Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08-08-2001 Planning Commission Packet
CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES DATE: Wednesday, August 8, 2001 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL: Commissioners Garakani, Jackman, Zutshi and Chair Barry ABSENT: Commissioners Hunter, Kurasch and Roupe STAFF: Director Sullivan, Planners Knapp and Livingstone and Minutes Clerk Shinn PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES -Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of July 25, 2001 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda. The lawgenerallyprohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staf f accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staf f REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on August 2, 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 Tuesday, a week before the meeting. 1. DR-O1-021 Est AS-O1-001 (397-43-001 Est -003) - JAIN, 18630 Allendale; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a new single-story 6,850 sq. ft residence and sport court. Maximum height of the structure is 26 feet. The 93,175 (net) sq. ft. lot is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (4-0 TO BE CONTINUED TO 9/12/01) PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA AUGUST 8, 2001 PAGE 2 2. DR-O1-007 &t BSE-O1-011 (397-17-034) - CHEN,19752 Versailles Way; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a new single-story 5,917 square foot home and demolish and existing 3,822 square foot home. The proposed height is 26 feet. The lot is 40,000 square feet in area and is located within the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (KNAPP) (APPROVED 4-0) 3. DR-O1-015/BSE-O1-021- (503-29-038) - CITENAOLT, 21345 Saratoga Hills Road; - Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 5,837 square foot two-story residence and demolish an existing 3,153 square foot residence. Maximum height will be 26 feet. The 53,403 net square foot parcel is located in the R-1-4,000 zoning district. (KNAPP) (APPROVED 4-0) 4. V-O1-007 (386-18-003) - NGUYEN, 18621 Kosich Drive; -Request for Variance approval to construct a new 439 square foot garage in the rear yard setback approximately five feet from the rear property line. The proposed garage will be attached to the existing single story house. Maximum height of the structure will be 12 feet 11 inches. The 10,788 square foot parcel is located in the R-1-10,000 zoning district. (LIVINGSTONE) (VARIANCE APPLICATION SPLIT, 4-0 APPROVAL FOR GARAGE VARIANCE, 4-0 DENIAL FOR BEDROOM VARIANCE) 5. DR-O1-016 ~ BSE-O1-022 (517-14-027) - NIJOR,15330 Kittridge Road; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a 2,301 square foot second-story addition to an existing 2,308 square foot single story residence. The proposed addition includes 60 square feet on the first floor and a new 2,241 square foot second story. The maximum height of the residence would be 25.5 feet. The site is 46,086 square feet and is located in the HR (Hillside Residential) zoning district. (SULLIVAN) (4-0 TO BE CONTINUED) DIRECTOR ITEMS COMMISSION ITEMS COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT AT 10:45 TO NEXT MEETING Wednesday, August 22, 2001 Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION LAND USE AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, August 7, 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, AUGUST 8, 2001 • ROLL CALL REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA AGENDA 1. V-O1-007 - NGUYEN Item 4 18621 Kosich Drive 2. DR-O1-015 ~ BSE-O1-021 - CITENAOLT Item 3 21345 Saratoga Hills Road 3. DR-O1-016 &r BSE-O1-022 - NIJOR Item 5 15330 Kittridge Road 4. DR-O1-007 6~ BSE-O1-011 - CHEN Item 2 19752 Versailles Way 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. • CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: Wednesday, August 8, 2001 - 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA TYPE: Regular Meeting ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MINUTES -Draft Minutes from Regular Planning Commission Meeting of July 25, 2001 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not on this agenda The lawgenerallyprohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning Commission direction to Staff. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on August 2, 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 Tuesday, a week before the meeting. 1. DR-O1-021 &t AS-O1-001 (397-43-001 Est -003) - JAIN,18630 Allendale; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a new single-story 6,850 sq. ft residence and sport court. Maximum height of the structure is 26 feet. The 93,175 (net) sq. ft. lot is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (TO BE CONTINUED TO 9/12/01) • PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA AUGUST 8, 2001 PAGE 2 2. DR-O1-007 ~ BSE-O1-011 (397-17-034) - CHEN,19752 Versailles Way; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a new single-story 5,917 square foot home and demolish and existing 3,822 square foot home. The proposed height is 26 feet. The lot is 40,000 square feet in area and is located within the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (KNAPP) DR-O1-015/BSE-O1-021- (503-29-038) - CITENAOLT, 21345 Saratoga Hills Road; - Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 5,837 square foot two-story residence and demolish an existing 3,153 square foot residence. Maximum height will be 26 feet. The 53,403 net square foot parcel is located in the R-1-4,000 zoning district. (KNAPP) 4. V-O1-007 (386-18-003) - NGUYEN, 18621 Kosich Drive; -Request for Variance approval to construct a new 439 square foot garage in the rear yard setback approximately five feet from the rear property line. The proposed garage will be attached to the existing single story house. Maximum height of the structure will be 12 feet 11 inches. The 10,788 square foot parcel is located in the R-1-10,000 zoning district. (LIVINGSTONE) • DR-O1-016 &r BSE-O1-022 (517-14-027) - NIJOR,15330 Kittridge Road; -Request for Design Review approval to construct a 2,301 square foot second-story addition to an existing 2,308 square foot single story residence. The proposed addition includes 60 square feet on the first floor and a new 2,241 square foot second story. The maximum height of the residence would be 25.5 feet. The site is 46,086 square feet and is located in the HR (Hillside Residential) zoning district. (SULLIVAN) DIRECTOR ITEMS COMMISSION ITEMS COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Wednesday, August 22, 2001 Council Chambers/Civic Theater 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA • MINUTES SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: PLACE TYPE: ~~ ;~~ L~~ ~~ G Wednesday, July 25, 2001 Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA Regular Meeting v' Chair Barry called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Rni.i, ('.Ai,i. Present: Commissioners Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Roupe and Zutshi Absent: Jackman and Kurasch Staff: Director Tom Sullivan and Associate Planner John Livingstone APPROVAL OF MINUTES -Regular Meeting of July 11, 2001. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Regular Planning Commission minutes of July 11, 2001, were approved with the following amendments: • Page 9 -changing Saratoga Lefts. to Saratoga Oaks. • Page 11 -added text to the motion as follows... V-00-018 and V-O1-004 with conditions previously outlined b_y Chair Barry to allow... • Page 15 - ... Informed that a groundbreaking ceremony will occur on August September 8, 2001, at 1 p.m. (5-0-2; Commissioners Jackman and Kurasch were absent) ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications. REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA Director Tom Sullivan announced that, pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on July 19, 2001. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PACKET There were no technical corrections to the packet. CONSENT CALENDAR There were no consent calendar items. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM NO. 1 DR-O1-001 (397-16-128) - RAHIM, 14350 Taos Drive: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 6,308 square foot two-story residence and demolish an existing 4,015 square foot house. Maximum height of the structure will be 26 feet. The 56,626 square foot parcel is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (KNAPP) Director Tom Sullivan presented the staff report: • Said that the applicant is seeking approval to demolish a 4,015 square foot residence and construct a new 6,308 square foot, two-story residence with a maximum height of 26 feet. The project site is 56,626 square feet within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. • Advised that staff is recommending approval as this project meets the design policies and guidelines including: • Minimizing the perception of bulk; • Building on a flat portion of the lot; • Using 13 variations on the roof; • Use of material and color to reduce the perception of bulk; • Fitting within the existing neighborhood; • Locating the building so as to minimize the privacy impacts. There are no privacy issues. Pointed out a letter from an adjacent neighbor indicating that they have worked out a compromise on the placement of windows. • The use of a basement. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing No. 1 at 7:11 p.m. Mr. Rahim, Applicant, 2079 Russell Lane, Saratoga: • Advised that his family resides in Saratoga and loves it. • Said that they purchased the property on Taos Drive with the intent to building a new home. • Promised that this home will be a nice addition to the neighborhood Mr. Fred Luminoso, 12772 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga: • Identified himself as an advisor to the Rahims. • Said that they had sent 45 letters to surrounding neighbors, inviting them to meet and review the plans for this new home. • Advised `that a few responded including Mr. Wong who resides to the north. • Said that their design minimizes bulk and mass through several means including articulation to the roofs.. Mr. Jun Siliano, Project Architect, International Design Group, 721 Lighthouse Avenue, Pacific , Grove: • Thanked staff for their assistance with this project and concurred with staff's recommendations and Conditions of Approval. • Said that this is an unusual site that offers a unique opportunity due to the large lot size and mature existing perimeter landscaping. • Said that the house was angled in order to break up the mass and bulk. • Added that the house can hardly be seen from the road. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 3 • Pointed out that the dormers on the northeast corner will not include windows in order to retain the neighbor's privacy. • Indicated that design features include a full slate roof, cornice molding, stone veneer, stucco, corbel design to give articulation and wrought iron railings. • The project meets the intent of the City's residential design guidelines. • Said that he was available to respond to any questions. Commissioner Roupe asked Mr. Siliano whether the entryway and grand salon are open above into the second floor and if so whether that space has been counted against the square footage as should be done when heights exceed a certain point. Director Sullivan clarified that such vaulted space has been counted against FAR (floor area ratios). Mr. Jun Siliano said that the maximum ceiling height is 14 feet, 10 inches and that there is no opening to the grand salon. Commissioner Roupe remembered that heights exceeding 15 feet are where second floor ceiling heights are counted into the square footage. Director Sullivan added that the area is not double counted until the ceiling heights exceed 15 feet. Chair Barry inquired how many bedrooms and bathrooms are included in this home, including within the basement. Mr. Jun Siliano replied that there are four bedrooms, including the master bedroom, and that there are no bedrooms within the basement space. Commissioner Zutshi asked if details are available for the iron railing. Mr. Jun Siliano said that the wrought iron railings will be forged and hand made but are only a concept at this point, to be defined later. Commissioner Roupe asked about the hardscape on this site. Said that there appears to be a lot at the front of the house and advised that the Commission ask applicants to do everything possible to minimize the amount of hardscape. Added that it is important that water be retained on site. Mr. Jun Siliano said that while 35 percent hardscape coverage is allowed, this project has but 24 percent hardscape. Said that they plan to retain run-off water on site by providing proper percolation. Commissioner Roupe asked what paving material would be utilized in the front. Mr. Jun Siliano said that the materials are not finalized but that they are considering concrete pavers on sand, which is a permeable surface. Commissioner Roupe declared that it appears this applicant is taking concerns about paving into account. Mr. Jun Siliano agreed and stated that they are very sensitive and conscious of those concerns. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 4 Commissioner Garakani asked about the stucco color. Mr. Jun Siliano advised that the stucco will be a light earthtone and distributed a color board. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1 at 7:29 p.m. Commissioner Roupe stated that he visited the site and finds the project to be very sensitive to the City's guidelines with water drainage and impervious coverage taken into consideration. Said that this project fits into the community nicely. Asked staff what rules are in place to deal with construction parking since there are several homes under construction in the immediate area. Director Sullivan advised that the construction vehicles must park in a legal manner. They have the same rights and responsibilities to park as anyone else. Commissioner Roupe suggested that the construction parking occur on site as much as possible. Chair Barry reopened the Public Hearing at 7:31 p.m. Mr. Mark Thomas, Builder: • Advised that he just completed a project in the area and that it is his practice to first fence and screen a site prior to beginning construction. They plan to fence along Taos up to Mr. Wong's property and will include two 12-foot gates that will be secured after hours. • Added that there will be on-site supervision and the site locked up after hours. • Said that the crews can park on site as this is a large lot. However, occasionally, larger construction vehicles will have to park on the street. • Said that the project superintendent will handle such logistics carefully. Commissioner Roupe asked Mr. Thomas if he had any objection to a Condition requiring on-site parking of construction vehicles. Mr. Mark Thomas said that he has no problem with such a Condition. Added that it is actually a disadvantage to park construction vehicles on the street as the workers need regular access to the vehicles for necessary equipment and tools. Chair Barry reclosed the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m. Commissioner Hunter said that the number of rooflines is unusual and that she is looking forward to seeing the house once built. Added that having the garage on the side is a nice feature. Said that this project is fine and she will support it. Commissioner Garakani said that he is happy that the issue with windows overlooking a neighboring property was resolved. Added that the project looks good. Chair Barry: • Stated that the relation between the number of bedrooms and garage parking spaces is something that the Commission should and would be evaluating for each project. Added that athree-car - Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 5 garage for afour-bedroom house is acceptable but this is a real issue to her and that she wants to raise it now. • Said that lots of things for this project are handled nicely including the attempt to obtain neighborhood input. • Stated that she is happy to see that the front door is not a massive standout feature. • Agreed that the garage placement is nice and that she appreciates the plan to use concrete pavers with sand for the front drive. • Supported the requirement to have construction parking on site and commended the builder on his extra screening and site security measures as well as his distribution of his business cards to neighbors to contact him should problems arise during the construction of the home. Commissioner Garakani asked if the expansion of the basement is possible. Director Sullivan replied that if the basement expansion is minimal, it can be approved at staff level but if the basement expansion is significant, it will be returned to the Planning Commission for approval. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Garakani, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, the Commission approved a Design Review application (DR-O1-001 BSE-O1-016) to allow the construction of a 6,308 square foot two-story residence on property located at 14350 Taos Drive with the added condition that the construction parking occur on site. AYES:Barry, Garakani, Hunter, Roupe and Zutshi. NOES: None ABSENT: Jackman and Kurasch ABSTAIN: None Chair Barry advised that there is a 15 day appeal period. *** PUBLIC HEARING =ITEM N0.2 DR-O1-012 &BSE-O1-020 (397-04-003) -CAMPBELL, 14725 Sobey Road: Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 6,180 square foot two-story residence and an 80 square foot pool house for a total of 6,190 square feet, and to demolish a 4,075 square foot residence. Maximum height of the structure will be 26 feet. The 76,040 square foot parcel is located in the R-1-40,000 zoning district. (LIVINGSTONE) Mr. John F. Livingstone, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that this application is for a Design Review approval to allow a new 6,190 square foot, two-story residence (five bedrooms) with a 2,100 square foot basement and 1,000 square foot garage with the demolition of an existing residence. • Stated that the project meets the City's policies and design guidelines including a detailed roof element that varies along the front to help reduce mass and dormers to create interest and break up the second story. • Added that the home will be constructed on a flat portion of the site near the location of the existing home. The existing driveway will be utilized. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 6 - • Added that existing views will be preserved and that the placement of the new home will actually reduce visual impacts on existing and future homes in the near area. • Said that the project is exceeding the garage requirement by providing athree-car garage and that ample on-site paved parking will be available. • Added that special care will be taken for Tree No. 19 (an oak), which is located near the center of the lot. • Said that the developer has assured staff that they will carefully preserve this tree and observe all of the Arborist's recommendations. • Recommended approval of this application. Chair Barry restated that this five-bedroom home will have athree-car garage. Associate Planner John Livingstone confirmed that fact. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4 at 7:45 p.m. Mr. Lyle Mosher, Project Architect, Mosher Associates Architecture, 1116 Willow Glen Way, San Jose: • Stated that his is a one-man office and that his specialty is work on historic homes. • Added that he wanted the character of an older home, one that will feel like it has been there a long time. • Pointed out that this is a 1.75-acre lot with mature perimeter landscaping. The site is not visible from Sobey Road. There is a drainage creek with established landscaping adjacent to this site. • Added that the center of this property will be undeveloped and the site of future orchards. • Said that the house has been dropped down slope a bit, following the contour lines of the natural grading. • Said that the primary focus was the oak tree, which is a magnificent specimen and a welcome feature of the property and said that the front door of the home is not oriented toward Sobey due to the tree and the desire to have that tree serve as a featured aspect of the front entry element. • Advised that there will be some terracing of the property and structure, including afour-foot high stone retaining wall made of natural stone. Additionally some of the same stone will be used at the base of the structure. • Said that materials include a natural slate roof, copper gutters and natural wood windows. There is a great attention to detail to reflect the flavor of an old estate. • Said that there is potential for an additional rental property with the saving of the existing home on the lot. Said that after the Commissioners brought up that potential, he spoke with the owner who is willing to consider this suggestion. If it is allowable under City guidelines, they would consider doing so. • Said that they will install landscaping along the left side of the property to screen against the neighboring property. A dense row of trees will be placed here. Commissioner Roupe asked if a Variance would be needed to support a second residence on this property. Added that he would only be willing to grant such a Variance as long as the unit is conditioned in the deed to be treated as slow-income unit, rented at below market rate. Mr. L le Mosher said that he cannot commit on the w y o ner s behalf this evening but reiterated that the owner is supportive of retaining the second unit if feasible. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 7 Commissioner Roupe reiterated that the only way he would support a Variance to exceed the allowable square footage is with unit being treated as a BMR unit. Director Sullivan stated that the existing structure would be used as a job site office during construction so there is time to work out the details with the owner and develop any appropriate Ordinances to accommodate the second unit. Commissioner Roupe said again that he can't approve the secondary unit tonight without specifics but would consider doing so at a later date. Director Sullivan stated that Commissioner Roupe is correct. Commissioner Zutshi asked if the second unit is planned for demolition. Mr. Lyle Mosher said that all existing structures are scheduled for demolition with one being used temporarily as an office during construction. Commissioner Zutshi asked what the square footage is for this structure. Mr. Lyle Mosher replied 850 square feet plus a garage. Commissioner Hunter asked Mr. Mosher if the adjacent neighbor on the left has been informed about the potential to keep a second unit. Mr. Lyle Mosher replied no. Commissioner Garakani asked about a well house depicted on the plans. Mr. Lyle Mosher advised that this well house covers up an abandoned well head that is capped off and no longer in use but cannot be abandoned. Commissioner Garakani asked if the existing wall separating this property from the adjacent property would be replaced. Mr. Lyle Mosher answered rio but added that they plan to plant something such as creeping fig along the wall in order to cover this wall. Said that they want the wall to look as natural as possible but that there are no plans to replace it at this point. Chair Barry expressed concern about only athree-car garage for a five bedroom house. Asked about additional on-site parking. Mr., Lyle Mosher advised that there is additional surface parking that is available for guests. Chair Barry suggested that perhaps the garage near the potential rental unit might be retained. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 8 Mr. Lyle Mosher disagreed, advising that this garage is located under the canopy of the oak tree and that it is a shame to park there rather than to leave the area completely open. Parking can occur at a more discrete location. Commissioner Roupe asked if there will be garage to house entry. Mr. Lyle Mosher said that he would like to put a doorway there if possible. Commissioner Roupe deferred this question to staff. Director Sullivan agreed that a doorway between the home and garage is needed for safety. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2 at 8:00 p.m. Commissioner Garakani asked staff if the 16-foot wide driveway is adequate. Director Sullivan advised that the minimum standard is 14 feet. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Hunter, seconded by Commissioner Roupe, the Planning Commission approved DR-O1-012 & BSE-O1-020 to allow the construction of a 6,180 square foot two-story residence with a 80 square foot pool house on property located at 14725 Sobey Road. (5-0-2; Commissioners Jackman and Kurasch were absent) Chair Barry advised that there is a 15 day appeal period before this action is final. PUBLIC HEARING -ITEM N0.3 *** DR-00-060 &BSE-00=056 (517-22-073) MASSIE, 15301 Peach Hill Road: Request to demolish an existing 4,733 square foot single-story residence and construct a new two-story 5,997 square foot residence plus a 3,620 square foot basement. Maximum height of the structure will be 26 feet. The 62,378 square foot parcel is located in a R-1-40,000 zoning district. (LIVINGSTONE) Mr. John F. Livingstone, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant seeks approval to construct a new 5,200 square foot two-story residence with a 3,600 square foot basement and 700 square foot three-car garage and the demolition of an existing residence. • Said that the proposal meets the five policies of the design guidelines. It is on the flat portion of the site. It uses the existing drive and turnaround area to reduce the grading and disturbance to the site. It will preserve the existing views of the neighboring properties. It will retain the existing mature trees on site, which help to obstruct the house. • Stated that the main entrance will face a large existing oak tree and landscaped area. • Said that the three-car garage exceeds the two-car garage requirement and that there is ample on- site parking on an existing paved area. • Said that per the Arborist's report the garage was to have been moved to save an oak tree (#36) but the Arborist agreed to allow the applicants to move this tree. However, the applicants have • Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 9 discovered that the cost of moving this tree is greater than the cost to replace the tree with five 24- inch box trees. The Arborist has written an amendment to his tree report, supporting the removal of tree #36 and its replacement with five 24-inch box trees. • Advised that staff is recommending approval. • Clarified that Condition 14 requires that fire sprinklers be included throughout, including the basement space. Commissioner Roupe stated that the text within the executive summary needs to be modified to read that the existing structure has been demolished rather than will be demolished. Commissioner Hunter advised that tree #36 is a California buckeye rather than an oak. Chair Barry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:08 p.m. Mr. Bob Flury, BF Design Group: • Said that staff has done a great job describing this project and thanked them for their work. • Advised that his clients, Mr. and Mrs. Massie have contacted the six adjacent neighbors and received written responses of support from five. • Provided a scaled model of the proposed home. • Pointed out that the second story portion of this home does not stick out but rather is nestled in the roof of the single story portion of the home. There is a three-car garage with a breezeway link that is designed to accommodate a parked car. • Said that the second floor is set back from the first floor to minimize the perception of bulk. • Stated that he is available for any questions. Chair Barry asked where the on-site parking is located. Mr. Bob Flury said that the apron will accommodate three cars and that there will be no off-site parking required. Chair Barry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:12 p.m. Commissioner Hunter asked to see the color board. Chair Barry: • ~ Stated her appreciation for the communication with the neighbors and the applicant's attention to her parking concern. • Encouraged the potential for low-income rental space in the basement. Commissioner Garakani expressed his appreciation for the installation of story poles. Chair Barry thanked the Mr. Flury for the model. Commissioner Hunter asked if there is any Ordinance requirement to replace a native tree with another native tree. Added that the buckeye is nearly extinct. Director Sullivan stated that a value for a removed tree is established and the replacements must be of equal value. When possible a native indiginous tree is suggested. Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 10 Chair Barry reopened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:17 p.m. Mr. Bob Flury advised that they are attempting to locate a new buckeye tree on the site but that they have not yet found one. They will continue to attempt to find a buckeye tree. Chair Barry reclosed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3 at 8:18 p.m. Commissioner Barry stated that the Commissioners have requested the modification to the sprinkler condition and the requirement that a buckeye tree be replanted on site if one can be located. Commissioner Garakani said that he could see the neighbor's deck from this property and recommended additional screening landscaping at the southwest corner of the property for the privacy of the adjacent neighbor. Commissioner Zutshi said that she has a hard time with old trees being removed. Chair Barry asked if it was possible to redesign and retain the tree. Chair Barry reopened Public Hearing No. 3 at 8:22 p.m. Mr. Bob Flury said that the tree is not perceived as a specimen, Said that they did discuss redesigning around the tree but were not able to do so. Assured that they will find a mature tree of comparable size. Reminded that this is not a huge tree, only 14-inches in diameter. Chair Barry reclosed Public Hearing No. 3 at 8:23 p.m. Chair Barry stated that tree preservation is another issue for the City and Commission to consider further in the future. Motion: Upon motion of Chair Barry, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, the Planning Commission approved DR-00-060 & BSE-00-056 to allow the construction of a new 5,997 square foot, two-story residence plus a 3,620 square foot basement on property located at 15301 Peach Hill Road, with the following modifications and/or additions to the Conditions of Approval: 1. Modify the fire sprinkler requirements to include sprinklers in the basement; 2. Add a condition that one buckeye tree be planted if available; 3. Add additional privacy landscaping at the southwest corner of the lot. (5-0-2; Commissioners Jackman and Kurasch were absent) Chair Barry advised that there is a 15 day appeal period before this action is final. *** DIRECTOR ITEMS Saratoga Planning Commission Minutes of July 25, 2001 Page 11 Director Tom Sullivan distributed copies of an article from Western Cities Magazine, which provides information on the Permit Streamlining Act and current information on State law, as well as a copy of the City's General Plan. Commissioners' Upcoming Availability/Vacation Schedules Chair Barry asked staff if there seems to be any problem achieving a quorum of the Commissioners for the upcoming meetings. Said that she understood that Commissioner Kurasch has vacation plans in August. Commissioner Garakani stated that he too would be on vacation from August 21 to September, missing. the second meeting in August. Update on Study Session Director Sullivan advised that the Housing Element Study Session went well with about 15 to 20 people in attendance. Said that he is working with the consultant to implement the suggestions received at this Study Session and that the Public Hearing process must start in August in order to meet the State mandated deadlines. Commissioner Roupe asked that as much advertising as possible occur to notify the public of these important hearings. Director Sullivan said that he would do everything possible to advertise the Public Hearings. Chair Barry thanked Director Sullivan for his work and efforts. Commissioner Hunter thanked staff for bringing forward three projects this evening that were done well and allowed the Commission to approve them quickly. COMMISSION ITEMS There were no commission items. COMMUNICATIONS The Council minutes from the Regular Meeting of June 6, 2001 and Special Meeting of July 10, 2001, were distributed in the Commissioners' packets. ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING Chair Barry adjourned the meeting at 8:29 p.m. to the next regular meeting set for Wednesday, August 8, 2001, to begin at 7 p.m. MINCTTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk ~,~'.~ ITEM I • ~ ~' C~B~4 04 ~~~~° BOO C~L~ 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 96070 • (40S) RfiS-1'(111 Incorporated October 22, 1956 August 8, 2001 • • TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kristin Borel, Office Specialist SUBJECT: JAIN - 18630 Allendale, DR-O1-021 COUNCIL, nlI:D4BFRS: Evan Baker Stan 6ooosian John Mehaffev Nick Streit Ann Waltonsmrth This item was originally scheduled to be heard at this meeting. The schedule for this project had been changed but the noticing was not. It will be heard on September 12, 2001. Printed on recvcied paper. "'"'E^~~ ITEM 2 ~ ° i~CB~4OOQ ~~° -°BOOC~L~ ~'~V ~~' J ~ R~ ~i ~ ~~ 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 August 8, 2001 COUNCIL DIEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Nick Streit Ann Waltonsmith TO: Planning Commission FROM: Allison Knapp, Contract Planner SUBJECT: 19752 Versailles Way; DR-O1-007 & BSE-O1-001 This item had previously been noticed as 17752 Versailles Way for the July 25th public hearing. Therefore it had to be re-noticed for the August 8th public hearing as 19752 Versailles Way. The dates of the resolution will be changed when the resolution is finalized reflecting the Planning Commission action on the 8th of August. VersaillesMemo19752 • or~nrn-+ nn rarvrl~r' nAnc+r • • • REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: DR-O1-007BSE-O1-011;19752 Versailles Way Applicant/Owner: LEE CHEN/PAUL DOBEL Staff Planner: Allison Knapp, Contract Planner Date: July 11, 2001 _~ APN: 397-17-034 Department Head: ~~ ` ~~~~~ 19752 Versailles Way CASE HISTORY Application filed: Application complete: Notice published: Mailing completed: Posting completed: PROJECT DESCRIPTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 02/23/01 06/07/01 06/27/01 06/28/01 06/21/01 The applicant proposes to demolish the existing 3,822 square foot, single-story residence and has requested Design Review approval to construct a new 5,986 square foot, one-story residence. The maximum height of the residence would be 26 feet. The site is 40,000 square feet and is located within an R-1-40, 000 zoning district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Design Review application with conditions by adopting Resolution DR-Ol- 007BSE-O1-011. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Analysis 2. Draft Resolution DR-O1-007BSE-O1-011. 3. Arborist Report dated 04/23/01 4. Plans, Exhibit °A" • • ~0~~0~ File No. DR-01-007/L. -01-011;19752 I~ersailles Way STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: R-1-40, 000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential -Very Low Density MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 40,000 sq. ft. Attachment 1 AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: Average Slope of Site 5.3%. Slope at Building Site 2.5% GRADING REQUIRED: Total cubic yards of cut would be 1,630 to a maximum depth of 14.4 feet. Of the total, 1,080 cubic yards of cut to a maximum depth of 14.4' v~~ould be necessary to construct the basement; 150 cubic yards of cut to a maximum depth of eight feet would be necessary to construct the pool. Total cubic yards of fill would be 70 to a maximum depth of 1.2 feet. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project consisting of construction of a new single-family residence is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. The project site is in an urbanized area and is connected to utility and roadway infrastructure and consists of constructing one single-family residence and associated out buildings. MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED: The exterior finish proposed is Ivory stucco; window trim in a tan-white (Cambridge White) and gutter, fascia and eave molding is proposed to be taupe. Cast stone in a sage color is proposed as trim and a clay rust colored roof file is proposed as the roofing material. Color and material samples will be available at the public hearing. (This Area Intentionally Left Blank) • P:~Planning~Design Rcview~2001~DR-01-007.doc 0O~ ®O File No. DR-01-007/e_ _-01-011;19752 [~ersailles Way Lot Coverage: Building Footprint Driveway Walkway Covered Patio/Carport TOTAL (Impervious Surface) Floor Area: First Floor Second Floor Garage (Basement) TOTAL Setbacks: Front Reaz Left Side Right Side Height: Residence Detached Gazage Proposal 26% 5,986 sq. ft. 1,611 sq. ft. 1,644 sq. ft. 1,184 sq. ft. 10;425 sq. ft. 5,264 sq. ft. 0 722 sq. ft. (3,340 sq. ft.) 5, 986 sq. ft. SO ft. 76 ft. 20 ft. 26 ft. Code Requirements Maazmum Allowable 35% Maximum Allowable 6,0001 Minimum Requirement 30 ft. 50 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. Maximum Allowable 26 ft. 26 ft. N/A 12 ft. 2 .i •i •i ' There is no height penalty with respect to floor area in the R-1-40, 000 Zoning District. The Planning Commission may grant up to 15 feet if the appropriate findings can be made. P:~Plannin~Design Review\2001~DR-O1.007.doc ~ ~O ®~ File No. DR-01-007/b._ -01-011;19752 [~ersailles Way PRO ECT DISCUSSION J Design Review The applicant proposes to demolish the existing 3,822 square foot, single-story residence and has requested Design Review approval to construct a new 5,986 square foot, one-story residence. The maximum height of the residence would be 26 feet. The site is 40,000 square feet and is locatedwithin an R-1-40,000 zoning district. The neighborhood was at one time predominately single-story large ranch style homes on large lots. Over the past several years, the neighborhood has and is continuing to witness a change in architectural style. The large rambling ranch style houses are being replaced with one- and two-story structures that are more `palatial" in style. The architecture is palatial in terms of the detailing, mass of the roof lines, use of auto courts that are based upon the porte-cochere style, the "statement" that the entry-ways announce along the front elevations, and very large basements (3,000 sq. ft.) with living quarters that could easily be converted to secondary dwelling units. The predominate building materials of the ranch homes, wood and brick with some use of stucco is being lending way to stucco and the with the construction of the newer homes. Ten lots along Versailles Way were surveyed in order to evaluate this application. The lots include the two lots at the corner of Versailles Way and Wild Oak Way, the lot at the corner of Versailles Way and El Puente Way and all the lots that directly front Versailles Way. The site location map on the cover of this staff report shows the block. Three lots have larger style homes constructed on them (19737 and 19753 Versailles Way and 14551 El Puente Way). Currently there is a Design Review application under review (for completeness and referral to the Planning Commission) at the Planning Department for 19805 Versailles Way. The house is across the street diagonally from the subject property. Similar to the project before the Commission, it is proposing to demolish the existing dwelling and reconstruct a new, larger dwelling. The proposed architecture is nearly identical in all respects including style, colors and materials, to that being proposed by DR- 01-007. The house at 19800 Versailles Way (adjacent to the subject site) is undergoing a remodel that is in-keeping with the architecture and materials of the original ranch-style homes in the neighborhood. Therefore, out of the ten lots surveyed, five have been or are under review to be constructed with larger "landmark" homes. A few questions arise when evaluating this application for compatibility with the neighborhood. We must evaluate the architecture in terms of its compatibility with the ranch. style architecture that was originally constructed in the neighborhood as well as the other newer and larger homes in the area. Clearly there are some older well-maintained and remodeled homes within the area that are likely to remain for some years to come. The newer homes on the block all seem to have their own architectural style that lends an eclectic feel to the area. We must evaluate this proposal (and the forthcoming one at 19805 Versailles) in light of both styles of architecture in the neighborhood, acknowledging the eclectic nature of the area while still attempting to preserve a sense of the history of the neighborhood. P:~I'Ianning~Design Review~2001~DR-O1-007.doc ~ ~O ©V J File No. DR-01-007/b_ . -01-011;19752 [~ersailles Way The proposed architecture is more in keeping with the architecture of the three newer dwellings in the neighborhood, although there is no common thread in terms of style or materials between the project and the other three newer dwellings. The proposed architecture is a departure from the ranch style of the area and is no less compatible with the ranch style architecture than the other three residences. It could be required of this project, and it should be at a minimum required of the forthcoming 19805 Versailles VVay, to include some brick and /or wood in the trim or details of the building. The proposed project does implement applicable Residential Design Guidelines as discussed below. • Policy 1 "Minimize the Perception of Bu1h", Technique #l, "Minimize Changes to Natural Topography". The lot is nearly flat with an average slope of 5.3 percent. The proposed grading is to construct the basement and swimming pool, not to alter the topography in order to construct the residence. Policy 1, Technique #3, "Else Materials and Color to Reduce Bulh", which suggests softening elevations by using different materials on different levels, the use of natural color and materials on the lower portions and foundations of a house and the use of materials that create horizontal proportions. The project proposes stone pedimentation (vertical element) and window trim and an eave line with stone corbels (horizontal detail). The use of stone and stucco, arched and rectangular fenestration and soft colors that include taupe and white break up the mass of the building. • Policy 1 "Minimize the Perception of Bulh", Technique #4 "Minimize Building Height", suggests varying the roof element of a structure to reduce bulk. The roofline is varied as the building setbacks are increased from the front property line. • Polity 1, Technique #6 "Use of Architectural Features to Breah Up Massing". The front entry porch is 50 feet from the front setback. Other elements of the front elevation increase in setback from 62, 64 and to 83 feet from the front property line. As a point of reference the existing residence that would be demolished is 32 to 43 feet from the front setback, with the majority of the building line at 43 feet. The proposed entry porch (at the 50 ft. setback) is identified by the use of arched windows and columns. The setback portions of the building duninish in mass or "importance" from the street as they continue to be setback from the street. The "diminishing effect" of the setback portions of the building is achieved by the increase in setback coupled with an alteration of the architectural detail to a simpler facade with rectangular windows. • Policy 1, Technique #5, "Design Structure to Fit with Existing Neighborhood". The proposed project fits with the eclectic nature of the neighborhood. It does however depart from the ranch style architecture. P:~Planning~Design Review~2001~DR-O1-007.doc Q-~O®OV File No. DR-01-007/b_ . -01-011;19752 Versailles Way • Policy 2, "Integrate Structures with the Em~ironment," Technique #3, "Use Landscaping to Blend Structure with the Environment", suggests preserving the existing vegetation as much as possible. Eighteen trees are on the site and three would be removed in order to construct the project. Four 36-inch box and two 24-inch box trees are the suggested replacement trees by the City Arborist, which are included as conditions of approval. The replacement trees shall be Coast Live Oak, Valley Oak, Big Leaf Maple, California Buckeye or Coast Redwood or any combination thereof. The applicant proposes four Coast Redwoods and two Coast Live Oaks as shove on Sheet C-1 of the drawings as the replacement trees. • Policy 3, "Avoid Interference with Privary",Technique #3 "Use Landscaping to Enhance Privary", which suggests the use of evergreen trees and shrubs to provide year-round privacy. Four replacement trees, Coast Redwood, are evergreen and placed along the side property lines. Existing evergreen trees that would remain which would continue to provide privacy screening are a Deodar Cedar (#1), Coast Redwoods (#'s 2,x,6,13, 16 and 17) and Coast Live Oaks (#'s 8,12 and 14). The existing and proposed trees would provide privacy screening. The two Coast Live Oaks shown in the front setback area are also evergreen. • Polity 3, "Avoid Interference with Privary", Technique #4 "Reduce Noise Impacts on Adjacent Dwellings" suggests screening and controlling outdoor noise activities. The pool (and pump) is proposed to be placed in the center of the lot, which would reduce noise impacts to adjacent propemes. The building on the left side screens the outdoor activities even more to the property owners on the left of the site. The carport is proposed to be 20 feet from the side (right) property line. The separation from the adjacent property appears adequate to protect the neighbors from excessive noise impacts for two reasons. One, it is a carport which by its nature does not have a door associated with it that would make more noise to open and close. Two, it is a single car carport therefore not a standard two-car garage which also by the nature of the increased use would be noisier. The proposed 3,340 sq. ft. basement is shown to have direct access to the outside. The size of the basement and the direct access to the outside lends itself to being used as a second unit. The applicant, through this entitlement review, should be put on notice that no conversion of the basement to a second dwelling unit shall occur in absence of abiding by the City's secondary dwelling unit process. A condition of approval is also included that addresses this issue. The City Arborist, the Public Works Department and the Saratoga Fire District have reviewed the application. The Public Works Department had no additional conditions and approved the Building Site Exemption on May 11, 2001. Comments from the City Arborist and the Saratoga Fire District are included as conditions of approval. P:~Planning~Design Aeview~Z001U)R-O1-007.doc h -'y ®~~/©O / File No. DR-01-007/b_ -01-011;19752 [~ersailles Way Parking The Saratoga City Code requires each residence to have at least tu~o enclosed parking spaces within a garage. The residence will have an attached 722 sq. ft. three-car garage plus a one-car carport. Grading Total cubic yards of cut would be 1,630 to a maximum depth of 14.4 feet. Of the tota1,1,080 cubic yards of cut to a maximum depth of 14:4' would be necessary to construct the 3,340 sq. ft. basement; 150 cubic yards of cut to a maximum depth of eight feet would be necessary to construct the pool. Total cubic yards of fill would be 70 to a maximum depth of 1.2 feet. The project does not require Planning Commission action on a grading plan. The information is provided as background for the Commission. Geotechnical Review Bachground Soil is classified by its stability. Sazatoga's soils are mapped on the "Ground Movement Potential and Potential Geologic Stability" map which in broad terms identifies soils that are stable and soils that require additional geologic study prior to issuance of entitlement permits, and/or building permits. A rule of thumb, soils with either a "P" or an "M" in the classification will require additional geotechnical review. "P" identifies soils that have a potential for failure while "M" identifies soils that have a moving landslide. Planning staff consults with the City's Geologist in making the determination if additional geotechnical investigation is required. The soil classifications are, "Areas of Relatively Stable Ground" consisting of soil types Sbr, Sls, Sun, Sff, Sex; "Area of Potentially Unstable Ground" consisting of Pmw, Pfs, Ps, Pd and Pdf; "Areas of Unstable Ground" consisting of soil types Ms, Md and Mrf; and the final classification, "Areas of Potential Surface Faulting" consisting of Psf soils. The "Areas of Relatively Stable Ground" are and predominately level areas with moderately steep slopes underlain with bedrock. Some areas are subject to soil creep, expansive clay rich soils and maybe on fill. These soils are considered stable and usually do not require a geologic report provided that the slopes are not excessive. The City Engineer is consulted on these matters. The remaining soil classifications typically require additional geotechnical investigation, review and mitigation. These soils typically have steep slopes, aze subject to mass wasting, slumping, rockfall, shallow and deep landsliding, debris flow and surface faulting. Depending on the potential for geologic instability, the percent slope and the expertise of the City Engineer and the City's geologic consultant geologic review is conducted prior to review of the project by the Planning Commission. The results of the review aze summarized for the Planning Commission, as appropriate, and the recommendations of the report become conditions of project approval. P:~Planning~DesignReview~2001~DR-01.007.doc /'~//~~h/-~ pp l.Jli'V®OC7 File No. DR-01-007/i -01-011;19752 [~ersailles Way Additionally, any grading in the City's HR District requires City Geologist re~~iew and approval. Grading on stable sites with minor slopes, under 10%, typically does not require City Geologist review. Grading associated with unstable sites identified above is typically forwarded to the Planning Commission for review when they are associated ~t~ith discretionary permit review. Proposed Project Soil The subject site contains Sbr soil, which is classified as an "Area of Relatively Stable Ground". The average slope of the site is 5.3 percent. Therefore additional geotechnical review was not required. The City Engineer has determined that the standard conditions of approval are sufficient. Trees There are eighteen trees on site that would be exposed to some risk due to project construction. Three trees, as discussed above, would be removed in order to construct the site improvements. The three trees are an 11-inch Sweet Gum in `fine" condition, a 19-inch Coast Redwood in "fine" condition and aseven-inch Hollywood Juniper in "fair" condition. Four 36-inch box Coast Redwoods and two 24-inch box Coast Live Oaks aze the proposed replacement trees. The project driveway was redesigned pursuant to the Arborist's recommendation in order to save the 17-inch Coast Live Oak (tree #14), which is in "exceptional" condition. Tree #'s 3, 5 and 8 (a 25-inch Canary Island Pine, a 12-inch Coast Redwood and a 13-inch Coast Live Oak) would require pruning and the pruning shall be conducted by an International Society of Arboricultural certified azborist. A platform buffer shall be placed between the construction of the house and the protective fence for root protection of tree #'s 3,5,6 and 8. The Arborist's Report contains other tree preservation recommendations, which shall become conditions of approval and are included on Sheet AB of Exhibit A (the architectural drawing packet). Fireplaces The plans indicate that two fireplaces and one chimney are proposed in the new residence without stating wood or gas burning. The plans omit the chimney on the left (east) elevation of the building. The proposed conditions of approval require the plans to be revised for zone cleazance to show both chimneys and to indicate that only one fireplace may be wood burning and the other shall be gas burning and identify the fireplaces as such. Correspondence No written correspondence was received on this application at the date that the staff report • was distributed to the Planning Commission. The neighbors at 19800 Versailles Way spoke to the project planner at the counter and expressed two concerns. One concern is the departure from the ranch style architecture (in particular the type of building materials P:~Planning~Design Revic~2001~DR-O1-007.doc ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O File No. DR-01-007/i, -01-011;19751 [~ersailles Way proposed) and other is the location of the outdoor shower for the pool. The Planning Commission could condition the project to eliminate the outdoor pool shower and /or relocate it to the interior of the building. Staff has discussed the issues with the eclectic nature of the architecture in this report. At a minimum, should the Commission find merit in this concern, the applicant and architect for the forthcoming 19805 Versailles Way (which are the same for this project), could be given direction from the Planning Commission as well as staff, to include brick and wood in the details of the building and less stucco on the 19805 Versailles Way plans. The Commission could also direct the applicant to work with staff to incorporate some brick and wood into this project. Conclusion The proposed residence is designed to conform to the policies set forth in the City's Residential Design Handbook and to satisfy all of the findings required within Section 1~-45.080 of the Ciry Code. The residence does not interfere with views or privacy, preser~~es the natural landscape to the extent feasible, and will minim~e the perception of bulk so that it is compatible with the neighborhood. The proposal further satisfies all other zoning regulations in terms of allowable floor area, setbacks, maximum height and impen~ious coverage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Design Review application with conditions by adopting Resolution DR-Ol- 007/BSE-O1-001. • • • P:~Planning~Design Review~2001~DR-O1-007.doc Attachment 2 APPROVAL of RESOLUTION No. DR-O1-007/BSE-O1-001 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA LEE CHEN; Versailles Way WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Review approval for the construction of a new 5,986 square foot residence on a 40,000 square foot pazcel; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heazd and to present e~~idence; and Whereas the project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. The site is in an urbanized area and is connected to utility and roadway infrastructure and involves the construction of one single family home and associated out buildings; 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 view sheds, will avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy, in that eighteen trees are on the site and three would be removed in order to construct the project. Four 36- inch box Coast Redwood and two 24-inch box Coast Live Oak trees aze the suggested replacement trees by the City Arborist which aze included as conditions of approval and shown on Sheet C-1 of the drawings. The trees continue to provide screening and privacy to the site and adjacent properties. Additionally, the pool (and pump) is proposed to be placed in the center of the lot, which would reduce noise impacts to adjacent properties. The building on the left side screens the outdoor activities even more to the property owners on the left of the site. The carport is proposed to be 20 feet from the right side property line. The sepazation from the adjacent property appeazs adequate to protect from excessive noise impacts for two reasons. One, it is a carport which by its nature does not have a door associated with it which would make more noise to raise and lower. Two, it is a single caz carport and not a standazd two-car garage which by the nature of the increased use would create more noise exposure to adjacent residential uses. nnnn~ -~ File No. DR-01-007/L, .-01-011;19752 [~ersailles Way The proposed entry porch (at the 50 ft. setback) is identified by the use of arched windows and columns. The setback portions of the building diminish in mass or "importance" from the, street as they continue to be setback from the street. The "climinishing effect" of the setback pomons of the building is achieved by the increase in setback coupled with an alteration of the architectural detail to a simpler facade with rectangular windows. The natural landscape will be preserved insofar as practicable by des boning structures to follow the natural contours of the site and minim~ing 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 in that the lot is nearly flat with an average slope of 5.3 percent. The proposed grading is to construct the basement and swimnung pool, not to alter the topography in order to construct the residence. Additionally, eighteen trees are on the site, and three would be removed in order to construct the project. Four 36-inch four Coast Redwoods and two 24-inch Coast Live Oaks as shown on Sheet C-1 of the drawings are the replacement tree as recommended by the City's arborist. The proposed main or accessory structure in relation to structures on adjacent lots, and to the surrounding region, will minimise the perception of excessive bulk and will be integrated into the natural environment, in that the roof line is varied as the building setbacks are increased from the front property line. The project proposes stone pedimentation (vertical element) and window trim and an eave line with stone corbels (horizontal detail). The use of stone and stucco, arched and rectangular fenestration and soft colors that include taupe and white break up the mass of the building. The front entry porch is 50 feet from the front setback. Other elements of the front elevation increase iri setback from 62, 64 and to 83 feet from the front property line. As a point of reference the existing residence that would be demolished is 32 to 43 feet from the front setback, with the majority of the building line at 43 feet. The proposed main or accessory structure 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 propemes to utilize solar energy in that the structure's design incorporates elements and materials which mi_nim;ze the perception of bulk and integrate the residence into the surrounding environment. The neighborhood is an eclectic mix of "statement" architecture and ranch style homes. The proposed project fits with the eclectic nature of the neighborhood. It does however depart from the ranch style architecture. The project setbacks provide sunlight and air corridors. P:~Planning~Design Review~200ADR-Ol-007.doc ~.~` ©Ll ®12 File No. DR-01-007/b~ .-01-011;19752 [~ersailles Way ^ The proposed site development or grading plan incorporates current grading and erosion control standards used by the City in the construction requires aCity- issued building permit. Appropriate grading and erosion control methods will be required as a part of that permit. The proposed residence will conform to each of the applicable design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Guidelines and as required by Section 15- 45.0~5. In particulaz the project conforms to Policy 1 "Minimise the Perception of Bulk", .Technique #1, "Minirni7e Changes to Natural Topography"; Policy 1, Technique #3, "Use Materials and Color to Reduce Bulk"; Policy 1 Technique #4 "Minimise Building Height"; Policy 1, Technique #6 "Use of Architectural Features to Break Up Massing"; Policy 1, Technique #S, "Design Structure to Fit with Existing Neighborhood"; Policy 2, "Integrate Structures with the Environment," Technique #3, "Use Landscaping to Blend Structure with the Environment", Policy 3, "Avoid Interference with Privacy", Technique #3 "Use Landscaping to Enhance Privacy" and Policy 3, Technique #4 "Reduce Noise Impacts on Adjacent Dwellings". Now, THEREFOitE, the Planning Commission of the City of Sazatoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After cazeful consideration of the site plan, azchitectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of LEE CHEN for Design Review approval be and the same is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit °A", incorporated by reference. 2. The basement shall not be converted to a secondary dwelling unit as defined by the City's Municipal Code in absence of abiding by the City's Secondary Dwelling Unit process and obtaining the requisite building permits. The deed to the property shall include a statement to such. The deed restriction shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and shown on the Title Report prior to issuance of building permits. 3. 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 sepazate plan page and containing the following revisions: i. Two fireplaces are included on the plans and only one may be wood burning. The other fireplace shall be gas as burning. One wood burning P:~Planning~Design Review~200ADR-Ol-007.doc File No. DR-01-007/Z. -01-011;19752 [~ersailles Way fireplace with a gas starter and one gas-burning fireplace shall be noted on the drawings. Both chimneys shall be indicated on the plans: ii. All the 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 pro~~ide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans." 4. No Ordinance-size tree, with the exception of tree #'s 4,7 and 18, shall be removed without first obtaining a Tree Removal Permit. 5. 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. 6. No structure shall be permitted in any easement. 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 04/23/01 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 grid grading plans. b. 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. c. 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. d. A platform buffer shall be placed between the construction of the house and the protective fence for root protection of tree #'s 3,5,6 and 8. P:~PlanningiDesign Review~Z001~DR-O1-007.doc 000014 File No. DR-01-007/x. -01-011;19752 Versailles Way e. Tree #'s 3, 5 and 8 (a 2~-inch Canary Island Pine, a 12-inch Coast Redwood and a 13-inch Coast Live Oak) shall only be pruned by an International Society of Arboricultural certified arborist. f. Four 36- inch box Coast Redwood and two 24-inch box Coast Live Oak trees shall be planted as shown on Sheet C-1 of Exhibit A. The plantings are also required to provide year-round privacy screening. 9. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall submit to the City, in a form acceptable to the Community Development Director, security in the amount of $22,353pursuant to the report and recommendation by the City Arborist to guarantee the maintenance and preservation of trees on the subject site. 10. Prior to Final Occupancy approval, the City 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 bond shall be released. 11. Any future landscaping shall be designed and installed in accordance with the Arborist's recommendations. 12. 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 minimizing damage to tree # 1; and (2) provide regular written progress reports to the City of these super~~ision functions as they occur. FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 13. The roof covering shall be fire retardant, Uniform Building Code Class "A" prepared or built-up roofing. (Reference Uniform Fire Code Appendix 3, City of Saratoga Code 16-20:210). 14. Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in the newly constructed garage (2 heads per stall), workshops, or storage areas, which are not, constructed as habitable space. To insure proper sprinkler operation, the garage shall have a smooth, flat, horizontal ceiling. The designer/architect shall contact the San Jose Water Company to determine the size of service and meter needed to meet fire suppression and domestic requirements. (City of Saratoga Code 16-15.090[I]). 15. All driveways shall have a 14-foot minimum width plus one-foot shoulders. 16. Plans shall be checked for weed/brush abatement accessibility. 17. Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the provisions of City of Saratoga Code Article 16-60. (Alternative requirements, sprinkler systems 16-60-E). P:~PlanningiDesign Review~2001~DR-O1.007.doc File No. DR-01-007/x. -01-011;19752 [~ersailles Way 18. Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall have documentation relative to the proposed installation and shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. 19. Automatic sprinklers are required for the residential dwelling (including the square footage of the basement). Documentation of the proposed installation and all calculations shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. A four head calculated sprinkler system is required. The sprinkler system shall be installed by a licensed contractor. CITY ATTORNEY 20. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of Ciry in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. 21. Noncompliance with 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. 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. • P:~Planning~Design Review~200ADR-Ol-007.doc File No. DR-01-007/x -01-OI1;19752 t~ersailles Way PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 11th day of July 2001 by the following roll call vote: .AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: • • Secretary, Planning Commission P:\Planning\Design Review\2001\DR-O1-007.doc • T~iIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • BARRIE D. ' SATE and ASSOCIATES Horticultural Consultants 408-353-1052 Fax 408-353-1238 23535 Summit Road, Los Gatos, CA 95033 Attachment 3 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CHEN PROPERTY 17752 VERSAILLES WAY SARATOGA Prepared at the Request o~ Community Planning Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fniitvale Ave. Saratoga, ~CA 95070 Site Visit by: Michael L. Bench Consulting Arbonst March 8, 2001 Job # 03-01-056 Plan Received: 3/1/01 Plan Due: 4/3/01 DC~~C~~ I~~~ ~, APR 2 3 2001 ,J CITY OF SAItA~i u.;~, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN"I~ ~~~^~,~ . TREE SURVEY AND PRESER [ON RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CHEN PROPERTY, 17752 . ~RSAILLES WAY 2. The dumping of construction materials, especially waste materials, such as painting products, mortar, concrete, etc.) under the canopies. 3. The construction traffic, including foot traffic across the root systems, and the parking of vehicles or construction equipment under the canopies. 4. Demolition of the existing buildings, driveway, and pathways adjacent to trees resulting in bazk injuries, broken branches, or root loss. 5. The trenching across root zones for new utilities or for landscape irrigation. 6. The grading of the surface soil resulting in the removal of quantities of absorbing root tips. 7. Broken branches or bark injuries as a result of construction equipment passing too close. 8. Landscaping, inchding incompatible plant species, trenching across tree root zones for irrigation, excessive soil disturbance of tree root zones, grading to create contours, etc. Virtually any landscape feature inside a tree's root zone results in a percentage of root damage. If the percentage is significant the affected trees will decline or die. Recommendations The following mitigation suggestions are intended to reduce the extent of construction damage to acceptable levels, so that retained trees can reasonably be assured of survival without decline. If any changes to these plans occur during construction, the following may require alteration. 1. I suggest that construction period fencing' be provided and located as noted on the attached map. Fencing must be of chainlink a minimum height of 5 feet, mounted on steel posts driven 18-inches into the ground. Fencing must be in place prior to the arrival of any other materials or equipment and must remain in place until all construction is completed and given final approval. The protective fencing must not be temporarily moved during construction. Fencing must be located exactly as shown on the attached map. 2. A platform buffer must be placed between construction of the house and the protective fence for root protection of trees #3, 5, 6, and 8. A platform buffer, which consists of 4 filll inches of coarse bark chips (shredded redwood is not acceptable for this propose due to its compressibility) bespread over the existing grade, which must immediately be covered by 1-inch plywood (full sheets), tied together, and secured to prevent slippage. This platform is sufficient for workers on foot using hand carried tools. This platform must cover the entire exposed root zone azea adjacent to construction. 3. I suggest that grading on the west side of the proposed addition be revised as noted on the attached map concerning contour 470, or eliminated. ' construction period fencing 2 platform buffer • • PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORLST MARCH 8, 2001 TREE SURVEY AND PRESEF ION RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CHEN PROPERTY,IT/52 vERSAILLES WAY 4. In order to retain tree #14, the proposed driveway turnaround must be revised so that the west edge of the new driveway is no closer than 10 feet from the trunk of tree #14. 5. There must be no grading, trenching, or surface scraping beneath the driplines of retained trees, (either before or after the construction period fencing is installed or removed). Where this may conflict with drainage or other requirements our office must be consulted. 4 6. Trenches for any utilities (gas, water, phone, TV cable, etc.) must be located outside the driplines of retained trees unless specifically indicated on the enclosed plan. For any tree where this cannot be achieved, I suggest a project arborist be retained to determine acceptable locations. A 2-foot section of each trench adjacent to any tree must be left exposed for inspections by our office. 7. Supplemental irrigation must be provided to retained trees #3, 5, 6, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 during the dry months (any month receiving less than 1-inch of rainfall). Irrigate with 10 gallons for each inch of trunk diameter every two weeks throughout the construction period. This can be achieved by installation of a simple soaker hose in a circle at least 3 feet from the trunk for each tree. • 8. Spread a full 3-inch layer of coarse wood chips over the entire root, zone exposed to construction activity to trees #3, 5, 6, 8, 12, 13, (on this property) and trees # 14, 15, 16, and 17. Spreading must be done by hand. 9. Excavated soil may not be piled or dumped (even temporarily) under the canopies of trees. 10. Trenches for a drainage system must be located within 1 foot of the proposed foundation footing. Where this cannot be achieved our office must be consulted. 11. Any pruning must be done by an International Society of Arboricultural certified arborist and according to ISA Western Chapter Standards. 12. Landscape pathways and other amenities that are constructed under the canopies of trees must be constructed completely on-grade without excavation. 13. Landscape irrigation trenches, which cross a root zone, and/or excavations for any other landscape features must be no closer to a trunk than 15 times the trunk diameter from tree trunks. However, radial trenches3 may be made if the trenches reach no closer than 5 times the trunk diameter to any tree's trunk, and if the spokes of such a design are no closer than 10 feet apart at the perimeter of the canopy. 14. Sprinkler irrigation must be designed so that it does not stn'Ice the trunks of trees. • Only drip or soaker hose irrigation is allowed beneath the canopies of oak trees. 3 radla~ b'C[ICheS PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORISr MARCH 8, 2001 TREE SURVEY AND PRESET. ION RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CHEN PROPERTY. 17752 VERSAn.LES WAY 5 • 15. Lawn or other plants that require frequent irrigation must be limited to a maximum of 20% of the entire root zone and a minimum distance of seven times the trunk diameter from the trunk of oak trees. 16. Bender board or similar edging material must not be used beneath the canopies of existing trees, because its installation requires trenching of 4-6 inches, which may result in significant root damage. 17. If landscape plants are to be installed within the root zone of an oak tree it should be planted only with compatible plants. A publication about compatible plants can be obtained from the California Oak Foundation, 1212 Broadway, Suite 810, Oakland 94612. 18. Landscape materials (cobbles, decorative bark, stones, fiencing, etc.) must not be directly in contact with the bark of a tree due to the risk of disease. 19. Materials or equipment must not be stored, stockpiled, dumped under the driplines of trees, or buried on site. Any excess materials (including mortar, concrete, paint .products, etc.) must be removed from site. Value Assessment The value of the trees are addressed according to ISA Standards, Seventh Edition, 1988. The following 3 trees are expected to be removed by implementation of this plan. Their values are as follows: Tree #4 - $716 Tree #7 - $4,478 Tree #18 - $1,035 This total value ($6,230) is equivalent to four 36-inch boxed and two 24-inch boxed native specimens. Replacements are suggested. Acceptable native tree replacements are: Coast live oak - Quercus agrifolia Valley oak - Quercus lobata Big leaf maple - Acer macrophyllum California buckeye -Aesculus californica Coast Redwood -Sequoia sempervirens However, 36-inch boxed specimens and sometimes 24-inch boxed specimens may not be available at the end of the project unless the trees are secured with a grower at the onset of construction. I recommend that it be required that replacement trees be secured within 60 days of the issuance of permits. PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST MARCH 8.2001 TREE SURVEY AND PRESER .ION RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CHEN PROPERTY. 17752 VERSAII.I.ES WAY 6 The combined value of all of the other retained trees is $89,411. I suggest a bond equal to 25% ($22,353) of the total value of the trees that will be retained to assure protection. Respectfully su tt , Michael L. Bench, Associate Barr' oate, Pnn" cip MLB/sl Enclosures: Glossary of Terms Tree Data Accumulation Charts Tree Protection Before, During and After Construction Protective Fencing (1) Radial Trenching Beneath Tree Canopies (3) Platform Buffer (2) Map • PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST MARCH 8, 2001 0~0®23 r ~ c l>r ~) ulaolad ivnowaa M M E 1VAOW3a ON3WW003a ~ j w j N~ n j ~~ N j 3 Op ~ 6 - cri ~ m - ~ ui II .a C ~ ______________ a3Zlllla33 S433N d, ~ ~ ~ w S ~ ~ w S «, ~ ~ 0. ~k - --- F C (S-t) a31HM S433N ~~ ~~ a ~~ ~~ ~~ W -~-, C] 0 0 o e e e 11 (S-t) 3sv3Slo av-no~ loos n o 0 0 0 m (s-c) a3a3no~ aviio~ loos _ Y ~ ~ ~ ____ ~ ~ ---_-~ ~ ~------------------------------ - X ----- X - X x X ---- X 0 a` (S-L).1d034 ~INflal m m ------------ - -- m m (S-L) OOOM Ot/30 N~ N ~ o rn o ~ v v a ~ ~ O N ap N n ~ N ~ d -_ (S-l) 3St/3SI0 NMOaO 33x1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (S-L) S103SNI ~~ u u ~~ ~~ ~~ (S-t) JWaOlad JNINfIad ° 0 0 ~n in o ~ m n n rn n m ^__________ # 03433N S318b'O c c °c c ° c Z 1H~JI3M-oN3 3/~OW3a ~____ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ c----------°__----__-___~ --- X ---- X - X X -- x ----- X ~ JNISItJa NMOaO m v ----------------------____~~_ ~~_ ~ ~ NOIlVNO1S3a NMOaO N t~ 47 N n n a __ ~ N _ O ~ n _ ~ ~ ~JNINNIHl NMOaO ~ NV! ~ ~ i.r ------- _ ---- _ -- ~ °JNIN\/3l0 NMOaO _ ~~ Y n u n n y n N e 2° 0 3° 3° o ~ (6-£) `JNI1Va OaVZHH o ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ C »-___~__'_'_-'____ ~ fd M ~~ y W N ~ ~ (O L-Z) `JNllda NOILONOO '~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ v m ~ m ~ ~ ~ U U M U _~_ U _`~~ U U ~ ~j (S-L) 3af110f1a1S ~ 'n ao r~ m cn w N m c+~ m 't'~ -------------------- -- _---- X --- X ---- X ----- x ------ X ----- X ~ (S-l) H1lH3H ~ OFI3adS °v n °v ~ c~v N N n "' c N o ~~ ~_~ N_ Q ~_ N __~_ N _~_ N 1HJI3H m ~ a°o y~ ~°o ~ a~i ~ v ~° ~ ~ 1333 Z~ a313WMU r u en+~ n n u ~ n ~ n c n • C C C C C N C _ _ __ ~ H8U ~ ~ ~ ~ b - _ H9O fA tN fA ~ M ~ ~ M X X X X X X W31SASi1lf1W x x O N O n O O O ' O 1333 Z/l 41M a313WM N v m °o N ~ ° N rn v c c c c c c W N 8 _ - - - - ~ O M ... _ ro v~ -d H ~ ~ ~ F'~ H ~ ; ~ II II u ~ x x ~ n' ~ 8 ~ .~ v W OD .a ~ v V 0~ i~ z Z m q ~ ~ u~ eV V> M ~_ B ~ ~ CL' ~ P'~ ~ VA ^~ ... cn w v E a ~ ~ F V ~ ~ Ei ~ a co m 2S y ~ ~ a ~ ~ WZ OTC c ~~ $ q ~ .o ~ ~ E E ~ ~ ~ ~ ^~ ° ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ H U~ n n a O a w ~aaa ~-, m ~ N ~, ~ ~ a un e~V ~ n Y /~ rl /Il /1 n ~ ~ O O M M O O i--, ','+ e+~ ~--i ~..i N n Q1 !"1 d "~ d 0 ~~ s~ a rl H O ~-, (t`~) uiaolad Trnowaa C m 7 m ~ m 7 N 7 m 7 O ~ ~ IVAOW3a aN3WW003a v j N j m j ~ j o f ,°~' 6 m a3Zlllla33 S033N v w ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S v- S w ~ ~ -_w__~______w_________~ - (S-L) a31VM S033N ° " " " 0 o e a° a° o (s-L) 3SV3slo alflio~ loos o o m m ~ w n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m (S-L) a3a3no0 avno~ loos - x x x x x _____ x 0 _ __ a` (S-L)AV030 ~iNflal m - a ------------ ____- (S-L) DOOM ab'30 _- ~ N N M m `r _ ~ O tD [h r r N m a (S-L) 3St/3S10 NMOaO 33x1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ _____~w_____ - (S-L) S103SNI " " n " u " (s-L) uiaolad ~NlNnad a ,~ o O e o o o 0 ~, 0 o m m # ^3033N S319V0 v v a d v v d m --°------ --------- -- c ~ c ~ c ~ c ~ --- c ~ ---- c ~ Z 1HJI3M-ON3 3/~OW3a ' a x X X X X ---- X e ----°--------- --- m v ~JNISIda NMOaO ___ _ --- a 5 _ ----_-____w-_____ NOllb'aO1S3a NMOaO _ - c _ a ~JNINNIHl NMOaJ ao u~ v N N N M fA M fA (A M `JNINV3l0 NMOaO " " " ° ° ° (8-E) `JNIlt/a OaVZVH 3e ~ 3' °o a? 0 ~ 0 o 0 00 C ~ ---~_-- (OL-Z) JNIlVa NOILUNOO ~ M~q tll m '~' t ~ M m "' My N m "' M W ~ % ~ ~" % ~ _ ~ v ~ v v - v v c ° v ----------- -- (S-L) 3af110f1a1S " m - v w v m ~ m c~ % m x x x x x x (S-LI H1Td3H av3ads N ~ r> ~ ' r> m O -- 0 N ~ N - Of 4 f ~ f7 C7 N 1H`JI3H u'mi ~ r~'i ~ ~ ~ ~' yi u' ~ N ~ e 1333 Z~ a313WMd o a °' u m u N n co n u m N E C C - C '_ C C - C '_ H80 = o o o ui ~ m ~ H80 O ~ N vi O ~ N w N en A ~ N en O ~ N vi N vs x X X X X X W31SASillflW J x x x x 1333 7,/L 41V a313WM o ~ roi 0 ~ 0 N 0 ~ ~ ~ o of 0 0 0 ~ 0 c 0 c c c c c c m ~ een C 0 Q w ~ 8 E V ~ a a. C ~ `~' ~~ Z (/) M ~ Y ,Q 'C a D ~ m % •~• ~ ~ ~~ a ~ ~ Y ~ OC _ r B ~ q ~ m ~ ~ r V ~ o ~ C m '~ Q' ~ J ~ ffi '3 ~ m ~ G 2 % ~ J a ~ v ~ Q ~ a a B m Y F ~ (n W a c O "' 3 ~o II ~ u, E= W o~ u r. o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ II n n w eo a° a° ~~~N o$°. ~~~~ U n n o o. ~aaa a~N~~ l E13~®~~ ~ c lr~) ulaolad Trnow3a ~ ~ ~ °Q ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ ~ m ~ ~ C t'7 E IVnOW3a ON3WW003a ~ ~ ~ iy ~ ~ ~ m N c -m 3 pip ' E of ~ c ~ ~° ~ co ~ v' ~ 0 a O ~ 213ZI1112l33 Sa33N ,~ F ~, ~ w S ,~ ~ w ~ S 'n G ~ ~ -- - [= ~ (S-L) a31t/M S033N ~ " " ° ~ ° ° ~ " W O pp ~' o 0 o a° o o u (S-L) 3St13S10 atJ-1100 lOOa ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,.., m (s-L) o3a3no~ a~mo~ loos - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a __-~~-__ X X X X X X 0 a` (S-L)AN03a ~Nf1M1 m m -- - . a (S-L) DOOM OFJ30 w~ N ~ o m v O ---- -- ro m o_ ~ co m m (S-L) 3S!/3S10 NM0210 332!1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w a ___----__________-- -- -- __-- ___-- (S-L) S103SNI " ~ ~ (S-L).WilOlad ~JNINfIild °o °o .n ~n o 0 n n co rn 9 # 03033N S318V0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ,o ~ m -----------------___----~__-_ c - c c c -- c ---- c a 1H`JI3M-ON3 3/~OW3a X X X X X X ~ c ---------- -_ --- 3 a JNISIHiI NMOaO v ------------------ ------- a _~ 5 NOIIVLIO1S3a NMO2l0 C O R N r"~ ~ - ~ N V m ~ Q ~ a `JNINNIHl NMOaO it ------ -- --- --- - ~ JNIN`d310 NMOaO - ° " ° ° - " - N o 0 0 ~ (6-E) `JNIlHiI O2IVZHH o 00 0 0 0 0 rn o rn rn n c ----- ----- - - -- m ~-°, (OL-Z) JNI1Va NOILON00 "' ~ "' ~ ~ ~ ~* - ~ '~ m '"> m .0 U U U U U - U ~ G - r r ~ V (S-L) 3aL110t1a1S m m en m c~ m < m N m ~ --------------- -- X ~-- X -~- X ~---- X --- X ------- X ~ (S-L) H1lV3H o ~ o '~ o m o ~ n ~ u~ o O OV3adS ~n o ~ ~ N o N rn ~' can ~ ~~ "~ - tD t0 CD '---- t_O -"'-- N 1H~JI3H ~ en ~ vs ~ en ~ en ~ ry ~' vi ~ N ~ 1333 Z~ a313Wt110 a n °r° n ,~ n ao '~ n ao u ~ n E C C N C O C N C C Q ` x m _~~_---------- n -- n -- n - n r n ~ H90 ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~c ~ X X X X X v X W31SJlSyllflW x x x x 0 0 o r o e o N o ~ o n 1333 Z/L b 1V a313Wb'1 ~ uNi ~ r N ~ ~ ~ N °m r~ o c c c c c c a p coon H ~y ~ Q ~ II II Q ~ Y ~ ,.y X X 0 4 r~°g o m w A o 0 V V ~ ~ a ~ •~ pWp~~ OD ~ ~ >~. c F ~ ~ ~ ~+, ~ a z m a r p 0 y ce ~ ~ ~~ a ~ > ~ ~ ~ j'~ m w .~+ w m m m w ~ U u u a E'' ~ $ ~ B B $ o' Q u x x x ~ U U U U U S Oar b ~O ~O ~O ~, ~ v ~n m n ao w ~i IA N ~ n Y ~..-. i. n n .-. TREE SURVEY AND PRESEF ION RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CHEN PROPERTY,17752 . ~RSAILLES WAY • Assignment At the request of the Community Planning Department, City of Saratoga this report reviews the proposal to demolish aone-story residence and to construct a new one-story residence in the context of potential damage to or the removal of existing trees. This report further provides information about the health and structure of the trees on site, and makes recommendations by which damage to the restricted trees can be controlled to prevent significant decline. Comments and suggestions contained in this report presume that the locations of trees in relation to proposed construction aze accurately presented on the plans provided. Summary This proposal exposes eighteen trees to some level of risk by proposed construction. Two trees (#4 and #18) would be removed by implementation of this design. In addition, tree #7 would be severely damaged and will not likely survive. Replacements, which equal their values are suggested. Procedures aze suggested to mitigate the damage that would be expected. A bond equal to 25% the value of the retained trees is suggested in accordance with the levels of the expected risks. Observations There are eighteen trees on this site that aze at risk of damage by proposed construction. The attached map shows the location of these trees and their approximate canopy dimensions. Each tree has been tagged with a metallic label with an assigned number. The eighteen trees aze classified as follows: Tree #1 Trees # 2, 5, 6, 7, 13; 15, 16, 17 Tree #3 Tree #4 Tree #8, 12, 14 Tree #10 Tree #11 Tree # 18 Deodaz cedaz (Cedrus deodara) Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) canary island pine (Pinus canariensis) sweet gum (Liquidamber styraciflua) coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) sazgent cherry (Prunus sargentil~ Prunus species Hollywood juniper (Juniperus chinensis 'Kaizuka~ The health and structure of each specimen is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (Excellent Poor) on the data sheets that follow this text. This information is converted to a single descriptive rating indicating overall condition. This is intended to aid with planning. Exceptional Fine Fair Marginal Poor S ecimens S imens S imens S imens S ecimens 2,13,14 3-7,11,12,15, 1,8,9,10,17 16, 18 PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L BENCH, CONSULTIIVG ARBORIST MARCH 8, 2001 ~~~~~~ TREE SURVEY AND PRESET 7ON RECOMMENDATIONS AT 2 THE CHEN PROPERTY. 17752 • ERSAH.LES WAY • Exceptional specimens must be retained at any cost and whatever procedures aze needed to retain them in their current condition must be used. Fine specimens must be retained if possible but without major design revisions. Mitigation procedures recommended here are intended to limit damage within accepted horticultural standards in order to prevent decline. Fair specimens aze worth retaining but again without major design revisions. Mitigation must prevent further decline. Trees #2 and 13 are located on adjacent properties in addition to being in Exceptional condition. Impacts of Construction Trees #1, 2, 9, 10, and 11 would suffer minor root damage if protected by construction period fencing. Trees #3, 5, 6, and 8 would suffer significant root damage by trenching for the foundation footing and by soil compaction from construction activity on the east side of the proposed new addition. As a result of the same construction, tree #7 would suffer more severe root damage than the other four and would not be expected to survive. Trees #3, 5, 6, and 8 would likely survive in good condition if recommended mitigation procedures are implemented as suggested. Trees #3, 5 and 8 will require pruning to provide access for construction of the new addition. This pruning appears feasible. Trees #4 and #18 aze in conflict with the proposed location of the house and with the proposed driveway respectively. These trees would be removed by the implementation of this design. Trees #12 and #13 would suffer at' least moderate root damage by proposed grading to establish proposed contour 470 on the west side of the property. This proposed grading combined with the proposed driveway turnaround adjacent to tree # 14 would result in such severe root damage that tree #14 would not be .expected to survive. However, tree #14 is an Exceptiona117-inch diameter coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). It will be essential to mitigate the grading and the driveway plan as proposed in order to retain tree #14, which in my opinion must be done. Trees #15, 16 and 17 would suffer significant root damage by construction of the driveway at the location proposed. However, these trees would survive in good condition if recommended mitigation procedures are done as suggested. In addition to the specific risks noted, the retained trees may be subjected to one or more of the following damaging events that are common to construction sites: 1. The stock ' ' of materials or the sto a of a ui ment under the cano ies. • P~ ~ q P P PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST MARCH 8, 2001 ~~, • L 7 BARRIE D. ~ ATE AND ASSOCIATES Horticultural Consultants (408) 353-1052 Fax (408) 353-1238 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 GLOSSARY Co-dominant (stems, branches) equal in size and relative importance, usually associated with either the trunks or stems, or scaffold limbs (branches) in the crown. Crown -The portion of a tree above the trunk including the branches and foliage. Cultivar - A named plant selection from which identical or nearly identical plants can be produced, usually by vegetative propagation or cloning. Decurrent - A term used to describe a mature tree crown composed of branches lacking a central leader resulting in around-headed tree. Ezcurreut - A term used to describe a tree crown in which a strong central leader is present to the top of a tree with lateral branches that progressively decrease in length upward from the base. Girdling root - A root that partially or entirely encircles the trunk and/or large buttress roots, which could restrict growth and downward movement of photosynthates. Included bark -Bark which is entrapped in narrow-angled attachments of two or more stems, . branches, or a stem and branch(es). Such attachments are weakly attached and subject to splitting out. Kinked root - A taproot or a major root(s) which is sharply bent and can cause plant instability and reduction of movement of water, nutrients, and photosynthates. Root collar -The flared, lower portion of the base of a tree where the roots and stem merge. Also referred to as the "root crown". Leader -The main stem or trunk that forms the apex of the tree. Stem -The axis (trunk of a central leader tree) of a plant on which branches are attached. Temporary branches - A small branch on the trunk or between scaffold branches retained to shade, nourish, and protect the trunk of small young trees. These branches are kept small and gradually removed as the trunk develops. Definition of Woody Parts Trunk -The main stem of a tree between the ground and the lowest scaffold branch. Scaffold brancbes - In decurrent trees, the branches that form the main structure of the crown. Limb - A major structural part. Branch - A smaller part, attached to a limb or scaffold branch. Branchlet - A small part, attached to a branch. Twig -Avery small part attached to a branchlet. Leaf- The main photosynthetic organ of most plants. ~00~~~ r BARRIE D. l ATE AND ASSOCIATES Horticultural Consultants (408) 353-1052 Fax (408) 353-1238 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 TREE PROTECTION BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER CONSTRUCTION These are general recommendations And may be superseded by site-specific instructions BEFORE Plan location of trenching to avoid all possible cuts beneath tree canopies. This includes trenches for utilities, irrigation lines, cable TV and roof drains. Plan construction period fence locations which will prevern equipmern travel or material storage beneath tree canopies. Install fences before any construction related equipment is allowed on site. This includes pickup trucks. Inform subcontractors in writing that they must read this document. Require return of signed copies to demonstrate that they have read the document. Prune any tree parts, which conflict with construction between August and January. Except for pines which may be pruned between October-January. Only an ISA certified arborist, using ISA pruning instructions may be used for his work. If limbs are in conflict with the construction equipment before the certified arborist is on-site, carpenters may cut off offending parts of 6" diameter or less, leaving an 18" long stub, which should be recut later by the arborist. Under no circumstances may any party remove more than 30% of a trees foliage, or prune so that an unbalanced canopy is created. DURING Avoid use of any wheeled equipmern beneath tree canopies. Maintain fences at original location in vertical, undamaged condition until all contractors and subcontractors, including pairners are gone. Clear root collars of retained trees enough to leave 5-6 buttress roots bases visible at 12" from the trunk. Irrigate trees adjacern to construction activity during hat months (June-October). Apply 10 gallons of water per 1" of trunk diameter (measured at 4 ''/:') once per 2 week period by soaker hose. Apply water at the dripline, or adjacent to construction not around the trunk. Apply mulch to make a 3" deep layer'in all areas beneath tree canopies and inside fences. Any organic material which is non toxic may be used. AFTER Irrigate monthly with 10 gallons of water per 1" of trunk diameter with a soaker hose, placed just inside the dripline. Continue urnil 8" of rain has fallen. Avoid cutting irrigation trenches beneath tree canopies: Avoid rototilling beneath tree canopies since that will destroy the small surface roots which absorb water. Avoid installation of turf or other frequernly irrigated plants beneath tree canopies. n • • r . O '' ' ~; '~~ tt'~ r' J: 'r ~ '~ N i~~ ~ J !'rid. •: ~ ~ O y •!~4' x~ ... ~ ~: t ~ . ` .~. ~ . ~ , yy •• ~~ ~ ~ o ° ~ p., 'a c ~ ~ .°° ~ c q ~ ~ '~ a~ t O i ~ ~ ~ Q~ ~~~~ c ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~; ~r ~h ~ o ~ a ~ a~ • ~.C ~ d 'r..~ ~, ~r'p , ~G 'c c a~' C \ ~ O d Fs- ~ ~ m N ~ N O m0 ~-+ N Q ~~ U ~ O ~ ~ ~ . m ~~ oo za M~~ oo t/~ _ Q c ~U L ~ 4 n?~ N ~ w ~ m ~T 111 v N J ~ ~ ~ U ~f ,~-+ o~ 3 ~ i = o~ ~ ~ i .Y +' cts •~ s % ~ ~ O i +, ~ O i o ~ Y c v p L ~ N d c ~ ~ d ~ ~ +~ O ~~D ~ O ~ ~ O L O ~, vs . ~ ~ = Y ~ b0 0p b0 ~ 3 .r ~ '~ 'C ~ .a env O ~ b _ °~ s 'D ,+-' i u o -+ N a ' o s ~ L ~ N O ~ . ~ . 3 ~ ~s °' ~~ u u~ d ~ ~ O N ~ ~ }"'~ N oo ~ s ~ N o 3 ~ S • ~ ~ N of o ~ fQ °o •~ ~ +~ ate. ~= s v ' ~. ~~ s O ~ s +~ ~ j + ~ s n(1~03i A 1-unch ~ _ good and ~I/ood Chips Pia~l rrn Buffer for Areas beneath A 'free Canopy which d~lust Be Used for Foot "gaff c Prepared by: Barrie ®. Coate Er Associates I~orticultural Consultants (408) 353-1052 23535 Surnrnit Road dos Gatos, CA 95033 • • ~ Tree Survey and Presmation Recommendations at the BARRIE D. COATE i Chen Property, 17752 Versailles w'ay and ASSOCIATES waatsss~asz i Prepared for: z3nss~..e~~me ~ la C1a, CA 95a7D City of Saratoga, Planning Department HORTICULTURAL CONSULTANT Date: March 8 2001 CONSULTING ARBORIST ]ob # 03-01-056 Tree numbers correspond to evaluation charts. ~ ~ , .411 dimensions and tree locations I are approximate. I I BARRIE D. COATE AND ASSOCIATES ~ V Horticultural Consultants ~ (408) 353-1052 ~ I ~ ~~ Fax (408) 353.1238 ~ I ~ ,- 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 _ _ J I I _ A \\ Legend\ I \ \ ~. Drip Line of Tree Canopy 5 10. ______________protectiveFencing l p E5 , i ~ ^ ~ ~ ~\ .Zf' Relocate .~ I ~' ' til _~ _~.. ~ ''o Fence To 4 ~.. _ ~~ ' - ~ - ~s ~ s' Here Immediately ~j After Demolition ~ -:-, ~ ~~ of Shed ,~ / ~ ~ ,. ~~,r ~ •~ ~ ~. •,' R OVE EXIST ~ . ~' ~ r REMOVE EXIST ~ ~ A ~ - - SHED ~. ,~'OUSr Protective Fencing . During Demolition of Shed ~~ ... .J . ,. . ,. ,\ ,ft` t 5 ,: _, 18 ', ~ ~ Fy ~ ~ I 1 .~-~~ A~ \~\ .~- ` I I ~9a '~ ~ ~ U~ ` _,,; -- _ _T_ 3 • _, . ~~__ _.-_-._a.._ _.__ - _. __ ,~ ;, - lo~~_ ~. yi ~~:. -~ ,,r / alp 'r~~, ~ `. - t/ _ -- - j _ _,~ 1 _ -- - _~~ - - / ~ ` Platform Buffer ,\ ~ `• 1~ 1 ~' ~ BARRIE D. COATS AND ASSOCIATES 1 ~ \ 1 - - ~ ttOmtuMnl CnnsulUn4 ~_~ r _ ~ ~~~ '- i 1 lWr)353.1033 ~ - ~' r..(wrlls3a x3e 'b ]3335 Summrt Rd. tot Gatos, CA )5033 ~-1 _- ~ lY.-- • 8 ~ -_~ ; i ~ ` a Drip Linr of Tree Gtrop. ~ I / --------------Proreeme FeneinR 7 ;_ ~ ---~--!- --t ~., -- _ -- ~ 12 -- (i lterS..evuENasvv~sRmnrt~mane ~ . ` FL1YpE D.COATF ~ - - _ 8 ud ASSOC1A1F5 ~°^^eoa•. mvva..ni.. r., ~ ; ~ - _ msr - 5~ ~ ` _ Ra..a rR, ~u~ 4/ NORTM CuydSrrtyA PWwq gprtebn \ .- F,1I ~ YJ u C_ Y ~ . _ T3IMI.CONSULTAM ~Wr - _ CONSIILTINO AR310RIST i3ol~ -..__~. IARU.. ]00~ . OtLIAy - --- C .;~. ' Limit 3 - ~ Tisnrsnpa. """°°°'" '~ °~,. ' ~ ~ - ,r ~ -_ ~- ..~....e I Grading , _ 1 ~~i~l ~ i r-, merle avsr ~ • L - _ t~~ ~ ~ I j = :~~~E ,~ ~, ;~ • Here 13 BASEMENT ~~ FF i X59.0 ~~ Platform Buffer I '- - ~~~- _ I :- ~ s~os it i - ~ ~AD 16 . J r '~ j i i~ .OODI ~ - , - ~~ - ' =-r ~ ~ -- -- -- - _ - _ ~--_\_ Relocate r_,I. ~ i REYDI[ aes. ~~~ Edge of I - ~ '- _ _ _ _ ~ Driveway To -, 2 `- ~ ~ I ~ ~'/ Here ~ '_ ~ - 1 ! ~ ' - - ;1 -rr- ~~ ~ .,. y ~ - ~ ~ ~'~`.14 J D~ i 1S l6 • J • / 4 3~ ~..s a • • • a „ 3 d = U v_ . VI d Q d N t h U ~ c: . ' , P ~~ ~c~ t ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ .a aft 1 a = ~ ,• li ~I m3_i~ 5~ . f y4! 1€ 1' E~~ a~a~ ~i •1 ~ ~p p,~~ ~, IC ~•^ 8p ~~ S a .l ~ ~ ~ Ga , ~rr a p a, 3 9 'i i ~ i lE ~ ~ Ga: } F ~ ~ fl Pd ~e ~ d 8 p yayl~ ,~d~ i~0 4 1!~ i i6 g ~ a¢g~,~ ~~L~; IJ ~~ Ij#~ ~jP~; E-gg i it ~ !s 6~~~~ a1 j ,~ 7 ~ E7 i€ to 7 ~ $= ~, 'P ~~ .[ ~ #~.8 JtP~a Ef ~ ~i ~,~ ~~ ~JP~f ja a ~~1 31 .!~ 1~~ i ~~' ~ ~a r~ {~ li~a i~ !! ,,{{fi ~ ~ ~!~ I ~ le ,. - - - = - - - li! }~Ial ' '~l!] ~ ~$s::~, is aiel !a .{ t~ ~~~ ~~9a ~ a~a I~J ~~a~`~ ~*s!~~a ~ 1 ~g•g a~l ~' {i~ as Q,~71 ~~ 1 8'P 1~ ~~ f~~~~~~~$~J~f~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~1~~L~~ ~~ ~, i Ie1 8]P $17idcC` 9a a 1 ~ 8 ~ asiBit ! ~~Z~7~ a~ ~ •! ppi ~1 1 ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ s1 t~l~~~ ~~ ~~ !, ~1 ~j~ t gg~~~ E ~~~i~i~ ~E ~F~~Pf jj J ~~ f ~ ! IE ~~{ ~~ ~ ~ $ gig@~ # 4" aril{ ~~~ J~ ~ e aF ii1 ~1af •` 1 s ~. ~ iJ~ e ~ 8~ - 1 ,~ jj .~~ ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ E~~ I J~ ~r3 ! Y ~ -- ;fig e !.p J4 N ~F ~ ~ !! ~i~~~~l dE ~~ «B~ ~ j~ ~~~ d!~~:~1:~ del, _I ~. 9 s 9 4 6 Q e 1 s ;3iE ~ ~,g!$ Efdl~ '- 7. -- a - i ~ --- ~ J { ! ~ ~ - ~ - - - : e i ! ~~3~'s p `~ ~ I ; ~' ~ ~ i' ~~ ! s ~:~: !}!! a.ai~ ~ 33~t~ _ . { 1 , ~~ ~ it t - ~i ~~ !; - ~ ! 1 E: i p ~' F f .: fi .~ ~ - , , tI --- I {: S 1 - i G • {I ~ ~ ~ ~ X11 I , ~ «~.. --- J ~ ~! _ a ~ ~ . ~ W . t + _ . SS ! ~ gi~~ { B ; I i i ! f i ~ ~ I ' ~~ . ~ - o° ~ o ~ ~ '~''jT ; !~ l ~{ j 9,~ 1 ~ 1 ~tt' ;7 ~~'' n iff+~ f ~ 1' /p 7 7 lji~f PI~ If ! I u ..(V.. ~~iP!e i ~ ~ ~ . ~ _ iYl<Y l~ ~ ~ , A I ~ r - ~ _, ~ i ~ .~\.c' t -~- ~ r ~~qe; ~ ~ - - ~a: ` 1 ' `:~„ ' i I 6~ ~ ~, ''nomn vI O Q z ~~•_ a' `•i6 `{j: B a•f 1!! ~[ ~~;li !~,.. .... ~- ' ~ ~ F ' 1 ~' l I / --~'`' i r - - " p. a _.... .. . . ... ..... .... ___. ... ...- _...._. __..- ........ as 1 i. ~ f j~~~ ~i?~~]a E ~ li P i a~ ~~a ~ E 1! 1 ~ ! f a ~ ~~ ~~ ~g!a~~~~ ~ l l e ~ ~ ~ ~~e 6 r 437: ~ ;$E ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ < ~ 1 . + -1! ~Sti i•i=~fi QI{aFilt i,, ~•~Ei~ %. 3 '.t s .E .Ift~Ial,'~ j ..+.~+~ F 1 ~i%.tti 1 j ~ F Zie f 9 ' ai iil~i IE ji~i P~~:1,1ii131? .i~i~;~~ `1 y 1 ~ fly ift j,! ~~, ~ ~!;:f;, it F e ~ • 1 t1 ((II ~+f(f Fl"'" •lt+t ~ ~~: Eii el3{l is 7f lti 3 71:ii E_ 1 a ! t ~t iIEIEl~tl~i( 3++~E! ~ • ~ fjftil7t~~ a S V ii,i~ 1l~i~lii '1 19„` ~ ,ti~lE~;f [- 5 ~ ~ tt ns ~ Ilf(1-.l;~i~te)i ~ ~stS ,.~f El,;i=ics ! C ,I~11~~"{ i 7t~t it,c>,;31~ ~Iji[~el, Pi! ~ i iit}~ #{+3 1~ altF !II 3 Ie'~a.,~;: k.~i~il'tEi§;i:Etl4~le!,.F°.i~i 9~~2't=ii t ; tli! =i=1 ~ ~ ' ;' j~;~~i I ~ i;3; ; ~ f ~i.~ 4 :i ,. SF ~la ~11 ilt~i~i~ ~:~t Et~'f ~'~• g l`! ~!`s ~;i 1 ~jile,i6 kJit (ift~ Pii~ i 5 ;i ~•li~il~ :1 { ifs'! ~~~• i ~~~ e @ 4 i;i114PE!llFii~ ~ i~~~,Tli1t ~ ~:;llj ~~ dal: }P}3!! Bel~e ~z~~~ [J i ~t~1{ ~Ip~p~~' rr•P'Ef i+ ~ i ~~~f i f r2Fd~~e3 • • ~ • • • i Doss-aw lass/ rnatad7r~ 'r+aw~sr~re 'or suns ~pt• ~rxdse Rr0 tsr d'J 'VOO1dadS B45Y 1~dal L lOl ~ H 1 ~17d _ _ 'ONI SS,LF~I~OSSu AdM S3llIVSa3A ZSL6l I Ntrld 3~VNIVaO 4NV 9NIada9 ~~ o i ~ s~vnra ~ ?ISQN~'X~7 V xadNiwn3ad . 8~: ' I, ~~. ~ ~ ~iE ~ - i~ d m ~Ikl {- ~ t i „y d 3 Z,a = u ~ Z r Q~ame ,~, = U c o~ ~ ~< N ~ S v "sae ~ ~° O i ~ ~ e ' M ~ bi 0~ o ~I~ ~ ~ {~ pp N ~ 3 V C N~ ~~ ~ ~ Z ~ yu 1 ~ Q ~0 ~ 161 ~, C7 ~ ~Q ~ W - 0 o ~~I ~~~ I ~~ I i., 1 i 1 ~ p I ~ 1 ~ k$ ~y~ _~ 11 i I~ d s3 ~ ;' ~% ~ I 1 I r; ~~~ I ~'L.y~l~1 i i~ Y I J I! ~i rt ~~I~jI p~''~r I I' i ~f ~ I~N I 1. ~ C, ~ I .. P ~ ~ ~ Y.~~~ b~ I ~ ~ 4 I I " x i[l ~ 1 i ~ '< I ~ , , 3~ 3 ' i i ~ ~ 4 I ~~ I ~ ----------- LJI -~ II I ~~ ~ I I I s3 ~ ~ ~~ I ~1 ~'::# ~: mil I i ;Is I g .' I. u I l i t I g - i r- I ~ r ~ - ~ ~? ~ ---- III n ;i~, ~ i ~ ~~~ ~_ ~I Z ~~ ;;-~~I ` i I I I I .V r---~ ~ O ~~ i I ~ ~I 1 ! y~ e j ~ „ I I I Q ~~ ~ I -~1 i I .t/i P.GL i i l l .1 y $ ) 6„ S i I i i ~ r j ~ 111 ~ Il... - I ~ ~ I ~ 4 1 §~ ~ 1 1~ t• -___ 1 3 ~ 1~ h t ~ 1 I 1 ~~ I~ 3 y LJ r. _-_ ~ j ~ r i i Ili ~ L - ~~~ I I ~ I, ~~ x ~ LnJ ~ ~ -~ I 1 ~ I 3 ~®~ II ~ ~ ~ J~ I I I ~ I t '~ l( f: I I ~ ! I ~I ~'y I I ~ ' ' r~ I ~ Z I ~ L_I L,J I I I S I a I O (~ ~ I I _ 1 I ¢ ~ ~.i L.J I ' 1 ~r-- ~_ !~I II ~i i I 1 3 ~ ~ ~~'LJ I r1 ~ - I 1 r -- 1 I I ~ 1 ~ i ~{ I iii ,~ o ~ ~ T ~ I ~ ~ I i~ I I a ; , ~ ^' I ~ ~ r~i--rte-~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ I ~ I. ~~1 ~~-~L~~ I 1 I I s\ j 7 I I ~ ~~ ~; i II _~_l 1 I x ; i~ i x ~ II ~ u I I :. i, s I~- i ;~ ~ i ~' I I I i ~ I~ I u j I _ I j '' L_L_.J II i 1 ii C~iIH ~ I ~ 1 -,,-r ------7 i. 1 I I 1 ~ • • I~~ N d A `~ k ~P tl =° °c' = V o _° ~ WZ ~ ao ~ U a a ~ 'q ~ h d N ~ ~~ N - - ° N ~ ~ -• !1 I N Q 3~ E N N C j C ~ Z ? 4WL A O r ~_ h ~ y ~ .G T a ~Q~ U ~ `n O ~I QW _ ^~-~-,^ n `~ w ~~~! a. j o .I ~~ o , ~ ;-. / / yI ® ~ ~ `/ Q -'- Q I U ~~ j ~ ICI O ~ S '~" I ~~ i o I ~„ ~ ~o~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~**. E I ~.-I 1 I 7 /- / D ~ i 7 a 3 I ~ ~ LL 3 ~ g ~ l_--i _ ~ ~ cra y j I r ^~ ~~ 'J 3 I 1 o ~ L~ ------~ i = W ~ ~ ~ .i-.CL T) ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~__J y I i ~/, 4 V I a~ ~ y___li EI R r~ f _ I I i •-~- Ly ~~ i ` =________- I i i~ ~ II~~!I i i' O ! I ua r~ ~ i~ ~ =I I c~u ,; ~ - ~ ~~i ! = ~ ~~ i ~ &3 i _ ~ ~ ~; ~ -- 1... I , } s I ., a i h I~ F~ r ---- -~ '; ~ ~~ ~ I~ ~ r I' g i i ~l ;- r------, I ; ~i ~~ I ~ I _____..___:_.___'~ o ~ ~ '~ o ~ a w ~ I~ ' ' t ~I ' ' i N y __.- ~ ~ I ~ VIII-_ ''I I ~ 9 ,~ I e ~ I `jl ~ I '-~ i ~ ~ i I v~ ~ i ~ F I tJ J ~~ / ~g a ~! IF ~ I I I ti ~ I ! §' °~ ~~~ r • ~~ M ~~ t .N m 3 ::; ;~ Z ;j ~ e C ~' Q F~=.~~ O O Y ~< ¢ y a° m y m~ U O ,°°"-°, d a ~ o ~ O A ~ _ ~I 3 ~ E ~ a ~ ? O ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~j N P y C ` -D W "Nj ~ -c ,Nr, ~ o ~ a ~Z ~ U ~ ~ O g~~ §3 ~IJ ~Q m _ ,. 14j tL (L --------~- --------------------_._.._----_--...__ ..._ I - - - ~} ~ v Y ~ ~i +~. ~ - < i I ' - ~ / ~ '--` r ./ ~ {`, i ~ i i w L: ~ 'i ' ' j ~ i Y i I ~ k~~kkkkkkkkkkkkkkAkkkik I o agnno~q ooo.,n~o4~s j n 'Z7'-----es,„h '~~ I ~ i -~ Ei~ kl :P. ~ I I~ ~ ~ I j I ~. ~ ~ ~ ~i 4.__.._...: ;E:. j ~i~ k ` ~ ~ ._ j i . ~ o I I y. ! I + ~ ~ i I m• .. - .. a~ __ r h'K... .,~ I it v `' ~ ~ i i'. yy iqp ~ ~I I O '• ~ .h ~ } L ~I ' li. I o i~ Y ~ ~;,• j ~; ~... I ~ __.._..___ ~ J~_.___ ~ ~ ~ i i -f~- _. _ -~ O s ~~ ~ 1 J j k \ r I ~ ~~ _ ,~ iu i I ~~ O ~ ~ i I ~,; '~ O I I m . O r 'I m ® ~ ~ O ~ V 0 0~ ~`~ i ~ ~ ~ r Y ~ k' k' --- a 7 ` ~ Z it E y~~,~ ~ ~! t ~ \ m Fi L) C r, E.~~S :~ I -- - -- :.. ==Q== -~ ~ 0 ~ I u ~-~ lJ 11 I ...._ .__ ~--~,.,..s _. .. . ._ ___-_~ --_-_--__-_______..____._._-1 <_ • ~; ~' o ~r ` C ~ ~ N 1 e Z ~ i ~ a, .. u ~ e ¢~o°,m e d C y Q d c O u' ~ A= u a a ~ U v M A q o ~ _ I N ~ Z i~: a y 3 E ~ ~' d O ~ ~ _ ~ ~ I ~ 11 11'' W Y$ >=~ c ` d N o w I U.IZ ~ ~ ~ ,~ m U ~ ~ 0 ~, IC - "% ~Q. x c~ I 4 fQ IL ~ `rr-r-r-r-r r----- ~ ?_J_____ - - -_-_-_ -_ ' -~f Y `:~2~' , 0 1 ~ I._..._' ~-_ ~ '~ ~_.: 3 . N: •~ ~ .i' ~ ~~. ~ j I ~ i i qiq L~ 'r~( '.,~.: ili y.r- ~ i ~ I ~yi ,o-.c ~ , t l' , ' i ~ ~ .vra y' ~ .o`.c G l h ;:~: t ~ y + ya F" h ci :5 i~ ~~ -sz-~ _... .. .. _ 1 oy ~ ~y _._____.____-._.__.._________.______ __.______._________J - ~y .' •. .. : • Ii~ ` ^ H ~i.~ r `y ~ 3 u,le' =lo N y I ~ ~ r (j ~` ^ O d . V O O I Y O • u 6 ~o o :C z N O U O Q d ` ~ ~ C N Y U ~ ~ 0 rc uvl W C7 ^ Q (~ v a i I o--__~_ __- . "~ I ~ I I ~ _ li y ~I _ i-..'__'.or-__- I i n 1 I Wq I ~ a" ~ ui I i ti ~ ,~ I m I i' I ( ~ _ I Y-.q I I I ~I ~ F-° I I I II O I F- it ~ ~ I I) Q I I ~ ~ !I ,, ~ ; ; ~ _ ._. ____~_. I , 'I I ' I e-.R 1 1 ~~ , --~~--.o.c---~"'-~ it I i I __._ . I I i i ~: I % n II _. __.~. a I ~ N -~---_---'-'--- - I i, li l i ~ ^i 1; I I I I ~ Q ~ ~ ~ b. I II i 1 ~O I I` Q ~ I I r_.--_~ ~ , ~ _ -. 11 ~ i K I I /r __~ II I ' ~ I I 1 I ~ i i ~ ' ~ I Rl I E 1 II I W II , p I V w ~ ~ I I W __ ~ ! Q I, I 11AIpp d ry I I ~I, O ~ ~ I ~ I , I t ~ I I l i ~_ .~ _ I '• U ~\ -t Yy i i f N I I I ~ ~ 1~ ~ 5~ I I i I ~ •~ { it ~ 1 i ` ~~ 1 I 4 ( `I - - _-_ == ~ ~ 1i t ; a ~ i I i 1----~--- ~ a 1 1 ~c I t 8 I! i EQ I ~ ° I; Q '~ I i i ,~, ~ m I 1 ,-oA --~-- .;.~ ;r: ¢• :r.F ~.rF ~a I i 3 y d i • • • • • ITEM 3 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application No./Location: DR-O1-015/BSE-O1-021; 21345 Saratoga Hills Road Applicant/Owner: Staff Planner: Date: APN: JOHN ~ PATTI CITENAOLT/MARK THOMAS Allison Knapp, Contract Planner August 8, 2001 503-29-038 Department Head: 000001 21345 Saratoga Hills Road EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY Application filed: Application complete: Notice published: Mailing completed: Posting completed: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 04/23/01 06/07/01 07/25/01 07/26/01 08/02/01 The applicant proposes to demolish the existing 3,153 square foot, single-story residence and has requested Design Review approval to construct a new 5,837 square foot, two-story residence. The maximum height of the residence would be 26 feet. The site is 53,403 net square feet (58,239 gross square feet) and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Design Review application with conditions by adopting Resolution DR-Ol- 015BSE-O1-021. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution DR-Ol-O15/BSE-O1-021. 2. Arborist Report dated 05/23/01 3. Plans, Exhibit "A" t • • 000002 File No. DR-01-015/BSE-01-021; 21345Saratoga Hills Rad STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: R-1-40,000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential -Very Low Density MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 53,403 net square feet (58,239 gross square feet) AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 19.92%. Flat at building site with topography at a 2% slope away from the building for drainage purposes. GRADING REQUIRED: Total cubic yards of cut would be 1,261 to a maximum depth of nine feet would be necessary to construct the basement; 265 cubic yards of cut for the garage; and 415 cubic yards of cut would be necessary to construct the motor court. Total fill would be 83 cubic yards. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The proposed project consisting of construction of a new single-family residence is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. The project site is in an urbanized area and is connected to utility and roadway infrastructure and consists of constructing one single-family residence and associated out buildings. MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED: The overall color palette is proposed to be a golden flesh- or sand-tone with subtler shades of the same, save for some detail elements. The exterior finish would be a golden flesh tone stucco. A sandstone colored "random stone" exterior is proposed. The random stone would trim the entry-way, selected larger windows and anchor the building. Smaller windows would include shutters. Fenestration also includes windowsills. The entry and garage doors are proposed to be wood and painted a lighter tone than the facade of the building. Afire free faux slate roof is proposed. Exposed rafter-tails, corbels and wood beams would be stained a dark walnut. Copper gutters, downspouts and leader boxes are also proposed. The driveway and auto court pavers would also be a golden- sand or flesh-tone. Herringbone pattern brick is proposed for chimney details. A color perspective of the building is included in the Planning Commission packet. Story poles are placed on the site and snow fencing indicates ridge lines of the proposed building. (This Area Intentionally Left Blank) • P:\Planning\Nlison4StaEf Reports\21345SaratogaHillsSRkdoc OOOOO ~] File No. DR-01-015/BSF 01-021; 21345Saratoga Fulls Rad Proposal Lot Coverage: Building Footprint Driveway Walkway/Patio TOTAL (Impervious Surface) Floor Area: First Floor Second Floor Garage (Basement) TOTAL Setbacks: Height: Front Rear Left Side Right Side Residence Detached Garage 17%1 3,674 sq. ft. 4,505 sq. ft. 549 sq. ft. s,728 sq. ft. Code Requirements Maxunum Allowable 35% 3,410 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable 1,720 sq. ft. 706 sq. ft. (1,993 sq. ft.) 5,8362 sq. ft. 5,8443 Minimum Requirement 209'-6"ft. 30 ft. 66 ft. 50/60 ft. 20ft. 20 ft. 32'-8" ft. 20 ft. Maximum Allowable 26 ft. 26 ft. N/A 12 ft. 4 ' Actually 16.34%, rounded to 17 percent. z Due to rounding, would be 5,836.79 sq. ft. ' Includes penalty for lot slope over 10 percent. 4 The Planning Commission may grant up to 15 feet if the appropriate findings can be made. .i •i •i P:\PlanningWlison\Sta~Reports\21345SaratogaHillsSRkdoc OO V v O4 File No. DR-0I-OIS/BSF 01-021; 2134SSaratoga Hills Rad PROJECT DISCUSSION Design Review The applicant proposes to demolish the existing 3,153 square foot, single-story residence and has requested Design Review approval to construct a new 5,837 square foot, two-story residence. The maximum height of the residence would be 26 feet. The site is 53,403 net square feet (58,239 gross square feet) and is located within an R-1-40,000 zoning district. The project area is a mix of one- and two-story residences and varying architectural styles including some Ranch. Building materials are wood and stucco exterior walls and tile, slate and shingle roofs. There are both and older newer residences in the area. Building heights in the neighborhood range from approximately 16 feet to 26 feet. Houses are typically large and are on large lots and the vegetation is well established. Many of the structures are not visible from the road-way. The project site itself is not visible from Saratoga Hills Road. The site is setback considerably from the main rcadway via a driveway that serves the subject parcel and an adjacent developed parcel. The mature trees and vegetation also screen the site from the surrounding properties. The proposed project implements the following Residential Design Guidelines policies. • Polity 1 "Minimi.Ze the Perception of Bulh", Technique #1, "Minimize Changes to Natural Topography". The residence would be placed on the flat portion of the previously graded lot. Grading would occur to construct the driveway, basement and motor court; however, the majority of the grading is where much of the site grading has occurred. Polity 1, Technique #4, also suggests varying the roof element of a structure to reduce bulk. The plans include a front elevation of varying levels on the ground- and second-floor to accommodate different uses within the house. Articulation is also provided by the use of divided light windows and various methods of fenestration which include shutters, stone pedimentation, wooden sills and iron railing. • Policy 1, Technique #3, "Lase Materials and Color to Reduce Bulh", which suggests softening elevations by using different materials on different levels, the use of natural color and materials on the lower portions and foundations of a house and the use of materials that create horizontal proportions and Technique #6, "Use Architectural Features to Breah LIp Massing". The project proposes stone limestone and random- stone pedimentation; stucco facade; varied fenestration and corbels and exposed rafter tails to provide visual interest to the building. The varied roofline, use of different materials and varied fenestration breakup the mass of the building. • Polity 1, Technique #5, "Design Structure to Fit with Existing Neighborhood". The project site is not visible to the neighborhood. The site is accesses off a shared driveway from Saratoga Hills Road. The neighborhood is a mix of wood and stucco clad buildings with shingle, slate and file roofs. Most of the residences in the immediate project P:~PlanningWlison~StaffReports~21345SaratogaHillsSRkdoc 00000 File No. DR-01-015/BSF-01-021; 2134SSaratoga Hills Rad area cannot be seen from public right-of-ways, due to the setbacks, topography and mature vegetation. The heights of the building range from two-two story buildings at approximately 26 feet in height, two single-story residences at approximately 16 to 18 feet in height and two single-story newer residences that are approximately 24 to 26 feet in height. Forty-seven houses were surveyed in the project area. Sixteen of the houses are one-story (48%) and 31 of them (52%) are two-story. The proposed project is compatible with the neighborhood. The proposal incorporates stone, faux slate, stucco and wood into the design. Policy 3, Technique #2 "Locate Buildings to Minimize Privacy Impact", which suggests locating a structure to increase visual distance between structures to increase privacy. The two-story residence has been designed to avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy of adjacent residences. This is largely due to the proposed location at the top of a ridgeline that is surrounded by mature vegetation and trees. The view corridors are to the north, north-east and west. Additionally, the finished floor of the residence would be at 829 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The finished floor of the two-story residence to the rear (south) of the site is at approximately 842 feet above MSL. Therefore, the proposed structure would not block the views enjoyed by the occupants of this residence. The finished floor elevation of the one-story residence to the north of the site is at 798 feet above MSL. The north, north-easterly and westerly views of the occupants of this residence would not be blocked by the proposed structure. Privacy would also be assured due to the difference in topography, 31 feet, and the presence of mature trees and vegetation. The City Arborist, the Public Works Department and the Saratoga Fire District have reviewed the application. The Public Works Department approved the BSE on June 6, 2001 with no additional conditions. Comments from the Ciry Arborist and the Saratoga Fire District are included as conditions of approval. Parking The Saratoga Ciry Code requires each residence to have at least two enclosed parking spaces within a garage. The residence will have an attached 706 sq. ft. three-car garage. The guest parking area would accommodate four full sized cars. The motor court area would also accommodate approximately three to four cars. Grading Total cubic yards of cut would be 1,261 to a maximum depth of nine feet would be necessary to construct the basement; 265 cubic yards of cut for the garage; and 415 cubic yards of cut would be necessary to construct the motor court. Total fill would be 83 cubic yards. The project does not require Planning Commission action on a grading plan. The information is provided as background for the Commission. • P:\Plannin~Allison~Staff Reports\21345SatatogaHillsSRkdoc 0 0 o O O^ File No. DR-01-015/BSE-01-021; 21345Saratoga HzIlsRad Geotechnical Review The subject site contains Sbr and Ps soils. Sbr soil is classified as an "Area of Relatively Stable Ground". Ps is classified as "Area of Potentially Unstable Ground ". The Sbr soil is subject to soil creep and settlement. Liquefication is possible during strong earthquakes. Ps soils are characterized by gently to moderate steep slopes underlain by relatively unstable material including landslide debris, colluvium and weak bedrock. The slope of the site is 20 percent on average and ranges in topography from a gentle to moderately steep gradient of 30 percent. The proposed residence is located on top of the ridge of the site. The City required additional geotechnical review. The geotechnical report prepared by Freemen-Kern Associates (March 30, 2001) was peer reviewed by the City's geotechnical consultant. On June 1, 2001 the Engineering Department issued geotechnical clearance for the project. The report found that previous grading of the site, associated with development of the existing house and driveway, resulted in fills and cuts along the driveway and front courtyard. A shallow prism fill, present along the northeast corner of the site, is partially retained by a set of retaining walls. The site is underlain by sedimentary bedrock materials of the Santa Clara Formation that consists of conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone and potentially expansive claystone. The bedrock is overlain by unconsolidated colluvium consisting of poorly sorted gravel, sand, silt and clay. Mapped traces of the potentially active Berrocal fault and the active San Andreas fault are approximately 4,000 and 2.4 miles of the site, respectively. The proposed residence is partially constrained by instability of adjacent slopes, potential instability of temporary basement cuts, expansive materials, and the susceptibility to strong seismic ground shaking. Project design criteria identified in the Freemen-Kern report along with the additional conditions of approval from the Engineering Division shall be conditions of project approval. The Freemen-Kern report identifies site preparation, grading and compaction methods and retaining wall design and surface drainage design, which shall be employed to develop the site. The Public Works Department has identified the following additional conditions which shall be employed for site development. 1. A Grading and Drainage Plan, depicting the current proposed site development plan (including locations and elevations of the basement, garage and motor court), shall be prepared by the applicant's civil consultants. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval by the Public Works Department. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the final development plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations) to ensure that the plans, specifications and details accurately reflect the consultants' recommendations. • P:\Plannin~Allison\Staff Reports\21345SaratogaHillsSRkdoc 1'~J OooOO / File No. DR-01-015/BSF 01-021; 21345Saratoga Hills Rad The results of the plan review shall be summarized by the Project Geotechnical Engineer in a letter(s) and submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. 2. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for fill keyways, and foundation construction prior to placement of fill, steel and concrete. The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter(s) and submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval prior to finalization of Grading Permit. 3. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the City Geotechnical Consultant's review of the prior to project Zone Clearance. 4. The owner (applicant) shall enter into agreement holding the City of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions. Trees There are 15 trees on the site that are at risk of damage by the proposed construction. The trees are an 11-inch European Olive (#1 rated as a fine specimen); aseven-inch Japanese Maple (#2 rated as a fine specimen); seven Monterey Pines consisting of a40" fair specimen (#3), a 26" marginal specimen (#4), a 17" marginal specimen (#5), a 24" exceptional specimen (#6), a 28" fine specunen (#13), a 1T' dead specimen (#14) and a 25" fair specimen (#15); and five Coast Live Oaks consisting of a 24" fair specimen (#8), a 2T' exceptional specimen (#9), a 16" poor specimen (#10), a 12" exceptional specimen (#11) and aseven- inch exceptional specimen (#12). Tree # 1, and 2 would be removed due to construction and tree # 7 would suffer severe root damage. Tree # 13 could be saved by relocating the utility lines ten feet to the north. This recommendation is included as a condition of approval, along with all the recommendations of the arborist's report. Replacement value of the trees is identified as $2,964. Replacement trees would be two 36'-box specimens. The applicant has indicated that the replacement trees would be Coast Redwood. Fireplaces The plans indicate that four fireplaces of which three would be gas-burning and one wood- burning are proposed. Three chimneys are proposed in the new residence. • P:~Planning~Allison\Staff Reports~21345SaratogaHillsSRkdoc O 00008 File No. DR-01-015/BSE-01-021; 21345Saratoga Hills Rad Correspondence No written correspondence was received on this application at the date that the staff report was distributed to the Planning Commission. Conclusion The proposed residence is designed to conform to the policies set forth in the City's Residential Design Handbook and to satisfy all of the findings required within Section 15- 45.080 of the Ciry Code. The residence does not interfere with views or privacy, preserves the natural landscape to the extent feasible, and will minimise the perception of bulk so. that it is compatible with the neighborhood. The proposal further satisfies all other zoning regulations in terms of allowable floor area, setbacks, maximum height and impervious coverage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the Design Review application with conditions by adopting Resolution DR-O1-015 and BSE-O1-021. • • P:~PlanningW lison\Staff Reports~21345Sa[a[ogaHillsSRkdoc 000009 T~iIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ~_~ 000010 Attachment 1 APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. DR-O1-015BSE-O1-021 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA JOHN ~ PATTI CITENAOLT; 21345 Saratoga Hills Road WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Review approval for the construction of a new 5,837 square foot residence on a 53,408 net square foot parcel (58,239 gross square foot); 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 project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. The site is in an urbanized area and is connected to utility and roadway infrastructure and .involves the construction of one single family home and associated out buildings; 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 view sheds, will avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy, in that the project site is not visible to the neighborhood. The site is accesses off a shared driveway from Saratoga Hills Road. The neighborhood is a mix of wood and stucco clad buildings with shingle, slate and file roofs. Most of the residences in the immediate project area cannot be seen from public right-of-ways, due to the setbacks, topography and mature vegetation. The heights of the building range from two-two story buildings at approximately 26 feet in height, two single-story residences at approximately 16 to 18 feet in height and two single-story newer residences that are approximately 24 to 26 feet in height. Forty-seven houses were surveyed in the project area. Sixteen of the houses are one-story (48%) and 31 of them (52%) are two-story. The proposed project is compatible with the neighborhood. The proposal incorporates stone, faux slate, stucco and wood into the design. • Additionally, the two-story residence has been designed to avoid unreasonable interference with views and privacy of adjacent residences. This is largely due to the proposed location at the top of a ridgeline that is surrounded by mature vegetation and trees. The view corridors are to the north, north-east and west. Additionally, the finished floor of the residence would be at 829 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The finished floor of the two-story residence to the rear (south) of 000011 File No. DR-01-015/BSE-01-021; 21345Saratoga Hills Rad the site is at approximately 842 feet above MSL. Therefore, the proposed structure would not block the views enjoyed by the occupants of this residence. The finished floor elevation of the one-story residence to the north of the site is at 798 feet above MSL. The north, north-easterly and westerly views of the occupants of this residence would not be blocked by the proposed structure. Privacy would also be assured due to the difference in topography, 31 Eeet, and the presence of mature trees and vegetation. • The natural landscape will be preserved insofar as practicable by designing structures to follow the natural contours of the site and minimizing tree and soil removal; grade changes will be minirrii7ed and will be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas and undeveloped areas in that the residence would be placed on the flat portion of the previously graded lot. Grading would occur to construct the driveway, basement and motor court; however, the majority of the grading is where much of the site grading has occurred. • The proposed main or accessory structure in relation to structures on adjacent lots, and to the surrounding region, will minimize the perception of excessive bulk and will be integrated into the natural environment, in that the existing mature vegetation would remain which screens views. Additionally, The plans include a front elevation of varying levels on the ground- and second-floor to accommodate different uses within the house. Articulation is also provided by the use of divided light windows and various methods of fenestration which include shutters, stone pedimentation, wooden sills and iron railing. The plans include a front elevation of varying levels on the ground- and second-floor to accommodate different uses within the house. Articulation is also provided by the use of divided light windows and various methods of fenestration which include shutters, stone pedimentation, wooden sills andiron railing. • The proposed main or accessory structure 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 in that ^ The proposed site development or grading plan incorporates current grading and erosion control standards used by the City in that the construction requires aCity- issued building and grading permit. Appropriate grading and erosion control methods will be required as a part of that permit. The proposed residence will conform to each of the applicable design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Guidelines and as required by Section 15- 45.055. In particular the project conforms to Policy 1, Technique #1, Policy 1, Technique #4; Policy 3, Technique #2; Policy 1, Technique #5; and Policy 3, Technique #2. P:U'Iannin~Allison\Staff Reports~21345SaratogaHillsSRkdoc 000012 File No. DR-0I-OISBSF-01-021; 21345Saratoga Hi11s Rad NOW THEREFO RE, the Plamung Commiss>on of the City of Saratoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of JOHN ~ PATTI CHENAULT for Design Review approval and the same is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The development shall be located and constructed as shown on Exhibit "A", 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 and containing the following revisions: i. A maximum of one wood-burning fireplace is permitted. ii. All the recommendations of the Ciry Arborist (dated may 29, 2001) 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 Ciry, the RCE or LLS of record shall provide a written certification that all building setbacks are per the approved plans." v. The pool equipment shall be removed from the interior side yard setback area and be placed near or behind the carport. The Saratoga Zoning Ordinance (Section 15-80.030 (b) (1)) prohibits mechanical equipment from being placed within any setback areas. The placement of the equipment shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 3. No Ordinance-size with the exception of tree #'s 1 and 2 shall be removed without first obtaining a Tree Removal Permit. Two 36-inch box Coast Redwood trees shall be planted as the replacement trees. 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. P:~PlanningiAllison\Sraff Repocts~21345SacatogaHillsSRkdoc 000013 File No. DR-0I-OISBSF-01-021; 21345Saratoga Hi1lsRad 6. 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. 7. Apply for and secure an encroachment permit for the new driveway approach. The permit process is through the Public Works Department. B. CITY ARBORIST 1. All recommendations in the City Arborist's Report dated 05/29/01 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. 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. c. 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. d. Plant two 36-inch box Coast Redwood trees as replacement trees. e. The utility lines shall be located 10 feet to the north to protect tree #13, a 28" Monterey Pine. 2. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall submit to the Ciry, in a form acceptable to the Community Development Director, security in the amount of $6,822 pursuant to the report and recommendation by the City Arborist to guarantee the maintenance and preservation of trees on the subject site. 3. 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 bond shall be released. 4. Any future landscaping shall be designed and installed in accordance with the Arborist's recommendations. • P:~PlanningWlison\Staff Reports~21345SatatogaHillsSRkdoc O 0o O File No. DR-01-015/BSF 01-021; 21345Saratoga Hi1lsRad C. FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 1. The roof covering shall be-fire retardant, Uniform Building Code Class "A" prepared or built-up roofing. (Reference Uniform Fire Code Appendix 3, Ciry of Saratoga Code 16-20:210). 2. Automatic sprinklers shall be installed in the newly constructed garage (2 heads per stall), workshops, or storage areas, which are not, constructed as habitable space. To insure proper sprinkler operation, the garage shall have a smooth, flat, horizontal ceiling. The designer/architect shall contact the San Jose Water Company to determine the size of service and meter needed to meet fire suppression and domestic requirements. (City of Saratoga Code 16-15.090[I]). 3. All driveways shall have a 14-foot minimum width plus one-foot shoulders. Slopes from 11% to 15% shall be surfaced using 2.5" of A.C. or better on a 6" aggregate base from a public street to the proposed dwelling. Driveway shall have a minimum inside radius of 21 feet. 4. A turn around shall be constructed and shall be constructed and shall have a 33' outside radius. Other approved types must meet the requirements of the fire district. Details shall be shown on the building plans and approved by the fire district. 5. Provide a parking area for two emergency vehicles at the proposed dwelling site or as required by the fire district. Details shall be shown on the building plans. 6. Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the City of Saratoga Code Article 16-60. (Alternative requirements, sprinkler systems, l6-60-E). 7. Early Warning Fire Alarm System shall have documentation relative to the proposed installation and shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. 8. Automatic sprinklers are required for the residential dwelling (including the square footage of the basement). Documentation of the proposed installation and all calculations shall be submitted to the fire district for approval. A four head calculated sprinkler system is required. The sprinkler system shall be installed by a licensed contractor. Sprinkler system shall be NPFA 13R, no exceptions. D. Public Works Department 1. A Grading and Drainage Plan, depicting the current proposed site development plan (including locations and elevations of the basement, garage and motor court), shall be prepared by the applicant's civil consultants. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be submitted to the Ciry for review and approval by the Public Works Department. P:~PlanninglAllison\Staff Reports~21345SaratogaH i11sSRkdoc 000015 File No. DR-0I-OISBSF 01-021; 21345Saratoga Hills Rad 2. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the final development plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations) to ensure that the plans, specifications and details accurately reflect the consultants' recommendations. 3. The results of the plan review shall be summarized by the Project Geotechnical Engineer in a letter(s) and submitted to the Public Works Department for re~~iew and approval prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. 4. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall~inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for fill keyways, and foundation construction prior to placement of fill, steel and concrete. 5. The results of these inspections and the as-built conditions of the project shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter(s) and submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval prior to finalization of Grading Permit. 6. The owner (applicant) shall pay any outstanding fees associated with the Ciry Geotechnical Consultant's review of the prior to project Zone Clearance. 7. The owner (applicant) shall enter into agreement holding the Ciry of Saratoga harmless from any claims or liabilities caused by or arising out of soil or slope instability, slides, slope failure or other soil related and/or erosion related conditions. 8. Comply with all the recommendations of the Freeman-Kern Geotechnical Report dated, March 30, 2001. E. CITY ATTORNEY 1. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. 2. 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. • • • P:\Planning\Allison\StafEReports\21345SatatogaH i1IsSRkdoc 000016 File No. DR-01-015/BSE-01-021; 21345Saratoga Hi1lsRad Section 2. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval v~~i1l 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 Ciry 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 8th day of August 2001 by the following roll call vote: • AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant, and Property Owner or Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the recommended time frames approved by the City Planning Commission. • Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date P:\PlanningW lison\Staff Reports\21345SaratogaHillsSRkdoc 00001'7 • T~iIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • • 000018 BARRIE D. C~~~TE and ASSOCIATES Attachment 2 Horticultural Consultants 408-353-1052 23535 Summit Road., Los Gatos, CA 95030 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION RECOMA~IENDATIONS AT THE CHENAULT PROPERTY 21345 SARATOGA HILLS ROAD SARATOGA Prepared at the Request of L.~ • Allison Knapp Community Planning Dept. City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 ` Site Visit by: Michael L. Bench Consulting Arborist May 23, 2001 Job # OS-01-105 Plan Received: 4/30 Plan Due: 5/29 `J ~~~Q~ U .JUN 0 5 2001 C[TY OF SARATOGA CO",9".gUN1TYDEVELOP,I~ENT . n00019 "TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVAi. _ .~ RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CI~NAULT PROPL - . Y 2134] SARATCXiA HILLS ROAD SARATOGA Assignment At the request of Allison Knapp, Planning Department, City of Saratoga this report reviews the proposal to demolish aone-story residence and construct a new two-story residence with a basement in the context of potential damage to or the removal of existing trees. This report further provides information about the health and structure of the trees on site, and makes recommendations by which damage to them can be restricted to prevent significant decline. Comments and suggestions contained in this report presume that the locations of trees in relation to proposed construction are accurately presented on the plans provided. Summary This proposal exposes 15 trees to some level of risk by construction. Two trees (#1 and 2) will be removed by implementation of this design. Replacement trees, which equal the values of the trees removed, are suggested. Procedures are suggested to mitigate the damage to trees to be retained. A bond equal to 20% the value of the retained trees is suggested in accordance with the levels of the expected risks. Observations There are 15 trees on this site that are at risk of damage by proposed construction. The attached map shows the locations of these trees and their approximate canopy dimensions. Each tree has been tagged with a metallic label indicating its assigned number. The 15 trees are classified as follows: Tree # 1 European olive (Ulea europea) Tree #2 Japanese maple (Ater palmatum) Trees #3-6, 13-15 Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) Trees #8-12 coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) The health and structure of each specimen is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (Excellent -Poor) on the data sheets that follow this text. Please note that each trees structure is distinguished from health. The structure rating is a visual evaluation of each tree's ability to remain standing and to maintain its branching without breaking or splitting apart. Damage of this nature can occur despite exceptional health. Also, structure is not an aesthetic focus. A tree that has an excellent structure may not necessarily be aesthetically pleasing. Because the various combinations of health and structure sometimes require interpretation, the combination of health and structure ratings for the 15 trees are converted to individual descriptive ratings as follows: PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST MAY 23.2001 000020 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVA"I,.~.•i RECOMIvv1EIETIDATIONS ATTHE CHENAULT PROPL... Y ~_ 21345 SARATOGA DILLS ROAD SARATOGA • Exceptional S ecimens Fine S ecimens Fair S ecimens Marginal S imens Poor S ecimens 6, 9, 11, 12 1, 2, 13 3, 7, 8, 15 4, 5 10 Dead Specimens 14 Exceptional specimens must be retained at any cost and whatever procedures are needed to retain them in their current condition must be used. Fine specimens must be retained if possible but without major design revisions. Mitigation procedures recommended here are intended to limit damage within accepted horticultural standards in order to prevent decline. Fair specimens'are worth retaining but again without major design revisions. Mitigation must prevent further decline. Marginal specimens are typically worth retaining but could be removed if necessary to facilitate construction. Mitigations recommended here are intended to prevent significant decline. Poor specimens cannot significantly improve regardless of care. For any which are considered hazardous, removal is recommended. For those retained, mitigation may not be typically requested. Impacts of Construction Trees # 1 and 2 are in conflict with construction and would be removed by implementation of this design. Tree #7 would be so severely damaged that it would not be expected to survive. In this sense, it is considered in conflict with construction. Both the new gas line and the new electrical line, as proposed, would severely impact the root system of tree # 13, a multi-stem Monterey pine in Fine condition. If constructed as proposed, this fine specimen would likely decline significantly, or may die. If these new utility lines were relocated 10 feet toward the north, the specimen should survive in good condition. In addition to the specific risks noted, the retained trees may be subjected to one or more of the following damaging events that are common to construction sites: 1. The stockpiling of materials or the storage of equipment under the canopies. 2. The dumping of construction materials, especially waste materials, such as painting products, mortar, concrete, etc.} under the canopies. PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST MAY 23.2001 nn[1(l21 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVAI. _. RECOM]vIENDATIONS AT THE GHENAULT PROPi ~' 2134.1 SARATOGA HILLS ROAD SARATOGA 3. The construction traffic, including foot traffic across the root systems, and the parking of vehicles or construction equipment under the canopies. 4. Demolition of the existing buildings, driveway, and pathways adjacent to trees resulting in bark injuries, broken branches, or root loss. 5. The excavations for foundation or for other construction adjacent to trees. 6. The trenching across root zones for new utilities or for landscape irrigation. 7. The grading of the surface soil resulting in the removal of quantities of absorbing root tips. 8. Broken branches or bark injuries as a result of construction equipment passing too close. 9. Landscaping, including incompatible plant species, trenching across tree root zones for irrigation, excessive soil disturbance of tree root zones, grading to create contours, etc. Virtually any landscape feature inside a tree's root zone results in a percentage of root damage. If the percentage is significant the affected trees will decline or die. Recoro roendations The following mitigation suggestions are intended to reduce the extent of construction damage to acceptable levels, so that retained trees can reasonably be assured of survival without decline. If any changes to these plans occur during construction, the following may require alteration. I suggest that construction period. fencing be provided and located as noted on the attached map. Fencing must be of chainlink a minimum height of 5 feet, mounted on steel posts driven 18-inches into the ground. Fencing must be in place prior to the arrival of any other materials or equipment and must remain in place until all construction is completed and given final approval. The protective fencing must not be temporarily moved during construction. Fencing must be located exactly as shown on the attached map. 2. I recommend that the proposed new gas lines and the proposed new electrical line between trees # 13 and 15 be relocated 10 feet toward the north. 3. There must be no grading, trenching, or surface scraping beneath the driplines of retained trees, (either before or after the construction period fencing is installed or removed). Where this may conflict with drainage or other requirements our office must be consulted. 4. Trenches for any utilities (gas, water, phone, TV .cable, etc.) must•be located outside the driplines of retained trees unless specifically indicated on the enclosed plan. For any tree where this cannot be achieved, I suggest a project arborist be retained to determine acceptable locations. A 2-foot section of each trench adjacent to any tree must be left exposed for inspections by our office. 5. Excavated soil may not be piled or dumped (even temporarily) under the canopies of trees. Loose soil must not be allowed to slide down slope to cover the root collars of retained trees. If this occurs, the soil must be excavated by hand to the original grade PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST MAY 23, 2001 000022 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVAI i~N RECOMIvv~ENDATIONS AT THE CHENAULT PROP6.. i Y 4 2134 SARATOGA HILLS ROAD SARATOGA and may require a retaining wall (dried laid stones, such as cobbles or rip rap set without a footing) to prevent further soil encroachment. 6. Trenches for a drainage system must be outside the protective fences as noted on the attached map. For any area where this cannot be achieved our office must be consulted. 7. Any pruning must be done by an International Society of Arboricultural certified arborist and according to ISA Western Chapter Standards. 8. Landscape. pathways and other amenities that are constructed under the canopies of trees must be constructed completely on-grade without excavation. 9. Landscape irrigation trenches, which cross a root zone, and/or excavations for any other landscape features must be no closer to a trunk than 15 times the trunk diameter from tree trunks. However, radial trenches may be made if the trenches reach no closer than 5 times the trunk diameter to any tree's trunk, and if the spokes of such a design are no closer than l 0 feet apart at the perimeter of the canopy. 10. Sprinkler irrigation must be designed so that it does not strike the trunks of trees. Only drip or soaker hose irrigation is allowed beneath the canopies of oak trees. 1 l .Lawn or other plants that require frequent irrigation must be limited to a maximum of 20% of the entire root zone and a minimum distance of seven times the trunk diameter from the trunk of oak trees. l2. Bender board or similar edging material must not be used beneath the canopies of existing trees, because its installation requires trenching of 4-6 inches, which may result in significant root damage. 13. If landscape plants aze to be installed within the root zone of an oak tree it should be planted only with compatible plants. A publication about compatible plants can be obtained from the California Oak Foundation, 1212 Broadway, Suite 810, Oakland 94612. ]4. Landscape materials (cobbles, decorative bark, stones, fencing, etc.) must not be directly in contact with the bark of a tree due to the risk of disease. 15. Drain dissipators or downspouts must be relocated, if trees are in the path of discharge. The discharge must be directed a minimum of 15 feet to the side of the trunk of any tree. 16. Materials or equipment must not be stored, stockpiled, dumped under the driplines of trees, or buried on site. Any excess materials (including mortar, concrete, paint products, etc.) must be removed from site. PREPARED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST MAY 23, 2001 nno023 TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVAI,~N RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE CHENALJLT PROPt;.. i Y 21345 SARATOGA HILLS ROAD SARATOGA Value Assessment The value of the trees are addressed according to ISA Standards, Seventh Edition, 1988. Tree #1 has a value of $1,389, which is equivalent to one 36-inch boxed native specimen. Tree #2 has a value of $1,575, which is also equivalent to one 36-inch boxed native specimens. Replacements are suggested. Acceptable native tree replacements are: Coast live oak - Quercus agrifolia Valley oak - Quercus lobata Big leaf maple - Acer macrophyllum California buckeye - Aesculus californica Coast Redwood -Sequoia sempervirens However, 36-inch boxed specimens and sometimes 24-inch boxed specimens may not be available at the end of the project unless the trees are secured with a grower at the onset of construction. I recommend that it be required that replacement trees be secured within 60 days of the issuance of permits. The combined value of all of the other retained trees is $34,1 l 0. I suggest a bond equal to 20% ($6,822) of the total value of these trees to assure their protection. Respectfully su ed, .~-~-^^w ~"~ Michael L. B, Assoc~i+ate • ~, cl;~ Ba a D. Coate, Principal. MLB/sl Enclosures: Glossary of Terms Tree Data Accumulation Charts Tree Protection Before, During and After Construction Protective Fencing Radial Trenching Beneath Tree Canopies Map PREPAf2ED BY: MICHAEL L. BENCH, CONSULTING ARBORIST MAY 23, 2001 0 O O ~-, '~ rn x O e~ M t~ N GJ id "~ '~ I--, .a.. s~ H O 1~ H a 3 II W Ic-N ulaOlad ~vnoWaa ~ c E IVnOW3a ON3WW003a ~ ~ ~ In ~ ~ rn ~ ~ ~ rn ~ m o ------- ~ ~ ------- > ~ V 2i3Z11i12133 Sa33N ,A o ~ o ~ ,A o ~ o a~ o (S-L) a31VM S433N 11 II 11 II 11 11 (S-l) 3Stf3S10 aMIOO lOOa o o °~i o o 0 0 c° <° m m m r E m (S-L) 43213A00 aH11001002i ~ ------- ~ ------- ~ ------- ~ ------- ~ ------- ~ -------------------------------------- ------- X x X X x '< o ------- ------ ------- ------- ------- a` (S-L)Ab030 ~INflal m °i ~ (S-L) DOOM 01/30 ~ N o r~i N m 0 a ___________________________________» _______ C7 N ___-___ aD _-_____ o ____-__ tT ~ -___-__ aD -__-_- f° i,~ (S-L) 3S1/3S10 NM0210 33a1 a -------------------------------------- ------- ~ ------- ~ ------- ~ ------- ~ ------- ~ ------- ~ (S-L) 51033NI II 11 it 11 11 11 (S-L).WaORid JNINfIad ~ ~ ~ 0 o --------------------------------------- ------- ~ r ------- u~ r ------- o m ------ u7 `* ------- u~ ~ ------- o ~ # 03033N S3181/0 . a+ d ------------------------------------- ------- ~ t5 ------- £ 25 ------- °Fr ~ ------ ~ 25 ------- ~ ° ------- ~ S c ----------1HJI3M_ON33nOW3a ------- X X c x x x t x ~ JNISIb'a NMOa0 V -------------------------------------- ------- a E 'c NOI1VaO1S3a NM0210 ~ -------------------------------°----- ------- afOO ------- rn ----- ~ ------- rn ------- ~ ------ ~ a JNINNIHl NMOa0 coi ~ ° ~ °D- -------------------------------------- ------- e» ------- ea ------- es ----- eri ------- v- ----- esl JNINV3l0 NMOa0 u u n n n u (6-E)'JNIlb21OaNZNH 0 o rn 0 r 0 c~ 0 r~ 0 r~ 0 r> c -; -------------------------------------- (OL-Z) JN111/a NOIL0N00 ------- ~* ~ ------- ~ ~ ------ o ~ ------- m W ------- m ~ ------- N ___»_ U ° U is-L) 3anl~nals M N ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ y N ------- x ------- x ------- x ------- X ------- >C ------- X (S-L) H1lV3H ~ m N av3ads N < .~-- ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ N N ~ I() ~ N ______________________________________ _______ ; ~ M ____--_ r ___-___ ~ _-_____ ~ -______ ~ ____»_ N 1H`J13H ~ ---- vi "' eri o v ~"' e» o ~ ~ eA o ~ ea o ~ vs c 133 Z19~ a313WM0 8 ~ N 11 ------ ~ E 11 ------- N '~ II ------- m N II °' -~ --- II ~O N ---- 11 ~ - ~ H90 ,°~ - - - - ~ ~ -------------------------------------- H90 ------- ~ h ~ ------- I° h ~ ------- ih h ~ ------- 1~ ~ ------- r ~ ------- h w -------------------------------------- ------ X ------- X ------ X __-- X ------ >C ------ X W31SAS-Illf1W x x ~ -------------------------------------- HEO ------ o r N ------- o ao ~' ------- o m N ------- o ~ ------- o r N ------- o cal v r v N , ~ N ... d W c c H c c N c y c H - F Ov ~~ ~ 0 E Q ~ E V Z m ~ V] ~ ~ C d$ a m ~ 0 ~ m ~ c ~ c c c p~ ~~ ~ ~ OC ~ `~ ~ ~ m a a L = a a a o m ~ Q °' ~ ~ ! -~E~~~ ~ w o ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ c ~ ~;~~~~ ~ y Y N ch v u7 ~° 0 ch N ~ rr w 0 00 ea G. ~ O M O Q ~ ~ ~ II u n w ec a° a° x ~ ~_~pp _ 1"'~ 1"1 1'-~ 117 W o w ~,~`~ n' U v~ p u n Q n x xx x ,~ ^, 0 0 0 w ~ a ~ a. ~i If1 N ~ n nnnn-~C 0 e=1 O i O O w•-, "~ ..~.I x bD O e~ ~~1 M N Q i--, r~r `V w~ W H O 11 l>~~1 Allaolad ~vnow3a v E -----ldnOW3a aN3WW003a - - ,N a~ m ~ rn a~ ~ ~ o d ~ ~ v d c0 ~ d r ~ ~ ~ a~ m ~ --- a3Zlllla33 S033N - -___ d' ~ F --__'-_ ~ en '~ F -___--- O ~ vs `~ F -__--_- ~ rn `~ F _ ----- N en ~ ----- ~ fN ~ ° ------ F - (S-l) a31tJM S033N II u u a u u (S-L) 3Sb'3S10 aVIIOO lOOa o I°c~i ~°c~i a o o °r~i - ------------------------------------ ------- co ~o co cn r n w m (S-l) 03a3n00 atJll00 lOOa ~ ------- ~ ------- ~"> ~ ------- ~ ------- M ~ ------- ~ o -------------------------------------- ------- X X X X X X ------- ------- ------- ------ ----- a` (S-l).l!l03O NNnal a 01 -------------------- ----------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- w D a -------------------------------------- ------- ------ _ ai ------- ai ----- ~ ------- ri ------- (S-L) 3S1I3SI0 NMOaO 33x1 a --- - ----------------------- ------- ~ ------- ~ ------ ~ ------ ~ ------- ~ ------- ~ (S-~) S103SN1 u u u u u n (S-L) AllaOlad ONINnad c °~ ° o ° 0 o co ~ r o .- co o ~ ~ ~ # 03033N S319d0 ar Z -------------------------------------- ~ - ------- ~ ~ ------- ~ ~ ----- c 8 ------ ~ ~ ------- ~ ~ ------ ~ 4 c 1H J13M ON3 3nOW3a -------------------------------------- ------- X ------- X ------- X ------- X ------- X ------- c X ~ JNISit/a NMOaO V -------------------------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- a E ' N0111/aO1S3a NMOa~ ° r- e ` -------------------------------------- ------- ~ _-_-_-- N ------_ ~ _______ N ____-_- N __----- ~ tL JNINNIHl NMOaO _ ~ N ~ ~ _ n °' ----------------------- --------------- ------- "' ------ '~' ------- ~, ------- ~ ------ ~ ------- v~ JNIN`d310 NMOa~ II II II u u u (6-£) ~JNIlVa Oab~Z`dH 0 0 ° 0 ° 0 ° o ° a° ° ~ o ~ o ~ o r- o o c -------------------------------------- (OL-Z) `JNIlt1a NOI110N00 ------- "'' ~ ------- < ~ ------- N ~ ------- r ~ ------- N ~ ------- r~ ~ ~ (S-~) 3anl~nals M y N w r H ~ y ~ N N N -------------------------------------- ------- X _'-_--- X -----__ X --____- X --_'--- X -_----_ X (S-L) H1lb9H N N CO av3adS N ~ r~'i N ~ ~ r ~ N N N ______________________________________ _______ N -----__ N _-___-- ~ _------ ~ ---___- (h __-__-- 1H`JI3H c°~I fA °~ ~ fA ~ ffl '~' fA '~' N fA '~ Y~ 1333 Z~ a313WM0 ~~ n N II N ~ ~ r' ~ ------------------------------------- ------- c ------- c ------ u c ------- n c ------ n c a o ---- u c H80 ° O - - - _ ~ _ ~ ~ d -------------------------------------- H80 X -^ --- ° ~ N ------- n N ------- ~ N ------- n N ------- ° n N ~ ------ O n N X X X X °O X ~ X W31SJlSillnW '~ x x ------------------------------------- H90 ------- ~ r ° ------- O N N c ------- O N N ~ ------- O ° N ------- O ~ O ~ ------- °~ N r c c c - c - c - c - ~ ... ~_ m m w ~ v~ ~"~ Q d N V V ~ : °' ~ u W ~ E ~ Z C _n ~ M W ~~ ~ ~~ f0 7 ~ Y ! C Y Y Y Y DC 4 =; FI d ~ m O `b O O o O _ Q C ,~ ~° ? ~ > > > > m !~ y c ~ •C J m ~ J J J J W ~ ~ B B B ~~~~~~ ~ ~ Y r ao Ol O N 0 M N ~ F» ~ ~ o II W r-I • W N O r7 O M O ~ ~ ~ ~ II 11 II a °° '° ~ ~p r E.I ry M IA E..I W t~r~ C.1 eh II II II Q u x x x ,.a ,~ 0 0 0 w ~coap o CCi to N QO n -i M (t-L1 A1RlOlad ~tlAOW3a ~ O O M ldnOW3a ON3WWOO3a c ~ p ~ °n ~ 3 ------------------------------------- ------- _ of ~ ------- QQ W ~ ------- ~ ~ II 4 a3Zlllla33 S033N ~ o p o ~ o ~ ------- ----- v~ (S-l) a31dM SO33N ~~ ~~ ~~ pWq (s-L) 3sv3sla a~rno~ loos o o \ o II (s-L) a3a3no~ aviio~ loos ~ ~ ~ x x x (s-L)~d~3a ~INnat (S-t) aOOM OV30 _____________________________________ _______ ~. _____~ _______ N (S-l) 3SF/3S1O NMOaO 33x1 ~ ~ ~ (S-l) S1O3SN1 ~~ ~~ ~~ (S-L) AllaOlad `JNINnad 0 0 # 43O33N S318`dO ------------------------------------- ~ - ------- ~ ------- ~° ------- v c $ 1H J13M ON3 3/~OW3a x x x JNISIba NMOaO p NOIlVaOlS3a NMOaO `JNINNIHI NMOaO v w o e°'S °---------------'------------------- -'----- ~' '------ ~' ------ ea ONINd3l0 NMOaO ~~ p ~~ ~~ (6-£) `JNilb21 Oa`dZ`dH ~"~ 0 C7 0 M (OL-Z)'JNIlt/a NO11J4NO0 N tll ~ 41 ~ ~"~ f/1 ~ _ _ (S-L) 3an1OnalS y N N y x x X (S-l) H1lb9H ~ ~ av3ads ~ ~ N ~ N ------------------------------------ ------- ~ ------- ~ ------ M 1H`JI3H n° _ ~ y~ y~ 1333 Z~ a313WM0 ------ ~ ~ ~~ ------ ~ ci „ ------ ~ c --°---------------------------'---- H8O ------- m c --'---- c ------- c O N O N O -_- N H8U o v- x a; rn x ~ N e~ x W31S~lSillnW x ------------------------------------ H8Q ------- o N in m ------- o ~ n N ------- o N v C C C W O ~ v' N to N ~" 1 ~ f/3 fA Q W ~ II U it ~ O E s Z ~ o ~ ~ ~ H~M~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~ c ~ ~ ~ ' z $ pC ~ a a a W c ~ ~ ~ V E19 11 II II d u x x x a ,.., 0 0 0 w Aa.aa ~ Horticultural Consultants 408-353-1052 BARRIE D. COATE and'ASSOCIATES Horticultural Consultants 408-353-1052 23535 Summit Road, Los Gatos, t;A 95030 The average tree: • has a horizontal root spread that is 2.5-3.0 times greater than the branch spread (a.k.a., the dripline) • Has most (>60%) of its root outside the dripline • has most (>95%) roots in the top meter of soil • has ~niost fine, or smallest diameter roots in the top 0.15 m (6 inches) yof soil (Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4) Literature cited: 1. Gilman E.F. 1988 Tree root spread in relation ro branch dripline and harvestable root ball. Hort Science 25:351-353 2. Gilman E.F. 1990 Tree root growth and development. 1. Form, depth, spread and periodicity. J. Environ. Hon. 8:215- 220 3.. Perry, T.O. 1982. The ecology of tree roots and practical signiftcance thereof. J. Arboric. 8:197-211 4. Watson, G.W. and E.B. Himelick. 1992b. Root distribution of nursery trees and its relationship to transplanting success. J. Arboric 8:225-228 5. American Society of Consulting.Arborists. 1989. Protecting trees during construction: Answers to frequently asked questions for builders and property owners. Wheat Ridge, Colorado. lpp. 6. Harris, R.W., 1992. Arboriculture: Care of Trees, Shrubs and Vines in the Landscape. Prentice Hall, Inc. Englwood Cliffs, New Jersey. 674 pp. Recommends 1 foot soil width for each 1 inches of trunk diameter 7. Morell, J.D. 1984. Parkway tree auguring speciftcations. J. Arboric. 10(5):129-132 Finds that trenching for water main installation resulted in mortality rates of 254% twelve years after trenching activity Information supplied by: Michael Gye, Consulting Arborist, British Columbia • • n00028 o~ `~ CO W ~I O) Cl1 J~ W N -+ ~ ?t Q„ ~ w D D C~ n .a 3~m ~' ~ " ° o ~ m ~ ~ _ _ ~ n p ~ ~ _a _, to cn c°~~~~oo-°owa' ¢'.cQO~MO.~oo ocn~. o=o°o ~~~°~ ~~ ... ° a~ w v n' .... m o ~ ~ ~ m .a m cQ ~ ° ~ o ~ 9• m m s m ~ N ~, • ~ o ° ..,. ~ w o m ~° ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ m m ~ ~D.N n cn m °. ~ ~ 0 m ~ ca ~ o ~ ° ° ~ ~ 0 .a su ~' as Q m c a~ ~n' A CD (D O d ~. ~. ~. CD ~. ~D _~ ~~ N --~. O ~D ~D O C! O K ro • 'd a Go n 0 a n x d 7~7 O .-. C., N ~ l G A td VI (n O O ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ w e AA ~o y~ °A8 a. H N "" N ,~ :: CrJ y ~ YM ~ o a y 0 BARRIE D. COH 1-E AND ASSOCIATES Horticultural Consultants (408) 353-1052 Fax (408) 353-1238 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 GLOSSARY Co-dominant (stems, branches) equal in size and relative importance, usually associated with either the trunks or stems, or scaffold limbs (branches) in the crown. Crown -The portion of a tree above the trunk including the branches and foliage Cultivar - A named plant selection from which identical or nearly identical plants can be produced, usually by vegetative propagation or cloning. Decurrent - A term used to describe a mature tree crown composed of branches lacking a central leader resulting in around-headed tree. Ezcurrent - A term used to describe a tree crown in which a strong central leader is present to the top of a tree with lateral branches that progressively decrease in length upward from the base. Girdling root - A root that partially or entirely encircles the trunk and/or large buttress roots, which could restrict growth and downward movement of photosynthates. Included bark -Bark which is entrapped in narrow-angled attachments of two or more stems, branches, or a stem and branch(es). Such attachments are weakly attached and subject to splitting out. Kinked root - A taproot or a major root(s) which is sharply bent and can cause plant instability and reduction of movement of water, nutrients, and photosynthates. Root collar -The flared, lower portion of the base of a tree where the roots and stem merge. Also referred to as the "root crown". Leader -The main stem or trunk that forms the apex of the tree. Stem -The axis (trunk of a central leader tree) of a plant on which branches are attached. Temporary branches - A small branch on the trunk or between scaffold branches retained to shade, nourish, and protect the trunk of small young trees. These branches are kept small and gradually removed as the trunk develops. DeSnition of Woody Parts Trunk -The main stem of a tree between the ground and the lowest scaffold branch. Scaffold branches - In decurrent trees, the branches that form the main structure of the crown. Limb - A major structural part. Branch - A smaller part, attached to a limb or scaffold branch. Brancblet - A small part, attached to a branch. Twig -Avery small part attached to a branchlet. Leaf- The main photosynthetic organ of most plants. • • .._, -- _ BARRIE D. COH fE AND ASSOCIATES Horticultural Consultants (408) 353-1052 Fax (408) 353-1238 23535 Summit Rd. Los Gatos, CA 95033 TREE PROTECTION BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER CONSTRUCTION These are general recommendations And may be superseded by site-specific instructions BEFORE Plan location of trenching to avoid all possible cuts beneath tree canopies. This includes trenches for utilities, irrigation lines, cable TV and roof drains. Plan construction period fence locations which will prevent equipment travel or material storage beneath tree canopies. Install fences before any construction related equipment is allowed on site. This includes pickup trucks. Inform subcontractors in writing that they must read this document. Require return of signed copies to demonstrate that they have read the document. Prune any tree parts, which conflict with construction between August and January. Except for pines which may be pruned between October-January. Only an ISA certified arborist, using ISA pruning instructions may be used for his work. If limbs are in conflict with the construction equipment before the certified arborist is on-site, carpenters may cut off offending parts of 6" diameter or less, leaving an 18" long stub, which should be re-cut later by the arborist. Under no circumstances may any party remove more than 30% of a trees foliage, or prune so -that an unbalanced canopy is created. DURING Avoid use of any wheeled equipment beneath tree canopies. Maintain fences-at original location in vertical, undamaged condition until all contractors and subconrtractors, including painters are gone. Clear root collars of retained trees enough to leave 5-6 buttress roots bases visible at 12" from the trunk. Irrigate trees adjacent to construction activity during hot months (June-October). Apply 10 gallons of water per 1" of trunk diameter (measured at 4 'h') once per 2 week period by soaker hose. Apply water at the dripline, or adjacent to construction not around the trunk. Apply mulch to make a 3" deep layer in all areas beneath tree canopies and inside fences. Any organic material which is non toxic maybe used. i~ AFTER Irrigate monthly with 10 gallons of water per 1" of trunk diameter with a soaker hose, placed just inside the dripline. Continue until 8" of rain has fallen. Avoid cutting irrigation trenches beneath tree canopies. Avoid rototilling beneath tree canopies since that will destroy the small surface roots which absorb water. Avoid installation of turf or other frequently irrigated plants beneath tree canopies. nnnn~~ 31 C' ,;i~l ~ S ~ti r r r 1 /; ~•t' ' ~ ~ ~~ ,~/i ~~ 1 s '/ ~l ', . / . 3 ' ~ p ~:. •: ~ . ~~:~, s ~ o~r,f ~ . r ~- i`' ~1 •~ ~, 1 ? 1 , ~ i . a '' ~ ~. ~O ~~,~ I - o ~ X ~~~, ~~ `~ ~?. ~ -, tit 1~.'• \~ t~` t` ,r ~ \`,\ •~,` ~\ a~~. ~, a c t V f= L ~- m 0 ~a 00 4-- C 0 0 -~ ~v ~o or s H d .~ 0 c m u d L .~ d c m 00 c s u Z i c0 M ~ N ° ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~Q ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ U Z o0 'a to O . U G ~ ~ tLau~OMU~ • J i OC v ~ N v i ~ _ N ~ ~ U J •S7 ~f ~ u O a~ ~ •a o -" N ,4 ~, O Q 0 ~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ O ~ •~ fy -~ Q ~,. ~r, •r• i, I,: ~~~ 1 t~ ~ j~.t ~ ~ ~f b :a .~e~ ~ --~---- 3 +s"•+ ~~ ul~~ •, ~,~i ~ . -. ca:~. d o~ -a o~ s 'N • iC ,, ~~ JO -_. ~~ • •~`~' . ~ r ~.~.. O`., ,• ~; ~,..,s~ •, ~ ~. v e ~ i~ `1t 1I ~~ ,~ . ~~ .1:.~~ ~~ ~•,~; ..., .. \'\,, • O •~, ~'. ;;°:, ,~~~~~' `~~, • o~ 3 ~ i ~ i y d ~4, o O a ``•C` i ~ ~ ~ ~ \~ ~~ ~ ~ V) ~ ~ y d 'til ~ N ~ 4:- ~ ~' ~ ' c~v ~ + , s .~, o ` 3 ~ ~ u ~ ' N ~ + O ~ ~ ~ O = Y ~ b0 b0 b0 N ~ ~ ~ 'C ~ c~v O ~ , ~ °~ -~ ~ ~ V d N +S•+ o ~ a °~~ s o °' - L . ~ ~ ~ c _ ~ = 3 ~ s ~ +~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ d ~ • ~ ~ oos ~ N ~ o 3 O s • ~ `^ d ~ cv ~ • ~ ~ }r d • ~ s tC • L N ~ o~ O' ' ca +' d : 0 s ~ ~ u + ~ s + ~ c a u - + • nnnn-2~ ii' ~ ~ .. ~_ .` -~.- f u ' ,L= < '9 C ~ v C . G tp C E ~ ~ E m ,~ O c ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ 9 `* ~ E ~ .' r, ~ E ~ N ~U{ ~ ` ^' p GL ~ OCq C y ~ ~ ~ I. \ ~` to m y ~ ~ r p N C' Q ~ \ ` v+t' ~ Vi ~= ~ ~ o ~~ ~~~ ~ I1 \~ _~ ~ h ~ ~ O ¢ ~ I~ ~ H ~.~~ FV Z~ C ~ ~ \ ~ ~ I ~ m\i U m ~~~ ~z o~ ,.,~~ \iiPr~\,, ~~~ ~f' \ rO' ice. -~ ~ !+i '~ ~~.~ ~ \ `I~-- ~ '~ --~ .r ~ _ m / M ~ v ~. o .: m ~ ~: Z i ~I~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~.~ P~ ^ ~ ~ l n \ f ~ ~ P ~ m ~ - ~ m m ~ ~ ~,~ ~` 0 I \ \\\ ~ ~ \~~ ~~m /7 API ~ ~ \ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~~ -~, ~\ `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • T~iIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • 000034 d4 ~ +~ ~ ~ ~ o °o~ ~~ °~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H N ~ ~•N a,~~ ® o ~' ~ 0 0 0 0 `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C~ o~ ~ c~i M ~ ~ ~o l~ o0 0~ ~ ~, D ,~ :, ..~. ~ ~ ~ o /~ ~M ~ ~_ ® ~ ~ ~ ~~ o °~ ~ ~~ P ~/~ d _® ~ ~'~ O kj: Y ~ '- . ~ .~ ~ a ~ r ~~ ~ _.. ~/ ~, ~J ..r ~ __. .. ~ "~~ ~• o- ~ ~ ~ ~ ` 'I r~ ~ ~ 1 N ~ ~ .~ tZl 1~1 t111Lbw 11111M Ptd ~S ~ ~ .y ~• r ` ,~• ~11~ ~' .r ~ •~ ~ `~~~ ! _ • /. ," h ~ ~' ~/. N _1 ~ 1 /'~ ~ 1'// r , ~ ~I 1r i ~ !! • i~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~6 ~ ~ `~ ~ ~. '~ ~ ~ ~{ ~ ~ ..a, ti ~. ~ ~~ S I ~ ` /e 1 1 %, .v. ~ Q v - .~- -- ~ ~• ~' p" ~ • O ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' '' a ~ ~ _L , !rte - M N -~ ~~ ~- b a .~1 I ~ ~ v a, ~M N a u s I < t to I 0 N W N N 0 u _ ~ . O W W U M ~ Qd o ti +~;~ ~~ I o v --~ ~ U ~ ~ ~~^'' ~~ ~ ,V ~, << ~ ~ --.z, ~ g ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ ,. ~- t o ~ ~ 3 ~~1 ~ --- ,~ -~ _ ~rl. ~ ~ ~ 4 ti o- ~''<<. O ti ~ ~ ~ I ~~_ . ~ ~ O 1~ ~I ~ ~ If ~ .[pt~ ~~~ P ~I ~ ~ v / ~ ~ ~ ^' NPy ~ Q v ~~ m sw ~ ~ 1 ~` ~ ~ 7Y IL7 I~ / / V K/ JGGI ~ ~ ~~1 ' '~ Y~~ w/. ' \ ~ ~~ . `` .P ~ ~ `` ~~ . b ~ \. ~. • • • ~" \ 'Y°~'1°°CdDI"! ~l I v n-3 06Lt-9r9 (lf9) .vYJ 19L 1-9s9 (lf9) INd I -~ ~tl~ ~V9G1 tl21tl$ $IIIH tlJGl tl?JV$ - ' 0 5 6 f 6 'YJ 3 n O tl 0 ~ I J I J Y d 3 ~ Y 3 5 fl O M 1 H 0 I 1 tLC ~;: V J.'Il1tlN3H:) hIHOf '52IIV ~' '21I1i w Z f ~' a - ~ _ I ~ _ ~, L o•r! 'o N v ~ ~ ~ s •v rav n r dflOtlO NOISHO ~`dNO11VNki~1.N1 I'~~C o g Q ~a0d 3~~n301$3i1 6t3u 173$GdG~d ~ a Qa ®®4 a w v N 1 1 v w •3 N H O r rZ u _Z Z Q J a z U a U N 1/1 N 0 UINN N N h ' '. J N~ II< ~ am mva n r i ~ K mo e~ Iri' °- a~ Ya9 ;N 7 r~ a eM~m~' UIN N xZa No o a is vl u z y~na N\ n a ~Y° Z Z W III b NpaZZ 1^ ~ U S'' ~ l a ,~ x n N a vQ ° ~ O ..o UN p t u3z ~r° a o x Y ao w O .. ~ i 4 a IF/IZ a p aONi z~m ~ r~ZO a N K U ~K~.-. w F VNiO< K~°< ~ vU O /i ~0 U~~F UUIxn~Z O 4<~ O~OV Z S jo p 8~ ~ ~ ~p 8~ UZ ~ ZS~3 ~ er O W ~ u U° ° Za ~.~ a ~n OrVf p,, CaO Q p O ~.- V1 .. i F- ZD: Nr~ N m 3 m N 1 Q ~O a n y o o m U~tv Y r OOa a¢ m?3 0 . a d a . . a . ~ w . . ~ ~ ~ . . . = m . o . IL ^ N m a u Z o °a Dp O p U Y>-Y Y UUV U 0 JIO~ n Y to ^ N U ~IUJi U~LL b II cO''Op ~ »U V O Yac o I P GOU ° ~I I I ~ w x .~ K y3W~ ANN ~O N a ,o o,n °on m m I~`+ II n ^ O ~ ~~ wu as a z o0 0 ~~ OUn U UG ~ yZj U t~0: r- QQ Q ~ Q U3 J ~ 3~ U m 3 Y V y U ~ M1 m II zOz II Vl- G a as a ow o Z I- 2 F3y~ Qi N <', xm z W N W ~Y ~ V V U z z ~~ s Ur V W~ °W Z 2 m~ m 0 U.Z.. U yNr J (- 2 O F V ~ ?U ° ~ O= N O o ~ J J ~ ~'N N ~ ~ Y a O O+ z~ WU K o. K ~+ W o [ (UTU pl II yy ~' S 3 ~ ^ ~ ~ 1 .~ Y. + J ~>~ U N ',JS ®®O ?OWW i 000 ^ $ aaa _ w~VO " zo< "U ~~ 'L 000 CV < H ~ N a 2 m K ~ ~. U N z O a m W M } Q d d o oFaa o O ZZ ~ O ° O°QQ O a°zc+ ~ OUq F ~ II U" II ~ K ~ C7 ~ ° . N a ~ fA _J6u1 VI U ~ ~ O~~i a . W ~, OF U a J ~ ~F2 ~< W U Wa O syi~ k' z i o ~zzd'~ o°a~~ ~_S ~~ 4 v c '^~~ WI^o w o mO~a aw0= 3 JO O p F cwi''m =aw ~ F rooa~ zRoa vl .~~ N Z° i~°'° W~pW W ~ ~wda ~moa a ~xm w m°w KU~ ==°ZJ ~ 0w: O: Z~VW °220 O Fa 0_ Fa0 t a~O =Q~ W i- OaQatz mpWZ O ra O ZLC :AwF In~uxf a~~ ~~ `~ao o ~~ ~ ~°z L Oxz ly.OIy.~~~Z Z wm~ ~NF° ~W ~ ZZa m4 F ~ ~U i WOU OOWV m2¢ ~~~zd Oa~O O 2F VI Z ~O E ~z° xo~° ~avl N ° s/iax~ ° Flal ~ i ~~ ZQ`l'A wm ~ ul<_II..~~ °°vwi~ k"nY ~~i W~W t- a t'na UI.iO ~W==iO ~F~I- ~WZ 171J~y2y11 la-Z la/IF a z WW i m~a JWU ~W`4 ~7mW aN> ZJ ~Z W YVl ~ 1 °~W NowZ ~$~o i+~9~ ~~lal~ < o~~ ° a~ ~° ~ ~rfn1 `J~m cai~3'¢ lna~" I-''W~ ~a m~ as o ao am Ul ~o ~ ~auo Quaw ~\xz azWO o° <pw° a as az i W ~a~a ~inaw k'?za alm^m° w~~a ~o ~o° '^ 3w o J I Q °°<~~"i ~~aFJJ ~~°m zd c°Si~ cFi p~p~< <n¢ °aa v °~ IH I Z UV=1~mW NO~a I~O~? `aa0 ZN1i120 ~~ KVxi~ LL O:W w~ i W oWN~ zc~i°wa zz°o~i ciao` Fw~Fa ~~ aoW k' ~~ x~Z F~¢ao rco5''z° avxiYm ~acci ~o3u~ za k'PiW ~ °aa maz I f!1 7poz ¢oa Paz waza ~zo~o <o owe o ww wwW U) zo 4ac~x o3a~ ~a ~ ~aF-~w m.- zma z LL° In~l~ ^ r ri v h Iti n m of o , ~ ~~G Cg- ~ ~ ~yl 9~=N ~ - =L ~p^ 3.~~e ^-~ _... ^ ~~ __. ~ -- -- j,,.~~ I _- . _ _. '-_. __ __ • P . -- _ - - - -_ ...~ _ °_ \\, I ~_. _. .___. __ l~ f I. _¢ _ __ 'f'-, . .. • ~ ~ `?. _. --_ ~ _ '1 I_- _ I z ~ -~" ~ ~~ ~ 2 ~' ~7 1 _...... ,N ~ .3 ~ ' f~ - _ tee- ~ ~ -~ ~/~t~ ! _ -_ jl ~m~ ~ 3 m ~ ~ QZ _ - _. ._ ~ NIW -1, J I .- ~ .9~ In W ~ ~ I ~; ,~Y ,3k m1 I R `~ ,I Y ~/ ~' ` ~j t.. ~ I ~ ~ .;~ ,u... ``~ _ '~ii~ ~ fir ~~ l 17 I ~ !'1 3 ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ,. s; % c R,go iI I ~ ~) Z N O;' ZI. i I'~ ~ m~m \ ~~~ c\ ~ i' :1 ~ ~~ % ~ y .l PI. _ ~ I~ ~~`~r. ~ ~m ~ _ ~ :, ' . I ,. M9 "`/f ( I I ~ ~ ~ ~~ O 2 ~~` ~' o~ ~~~ V ~ o - \ 1. ~ N _ _~ ~ m ~,_ _, _m~ ~_. °e~l, a ti CQ C ~_ Z ~ ~ ~ ~" ~, I e ~ - . _ ~- ~-- ~~.' 1 _ - _ I 1b _ ~_ J~~ • ''~ • • • 'tl0 ~tl001tlatl$ Sl'lIH tl001tl2JtlS Z. ~ woa'pop6D!W '1 I V M-3 06L 1-919 (lf9) ~llVf I9Z 1-919 (lf9) ~Md O S 6 f 6 YO 3 ~ O tl 0 0! f 1 0 V d 3 ~ Y 3 5 A O H 1 M 0! l lii ~~~ .L'If1dN~H~ NHOf 'S211Y ~ '2INl ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ -~-ro •o N v -~ ~ ~ s -v N n r dP'IOtiO NOIS9O 7tfNO11~aINti~.LN1 ~ L ~~ '~~~ p Q ~yGj 31IJ3015321 M3fl 0350d0e1d F~ ~ ~~ ®® 4 B W V M 1 1 d W "~ N M O 1" .may ! e 4 9~~r } a ~ l' ~:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ d~ . "~ ~ ~ ~ ~l~~~~ a~~'~ ~6 ~~ i E~ ~8 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~>~~d 9'~y b~ ~~ ~ C ~~ag~ ~° A ! 1 ~9~E~~rAB; ~~ ~l ~~~~~~ i • a . ° ,~ ~ ~ ~~~~ $~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ is ~~ s ^~ ! b Aa Iti 1 0y~ a E- 3 ~e a j~`~r r~ ~~ ~ a l~~ ~ ,~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ s~ ~s ~~~~r ~~ ~~~ ~~~' ~1~~ ~~ ~#~ ~~~ ~ ~a ~ - - - ~ - ^ ~ ' ~ ~ ~~~e ~~~ a~{9 ~~ ~ ~S ~n~o ~~~ c ~ ~ ,~~ ~ {{~~ alb, ~r~~g~, ~~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~~a i ~~~Cm~a~ ~ ~~ ~ a®~ ~~~a ~ ,~ ~ g ~ _~ ~ E~ ~~S°~~s ~ ~aid® js~ s~ ~~ ~J ~j~ ~~ ~B BCE ~~ !i~ I~1 ~~~~~ d- a~ ~ a Jga~ ~~ ~~~~t~ ~' 9~~`~ ~~~ ~~~~~If ~ ~7~~ ~~~~g ~~~ ~~ ~~.6~~~i~` ~~~ lr~e~~ppij ~tt9yr77ib°~(I~~ ~cQ~ ~~~pa~ ~~~~~ y~4l~yy, y aC Pt~~~~418N~~Pt~ ~~~TI ..Yi~8J6 ~Y ~11Y ~d ~~~ Aaa z 0 0 0 W W n s ~ ~ I ~ 6 ~ ~~ 1~' ~ }~ja ~ ~ e 1 ~ A e 0 ~°~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~~, ~ ~ ~~ f ~° ~~ ~ ~ ~~e~ ~~ ~~ a g ' ~ ~~ •~ ~ ; ~ ~, g~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~~ d ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ e~e ~ - a r ~~"~~ ` 3 ~ ~ ~~~~ 1 ~• ~n, ~~ a ~7 ~ ~° ~ ~ i a ~ y3 ~~t ~~i~ '1et ~ 1 y~ •~`~~1 ~'} ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~ ~ B~~ ~ J P j 7 9 1' o ~~ 8~~! ~~ ~~~~a~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ } ~~ a~i ~~~~! ~~~'~~ ~~~ ~ g g $ ! i g~ ~~ ~~~~fa~ ~4 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~i ~~~1~ d~~,~~ de~!i~~ ~~~ i B 4 a ~ 1 .....s. 1 1 J 1 .o~.w ~ ~ .... : r1 ~ ~ ~ • ~ 9 ~ + L ' ' w 7 0 ! 1 ~~1~~ ~ ~ a a ~ ~ - i 1 ~a~: ~~~ ~~l~ i~l~ 1 i t i E ~p#-` .~~~ ?~~~ z -, ~ • • • ~;, ' ~~~ 'tl~ •b J~ltl 21V$ $IIIH tl901 tl21V$ I .i Z ' woa~pap6p!W ~l I V h-3 O6L1-9Y9 (l[B) ~%Vd 19Lt-9s9 (LCB) ~Hd O S 6 C 6 "v0 3 n 0 d 0 J 1 1 1 J V d 3 n v 3 5 0 0 H 1 H 0 1 ~ tLL C I~ Q~I I~~ `VI O J,'If]dN~H:) n~Fior •saiv ~3 '21iN ~ ~ ` ~ o a $ ~ o-ro •o N v ~ ~ ~ s -v N n r - dflOtlO NOIS~O ~`dNO11\lNtlB1Ni I '~~C (V g Q Otld SU ' ~ k~ S ~ Q ® ® Q B W V H 1 1 d W -9 N N O f" tl b d ~dOd 3~W301S32i M3N 03 s o n Z Q J J a~,~~a~n,d,~,~~u,~a,a~l ~ ~388RF83cReeRR ? .............. 4~,bhX44FR ~%FX ~ 40ry«4h4h- h'^pe o °°-bk~,` °iee- • • • C \ V 'tl0 ~NJOltl2Jtl$ $IIIH tl001tl?Jtl$ .L'If1VN3H:) NHOi 'S2IIQ ~8 'i1N[ ~dUJ 3"JI-!3015jd M3r1 C13$OdOEid ~ Z° ~ a ~ ~ o ~ o ~ L l•' o w4 ~® Q woa~pcp6P!W "I i Y h-3 Obi 1-9~9 (tS9) ~%Vf l9i1-919 (l[B) ~Ild _ O S 6 i 6 'YO 3 0 8 0 0! f 1 J Y a 3 ~ V 3 6 0 0 H 1 N 0! l lZL ~ ~~~ ~JV~, _ tV ~-ro •o {r vs ~ ~ ~ s -v N n r dflOt/0 NOIS~O 'PdNOllt/Nt1~1N1 7~~C p Q 6 W b N 1 1 d W '~ N H O r tl / \ / ~ / ~\ 3 w~ ~~ ~~, ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ \ . / ~ \. ~o M -~ r, ~---~ . I ~ i( ~jA, ~----- ,. r~ s ~- ~ .. ~I~ ~~~ (~__ ~ `~-- - ~~ gMbMgbbMqqqqMqq b 88H8H.CBBCH{0{A i btir.'b V•Ebw444[5• 0964 °sbb~4 se _ _ _ x• ie. _~~•~•• ___oss _ • • • C^` ~.J ! !! iJ QI J a 0 0 J W J W J W a a 'tl0 ~tl001tlatl$ SIlIH tl001tlatl$ s <Z uwa~pop6D!W, :1 I r h-3 06Z I-9r9 (If9) ~tY! l9Zl-9~9 (lC7):Ha OS6f6 'YJ 3nOtl0 JIl IJVd 3nY 3500 M1M01~ tZL ~~\~~ .L'f11VA;3H0 I~HOf 'Sill` ~' '211V Fa ~ c 3 .. o-r~ •o N v ~ ~ ~ s -.r N n r - df70ti0 NOIS~O 1brN011VNt1~1N1 ~ ~ ' C N p Q y g a M O r - ~~ man 43SOd0ad 63 < ~+ m r' ~a ~® 4 ~ N B W V N 1 1 d W a aoe 3~r+30 0 i ii Z Q J a 0 o~ J WI W' Q L9 W W lA Q [D I I I I I I I i i o~ I r L---------~ rJ I I L~ I ~ I I ~~ L I ~ ~ I 0 me • • • ~~~ 'tlQ 'VQQ1 tl21V$ $l'lIH tlQOltl atl$ ~ woa~NMOV~wi ~ I V n-3 062 t-9s9 (lf0) ~%Y! t92 t-9v9 (t[V) ~Md O S 6 f 6 'Y] 3 n O tl 0 0~!~] v d 3 n v 3 5 fl O N 1 N 0~ ~ l22 n ,\\ I I ~ 4 ~ /~~ J L'If1VN~HJ NHOC '521) ~' '2ilV ~ ~ •~•r~ •o N v -~ ~ ~ s •d N n r C~ N , _ . °o ~ df'1OldO~ NOIS3O 7lyNO11~dNtl~1N1 ' ~C p Q ~eJd 3:~Ia3Ql53a h53(i 035Gd0ad ~ ~~ s ~Q ©®Q s w ~r -+ 1 1 v w •a N M o r ~ tltl b ~~, • • • ~~~ 'VG ~VJOl tl2JV$ ~ $IIIH tlGGlV21tl$ y ~'°~'IOOpEpIW :~ I • n-3 06Z 1-9t9 (lf9) :xv! IpLI-W9 (If9) ~Nd 0 9 6 C 6 'YO 3 ~ O tl 0 J i! I J v d 3 A v 3 5 n 0 M t M 0 I x lZL .L'I1ltlN3HJ 11HOf 'SNiV ~a' 'NNI < ~ o ~ ~~ tM -~-r~ •o N v -~ -+ ~ e -rs N n r dfIOCO N019~0 'I~o/N011lfNtl~1N1 '~~~ 4 Q ~d0! ~_IN30153d M3N G350d021d W k S rcQ ®® Q 5 W !/ M 1 1 d W "~ N M O ~"' u/ LW r 0 Z Z 0 \Q W J W IA IA X J O ~ O ~ Z I~W~ Q Q < X J ~ ~ W O O K ~ Q O V ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ` ~ D. W ~ ~o a W z ~ m ~,I ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ o $ o vSf a ~ 8~ o~ Q o `~ ~ o~~ ~,, W N ~ J ~ C ~ I ~ 3 O K ~ ~ N N O ~ W Y ~ <JJ O = rO d Z ~ x 0_ U lai V LL O d 3 G W Q W ~ V m 000000 0000 00 l~ ~' i i ~ ~ I 'I i6 I . ,,14~- , t ~ ~ ~ ,, . . i i~ ~ :I = ~ Q W ~~ ',1','i' ;;!~ I _ ~ ~~i_, Q i ~_ !J ~. ~ llil~~i,i I `, J - W WW I > _ ~ DNL ~ • • • 0 -,. 'V~ 'V`JU1v21VS Sll!H VJOIV2JV5 ~ i i wovpop60!W, :l I r n-3 O6Z 1-919 (IfB) ~%r! 1921-9t9 (l[B) ~Nd I ~! O S 6 f 6 'r7 3 ~ 0 b 0 0 I! 1 7 Y a 3 ~ v 3 5 f1 0 H 1 H 0! l !LL j ,I'~ ~ \°J ,L'[f1Vh811J NHOf 'S2ilti ~' '2I11I Z m a ' - ~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~ -- ~ -°-r~ •o N v ~ -~ ~ s -v N n r dflOtlO NO1590 7VNOt1dNtl~1N1 ~~ p Q ~d0! 3~IJ3(]li3'J h\31d ~J350d08d '~ Q I W rcQ ® ® a . s w v H t i d w -a N M O I'• ~! LW r Z Q \Q W J W t%N N O ~ ~ m O ~ ~ K p a < x w O ~ w J C] (] z o ~ c a O ~ !n ~ ~ o~ ~ a° m ¢ ~ a ~ W i ~ w '4q~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a 8 w .~- ~ ~ l a iO o ~ g ~ w VI U ~ [C O U ! ~ ~ O ~ ~ > O ~ ~ N O ~ ~ W y ~i X Y Z QK O O x 4. V ~ U la. d d ~O w K W ~ U m 000000 0000 00 Z ~_ ~'. W J W I 0 i~ ~"W j I ~ I ~~ ~~ d't~ I II it ^+ ~. ,~{k ?•F , ~'_ . . a },~: I i ~~ '~ _ --3` ~-i ~ t_. r+ ` ~ ( ~~~`~~ _ ! ~ ~~ F I 7-~~'' '-'_I ~ F=Z' L Il~il;li~ I \ ~;'.' I ~~ ~~ • • • 0 II ~_ W W. I 0 'tl:1 'tl`~O1Vtltl5 S'1lIH tl001V2{tl5 v _ uca~pep6p!u! l i v n-3 06Z L-9t9 llto) ~XVJ l9Zi-9Y9 (If0) ~Ne O S B t 6 'YJ 3 n O tl 0 J I J I J v d 3 ~ Y 3 5 0 0 M 1 N 7 I l !ZC \n ~I ~~~V O ~n~n!~t~:~ ntt~or ~sayv ~ ~xw Z °_ ~ ~ m 3 ~ -o•ro ~ •o N v ~ ~ ~ e •es n~ n r dflOkiO N0199G 7bYN011lfNtl~1N1 L ~~C Q 1 ~n3tJ 0350c0eJd 0!S7 1 ~ ~ A a a ~Q ~ 6 W d M 1 1 d W •~ N M O r ~CIJ 3i 13 ? V g 0 x a •i ° o w °a '- W d ~ ~ o L^ n ~ i a i m i LL z O b • o °a 4 .°n c ' n ~~ g m ~ ~ ~ ~ a m o~ m ~ ' ^ i z 4~ l0i Q o T m Q o o ° 0 o: z o ¢ a ~ < u ~ z ° ~ " U _ W O '` ~ a ~ `' O LL N W Ul '^ I UJ ~ m rn m q • •` ~ ~ ITEM 5 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ~i Application No./Location: 15330 Kittredge RoadJDR-O1-016 &z BSE-O1-022 Applicant/Owner: NIJOR Staff Planner: Thomas Sullivan, AICP Community Development Director Date: August 8, 2001 APN: 517-14-027 Department Head SITE v North g0 • ~--~_ ~9EI.NAP hITTRI 300 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 Feet 15330 Kittredge Road 000001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CASE HISTORY Application filed: Application complete: Notice published: Mailing completed Posting completed: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 04/24/01 05/18/01 07/25/01 07/26/01 07/26/01 The applicant requests Design Review approval to construct a 2,301 square foot one- and two- story addition to an existing 2,038 square foot, single-story residence at the northeast corner of Bohlman. Road and Kittredge Road The proposed addition includes 60 square feet on the first floor and a new 2,241 square foot second story. The maximum height of the residence would be 25.5 feet. The site is 46,086 square feet (gross and net) and is located within an HR (Hillside Residential) zoning district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Deny the Design Review application with findings by adopting Resolution DR-O1-016. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution DR-O1-016 2. Letter from Terrasearch, Inc. dated U3U00 3. Arborist Report dated 5/2U01 4. Plans, Exhibit "A" • r~ OOOU02 File No. DR-01-016,• 15330 Kittredge Road • • • STAFF ANALYSIS ZONING: HR (Hillside Residential) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential -Very Low Density MEASURE G: Not applicable PARCEL SIZE: 46,086 sq. ft. AVERAGE SITE SLOPE: 18% GRADING REQUIRED: No grading is required. Environmental Determination: The proposed project consisting of the construction of an addition to an existing single-family residence is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single- family residences. The site is in an urbanized area and is connected to utility and roadway infrastructure. MATERIALS AND COLORS PROPOSED: The exterior finish is proposed to be a combination of stucco, wood detailing and composition shingle roofing material. The stucco siding is proposed to be painted an Oyster color and the window trim will be painted Sierra White. These materials and colors will replace those on the existing home. Color and material samples will presented at the public hearing. P:U'Ianning~Design Review~2001V5330kitteridge.doc 000003 File No. DR-01-016,• 15330 KittridgeRoad Proposal Code Requirements Lot Coverage: 14% Maximum Allowable 25% (up to maximum of 15,000 sq. ft.) Building Footprint 2,098 sq. Driveway Decks TOTAL (Impervious 3,040 sq. Surface) 1,200 sq. 6,338 sq. ft. Floor Area: Main Floor 2,098 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable Second Floor 2,241 sq. ft. TOTAL 4,339 sq. ft. 5,610 sq. ft. Setbacks: Minimum Requirement Front 46 ft. 30 ft. Rear -15C Floor 80 ft. 50 ft. Rear - 2nd Floor 80 ft. 60 ft. Left Side 75 ft. 25 ft. Right Side 55 ft. 20 ft. Height: Maximum Allowable Residence 25.5 ft. 26 ft. Detached Garage N/A 12 ft. •i P:~P]anning~Design Review~200N5330kitteridge.doc 000004 File No. DR-01-016,• 15330 Kittredge Road PROJECT DISCUSSION Desegn Review The applicant requests Design Review approval to construct a 2,301 square foot one- and two-story addition to an existing 2,038 square foot, single-story residence at the northeast corner of Bohlman Road and Kittredge Road. The proposed addition includes 60 square feet on the first floor and a new 2,241 square foot second story. The maximum height of the residence would be 25.5 feet. The site is 46,086 square feet (gross and net) and is located within an HR (Hillside Residential) zoning district. The subject property is a 1.1-acre lot accessed by a private driveway off Kittredge Road. Kittrdge Road is developed predominately with large single-story residences. The architecture in the area is eclectic consisting of stucco, brick and both horizontal and vertical wood. The natural landscape is preserved in the design of the home. The terrain would be altered minimally. There are no trees on the site. No landscape plan was proposed as part of the project. The proposed residence fails to comply with the policies set forth in the City's Residential Design Handbook nor does it satisfy all of the findings required within Section 15-45.080 of the City Code. The residence does not minim~e the perception of bullz as required in Section 15-45-080 (c) and Policy 1, Technique #6 of the Residential Design Handbook. The application has been reviewed by the City Arborist, Public Works Department and the Saratoga Fire District. Parking The. Saratoga City Code requires each residence to have at least two enclosed parking spaces within a garage. The proposed residence has this. Grading No grading is proposed. Geotechnecal Review The City Engineer has determined that additional review should be conducted if the project is to move forward. (see the attached letter from letter from Terrasearch, Inc. dated January 31, 2000). Trees P:~Planning~Design Revie~200N5330kittetidge.doc OoOOO~ File No. DR-01-016,• 15330 Kittredge Road No existing trees would be removed as a result of construction. According to the attached arborist report dated May 21, 2001, there are five existing trees close to the proposed construction area, but "it would appear none of them would be affected by the proposed activity." Fireplaces No fireplaces are proposed. Correspondence No correspondence was received on this application at the date that the staff report was distributed to the Planning Commission. Conclusion The proposed residence is not designed to conform to the policies set forth in the City's Residential Design Handbook and to satisfy all of the findings required within Section 15- 45.080 of the City Code. The residence does not minimize the perception of bulk. However, the proposal satisfies other zoning regulations in terms of allowable floor area, setbacks, maximum height and impervious coverage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION • Deny the Design Review application with findings by adopting Resolution DR-00-016. An alternative is to continue the Public Hearing to allow the applicant to revise the design. • P:~Planning~Design Review~200N5330kitteridge.doc OoOOOV Attachment 1 • APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. DR-O1-016 DENYING THE APPLICATION CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA NIJOR;15330 KITTRIDGE ROAD WHEREAS, the Ciry of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Review approval for the construction of a 2,301 square foot one- and two-story addition to an existing 2,038 square foot, single-story residence on a 46,086 square foot parcel; 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 project is Categorically Exempt from the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15303, "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures", Class 3 (a) of the Public Resources Code (CEQA). This exemption allows for the construction or conversion of up to three single-family residences. The site is in an urbanized area and is connected to utility and roadway infrastructure; and • WHEREAS, the applicant has not met the burden of proof required to support said application for Design Review approval, and the following findings have been determined: • The proposed structure does not minimize the perception of excessive due to roof design and lack of articulation. ^ The proposed residence does not conform to all of the applicable design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Guidelines and as required by Section 15- 45.055. In particular the project does not conform to Policy 1, Technique #6, "Use architectural features to break up massing". ; 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, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application for Design Review approval be and the same is hereby denied. ~~00~~ File No. DR-01-016,• 15330 Kittredge Road PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 8th day of August 2001 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission • • P:U'lanning~Design Review~2001U5330kitteridge.doc OoOOO~ .Ia~_ 16 01-09:03a - RL_ _IE FRENCH IMC. ._ __ ` 40f ~~ Attachment 2 ~~, Enrironmet,ul • Gcotechnical • Sperlal it,upections • Ma,eriats Test • $ER\~NG IVORTHCRIV CALIFORNIA SINCE 1964 l GEVTP.CIIKICAL 1 Mr. And Mrs. Reggie Nijor - GEOI.oc,c,tl. ~ C/o Marlene. Rodman Alain Pinel Realtors E~~'IRO~AtENTaL ~ --"_---_ _ - -~ SPF,CIA.1_ I Subject: 15530 Kittridge Road Insrccr,ons ' Saratoga, Calif." SITE OBSERVATIONS Agal'EU[ALS Reference: Geologic Map; Congress Springs Arca Tt;S'i't"c ' By William Cotton and Associates _ + Dated 31 May 1977 Cep JtiSF.: GShcl ~~;: Uc! 0-0 Suite : i 0 5ar: lo.e, Ca Y~ 119 I<~hl:,(?-x920 Dun,:rn'; (9~5)S33 72y1 I Fax. (925) c;3-9~.G6 EI.x GROt•r: *7F5 $11: Gro~~c HI•: o Buiidmg :. Suttc )a Llk Gv.•c, C.4 YSb2a (9.6) 6A6.2S7R Fax:(916)6tl6-OGJR FRr:MOI~T: 43353-A Osgood ltd. Fremont, CA y4536 (s)n~ 413-olao rax~ (slo~al3-ol0l Dear Mr. And Mrs. Nijor: Project No. 857.8.01 3l. January 2000 At thc~ request of your agents; Marlene and r~icoletie Rodman, we have obsrrved the subject residence for the purpose of fomaing an opinion regarding the condition of the existing structure and building pad. Additionally, the site was located nn file abnvP referenced' plan to determine the, site locatation relative to the active "Congress Springs Landslide". Our site observations were made on 25 January 20U0 in the presence of yourself and. yoty agent, Ms. Rodman. No Geotcchnical report was available at the time of this ~~-iting, and our site observations, discussioTts, and conclusions regarding this site apply to the structure and :hc pad area only. Site Deseription• The subject residence is located on a terrace pad which appears to have been constructed primarily by cut operations into native material. Descending slopes extend from the pad to the north .and to the cast. Access to the lot is provided from a drivev~ray extending from Kittridgc Road. The structure appears to be supported on a conventional spread footing foundation. The structure is believed to have been constructed in the mid 1950's and has experienced at least one major addition and remodel since the original construction. The referenced map indicates that this site is adjacent to the active "Congress Springs Landslide", but is not located on the slide itself. The subject site has been mapped as being located on a dormant landslide. D C~l~>~~~°(~ APi~ it 5 2001 rrrvrr; ,n.m.-.., n J 0000~9 _ Jan_ 16 O1_ 09:03a _ R( _ IE FRENCH InC. ~ r ~40; .'86 0650 p.2 . _ Project No. 8~I8.OI Siic Ubscrvations 3] January 1000 Observations: 1 • The structure is a single story, wood frame residence with a two car attached garage. The ea-tcrior is fuushed in wooden siding. 2.. No cracks were observed in the perimeter foundation, however the foundation on the north side of the structure ~,~ covered by ea-teri.or decking and decking foundations. 3. Few indications of stress or cracking were observed on the structures ea7erior, however, wooden siding tends to minimize the occurrence of such indicators. 4. Few indications of cracked, repaired, repainted drywall were observed, however, the drywall texturing used tends to obfuscate repairs. 5. Evidence of repeated slope movements and/or significant creep .were observed, primarily on the descending slope to the east of the structure. 6. The exterior decking to the east has experienced differential settlement. The lightweight concrete decking outside of the living room tilts downward and away from the residence, and there has been shimming to level the deck to the south of the lightweight concrete deck. 7. Evidence of slope failure ~~vas observed under the shimmed wooden deck, and on the descending slope below the deck. Additionally, trees located on the east facing slope exhibit curved and bent trunks typical of trees subject to slope movements. The trees exhibiting these curved tzunks aze of differin 8. The living room floor axpears ~ tili slightly to the east inghe dolwnslope direction. Additionally, the bottom of the living room ea-terior wall appeazs to have moved out slightly due to downslope movement. Discussion This discussion is based on our site observations, and the referenced map The residence exhibits indications of stress resulting :6rom downslope soil movement, however tae soil movement and discussed damage do not appear to be recent. Corrective measures may have been taken during the course of remodelling and may have stabilized the movements. Wooden siding and the remodel work make it difficult to reconstruct the site history without additional information Regarding the overall site stability; this site is located on a dormant landslide located adjacent to a large active slide. It does not appear that the dormant slide has moved in some time, however the designation "dormatat" indicates that the slide has moved in the past and ma}~ move a ain in the future at an undetermined time. It does not appear that the sli.dc is directly responsible for the ~E'RRA.SEARCH, me Page 2 of 3 J.~n - i 6 O1 09: 03a RC I E FRENCH I HC. 40E ~ Gl/J1j LUUU 1`1.Y7 1MUO' "17C0 ~ ICRflM.7CMI~L,C1 1 Project No. 8518.OI ~' Site Ob"servations 86 0650 p , 3 ~ n~/~ V ti 31 January 2000 noted slope movements on the subject sift, however, transported slide material tends to be more prone toward downslope movement. Conclusions: It is evident from our observations that the site has experienced repeated events of downslope movement with some resulting stress to the subject residence. Because of the. structure's construction and remodel history it is difficult to know at this time whether distress observed during our site visit occurred prior to or subsequent of various remodel and/or remecliacion efforts. It does appear however, that most of the slope movements occurred at some time in the past prior to remodel or remediation efforts. • Regarding the overall site stability as it pertains to the dormant landslide, the current state of the geo-technical industry is such that reliable predictions of futwe pezformance of dormant landslides is not possibIc at this time, Should you have any questions relating to the contents of this letter. or should you require additional informatiozz, please do not hesitate contacting our office at your convenience. Very truly yours, S~~4RCH, inc. ~~ Robert Pollak Project Engineer ~i Copies: 1 via fax TFRR4SEARCX, iRG Page 3 of 3 - .~nnn~ ~ T~iIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C n(~~(l12 FROM :Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE N0. 468 3531238 • Attachment 3 A RECOMMENDATION FOR TREE PRESEI2VATTON AT THE NIJOR RESIDENCE 15330 KI'fTRIDGE ROAD SARATOGA Prepared at the Request of- Planning Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fnutvale Ave_ Saratoga, CA 95070 • Site Visit tiy: Barrie D. Coate Certified Arborist May 21, 200'f Job #02-01-049 Plan Received 4-30-01 Plan Due 5-29-01 • r ~Q~~1.~ FROM Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE N0. 408 3531238 Jun. 18 2001 11:07AM P3 A Krc~N1MF.NDATI~~N 1'c)t: TRF.F: PRr;SLRVn'fTUN A7 TIII3 NI1c )k hth:Stl)E:NCL, lS330 KI'I-tRI1XJL RQAn. SAt2n'i'cx:n. Assignment We were asked to inspect the site and comment on any relationship between the tree preservation and proposed construction at the site. The plan used for referral for this report was prepared by CRW Inc., and dated 421-01. Sammairy There are five trees reasonably close to the proposed construction area but it would appear none of them would be affected by the proposed activity. Trees #1 and 2 are directly adjacent to and below the existing driveway and edge of the deck. Trees #3, 4, and 5 are below the deck on the north side ofthe property and would appear to be entirely out of the way of proposed construction activity. In my opinion, there is. no reason to create tree preservation requirements or to require bonds during construction, since it seems inconceivable that any construction equipment would have any affect on any of the trees on the property during the addition of the second story to the existing home. BT3C/sl Encl: Tree Taata Charts Map Respec ly submitte ~,` ~ B e D. Coate ~ C•~'~'~ • • PREPAR2=,D BY: BA12tt[E D. CUATL. CUNSUL'rTNCt A12BORI8T MAY 2l, 2o0I flnn0'i 4 1 FROM :'Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE N0. 408 3531238 Jun. 18 2001 11:08AM P5 • 4 .; ~ ._ N ~ ~ i ~~ ~ . `~~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ • _~ ~ / ~ ~ r -- ~ ~~ ~ t . f ,~ i ~ +: ~ ;~ ! r;: ~ t 1 •~: ~ ~ 1 y ,tom i .r i. ~ ~ ~ j C M tO 0 ~ ~~• .t ~ .+~ ~ ~• i• / t jr (, ~ .~ '( 'r ` ~ r '.!fit. ~ •'~'~• ~•~ u +~~ V+ i i ~ ~ Q' M (7 ~ ~ Fw C'i ~ ~ 1 ~. 1 ~ ~ ; ~ ~ it aD vv" ~ Z O c0 1 ; ~ ~ .~ ~~ ,3 z ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~y 1 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~a. i ' 4 `1~ ~ ~ ~ F `. i, +, d FROM :'Panasonic FAX SYSTEM ~ ~ r-+ 0 N O O r., '~ RY O d bD "t3 •.y y V 0 M M 4'~ sa., "C. Si O p"\ ~, .O y 0 ~. PHONE N0. 408 3531238 O N (r~)ulaonid~-no~aa v N ~ lMA0i03a ON3WWOJ3a ~ ~ ~ w j ,'^r ~ , j ~ ~ S t4 ~ r a3DlIla83S033N _^ - ~ ~ ~ _ _ o _ $ m ~ -- ~ w ~ ~ p ~ y ~ (sL) aH1bM S433N e n u o ^ (S-1) 3St13St0 a~100 tOOa o 0 o c ~ E m (s-c) aaaanoo avi~oo tooa ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 c ^ x x x x x - d (s-L)~vo3a kNna1 m -- m (5-i) QOOM U~f3Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ __ _-................. ~ N ~ - N N tp ~ m (S-1) 3SK3S10 NM02lO 33a1 a _ eri w vs to erf (S'L)S103SN! u u n u (S'L)JWaOlad'JNINnbd ~ o o $ c # 03033N S318'd0 m .. -d v .. v ti z 1H~13M-aN3 anowa ~ c 8 ,_ ~ --- ~ 8 --- a ~~.........,............... x X X X X _ _ ~ 9NISroa NMOaO 5 NOIlKaOiS3a NMOaO . ~ - - a JNINN~Ht NMOa7 - ~' N ~ m 'A "' N yr m N eA ~ a° ~.._..._. _ _ .. m owNd3i~ NMOaO A n ^ u o (6-6) ~JNLLb2i OaVZVN ~ ~ g o 0 _ N ,n ° T _ (OL-z) 9NL.LVL! NOWONOO N W N ~ N ~ N-- •°` ~•, °~ ~ ............^...........~. ~ U ~ ~ .„ [ __ V ___......._ x x x x x __ ~ -- ---- (S-L) H2lt/3H ~ Q'd32idS ....~....~.. ............... •--___^ '~ ~ ~ . N v '~ .~- ,~ N v N N v N N m - N ch t~ 1HJ13H N Q ,R N ~„ ,°, w ,~ ;~ 133 Z~ aa~wvla N y N ~ `_ ^ ^ u N a N A E -- c c c c c ~ ~ H80 ti ~ H9O X -^ X k n y ~ » _- X X ..... _ Yn31SASytlniN ................. H84 ~ °' Qi ''~ ~ ~ N v N v 5 ~ C C c W ~ ~ W m w m O d ~~ m ~ '~ _ ~ ~ V V G ~ ~ @3 z m r $~q W VJ ~' ~ M m G a Q Y 0 T~. '~ Y Y. ~ G 4' A~ " O ~ ~ ~ OG !7 m ~ ~s J ~ ~ i ~ ~ a v `i ` ppp3~~~ Q V J ~ ~ L q S 4 _ ~ O O b ec N m ~ ~ , Jun. 18 2001 11:07AM P4 , r ~J M W ~ o O ~ of M ~ G w A H • ~ ~ N M ~ ~ n a ~ ~' „ u u ,~, x -c cwa ep .~ .a° r+ e~i ~ Z Q ~„~a~~ g ~ urpt u .C .C ~ a ^ s 04 ~n N ~ n \~-. 'e 'V/ 11r'/j ~/ ~~ .t[ r - . ~.. ~_ `.: _ ~ 1, O c ' ~ - a. ~ ~. ~_N: _ ~~ ~Q,. ,:~- . J .•'1 d t pp ~ ~ ~. r O 6 i ~. ~ tl ' J 1 / ~ ~ ` / ~: ~ ~ .:~ 1 r f r '~ ,`' Y ~~ ~ ;t p ! . l ~~~ ~ of g ~ 1, --1, . ~. Lf i (le. $f~J ~ i~. ~ ~~ /.. /r J, ~Vll ff ~\~P 1.~ ~ f 1( r ' ;j ~ i t ff i ~ ~ ~ ~~ i JJJJJJ ~ ~ bb ~~ r ~ .~ J:p N Sf ~ ~ . S ~ ~ v (: +~.; J i 1 SL ;r i r t o ~~: _ ~ ~ ;. ,` ~ 1 .y F ~ ~', . ,,. ~ ~ r '~ ~ L ~ y1~ ~` .Q ~1 f ~ ,~ fl+ ~ I l `fl` 1 l 5 1 hV of ~ ~ i r t Q` , \' i \i M ~ ,i: ~t ti i ~ 2 r ..: ~ ~ (~ Wets ~ ~ ) ~ t 1~ I~ V~ t1 W Ic ~ 6 ~' -. .. 1~ ~ ~ .1. VVV/ !j / fJ ~ 1 , ~ _r ~ 4 ~ p~ ~. -~r i ~ `~V/ ~ 1 e .lam ` j ~ 1c v a0 !~ ar '~ ^1 ~~ o ~ `w~J,Jr7d 2 nb. j ,~: ~~ i ~ ,~ --r _ _ n i 7--- t ~ ~ ~ ~ s :. .,, rra a~ a ~.III ~.i 4 Nf •,/~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ Yl .I ~~ .; z,~ ?TAY i ~ s- ~ F ~! v `~ ~~ f? m ~ ,~ - - r ,S ~ t i 1 ; ~ ._ ~ , t ' ~, f } 1 ! / 1~~ ' .. ~ 1~. ~ N ' i J ~ ~ `~ .~ .n. ,~o ~o, ~ ~ ~N~ .~ ~~ tl .. ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~~ t 1 •- t ~ 'J ~_~ ~ r e q r \Q ' ~ ,o ,~.. O, ~o g ` _ ~ ~I c ' I~ ~~s*a. , ~Q ~ ~& i ~,~+~N,~-. \11. a ~V, ~ Jo v r~ O -. ~ ti L k ~„ ~. a ,. S p i~ . d J ~ vt ~ n ~a;,, 3~dr'd ~ ~~ tm~ ~~~ F~~ .ypad°` a '' ~v~ c ~ ~ ~n V J _ t%~ N. \~I ~ .I ~ ~ F~v >; r O' `~ 0 s - fe ~i ~,~ I ~ ~ ul N p ~7 r( ~ Cc. C w ~~~ \cS' 3 ~ ~ 2 .~7~ tr ~ .4 c ~I ~ ~ f* ~ - 3 .N ~ ~' ~N~ ~ 'F~ a ~ ~i ~.Q` to ~ . ~ m cP m m N p .o 'InC~I ff s r c~.c.c~ mac" ®~®c~o~ I ~~~(- .~ ~ s ~. ~~ - 'g ~ ~ w /_ .--~ ~ d ~. ~! str ' ry v ` I ` 1 ~ ~% `~~/ .E-1~ , - ~ i ~~ 9 Q ' v O p N Ir... I ~ ° ~ l ~ ~~~ ~ ~ M ~ I d~ 0 ~I J ' ~ ~ w ~ `~ ii I` ~ ~ II yy (~, j~ ~~ ~~ o F d ~ • _~--~ w ~r- d E:n-~ C~ C7 0. U O ~ cL ~` C ~ L i ~ w ;,.. ~J ^~ ~ h J ~.r ~~ ~ U O ~_,,~ U (~~ ' y >t i • ~4: ~1 ~'1 ~- '~: +!h T s~= ~.. ~:,. _ °~ s _ : . ~-~ ~ ~~ Qom! I ~ n ~ ~ S ~ ,~ ~ Q ~ ( ~, ,. ~ Q. ~ ~ ",. r ~.. :~ ~ ~ h ; : ~ :; ~ ~ ~ o o ~ , v '' J, `~' V1 a ~ . ~!/ OI Oy ~~ ~ ~ ti..~, JWp 2 ~~ ~~ p; ,' I~~'a S ~ N ~. ~. ~ i ~ . ~ ~, a. ~•F'. ~ ~ N N .. ~.. 1 ~ . tb ~ ~ ~ Q~ 7 r 0 0 0 ~ w p~ 0 a n ~~ a Z U-. ~a., ¢. , N ., IU ~ ~; . g' ° : 3 a ~. I y Z ;: U1 ' w .3 ' .ui,- ~, . `t ... ~I ~ v ~.I- O ~ ~~ F ~ ~ y j ~ I_ ~ ,_ .. / Yt,'' / .. ~ O O ~ ~ ~ / ~ R i~ ~ • ~ ~ 1 I ` . ~~ •, ~. ,.. ~ `~ ~I ~, 4. .. I °y ! x . C 41 ~ .I j ~i ~~~i ,,. \~~'. `\~ I I ~ ~ ~' .~.__._.__ ___.._ '.. I .. _... _. ...___-.r..._.__. _..._._~ .. ..... ............~ 1i ~ J ~ I ;~ ~II ~ F~ i~ i t ~,~ - , _ ~. i '~ r ~~ I i ` .~ ~~ i ~~ r I! y ~ ~ ~~ ~ 1 ~ --I ~ {- =I. , 1 II 1 tl I I .{ n __.. - j I II o , a ~' \ f J `" G I _ w ~ 1 M I o' (j ~1 _~ U.~ . .~.,1 4. ... _ ~ ~ .~ ~`•~ l ~. ~~ _ ~ . .: `.. 1 _~ .: -~' ,n .. N; I ~I I .o . ~~ ~W ~ _ ~ , ~~ , _ . - ~d n ~a r '~; a ~~ ; ';.e n S .~/ ; ~:-. ~ .. _ ~' ~r ~L , . ``~. .._....-. _1. .. r. . ~ .....I ~F I- ~. ~ r ~~ :~ {: #'. `L- r I~~ o ~ ~. Lo I ~ ~ ' ll~.~ , r ~. _ - _ _. ~ y - ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ... .. ~? ~ ~ ` ~ p ~. 9 N ~ •~..., Q ~ Q _ ` ~ c ~ . ~ Y .. a • Q~ ~I 1! ~ ( ~~ ~~ © ~) J ~` . 1L ~ ~I __. V ti~ 3I ~~ 2 .~; . -• ~ a aye d ~~' ; J y~ ; ~~, ~ / p 0 0 /~~ . ~. ;~ ~ . ~ a aO' a~ ~ . O z 3~~ . jQ'~Q~zi~ . a ~: ~ Q 3 2 --~ ~ ~; a P o ~K~a W ~ ~~,~;~ i ~, ~,~, u ~ ~ N. ~I© 2' .-1 N ~~ °i ~ yam. ~ i\ ~. - \ i9`\ __ s =o r;, `' :~~ o ~ -s-, /% ~: W _ ~ ~~ %~ - N ~ # ti ~. _ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .ice ~ ~' ;i~ W~ ©~ ~P 3~ F=. ~~~~~~~ a~3o ©~ vJ.. ~(~ 3 ,.2 d~ g ~ q 3 ~, ~ of ri ~ ;:~ d~~ ~N a' ~~~'~QQ ~: W~ 2~ tt 1~ 7.. ~ W vi nn?~Pcl.~ ~~ti a~ ro?OaL~~pl.a ~' F.:.a'. J - o ,~ ~.. 1,3 03~23~3~.a3..3a°' .~_. d ~ .. `a~, J~a Aa~9 ~~a~~~' ~LLZ I ; . / ~ ~ ~ p~ o :. \ ern. ~ ~ f 2 d~ ~ ~-~n! ~ '~, 9 \.. ! ~ ~ ` ~ i ~ ~ _ .~ J ~ / e' .~ `~` \''Q4 ~~ Q ~~ v o 9 .\ ~, ~ ~ ,~> ~ ~~ _ -~ . I ~ \ \'Y `I ~ ~r4. I \ r- ~- N ,_' ~ 1 -•~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~MI' Baru ~ .\ ~ I 1 Iwv~ ° f 1~ 3 $ _ I ~ :y /% -, ,/ ~ ~ ~ . o/ . NG~~ 2 ~ / _ I l .i /~ _ ~' 9 I i ~ LL m . I ~ ~ d ( ~ z J ~; ~ ~- ~ m ,- . ~ ~ 16 / ~ ___ ~! l a ~ -~ ~- ~ .. ~~ o: I - ~ ~ >~ ~ ~ .:I ~ ~ ~ o i ~ t1. ~ ~ q W I it n _.. _. . ~~ s g ~ - ~ ~ I . _ pq . i - C I~- i . ~ 1 X1+1 '1 ~~~ __ ~- \ ~.` 1 4 u t _`X d~ , i I Y J 1 ~ ~ ~ - ~. . i.+ _. _..._. ~ ~. \ I ~ ~ ~~ ~. { ~ it ~`~~ X909`''` / ~ ~ ~ / ~P ~ % ~~ -,, - ~ ~a i I~ `° I v I ~ ~i ~i 4 ~nY'nf' \y 1-~- ~~ L ~ ~ L s E . _ ~ ~ ~ Y ` ~: s: ~ ~. - ~~ ~ . m ~ . i N t n . ~ o 3 (~ a _d ~. ~~ aF • ~ ~~ ~, a~ 1 WJ I ~, I ~ ;~ ~~ „9,os 1 ~: g..; ~,.r i a; .. ~ ,. ~ o;~ i S ~ h p I p ~~ ~.; ~a~ q~ Od ~ ~ ~O~z N~ J N 3O ? J •~ ~ H ' ~ ~ d ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ hLN~ t- 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ \' ~~ m ~. __ n- IY ~~ VI ~ . ~ i ~ r ` N : ~ ~~ .~ ~ A ~ N m ~ =~ s 3 l<!`` _ ` ~~. . J 0 _ o ~~ ' ~ V y o _ ~_ ~ . ~i ~. 2 a 9 j a y ~ G_ ~ LL ~ O C~1 ~, N Pi •.G;9/ ;l'i'W „~ ;9Z ~ ,~; _ • . . .° ~ ~ 6 o ~ a ,,,~~~.JJJ. ~ , { ~ ,o: 8. 2 ~, .~ a' u .. .. :. - .: ~ ~ Z ,.. i .. 1 .. \' :, .... .. 3G- a .. ,n _ u ~¢ u o0 a 0.. ~ V ~~ ~a =m ~ ;- ~~` h -~ o° ~ ~ ~® ~ ~,~ by ~ =~ ~ . ~' -- - - - :~ _ ~ ~ .. % I m ~ / _ ... . ./ // U ~ u N N. ~ J , N 0°'4 a 3p Q~ N .0 Irk ~ u s i ,n L' ~ /~ ~J_ ~ IF ~ _ P i ~ ~~`' Ins IW I _ ~ ~ LL i I ~ ~ W .Q t J N I ° ~. J ~ `, :,~,~ -- h ~ P ~ ~ ~ ~' w ~ a ~ `' , . ~ I `~ ,~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ , \;\ v \,1\ ~, ~, :o ~;~ ,:9;sz : ~ ., ~~ ~3 ~. y 2 2 0 -~ . `/ 01 ~~.. ,~.~~. n .W i b r•..: t i F • • _ .. x~~. i '. ~ ~.. ~' /'~~ - \ \ ~ '~. ~ ~. \ / ~\~ !l s r l a w \• i ~ `^ ~ /;. L ?u E N ~ ~~ w . a, c. Y3. _ a w _~ ~ ` ~~ _ /~ , .... .. ~' ~ ~ ~~ ,; ~ ~ .. ~ - : _.. .. 1 .. N ~. ` / it I.. W`--,c ~ \ \ \\ '.. _ ... ... / ~ . .. ,:.., _.~,.:".... ... ~ -. ... a / % to ~ .. _ .. .. _ ~ ~ \ ~• . Q W ~`, ~ `~ :~ / - _ ;', / V J w ~. ~ a . ~ _ ~ ~~ r ~---- -- - .- ~ ~ ~ a ~ r _ _ . I ~ ... ~,_.- o s _ -' . -- - - ~~- - i y i` i .! 111 r. ~ - . -~ ... ~ I ~, `- =.o ~~ ~:1i _ . _ ::- - - L y~ / ~ • o ~ {~ / .i ^ . ~~ ~ ~.O W - ~ ~~. . :o ~ ~ ` _ ~ ~ C _ "'~1- ~~ N ~ _ yL 5 O'OA C u 1 ~ d ~ ~ >. ~. f n a~ C ~X ~ Moo ' . o ~. •1 ' "~ ~ L :~ o v~- ~3 ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ G r ~ i / _i X Q W / i ~ W '.:J ~ ~.~ ... . .. ~ _O.-.._~... .... .._. .. .... _...__... .. -.. .. _ _."_ _ _... .. _ l _ ` ~- i \ i _ j .' .. ~ ~-mac,- C`. J~ .. \/ ~ a5 .r ~. ` J ~ `~ ~ i w ,9 i- 13 ~ ~ ~ 3 a ~ !- ~ ~ ~, to ~ /~I " 1' (I" i. ~.Wo ~ S~ LL's ~u J +1 ~ ( 4 ~,, ~ q ~ u .~ w: C. I ~.~ ~ ~ ot:` p~j `3 vr, O a ~~~, tL ~ .: ~ 1 - u~ V.:W~z''- ~ vi ~ - Ul }''3' ^ 2 J.u ~ FJ ti = ~~`•~ ~~_ _. _ ~ ,,~ .~~~ _~ ~. ~.~ ~ ,. _ //• ~ _ _ ~ ~r :D. - ~ _ ~ ... ! .. . . _ O ,; .. _ . ~ ~ -:~ ~ -~ c,,. ..o. C 3 a F-r0 e ~ u ~ no :i; ~ ~~ ~ 0 rq , c :. :,, "O a. 3 ~ ~ ~ .. - E c a ., __..._~- 7 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ `8 8~ j ~ ~Y ,D . R ~_ _-_ ,moo N: ~ ~ ~ .. ~ > 2 . I ~~ ,, ~ ' E' m. ^ _ - (~ ~ is '-~ Attachment 3 ~~ SETBACK VARIANCE FINDINGS REPORT July 21,2001 NGUYEN GARAGE ADDITION ,~ 18621 Kosich Drive Saratoga, California PREPARED BY ZAMORA & ASSOCIA TES 42A South First Street San Jose, California 95113 • Zamora ~ Associates, InC. 42A South First Sk, San Jose, CA 95113 Tel 408-297-9377 Fax 408-946-6457 Duly 21, 2001 Planning Department City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Subject: Findings Report Project: Nguyen Residence -Setback Variance- Address: 18621 Kosich Drive Ref: V-01-0007 • Introduction: The purpose of this letter is to provide an introduction to the findings report hereby being submitted for the Nguyen residence setback variance to build a new garage. Scope of Work: The main purpose of this project is to make an addition to the existing residence to allow for adequate family living. When the home was purchased in October, 1999 it was advertised as a three bedroom -sixteen hundred square foot (1,600 SF) home with "Pre- approved" plans for a new garage on the left and the conversion of the existing garage into a "Master bedroom Suite" (see Exhibit photo "P"). After Gose of escrow it was discovered that the planning department never approved the plans for the addition. With four children and two adults it became imperative that more bedrooms were needed for the family. Also, it became evident that the existing garage backing into Saratoga Avenue was a "Traffic Safety" liability that needed correction. During early meetings with the planning staff it became apparent that, due to numerous lot restrictions such as topography, landscaping, and setbacks, that the best option to resolve the "Traffic Safety" issue was to build a new garage on the West side of the lot. In doing so, and in order to meet the minimum twenty by twenty feet garage dimensions, the new garage would have to encroach into the existing ten-foot setback by five feet. Variance Justification: The body of this finding report will show that there is a "solid" justification for granting the setback variance on the basis of "General Traffic Safety' that all neighbors would benefit from. Also, by granting this variance no special .privileges are requested that others might object or tack thereof. Planning Departr»ent Support . The application for the setback variance was initially submitted on April 10, 2001. On May 8, 2001 the assigned planner (Sr. planner Philip W. Block) send a letter stating that the planning staff could support the variances requested except for the modified entrance. The planner suggested that the front entrance be moved back two feet in order to meet the minimum twenty five-foot setback. Also, it was recommended that the new entrance be lowered to reduce its massiveness. In response to the May 8, 2001 letter of support from the planning department the changes requested were made and a new set of plans was resubmitted per cover letter dated May 21, 2001. Per a letter from planner Philip W: Block dated June 19, 2001 it was confirmed that the application was complete and that the project had been scheduled to be placed for the August 8,2001 Planning Commission meeting. The letter also requested that thirteen set of reduces plans be submitted for the planning commissioners' packets. The requested reduced sets were submitted two weeks later. Neighborhood Support ~_ While the planning department was reviewing the initial application the owner canvassed the neighborhood to show the proposed plans and to request their support. It was gratified to find out that all adjoining neighbors were in full agreement to support the setback variance. They all agreed to write letters of support (see attached) and some of them even • volunteered to attend the panning commission meeting to speak for support of the variance. Conclusion After careful review of the facts, and the variance regulations pertaining to this project it is felt that the Planning commission should grant the variance in order to prevent or lessen the practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of the city's "Variance" chapter, as result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the zoning regulations. The mere difficulty and unnecessary physical hardship from the lot size, shape, comer location and locations of existing physical obstructions such as protected trees, power poles, fire hydrants and extremely heavy traffic conditions affecting life and safety mandates that granting of this variance does not by itself constitute a special privilege but rather repairs past mistakes. • FIN®INGS REPORT Statement: The purpose of this findings is to present to the Planning Commission justification to support a setback variance for the building of a new garage in adherence with city ordinances. According to the Saratoga's city ordinance pertaining to the granting of variances Article 15-70.010, "The Planning Commission is empowered to grant variances in order to prevent or fo lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this Chapter as would result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of certain zoning regulations. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon, from geographic, topographic or other physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity or from population densities, street locations or traffic conditions in the immediate vicinity." Scope of Work & Existing Conditions: The purpose of this project is to build a 20' x 20' garage attaching it to the East side of • the existing residence (see plans attached) reusing an existing driveway facing Kosich Drive. This new garage will replace the original garage that currently faces Saratoga Avenue, which is the source of a serious traffic safety conflict. The existing garage would be then be converted to a master bedroom suite which is desperately needed since the current home is too small (1600 square feet) to meet the living spaces of the family (HusbandNVife and four children). According to the current zoning ordinances the lot (corner) coverage and setback requirements are so restrictive that the existing home, which was built forty-seven years ago, does not meet setbacks requirements. In addition, the existing garage facing Saratoga Avenue is so close to the intersection (Kosich Drive) that if this plan was to be submitted for planning approval today it would not be approved due to safety reasons. Any other options to add the needed master bedroom space faces physical restrictions due to the topography and the existence of several large trees (see photos). Due to the location and topography of the lot the existing garage is in a blind spot that makes it very dangerous to back out into Saratoga Avenue. In addition, there is a bicycle lane that breaks about ten feet in front of the garage which motorists use as an "exit" lane when making a right turn into Kosich Drive. When these motorists make this turn their car wheels are almost at the roll curb or our driveway. • Pursuant to the above regulation this report will illustrate that the granting of a setback variance for the building of the new garage is in full conformance with the above • reference ordinance. In addition, careful consideration has been made to assure that the proposed design meet proper architectural scale, aesthetic and mass. Special Circumstances: -Size, Shape, Topography, location and surroundings- A Will granting of this variance deprive the applicant privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district? • Not at all. ~. All current owners in the vicinity have a safer egress to and from their homes due to fact that their garages do not have to back out into a major arterial and into a dangerous corner with asix-foot bicycle lane in front of their garages. According to 1979-1981 a traffic flow Saratoga Avenue had an ADT of 27, 537. Since then this traffic count there has seen a great increase due to opening of highway 85. All current traffic reports point to the fact that Saratoga Avenue is at maximum capacity in terms of traffic flow. B Will the granting of the variance constitutes a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in • the same zoning district? • Not at all. Due to the special site conditions (corner lot with blind spots due to existing landscaping) this setback variance will serve to mitigate an existing dangerous life and safety condition that affects all adjoining neighbors. By resolving the unsafe access to the existing garage the adjoining residents will be able to benefit from a safer intersection so this is a "general community" enhancement and not just a privilege for the applicant. C Will the granting of the variance be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvement in the vicinity? • Not at all. By eliminating a dangerous life and safety problem that affects all passing motorists (and neighbors) this will have no detrimental effect to anyone. On the contrary, this change will improve the general safety and welfare of the community. D If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to signs? • This variance has nothing to do with signs; therefore this section is not applicable. E If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to off-street parking or loading • facilities? • This variance has nothing to do with parking; therefore this section is not applicable. Conclusion: In view of the above findings, and with all of the letters of support from the adjoining neighbors, it is strongly recommended that the Planning Commission should approve the granting of this setback variance. Senior planner Philip W. Block made at least three separate visits to the site and with each visit he was more convinced that the variance should be granted. In his letter dated May 8, 2001 he specifically stated that this variance he supported the reduced variance. • • • '3AV ~JOlVZiVS 1 z Q a • in' Q' O UN O Y ~o o; o- w~ F- N qqq LLLLLLLL LL LLLL W O O~ m~ m W O p p~ W W 0 O ~~an~$~~°Oa~~~ o~ o f tY ^ n > ~ p NN~~NW =, .fit O p ~,4=.\A~ Q~, C 'j'SIrO>1> ~OW ~ W ^ ~~°~ X333 0°°° W ~~.s~~~~s~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~RSa~o6Fo8s~~ ~ Si' i I ' }.-- -- ,f i r--- - i ° z z o O W ~ ~ o -~ ~~8~ Z ~ ~' Q Q O ~ ° . x v ~ ~ ~ ~" N Z O V g . j. N i 1. i Z g a O O Z V+ 1 ~t r-- ;;-, ~ i_. m W ®W mpm W W pOp W WW m W W W W 0 ~~ 3~Nnp~f~tl000~WONnNmO N O Q O O W p ~' LL LL m $ m N N e ~ ` ~ W WW yNW o t"S Q a `~ G W p ~ N ~ N 0 Z i E ^ ~ W U ~ f I W ~• W a 0.,.~.,< o ° S ~ ~oo~~<'<; =g ~ ~ mW~ ' E ` ` Q ~ dj s-as:.aeFa 6~R^o~o^8Fo 8...~-~~~~~~~ s ~ F ,~ ~~ ,i ------ . - ~ --~ Z 1 R -_ a --~ O «O^ ^.^~. W O O a • • • 1 :~ 4., v. Z F=- L i LL Z O `~ W J W 0 T. 4 I ~` 4 • •t •t ~ •~ V ~~~ 7 .`. a • • ~ •~• ~ •~ •' ~ ~ ~ j sf ~. a' T - ~ ~. ` ... <7 Z O `~ W J W Z :~ i `v~ v ~ "' ~ i , 4 e~. p A } ~~ R~ •~ t' • ~ v ,~ ~: ..- _ 1' ' ~ ..~ ~nl I/ ~U y N C O_ Z O O A ~ I I Z ~ v ~ ~~ O ~ ~m ~ ~ =m ~ ~~ O Z I is I ^ A 'D S r !n S G r m A O 0 Z ~~ I~ 1 If T_7 ~' ( 1' A c° O u ~ ' m N u. I . ^ i. ~ ~I -- - l ! I' t6 ~_i ~ ~ 1 l ` ~ , C7 ~ I ; ~. '~, i P, ~ ° : ' I . ` ~:~ ; . 7 ~a € . ! y 6 S. ~ r r ~ a,lh ~ 1.. k . Jt . ~ M '- ~~ z - y~ ti ~ ~ • Y V a ~ ~ , t ~. ~~:~ , II r ~~ ~ '.. F 4 r n z . 4 ~ f = - sf d ~ ~ ~ ~ i r 4' ~ U V / . k ~~ U~u ~ A .; i ~ ° 3i _ .. ~ ~ Z,_: o .i ~ y iF ap :, ~J o S C .. . _ F ~ , S 4 ~g ;, . ~ >d~ A S: ,. ,`? 8 ., 3 7 ~ 9 ` J'. _ F P ~:. ~ q 9 .. F ~ ~ Y .. r, Y a i :~ a a 1 ® a ~ - f o © ~; LI n V A ' ~ id ~ ; i 1 fJ M ~ ~ ~, '~ Gi ~i _, 4 ~. ~ / .. .. ^ I „I Ci , ', ~. s f . ^ _ ; _ ~ , .f? Ny ~ a o~ m ~ ~ :.r' ., l ;. ~ ~ z e r ' '. . ~ 's ' ~~ '~ -~ F ro I. ~: ~ .' , .7 O~ ('"~ ~ - i--~ 8 O ~ V ~ O O -~-, ~y f N Z r~ Qm S Z A Vl _ ~ N m ~ +~ ~ ~° ~$~ r ~~ ~ t $~ ~ ~A t ~~~~' ~~~~' ~~ ~~~~a~o~~~ Q~o~~~ o ~o~~~- ,. iFii Exhibit A • • y-~ _ yet .,..~, -:~ *9F {1Na~ - E` f4 ~ r ~. ~~ ~~,. Z ... 5 f ' ~ ~~ Saratoga Avenue Photo facing North showing South-bound traffic with five six feet wide bicycle lane break at right. At left is entrance to the existing garage driveway. Traffic: Moderate Time: Approximately 12: 35 PM Speed: Traffic appears to be moving in excess of posted 40 mph SAFETY ACCESS PROBLEM HERE Motorists making a right turn into Kosich ®rive start to merge into the bicycle lane at the lane break entering into the backing lane of garage. EXHIBIT "B" Saratoga Avenue Photo taken in front of driveway facing south showing narrow bicycle lane break starting just before the existing driveway on the right. Traffic: Moderate Time: 12:37 PM Speed: Traffic speed approximately 50 mph. ~Q~C~~ ~G°3GaI~G~IC~ G°~G°30o ~ C~~l ~~~~f~~~~ C~J~P~1~C~ C~W~P~I~t6C~ X0000 6~00~@ f~OO ~~p~~{~ 60OP~C~P. EXHIBIT C ~• u -~~ ~~ . ~~. Saratoga Avenue Photo facing South showing South bound traffic at intersection of Saratoga Avenue &Kosich Drive. Note that bicycle lane widens from six feet to eleven feet after crossing Kosich Drive. Traffic: Moderate Time: Approximately 12: 37 PM Speed: Traffic appears to be moving in excess of 40 mph Neic~hb®rs Have Safer Access: ~. Notice that neighbors across Kosich Drive have a wider lane to "Safely" back out from their driveways. Also, some of them have "horseshoe" driveways that allow them to egress without backing out into incoming traffic. • • EXHIBIT "D" - ~..... ...~.~,..d. y.. _,~~_ .c.~..._.~._,. _ ,~ ~,- I 7 f ~ ~i ~.r'1 ~ ~ ~~~ ~RI ~ ! ~~ f3 ,i i ~ ~ y` . § ,~ JJ A ~ -a ~~ ~.{' ~ .t1 n. Saratoga Avenue Photo showing the existing garage facing Saratoga Avenue. Traffic: Moderate Time: 12:37 PM SAFETY TRAFFIC PROBEM/BAD CITY PLANNING The existing garage is less than seventy-five feet from the intersection of Saratoga Avenue and Kosich Drive. Under current city planning guidelines this would garage would not be approved to be built. • EXHIBIT "F" ~~ • . 18621 Kosich Drive Photo taken across residence showing existing driveway on the left and front bedroom facing Kosich Drive. Existing driveway will provide a safer access to proposed garage on the left side. Traffic: Moderate Time: 12:37 PM. SETBACK RESTRICTIQNS: Due to existing setback restrictions a garage addition on the left is only possible with the approval of a setback variance. • • ~~~ O~ 13717 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 May 8, 2001 David Zamora 42A South f=irst Street San Jose, CA 95113 Dear Mr. Zamora: Re: V-01-007 18621 Kosich Nguyen Residence COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Nick Streit Ann Waltonsmith I have been assigned as the project planner for your project and look forward to working witi~ you. The Planning Staff has completed the application review for your project. The application is incomplete until we receive the following information: ~ 1. A reduced schematic drawing showing the floor area calculations including the subtotals for each room. r 2. Clearly distinguish between the existing dwelling and garage and what is being proposed so the two can easily be compared. Either add shading to the existing Sheet A-2 site plan or perhaps add a reduction of this to the sheet. If a reduction is used please include the setbacks. ~ 3. Call out the species and size (diameter) of each tree measured two feet above grade. Any protected trees will require steel tree protective fencing. 1 4. Please revise the project data on Sheet A-2 to include the building and impervious lot coverage broken down by sub areas as well as the maximum allowed, assessor parcel number, zoning, building slope and average site slope. ~' S. Call out the existing and finished grades and on Sheets A-4 and A-5. We can support the four foot rear yard Variance and the 13 foot exterior side yard ~ Variance for bedroom # 3. However, we cannot support the two foot exterior side yard Variance for the proposed modified entrance. We suggest that you pull back the entrance two feet in order to meet the minimum 25 foot exterior yard setback requirement and thus avoid the need for a Variance. Also, the entrance element should Incorporated October 22, 1956 Printed on recycled paper. be lowered in order to reduce its massiveness. The Planning Commission has expressed much concern about what they consider to be excessively massive residential front entrances. If we can work out these front entrance issues with you, there should not be a need for the Planning Commission to get involved with your project beyond the Variance request. We will provide you a copy of the Fire Department conditions when we receive them. Once we have these conditions and the above requested information we will be able to let you know what Planning Commission meeting your item is tentatively scheduled for. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 408/868-1231 if you have questions or I can be of assistance as we proceed through the application review process. Sincerely, ~_ ~ . ~~ Philip W. Block Senior Planner CC: Hoa Thi Nguyen 224 Meadowhaven Way Milpitas, CA 95035 C i. • • Zamora 8~ Associates, ~t1C. 42A South first St., San Jose, CA 95113 Tel 408-297-9377 Fax 408-946-6457 May 21, 2001 Planning Department City of Saratoga Attention: Philip W. Block Subject: Response to Planning Staff review Project: Nguyen Residence Addition Variance- . 18621. Kosich Drive Ref. No. V-01-007 Dear Philip, The purpose of this letter is to respond to the initial planning staff review comments per your letter dated May 8, 20001. Attached please find four revised sets of drawings as requested. We have reviewed all the planning reviewed comments and are hereby providing a response for each item to make this a complete application. At this time we would also like to thank you for the meeting we had .last. Friday, whereby you provided us with additional clarifications and pre-review of our revised design package. The following is a brief summary of the responses made as indicated on our revised design package: 1. The reduced schematic -Floor Plan drawing A-3 has been modified to include floor area subtotal calculations for each room.- This has been done for the existing as well as for the proposed floor plan. 2. Site plan drawing A-2 has been modified to include shading on the proposed garage to distinguish it from the old garage (no shading). 3. Site plan drawing A-2 has been modified to include missing free data such as diameter size, type,, location and status. 4. Site plan drawing A-2 has been modified to include previously missing project data such as: building and impervious coverage, maximum allowed areas, assessor parcel number, zoning, building slope and average site slope. 5. Elevations and Section drawings: A-4 & A-5 respectively have been modified to include existing and proposed finished grades. • With regards to the variance comments, we are pleased with your overall support for the exterior side yard and rear yard variances, as mentioned in your letter. We have.adjusted the site and floor plans in order to meet the 25-foot exterior yard setback as recommended. Also, we have redesigned the front entrance by lowering this element by two feet. We believe that this new fagade provides for a more harmonized scale of the fagade masses. We did receive the fire department comments last week. The fire department is requiring fire sprinklers in the new garage. This should not be a problem since there appears to be -enough water pressure in the adjacent lines. This requirement will be incorporated in the final working drawings. . We look forward to have this project approved by the planning department, and to have it included in the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting for the Variance approval. S'ncerely, avid Z or Principal Cc: Hoa Nguyen Encl: Four revised sets (D size -24" x 36") Four revised sets (reduced 11" x 17") • • c~ ~~„a~ CAB J`s~ OO ~ ~° ~° 1~Oo C~~ 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 June 19, 2001 navid _7.a.mora 42A South First Street San Jose, CA 95113 Dear Mr. Zamora: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Nick Streit Ann Waltonsmith Re: V-O1-007 18621 Kosich Nguyen Residence This is to confirm that your application is complete and scheduled for August 8, 2001 Planning Commission meeting. Please provide us with 13 sets of reduced plans for the Planning Commissioners' packets (please have the plans reduced to "11 x 17," three hole punched and "Z" folded). We should receive them well in advance of the Commission meeting. If you have any questions relating to your project, please call me at (408) 868-1235). My temporary contract with the City of Saratoga is ending this week since they have hired permanent staff. On June 25, 2001 John Livingstone will be taking over your project. He has a lot of experience and you will find him easy to work with. He can be reached at .,o,ncpp , ~, g„ ~. 1, =fVUr OU(7-12J L. I huge ::.lj:,yed ;v:.rl~i:,g zvltl'i ;~/OLI. •vuL :`:`iSiie3. _ Sincerely, Philip W. Block Senior Planner CC: Hoa Thi Nguyen • 224 Meadowhaven Way Milpitas, CA 9503 Printed on recycled paper • July 8, 2001 Planning Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Subject: Variance for=Nguyen Residence Address: 18621 Kosich Drive To whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to provide my support for the setback variance, as requested by Ms. Nguyen, as part of the new garage to be facing Kosich Drive,. to help alleviate an existing unsafe access condition through the existing Saratoga Avenue driveway. According to the remodeling plans I saw, as prepared by architect Zamora & Associates, the variance is not only justified but it makes sense from a design and aesthetic point of view. I have no problems in granting the requested variance for the new garage. sincerely, Mr & Mrs. Bob Speicher 12325 Kosich Place Saratoga, CA July 9, zoo 1 Planning Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Subject: Support of Variance for Nguyen Residence (Remodeling) Address: 18621 Kosich Drive To Whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to provide my support for the vaziance, as requested by Ms. Nguyen, in her efforts to resolve an unsafe traffic condition caused by the existing garage facing Sazatoga Avenue. According to the remodeling plans, as shown to me by Ms. Nguyen, the variance is needed to build a new garage facing Kosich drive. This new garage will provide for a safer access from Kosich Drive instead of the existing access through the busy Saratoga • Avenue. Ever since the opening of highway 85 Saratoga Avenue has become a more congested avenue full of fast driven vehicles whose drivers seem always speeding in excess of the posted limits. It therefore makes sense to grant the variance to mitigate this existing dangerous situation. Sincerely, VIZ. ~~ ~~~'~~- Mrs. Rose L. Weiner 18651 Kosich Drive Sazatoga, CA • • July 10, 2001 Planning Department 13777 f=ruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Attention: Sr. Planner Philip W. Block Subject: Variance for Nguyen Residence Address: 18621 Kosich Drive Mr. Block, The purpose of this letter is to provide my support for the variance, for Ms. Nguyen, to build a new garage facing Kosich Drive. The existing garage design (facing Saratoga Ave.) may have been fine back forty plus years ago when the home was built because the traffic then was a trickle compare with what it is now. With the building boom within the last forty years, • coupled with the construction of highway 85 this has tamed Saratoga Avenue into a main traffic artery with all of the risks and safety problems of a main throughway. I have no problems in granting the requested variance for the new garage. Sincerely, n henault 18681 Kosich Drive Saratoga, CA n U r~ U • July 8, 2001 Planning Department 13777 Fruifirale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Subject: Support of Variance for Nguyen Residence Address: 18621 Kosich Drive To Whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to provide my support for the variance, as requested by Ms. Nguyen, in her efforts to resolve an unsafe traffic condition caused by the existing garage facing Saratoga Avenue. According to the remodeling plans, as prepared by architect Zamora 8~ Associates, the variance is needed to accommodate the building of the new garage facing Kosich drive. I have no problems in granting the requested variance for the new garage. Sincerely, ,9yL ~~-~ Earl Eubanks 18650 Kosich Drive Saratoga, CA • July 14, 2001 Planning Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Attention: Sr. Planner Philip W. Block Subject: Setback Variance for Nguyen Residence Address: 18621 Kosich Drive Mr. Block, 1 am writing this letter to provide my support for the setback variance, as requested by Ms. Nguyen, to build a new garage facing Kosich Drive. The existing garage is very unsafe when backing out due to the fast moving and heavy traffic on Saratoga Avenue. Also, the existing garage is too close to the intersection making it very unsafe to slow down while avoid getting hit in • the back by trailing drivers who may assume that Ms. Nguyen is making a right turn at the street (Kosich Drive) rather than to her garage. Given the above argument it seems safe and logical that a setback variance to resolve the above-described "unsafe" condition should be granted by the planning commission. • Saratoga, CA 95070 (408) 393-5?98 • July 7; 2001 Planning Department :13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California . _ 95070 . ~: Subject: Support letter for Variance Address: 18621 Kosich Drive ~ -. Sr. Planner Philip W....Block The :pur-pose of this lever isao -support-the ariance;- as requested by -Ms: Nguyen; to-°:resolve. ari ..unsafe access to -the existing= ~ . .- . garage through Saratoga :Avenue., .. _ ~. According to the remodeling plans, as shown to me by 11~s: Nguyen, the variance is needed ~o build a anew garage,facirag Kosich .drive;. This new ".garage not only makes more sense,, but ~it will. also provide. fora afer traffic corner for,tlie rest of us the. . neighbors. who have #o drive .through it: see no ~ reason why this variance should not .be =granted. Sincerely, - Mr: Danny Hwang 12308 fKosich Place Saratoga;: CA ,` 15-70.030 • C • of the site or six feet, whichever is greater, and the mini- mum width of an exterior side yazd of a corner lot shall be not less than twenty percent of the width of the site or fifteen feet, whichever is greater. (b) Where the depth of the site is less than the standazd for the district, the reaz yard shall be twenty percent of the depth of the site or twenty feet, whichever is greater. (c) In the event the setbacks in subsections (a) or (b) of this Section are determined to be greater than those in the applicable zoning standazd, then the zoning standazd shall apply. (Amended by•Ord. 71-106 § 11, 1992) Article 15-70 VARIANCES Sections: 15-70.010 Purpose of Article. 15-70.020 Authority to grant variances. 15-70.030 Application for variance; fee. 15-70.040 Investigation and report by Planning Director. 15-70.050 Public hearing by approving authority; notice. 15-70.060 Findings required for granting of variance. 15-70.070 Action by approving authority. 15-70.080 Expiration of variance; extensions. 15-70.090 Revocation of variance. 15.70.100 New application following denial or revocation. 15-70.110 Appeals to City Council. 15-70.010 Purpose of Article. The Planning Commission is empowered to grant vari- ances in order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficul- ties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this Chapter as would result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of certain zoning regulations. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hazdship may result from the size, shape or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon, from geographic, topographic or other physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity or from population densities, street locations or traffic conditions in the immedi- ate vicinity. Cost to the applicant of strict or literal compli- ance with a regulation shall not be the sole reason for granting a variance. The power to grant variances does not extend to use regulations and any use which is prohibit- ed under the regulations of his Chapter may not be autho- rized through the granting of a variance. 15-70.020 Authority to grant variances. (a) The Planning Commission is designated as the approving authority under this Article with power to grant variances from the regulations prescribed in this Chapter with respect to site area, site frontage, width and depth, and coverage, setbacks for front yards, side yards and reaz yards, allowable floor area, height of structures, distance between structures, signs, off-street pazking and loading facilities, fences, walls and hedges, and alteration or expan- sion of non-conforming structures, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in this Article. (b) No variance for setbacks shall be required for new main and accessory structures proposed to be built where: (1) The building pad has been graded pursuant to an approved tentative map, recorded final map and approved grading plan, consistent with the final map; or (2) The location of the building site was an important factor in approving the subdivision, as demonstrated by a preponderance of evidence, such as supplemental site development plans, discussion in staff reports or public hearing minutes, applicable environmental documents, adopted findings and a resolution approving the project and in adopted conditions of approval. (3) In the event that new main and accessory structures proposed to be built meet the criteria set forth in subsections (bxl) and (bx2) of this Section, those setback requirements in effect at the time the tentative map was approved shall apply. The Community Development Director shall determine the applicability of this subsection. The Director's decision shall be subject to appeal pursuant to Section 2-05.030. Relief granted under this subsection does not relieve the project from other applicable requirements of this Chapter. (Amended by Ord. 71.99 § 28, 1991; Ord. 71-106 § 12, 1992; Ord. 71-155 § 1, 1995) 15-70.030 Application for variance; fee. (a) Applications for a variance shall be filed with the Planning Director on such form as he shall prescribe. The application shall include the following: (1) Address or description of the property. (2) Statement of the precise nature of the variance requested and the practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hazdship inconsistent with the objectives of this Chapter which would result from a strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation of this Chapter, together with any other data pertinent to the findings required for the granting of a variance, as prescribed in Section 15-70.060. 367 (Saratoga 4%) 15-70.030 (3) An accurate scale drawing of the site and the surrounding area for a distance of at least five hundred feet from each boundary of the site, showing the locations of streets and property lines and the names and last known addresses of the recorded legal owners of all properties shown on the drawing. (4) An accurate scale drawing of the site, showing the contours at intervals of not more than five feet and existing and proposed locations of streets, property lines, uses, structures, driveways, pathways, off-street parking and off- street loading facilities and landscaped areas. (5) A preliminary title report or other evidence showing the applicant to be the owner of the property, or evidence that the applicant is the duly authorized agent of the owner. (b) The application shaD be accompanied by the payment of a processing fee, in such amount as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council, together with a deposit of the estimated cost of noticing the public hearing as determined by the Planning Director. 15-70.040 Investigation and report by Planning Director. The Planning Director shall make an investigation of the application and shall prepare a report thereon which shall be submitted to the approving authority. 15-70.050 Public hearing by approving authority; notice. The approving authority shall conduct a public hearing on the application for a variance. Notice of the public hearing shall be given not less than ten days nor more than thirty days prior to the date of the hearing by mailing, postage prepaid, a notice of the time and place of the hearing to the applicant and to all persons whose names appear on the latest available assessment roll of the County as owning property within five hundred feet of the bound- aries ofthe site which is the subject of the variance. Notice of the public hearing shall also be published once in a newspaper having general circulation in the City not later than ten days prior to the date of the hearing. 15-70.060 Findings required for granting of variance. The approving authority may grant a variance as applied for or in modified form if, on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the approving authority makes all of the following findings: (a) That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, strict enforcement of the specified regula- tion would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. tb) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and classified in the same zoning district. (c) That the granting of the variance will not be detri- mental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. (d) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to signs, the Planning Commission shall also find that the granting of the variance will not introduce a visual element which is inconsistent with the appearance of the immediately surrounding area. (e) If the variance is for any regulation pertaining to off-strut parking or loading facilities, the Planning Com- mission shall make the following additional findings: (1) That strict enforcement of the specified regulation is not required by either present or anticipated future traffic volume or traffic circulation on the site. (2) That the granting of the variance will not result in the parking or loading of vehicles on public streets in such a manner as to interfere with the free flow of traffic on the streets. 15-70.070 Action by approving authority. (a) The approving authority may either grant or deny the application for a variance. If granted, the variance may be revocable, may be granted for a limited period of time, and may be granted subject to such conditions as imposed by the approving authority. (b) The variance shall become effective upon the expiration of ten days following the date on which the variance was granted unless an appeal has been taken to the City Council pursuant to Article 15-90 of this Chapter. 15-70.080 Expiration of variance; extensions. (a) A variance granted pursuant to this Article shall expire twenty-four months from the daft on which approval of such variance became effective, unless prior to such expiration date a building permit is issued and construction is commenced and prosecuted diligently toward completion on the site or structure constituting the subject of the variance, or a certificate of occupancy is issued for such site or structure. (b) A variance may be extended for a period or periods of time not exceeding thirty-six months. The application for extension shall be filed prior to the expiration date, and shall be accompanied by the payment of a fee in such amount as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. A public hearing shall be conducted on the application for extension and notice thereof shall be • • r1 L._J cs~~ a9a) 368 15-70.080 • given in the same manner as prescribed in Section 15- 70.050 of this Article. Extension of a variance is not a matter of right and the approving authority may deny the application or grant the same subject to conditions. • • 368-1 (saiscega a%~ 15-80.030 15-70.090 Revocation of variance. A variance granted subject w conditions may be revoked upon a deternrination by the Planning Commission that any of the conditions of the variance have been violated. A public hearing on the revocation shall be conducted by the Planning Commission and notice thereof shall be given iq the same manner as prescribed in Section 15-70.050 of this Article. 15-70.100 New application following denial or revocation. Following the denial of a variance application or the revocation of a variance, no application for the same or substantially the same variance on dte same or substantially the same site shall be filed within one year from the date of denial or revocation of the variance,provided however, this Section shall not apply to any denial which is specifical- ly stated to be without prejudice. 15-70.110 Appeals to City Councr~. Any determination or decision by the approving authority under this Article may be appealed to the City Council in accordance with the procedure set forth in Article 15-90 of this Chapter. Article 15-75 Repealed. Article 15-80 MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS 369 15-80.090 Early warning fu-e alarm system. 15-80.100 Construction trailers. 15-80.110 Covenants for easements. 15-80.010 Exceptions to yard requirements. (a) Architectural features, including sills, chimneys, weather vanes, cornices and eaves may extend into a required side yard not more than three feet or into a space between stntctures on the same site not more than eighteen inches, and may extend into a required front or rear yard not more than four feet. (b) Aboveground balconies, Porches, decks, Platforms, stairways and landing places, which are open, unenclosed, uncovered and no part of which is more than four feet above finish grade, may extend into a required yard or space between buildings not more than four feet. (c) Open. unenclosed and uncovered walks. driveways, parking areas, decks, platforms and patios, which are not above finish grade. and fences, walls, hedges and retaining walls, may be condwcted within any required yard, subject to other applicable limitations prescribed by this Chapter. (d) Bay windows. having no foundation orother connec- tion to the surface of the ground directly below, may overhang and extend into any required yard for a distance not exceeding two feet (Amended by Ord. 71.91 § 5,1991 and Ord. 71.86 § 5, 1990; Ord. 71-163 § 1 (part), 1996) 15-80.020 Exceptions to height limitations. Chimneys, flagpoles, spires, and similar appurtenances may be erected m a height not moae than fifteen feet above the height limit presscxibed by the regulations for the district in which the site is located. Utility poles shall not be subject to the height limits prescribed in the district regulations. 15-80.030 Special rules for accessory uses and structures in residential districts. 'Ilre following special nrles shall apply m certain accesso- ry uses and structures in any A, R-1, HIt, R-0S or R-M district: (a) Stables and corrals. No stable or corral. whether private or cmnmunity, shall be located closer than fifty feet from any property line of the site, or closer than fifty feet from any dwelling unit or swimming pool on the site. In the IBt district, no stable or corral shall be located closer than fifty feet from any stream and the natural grade of a coral shall not exceed an average slope of fifteen percent (b) Swimming pools. No swimming pool or accessory mechanical equipment shall be located in a required front, side or rear yard, except as follows: (1) A swimming pool and accessory mechanical equip- ment may be located within a required rear yard, but no closer than six feet from any property line. Any portion • • Sections: 15-80.010 Exceptions to yard requirements. 15-80.020 Exceptions to height limitations. 15-80.030 Special rules for accessory uses and structures in residential i i 15-80.040 str cts. d Undergrounding of public utilities. 15-80.050 Maintenance of landscaped 15-80.060 areas. Storage in unimproved right-of- way prohibited. 15-80.070 Stadiums prohibited in all di i 15-80.080 str cts. Radio and television antennas. (Saratoga 69n • • THE CIRCULATION AND SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT Saratoga inherited its basic pattern of arterials from days before incorporation. In the past, Saratoga was an area traversed from a natural pass through the mountains to San Jose or southwest to Gilroy and beyond. The pattern of radiating arterials, Route 85, Route 9, Saratoga Avenue and Quito Road, from Big Basin Way provides less efficient access now that destinations of travelers are more dis- persed. The radiating arterials soon become more than a mile apart. This distance creates a need to connect arterials to allow more efficient traffic movement between arterials and their destinations. Since traffic generally finds the route of least resistance (time/ distance) some of the better located collectors have provided sub- stitutes.for missing arterials. Generally, radical reclassification and upgrading of streets in Saratoga is not necessary to meet the existing and anticipated future vehicular needs. However, it is important that the City recognize that in some cases it~must live with the historical deficiency on all modes of transportation but particularly on vehicles. DATA AND FUTURE USES Automobile and Roads The low density residential character of Saratoga which is critical to the City's life style has committed the City (at least for the foreseeable future) to the automobile as the major mode of transportation. With this in mind, it is necessary to examine the internal movement in patterns and accesses to major traffic generators beyond the City limits, and to provide City residents with the safest and most efficient road system possible while continuing to protect the intrinsic character of Saratoga. Freeways and Expressways The major freeways now serving Saratoga include Junipero Serra (280) Santa Cruz (17) and Bayshore (101). From these freeways local residents can connect with a variety of major Statewide traffic carriers and reach virtually any point in the State. For the past 23 years, the State Division of Highways has shown a freeway traversing the northeast corner of the City of Saratoga. This proposed West Valley Freeway would extend from Highway 280 in the northwest to 101 in the vicinity of Morgan Hill in the south- east. The State owns most of the parcels that make up the freeway ~ ~_6 COP_Y~ .• • 4 corridor but it is not known when the State will have sufficient funds to acquire the remaining parcels to complete the right-of-way. Some communities such as Los Gatos have allowed development on parcels designated as part of the corridor. It is possible Saratoga might also allow, or be compelled to allow by the courts, development of parcels within the proposed corridor. Such actions would make acquisition more difficult and thus delay any use of the corridor. The Environmental Impact Report for the project was completed in 1980. At that time, it was reaffirmed by Saratoga that the corridor right-of-way should be preserved. The Lawrence Expressway extends from Highway 101 to the intersection of Saratoga Avenue and Quito Road providing a major access to the northeast portion of the City. The expressway terminates at this intersection and through traffic continues on Quito Road to Route 9. Arterials The City of Saratoga is served by nine arterial roads. Arterials are major traffic carriers which take cars through the City to and from th.e major traffic generators in the City. Three of these arterials are State highways; Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (Route 85), Big Basin Way (Route 9) and Saratoga-Los Gatos Road (Route 9). These State highways radiate from a hub, the intersection of Route 85 and 9 and continue through the adjacent communities to the freeway system. Saratoga Avenue, a local arterial, bisects the area between the State highways. Quito Road and Fruitvale Avenue serve as arterials for north-south traffic wanting to avoid the Route 85-9 intersection. Pierce Road is currently designated as an arterial north of Arroyo de Arguello for residents living in the westerly section of the City and in the Sphere of Influence beyond, who want to avoid the intersection of Route 85 and 9. Mt. Eden Road is a designated arterial off Pierce Road which provides . access to the Cupertino Sphere of Influence, particularly Stevens Creek Park. Cox Avenue provides an east-west arterial in the City. It connects the major radiating arterials in the City, Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga Avenue, Saratoga-Los Gatos/Quito Road. Available 1979-81 traffic counts indicate that the most heavily traveled arterials are Saratoga Avenue north of Cox Avenue_ (ADT 27,537), Saratoga Avenue south of Cox (ADT 20,218), Quito Road which carries 24,000 ADT near Lawrence Expressway dissipating to 12,000 ADT near Allendale, Saratoga-Sunnyvale which carries 20,000 ADT at the junction with Highway 9 and 29,000 ADT at its junction near Prospect Road, and Saratoga-Los Gatos Road which carries 21,300 ADT at the junction with Highway 85 and 30,500 ADT at its junction with Quito Road. • • State highway projections for 1990 indicate increases on the City`s arterials, particularly at th.e intersection of Saratoga-Sunnyvale (Route 85) and Saratoga-Los Gatos Road from the intersection with Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (Route 85) to Quito Road. Traffic volumes through the Village on .Big Basin Way would not be appreciably affected by a Freeway's presence in the Corridor. Traffic count projections are not available for local arterials in Saratoga. However; Cox•Avenue, Fruitvale Avenue znd Quito Road can be expected to carry increased traffic volumes with increases in County population. One of the major traffic generators in Saratoga is West Valley Community College. The College, located at the intersection of Fruitvale and Allendale Roads, stimulates heavy volumes of traffic on Saratoga Avenue to Fruitvale, and Quito Road to Allendale, and across Allendale from Quito to Fruitvale. Intersection and street improvements at Saratoga Avenue and Fruitvale have relieved some of this pressure. Better use of the Lawrence Expressway will depend upon the improvement of Quito Road and upgrading of Allendale to an arterial. It is currently anticipated that the enrollment of the College will stabilize. As a result, these improvements are anticipated to be adequate for the foreseeable future. Collector Streets Collector streets serve an important function in residential Saratoga. They provide access from residential areas to local traffic generators such. as schools, local shopping centers or community centers, as well as safe connections to the City's arterial system. Citizen complaints, accident reports, and traffic counts indicate that the major problem on existing City collector streets in most cases~is not volume but speed control. In a"few isolated cases where neighborhood collector streets aid in filling in for the inadequacies of the City's arterial system or provide the only access to a relatively large area, the collector may carry as many as 2,000 to 3,000 cars. In most cases, the average ADT is well below this. Disregard for speed limits by many City residents, how- ever, creates safety problems on almost all the City`s collector streets . .~- - ~~ L~ Future traffic volumes on the majority of the City's existing collector streets is dependent upon the number of trips by home- owners. There are, of course, some exceptions in the City where the collector streets are so constructed that they have the poten- tial of serving as through routes for other City residents. For example, the wide spread between Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and Saratoga . Avenue has generated some pressure on Miller Avenue, Titus Avenue and Homes/Brookglen Drive for an intermediate through route. 3-8 • Those collectors whose location is such that they are also filling in for inadequacies in the City's arterial system present a different problem. Streets which have. this potential should be recognized be- fore construction and appropriate actions taken to protect future home owners from the problems of higher traffic volumes. Those areas where collector streets currently are doing double service and sup- plementing the arterial system need specific study which goes beyond the scope of the General Plan. Every residential neighborhood in Saratoga appears to be adequately served with collector street access for safety and resident conven- ience except for the area bounded by Saratoga Avenue-Fruitvale Avenue- Saratoga-Los Gatos Road. While there are three designated collectors in this area, two spurs of Douglass Lane and LaPaloma, none traverse the area. Residents of this neight~orhood seem to prefer the protective nature of the existing circulation system to the convenience of a through collector. Both the fire and sheriff's departments feel that existing access to this area is adequate. Additional residential de- velopment in the area might alter the situation in the future, but currently, the street system appears to adequately satisfy the needs of the neighborhood's residents. • The primary function of a local street is to provide access for safety vehicles and residents to the property adjacent to the public right-of-way. Since service is their primary purpose, local streets usually do not carry through traffic. The major problem on local streets in Saratoga is speed control. In 1976, a speed zone study was completed by TJKM Planning and Transportation Consultants which recommended speed limits for specific streets. These limits have since been imposed by the City in an effort to alleviate the problem. Road Design The roadways, whether access or arterials, are the corner stone to Saratoga's country atmosphere. While it is essential that roads be designed to safely serve the specific function determined by their location, the area served and potential traffic use, this can be done without urbanizing the countryside. Much of the flat area of Saratoga has been developed. However, in the more hilly area of the City and steeper Urban Service Area, the formally curbed and guttered access streets seem less appropriate, particularly when crossing the face of a hill or serving a hillside development. Abetter alternative might be to :iave a variety of City street standards depending upon the character of the area and the development. This is not to recommend poorer quality streets or inferior drainage; but rather to provide a variety of acceptable standards which can be more compatible with the natural environment of the area. These policies are reflected in the Specific Plan for the Northwestern Hillsides. 3-9 Residential areas should be protected from arterials by visual ~ • barriers wherever possible. Shopping centers facing on to arterials should have controlled access by using service roads or other focusing techniques. Since the system of arterial streets is fairly well established in Saratoga, and predominant land use is residential, the collector street is the most likely new major traffic carrier to be added. Some connections will be needed to complete the existing collector. system; in other cases new collectors will be required. In order to avoid the conflicts with adjacent residential land uses which now exist on some residential collectors in Saratoga, developers should initially design residential collectors with their function in mind. Hillside collectors may, in some cases, present a lesser traffic problem to adjacent homeowners, but present a real environmental and visual problem. In these cases split lanes are suggested to mitigate scarring from grading. Periodic parking bays might also be used to permit the smallest feasible cut. Hillside access or local streets could be designed to minimize scarring: Parking bays should be provided periodically and on-street parking prohibited. Walkways or pathways could be separated from the roadway to pro- tect the pedestrian from the roadway and be more in keeping with the country atmosphere. Mass Transit For the past several years, Santa Clara County has been studying the problem of mass transit with the assumption that the only economically feasible mass transit system is one that is County- wide. A look at the interdependence among cities in the County, the low densities, and the large distances between the major traffic generators such as important shopping centers, government offices, airports, bus and train stations, colleges, centers of employment and community activities, further supports the need for a Countywide transit system. Only one per cent of the workers in Saratoga do not have access to a car. Over half have access to two cars, and 16~ have access to three cars. The existing residential spread of Saratoga and minimum of local commercial services, entertainment centers and employment centers, make many locations difficult to live in without a car. Saratoga alone cannot economically support a public transit system, but, when combined with the adjacent communitie a Countywide transit system is workable and financially possible. The County has served Saratoga with its bus system for over 7 years and currently has three bus lines routed through Saratoga. All bus lines terminate and transfer passengers at West Valley College which is a major traffic generator for Saratoga. Two . of the lines stop near the entrance to the Village. The buses run on a half-hour arrival frequency from about 5:00 a.m. to 10:30 m on weekdays. These transit services make it possible for the elderly, infirm and young people of Saratoga to take advantage of the commercial, recreational, educational, and social services outside of Saratoga on their own. • Railroads Saratoga is served by a spur line of the Southern Pacific Railroad. The spur extends from San Jose across Saratoga from Prospect Road in the north to Quito Road in the south, and terminates at the Kaiser Permanente Plant in Cupertino. One train a day runs between the San Jose switch yard and the Permanente plant with regular stops at Paul Masson in Saratoga. Within the City of Saratoga the tracks cross two arterials, Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road and Saratoga Avenue; two collectors, Via Roncole and Cox Avenue; and one local street, Glenbrae. All track crossings in the City are at grade and only three are protected by automatic safety gate warning systems, Via Roncole, Glenbrae, and Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road. Although not in the City, the railroad crosses two major access roads to the City, Prospect and Quito roads. The County sets the priorities for installation of automatic. safety gates on these roads. • • 3-11 • • TRAILS, PATHWAYS AND BICYCLE ROUTES For Saratogans, numerous mountain trails and an historical trail have, for many years, been available for recreational use. In addition, equestrian trails are found in the specially designated Equestrian Zones of the City: the Sobey Road area and the vicinity of Pierce Road. Reliance on the automobile for all but purely calisthenic locomotion has, until recently, eclipsed the advantages of the other ways of "getting around". In the last several years increasingly frustrating traffic jams, air pollution and the high costs of automobile operation and maintenance have contributed to the emergence of a new breed of commuters and shoppers who walk or ride a bicycle whenever they need to go. A consciousness of physical fitness and a desire for outdoor recreation has increased the popularity of walking and biking as well as horseback riding. Also, pathways are needed not just for recreation but for safe access from schools and employment centers to other parts of the City. Therefore, a coordinated system of trails, • pathways and bike routes providing links between major traffic generators such as employment centers, colleges, shopping areas, and neighborhoods is needed. This'system of routes should also provi~.e access to quiet scenic areas and parks. It should assure persons using non-motorized transportation safety and mobility in pleasant surroundings. The placement of hazard signs for joggers ana other trail users at dangerous intersections should be encouraged. The purpose of the trails, pathways and bicycle paths element is to promote civic participation in developing a system of appropriate routes which is integrated into the overall transportation system of the City. On July 6, 1977,~the Trails and Pathways portion of the Circulation Element was amended by the adoption of a Master Trails and Pathways Plan (see Figure 2). This plan followed the broad recommendations of the Trails and Pathways Task Force which were submitted to the City Council in August, 1976. Three arterials were proposed in this plan. The major arterial followed the P.G.&E. right-of-way from Prospect Road near the Fremont Union School District High School site to Quito Road at the junction with the S.P.R.R.~ tracks. This arterial connects the two other arterials which serve the Pierce Road and Sobey Road equestrian areas. These arterials then connect with proposed Cour_ty trails in the Sphere of Influence area which connect with Countyparks and other County trails in the Santa Cruz Mountains. In 1978 the County adopted a Trails and Pathways Master Plan in which members of Saratoga's City Council and Planning Commission were involved through the Planning Policy Committee which formul- ated the plan. This plan links urban population centers with the great scenic and open space resources available in the County. Since the City's Trails and Pathways Plan compliments that of the County, these resources have been and will be available to Saratoga's residents. _ __ ~ Mountain Trails , There are twelve mountain trails available for hiking and horseback riding in the Saratoga area. The majority of these trails are in the Sphere of Influence. Each. of these trails is described here. 1. Mt. Eden Valley Trails - This trail lies along an existing paved road and is an- important link with Stevens Creek Park. The rural atmosphere should be preserved with off- road trail easements. Ary road construction should make accommodations for bicycles as well. The Pierce Road- Mt. Eden Road route has been indicated in county trail studies. 2. Monte Be11o Ridge Trails - These jeep trails and fire breaks are a natural extension of Stevens Creek trails and offer a connection to Palo Alto's trails system along the ridge to Page Mill Road. There are spectacular views of the Santa Clara Valley and the skyline. Several loop hikes are possible. - 3. San Andreas Rift Trail - This trail follows th.e San Andreas earthquake fault line along Stevens Creek, Saratoga Creek and Sanborn Creek. It offers many opportunities for observation and inspection of the classic detail of an earth rift, especially along the jeep trail which connects • Stevens Creek and Saratoga Creek. Although this route can be traversed at present, off-road trails are needed along Stevens Creek, Saratoga Creek and Sanborn Road. Park areas lie at both ends of this route; Sanborn Park lies across the rift. This trail has been indicated in County trail studies. 4. Table Mountain Trail - This trail lies on jeep trails and fire breaks through chapparal and oak. There are many fine view points. 5. Loghry Trail - From Saratoga Creek up Booker Creek, this trail may have been the ancient route of the native Indian tribes to their Skyline encampment. Loghry Forest, which was a gift to the State, is the smallest state forest in California, and is scheduled to become a part of Castle Rock State Park. Loghry Forest is planted with many species of trees and shrubs, and has a lookout tower. ---The trail, which runs over private property, is little traveled and the track is poor at present. This could, however, become a major route from Saratoga to the Skyline and the trails beyond. • 3-13 • 6. Judge Welch Trail - In the late 1800s when Congress Springs Resort was at its prime, this trail was a well used route. Judge Welch, who owned the property, wel- comed people to use the trail for outings to Castle Rock. It traverses lovely forested mountain slopes and climbs to Mt. Bielawski lookout (3,231 ft.). From Castle Rock Park and the Skyline, a whole vista of public trails to Big Basin and the ocean are open to the hiker and rider. Parks lie at both ends of this trail. 7. Long Bridge Trail - Along fire breaks and jeep trails, this is at present a good trail used by the Boy Scouts riders. From the historical "long bridge" (by Fischer's Resort) it traverses the eastern chapparal covered slope of the San Andreas rift. 8. Congress Springs Canyon Trail - At present this is re- stricted Water Company property. This trail is an interesting route through a rugged canyon and would add nearby loop hike possibilities to the Saratoga Trails. 9. San Tomas Trail - At present a usable trail, this route • could become a major connector to the Skyline. This is a rugged, up and down trail which climbs from the valley to the Skyline traversing many observable ages of geological formations. It passes through a great diver- sity of flora; chapparal, madrone, oak, tan oak and fir. 10. E1 Sereno Trail - Along existing road and jeep trails, this trail has many spectacular views of the valley and in the opposite direction the San Andreas rift and Skyline. There are connections to the Los Gatos trail system and Lexington Reservoir. Crossing dry chapparal country with some lovely oak glades, this route makes excellent winter hiking. 11. Toll Gate History Trail - This route lies along the Congress Springs Road, but is not at present an existing trail. The easements for a separate, off-road trail along Saratoga Creek would be desirable. This route was the path of the ancient Indian tribes from their Saratoga Creek encampment to the Skyline and the ocean. Several points of interest are: 1. The first county lumber mill. 2. Campbell Cooper Mine. 3. Maclay's Turnpike Tollgate. 4. Hakone Gardens. 3-14 ,~ The trail terminates at the historical "long bridge" crossing of Sanborn Creek (and San Andreas fault) where it meets the Rift Trail, Judge Welch Trail and Long Bridge Trail. 12. Bohlman Trail - This route is an interesting climb from downtown Saratoga (or Hakone) to the Stuart Camp and the other loop trail return routes. Adequate trail ease- ments should be secured along the roadway. City Pathways The following is an inventory of existing pathways in Saratoga: 1. Both sides of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road from Prospect Avenue to Reid Lane (with gaps). 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12 .. 13. 14. East side of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road from Reid Lane to Big Basin Way (with gaps). East side of Saratoga-Los Gatos Road from Big Basin Way to Wildcat Creek (with gaps). Both sides of Big Basin Way from Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road to Bohlman Road. West side of 4th Street from Canyon View Road to Saratoga Creek. Along Oak Street from 5th Street to Madronia Cemetery. West side of Arroyo de Arguello from SPRR to Wardell Road. East side of Arroyo de Arguello from Wardell Road to its end. North side of SPRR from Prospect Road to Quito Road Southeast side of Carnelian Glen Drive and along a drainage easement connecting Carnelian Glen Drive with Douglass Lane (with gaps) . South side of Prospect Avenue from SPRR to Quito Road. North side of Cox Avenue from Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road to Glen Arbor Court. South side of Cox Avenue from SPRR to Paseo Presada. South side of Herriman Avenue and Herriman extension to West Valley College. 3-15 .~ 15. North side of Saratoga Avenue from Big Basin Way to Herriman Avenue. 16. South side of Saratoga. Avenue from Herriman Avenue to Fruitvale Avenue. 17. North side of Saratoga Avenue from SPRR to Quito Road (with gaps) . 18. Along west side of Fruitvale from Saratoga Avenue to Douglass. 19. Along east side of Fruitvale from Allendale to Valle Vista. 20. South side of Allendale from Fruitvale to Quito Road. BICYCLE PATHS A Citizen's Committee met to study providing a demonstration bicycle path system in Saratoga. The County has suggested that each community designate a demonstration bicycle route system so that all communities in the County could be joined and accessible by bicycle. The initial stage of the Saratoga demonstration bicycle route system is described here: 1. Generally: Implementation of a demonstration bicycle system on the major streets of Saratoga as soon as practicable. The expansion of the system onto collector streets was viewed with caution and the recommendation in this regard is quite limited. These concerns and other features that apply to the entire system are treated in a section apart from the dis- cussion of each street. 2. Cox Avenue: Primarily a path system on each side of the street with limited use of lanes for transition where paths are not possible. Striped bicycle route, pavement marking should be installed from Saratoga to Paseo Presada. 3. Highway #85 (.Cox to Village): Primarily a path system on each side of highway. Difficulty with the system is~noted from Reid Lane south to Village. ~~" 4. Blaney Plaza: Transition from Highway #85 to Highway #9 presents difficulty. Appropriate signs stating "route ends" and "use caution" are urged. 5. Highway #9 (Village to Fruitvale): This system depends upon in- M stallation of path over rock wall from Oak to Aloha. Then there would be a two-way system on the south side from Aloha Avenue to Vickery Avenue. Thereafter, proceeding toward Los Gatos, the system would change to a bicycle lane system on each side of the highway . 6. Fruitvale Avenue: A path system on each side of street from Valle Vista to Allendale; thereafter bicycle lanes from Allendale to Saratoga Avenue. 7. Saratoga Avenue: A striped bicycle route system on each side of street from Cox to Village. 8. Herriman: A.bicycle route on each side with parking allowed from Highway #85 to Beaumont. Appropriate signs to indicate route ends before bridge. 9. Miller: No demonstration system; only three-block area from Somerville to East Melinda Circle shall be marked with bicycle lanes to provide safety to hazardous crossing area for Hansen School children. The City has attempted to implement its demonstration bicycle system but difficulties have arisen in funding the project so it may be delayed. SCENIC HIGHWAYS The Scenic Highways Element's legislative authority, stemming from SB1489, was passed into law on April 16, 1971. Saratoga adopted its Scenic Highways Element in 1974. The purpose of the element is to inventory scenic corridors and to develop plans to protect them. The Master Plan for Scenic Highways, adopted by the State Legislature, identifies highways which are eligible for official designation as State Scenic Highways. Eligible highways can only become officially designated by the State after the local jurisdiction has adopted and implemented a plan to protect and enhance the scenic corridor. The ultimate objective of Saratoga's Scenic Roads Program should be aesthetically pleasing views on all roads in Saratoga and the Sphere of Influence. This is not an unattainable goal. Most roads in the Sphere are scenic and only need to be protected. Most City roads are pleasant, some are scenic; only a few need improve- ment to make them visually attractive. Designated Scenic Highways in Saratoga 'and its Sphere--of Influence A scenic highway provides the motorist visual experience. The most important a scenic highway is the field of visio types of landscape qualify whether they or cultivated. with a continuous, varied criteria in .the selection of n for touring vehicles. All are urban or rural, natural • • • 3-17 ~ 1 In considerin scenic g qualities, residential neighborhoods in Saratoga are well maintained with a variety of trees, ample set- back, and pleasant architectural quality. On the other hand, major thoroughfares and commercial areas are an area of concern. Efforts should be directed toward improving the visual aesthetics of these streets to complement the scenic character so carefully cultivated in the res.iden.tial areas. In the Sphere of Influence, County corridors may be designated County Scenic Roads and protected by the Santa Clara County zoning ordinance #NS-1200, 643-3.3 which requires 100 foot setbacks for building and structures along the scenic route. The County Board of Supervisors, on advice from the State Department of Transportation, designates those roads which qualify (under the same requirements as State Scenic~Highways) as officially designated County Scenic Highways. State Scenic Highways, which may be located in either the City or Sphere of Influence, rely on local zoning and other measures for maintenance and protection. 'For this reason, the State Department of Public Works must be convinced that local government agencies have taken sufficient steps to protect the scenic corridor by re- gulating land use and the intensity of development; requiring de- tailed site planning; and control of outdoor advertising, earthmoving, • landscaping, design and appearance of structures and equipment in the area. The State protects the highway by landscaping and by securing adjacent property easements to protect or enhance the motorists' view. Saratoga needs to adopt a Scenic Highways Preservation Ordinance to supplement existing design review regulations. This would ensure adequate protection of existing scenic highways. To qualify as an Officially Designated State Scenic Highway, scenic beauty is not the only criterion. A highway must be brought up to the standards of a "Complete Highway", one which incorporates safety, utility, economy, and beauty -- only then will the Department of Public Works, on advice from the Scenic Highway Advisory Committee, consider it for Official Scenic Highway status. Once a highway had been so designated, the State will post highway signs and label maps and pub- lications with the California Poppy Scenic Route emblem. This has already been done for Highway 9 (Saratoga-Los Gatos Road). Saratoga already contains two designated State Scenic-Highways and four designated County Scenic Highways. The State Scenic Highways include Route 9 from Los Gatos to Saratoga (ending at the intersection of 9 with 85). The portion of Highway 9 from Saratoga to Skyline Boulevard has been under a State corridor study for several years but has not yet been designated. A Scenic Highway Report for this section of highway was completed in 1976. • 3-18 i ~ ~ State Highway 35, or Skyline, has been also designated an Official '~ State Scenic Highway from -Page rZiii Raad s•o.uth to the San Mateo/ Santa Cruz County boundary. Santa Cruz County has not yet sub- mitted a Scenic Highways program showing it is capable of protecting the corridor; as a result, the portion of Skyline in Saratoga's Sphere of Influence has not yet been designated an Official State Scenic Highway. - The Santa Clara Zoning Ordinance protects several scenic highways in Saratoga and its Sphere of Influence by specifying 100 foot setbacks. These include Skyline Boulevard from Saratoga Gap to Loma Prieta; Congress Springs Road from Saratoga Gap to the City limits of Saratoga, Bohlman Road and a low extension, Montevian Road; and Sanborn Road. POTENTIAL SCENIC CORRIDORS Several areas in Saratoga and its Sphere of Influence are being considered or have potential to be protected by the scenic highways designation. Eligible State Highways Highways 9 and 35 are the only two State Highways being considered in the State Scenic Highways Master Plan in Saratoga and the Sphere of Influence. Part of Highway 9 is already a Designated Scenic Route; the rest is under corridor study by the State. Highway 35, bordering Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties is under the juris- diction of both counties and the actual "scenic corridor" or view is in Santa Cruz County. Therefore, it will be necessary for Santa Cruz to prepare an acceptable Scenic Highways Program or Plan before the State will officially designate Highway 35; Santa Clara's plan is considered adequate. State Highway 85 (Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road), although not on the State Master Plan, could conceivably qualify as an urban designated scenic highway. Landscaping and design on a massive scale are needed to upgrade this important entrance to Saratoga. If this is ever accomplishes and State Scenic Highway Designation is desired, the legislature can request that this highway be included in the Master P-lan~.-- Eligible County Scenic Highways Corridors for consideration under the Santa Clara County Scenic Highways Protective Zoning Ordinance are innumerable. In addition to those already enumerated in the Ordinance, Mt. Eden Road in the Sphere of Influence should be considered. County Roads which pass • through Saratoga should be upgraded to permit their consideration under the scenic highways zoning provision. 3-19 Eligible Local Streets Fortunately, low density zoning and stringent subdivision ordinances protect residential area streets with minimum site frontage measure- ments and design review. Commercial streets and major thoroughfares need attention. Saratoga Avenue, Quito Road, and Prospect Avenue all need considerable landscaping and/or sign control as well as architectural reworking before they can qualify as urban scenic roads. These improvements would provide the visual unity the residential areas achieve but the commercial sections lack. On Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road, the northern portal to the City, landscaping and sign control are needed. Citizens have expressed concern about the view entering motorists encounter at Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road and Prospect Avenue. Big Basin Way, in Saratoga, (also subject of a detailed special study) needs much work to make it qualify as scenic or even utilitarian. Perhaps this is the obstacle to the rest of Highway 9 becoming a Designated State Scenic Highway. Local Measures to Protect Scenic Roadways City of Saratoga . Low density residential zoning Minimum site frontage requirements . Subdivision requirements for street arrangement which is "harmonious with topography (and) shall save and preserve orna- mental trees where practicable." (Sec. 3.3.-15) Subdivision may be required to landscape area between property wall or fence and a major highway. (Sec. 4.8) Subdivision requirement for landscaping dead end streets. (Sec. 4.9) Planning Commission design review of most single family dwellings, commercial structures, major modifications to commercial structures., and signs. Tree removal prohibition without permit from Community Development Director (Ord. No. 38.26 Sec. l). Height limits in zoning ordinance. _ Grading Ordinance the purpose of which is to preserve natural topographic features and vegetation. Priorities for underground wiring: 1. New Development 2. Areas of wide public use 3. Commercial areas 4. Scenic areas ~~ i ~ . Obstruction to view from vehicles are declared nuisances: -(Streets and Sidewalks (Sec. 1305.) ~/V• . $50 reward for conviction for persons throwing trash on highways, (Ordinance, No. 4A Sec. 13-5) . Williamson Act protection of agricultural lands. Special ordinances for hillside subdivision to prevent erosion. Scenic easments on hillside subdivisions . The aesthetic/scenic qualities policies of the Northwestern Hill- sides Specific Plan. Santa Clara County . Inclusion of road in scenic highway zoning. . Williamson Act. . Scenic Easements (State and County). Zoning which provides for clustering of service stations and facilities along scenic roads. This has only been used rarely, never in Sara toga's sphere. Minimum lot areas and site frontages in all zones with adjustments • based on slope and density. . Height limits on buildings. The Scenic Highway Element - 1981 County General Plan Procedure for Designation Official Scenic Highways The corridor studies necessary for official designation of a highway as a Scenic Highway must be initiated by the jurisdiction which controls the adjacent lands. The responsibility for the corridor study may 'be delegated to a department, employee, commission or committee. When such a study is initiated, the District Engineer of the Highway District should be notified. The Highway Division will then undertake two studies called the Corridor Survey which will be joined with the local jurisdiction's study to form the Scenic Highway Report. A specific plan and program must then be developed by the local jurisdiction assisted by the Division of Highway's staff. This plan and program will insure the protection and enhancement of the existing natural and man-made scenic resources that contribute to the Highway's being included in the State Master Plan for Scenic Highways. The plan and program are reviewed by the Highway District's staff and forwarded to the Interdepartmental Committee of Scenic Highways. After review by the Interdepartmental Committee, the reports. are forwarded to the Scenic Highway Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee reviews the information and recommends to the Director of the Department of Transportation whether the highway should be~designated. County roads may be designated by the County Board of Supervisors after the State Director of Transportation has found all requirements have been met. The standards and requirements for the State Scenic Highways apply to County Scenic Highways; however, tha Tli vi c i nn of Hi rTh~uavc cai 1 l r,ni- .,nAcr~-~Lc a r~.,,,.,~.. ene,,; .. u; ~},c.~ac~ Ct»Av • RESOLIITION NO. _ RESOLIITION OF THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE OPEN SPACE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN, MODIFYING GENERAL TEST, GOALS, POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS. WHEREAS, the City Council held properly noticed public hearings on September 1 and November 17, 1993 to consider draft amendments to the Open Space Element of the City's General Plan, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the~City Council determined that General Plan amendments are necessary to strengthen and update the goals, policies and implementation programs to protect, maintain and preserve Open Space in the City of Saratoga and its unincorporated areas; and WHEREAS, the City Council found that the Negative Declaration prepared for this project was in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and .reflected the independent judgment of the City as a lead agency, and that the City Council voted unanimously to adopt the Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the City Council moved to adopt the draft amendments by a vote of three (3) to two (2) (Anderson, Kohler and Monia in favor, Burger and Tucker opposed); and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby approves GP-93-001, adopting General Plan Amendments to the Open Space Element, as amended at the November 17, 1993 public hearing and as incorporated herein by reference. The above and .foregoing .resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga on the 1st day of December, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Mayor, City of Saratoga- • Clerk, City of Saratoga gpos e ,Y`• • • i f. ~ J • C~ I \~~ W 1~.. 'a J "'~ ~' J e v~_ Q W V x •o ° ~rn,~,NNns-vooldavs ~~. -a ., ~ ~ `~' ~--- J .. W U~ W ~ ~ ~ Q z~ O~ ~- ~ A ~ b Q ~ LU ~ W ~1` r Od. ~ m ,.~- ,~.~ 'd --~ } I W U Z W z o ~ W W a h I a O I a Q \ ~: I 8 ~~ ~~~ L cdl~ 1~ y'~3~\\ 2~l ~~ o~ ~ ~ O~ v 'A11f12i~ 1 ~P 1 ~~ ~'~ ~ ~ J~ \a~ 0 ~o 0 0 ~~ N 0 U W ~ I J k _~ /D \D ~- Z L I ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ O. WI W aI • ~ = a Q ~ N I ~~ a l o Q :.• ' ~ ` -_- ~ \ j ~ ~rt ~ ' rt ~ ~ X }~ ~ .• ~~ o~~ C ~ .r. ~.~ • / x ~ X ~ . x o • ,~ m, x ~~ x ~. ~~'~:`• ~ ~ --- - ~ . GD• - ~ P • y.~ G~' •,~ ~ E+ J z ~ u 'c G4~ 0 j R F o re gh~ ~ '~ roa ` `Y ,a ~ ~., . ;_ N i~ N ~ ~ ~ M ~ J =~ .~- ~~l~aaU ~ ~ _ ; = • x y 1 V - r - _ • ^ y ~-v Z ' ~ • y . x / ~ ~ 1_•~x J _ _ c ~ q. ~ Q r0 C ~" ~ V i i ~ ~ Q ~ - - _ _. i N ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ W ~ ~ a~• u d ate- ~ ~ ~ t ~~ - 7L ~ ~ c~ o ~' o° H r ~~~~~~ ~ O~ o~OD\~ N . D . O ''a~,,,M ~ ` ~ ~ a: ,..., o . N v o ~ o 1 Li F d ~ c / ~ ° ~`,,~`'0' on9 ~ W ~~ ' v a ~ 1 4 _t ~ ~ cY C I Q` ~" ~ a ~ _ t ~ W ~ ~~~~~- h ~ ~ ~oooooooo~,op a D o\ _ ~ ~ `'''•,,,,~,i O ~ ~ I ~ \ 1 ,, 0 `~ o°°0000°00o doo .., a° o ~ .~ '~~ - - h~ H ~ N q ~ ~ ~Q Q r C ` ~0 Q ~ ~ ~`1+ 1~/1 v ~Yp • ~ F°. H N V u~ a ~ to u ~ ~O v Y ~N N ~ .V m ~~~....7777 ~ g~ ~~ ~ -- V ~u Y .~C i V a°.~ ~n • o ~ O V1 i ~ a° n. a __ _ _ __ . _.. ~-r, ~~~ .. ~~~ Setback and Lot Coverage Requirements: CORNER LOTS (created before Jan 1992) THE MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS FOR CORNER LOTS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF VACANT LOTS, ARE AS FOLLOWS: ZONE DISTRICT FRONT SIDE REAR IMPERVIOUS Int/E8t 1st/2st COVERAGE R-1-10,000 25~ 10/25 10_ /10 600 R-1-12,500 25 10/25 10/10 550 R-1-15,000 25 12/25 12/12 50% R-1-20,000 30 15/25 15/15 45° R-1-40,000 30 20/25 20/20 350 HR, 30.. 20/25 50/60 250 (up to max. 15,000 sq. ft.) • THE MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL VACANT CORNER LOTS SHALL BE EITHER THE ABOVE, OR AS FOLLOWS, WHICHEVER IS GREATER: FRONT: 200 of lot depth SIDE: 10% of lot width REAR: 250 of lot depth Line • SETBACK ENVELOPE ~ . • • •