Montalvo Rd in the R-20,000 (Single Family Residential) zoning district. The site is bounded on one side by Vickery Ave, on another side by Saratoga Los Gatos Rd, and on a third side by Montalvo Rd which provides site access. The site contains an existing 5,995 sq. ft. two-story single-family residence, garage, accessory structure, pool, and related site improvements. A total of 34 protected trees are in the vicinity of the project site. The existing parcel has an unconventional long and skinny shape with a total size that is substantially larger than what is typical for the R-20,000 zoning. Surrounding uses include single-story and two-story single-family homes of similar sizes on smaller parcels. Project Description The applicant proposes subdividing the existing 42,967 net sq. ft. property under an SB 9 Urban Lot Split application to create two new parcels. One of the newly created parcels (Lot 1) will contain all of the existing site improvements and be occupied by the owner. The other new parcel (Lot 2) is where the proposed two-story residence and detached ADU are proposed for development. SB 9 requires ministerial approval for both urban lot splits and residential developments that meet certain objective criteria. Because the proposed subdivision and project do not meet those objective criteria, a combination of variances and discretionary approvals are proposed. The Urban Lot Split would require the variances #1 and #2 outlined above which, if granted, will allow the project to be subject to ministerial review. The proposed residences on Lot 2 are 126 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 4 inconsistent with SB 9’s development standards. Therefore, under City Code Section 15-57.040, the residence and ADU will be subject to discretionary approval, including Design Review. Design Review The new construction on Lot 2 will consist of a two-story residence with detached, deed restricted accessory dwelling unit (ADU). The architectural style of the project can best be described as modern Mediterranean or Spanish Colonial Revival matching the architectural style of the existing home. The project will include a 2,390 sq. ft. first story with a side facing two-car garage, foyer, family room, kitchen, dining area room, and office. The project will also include a 2,173 sq. ft. second story with a laundry room, four bedrooms, and four and a half bathrooms. 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 Shoji White Stucco Urbane Bronze Trim Mountain Ledge Stone Windows Black Casement Windows Doors Covered Front Entry with Wooden Doors Roof Autumn Spanish Barrel Tile Roofing Trees The project arborist inventoried a total of 34 protected trees on the project site. Eleven (11) protected trees are proposed for removal with this project having met the required findings for removal. Tree fencing is required to be installed to minimize impacts to protected trees prior to project commencement and during its duration. The payment of a tree protection security deposit is required prior to building permit issuance. Details of the arborist’s findings and description of the trees on site are included in the Arborist Report. Landscaping The project will largely maintain the existing natural landscaping of native trees, bushes, and grasses. The installation of front yard landscaping is required prior to building permit final inspection. The project includes a condition of approval that landscaping is to be installed per City Code Section 15-12.095. Hardscape located within the front setback will be less than 50% of the front setback area. Variance 1 – Lot Area standards for Urban Lot Splits City Code for Urban Lot Splits requires that the parcel map subdivide the existing parcel into two new parcels of approximately equal area provided that no parcel is smaller than 40% of the lot area of the original parcel (15-57.050(a)(2)). The project proposes to split the original 42,967 net sq. ft. parcel into two new parcels with areas of 26,379 sq. ft. (Lot 1) and 16,588 sq. ft. (Lot 2). The smaller of these parcels is only 38% of the original parcel area. The Planning Commission would need to grant a variance to this standard to approve the Urban Lot Split. 127 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 5 Variance 2 – Lot Width standards for Urban Lot Splits City Code for Urban Lot Splits requires that the lot split does not result in a new lot with a lot width that is less than 50% of the lot width of the original parcel (15-57.050(a)(6)). The original parcel has a lot width of 553’. The proposed lot width for Lot 1 and Lot 2 would be 193’ and 361’ respectively. The site width for Lot 1 would only be 35% of the original lot width. The Planning Commission would need to grant a variance to this standard to approve the Urban Lot Split. The original parcel’s uniquely long shape gives the lot an uncommonly long site width. The parcel shape also narrows substantially towards one side. The combination of these factors poses a problem when trying to simultaneously apply the City Code’s Urban Lot Split standards for area and width. The lot split cannot be drawn in such a way to satisfy both the 40% area requirement and the 50% width requirement as increasing the proposed width of Lot 1 decreases the area of Lot 2 and vice versa. The proposed lot line for the Urban Lot Split, while failing to fully meet either the Lot Area or Lot Width standards for Urban Lot Splits, best compromises between these two regulations and creates a building envelope that maintains adequate distance from the existing home and best preserves protected trees. Variance 3 – Floor Area Maximum allowable floor area for lots that have been subdivided through an Urban Lot Split is determined by taking the maximum allowable floor area of the original lot and multiplying it by the ratio of the newly created lots (15-57.040(a)(1)). This would give an allowable floor area of 3,720 sq. ft. for Lot 1 and 2,280 sq. ft. for Lot 2. However, when existing structures use more than the floor area allocated under this method, then the other lot shall have an allowable floor area that is the difference between the maximum for the two lots and actual floor area already used. The existing floor area on Lot 1 is 5,996 sq. ft. which would leave only 5 sq. ft. for Lot 2. However, City Code gives lots created by an Urban Lot Split a minimum allowable floor area of 800 sq. ft. per dwelling unit. This application proposes a floor area on Lot 2 of 5,353 sq. ft. for the main home and detached ADU, which is larger than the 1,600 sq. ft. allowed by the City Code, in order to better utilize the vacant land and create a home size that conforms to the size and character of homes present in the neighborhood. Variance 4 – Front Setback As mentioned previously, Lot 2 has a uniquely skinny shape that significantly constrains the building envelope once front and rear setbacks are applied. Due to this, the project is seeking a variance to the required front setback of 30 feet. The project proposes a 5.8-foot front setback for both floors of the main structure. There exists a large right-of-way of approximately 30 feet from the edge of Montalvo Rd to the start of this property’s front property line. This excessive right-of- way was put in place in 1908 with the potential intention to expand Montalvo Rd. into a wider road. The City has no current intentions of expanding Montalvo Rd. and the right-of-way is smaller for the properties further along Montalvo Rd. With this largely defunct right-of-way included, the proposed home would be located over 35 feet from Montalvo Rd. FINDINGS Design Review 128 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 6 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 follows the natural contours of the site and minimizes grading. The lot is relatively flat, and the project will not make significant changes to the existing natural elevations. The development is appropriate to the site’s natural constraints. 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 there are 11 protected trees proposed for removal out of the 34 protected trees inventoried for the project. The City Arborist has made the required findings for removal of the protected trees. The project, including the lot split and the home placement, is designed in such a way as to reduce the removal of valuable protected trees. Tree protection fencing is required to be installed prior to the 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 has adequate separation and screening to avoid privacy impacts to adjoining properties. The building setbacks comply with those required for the R-1-20,000 zoning district for the rear and sides, and the large right-of-way in the front of the property provides additional distance in that direction. The property is bounded by streets on three sides and the owner’s property on the fourth. The proposed residence complies with the height limit for single-family homes and there is substantial existing vegetation for screening. The site is mostly flat, and no community view sheds are in the vicinity of the project. 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 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-1-20,000 zoning district for the rear and sides, and the large right-of-way in the front of the property provides additional distance in that direction. The proposed residence is consistent in mass, height, and architectural elements with surrounding properties with are largely similarly sized two-story homes. ` 129 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 7 e. The landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the front yard landscaping will continue to be dominated by existing trees, native bushes and grasses which are complementary to the streetscape. The project includes a condition of approval that front yard landscaping is to be installed prior to the building department final inspection. The City Code requires that at least 50% of the front setback area be landscaped. f. Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the home is similar in mass with the homes in the neighborhood and will not cast shadows on the adjacent properties which could impair the adjacent property owner’s opportunity to utilize solar energy. g. The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the proposed project conforms to the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook in terms of compatible bulk and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views as detailed in the findings above. 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 is not considered a hillside lot as the average slope is less than 10% nor will it affect any significant hillside feature or community viewshed. Variance 1 – Lot Area standards for Urban Lot Splits The finding required for issuance of a Variance pursuant to City Code Section 15-70.060 are set forth below and the applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all the required findings: a. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive this applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the unique size and shape of the property make it effectively impossible to subdivide the original parcel in a way that complies with the City Code for Urban Lot Splits. All other lots with single-family zoning which do not have such unique shapes are able to apply for Urban Lot Splits under this Code. The proposed lot split line creating a new parcel with an area less than 40% of the original parcel area is the most amenable split location given the special circumstances of the site as it allows for development of the new parcel in a way that 130 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 8 maintains separation from the existing home and better preserves some of the larger redwood trees on the property. b. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. As stated above, the ability to subdivide a residential property through an Urban Lot Split is a privilege that other properties classified in the same zoning and in the vicinity and which do not have the same shape constraints already have. The granting of this variance would allow the applicant to benefit from this same privilege in a way that best allows for the development of the new lot. c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed Urban Lot Split creating a new parcel with an area less than 40% of the original parcel area would not pose any adverse impacts to public health, safety, or welfare. The development enabled by the proposed Urban Lot Split would be in line with the type of development present in the neighborhood and would not be injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Variance 2 – Lot Width standards for Urban Lot Splits The finding required for issuance of a Variance pursuant to City Code Section 15-70.060 are set forth below and the applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all the required findings: a. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive this applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the unique size and shape of the property make it effectively impossible to subdivide the original parcel in a way that complies with the City Code for Urban Lot Splits. All other lots with single-family zoning which do not have such unique shapes are able to apply for Urban Lot Splits under this Code. The proposed lot split line creating a new parcel with a site width that is less than 50% of the original parcel site width is the most amenable split location given the special circumstances of the site as it allows for development of the new parcel in a way that maintains separation from the existing home and better preserves some of the larger redwood trees on the property. b. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. 131 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 9 This finding can be made in the affirmative. As stated above, the ability to subdivide a residential property through an Urban Lot Split is a privilege that other properties classified in the same zoning and in the vicinity and which do not have the same shape constraints already have. The granting of this variance would allow the applicant to benefit from this same privilege in a way that best allows for the development of the new lot. c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed Urban Lot Split creating a new parcel with a site width that is less than 50% of the original parcel site width would not pose any adverse impacts to public health, safety, or welfare. The development enabled by the proposed Urban Lot Split would be in line with the type of development present in the neighborhood and would not be injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Variance 3 – Floor Area a. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive this applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The circumstances of the project, specifically the presence of the existing home using up the allowable floor area as set by the City Code, would prevent the newly created Lot 2 from being developed at a level that is consistent with the surrounding properties. A normal lot in this zoning district with a net area of 16,588 sq. ft. would be able to build out to 5,427 sq. ft. with a deed restricted ADU which is in line with the size of development of properties in the vicinity; however, the circumstances of the parcel size, existing home size, and Urban Lot Split regulations would limit the buildable area of Lot 2 to just 1,600 sq. ft., a level of development that is incongruous and financially infeasible with the size of the lot and the character of the neighborhood. Therefore, strict enforcement of the floor area Code standards would effectively prevent this new lot from being developed with housing in the way that similar properties would. b. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Other properties within the vicinity and zoning district are able to construct homes with a similar floor area. The granting of this variance would allow the applicant to benefit from the same privilege to develop the lot in a way that is consistent with the type of development in the neighborhood. 132 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 10 c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed home size would be consistent with the type of development present in the vicinity of the project. The home size would not pose any detrimental impacts to public health, safety, or welfare. Variance 4 – Front Setback a. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive this applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Special circumstances are posed by the unique, skinny shape of the lot and by the presence of an unusually large right-of-way along the front of the property. The application of the City Code required 30-foot front setback would shrink the building envelope to a level that would prevent practical development of the lot, depriving the applicant of a development privilege enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and the same zoning district. b. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Other properties within the vicinity and zoning district which are not beset with the same circumstances of a thin property shape and larger right-of-way have building envelopes that enable development at a similar level to this project. Moreover, the large right-of-way of approximately 30 feet in distance from the edge of Montalvo Road to the front property line effectively fulfills the same function as a regular front setback does for properties not bounded by such a large right-of-way. c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed home would be consistent with the type of development present in the vicinity of the project. The presence of a large right-of-way gives the home an effective setback from the street that is similar to that of other homes in the zoning district. The home location would not pose any detrimental impacts to public health, safety, or welfare. NEIGHBOR NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE 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. The applicant reached out to the adjacent neighbors during the review process and provided completed neighbor notification forms; no concerns were raised with the neighbor 133 Report to the Planning Commission 14771 Montalvo Rd – Application # PDR23-0023 / VAR23-0004 / ARB24-0060 November 13, 2024 Page | 11 notification forms, and to date no additional public comments have been received. 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 up to three single-family residences in a residential area. The project, as proposed, is for the construction of a new residence and ADU in a suburban, residential area. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 24-032 2. Variance Constraints Example 3. Applicant Provided Variance Justifications 4. Arborist Report dated November 4, 2024 5. Project Notification Forms 6. Color and Materials Board 7. Project Plans 134 RESOLUTION NO: 24-029 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW PDR23-0023 AND VARIANCE VAR23-0004 14771 MONTALVO ROAD (517-19-040) WHEREAS, on November 15, 2023, an application was submitted by Joseph Beyers requesting Design Review approval for a new 4,563 square foot two-story single-family residence with a 790 square foot detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and a Variance for SB 9 Lot Split parcel map width and area requirements, encroachment of the main residence into the front setback, and allowable floor area limits for the main home. Eleven (11) protected trees are proposed for removal. The site is zoned R-1-20,000 with a General Plan Designation of Low Density Residential (M-10). 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 November 13, 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 Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines: “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”, Class 3(a). This exemption allows for the construction of a single-family residence and small structures in a residential area. Section 3: The Planning Commission finds that the application for Design Review for 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 the new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the site and the adjacent surroundings; Safety Element Site and Drainage Policy 3 which provides that the City shall require that landscaping and site drainage plans be submitted and approved during Design Review for a residence prior to issuance of permits; and Conservation Element Policy 6.0 which provides that the City shall protect the existing rural atmosphere of Saratoga by carefully considering the visual impact of new development. 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 the size and shape of the lot; site development follows contours and is appropriate given the 135 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 Planning Commission finds that the application for a Variance to allow for an Urban Lot Split that creates a new parcel with a site area that is less than 40% of the original parcel site area; a new parcel with a site width that is less than 50% of the area of the original parcel; the main residence to exceed the maximum allowable floor area allowed by the lot split; and the main residence to be located within the front setback is consistent with the required findings in that 1) because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district, 2) that the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district, 3) that the granting of variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Section 6: The City of Saratoga Planning Commission hereby approves PDR23-0023 and VAR23-0004 for 14771 Montalvo Road (517-19-040) 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 13th day of November 2024 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ____________________________ Jonathan “Jojo” Choi Chair, Planning Commission Exhibit 1 136 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 14771 Montalvo Rd PDR23-0023/VAR23-0004 (517-19-040) GENERAL 1. All conditions below which are identified as permanent or for which an alternative period of time for applicability is specified shall run with the land and apply to the landowner’s successors in interest for such time period. No zoning clearance, or demolition, grading for this project shall be issued until proof is filed with the city that a certificate of approval documenting all applicable permanent or other term-specified conditions has been recorded by the applicant with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s office in form and content to the Community Development Director. If a condition is not “Permanent” or does not have a term specified, it shall remain in effect until the issuance by the City of Saratoga of a Certificate of Occupancy or its equivalent. 2. The Owner and Applicant will be mailed a statement after the time the Resolution granting this approval is duly executed, containing a statement of all amounts due to the City in connection with this application, including all consultant fees (collectively “processing fees”). This approval or permit shall expire sixty (60) days after the date said notice is mailed if all processing fees contained in the notice have not been paid in full. No Zoning Clearance or Demolition, Grading, or Building Permit may be issued until the City certifies that all processing fees have been paid in full (and, for deposit accounts, a surplus balance of $500 is maintained). 3. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable regulations of the State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdiction including, without limitation, the requirements of the Saratoga City Code incorporated herein by this reference. 4. As a condition of this Approval, Owner and Applicant hereby agree to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against: a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any action on the subject application, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to said action; and b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person acting on their behalf. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 5. A Building Permit must be issued, and construction commenced within 36 months from the date of adoption of this Resolution or the Design Review Approval will expire unless extended in accordance with the City Code. 137 6. The development shall be located and constructed to include those features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Development Plans. All proposed changes to the approved plans must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. Such changes shall be subject to approval in accordance with City Code. 7. 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. In order to comply with standards that minimize impacts to the neighborhood during site preparation and construction, the applicant shall comply with City Code Sections 7-30.060 and 16-75.050, with respect to noise, construction hours, maintenance of the construction site and other requirements stated in these sections. 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 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 City Code Section 15-29. 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 prolonged 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. 138 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. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. West Valley Collection & Recycling is the exclusive roll-off and debris box provider for the City of Saratoga. 14. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the property owner will sign and have notarized an affidavit deed restricting the rental of the proposed ADU to qualifying low-income tenants. FIRE DEPARTMENT 15. The owner/applicant shall comply with all Fire Department requirements. ARBORIST 16. All requirements in the City Arborist Approval Letter dated November 4, 2024 are hereby adopted as conditions of approval and shall be implemented as part of the approved plans. PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING 17. The Project shall retain and/or detain any increase in design flow from the site created by their construction and grading, such that adjacent down slope properties will not be negatively impacted by an increase in stormwater runoff. Disposition and treatment of stormwater shall comply with the applicable requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit issued to the City of Saratoga and the implementation standards established by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (collectively the "NPDES Permit Standards"). 18. Prior to issuance of a Grading or Building Permit, a Stormwater Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval demonstrating how all storm water will be retained on-site and in compliance with the NPDES Permit Standards. If not all stormwater can be retained on- site due to topographic, soils or other constraints, and if complete retention is not otherwise required by the NPDES Permit Standards, the Project shall be designed to retain on-site the maximum reasonably feasible amount of stormwater and to direct all excess stormwater away from adjoining property and toward stormwater drains, drainageways, streets or road right-of- ways and otherwise comply with the NPDES Permit Standards and applicable City Codes. 19. For single-family home projects that create and/or replace between 2,500 SF and 10,000 SF of 139 impervious surface (Site Coverage), Owner / Applicant shall provide the Small Projects Worksheet and implement at least one the (1) Low Impact Development (LID) Site Design Measures listed on the form. The Worksheet is available on the City’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention webpage. 20. 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). 21. All building and construction related activities shall adhere to New Development and Construction – Best Management Practices (BMPs) as adopted by the City for the purpose of preventing storm water pollution. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, Owner / Applicant shall prepare an Erosion Control Plan implementing the following: • Construction site inspection and control to prevent construction site discharges of pollutants into the storm drains per approved. • 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, building, and site finishing) until the site is fully stabilized by landscaping or the installation of permanent erosion control measures is complete. 22. 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. The owner shall be required to timely correct all actual and potential discharges observed. 23. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, Owner / Applicant shall prepare a Grading and Drainage Plan in conformance with the Approved Development Plans and Approved Tentative Parcel Map, as modified per these conditions of approval. The Grading and Drainage Plans shall clearly indicate and/or implement the following: • On-site stormwater retention and pollution control, in compliance with the Low Impact Development (LID) Site Design Measures listed on the Small Project Worksheet. • Show all drainage facilities, locations of downspouts and area drains, path and direction of drainage swales and other surface or underground drainage feature • Maximum depth and volumes of cut and fill • All hardscape and landscape features (labeled and detailed as needed) • Detailed grading information, including but not limited to top and bottom of retaining walls, pad and finish floor elevations, spot elevations and slope and direction of flow, trenching locations, accurate tree canopy/dripline, and any other necessary details 24. Applicant / Owner shall obtain an encroachment permit (separate from the Building Permit) for construction of any improvements in the City right-of-way and/or within any City easements, prior to commencement of the work. Be advised that the City right-of-way typically extends 7-10 feet from the edge of the paved 140 public roadway and an encroachment permit is required regardless of whether or not curbs/gutters/sidewalk exist. City Municipal Code Article 10-20. 25. Applicant / Owner shall make the following improvements in the City right-of-way: a. New driveway approaches shall be 14’ – 24’ wide at the street and shall include a 6” concrete “mow strip” between the pavers and the asphalt, as shown on Sheet A2. See City of Saratoga Standard Details for removal and new installation. New flow line shall conform to existing flow lines and grade. 26. Damages to driveway approach, curb and gutter, public streets, or other public improvements during construction shall be repaired prior to final inspection. 27. 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. 28. Prior to commencement of the work, Applicant / Owner shall obtain a Caltrans encroachment permit for any work in the State right-of-way (SR 9; Saratoga-Los Gatos Road). 29. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, Owner / Applicant shall prepare a Utility Plan showing utilities serving the residential structures. Show existing and proposed mains/pipelines and all connection points (sewer, water, power, etc.). If utilities are to remain, and will not be capped or replaced, please add a note to that effect on the plans. All new/upgraded utilities shall be installed underground. 30. Prior to final Parcel Map approval, the Owner / Applicant shall furnish the City Engineer with satisfactory written commitments from all public and private utility providers serving the subdivision guaranteeing the completion of all required utility improvements to serve the subdivision. 31. Applicant / Owner shall secure all necessary permits from the City and any other public agency, including utility providers, prior to commencement of construction. Copies of permits other than those issued by the City shall be provided to the City Engineer. 32. Applicant / Owner shall comply with all conditions regarding on-site or off-site improvements as may be requested by other Agencies or Utility Companies having jurisdiction over the Project site. Prior to issuance of City permits, the applicant must present evidence of permit approval by any such agencies, as required for any activities within jurisdictional areas of said agencies. 33. 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. 34. Prior to the Building final, all Public Works conditions shall be completed per approved plans. 35. A final Parcel Map shall be prepared substantially in accord with the Tentative Parcel Map as 141 approved. Any substantial change to the Tentative Parcel Map may require additional review. All proposed changes to the Tentative Parcel Map must be submitted in writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the changes. 36. Prior to submittal of the final Parcel Map to the City Engineer for examination, the Applicant / Owner shall cause the property to be surveyed by a Licensed Land Surveyor or an authorized Civil Engineer. The submitted map shall show all monuments found or set and shall certify on the face of the map that such monuments are, or will be, sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced in conformity with the Subdivision Map Act and the Professional Land Surveyors’ Act. 37. Interior monuments shall be set at each new lot corner location, angle point, or as directed by the City Engineer, either prior to recordation of the final Parcel Map, or some later date to be specified on the face of the map. 38. If the Applicant / Owner chooses to defer the setting of any monument to a specified later date, then sufficient security as determined by the City Engineer shall be furnished prior to final Parcel Map approval, to guarantee the setting of monuments. 39. Applicant / Owner shall submit four (4) copies of a final Parcel Map in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Parcel Map, along with the additional documents required by Section 14-40.020 of the Municipal Code, to the City Engineer for examination. The final Parcel Map shall contain all the information required in Section 14-40.030 of the Municipal Code and shall be accompanied by the following items: a. Two copies of closure calculations. b. Two copies of a Preliminary Title Report for the property dated within ninety (90) days of the date of submittal for the final Parcel Map. c. Two copies of each record map referenced on the final Parcel Map. d. Two copies of each record document/deed referenced on the final Parcel Map. e. Two copies of any other map, document, deed, easement or other resource that will facilitate the examination process as requested by the City Engineer. An electronic copy of the above documents shall also be furnished to the City Engineer. Preliminary Title Report shall be submitted with hyperlinks to all listed encumbrances. 40. The owner (applicant) shall pay a Map Checking fee, as determined by the City Engineer, at the time of submittal of the final Parcel Map for examination. 41. Prior to approval of the final Parcel Map, the owner (applicant) shall pay all fees and deposits in accordance with Section 14-05.050 of the Municipal Code. 42. The owner (applicant) shall pay the applicable Park Development fee prior to final Parcel Map approval. 43. The legal description for the subject site refers to Parcel I as shown on that certain Parcel Map recorded in Book 294 of Maps at page 56 on January 6, 1972. The exterior boundary of the minor subdivision for urban lot split indicates that the City’s Right-of-Way exists in a location different from what is shown on the record map. Prior to approval of the final Parcel Map, 142 Applicant / Owner shall provide evidence from a reputable Title Company that the offers of dedication encumbering the subject parcel were accepted by Resolution of the City Council and that the City’s Right-of-Way is correct as shown on the Tentative Parcel Map. If no evidence is found, the Applicant / Owner shall cause to be recorded all necessary acceptance documents in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, the Streets and Highways Code, and the City’s Municipal Code. 44. Applicant / Owner shall enter into an Agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions prior to issuance of any City permits. 45. A soils report is required for review by the Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit for all new buildings, 2nd floor and basement additions, or for any project with an unconventional foundation design. BUILDING DEPARTMENT SUBMITTAL 46. 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 4, 2024. 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. 143 DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS 14771 Montalvo Rd PDR23-0023 (517-19-040) The findings required for issuance of Design Review approval pursuant to City Code Section 15- 45.080 are set forth below. 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 follows the natural contours of the site and minimizes grading. The lot is relatively flat, and the project will not make significant changes to the existing natural elevations. The development is appropriate to the site’s natural constraints. 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 there are 11 protected trees proposed for removal out of the 34 protected trees inventoried for the project. The City Arborist has made the required findings for removal of the protected trees. The project, including the lot split and the home placement, is designed in such a way as to reduce the removal of valuable protected trees. Tree protection fencing is required to be installed prior to the 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 has adequate separation and screening to avoid privacy impacts to adjoining properties. The building setbacks comply with those required for the R-1-20,000 zoning district for the rear and sides, and the large right-of-way in the front of the property provides additional distance in that direction. The property is bounded by streets on three sides and the owner’s property on the fourth. The proposed residence complies with the height limit for single-family homes and there is substantial existing vegetation for screening. The site is mostly flat, and no community view sheds are in the vicinity of the project. 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 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-1-20,000 zoning district for the rear and sides, and the large right-of-way in the front of the property provides additional distance 144 in that direction. The proposed residence is consistent in mass, height, and architectural elements with surrounding properties with are largely similarly sized two-story homes. ` e. The landscape design minimizes hardscape in the front setback area and contains elements that are complementary to the neighborhood streetscape. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the front yard landscaping will continue to be dominated by existing trees, native bushes and grasses which are complementary to the streetscape. The project includes a condition of approval that front yard landscaping is to be installed prior to the building department final inspection. The City Code requires that at least 50% of the front setback area be landscaped. f. Development of the site does not unreasonably impair the ability of adjoining properties to utilize solar energy. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the home is similar in mass with the homes in the neighborhood and will not cast shadows on the adjacent properties which could impair the adjacent property owner’s opportunity to utilize solar energy. g. The design of the structure and the site development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Handbook, pursuant to Section 15-45.055. This finding may be made in the affirmative in that the proposed project conforms to the applicable design policies and techniques in the Residential Design Handbook in terms of compatible bulk and avoiding unreasonable interference with privacy and views as detailed in the findings above. 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 is not considered a hillside lot as the average slope is less than 10% nor will it affect any significant hillside feature or community viewshed. 145 VARIANCE FINDINGS 14771 Montalvo Rd VAR23-0004 (517-19-040) Variance 1 – Lot Area standards for Urban Lot Splits The finding required for issuance of a Variance pursuant to City Code Section 15-70.060 are set forth below and the applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all the required findings: a. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive this applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the unique size and shape of the property make it effectively impossible to subdivide the original parcel in a way that complies with the City Code for Urban Lot Splits. All other lots with single-family zoning which do not have such unique shapes are able to apply for Urban Lot Splits under this Code. The proposed lot split line creating a new parcel with an area less than 40% of the original parcel area is the most amenable split location given the special circumstances of the site as it allows for development of the new parcel in a way that maintains separation from the existing home and better preserves some of the larger redwood trees on the property. b. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. As stated above, the ability to subdivide a residential property through an Urban Lot Split is a privilege that other properties classified in the same zoning and in the vicinity and which do not have the same shape constraints already have. The granting of this variance would allow the applicant to benefit from this same privilege in a way that best allows for the development of the new lot. c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed Urban Lot Split creating a new parcel with an area less than 40% of the original parcel area would not pose any adverse impacts to public health, safety, or welfare. The development enabled by the proposed Urban Lot Split would be in line with the type of development present in the neighborhood and would not be injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Variance 2 – Lot Width standards for Urban Lot Splits 146 The finding required for issuance of a Variance pursuant to City Code Section 15-70.060 are set forth below and the applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all the required findings: a. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive this applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the unique size and shape of the property make it effectively impossible to subdivide the original parcel in a way that complies with the City Code for Urban Lot Splits. All other lots with single-family zoning which do not have such unique shapes are able to apply for Urban Lot Splits under this Code. The proposed lot split line creating a new parcel with a site width that is less than 50% of the original parcel site width is the most amenable split location given the special circumstances of the site as it allows for development of the new parcel in a way that maintains separation from the existing home and better preserves some of the larger redwood trees on the property. b. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. As stated above, the ability to subdivide a residential property through an Urban Lot Split is a privilege that other properties classified in the same zoning and in the vicinity and which do not have the same shape constraints already have. The granting of this variance would allow the applicant to benefit from this same privilege in a way that best allows for the development of the new lot. c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed Urban Lot Split creating a new parcel with a site width that is less than 50% of the original parcel site width would not pose any adverse impacts to public health, safety, or welfare. The development enabled by the proposed Urban Lot Split would be in line with the type of development present in the neighborhood and would not be injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Variance 3 – Floor Area a. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive this applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The circumstances of the project, specifically the presence of the existing home using up the allowable floor area as set by the City Code, would prevent the newly created Lot 2 from being developed at a level that is consistent with the 147 surrounding properties. A normal lot in this zoning district with a net area of 16,588 sq. ft. would be able to build out to 5,427 sq. ft. with a deed restricted ADU which is in line with the size of development of properties in the vicinity; however, the circumstances of the parcel size, existing home size, and Urban Lot Split regulations would limit the buildable area of Lot 2 to just 1,600 sq. ft., a level of development that is incongruous and financially infeasible with the size of the lot and the character of the neighborhood. Therefore, strict enforcement of the floor area Code standards would effectively prevent this new lot from being developed with housing in the way that similar properties would. b. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Other properties within the vicinity and zoning district are able to construct homes with a similar floor area. The granting of this variance would allow the applicant to benefit from the same privilege to develop the lot in a way that is consistent with the type of development in the neighborhood. c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed home size would be consistent with the type of development present in the vicinity of the project. The home size would not pose any detrimental impacts to public health, safety, or welfare. Variance 4 – Front Setback a. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive this applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Special circumstances are posed by the unique, skinny shape of the lot and by the presence of an unusually large right-of-way along the front of the property. The application of the City Code required 30-foot front setback would shrink the building envelope to a level that would prevent practical development of the lot, depriving the applicant of a development privilege enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and the same zoning district. b. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. Other properties within the vicinity and zoning district which are not beset with the same circumstances of a thin property shape and larger right-of-way have building envelopes that enable development at a similar level to this project. Moreover, the large right-of-way of approximately 30 feet in distance from the edge of Montalvo Road to the front 148 property line effectively fulfills the same function as a regular front setback does for properties not bounded by such a large right-of-way. c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed home would be consistent with the type of development present in the vicinity of the project. The presence of a large right-of-way gives the home an effective setback from the street that is similar to that of other homes in the zoning district. The home location would not pose any detrimental impacts to public health, safety, or welfare. 149 MONTALVO DRIVE VICKERY AVENUE LANDS OF JOSEPH W & KATHRYN ANNE BEYERS APN: 517-19-040 DEED DOCUMENT NO. 24239269, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS 42,967± SQ.FT, 0.986± ACRES -5.75%-6.46%-5.28%-6.71% -6.94%-8.54%-2.05%- 4 . 5 4% -3.45% -3.39% -0 . 6 8 %-2.10%-6.39%-5.54%-7.11% -3.92 % -5.68% -4.38 % -3.85% -5. 9 5 %LOT SPLIT LINE(PROPOSED)LOT 1 26,379± SQ FT (PROPOSED) LOT 2 16,588± SQ FT (PROPOSED)SARATOGA -LOS GATOS ROADPROPOSED PROPOSED sandis.net build on.1SB9 - TENTATIVE MAP14771 MONTALVO ROAD SARATOGA CALIFORNIA 0' 1 INCH = 40'20'10'4' 20 FT SITE VICINITY MAP NO. LS7756 150 Variance #1 - 38%/62% • Article 15-70 – VARIANCES • 15-70.010 - Purpose of Article. The Planning Commission is empowered to grant variances in order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this Chapter as would result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of certain zoning regulations. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon, from geographic, topographic or other physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity or from population densities, street locations or traffic conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be the sole reason for granting a variance. The power to grant variances does not extend to use regulations and any use which is prohibited under the regulations of this Chapter may not be authorized through the granting of a variance. THIS LOT IS AN IRREGULAR LOT. IF THE 40%/60% SPLIT IS NOT APPROVED THEN THE LOT TO THE EDGE OF MY CURRENT LARGE HOUSE WILL ONLY BE 15 FEET (INSTEAD OF 26 FEET) TO THE EDGE OF THE SIDE PATIO TO THE LOT LINE. THIS WILL BE DETERIMENTAL TO THE AESTHETICS OF MY HOUSE AND CAN BE SEEN BY PEOPLE FROM MONTALVO RD. THE PROPOSAL IS TO MOVE THE LOT BY 11 FEET THAT WILL RESULT IN A 39%/61% SPLIT. • 15-70.020 - Authority to grant variances. (a) The Planning Commission is designated as the approving authority under this Article with power to grant variances from the regulations prescribed in this Chapter with respect to site area, site frontage, width and depth, and coverage, setbacks for front, side and rear setback areas, allowable floor area, height of structures, distance between structures, signs, off-street parking and loading facilities, fences, walls and hedges, and alteration or expansion of nonconforming structures, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in this Article. FAILURE TO APPROVAL OF THIS VARIANCE WILL RESULT TO RUN THE LOT LINE THROUGH A TRIO OF 60 FEET HIGH BEAUTIFUL REDWOOD TREES. THE 11 FOOT LOT MOVE WILL ENSURE THE SUPPORT OF THIS REDWOOD TREE. THE NEW LOT WILL STILL BE OVER 243 FEET LONG SO THIS 11 FOOT MOVE DOES NOT MATERIALLY IMPACT THE REVISED NEW LOT. 151 (b) No variance for setbacks shall be required for new main and accessory structures proposed to be built where: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ • 15-70.060 - Findings required for granting of variance The approving authority may grant a variance as applied for or in modified form if, on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the approving authority makes all of the following findings: (a) That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. A 40%/60% SPLIT BETWEEN THE TWO LOTS RESULT IN ONLY 15 FEET BETWEEN MY CURRENT HOUSE AND THE LOT LINE. MOVING THE LOT 11 FEET WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE THE AESTHETICS OF MY HOUSE AND SEEN BY PEOPLE FROM MONTALVO RD. (b) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT PROVIDE A SPECIAL PRIVILIGE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY. THIS VARIANCE WILL PROVIDE A BENEFIT TO THE VICNITY TO THE PROPERTIES NEARBY A) A BETTER VISUAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO POTENTIAL HOUSES B) WILL BE BENEFICIAL TO A TRIO OF 60’ HIGH TREES (c) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT BE NEGATIVE TO PUBLIC HEALTH/SAFETY/WELFARE THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT INJURY PROPERTY NOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY 152 (d) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to signs, the Planning Commission shall also find that the granting of the variance will not introduce a visual element which is inconsistent with the appearance of the immediately surrounding area. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A NEGATIVE VISUAL ELEMENT IN THE AREA (e) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to off-street parking or loading facilities, the Planning Commission shall make the following additional findings: THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT IMPACT OFF-STREET PARKING OR LOADING. (1) That strict enforcement of the specified regulation is not required by either present or anticipated future traffic volume or traffic circulation on the site. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT IMPACT ANY MATERIAL TRAFFIC VOLUME NOTE: THE DRIVEWAY ON THIS NEW LOT WILL BE MONTALVO RD ON THE MAIN HOUSE AND THE ADU DRIVEWAY WILL BE ON VICKORY. THE DRIVEWAY MAIN HOUSE ENTRANCE IS OVER 200 FEET AWAY FROM HIGHWAY 9 AND IS OVER 100 FEET AWAY FROM THE NEXT DRIVEWAY ON THAT SIDE. THE MAILBOX (AND ADDRESS) WILL BE ON MONTALVO RD. TRASH WILL BE DROPPED ON VICKORY – THE SAME SIDE AS MY CURRENT HOUSE. ALL UTILITIES ARE ON VICKORY. (2) That the granting of the variance will not result in the parking or loading of vehicles on public streets in such a manner as to interfere with the free flow of traffic on the streets. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT INTERFERE ANY MATERIAL FREE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. 153 Variance #2 - Width • Article 15-70 - VARIANCES • 15-70.010 - Purpose of Article. The Planning Commission is empowered to grant variances in order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this Chapter as would result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of certain zoning regulations. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon, from geographic, topographic or other physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity or from population densities, street locations or traffic conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be the sole reason for granting a variance. The power to grant variances does not extend to use regulations and any use which is prohibited under the regulations of this Chapter may not be authorized through the granting of a variance. THIS LOT IS AN IRREGULAR LOT. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO MEET THE RATIO BETWEEN THE WIDTH AND HEIGHT OF THE NEW LOT WITHOUT THE APPROVAL BY THE CITY. PREVIOUSLY, THE PROPOSED NEW LOT HAS BEEN WASTING VALUABLE LAND THAT CAN AND SHOULD BE DEVELOPED TO ENABLE NEW HOUSING. DURING THE PAST 18 YEARS I HAVE SPENT WASTING OVER $300,000 OF COSTS LETTING THIS PROPERTY JUST SITTING - $250,000 IN TAXES AND OVER $50,000 IN MAINTENANCE, TREE MANAGEMENT, ETC. EVEN 22 YEARS AGO, MY SON AND HIS FRIENDS USED TO RUN THEIR SUVS TO DO 4-WHEELING OVER THE LAND (BEFORE THIS WAS EVEN MY PROPERTY). • 15-70.020 - Authority to grant variances. (a) The Planning Commission is designated as the approving authority under this Article with power to grant variances from the regulations prescribed in this Chapter with respect to site area, site frontage, width and depth, and coverage, setbacks for front, side and rear setback areas, allowable floor area, height of structures, distance between structures, signs, off-street parking and loading facilities, fences, walls and hedges, and alteration or expansion of nonconforming structures, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in this Article. IF THE 30 TO 40 ‘ EASEMENT ON MONTALVO RD IS ELIMINATED, THEN THE AREA OF THE NEW LOT WILL INCREASE BY OVER 10,800 SQ’ – NEARLY A 65% INCREASE. THIS WILL COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THE 40%/60% VARIANCE #1 ISSUE AND THE WIDTH AND HEIGHT 154 RATIO WILL BE STILL AN ISSUE BUT MATERIALLY IMPROVED. I DO NOT EXPECT THE CITY TO APPROVE THIS AT THIS TIME, BUT I HOPE THAT THIS AND THESE VARIANCES WILL BE APPROVED. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ • 15-70.060 - Findings required for granting of variance The approving authority may grant a variance as applied for or in modified form if, on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the approving authority makes all of the following findings: (a) That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. THE STANDARD RULES FOR THE RATIO BETWEEN THE WIDTH AND HEIGHT OF A LOT IS SOMEWHAT ARBITRUARY. WHILE IT IS IRREGULAR, THIS LOT PROVIDES A MEANINGFUL HOME AND AN ADU TO ADD TO THE COMMUNITY AND PROVIDES SUPPORT FOR THE REQUIREMENTS TO ADD NEW EFFECTIVE HOUSING. (b) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT PROVIDE A SPECIAL PRIVILIGE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PROPERTIES IN THE VINICITY. NOTE THAT I EVEN THOUGH, I HAVE SPENT OVER $300,000 TO MANAGE THIS PORTION OF THIS LOT, IT HAS STILL BEEN OCCASSIONALLY A PROBLEM FOR THE VISUAL ASPECTS OF THE NEIGHBORS AND THE CITY OF SARATOGA. A. SARATOGA PREVIOUSLY PUT ME ON NOTICE TO BETTER MANAGE SOME OF THE DOWN TREES ON THE PROPERTY B. SOME NEIGHBORS HAVE ASKED ME A FEW TIMES TO BETTER MANAGE THE LANSCAPING AND THE GRASS OF THE EMPLY LOT. WITH THIS LOT SPLIT IS COMPLETED AND THE HOUSING BUILT, IT WILL BE MUCH BETTER MANAGED ON THIS PROPERTY. (c) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 155 THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT BE NEGATIVE TO PUBLIC HEALTH/SAFETY/WELFARE THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT INJURY PROPERTY NOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VINICITY (c) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to signs, the Planning Commission shall also find that the granting of the variance will not introduce a visual element which is inconsistent with the appearance of the immediately surrounding area. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A NEGATIVE VISUAL ELEMENT IN THE AREA AND WILL BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER HOUSES IN THE AREA. MONTALVO RD AT THIS LOCATION HAS AN ADDITIONAL 30 TO 40 FOOT EASEMENT ON MONTALVO RD. (d) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to off-street parking or loading facilities, the Planning Commission shall make the following additional findings: THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT MATERIALLY IMPACT OFF-STREET PARKING OR LOADING. (1) That strict enforcement of the specified regulation is not required by either present or anticipated future traffic volume or traffic circulation on the site. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT MATERIALLY IMPACT TRAFFIC VOLUME. NOTE: THE DRIVEWAY ON THIS NEW LOT WILL BE ON MONTALVO RD OF THE MAIN HOUSE AND THE ADU DRIVEWAY WILL BE ON VICKORY. THE DRIVEWAY MAIN HOUSE ENTRANCE IS OVER 200 FEET AWAY FROM HIGHWAY 9 AND IS OVER 100 FEET AWAY FROM THE NEXT DRIVEWAY ON THAT SIDE. THE MAILBOX (AND ADDRESS) WILL BE ON MONTALVO RD. TRASH WILL BE DROPPED ON VICKORY – THE SAME SIDE AS MY CURRENT HOUSE. ALL UTILITIES ARE ON VICKORY. (2) That the granting of the variance will not result in the parking or loading of vehicles on public streets in such a manner as to interfere with the free flow of traffic on the streets. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT MATERIALLY INTERFERE ANY FREE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. 156 Variance #3 - 4,563 sq ' size - Total 5,353 sq’ with a 790 sq ‘ ADU • Article 15-70 - VARIANCES • 15-70.010 - Purpose of Article. The Planning Commission is empowered to grant variances in order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this Chapter as would result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of certain zoning regulations. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon, from geographic, topographic or other physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity or from population densities, street locations or traffic conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be the sole reason for granting a variance. The power to grant variances does not extend to use regulations and any use which is prohibited under the regulations of this Chapter may not be authorized through the granting of a variance. • 15-70.020 - Authority to grant variances. (a) The Planning Commission is designated as the approving authority under this Article with power to grant variances from the regulations prescribed in this Chapter with respect to site area, site frontage, width and depth, and coverage, setbacks for front, side and rear setback areas, allowable floor area, height of structures, distance between structures, signs, off-street parking and loading facilities, fences, walls and hedges, and alteration or expansion of nonconforming structures, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in this Article. THE SIZE OF THE HOUSES IN THIS AREA ARE MOSTLY BETWEEN 4000 AND 6000 SQUARE FEET( INCLUDING GARAGE) A SMALLER HOUSE WILL LOOK NEGATIVE TO OTHER NEARBY PROPERTIES. WE ARE PROPOSING A 2-STORY HOUSE WITH A 4,122 SQ ‘ HOUSE PLUS A 441 SQ ‘ 2 CAR GARAGE (TOTAL 4,563 SQ ‘) PLUS A 790 SQ ‘ ADU – GROSS TOTAL 5,353 SQ ‘ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 157 • 15-70.060 - Findings required for granting of variance The approving authority may grant a variance as applied for or in modified form if, on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the approving authority makes all of the following findings: (a) That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. WE WANT THIS HOUSE TO ATTEMPT TO MATCH THE VISUAL ASTHETICS OF OUR CURRENT HOUSE - IT WILL BE SOMEWHAT SMALLER, BUT NEEDS TO BE AT LEAST THIS SIZE. (b) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. THIS VARAIANCE WILL NOT PROVIDE A SPECIAL PRIVILIGE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PROPERTIES IN THE VINICITY. THE SIZE OF THE HOUSES IN THIS AREA ARE MOSTLY BETWEEN 4000 AND 6000 SQUARE FEET (INCLUDING GARAGE) AND ARE USUALLY A 2- STORY HOUSE. A SMALLER HOUSE WILL LOOK NEGATIVE TO OTHER NEARBY PROPERTIES. (c) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT BE NEGATIVE TO PUBLIC HEALTH/SAFETY/WELFARE THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT INJURY PROPERTY NOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VINICITY (c) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to signs, the Planning Commission shall also find that the granting of the variance will not introduce a visual element which is inconsistent with the appearance of the immediately surrounding area. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A NEGATIVE VISUAL ELEMENT IN THE AREA AND WILL BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER HOUSES IN THE AREA. 158 (d) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to off-street parking or loading facilities, the Planning Commission shall make the following additional findings: THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT MATERIALLY IMPACT OFF-STREET PARKING OR LOADING. (1) That strict enforcement of the specified regulation is not required by either present or anticipated future traffic volume or traffic circulation on the site. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOTMATERIALLY IMPACT TRAFFIC VOLUME NOTE: THE DRIVEWAY ON THIS NEW LOT WILL BE MONTALVO RD OF THE MAIN HOUSE AND THE ADU DRIVEWAY WILL BE ON VICKORY. THE DRIVEWAY MAIN HOUSE ENTRANCE IS OVER 200 FEET AWAY FROM HIGHWAY 9 AND IS OVER 100 FEET AWAY FROM THE NEXT DRIVEWAY ON THAT SIDE. THE MAILBOX (AND ADDRESS) WILL BE ON MONTALVO RD. TRASH WILL BE DROPPED ON VICKORY – THE SAME SIDE AS MY CURRENT HOUSE. ALL UTILITIES ARE ON VICKORY. (2) That the granting of the variance will not result in the parking or loading of vehicles on public streets in such a manner as to interfere with the free flow of traffic on the streets. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT INTERFERE ANY MATERIAL FREE FLOW OF TRAFFIC 159 Variance #4 - 5 ' 8 '' Setback vs 30 ' on Montalvo Rd. • Article 15-70 - VARIANCES • 15-70.010 - Purpose of Article. The Planning Commission is empowered to grant variances in order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this Chapter as would result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of certain zoning regulations. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon, from geographic, topographic or other physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity or from population densities, street locations or traffic conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be the sole reason for granting a variance. The power to grant variances does not extend to use regulations and any use which is prohibited under the regulations of this Chapter may not be authorized through the granting of a variance. THIS LOT IS AN IRREGULAR LOT. THE FIRST HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT AT THIS LOCATION WAS IN 1900, BEFORE ANY OTHER HOUSES WERE BUILT IN MONTALVO RD. EVEN THE MONTALVO ESTATE WAS NOT BUILT UNTIL 1911. I ASSUME THAT AT THAT TIME, THE CITY THOUGHT THAT A 4 LANE ROAD MAY BE BUILT ON MONTALVO RD. ON MY LOT, A VERY LARGE EASEMENT WAS SET UP NEXT TO MY LOT. OF COURSE, THIS WAS NEVER COMPLETED AND THE EASEMENT DID NOT EVEN EXTEND DOWN MONTALVO RD. I ASKED THE CITY TO ELIMINATE OR REDUCE THE LARGE UNUSED EASEMENT AND THEY SUGGESTED INSTEAD TO REQUEST A REDUCED SETOFF AS I HAVE PROPOSED. • 15-70.020 - Authority to grant variances. (a) The Planning Commission is designated as the approving authority under this Article with power to grant variances from the regulations prescribed in this Chapter with respect to site area, site frontage, width and depth, and coverage, setbacks for front, side and rear setback areas, allowable floor area, height of structures, distance between structures, signs, off-street parking and loading facilities, fences, walls and hedges, and alteration or expansion of nonconforming structures, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in this Article. WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS A 5 ‘ 8 ‘’ SETBACK (INSTEAD OF A 30 ‘ SETBACK PLUS A 30’ TO 40 ‘ EASEMENT TO MONTALVO RD. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 160 • 15-70.060 - Findings required for granting of variance The approving authority may grant a variance as applied for or in modified form if, on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the approving authority makes all of the following findings: (a) That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. THE PROPOSED DISTANCE FROM THE HOUSE TO BE A TOTAL OF 35 TO 45 FOOT DISTANCE TO MONTALVO RD. (b) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. THIS VARAIANCE WILL NOT PROVIDE A SPECIAL PRIVILIGE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PROPERTIES IN THE VINICITY. THE SIZE OF THE HOUSES IN THIS AREA ARE AT MOSTLY BETWEEN 4000 AND 6000 SQUARE FEET (INCLUDING GARAGE) AND ARE USUALLY A 2- STORY HOUSE. A SMALLER HOUSE WITH A LARGER SETBACK WILL LOOK NEGATIVE TO OTHER NEARBY PROPERTIES. (c) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT BE NEGATIVE TO PUBLIC HEALTH/SAFETY/WELFARE THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT INJURY PROPERTY NOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VINICITY (d) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to signs, the Planning Commission shall also find that the granting of the variance will not introduce a visual element which is inconsistent with the appearance of the immediately surrounding area. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE A NEGATIVE VISUAL ELEMENT IN THE AREA. AS STATED ABOVE, THE NEW HOUSE WILL STILL HAVE A 5’ 8’ SETBACK PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 30 TO 40 ‘ ADDITIONAL SETBACK TO MONTALVO RD. 161 (e) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to off-street parking or loading facilities, the Planning Commission shall make the following additional findings: THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT IMPACT OFF-STREET PARKING OR LOADING. (1) That strict enforcement of the specified regulation is not required by either present or anticipated future traffic volume or traffic circulation on the site. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT MATERIALLY IMPACT TRAFFIC VOLUME. NOTE: THE DRIVEWAY ON THIS NEW LOT WILL BE MONTALVO RD OF THE MAIN HOUSE AND THE ADU DRIVEWAY WILL BE ON VICKORY. THE DRIVEWAY MAIN HOUSE ENTRANCE IS OVER 200 FEET AWAY FROM HIGHWAY 9 AND IS OVER 100 FEET AWAY FROM THE NEXT DRIVEWAY ON THAT SIDE. THE MAILBOX (AND ADDRESS) WILL BE ON MONTALVO RD. TRASH WILL BE DROPPED ON VICKORY – THE SAME SIDE AS MY CURRENT HOUSE. ALL UTILITIES ARE ON VICKORY. (2) That the granting of the variance will not result in the parking or loading of vehicles on public streets in such a manner as to interfere with the free flow of traffic on the streets. THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT MATERIALY INTERFERE ANY FREE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. 162 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 ARB24-0060 Phone: (408) 868-1276 14771 Montalvo Rd Email: cfusco@saratoga.ca.us Joseph Beyers Application No. Address: Owner: APN: Date: 517-19-040 November 4, 2024 REPORT HISTORY: Report 1: September 4, 2024 Report 2: November 4, 2024, This report replaces Report 1. PROJECT SCOPE: The applicant has submitted plans to build a new home and detached ADU on a recently created vacant lot. Eleven((11) trees are requested for removal to construct the project. PROJECT DATA IN BRIEF: Tree security deposit – Required - $77,300 Tree protection – Required – See Conditions of Approval and attached map. Tree removals – Trees #1, 5, 7, 9, 10, 17, 19, 29, 30, 33, and 36 meet the criteria for removal and may be removed once building division permits have been issued. Replacement trees – Required = $54,940 ATTACHMENTS: 1 – Findings and Tree Information 2 – Tree Removal Criteria 3 – Conditions of Approval 4 – Map Showing Tree Protection 1 of 12 163 14771 Montalvo Rd 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. Eleven (11)trees #1, 5, 7, 9, 10, 17, 19, 29, 30, 33, and 36 are in conflict with the project and meet the City’s criteria allowing it to be removed and replaced as part of the project, once building division permits have been obtained. Attachment 2 contains the tree removal criteria for reference. Table 1: Summary of Tree Removal Criteria that are met Tree No. Species Criteria met Comments 1 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 4-8, 9 In footprint of new home. 5 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 4-8, 9 In footprint of new home. 7 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 1, 4-8, 9 Poor health, leaning over road. 9 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 4-8, 9 In footprint of new home. 10 black oak Quercus kelloggii 4-8, 9 Poor health, leaning over proposed home 17 coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 4-8, 9 In footprint of new ADU. 19 California buckeye Aesculus californica 4-8, 9 In footprint of new ADU. 29 Black walnut Julgans hindsii 1, 5, 6 Poor health and structure. 30 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 1, 5, 6 Dead. 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: 33 1, 5, 6 36 coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 1, 5, 6, 9 valley oak Quercus lobata Poor health In footprint of new driveway. 2 of 12 164 Attachment 1 14771 Montalvo Rd TREE INFORMATION: Project Arborist: Date of Report: Kaitlyn Shelton October 14, 2024 Number of protected trees inventoried: 27 Number of protected trees requested for removal: 11 A table summarizing information about each tree is below. Table 2: Tree information from submitted arborist report dated October 14, 2024 1)The tree information and recommendations from the submitted arborist report dated October 14, 2024; 2)The Project Data in Brief, the Conditions of Approval, and the map showing tree protection from this report dated November 4, 2024. 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: 3 of 12 165 14 | Prepared by Kaitlyn Shelton for Joe Beyers Kaitlyn Shelton Arborist Cell : 669-236-0137 Office :408.226.8733 TCIA Accredited Company CA-042 ISA Certified Arborist WE-12733A TRAQ Qualified California State Contractors License #705171 www.Andersonstreecare.com Appendix A: Tree Table Tree # Common Name Species DBH (in) Spread Condition Suitability Impacts Disposition TPZ Radius (ft) TPZ Type 1 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 26 22 3 Low Direct Impacts/Root Loss/Within Footprint Remove N/A N/A 2 Coast Redwood Sequoia sempervirens 47.5 25 4 High Negligible Retain 17.5 I 3 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 16 27 4 High Negligible Retain 18.5 III 4 Deodar Cedar Cedrus deodara 12 11 4 High Negligible Retain 10.5 I 5 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 25 32 4 High Direct Impacts/Root Loss Remove N/A N/A 6 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 23 31 3 Moderate Direct Impacts/Root Loss Retain 20.5 III 7 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 10.5 10 2 Low Direct Impacts Remove N/A N/A 8 Coast Redwood Sequoia sempervirens 4.5 8 3 Low Direct Impacts Remove N/A N/A 9 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 13 24 4 Moderate Direct Impacts/Root Loss/Within Footprint Remove N/A N/A 4 of 12 166 15 | Prepared by Kaitlyn Shelton for Joe Beyers 10 California Black Oak Quercus kelloggii 21 35 2 Low Direct Impacts/Root Loss/Within Footprint Remove N/A N/A 11 Valley Oak Quercus lobata 13.5 33 4 High Negligible Retain 21.5 III 12 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 9.6 15 4 High Negligible Retain 12.5 III 13 Valley Oak Quercus lobata 9 20 4 High Negligible Retain 15 I 14 Valley Oak Quercus lobata 11.5 28 4 High Negligible Retain 19 III 15 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 12 20 4 High Negligible Retain 15 III 16 Coast Redwood Sequoia sempervirens 5.5 10 4 High Direct Impacts/Root Loss/Within Footprint Remove N/A N/A 17 Coast Redwood Sequoia sempervirens 9.5 10 4 High Direct Impacts/Root Loss/Within Footprint Remove N/A N/A 18 Shumard Oak Quercus shumardii 5 15 1 Low Negligible Remove N/A N/A 19 California Buckeye Aesculus californica 13.5 18 4 Moderate Direct Impacts/Root Loss/Within Footprint Remove N/A N/A 20 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 9.5 20 4 Moderate Negligible Retain 15 I 21 Valley Oak Quercus lobata 17.5 32 4 High Negligible Retain 21 I 22 Valley Oak Quercus lobata 15 18 4 High Negligible Retain 14 III 23 Valley Oak Quercus lobata 15 18 4 Moderate Negligible Retain 14 II 24 Valley Oak Quercus lobata 11 18 4 High Negligible Retain 14 III 25 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 10 12 4 Moderate Negligible Retain 11 II 26 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 17.5 21 4 High Direct Impacts / Root Loss Remove 15.5 II 5 of 12 167 16 | Prepared by Kaitlyn Shelton for Joe Beyers 27 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 8 10 4 Moderate Negligible Retain 10 III 28 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 7.5 10 4 Low Negligible Retain 10 III 29 Northern California Black Walnut Juglans hindsii 18 20 1 Low Negligible Remove N/A N/A 30 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 14.5 15 DEAD Low N/A Remove N/A N/A 31 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 18 25 3 Low Direct Impacts/Root Loss Retain 17.5 III 32 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 13.5 12 3 Low Direct Impacts/Root Loss Retain 11 III 33 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 21 16 3 Low Direct Impacts/Root Loss Retain/Re move 13/NA III/ NA 34 Valley Oak Quercus lobata 14 18 3 Low Direct Impacts/Root Loss Retain 14 III 35 Valley Oak Quercus lobata 18 15 3 Low Direct Impacts/Root Loss Retain 12.5 III 36 Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia 10 10 3 Low In Footprint Removal N/A N/A Appendix B: Tree Appraisals Tree # Common Name DBH (in.) Protected Condition Rating Functional Limit % External Limit % Appraised Value 1 Coast Live Oak 26 X 67 80 80 $10,200 2 Coast Redwood 47.5 X 81 90 95 $103,500 3 Coast Live Oak 16 X 64 80 85 $4,190 4 Deodar Cedar 12 X 70 70 85 $2,290 5 Coast Live Oak 25 X 74 85 85 $11,700 6 Coast Live Oak 23 X 80 85 85 $10,400 7 Coast Live Oak 10.5 X 51 60 70 $890 8 Coast Redwood 4.5 76 70 85 $0 9 Coast Live Oak 13 X 73 75 85 $2,840 6 of 12 168 17 | Prepared by Kaitlyn Shelton for Joe Beyers 10 California Black Oak 21 X 70 70 80 $9,900 11 Valley Oak 13.5 X 85 90 95 $8,000 12 Coast Live Oak 9.6 X 78 80 95 $2,000 13 Valley Oak 9 X 81 90 90 $3,270 14 Valley Oak 11.5 X 83 90 95 $5,700 15 Coast Live Oak 12 X 76 80 90 $2,910 16 Coast Redwood 5.5 83 85 95 $0 17 Coast Redwood 9.5 X 83 85 95 $1,660 18 Shumard Oak 5 80 85 60 $0 19 California Buckeye 13.5 X 82 90 95 $4,520 20 Coast Live Oak 9.5 X 74 70 95 $1,660 21 Valley Oak 17.5 X 85 85 95 $12,700 22 Valley Oak 15 X 81 85 90 $8,600 23 Valley Oak 15 X 74 75 85 $6,700 24 Valley Oak 11 X 78 75 90 $3,950 25 Coast Live Oak 10 X 76 75 90 $1,780 26 Coast Live Oak 17.5 X 79 85 90 $6,800 27 Coast Live Oak 8 X 73 70 90 $1,080 28 Coast Live Oak 7.5 X 54 70 90 $730 29 Northern California Black Walnut 18 X 39 50 90 $2,210 30 Coast Live Oak 14.5 X 0 0 90 $0 31 Coast Live Oak 18 X 75 85 90 $6,600 32 Coast Live Oak 13.5 X 80 90 85 $3,980 33 Valley Oak 14 X 85 90 95 $8,600 34 Valley Oak 18 X 87 90 95 $14,600 35 Coast Live Oak 21 X 75 95 80 $3,440 36 Coast Live Oak 10 X 75 95 95 $2,420 Number of Protected Trees 33 Total Appraised Value $269,820 Appendix C: Summary Table Summary Table Total Number of Trees Inventoried 36 Number of Protected Trees 33 Total Appraised Value of Protected Trees $269,820.00 7 of 12 169 14771 Montalvo Rd Attachment 2 TREE REMOVAL CRITERIA Criteria that permit the removal of a protected tree are listed below. This information is from Article 15- 50.080 of the City Code and is applied to any tree requested for removal as part of the project. If findings are made that meet the criteria listed below, the tree(s) may be approved for removal and replacement during construction. (1)The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures and interference with utility services, and whether the tree is a Dead tree or a Fallen tree. (2)The necessity to remove the tree because of physical damage or threatened damage to improvements or impervious surfaces on the property. (3)The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters, particularly on steep slopes. (4)The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values, erosion control, and the general welfare of residents in the area. (5)The age and number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices. (6)Whether or not there are any alternatives that would allow for retaining or not encroaching on the protected tree. (7)Whether the approval of the request would be contrary to or in conflict with the general purpose and intent of this Article. (8)Any other information relevant to the public health, safety, or general welfare and the purposes of this ordinance as set forth in Section 15-50.010 (9)The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property when there is no other feasible alternative to the removal. (10)The necessity to remove the tree for installation and efficient operation of solar panels, subject to the requirements that the tree(s) to be removed, shall not be removed until solar panels have been installed and replacement trees planted in conformance with the City Arborist's recommendation. (11)The necessity to remove a tree following the creation of defensible space within 100 feet of a structure located within the Wildland Urban Interface, in accordance with defensible space standards established by CAL FIRE or as determined by Santa Clara County Fire Department, and that risk of increased wildfire cannot reasonably be addressed through maintenance or without tree removal. (12)Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) or blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) located within the Wildland Urban Interface Area as defined in section 16-20.150 of this Code. 8 of 12 170 14771 Montalvo Rd Attachment 3 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 the applicant of their 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 Kaitlyn Shelton dated July 11, 2024 copied onto a plan sheet. b)Shall include the Project Data in Brief and Conditions of Approval sections of the City Arborist report dated September 4, 2024. 4)Tree Protection Security Deposit: a)Is required per City Ordinance 15-50.080. b)Shall be $77,300 for trees #2-4, 11-15, 20-25, 27, 28, 31, 32, 34, and 35. 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. 9 of 12 171 14771 Montalvo Rd Attachment 3 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 Kaitlyn Shelton 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 excavation work within the driplines of trees #3, 6, 26, 31, 32, and 35. e)The recommendations from the submitted arborist report dated July 11, 2024 are conditions of approval for the project. 9)Tree removal: Trees #1, 5, 7, 9, 10, 17, 19, 29, 30, 33, and 36 meet the criteria for removal and may be removed once building division permits have been obtained. 10)New trees: a)New trees equal to $54,940 shall be planted as part of the project before final inspection and occupancy of the new home. New trees may be of any species and planted anywhere on the property as long as they do not encroach on retained trees. Replacement values for new trees are listed below. 15 gallon = $350 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 b)Trees shall be replaced on or off site according to good forestry practices and shall provide equivalent value in terms of aesthetic and environmental quality, size, height, location, appearance, and other significant beneficial characteristics of the removed trees. 10 of 12 172 14771 Montalvo Rd Attachment 3 a)Should any protected tree be damaged beyond repair: i)New trees shall be required to replace the tree(s) equal to the assessed value of the damaged/removed tree(s). Replacement values for new trees are listed below. 15 gallon = $350 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500 48 inch box = $5,000 60 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000 ii)A payment shall be made to the City Tree Fund equal to the assessed value of the damaged/removed trees. 12)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. 11) Damage to protected trees that will be retained: 11 of 12 173 Aachment 4 Legend Tree Protecon Fencing 14771 Montalvo Road 12 of 12174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 MONTALVO DRIVE=VICKERY AVENUEPARCEL 1,BK.294, PG 561PROPOSEDPROPOSEDLOT 126,379± SQ FT(PROPOSED)LOT 216,588± SQ FT(PROPOSED)LANDS OF JOSEPH W& KATHRYN ANNE BEYERSAPN: 517-19-040DEED DOCUMENT NO. 24239269,SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS42,967± SQ.FT, 0.986± ACRESsandis.netbuild on.1File: S:\223140\3_SURVEY\1_MAPPING\9_CAD\LOT SPLIT-SB9\223140-MONTALVO TOPO & BDY-SITE.dwg Date:September 30, 2024 - 12:52 PM, whollandTOPOGRAPHIC & BOUNDARY SURVEYSANTA CLARA COUNTYCALIFORNIA14771 MONTALVO ROADCITY OF SARATOGASITESURVEY NOTES ABBREVIATIONSLEGEND UNDERGROUND UTILITY NOTESURVEYOR'S STATEMENTSITE BENCHMARKOVERHEAD UTILITY NOTEVICINITY MAP0'1 INCH = 40'20'10'4'20 FTBENCHMARKBASIS OF BEARINGSFEMALA U R A J. CABRALNO.LS7756LIC EN S E D LAND SURVEYORSTATE OF CALI F O RNIA 187 MONTALVO DRIVEVICKERY AVENUELANDS OF JOSEPH W& KATHRYN ANNE BEYERSAPN: 517-19-040DEED DOCUMENT NO. 24239269,SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS42,967± SQ.FT, 0.986± ACRESPARCEL 1,BK.294, PG 561-5.75% -6.46 % -5.28 % - 6 . 7 1%-6.94%- 8 . 5 4% -2.05%-4.54%-3.45%-3.39%-0.68%-2.10%-6.39% -5.54% - 7 . 1 1%-3.92%-5.68%-4.38%-3.85%-5.95%LOT SPLIT LINE (PROPOSED)LOT 126,379± SQ FT(PROPOSED)LOT 216,588± SQ FT(PROPOSED)SARATOGA - LOS GATOS ROAD PROPOSEDPROPOSEDsandis.netbuild on.1File: S:\223140\3_SURVEY\1_MAPPING\9_CAD\LOT SPLIT-SB9\223140-MONTALVO SB9 LOT SPLIT.dwg Date:October 29, 2024 - 12:18 PM, whollandSB9 - TENTATIVE MAP14771 MONTALVO ROADSARATOGACALIFORNIASURVEY NOTES ABBREVIATIONSLEGEND 0'1 INCH = 40'20'10'4'20 FTOWNERSSURVEYOR'S STATEMENTSITE COVERAGE CALCULATIONSFLOOR AREA CALCULATIONSSITEVICINITY MAPBASIS OF BEARINGSLA U R A J. CABRALNO.LS7756LIC EN S E D LAND SURVEYORSTATE OF CALI F O RNIA 188 189 LEGEND #2 #1 Estimated Property Line#3 #4 #5 #7 #8 #6 #30 #29 #9 #10 #16 #17 #18 #19 #13 #12 #14 #15 #20 #23#24 #22 #28#27 #25 #21 #26 #11 Property Line Wood Fence Chainlink Fence Overhead Wires Major Contour Building Wall Concrete Pavement Brick Slate/Stone Grass Spot Elevation TPZ Type I with Canopy Size Overlay TPZ Type II with Canopy Size Overlay Recommended/Necessary Removal Proposed Building 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 CITY OF SARATOGA Memorandum To: Saratoga Planning Commission From: Kyle Rathbone, Assistant Planner Date: November 13, 2024 Subject: Application PDR23-0023 14771 Montalvo Road - Supplemental Memo No 1 Please see attached email public comment received after publication of the packet. Summary of the proposed lot split of 14771 Montalvo Rd., Saratoga, CA 95070 Joe Beyers – November 8, 2024, I have lived in Saratoga over 40 years owning 3 different homes. I raised three children. After 30 years of marriage, my wife passed away. God blessed me with another wonderful woman (who previously lived in Saratoga) with 3 additional children, and we together moved to 14771 Montalvo Rd., in Saratoga. In Saratoga, I was a Scoutmaster for 25 years and helped 48 scouts to reach Eagle. I have been very active as a coach for Saratoga baseball, basketball and soccer and also was a referee for soccer. On the business side, I led the design and creation of the world’s most complex microprocessor on the planet. At that time, I was on the front page of every continent. I then managed 4000 engineers in Asia, Australia, US and Europe. I also then managed M&A and Planning Strategy for Hewlett-Packard which was at that time the world’s largest IT infrastructure company. Additionally, I was on the front cover with Steve Jobs as viewed as one of the 10 top people that transformed the Intellectual Property of the last decade. When we moved to Montalvo Rd., my wife, Kathy Beyers joined the board of Villa Montalvo and several other organizations including the Foothill Club, the American Heart Association and was a part of the Saratoga Orchestra. She was a schoolteacher of special education and is an author with a children’s book that is for sale in Amazon. Kathy and I are also involved in Sacred Heart Church, we both were selected to be part of the Knights of St. John, and we have been in several philanthropic events. We love Saratoga and we love our house, our trees and our neighbors. On our house, we have a large portion of our lot that are great trees but has a flat wasted piece of land. Years ago, people used to drive their vehicles across the land between the trees. Recently, even one of my sons admitted that in 1997 ( even when we lived in a different Saratoga house) he and his buddies drove his Tahoe between the 14771 Montalvo Rd. trees for fun. Since Kathy and I purchased the lot 18 years ago, I have estimated that we spent over $100,000 in cost for taxes, insurance tree maintenance and triple increased in mortgage interest. With the major push by California, and in particular Saratoga, for more housing, for 18 months I have been working to develop a plan to split my lot and build a 2 story house and an ADU. My architect, civil engineer, arborist, the Saratoga Planning Department and I worked hard to maintain the maximum number of trees and ensure that the property will be maintained with the integrity of my current house and the neighborhood. Kathy and I 100% intend to stay in our house after the split of the lot. We are uncertain if we will build the house and ADU (which we are setting a deed to require an affordable funding that the ADU will also be built) ourselves or sell to someone else. This depends on two financial transactions that are underway for two of my businesses. If we do sell, we will be pressing the new owners (and with the City of Saratoga) to preserve the above commitments. Regarding the 4 proposed variances: #1. 40%/60% split. We are asking to move the line of the lot 10 feet to be 38.5%/61.5%. In doing so we are better to save the largest big trio of and provide a little more space between the new house my current house. Please see #4 below. If the 30 foot easement is included in the entire house, then the lot split will actually be 42%/58%. #2. Width/length ratio. This lot is unique, and we have drawn the plans to enable the benefits of building more housing and maintain the integrity of the neighborhood. #3. Floor Area – 2 story. Several builders and architects repeatedly told me that we need to be a house that are complemented to the neighborhood – in size and value. We studied the houses on Montalvo Rd and Vickery. In each road, 60% of the 17 total homes are two story houses. #4. Front Setback- The first house that was built (in 1900) on Montalvo Rd as the address of our lot – 14771 Montalvo Rd. In 1908, a 30 foot easement was established on Montalvo Rd on my lot to be ready to do a potential 4 lane road. I do not think that this easement extends beyond my lot. It is now known that this could never be implemented (a “largely defunct right-of-way” – as described by the Planning Department of the City of Saratoga). The second house built on Montalvo Rd. was the Montalvo Villa – in 1911. At 1949, there were only 3 houses on Montalvo Rd. I talked to the Saratoga Building department about what would be needed to eliminate this easement. I was told that this could be done, but this could be difficult. Instead, I was advised to instead to reduce (or even to zero) the offset. In the plan, the minimum offset is now 5’ 6””. I measured the minimum distance from the proposed front house to the road of Montalvo Rd. is now 47 feet. 67% of the 12 front houses on Montalvo Rd have an average of 46 feet distance to the road. 67% of the 6 front houses on Vickery have an average of 36 feet. Please support the proposed plan. Thank you for your consideration. Joe and Kathy Beyers