HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 91-72
...",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,...,....,.",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,""",,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'.,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,.,
,,,,,,.,,,..,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,.,,,,...,,,",,,,.,,,,,,,.,,,""."''',.......
RESOLUTION 91- 72
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SARATOGA GRANTING AN APPEAL FROM
THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
DR-91-022 and SD-89-011.2
Orosz; 14113 Pike Road
WHBRBAS, Mr. and Mrs. Orosz, the applicants, have applied
for design review approval to construct a new, 5,217 sq. ft. two-
story residence. Modification to condition #27 of Resolution
SD-89-011 limiting construction to a 200 ft. contour elevation is
also requested to allow the structure to exceed this limit by 3
ft. ¡and
WHEREAS, on October 9, 1991, the Planning Commission of the
City of saratoga held a duly noticed public hearing on said
application at which time all interested parties were given a
full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and
following the conclusion thereof the Planning Commission denied
the application; and
WHEREAS, applicant has appealed the decision of the Planning
Commission to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on November 6, 1991, the City Council conducted a
de novo public hearing on the appeal, at which time any person
interested in the matter was given a full opportunity to be
heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the staff
report, minutes of proceedings, conducted by the Commission
relating to the application, and the written and oral evidence
presented to the City Council in support of and in opposition to
the appeal.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City council of the
City of Saratoga as follows:
1. The appeal from the Planning Commission is hereby
granted and the decision of the Planning Commission is reversed,
to wit: The applicant has met the burden of proof required to
support the application and the following findings have been
determined:
The height, elevation and placement of the project on the site
does not unreasonably interfere with views of the surrounding
residences in that the nearest neighbors are at a much lower
1
elevation and are separated by mature vegetation. The views
of the home recently approved to the west will be oriented
towards the Mt. Eden Valley, away from this residence.
The project does not unreasonably interfere with the privacy
of the surrounding residences in that the south wing of the
home, which faces the recently approved but not yet built home
to the west, is one-story and will have minimal affect on
future neighbor's privacy.
The natural landscape is being preserved by minimizing tree
removal, soil removal, and grade changes in that only one 13
inch oak and three fruit trees will be removed and the oak was
approved to be removed by Resolution SD-89-011. Grade changes
are limited to those necessary to construct the home, driveway
and pool.
The project will minimize the perception of excessive bulk in
relation to the immediate neighborhood in that due to the
topography and existing vegetation, few of the neighboring
homes are visible from this site. The portion of the roofline
which extends to the 204 ft. contour is a relatively small
area and does not increase the home's perception of excessive
bulk.
The project is compatible in terms of bulk and height with
those homes within the immediate area and in the same zoning
district in that there are existing two-story homes of similar
size, scale and design throughout the northwestern hills.
These homes are particularly evident in the Teerlink and
DeMartini subdivisions to the west.
The project will not interfere with the light, air, and solar
access of adjacent properties in that the nearest neighbors
are at a much lower elevation and are separated by mature
vegetation. The south wing of the home, which faces the
recently approved but not yet built home to the west, is one-
story and will have minimal affect on future neighbor's light,
air and solar access.
The plan does incorporate current Saratoga grading and erosion
control standards.
2. The application of Orosz for design review approval be
and the same is hereby granted subject to the following
conditions:
(1) The development shall be located and constructed as shown on
Exhibit "A", as modified by the City council at the
conclusion of its hearing on this matter, incorporated by
reference.
2
(2) Prior to submittal for building permit or grading permit, a
zone clearance shall be obtained from the Planning
Department.
(3) The structure's foundation, and associated deck, driveway
and walkway elevations shall be raised 1 ft. in order to
reduce the amount of grading necessary.
(4) Height of structure shall not exceed the 204 ft. contour
elevation.
(5) The maximum height of an exposed underfloor area shall not
exceed 5 ft.
(6) No retaining wall shall have an exposed height that exceeds
5 ft. In addition, no fence or wall shall exceed six (6)
feet in height and no fence or wall located within any
required front yard or within any required exterior side
yard of a reversed corner lot shall exceed three (3) feet in
height. In addition, all future fencing shall comply with
the hillside fencing regulations per section 15-29.020 of
the City Code.
(7) No structure shall be permitted in any easement.
(8) No ordinance size tree shall be removed without first
obtaining a Tree Removal Permit, with the exception of those
approved to be removed per Exhibit "A". Any ordinance size
tree removed shall be replaced in accordance with the
requirements of the City Code.
(9) No recreational courts are permitted.
(10) Slopes shall be graded to a maximum 2:1 slope.
(11) All exposed slopes shall be contour graded.
(12) The exterior color shall be smoke rose.
(13) Landscaping for screening along the west property line shall
be installed prior to final occupancy, as indicated on the
approved site plan. In addition to these six trees, an
equal trunk diameter replacement shall be provided for the
13 inch oak removed.
(14) Prior to zone clearance approval, applicant shall submit
landscape plans for the Planning Director's review and
approval indicating the additional replacement trees. All
landscaping shall consist of native and drought tolerant
species in conformance with the City's xeriscape guidelines.
November 21, 1991
3
(15) All tree preservation measures recommended in the Arborist
Report dated April 23, 1991 shall apply.
(16) Detailed on-site improvement plans showing the following
shall be submitted to the Building Division prior to the
issuance of a Zoning Clearance:
a. Grading (limits of cuts, fills; slopes, cross sections,
existing and proposed elevations, earthwork
quanti ties) .
b. Drainage details (conduit type, slope, outfall,
location, etc.).
c. Retaining structures including design by A.I.A. or
R.C.E. for walls 4 feet or higher.
d. All existing structures, with notes as to remain or be
removed.
e. Erosion control measures.
f. Standard information to include title block, plot plan
using record data, location map, north arrow, sheet
no's. owner's name, etc.
(17) Prior to the pre-grading meeting, 6' chain link or welded
wire mesh protective fencing shall be placed around the
trees under the dripline as indicated in the Arborist Report
dated April 23, 1991.
(18) Roof covering shall be fire retardant, Uniform Building Code
Class A or B prepared or built-up roofing. Reroofing, less
than 10%, shall be exempt. (Ref. Uniform Fire Code Appendix
E, City of Saratoga Code 16-20:210).
(19) Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall be installed and
maintained in accordance with the provisions of Article
16-60 City of Saratoga.
(20) Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall have documentation
relative to the proposed installation and shall be submitted
to the Fire District for approval, prior to issuance of a
building permit (City of saratoga 16-60).
(21) Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in garage. (City of
Saratoga Code 16-15:110).
(22) Driveways: All driveways have a 14 ft. minimum width plus
one ft. shoulders.
4
a. Slopes from 0% to 11% shall use a double seal coat of 0
& S or better on a 6" aggregate base from a public
street to the proposed dwelling.
b. Slopes from 11% to 15% shall be surfaced using 2-1/2"
of A.C. or better on U' aggregate base from a public
street to proposed dwelling.
c. Slopes from 15% to 17% shall be surfaced using a 4" PPC
concrete rough surfaced on 4" aggregate base from a
public street to proposed dwelling.
d. Curves: Driveway shall have a minimum inside radius of
32 ft.
e. Turnouts: construct a passing turnout 10 ft. wide and
40 ft. long as required by the Fire District. Details
shall be shown on building plans.
(23) Parking: Provide a parking area for two emergency vehicles
at the proposed dwelling site or as required by the Fire
District. Details shall be shown on the building plans.
(24) The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and
approve all geotechnical aspects of the final foundation and
development plans (i.e. site preparation and grading
drainage improvements, and design parameters for foundations
and retaining walls) to ensure that the consultant's
recommendations have been properly incorporated.
The results of the plan review shall be submitted to the
City for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of a grading permit.
(25) The geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test, (as
needed,) and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project
constructions. The inspections should include, but not
limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and
subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for
foundations, retaining walls, and keyways prior to the
placement of concrete and steel.
(26) Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and
expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or
held to be the liability of city in connection with City's
defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any
state or Federal Court, challenging the city's action with
respect to the applicant's project.
(27) Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this permit
shall constitute a violation of the permit. Because it is
impossible to estimate damages the city could incur due to
5
the violation, liquidated damages of $250.00 shall be
payable to this City per each day of the violation.
3. Applicant shall sign the agreement to these conditions
within 30 days of the passage of this resolution or said
resolution shall be void.
4. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or
approval will expire.
5. All applicable requirements of the state, County, City
and other Governmental entities must be met.
6. The applicant shall affix a copy of this resolution to
each set of construction plans which will be submitted to the
Building Division when applying for a building permit.
***
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Saratoga held on the 20th day of NovemBer
1991, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Anderson, Clevenger. Monia and Mayor Kohler
NOES: Council member Stutzman
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:
~¿,~
Deputy city Clerk ~
ÞÁ-/~
llayor
~. ~
--
November 13, 1991
mnrw\273\res\Orosz
I hereby agree to the above conditions.
-----------
mnrw\273\res\Orosz
6