Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-28-2001 Planning Commission PacketCITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Barry, Jackman Kurash, Page, and Roupe ABSENT: PATRICK, BERNALD(BOTH NOTIFIED US THEY WOULD NOT ATTEND) STAFF: Interim Director Kaplan, Planner Connolly and Minutes Clerk Shinn PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES -Regular Meeting Minutes from March 14, 2001. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on March 23, 2001. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET ITEM 2, PAGE 2- THE THIRD ATTACHMENT SHOULD STATE THE ARBORIST REPORT DATE NOV 20 NOT OCT 18, AND ITEM 2 PAGE 3 THE FLOOR AREA FOR THE FIRST FLOOR SHOULD REFLECT 3,917 SQ FT AND THE SECOND FLOOR SHOULD REFLECT 2,449 SQ FT WITH THE TOTAL BEING THE SAME. THE DIRECTORS ITEM IS WITDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT CONSENT CALENDAR NO ITEMS PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communication should be filed on or before the Thursday before the meeting. 1. DR-00-011, SD-00-001, V-00-018 and V-O1-004 (517-08-008 Est 016) -TRAFALGAR INC., 14612 Big Basin Way ~ 20717 St. Charles Street; -Request for Design Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and Variance(s) approval to allow the subdivision of a 22,582 net square foot site for townhouses and a retail commercial space. A rear yard setback variance has been requested for a building on the CH-2 portion of the site. The Big Basin Way portion of the site is zoned CH-2 and the St. Charles Street portion is PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MARCH 28, 2001 PAGE 2 zoned R-M-3000. This applicant has prepared an alternative for Commission consideration, as well as a modification of the original request to reflect concerns raised at a previous Public Hearing. Four existing residences with garages totaling 4,595 square feet and 1,000 square feet of retail space that includes asecond-story flat would be demolished. (V-00-004(PARKING) APPROVED 5-0, V-00-018(SETBACK) DENIED 3-2, COMMISSIONERS KURASH, JACKMAN AND BARRY OPPOSED) SD-00- 001 AND DR-00-011 DENIED 3-2, COMMISSIONERS KURASH; JACKMAN AND BARRY OPPOSED). DR-00-054 Est V-O1-002 (517-14-087) -MARTIN/ROSE, Kittridge Road; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 7,340 square foot two- story residence on a 347,173 square foot vacant parcel. The Variance is necessary for retaining walls to exceed five feet in height and possibly separated by less than 10 feet for parallel walls. The Variance is also necessary to exceed 15,000 square feet of impervious surface due to a long driveway. Maximum height of the structure is 26 feet tall, located within a Hillside Residential zoning district. (APPROVED 4-1 COMMISSIONER KURASH OPPOSED). 3. DR-O1-003 (517-12-020) -BEAN, 20500 Lomita Avenue; -Request for Design Review approval to demolish an existing 4,559 square foot single family residence and construct a new 5,220 square foot single story residence. Maximum height of the structure will be 26 feet. The 39,673 square foot parcel is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (APPROVED 5-0). 4. DR-00-062 (397-28-013) - PICO RANCH INC., 20460 Williams Avenue; -Request for Design Review approval to demolish an existing 1,275 square foot single family residence and construct a new 2,663 square foot two-story residence. Maximum height of the structure will be 23 feet. The 7,671 square foot parcel is located in the R-1-10,000 zoning district. (CONTINUED TO APRIL 11 ) DIRECTOR ITEMS Appeal-Ol-002- Jagadeesh, 14232 Shady Oaks Court -Appeal of Administrative Decision of tree removal for tennis court WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT COMMISSION ITEMS DR-00-050;14499 Oak Street -Modification of Approval APPROVED DR-00-021; 21116 Comer Drive -Review of Landscape Plan APPROVED WITH CONDITION THAT IF THEY WANT TO USE A MORE FIRE RETARDANT TREE SPECIMEN THE NEIGHBORS MUST BE NOTIFIED AND APPROVE. COMMUNICATIONS PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MARCH 28, 2001 PAGE 3 Written -Saratoga City Council Minutes from Regular Meeting of February 21,2001. ADJOURNMENT AT 11:35 PM TO NEXT MEETING Wednesday, April 11, 2001 Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION L~CTION 1VIINUrES DATE: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Barry, Bernald, Jackman, Kurash, Patrick and Roupe ABSENT: Chairman Page STAFF: Interim Director Kaplan, Planner Connolly and Minutes Clerk Shinn PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES -Regular Meeting Minutes from February 28, 2001. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on March 9, 2001. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communication should be filed on or before the Thursday before the meeting. DR-00-036 (397-05-091) -SAN FILIPPO, Sobey Road; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a new two story residence on a 43,042 square foot parcel, and Use Permit approval to allow an accessory structure to be located with in the rear yard setback. Maximum height of the structure is 26 feet tall and is located within a R-1-40,000 zoning district. (DENIED 5-0, BERNALD RECUSED) PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 2 MARCH 14, 2001 DR-00-054 &t V-O1-002 (517-14-087) -MARTIN/ROSE, Kittridge Road; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 7,340 square foot two- story residence on a 347,173 square foot vacant parcel. The Variance is necessary for retaining walls to exceed five feet in height and possibly closer than 10 feet for parallel walls. The Variance is also necessary to exceed 15,000 square feet of impervious surface due to a long driveway. Maximum height of the structure is 26 feet tall, located within a Hillside Residential zoning district. (CONTINUED 6-0 TO 3/28/01) DR-00-011, SD-00-001, and V-00-018 (517-08-008 ~ 016) -TRAFALGAR INC., 14612 Big Basin Way ~ 20717 St. Charles Street; -Request for Design Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and Variance approval to allow the subdivision of a 22,582 net square foot site into six lots ranging in size from 1,756 square feet to 2,489 square feet and two additional common area lots. The proposal calls for demolishing four existing residences with garages totaling 4,595 square feet and 1,000 square feet of retail space that includes a second story flat. Five new two-story townhouses with garages will be constructed at the rear of the site. Additionally, 1,316 square feet of retail space with a second story condominium would face Big Basin Way. The Big Basin Way portion of the site is zoned CH-2 and the St. Charles Street portion is zoned R-M-3000. A rear yard setback variance has been requested for a building on the CH-2 portion of the site. (This item will be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of March 28, 2001, to allow consideration of the original proposal and modifications, as well as an alternative proposal that the applicant will present to the Commission at that time:) (CONTINUED 6-0 TO 3/28/01) DIRECTOR ITEMS COMMISSION ITEMS DR-00-021; 21116 Comer Drive -Review of Landscape Plan DR-00-050;14499 Oak Street -Modification of Approval Discussion of the Planning Commission Staff Report Format COMMUNICATIONS Written -Saratoga City Council Minutes from Adjourned Meetings of January 23 and February 13,2001. ADJOURNMENT AT 9:50 P.M. TO NEXT MEETING Wednesday, March 28, 2001 Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION • LAND USE AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, March 13, 2001- 3:00 p.m. PLACE: City Hall Parking Lot, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue TYPE: Land Use Committee SITE VISITS WILL BE MADE TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2001 ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA AGENDA 1. DR-00-036 - SAN FILIPPOx Item 1 Sobey Road LAND USE COMMITTEE The Land Use Committee is comprised of interested Planning Commission members. The committee conducts site visits to properties which are new items on the Planning Commission agenda. The site visits are held Tuesday preceding the Wednesday hearing between 3:00 and 5:00 p.m. It is not necessary for the applicant to be present,- but you are invited to join the Committee at the site visit to answer any questions which. may arise. Site visits are generally short (5 to 10 minutes) because of time constraints. Any presentations and testimony you may wish to give should be saved for the public hearing: Please contact staff Tuesday morning for an estimated time of the site visit. * Commissioner's Option, since this site has been pre~~iously visited • CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 - 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater,13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES -Regular Meeting Minutes from February 28, 2001. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on March 9, 2001. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communication should be filed on or before the Thursday before the meeting. DR-00-036 (397-05-091) -SAN FILIPPO, Sobey Road; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a new two story residence on a 43,042 square foot parcel, and Use Permit approval to allow an accessory structure to be located with in the rear yard setback. Maximum height of the structure is 26 feet tall and is located within a R-1-40,000 zoning district. DR-00-054 &t V-O1-002 (517-14-087) -MARTIN/ROSE, Kittridge Road; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 7,340 square foot two- story residence on a 347,173 square foot vacant parcel. The Variance is necessary for retaining walls to exceed five feet in height and possibly closer than 10 feet for parallel walls. The Variance is also necessary to exceed 15,000 square feet of impervious surface due to a long driveway. Maximum height of the structure is 26 feet tall, located within a Hillside Residential zoning district. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PAGE 2 MARCH 14, 2001 DR-00-011, SD-00-001, and V-00-018 517-08-008 &r 016 -TRAFALGAR INC. 14612 Bi ( ) g Basin Way &r 20717 St. Charles Street; -Request for Design Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and Variance approval to allow the subdivision of a 22,582 net square foot site into six lots ranging in size from 1,756 square feet to 2,489 square feet and two additional common area lots. The proposal calls for demolishing four existing residences with garages totaling 4,595 square feet and 1,000 square feet of retail space that includes a second story flat. Five new two-story townhouses with garages will be constructed at the rear of the site.. Additionally, 1,316 square feet of retail space with a second story condominium would face Big Basin Way. The Big Basin Way portion of the site is zoned CH-2 and the St. Charles Street portion is zoned R-M-3000. A rear yard setback variance has been requested for a building on the CH-2 portion of the site. (This item will be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of March 28, 2001, to allow consideration of the original proposal and modifications, as well as an alternative proposal that the applicant will present to the Commission at that time.) DIRECTOR ITEMS COMMISSION ITEMS DR-00-021; 21116 Comer Drive -Review of Landscape Plan DR-00-050;14499 Oak Street -Modification of Approval Discussion of the Planning Commission Staff Report Format COMMUNICATIONS Written -Saratoga City Council Minutes from Adjourned Meetings of January 23 and February 13,2001. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Wednesday, March 28, 2001 Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA i MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting Chair Page called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barry, Bernald, Kurasch, Patrick, Roupe and Chair Page Absent: Commissioner Jackman Staff: Senior Planner Bob Schubert, Planner Mark Connolly and Planner Philip Block PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Study Session and Regular Meeting of February 14, 2001. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Kurasch, seconded by Commissioner Patrick, the Regular Planning Commission minutes of February 14, 2001, were approved with the following amendments: • Page 8 -- Commissioner Kurasch stated that it is fair game to look at this proposal since the applicant could have chosen a confos•ming design i~: height and placement and since a Use Permit is required to approve the cabana. • Page 9 -- ...Suggested that staff be directed to investigate whether the Planning Commission can call up the College's Use Permit for review wit1: respect to other issues not in litigation. • Page 10 -Commissioner Bernald added that there is a safety issue, as this building appears to be ^°r^"°a ^~ ~*~~*~ tilting while the basement is being dug beneath it. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent.) Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Bernald, the Study Session minutes of February 14, 2001, were approved with a correction in two places on page 2 replacing sh-a-re with shared parking. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent.) ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Mr. Mark Connolly, Planner, announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on February 23, 2001. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 2 TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET Mr. Mark Connolly, Planner, provided the following technical corrections to the acket: P • Advised that staff is recommending postponing the Director Item listed on this evening's agenda to the March 14th meeting. • Agenda Item No. 1/Page 3 -Clarified that the proposed fence would be placed two feet behind the right-of--way on Saratoga Avenue. The Zoning Ordinance requires the applicant to landscape and maintain the 20-foot wide area along the exterior fence. Commissioner Bernald pointed out a discrepancy 'in the staff report versus plans for Agenda Item No. 2 regarding inclusion of awood-burning fireplace in Lot C in the Living Room/Library Area. CONSENT CALENDAR There are no Consent Calendar Items. PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 1 V-O1-001 (393-25-024) - ST. ANDREWS SCHOOL, 13601 Saratoga Avenue: Request for Variance approval to construct a fence over three feet in height along Saratoga Avenue within the front yard setback. The site is located on an 89,291 (net) square foot parcel within an R-1-20,000 zoning district. Mr. Mark Connolly, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that this a Variance request to allow asix-foot welded metal fence within a required setback. • Added that the Heritage Preservation Commission approved the proposed design a few months ago. • The school's biggest concern is the safety of children playing on that playground and preventing people from entering the site during school hours • Said that two fencing alternatives have been presented including the applicant's original submittal, which is the one being recommended by staff. • The project site is within the R-1-20,000 zoning district with a required front setback from Sarataga Avenue of 30 feet. A temporary fence is in place at the present time. Commissioner Roupe stated his confusion about the two proposed layouts for the fence. Mr. Mark Connolly clarified that Exhibit A represents the fence being recommended for approval with the fence placed on the interior side of the trees. Commissioner Kurasch stated that the posts are already installed. Mr. Mark Connolly advised that the applicant began installation without realizing that a Variance would be required to have the six-foot height. They stopped work when notified by the City of that requirement. • Commissioner Kurasch sought clarification that the fence is not to be located within the street right-of- way on Saratoga. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 3 .~ Mr. Mark Connolly replied that the applicant would maintain 20 feet of landscape area in the right of way. Commissioner Barry questioned the duration of time for the Tree Protection Bond (Condition of Approval No. 3). Mr. Mark Connolly replied a year. Commissioner Roupe suggested adding the words and duration to Condition of Approval No. 3. Chair Page opened the Public Hearing No. 1 at 7:51 p.m. Rev. Ernest Cockrell, Applicant and Rector of St. Andrew's Church, Saratoga: • Advised that this new fence will be much better than the previous chain link fencing. • Stated that safety is a factor and keeping people out who don't need to be at the school. Additionally, the fencing should help prevent vandalism on site. • Assured that the fencing will add to the beauty of the site and will be nicely landscaped. Commissioner Patrick asked Reverend Cockrell if he would accept a Condition that prohibits the posting of any signs or banners on this fencing. Rev. Ernest Cockrell answered that he had no problem with that restriction. Commissioner Barry asked Reverend Cockrell if he is willing to install drought tolerant plants within the landscaping area. Rev. Ernest Cockrell replied that this is a very reasonable request. Commissioner Kurasch asked the age groups of the children on site. Mr. Richard Hof, Assistant Head Master of St. Andrew's School, replied that students from third to eighth grades use the fenced area for both recess and physical education classes. Commissioner Kurasch asked if students are supervised while using the area. Mr. Hof replied that the children are supervised and added that the fence is needed for the safety of the children as well as providing an opportunity for the beautification of the property. Commissioner Patrick asked. if there is a choice of colors available for this fencing material. Mr. Hof replied that he is aware of black and green being available. Commissioner Barry asked Mr. Hof if he had any problems using their original plan proposal locating the fence at the interior of the trees. Mr. Hof answered no. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 4 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Bernald, the _ Commission closed .Public Hearing No. 1 at 7:55 p:m. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Commissioners Bernald and Roupe stated no problems with the application. Commissioner Kurasch expressed her concern regarding the height of this fence on Saratoga Avenue while also stating her understanding of the school's safety issues. Added that the application is well thought out and that she agrees with the recommendation of utilizing native planting. Commissioner Patrick said she had no problems with the request. ;Commissioner Barry.recommended some modifications to the Conditions of Approval as follows: • Favor Plan A strongly. • Suggest changes to Condition of Approval No. 3 relative to the bond duration, leaving the length of duration to the discretion of staff in conjunction with the City's Arborist. • Suggested a change to Condition of Approval No. 4 requiring the final landscape plan to rely on the use of native plants. • Added a condition requiring a sign be posted listing allowable hours of construction. Chair Page stated that this is a good project and in this situation it is appropriate to have asix-foot fence. Added _that a black fence may look better than a green. Commissioner Roupe reminded that a Condition has been recommended that prohibits the posting of any signs and/or banners on this fencing. Commissioner Patrick reiterated that the Conditions must encompass the use of native plants, the prohibition of signs on the fence and the bond for the tree protection to be established for an appropriate duration and amount as determined by staff. Chair Page added that the Sign Ordinance would apply regarding signs anyway. Commissioner Patrick replied that it might not apply to schools. Motion: ..Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Bernald, the Commission approved V-O1-001 with the amendments to the Conditions: • Strike Option B fence plan design; • Modify Condition 3 regarding the duration of the tree protection bond, • Modify Condition 4 to require native and drought tolerant plants; and • Add a Condition prohibiting the posting of any signs on this new fencing. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman'was absent) *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.2 L` DR-00-045 7 SD-00-006 (410-39-012) - LEXOR INVESTMENTS, INC., 15202 Quito Road: Request for Design Review and Parcel Map approval to allow the subdivision of a 3.62 net acre parcel ..,.~. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 5 into three lots of 48,426, 50,868 and 65,484 (net) square feet. The proposal calls for demolishing an existing residence and accessory structures and constructing three two-story residences ranging in size from 5,702 square feet to 6,498 square feet. The site is located in an R-1-40,000 zoning district. Mr. Philip Block, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the project site is located on the northeast corner of Quito Road and Twin Creeks Road. • The application includes Design Review and a Parcel Map to create three lots. • An existing residence and accessory structures will be demolished and three new homes constructed, two two-story residences and one single-story residence. The size of these homes will range from 5,702 to 6,498 square feet. • Staff is recommending approval of this application. • Advised that the applicant is asking for the rewording of Condition of Approval 30A with the concurrence of the Public Works Department. • Added that a letter has been distributed from the adjacent property owners advising that they are receptive to an easement (specific details to be worked out). Additionally, a slight boundary adjustment will occur. Commissioner Bernald expressed concern about Condition No. 16 pertaining to rear yard landscaping and sought assurances that the recommendations contained within both the Arborist's Report and the Harvey Ecological Report are followed. Questioned the reasoning for Condition No. 18 as it pertains to street addressing being placed in view, wondering why that condition is even included at all. Mr. Philip Block replied that the Condition is the result of a recommendation by the Fire Department. Commissioner Bernald questioned Condition No. 28 regarding the placement of interior monuments and asked the reasoning for that condition. l~lr. Philip Block answered that this is a standard Public Works Condition of Approval that is not unusual. Commissioner Bernald stated that she just wanted to be sure that necessary monuments are installed. Commissioner Patrick questioned the requirement for a Reciprocal Access Agreement and why it has not been formalized prior to this evening's meeting. Mr. Philip Block replied that this agreement is .only necessary if the map is approved. Such an agreement is premature and unnecessary if the map is not approved. The agreement would be finalized prior to the final map. Commissioner Barry brought up the Ecological Report that states that the Repairian Habitat Area is of "moderate to low quality." Suggested that the level be upgraded wherever and to the extent it is possible to do so. Mr. Philip Block agreed that such a condition could. be added. Commissioner Kurasch asked if there would be two drives from Quito. Saratoga Planning-Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 6 Chair Page replied that there will be access for two lots from Quito Road and one lot from Twin Creeks Road. Commissioner Kurasch asked if there are restrictions for the access driveways for the lots accessed by Quito Road. Mr. Philip Block advised that the applicant has worked with the Arborist's recommendations. Commissioner Kurasch asked if there are any other easements. Commissioner Roupe asked whether Lot C will provide an easement for Lot B. Commissioner Kurasch stated that.the level of detail provide goes beyond what is used for a Tentative Map. Mr. Philip Block advised that the Commission is considering the Subdivision and Design Review as a package this evening. This is the only opportunity the Commission will have to review this proposal. Added that the Final Map is handled by the Public Works Department and is a very technical process. Chair Page opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 8:27 p.m. Ms. Kristine Syskowski, Lexor Investments, Inc., 15585 Los Gatos Boulevard, Los Gatos. • Informed that they were encouraged by staff to bring this project- forward to the Commission as a package as far back as 1999. - • Clarified that for the easement, Condition No. 24 requires a recorded access easement to allow access to Twin Creeks Road. Additionally, there is a proposed lot line adjustment as a Condition of Approval. • Advised that the gross existing site is .92 acres. After the lot line adjustment, there will be no net effect. Commissioner Roupe asked whether the adjusted lot was used in the calculations provided. Ms. Kristine Syskowski: • Replied that the deductions were made off gross square footage. • Added that there is one wood-burning fireplace proposed.which can be changed if necessary. • Informed that this project began in 1999 with James Walgren. • Said that there are three features to their application the site approval, the architectural design and landscaping. • Advised that the site is at Quito and San Tomas Aquino Creek. • Advised that the trees on site will be preserved. • Said that the three proposed homes will be scarcely visible and that there will be generous front setback. • Added that the lot depths are from 200 to 460 feet. + ~ Advised that both Lots B and C will be accessed from Quito Road. • Said that pervious pavers will be used for the driveway and that minor retaining walls will be required. Added that Barrie Coates has approved the proposed driveway placement. • Said that allowing access to Twin Creeks is agreeable to the adjacent neighbor. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 7 • Advised that they have spent a lot of time on site with the architect in order to site the homes and • Regarding landscaping, there are 48 trees on the Tree Report. Five olive trees will be relocated and seven trees removed, including a walnut, pine and fruit trees. The trees to be removed are rated as being in fine, fair or poor condition. Eighty-eight new trees will be planted include seven redwoods on Lot A. There will be groves of redwoods between each of the homes. • Stated that this proposal meets all City Zoning and General Plan requirements. • Added that they have met and exceeded the Repairian Corridor requirements. work with the existing landscaping. • The proposed homes are in context with the surrounding homes. • Advised that Lot A and C will include two-story homes and Lot B will have asingle-story home. Distances between the homes are from 54 to 100 feet. The distance between Lot C and the existing neighboring residence is 130 feet. A distance of between 70 to 150 feet separates the three new homes from the Repairian Corridor. • Added that an existing structure will be demolished. The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed and accepted this proposed demolition. • Advised that the architectural style proposed for the homes is early-Californian, incorporating low- pitched roofs; stucco walls; upper balconies; front courtyards; wood windows and doors; stone, wood and the materials, including recycled the from the Town & Country project recently demolished in San Jose. The rooflines will be articulated. Commissioner Bernald asked whether the Harvey Report supports rear yard landscaping. Ms. Kristine Syskowski replied that it is fine to landscape the rear yards. Advised that the Repairian Corridor is considered to be in poor condition because of the existing structures, which will be demolished. Commissioner Bernald asked if the applicants are willing to accept a Condition to disallow swimming pools. Ms. Kristine Syskowski replied that they would prefer to discuss this further. They are not proposing any swimming pools within the Repairian Corridor itself but in the rear yards. Commissioner Bernald asked why there is a second story exit at the front of the home on Lot C. Ms. Kristine Syskowski replied that it leads off of a bonus room but that she was not sure of the reasoning for that exit. Mr. Kirk Nonley, Architect, advised that this exit is a traditional architectural feature that was incorporated in this particular design because it did not include a courtyard feature as is included with the other two homes. Commissioner Patrick asked if the applicants would eliminate the wood-burning fireplace. Ms. Kristine Syskowski replied yes. S Commissioner Patrick stated that there should be no structures within the Repairian Corridor. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 8 Ms. Kristine Syskowski replied that she believes that Codes do not permit structures in the Repairian Corridor but they are willing to agree not to have any structures within the Repairian Corridor. Commissioner Patrick inquired about impervious coverage numbers for each unit. Ms. Kristine Syskowski pointed out the details on the plans. Commissioner Patrick asked why the lot line adjustment is not being done at the same time. Ms. Kristine Syskowski admitted that she would have liked to have done so but was encouraged by staff not to file at the same time. Commissioner Patrick asked Ms. Syskowski if she would accept a Condition of Approval requiring the easement exactly as depicted in the drawings. Ms. Kristine Syskowski replied yes. Commissioner Kurasch inquired about the location of the driveways from Quito Road, particularly for Lot B. Ms. Kristine Syskowski replied that more grading and hardscape would be required to place that driveway elsewhere on the site. Mr. Bill Hirschman, Engineer for the project, replied that the goal is to make the road parallel to the contours of the property. Added that they are successful in dealing with trees near paving. Commissioner Kurasch stated that there will be an impact to Quito Road itself as a result of the driveway. Added that her main concern is Lot B. Stated that it appears from the plans that six-foot high fences will be required in the future for security purposes. Suggested.a Condition of Approval that all fences comply with current code. Ms. Kristine Syskowski replied that they want to keep the sites open. The proposed fencing is located 60 feet from the front property line. The proposed fence depicted is three-foot high that meets the six- foot columns at the gates of the driveways. Added that staff has indicated that the six-foot columns are a supportable Variance but that they could revise the six-foot columns. Commissioner -Roupe made it clear that the fencing is not under consideration for approval this evening. - Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner ..Bernald, seconded by Commissioner Barry, the Commission- closed Public Hearing No. 2 at 9:03 p.m. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) . Commissioner Roupe stated that he has no real concerns with this project and that it appears to be well thought out. Commissioner Kurasch stated that she would like to see an alternative front drive for Lot B, even if it goes against the contours as long as it leaves more of a.buffer on Quito Road. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 9 ~~ Commissioner Patrick stated that she has no concerns or objections. Suggested that the rear yard landscaping take into consideration the recommendations of the Harvey Report; that the easement be recorded as shown; that no structure or pools be constructed within the Repairian Corridor; that no wood-burning fireplaces be included in the project; that Condition 30A be amended with the Public Works Department's approval; that Condition 22 be modified so that the Fire Department approval for the House Numbering Placement be obtained prior to final occupancy; and that the second sentence of Condition 28 be deleted entirely. Commissioner Barry suggested adding the landscape restriction within the Repairian Corridor by modifying Condition 12 to read that no hadscape, fencing or accessory structures will be allowed within the Repairian Corridor. Added the recommendation that a sign be posted listing the allowable construction hours. Commissioner Bernald commended the applicants for designing homes that echo the existing homes in the area and for the detailed report provided to the Commission. Thanked the applicants for their willingness to eliminate the only wood-burning fireplace of this project. Said that the homes integrate architectural materials used in the area. With the changes outlined by the previous Commissioners, all concerns are set aside. Chair Page stated his agreement with Commissioner Bernald and said he could support this application. Commissioner Barry said that the design is great and a lot of work has gone into designing this proposal. Expressed appreciation for the applicants giving up the wood-burning fireplace. Suggested additional landscape screening to help alleviate Commissioner Kurasch's concerns regarding Lot B's driveway. Commissioner Bernald said that there are few pedestrians using Quito Road as the fast paced traffic makes it dangerous to walk on Quito. As a result, no one will be looking down onto the site from Quito Road. Commissioner Kurasch said that she is not necessarily just concerned about pedestrian views. Added that she also does not want to rely on landscape screening for design defects. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Bernald, the Commission approved SD-00-006 with the following Conditions: • Amend Condition of Approval No. 30A as approved by the Public Works Department; • Delete Condition of Approval No. 28 and require that all monuments be installed prior to recording the map; • Amend Condition of Approval No. 22 requiring Fire Department approval of the house numbering placement prior to final occupancy; • Require the recordation of an easement exactly as depicted on the plans seen this evening by the Commission; • Include a Condition that restricts placement of any structure, pool or hardscape within the Repairian Corridor; and • Require additional landscaping to the satisfaction of staff. Saratoga.Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Page 10 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Bernald, the Commission approved. DR-00-045 with the following Conditions: • Add a Condition that nowood-burning fireplaces be installed; • Include a Condition that restricts placement of any structure, pool or hardscape within the Repairian Corridor; and • Require additional landscaping to the satisfaction of staff. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Chair Page called for a break at 9:20 p.m. Chair Page reconvened the meeting at 9:28 p.m. *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.3 V-00-023 (503-56-010) -HALL, 13410 Old Oak Way: Request for Variance approval to construct an addition to match an existing non-conforming structure, within the rear yard setback, on a slope that exceeds 30% and at a height greater than 26 feet. The existing structure is built on piers with a maximum height of about 43 feet. The site is located on a 40,075 (net) square foot parcel within an R- 1-40,000 zoning district. Mr. Mark Connolly, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that this request is for three point Variance for an existing home for setback, slope over 43% and height of 44 feet. • The subject house was built on piers and is a legal non-conforming structure. • The applicants wish to add a new entry and nook on the first floor with awalk-in closet, bath and sitting room on the second floor. The new space will be contained within an existing deck footprint. • The property is located within the Hillside Residential District and consists of nearly an acre. • Staff recommends approval. Commissioner Kurasch asked how much square footage is being added to the home. Mr. Mark Connolly replied 300 square feet. He added that without the need for the Variance for setback, height and slope, this size addition would typically be handled over the counter. Chair Page opened Public Hearing No. 3 at 9:30 p.m. • • Mr. Tom Hall, 13410 Old Oak Way, Saratoga: • Complimented staff- for their assistance and said that everything has been well spelled out in the staff report. • Added that this addition will have no impact on neighbors and that existing trees screen the site from view. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 11 • Said that they will match the existing exterior wood siding on the addition so there will be no real change visible from the outside. Commissioner Roupe asked Mr. Hall whether any additional piers are required and whether a structural engineer has found the residence to be structurally sound and able to handle this addition without additional piers. Mr. Tom Hall replied that his architect has advised him that review by a structural engineer is a requirement of this project. Mr. Mark Connolly added that a structural analysis is a part of the building plan review. Added that no geologic review is required in this situation. Commissioner Barry suggested that if any additional piers are deemed necessary, this project be required to be returned to the Planning Commission for further review. • Mr. Mark Connolly replied that if any structural changes are required the project would most certainly be returned to the Commission. Commissioner Patrick questioned two apparent cut out sections on the second story front of the house. Mr. Tom Hall advised that what is seen is decking. Added that they have been experiencing a small leak in the upstairs patio. Chair Page asked if a color board is available. Mr. Mark Connolly advised that a color board is not required due to the small scope of work with this addition. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Bernald, the Commission closed Public Hearing No. 3 at 9:37 p.m. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Commissioner Kurasch stated that this is a supportable application. It has no impact and fits in the area. Commissioner Patrick concurred. Commissioner Barry said she supports the project as long as no grading or additional piers are required. Commissioner Bernald concurred. Commissioner Roupe reiterated that should additional piers be deemed necessary, this project must come back to the Commission. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Kurasch, seconded by Commissioner Patrick, the Commission approved V-00-023 with the addition Condition of Approval that this Sazatoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 12 application will be returned to the Commission for additional review in the event that a structural engineer deems additional piers to be necessary to accommodate this addition. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Chair Page advised that there is a 15-day appeal period. *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.4 DR-00-063 (397-07-083) - SATHAYE, 15315 Sobey Road: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 6,066 square foot two-story, single-family residence. The maximum height proposed is approximately 26 feet. The pazcel is approximately 43,680 square feet located in an R-1-40,000 zoning district. - _ Mr. Bob Schubert, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that this request is for the construction of a new 6,066 squaze foot, two-story residence with a 2,009 squaze foot basement, on a 43,680 square foot site, which.is zoned R-1-40,000. • The project includes the demolition of an~ existing 2,476 squaze foot home. • The applicants have prepared an extensive landscape plan. for the site including 46 replacement trees, exceeding the requirements.. _. _ • Staff is recommending approval with proposed modifications to the draft Conditions of Approval to allow the removal of Tree No. 15 (cedar) and Tree No. 31 (olive) and deleting Condition 7B and 7C. • Advised that a letter of support from the adjacent neighbor has been provided. Commissioner Bernald inquired what will be done to prevent storm water from draining east onto neighboring property. Chair Page mentioned that he saw a dissipater. on the plans. Commissioner Roupe questioned the six-foot, high fence depicted on Sheet 8.1.2 as surrounding the property, saying that it appears to encroach upon setback area where fencing is limited to three-feet in height. Commissioner Patrick asked. why the staff recommendation for removal of Trees 15 and 31 is changing. Mr. Bob Schubert advised that staff has since met with the applicants on the site and due to the impacts of these trees to •the applicant's plans, staff can support the removal of those tvuo trees. Commissioner Kurasch asked if staff had the figures for the excavation of the basement. Mr. Bob Schubert replied 1,272 cubic yazds. Commissioner Barry asked staff why there aze no requirements limiting the amount of excavation that can be done for a basement. +5 Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 13 Mr. Mark Connolly replied that basements are exempt from grading permits. Chair Page opened Public Hearing No. 4 at 9:50 p.m. Mr. Louie Leu, Architect, 236 N. Santa Cruz Avenue, Los Gatos: • Advised that drainage will be handled through the placement of a large dry well at the back of the site along with a sump pump. • Added that the fence is to -the lower right of the site and that they have no problem pushing the fence back to the setback line. • Explained that the cedar tree (No. 15) is messy. The olive tree (No. 31) is low and sparse and not particularly attractive. Added that they will install redwoods to help screen the site. They plan to retain most of the native trees and add 46 new trees to the site. A srnall vineyard will also be installed. • Said that they have gone to a lot of effort to articulate the massing and materials to minimize bulk. Materials to be used include brick, cobblestone, stucco, half-timber trim and a slate roof. • Infornied that they have taken time to talk to the neighbors and solicit their support for this project. Commissioner Roupe stated that the project is close to the maximum allowable impervious coverage and that retention of on-site water is a concern. Suggested one option to reduce impervious coverage might be to used crushed granite instead of stone for some of the walkway areas. Said that the applicants need to drop back the percentage of impervious coverage. Mr. Louie Leu replied that this can be done. Commissioner Kurasch agreed that more pervious surfaces should be used and suggested adding a Condition of Approval that native trees be used as replacement trees for those being removed. Mr. Tim Hoagland, Landscape Architect, 43 E. Main Street, Los Gatos: • Stated that it had always been their intention to remove Trees No. 15 and 31 and somehow that was never communicated to the Arborist and therefore not incorporated into the Tree Report. • Added that they have no problem coming back with pervious pathway materials. • Advised that they will be using interlocking paving stone for the driveway. • Said that they can easily cut down the amount of impervious coverage to 30%. • Said that most of the driveway will drain out to Sobey. Commissioner Barry asked if the applicants are willing to give up the wood-burning fireplace. Mr. Louie Leu said that he thought that question might come up. Said that there are good reasons to have wood-burning fireplaces as well as good reasons for not having them. The wood-burning fireplace gives a bigger size opening than does a gas fireplace. Added that even though the fireplace is intended to be constructed as wood burning, they plan to place a gas log within it. A gas fireplace in itself does not fit the proportion of this house, it has too small an opening for the large room in which it will be located. Commissioner Roupe reiterated the importance to retain all water on site. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Commission closed Public Hearing No. 4 at 10:05 p.m. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Commissioner Patrick stated that she is not comfortable with the design and that the project has an incredible amount of lot coverage. Added that she is uncomfortable with removing trees to install a patio. Suggested that the Tree Protection Bond be incre_ ased if_two more trees are removed as well as an adjustment to the replacement requirements. Said that this is a very busy, ambitious design of which she is not in favor. Commissioner Barry agreed that convenience is not a good reason to ignore the Arborist's report. Agreed with the comments of the other Commissioners. Added that pervious pavers are a good option for the car drive. Said that this is a massive house. Commissioner Bernald concurred with concerns about impervious coverage and site drainage. Said she had no problem with the removal of the two additional trees as they are not substantial trees: Added that the landscape plan is more than is usually provided. Said that this project is similar to homes already existing on Sobey. Said that the vineyard down below will compliment this site tremendously and help lessen impervious coverage. Commissioner Roupe agreed with Commissioner Bernald, saying this is an ambitious but compatible proposal that he finds acceptable. Commissioner Kurasch said that impervious coverage should be reduced by reducing the actual amount of site coverage rather than simply switching from impervious to pervious materials. Said that she is able to support the type and size of house proposed. Chair Page concurred that the design is appropriate and the vineyard a nice addition. Suggested removing the walkway around the vineyard as well as reducing the overall impervious coverage of the site. Said that Tree No. 15 should be removed as it is hazardous. Commissioner Roupe asked whether crushed stone is considered a pervious material. Mr. Mark Connolly replied that it depends upon the size of stone and how it is installed. Commissioner Barry suggested that the Arborist review the removal of Trees No. 15 and 31 and that, as a matter of policy, an appropriate time frame for the Tree Protection Bond be established. Chair Page pointed out that the two additional trees slated for removal are only rated as fair and fine. Commissioner Kurasch asked what level of impervious coverage should be achieved. Mark Connolly advised that the maximum credit for use of pervious materials is 25%. Chair suggested reductions in the walkways, particularly by the vineyard, and the auto court. Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Commission approved DR-00-063 with the Conditions of Approval: r - Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 15 • That the impervious coverage be reduced to the maximum extent possible with the reduction in area and use of different materials, to a level of ao more than 30%; • That Tree No. 15 and Tree No. 31 can be removed subject to the review by and concurrence of the Arborist and with appropriate replacement trees; • That fencing be moved beyond the setback area in all instances; and • Than an appropriate time frame for the Tree Protection Bonds be set by staff. (5-1-1; Commissioner Patrick voted against and Commissioner Jackman was absent) Chair Page advised that there is a 15-day appeal period. *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 5 DR-00-061 (397-07-103) - CHIU, 18615 Maude Avenue: Request for Design Review approval to demolish an existing 2,873 square foot single story residence with accessory structures and construct a new single story 6,096 square foot residence. Maximum height of the structure will be 26 feet. The 46,120 square foot parcel is located in an R-1-40,000 zoning district. Mr. Philip Block, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that this site is located on Maude Avenue, near Quito Road. • The proposal is fora 6,096 square foot residence with a basement. The maximum height is 26 feet. • The property is zoned R-1-40,000. • An existing residence will be demolished as well as accessory structures. • Staff is recommending approval. • Among the trees to be removed are two Spanish fir (No. 14 and No. 15) and Tree No. 29 that needs to be removed for placement of the pool. Commissioner Roupe pointed to sheet C.1 of the plans and said that it appears that the house can be removed without impinging on setbacks in order to retain Tree No. 14 and Tree No. 15. Questioned the need for both athree-car garage and two-car carport. Chair Page opened Public Hearing No. 5 at 10:34 p.m. Mr. Greg Kawahara, Architect, 5466 Molly Circle, Livermore: • Stated that this home reflects a Mediterranean style elevation with concrete s-tile roof, plaster siding and a manufactured stone veneer wainscoting. • A three-car garage is proposed for the west side as well as a two-car carport. • Added that he has tried to set back this home in a similar fashion to the other homes on the street. • Advised that the wainscoting will be used all around the house and not just on the front elevation. • Said that there will be a basement on the west side of the structure. • Said that Trees 14 and 15 are the biggest issue. Said that Tree 14 would not likely survive construction as the base of the house will be fairly close. • Added that they are willing to move the house forward to save Tree No. 15 but to do so would encroach into one of the side setbacks by 18 inches. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 16 Commissioner Roupe suggested encroaching on both side setbacks by nine inches instead. Questioned why the applicant needs both the three-car garage as well as the two-car carport. Mr. Greg Kawahara replied that the applicants currently own two cars and have a teenaged daughter who will be driving soon. Additionally, they plan to have live-in help. Commissioner Kurasch asked about hardscape plans for the site. Mr. Greg Kawahara advised the Commission that the project's Landscape Architect has just been retained so the landscape plans are not yet developed. Commissioner Kurasch stated that this home reflects side to side coverage of the lot. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Commission closed Public Hearing No. 5 at 10:42 p.m. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Commissioner Barry stated that a redesign should occur that preserves Tree No. 14 and Tree No. 15. Commissioner Bernald concurred and' stated that exceptional trees must be retained at any cost. These trees are in beautiful shape. Added that she hates carports. Suggested deepening the garage instead. Said that necessary storage can also occur in the proposed basement/bonus room. Said that she supported the home's design but that the end to end placement of the residence on the site is inappropriate.- Stated that she is not willing to support this .project as it is currently. Commissioner. Roupe also expressed concern about the end to end .coverage and tree protection. Suggested that the applicants give up on having the carport and~move the house forward. Commissioner Kurasch said that Siberian Elms are not highly rated in this area. Said that with a small shift and the elimination of,the carport, she can support this project. Suggested that a landscape plan for screening at the front of the site be provided for review by staff. Commissioner Patrick concurred. Chair Page concurred with the need to save Trees 14 and 15 and suggested striking Condition No. 10. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roupe, seconded by Commissioner Barry, the Commission reopened Public Hearing No. 5 at 10:50 p.m. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Mr. Louie Leu suggested a compromise by which they will reduce the carport to a one-car carport, save both trees and set the house at a realistic and sufficient distance from the two trees (No. 14 and No. 15) so as not to negatively impact them per the recommendation of the Arborist. Commissioner Kurasch again asked if the applicants could consider .the complete elimination of the carport. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 17 Mr. Chiu, Property Owner, 18615 Maude Avenue, Saratoga: • Stressed his desire to have the carport to provide covered parking for his guests. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Commission again closed Public Hearing No. 5 at 10:53 p.m. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Commissioner Roupe stated that he can support aone-car carport with the move of the footprint of the house, staying within the setbacks, in order to protect Trees 14 and 15. Commissioner Bernald stated that parking in the carport will not protect visitors from rain. Commissioner Patrick asked where the carport is located. Commissioner Roupe pointed it out and added that it now will behalf the width. Chair Page stated his support with the move of the house to save the two trees and the reduction in the carport. Commissioner Kurasch stated that rather than cutting the carport in half, the Commission should simply say yes or no to including the carport at all. Commissioner Patrick agreed. Motion: U on motion of Commissioner Kurasch seconded b Commissioner B rn p y e ald, the Commission approved DR-00-061 with the Conditions of Approval: • That the house be moved to the south and southwest position an adequate distance to safeguard Tree No. 14 and Tree No. 15 per the Arborist; • Elimination of the carport; • Removal of Condition of Approval No. 10; and • That the applicants provide a front, landscape plan for review and approval by staff. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) Chair Page advised that there is a 15-day appeal period. *** DIRECTOR ITEMS The Director Item was postponed to the March 14, 2001, meeting. COMMISSION ITEMS 1. Chew -Rodeo Creek Hollow (Lot 5) Modifications: Mr. Mark Connolly advised that this project (DR-99-056) has been brought back to the Commission because any proposed modifications to an approval that changes more than 25 square feet must be reviewed and approved by the Commission. This project's modification includes the reduction of the basement by 1,000 square Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 2001 Page 18 feet and a 50 square foot addition to the sunroom. The original approval was fora 3,417 square foot residence. With the added square footage, the structure now would total 3,467 square feet. The maximum allowable is 3,728. The project continues to meet all requirements. The Commission supported this minor modification. (6-0-1; Commissioner Jackman was absent) 2. ~ Illegal Tree Removal: Commissioner Bernald reported on the improper removal of an eucalyptus tree. Mr. Mark Connolly advised that he has submitted this matter to Code Enforcement.. The Senior Code Enforcement Officer will handle the situation. 3. League of California Cities Planners Institute: Commissioner Bernald inquired about the League of California Cities Planners Institute, which is scheduled for March 21 -23 in Monterey as the -Commissioners normally are able to attend this program. Mr. Mark Connolly will look into obtaining authorization for the Commissioners to attend. 4. West Valley. College Update: Commissioner Roupe advised that the City Attorney has provided a letter in response to the Commission's inquiry about the potential to review the Use Permit for West Valley College. The City Attorney has recommended that the Commission let this matter sit. 5. 13497 Old Oak Road: Commissioner Kurasch reported on a block wall currently under construction that appears to be at least five feet tall right at the street. Mr. Mark Connolly said that he would research this installation and report back at the next~meeting: 6. Pro osed wordin for staff re ort: Commissioner B su ested identi in the maximum code U g U ~' gg fY g allowance column as being "discretionary" in order to clarify for the public. Chair Page asked staff to look into this matter but stated that using the word "maximum" is perhaps more clear than discretionary. COMMUNICATIONS 1. Written: Saratoga City Council Minutes from February 7, 2001. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Chair- Fage adjourned the meeting at 11:12 p.m. to Wednesday, March 14, 2001, at the Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA. MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn Minutes Clerk • t,N`~ "~ ITEM 1 • ~~ C~B~4 04 ~~OO C~~ 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Mark Connolly, Assistant Planner ~1 -~ DATE: March 14, 2001 SUBJECT: DR-00-036 ~ UP-00-018; SAN FILIPP0,15500 Sobey Road COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Nick Streit Ann Waltonsmith DESCRIPTION The applicant has requested Design Review and Use Permit approval to construct a new 5,312 square foot two story residence, and a 529 square foot cabana totaling 5,841 square feet on a vacant lot. In addition the proposal includes a 608 square foot basement. The Use Permit approval is necessary to allow the cabana to be located within the rear yard setback. The maximum height of the residence will be 24 feet. The site is 43,042 square feet and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. Comparative ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED SAN FILIPPO ON SOBEY ROAD. DR-99-010 &~ V00-020 ZONING: R-1-40,000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential- Hillside Conservation PARCEL SIZE: 43,042 sq. ft. (net) AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 11% GRADING REQUIRED: Cut: 793 Cu Yds Max. Depth: 8 ft. &z Cut for Basement: 185 Cu Yds Fill: 578 Cu Yds Max. Depth: l2 ft. 000001 ?rimed on recyc~ed paper. File No. DR-00-036 & UP-00-018; Sobey Road MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED: Stucco exterior painted medium tan with brown wainscot or olive green stucco and dark brown wainscot. Window trim will be dark green, and the roof material will be a Mission tile. Color and material samples will be available at the Public Hearing. Proposal Code Requirement/ Allowance LOT COVERAGE: Approx. 36% 35% SETBACKS: Front: 50 ft. 50 ft. Rear: 85 ft. 75 ft. Right Side: 30 ft. 20 ft. Left Side: 20 ft. 20 ft. SIZE OF STRUCTURE: First Floor: 3,498 sq. ft. Second Floor: 1,352 sq. ft. Garage: 462 sq. ft. Cabana Ba~emenr: 529 sq. ft. fr (E~(lf3 TOTAL: y S~~ 5,841 sq. ft. 5,844 sq. ft. HEIGHT: 26 ft. 26 ft. GRADING REQUIRED: Cut: 793 Cu. Yds. Max. Depth: 8 ft. &t Cut for Basement: 185 Cu Yds Fill: 578 Cu. Yds. Max. Depth: l2 ft. MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED: Light beige painted stucco exterior with a stucco base wainscot in a darker beige and trim details in white. The roof material proposed is a darker red and brown blended mission tile. A color and material board will be available at the Public Hearing. 00000 • File No. DR-00-036 & UP-00-01 S; Sobey Road Proposal Code Requirement/ Allowance • • LOT COVERAGE: 32.6% =(14,113/43,042) Driveway 3570 sq. ft Entry and Walks 1004 sq. ft Dining patio and fountain 183 sq. ft Upper deck and house 1460 sq. ft Pool and pool deck 3218 sq. ft. Walk from garage 122 sq. ft. House and garage 4,027 sq. ft Cabana 529 sq. ft Total 14,113 sq. ft. SETBACKS: Front: 50 ft. 50 ft. Rear: 85 ft. 75 ft. Right Side: 30 ft. 20 ft. Left Side: 20 ft. 20 ft. SIZE OF STRUCTURE: First Floor: 3,498 sq. ft. Second Floor: 1,352 sq. ft. Garage: 462 sq. ft. Cabana RasemPnt: 529 sq. ft. ~ (fiOR ~a ft 1 TOTAL: 5,841 sq. ft. 5,844 sq. ft. HEIGHT: 24 ft. 26 ft. DISCUSSION 35% The project was continued from January 24, 2001 for the applicant to redesign the residence and address issues of compatibility with the neighborhood, bulk and mass, cascading of the residence down a slope at the front of the lot to the middle, reducing impervious coverage, and to consider changes to size and materials. 000003 File No. DR-00-036 & UP-00-018; Sobey Road The applicant has reduced the height of the residence to 24 feet from the previous 26 feet, and softened the rooflines. The impervious coverage has been reduced well within the maximum allowed through the use of pervious pavers and gravel walks. The square footage, footprint, and materials are unchanged. There was concern at the January 24`h Public hearing from an adjacent neighbor to the West who had raised issues of bulk and mass, and recommended that the residence be reduced in size and brought down the slope on the front of the property toward the middle of the lot. The applicant chose not to relocate the residence but to mitigate the impact by lowering the overall height and emphasizing landscape screening. Staff feels that the revised design responds to some, but not all of the Commission's recommendations, and fails to meet the intention, which is to reduce the overall effect of bulk and mass, and create a design more compatible with the natural environment and the adjacent properties. Staff is basing its conclusion on the following Design review findings: • Although the height was reduced 2 feet, the project does not adequately protect the adjacent properties from unreasonable interference with views and privacy through placement, height and elevations. • The project does preserve the natural landscape by cascading the structure to follow the natural topography and by avoiding excess grading cuts. To achieve this, the plan requires removal of a considerable number of trees that have been approved by the City Arborist. • The residence will rely upon landscaping to screen the project from the adjacent properties and to minimize the perception of excessive bulk and mass in relation to other structures on adjacent lands due to the slope at the front of the property, the perception of bulk is reduced as viewed from Sobey Road and will blend in from that elevation. • The project does maintain compatible bulk and height to the adjacent properties to some degree, in that the rooflines are well articulated, and the residence is stepped down the slope. However, it does not maintain compatible mass with the adjacent properties in that the residence would cover a large portion of the lot. Relative to the neighborhood, the residence is only about 300 sq. ft. larger than the largest homes immediately adjacent. • The project does incorporate current grading and erosion control measures. • As described above, the project has incorporated certain but not all policies and techniques of the Residential Design Handbook. • OOUOO4 File No. DR-00-036 & UP-00-018; Sobey Road RECOMMENDATION Although the project meets all minimum zoning requirements in terms of setbacks, floor area, coverage and height, staff notes that it does not appear that the redesign fully complies with the intent of the Commission. Nor does the project meet all the necessary Design Review findings and the Residential Design Handbook guidelines. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolutions DR-00-036 ~sz UP-00-018 2. Excerpted Planning Commission hearing minutes, January 24, 2001 3. Previous Plans, Exhibit "A" 4. Current Plans, Exhibit "B" 5. Correspondence from Tim McNeil in opposition of the project 6. Correspondence from David and Linda Scott with concerns of compatibility and water drainage • • 000005 THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ooooos APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. DR-00-036 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAN FILIPPO; SOBEY ROAD WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Re~~iew approval to construct a new 5,312 square foot t~~o story residence with a 608 square foot basement and 529 square foot cabana on a vacant lot; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at ~~hich time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present e~~idence; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application for Design Review approval, and the following findings have been determined: ' The height, elevations and placement on the site of the proposed residence, when considered with reference to: (i) the nature and location of residential structures on adjacent lots and within the neighborhood; and (ii) community ~~iew sheds, will avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy, in that the location of the proposed residence will be partially screened from existing residences by mature vegetation. ' The natural landsca e will be reserved insof p p ar as practicable by designing structures to follov~~ the natural contours of the site and minimizing tree and soil removal; grade changes will be minimized and will be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas and undeveloped areas and in that there is minimal grading proposed outside of the basement excavation and the impact of 17 ordinance protected trees proposed to be removed will be mitigated. The proposed residence in relation to structures on adjacent lots, and to the surrounding region, will minimize the perception of excessive bulk and will be integrated into the natural environment, in that the structure's design incorporates elements and materials which minimize the perception of bulk and integrate the residence into the surrounding en~~ironment in that the structure's design incorporates elements and materials which minimize the perception of bulk and integrate the residence into the surrounding environment and the structure's design is similar in scale, size and style to other homes within this area. ' The residence will be compatible in terms of bulk and height with (i) existing residential structures on adjacent lots and those within the immediate neighborhood and within the same zoning district; and (ii) the natural environment; and shall not (i) unreasonably impair the light and air of adjacent properties; nor (ii) unreasonably impair the ability of adjacent properties to utilize solar energy. ~000~"~ File No. DR-00-036 Est UP-00-018; Sobey Road ' The proposed site development or grading plan incorporates current grading and erosion control standards used by the City. ' The proposed residence v;~ll conform to each of the applicable design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Handbook and as required by Section 15- 45.055. Now, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural dravt~ings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of DR-00-036; SAN FILIPPO for Design Review approval be and the same is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "B", incorporated by reference. 2. Prior to submittal for Building permits, the following shall be submitted to the Planning Di~~ision staff in order to issue a Zoning Clearance: a. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page and containing the following: i. The plans shall show only one wood-burning fireplace. ii. All recommendations of the City Arborist shall be followed and incorporated into the plans. iii. The site plan shall be stamped and signed by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor. iv. The site plan shall contain a note with the following language: "Prior to foundation inspection by the City, the RCE or LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans." v. Four (4) sets of complete grading plans .incorporating this Resolution and Arborist report as a separate plan page. «. No Retaining wall shall exceed five feet in height and three feet within the front yard setback. 3. No Ordinance-size tree shall be removed without first obtaining a Tree Removal Permit. 0~0~08 File No. DR-00-036. UP-00-018; Sobey Road ~• 4. FENCING REGULATIONS - No fence or wall shall exceed six feet in height and no fence or wall located within any required front yard shall exceed three feet in height. 5. No structure shall be permitted in any easement. 6. The walkways from the garage leading to the rear patio and cabana shall be constructed of completely pervious material (i.e. decomposed granite or gravel), and the parking area . of the driveway closest to the garage shall be echo stone or turf block. 7. A storm water retention plan indicating how all storm water will be retained on-site, and incorporating the New Development and Construction -Best Management Practices. If all storm water cannot be retained on-site due to topographic, soils or other constraints, an explanatory note shall be provided on the plan. CITY ARBORIST 8. All recommendations in the City Arborist's Report dated October 21, 2000 shall be followed and incorporated into the plans. This includes, but is not limited to: a. The Arborist Report shall be incorporated, as a separate plan page, to the construction plan set and the grading plan set and all applicable measures noted on the site and grading plans. b. The grading plan shall be revised to show that no grading will occur within the following distances from the trunks of the following trees: Tree #1 18 feet Tree #15-17 15 feet Tree #2 35 feet Tree # 27 18 feet c. Five (5) ft. chain link tree protective fencing shall be shown on the site plan as recommended by the Arborist with a note "to remain in place throughout construction." The fencing shall be inspected by staff prior to issuance of a Building Permit. d. A bond in the amount of $14,897 be posted to ensure protection of trees #2 and #27 and a 10 % bond of all other trees. e. The applicant shall replant an equivalent value of $12,513 in 6- 36 inch box and 11- 24 inch box native specimens for removal of #3-14 and #28-32. f. A note shall be included on the site plan stating that no construction equipment or private vehicles shall park or be stored within the dripline of any ordinance protected trees on the site. Do00~~ File No. DR-00-036 ~St UP-00-018; Sobey Road 9 • A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance showing locations of the any native replacement trees. 9. Prior to Final Occupancy approval, the Ciry Arborist shall inspect the site to verify compliance with tree protective measures. Upon a favorable site inspection by the Arborist and, any replacement trees having been planted, the bored shall be released. 10. Any future landscaping shall be designed and installed in accordance with the Arborist's recommendations. 11. A project arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture shall be retained to (1) provide on site supervision during key aspects of construction of the residence and driveway for the purpose of preventing or minimising damage to trees and (2) pro~~ide regular written progress reports to the City of these supervision functions as they occur. CITY GEOLOGIST 12. All conditions of The City Geologist shall be incorporated into the plans as a separate plan page. FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 13. The roof covering shall be fire retardant, Uniform Building Code Class "A" prepared or built-up roofing. 14. Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the City of Saratoga Code-Article 16-60. 15. Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall have documentation relative to the proposed installation and shall be submitted to the Fire District for approval. 16. The required fire flow for this project is 2,000 gpm at 20-psi residual pressure. The fire flow IS NOT available from the area water mains and the fire hydrants, which are spaced at the required spacing. 17. Provide the required fire flow from the hydrants spaced at the maximum of 500 feet, OR, provide and approved fire sprinkler system designed per NFPA standard #13D and local ordinances throughout all portions of the building. A licensed contractor shall install the sprinkler system. 18. Provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside. 19. An approved, automatic fire sprinkler system shall be provided for the garage. 0~0~~0 File No. DR-00-036 CSC UP-00-018; Sobey Road • CITY ATTORNEY 20. Applicant agrees to hold Ciry harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of Ciry in connection with Ciry'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. 21. Noncompliance v,~ith any of the conditions of this permit shall constitute a ~~iolation of the permit. Because it is impossible to estimate damages the City could incur due to the violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to this Ciry per each day of the violation. r~ ~~ • 000011 File No. DR-00-036 &t UP-00-018; Sobey Road • Section 2. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. 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 adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 14th day of March 2001 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: • Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission • 000012 File No. DR-00-036 Est UP-00-018; Sobey Road APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. UP-00-018 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAN FILIPPO; Sobey Road. WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Use Permit approval to allow a 529 square foot Cabana to be located within the rear yard setback; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application, and the following findings have been determined: ' The proposed location of the conditional use will be in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. ' Tha t the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor be materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. ' That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of SAN FILIPPO for Use Permit approval be and the same is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: • 000013 File No. DR-00-036 ~ UP-00-018; Sobey Road COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "B", incorporated by reference. 2. Prior to submittal for Building permits, the following shall be submitted to the Planning Division staff in order to issue a Zoning Clearance: a. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page. b. The site plan shall be stamped and signed by a Registered civil Engineer or a Licensed land Surveyor. c. The Cabana shall be located exactly as shown in exhibit "A" at a maximum height of 15 feet. d. A final landscaping plan showing the proposed landscape screening be submitted. 3. FENCING REGULATIONS- No fence or wall shall exceed six feet in height and no fence or wall located within any required front yard shall exceed three feet in height. 4. No structure shall be permitted in any easement. PUBLIC WORKS 5. 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. CITY ATTORNEY 6. Applicant agrees to hold the City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of the City in connection with the 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. 7. 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 the violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to this City per each day of the violation. 000014 File No. DR-00-036 ~St UP-00-018; Sobey Road Section 2. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval will empire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 1~-90 of the Saratoga Ciry Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (l~) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 14`h day of March 2001 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission • 000015 • THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ~~~0~~ • Saratoga Planning Commissi .ylinutes of January 24, 2001 Page 2 • CONSENT CALENDAR There are no Consent Calendar Items. PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 1 DR-00-036 & UP-00-018 (397-05-091}- SAN FILIPPO, Sobey Road: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 5,312 square foot two-story residence with a 608 square foot basement and 529 square foot cabana on a vacant lot. The Use Permit approval is necessary to allow the cabana to be located within the rear yard setback. The maximum height of the residence will be 26 feet. The site is 43,042 square feet and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. Mr. Mark Connolly, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Stated that this request is for a Design Review approval to allow the construction of a 5,312 square foot, two-story residence with a 608 square foot basement and a 529 square foot cabana. A Use Permit is required to allow the cabana to be located within the rear yard setback. The maximum height of the cabana is 15 feet while the maximum height of the residence will be 26 feet. This is a constrained lot in that there is a 30 percent grade at the front of the lot. Concerns have been expressed by the adjacent neighbor to the east regarding the proposed placement of the house. As mentioned during the Technical Corrections, amendments to the plans will be required to reduce the impervious surfaces for the property to meet allowable percentages. Echo stone and decomposed granite or gravel will be used for walkways. With those adjustments, staff is recommending approval as all other requirements are met. Commissioner Kurash inquired about the cabana. Mr. Mark Connolly advised that a Use Permit is required to allow the 15-foot height as well as the placement within the rear yard setback. Commissioner Roupe inquired whether the retaining walls are within the allowances. Mr. Mark Connolly advised that staff has verified that the maximum height of any retaining walls on site is three feet. Chairman Page opened the Public Hearing No. 1 at 7:50 p.m. Mr. Rick Zea, 4616 Venice Way, San Jose: • Identified himself as the representative for the applicant and advised that they have worked closely with staff to meet all requirements. Thanked Mr. Connolly for his assistance. • Added that they have also worked closely with the neighbors, having mailed information as well as meeting with neighbors. At the meeting with neighbors, support was expressed. • Requested approval. • Advised that both the applicant and architect are available for questions. • Commissioner Patrick asked Mr. Zea if there would be any problem complying with the requirement to reduce impervious surfaces. Mr. Rick Zea deferred to the applicant and architect. 00001'7 Saratoga Planning Commissi. _vlinutes of January 24, 2001 Page 3 Commissioner Patrick added that she felt there is too much paved area on the property. Asked if the applicants might consider reducing the amount of driveway. Mr. Rick Zea advised that adequate access to the site requires the long driveway. Said that they would consider a compromise material for portions of the driveway as possible. Mr. Maurice Carmargo, 3953 Yolo Drive: • Identified himself as the project architect. • Assured the Commission that it will be easy to reduce the impervious surfaces to meet acceptable standards. Suggested changes to some of the walkway materials. Commissioner Roupe asked about the significance of such changes. Mr. Mark Connolly advised that should the walkways be comprised of decomposed gravel, a 25 percent credit is given that reduces the total amount of impervious surface to allowable levels. Added that the applicants will be using pervious pavers for the hammerhead and flat area in front of the garage, which offers a 25 percent credit. These changes result in 32 percent of impervious surfaces. Chairman Page expressed concern with the numbers provided and ultimate percentage of impervious ' surfaces that will result on this site. Commissioner Roupe agreed and said that there appears to be a lot of impervious surface. This issue must be resolved to ensure that the project meets allowable limits. Mr. Maurice Carmargo said that there are walkway areas that can be eliminated outright. Assured that he was willing to make changes to meet City requirements. Said that the edges of the driveway can be constructed using pervious material. Chairman Page inquired whether any other architectural design styles had been considered and whether the applicant might be willing to consider the use of wood siding. Added that this Mediterranean-style stucco building is out of character with the beginning of Sobey Road. Said that with the removal of 17 trees from this site, this structure will be highly visible from Sobey Road and that he is not certain this style home fits. Mr. Maurice Carmargo advised that they had considered many architectural styles but that the owner has a pretty strong desire to have Mediterranean-style architecture. Added that many trees are staying and that the house is set back quite a way from the front of the lot while retaining a presence to the street. There are limits due to the constraints of the lot. Concluded by stating that this design is compatible and set back. Commissioner Roupe said that the structure gives the appearance of a three-story in that it marches up that hill. Said that the ceiling height in the study seems excessive and inquired why it is so massive, especially since it is at the front elevation that is most visible from the street. Mr. Maurice Carmargo said that the house is single-story on that elevation. Said that the high ceiling for the study was designed to give balance to that whole elevation and a certain prominence to highlight the front entrance. Said that this one-story facade balances with the living room wing. 00008 Saratoga Planning Commissi. _~Iinutes of January 24, 2001 Page 4 . Commissioner Roupe stated that it rather creates bulk and mass. Commissioner Kurash inquired about landscaping plans around the large oak tree in the front of the property. ' Mr. Maurice Carmargo advised that the landscaping plan has not yet been developed. Said that they could look into adding additional landscaping that is compatible and requires low water. Commissioner Kurasch asked if the neighbor's concerns have been addressed. Asked why the, house is situated on the site as it is currently. Mr. Maurice Carmargo said that they moved the house as far back from the east property line as possible. The study has been buried into the hillside. They also created a planting strip between the driveway and house next door. This planting area will allow plenty of room to install screening landscaping. Added that the owner is willing to plant as many trees as necessary. Mr. Tim McNeil, 18450 Sobey Road, Saratoga: • Stated his opposition to this project. • Expressed concern that the structure cascades down the slope of the hill which gives bulk and mass to the house. • Added that this new home has been positioned over his rear yard and pool area, which will greatly affect his privacy. • Said that there is plenty of property in the meadow portion of this lot on which to construct this home. • Advised that many of the 17 trees to be removed are over 30 feet in height. Therefore, his property will be substantially and unfairly impacted by this project. • Suggested that the project be redesigned for placement on the lower portion of the meadow. Added that the City should consider issuance of a Variance, if necessary, in order to facilitate placement of this home there. Said this would be a good solution to the problems of the current placement. • Expressed his opinion that it was a bad subdivision that created this lot. Ms. Nona Christensen, 18510 Sobey Road, Saratoga: • Said that she owns three acres over several lots, including the lot immediately adjacent to the west to the applicant's lot. • Expressed support for this project and stated that the proposed house will be a beautiful addition to Sobey Road. • Said that several architects were consulted and all came up with the same placement of the house on this lot. Ms. Grace San Filippo, Applicant, 117 El Portal, Los Gatos: • Advised that this is her first experience in building a house. • Said that she feels strongly that she wants aMediterranean-style home to reflect her Italian heritage. • Said that she has done everything possible to design this project and feels that it will be a beautiful addition to Sobey Road. 000019 Saratoga Planning Commissi: _vlinutes of January.24, 2001 Page 5 Commissioner Roupe asked why Ms. San Filippo would not consider constructed in the meadow area of her lot. Ms. Grace4 San Filippo replied that the meadow area is so far back and would feel very isolated and would result in a flag lot appearance. Said that she prefers a home with a street presence. Additionally, to do so would leave her with little rear yard area and without any option for the placement of a cabana on site. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 was closed at 8:25 p.m.. (5-0-2; Commissioners Bernald and Jackman were absent) Commissioner Barry said that she was not ready to approve this application this evening, as she does not feel it fits with the rural character of Sobey Road. There is still the chance to preserve the semi- rural atmosphere. Said that the mass and bulk issues raised are relevant and that she has concerns about drainage issues. Commissioner Roupe stated his shared concern. Said that this is a large house that cascades down the slope. The high ceiling in the study accentuates the mass and bulk. Commissioner Kurasch said that the proposal is not outlandish and is kind of a trend. Suggested that the house might be a bit ambitious for its lot. Commissioner Patrick reiterated concern about impervious coverage. Added that the house is not compatible with the neighborhood. Said that. the siting of the house seems logical but that the mass and bulk are a problem. This is simply too big a house and she cannot support it. Chairman Page stated that he concurred with the other Commissioners' concerns. He listed a concern with the architectural style of the house. Since this part of Sobey Road is more rustic, wood siding might be more compatible. While much of the house may not be visible from the street, from the neighboring homes, this structure will be highly visible. Commissioner Roupe stated that it appears this application would not be approved if put to a vote this evening. Suggested a continuance to allow the applicant the opportunity to reconsider several things. Suggested changes include reducing the amount of impervious surfaces on the site as well as the mass and bulk of the structure (specifically the three-story appearance caused by the high ceiling of the study) and possibly repositioning the structure on the lot. Chairman Page advised that should the application not be approved this evening, the applicant can appeal to Council. An alternative is a continuance to allow some redesign, which can be brought back to the Commission at a future meeting. Commissioner Kurasch questioned whether the Commission was in agreement that the architectural style was inappropriate. Commissioner Roupe cautioned that the Commission should not stand too hard on that issue. The main issues appear to be the mass and bulk and the cascade effect of this current design. 000020 Saratoga Planning Commissi. _~Iinutes of January 24, 2001 Page 6 Chairman Page suggested the addition of some stone and a different roof color. Commissioner Barry stated her preference for awood-sided home at this location. Added that since not all seven Commissioners are here tonight, other views may be forthcoming. Said that this house will have a presence and should be more compatible with the area. Everyone will have to try to be reasonable. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Patrick, seconded by Commissioner Barry, the Commission continued DR-00-036 & UP-00-018 to its meeting of March 14, 2001. (5-0-2; Commissioner Bernald and Jackman were absent) *** PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.2 . DR-00-052 (397-07-018) - MAESUMI, 15171 Maude Avenue: Request for Design Review approval to demolish an existing single-story residence and two accessory structures totaling 3,100 square feet and construct a new 5,235 square foot single-story residence with 2,486 square foot basement. Maximum height of the structure is 24 feet tall, located on a 33,105 square foot parcel within an R-1- 40,000 zoning district. Mr. Mark Connolly, Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that this application seeks approval for the demolition of three existing structures totaling • 3,100 square feet and the construction of a 5,235 square foot, single-story residence with a 2,486 square foot basement. The maximum height would be 24 feet. The zoning is R-1-40,000 and the lot is 33,105 square feet. This project meets all minimum requirements and is actually two feet lower than the maximum allowable. Staff is recommending approval. Commissioner Patrick pointed out two light wells that appear larger than the allowable 36 inches. Mr. Mark Connolly advised that the applicant would modify the size of the light wells on their construction plans. Commissioner Barry asked if a color board is available. Mr. Mark Connolly replied yes and distributed the color board to the Commissioners. Chairman Page asked if the new construction hours would be imposed on this project, from 7:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. weekdays with no weekend construction permitted. Mr. Mark Connolly advised that those hours would be imposed. Chairman Page inquired why a new fire hydrant is required, as it appears that there is an existing fire hydrant in close proximity. Mr. Mark Connolly advised that the applicant had the option to install the fire hydrant or install fire • sprinklers throughout the new home. Chairman Page opened Public Hearing No. 2 at 8:45 p.m. 000021 A T~-IIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK . oooozz a FROM RICK ZEA REMAX GS BAY FAX N0. 1408 255 2627 Feb. 23 2001 03:54PM P2 • f bruar 7 2881 e y , Ms. Grace Sanfilippo 1 i 7 EI Portal Los Gatos, CR 95832 Dear Grace, This letter is to follow up on our conversation after the planning commission meeting on January 24th. We do not wish to oppose your project and are looking forward to welcoming you to the neighborhood when you moue in. However, our concern is the towering effect the proposed home will have over our backyard. The proposed plan has the footprint of the home starting on the slope with it cascading down the hill thus giving it the appearance of a three story home from our backyard. Our ortry request is that you build your home as a true two story home to help minimize the mass and scale of your project. This would require you to begin the home about 28 - 25 feet further back on the lat. Hlthough, the impact on us will still be great, we are not objecting to the setbacks, size, tree's or style of your home. We feel that this would be a fair compromise. f n conclusion, you wilt still be able #o build your home, pool, spa and cabana but will lesson the impact and privacy issue the three level home would impose. If you feet that you would be agreeable to this minor change in the footprint, then we would be happy to support your project. Thank; you. Regards, Tim McNeil Fr .lennifer McNeil • cc: City of Saratoga 000023 David and Linda Scott 14269 Quito Road Saratoga, CA 95070 March 8, 2001 City of Saratoga Community Development Department 13777 Fruitvale, Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Subject: DR-00-036 (397-OS-091) Sanfilippo Development on Sobey Road Dear Members of the Planning Commission, This is an update to our previous letter. FEB 08 2001 CITY OF SABATOGA COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT We own the lot adjacent and to the east ofthe proposed development by Ms. Grace Sanfilippo on Sobey Road. We are aware of the minor revisions to the original plan and we are writing again to register our ongoing concerns related to this project. Please enter this letter as part of the official meeting minutes. 1. The scone of the project seems out of character with the neighborhood. The house's mass and proposed architectural style stands in stark contrast to a neighborhood of ranch style, fairly unobtrusive homes. The lot in question is an L-shaped, one acre lot, meaning that it is really two one-half acre lots joined at the angle. The proposedtwo-story, 6,000 square foot home does not fit well on the current site lot. The proposed home is shoe-homed on one-half and the other half is covered with a pool, hot tub, terrace, out building and a lot of concrete (all impermeable fixtures). Such a project will create a monster home because of the shape and slope of the lot in question. 2. A smaller house limited to two levels and relocated to the lot's lower pOrtlOn, would be a better fit and less intrusive to the existin nei hors Looking at the plans dated July 25, 2000, and taking into account the minimal changes of the revised plan, it appears that because of the slope of the lot this is still really a three level house and 26 feet above grade. The problem is that the lot has a considerable slope to it; the front of this lot is ah-eady at the same level as the roof of our two-story house. The proposed new structure will add yet another 24 feet, creating a house that would loom over the neighbors and dramatically affect privacy indoors and out. Our back yard and the main living areas of our home (and our neighbors) -including living room, kitchen, dining room and master bedroom all face the lot in question. If the house was smaller and moved lower on the lot, this issue would be minimized. • • 0~~0~~ 3. The full length of the lot needs sufficient screened to minimize noise and lights. Adequate screening (fencing and planting) would be necessary to help block light and noise. The proposed driveway is planned to run the length of McNeil's and a considerable portion of our yard -both of us have our master bedrooms facing the location of the proposed driveway. In addition, the garage and its turnaround area would be located next to both of our properties and bedrooms. Yard lights, headlights and noise from cars going up and down the driveway is a potential problem. We would therefore like to see sufficient screening, including appropriate fencing and mature trees made part of any approved plan. 4. Water drainage issues must be addressed. Looking at the proposed plans, it seems that a large portion of the lot will be covered with either the house or some other impermeable structure. If not handled properly, water that would normally drain from our back yard will back up onto our property and perhaps damage existing improvements. Right now, there is a large storm drain on the Sanfilippo lot at its lowest point near our fence that the prior owners have filled and buried. It needs to be excavated and opened prior to any development. We do not want to stop the property's development, but we do want to ensure that, once completed, it fits into the existing neighborhood and does not adversely impact the existing neighbors' enjoyment and use of their properties. Sincerely, David and Linda Scott cc: Mr. and Mrs. Tim McNeil Mr. and Mrs. Paul Heath Camargo and Associates • 000025 • • • 000026 ~.~-- T '^ ... _ -- ... _ . -- '~'~ I' ~ 4 s "-'~- 7v .. -- -_ - ~ __ - ' . ` ~ ~° ~~ 9Z6T-569 (TE9) '~iiE~ `E~O'}E.ZES `;~ E0096 Etuao;tje~ 'so;dd II pEO~ ~agOs I --~ peog asnog Toogas etouateA 9G8 u~ I G a~ I~ o d d l ~ l,~ ' ,suoieinab ~uiuuEjd a~ig aan~oa~tuoid adeospuE~ . ~ . ~ ~ -/ 00-LZ-b •~•~•S•d - ~.zaquaso~ jaegoiy~ ~a6¢d ~a~¢Q - 1 '~~ soacr imw i ~ ~~ - --- - - - ~_ ----- ---- 000 .._ - _- ----- %~ x ~ :' n i /1 ~ 1 I / ~ o i ~ i ~ ~ ~~ ;~ i o RI - .. ~._ _ . ~ ~ ;: ~~ _. ~ -_o ~ ~ a ' -- -' ~~ i r, , .~ ~ ~~r - - - - i / ~ ~ _ / ~ ~ j~ - i ~ li - o C u ~ i ~ e 8 i p ~ ~ R ~ a r/::. .. / ' s :%. `' i i"': ~ i ^ i. ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ j ,. V pa i r ~ e a i. i~ t Q O H O ~ n N ~ gc p m N I i/ ~~ 9 r , W e ~ A tt~99 O m n / u $ ' tr i II ~` is /~ ~ i i ~ ~ ' i v / g ~ - ~ ~•~ / E /r Q y u / o ~ ; ,~ $ u g i' ~ a ' i ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ ° s ~ ~ - i 1 1 of "~y,~ d O Y O W ~ 7 d 3 ~ 1 ^O $ Y a ~ {~ l ~ ~ - ~ ~ ; i ~ o~ , y ~ d~ oo !'" ' ,%, . ~ ~ p ~~• ~ , O ~ 2( 'J'',~ oo° $ I ~ ~- ,~ !~ ~~~ ~ n, - ," ~_~ sers'srt uer o~ i \ •` ," ~ _-- Q \\ ~ 'j / r 1~, ~ ~ g b c~ ~ ~ r ' d / .~ r a ~ ~ ~ ~,.~, , ., ~^"~.'; ' .-. -' :•.' .•: ;~.•, .' '. ,. ~ ~. it _, ~' .~w. a~ rw . \ ^. - ~ r - _ L~ J r i • / v /~ ~ A O O O ~ ~' a_ u° % '~\ ~ ~\ ~ .I, I ~ O r i `~ ,.~~~~~ ~~,.~.., mob, /'~ i o ~~ .sex a nw ~ ~ Ss~iPTi ¢rr (stool i O ~ ~~ (\'~~> i i y •~-: i~ ~~-_~ 9261-599 (T£9) •~iiE~ `E~O'}E,~ES '~° ~.uawaa~~da~ ~ p8o~ Lagos £0096 gtuioj??e~ 'so;dy pao~ asnoF{ ?oogos a?oua~aA 9L9 _ fsuotslnab u9?saQ [e;uannuoi?eag / 9u?uuald a;?S ~ ~ n o w a ~ a a .~ 1 0 d ~ i ~ I ~ lA ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ¢~S 00-9Z-b aan~}~a~}iq~ad adE~spIIS7 ~aaquasog jaE~~ty~ l IIIJJJ ~o6ad .o;19Q t+49.T ~ -'--' '---~' - - ~---~ ~ --+-447- 2 - .. N 9;-,~~!~ ~I,.°fl ~!~' ~~ ~j ° SOBEY ROAD ', ~9!l9.vlL9vvl9t9lL~~ c7if7j NIf7I N.N f'~f~CAfV \ tf7.z ~ ' I ! I 120.`4 119.7 117. 116.0 I L 1 ~ cy _ _ _ 115.6 G ' T 113 9 ~ L I i 1 0.3 ROLL GUT R 118.6 17.3 1116. \ ~I14.3 112.8 ! I I I t0 ~ ~i \ •-+ ~ IdAB-DAK I I i, J I \ "~I t17.7 N50 H]fiM / rr ; ~ ~ j I•~I~ I r. \ :.~ 24-DAK + 116.2 /+ tf4.6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ US ~ \r +rµ11 t ' ! I, !~I IoGI wl I UTP .-_ _._% _ .. ___. _ , / UTP I (D I' t 00_ I 719.6 ___\______r__________;.___-_____ ___ tROr: BaN ! O u1~ ~ ! AD-IP \ r fserlo'og4 +tx.m') / D J1 E +' I ~! ~ ~ +~.1, I I l \ ,' S89?30' 00"E 171 .96' / " ~ Z tDl I~ ~~>!, ~ W m I I I r •ICE EASEM NT / ~ ~ LI t0 f0 \ , ~ ~ U O' ~ tOi NI L W W ~ ~ ~ \ i I , ~ 1_ E ~ E~ fa ~- - fa! ~ -~ 119.9 \ ! / ~ 0 ~ O u ~, ~ I ~ N ~ Vl~,m VIO+J .WI pI J1lu Ij 119.1 II I '~/ /r' E y W 1- L ~~ Q! L fU it B-TREE ~ i l~ +'314. 1 1 y. o~ U ~ ~ N L. O L !UI ~ - ' U (~IQ ~dil)aIYIJIUIC'~ II i - d ! ~ ~ ~ II~ ' I r , J ~ N E ~ I i 0 .~ I I~ W 1 1p !I ~ y~I 3 ~1 ~ - + 10 . 3 ~ Spl~~~~~~L. Q I f 11.4 r'+115:6' + .i'r' fu m o1+19 y o ~ o U ? NIA >I O 9 ~ A ~I l0 I r~i12.3\~ / _ i I ~ .--i!l9 I~-+I ~ ~I NIA I / m ~ ~ r 1 7.1 ~ R ~ , ~O I ,. ,r x'8.0 Y~ ~Q I ~ml)I OI WIS~I~L _-7! 1 ~; 119. 111. +r~14.4//~ ~ i,~ %~~ ~ 103.7 \ ~m Ac r f ~ / r r /T-~ / f 1.5 U" r Z i j / T \ i' 107. ' r ' r I ;' ^ u r a s +' 119.6 i ~ ~+ t. ~~ ;r J T--1 c ,j r~ r r \ 170. Bi9APLU i ''^ a O I ' ~ > S J,--''- W ' O - ~~ 7 + f e ~. ~ fee-TRE ~ / / , +98.9 \\~-.-. ___ - __ .9 ~ , _ \ IP Q 3 + fos o\ I 4 fid~fO-KA T \\\ ~ d s° S ~~ foe 1 ~ s. t 1. '~ ~ I N/ ~ 7 E 144.7 4 4l ~ IY//~ 137.0 ' ~ 49' -M NUT i 99.3 ~~ N} '~ I ~ ~ 1 1 \ p /'" t ~,~ ~ / Q ~ 143.2 1 •F97.e \ -~/ ` 1 48~6nIGM N Fp" T f O 24-KALNUT ~ -N NUT I / / r9 f 1 1 ~ \ / Q \ 1~ + 97.7 + 98.3 f1 MifiN +/96 N ' S89?30' 53"E 82.51 ' /\ ~ \ ~- I1 98.0.' ~_-___~._________~ __ 5 ~ \ \ ~ j / FUrF1118 ~ ~t 1 _ / ~ \ / ,1 \ \ ~1 1 \ ` ' / ' / \ 9 .B f i I f / 1 \ ~ - i ~1 t ~ - ' + 97.7 \ ~6. \ + 8.7 / O .--i 1 x.97. \ ~ \ - \ ,, . O 1~ .--- K ~ ~ r~ O 1n l v 1. ~ I l N _ 1 .~. - f:.ee.v " d .,1, , 1~~ ' /-' ~I o -~ _ \ r + 9e.1 \ ~ I 1 r' 1 O _ --~ 8.6 •16PT 5 Z i ~~ 1 ~ 2-PINE I ~-. / ~~ \ \ / \ ~ \ _ _ O ~ \ / +98.0 ~ _ - O ~ ~/ ~ 1,'102.5 M 1 D `t r ~/ , + 99.5 ~ O rn + 99. '~ N o / . }, . ' ., O r'.%~ .N' 7 ACL r' /,' O NDTE: TREE NEIGMT6 SNONN ARE APPROXIMATIONS. / ' \Tb J~~^~`\ // \ /20' rfr 102.3 / rM. f_~.e '~ Q / 6 ~ • ~ FIp~6±~ (988?3 '~4'E 63.25') BEN HM RK 1• fo• T I f S89?5 /59"E 63.20' 1 ~'•J tBP ~' NIGH -s '00.7 1+99.4 ~ _____ ____ -- \ FD-IP // I ~~) I \Sp~p ,1 FD- // sgVlT R.fY \ 1 H ! ~ ~ ~ \+-99-4 ~--~ j ~~9B: f-____ _ _ - ~. _ .--S~J~B '~~,~/ \ / " \~ _/ 1 / '~°• • ~~_ ___ _ ~__. "'_`-_ _V!~+v~+~/ M"d"y`d!~.~"1'"a'T'a7_"l~'~'VZI~7S"Ii Q~ll.? " .... _ ._ _ _ _ _ ... _~T- -- ~_------- - --~ -- ----- --------_ --- _. ~---_ - --- - y . ~n C ,qy~ ~ .. .. . O ~ ~ ~ . -lY__ _. _.. -~ ~~ ~`~< i----- --- ~---- ' ~ ~ _:v~ ,. _. _ ~ .- _--_~_ ~ t --odd ~, _~~~.~~[~ _--_ _ - ~ -- ~.. ~ ~ -~' a ~ < _". ~'~. --- - -- r ~.~_ ~_ - __ ~ .. .-. ~~. - N I2;n 5 ~ V.__.1.___. _.... ~ - - ~_ ._ _~ I J, _ _ _ i < s {` . 71 a t• a v ~...._... _ 1 ~ . ` . w.. ---- ----- ~---° - - _ .. _--- .. _- _~.~_~_~__- .r.____-_-__.------~-~ --- ._._ ......._ ..__-__.__~.~.._..1.. IT-'i-_ i~ - ig a 4 `~ ~~ I~ I~ i-~ ~~o ~~~ ,\ .~ .~ 4 4 ~~ ~~ .~ . /i~~.- !~ ~~ ~~ i ~~~\ i '` ~v I ~F $ 4 I ~ I -----~ I ~ ~ i ~ ~~0 I - ~$ I I I ..\ ~ ~~ ~~d ~€~ / ~ ~// 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ '~~~ j~ 0 ~~~ ~~ a ~ :s ~~ ~ a ~ / ~, :~ , .. ~ ,~ / \ / ~~\ \\ / ~ /~~tt, / / ro ~ ...\ ~ ` / x \ \\ / ~\ / .po ~. /./ ~:} ~ V'\ ~ ~ . / i \ / ~ ~ \ro ~ ``~ /\/ \ \ '7 \ / ~ ~ ~ / ~ i ~ ~: . •o \ ~o t ~ ~ ~, ,~ Q . q'o \ \ ~~ / •d~. ~~E//, ~\ i --~-* I ~I i i ' -~ i N I~ ii ~~~ ` ~~ / ~% %~ `~y~ / .. ~$ +~ \. / P t ~ r ~~ ~ • ~-. _ _ _ _ _ f~ e~n~vv == .r~~~~y~~~~+ -- .- - --- - ~.}Q{ p~p~~ t Zi~7llfl i {~717X~"'. ~+CiII'v~ _ _ .... ~ ~ ~.. ~ ~ --~ ~" e- .. ~ . .. -- - _.. ~ - - - _- -- ..: . ~ ~ :.._.. _ .. - ----~-- -------- - - :.:- -.. _ .a ~ - - - -~-- - - . . .~- ______...._ u' -~ ___._._.____.____.____._._.____~_.__..-__. ._.__--_.___ .. _ e, ~ ~_- ~ I ~ ~ ~ I - ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I .~ ~ ~ . v _. ~~: t /////' --- •---~------- .._ ------~--- O _ i ~a . _ __ -- ----- - - _ ----- ~ - -- - -• ----- t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _~--- ~~. ~ - --.. ~- <~ .. . - --~ ~. ------ ---- -- ... ._. u - --- - -- ..... . 3~ -~- o--- ~ ~~ I ~ i ~~ ~ ~~ ----~ `Y ~• ~^~ i ~ i i /. / / / ,\ / ,\ ~\ ~H ,~ \~ C~ \ ~ ~~ ----~-- i ~ b ~ ~ pp66; ~ - - - J M~ - Q~ac i i ----- ~ 7q ~~,t~t ~K R q`Pr ~~ ~f' J ~ ,.~. i, ~~I ~~ i is! -------y 3~ - ~ _ / .~ ~ .. // \ ~ \ ~ ~.. :_ / \ / \ \ . /, ,L~ '~~ ~ ~\ \ V /, ,Q~'~Y ~~ ~ /, /, \ ~~ ~ is j' /' ~~ `~ ~ ~~ /, \ \ ~. . ~ ~~ .~ j" Y,6. ~ .\/~/\/ / \\ ~1.~ ~ \ /, f ~. ,\ ~ \ \ / \ ~ `\ `\ \ ~. 4 ~ ~ ~~ ~ •~ \ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~.~ ~~ ~~ .~ ,, ~, , , ,, ,, ~ ~ v ~ i ~ i v ;;:: P _ rte. - Rfi7A1\I I ~7QYlQ -_.....__ __.. .._ ~~~~~11 ~.F ~ ~ ~ O ry .:-~... --{~~ . }~}~+~- t _ ~ „ --- _ _ _ _- ... i i _.__ ~ a--;t- ~ ~D ~P s~ aD =D e~ - ~ . _ .. :; i ~ ~ ~~~! `i .i ~; '~ Iy ~ 1 i i ~ I' 11 ~ \, I~ 1 1 I ! 1 I .i~ O i 1 ~ I 1 ~ I 0 }~ W W H Z W ~ ~D ~D 1 , ~ ~ ~ ~~ ., ~ fi ~ s1 1 `k~k~x ~' ~ ~ 1 1161 el I9~ ~I B~ 4 1 I i 1 1 ~ 1 1 ~ I~ , _ ~, ~ ~ 1 ~ i I; ' i ~ ~ z !II ~~~ ~, ~ 11 O I ~~ ~~ 1 ~ •~ I I i ' W 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ '1 u~ ~ ~ ~~~ i N $ ~ W i ~ ~ I I Iyy:(( i I r e ~ ~IM n T I I I ~' ' ~" ~~ I i 2I I ® ~ I QI I ~ }~ I I it11 t ~~~ I W~ I ~ I I ~ I ~I I I ~I I ~ I I ~~ H I ~~ ® ~~I QC I ~ .~ . v I ~~ I Z, I a ~ mI W I 1 I I i I r-~ I I ~ ~~ I I i I I ~~ °D ~D ~=~ sd ~, ~' ~° ~'"' ... _, .. wnn - - - _ _ -- ._ ... _ _--_ _. - --_ - - _ --- --. u ~_: ._ _ _ .-- O _ _ _ _ ..._._ _. __ - y ~ ~ _ ~ ~ _ S ! ~ _..._ - _........_ ' ' U _ .. ._._.- B.. 4 ~I~ ~I Z ~~ ~I W~ .A W {- H W .~ i f i i g ~.~ ~ - ~~ ~~~~ I ~~ 3 " • • • s • -_~---- .~~__ ~~ ~~- --- - - ------ g-'-H~O~~H~- - - -_ _._. ~ --T --- -- i - _~ ~ ' ---- - -- - .. ~ 4 ~~ v ~ - - - -I'... ~_ ~' ---._..... - -~ - a -- -.. _. _ . _ _~_ _ ~, V' ~~~ ~ i ~~ ~~ ~ ~ , ~~ a ob R~ ~ V I I I ^ I I I I ~~ _ ~ O I / I ~~ I / O I I 1 ~ ~ I ~ ~~~ ~ J ~'' I l ~ ~~ ~ r 1 ~ I ~I I } ~ ~ al W J W I ~ I ~ ~ I ~ I ~ ~ ~~~, ~~~ 5d 111 1 I' I `k~ ~: ncncL ~_. - __ .._ --_._. .-. Vi:V7tl"-1'tJ-'1`~-~.~[TCJ~./z ~+~+^~~ 'Qi _.. ~..-. _.. _.._. _-___ _. ._-_ _ __--~..__-_ - - _-~. _. - - - _ -. __-. -- _ ~. i~ 3 ~ ..~,~.-~-~ ~ ~ ,- ~ _ = -- - ~ •--~----- -- - - - - •----- - V. .. ~ - a ~_._ _ . . ~ ~ ~, - 1 ~ ~I ~I al i Z'. fi I W:; I I ~\ ~. I I ~ Q - ~~':"< Z I '.~.~, ' r ~, ` - W'. ,~ ,n 1. I ~` .. ^^ i :~ •~ Zd i. I < \ 4 I :~ ~i I * o 1 ~ ~ ~"mil Y ~ ~ ~I I ~~ ~ z, I m O, ~I I Q vi `I li ~~ ~ N I W ~ I ~ ~ ~ N~ I I ~ ~ I Z 0 ~ ~ v I 1 ~ W I ~ ~' ~ ~I • f I a ~ :j I ~~ ;i N I i ~i ~i ~i ~~i $~ ~_ Q N Q Z ~/ Z_ J Z H l~ W i m N r.,~~..~ ... Z ~_ ~- w In b `~ ._ .~I ( ~ i I ~ ~.. j I ~ b j ~ ~ 8W ,, Y ~1 ' ~ IL 2 m O y ------'----- -' -----'-----"-- W W E.~-,.--~- --._.~ __ ~ ~~ ~ ~° • - • ~ ` -- ---- .... ...... - ~ ... ~' s < j .. aaE ~o aar~a t h tug a 8 R. -- ::. odd~j 3- P~ l ~ Y ~d . ~_ ...~ .._.. _ " .. - ,.- . x _ ~ ` ~ < - P - d _ ' ;~~s~~ ~ ~ ~ ..... - __ _ _ :~ ... i~T .. _ r~s .. ~ ... _ ~• 5 ~ ~Y ` _ - C .. ._. _.._ .. .... .. U 0 ~ Z Z o d i~ d; ° ia ~ ~ O ° ~ } ; ~ ' ~' = w> J j Ji ~ J~~ } ~ wl ~ w w J I w -.I Z~ -.~ ; ~, ~. ~~ ~i ~ ~ ~i ' OL. ~. W' J. F ~. F-~', ~ ~' I -~, Ni ~: ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ E-I I ~ ~~ ~' ~ ~~ ~~ ; ~ ~ ~~ I Zi O Z' ~ ~~ . ~ ~ -Zi ~~ Zl ~~ .~ Z, ~' ,~; Q d~ ~! ~ ' ~ ~ v~ V v, m i .~ Wi wi wi w _-.---- - - --- --_ ---- o ~ ~ ~ -~- -- ,..,- - . ... .:. . _ ~.. J ~ _. -• ~ --- ~ -d -~ .. _ T -- --- -- I~ 1, 7 i ~Q ~: i ~~ z Y ~~ J i • '- -_ _ __ ~ ~ § w ~----f-- .~.k~-_ ._ ._._..._ ~__._._ _-----_----- -_-.~. v _.. _ ~ < _ .. _---- . . Z ~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ I~ F ~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ Qrman~nN a ~ mm ~ ~ ° n m 3 <m.0111^ m<~tf1 ryr nm c u~ m n a ~ m$"''~g1~'m^n'~ m V c~nR ~ ~ mo m ~n ~ o ~ . tl . ~ ., ., ° ., ~ „ ., ., .. ,. „ ,.., ~ . Q m~~oo~NNg+ ~ a.<~i~ ry m n m m n n~ 4. n 5 ~ xxxxxxxxx ~ fuV~ xxpx dl ~ ~pp~ m~ry00~umi.mQ ~ -mpNmp ~ ~~ • LL rtim ryYmrvn~ z ~ < ~ LL w a rv- < Z ~ ~ >~x>N~~Y4~ ~ ~Y~z ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~: _ _ Z a 5 ~. 7~g 4 F I 8g~ryRgg~~R,°-,~~g~~~$~~~~F 81f~1i;01M100 ry^?N ~ ry~~~ m ^ m ~ m - n xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx~ R~R888m ry88 A ~~~„ M LL f c m J p w a 0 x_~ Y ~ I z O d d n m~ 4 -„ z F g 3 J V J LL W z O g 3 V W n. J V ~=~m ~~~ n x I~ W 9~ ~ • ~ . ~ ' -_ --"_ ,_------' --- ---'-- t '~-'- vnrviO~ ~ /i~7l1v I ~QY1Q _ . -_ . ... - O ~ ~ 4 s--0- h -'~~ -- . ~-- - T-- _ -- -- - - - -. ~.. _ _ _----- - --'------- ~ - __ - a - -- _ _. _ _ . . ~~ ~~ ~ --e - ---_.. ------ - ~...._ e- ~ - - . ------ ------ -- . , . ._-- 0 ':w ;~ ~~ ~! OLI O. O' ~i ~, ~~ Ji wl I° of i w wj QI Ni N~. w ~I u " ~ ~ _ _ -~ ~ ~~~ -. _ J "~:i$ ~.,f 7~gyj ~~~ R' Si ~ ~:J i ~~~ . '.flls~~ _i7l~i;l s`< }itils~Y~.a.v I i -. . 1N3NI3~dc 3C 30(!_ _} - ~~ ~ \ ~~ 1 ~ ~~ I y -I ~ I-`T ~ ~ V ~1 I -~ ~~ e~ ~g s ~~ i ~ a ~~ ~ 4 0 ~ ~ of ~ N ~ 1 ~ ~ X111 ~- ~ .y J r _~- ate-=5 -\ _' _ ~t+3~':3ntc 3C 3~~3 -,. _ ~ 1~ .,....o,..i- ~ ,.. "1 I I I •r ~•• ~~ r a ~ ~ • ~ I II r~ o in : •.' •:• gooooo0 ~ ooooooc ~ X00' HOUSE z u i o .- ~ W -----qttrr`,..' ~.-' ~-~.i -'f~~.••' i .~•' I x ' ~ 4 ... -i.~ _ .~---~~ , ~" ;: .l, z _, i ` .1-•~ ..r" ~ p ~ _ • ~ ~'Q ~ a '- ' ~ ~ ~: I~ -~-- - --- - - -- ----~~ ~( it ig~ \ •`•. ~I !l ~ ~- i ,~ ' . e ~ ~z~ ~` O w? Jz- /~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ I v a I v ~ n s :L.. .: ~ .~ 1 t ni a y r--~ q ? ~ j ~ N O Jz~ `" ~ U n i ~ ~ ~ °_° I ~ 2 C •, U R n ~ ~ jw ' N Z~ x~ x _-, . r . :- M ~ r 2 ~ 0 ~ o ~~ ~o f 6 ~~ a b ~~ 4~~ ~j P1 q r s~~ 1~~g~~~ ~i a 1 i ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~9 , ~ j ~ i,~~~ ~~~~ ~' ~~ ~ ~ . ~ ~{~a~~€ ~~~ ~ ~~ as ~d , .~f,~ ~ $~~ : ~~~ ~ ;~ ~~ ~~~a ~# i~~~~iy;t~a~~~i i t I ' .~ ! !!; :I 'a ~~ o.._ 3 _~3= ~z ~~~ ~_- -~~~s ~- ;_ -~ ~_ __ N G v n N A .. /~ 1 ~ ~ ~ i i ~ i ~ ~ . r ~,, Z~~'~~ IsjO°~ y~ ~ I 1 1 iii, z m a C O e~aoL,z 'e',.~}U ~ y W < 'v~UO~ ~ eyF V a~C y I a ' _ ~ i~~ ~_ ~ ' ~~ I~;~ ~ ~ ~, ~~ f ~ ~ 8 H 8 ~ ~"o :s, ~~~~ m,,.w,a; n+~'r>: xu u x u cr ~•: •.. do +•.arrx:rwev.~x~~r I.L N J . ~p Nd . r ~:3$ __- - _ ~ ----- 505: BOAC '~ ,. . of •~- •> _ _ _ _ _ ~ - . _...- - -- ~ ~ ~,~ '. ~~; _ ~, j~ - ~ z ser]o'WT ~ 96' ~ I ~~ e i ,~~ . ~ o~ '. ~`'i: oc ~ a N i -- ~ ~,` p~m< ,.i• I' ~ i ii' ~' _ ii r aL ~ ~ `S t /~' I '~~~ i r Q /N~ j• ~ 9R "`. .- I ~~I i 7 ~ > ~ -i ~ il~ ~` or ~ ; ) L, •'"~ V .._.-r ~ ~~ ...~ a Y ..~o'r•••-. ' a i 1Z,• f K O N~ o ... ~ m ~ _.~.~ .... e i nI s~;a __~~~. u_3~ ~W~a ;I °.B I ~ l.ov~n) lddiWoY4olfrlvs (ei.eo') .~ o ~~ =P ~~ ~~ '~~ _ _ s II -I ~ ~noi ~~s:4 ~ ~~ i a Y i ~~~~a ' ° u7uo" o go z~ ¢L ,~ Z w~,.w.a.~ i~..;,~; rrz w r c~ x ~.: M: f.e .~.c-~o~wuae~omwao: ~,ew-se] r ; - . .>i - .e sv~sra el.a^ ---- <I .,, . ,» N7rlvNnc-~r Jr..:cne C~aauv ~,s~lcol.<.~ ; r'1 z r2Aw• ,MI]^ -~ Y~ ~ ' ~~ tyFl. °. ~ o.. .~.. I P I. 1 i J E~.aGY ~i I ~Y~ 1=' 0' ~] a_ 8e d 6,y Y~b7~ I _ 7Yb Li iY li"J1J ~`'I I ,_..... ,.... ce : 8= 3E r ~~ g 5: ~ a3 N~ s'• ~B =e R'4~~: NI ~. iP~ a F~YJ~: ~I ~s~ c z~i ~~ s~M _ m ge d~: 7_6g = ~I ~ z~ ~ ~1 ai '\'~ ~ i i of ~ o { V1 Y - .:., :::.:.: Ya I s b ;~~~ JJ~ i,e? ~'; ; 3 f '~ S iI U ~ 5~ 5 iL. it ~ Y iY I. ~ ~6 Y a1 _ _~ - ;5 =: si 2z. m~ X63 S;~ ';~°. ~~: ,t I 2 JI ~\ c. 51 s: ~e ~~ ai ~;y =s 61 dSY aml ~e E~~ ?sErZ~~tl zl a til ~ j .. ,' i -' 1+ I _ .. ~ • . ~ ~ I \ ] ~. I ` I I ` `I'j I .. I •~ ~ ~I ~ _ ._ i-~ ~o - I - ~ I ~ ;~ .. , i N~ $ !~ ~,' ~ ~' .cgs . ~ I ^- ~ I ~1 ~ i `' }~ ri ~.~ r : I r r rr . - i~{~ i~~ I _ I ] i i { ~i i I I j~;~{ ll! I 11 I I _ --- ~ _ -- r_'R .`Zoe i J -~ n~ E_` /~' ' _'ai: g II'•1~ i ter' _ :Y_ I'I' i X11 .~,°4~i Y~. _ ~ __ ~,J 985: g~?_ - .'ib .- ~ >< ~_~ ~ ~~ ~ Y { Id °i 7 __ i ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ i • ~ ~-~. ~ . ;Y: a~ '~=»g'~»~ a`Y '~_'~ ~`~ '~ ~$ III a 1 'fib ~~=~g~a:5~a ~~e »CG~'-_„~ >3Yh ~`~si ~> +. - ~ I. ~$y~ a q +t Yj~i .~ » I ~P3 ~.y'. "~RSY~YS~gY.~Yg~~5o~`~ ~ ?~; J - a"~~~~d ~~~~;"4~c~~~gt"~a `'set ~ar I .,. a J 4 p zi ~ aI J ~ ~~~ i$t il~ ~; ~ ~ y ~~ :'E g Jq pp Q3 ~i ~~ / ~ b~! a~ 4 d~ g i aA~~ I ,n. :,S »~ ~ SHi4 ~~ ~++ S$~~ >r~~~ ~~~~ i 1 / ~, F~ . \ ~ LI ~ ~ wv ~ nS - ~ ` ~ w~ / • , ~ ~ T r ~ l ..,./ ~ ~. ~` a ~~- ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ s a 3~ > _ ~, __ , .. 31 I I 1 ~_ io Y e ~ _ Rg '~ a °- i Q t i] ~ ; ° A ~ y g p Y Y S Y . ~ ~`b- e i~g~r~~ a ~ ~ ~?s ~ ~"~' `J~ 8 ?~~~ =~a b g _~: ~ ~~~~3~ b`," m ~~;~~q~s -: r _ J 'fig P ~. ~~ '< < Z OC • ~ ~ ~ ~ ..a- arso ' zZ~ J. ~ h ~ caNF z oc < :~o ~ _._. ~ rn i I` : Z » ~l ~~~ ~ ~~ ~" ~ ~~~ ~ = I ~ ~ V .~ I~~~- `~ - ' ~' 7 __ ~~ _~...i ~ i Hx~ O I~~I M~~1 V A __ O~..- ~ J r _,~ _,.~. ,W 4 ~'+ ~ N r V U 0 > ~ C7 „ ~ ~:. _ ~ O. . ~ G U [(~~ U~ a3, < , 9z6i-5s9 (iES) •~ii~e~ `E~o~}~e.zLs `~~ to-t-f EOOS6 Eiu.iO;ijE~ 'so}dd pEO~ L~agOs t0-9Z-Z P ~ H I u S I A sus u~~G 2~~5 t0-5L-Z EO asno 00 O EiOUa E Y~ Y ~suoisina ~uiuuE a i aan oa i oa adeos uE l ~7 to-~z-t~ id 7.S ~ 3.LI V P Z O Ijt~ ll~ ~ ~ ~ ~e~~ ~a6ad oo-~ a~QQ •d•~•S•~ - ~.Iaquaso~ ja~euaty~ \ avow ,~3eos ~_ _ o M O N O O ~ ~- ~ I / f ^ " zn w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y a+ a ~ ' ~ ' ~ u w i a m a a LJ Q p~ ° a a ~ r J' n a m N e a ~9 a ~ O a O ep N ~ ~ O n O W M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ a a ~ ~ c Q v n .d ~ , In s p ° ' ~ ~ y O Y Y ~ p V ~ N ~ O L L U u A J p p U ~ ~ o V o 0 L U O 6 ~ ~ U > W p ~ y ~ ~ ~ L p p N d V /~ `~ + ~' Jl a a > ~ pf S ~ O ~ V f ° ~ V Ji ~ O O o u o ~ ~ 3 y r a o v a ~ o c ~ ~ R' ~seaw'oo'c ex~r) sevwmt ex.si• _~~_~-_~ ~~J szsr-sas (isa) '~IjE~ `E`o~0'}E.~ES `;° ~uawaa~~da~ ~ peon ~fagos BOOS6 eiaso;iTe~ 'so;dd peon asnog Iooyog atoualBA aLa T p ~suoisinob uEisaQ ieluamuo~ieug ~ 2utuasid azig I ~ /~ O W a ~ a a J 1 0 ~ ~ ~ T I J~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v oo-~z-b aan~aa}tga.ro adeaspue7 ~.caquasog iaauaty~ l vvJJ II..JJ 11.JJ ~~Bad ~~~nd -1-fs~~- - - --- - - --~- - -,-~~.-a - - - ~ i ___ ___---+114.0 I I I I i I ~~ I I UTP ~+-r~-a- - j- \ --. . ~~__~ ~ / `•' ~\ ~/ • 0 .\ .\ .\ ' ~ / , / \ / ~ ^~ .~ ~\ .~ % ~. % ~. ~~ /' /' /' /' ~$ ~° ~ .. ~, ~ ~'vo ~~ •¢ ,\ .\ .\ .\ .\ .\ - - --~ ~ o v w t ~° S r '' ~ -° u --~ - ~ g ---c- -~--:~~ " " ~ ~~°' a ...~ N O O ___-_-_ ~ I ~~_---__-_ -- -IZ~ ~ ~ ,~ 4 ~' O I W ~ O J~ O I ~ I I i~~o I LL~ ~ r I ~ I ~ / I« ~ \ \~ `~ ~ `~ .\ /. \`\`~ ~~. / ~ /' } .~~ ~Q~g ,~ ~<~~ r ~u^~ n 9 S V N s ~ i g ~ ~~ ~~ •a ,' I n ~ ~~v I ~`~ ~~ ~ / .~ ., ~~ ~~~ ~~ ,~> ~~ /. r /' ~ ~. i r ~~ o ~~ ~~ / /" -~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ / '~ z - ~ /. ., \ , ~~ ~ ~ r ~~ /a," /~ n \ r~ ~ ~ $ ` 54 \ r r ~ err ~ ~ n ~ $ ~ '- ~ g ~ /~ rjr ` m ~. ~ ~ r \~rr ~ ~ r ~ ~ rrr \ ~ ~ \r\ r r ~ ~~ \ ~ rr ~ /rr~\ ~ r / , r ~ ' ~ ~r >x '~\~ rig ~ r • / /~ ~ r . r r \ i r r ~/ ~ rr ~~ ~/ ~~ r ~ p Q x~ rr r~ / /' 'D rXr\ ~ rjr\ / ~ r ~ ` '~~ o rr j ~ r%r \~\ / nr ' ~ i vrr ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~~ ~ r . ~ I ~ l ~~r ~~ \ r~~ ~/ / rr~~ ~~ i ~ i ~rr\~~ r rr ~ r r/ i , ~ ~ ~vri ~ ~ rr ~~ ~ rr ~~i ~ ~~ r \ • v~r r~~ N4 '' ~ rr b~ ~ r\~ ~ '~~ r i ~ r r \~~ r ~' ur ~~ \ n ~ ~ ~~rx~~\ r~~ ~~ rri ~~ rig ri ~~ ~ ~ r ~ ~r/ ~ x r ~ ~r r g ~x r y ~ '\ , vC/ \ \ it ~ \ / r \ ~ / \ r ,.8 r vC ,~ \ o / \ ~ r '~ ./ • ~ \ /~~ ,~ ~ ~ /~ i • P I ` I {'~` I I / I ----------11 ~- // I \ /~ / / I I / I ~ / I / ~ / / ~ \~ // I // I \\ // -F- - - - - ~----- - I ~ , I ~ I / ` ~ I ~ ~ ` I /// \~\ ~ m m ~~\ ~ I / ~ I ~ ~ ~ I I I I ~° O _ _..- . W r U o ~^) /t ' . w Q ~ . ~' P ^ : ~ ~ r U ~ : M ~ ~ _iV~- I n 5 g U 4 ~~ ~~ ~ ~._- T i i ~ ~ _ -t- ~ ~ I / I ~ \ Z ~ ~ I ~~ ~ ~ I\` ~/ I \` ~ o ~ ~i~ I ~~ ~ I 5• ~ ~~4 i~~ I I ~% Im + I I I ~ ~ `~ ~ O ~ I i ~ I I I ~ ` ~ I ` . , I I ~/ , . , I ~ I m 4~ ` a. .. /, I I / - - - , - j ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ \ I \ ~ ~ / , ~ ~ ( T I // \` \\ \\ a/ ~ / I ~ I ~ ~ .\ ~ ~ ~ °°° °°°°°°° ~, ~ I , '~ ~ ~---- --- 000000000o I 0000000, /~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ `~ I --- ~ I - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ o ~ , 00 0000000 o°0000000 00000 ~ ~ I I I ~~ I ~ °°o°o .~ ~ I 00000000000 ~ \ I ~ , ~ ~ o '° o°o°o 0000000000 o o°o Ooo°0000°o 000000000 o °o°o° . o 0 o°o°o 00°000000°000 \ ~ 0 0°0°0 o°o°o°o°o °°0°000 00°° o°o°o°o ~ °°° _. ~ o°o ~ o°o 00000 OpOpOO O O _a o°o o°o°o°o°o o°o°o°ooo°o o°o°o°o ooo of 4 --°- Q --- FF~ ~I L ~w allow air ado~ts ryIQ f ~ I~ ~~ I_ rid - - - I J ~~F _'o'rrn _du ~ ' d~IF ~~r adcis~ ~'' ~+ ~ ~tr • ~: r \ r ,\ ~\ ~p \ ~ \\ ~~ ~/ F /' R `aM \ ,~ \ •\ \. / ~. , ~~~.. /~ \ r pv`b• p', J? ~ ~o oo°o°o°o°~ ~ ~o000g \ ~~ \ /, /. %` m"Q rQ~4~ / lDUJ111Y1 / ~ / ~ / ~ / ~ / ~ rr r0 0 \\ ~~ ~, // ~ ~Q /, /' ` /~ '0.T \ C M~%• ~CC ~ nQ /' r ~ ~ ~ /, ,.... ~ F T $ U ~ _ ~ ~', 0 P ,S~ ~ U N f' h ~ ^., ., 9 ~ ,~~ V ti ~~ ~' i ~. .~~ /, \ / ~ /' ~ •\ ~,~. /~ ~~. ~ ~~ \ / ~ ~. x / \\ / \ ,' \ ~ / ~ ~ / \\ ~ ,\ \ \ / `\ `` \ ~\ \ ~\ / \ ~ ro o ~~ 0 ~O°o°°o°°o°°~ ~or o . ~~ S~~$ \ ~~ ~~ / o°o °°o°o°o°° ~~ .\ o°o°o°o°oo 0000 ~ `OOOO° ~ '\ ~ 00° ~ o°o ~ `\ o°o°o°o ~ o°o°o°o o°o°o°o°o°o ~ ~ 0000000000 '\ °ooooooo° ~ row o°ooo°o o°o r r 000000°~ \ r l°°o°o°o°~ r .°°°o°o° ro°o `\ r °' °°o°o°o°° ,\l r' 000000 ro~ o°°°ooo°°o r r o°o°o°o` ~oooo r \ 00000000 r - ° n r r ~ r ~ r ~ ~ r ~ r ~ r ~ r ~ r ~ r ~. r ~ , ~ r ~ r ~ r ~ r 4 r000 p~ `~ o°oooooo~ 11 1 1 I .~ I ~~ i I F- z 0 w w H 0 z w i1 1~ ~_ `i z 0 ~ac } w J w ~'i n w 4 b h "D WI ~I i ~~ ~ i ~~ ~ i ~ i~ ~ " I I I I I I I i i i i i ~ i i _: ~ ~ _ ;w' ~^ ~ o ~ S ~r. _ °' S~ ~~ .~ :~ y i ~ 0 0 ~ PD ~ - .o-. i .o-, b s i .o-i r ~~cl f ~~ d~ ~ ~ ~ ! i i ~i ~ ~ q D m~ 4 a i ~C Z 0 ~C w w u~ O z m w • 1 t W W I _n ~ ~~~ I I I I I 4 v r Y _~ ._ 0 Z V _.y_ _ ~ ` ~ LLB ~. ~O v ~ ~~ W ~ Q ,,x,,~~ U ~. . _~. I r „sW~ .°.~Ng . ~ U'._-.~___ __ _ ______ _ i ' od i C i i b k m~ o~ ~ ~ i ~~ Y i ~~~~ i i i i i i i i i i i i ~ ~ ~~~ ~ • ry~ ~~ ~' ~~~ i i z O w w ,`O 'V.A`/ Y • w 4 ,{-, A l LL d 4 h L FF ~ CI I ~ ~ f I I b u~ o~ g ~ I I ~ k r i i i P I ^I Z' F= } w w w 4 a s o r ,o ~' W ~ ~$ a o~~~ ~- =~5g V m p~ a N d 5 ~g~L +~'.o' V~' ~~ II ~I „~ I ~I VI O o W~ W A z w z O v w a fi ADI O~~ `~ " w~ m w) ry ~~V// ` FF 1~i{ I '~ \ w O U ,~, = a~$~ ~~~ ~N ~ __ ~e ~ ~ u _. .. 4 a ~~ o~ g~ ~ ~ ~~ s g ~ ~_ d ~j ~j ~I ~I ~I ~i ~I §I ~--- i ~1 i1 ~1 i 1 1 t 1 ~l I ~~ `I ~~ ~! ~' ~) g~ ~I ~I ~ .o-s~ I~ o § 8 A R O A ~ 4 Q~ O 0 z } Z 0 w m ~~ i i I I I 1 1 I i ~I ~~ ~I ~I a ~, ~ $ a W ~ &~ < ~ fQ1 f, ~U~_Y1 ~ ~ ~ u v a7 v 0 0 4 Y 2d J a a O 0 J 4 z v -- ~~ z J LL z N. o ~ ~ u "a,aJ,~ w ~ U H ~ ~ x ~ x~9~a V w 5 Z 0 w§ W~ N Z H 2 Q Q U z 0 v w 4 Z 0 w° w~ ~i ~- w i 0 z Z v 4 t'~ m Z 0 v w ~~ i i I i i i ~~ f .~ O ~ ~ '~ cA $ , , cn x 5 ~ a J --~ i ~-- ~ -- h 8 ~ -~- U , ~ -~9 -~ ~ < I , z O Z ~ ~a HQ a a w J ~ > J ~ - w ... Z m w m Q Z Q V Z J ~~ ~ a ~ ~~~ w ~~ z ~ ~ LL Z _~ g 3 4 V g ~c 0 0 J LL w Z 0 g V J~ W to g U g Z_ Q O _~ i1 _ -- - - --, ~, ~, ~ o .W'.~ + o V ,/ .•~ Vii" ~ H _ }° : ^ ~~ ° o !d ~ ~ ~~~~~.~~~~~ ~ g ~~~~ ~ ~~Np m'_mv~m '~ ~ cv1=ry~ ~ o ~~ m~ ry m m m m m V m~~ p ry ry v ~ Q m N .. ~~ n n n n n n n .. Q ~~ .. .. .. Op lon ~001rilmil mu~i ~ Rryv, , , ~~Dh 111~ryC/~ J Qry~ X X X X X X X X X O X X X ~ R rA R~,~00.~o umi u`~i~ -~ m m mOpm 3 m , , ry111ryt`1Ymryry~ LL Q ~N~ LL ~ ~ >~x~-N~~~~~ aad< ~ ~ ~ ~ Om h ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ m ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ aQa ry ~ ~ l11 n n u a n o n n n n n n n u n n n n u n u rym~ ~~~~ ry~N ~D ryryQ.D X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O~ OgOa moo ~ ~Iomm O~~p O~ °JOO mmm prvcomvc0 ry.oal n mm~N ry ry ~ ~ ry ry LL Z f < m J ~ w LL~ x_~ Y ~ I z 0 d (i K I n t- O n .Z ~_ 3 dV W OC 4 z 0 0 J lL Z d V ~~~~I~ ~~~~ ~ n ~ m a~, Om m ~ ~ v m ~i u u n LL ~ IL ~ Q LL z ~~ LL~~~~ I ~ J U 1V- ~rym r ~ ..tppv Q Y n ~ u (~1, h X O g a W ~ O Z O d w w Z O z O Q v '~. W ~ - a ~~ a ~~' oU~ ~i `t~ 1- r ~ m ' - .` V ~~ l ~ 4 a O O - J S xV c Q a 0 ~_ w O `~C V r w • ~ ~ 4 'a y O W V! n N w '~ ~. _ 1N3w nvd !0 3903 ~+ _ _ ~ ,,,, _._ 3rv3ndd !0 3903 f ~ 105: ~ ~` ~ W" M ~ ~ .. ~ ~ i 6i i ~ a ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ r a `` ! 1 ~ 0 0 d"_ vpi ~ I'••_ _ I !3 . vm w ~~ ` I i •." ~ CO e w ~ / c~ ~ I,•'• yy yy m ~ W= ,(~ I r dy L - ~ V o Z .~..~ I, % ,; I o jw ~ y~ N ~ ' ~ , i•"~ •' P00 HOUSE =p 'J ~ C c~ X I ~ goooOOP • ~aooooa a ? w i : / ^ US ~:1 ~ I w Z W : ~~I \ KVI _ / I R Jt wW ~" ~.... \ ~ I O ~ o _ ~ - ~ _ = ~ r 'e .~ - I R~ ' ~ / .".. _ _ ~ ° i ~' J I I _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ .. _ ... t~ ~ ~`~ M ~~ p t ~~ it ~ 6i ' ~ " °~' ~ zo ~I p• ~ i~ t ~, I 1 ~ ... ~ ~~ _ ~ _ _ Y .. ~ s ~ ~ i~ ~~ o~~ ,~~_ I U I ~ ~ F C ~ ~ ~ p a O~~ a~.~ a a ~e ~ ~ ~ ~~ YR r B ~ ~ i 1~ s~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~~} ~ i~ ~~ ~ I ~ ~ j#~ ~ j ~b9 9y ~ ~9 ~ ~ ~jj~~ 8 j~' ~ ~~ a 'ur ~ ~ i~i ~ ~;i ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~,~ .,~ ~~~ ~ ;E i 9~ 1 ~~~ ~ ~~~ a ~~; f ,~ ~ ~~~ ~~{ ~ ~~~ :11~ ~ ;~ ~~ ~3ta ~}~ B 1 is ~~~ ? ~~~ ~ j! ~~ ~~a~ {~~ t g $~ ~ L - 2 t o W 3 5 ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ q ~ ~~ ( 'I o ( ~ ~ I I~C ~I c~ JI.I II a ~ • 11 SOBEY RC.AD ~2 e~um nog ~n :~;~_ -_ . ~„ .,,~ 1 ~ 1 ~u. SAIA~n OviwV1V .%l '\ w --Y - I \ V~ YI '~ 1 W W M I I SeTIO'OOt tti.96' .. v- ~- v~.._ w- v- ~- v- ~- • __ _. ..._ -. I v ~ v~ J ~ 119 ~ i _ / / ~ I i ~ / // .-' Y t~ t~ '`O O / .yob" m~ ~~ ,~' ''' '' n MI ~ i ~m K ~~~ . -~b„' / ~ 3 r ~n o ~°n ~ f o n o ~ (9lffb'9C4 93.)5'1 ? 3 sS3p ~qY£ ?e WX €W¢° ~aN& (.9919) ~v'A•dr!°d~!A~ (e1.eo') i ~~ap~ ~~~~~ ozx«~ ~W8~ im ~Z I ~ R A rf ~8 ^Ap Y Si rj •, w~ 1 1 ~1 11 \`$ \~1 ~ . .~ 1 \ C 1 1 1` ., C~~3 ~ ~ n `~ z ~H G N y1 Ay ~ _ ~~ ~ ~ u ona~sreeo .o-,~ - .vr s~ - .e sNUVe mvaa =.."==°`"' NolinNaplNl unapad 7i.laWO.}sC~dOj,4~ ~ c+7 ~ cz~. iwa~~w Y Y° ~ r2~5 .~, tl 7 , E~,oy4yyY ~ ~~n YY L L~63A :L'o ~~ v °~ a$ y db "g e~ a~~~ g~ "~ a~ ~~> Q ~tly~y ~ ez y tl C M 4Ng ~' R y~y ~ ~d3 ~ 39: ;~>bs d~a ~ <9 ~4: ~ii~g~#~¢ z J Z ~ ~ a q ~ l\ `~`~'" a ~ o 3 ."~~. ie ~'~ Ggg a sa . Y~' @~e ~ ~:ai~x ~ }g~ ~ r~bQ~ ~' • e a~ ~ ~~ ~a t `t'ar ~~ ~~ b~ ~~C ~ ~~~ ~ ~9~ >i88~J~~c ~ ~g d~•. i~SB~xs Z Q ~ ¢~ ~ ~ o C7 NI ~ L s 9: ~ , ~' `s y?, 's Y~ ' ~~~ j,~; y ^~ r ~ 1 k . p^ Yi '~ 3 ~ y.' 3 ~ ~ ~ r ~ c^ ~ ~ F~;' ~ ?G S ~ I ~ ~~ ~., ~ .S -. .~r ~b ;~ i I I ~r 1 .. i s ~ i i I ~ TM `, ~~ ~ - ~ i s n .y; '~ ~ ., r ~]' I ~ 5 7 Ka ~ I .' ~ ; i~ ~. i , ~, ~~E ~~i -L oa Sy .' -- _ ~ "~~ ~:: 9jii } 1 j zi~ ~ „i j :~ I ~ 9 , ~'~I plj !~~ ~~I c ~ ~ _ ~11~! ~!' ~ ,°~°-i I ~, ~°° li i~ ~I!i ~ ~~ ~, ~ I ~ __ _ _.. __....._ -- ------- --- -----._ .... _. -- _ . .._. q U r 4g , h 4 ~W ~e g b ~, °~ .- ~ • y a ~~~~~ ama J ~Yb$~ a - ~ : = ~ 3 ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 4e° 3 S 1i k ^ ~ ^ S~ lilii ~ ~ 6~q~Y Y 3 „<b ~4: °yii» ~4=~ ~ , I S b b ~g~i@t ~Y~ `~ .. b b b ~'3 "'~~~" ~YuY1 o :8 N~~~~~~qF' _ ~~im ~ aa E~4: ~Y ~N i~ 4~~ ffi„ ~dq' be~> 3W~k ~ ~ ~~~ s~~ ., ~': 4:-b~ =f 1g ~ Y~ 8#y ~jk gW4~~y~B~ E:kug~Sk gR~ ~~~ .~a ~~ ~ ~4 , :r =~ ill "a ~ ~; ~ ~ ,6A ~z~Y.i ~ I4 "~ ~~ ~~~ ~l ~ ~Q MN ~i ~~b »F ~8R ~` ~ ~\ nal! /1pl! y „ / 3 ~~ / ii Ana ~f a Y g = ~ Q h ~ ~ ~ 4 ~§ a ~ y ~ y~ a ~ ~#~ ~ ~ # 5 ygo ~ 4 ~~~ y~ 2°2g~ L rsJN` ~~~~~W ~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~neae ~~~~~~~~ F S WQ a ° o cv~a; z,, a ay~< ~UO~ ~~~~ G~ a G7 ~~a ~ a~x z ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~_ ~°,~ Y ''~> WW` LI ~ ~ ~4 >y I ~ ~ G ay 'o ~ ~~ ~~ r ITEM 2 • • • C~~~~ o~ ~ ° o e T~C~~ 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Mark J. Connolly, Assistant Planner DATE: March 14, 2001 SUBJECT: DR-00-054 ~ V-O1-002; MARTIN/ROSE, Kittridge Road. PROJECT DESCRIPTION COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehalfey Nick Streit Ann Waltonsmith The applicant has requested Design Review and Variance approval to construct a new 7,340 square foot two story residence on a 347,173 square foot vacant parcel. The Variance is necessary for retaining walls to exceed five feet in height and possibly closer than 10 feet for parallel walls. The Variance is also necessary to exceed 15,000 square feet of impervious surface due to a long driveway. Maximum height of the structure is 26 feet tall, located within a Hillside Residential zoning district. PROJECT DISCUSSION The project has undergone an extensive Geologic review by the Project Geologist as well as the City Geologist. The City Geologist recommended to Staff that due to new landslide information the item should not go to Public Hearing until the geology issues are resolved. Staff agrees with this recommendation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Take public input and continue the Design Review and Variance application to March 28, 2001. Tinted on recycled paper. • • • ITEM 3 Gc~B`2~4 04 ~s° ° BOO C1~ 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 MEMORANDUM • TO: Planning Commission FROM: Philip W. Block, Senior Planner: DATE: March 14, 2001 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaf(ey Nick Streit Ann Waltonsmith SUBJECT: SD-00-001, DR-00-011, V-00-018 and V-O1-004; TRAFALGAR, INC 14612 Big Basin Way ~t 20717 St. Chazles Street BACKGROUND At a study session on February 14, 2001, public testimony was taken and the Planning staff and applicant discussed various issues and options regarding the proposed project. Since the study session, the applicant has revised the rear portion of the site plan to contain two instead of three townhouses. This preserves the Cork Oak tree and provides greater open space. The applicant has also provided an alternative for the portion of the site that fronts on Big Basin Way. The item is being continued to the March 28, 2001 meeting in order to provide the applicant sufficient time to prepare the alternative proposal for presentation to the Commission and to publish the public notice that is required for the matter to be considered. At that time the original request along with a modification and alternative described below will be considered. Staff will provide a recommendation with conditions and resolutions in order for the Commission to take action on the request. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This is a request for Design Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and Variance(s) approval to allow the subdivision of a 22,582 net square foot site for townhouses and a retail commercial space. A rear yard setback variance has been requested for a building on the CH-2 portion of the site. The Big Basin Way portion of the site is zoned CH-2 and the St. Charles Street portion is zoned R-M-3000. Four existing residences with garages totaling 4,595 square 000001 Printed on recycled paper. File No. DR-00-O1, SD-00-001, V-00-018 and V-O1-004 14612 Big Basin Way Est 20717 St. Charles Street feet and 1,000 square feet of retail space would be demolished. The original proposal called for the creation of a six lot subdivision with five ne~v two story townhouses with garages and a 1,316 square foot retail space with a second story residential condominium that would face Big Basin Way. The Commission will consider the original proposal as well as the following modifications that are proposed to the application as originally submitted: ' The project would remain divided into two parcels along the existing CH-2 and'R-M- 3,000 zone district boundary. All of the units would be separate air right condominium units instead of individual lots. ' There would be two rather than three townhouses on the St. Charles Street portion of the site for a total of four two story townhouses. ' The proposed retail space with the second story residential condominium along Big Basin Way would be retained _ - ' The modified proposal would also require a rear yard setback variance. The applicant's request is for approval of either the original proposal as modified above or the alternative described below: ... • ' The unit above the retail commercial space would be designated as commercial office for a period of five years (until 2006). It would remain as commercial office assuming additional parking was available through an expanded parking district or some other mechanism. If additional parking was not available, the commercial office space would be re-designated as a residential condominium. . ' A parking variance for eight off street parking places (retaining the same number of parking spaces as the original application) is requested. . ' There would be t~vo rather than three townho~zses on the St. Charles Street portion of the site fora total of four two story townhouses. ' A rear yard setback variance would also be required. - RECOI~iMENDATION Continue the public hearing to March 28, 2001 at which time the .Planning Commission will consider the original request along `with the proposed modification and.alternative. ". • ~000~~ -: • MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED MEETING JOINT SESSION HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 23, 2001 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in a scheduled Adjourned City Council Meeting on January 23, 2001 at the Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue. Mayor Mehaffey called the Adjourned City Council meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. and requested Irwin Kaplan, Interim Community Development Director, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councihnembers Ann Waltonsmith, Evan Baker, Stan Bogosian Mayor. John Mehaffey ABSENT: Vice Mayor Nick Streit ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Irwin Kaplan, Interim Director of Community Development Heather Bradley, Assistant Planner/Heritage Preservation Commission, Liaison Mayor Mehaffey requested the City Clerk to proceed with the roll call of the Heritage Preservation Commission. The following Commissioners were present: PRESENT Jill Hunter, Carolyn King, Norman Koepernik The following Commissioner arrived late: Willys Peck, Beth Wyman ABSENT: Robert Peepari REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR JANUARY 23, 2001 Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of January 23, 2001 was properly posted on January 19, 2001. ~~ City Council Minutes January 23, 2001 • COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC No one spoke at tonight's meeting. JOINT MEETING WITH HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Mayor Mehaffey welcomed the Heritage Preservation Commission. Norman Koepernick, Chair/Heritage Preservation Commission introduced the Heritage Preservation Commission members. 1. HEIGHT LIMITATION ORDINANCE Chair Koepernik noted that the current height ordinance for a detached structure is 12ft. with the allowance, under certain conditions, to go up to 1Sft. Mr. Koepernick suggested amending the ordinance to allow homeowners to built detached structures to match the design of the existing house as long as it did not obstruct or interfere with any of the surrounding neighbors. Chair Koepernik stated that if the height limit for detached structures were increased, he feels that homes would have a better design element Councihnember Bogosian asked Chair Koepernick if the height limit was raised, how could the City guarantee that it would not be abused. Councilmember Bogosian noted that he sees no reason to change an ordinance that seems to be working fine and noted that possible height violations could be a problem with homeowners trying to build massive detached structures. Heather Bradley, Heritage Preservation Commission/Staff Liaison, noted that the amendment could state that a proposed detached structure could be built based on the existing home, especially historic homes. Mrs. Bradley explained that currently if a homeowner wants to raise the height limitation they have to request a variance. Mayor Mehaffey asked if an amended height ordinance would apply to all homes or just historic homes. Chair Koepernik replied that it could start with historic homes but if applied to other homes the height could be based on design. Carolyn King, Heritage Preservation Commissioner, stated for the record that this topic was not discussed with the rest of the Commission, prior to presenting it at the Joint Meeting with the City Coucnil. Councilmember Baker suggested that the Heritage Preservation Commission take Mr. Koepernick's suggestions as an action item and come back with a recommendation to the Planning Commission and the City Council. ~~ • 2 e• Ciry Council Minutes January 23, 2001 Mayor Mehaffey asked Chair Koepernik what specific changes he would like to see to he existing ordinance. Chair Koepernik explained that in regards to detached structures, mainly garages, changes in the height limit to balance the present structure would be his preference. Councilmember Waltonsmith requested background on any problems with the current ordinance. Mayor Mehaffey concurred with his colleagues and suggested that Chair Koepernick take this back to the Heritage Preservation Commission for discussion. 2. DEMOLITION PERMIT PROCESS Chair Koepernik explained that within the city limits demolition permits should come to the Heritage Preservation Commission first. Chair Koepernik suggested that perhaps if the City put an age restriction on buildings that would automatically signal the Planning Staff to sent that particular permit to the HPC for approval. Chair Koepernik suggested that the City should consider developing a salvaging program. Chair Koepernik explained that when a historical house in Saratoga is approved to be demolished, a qualified person should be allowed to salvage certain elements of the house for possible reuse in other historic homes. Commissioner Hunter noted that she is very frustrated because several homes have been and will be destroyed without the HPC even reviewing the permits. Commissioner Hunter noted that it should not matter if these older homes are not listed on the Saratoga Historic Register, they still could have some sort of historical value. Commissioner King used the Sasso House as an example. Commissioner King also noted that sometimes the Planning Commission overrules their decisions. Commissioner Peck noted that when it comes down to the final decision no one can really deny a property owner's rights develop or demolish their own property. Commissioner Peck noted that the Heritage Preservation Commission should implement more restrictions and/or requirements so the homeowners would want to keep the historical value of their home and not demolish them. Councihnember Bogosian noted that he does not want to make it more difficult for homeowners but agrees that the historical value of homes should be preserved in Saratoga. He noted the City should offer incentives to homeowners to keep the historic value of their home. Commissioner Hunter suggested perhaps the City could offer plaques with the history of the house on it or simply honor homeowners who preserve their homes. Chair Koepernik noted that occasionally the HPC will deny a demolition permit and the 3 r0 City Council Minutes January 23, 2001 Planning Commission over rules their decision. Councilmember Baker noted that owners of historical homes in Sazatoga aze not required to register their home on the designated landmark list but if they choose to do so and in turn destroy that home they have committed a major violation and should be held accountable. Mrs. Bradley requested the opportunity to clarify the difference between the two lists of historic homes the City currently has. First, she explained that the 17 homes on the designated landmazk:list were placed there on a voluntary basis and the 101 structures that are on the City's inventory list were involuntarily placed there. Councilmember Baker asked who puts the 101 structures on the City's inventory list. Mrs. Bradley noted that the HPC generates the list. Commissioner Hunter explained that right now two Julia Morgan houses aze being redone, . and no one in this City knows this is taking place, nor do they know the significance of these houses. Commissioner Hunter explained that Julia Morgan was awell-known female architect of the 1900's who designed the Hurst Castle. Commissioner Hunter noted that she feels that the people in Saratoga need to know the historic value of certain homes otherwise they will be demolished. Councilmember Baker noted he disagrees with the City designating homes as lustonc and subjecting a homeowner involuntarily to rules and restriction that otherwise do not imply to any one else in the City. Mrs. Bradley explained that the general notion is that the HPC is letting the historic homes, which are on the inventory list, be demolished. Mrs. Bradley pointed out that people seem to forget that these homes were not voluntarily placed on the City's inventory list. This is why the HPC does not feel they have the authority to stop these demolitions. Mayor Mehaffey does not support telling people what they can do with their home as if they have not placed their home voluntarily on the historic list. Councilmember Bogosian noted that the Council recently adopted a resolution supporting the Heritage. Orchard in. perpetuity and that the future restoration project shows a reawaking of the interest of preserving the past of Sazatoga. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted she wants to save the old houses in Sazatoga and suggested that the HPC find ways promote and develop incentives for homeowners who own historic houses. Commissioner Wyman noted that the HPC has recently tried to offer incentives to two particular homes in Saratoga, both owners refused. 4 City Council Minutes January 23, 2001 ! Mayor Mehaffey summarized what he feels is the consensus of the Council. Direct the HPC to develop a set of incentives that the City could use to get the 101 homes on the inventory to voluntarily designate themselves as landmarks Mrs. Bradley noted that about every two years the HPC sends out notices to all the 101 homes on the City's inventory list explaining the incentives and asking them to voluntarily place their home on the landmark inventory list. HERITAGE ORCHARD/LIBRARY EXPANSION & RENOVATION PROJECT Chair Koepernik noted that the HPC is extremely eager to work on the restoration of the Heritage Orchard. Dave Anderson, City Manager, noted that in conjunction with the Library Expansion Project and money in the City's CIP budget the entire orchard would be restored. Mr. Anderson noted that at the last HPC meeting they brainstormed several ideas on how to restore the Heritage Orchard. Mr. Anderson noted that Matt Novakovich would be replanting some trees along Fruitvale Avenue/Saratoga Avenue and that Linda Gates will be developing a Master Plan for the Heritage Orchard Restoration Project. Mr. Anderson noted that the Library Expansion Committee has helped design the new Library to bring the orchard closer to the new building. Commissioner Wyman noted she still would like to implement a fourth grade curriculum once the Heritage Orchard Restoration Project is complete. Chair Koepernik noted that the HPC is considering an "Adopt a Tree" program along with several ideas of classes that could be offered in relation to the orchard. Councilmember Waltonsmith requested that the public be made aware of the restoration project before bulldozers start removing the trees. Mr. Anderson responded that an article was published in the Saratoga News, a notice was placed on the bulletin board on KSAR, and a sign will be placed on the corner of Fruitvale Avenue/Saratoga Avenue and a project description placed on the City's website. Councihnember Bogosian suggested continuous articles in the Saratoga News explaining the process and progress of the restoration project. Mayor Mehaffey thanked the Heritage Preservation Commission for attending tonight's meeting. Mayor Mehaffey declared a recess at 8:05 p.m., reconvening at 8:15 p.m. 5 City Council Minutes January 23, 2001 JOINT MEETING WITH PLANNING COMMISSION i Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, conducted roll call of the Planning Commission: PRESENT Cynthia Barry, Lisa Kurasch, Chuck Page/Chair, Margaret Patrick, George Roupe '. ABSENT: Mary-Lynne Bernald, Erna Jackman HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION -POSSIBLE GOVERNING BODY Chair Page stated that during the previous discussion with the Heritage Preservation Commission he heard some talk about the Planning Commission overturning decisions that the HPC may have recommended. Chair Page explained that the Planning Commission receives the minutes from the HPC meetings. The Planning Commission takes the comments that come from HPC and incorporate, their intentions in a resolution of the conditions of approval. Chair Page noted that the Planning Commission have had discussions about the HPC becoming more of a governing body, taking votes, and making strong recommendations, which would be appealable only to the City Council. Chair Page noted this is why this is an agenda item for discussion tonight. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that the HPC's decisions are recommendations from a group of people looking at a project strictly from its historic nature. Commissioner Kurasch noted that she sees an opportunity for interaction between the HPC and the Planning Commission, which has not been taken advantage of in the past. Commissioner Kurasch suggested having study sessions with the HPC when there is a project of historic value to the community. Commissioner Kurasch noted that this might help the Planning Commission have a better understanding of the HPC views. Commissioner Barry concurred with Commissioner Kurasch. Councilmember Baker disagreed with having the two Commissions meet for study sessions. Councilmember Baker noted that it is the HPC's responsibility to bring their concerns to the attention 6f the Planning Commission. Councilmember Baker noted that the Planning Commission should not have to monitor the HPC's agenda for potential problems. Mayor Mehaffey asked if a house that is on the City's inventory list automatically gets routed to the HPC when permits are submitted, when it goes to the Planning does the Chair of the HPC attend the Planning Commission. 6 City Council Minutes January. 23, 2001 Chair Page responded that Chair Koepernick attends when there are problems that need to be addressed other than that the Planning Commission gets direction from the HPC minutes. Mayor Mehaffey responded that the Council advised the HPC to take that issue back for more discussion. Mayor Mehaffey asked if the Planning Commission would like to review their recommendations. Chair Page responded yes. 2. DIRECTION OF ADVANCED PLANNING PROJECTS Irwin Kaplan, Interim Community Development Director presented a brief status report on advanced planning projects. a. Housing Element -Recently received the background report, which included the Housing Needs Assessment Report from ABAG. Heather Bradley has agreed to review it. Once reviewed staff will make recommendations to Council through the normal hearing process. b. Circulation Element -Complete c. Land Use Element -Next step Lisa Kurasch, Planning Commissioner, asked for an overview on how the Needs Assessment Report relates to the Housing Element. Director Kaplan responded that the Assessment Report is a statistical analysis of the City and resources for potential growth and development. Director Kaplan explained that by itself, the Assessment Report, states where the City is today, where it has been, and with the policies that are currently used, where the City is going. The City will in turn hire a consultant to assist with the effect. Cynthia Barry, Planning Commissioner, noted that when the Circulation Element was being drafted the Planning Commission was left out of the policy decision-making process. Commissioner Barry noted that the Circulation Element was not developed in an open discussion with the Planning Commission and requested that perhaps City Staff, Planning Commission, and the Consultant could meet prior to review and discuss the report. Director Kaplan agreed that a study session would be beneficial. Mayor Mehaffey directed staff to schedule a study session with the pertinent parties to discuss the Back Ground and Needs Assessment Reports. Commissioner Kurasch noted that she feels that communications and awareness of similar problems that surrounding communities are facing could benefit Saratoga and help solve our housing issues. 7 City Council Minutes 4. 5 January 23, 2001 Mayor Mehaffey agreed and directed the City Manger to contact the surrounding cities and find out when this issue will be on their agendas. Director Kaplan recommended that all the Planning Commissioners attend the Annual Institute in Monterey. Director Kaplan noted it is a good opportunity for networking. Councilmember Bogosian noted he attended this conference when he was a Planning Commissioner and found it very beneficial. STATUS OF HOUSING ELEMENT Director Kaplan noted that the first part of the Housing Element is complete. Director Kaplan explained that the background report contains the Housing Needs Assessment Report, which contains an inventory of the City's housing needs and statistical information, which predicts the future needs of Saratoga. Staff needs to review the document and translate the information into proposals on what the City should be doing. Chair Page asked if the public would be included in the review process of the Assessment report. Director Kaplan noted that the Assessment Report is a technical report but if it is the Council's desire he could make it available to the public for review. Chair Page suggested putting it on the City's website. STATUS OF SOBRATO/BOHLMAN ROAD TASK FORCE Director Kaplan explained that the' Planning Commission directed that Public Safety Commission on February 8, 2001 to make recommendations and perhaps form a neighborhood task force. Director Kaplan noted that the subdivision is at a stand still until further notice and invited all the people who spoke at the Planning Commission to attend the Public Safety Commission meeting. DISCUSSION ON SIZE OF BASEMENTS AND LAND FILL EXPORT Commissioner Barry noted that the current ordinance concerning basements should be amended. Commissioner Barry explained that-the way it stands right now there are no limits on the size of basements or any requirement of the basement space be used as a trade off of above the ground space. Commissioner Barry stated for example, that a project could come before the Planning 8 Ciry Council Minutes January 23, 2001 Commission with 2,500 square feet of basement, 2,500 square feet on the 1st floor, and 2,500 square feet on the 2nd floor and the basement figures are not included in the total square footage of the house. Councilmember Baker asked Commissioner Barry what her objections with the current ordinance. Commissioner Barry explained that there are some environmental considerations in. regards to basements but her main concern is why the City has not required that a project with an extremely large basement decrease the square footage of the proposed ground level plan. Councilmember Bogosian asked why she wants smaller houses above ground. Commissioner Barry noted that houses are coming before the Planning Commission are tremendously increasing in size. Mayor Mehaffey noted he supports basements especially in the current housing prices and if there is no harm being caused to anyone then it should be allowed. Councilmember Baker asked if it was a cut and fill problem. Commissioner Barry noted that it is not a cost option because there is often a considerable cut and that earth has to be transported somewhere else. Councilmember Baker noted basements should not be a problem in a built-out city like Saratoga. He does not see an environmental problem and noted that basements do strengthen the houses and provides extra storage space. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she supports basements if homeowners feel they need more space but does not know whether or not the current ordinance needs to be amended. Councilmember Bogosian does not support bringing size restrictions through the back door by using basements to limit homeowners' rights. Councilmember Bogosian noted that as long as basements are being built properly he supports the construction of them. If the subject of concern is the size of houses, monster houses, he is willing to discuss that issue further. Commissioner Kurasch noted that fill for basements are exempt in the Uniform Building Code. Commissioner Kurasch stated that she sees a problem with this and that a she doesn't view a basement as a 4000 square feet room with 10-foot ceilings. Also she noted that there are many impacts to the neighborhood around where the basement is being constructed. 9 City Council Minutes January 23, 2001 Mayor Mehaffey mentioned the ongoing construction project on Paul Avenue. Mayor Mehaffey noted that his only problem with basements and crawl spaces is that the fill is not being trucked out. Mayor Mehaffey explained that a particular contractor on Paul Avenue is digging a hole and spreading the fill in the yard, which in turn is raising the entire property without a grading permit. Councilmember Baker noted that the situation that is occurring on Paul Avenue is in violation of their building permit. Commissioner Roupe noted that the current construction of basements is safe and noted the City's building inspectors could tell if they were not. Commissioner Roupe noted that lately 3 out of 4 applications that come before the Planning Commission include a basement. Councilmember Baker noted that Councilmember Streit is the City's representative to the Solid Waste JPA and perhaps he could ask the JPA about the uses of dirt from Mayor Mehaffey noted that if there is documented evidence supporting the misuse of basements or any relevant environmental issues he would like a repot back from the Planning Commission, but he has not heard anything tonight that is incriminating to prohibit the use of basements. Chair Koepernik/ noted he supports the use of basements because they are a great solution to increase the square footage of a house. Councilmember Baker asked the Planning Commission if there are issues that continue to reoccur in Planning Commission hearings, applications, and considerations that lead them to conclusions that the City may have ordinances that are out of sync with our citizens. Commissioner Kurasch responded that the Commission has had discussions of the possibility of restricting all new wood burning fireplaces. Commissioner Kurasch explained that can ently the Commission limits them to one per home. Commissio Kurasch noted that it is an air quality issue. Commissioner Kurasch also mentioned the ongoing opposition to monster homes. Commissioner Kurasch noted that the phrase "monster home" comes up about every other meeting from members of the public who do not~want these huge homes in their neighborhood. Currently, the writing in the code, regarding-compatibility with an existing neighborhood, is related to square footage of the existing homes. Councilmember Baker asked if the Planning Commission have approved homes that when the finished product is viewable, is incompatible with the neighborhood and viewed as a "monster home". City Council Minutes January 23, 2001 Commissioner Kurasch responded that they have approved homes that had no other findings to make but to approve them. Commissioner Kurasch noted that sometimes the homes become the president of what may come to those particular neighborhoods in the future. Councilmember Baker noted that he understood the Community Development Department was studying two or three neighborhoods in the City of Saratoga to defined what a "neighborhood" should be. Councilmember Baker asked what the status was on that study. Mr. Anderson noted he would follow up with the Community Development Department. Mayor Mehaffey commented on the use of wood burning fireplaces and directed the Planning Commission to research the issue. He suggested that they focus on emissions rather that wood burning. Councilmember Baker noted that he agrees that wood burning fireplaces are pollutants. Councilmember Baker pointed out that fireplaces are also the only emergency source of heat some people have especially during the recent rolling blackouts and high cost of gas and electricity. Mayor Mehaffey thanked the Planning Commission for attending tonight's meeting. Councilmember Baker noted that he is the City Council liaison to the Planning Commission. Councilmember Baker explained that although he does not attend the meetings he does watch it on KSAR. Councilmember Baker noted that Chair Page has agreed to meet with him about every 6-8 weeks to discuss important issues that have come up during the Planning Commission meetings. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Bogosian informed the Council of the current status of the Silicon Valley Animal Control JPA. Councilmember Bogosian noted the JPA's recent actions: 1) Advertised positions of General Manager 2) Posted a job description for an Operational Manager. Councilmember Bogosian explained that recent studies have indicated that for FY 2001-02 the JPA would have a budgetary share of this project of $168,000.00. Councilmember Bogosian noted that the JPA have had discussions on the different facility options of whether to purchase land and build a shelter or lease the existing Animal Shelter and renovate it. Councilmember Waltonsmith stated she received another email from Jeff Walker that indicated the ongoing problems at the Azule Crossing Project have not been resolved. 11 City Council Minutes January 23, 2001 Councilmember Waltonsmith requested an update on the status of the problems associated with the Azule Shopping Center project. Dave Anderson, City Manager, noted it would be on the next agenda. Councilmember Baker expressed dissatisfaction in regards to he Azule Crossing Project. Councilmember Baker suggested that the City should take immediate action and enforce the ordinance and agreement pertinent to this project. Councilmember Baker requested a status report on this project at the next City Council meeting. Mayor Mehaffey concurred with Councilmember Baker. Councilmember Baker reported that an overflow spill occurred in the Community Center on January 11, 2001. A report from the West Valley Sanitation District indicated that 700 gallons of sewage flowed into Wild Cat Creek and an additional 100 gallons flowed into the Community Center. The District reported that the overflow was to due to a blockage in the sewer. Large amounts of clay, rock and pieces of pipe apparently cause the blockage. Also, the District reported the City's sanitary sewer connection does not have back flow check valves. Councilmember Baker recommended that staff contact the District and gather the estimates to install backflow devices in the City's connections. Councilmember Baker noted he would keep the Council abreast of the situation as he finds out new information. Councilmember Bogosian requested a complete cost breakdown of all the cost associated with this recent overflow. Councilmember Bogosian expressed that the party responsible for the overflow should be responsible to pay for the damages. Mr. Anderson noted he would follow up with John Cherbone, Public Works Director. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. • 12 r :r MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED MEETING JOINT SESSION FINANCE COMMISSION LIBRARY COMMISSION FEBRUARY 13, 2001 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in a scheduled Adjourned Council Meeting on January 23, 2001 at the Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue. Mayor Mehaffey called the Adjourned City Council meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. and requested Ernest Brookfield, Finance Commissioner, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councihnembers Ann Waltonsmith, Evan Baker, Stan Bogosian Vice Mayor Nick Streit, Mayor John Mehaffey ABSENT: None ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT: Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Mary Jo Walker, Staff Liaison/Finance Commission Lori Burns, Staff Liaison/Library Commission Mayor Mehaffey requested the City Clerk to proceed with the roll call of the Finance Commission. The following Commissioners were present: PRESENT Ernest Brookfield, Sam Ochi, Chuck Swan/Chair The following Commissioner arrived late: Michael Gordon ABSENT: Ching-Li Chang, Robert Gager, REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 13, 2001. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of February 13, 2001 was properly posted on February 9, 2001. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC No one spoke at tonight's meeting. r City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 JOINT MEETING WITH FINANCE COMMISSION Mayor Mehaffey welcomed the Finance Commission. Chuck Swan, Chair/Finance Commission, thanked the Council for the opportunity to meet with -them. 1. ACCOMPLISHMENTS - 2000 Chair Swan briefly presented the Finance Commission's accomplishments for the year - 2000 as follows: • Provided input and worked with staff to develop a Purchasing Policies and Procedures Manual for the City of Sazatoga. - • Provided input into FY 2000-01 and 2001-02 budgets, including five-yeaz projections. _ • Reviewed requirements of GASB 34 for financial reporting and infrastructure. • Monitored SB 1883 for the return of Tax Equity Allocation property taxed. • Reviewed the Comprehensive,Annual Financial Report with the auditors. • Assisted in the selection of a new audit firm. - • Discussed timing and amount of Library bond sale. • Reviewed investment policy. Chair Swan briefly explained the Finance Commission's ongoing projects as follows: • Updating the Finance Policy and Procedure Manual.- • Monitoring infrastructure physical inventory and reporting. • Monitoring sale of Library bonds. • Provide input into the FY 2001-02 and 2003-04 budgets, including five-year projections. Mayor Mehaffey requested Chair Swan to briefly explain GASB 34 . Chair Swan explained that GASB 34 is a new federal requirement for state and local government agencies. GASB 34 is the new framework for financial reporting including infrastructure, fixed assets and their appreciation. Councilmember Baker asked how the City was going to appraise all of its assets and infrastructures. Chair Swan responded that the City would be hiring an appraisal firm and a consultant. Mayor Mehaffey questioned the deadline on compliance with GASB 34. Mary Jo Walker, Staff Liaison/Finance Commission, responded that the City has to be in full compliance by 2003. 2 i City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 Chair Swan asked the City Council if they had any direction or special projects they would like the Finance Commission to work on. Councilmember Waltonsmith suggested the Finance Commission consider the following items and possibly place them on future agendas for funding recommendations: • Saratoga Community Foundation • BMR Housing • Union Pacific Railroad Trail Councilmember Baker added the Civic Center Master Plan to Councilmember Waltonsmith's suggestions. Councilmember Baker asked if the Finance Commission have thought about uses of any of the City's reserve funds. Chair Swan noted that the Finance Commission made recommendation a few years ago in regards to the approximate $2 million in the reserve funds, but have not made any recent recommendations. Chair Swan stated the money should be used wisely and for the best interest of the community. Vice Mayor Streit explained that between now and June 30 the City will have many projects in the works and also several nonprofit and special groups will probably be requesting funding from the City. Vice Mayor Streit asked Chair Swan how the Finance Commission would handle those types of requests. Chair Swan noted that the Finance Commission would probably collect the requests, prioritize them, and make recommendations to the City Council. Mayor Mehaffey noted that the City Manager would be initiating a Capital Improvement Project budget in the next budget cycle, which a set amount of money will be designated for capital improvements only. Mayor Mehaffey requested that the Finance Commission work with staff to come up with an appropriate amount to designate for the new CIP budget. Mayor Mehaffey invited the Finance Commission to attend two Adjourned City Council meetings; February 27 to discuss the formation of a nonprofit foundation and March 27 to discuss the need for affordable housing in Saratoga. Mayor Mehaffey noted he welcomed any ideas they could bring. Mayor Mehaffey thanked the Finance Commission for all of their work and for joining the City Council at tonight's meeting. Mayor Mehaffey adjourned the Joint City Council with the Finance Commission and commenced the meeting with the Library Commission at 7:30 p.m. JOINT MEETING WITH LIBRARY COMMISSION Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, conducted roll call of the Planning Commission: 3 City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 PRESENT Ruth Gipstein, Marcia Manzo/Chair, Donald Johnson ABSENT: Bobby Chandra, Anne Cross, Cathy Fascato, CiCi O'Donnell Chair Manzo thanked the City Council for appointing their newest commission member Donald Johnson. 1. DONATIONS OF ART Chair Manzo explained to the City Council the donation of art has been a topic discussed at recent Library Commission meetings. Chair Manzo noted that many people want to donate art to the Saratoga Library. Because of this, Chair Manzo explained, a sub-committee was formed, chaired by Ruth Gipstein. Commissioner Gipstein's task was to research how other cities handle donations of art. Chair Manzo explained that Commissioner Gipstein contacted surrounding cities and found that art donation policies vary from city to city: For example, some cities do not except any donations, some except everything, and other cities accept the art but require the artist sign a waiver indicating that the City would not guarantee the art would be displayed and the City could sell it at any time. Chair Manzo noted that the Library Commission recommends that the City Council except no further donations of art except for the recent donations from the Givens Family. Chair Manzo explained that the Commission supports the current ongoing display of art that rotates approximately every 3-6 months. This display is overseen by the Library Staff. Lori Burns, Staff Liaison/Library Commission, noted that all art the City accepts would have to be included in the GASB 34 reports. Councilmember Bogosian suggested that a discussion of the donation of art be placed on a future City Council agenda. Commissioner Gipstein noted that in a few cities committees were formed to review all prospective donations of art. Commissioner Gipstein explained members on these review committees have different types of artistic backgrounds such as: sculptors, artist, architects, etc. Commissioner Gipstein noted that she fully supports the recommendation to the City Council not to except any further donations of art except for the Givens Family donation. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that she supports the current rotating art in the Library and that sometime in the future she would like to see a committee formed to over see art projects throughout the City of Saratoga. 4 Ciry Council Minutes February 13, 2001 Councilmembers Waltonsmith mentioned that she feels that art is an important part of a community and offered her assistance to the Library Commission to form a committee to implement citywide art displays. 2. INTERIM LIBRARY SERVICES Chair Manzo noted that although it may not be in writing, but throughout the library bond drive, the residents were promised that library services would not be disrupted and temporary library services would be provided if the bond passed and a new library was constructed. Chair Manzo stressed the importance of keeping library services available during the expansion project. Chair Manzo noted that she is aware of the lack of land to house a temporary facility. Commissioner Gipstein noted safety is her number one concern, if temporary services are in the existing building during construction. Commissioner Gipstein noted that Gilbane (Project Manager) reassures the Commission and the Library Expansion Committee that if the need arises that temporary services are in the existing building during construction, it would be safe. Commissioner Gipstein stated that she strongly opposes closing the Library down completely for 18 months during construction. Commissioner Gipstein noted that she would prefer off site temporary services but can support using the existing library. Councilmember Bogosian asked if Gilbane has developed a plan for temporary facilities on site during construction. In response to Councilmember Bogosian's question, Chair Manzo explained that the Library Expansion Committee has already directed Mark Schatz and Gilbane to develop a plan for temporary facilities and that plan will be presented at the March ls` Library Expansion Committee meeting. Chair Manzo noted that having alternative library services on the existing library site has always been her first choice for the following reasons: • Site is known Requires no outreach to another community • After school programs would not be interrupted • Money from the bond measure could be saved if the City did not have to pay rent to someone else to lease land. Councilmember Waltonsmith expressed concern regarding the preservation of the Heritage Orchard if temporary services are placed at the current site. Chair Manzo reiterated the fact that at the March ls` Library Expansion Meeting all of those types of issues would be addressed. 5 City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 Commissioner Gipstein responded that each time the Library Expansion Committee has meet the issue of the preservation of the Heritage Orchard has been discussed. Commissioner Gipstein noted that once the construction of the Library is complete, she believes the orchard will be enhanced. Councilmember Baker asked if the Library Commission/L`ibrary Expansion Committee have given Gilbane a list of services that must be provided during the construction phase. Chair Manzo explained that the Library Expansion Committee directed the Library staff to develop a needs assessment list. The library staff have recently been calling surrounding libraries that are in the 7,500 square foot range, to find out the following; what kinds of services they provide, what is in their collection, how many computer terminals they have, what kind of special programs are offered, and how many seats they provided. Councilmember Baker noted that before the recommend plan for temporary services comes before the City Council, he recommends that all the parties involved have been given the opportunity to provide their input on this issue. Dave Anderson, City Manager, noted that this issue could be placed on the March 7, 2001 City Council agenda.. Mayor Mehaffey noted that he agreed that having library services during construction is necessary. Mayor Mehaffey noted his concern is also safety of the patrons if the temporary library_ services are on site. Mayor Mehaffey noted-that it would require two separate ways into the site for pedestrian use and construction use. 3. DISCUSSION OF SB74 &SB94 Chair Manzo noted that there are two bills before the Senate -SB74 &SB94. Both of these bills address the loss of revenue to special districts, which included libraries, back in 1992-93. This was when Sacramento shifted funds from special districts and gave the money to the schools in the form of the ERAF program. Chair Manzo explained that these bills would exclude library districts from ER.AF program and libraries would get their funding back that they lost in 1992, which was about 42% of their budgets. Chair Manzo noted that $8 million could be given back to the Santa Clara County Library System. Chair Manzo asked if the Council would support the passage of SB74 &SB94 in a letter . of support. • 6 .' City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 Councilmember Bogosian noted he did not support helping the Santa Clara County Library System get money back from the State's ERAF program because the City would not benefit from it even though they do provide library services. Councilmember Baker concurred with Councilmember Bogosian. Mayor Mehaffey noted that there is on going litigation of the State's implementation of the ERAF program to decide whether or not it was even constitutional to do in the first place. Mayor Mehaffey concurred with his fellow colleagues and can not support SB74 & AS 94. Chair Manzo asked the City Council if they had any further questions or comments. Councilmember Baker requested that between now and March ls`, the Library Expansion Committee, Library Commission, and Library Staff clearly define what is needed for temporary library services. Mayor Mehaffey thanked the Library Commission for attending tonight's meeting. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Bogosian referred to the memo, that the City Clerk provided tonight, informing the Council of an oral report presented at the February 1S1 County Planning Commission regarding the Mountain Winery's Use Permit status report. Councilmember Bogosian expressed concern because one of the conditions he negotiated last year, on behalf of the City with the Mountain Winery, included language that said the County must notify the City of Saratoga of any issues relating to the Mountain Winery that came before them. • A discussion took place about the responsibility of the County Planning and Zoning Commission to notify the City of Saratoga. Councilmember Bogosian requested a staff member be assigned to monitor the County Planning Commission agendas. Dave Anderson, City Manager, noted that staff has already been added to the mailing list to receive the County's agendas, and he currently reviews the Board of Supervisor's agendas. Councilmember Baker requested the status of two letters he received last year ,one from Mr. Paulsin and the other from Ms. Nieman. Councilmember Baker noted he would like to know if the City addressed these resident's concerns. 7 City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 Councilmember Bogosian responded in regards to Ms. Nieman's concerns, she attended the hearing on the development of the Owens property, and he believes, from conversations with Ms. Nieman, discussions are in progress with the developers. Mayor Mehaffey noted he received a letter from a neighbor of West Valley College alleging a number of on going construction activities that do not seem to be related to the educational facility. The neighbor asked if the College is required to obtain permits from the City of Saratoga. Mayor Mehaffey noted the letter went on to explain that a response from Marchelle Fox said the College could do what they want and the City could not do anything about it. Mr. Anderson noted he also received a copy of that letter and forwarded it to the City Attorney and to the Interim Community Development Director to investigate the issues that were addressed in the letter. Mr. Anderson noted that he would report back to the City Council as soon as he has any information. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT Mr. Anderson informed the City Council that he would be out of town until Monday, February 26, 2001. Mr. Anderson indicated that Mary Jo Walker, Director of Administrative Services, would be acting City Manager. Mr. Anderson informed the Council that on Thursday, February 15, 2001, Phase I of the Heritage Orchard Restoration Project will begin. 1NIr. Anderson explained that several measures were taken to inform the public of the project: • A sign will be placed at the corner of Saratoga Avenue and Fruitvale Avenue- installation scheduled for Wednesday (2/14/01). • A notice was posted on KSAR's bulletin board. • A link was created on the City of Saratoga website. • Article in this week's edition of the Saratoga News. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 8.30 Q.m. espectfully .subrmtte -~~ - ~ .~ athleen Boyer, C City Clerk • 8 NOTE TO SARATOGA NEWS: THIS IS A LEGAL AD. Please typeset text. Any questions should be directed to Kristin at 868-1222. This is Ad PL-00438. (Publish Saratoga News on March 14, 2001) NOTICE OF HEARING BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SARATOGA'S PLANNING COMMISSION announces the follov~~ing public hearings on Wednesday, the 28th day of March 2001 at 7:30 p.m. in the .City Council Chambers located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Details and plans are available at the Saratoga Community Development Department, Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. If you have questions, Planners are available at the public counter between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision of the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Saratoga Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the Planning Commission's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before the Thursday before the meeting. DR-O1-003 (517-12-020) -BEAN, 20500 Lomita Avenue; -Request for Design Review approval to demolish an existing 4,559 square foot single family residence and construct a new 5,220 square foot single story residence. Maximum height of the structure will be 26 feet. The 39,673 square foot parcel is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. DR-00-062 (397-28-013) - PICO RANCH INC., 20460 Williams Avenue; -Request for Design Review approval to demolish an existing 1,275 square foot single family residence and construct a new 4,057 square foot two-story residence. Maximum height of the structure will be 23 feet. The 7,671 square foot parcel is located in the R-1-10,000 zoning district. DR-00-011, SD-00-001, V-00-018 and V-O1-004 (517-08-008 ~ 016) -TRAFALGAR INC., 14612 Big Basin Way &t 20717 St. Charles Street; -Request for Design Re~~iew, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and Variance(s) approval to allow the subdivision of a 22,582 net square foot site to allow townhouses and a retail commercial space. A rear yard setback variance has been requested for a building on the CH-2 portion of the site. The Big Basin Way portion of the site is zoned CH-2 and the St. Charles Street portion is zoned R-M-3000. Four existing .residences with garages totaling 4,595 square feet and 1,000 square feet of retail space that includes a second story flat would be demolished. The original proposal called for the creation of a six lot subdivision with five new two story townhouses with garages and a 1,316 square foot retail space with a second story residential condominium that would face Big Basin Way. The Commission will consider the original proposal as well as modifications that are proposed to the application as originally submitted. These changes include: ^ The project would remain divided into two parcels along the existing CH-2 and R-M- 3,000 zone district boundary. All of the units would be separate air right condominium units instead of individual lots. ^ There would be two rather than three townhouses on the St. Charles Street portion of the site for a total of four two story townhouses. The proposed retail space with the second story residential condominium along Big Basin Way would be retained. The modified proposal would still require a rear yard setback variance. The applicant's request is for approval of either the original proposal as modified above or the alternative described below: Alternative proposal: ^ The unit above the retail commercial space would be designated as commercial office for a period of five years (until January 2006). It would remain as commercial office assuming additional parking was available through an expanded parking district or some other mechanism. If additional parking was not available, the commercial office space would be re-designated as a residential condominium. ^ A parking variance for eight off street parking places (retaining the same number of parking spaces as the original application) is requested. ^ There would be two rather than three townhouses on the St. Charles Street portion of the, site for a total of four two story townhouses. ^ A rear yard setback variance would still be required. • •